I hope HR 669 Passes

[Sever0n]

Has anybody contemplated the effect this is going to have on our already suffering economy? Hardly any LFS, No delivery drivers, no Distributors eventually that chain heads over seas and effects those third world countries where alot of these fish come from. working for a LFS We no longer make a profit of supplies due to Foster and smith and some of these other online retailers we depend on what income from fish we get. this Bill will effectively close us down very quickly.

 

[cguarino30]

Has anybody contemplated the effect this is going to have on our already suffering economy? Hardly any LFS, No delivery drivers, no Distributors eventually that chain heads over seas and effects those third world countries where alot of these fish come from. working for a LFS We no longer make a profit of supplies due to Foster and smith and some of these other online retailers we depend on what income from fish we get. this Bill will effectively close us down very quickly.

I can empathize with your position (I recently lost my job), and truly hope things get better for you, but as for the economy as a whole, I don't think the entire pet industry itself constitutes a significant part of it to cause any widespread damage. There will still be things to ship, even fish to ship (the non-invasive ones) and things to sell, etc.

In response to another post about fish smuggling:

I think that the assumption that black marketeers would be any less proficient at packing fish and keeping them alive in transport shows a lack of knowledge of smugglers. I'm not pro-smuggling, but if the fish were worth enough for some people to break the law to sell them, those people are probably going to take the time to make sure they don't lose their investment. In my experience (I lived in East Africa for a while) Black Marketeers are usually the most expert, most talented, and most capable people in a given industry. I used to buy LEGITIMATE<--(please notice that word) goods from them just because I knew they'd be better quality, or the black marketeers wouldn't even bother with them.

If you really want to stop fish from dieing in transport, you should stop buying them from mass farms in Florida and SE Asia, or from stores that buy them in such bulk that they generally assume a 10-20% loss just from packaging.

 

[Sever0n]

no it doesn't but it's that much more unemployment ...every little bit counts against us.

 

[jcardona1]

I can empathize with your position (I recently lost my job), and truly hope things get better for you, but as for the economy as a whole, I don't think the entire pet industry itself constitutes a significant part of it to cause any widespread damage. There will still be things to ship, even fish to ship (the non-invasive ones) and things to sell, etc.

In response to another post about fish smuggling:

I think that the assumption that black marketeers would be any less proficient at packing fish and keeping them alive in transport shows a lack of knowledge of smugglers. I'm not pro-smuggling, but if the fish were worth enough for some people to break the law to sell them, those people are probably going to take the time to make sure they don't lose their investment. In my experience (I lived in East Africa for a while) Black Marketeers are usually the most expert, most talented, and most capable people in a given industry. I used to buy LEGITIMATE<--(please notice that word) goods from them just because I knew they'd be better quality, or the black marketeers wouldn't even bother with them.

If you really want to stop fish from dieing in transport, you should stop buying them from mass markets in Florida and SE Asia, or from stores that buy them in such bulk that they generally assume a 10-20% loss just from packaging.

no, but the overall economy depends on smaller industries like this. its the foundation of the world as it is today. i still think you should take a step back and re-look at things. the way you speak, it really does make it seem that you dont care because it wont affect YOU personally

 

[Cecropia]

I can empathize with your position (I recently lost my job), and truly hope things get better for you, but as for the economy as a whole, I don't think the entire pet industry itself constitutes a significant part of it.

The ripple effect of a pet industry collapse will be hard to predict and the effect will always be greater than predicted.
ALL LFS in this area depend on the income from freshwater/saltwater fish and reptiles. The supplies don't sell much due to chain pricing being lower. The stores that do survive will be destroyed there after as other chains begin carrying more brand name pet supplies (walmart has already started carrying more brand name pet supplies for example).

Last online statistics put the US as having over 26 million fish and reptiles. Just imagining what the ripples from this bill will effect is scary.

 

[cguarino30]

no, but the overall economy depends on smaller industries like this. its the foundation of the world as it is today. i still think you should take a step back and re-look at things. the way you speak, it really does make it seem that you dont care because it wont affect YOU personally

Again, I say, it WILL affect me personally, I just don't think that the mild inconvenience is worth the continually immoral treatment of animals that we have a responsibility for. I realize that the vast majority of people on this forum are dedicated, knowledgeable people, but we need to remember that it's the rest of the hobby, the inexperienced, impulsive, uncaring people that keep fish in unsuitable conditions, and also the ones who irresponsibly let them go in the wild, and I think it is the duty of us responsible ones to take the mildly inconvenient hit to ensure responsible care and treatment of the animals that I (and I know many others here) care so deeply about.

 

[Sever0n]

so instead of banning them start a permit process.

 

[jcardona1]

Again, I say, it WILL affect me personally, I just don't think that the mild inconvenience is worth the continually immoral treatment of animals that we have a responsibility for. I realize that the vast majority of people on this forum are dedicated, knowledgeable people, but we need to remember that it's the rest of the hobby, the inexperienced, impulsive, uncaring people that keep fish in unsuitable conditions, and also the ones who irresponsibly let them go in the wild, and I think it is the duty of us responsible ones to take the mildly inconvenient hit to ensure responsible care and treatment of the animals that I (and I know many others here) care so deeply about.

but unless im mistaken, this bill isnt being proposed to address ethical and moral issues, so why try to make it as such?

 

[cguarino30]

The ripple effect of a pet industry collapse will be hard to predict and the effect will always be greater than predicted.
ALL LFS in this area depend on the income from freshwater/saltwater fish and reptiles. The supplies don't sell much due to chain pricing being lower. The stores that do survive will be destroyed there after as other chains begin carrying more brand name pet supplies (walmart has already started carrying more brand name pet supplies for example).

Last online statistics put the US as having over 26 million fish and reptiles. Just imagining what the ripples from this bill will effect is scary.

I agree that it's hard to predict, but I would suggest that it's just as likely that this bill would help and LFS (Pickering Valley Farm and Feed, in PA). My LFS regularly sells locally bred fish (all fish that would not be considered invasive due to temperature needs) and if this bill passed, the vast majority of their competition (online stores and major chains) would not be able to sell live fish, or at least would have to pay more to do it, since they would have to transport the fish across state lines. If that happened, my LFS would essentially corner the market as they would have one of the only supplies of live fish, and could then benefit from the raised prices. All the LFSs would have to do is find a local source for fish. Maybe diversity would go down a little, but honestly, most of the people that support the LFS only want what they see anyway.

 

[cguarino30]

but unless im mistaken, this bill isnt being proposed to address ethical and moral issues, so why try to make it as such?

Just because the bill isn't based on moral issues doesn't mean I can't support it for them. (also, I consider environmental preservation a moral issue)