If you're planning a trip to Florida...

[sfloridasalty]

Just thought some folks might find the following info interesting. What prompted this was that I got to work this morning and overheard a couple of guys talking about how they had been diving over the weekend and captured some "critters" for their tanks. They talked about how they turned over rocks and generally made a mess of things in their pursuit of fish. It really got me angry. Although most of what they did wasn't technically illegal, it certainly was thoughless. I'm sure some will disagree with me, but I'm one of those "Take only memories, leave only wake" kinda people. These guys have what I call "Dude Tanks"... as in "dude, look at my cool tank." Anyways, in case anyone was wondering (who doesn't live here), here are the rules from the state.

http://www.floridasportsman.com/regs.html

ORNAMENTAL TROPICAL FISH AND PLANTS
Minimum Size Limit (Total Length): Spanish Hogfish 2", Spotfin Hogfish 3", Porkfish 1 1/2"
Maximum size Limit (Total Length): Angelfish (except rock beauty) 8", Butterfly, Jawfish 4",
Rock Beauty 5", Gobies 2", Spanish Hogfish 8", Spotfin Hogfish 8"
Bag Limit fishes/Invertebrates: 20 per person per day. no more than 5 Angelfish and no more than 6 Octocoral Colonies. Plants: 1 gallon per person per day
Live landing and live well requirements. Harvest in Biscayne National Park & John Pennekamp State Park Prohibited.
Unlawful to harvest or posses Longspine Urchin, Hard and Fire Corals, Sea Fans, Florida Queen Conch and Bahamas Starfish.
Harvest of live rock in state waters is prohibited.
PROTECTED SPECIES
It is unlawful to harvest, posses, land, purchase, sell, or exchange the following species:
Nassau Grouper, Jewfish, Sawfish, Basking Shark, Whale Shark, Spotted Eagle Ray, Sturgeon,
White Shark, Sand Tiger Shark, Bigeye Sand Tiger Shark, Manta Rays.

 

[Len]

Good to know.

The fundamental criteria in life should never be whether you can, but whether you should.

 

[Reefguide]

Well spoken Leonard.

 

[Contender]

I'm one of those "Take only memories, leave only wake" kinda people.

Then don't have a reef tank.

 

[wade1]

Actually, its entirely possible to create a tank of beautiful sps out of nothing more than fragments from corals. They certainly came from the ocean at some point in the past, but they are many generations in tanks at this stage. I have only 3 of 60 species that are wild harvested (and those the result of fragging demos for the local club).

The same goes with captive bred fish, although you are more limited in your selection for certain.

But, the point of the message I believe is not don't take anything, but limit what you take and be thoughtful about it.

My $0.02

 

[beerbaron]

good point sfloridasalty

 

[sfloridasalty]

I'm one of those "Take only memories, leave only wake" kinda people.

Then don't have a reef tank.

You missed the point entirely. I'm obviously not against having a reef tank. The point I was trying to make was, don't destroy the reef when you're diving it. If you want live rock, buy it from an aquaculture source (Like Tampa)... etc. There ins't any reason to be destructive just to collect a couple fish. Living here in FL I would hope that you've noticed what this type of behavior has done to our own barrier reef and other wildlife as well.

 

[sfloridasalty]

Actually, its entirely possible to create a tank of beautiful sps out of nothing more than fragments from corals. They certainly came from the ocean at some point in the past, but they are many generations in tanks at this stage. I have only 3 of 60 species that are wild harvested (and those the result of fragging demos for the local club).

The same goes with captive bred fish, although you are more limited in your selection for certain.

But, the point of the message I believe is not don't take anything, but limit what you take and be thoughtful about it.

My $0.02

Wade, your point is certainly a good and a valid one and if this were a perfect world where people could limit themselves and be careful I would fully agree. Unfortunately though, people aren't careful... they tear up the reef, injure coral heads, turn up the SB with props when they're in the shallows.... basically people are thoughtless most of the time (even people that live here, not just tourists). I would hope that through education and enlightenment, people can be taught that the reefs are not inexhaustable supplies of "cool stuff for their tanks," but actually the very limited and fragile ecosystems that they are.

 

[sfloridasalty]

Actually, its entirely possible to create a tank of beautiful sps out of nothing more than fragments from corals. They certainly came from the ocean at some point in the past, but they are many generations in tanks at this stage. I have only 3 of 60 species that are wild harvested (and those the result of fragging demos for the local club).

