GAR TALK

 On recent paddle up Tranters Creek near Washington, NC, the water, particularly in certain reaches, was churning with longnose gar surfacing (often called rolling) and leaping. It was a beautiful day on the creek, and I was reporting on it to my wife Lynn, who was not able to accompany me. When I indicated that I wished she had been there, she indicated that she had no interest in paddling through "gar soup," as I called it. She finds them "icky," and referred to them as primitive, unevolved, gill-less, top-breathing bottom feeders (OK, I am paraphrasing and embellishing here). Though I have nothing against gar I did not argue as I thought it was not an inaccurate characterization.

Gar party on Tranters Creek, NC

But I was wrong.

Longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus) are indeed often described as primitive, because they have retained some primitive features, such as a spiral valve intestine and ganoid scales. They are olive brown to green in color, and their scaly armoring, torpedo shape, and long, toothy, spear-like snout do make them look like unevolved Jurassic killing machines. It seems they have been around for at least 100 million years, which would place them in the Cretaceous (younger than Jurassic but still dinosaur times), but in the U.S. fossils date only to the Pleistocene. 

Longnose gar in the N.C. Aquarium at Fort Fisher

Unevolved, they are not; they are actually highly adapted to their habitats. They are indeed gill-less. Instead they have a swim bladder that allows them to breathe air or water, which in turn affords them success in waters with low dissolved oxygen (DO), a frequent hazard for fish in the estuaries and swamps of the southeastern U.S. Their surfacing is the air-breathing part, and when they are churning the water as they were recently on Tranters Creek (I have seen similar gar parties in other creeks and swamps) it probably indicates low DO. Longnose gar are not bottom-feeders, or at least not exclusively or primarily. They generally eat small fish, and occasionally crustaceans and insects, wherever they find them. 

Longnose gar distribution in the U.S.A.

The species is mostly freshwater, but has been found in salinities up to 31 ppt, nearly that of ocean water. They are quite common in estuaries of the Pamlico-Albemarle Sound system, where they come out of the freshwater to feed on menhaden. They are found in lakes, ponds, swamps, and slow-moving rivers and creeks. 

                                                    Longnose gar from eastern N.C.

Fun gar factoids:

•The species was first named (though the genus was later renamed) by Carl Linnaeus, the father of biological taxonomy, in 1758. The name Lepisosteus osseus is derived from lepis (Greek for scale) and osteos (Latin for bony). 

•The North Carolina record for longnose gar has been broken twice so far in 2025, first in the Intracoastal Waterway near Coinjock, and then in a quarry pond near Maysville. The world record (25.5 kg) was caught by a bowfisher on Lake Palestine in east Texas. 

•Longnose gar can reach 2 m in length. The ones I see in the swamps of the Carolinas are generally in the 0.5 to 1 m range. 

•Longnose gar are known to breed and hybridize with the even bigger and scarier looking alligator gar (Atractosteus spatula), but that only happens in the Gulf Coast and lower Mississippi/Ohio River valleys. Alligator gar are not found along the SE coast. 

87.5 kg alligator gar from the Trinity River, Texas (https://www.reddit.com/r/Fishing/comments/13n2cte/alligator_gar_193_lbs_trinity_river_texas/#lightbox)

More information at animalia.bio.

WATER TUPELO AND LOGGING LEGACIES

In an earlier post I noted that there are some swamps along the lower Neuse River, NC that are almost entirely dominated by water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica). Water tupelo is a common swamp tree in the area, and is known to dominate some stands, but usually (even when dominant) co-occurs with other species such as bald cypress (Taxodium distichum). But some areas along the Neuse and its side-channels contain almost nothing else in the overstory, canopy-tree layer in the swamp interiors (some cypress occurs along the channel margin, though water tupelo is still dominant). 

The most likely explanation is logging for cypress. Where most or all cypress is removed—which apparently was common when the trees were of good commercial quality—only tupelo (Nyssa aquatica and/or N. Biflora, swamp tupelo) among potential dominant canopy trees in frequently flooded swamps, were left behind as a seed source. Thus tupelo were left standing, and able to reproduce. Some tupelo has historically been cut (in the New Bern/Craven County Public Library I found a few early 20^th century advertisements for “swamp gum” lumber; Nyssa species are also referred to as tupelo gum, black gum, swamp gum, and sour gum)..

Though there is a clear historical record of cypress logging in the region, I have tried without success to learn anything about the specific logging and forestry history of the lower Neuse—i.e., what tracts were cut and when. To confirm the logging interpretation of the tupelo dominance, I visited these water tupelo-dominated swamps again, specifically to looked for sawed-off cypress stumps.

Sawed-off bald cypress stumps (with 2 uncut trunks in the foreground) and regrowth along the Northeast Cape Fear River 

Sawed stumps are a sure indicator of at least some tree harvesting, and as cypress wood is famously decay-resistant, you would expect at least some of all but the most ancient to remain—but no. Cypress logs at the bottom of a river or cypress stumps and roots buried by sediments can indeed last for very long periods, and cypress lumber is exceptionally durable. But cypress stumps in hot, wet swamps of the southeastern U.S. apparently don’t last more than a few decades. I have seen some sawed stumps around the area, but on my recent expedition specifically looking for them in the water tupelo swamps did not turn any up, which is not too surprising if the logging occurred in the early 20^th century. 

Stumpless tupelo swamp where cypress harvesting occurred sometime in the early 20^th century.

Neuse River swamp near Fort Barnwell, NC logged between 2012 and 2014, photographed in 2023. 

Another potential fate for cypress stumps is that they serve as “nurse” sites for tupelo or other trees. As shown below, it is not unusual for downed logs and stumps to be sites for establishment of new trees. In time, it seems possible that a water tupelo base could simply cover a stump as the latter rots away.

Sawed cypress stumps supporting new growth of water tupelo and other trees.

Apparently, however, cypress knees do not decay nearly as quickly. Throughout many of the tupelo stands cypress knees are evident even where no cypress trees are nearby. This clearly shows a cypress-to-tupelo transition, or more likely a mixed cypress-tupelo to nearly-complete tupelo domination of the canopy. 

Cypress knees in water tupelo swamp with no living cypress nearby.