IMO it's perfectly fine to collect colonies as long as you know you can get a queen or multiple, fill in the hole, and that the ants you're digging up are locally abundant/abundant all over the state. Most midwestern ant keepers have at least a few dug up colonies since it's nearly impossible for us to catch flights of certain ants in the Midwest if you don't live right next to a sand prairie, such as Pheidole bicarinata or Aphenogastor treatae. I've also went back to the same places I've dug up ants before for multiple years and there's never been a difference from only taking one or two small colonies, or taking a few queens and a few hundred workers out of a mature Formica colony. Colonies of locally abundant ants should never be collected in large amounts though, but taking 1 or 2 small/medium colonies won't hurt a population. As long as you stay respectful to the environment and know what you're doing collecting colonies is fine.
Fair enough, but the size of the colony is irrelevant. Small colonies are needed to grow and replace large colonies. This is exactly why there are size limits set for fishing, for example.
I'm responding to this thread in my capacity as an entomologist and PhD student at the University of Florida -- and as an ant keeper. I see a need to acknowledge that this topic is nuanced and that blanket statements aren't all that helpful in convincing folks of scientific findings.
Of course the size (life stage) of the colony is relevant. I'd caution against making strong and inflexible statements in the realm of biology, as they betray the otherwise scientifically-accurate points that are being made. Nuance is critical in science and biology in particular, as well as in communications about science. Removing an incipient colony has very different impacts than removing an established, reproductive-producing colony. That's just objectively the situation, and synonymizing those impacts is intellectually dishonest and intuitively not the case, which reduces perceptions of credibility on the whole.
Organisms CAN -- in some circumstances -- be taken from the wild sustainably. That said, ANTdrew is entirely right that we are experiencing an "insect apocalypse" of sorts, and it's of huge interest to and focus of the entomological community. There is hardly a week that goes by that my colleagues and I don't discuss this topic and what may be done to 1) increase understanding of what's going on and 2) develop mitigation strategies. Ant keepers removing species from the natural world can certainly be a threat. An example of this would be Pheidole rhea or Atta mexicana in the southwestern United States, where small, disjunct populations can easily be overcollected and pushed over the brink from unbridled ant keeper collection pressure. On the flip side, each year Pogonomyrmex barbatus hold immense mating flights, and the removal of even a hundred or more queens at a time during that process would have little impact.
One of the most important parts that ANTdrew brought up is one of survival in captivity. Chances are good that the stress incurred by the colony in the collection process (particularly when done by a non-professional) could have fatal consequences. Rearing colonies from newly-mated queens is nearly always a better option, and certainly the more ethical and sustainable route for new ant enthusiasts.
My best recommendation is that less experienced ant keepers (3+ full years) should be particularly hesitant to attempt to collect established colonies. Sourcing your colonies from new queens is the best path to success. For more experienced keepers, some species that are unattainable through that methodology can be responsibly collected after an evaluation of that species' presence in the habitat, an educated plan is made for whole colony extraction (I have a no ant left behind policy) and a nesting environment and collecting box is prepared. It can be done responsibly, though that varies considerably depending on a litany of factors.
Cheers,
Miles
Edited by Miles, May 11 2023 - 7:02 AM.