The same goes with captive bred fish, although you are more limited in your selection for certain.

Wade, I didn't want to make light of the majority of your post though. I completely agree with you here. I have tanks that have evolved directly through this philosophy. If my fish weren't captive bred, then they were either rescued from dying tanks or inherited from tanks that people couldn't take care of. The point is I think we just all need to be responsible and conscientious consumers and reef keepers by minimizing our hobby's (aka our obsession's) impact on the wild environment.

 

[Contender]

I am a diver and a reefer, and I have never caught anything to put it in my tank. I don't know the people you mentioned in your post, nor do I know the damage they did. However, I could think of a lot worse things that could be done than turning over a couple of rocks for a shrimp or a crab. I don't think these people should be criticized any more than a person going into an LFS and buying a specimen for their tank. Do you think the Fijean divers or Red Sea Divers catch animals with ecology in mind? Do you think they put back everything the way it was after they catch it? Lets face it...most of the animals we see come from developing countries, and their captors have little education or regard for the well being of the animals. Catching more aquarium fish means better providing for their family, whatever the cost to the environment everyone takes for granted. For every 20 shrimp or crab or whatever they catch over there, MAYBE 15 make it to the US wholesalers, of which MAYBE 11 reach the LFS, of which MAYBE 8 reach consumers, of which only 3 or 4 truly know how to provide for them. Now ask yourself, which do you think is worse...your coworker going out and catching a couple of animals for his tank, or someone somewhere else in the world going out and catching a handful of animals in just as reckless a manner and only having a fraction survive the transportation alone?

I think your statement perfectly represents the general American sentiment that what you don't see doesn't hurt you. Otherwise, you would realize that your coworker turning over a couple of rocks in the reef you love to dive isn't the real problem affecting reefs in the big picture. It just brings the problems inherent in our hobby a little closer to home.

 

[sfloridasalty]

So let me get this straight... you're saying that since people are irresponsible the world over it should be oK for everyone to be irresponsible?

I'm glad that you personally are a responsible diver and reefer. As such a person, do you ever wish that everyone else was as responsible as you or does that not matter?

Your point that people need to make a living is well founded and lack of education certainly does come into play. You did hit on a common theme between both situations (local and global) and that is a lack of education (or caring for that matter). In that light, disturbing reef environments in domestic waters is equally as bad as disturbing them elsewhere in the world. Wrong is wrong in any ocean. So to answer your question, I think my coworker going out and catching a couple of animals for his tank is wrong in the same vein as someone somewhere else in the world going out and catching a handful of animals in just as reckless a manner and only having a fraction survive the transportation. This isn't a contest its about doing the right thing. If you're going to catch the animals, don't destroy their environment in the proccess.


As far as your statement "I think your statement perfectly represents the general American sentiment that what you don't see doesn't hurt you." Not sure where you got this from, but I can assure you that most reef conservationist are well aware of what happens to reefs on a global basis... we all need to be. But I LIVE IN SOUTH FLORIDA, these reefs are my backyard. They are the closest to me (and to you as well) and therefore the ones I pay attention to most often because they are the ones I can have the greatest impact on (wichout traveling the world over). Luckily there are other people, with similar views, that live close to other reefs in the world. Collectively we should all be able to make a difference by taking care of what's in our own backyards with the whole ecosystem in mind.

 

[Contender]

My comments seem to reflect that I think its ok to ruin our ecosystem because it is going to happen either way. That is not what I'm saying and I would like to clarify that. I think that coral reefs are one of the Earth's most beautiful wonders, yet they are also one of the most abused. I would like nothing more than to have my children and grand children witness it's beauty through their eyes first hand, much the way I see it now.

However we have certain realizations to make. As a diver in Florida, you know that our reefs now are nothing compared to the reefs of 10 years ago, and those are nothing compared to the reefs of 20 years ago. The reefs are steadily depleting due to a number of causes, amongst which reefkeeping has to be included. Many reefers will tell you that the aquarium hobby accounts for a small fraction of the destruction of coral reefs. Yet it is a factor and it should not be disregarded. Reefers claim to want to do whats best for the reefs, and to only have x amount of tangs per x amount of gallons, and to only buy what they could provide for. You want to do whats best for the reefs? Leave the fishes in the sea. You want captive bred fish? Let them breed in the wild undisturbed, where they will produce more fish than at any lab or research facility.

