Declining wild fish stocks.

[juanveldez]

I also have to agree with CM on this one. there is a necisity to a point that new genes need to be avalible. I hate to think of the logistics involved if we were to ban the use of wild fish to enhance the gene pool. just think about it. if I were to have to pack up bert and ship him off to god knows where to breed I have NO personal guarntee that he would be alive. NOW I am going to say this, I think that F0 fish SHOULD be kept by experinced people so that they can offer generations to the average hobbyist, but if I have the chance to get involved with propogating a species that would ensure that the gene pool be diverse for years to come then I would in a heart beat.

 

[aquamanis]

I think we are all guilty to some point wether we like it or not. If there was no demand there wouldn,t be a tropical fish trade in the first place. On the other hand, Mike Wickham in his book makes a good point: Wouldn,t it be great to be the first person to breed a species in captivity. If we are really concerned about the trade maybe more people should be trying to breed species that were once considered impossible to breed in captivity.

 

[Lateral Line]

>>> If there was no demand

Unfortunately, one of the biggest markets for seahorses for example, is traditional Chinese medicine.

>>> I have assisted well known breeders involved in captive breeding programs

For 2 years, I held and bred genetically diverse specimens of the CITES red listed Caecobarbus geertsii, (now highly threatened still in the wild). The paperwork was more difficult than the breeding.

 

[joshua]

yeah chinese medicine is cruel to many animals and sometimes even extremely inhumane pain is brought to these animals just to get what they want. i heard about the bear bile. they slice the side of the bear and let the bile drip for days while the bear is in the cage and it eventually dies. somewhat off topic here but just wanted to give some insight. and the so-called tonics they get out of these animals aren't even proven... many just myths or superstitions

 

[guppymonkey]

In the cases of most tropical fish, they are threatened because of mankind whether because of deforestation, pollution or even collection for export to foreign countries. Taking more fish to try to save the species doesn't make sense to me. By taking wild stock you are simply reducing the population even more. At some point the species will die off in their natural environment and only live in captivity!

I still don't agree with introducing wild stock for "genetic diversity". The genetic diversity can be guaranteed with a few hundred specimens or less. This has been demonstrated with many endangered species. While I haven't worked with fish breeding (I don't have the time, money and space and I don't think my girlfriend would enjoy having a house full of fish tanks) I have done much research on endangered species. They have been reintroducing the California condor to parts of its former range. This has worked pretty well with some mishaps as is to be expected. Will they be reintroducing fish to their natural environment? I doubt it. It would be expensive and many of the fish would die on the trip. People that taking fish for propagation of endangered species are not actually saving the species. They are contributing to its demise. Most fish that are sold (in stores, online, etc) die, either from neglect, shock or from owners not knowing enough. Most aquarium enthusiasts don't want to breed their fish. Many fish are difficult to breed even if their owners try. This all contributes to the downfall of some species of tropical fish in the wild.