U.S. Senators and Representatives recommending a ban on the international trade of wildlife.

BRS
Budmans

Doctorgori

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2019
Messages
1,692
Reaction score
1,716
Location
NE Ohio
I fully realize it is very easy to become a pariah on these forums...but even at that risk I'm going against the collective grain here:

"The COVID-19 virus was not spread internationally through wildlife, but instead through human-to-human contact."

Animal transmission likely played a party initially

"Wildlife has been legally imported into the U.S. for over 50 years without creating a zoonotic incident, and these animals pose no more threat to human health than imported and domestic animals that are already in the country."


This is just flat out wrong and irresponsibly misleading... If anyone who has been visiting or fishing in S.Fla can attest..... Threats to Human health not withstanding, but there are other impacts just as bad if not worse
Ever since well meaning Europeans "responsibly" brought starlings, pigeons, cats, et et ...N.America took a HUGE hit ecologically... our pet industry can be "responsible" all it wants to, but it can't control millions of irresponsible consumers...
 
Last edited:

Dallascowboys16

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
40
Reaction score
78
Location
Littleton, CO
I fully realize it is very easy to become a pariah on these forums...but even at that risk I'm going against the collective grain here:

"The COVID-19 virus was not spread internationally through wildlife, but instead through human-to-human contact."

Animal transmission likely played a party initially

"Wildlife has been legally imported into the U.S. for over 50 years without creating a zoonotic incident, and these animals pose no more threat to human health than imported and domestic animals that are already in the country."


This is just flat out wrong and irresponsibly misleading... If anyone who has been visiting or fishing in S.Fla can attest..... Threats to Human health not withstanding, but there are other impacts just as bad if not worse
Ever since well meaning Europeans "responsibly" brought starlings, pigeons, cats, et et ...N.America took a HUGE hit ecologically... our pet industry can be "responsible" all it wants to, but it can't control millions of irresponsible consumers...

I get your point, but trying to fix our ecological problems by banning the pet trade is like trying to put out a forest fire with a watering can. Not to mention the legislation seems to have no desire to differentiate between the illegal endangered wildlife trade and harmless aquarium fish collection.
 
Top Shelf Aquatics

Kyl

And how does it feel like, to wake up in the sun
View Badges
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
2,400
Reaction score
3,012
Location
Vancouver, Canada
Maybe a temporary ban is what this hobby needs to clean the industry, retailers and entire supply chain up from top to bottom. It's about time this hobby stops treating fish as disposable.
 
Last edited:

jcolliii

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
448
Reaction score
502
I fully realize it is very easy to become a pariah on these forums...but even at that risk I'm going against the collective grain here:

I agree. This letter is mostly about maintaining a status quo of profiting from wild-caught animals. And while I realize the letter is in response to a knee-jerk reaction, this conversation is worth having for other reasons. I will not sign.
 
Budmans

Doctorgori

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2019
Messages
1,692
Reaction score
1,716
Location
NE Ohio
Wildlife trafficking, appologies in advance for the soapbox moment here...but this is our hobby and our planet ...the conversations needs to develop further...

I get your point, but trying to fix our ecological problems by banning the pet trade is like trying to put out a forest fire with a watering can. Not to mention the legislation seems to have no desire to differentiate between the illegal endangered wildlife trade and harmless aquarium fish collection.
Agree....Yeah actually that was close to my thoughts also but the aquarium industry has some blame in Floridas aquatic invasive mess: floods, morons, et ...NTM everyone it seems has a “not in my backyard” attitude to wildlife. The fish we “consume” as pets does sometimes have a negative impact (not always)...while the numbers are a drop in the bucket compared to commercial fishing, Gordons Fish sticks and fried red snapper can’t invade ecosystems (No studies have been done on VandeKampfs “extra crispy” tho) ;Dead

I agree. This letter is mostly about maintaining a status quo of profiting from wild-caught animals. And while I realize the letter is in response to a knee-jerk reaction, this conversation is worth having for other reasons. I will not sign.
Pretty much why I didn’t either ....We need to decouple wildlife from the commodities market and local 3rd world economies, but at the same time offer sustainable alternatives .... its a negative feedback loop: rarity = more profits ... sooner or later. that swissguard basslet will equal a months salary for some enterprising Haitian ....
 