Of course, that is not going to happen. So the next best alternative is to try to buy environmentally friendly species, and to make sure you can absolutely provide for every specimen you ever buy. But the people who buy responsibly in this hobby are FAR outnumbered by those who approach it with stupidity. I will be the first to say that responsibility in this hobby begins with education, and everytime I see someone with a fish tank, whether it be someone I know or someone at the LFS, I try to influence them to be as ecologically friendly as possible, and try to show them how to set up a tank properly. But a realization most knowledgable reefers have undoubtedly come to is that alot of people do not want to learn. And to think people are like that here in Miami, where we are surrounded by natural reefs. Imagine someone in a state somewhere in the middle of this continent, who has never seen an ocean with his own eyes. They have even less incentive to learn. We are involved in an overall destructive hobby, one that has a big learning curve, and one that is going to get worse everytime some ignorant punk sees a cool rock star or rapper on MTV Cribs with a nice big poorly planned fish tank in his house, and decides "dude, I want one of those." You and I may do our own part and be as responsible as possible, but each of us is still part of a bigger picture in this hobby. I am not saying this hobby is hopeless, I'm just saying that all this education people constantly speak of in hypotheticals is not making enough of an impact. If anyone has any suggestions to increase awareness, I'm all ears.

Now getting back to my point....I am not saying that it is ok for this coworker of yours to go around making a mess of the reef for the sake of having his "dude tank", which I think is a superb description for that type of aquarist. All I was saying was that if this guy hadn't gone out and caught this fish for his tank, then he would have instead gone to the LFS and bought a fish which was undoubtedly caught in a similar manner, plus there probably was a greater loss of life in it's transport. My point is that if you are going to criticize him, then you also have to criticize all who buy wild specimens, which includes many people on this board, including me. The only difference between the two is that one of them occurrs in your own back yard, and the other occurrs in an ocean far far away that you have never visited. Going back to my original post, when I said that if your credo is "take only memories, leave only wake" then perhaps it is not in your best interest to keep a reef tank. Either that, or your personal beliefs for scuba diving do not transfer over to your other hobbies.

 

[SPC]

Posted by Contender:

You want captive bred fish? Let them breed in the wild undisturbed, where they will produce more fish than at any lab or research facility.

-Contender, I'm not sure I understand your logic here. Is it your belief that a wild pair of fish will have the same # of offspring survive as a pair of fish in a captive environement?

 

[sfloridasalty]

OK, lets try to bring this into perspective. I think we're agreeing on several key topics, but in a couple others we're not addressing the same things. So let me break this down and we'll see if we can agree on the following:

1. Destruction of reef environments is bad. I think we both agree on this one (and honestly, if anyone out there doesn't agree with this I'd love to hear their reasons).

2. (This is a whole other topic that is actually going on right now in this post by Sharkky http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=16492) There are two types of hobbyists... those who approach the hobby with a sense of respect and ecology and those who just want a "dude tank" to impress their friends. These are the folks that give this hobby a bad name and cause ecologists and conservationists to believe that our hobby is (and in a sense they're right) destructive to the environments they want to protect.

3. Education is key. You're right here, we can't make everyone else as educated as they should be. Your point that we are involved in an "overall destructive hobby" made me stop and think. You're right, but it doesn't need to be that way. Its destructive in the same way that camping can be destructive or farming can be destructive. It all depends on how the activity is carried out. I'm not saying that we can educate everyone, but we have to try. I'm sure that most of the owners of LFS's on this board will tell you that they try everyday to educate their customers (especially the newbies) and that many of the reefers that hang out in those LFS's (including myself) try to do so as well. I realize that you're just a frustrated as I am about the lack of education and I'm right there with you when you say "I am not saying this hobby is hopeless, I'm just saying that all this education people constantly speak of in hypotheticals is not making enough of an impact. If anyone has any suggestions to increase awareness, I'm all ears." I'd love to hear people's ideas. I'd love to have the Tang Police , and the Coral Police, and the Dude Tank Prevention Squad hang out at every reef and LFS, but is that realistic?

