our impact

[[email protected]]

Hello everyone,

I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? I just left That
Fish Place and apparently it was fish receiving day. There must have
been 20 styrofoam coolers on the floor filled with new fish. Of
course, roughly 40% of them were dead. Now, I've heard the horror
stories of TFP, but these fish were dead on arrival, long before being
mishandled by the 13 year olds working at TFP. My point is, because I
wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
take home, but still....

I went to TFP to start the process of upgrading my 7 year old 30
gallon FOWLR to a 75 mixed reef, but now I'm just thinking of leaving
the hobby. Anyone else had a similar experience?

Grant

[Billy]

> wrote in message
...
> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone
> else
> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? I just left
> That


I prefer to think of the fish and critters that *do* make it to my
tanks, and strive to treat them as good as I am able.

[Michael Lawford]

Yeah myself. I guess it is similar to keeping birds....

~m

"Billy" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
>> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? I just left That
>
>
> I prefer to think of the fish and critters that *do* make it to my tanks,
> and strive to treat them as good as I am able.
>

[Mark Cooper]

"Michael Lawford" > wrote in
:

> Yeah myself. I guess it is similar to keeping birds....
>
> ~m
>
> "Billy" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
>>> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? I just left
>>> That
>>
>>
>> I prefer to think of the fish and critters that *do* make it to my
>> tanks, and strive to treat them as good as I am able.
>>
>
>
>

I think a lot has to do with the wholesaler as well. Some take much
better care of the fish than others. Support stores that use the better
suppliers if possible.


Mark

[George Patterson]

Michael Lawford wrote:
> Yeah myself. I guess it is similar to keeping birds....

Not in the U.S.. A few decades back, laws were passed that require birds sold
here to be hatched and raised here. The original laws were in response to
outbreaks of psittacosis in the 60s.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[George Patterson]

wrote:
>
> I just left That
> Fish Place and apparently it was fish receiving day. There must have
> been 20 styrofoam coolers on the floor filled with new fish. Of
> course, roughly 40% of them were dead.

Sounds like they're buying from a supplier who uses cyanide.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Rocco Moretti]

wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> My point is, because I
> wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
> to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
> take home, but still....

One way you can mitigate your guilt is to buy only tank bred/propagated
fish, live rock, invertibrates and corals, and encourage efforts to
breed & propagate aquarium inhabitants. While this certainly limits your
choices, it preserves wild stocks, and if they are bred locally (or at
least in the country) it limits transportation losses.

Drs Foster & Smith even has a special section for tank bred animals
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/scateg.cfm?pCatId=1500

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:20:03 -0500, Rocco Moretti
> wrote:

wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> My point is, because I
>> wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
>> to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
>> take home, but still....
>
>One way you can mitigate your guilt is to buy only tank bred/propagated
>fish, live rock, invertibrates and corals, and encourage efforts to
>breed & propagate aquarium inhabitants. While this certainly limits your
>choices, it preserves wild stocks, and if they are bred locally (or at
>least in the country) it limits transportation losses.
>
>Drs Foster & Smith even has a special section for tank bred animals
>http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/scateg.cfm?pCatId=1500


Thanks for the input. I'll check that out.

Grant

[Tidepool Geek]

> wrote in message
...
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? My point is, because
> I
> wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
> to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
> take home, but still....
>
Hi Grant,

It strikes me that your moral dilemma has several levels relating to the
history of the animal being considered.

1. If it bothers you to keep another living creature for no other reason
than personal enjoyment then you probably would be best served by getting
out of the hobby. OTOH: If you're OK with having a pet such as a dog or cat
or if you don't have a problem with eating meat then you shouldn't worry
about the _ethical_ keeping of aquarium pets either.

2. If your concern is about mortality connected with collecting animals from
the wild then you've got a valid concern that should be shared by everyone.
Many aquarium animals are harvested by techniques, such as cyanide, that
lead to increased mortality of both the harvested fish and his less saleable
neighbors. You do have the option, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, of
buying only captive/tank bred animals.

2a. There are some of us that are interested in collecting and keeping
animals native to our home area. If you do your own collecting then you have
control over the whole process and can limit mortality associated with both
collection and transport as well as drastically reducing 'collateral damage'
compared to what a commercial harvester might cause. Of course, if you live
in Kansas this probably isn't an option ;-).

