check out the lightning maroon....

mrbigshot · Apr 5, 2010

a local breeder bought it here but its not doing good. the fish had issues so he did a formulin dip and the mix ratio was wrong (the formulin was so strong from the factory i guess). its doing better than the saddleback he was pairing it to but it still wont eat. mpeterson bought it.

The Lightning Project - The ongoing saga of the PNG Lightning Maroon Clownfish Breeding Project

Ret_Talbot · Apr 5, 2010

mrbigshot said:
a local breeder bought it here but its not doing good. the fish had issues so he did a formulin dip and the mix ratio was wrong (the formulin was so strong from the factory i guess). its doing better than the saddleback he was pairing it to but it still wont eat. mpeterson bought it.

The Lightning Project - The ongoing saga of the PNG Lightning Maroon Clownfish Breeding Project

Just a clarification here: the PNG lightning maroon clownfish was not being paired with the saddleback. The PNG lightning maroon clown is being paired with a "normal" maroon clown from the same reef.

My understanding is that the manufacturer's instructions on the Formalin dosing are confusing at best, inaccurate at worst. To wit: "It turns out that potentially there may be straight up conflicting treatment instructions in their documentation that would result in a 10-fold difference in medication levels depending on which instruction you followed." That's from Matt's blog: The Lightning Project - The ongoing saga of the PNG Lightning Maroon Clownfish Breeding Project

Hang in there, PNG lightning maroon clown! And keep up the good work, Matt! We're all rooting for this one.

Troylee · Apr 5, 2010

That's sad!!! Hope it works out... It's boiling down to that ingnorant money thing now!!! That fish was happy and healthy and people saw dollar signs and now his life is in jepordy....

Ret_Talbot · Apr 5, 2010

troylee said:
That's sad!!! Hope it works out... It's boiling down to that ingnorant money thing now!!! That fish was happy and healthy and people saw dollar signs and now his life is in jepordy....

How so? I'm not sure I see your point, Troylee.

Troylee · Apr 5, 2010

that clown is decent size, which means he has been around for awhile and was doing his thing....im not saying blue zoo didnt do a responsible thing, they for sure did, by not just giving it to anyone, but i think if it was left alone and nature took it's course we might start seeing these pop up alot more in the ocean. it was collected for one reason in mind to sell, not to study or learn more about etc....im almost suprised there isnt some kind of law on it, like the endangered species list...i dunno just grumpy this morning and reading that article made it worse lol....

sorry....

Ret_Talbot · Apr 5, 2010

troylee said:
that clown is decent size, which means he has been around for awhile and was doing his thing....im not saying blue zoo didnt do a responsible thing, they for sure did, by not just giving it to anyone, but i think if it was left alone and nature took it's course we might start seeing these pop up alot more in the ocean. it was collected for one reason in mind to sell, not to study or learn more about etc....im almost suprised there isnt some kind of law on it, like the endangered species list...i dunno just grumpy this morning and reading that article made it worse lol.... sorry....

I hear ya, and I'd probably agree if this was a rare species, but the species is plentiful on this reef and the collection is well under the total allowable catch (TAC) for the species. While it's true the variant is rare, I'm not so sure that removing two in as many years has significantly impacted the frequency of the variation. We are not even really sure if this anomaly is environmental or genetic.

To the larger point, the hobby is dependent upon wild caught animals (unlike the freshwater hobby, which is dependent upon aquaculture). The future of the saltwater hobby will hopefully be a better balance of wild collection and aquaculture, but I do believe that wild collection of some species is a good thing. This is, I believe, one way that the hobby can provide socio-economic development and encourage reef conservation in developing island nations. That is actually why I wanted to go to Papua New Guinea in the first place--to continue my longterm research on the impact of the hobby on locals and local resources.

In short, if well managed, "seeing $" in marine aquarium fish is not categorically a bad thing, although I admit that the "well managed" part is the trick.

Does that make sense? It's my two cents, at least, on a rainy Southern California morning.

Troylee · Apr 5, 2010

It's understandable and I know what your saying there is plenty of maroon clowns everywhere but that particular one, there has only been 2.... We all know if there was more they would be collected also $$$$$$$ I hope the fish makes it and everything works out as planned so next time they see one it gets a pass and continues to live and do it's thing where nature intended him to...

Ret_Talbot · Apr 5, 2010

troylee said:
It's understandable and I know what your saying there is plenty of maroon clowns everywhere but that particular one, there has only been 2.... We all know if there was more they would be collected also $$$$$$$ I hope the fish makes it and everything works out as planned so next time they see one it gets a pass and continues to live and do it's thing where nature intended him to...

This is a great discussion--thanks! There have only been two PNG lightning maroon clownfish collected in that fishery management area, but the FMA is quite large and has less than twenty fishers fishing it for marine aquarium fishes. In other words, just because they have not been collected doesn't mean they are not out there. Other variants have been collected, but it's just that the lightning maroon we are discussing here is the most dramatic.

Now here is a novel idea: it could be argued that the fish actually has a worse chance of survival on the reef. I know, I know...I'll get a lot of grief for saying that, but I'm simply sharing a point of view that came up in two separate and unconnected interviews. Because this is an anomaly, it could be argued that "nature intends" the fish with the anomaly to either 1) be successful because the anomaly gives it some advantage (e.g., in regard to predation, mating, etc.) or 2) be unsuccessful because the anomaly gives it some disadvantage (e.g., in regard to predation, mating, etc.). In this case, it seems the latter is more likely, and, as such, it could be argued this fish has a better chance of survival (and mating) in an aquarium than on the reef.

Now the next question has to do with the ethics of breeding for an anomaly, and that is ground Matt and I have been over in previous interviews.