Data: Wrong; Sustainability: Don't care; Robert Wintner: Aquarium trade should stop!

[Reef Pilot]

Originally Posted by IanWR

I hope everyone who is passionate about reefs, the ocean, the environment, what have you, can always try to find points of agreement and at least understand those points where there is difference. By building on consensus, and understanding (and possibly addressing) differences, real world workable solutions can be achieved.

Ha ha... maybe they should send you over to Beirut...

I think our building on consensus is pretty good on Canreef,... too good actually,... and sometimes newbies are led down the wrong path. That's why it's good to also discuss our differences.

But I prefer to use direct experience (and listen to others with their direct experiences) to state my case, rather than just see quotes or references to others on the internet. People who just disagree (or agree) and can't back up what they are saying don't have a lot of credibility with me.

[kien]

Originally Posted by IanWR

Wintner is saying that unlike fishing for food, fishing for aquaria is a luxury that is not needed. I think we could agree on the point that aquaria are luxuries, if not on the morality of luxury.

Indeed, I think we all understand and agree that our hobby is a luxury. Taking that notion a step further, I believe that mankind has based most of his existence on luxuries. If we roll the clock back a few hundred thousand years we will find our very first few luxury items, the controlled use of fire and primitive tools. There was a time when we existed without such things so in fact, they were not requirements for life. They simple made living easier and more luxurious.

From there we had opened Pandora's box and nearly everything in our history from that point can be attributed to luxurious living. The animals that we domesticated with the help of our tools. The paper that we invented to write on. The animals that we slaughtered for clothing and housing. The vast stretches of land we claimed to grow food or cotton for the clothes on our backs. The giant holes that we dig into the ground to harvest metals or dig up oil to fuel our cars, planes, boats or manufacture plastics and rubber for the shoes on our feet. The rivers that we dam up to power our cell phones and internets. These are all luxuries. Is riding your bike really "green" ? How did your bike come to be? Did it organically spring from the earth?

The luxury and impact of marine aquaria is just a drop of water in a tidal wave of human impact.

[Reef Pilot]

Originally Posted by kien

Indeed, I think we all understand and agree that our hobby is a luxury. Taking that notion a step further, I believe that mankind has based most of his existence on luxuries. If we roll the clock back a few hundred thousand years we will find our very first few luxury items, the controlled use of fire and primitive tools. There was a time when we existed without such things so in fact, they were not requirements for life. They simple made living easier and more luxurious.

From there we had opened Pandora's box and nearly everything in our history from that point can be attributed to luxurious living. The animals that we domesticated with the help of our tools. The paper that we invented to write on. The animals that we slaughtered for clothing and housing. The vast stretches of land we claimed to grow food or cotton for the clothes on our backs. The giant holes that we dig into the ground to harvest metals or dig up oil to fuel our cars, planes, boats or manufacture plastics and rubber for the shoes on our feet. The rivers that we dam up to power our cell phones and internets. These are all luxuries. Is riding your bike really "green" ? How did your bike come to be? Did it organically spring from the earth?

The luxury and impact of marine aquaria is just a drop of water in a tidal wave of human impact.

+1.... And this will just continue,... until the next asteroid hits... In the meantime, I'll keep enjoying my reefing, flying, biking, hiking, etc, etc....

[TimT]

Naesco I don't think you understood what I was saying.

Why do you think my saying

Originally Posted by timt

In general Cleaner Wrasses from Hawaii and the South Pacific do fine while their Indo-Pacific counterparts don't have a chance.

is telling people to buy cyanided cleaner wrasses???? It is clearly the opposite as the cyanided ones don't have a chance while the Hawaiian and South Pacific ones do. Most people won't buy a fish they know doesn't have a chance.

Originally Posted by naesco

When they are imported they than die in our tanks.

There are a lot of other reasons why fish die in aquariums than not being suitable for captivity.

Originally Posted by naesco

Considering the good work they do in the sea IMO we should not be importing them if they can't survive whether it is cyanide, shipping or the nature of the fish.

Agreed that they perform a valuable function in the sea. I am aware of the study on what happens when cleaner wrasses were removed from an area. However, fish do naturally migrate to areas where there is less density of conspecifics. The populations do recover over time if the reef has not been poisoned.

