Please look at this video
- Thread starter WWC
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
AquaWorldPSC
Well-Known Member
Great link indeed. I personally don't think that this bill will be passed. Our economy cannot afford to lose this industry. It would be a stupid move to pass this bill. It's like kicking the economy while it is down.
coral88
Hobbyist for now
I just think there is no way this could pass. Even if you don't care about having a pet who in their right mind would think it's a good idea to Kill an entire industry in the middle of an economic downturn.
I say I will back this bill if we attach a bill that bans all use of carbon fuels.
If we're going to get all crazy in the name of saving the environment let's go for broke.
I say I will back this bill if we attach a bill that bans all use of carbon fuels.
If we're going to get all crazy in the name of saving the environment let's go for broke.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 603
- Reaction score
- 4
Nah, it will never pass. Our country cannot afford to lose it's pet industry. It will be an endless chain reaction to the unemployment line. You think the country is in recession now? Just think of the countless jobs that would be lost due to the success of this bill passing. Lets' just look at the poor ol puppy dog for a minute. you would have to euthenize every litter you had. No more pet stores to sell doggie toys, no more companies like Purina and Iams to sell the dog food. No more trucks to deliver such products. Vetranarians would go out of business. Nah, i dont think so!!!! The list would go on and on and on......
BroncosZOA
Active Member
Here you go
Guys the Bill is real and will def have an affect on the coral and fish importation. BY THE WAY ITS GOOOOD!!
But lets back track before we discuss the legislation. The only reason why this legislation is being put forth is because its being sponsored by politicians who are looking out for the interest of their legislative district. Most of these politicians have interest that involve invasive species.
This legislation was brought on by careless importers and vendors and hobbyist who don't understand that if its gonna get too big and you wouldn't be able to keep don't buy it. Vendors and importers bring in fish and inverts or macros that they know people cant keep and don't care.
Here are some of the committee member home locations
GUAM
Lousiana
American Samoa
Hawaii
South Carolina
Virgin Island
California
Puerto Rico
Mariana Islands
New Jersey
New Hampshire
They are not going after an industry they are trying to protect wildlife and preserve our oceans by making sure people dont import fish and animals that can be invasive. Most of our fish can not survive in water like ours but some of those areas on the list they will.
You are all lookin at this legislation from a me first point of view. If you knew that not having a certain coral or fish would make it possible for your grand kids to go diving or use a beach somewhere in the USA, doesn't that mean anything.
Or are you really concerned that you might not get that zoa or fish, or bird. If you are so concerned about this legislation dont be the ninny who calls these politicians and yells that their hobby is in danger. ITS A HOBBY.
Vendors all i can suggest is that you need to band together and offer your insight and operations as reasons why this legislation needs to be rewritten.
YOU man not be importing stuff that is invasive but some schmo vendor in FLA might be bringing in lion fish or calurpa thats why you need to offer up your business as a model.
Guys the Bill is real and will def have an affect on the coral and fish importation. BY THE WAY ITS GOOOOD!!
But lets back track before we discuss the legislation. The only reason why this legislation is being put forth is because its being sponsored by politicians who are looking out for the interest of their legislative district. Most of these politicians have interest that involve invasive species.
This legislation was brought on by careless importers and vendors and hobbyist who don't understand that if its gonna get too big and you wouldn't be able to keep don't buy it. Vendors and importers bring in fish and inverts or macros that they know people cant keep and don't care.
Here are some of the committee member home locations
GUAM
Lousiana
American Samoa
Hawaii
South Carolina
Virgin Island
California
Puerto Rico
Mariana Islands
New Jersey
New Hampshire
They are not going after an industry they are trying to protect wildlife and preserve our oceans by making sure people dont import fish and animals that can be invasive. Most of our fish can not survive in water like ours but some of those areas on the list they will.
You are all lookin at this legislation from a me first point of view. If you knew that not having a certain coral or fish would make it possible for your grand kids to go diving or use a beach somewhere in the USA, doesn't that mean anything.
Or are you really concerned that you might not get that zoa or fish, or bird. If you are so concerned about this legislation dont be the ninny who calls these politicians and yells that their hobby is in danger. ITS A HOBBY.
Vendors all i can suggest is that you need to band together and offer your insight and operations as reasons why this legislation needs to be rewritten.
