Then I'm confused. I thought invasive meant that there was no native predator for them.

If this is the case then there may be a possibility that fraud charges could potentially be brought against TPWD since they would be profiting from citations issued.

Of course additional in-depth research would have to be done first, but just saying...

It wouldn't be the first time a government agency has lied for profit. It is called Fraud, and perpetrators should be locked up for a very long time.

Certificate? Who is going to certify and what is that going to cost? Really? Chuck is right- you ain't stopping it....

Invasive means that they didn't exist previously to their human-based (or assisted) introduction. There may, or may not, be predators for them.
We are surrounded by massive amounts of invasive plants and animals, it's only when they "negatively affect the governmental economics" or they do something newsworthy (killer bees, fire ants, etc that hurt people in an obvious sense) that you really HEAR about them though.
Sunflowers are one of the most pervasively invasive plants introduced from Europe. No on really cares much though, they are not hard to keep under control and are "pretty" to look at, so it's not newsworthy.

According to Wikipedia, the lack of predators (natural controls) may play a role in a species being classified as invasive.

The first definition, the most used, applies to introduced species (also called "non-indigenous" or "non-native") that adversely affect the habitats and bioregions they invade economically, environmentally, and/or ecologically. Such invasive species may be either plants or animals and may disrupt by dominating a region, wilderness areas, particular habitats, or wildland-urban interface land from loss of natural controls (such as predators or herbivores).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species

I can agree that they are non-native, but invasive may be a little bit of a stretch if there are predators such as blue catfish, redear sunfish, and freshwater drum.

Of course there has to be a balance based on number of predators and reproductive rates, etc.

Wikipedia... yeah, that'll stand up in court

Well no $#!T. As I said, more thorough research would need to be done. Please re-read and note the qualifiers used throughout.

I'll consult Blacks Law Dictionary when I get home. There may be comma in the definition that changes everything.

The reproduction rate on Zebra's is astounding! Catfish, drum, and other predators will not and can not keep up with it. not even a little bit.

I cant wait until they invade lake Houston!

I will go get some gobies from the pet store and throw them in after the water clears up! Might even swing by the Asian market and get some snake heads!

Im more worried about those jumping carp than any of those invasives!

You and me both.

Bring on the clear water Lolol.

I suggested in another thread they should purposely stock the zebras in lake Houston and do a serious environmental impact study on the zebra mussels there.

LH has got to be one of the worst lakes in the state, as far as water clarity and quality. It would be the perfect testing ground.

Wondering about that myself too! Official boat cleaners? Right. My Dad and I were talking about this today and I told him not to ever underestimate the power of bird feces. Otherwise it smacks of another scam to drive prices up.

When the get to Fork maybe they'll plug up the pump station intake and we'll all be happy lol

that right there is what people don't understand. It doesn't matter how many predators in the water will learn to eat the mussels, they'll never keep up.

My boat mechanic in gainesville says the boats harbored in the lower part of texoma lake,where the water has always been clearer, are all pretty infested. On the other hand,boats harbored in the west bridge area, where the water is always less clear, have almost no infestation. Makes you wonder if they would ever really get established in our less clear lakes..anecdotal, so who knows..