Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Help! Am I crazy?

Started by Guest_augustaranger_* , Jan 11 2008 08:28 PM

Prev

Next

Please log in to reply

72 replies to this topic

#21 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 03:03 PM

But if we start a "ban anything that could colonize our waters" campaign...we are on a terribly slippery slope, that may come back to haunt us all

Be very afraid, now is the time to be proactive. Aquarists are already on this slippery slope. There are many ecologists who unfortunately feel strongly that the solution to aquarium "escapes" is to not give the general public that option at all, since a few have demonstrated they can't handle the responsiblity.

Here's the cover of last month's Fronteirs in Ecology and the Environment:

http://www.frontiersinecology.org/

This is a BIG journal.

One way to get involved is through Habitattitude:

http://www.habitattitude.net/

It's only through cooperative organizations like this that bring all stakeholders to the table that we'll still be keeping fish in the next decade.

Todd

Back to top

#22 Guest_Nightwing_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 03:37 PM

Be very afraid, now is the time to be proactive. Aquarists are already on this slippery slope. There are many ecologists who unfortunately feel strongly that the solution to aquarium "escapes" is to not give the general public that option at all, since a few have demonstrated they can't handle the responsiblity.

Here's the cover of last month's Fronteirs in Ecology and the Environment:

http://www.frontiersinecology.org/

This is a BIG journal.

One way to get involved is through Habitattitude:

http://www.habitattitude.net/

It's only through cooperative organizations like this that bring all stakeholders to the table that we'll still be keeping fish in the next decade.

Todd

Todd, it's not even "just" fish keeping that's in the crosshairs.
The anti-everything groups such as Greenpeace, HSUS, and others, would have us ban the ownership of all animals for both pet use and consumptive use....yep, everything. One way to do this, is use the "invasive" approach, and get the groups that SHOULD be united against them(pet trade, anglers, hunters, farmers, pretty much everyone interested in nature in any form) fighting amongst themselves.
I've already seen it happen in parts of the hunting/angling sector..and I can very easily see it happening in a "native vs imported" fish keeping situation.

Back to top

#23 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 03:49 PM

I'm not talking about religious zealots (PETA etc). Nobody who can make a real decision takes these people seriously. I swear they exist for the sole purpose of richly lining the pockets of Conservative Talk Radio hosts. How ironic.

I'm talking about relatively sane professional people who are in charge of POLICY.

And they're coming to a very sane, pragmatic decision on this topic, as far as they're concerned.

It certainly doesn't help to have the zealots whistling in their ears either.

My advice is to not linger your thoughts on loud mouthed marginalized Liberal Fundamentalists... It's the same blame game they play. Instead, give your energy focus in programs that the rest of us can participate in, such as Habitattitude.

Todd

Back to top

#24 Guest_Nightwing_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 04:20 PM

Actually, a huge number of people do take them seriously, as much through ignorance as anything. However..your point is well taken and that looks like a great organization you linked!

Back to top

#25 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 04:45 PM

And some of that sanity is arrising from the fact it is a whole lot easier to blanket ban rather than sit back and wait and take a reactive approach. It takes heat off managers too by allowing them to say "hey we said no _______ because they could risk the fishery". In turn it is also (or seems) alot cheaper to blanket ban and hope for the best compared to dealing with an exotic after it becomes imported, released, and entrenched.

Back to top

#26 Guest_Nightwing_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:00 PM

And some of that sanity is arrising from the fact it is a whole lot easier to blanket ban rather than sit back and wait and take a reactive approach. It takes heat off managers too by allowing them to say "hey we said no _______ because they could risk the fishery". In turn it is also (or seems) alot cheaper to blanket ban and hope for the best compared to dealing with an exotic after it becomes imported, released, and entrenched.

The problem again though is that almost every animal currently in domestication, can become an invasive in the right circumstances. Hogs go feral, range cattle cause massive damage(erosion in particular, as well as habitat destruction), almost every commonly kept aquarium fish has the potential to go feral, and even the most common mammal pets(cats and dogs..cat's in particular) have the potential.
I could make the argument that feral cats, hogs, and range cattle area perhaps THE most damaging animals we have at the moment.(although..I"m sure I'm overlooking something obvious!).
I just think that if we go this route, that our ability to keep fish of any kindl be gone far quicker then we realize. There is not any technical difference between a ban on potentially invasive fish, and that on potentially invasive mammals. The former will almost inevitably lead to the latter, given time.

Back to top

#27 Guest_farmertodd_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:30 PM

There is not any technical difference between a ban on potentially invasive fish, and that on potentially invasive mammals.

Sure there is.

One of them, people already make a TON of money on and supplies food and money for people to grow corn, which our government gives those people a ton of money to keep the cows coming home.

The other... Not so much

Bottom line is... ADM isn't gonna just roll over and switch products because vegetarianism is more ecologically sustainable and some big mouthed liberal made this great case for eating lower on the food chain. Corn-as-feed is too danged easy. Hell, they want to turn it into gasoline now. I don't even have to bother getting into the livestock cartels.

So who takes the zealots seriously? I'm curious.

In any case, don't count on aquarists having a great voice in your state capital. Time to team up!

