Why are these being sold????

[Ogertron3000]

I think having to order the fish would stop impulse buying, also the casual hobbyist wouldn't know about a lot of the fishif they weren't on display in the LFS. Personally due to our laws I've been shocked at the amount of ish I didn't know anything about just since I joined this forum. I was aware of arapaima but didn't know people kept them in tanks and had no idea RTC were so common in the U.S. If people aren't aware of them and you make it difficult to obtain it would help minimise them being purchased. I guess this idea wouldn't work too well in the Internet age though.
I'd also like to see some LifeSize pictures painted on to the LFS wall of full grown fish, maybe stating "fish don't grow to the size of the tank" under it. Seeing the full size of even an Oscar would shock some people, Imagine the reaction to a 10 foot arapaima painted along the wall.

 

[jaws7777]

I think having to order the fish would stop impulse buying, also the casual hobbyist wouldn't know about a lot of the fishif they weren't on display in the LFS. Personally due to our laws I've been shocked at the amount of ish I didn't know anything about just since I joined this forum. I was aware of arapaima but didn't know people kept them in tanks and had no idea RTC were so common in the U.S. If people aren't aware of them and you make it difficult to obtain it would help minimise them being purchased. I guess this idea wouldn't work too well in the Internet age though.
I'd also like to see some LifeSize pictures painted on to the LFS wall of full grown fish, maybe stating "fish don't grow to the size of the tank" under it. Seeing the full size of even an Oscar would shock some people, Imagine the reaction to a 10 foot arapaima painted along the wall.

In theory it would work but lfs are on life support in the U.S. some will blame the big box stores but many of us would also argue that its the online sales that really hurt the lfs

Putting up pics of the adult sizes is agood idea. The petco and petsmart near me do this with a brief description of the temperament of the fish.

 

[jaws7777]

Im confused by all the pro ban support. Are we disagreeing on the subject or just disagreeing because of who messenger is ?

 

[RD.]

Im confused by all the pro ban support. Are we disagreeing on the subject or just disagreeing because of who messenger is ?

I thought that you were bowing out of this conversation, Frank? lol

All what pro ban support? 1 person? I'm not pro ban, for large species such as pimas. I'm pro education, and pro pre-order if logistically possible for the vendor. Yes, obviously millions of smaller tropical fish regularly die in this hobby, many long before they ever reach a hobbyists tank. That's a cruel reality of our little hobby. Does that mean that we should support stupidity? Support the sale of Arapaima to kids with more money than brains? Not carrying fish such as Arapaima is not going to put a LFS out of business.

 

[CarpCharacin]

Carp shouldn't be banned, they have superior intelligence compared to the other fish.

 

[skjl47]

Im confused by all the pro ban support. Are we disagreeing on the subject or just disagreeing because of who messenger is ?

Hello; I am not sure how to answer this specific question simply because I have lost track and do not recall who this messenger you refer to happens to be.

Because I taught biology and physical sciences for over three decades there was reason for me to keep up with the invasive species issues. From my perspective the invasives are a threat and an economic issue equal to any other of the doom and gloom issues. Many invasives have been introduced by "accident" such as a stowaway in cargo or flushing a bilge tank.

However some others were released by hobbyist who did not have the guts to kill a pet they could no longer keep. Lots of examples of this for aquarium fish so far. I am fairly confident most all on this forum agree with the "never release an aquarium fish into the wild" sentiment. I do, however, know of folks who have done just that and done it recently. Last time I learned of it I did the "never do that spiel", but could tell the guy was just being polite and did not believe me.

So where do I stand on bans? I guess I must reluctantly be in favor of some bans. Just too many irresponsible folks have already shown we cannot depend on them to do the right thing. As to what species to ban, that is another question. I guess a selfish answer would be to allow all the species I happen to like and to ban the ones I do not care about.

Please discount my opinion if it goes against your point of view and accept it if it happens to be in line with what you already think.

 

[jaws7777]

Hello; I am not sure how to answer this specific question simply because I have lost track and do not recall who this messenger you refer to happens to be.

Because I taught biology and physical sciences for over three decades there was reason for me to keep up with the invasive species issues. From my perspective the invasives are a threat and an economic issue equal to any other of the doom and gloom issues. Many invasives have been introduced by "accident" such as a stowaway in cargo or flushing a bilge tank.

However some others were released by hobbyist who did not have the guts to kill a pet they could no longer keep. Lots of examples of this for aquarium fish so far. I am fairly confident most all on this forum agree with the "never release an aquarium fish into the wild" sentiment. I do, however, know of folks who have done just that and done it recently. Last time I learned of it I did the "never do that spiel", but could tell the guy was just being polite and did not believe me.

So where do I stand on bans? I guess I must reluctantly be in favor of some bans. Just too many irresponsible folks have already shown we cannot depend on them to do the right thing. As to what species to ban, that is another question. I guess a selfish answer would be to allow all the species I happen to like and to ban the ones I do not care about.

Please discount my opinion if it goes against your point of view and accept it if it happens to be in line with what you already think.

Oh no i definitely am not arguing against bans on invasives or rare fish. My comment was not directed towards you

 

[RD.]

I think the fine is $50000 for importing banned animals. not sure what it is for having one but it will be more than $1000 and result in the animal being destroyed.



