This could end very badly for our hobby ...

[jkopfishman]

Not to degrade what is happening because it is, But they are talking about the Hawaiian islands and cardinalfish ( as far as I know) are not found in the Hawaiian area

The banggai cardinal fish is only supposed to b from the banggai islands. But ur right due to over harvest they are caprive bred for our hobby. I was snorkling the florida keys and was very surprised to see some swimming there wild. Later heard there's a Banggai Cardinal restoration project down there (Not sure if true). Wonder if some got released somehow.

 

[saltyhog]

I would love to avoid buying fish that are caught unethically. How exactly do I know how the fish is caught before I buy it? We need some kind of database or information center.

I don't know of any hobbyist I know that would knowingly buy a fish caught with cyanide.....how can we be better informed?

 

[sundog101]

So...we can catch millions and millions of fish to eat, but we can't take a fraction of that to put in aquariums? I don't get these groups. Is there no bigger problem in the world that they could be trying to fix?

 

[Susan Bates]

I would love to avoid buying fish that are caught unethically. How exactly do I know how the fish is caught before I buy it? We need some kind of database or information center.

I don't know of any hobbyist I know that would knowingly buy a fish caught with cyanide.....how can we be better informed?

you are right, I think it is up to us to try can stop fish being caught this way before someone stops our hobby

 

[dmh41532]

oh wake up and smell the coffee , just listen to yourselves in total denial. speak to any diver and ask them how the undersea landscape has changed in the last twenty years. you cant keep taking hundreds or thousands of fish a month, and it not have an impact. they dont breed that fast, and if you look at all the dead fish laid out in rows , well thats not pollution , thats the ones who didnt even make it off the island.
this is as bad if not worst than the ivory trade killing elephants and rhinos. Difference is we can breed elephants and rhinos in zoos to restock if needed in the future, we cannot breed yellow tangs ect so what happens when they are all gone. there should be a three year cycle bought in , no taking for two years then allowed in the third year, then two off again , at least it would give a chance for the stocks to build up

Except, yellow tangs, and now even blue tangs have been captive bred.

 

[Ike]

Just so everyone is aware, focusing on only captive raised fish is not some panacea for the reefs. In many places, the fishing techniques are not detrimental to the reefs. If we stop supporting the local fish collectors, especially in countries with at risk reefs, that fisherman is still there, and if he can't support his family as an ornamental fish collector, his next career choice, probably commercial food fishing, is far more destructive to the reefs. Supporting responsiby caught wild fish is the best way we can help provide value to these reefs, and if they are valuable to those at the forefront these reefs will fare better.

Not keeping difficult fish is also not a great solution. There are many fish that used to be viewed as impossible years ago, but their secrets have since been 'unlocked' due to dedicated aquarists.

No, neither are a solution, but it's a way to make the hobby directly less destructive. We can't create a slippery slope about what might happen if we stop collecting so many wild fish for our hobby. Sustainable and captive grown fish for the hobby is something we should strive for. The reality is that our hobby is contributing to the depletion of a natural resource and being placed under scrutiny due to some bad practices. We quite literally had child slave labor not all that long ago as part of the supply chain. We need to continue to try and change for the better and be less reliant on the natural reefs.

Why do we need to keep trying to keep highly difficult animals when there are hundreds of species out there that we know can be sustained long-term in an aquarium and with fairly basic knowledge. I would like to know the many fish that we couldn't keep years ago and now have a high success rate with? Please tell me some, because I'm struggling to come up with any... It's ego or naivete that drive most hobbyists to keep trying really difficult to keep fish, and as far as I'm concerned both ego and a lack of knowledge are very harmful to this hobby's future.

 

[jeremy.gosnell]

The issues with collection/consumption/etc of live ornamental fish don't begin at the local fish store, even the horrible local fish store. They begin on the other side of the world, where reef fish are living in their natural environment. This is a natural environment being threatened daily by rising ocean temperatures, ocean acidification, sedimentation, over-fishing, cyanide collection and the list goes on. It is likely a valid argument that live ornamental collection is sustainable, if it is regulated and monitored with transparent access to adequate fisheries data.

