Is releasing dragonflies raised as nymphs in captivity bad for the environment?

[Kada]

I don't think that every release is risky. For example, an insect or arachnid that originated in our backyard and didn't come in contact with imported crickets, dubia roaches, or darkling beetles is unlikely to carry any bacteria or diseases that don't already exist in the environment.

I usually only feed wild spiders and other predators wild insects and other prey that originated in the same location.
And dragonfly nymphs from a backyard pond feeding on mosquito larvae from that backyard aren't being introduced to any foreign threats.

There is also logic behind this. Why would you buy feeders for an animal that isn't even a permanent pet?
Just feed it what it was feeding on in the wild.

If all it takes to spread diseases to everything is to take them indoors, then that means that every time we open or close a door we are introducing new diseases to the environment.

Indeed, it isnt 100%. there are loads of variables, probably millions of trillions just in a person's backyard. But generally speaking if a household keeps pets, it is not good practice to bring in wild animals and especially release to them after. A house with no such pets is a different story But care still required.

As with everything, it's just about chances and if they are worth taking. The chance may be 0.001%, but even then there should be a very legitimate reason to do it at all or that low possibility isnt worth it

Not everyone gets covid, the flu etc either. just a numbers game. Why allow strangers into intensive care unchecked. In terms of ecosystems, something people have very little knowledge about, it is just not worth the tiniest of risks as there is often no way to remedy an outbreak in the wild.

In my opinion, dont take the wild animals in the first place. If one does, be responsible for it until death and dont release it or throw away the corpse, burning is probably the easiest safest way for most of us to ensure it. there are already far too many released things by irresponsible humans, be it vertebrates, arthropods, fungi or viruses etc etc. better to just avoid the risk because in reality we are all ignorant and certainly not diligent enough to warrant such authority over this seemingly harmless endeavor. No one knows if there was no problem after, simply because we cannot monitor and test such a vast amount afterwards

This is one reason governments step in and ban the trade of things. for good reason usually, despite us not liking it

 

[Ultum4Spiderz]

Indeed, it isnt 100%. there are loads of variables, probably millions of trillions just in a person's backyard. But generally speaking if a household keeps pets, it is not good practice to bring in wild animals and especially release to them after. A house with no such pets is a different story But care still required.

As with everything, it's just about chances and if they are worth taking. The chance may be 0.001%, but even then there should be a very legitimate reason to do it at all or that low possibility isnt worth it

Not everyone gets covid, the flu etc either. just a numbers game. Why allow strangers into intensive care unchecked. In terms of ecosystems, something people have very little knowledge about, it is just not worth the tiniest of risks as there is often no way to remedy an outbreak in the wild.

In my opinion, dont take the wild animals in the first place. If one does, be responsible for it until death and dont release it or throw away the corpse, burning is probably the easiest safest way for most of us to ensure it. there are already far too many released things by irresponsible humans, be it vertebrates, arthropods, fungi or viruses etc etc. better to just avoid the risk because in reality we are all ignorant and certainly not diligent enough to warrant such authority over this seemingly harmless endeavor. No one knows if there was no problem after, simply because we cannot monitor and test such a vast amount afterwards

This is one reason governments step in and ban the trade of things. for good reason usually, despite us not liking it

yeah but I feel bad for our fellow keepers above the border .
Banning tropical roaches in Canada makes zero since it’s the coldest place beside Siberia. Dubia can’t even survive we’re I live. O well they can still find plenty of feeders .

 

[Wayfarin]

Indeed, it isnt 100%. there are loads of variables, probably millions of trillions just in a person's backyard. But generally speaking if a household keeps pets, it is not good practice to bring in wild animals and especially release to them after. A house with no such pets is a different story But care still required.

As with everything, it's just about chances and if they are worth taking. The chance may be 0.001%, but even then there should be a very legitimate reason to do it at all or that low possibility isnt worth it

Not everyone gets covid, the flu etc either. just a numbers game. Why allow strangers into intensive care unchecked. In terms of ecosystems, something people have very little knowledge about, it is just not worth the tiniest of risks as there is often no way to remedy an outbreak in the wild.

In my opinion, dont take the wild animals in the first place. If one does, be responsible for it until death and dont release it or throw away the corpse, burning is probably the easiest safest way for most of us to ensure it. there are already far too many released things by irresponsible humans, be it vertebrates, arthropods, fungi or viruses etc etc. better to just avoid the risk because in reality we are all ignorant and certainly not diligent enough to warrant such authority over this seemingly harmless endeavor. No one knows if there was no problem after, simply because we cannot monitor and test such a vast amount afterwards

This is one reason governments step in and ban the trade of things. for good reason usually, despite us not liking it

I think the risk for dragonflies in particular is decreased by the fact that they are in aquatic ecosystems.
In nature, ponds are often similar to enclosed ecosystems or islands. One pond might be clean while a nearby pond is diseased.
They depend primarily on animals dispersing between ponds and introducing diseases to become contaminated.
In an aquarium, diseases are often either introduced by diseased fish or caused by stressed fish becoming overwhelmed by certain organisms that were present the whole time.

Indoors, if a dragonfly larva is inside a tank filled only with water from its pond of origin, it is largely dependent on us to introduce foreign diseases by what we add to the tank. Diseases could be spread by putting the dragonfly tank too close to an aquarium with a splashing filter/pump or introducing worms or water fleas from a fish store. If the dragonfly originated from a backyard pond, any feeder animal within the small ecosystem would either be clean, or else the whole pond would be contaminated.

The raising of dragonflies from naiad to mature adult in captivity is both educational and informative, and allows some naiads to survive to the difficult stage of maturity while not at risk of predation by other animals in the pond, potentially causing a spike in the dragonfly population.
But it isn't for everyone. In my state, the laws restricting the release of freshwater life primarily restrict their release into foreign freshwater locations.
It's just my personal opinion that this can be done correctly. But you're entitled to yours. The less people practicing this, the lower the risk.

Caddisflies and especially mayflies (sometimes called "shadflies") are more appropriate for those who want to raise insects from aquatic stage to adult.
They are easy to feed as larvae, feeding on algae and organic matter, and the flying adults are easier to keep in captivity, with caddisflies only living a few weeks without feeding and mayflies dying after a day or two. But since they will be deprived of any breeding opportunities, collecting should be kept to a minimum.