That's right, trying to make an example of a ban that doesn't work. A 3 hour drive to buy a banned fish from another state isn't really effective. In this case the border between the states is a river so if you were stupid enough to let a koi go in it then as long as the koi swims north not South It wouldn't enter forbidden territory!



Common carp have destroyed native populations of fish in all rivers here. They are a huge problem that I don't think,can be solved It's too cold in winter for cichlids or plecos to survive here but up north I can only imagine what some convicts released into a lake could do.Also Indian mynah birds, rabbits, cane toads and many more have made an impact so do agree bans are necessary to avoid situations like you describe. I don't like the inconsistency when it comes to aquarium fish but obviously have a vested interest in it. It seems strange I can buy a reed devil but not Trimacs or comet goldfish but not koi etc.

I was simply using 1K as an example. I understand that the fines for importing banned fish are much larger. My point being when large fines are involved, honest people stay honest. Obviously this won't stop everyone. And this is the problem when government agencies are forced to get involved, sometimes the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. Bans are created in the hopes of stopping the vast majority, not 100% of the morons or dishonest crooks of the world. No different than speed limits, and the associated fines. ​

 

[jaws7777]

I thought that you were bowing out of this conversation, Frank? lol

.

Is it acceptable to you that i continue being involved ? Lets say im ready to jump back in the ring.

I get your not for banning primas, no one is arguing that education is a bad thing. If i was incorrectly interpreting your comments forgive me.


Rd post 156
"So no, IMO the carp/koi ban in AU is not a perfect example of bans gone wrong. It's a perfect example of why govt agencies have had to step in and create more legislation, red tape, and outright bans in certain states"

Post 178
"Bans are created in the hopes of stopping the vast majority, not 100% of the morons or dishonest crooks of the world. No different than speed limits, and the associated fines"

Yet here your comments are....
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/threads/do-you-agree-or-disagree.694197/

"Making fish illegal doesn't stop the death of those fish, or any other fish, it doesn't even make a blip on the radar. If saving fish is a life choice that you want to make, join PETA, because this most certainly isn't the place for you"

So in essence you agree with everything ive said. As i am basically agreeing with you.


Stanzzz
"Alex I'm not trying to be confrontational and I hate cruelty as much as anyone,but you yourself had a pacu and have in the past recommend silver dollars for a 55 gallon.
We are all a little guilty of what you are saying but I don't feel banning these fish from sale is the answer.
I can't house a rtc fairly but there are plenty here on mfk that can.
I don't see a solution to fish being unfairly housed unless we ban them all,and who wants that? I know I don't"

Stanzzz agrees with me opinion in the older thread but not here.



Comments from this one on prima
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/threads/about-arapaima.662698/
"A handful? Really?

Think about it. How many people in tropical climates have massive ponds on their land? Hundreds, thousands, millions? Lots of people can house fish this large."

Again agreeing with me.

"I wonder what kind of "proof of habitat", or special order red tape, feeder fish should require? Do you not hear yourselves? As soon as you begin the slide down that slippery slope, you might as well join PETA"

Theres another agreement

Yet in this current thread :
Rd post 159
I believe that
Zoodiver once stated that in his opinion an adult Arapaima requires a minimum of 15,000 gallons. His pima grew to 6ft in the first two years
But not a ton of people out there that have that kind of set up to house an adult Arapaima"

Rd post 156
So no, IMO the carp/koi ban in AU is not a perfect example of bans gone wrong. It's a perfect example of why govt agencies have had to step in and create more legislation, red tape, and outright bans in certain states



You are hammering home the invasive species narrative but no one to my recollection disagrees with this. The OP of this thread was banning the sale of fish because of improper care.

 

[RD.]

I honestly don't care what you do, Frank. I just thought that it was funny, posting a big announcement with odd pics included that you are leaving, then here you are again. Okay then ....

BTW - Seeing as you are the quote etiquette police, my full quote from above was:

"This hobby is cruel, and selfish. Millions upon millions of both freshwater & marine fish die every year during collection, transportation, while in holding tanks, ponds, vats, and of course in our tanks. Making fish illegal doesn't stop the death of those fish, or any other fish, it doesn't even make a blip on the radar. If saving fish is a life choice that you want to make, join PETA, because this most certainly isn't the place for you."

My stance has never changed, and I'm not sure why you feel that I was disagreeing with you about banning fish? I have never said that large fish should be banned, and posting that comment when I tagged Matt Zoodiver, above, never supported outright bans of this species either.

WTF are you talking about? lol

Invasive species wasn't brought up by me, do I need to go back and quote you, in the infant manner that you just did to prove my point? You previously used snakeheads to support your earlier view, I clarified why only a partial species ban on snakeheads (invasive species) was not realistic due to identification at juvenile/fry stages. You later used the comment about koi (deemed noxious/invasive in AU) from our AU members to support your view (bans don't work), which again I had to come back and clarify why those bans are in place.

You seem to want to go back & forth, but when others do you proclaim that we are somehow in support of banning the fish mentioned by the OP? Ummm, nope, never said that. lol

I'm not hammering home anything, I was simply attempting to clarify for those that are apparently fairly ignorant on the subject.