I hope HR 669 Passes

[cguarino30]

i would like to make the point that there has been no in depth studies on the fish released into the amercian waters. Such as channa, piranha, cichlids, and so on. No one has prooved that the release of these fish into warm water area's where they can thrive has made any detrimental environmental impact.

That's very true. If this bill passes, we should make an effort to ensure that the department of interior only bans fish that have a legitimate reason to be banned. I have always been vocally against the prohibition of piranhas here in NC. It's ridiculous, and based largely on the general public's ill-founded fears.

 

[ewurm]

I don't think there's a chance it will pass, but I hope it does. There I said it.

1) importation restrictions would deter people without the necessary time, expertise, seriousness, and money from keeping rare, wild fish that need extra attention

2) the temporary spike in fish prices would encourage more domestic breeding/farming programs, diminishing what I see as a massive influx of east asian farm stock of inferior quality and questionable origins

3) Virtually none of the fish I keep are wild imports, and if I had to I could certainly have gotten them from a domestic breeder, or gotten other fish that I would enjoy just as much

*braces self for hatemail*

That's a pretty selfish outlook, and I think you are missing the point. There would be less aquaculture in the United States because fish that are being bred here may be banned. The last line makes me wonder if this was posted for the attention.

 

[cguarino30]

That's a pretty selfish outlook, and I think you are missing the point. There would be less aquaculture in the United States because fish that are being bred here may be banned. The last line makes me wonder if this was posted for the attention.

Did you actually read the rest of this thread? I think I've already explained all the points you bring up.

 

[---XR---]

That's very true. If this bill passes, we should make an effort to ensure that the department of interior only bans fish that have a legitimate reason to be banned. I have always been vocally against the prohibition of piranhas here in NC. It's ridiculous, and based largely on the general public's ill-founded fears.

There will be no way to convince politicians what is detrimental and what is not. There are Thousands of fish species that will be banned. no one will be able to go through them all and study eaches effect in the environment. I believe the channa ban was wrong. Aswell as piranhas in certain states. the fish that provoke fear in amercians are the ones with teeth and have abnormal capabilitys like going from water onto land and back to water. There is no politican who can make an informed opinion on this to say what should and shouldn't be banned, in fact - NO ONE POSSIBLY CAN.

 

[cguarino30]

There will be no way to convince politicians what is detrimental and what is not. There are Thousands of fish species that will be banned. no one will be able to go through them all and study eaches effect in the environment. I believe the channa ban was wrong. Aswell as piranhas in certain states. the fish that provoke fear in amercians are the ones with teeth and have abnormal capabilitys like going from water onto land and back to water. There is no politican who can make an informed opinion on this to say what should and shouldn't be banned, in fact - NO ONE POSSIBLY CAN.

All the more reason that we, the hobbyists, should take responsibility for these fish, so as to keep the general public from asking the government to do it for us.

 

[ewurm]

Did you actually read the rest of this thread? I think I've already explained all the points you bring up.

Yes I did, and I didn't really see anything that fixes the problem. The problem is not the number of species that are potentially invasive within the entire country, the problem is a a few dozen species which are potentially invasive in a handful of states, and the majority of those states already ban them. The one thing that no one seems to be focusing on that is the largest problem is education. How many pet stores have materials promoting responsibility regarding the release of pets into the wild? Not many. How many advertisements have you seen from fish and game or other organizations about the release of non-native species? Probably not many again. Education wouldn't fix the problem, but it could definitely help.

If you are a member on this site, and this bill passes, the fact that you would just buy fish that are legal doesn't make any sense. Most of the fish that would likely remain legal would be commonplace specimens and definitely not your rare, exotic or predatory fish.

 

[smpage]

If you are a member on this site, and this bill passes, the fact that you would just buy fish that are legal doesn't make any sense. Most of the fish that would likely remain legal would be commonplace specimens and definitely not your rare, exotic or predatory fish.

Yay Goldfish!! lol

 

[Texs]

Well I am a proud gun owner(It's required in Texas lol) and new to fish keeping. I feel that the government should not interfere in things of this matter and I certainly don't think it will pass.

 

[Ak-Kronic]

http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/member.php?u=54303 cguarino30, You are a WHACK JOB! There i said it!!

why would you even bother to join a fish keeping community then start a thread like this.......you should be ousted from the community, i know i don't want someone like you claiming to be a loyal tropical/rare fish enthusiast. you give the rest of us a bad name, you would like to see the downfall of the hobby i bet........i don't get ppl like you. pack you bags and leave, you disappoint me

 

[BigJ]

Reading this just pisses me off!!

Hope the bill fail's.

That's all i'll say.