Import ban- discuss!

[madmark285]

As usual, anything the government hopes to regulate "for the greater good" will end up being a damn disaster

The US government failed to properly regulate Lionfish, now they are devastating fish populations in the Caribbean. The US government failed to properly regulate Burmese pythons, now they are wiping out native wildlife in the Everglades. The government failed to properly regulate Asian carp, now try boating in the Mississippi River without getting hit by this jumping catfish. If the Asian carp gets into Lake Michigan, the Great Lakes could be screwed.

So i don't disagree with you, government actions have been a disaster. But the issue is the lack of regulations.

 

[madmark285]

I do think we could get out ahead of this issue by adding a tariff to all imports that are wild caught (yes, I realize this raises a tracking issue, but this is typically born on the shoulders of the importer - business, broker, or individual; and I fully recogonize some wild caught individulas might slip through the cracks), particularly for species that have been shown to be able to be bred in captivity. It would likely up the appeal of captive bred stocks, incentivize in-country breeders, and reduce demand for wild caught specimens except perhaps to add new bloodlines to captive bred stock*.

I prefer not to buy any wild caught fish, I am good with buying from breeders in the USA. I would be OK with requiring permits to import fish, only certified breeder could buy wild caught fish.

And I would ban the importation of many fish such as the Snakehead which could survive in lakes in the USA. The EU has banned the importation of the largemouth bass, that guy would devastate lakes in the EU.

Anyways, wish me luck, time to drill my 40 gallon tank. With glass shortage from COVID, Aqueon says don't drill your tank, it could be tempered glass.

 

[GaryE]

Usually, tempered glass is on the bottom, and you odds at getting away with drilling a side panel are better....

 

[WhistlingBadger]

I prefer not to buy any wild caught fish, I am good with buying from breeders in the USA. I would be OK with requiring permits to import fish, only certified breeder could buy wild caught fish.

And I would ban the importation of many fish such as the Snakehead which could survive in lakes in the USA. The EU has banned the importation of the largemouth bass, that guy would devastate lakes in the EU.

Anyways, wish me luck, time to drill my 40 gallon tank. With glass shortage from COVID, Aqueon says don't drill your tank, it could be tempered glass.

Wow, good luck. Let us know how it goes.

 

[madmark285]

Wow, good luck. Let us know how it goes.

A 93% success rate. It was not tempered glass and the first hole was perfect. The second hole has a minor chip out but I should be OK. I had too much pressure on the drill as it broke thru the glass at the end. I will put some silicone caulk on the rubber seal for the thru hull fitting. Hopefully I will have the sump filter running in a day or two, the barbs are getting pissed off as they are cramped in a 29 gallon tank

 

[anewbie]

Doesn't matter what usa short-sighted govt does; climate change will get many of the species soon enough; of course if they are banned they might disappear from the trade all together before breeding can at least preserve some of them.

 

[GaryE]

Doesn't matter what usa short-sighted govt does; climate change will get many of the species soon enough; of course if they are banned they might disappear from the trade all together before breeding can at least preserve some of them.

We have to be careful climate change doesn't become the new 'end of the world' religious scenario that many use to justify doing nothing. In the case of this ban, the danger to the wild species isn't change, it's overfishing. So in the short term, it can be protected from us, the buyers of aquarium fish, pretty easily. Breeding to preserve? Show me a multi-generational breeding project anywhere other than in fancy, mutated fish. 99% of the people on this active and engaged forum have zero interest in intentionally breeding fish. We talk the talk in the hobby, but there are no working programs with studbooks, networks of keepers, etc. We have improv with the well meaning CARES project, and that's about it.

The only forces with the resources to make conservation of species work are government and universities. Ideally, we can protect habitat so the species capable of withstanding temperature change have a chance. We're one of those species.

I suspect the trade will disappear in the west in the next few decades, when you look at the rate the aquarium world is shrinking and at how leisure time is being undermined. I don't think we can count on it to preserve itself, let alone other species.

 

[OnlyGenusCaps]

If the Asian carp gets into Lake Michigan, the Great Lakes could be screwed.

If any of the Asian carp species make it into the Great Lakes, I think it's time we decide they are no longer a native ecosystem and start introducing some interesting stuff. My vote goes to Baikal seals!

I prefer not to buy any wild caught fish

I agree. Since getting back into tanks, I don't think I have even bought many fish where I don't know whose tank they were born in, much less wild caught ones. That's been a fun aspect of the hobby for me!

And I would ban the importation of many fish such as the Snakehead which could survive in lakes in the USA.

I mean the US has gone further. Not only the ones that could survive in the States, but all of them! The argument USFWS made is that when young all the species are too hard to distinguish. I think it was Australia, of all places, that took a more logical approach by just banning the species of concern, and import of the group below a certain size, thus allowing them to distinguish between the ones of concern and those which were not (this may have been before their whitelist, I haven't looked into it in depth). Sadly, the American approach is rarely this nuanced, and I do think it's at least part of the reason there is so much mistrust with government actions like this in the States.

The EU has banned the importation of the largemouth bass, that guy would devastate lakes in the EU.

I mean that's like Florida banning lionfish.

"What?! The horse is out! Quick, close the barn door!" (My understanding is they are already there in numbers.).

