Poll: Fish Store "Responsible Practices" Certification

[dogofwar]

"What? That doesn't even add up. 4/10+6/10+3/10=FAIL."

They're not supposed to add up. Read what I wrote.

4/10 Monster Fishkeepers would avoid or not change their shopping habits in order to go to a store that demonstrates Responsible Practices = (response 3 + 4)

6/10 would go out of their way to shop at such a store = (response 1 + 2)

But only 3/10 would pay a little more (e.g $5.50 vs. $5.00) for a fish from a store that demonstrates responsible practices instead of buying a fish from a store that doesn't commit to responsible practices = (response 1 only)

 

[dogofwar]

"This poll would work if you were at all willing to hear the other side of the argument, but you obviously have your own preconceived idea of this reality."

What is the other side of the argument?

- That most cichlid vendors are completely responsible (i.e. are responsible and accurate in labeling, don't mix easily confused fish together, don't sell things using made up names, don't mislabel on purpose, etc.)?

- That most people who buy cichlids could describe the criteria that would make one fish vendor more responsible than others...and the importance of responsibility as it related to captive populations of cichlids?

- That vendors that have chosen to be responsible currently have a measurable, visible way of showing that they're committed to responsible practices...and as a result the vast majority of cichlid keepers push their business to these select vendors that do the right thing?

- That the status quo is OK. Everything is hunkey dorey?

I've heard the other side of the argument (i.e. that many aren't willing to pay - even a little - for responsibility). And it's sad.

 

[dogofwar]

I can understand objections to what I've proposed on the grounds that the ACA isn't up to the the task of supporting something like this. That it's outside what it want to commit to. Making real change takes more than talk.

What I can't understand is that people don't think that there's a problem with the level of responsible practices that most LFS / cichlid vendors exhibit today. The status quo is acceptable.

What's wrong with someone buying a fish that looks like a "beani" from a LFS is that the provenance of this rare fish has been lost. Is it wild? F1? tank raised? pure? what varient or cross of geographic varients is it? What was the source of the fish?

If you can't answer these questions, then the fish should no longer be considered anything more than a nice aquarium pet. It is now useless for maintaining an authentic captive population of the fish (as part of a breeding project).

Would it have killed the LFS to have properly labeled the fish?

How about providing vendors with guidelines...and publicly recognizing those that (already or choose to make changes to) go the extra yard to do things right.

Thats all I'm talking about.

 

[Somethingfishyinc.net]

Okay my turn.
I'm a LFS & in business almost 17 years & working all together for about 25 years & hobbyist for 30. Always a hobbyist by blood. We are about 80% cichlid store & have a hatchery on site which many ACA members & Board members have visited on may occasions. We are one of the rare few that mainly carry true blood fishes. We have and breed the OB peacock which is not natural. & We sell the glow danios which are really hot sellers. Most of our customers buy for color, shape, size, price etc. & not for breeding purposes.
From my very first shop I did not & still do not sell Pacu, burmese pythons etc.. because most can not keep these animals for life or long at all. The zoos & such will not take these and they end up released in the park etc. ( i also was a animal warden.)
This business is not growing leaps & bounds & LFS go out more then open Internet is a big reason then the big box of crap stores.
The stores get these things from suppliers etc.. so as long as there is supply & demand (like drugs) there always will be buyers. Stop it at the start or educate more.
There use to be over 350 fish farm members 10 years or so ago & now there is like 84!
My reputation sets me apart from the rest local and abroad so certification I would not need to pay more money which everything else keeps going up like my frikin heat bill which I have to have! So with the cost of doing business keeps going up etc. I really do not think it will fly.
As mentioned before if they want to certify a LFS on their site as being a good place for its members etc. that would work.
Then the idea the government would have to have a say is crazy since we are taxed, inspected for this & that would just close up more.
well enough for now I could go on & on.

me Dave

 

[dogofwar]

Thanks Dave!

I think that you get the jist of what the proposed program would do: recognize folks - like you - who are responsible...and provide a way to show consumers what sets your business apart from stores that have no qualms with being irresponsible / selling crap. In other words, a way to formalize a reputation for responsibility in a way that makes it easy for more people to buy from you.

In my opinion, it is perfectly responsible to sell fish the OB Peacocks, Flowerhorns, etc. if they are correctly labeled....and not mixed in tanks in a way that would make it easy to sell them as something else (unintentionally).

It has to be dispiriting to see so many on this board not put any value in the extra efforts that you take to be responsible. You probably know this better than me...

 

[Somethingfishyinc.net]

You can not make everyone happy in just about everything.
Only as a person or business owner can do what they feel is the right thing to do & hope the majority supports it.

Common sense & Respect. You do not need a college degree as I always have said.

You will have the haves & the have knots. You will have the sellers & have the buyers across the board. Some will support & some will not. Its the way of life.

me

 

[dogofwar]

Good stuff - any other vendors have thoughts on this?

 

[pcfriedrich]

"Caveat Emptor"

let the buyer beware.

That about sums it up, in my opinion.


if you shop at an LFS enough, you will get to know the people, and their practices. as a consumer, take responsibility for your own actions, but you can't help what others do.

we already have a nationwide, private organization regulating questionable business practices. Its called "The Better Business Bureau". Research your retailers through them, and report shady ones to them.


but lets especially keep the government out of private business practices. that is the absolute definition of fascism.

 

[dogofwar]

"we already have a nationwide, private organization regulating questionable business practices. Its called "The Better Business Bureau". Research your retailers through them, and report shady ones to them."

So you're OK with the BBB but against something specifically focused on highlighting responsible fish vendors? Please explain why one but not the other.


"but lets especially keep the government out of private business practices. that is the absolute definition of fascism."

Who mentioned anything about the government (other than you)? There's the legislative branch, the judicial branch, the executive branch...and the fish club (ACA) branch of government?

 

[dogofwar]

"Caveat Emptor - let the buyer beware."

Could you explain why you think every hobbyist should have to figure out (on their own) whether a vendor is responsible or not? Do you use Consumer Reports?