YOU man not be importing stuff that is invasive but some schmo vendor in FLA might be bringing in lion fish or calurpa thats why you need to offer up your business as a model.
You do realize we are talking about the government!? That is exactly the way they intend for legislation to be written. They can then appoint a director or "head of" to oversee it and then he can decide where it is applicable or not.
revhtree
Owner Administrator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Reef Squad
Partner Member 2024
Excellence Award
RGB
Photo of the Month
Article Contributor
R2R TV Featured
Hospitality Award
Article Administrator
Black Friday Sponsor
Industry Professional
My Tank Thread
My Aquarium Showcase
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 49,234
- Reaction score
- 98,071
My letter is sent!
My letter is sent but my representative is an butt and should not hold a political position so it will most likely be for not. What a dumb bill to even introduce. Someone needs to get on the Obama website for his public addresses and post about it. Then put the link on here and RC so we can bombard it with posts and emails. That way he can hear our thoughts on it and when he ignores them we at least have someone to blame!
Hr669
Even if you believe this bill will not pass you should send a letter; it takes a few minutes of your time and it will ensure that you are heard. By looking at the list of committee members this bill will gain some major ground; also the wording of the bill is very detailed.
Even if you believe this bill will not pass you should send a letter; it takes a few minutes of your time and it will ensure that you are heard. By looking at the list of committee members this bill will gain some major ground; also the wording of the bill is very detailed.
BroncosZOA
Active Member
Guys
Do you guys understand why this legislation is needed?
Do you understand that out ecological preserves are being ***** pilaged by invasive animals that we as hobbyist have turned a blind eye too.
It amazes me that your more concerned about cool new corals and not about saving our oceans and eco systems. Thats the problem with this hobby is there is alot of people who are concerned about themselves and dont realize this hobby is helping to ruin our eco system and the ones we take our animals from.
This legislation is not going away. GET OVER IT. Starting working on letters with idea and suggestions on how this legislation can be changed.
I cant beleive you guys dont realize that WE are the reason why there is this legislation.
Every vendor on here or RC or any forum should send a letter saying they would like to meet with the committee to discuss changes to the proposed legislation so that their business doesnt suffer.
You may have to give up getting some corals or fish but at least you can make sure its not a total ban.
Do you guys understand why this legislation is needed?
Do you understand that out ecological preserves are being ***** pilaged by invasive animals that we as hobbyist have turned a blind eye too.
It amazes me that your more concerned about cool new corals and not about saving our oceans and eco systems. Thats the problem with this hobby is there is alot of people who are concerned about themselves and dont realize this hobby is helping to ruin our eco system and the ones we take our animals from.
This legislation is not going away. GET OVER IT. Starting working on letters with idea and suggestions on how this legislation can be changed.
I cant beleive you guys dont realize that WE are the reason why there is this legislation.
Every vendor on here or RC or any forum should send a letter saying they would like to meet with the committee to discuss changes to the proposed legislation so that their business doesnt suffer.
You may have to give up getting some corals or fish but at least you can make sure its not a total ban.
Sikryd
hmm...Sweet!
Yeah - my wife works for the NSA and I am a Disabled Vet. Both of us have ties to government in a few forms.
Although I don't agree with the bill as it is written - it will pass later on.
I have already sent a letter to both my former and current local government.
Lionfish on the East coast is cool I guess...misc. sea grasses that aren't native are too, same with freshwater fish in our rivers that prevent salmon from running....
I am on the fence on this till they work it out.
If nothing is done, this will pass. So doing nothing doesn't work. Totally freaking out, not learning why this bill was drafted in the first place won't work either - cause no one wants to listen to undereducated people spouting that this will prevent us from having any household pets.
Education on the problem, then solidified answers to rectify the issue at hand can only help further the discussion on ways to solve it.
Just my $0.02
Disclaimer: I am not saying anyone here is spouting off and sending crazy emails. I am referring to some other forums where I have seen some guys send off some crazy stuff not even related to this, which only creates a bad vibe.
Last edited:
I went through the congress website also and sent my Representative and Senator an e-mail.
revhtree
Owner Administrator
Staff member
Super Moderator
Reef Squad
Partner Member 2024
Excellence Award
RGB
Photo of the Month
Article Contributor
R2R TV Featured
Hospitality Award
Article Administrator
Black Friday Sponsor
Industry Professional
My Tank Thread
My Aquarium Showcase
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 49,234
- Reaction score
- 98,071
The thing is we don't need this one to pass then work out the details. We need to stop it right now and then work in reworking the bill.
