its not fair. my license and permits wouldnt be worth sh.. fish dealer license and tropical fish importation permit. double hard for us that work hard to hold and keep themHR 669 : CONGRESSIONAL HEARING BANNING NONNATIVE SPECIES APRIL 23, 2009 ACTION NEEDED
- Thread starter neoprodigy
- Start date
its not fair. my license and permits wouldnt be worth sh.. fish dealer license and tropical fish importation permit. double hard for us that work hard to hold and keep themSometimes I just go back and hide at my 250 member site. No silliness there.Aquamojo;2991690; said:
Prohibition doesn't work and neither would a ban on an enormous list. Sadly, the snakehead ban doesn't even work (or it was too late). They've spread plenty since the ban.
So... were they too late or does the ban not work? or both? Probably both.
There will be some regulation and there probably should be, because the average hobbyist that buys a pacu can NOT handle the pacu.
My solution is selfish. I think they need to hire a select group of ichthyologists that not only have Ph.D.s but also are hardcore hobbyists (a taskforce if you will). These folks could make educated calls on how to regulate REAL problem animals like burmese pythons and pacu. They could come up with ideas about what regulations are reasonable and which are not. They also could have an extended task force that monitors international shipments and even sneaks around these mega webpages to see what's being traded. The current USFWS and state FWS usually can't tell an Asian Aro from a silver, or a northern snakehead from any small (harmless) tropicals.
Seems like more work? ...um... NO! Saves the industry millions as opposed to bans. It also could mean we could see our tropical snakeheads, because they are not the threat they're larger congeners are. Having this freed up means more money for the industry too. There could even be licensing for the megafish that are not apparent threats. For example, pacu are REALLY BAD FOR THE HOBBY... not because they are invasives, but because they are dumped and FOUND in the wild so often. Apparently they aren't great at surviving or reproducing, but the more they're found, the more likely these fish bans are going to take hold. And, yes, bans/prohibition only adds a new problem and may not solve the invasive species problem.
Just a pipe dream of a Ph.D/hobbyist
Hi All,
I'm a mere newbie here, however I feel compelled to share an experience I had on another tropical fish forum.
I had signed on in order to let their members know that HR 669 was not a pretty piece of legislation for pet owners.
HR 669 pretty much says, Guilty or Innocent, it doesn't matter, any Non-Native Pet that is not on the Approved List will be banned.
This means, if a Captive Born AND Bred Discuss can survive anywhere in the US it will be banned! The government doesn't care of the animals lineage, they are attacking Non-Native Pets. It's the animals scientific name that they are attacking!
Well anyway, I signed on to this other forum to try and be like "Paul Revere" and spread the news. I even spent 12 hours making a "mini-web-site" so people would know everyone involved in HR 669, even it's elected Co-Sponsors (supporters).
Well, I have to tell you...I wasn't on there an hour before the moderators circled and attacked me! They were full of nothing but misinformation on HR 669 only thinking it would affect problimatic imports.
As soon as I corrected them I was pretty much verbally raped, told by a member they'd rather give up their hobby...an booted!
It makes me wonder?
Sorry...I had to get that off of my chest...you guys are great...Thank You!
I'm a mere newbie here, however I feel compelled to share an experience I had on another tropical fish forum.
I had signed on in order to let their members know that HR 669 was not a pretty piece of legislation for pet owners.
HR 669 pretty much says, Guilty or Innocent, it doesn't matter, any Non-Native Pet that is not on the Approved List will be banned.
This means, if a Captive Born AND Bred Discuss can survive anywhere in the US it will be banned! The government doesn't care of the animals lineage, they are attacking Non-Native Pets. It's the animals scientific name that they are attacking!
Well anyway, I signed on to this other forum to try and be like "Paul Revere" and spread the news. I even spent 12 hours making a "mini-web-site" so people would know everyone involved in HR 669, even it's elected Co-Sponsors (supporters).
Well, I have to tell you...I wasn't on there an hour before the moderators circled and attacked me! They were full of nothing but misinformation on HR 669 only thinking it would affect problimatic imports.
As soon as I corrected them I was pretty much verbally raped, told by a member they'd rather give up their hobby...an booted!
It makes me wonder?
Sorry...I had to get that off of my chest...you guys are great...Thank You!
Aquamojo;2991690; said:
The comments were totally inappropriate to the discussion at hand and were basically meant as an attack to stir things up. It's a frequent occurrence and it has been dealt with. Also, the comments were posted on the petition thread instead of the discussion thread. Criticize away.
ewurm;2992318; said:
Not a criticism...just an observation.
You're the guy with the hammer. Nail away.
Yes that would suck but 2 kinds of people are going to ruin things for the legit fish keepers and dealers. The Fish keepers that get tired of their fish and dump them in local waters or own illegal fish and buy them from dealers that keep selling fish to retailers and individuals where the fish are not legal. Case in point look at all the Threads where people in California own gars and happily post the fact here on MFK that they are in possession of the fish. The laws are there for a reason but a lot of stupid people chose to ignore the laws because they either don't agree with them or think they are above the law. So its jerkoffs like that that will ruin it for the rest of us.scotty61;2991890; said:
Acestro;2992029; said:Sometimes I just go back and hide at my 250 member site. No silliness there.
Prohibition doesn't work and neither would a ban on an enormous list. Sadly, the snakehead ban doesn't even work (or it was too late). They've spread plenty since the ban.
So... were they too late or does the ban not work? or both? Probably both.
There will be some regulation and there probably should be, because the average hobbyist that buys a pacu can NOT handle the pacu.
My solution is selfish. I think they need to hire a select group of ichthyologists that not only have Ph.D.s but also are hardcore hobbyists (a taskforce if you will). These folks could make educated calls on how to regulate REAL problem animals like burmese pythons and pacu. They could come up with ideas about what regulations are reasonable and which are not. They also could have an extended task force that monitors international shipments and even sneaks around these mega webpages to see what's being traded. The current USFWS and state FWS usually can't tell an Asian Aro from a silver, or a northern snakehead from any small (harmless) tropicals.
Seems like more work? ...um... NO! Saves the industry millions as opposed to bans. It also could mean we could see our tropical snakeheads, because they are not the threat they're larger congeners are. Having this freed up means more money for the industry too. There could even be licensing for the megafish that are not apparent threats. For example, pacu are REALLY BAD FOR THE HOBBY... not because they are invasives, but because they are dumped and FOUND in the wild so often. Apparently they aren't great at surviving or reproducing, but the more they're found, the more likely these fish bans are going to take hold. And, yes, bans/prohibition only adds a new problem and may not solve the invasive species problem.
Just a pipe dream of a Ph.D/hobbyist
I see your point, but I don't think a federal law is appropriate. The states are already dealing with the invasive species issue. There is no need for the federal government to step in and pass a law that applies to all states. Very few states have a problem with invasive tropical species. The threat in Florida is not the same in Minnesota, Oregon, Kansas, or any other state. Minnesota just does not have this problem, so why should I or anyone in a state where a species can't possibly live be included in this type of regulation? Let the states deal with their problems on an individual basis.
ewurm;2993482; said:
Actually, the individuals states may be doing a fair job...but overall the system is being circumvented. The example I pointed out previously was that Piranha are illegal in Kentucky, but folks can drive across the border to a neighboring state and get the fish.
There's only one way to CYA in a situation like that...and unfortunately it means a federal law. Something is gonna shake out from this. The best we can hope for is that they give us a kiss before they, well...you know.
My good friend Marc Weiss sent me this to http://www.aquamojo.com/misc/669_ShortAlert_Comm.pdf distribute this for anyone who would like to post or distribute.