Bans are a tough subject, I think. I know from friends at USFWS that the thing the agency is really pushing for is to find a way to create a "whitelist". Outwardly they claim this will stop new invasive species introductions, but they know it won't. Accidental introductions from global trade are responsible for far more, and often far worse invasive species introductions (think zebra mussles, emerald ash borer, various Asian hornets, etc.) - and no one is proposing a curtailing of that; too much money to be made! In truth, USFWS wants a whitelist of imports for the pet trade because it's easier. Then they don't need to hire agents with as much education, and can pay inspectors less. Again, this is just what a few friends of mine in the agency say the discussion is behind closed doors.

I don't disagree with you that invasive species are a concern, but it's really hard even for biologists to know a priori which species are a threat. I mean, I know no herpetologists who would have predicted that burms but not boas would have been the species to become such a pest in Fla.

To be clear, I'm not a "the gubernmint is out to get us, go Murica!" kind of guy. I'd be all for your idea of regulating imports to certified breeders and researchers. Sure, the quick turn around wholesalers would be out of business, but the resulting experience for most hobbyists would likely be better, with healthier fish more generally available. It's the laziness and thoughtlessness of blanket bans that drives me a bit nuts.

 

[madmark285]

If any of the Asian carp species make it into the Great Lakes, I think it's time we decide they are no longer a native ecosystem and start introducing some interesting stuff. My vote goes to Baikal seals!

If they eat Lamprey eels and zebra mussels, they got my vote! You do raise a good point with the Great Lakes as they heavy stock the lakes with Salmon to control the alewives population. I still remember the crunchy Lake Michigan beaches with the mass alewives deaths.

What?! The horse is out! Quick, close the barn door!" (My understanding is they are already there in numbers.).

LOL, clearly that's not a very good example. From ESPN, England got largemouths in 1879, Germany in 1888 and Italy in 1897. I thought they were just in Spain and southern France.

I admit that I am naïve about banning imports of aquarium fish. I watch a youtube video and the huge wholesaler do raise a good point, they are creating jobs in their home countries of these fish.

 

[GaryE]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to ban imports of certain species, if the data shows collecting is threatening wild stocks.

I buy wild fish by preference, and not just because they are healthier. Freshwater fish collecting is done by local populations and is quite sustainable. The fish farms listed on stock exchanges are a different story, and you choose your sources.

True, far more damage to our environment has been done by ballasts and such than by imports of aquarium fish. Food fish have caused disasters as well. But getting into arguments like that get us nowhere. If we look at aquarium choices, we have to focus. For aquarium choices, there's no danger of escapes surviving a Canadian winter for where I am. The issues are overfishing at source and diseases. One involves wild fish and the other affects farmed ones.

The great problem governments have is lack of resources - not enough scientists, and poorly trained inspectors going up against crooked dealers and hobbyists who want that forbidden fruit. Importers all have stories of those several times a week messages from many different people seeking fish they know are banned for good reasons. Some get really angry and abusive - they must have their snakeheads!

Why?

If people take the "democratic governments can't do anything" talking points, you end up with dictators who don't know about fish either. That solves nothing and leaves us worse off. People like PETA take advantage of the lack of resources and political corruption to push blanket bans, and that is stupid too. We need science based decisions, but we have a shortage of science based decision makers out there.

 

[Alice B]

Ideally overfishing would be handled at a local level and not at customs. It is not an ideal world. I do not have the answer except I shop carefully, preferably for tank bred locally raised fish.

 

[OnlyGenusCaps]

I admit that I am naïve about banning imports of aquarium fish.

I know that's not true! I call false modesty! As I hope you well know, I have a great respect for you, and your thoughts on many subjects.

We need science based decisions, but we have a shortage of science based decision makers out there.

Agreed! On top of that, and this never gets great feedback, you can't have every single one of your whims satisfied. (To be clear, the previous sentence uses the general forms of the words "you" and "your", and not the specific forms.). Sometimes, people just need to learn to let stuff go.

Ideally overfishing would be handled at a local level and not at customs.

Absolutely! Unfortunately, much of the world's biodiversity exists within the borders of nation states that have vastly fewer resources, control over their territory, and sometimes, yes, even the will to take on conservation issues than does the developed world. In the case of over-harvesting, there are basically forms of two levers to pull - local conservation/enforcement, and demand reduction/control on the buyer side. In situ conservation is always best, but sometimes that is not possible (even when the resources, control, and will are all there) when demand is too high. In my mind, partnerships between exporting and importing communities/nations would be best, when possible. And sometimes it's just not - how do you have sustainable elephant ivory harvests? Of course, I am for a data driven approach to assess when and where that most extreme lever should be pulled. But we'll encounter it. There are a lot of people, with a lot of wants.

 

[GaryE]

The local level would be great, except what I just saw in Gabon was a system where many decisions were being made in China, North America and Europe, and the great corporate machines were rolling over the local environmental concerns. Fish catching is a tiny pressure compared to deforestation, mining and climate change. People trying to make local level changes in Brazil, for example, get shot.

We have to go after elements of the trade in highly endangered species because it is an international market. It's larger, more ruthless and more powerful than a fisher's co-op on a tropical river. There is a lot of too little too late, but I'm afraid the lever has to be pulled on demand reduction and control for designated species. Equal partnerships are also a goal, but unequal balances of power make that very difficult. Corporate power isn't democratic, and if we live in democracies, we can only exert pressure on our own representatives to force changes.

I think that means keeping an eye on data about which species our activities as hobbyists threaten, and lobbying for more or fewer restrictions as the scenarios evolve. If we want to take on the whole system, then that's another debate not for here. There are a number of species that can no longer be wild collected, and that's good. I just wish the fishfarms operated with fish health and sustainability in mind. That's a whole other kettle of fish.