Todd "Corn is not the Answer" Crail

Back to top

#28 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:44 PM

There are already bans on different taxa, plant and animal. Even though there are bans they are still violated by gardening stores, pet stores, etc. All your arguements are valid, some of us are unfortunately on both sides of the fence. Controlling megafauna, small mammals, plants, is somewhat easier than aquatics especially invertebrates and something like VHS. At the same time, would you like to be able to collect and possess native fish X or would you like to know that native fish X exists? Our ability to collect many native fishes may very well vanish because they vanish. I dont think anyone (including myself) here has advocated the route of a blanket ban either just pointing out there are instances where it exists and instances of the momentemum to move in that direction.

Not every user group you mentioned in a previous post is going to be united against these types of regulations, recreational fisherman especially. Petco cares about N.A. aquatic diversity as much as they do about educating people about the problems (and legality) with releasing fish. In all honesty, if we are educating people about releasing exotic pets at the pet store it's really too late.

I think that exotic and invasive are being used little too loosely and incorrectly, there are differences. :biggrin:

Back to top

#29 Guest_drewish_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:44 PM

I thought this was a WCMM thread? Or has the other thread merged into this one as well?

Back to top

#30 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:49 PM

Yeah pretty much. (guilty)

Back to top

#31 Guest_butch_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 05:54 PM

Are they having debate about barnyard animals?

I thought we supposed to doing about the mountain minnows? I think they should be collected almost all of them and give them away to some folks on this forum and do something about it.

Back to top

#32 Guest_keepnatives_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 07:36 PM

I caught a female white cloud in a creek up here in NY state several yrs back only one I could find though. It was quite healthy. Check with those kids they may have more info then they were giving. If you can find out who dumped them you could talk to them in a nice way. Definately make regular collections in that creek and maybe you can reverse whatever damage has been done if it was a recent dump.

Mike

Back to top

#33 Guest_drewish_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 07:54 PM

I will be in Augusta in a few months. I'd be happy to assist in removal of the white clouds. Let me know if this is possible.

Back to top

#34 Guest_butch_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 08:35 PM

Maybe ill ask some people if they wanted some feral WCMM, I really hate to see them had to put down for no reasons, unless they can be use as feeder or aquarium fishes. Just set up some tubs and put them into then give them away to the serious fishkeepers only. You can even put your ad in our trade dock post if drewish says its okay. I can ask some people in Minnesota Fish keeper forum if you want me to.

Its not really WCMM'S fault and at last they are not biggest or worsiest of ASIAN CARP species.

Back to top

#35 Guest_augustaranger_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 08:40 PM

The verdict is in: white clouds. There is still the question of contacting DNR. Not sure if I would be a hero, or if I would be tarred and feathered.

The kid who told us about the fish lived at the end of our street for about six years. The family moved to another school district a while back. She was here visiting and showed us the ditch behind her former house. The house is currently for sale. Access to the ditch is within the fenced yard. If the house sells, I doubt anyone could get to the ditch. I'll look on a map to see if I can see another access point.

I am willing to make them available to others on this forum, but I have never shipped or received fish through the mail, and don't really know how to do that. I have a fair number and could get probably get a lot more. Maybe I could trade some white clouds for the yellow fin shiners that I wanted in the first place. When I first got the fish, I was kind of excited that I finally had some native fish. It's really bizarre that I wound up with fish from China and still don't have any natives.

Back to top

#36 Guest_butch_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 09:39 PM

Well you can check posts about the shipping in this forum, they are not hard. You can ask new owners if you can go collecting fish in the ditch.

I think we need to make a plan of what to do with feral WCMM. My plan is we need to find a group of serious fish keepers, like us and few people in other forums whose will take some of feral WCMM for aquarium purposes only. But its up to you.

Back to top

#37 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 11:24 PM

I think a certification process for pet owners should be mandatory; they would have to know enough to pass tests on proper husbandry and environmental responsibility. It's probably not going to happen, though.

I agree, we don't have enough government supervision in our lives.

Back to top

#38 Guest_Newt_*

Guests

Posted 14 January 2008 - 10:42 AM

Well, it's that, or just keep spending all those futile tax dollars on the failing battle to deal with the consequences of irresponsible pet ownership. There's not a fun solution.

Back to top

#39 Guest_Elassoman_*

Guests

Posted 15 January 2008 - 12:13 PM

Let's get back to the white clouds. What is the exact locality where they were collected? Is this the first report of white clouds in the southeast? Superficially, they appear to be a real threat to species such as Pteronotropis, due to their shared behavior and ecology.

Has Georgia DNR been notified?

We have no information to suggest that this species is not a threat to native species, so it is premature to consider this invasion as harmless. In my opinion, a little freaking out is in order.

Someone has already volunteered to assist with removal. If a trip is planned, please notify me; kwksand@yahoo.com. I'll bring a leatherman.

Back to top

#40 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guests

Posted 15 January 2008 - 01:05 PM

I'm not aware of Tanichthys albonubes being found as a reproducing population anywhere in the US. It is not really a surprise however and it should be reported to the DNR and USGS: http://nas.er.usgs.g...htingReport.asp