Dallascowboys16

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
40
Reaction score
78
Location
Littleton, CO
Wildlife trafficking, appologies in advance for the soapbox moment here...but this is our hobby and our planet ...the conversations needs to develop further...


Agree....Yeah actually that was close to my thoughts also but the aquarium industry has some blame in Floridas aquatic invasive mess: floods, morons, et ...NTM everyone it seems has a “not in my backyard” attitude to wildlife. The fish we “consume” as pets does sometimes have a negative impact (not always)...while the numbers are a drop in the bucket compared to commercial fishing, Gordons Fish sticks and fried red snapper can’t invade ecosystems (No studies have been done on VandeKampfs “extra crispy” tho) ;Dead


Pretty much why I didn’t either ....We need to decouple wildlife from the commodities market and local 3rd world economies, but at the same time offer sustainable alternatives .... its a negative feedback loop: rarity = more profits ... sooner or later. that swissguard basslet will equal a months salary for some enterprising Haitian ....

Totally understand your position on this. The aquarium industry is to blame for the lion fish fiasco down in Florida. Heck, I am an avid fly fisherman here in CO and the other day they found a common pleco in the Arkansas river in Buena Vista :confused:. Brook trout have displaced our native greenback cutthroat trout in our alpine lakes and streams, but enormous efforts have rescued the greenback from extinction and are helping them to repopulate their ancestral range. Zebra and quagga mussels have changed the ecological foundations of aquatic habitats around the country as well. Nile perch have ravaged the African rift lakes and driven natives to the brink. All of these disasters are the result of invasive species being where they shouldn't be, but I ask what will banning the trade of aquatics in this country do it fix it? Not to mention that the goal of this legislation is to limit the spread of novel zoonotic infections, and does not really mention invasive species.

Another thing I think should be considered is the immense educational value of properly kept wildlife. People living in most areas of the world would never have a chance to see a living, wild coral reef. I'm sure that many of us here can remember the first time you went to the public aquarium or the zoo and saw a clownfish hiding in an anemone or a giraffe grazing off of a 20 foot tall tree. Many of us have been fueled by those experiences to keep our own tiny piece of nature and get involved/gain knowledge on the issues most threatening our planet's wild places. Where I live, you can drive 30 minutes into the mountains or plains and experience nature. 60% of humans on this planet live in an urban setting and cannot do the same. Zoos, aquariums, and home hobbyists bring that experience to them and help to spark that same love for our planet that many animal keepers share. Removing that ability to see nature first hand will surely make it harder for people to love and get involved with conservation and eco friendly practices. It is so much harder to care about something you have never seen with your own eyes.

Once a sweeping ban goes into place, it will be much harder to recover the non-damaging subsets of the wildlife trade like aquarium fish collection (fresh and saltwater alike). I am very much for eliminating the most damaging and immoral parts of the wild life trade (ivory, big cat pelts, pangolin scales, etc), but I worry that a group of legislators lacking subject matter expertise could really do some damage to the aquarium hobby. That's why I signed. We'll see where this goes and what the future hold. I totally agree that things do need to change, but I worry that this issue is not as binary as many seem to think.
 
Last edited:
Corals.com
BRS

Do you worry about keeping your sump clean?

  • YES I clean it often

    Votes: 49 8.9%
  • YES I clean it occasionally

    Votes: 201 36.6%
  • NO but I'll clean it on a rare occasion

    Votes: 198 36.1%
  • No I have never cleaned it

    Votes: 82 14.9%
  • Other (please explain in the thread)

    Votes: 19 3.5%

Online statistics

Members online
1,430
Guests online
4,222
Total visitors
5,652
DD
Top