Sadly, that isn't what exists - especially in the two locales that supply the vast majority of fish. Even an impeccable LFS can't contribute much change to this issue, because the majority of the fish they get in (largely because they are the most desirable species in the trade pipeline) have come for potentially toxic sources. Foreign governments are working on the problem - and many are hopeful the change in leadership in the Philippines will bring about a positive impact. NGOs (Non-government organizations) are working on the issue as well.

I've spoken to fish collectors who started the trend of training local Philippine and Indonesian fish collectors in net-capture. Some of these guys were the first to reach out and try to put a stop to cyanide collection, well over 25 years ago. A rift exists between NGOs and local village divers. The village divers are used to a humble, poor life - no a/c - no modern luxury, quite literally a life most westerners couldn't imagine. Here come the NGOs, flying into luxury hotels, trying to change the game all in the comfort of an air conditioned room in a luxury hotel in Manila. Often NGOs are supported by lots of money, that could be going to improve conditions for village fishers willing to adopt better standards, but instead go to luxury trips for NGOs to sort through paper invoices and build data bases. These collectors tell me that the only real change is at the village level, one village at a time, one fisher at a time. To make it work, everyone has to be willing to get their hands dirty and spend some time with no a/c - possibly no power and work to improve the social and economic structure of ornamental fishing villages.

Thus far, no one has been willing to do that - except for a small handful of American fish exporters. RVS Fish World is infamous for working toward the trend of net-captured, sustainably sourced ornamental livestock. I imagine there are few people in this country that have more in-depth knowledge of this issue than Steve Robinson. Steve has invited me to spend some time in the Philippines at the village level, seeing the world of marine fish collection for myself. I am working on planning a trip for next year and if I go, I am hoping to write a series about my findings for reef2reef.

 

[eatbreakfast]

I would say however, that LFS often do get a bad rap. The numbers they bring

No, neither are a solution, but it's a way to make the hobby directly less destructive. We can't create a slippery slope about what might happen if we stop collecting so many wild fish for our hobby. Sustainable and captive grown fish for the hobby is something we should strive for. The reality is that our hobby is contributing to the depletion of a natural resource and being placed under scrutiny due to some bad practices. We quite literally had child slave labor not all that long ago as part of the supply chain. We need to continue to try and change for the better and be less reliant on the natural reefs.

Why do we need to keep trying to keep highly difficult animals when there are hundreds of species out there that we know can be sustained long-term in an aquarium and with fairly basic knowledge. I would like to know the many fish that we couldn't keep years ago and now have a high success rate with? Please tell me some, because I'm struggling to come up with any... It's ego or naivete that drive most hobbyists to keep trying really difficult to keep fish, and as far as I'm concerned both ego and a lack of knowledge are very harmful to this hobby's future.

Look at marine books written in the 80's. Anthias weren't kept, nor were fairy wrasses. Angels were seemed sensitive. In the late 90's bangaii cardinals were difficult, in the 2000's orange spot filefish couldn't be kept, now they are bred. Advances and understanding grow. If we always stayed stuck on this idea of 'it should be left in the ocean' those types of advances stop. Understanding personal limitations is important, but someone that is dedicated, though perhaps relatively inexperienced, can do better than someone far more experienced, but not as focused.

On the hobby collection level, the recruitment rates for replacing the fish is surprisingly quick, almost immediate.

The reality is, even if the hobby were banned in it's entirety, fishstocks and reef health improvements would be negligible, whereas if commercial fishing, or a drastic cut in greenhouse gasses, or even runoff pollution, the results would be astounding and almost immediate.

 

[Ike]

I would say however, that LFS often do get a bad rap. The numbers they bring

Look at marine books written in the 80's. Anthias weren't kept, nor were fairy wrasses. Angels were seemed sensitive. In the late 90's bangaii cardinals were difficult, in the 2000's orange spot filefish couldn't be kept, now they are bred. Advances and understanding grow. If we always stayed stuck on this idea of 'it should be left in the ocean' those types of advances stop. Understanding personal limitations is important, but someone that is dedicated, though perhaps relatively inexperienced, can do better than someone far more experienced, but not as focused.

