Poll: level(s) of accountability in the hobby/trade

[Anonymous]

please note:

the intent is not to deal w/ anything the hobby/industry may or may not be accountable for, for good or bad

i'm trying to find out what y'all think about the comparative levels of responsibility shared, or not between the various elements of the 'hobbyist >middlemen >exporters/manufacturers' chain.whether it's for a new propagation method, or a damaging collection method :wink:

please also don't take into consideration the relative good/damage assumed in relation to size of the group


what i'm looking for is more along the lines of your perception from a social/sociological, and 'psychological', p.o.v. .would be nice to also hear why ya think what ya think



(sumpers-muffins are not an option)

 

[rabagley]

Aquarists can decide to be more educated about what they buy (not ever making impulse buys is a good start) and the path by which it came to them. If we insist as a group into visibility into the collection process, by letter writing and with the power of our substantial wallets, we could make a change in the industry.

Distributors and retailers need to escape the rather American way of thinking about their businesses: always desperate to make the next dollar. This includes selling livestock that's about to die because of collection methods, treatment during transport, etc. Honest retailers who give me reliable information about livestock condition and treatment keep my business. Most places lose my business when their employees fail my verbal test, "I'd like to get into saltwater, what should I buy?" Even if I don't spend a lot of money in your store today, I will probably spend two to three thousand each year, so do what you can to keep my business.

Collectors who care to supply fish that are captured in sustainable ways have left open their future livelihood. Collectors who supply fish that are going to make the journey to America and live long lives in aquariums should gain the confidence of the stores who do well with their product to the exclusion of those who send fish with 80-90% or worse mortality rates.

I'm a huge fan of captive propagation and renewable capture (http://www.tampabaysaltwater.com). I'm very happy to see that I am not alone in my enthusiasm and that as a group, educated aquarists are trying very hard to support these worthy businesses. The gap is those aquarists who don't know or don't care about the impact of their money on the environment. This group buys the pretty fish, no matter how short of a life that fish is likely to have in their tank. This group has no patience, no self-control, no conciousness of their actions and choices.

As a group, responsible aquarists who care about the future of our hobby need to work to educate others, especially those new to the hobby. Starting a marine aquarist club where there isn't one would be a good start. Participating in these forums and recommending these forums as sources of information when asked. Having extra copies of good books and loaning them out often (or donating them to libraries). We can also recruit responsible live fish store owners in this, though it's a bit of a challenge to find the responsible ones. :?

There's no shortage of work to improve our hobby and the impact our hobby has on the worlds oceans. We can't be responsible for the independant actions of others (blowing up coral reefs to use for building materials) but we have real influence with our money and we can and should use that influence to make improvements to parts of this planet.

At least that's my take on the subject.

Regards,
Ross

 

[Arch01]

I'm a big subscriber to the ideas of Adam Smith. I think in a perfect world, everything is demand driven. If we didn't buy cyanide caught fish and we didn't shop at irresponsible LFSs, then the problem would go away.

The problem is that we (consumers) don't always have all of the information when we are buying something so we can't always be blamed. However, with a little effort we can become much more informed about things that we are buying or keeping in our reefs. I guess I would put the more of the accountability on hobbyists (especially the less informed ones) but I do think there is plenty of blame to go around.

Alex
_________________
our economy

 

[Anonymous]

remember that the 'credit' aspect is also one to be considered

should hobbyists then be credited for discoveries made in improving holding techniques/dry goods evaluation by the source end of the chain?

