|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
I have been so overwhelmed by the knew-jerk response of the hobby to legislation in the past and continuing today.
I decided to start a thread which I hope to integrate into a website in the near future.
I plan to link online articles or at least abstracts and make suggestions for and against self-policing and legislation and actions hobbyists can take to ensure the continued existence of a sustainable trade. Basically, I want to show both sides of the issue and what I feel are the most helpful things the trade can do do ensure its continuance in a responsible manner. I want the hobby to realize, too, the perceptions and data that is used - both valid and flawed - against the trade and the actions that, despite seeming to be helpful, are actually harmful.
This will be an ongoing process and I will post links and ideas over time so bear with me.
First, some background.
http://www.oie.int/boutique/extrait/mecooper_1.pdf
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
Impacts of collecting anemones
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p57957w470m1g168/
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
A master's thesis worth reading
http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/LRF/15/LRF15-Alencastro.pdf
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
on introductions
http://www.reef.org/programs/exotic
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
on lionfish sightings:
http://nas.er.usgs.gov/taxgroup/fish/lionfishdistribution.asp
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Today @ 4:39:45 PM
Posts: 3,705,
Visits: 10,267
|
|
[quote]Eric Borneman (4/25/2009)
Impacts of collecting anemones
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p57957w470m1g168/[/quote] I've noticed such decline over the years myself, where I once saw anemone/clownfish quite often, they are pretty much gone now. I find it surprising that there is still a need to collect wild clownfish when captive bred specimens are so commonly available now. Really sad and to be honest, it sort of pisses me off when I hear others online state "but the hobby has little to no impact". How can it not when millions of organisms are removed each and every year. Okay, I have to stop now as I feel a rant coming on. One last note, I have yet to see a wild blue tang!!! Something wrong with that. Chuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 11/2/2009 12:30:05 AM
Posts: 61,
Visits: 165
|
|
I think you should submit a list of Coral's or invert's, fish what not together with other experts of ONLY organism's that can never be in aquarium's not public aquariums, zoo's, private aquarium's, nobody can have not even college's and this will help with some part's the lionfish thing is a joke cause they came from boat's that have massive tank's in them to pull water in and support livestock and then drain in port and refill and leave so that is most likely how so many foreign species came to Caribbean think of all the cruise ships in the port's of florida and where all they go and then come back. So people need to look at everyone and everything before going after us hobbyist that love and respect the environment but I am sure there are a few knuckle-head's that may release not knowing what it could do to the environment.
mr.reef24
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
I made such a list and presented it to the USCRTF in 1997, then did a talk on it at the ICRS in 2000 in Bali. John Brandt and Scott Michael and others have also made such a list. This was recently revisited at an ornamentals workshop in DC last week. I realized that the species on my original list from 2000 needed amending because a lot that were unsuitable are now are not so unsuitable due to advances in husbandry.
I have an idea. Why don't we start such a list and get other's inputs? We can argue the merits or not of each. Now, to me, an unsuitable list would contain species where they are not banned, but not regularly ordered. For example, someone who really wanted to work with an animal could place an order, perhaps even fill out a form, and it may take a few weeks before it was ordered, collected and shipped, but they would get it. This would keep, for example using one I previously considered unsuitable, the harlequin filefish from being collected by the thousands to be in random retail stores for any novice to buy. Now, since they have been bred and it is possible to keep them alive especially if a tank has enough appropriate coral for them to eat, I consider them not unsuitable for captivity, just for most hobbyists. Another example - I have a standing order for a pair of fantail pipefish but I don't know when they will arrive and I certainly wouldn't see them regularly at a pet store. This would be a dynamic list that upon application showing widespread success or protocol (i.e Wittenrich, Pedersen, Moe, etc.) and no harm from collection activities in the wild could/would be removed from the list.
A lot of this has already happened passively. For example, coral eating butterflyfishes used to be collected in droves till everyone learned they died, and now they aren't collected nearly as much because there is no demand. They would be obvious candidates for an unsuitable list.
As Chuck mentioned, and as there is proof of this for the Philippines, at least, overcollection of anemones is a problem. This might be geographically relevant, as I just returned from an area where there were a lot, but would also quickly be overcollected if collectors went to the area. So managed collection is best, but if the country isn't good at that, it would be up to demand to control the flow, hence the special order process to keep, say, H. magnifica and H. crispa from being in every retail store in town only to die in the hands of the inexperienced. Also, since E. quadricolor is so easily propagated and divides naturally, shouldn't this move to cultured only and/or limited harvest? Since the ability exists, would this be criteria for unsuitable to protect wild populations? What about Acropora? Easily maricultured and aquacultured, extremely abundant, but also extremely important to reefs in terms of providing habitat and reef growth - and extremely sensitive to current threat facing coral reefs. Do we need to import wild Acropora anymore? Even though abundant and easy to grow, it is so easy to culture and select for desirable morphs, why get them from the wild.