On the hobby collection level, the recruitment rates for replacing the fish is surprisingly quick, almost immediate.

The reality is, even if the hobby were banned in it's entirety, fishstocks and reef health improvements would be negligible, whereas if commercial fishing, or a drastic cut in greenhouse gasses, or even runoff pollution, the results would be astounding and almost immediate.

I don't have to look at books, I lived it... Anthias weren't as commonly available as they are now, and the same goes for many wrasses. This is where improved shipping practices and holding facilities have helped quite a bit. Angelfish are still quite sensitive in many cases, but back then, between the two things I just mentioned and how often cyanide was used in their capture. The angels that were really difficult to keep back then are still really difficult to keep...

Bangaii were never difficult, but they were prone to unexplained die-off after importation, which they still are to a lesser degree. There were also some collection factors in there... I would still contend that Anthias, and many of the more sensitive wrasses (Anampses, Macropharyngodon, Cirrihlabrus, etc.) still have mortality rates inside of a year that would make most of us sick, certain species are probably well above 95%+. You brought up orange spotted filefish, sure, we've bred them, but I would bet a large sum of money that nearly 100% of the wild captured orange spotted file-fish are still dead inside of a year. However, I still feel a dedicated hobbysist that knows what they're doing can keep these fish, and they're not really the type of fish I'm talking about, though all the people that buy them and quickly kill them quickly because they don't have a proper set-up are hurting this hobby.

Moorish Idols, Rock Beauties, sweetlips, parrotfish, coralivore butterflies, fish like that are more what I'm talking about here, fish that have very almost zero chance of surviving long term in an overwhelming majority of tanks, yet they're still being imported regularly. If they die in the holding tanks at collection stations and distributors I can assure you they won't continue collecting them at the rate they are now.

Will it make a huge impact on the overall reef if these fish aren't collected, no? Does that mean we should just be ok with them being collected, absolutely not! I don't want people to take this the wrong way, I'm not getting preachy or judgey; I've killed my fair share of fish. However, I'm just tired of many in the hobby being blatant about how little they care about the well being of the animals we keep. It's only going to hurt all of us in the long run and give guys like snorkel Bob more ammunition.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Water comes from the water your mom drank. Then we drink water as we grow up. It all get pee'd out and recycled.

Except for all the water that fills cells, muscles, etc, right? So it comes from where?

 

[reeferfoxx]

Except for all the water that fills cells, muscles, etc, right? So it comes from where?

Water that fills cells and muscles? In our bodies? It's absorbed from the things you eat and drink lol

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Lets stop bickering, we have differences of opinion and that's OK.

I venture to guess that most if not all of us are passionate about this hobby and the marine life we keep. Lots of good points here. Instead of chiming in about why my local LFS are awful and I wish I had Humblefish style business to support (and happily pay a premium for) I would rather us try to come together.

Another thing I am seeing is that we are starting to take a convoluted situation and make it more convoluted which is a recipe for no solutions or insights. Honesty how long have we been talking about "conversation and comprehensive X reform" for many problems we face? (Think politics for example) Those terms just mean nothing will ever change or happen but we will talk about the problem and have conversations until we are blue in the face and give up.

Admittedly, I don't really have any solutions, but I think the first step is making the problem more simple, and identifying what can be controlled and what cannot, and go from there.

I'm not bright enough to know much about the supply chain and processes.

I will also concede that there are many in this hobby that join for a short time and leave and that learning curve for many is often harmful to sealife distributed to them.

I think the last problem is hopefully addressed in part by this great community. Let's work together folks not against each other. We are in this together!

That's one thing I find evident, over and over again. The forums haven't changed much since early 2000's. Some people are yelling stuff is dying, some people are trying to be the experts, some people are trying to be inquisitive, some people are flaming, some people are rehashing posts that have been repeated 50 times over.
I'm not sure where the hobby is going, but it hasn't changed much.

 

[eatbreakfast]

I don't have to look at books, I lived it... Anthias weren't as commonly available as they are now, and the same goes for many wrasses. This is where improved shipping practices and holding facilities have helped quite a bit. Angelfish are still quite sensitive in many cases, but back then, between the two things I just mentioned and how often cyanide was used in their capture. The angels that were really difficult to keep back then are still really difficult to keep...

Bangaii were never difficult, but they were prone to unexplained die-off after importation, which they still are to a lesser degree. There were also some collection factors in there... I would still contend that Anthias, and many of the more sensitive wrasses (Anampses, Macropharyngodon, Cirrihlabrus, etc.) still have mortality rates inside of a year that would make most of us sick, certain species are probably well above 95%+. You brought up orange spotted filefish, sure, we've bred them, but I would bet a large sum of money that nearly 100% of the wild captured orange spotted file-fish are still dead inside of a year. However, I still feel a dedicated hobbysist that knows what they're doing can keep these fish, and they're not really the type of fish I'm talking about, though all the people that buy them and quickly kill them quickly because they don't have a proper set-up are hurting this hobby.

Moorish Idols, Rock Beauties, sweetlips, parrotfish, coralivore butterflies, fish like that are more what I'm talking about here, fish that have very almost zero chance of surviving long term in an overwhelming majority of tanks, yet they're still being imported regularly. If they die in the holding tanks at collection stations and distributors I can assure you they won't continue collecting them at the rate they are now.

Will it make a huge impact on the overall reef if these fish aren't collected, no? Does that mean we should just be ok with them being collected, absolutely not! I don't want people to take this the wrong way, I'm not getting preachy or judgey; I've killed my fair share of fish. However, I'm just tired of many in the hobby being blatant about how little they care about the well being of the animals we keep. It's only going to hurt all of us in the long run and give guys like snorkel Bob more ammunition.

I have a saltwater pamphlet from 1966 that has a fasciatus anthias in it. So they could have been had, they weren't available because they wouldn't live. So yeah, we have come a long way in some of those. Angels can still be sensitive, but flames and coral beauties aren't considered as difficult as they once were. Yes, wild caught bangaii's were considered difficult in published aquarium literature exactly because of unexplained die-offs, that doesn't happen any more. While not all parrots are being kept yet with great success, more of them are. And as somebody that pays particularly close attention to wrasses, I would say that mortality in leopards has been cut in half in the last decade and a half.

Advances will continue to be made, as I've seen more success being had with hobbyists keeping moorish idols too.

Yes, there is still quite a bit of needless waste, but to come up with an idea that some fish should never be captured is unwise and soley reactionary.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Water that fills cells and muscles? In our bodies? It's absorbed from the things you eat and drink lol

I was trying to show you that the more cells/muscle/etc you have, the more water goes from the Earth, into your body. Until you die, that displaced water is not released or as you put it, 'peed out and recycled'. Sorry for getting off-topic, but until we understand a lot, we only understand very little! (lawl)

 

[reeferfoxx]

I was trying to show you that the more cells/muscle/etc you have, the more water goes from the Earth, into your body. Until you die, that displaced water is not released or as you put it, 'peed out and recycled'. Sorry for getting off-topic, but until we understand a lot, we only understand very little! (lawl)

Not to sound rude, but this is all explained in 5th-8th grade. From the digestive track to precipitation, evaporation and condensation and how it all cycles within the atmosphere. This is no mystery science.

 

[eatbreakfast]

I was trying to show you that the more cells/muscle/etc you have, the more water goes from the Earth, into your body. Until you die, that displaced water is not released or as you put it, 'peed out and recycled'. Sorry for getting off-topic, but until we understand a lot, we only understand very little! (lawl)

The human body is between 50-75% water. If just for statistical ease lets say 60%, a 180lb person has about 13.5 gallons. There is over 10 trillion million gallons of freshwater, perhaps more with underground sources. Any water shortage is from himan mismanagement, not that the human population will absorb it.

