Public Outrage halts states execution of Snake head ...

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
gt1009;2891119; said:
Well I sent them an email too.To whom it may concern,
I, along with countless other concerned fishkeepers, have decided that your decision to end the life of this fish is both unjust and not needed. This fish is a giant snakehead. This species would not be able to tolerate the cold temperatures that you recieve in New York during wintertime, and because of that would not pose a threat to the ecosystem. I understand you concerns, because we all know what can happen if the Northern Snakehead is released. However, this is a completely different species. In fact, the method you chose to kill the fish was freezing. I lived in Rochester, New York for ten years, and have firsthand experience with winters there. Now, if you were going to kill the fish by freezing it, and the waterways of New York freeze or dip down close to freezing temperatures during winter, does it not make sense that the fish would die in freezing water?
I'm sure that you have seen the picture of Mr. Deverso standing next to his fish tank looking at Rocky. In the corner of the tank you can notice an aquarium heater. This is an expensive piece of equipment that would not be in the tank if it was unnecessary. The fact that this man has spend hundreds, likely thousands of dollars over the years to care for this fish proves that he does not intend to release it anytime soon. The tank he has purchased to house this fish is listed at 200 gallons in the news articles describing this situation. This is by no means a cheap tank, and is much larger than the average hobbyist would supply for a fish like this. This simply adds to the proof that he truly cares for this fish.
Finally, he bought this fish 10 years ago. A simple grandfather clause would end all this trouble and provide much better publicity for your department. If you kill this fish, anyone who knows about keeping tropical fish will know that your department is uneducated and unconcerned for the general well being of the environment. To me, not differentiating between snakehead species seems like banning any species of mussel from New York, instead of just getting rid of Zebra Mussels. If you grandfather clause this man, I'm sure that the general public will be very impressed by your decision.
I hope this helps influence you to let this fish live.
Sincerely,
Greg Trusso
Click to expand...
great letter... let us know if they respond...
 
to all , you guys have great questions and concerns ,first ROCKY is still a bit mad at me for all the media coverage but os doing good,the t-shirt and bumper stickers will kick off this weekend ,

to answer a few ?`s on here as to the species ,yes it is very easy to differentiate between all 29 species i have studyied all of them through out my quest they all have very unique features and pretty much their own color ,not like a mixed breed of a dog where one species comes in different colors or size,so yes i agree that its a copout and my point is if the state of MD can do it then so can they here in ny ,local paper here yesterday said they contacted the dec who says they still plan on putting rocky down but gave no time frame ,i have checked into almost all of the surrounding aquariums as well as the zoos ,watertowns zoo went on record saying it simply would cost to much to maintain rocky put at 4k a yr ,great times that by 10 yrs that i have ,
bottom line is its all common sence stuff yet the dec just looked at the proof i provided and dismissed it like it was writtren in greek ..the dec has mistaken rocky as a northern and compared him to lets see drugs,oh and a bear ,,yeah after 10 yrs they cant differentiate between species but see the resemblence of him as drugs and a bear ..im really tired of their excuse of the WELL WHAT IF'S we all live with risk and the what ifs in life ,i just cant believe they would profile me that im one of them ,when they are the ones not educated and yet walk around with guns and mentality to kill first ask ?`s later ...

AGAIN THANKS TO EVERYONE ON THIS SITE ,AND WHO HAVE SPREAD ROCKY MANIA ALL OVER THE NET ......
 
I know this is a long shot, but Cabela's Sporting Goods Stores have huge aquariums. I was at the one in Fort Worth this past Sunday and they had two large snakeheads. Cabela's has stores in Conneticut and New Jersey. It might be worth looking into.
 
I'm wondering what it would take to convince a local zoo/aquarium to take Rocky in... $4k a year sounds like a lot at first, but when you consider the media this fish has gotten already, I'd be willing to bet that it could be seen as an "investment" for the zoo/aquarium. Plus if fund-raising is done by private organizations to help out...
 
srikamaraja;2890473; said:
If you buy a guidebook, or even spend some time on FishBase, you can tell the difference between all 29 species. I don't think it's easy, I just think it's their job.
Click to expand...

Exactly, with a some research, It can be done. As you said it's there job. Sounds as if a change in the law is needed. If they were to allow a grandfather clause to all who can prove ownership before the ban, it would be the the advantage of the DEC anyway. The DEC would be much better off knowing where these fish are and who has them, then to rely on informants.
 
Perhaps someone can clarify this for me, but if this fish was bought prior to the law being created then surely it must be exempt from the law?

Or at least provide an alternative to killing the animal. That is what is baffling me. Why not either ship it back to Asia or take it to an alternative house.

How did they even find out the guy had it???
 
What is the story with the lady that had the cat that was banned from posession but she was allowed to keep it. Why cant you use that example in your case?
 
Natural_Born_Killer;2892378; said:
Perhaps someone can clarify this for me, but if this fish was bought prior to the law being created then surely it must be exempt from the law?

Or at least provide an alternative to killing the animal. That is what is baffling me. Why not either ship it back to Asia or take it to an alternative house.

How did they even find out the guy had it???
Click to expand...

I think the law would have to be written in such away to allow for grandfathering. I know here locally, there is a ban on certain dog breeds. For those who owned the dogs they had a certain amount of time to get rid of the dogs, no grandfathering was allowed.
 
Bderick67;2892428; said:
I think the law would have to be written in such away to allow for grandfathering. I know here locally, there is a ban on certain dog breeds. For those who owned the dogs they had a certain amount of time to get rid of the dogs, no grandfathering was allowed.
Click to expand...

I just find it quite outrageous that you can get in "trouble" for a law that was passed AFTER having the creature. Then to decide to kill it?

How is it the animals fault?

Sorry I am ranting, but I just find this all so ludicrous. This poor mans fish is in a tank, in a house, with monthly government checks they can make sure that the animal remains there till its dying day.

I can understand a fear for an animal that might just escape out a door, but surely a fish?? Come on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom