I am going to be composing a research based paper about the notorious greenback cutthroat trout. The premise of the paper is going to be that perhaps our beloved state fish, the one that has supposedly gone from plentiful to extinct, to endangered to stable and back to extremely endangered at best,, is in fact either extinct, or was never really a distinct subspecies to begin with. The credible and scholarly information that is available about the greenback is so contradictory and changing so rapidly, in regard to historical information as well as current genetic findings, that I believe it will be possible to argue that the fish is either just a Colorado River cutthroat, or that it is in fact extinct.
The thesis for this paper will likely read something like 'due to a wide variety of possibilities, the likelihood that a truly distinct subspecies of cutthroat trout, indigenous only to Colorado, remains in existence is very unlikely if not downright wishful thinking.' Some of the subtopics that I will discuss to support my thesis are: 1. the contradicting studies / published works of literature that have come out within the last ten years 2. the weakness of historical identification and taxonomy of fish 3. The lack of concrete documentation about the original range of this fish 4. the general improbability of a pure population of these fish existing due primarily to interbreeding with other species 5. the question of wether the greenback was ever a truly distinct subspecies, or just populations of Colorado River cutthroats outside of their known range that came to be referred to as greenbacks.
I hope to be able to highlight many of the questions and contradictions that surround our state fish primarily by presenting the contradictions in research and the follies in conservation efforts. It is my intention to introduce as many examples of uncertainty around the topic as possible in combination with facts about environmental degradation and interbreeding between trout species. My hope is that if I am able to compile enough of this information, that readers will be led to their own conclusions without it being necessary for me to indicate what the logical conclusion is.
The thesis for this paper will likely read something like 'due to a wide variety of possibilities, the likelihood that a truly distinct subspecies of cutthroat trout, indigenous only to Colorado, remains in existence is very unlikely if not downright wishful thinking.' Some of the subtopics that I will discuss to support my thesis are: 1. the contradicting studies / published works of literature that have come out within the last ten years 2. the weakness of historical identification and taxonomy of fish 3. The lack of concrete documentation about the original range of this fish 4. the general improbability of a pure population of these fish existing due primarily to interbreeding with other species 5. the question of wether the greenback was ever a truly distinct subspecies, or just populations of Colorado River cutthroats outside of their known range that came to be referred to as greenbacks.
I hope to be able to highlight many of the questions and contradictions that surround our state fish primarily by presenting the contradictions in research and the follies in conservation efforts. It is my intention to introduce as many examples of uncertainty around the topic as possible in combination with facts about environmental degradation and interbreeding between trout species. My hope is that if I am able to compile enough of this information, that readers will be led to their own conclusions without it being necessary for me to indicate what the logical conclusion is.
RSS Feed