thanks Frank, for the info, let me know when you get that paper done.
I will let you ALL know.
Interesting question. Scientifically speaking, no, they should not be illegal because they are not by definition
pirana. However, some states use common names only and their logic is the fish is a pirana by name only and would be illegal.
I remember a situation in California where a dealer imported Catoprion mento for sale in Southern portion of state. They used the common name as a display and were almost immediately investigated by California Fish and Game. The fish were not confiscated from the dealer, but was told to get rid of them quickly (as in a warning or else). Such is the mentalty (then) of CF&W. Don't know if they are still like that or have changed. This happened in 1986. The name
pirana strikes terror in people's heart which is why I dislike so many references to the fish being called a killer or eating machine. This description of the fish is what gives the
pirana its reputation (as also shown in Survivor by how they portrayed the fish). Though I am a bit off topic on the wimple, it does illustrate why some states are afraid of anything called a
piranha.