 

[reeferfoxx]

I was trying to show you that the more cells/muscle/etc you have, the more water goes from the Earth, into your body. Until you die, that displaced water is not released or as you put it, 'peed out and recycled'. Sorry for getting off-topic, but until we understand a lot, we only understand very little! (lawl)

Do people not sweat, pee, spit, sneeze, bleed, poop, or cry? All of these, are forms of secretion. They evaporate back into the atmosphere. The only water displacement you are talking about are city water reserves and how people manage the water. That water also evaporates. When things evaporate, they get recycled back into the atmosphere. Then condensation begins in the form of rain. Correct me if you disagree?

 

[jeremy.gosnell]

I don't have to look at books, I lived it... Anthias weren't as commonly available as they are now, and the same goes for many wrasses. This is where improved shipping practices and holding facilities have helped quite a bit. Angelfish are still quite sensitive in many cases, but back then, between the two things I just mentioned and how often cyanide was used in their capture. The angels that were really difficult to keep back then are still really difficult to keep...

Bangaii were never difficult, but they were prone to unexplained die-off after importation, which they still are to a lesser degree. There were also some collection factors in there... I would still contend that Anthias, and many of the more sensitive wrasses (Anampses, Macropharyngodon, Cirrihlabrus, etc.) still have mortality rates inside of a year that would make most of us sick, certain species are probably well above 95%+. You brought up orange spotted filefish, sure, we've bred them, but I would bet a large sum of money that nearly 100% of the wild captured orange spotted file-fish are still dead inside of a year. However, I still feel a dedicated hobbysist that knows what they're doing can keep these fish, and they're not really the type of fish I'm talking about, though all the people that buy them and quickly kill them quickly because they don't have a proper set-up are hurting this hobby.

Moorish Idols, Rock Beauties, sweetlips, parrotfish, coralivore butterflies, fish like that are more what I'm talking about here, fish that have very almost zero chance of surviving long term in an overwhelming majority of tanks, yet they're still being imported regularly. If they die in the holding tanks at collection stations and distributors I can assure you they won't continue collecting them at the rate they are now.

Will it make a huge impact on the overall reef if these fish aren't collected, no? Does that mean we should just be ok with them being collected, absolutely not! I don't want people to take this the wrong way, I'm not getting preachy or judgey; I've killed my fair share of fish. However, I'm just tired of many in the hobby being blatant about how little they care about the well being of the animals we keep. It's only going to hurt all of us in the long run and give guys like snorkel Bob more ammunition.

This is pretty right on, in my books. It also represents another issue outside of fishery concerns that taint public perception of the hobby and that is removing animals from the reef that have dismal survival records. The Moorish idol is a good example of this, as they are commonly offered for sale online and in fish stores, often for $60-$100. I know of many, many hobbyists who have purchased idols and reached out to me when things start going south. Most have systems not capable of housing an idol and many others are unwilling to invest the time and money to keep them alive - as this often means large and drastic changes to reef systems. When you tell someone that in order to keep one species they need to remove a percentage of their coral, re-arrange their rock-work, install different circulation pumps and remove a percentage of their fish population, the response is mixed. Idols can be kept, but the entire system has to be designed around them. I've aided several aquarists in setting up idol systems. One didn't last a year and the owner exited the hobby. The the other 3 or 4 are still up and running today, with idols that are nearly as old as the systems. Granted, two of these tanks are large displays in hotels.

There certainly are fish with a 95%+ mortality rate. Psychedelic or red-tailed tamarin wrasse are an example. Most of the individuals offered die quickly. I set-up an entire reef system tailored to their care. I got lucky, as one female died. I've had the other two pair members (a male and female) for several years and the male reverted back to female. The industry could easily conduct a study on a selection of 20 fish that have poor survival rates and the study could determine what effect removing them has on a reef ecosystem. Do they provide cleaning services, are they detrimental to the ecosystem in some previously unknown way, do they take years to reach spawning age? At the very least, if the study determined that removing them doesn't have a domino effect on reef ecosystems and the industry continues to sell them, we would have a study behind us that says removing them causes no intertwined effects on reef ecosystems.

