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

[saltcreep]

Originally Posted by Myka

If that's really how you feel, how do you justify being in the hobby? Is it one of those, "I will do it for as long as I'm allowed, even though I think it is wrong." sort of things for you?

[Maybe we should quit drilling for oil too?]

What about the millions of people who feed their families from their profits in the aquarium trade?

[You better get rid of all man-made plastics and fibers too; carpet, shoes, furniture, clothing, curtains, picture frames, stereos, TVs, canned foods, cars, cell phones, fridges, furnaces...]

In the past fish were caught with cyanide, blasting, and physically breaking apart the reef structures to catch fish. Nowadays, these things still happen but they are frowned upon and people are changing their ways. Indigenous peoples are learning about sustainable collection so there will still be species to collect in the decades to come.

I believe regulation is the answer. Not only does regulation create jobs rather than removing jobs, it also creates a sustainable practice.

Food fishing, cattle farming, oilfields...they are all much bigger problems than the aquarium trade, and all of these challenges affect the oceans and reefs more than collection does.

All straw man arguments.

This is simply about the impact the aquarium trade is having on the reefs. It is well understood that the impact by the trade is far less than those that you and others have stated. The fact still remains there is an impact. So what to do?

The answer is not an outright ban, but it comes down to sustainability. Easier said than done, but it can be done. There have been major strides made in a number of areas, but there is still a lot of work that needs to be done.

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by Myka

You have the LFS owner who can't see past dollar signs (although for good reason). He sees the wild caught fish for half the price on the fish list and can't seem to grasp the fact that landed cost (shipping, permits, losses) will often make a basic captive bred fish cheaper, like Clownfish, Dottybacks, Seahorses, Gobies, Blennies, Cardinals, and even Mandarins. He refuses to pay a reasonable price for the captive bred fish so few small scale captive breeding programs actually have any sort of profit. Most of the LFS owners involved here on CanReef tend to be fairly advanced, and more open to small scale captive breeding programs.

Are you implicating that the typical small business owner has not even the slightest notion regarding their own finances? That is a ridiculous and heavy handed assessment of the situation! Where's your evidence? Cite your sources?

No, they do not land at the same price. No, they are not identical looking animals.

Allow me to illustrate:

Typical captive-bred orchid dottyback






Typical wild-caught orchid dottyback






Typical captive-bred fang blenny







Typical wild-caught fang blenny






There is a noticeable and obvious difference in quality between these samples. This is even more obvious in the most ubiquitous captive-bred marine fish of them all, the clownfish. Next time you're looking at a CB clownfish that isn't a $300+ Grade A Picasso or whatever, look at its gills and the profile of its head. More often than not, they'll be flared and notched, in that order.

I'm all for captive rearing and all and there are definitely a few farms out there that push out high quality stock (Sustainable Aquatics in Jefferson City, TN is one of them), but the vast majority (I'm looking at you, ORA) don't seem to care about letting out only top quality fish if they're not worth triple digits. This is something that should not be supported any more than one would support a puppy mill. Yes, I'm going there. Ethics all-in.

Tack onto this that the average LANDED price (no, not every city has access to a local breeder) is often 1.5-10x higher than the LANDED price of a WC animal and you'll be quick to conclude what the "true" motivations of a typical LFS owner are.

[Myka]

And Snorkel Bob? He doesn't have clean hands either...

I've seen divers and snorkelers and dive shop owners damage the reef many times. I've seen them run their boats onto the reefs, I've seen them break corals, take them out of the water, or otherwise disturb them. I've heard them joking around about terrible things they have done and shown no remorse. They feed the fish unhealthy foods. Should we ban snorkeling and diving too?

Sunbathers on the beach bring gallons and gallons of sunscreen and tanning oils into the water. They trample the reefs and scare the fish. Maybe we should ban this too?

Let's not even bother to talk about the animal farming on land producing waste that runs off into the oceans or the food farming where fertilizers have made soil so salty it won't even grow plants anymore. Guess where those phosphate laden waters run off to?