4. On the whole issue of captive bred vs. wild caught: I'm not sure how to address your point here. Its just my opinion that utilizing captive bred and/or aquacultured sources will be less environmentally detrimental than using wild caught or harvested ones. This goes back to an earlier post where I said, "we just all need to be responsible and conscientious consumers and reef keepers by minimizing our hobby's (aka our obsession's) impact on the wild environment" and this is done by finding out where the stuff you buy comes from and how it is harvested. I know I'm being an optimist here, but that's the only solution. If we can make people understand the impact that their buying habits have on the reefs then we can create a demand (and therefore a supply) of ... and I hate to use this cliché... environmentally friendly reef products (such as captive bred fish, aquacultured rock, and frag bred coral). Ultimately this demand will exist, its inevitable. The question is will this demand be created because we, as a species, have been so irresponsible that we've destroyed the reef or will this demand be created because people are aware of the impacts of current practices and want to save the reefs? I sure hope its the latter.

5. I think we disagree on what it means to be a conscientious diver vs. being a conscientious hobbyist. The two, though hand-in-hand, aren't the same thing. One would hope that all divers on the reef would respect the environment and that all reefers would try to act in the environment's best interest with their buying habits, but one is not dependant on the other. My statement, "take only memories, leave only wake" applies to my time spent in the water and means that I try not to destroy the environment I'm visiting (just as I wouldn't litter in a national forest or cut down a Sequoia tree). Let me put it this way, should I not have tropical tree's in my lawn because people are destroying the rain forests? I should say not! I have tropical species of plants (trees, orchids etc.) that I raise that were taken from cuttings, etc. from existing species. In the interest of not supporting the destruction of the native environment of those species, I try not to buy products that benefit the industries that destroy the rain forests. Same goes for the reefs. So, to your statement... I try to be conscientious in both my diving and my reef keeping, but because I'm a diver doesn't mean that I can't be a reef keeper.

Did I miss anything here?

I think it boils down to the fact that you may be more pessimistic and I may be more optimistic. Neither is right or wrong and I think we'll probably find reality somewhere in the middle. If we end this debate before I have a chance to say so, this has been very interesting and you've made some great points. I'm really glad I joined this board... its a much more intelligent place than some of the other boards I've found.

 

[Contender]

To begin with, let me state that I agree with most of the issues you are addressing. In certain respects, I am playing devils advocate to try to make people think about certain issues we all like to ignore in this hobby.

However, I don't agree with one key point. We both agree that there is problems in this hobby. We both agree that education can help. However, you seem complacent with the status quo, while I am certainly not. If the best thing for this hobby is to continue at is, then there is always going to be 20 "dude tanks" to every one well saught out tank. At this rate, I am afraid that the only event that could really bring about a increase in the aquaculture industry is destruction of too much coral reef. You say that the LFS on this board give good advice. I agree, but they represent but a fraction of the LFS's....and even if the owners are knowledgable, often they hire people who don't know a thing and the customer gets bad advice. Who is the first person a newbie asks when wanting to set up a tank? The LFS guy. There is going to have to be some change....or maybe a complete ban on importation of all wild specimens is the answer. But I would hate to think that the government is the answer to the problem in our hobby.

Now the topic of aquaculture. If the majority of animals sold were aquaculture, then I think this could be a positive hobby. It would increase education on coral reefs, while not making more of an impact on them. However, there is many specimens of fish in every LFS that could easily be captive raised, yet they are wild caught. We, the consumer, are to blame for this. In the short run, aquaculture would be more expensive, but in the long run would be more ecologically, as well as economically, friendly. We just have to create the demand.

Now, sfloridasalty and wade...I will join you in not buying any wild specimens from this point on. It is not that difficult...I get all my frags from local reefers anyway. But if you guys have any advice on how I could make more of an impact than JUST doing my part, please let me know.

 

[Contender]

Posted by Contender:

You want captive bred fish? Let them breed in the wild undisturbed, where they will produce more fish than at any lab or research facility.

-Contender, I'm not sure I understand your logic here. Is it your belief that a wild pair of fish will have the same # of offspring survive as a pair of fish in a captive environement?

You misunderstood what I'm saying...this was taken out of context. What I'm saying is that in reality, the most ecologically beneficial method would be not to aquaculture but to not have tanks at all, and leave fish alone. I am not saying that there would be more offspring...although in the long run there would be, because generation after generation could reproduce instead of having offspring periodically shipped off to the LFS...I am just saying that the best thing for the species would be to leave them in the ocean undisturbed, and not in a tank in your house.

Like I said, I don't truly believe this is what we should do....I'm just trying to make a point.