The issues with the industry and studies, IME, have been that they cost money, required educated people to preside over them and take time. Just the travel costs are astronomical. In planning several weeks to be in the Philippines and Indonesia, I personally am looking at in expenses in excess of $ 10,000.00 to write a series of articles that wouldn't pay for food costs. For me, I don't rely on this to make a living and a lot of it is important as I enjoy the hobby, diving and experiencing the culture that surrounds it - so I can justify the expensive basically as a vacation. For professionals though, that rely on the industry as a livelihood, the costs cannot be justified. A marine scientist capable of conducting such a study is going to likely have in upwards of $ 100k or more, by the time their travel, equipment, lodging and salary costs are factored in. When I worked for BOA I was blown away at the travel costs associated with our work. For the staff to be on assignment at any given time, the company was shelling out 10's of thousands of dollars per week. Airfare alone was out of this world, as we were going to locales around the world. In the end, these costs sunk the company, because we couldn't keep our prices competitive enough for clients to make the costs worthwhile. Frankly, dive shops weren't willing to spend a quarter million dollars to have our team come and create a 3D map of dive sites and offer coral reef biology classes.

Part of the reason conservation groups like For the Fishes provide such skewed data is because they aren't impartial. People that are passionate about something are more likely to put in time, sweat and dollars to pursue it - but with that, you're going to get their personal opinion and viewpoint. They go into something with a mindset and often come out with that mindset unchanged. Data and facts are twisted to support the initial mindset, giving the group even greater leverage to make the case to the ignorant. An impartial researcher will want paid, as they have no personal passion in the criteria. Such studies could potentially raise the costs of livestock for the aquarist and I am sure many in the industry question at this point if that risk is worthwhile. That may change if public pressure starts mounting.

 

[Brew12]

There is a Native American proverb that goes something along the lines of "No single raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood."

Some rain is good, too much rain causes devastation. Some fish harvesting is good (we learn about the species and gain knowledge that may save them in the future) but too much harvesting can be devastating. Using some water from aquafers can actually really help the environment since it puts more water back into the evaporation process that gets filtered by the sand and returns clean to the aquafer. Pulling too much water out of an aquafer can cause the land to sink and the aquafer to be permanently lost.
Every person in the aquarium hobby has an impact on reef collection and we must acknowledge that. Even if you only purchase net collected fish or tank bred fish, that potentially removes a fish from the market that is replaced with a cyanide captured fish. Our aquariums all use water, and most use DI/DO water which wastes more water than it produces. If we live in an area that has limited natural fresh water supplies, we contribute to the total water usage of that area.
In my opinion we really need to work on establishing reasonable regulation on the aquarium industry. Hobbyists alone aren't going to be able to make the aquarium industry operate responsibly in a sustainable manner but we can work to make the industry better.
Just like every aquarist is a raindrop whose collecting fish contributes the flood that potentially overharvests fish from reefs, every aquarist who supports sustainable fish collection can be a raindrop that leads to a flood of positive fish industry reforms.

 

[Susan Bates]

There is a Native American proverb that goes something along the lines of "No single raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood."

Some rain is good, too much rain causes devastation. Some fish harvesting is good (we learn about the species and gain knowledge that may save them in the future) but too much harvesting can be devastating. Using some water from aquafers can actually really help the environment since it puts more water back into the evaporation process that gets filtered by the sand and returns clean to the aquafer. Pulling too much water out of an aquafer can cause the land to sink and the aquafer to be permanently lost.
Every person in the aquarium hobby has an impact on reef collection and we must acknowledge that. Even if you only purchase net collected fish or tank bred fish, that potentially removes a fish from the market that is replaced with a cyanide captured fish. Our aquariums all use water, and most use DI/DO water which wastes more water than it produces. If we live in an area that has limited natural fresh water supplies, we contribute to the total water usage of that area.
In my opinion we really need to work on establishing reasonable regulation on the aquarium industry. Hobbyists alone aren't going to be able to make the aquarium industry operate responsibly in a sustainable manner but we can work to make the industry better.
Just like every aquarist is a raindrop whose collecting fish contributes the flood that potentially overharvests fish from reefs, every aquarist who supports sustainable fish collection can be a raindrop that leads to a flood of positive fish industry reforms.

Very well said