3. If the discussion is limited to tank bred animals then it seems to me
that it's just a question of statistics - consider a fish that normally has
only 10 offspring per breeding and that is capable of breeding annually for
only two years. In the wild, just 2 offspring (10%) would be expected to
survive to breeding age. Compared to that, the TFP survival rate that you
mention (25%) looks pretty good. For an extreme example, the Giant Pacific
Octopus lays up to 60,000 eggs of which only two survive to breeding age.
That's a cradle to grave survival rate of 0.00167%!

It's all a personal decision of course but I think you can do the most good
by keeping only tank bred animals AND using your aquarium to occasionally
teach something to your family, friends, or associates about the problems
faced by the coral reef environment (or whatever habitat you happen to be
simulating). BTW: Don't go overboard on the teaching - I'm pretty sure that
we have fewer guests at our house because of the fact that I sometimes 'go
on a bit'.


Ethically yours,

TPG

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:45:06 -0700, "Tidepool Geek"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
>> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? My point is, because
>> I
>> wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
>> to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
>> take home, but still....
>>
>Hi Grant,
>
>It strikes me that your moral dilemma has several levels relating to the
>history of the animal being considered.
>
>1. If it bothers you to keep another living creature for no other reason
>than personal enjoyment then you probably would be best served by getting
>out of the hobby. OTOH: If you're OK with having a pet such as a dog or cat
>or if you don't have a problem with eating meat then you shouldn't worry
>about the _ethical_ keeping of aquarium pets either.
>
>2. If your concern is about mortality connected with collecting animals from
>the wild then you've got a valid concern that should be shared by everyone.
>Many aquarium animals are harvested by techniques, such as cyanide, that
>lead to increased mortality of both the harvested fish and his less saleable
>neighbors. You do have the option, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, of
>buying only captive/tank bred animals.
>
>2a. There are some of us that are interested in collecting and keeping
>animals native to our home area. If you do your own collecting then you have
>control over the whole process and can limit mortality associated with both
>collection and transport as well as drastically reducing 'collateral damage'
>compared to what a commercial harvester might cause. Of course, if you live
>in Kansas this probably isn't an option ;-).
>
>3. If the discussion is limited to tank bred animals then it seems to me
>that it's just a question of statistics - consider a fish that normally has
>only 10 offspring per breeding and that is capable of breeding annually for
>only two years. In the wild, just 2 offspring (10%) would be expected to
>survive to breeding age. Compared to that, the TFP survival rate that you
>mention (25%) looks pretty good. For an extreme example, the Giant Pacific
>Octopus lays up to 60,000 eggs of which only two survive to breeding age.
>That's a cradle to grave survival rate of 0.00167%!
>
>It's all a personal decision of course but I think you can do the most good
>by keeping only tank bred animals AND using your aquarium to occasionally
>teach something to your family, friends, or associates about the problems
>faced by the coral reef environment (or whatever habitat you happen to be
>simulating). BTW: Don't go overboard on the teaching - I'm pretty sure that
>we have fewer guests at our house because of the fact that I sometimes 'go
>on a bit'.
>
>
>Ethically yours,
>
>TPG
>
>
TPG

Thanks for the interest and your opinions. In response to the
domestic animal/reef fish comparison, I think there is a big
difference. Not to get on any moral high horse, but I only get
animals from shelters. My last cat, I had for 14 years; my last dog,
for only 2, but he was 16, blind and deaf when we adopted him. My
point is, for these animals, we truly are helping them by bringing
them home. These reef fish weren't having a tough life, weren't
facing euthanasia, weren't even bothering anyone when they were yanked
from the ocean because of our demand for them. Having said all that,
I realize that that I'm something of a hypocrite. I'd never shoot an
animal, but I love a good hamburger...

Incidentally, the tank raised angle sounds good to me. I can remain
in the hobby with only a fraction of the guilt. Are there any facts
out there on reef depletion? I'm a scuba diver (occasionally), and if
you read the scuba magazines, many of the world's reefs that were
teeming with fish 15 years ago are pretty barren now, due mostly to
the aquarium trade. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is
propaganda.

