Lol,someone else who either did not completely read my post or,just did not understand it and jumped to a conclusion.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Lifting The Ban On Snakeheads In The U.S.A.
- Thread starter jim j
- Start date
Lol,someone else who either did not completely read my post or,just did not understand it and jumped to a conclusion.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
I don't think Banning any pet is practical at all. Proper husbandry is a universal concept and applies to ALL animals.
Putting barriers to ownership or some sort of oversight in place for dangerous animals makes sense but honestly most of the pet trade would be invasive in a large portion of the US if released. Wild cats and dogs kill so much on an annual basis yet we don't ban pet ownership of them because there are good pet owners.
I would like to see more punishment for abandoned or abused animals but sadly michael vick is already walking the streets. Its not a bad thing to torture animals in our society really, else a serial killer of animals like him would be put away for life for what he's done repeatedly.
The exaggerated threat the snake head posses is limited to ONE species of snake head and should not be applied the the entire genus. I would be satisfied if they left the Northern banned mainly because it doesn't appeal to me but on principle no ban should exist for any animal. The rest of the channa genus is a huge loss to the hobby, similar to the ban on asian arrows.
I would also point out as sighted before that F&W is as much an enemy of wild populations as any pet trade animal. They've been of huge negative impact, congratulations they stock lakes, rivers, and ponds with what is often unnatural levels of fish that aren't frequently even native to the waters in question, don't worry they grow real fast in the farms. Don't worry stocking these animals allows for fishing licenses that they reinvest into preservation of said animals. :^/ The idea of what the F&W should be or could do is a good one but look left and right and you'll see they are more corrupt than most government agencies with uneven enforcement of arbitrary laws. One thing the government seems to struggle with is a measured approach to nature conservation.
Putting barriers to ownership or some sort of oversight in place for dangerous animals makes sense but honestly most of the pet trade would be invasive in a large portion of the US if released. Wild cats and dogs kill so much on an annual basis yet we don't ban pet ownership of them because there are good pet owners.
I would like to see more punishment for abandoned or abused animals but sadly michael vick is already walking the streets. Its not a bad thing to torture animals in our society really, else a serial killer of animals like him would be put away for life for what he's done repeatedly.
The exaggerated threat the snake head posses is limited to ONE species of snake head and should not be applied the the entire genus. I would be satisfied if they left the Northern banned mainly because it doesn't appeal to me but on principle no ban should exist for any animal. The rest of the channa genus is a huge loss to the hobby, similar to the ban on asian arrows.
I would also point out as sighted before that F&W is as much an enemy of wild populations as any pet trade animal. They've been of huge negative impact, congratulations they stock lakes, rivers, and ponds with what is often unnatural levels of fish that aren't frequently even native to the waters in question, don't worry they grow real fast in the farms. Don't worry stocking these animals allows for fishing licenses that they reinvest into preservation of said animals. :^/ The idea of what the F&W should be or could do is a good one but look left and right and you'll see they are more corrupt than most government agencies with uneven enforcement of arbitrary laws. One thing the government seems to struggle with is a measured approach to nature conservation.
Just joking, They are two of my least favorite fish... never mind that they are frankenfish.
Aha, well I don't know what they are then. An old neighbor called them brown trout. Perhaps they aren't I don't know the scientific name of that species or the "cisco" fish. They were the two largest fish species in the lake but are non existent any more. Sometimes we get a huge corpse washing up on the shore but no one has fished one out in a decade.
I'm still confused how people can be on these forums and be against lifting any ban on any monster fish. This forum is built around keeping things that obviously are huge and different and many of which would have enormous impact on wild populations if released.
If we're banning destructive fish then the SW community should get together and work on a ban for Lionfish. Anyone who has seen what they've done to the reef systems in the Caribbean knows that they are a true menace.
I think that banning them doesn't do anything. If you know one thing about a ban is it never in the history of the world resolved a single invasive animal instance. Please sight an invasive animal that was made less so by banning?
Yup, there are worse fish than a snakehead that can have serious impacts on the ecosystems...like these carps. It's funny that Koi carps are allowed to be kept and yet they and their wild cousin causes huge impacts on the ecosystems.
Yeah, don't let anyone tell you otherwise I've seen Koi or goldfish in lake Michigan on more than one occasion. Right around the chicago area You'll see 2-3 foot specimens in the open water of the marinas and docks north of the city. When I would bike up and down the north shore coast I'd see em when stopping in to check out some sail boats.