Different examples, different situations, different reasons. I don't think you can set one set of rules for all species.
I'll start with the obvious - Banggai cardinalfish collected from the wild in the Banggai archipelago (their natural range) should be banned, but maybe not the introduced populations where they don't belong or any that are bred (I would also argue that a legitimate registry be kept for breeding programs and that introduced and native populations are monitored and managed to preserve the genetic diversity of the species to prevent cohort or population extinction).
I would say that all the azooxanthellate seafans should be on an unsuitable list requiring restrictions and special order and even if not widely collected or rare, they won't make it in almost any tank. Same with Heliofungia which is collected in large numbers, and I have never been able to keep one alive and most people, I think, would say the same.
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:07:40 PM
Posts: 449,
Visits: 2,388
|
|
the lionfish thing is a joke cause they came from boat's that have massive tank's in them to pull water in and support livestock and then drain in port and refill and leave so that is most likely how so many foreign species came to Caribbean think of all the cruise ships in the port's of florida and where all they go and then come back. So people need to look at everyone and everything before going after us hobbyist that love and respect the environment
Quite simply, the argument that the lionfish are a result of anything but captive releases/escapes is a non-starter. Genetic tests have shown that all of the lionfish in the Atlantic can trace their lineage back to a single population in Indonesia- one of the biggest areas of livestock collection for the hobby. What's more, the genetic diversity indicates the founders in the Atlantic were 6-8 individuals from that Indonesian population. That's a very important number since about 6 lionfish are known to have been released into Biscayne Bay from a broken aquarium during Hurricane Andrew. The fact that the first one was caught in the Miami area in 2000 and reports quickly spread north from there, but extremely slowly south, also suggests that that's very close to original release. The fact that they hadn't yet reached their northern limits by 2000 also indicates that the outbreak was fairly recent.
Furthermore, that number of 6-8 founders makes it extremely unlikely that the population is due to ballast water introduction. Lionfish eggs are sticky masses stuck to the substrate. It would be extremely rare for even one mass of of eggs to be sucked into a ship's ballast tank, much less 6-8 genetically distinct masses from the same area at roughly the same time, but not from anywhere else in the world. What's more, any eggs that did make it into a ballast tank would then have to survive the trip to the other side of the world. The two southern routes around either S. America or Africa would take the ship through water known to be cold enough to kill lionfish. The routes through the Panama or Suez canals require the ship to take on and offload ballast water near the entrances and exits of the canal. If they are being transported through the canals via ballast water often enough to have 6-8 separate introductions on the East Coast of the US, there should also be populations near the Atlantic/ Mediterranean ends of the canals. There are none.
I am sure there are a few knuckle-head's that may release not knowing what it could do to the environment.
There are a LOT of them, though they're underrepresented on the internet. About once a week someone comes into the shop I work at and tells me they have released Pacific fish back into local (South Florida) waters and almost every day someone mentions that they plan to do so if they can ever catch the fish in question.
If the hobby continues to bury its head in the sand and say we aren't having an impact either on the collection or introduction side we can expect heavy-handed legislation to put an abrupt end to what we love without much say from us in the matter. If we're responsible and acknowledge that there are real problems and then take steps to find solutions we can delay the need for the government to intervene and we stand some chance of working with them to find a mutually amicable solution when they finally decide real regulation is needed.
Rather than assuming there aren't knuckleheads that would release fish, talk to people. Make sure they understand why it's a bad idea. Rather than assuming that the hobby is being used as a scapegoat for environmental problems, see if any research has been done to rule out other possibilities. Rather than assuming that collection is sustainable or not, see if anyone has actually collected data on the question (in most cases they haven't). Where there is no data to say one way or the other we need to learn to say "maybe we're overcollecting" and apply the precautionary principle until we can determine what a sustainable level of use is.
Mike G.
Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana.
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:13:38 AM
Posts: 5,369,
Visits: 6,926
|
|
Very well said - and I can personally attest to the veracity of the last part! Report today that lionfish now in Roatan. That basically makes them Caribbean wide and Eastern seaboard-wide. Not to mention the dozens of other Pacific aquarium fish in Florida and Bahamas waters. The lionfish introduction is a disaster and getting worse and is very well documented. I am quite sure others, such as blue tangs and clownfish will be researched the same way soon.
_____________________
Eric Borneman
|
|
|
|