Anyway, thanks again for the reply. It lent some perspective.

Grant

[Yuriy Krushelnytskiy]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 04:07:00 GMT, wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:45:06 -0700, "Tidepool Geek"
> wrote:
>
>>
> wrote in message
...
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> I have a basic question to satisfy my own curiosity: Is anyone else
>>> ridden with guilt over this hobby or is it just me? My point is, because
>>> I
>>> wanted that coral beauty, the four others in the cooler with him had
>>> to die. I can rationalize it by saying that I rescued any fish I did
>>> take home, but still....
>>>
>>Hi Grant,
>>
>>It strikes me that your moral dilemma has several levels relating to the
>>history of the animal being considered.
>>
>>1. If it bothers you to keep another living creature for no other reason
>>than personal enjoyment then you probably would be best served by getting
>>out of the hobby. OTOH: If you're OK with having a pet such as a dog or cat
>>or if you don't have a problem with eating meat then you shouldn't worry
>>about the _ethical_ keeping of aquarium pets either.
>>
>>2. If your concern is about mortality connected with collecting animals from
>>the wild then you've got a valid concern that should be shared by everyone.
>>Many aquarium animals are harvested by techniques, such as cyanide, that
>>lead to increased mortality of both the harvested fish and his less saleable
>>neighbors. You do have the option, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, of
>>buying only captive/tank bred animals.
>>
>>2a. There are some of us that are interested in collecting and keeping
>>animals native to our home area. If you do your own collecting then you have
>>control over the whole process and can limit mortality associated with both
>>collection and transport as well as drastically reducing 'collateral damage'
>>compared to what a commercial harvester might cause. Of course, if you live
>>in Kansas this probably isn't an option ;-).
>>
>>3. If the discussion is limited to tank bred animals then it seems to me
>>that it's just a question of statistics - consider a fish that normally has
>>only 10 offspring per breeding and that is capable of breeding annually for
>>only two years. In the wild, just 2 offspring (10%) would be expected to
>>survive to breeding age. Compared to that, the TFP survival rate that you
>>mention (25%) looks pretty good. For an extreme example, the Giant Pacific
>>Octopus lays up to 60,000 eggs of which only two survive to breeding age.
>>That's a cradle to grave survival rate of 0.00167%!
>>
>>It's all a personal decision of course but I think you can do the most good
>>by keeping only tank bred animals AND using your aquarium to occasionally
>>teach something to your family, friends, or associates about the problems
>>faced by the coral reef environment (or whatever habitat you happen to be
>>simulating). BTW: Don't go overboard on the teaching - I'm pretty sure that
>>we have fewer guests at our house because of the fact that I sometimes 'go
>>on a bit'.
>>
>>
>>Ethically yours,
>>
>>TPG
>>
>>
>TPG
>
>Thanks for the interest and your opinions. In response to the
>domestic animal/reef fish comparison, I think there is a big
>difference. Not to get on any moral high horse, but I only get
>animals from shelters. My last cat, I had for 14 years; my last dog,
>for only 2, but he was 16, blind and deaf when we adopted him. My
>point is, for these animals, we truly are helping them by bringing
>them home. These reef fish weren't having a tough life, weren't
>facing euthanasia, weren't even bothering anyone when they were yanked
>from the ocean because of our demand for them. Having said all that,
>I realize that that I'm something of a hypocrite. I'd never shoot an
>animal, but I love a good hamburger...
>
>Incidentally, the tank raised angle sounds good to me. I can remain
>in the hobby with only a fraction of the guilt. Are there any facts
>out there on reef depletion? I'm a scuba diver (occasionally), and if
>you read the scuba magazines, many of the world's reefs that were
>teeming with fish 15 years ago are pretty barren now, due mostly to
>the aquarium trade. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is
>propaganda.
>
>Anyway, thanks again for the reply. It lent some perspective.
>
>Grant

Grant,

My opinion is that the hobby is not going to goo away when couple
people decide not to keep reef tanks. In that sense your staying or
leaving is not going to make much difference. On the other hand, even
handful of conscious aquarists can make a big difference...
In my area there are 5 specialized marine aquarium shops.
One of them sells only captively propagated livestock (mostly inverts)
and second shop is approaching that point. In addition, one of the
remaining three said that he is feeling constant pressure.

With some effort marine hobby can become *almost* self sufficient with
time (freshwater being an example)

Just my $.02 worth

Regards
Yuri

[Mislav]

> Incidentally, the tank raised angle sounds good to me. I can remain
> in the hobby with only a fraction of the guilt. Are there any facts
> out there on reef depletion? I'm a scuba diver (occasionally), and if
> you read the scuba magazines, many of the world's reefs that were
> teeming with fish 15 years ago are pretty barren now, due mostly to
> the aquarium trade. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is
> propaganda.
>

I seriously doubt that the reason of barren reefs is due to the aquarium
trade. If those fish there are cought by net, without cyanide it can not
seriously endanger fish population. The number of fish caught for aquarim
trade is insignificant compared to tons of fish caught for consumation every
day. The local people there eat fish that we keep in aquariums.
The problems are elswere, primairly IMO in local polution that pushes the
reefs away from populated areas.
Did anyone see the markets in Japan and Honk-Kong? They have pufferfish,
mantis shrimps, moray eals, tangs... all ment for consumation.
Local comunities that export fish for aquarium trade should take care in
minimizing polution and try everything that coral reefs remain beautyfoul
and attractive.

Mislav

[Marc Levenson]

I agree, Mislav. I've heard that you can eat Tang in Hawaii.. I can't
believe it. And I watched a fascinating nature show about seahorses a
few years ago, and how Asian countries were harvesting these, drying
them out and selling them as cures for anything or to be use for sexual
potentcy. It has gotten so bad that some areas are now patrolled to
keep poachers away just so the sea horse population can recover in small
sections that are off-limits.

I've also seen shows where thousands of crabs were killed (to eat I
assume) and the shells were piled high in the front yards of homes. It
was surreal, and hard to grasp mentally.

Our hobby and the industry that supports it is not the reason the coral
reefs are declining.

Marc


Mislav wrote:
>>Incidentally, the tank raised angle sounds good to me. I can remain
>>in the hobby with only a fraction of the guilt. Are there any facts
>>out there on reef depletion? I'm a scuba diver (occasionally), and if
>>you read the scuba magazines, many of the world's reefs that were
>>teeming with fish 15 years ago are pretty barren now, due mostly to
>>the aquarium trade. I wonder how much of this is true and how much is
>>propaganda.
>>
>
>
> I seriously doubt that the reason of barren reefs is due to the aquarium
> trade. If those fish there are cought by net, without cyanide it can not
> seriously endanger fish population. The number of fish caught for aquarim
> trade is insignificant compared to tons of fish caught for consumation every
> day. The local people there eat fish that we keep in aquariums.
> The problems are elswere, primairly IMO in local polution that pushes the
> reefs away from populated areas.
> Did anyone see the markets in Japan and Honk-Kong? They have pufferfish,
> mantis shrimps, moray eals, tangs... all ment for consumation.
> Local comunities that export fish for aquarium trade should take care in
> minimizing polution and try everything that coral reefs remain beautyfoul
> and attractive.
>
> Mislav
>
>

--
Personal Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com/oanda/index.html
Business Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com
Marine Hobbyist: http://www.melevsreef.com

[Pszemol]

"Marc Levenson" > wrote in message ...
> I've also seen shows where thousands of crabs were killed (to eat I
> assume) and the shells were piled high in the front yards of homes.
> It was surreal, and hard to grasp mentally.

Why is it so hard to grasp for you ?
What is big difference between eating fish/crab or eating a cow/pig ?

[Tidepool Geek]

"Mislav" > wrote in message ...
>
> I seriously doubt that the reason of barren reefs is due to the aquarium
> trade. If those fish there are cought by net, without cyanide it can not
> seriously endanger fish population. The number of fish caught for aquarim
> trade is insignificant compared to tons of fish caught for consumation
> every day.

Hi Mislav,

I'm sure that you (and Marc) are correct that the aquarium trade doesn't
contribute too much to the decline in reef health. IMHO: That's not the same
as saying that there's no problem with the trade in wild caught aquarium
specimens.