FX CharityCorals
Well-Known Member
Well when they start something to stop the deforestation and pollution that is being poured into the oceans which are doing far far more damage than we as hobbyist are causing Im gonna have to say the bill is rediculous. It is not needed. This bill affects more than just fish. Its birds, reptiles, ect... Some of the animals in captive care is the only way for that species to survive do to habitat destruction. This is a careless poorly thought out bill made by someone that just wants to get their name in the news.
Here is the problem with your point of view....
What effects those in areas with animals that are effecting the eco system and putting under threat does not effect ours in Michigan. Each area is specific and the law should be applied as such. Not a broad based approach that effects all 50 states, without the same problem. I understand wanting to get rid of Pythons in Florida and other such cases across the country, but why should I be under the same restrictions when here in Michigan in 99% of the time if they were released into the wild they would die. It is much cheaper and be more effective if those states enacted such laws within their boarders and for their own citizens.
This is just a first step it even says so in the bill, what comes after that? The next step will be taking animals on the banned list and having everyone that owns one to turn them in for destruction.
Save the holier then thou and pointing fingers telling us we are selfish because we want the one thing outside our families that gives us satisfaction, what you don't understand is this government has the track record for getting a foot in the door and never taking it out only to then stick in a leg then the rest of the body and before you know it not only will we not have our tanks, dogs, birds and what ever they deem invasive but there will be thousands out of jobs. Education is cheaper and more effective.....What happens when they find that they don't have the funds to support the bill and the research? I can tell you every species they haven't researched to see if it might cause harm will be added to the banned list just to be safe. Good luck getting it off it once it's on it wither it should be or not.....
Why don't they try regulating these species that are effecting their ecosystems with taxes for those that want Pythons in Florida and regulate them there with fees and charges. Make it extremely expensive so that not every Tom, dick, or Harry can by them. This way only those that A. can afford them and B. they paid so much to have the privilege of having these animals that in most cases would not get rid of them due to the cost that they paid for the privilege. Then they could at the same time have them in a data base as they do with guns and randomly execute checks to make sure they didn't release them into the wild. It would be much cheaper then the billions that will be spent doing research on every species to find out if they would have an impact. Yea they might have to hire into the DNR depts, then they can say they created jobs as well......
What effects those in areas with animals that are effecting the eco system and putting under threat does not effect ours in Michigan. Each area is specific and the law should be applied as such. Not a broad based approach that effects all 50 states, without the same problem. I understand wanting to get rid of Pythons in Florida and other such cases across the country, but why should I be under the same restrictions when here in Michigan in 99% of the time if they were released into the wild they would die. It is much cheaper and be more effective if those states enacted such laws within their boarders and for their own citizens.
This is just a first step it even says so in the bill, what comes after that? The next step will be taking animals on the banned list and having everyone that owns one to turn them in for destruction.
Save the holier then thou and pointing fingers telling us we are selfish because we want the one thing outside our families that gives us satisfaction, what you don't understand is this government has the track record for getting a foot in the door and never taking it out only to then stick in a leg then the rest of the body and before you know it not only will we not have our tanks, dogs, birds and what ever they deem invasive but there will be thousands out of jobs. Education is cheaper and more effective.....What happens when they find that they don't have the funds to support the bill and the research? I can tell you every species they haven't researched to see if it might cause harm will be added to the banned list just to be safe. Good luck getting it off it once it's on it wither it should be or not.....
Why don't they try regulating these species that are effecting their ecosystems with taxes for those that want Pythons in Florida and regulate them there with fees and charges. Make it extremely expensive so that not every Tom, dick, or Harry can by them. This way only those that A. can afford them and B. they paid so much to have the privilege of having these animals that in most cases would not get rid of them due to the cost that they paid for the privilege. Then they could at the same time have them in a data base as they do with guns and randomly execute checks to make sure they didn't release them into the wild. It would be much cheaper then the billions that will be spent doing research on every species to find out if they would have an impact. Yea they might have to hire into the DNR depts, then they can say they created jobs as well......
Last edited:
