i think they shouldnt be legal to be imported because the cost of them you be big and none would sell and they would end up dying in pet stores because of a rush to start selling the new fish. it could endanger the species if we start to import them and sell them... the populations could go way down and we could lose this amazing fish altogether because of our greed and want to have one.
Start an argument thread!
- Thread starter puffcrusader696
- Start date
jbnebres;2869668; said:
It would be easy to do this with a quota system agreed upon by both countries. Say 500 or 400 or less to each country. If the reason behind the ban is to protect the wild aros, then a tax could be imposed that would go towards a program to protect the wild populations.
It would keep the value on these fish high and would encourage farms to increase in size on order to handle the demand.
Of course my argument is based on the idea that the reason for the ban is to protect the wild population.
And to add to that, set up a quarantine station similar to Australia where ALL aros would have to go upon arrival to be inspected for chips. A database would be easy to set up for both sides to document each individual fish leaving one country and arriving in the other. Have a registry identifying owners. If someone wants to sell their aro to a private buyer, impose a condition to register new owner.
If organizations in alliance and cooperation with CITES in the US really wanted to deal with the Asian Arowana issue, they could. For example, it takes about $10,000 per horned ram to move the horned ram from one population to another. This is done to keep their genes diverse and to prevent the extinction of the species due to inbreeding. The reason we have to move them physically (by helicopter) is because we have built aqueducts and farmers have put up fences that prevent the horned rams from moving and spreading their DNA like they normally would.
Now, if the national parks, such as Yosemite, can spend $250,000 to do this, it would be no problem setting up Asian Arowana farms. The farms would be beneficial because all of the Arowanas in the pet trade could be captively bred and raised, therefore eliminating the pressure on the wild populations. That way wild populations can recover and we can have the Asian Arowana legally. If necessary, a tax could be imposed. It will not kill you to pay a meager 5% tax on a fish you really want. You pay more on your groceries. Of course, that's assuming the government doesn't decide to place a ridiculous 300% tax on the Asian Arowana or something, which I can safely assume it won't. And the tax can go to maintaining the Arowana farms and maybe even aiding conservation efforts.
Now, if the national parks, such as Yosemite, can spend $250,000 to do this, it would be no problem setting up Asian Arowana farms. The farms would be beneficial because all of the Arowanas in the pet trade could be captively bred and raised, therefore eliminating the pressure on the wild populations. That way wild populations can recover and we can have the Asian Arowana legally. If necessary, a tax could be imposed. It will not kill you to pay a meager 5% tax on a fish you really want. You pay more on your groceries. Of course, that's assuming the government doesn't decide to place a ridiculous 300% tax on the Asian Arowana or something, which I can safely assume it won't. And the tax can go to maintaining the Arowana farms and maybe even aiding conservation efforts.
I'm not sure you have the climate in the continental US to actually farm aros? Could it be artificially created?
Chaitika;2870098; said:
I'm sure it could be done in Florida and certain warmer parts of California. Besides, I'm sure steps could be taken for preventative action in case of a heat wave or a cold snap. It's not so hard once you look at the big picture. I mean, a lot of people who live in really cold places still keep fish with a heater, and it doesn't cost a fortune. Same could be done with the Arowanas.
Outside of Florida- I'm betting C/S America has plenty of space and adequate temps for farming.
But to rebut...
The importation of Asian arowanas should remain illegal. While the idea of creating outsourced breeding farms from farm bred specimens are a great start, there are no existing regulations that would put an emphasis in adequate care for the species. Through out the fish hobby trade, and more specifically with S. American and Australian arowanas, it is sadly, yet common to see keepers house full grown fishes in inadequate tank proportions. Until there is proper education and regulation, the new market for Asian arowanas can lead to the same abuse that gives a bad name to fish hobbyists. With that said, it is critical for the industry to manage and minimized the abuse of the existing fish legal in the trade. What would become of the value, rarity, and highly invested line breeding strains of the Asian arowanas under a society that perpetuates mass production and fails to address the lack of care and education.
With the existing.. peculiar.. international regulations, along with the current economy, the chances of creating a market that can responsibly address the demands of the species is less likely.
But to rebut...
The importation of Asian arowanas should remain illegal. While the idea of creating outsourced breeding farms from farm bred specimens are a great start, there are no existing regulations that would put an emphasis in adequate care for the species. Through out the fish hobby trade, and more specifically with S. American and Australian arowanas, it is sadly, yet common to see keepers house full grown fishes in inadequate tank proportions. Until there is proper education and regulation, the new market for Asian arowanas can lead to the same abuse that gives a bad name to fish hobbyists. With that said, it is critical for the industry to manage and minimized the abuse of the existing fish legal in the trade. What would become of the value, rarity, and highly invested line breeding strains of the Asian arowanas under a society that perpetuates mass production and fails to address the lack of care and education.
With the existing.. peculiar.. international regulations, along with the current economy, the chances of creating a market that can responsibly address the demands of the species is less likely.
So your saying managing people is not efficient? especially in a large scale company? Sure there are other levels of managers, but you need people even above this, to see the big picture (but you need to correctly balance it as such so you are not overmanaging as well). Therefore, I believe C_O's are necessary, and you need someone in charge of operations as such, not only to keep the business in line, but to make sure that the way operations are carried out agree with the interest of the owner. Their pay can be way off, I agree on that, but it is their neck when things go wrong, which why a large number of them are gone after a year, therefore to some extent, it should be higher to reflect this. When it comes down to it, they need to be there, but with this said I think it is stupid when they bring in new ones to 'cut costs' who do so by cutting labor, and as a result are rewarded with more bonuses. Something which needs to be considered though, is that such positions are more than your typical 9-5 job, as you can't just stop thinking about the business when you clock out, it's a constant thing, even though the time clock does not reflect that, however it is realized and the paycheck does. What is interesting though, is in most other countries, the C_O's don't make nearly the amount of times of pay compared to the average worker as they do here, and as a result their production tends to be higher, more effecient, and with better decisions made, so I think we should incorporate this as well. It is allready mentioned on this thread that if you cut pay, they will go elsewhere, so obviously you can't cut the huge steps in the pay ladder out completely, and if you do there would be somewhat less motivation for them to do their job, as even though it might not all be about the money, it is about the status that the money ascribes to them. Anyhow, its 4:30 am here, so it's bed, but I'll leave with the following question...srikamaraja;2859178; said:
Should the goal of a business, to maxamize profit for shareholders, or to give back to the community, because there is no way to truely do both, since you are always depleting one by doing the other.