As you point out, some aquarium fish are caught by humane and efficient
means with low by-catch rates and low collateral damage rates. OTOH: There
are still a fair number of professional collectors out there who use
chemicals to increase their yield and, coincidentally, probably kill more
animals than they collect; to include killing or damaging (which comes to
the same thing) animals other than the target species.

I won't pretend to understand all the intricacies of the aquarium fish trade
but it seems unlikely that anyone can tell how a given fish was originally
caught by the time it has been through a chain of buyers, exporters,
importers, wholesalers, and vendors. [I would be happy to be corrected on
this point!] Further, there are a number of occurrences of wild caught
animals being sold for which there is insufficient husbandry information or
incorrect/incomplete identification. That sort of thing often leads to a
specimen starving or otherwise dieing after awhile in the home aquarium.

OTOH: Captive bred fish are fairly easy to identify since such animals are
virtually always identified in the seller's advertising. It's also far
easier to include correct I.D. and husbandry info for a captive bred animal
since the breeder obviously needs to know that stuff in order to have a
successful operation.

My bottom line is that, insignificant or not, the professional collecting of
wild fish and inverts is fraught with enough problems or potential problems
that we, as consumers, should avoid supporting the trade as much as
possible.

Greenly yours,

TPG

[JUNE SANDERSON]

Hi

Thank you Marc for your reply about my Bengali Cardinal.

I to feel a bit guilty about keeping fish. I have had a full tank for a
long while now and then I lost one of my tangs, he had got a bit big for the
tank. So I bought a copper band (beautiful), my large yellow tang started
on him as soon as he was in the tank, in spite of a total change of rocks.
So I put a sheet of glass across one end of the tank, hoping the tang would
get used to it, but he didn't. So I took him back and although they were
not happy they took it back. I bought 2 scooter blennies, he took to them
and were fine,then I bought the Bengal Cardinal, he had to hid all the time
in some plastic weed that I put in for him to hide. He didn't move from the
weed. So I thought if there were two of them the tank would leave them
alone. He has a little go if they got in his way but nothing serious, they
started to swim round the tank together, Success at last. Day 3 the
original one I was sorry for started on the new little one and bit all of
his tail
, so now I have the new one in a breading trap so the old one cant get him.
The old one is patrolling the breading trap and trying to get to him, he has
been in there for 24 hours now and the one I was worried about is now the
aggressor. My partner is watching all this and thinks I am cruel. Any help
would be appreciated.

June

"Tidepool Geek" > wrote in message
...
> "Mislav" > wrote in message ...[i]
>>
>> I seriously doubt that the reason of barren reefs is due to the aquarium
>> trade. If those fish there are cought by net, without cyanide it can not
>> seriously endanger fish population. The number of fish caught for aquarim
>> trade is insignificant compared to tons of fish caught for consumation
>> every day.
>
> Hi Mislav,
>
> I'm sure that you (and Marc) are correct that the aquarium trade doesn't
> contribute too much to the decline in reef health. IMHO: That's not the
> same
> as saying that there's no problem with the trade in wild caught aquarium
> specimens.
>
> As you point out, some aquarium fish are caught by humane and efficient
> means with low by-catch rates and low collateral damage rates. OTOH: There
> are still a fair number of professional collectors out there who use
> chemicals to increase their yield and, coincidentally, probably kill more
> animals than they collect; to include killing or damaging (which comes to
> the same thing) animals other than the target species.
>
> I won't pretend to understand all the intricacies of the aquarium fish
> trade
> but it seems unlikely that anyone can tell how a given fish was originally
> caught by the time it has been through a chain of buyers, exporters,
> importers, wholesalers, and vendors. Further, there are a number of occurrences of wild caught
> animals being sold for which there is insufficient husbandry information
> or
> incorrect/incomplete identification. That sort of thing often leads to a
> specimen starving or otherwise dieing after awhile in the home aquarium.
>
> OTOH: Captive bred fish are fairly easy to identify since such animals are
> virtually always identified in the seller's advertising. It's also far
> easier to include correct I.D. and husbandry info for a captive bred
> animal
> since the breeder obviously needs to know that stuff in order to have a
> successful operation.
>
> My bottom line is that, insignificant or not, the professional collecting
> of
> wild fish and inverts is fraught with enough problems or potential
> problems
> that we, as consumers, should avoid supporting the trade as much as
> possible.
>
> Greenly yours,
>
> TPG
>

[Marc Levenson]

What was hard to grasp was the depth of shells covering all the area
around those homes. It was insane, and the stench had to be horrific.
I couldn't imagine living amongst all those empty shells. I wish I
could locate the image I saw, but I don't recall where I came across it.
Thousands upon thousands of shells were just everywhere.