Originally Posted by naesco

(BTW I do not agree with your comment that it has nothing to do with the fish).

That's fine as this is western society and people are free to express differing opinions. My opinion is based on handling thousands of cleaner wrasses over a 14 year period from a variety of different exporters and geographical regions. What is your opinion based on?

I have personally seen the mortality rates of cleaner wrasses from Philippines and Indonesia. I have also seen the markedly lower mortality rates and better long term survivability of South Pacific and Hawaiian cleaner wrasses. Obviously there are other factors at play than a supposed unsuitability to captivity.

Cheers,
Tim

[TimT]

Well said Ian.

There is another side of the equation that Wintner is missing.

Originally Posted by IanWR

Wintner is saying that unlike fishing for food, fishing for aquaria is a luxury that is not needed. I think we could agree on the point that aquaria are luxuries, if not on the morality of luxury.

I agree that for us an aquaria is a luxury. But to the divers collecting for us, our luxuries are a means to feed their families. Especially when they have over fished the food fish stocks to the point of no recovery. I think this industry can help a lot of people in the developing world if it is done correctly.

Cheers,
Tim

[naesco]

Originally Posted by TimT

Naesco I don't think you understood what I was saying.

Why do you think my saying



is telling people to buy cyanided cleaner wrasses???? It is clearly the opposite as the cyanided ones don't have a chance while the Hawaiian and South Pacific ones do. Most people won't buy a fish they know doesn't have a chance.



There are a lot of other reasons why fish die in aquariums than not being suitable for captivity.



Agreed that they perform a valuable function in the sea. I am aware of the study on what happens when cleaner wrasses were removed from an area. However, fish do naturally migrate to areas where there is less density of conspecifics. The populations do recover over time if the reef has not been poisoned.



That's fine as this is western society and people are free to express differing opinions. My opinion is based on handling thousands of cleaner wrasses over a 14 year period from a variety of different exporters and geographical regions. What is your opinion based on?

I have personally seen the mortality rates of cleaner wrasses from Philippines and Indonesia. I have also seen the markedly lower mortality rates and better long term survivability of South Pacific and Hawaiian cleaner wrasses. Obviously there are other factors at play than a supposed unsuitability to captivity.

Cheers,
Tim

My opinion is based on 24 years as a hobbyist. I am not in the industry so my opinion is not biased.

I have visited marine collectors and wholesalers in Indonesia and they confirmed what you have already stated. Indonesia cleaner wrasse rarely survive. They know this.

You say but Hawaiian cleaner wrasse are not a problem. I disagree with you totally.

Attached is a portion of a thread on a USL Unsuitable Species List discussion.



Re: Unsuitable list, bah - what about a 'collect to order' list?
Postby sdcfish » February 6th, 2010, 6:30 pm
Thales,
Also....these issues are simply regulating themselves by the economics of trading in hard to keep species.

Not many fish are going to be sold if they are difficult to keep. It starts with the collector and then travels right down the line. Let's take Hawaiian cleaner wrasse for example. We might have sold 1 all year long if that. I speak to the collectors and make sure they know not to collect them!

We do the same in other regions as well.
I know there are people/groups out there that would love to see some regulation on certain species, but it's really not necessary in my opinion.
I still believe that the SMART program will take care of the concerns of those pushing for regulation. Working on quotas that are comprised from MAQTRAC, everyone will know that the numbers collected per specie are sustainable.
In the meantime, the majority of the industry can continue to keep difficult species to a minium.
Regards,
Eric

Tim you know Eric one of the largest marine fish importers in the USA. His company is Sea Dwelling Creatures. As the above thread shows Eric uses Hawaiian cleaner wrasse as an example of a fish that should not be collected due to its poor survival rate. Eric is a respected industry person

Attached is an article in wetwebmedia.com by Robert Fenner and accomplished expert in fish and recognized as such.

Reefers need to make their own opinion based on facts/

[jorjef]

I have a fake Christmas tree, I feel bad...... please continue

[SanguinesDream]

Originally Posted by kien

Who was there to help save Neandethals from extinction?

Rugby and ale. But in all fairness that only slowed their extinction as some still manage the chance to procreate after title wins.