My point is, the aquarium trade is a drop of water in a large puddle.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by albert_dao

Are you implicating that the typical small business owner has not even the slightest notion regarding their own finances? That is a ridiculous and heavy handed assessment of the situation! Where's your evidence? Cite your sources?

Many of them yes. The old school thought is to make money off the dry goods and the livestock just draw people in. Many aquarium stores expect and take a loss on livestock. Box stores and mom and pop "pet stores" tend to be in this category.

Evidence and sources? I don't think they will let me show you their price lists, losses, and finances.

No, they do not land at the same price. No, they are not identical looking animals.
There is a noticeable and obvious difference in quality between these samples. This is even more obvious in the most ubiquitous captive-bred marine fish of them all, the clownfish. Next time you're looking at a CB clownfish that isn't a $300+ Grade A Picasso or whatever, look at its gills and the profile of its head. More often than not, they'll be flared and notched, in that order.

I'm all for captive rearing and all and there are definitely a few farms out there that push out high quality stock (Sustainable Aquatics in Jefferson City, TN is one of them), but the vast majority (I'm looking at you, ORA) don't seem to care about letting out only top quality fish if they're not worth triple digits. This is something that should not be supported any more than one would support a puppy mill. Yes, I'm going there. Ethics all-in.

ORA is often chided for very poor culling practices. Many of the defects that are commonly seen in Clownfish are not genetic, rather poor culturing conditions. Even something as simple as misbarring is controlled with diet and water quality.

Good quality rearing techniques provide specimens of wild caught quality. Take Sustainable Aquatics for example. Compare a SA Clownfish to an ORA Clownfish...there is no comparison. The SA Clownfish is many times nicer than an ORA Clownfish. I have both wild caught and captive bred Orchid Dottybacks, and if I didn't tell you which one was which you would never know. Sure, there are terrible examples of captive bred fish out there, but there are also excellent examples.

[msjboy]

I think the marine fish hobby is expensive so it will be a barrier to entry for those who would care less if the livestock was any cheaper....the hobby will get even more expensive if there is qoutas or if they are all tank bred which again might be a good thing for nature proponents.

If we were abound in ref fish and cheap, i think we would have a lot more mass dieoff as people do not care. I think many people buy goldfish and they end up dead in a few months foe example,....only a few studiuos person will,ake effort to keep their stock alive instead of just replacing it

I remember when red ear turtles were $1 each at stores...and because of it, people dumped them, killed a lot by letting kids take care of it and so on. Also pet monkeys were readily available but no more....will corals and marine fish come to this...i cant say.

Msjboy

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by Myka

Many of them yes. The old school thought is to make money off the dry goods and the livestock just draw people in. Many aquarium stores expect and take a loss on livestock. Box stores and mom and pop "pet stores" tend to be in this category.

What? As an employee of dry goods wholesaler/manufacturer, I would most assuredly appreciate it if you pointed me towards these dry goods-do gooders. Barring that, I must strongly disagree. With any store worth its salt (tee hee), the exact opposite is true. Most stores rely on their livestock to carry their bottom line. Why? Because they don't want to compete in the same arena with the "big boys", businesses that have a lot of capital invested into their online marketplace and dry goods inventory. It's just not worth it to grind out the 20-35% margin vs. 100-500%+ (frags) margin on livestock.

Want some evidence? Take a look at some of the more respected businesses Stateside:

http://www.worldwidecorals.com/

http://www.aquatouch.com/index.html

http://www.vividaquariums.com/

etc, etc... Compare their livestock sections to their dry goods sections. These guys are simply not interested in competing with the likes or Premium Aquatics or BRS. Well, guess what, there are a hundred times more of these sorts of businesses than there are Premiums or BRS's. In Canada, one need look no further than J&L Aquatics vs. the world to see that the trend is reiterative rather than unique. J&L, Premium, BRS, etc have all done an incredible job of securing their place within the industry and, in doing so, have carved out a designation for most of the other businesses to make their niche (livestock).