 

[sfloridasalty]

I'm glad we've found some common ground. I'm not sure how any of what I've said indicates complacency though. My intent, as shown in the previous posts, has been to advocate methods that are different from the status quo. It certainly would be much easier to just buy whatever the LFS had to offer than to seek out captive bred or aqucultured products. If I haven't championed change loud enough in my posts, then all this typing has been a waste.

You're right, there probably will probably always be 20 "dude tanks" to 1 purist tank. That seems inherent in the hobby. Let's face it, reef tanks are pretty damn cool. I mean we're not talking about Sea Monkey's here... a full blown reef tank is a pretty spectacular thing to behold. The problem is most people don't get into them knowing how much work is involved. Given that there will always be this unbalance in the type of hobbyists, what's the answer? That's hard to say. I would also hate to see the government get involved in this, but what other way is there? Given my first post, it is perfectly legal to harvest these animals without concern for their environment. Without Reef Police present to monitor collection methods, there just isn't any way to control human impact on the reef. A ban on importation would certainly drive the aquaculture industry.

Suggestions from the rest of the community would certainly be welcome on this issue: How do we create an increased market for captive bred/aquacultured products and reduce dependence on wild caught organisms?

Lastly, how can we make more of an impact? There's nothing wrong with just doing your part and setting a good example. What makes the difference is getting others to act conscientiously as well. Its all about social change. The question here is can the habits of many be changed by reaching some critical mass in terms of public or hobbyist education?

 

[SPC]

Posted by Contender:

You misunderstood what I'm saying...this was taken out of context.

-You made a very clear statement Contender that one could definately construe as more offspring survive in the wild than in aquaculture facilities.

What I'm saying is that in reality, the most ecologically beneficial method would be not to aquaculture but to not have tanks at all, and leave fish alone.

-I disagree with your assumption here, lets consider sustainability of the fish species. A sustainable harvest in an ethical and environmentally friendly manner is quite possible.

I am not saying that there would be more offspring...although in the long run there would be, because generation after generation could reproduce instead of having offspring periodically shipped off to the LFS...I am just saying that the best thing for the species would be to leave them in the ocean undisturbed, and not in a tank in your house.

-You lost me a bit here, the more aquacultured fish that are purchased by hobbiest the less that are taken from the wild (except for the ones that are eaten). Now we can also bring up the point that if hobbiest stopped purchasing fish, would the native peoples be more inclined to allow the reefs to be destroyed? Less value = less protection.
Steve

 

[sfloridasalty]

-You lost me a bit here, the more aquacultured fish that are purchased by hobbiest the less that are taken from the wild (except for the ones that are eaten). Now we can also bring up the point that if hobbiest stopped purchasing fish, would the native peoples be more inclined to allow the reefs to be destroyed? Less value = less protection.
Steve

Ok Steve, this is a really interesting view. Are you suggesting that if we didn't purchase wild caught species that the people who harvest them would cease to view their local reefs as valuable and this would in turn lead to greater destruction of those reefs? If so, what would destroy these reefs in these developing countries if people weren't on them all the time?

 

[Contender]

ok now, SPC, lets not get ahead of ourselves. You took one stement out of several very long posts. It is very easy to change the meaning of something by taking a quote out of a paragraph and analyzing it. Apparently, that is the way you disect, so I will try to work with you.

First place, if you read my second to last thread, you will see that I embrace aquaculture, I am not criticizing it, as you are arguing. A sustainable harvest is most definitely possible, and hopefully we will be seeing more of it in the near future. And obviously, more aquacultured fish means less wild harvested ones (even for eating....alot of salmon, tilapia, etc. that we eat is aquacultured). I can assure you that we see eye to eye on this topic. I am sorry if there was ambiguity in my statements, I hope I have cleared it up.

Now that is where the agreement stops.

Now we can also bring up the point that if hobbiest stopped purchasing fish, would the native peoples be more inclined to allow the reefs to be destroyed? Less value = less protection.

HAHAHA. You sure like to toot your own horn. You think that some Indonesian diver could care less about the animals he is catching? Demand = Destruction. The best thing that could happen to a reef is there be no demand, either by ban or because it is replaced by aquaculture. Sorry to break it to you, but the reefs do not need humans to thrive. We are the cause of the problems, not the solution, and the best thing people could do is leave the reefs alone. Measures could be taken and laws could be passed to make humans less detrimental to reefs, such as the ban on collection of live rocks in Florida, but we are protecting the reefs from our self. If you think that the demand you create is really saving the reefs than you are just self righteous.