Category: 

What Is a State Fish?

Article Details
  • Written By: Misty Amber Brighton
  • Edited By: Allegra J. Lingo
  • Images By: n/a, Witold Krasowski
  • Last Modified Date: 10 September 2016
  • Copyright Protected:
    2003-2016
    Conjecture Corporation
  • Print this Article
Free Widgets for your Site/Blog
Due to synthetic materials and furnishings, new homes burn about five times faster than those built 30 years ago.  more...

September 25 ,  1789 :  The US Bill of Rights was adopted.  more...

Many states within the U.S. choose official symbols such as birds, mammals, flowers, and state fish. This species is normally selected by asking the citizens of that state to vote, and then passing an act through the legislature. The one that is chosen is normally reflective of the type of aquatic life commonly found there. Some states that border the ocean have chosen both a freshwater and a saltwater variety to be the official state symbol.

Naming a state fish is not mandated by the U.S. Constitution, but many states choose to do this because it represents the type of aquatic life native to the area. The practice of doing so is very common, and 45 out of the 50 states have this state symbol. Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, and Ohio do not recognize a state animal in this category. Many states that border the ocean name both a freshwater and saltwater fish in addition to a state shell. Tennessee recognizes both a sport and commercial fish, while Vermont names both a cold and warm water variety.

Ad

The process of naming a state fish may vary, but this symbol is normally chosen by that state's citizens. This might begin by a group of people asking their state representative to sponsor a bill to do this. Once a senator has agreed, residents may be allowed to vote on several different species, and the winner is then added to the final draft of the bill before it is voted on by the legislature. If the governor of that state signs the bill, the fish will become the official state symbol in this category.

Once a species is named as the official state fish, this fact may be advertised on the Internet or official state tourism documents. It is often highlighted along with state birds and animals to promote outdoor activity and recreation. Some states choose a representative that may be threatened or endangered, in which case they might devote special efforts toward the conservation of this species. This may include educating the public about the significance of the fish to that state's waters.

Trout and bass are two common examples of a state fish. Eleven states, including California and New York, have named a variety of trout, and the brook trout is the most common one. Ten states, including South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Florida, have named a species of bass, and the largemouth variety is the most popular. Some state fish represent only one state. For example, Connecticut has named the American shad, Wisconsin the muskellunge, and Alaska the salmon.

Ad

You might also Like

Recommended

Discuss this Article

jcraig
Post 4

@kentuckycat - I agree with you to an extent, but keep in mind these are just fun little things to add to the state to give it a bit of identity.

The reason why there is a state fish in so many states is because fish thrive nearly everywhere there is water and because of this, most states feel that they need to have a state fish in order to fairly address and recognize aquatic life, just as they do the state land animals.

To be hinest, these types of things do not bother me very much, as they really do not take up a lot of time and at least do contribute to the creation of the identity for the

state to compare it with other states.

It is also fun to think of why they chose such a thing in the first place and wonder what could be picked as a state sponsored thing, if there is not already one to fill that spot in the state.

kentuckycat
Post 3

@Emilski - Those are very strong words, but to be honest most of the time it is the residents of the state and in many cases school children that come up with these things and end up proposing them to the state legislatures.

Yes it may seem like it is time consuming, but these measures almost always pass when they are brought up in front of the legislatures for a vote and do not really waste a whole lot of time or money.

I will say though one thing that does annoy me is how states will usually pick the same animals. Like for example the cardinal is the state bird in nearly a dozen states and I really do not

understand why this is so, because it is not as common as other birds.

I really feel like states more or less do these things because other states have done them and they have gotten a bit bland and lost their symbolism as of late.

Emilski
Post 2

@JimmyT - I absolutely agree and feel like there are way too many things that become state sponsored that have no business being so.

In the state I live in, Illinois, we have a state dance, a state fossil, and a state snack. In all honesty what is the point of having these when the dance is the square dance and the snack is popcorn which are relatively common things?

I feel like there is always some type of movement going on to add a state something and that the politicians feel that it is a good story in the press, but in reality wastes time and gets little done.

SOmething that is state sponsored needs to have a tie to

the state either in its history or livelihood, so that makes sense why states on the east or west coasts would have a state fish, but what is the point of a state like Kansas having a state fish?

I really do not like things like this and kind of wish they would get rid of them.

JimmyT
Post 1

I have to be totally and completely hoenst. I feel that it is a complete waste of time on the effort of politicians as well as tax payer dollars to name something as simple as a state fish.

I fully understand why it is necessary for a state to pick things to represent thei state like a state flag or seal or what not but to be honest what use is there for a state fish?

I understand that some states economies rely heavily on commercial fishing, but as this article state 45 of the 50 states in the Union have a state fish and I really do not feel that something like this is necessary.

The worst part about

it legislation has to be passed to make these types of things official and because there are so many petty state sponsored things like this that get proposed all the time, I just feel that it is a waste of taxpayers money and time that could be spent by politicians doing something more productive with their time.

Post your comments

Post Anonymously

Login

username
password
forgot password?

Register

username
password
confirm
email