Originally Posted by Myka

Evidence and sources? I don't think they will let me show you their price lists, losses, and finances.

Then I suppose we come to a standstill. If possible, I am hesitant to make a call to authority, but in this case, it is warranted; I have a fairly wide bird's eye view of the industry and your impression is the exception rather than the rule.

Originally Posted by Myka

ORA is often chided for very poor culling practices. Many of the defects that are commonly seen in Clownfish are not genetic, rather poor culturing conditions. Even something as simple as misbarring is controlled with diet and water quality.

ORA is representative of the CB livestock sectional.

Originally Posted by Myka

Good quality rearing techniques provide specimens of wild caught quality. Take Sustainable Aquatics for example. Compare a SA Clownfish to an ORA Clownfish...there is no comparison. The SA Clownfish is many times nicer than an ORA Clownfish. I have both wild caught and captive bred Orchid Dottybacks, and if I didn't tell you which one was which you would never know. Sure, there are terrible examples of captive bred fish out there, but there are also excellent examples.

Again, your fish/experience is the exception, not the rule.

[gobytron]

To be honest, it's because I feel at this point, anything is going to be too little too late.

At the end of the day, I firmly believe we won't have much in the way of marine aquatic life sometime in the next 50 years.

Whether its global warming or acidification the signs are already apparent that this is a sick ecosystem...

Short of some technological miracle solution...we're probably the last reefers one way or the other...


Do you really think millions of people feed their families from this hobby?

That's a lot more than I would guess.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by albert_dao

I have a fairly wide bird's eye view of the industry and your impression is the exception rather than the rule.

For crap sake Albert, I clearly stated I was talking about mom and pop and box stores. Yeesh, you even quoted what I said. If you take a look at many of the LFS that support CanReef you will notice a large livestock section and a small dry goods section. It is obvious that these stores rely on livestock sales.

ORA is representative of the CB livestock sectional.

Yes, ORA is one representative. The largest one in North America, but that's like saying all meat markets are like Extra Foods/Superstore. You can't paint them all with the same brush.

Again, your fish/experience is the exception, not the rule.

If you are basing your entire captive bred opinion on ORA-raised fish you have a very limited view.


Anyway...I'm not here to argue with you about how an LFS makes money. We've both been involved in the aquarium industry for many years, and have obviously come to different conclusions which probably came from different experiences. Ciao.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by gobytron

To be honest, it's because I feel at this point, anything is going to be too little too late.

At the end of the day, I firmly believe we won't have much in the way of marine aquatic life sometime in the next 50 years.

Whether its global warming or acidification the signs are already apparent that this is a sick ecosystem...

Short of some technological miracle solution...we're probably the last reefers one way or the other...


Do you really think millions of people feed their families from this hobby?

That's a lot more than I would guess.

I tend to agree with you, although I would give it a longer timeline, probably more like 100 years, maybe 200. Earth is resilient, look at what it has put up with already. I think it would be interesting to look into the future and see Earth's human population 1000 years from now.

Do I think that millions of people feed their families through the aquarium trade? The entire aquarium trade, yes. Not so many just in the MO trade. Think of all the collectors (corals, fish, rock), wholesalers, shippers, LFS owners and employees, captive breeders, biologists, equipment manufacturers. Not all of them rely on the MO trade 100%, but for many of them it makes a big portion of their livelihood.

[saltcreep]

Originally Posted by Myka

My point is, the aquarium trade is a drop of water in a large puddle.

And nobody is arguing that point. This simply boils down to those with a vested interest wanting to shut down the aquarium trade in Hawaii because it does impact the reef. It doesn't matter the degree or where is falls in the pecking order for damage to the reefs, simply put, the industry damages the reefs. There is no other way to put it.

This can only be "won" from a position of sustainability.