Regulations (pertaining to the Great Lakes)
In Canada, tubenose goby is listed as an invasive species under Canadian Federal Statutes and Regulations—Ontario Fishery Regulations SOR/2007-237, and is thus prohibited from being possessed, released, or used as bait without a license. In Quebec, aquarium fish keeping, production, keeping in captivity, breeding, stocking, transport, sale, or purchase of live tubenose goby is prohibited by Quebec Statutes and Regulations RRQ, c C-61.1, r 7. In the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it is unlawful to possess, sell, introduce, or import tubenose goby under 58 PA Code § 71.6. Sale, purchase, or barter of injurious, nonnative species, including tubenose goby, is prohibited by 58 PA Code § 63.46, and transportation in or through the commonwealth is prohibited by 58 PA Code § 73.1. In the state of Ohio, it is unlawful for a person to possess, import, or sell live tubenose goby under OAC Chapter 1501:31-19-01. In the state of Michigan, tubenose goby is a prohibited species under MI NREPA § 324.41301. Tubenose goby is regulated as an exotic fish in the state of Indiana under 312 IAC § 9-6-7, meaning an individual must not import, possess, propagate, buy, sell, barter, trade, transfer, loan, or release into public or private waters any tubenose goby, including recently hatched or juvenile live fish or their viable eggs or genetic material. In the state of Illinois, tubenose goby is an injurious species under Ill. Admin. Code Ch. 1 § 805. It is unlawful to possess, propagate, buy, sell, barter, or offer to buy, sell, barter, transport, trade, transfer, or loan tubenose goby to any person or institution without a permit in Illinois. Tubenose goby is a restricted invasive species in Wisconsin under Wis. Admin. Code § NR 40.05. In the state of Minnesota, tubenose goby is a prohibited invasive species as defined in MN Admin. Rules § 6216.0250. The species is not on New York’s list of approved baitfish, so may not be sold as bait.
Note: Check federal, state/provincial, and local regulations for the most up-to-date information.
Control
Biological
There are no known biological control methods for this species.
Physical
The USACE Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study notes the potential effectiveness of acoustic fish deterrents in controlling or deterring Proterorhinus semilunaris populations (GLMRIS 2012). Acoustic deterrents include continuous wave and pulsed wave technology, which use sound/pressure waves to influence the behavior of aquatic organisms. Similarly, sensory deterrent systems such as acoustic air bubble curtains, electric barriers, and underwater strobe lights may prove useful in controlling populations in waterways and small bodies of water, but there are no studies of their effects on P. semilunaris at the present time (GLMRIS 2012). When using physical deterrents as barriers, combining methods can increase effectiveness, as was the case for Patrick et al. (1985), who found that pelagic estuarine and freshwater fishes were successfully deterred by a barrier combining air bubbles and strobe lights.
Chemical
Of the four chemical piscicides registered for use in the United States, antimycin A and rotenone are considered general piscicides, but there are no studies of the effects of chemical treatment on P. semilunaris at the present time (GLMRIS 2012).
Increasing CO2 concentrations, either by bubbling pressurized gas directly into water or by the addition of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) has been used to sedate fish with minimal residual toxicity, and is a potential method of harvesting fish for removal, though maintaining adequate CO2 concentrations may be difficult in large/natural water bodies (Clearwater et al. 2008). CO2 is approved only for use as an anesthetic for cold, cool, and warm water fishes the US, not for use as euthanasia (Clearwater et al. 2008). Exposure to NaHCO3 concentration of 142-642 mg/L for 5 min. is sufficient to anaesthetize most fish (Clearwater et al 2008).
It should be noted that chemical treatment will often lead to non-target kills, and so all options for management of a species should be adequately studied before a decision is made to use piscicides or other chemicals. Potential effects on non-target plants and organisms, including macroinvertebrates and other fishes, should always be deliberately evaluated and analyzed. The effects of combinations of management chemicals and other toxicants, whether intentional or unintentional, should be understood prior to chemical treatment. Other non-selective alterations of water quality, such as reducing dissolved oxygen levels or altering pH, could also have a deleterious impact on native fish, invertebrates, and other fauna or flora, and their potential harmful effects should therefore be evaluated thoroughly.
Note: Check state/provincial and local regulations for the most up-to-date information regarding permits for control methods. Follow all label instructions.