People eating them isn't an issue for me at all. But wouldn't you bag
it and haul it away? This was way more than the family ate that week,
and every home had these cluttering up the yard, stacked easily to their
knees. Almost like the ocean just threw up crab shells everywhere in
that neighborhood.

Oh well, without the picture, my point is hard to make.

Marc


Pszemol wrote:
> "Marc Levenson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I've also seen shows where thousands of crabs were killed (to eat I
>> assume) and the shells were piled high in the front yards of homes.
>> It was surreal, and hard to grasp mentally.
>
>
> Why is it so hard to grasp for you ?
> What is big difference between eating fish/crab or eating a cow/pig ?

--
Personal Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com/oanda/index.html
Business Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com
Marine Hobbyist: http://www.melevsreef.com

[Pszemol]

"Marc Levenson" > wrote in message ...
> Oh well, without the picture, my point is hard to make.

Maybe they were involved in some home-based business
preparing crab meat or something?

[Mislav]

> Hi Mislav,
>
> I'm sure that you (and Marc) are correct that the aquarium trade doesn't
> contribute too much to the decline in reef health. IMHO: That's not the
> same
> as saying that there's no problem with the trade in wild caught aquarium
> specimens.
>
> As you point out, some aquarium fish are caught by humane and efficient
> means with low by-catch rates and low collateral damage rates. OTOH: There
> are still a fair number of professional collectors out there who use
> chemicals to increase their yield and, coincidentally, probably kill more
> animals than they collect; to include killing or damaging (which comes to
> the same thing) animals other than the target species.
>
> I won't pretend to understand all the intricacies of the aquarium fish
> trade
> but it seems unlikely that anyone can tell how a given fish was originally
> caught by the time it has been through a chain of buyers, exporters,
> importers, wholesalers, and vendors. [I would be happy to be corrected on
> this point!] Further, there are a number of occurrences of wild caught
> animals being sold for which there is insufficient husbandry information
> or
> incorrect/incomplete identification. That sort of thing often leads to a
> specimen starving or otherwise dieing after awhile in the home aquarium.
>

You are right there. We as aquarists should do anything we can not to buy
animals caught by chemicals. I know it isn't always easy to tell wheter it's
been caught by cyanide or not. I have bought coral beauty and it did very
fine in my aquarium, ate, was interested in everything but after about two
weeks I found her lying dead on the bottom. I didn't see any indications she
was suffering from anything. My guess is that she was caught by cyanide
'cose all other fish that were in that time with her in aquarim are still
alive and well (2 years ago). So I decided not to buy fish from that store
anymore.
I know that I can't be sure if in other stores fish are caught by cyanide
but having good experience for some time with one LFS gives me peace of
mind.


> OTOH: Captive bred fish are fairly easy to identify since such animals are
> virtually always identified in the seller's advertising. It's also far
> easier to include correct I.D. and husbandry info for a captive bred
> animal
> since the breeder obviously needs to know that stuff in order to have a
> successful operation.
>
> My bottom line is that, insignificant or not, the professional collecting
> of
> wild fish and inverts is fraught with enough problems or potential
> problems
> that we, as consumers, should avoid supporting the trade as much as
> possible.

I think that every link in the chain of buyers and importers should do
everything that is in their power not to get cyanide caught fish. Besides
ecology they should also think for their buisness. If they sell poisoned
fish I think it cannot be good (long term) for their buisness

>
> Greenly yours,
>
> TPG
>

[Marc Levenson]

It was a freakin' neighborhood!

Marc


Pszemol wrote:
> "Marc Levenson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Oh well, without the picture, my point is hard to make.
>
>
> Maybe they were involved in some home-based business
> preparing crab meat or something?

--
Personal Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com/oanda/index.html
Business Page: http://www.sparklingfloorservice.com
Marine Hobbyist: http://www.melevsreef.com