 

[Anonymous]

please note:

the intent is not to deal w/ anything the hobby/industry may or may not be accountable for, for good or bad

i'm trying to find out what y'all think about the comparative levels of responsibility shared, or not between the various elements of the 'hobbyist >middlemen >exporters/manufacturers' chain.whether it's for a new propagation method, or a damaging collection method :wink:

please also don't take into consideration the relative good/damage assumed in relation to size of the group


what i'm looking for is more along the lines of your perception from a social/sociological, and 'psychological', p.o.v. .would be nice to also hear why ya think what ya think



(sumpers-muffins are not an option)

i don't know that i follow 100% so i will answer what i think you are asking and you can take it or leave it...

i chose 'the collector' option as being the most responsible on the grounds that everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions. i don't see how demand can relieve or lessen the responsiblity of a freewilled person committing an act... good or bad.
IMO, knowledge incurs responsiblity. when one is made aware of the results brought on by his own actions, he must then accept the responsiblity incurred through this knowledge.


either way, for the purchase of aquacultured specimens or for the purchase of wild caught specimens, i don't think the consumer can be held responsible if he is completely unaware of the livestock's origin and of any issues regarding the specimen's origin.
to go to a greater depth, if the buyer is made aware of an issue regarding the specimen's origin (ie. poor collection techniques), he then has a responsiblity to make himself knowledgable of his prospected specimen's origin. anything else would be irresponsible to the issue at hand and also to the role he plays within the trade.


i can only thoroughly explain myself through an analogy...
my parents bought their grandchildren some seashells at the coast and in them were dried linkia skeltons and coral skeletons. when i informed them as to the likely demise of these animals their reaction was an initial disbelief that such things would be sold in todays market followed by remorse for purchasing them.
i can't hold them responsible for the collection of those patricular curios as they never would have bought them if they had known the method in which they were obtained.
now, if they were to return to buy more, then they are to be held 100% responsible for their role in the trade and i would dare say they share an equal split with the collector in the responsibility pool.


i like this analogy. it removes the cost issue between aquaculture and wildcaught and deals solely with the responsibility incurred through the collection.
cost tends to confuse the issue with many consumers that find a bargain to be justification for their acting role.

this aspect of all trades interests me to great lengths.... but i think i have expunged my need to go on for thirty pages this time :wink:


muffins

 

[melanotaenia1]

It is just a shame that it is not easier to breed most saltwater fish in captivity but alas, that is a totally different subject, sure ORA is great, if I want a clownfish tank, but come on, they aren't breeding regal angels. But as hobbyists, all of the trials and errors we have had over the years should teach us not to buy certain fish because they just don't live in captivity, I still see Rock Beauties for sale, don't tell me these are being caught because they are such "great eaters"

So if more LFS eduacte hobbyists when they are looking at NEMO, they would be able to avoid the hassles of people who don't have the time or patience to keep saltwater fish, which, being mostly wild caught, are not used to a closed in glass box, so every fish is different. We as hobbyists need to be responsible on our end as to what we buy, but then again, so do the wholesalers, they obviously know the poor track records of certain fish, but still choose to catch and import these fish. Until the wholesalers stop ordering these fish, they are still going to be caught, whether with nets or drugs.

It is a domino effect, and it starts at our end because if we never opened our wallets to pay for the hobby in the first place, there would be no hobby to open our wallets for.

I think MAC is a good start, but is only a START, so much more needs to be done.

If more people could put the time into breeding the fish in captivity, I think that would be a good thing too, but then that would mean lots of money and time trying to figure out how to breed the fish, when it is so much easier to just catch one outta the ocean. This of course goes back to one thing: the bottom line.

:?

 

[Anonymous]

but are all these particular dominoes equal in responsibility, or the effect each has on the other, - or are they all equally responsible ?

 

[melanotaenia1]

but are all these particular dominoes equal in responsibility, or the effect each has on the other, - or are they all equally responsible ?

I think they all are equal, now that would be a vast generalization, but I think the hobbyist who buys the rock beauty is just as at fault as the person selling it to them at the LFS or the person in the boat in the Caribbean bringing them out of the ocean or the wholesaler in Florida sending them out in little plastic baggies.

I would really hate to be a fish in one of those bags, talk about claustrophobia :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Ya know, it was quite a few years into this hobby that I realized some of the fish I was keeping were possibly caught with cyanide. Actually, it wasn't until I came to RDO that I learned this and at that point I was already keeping stony coral tanks. This is pure ignorance, and I feel a lot of people are in the same boat as me.

For me, the distinction is simple: Collectors *know* that using cyanide is bad, or at least I hope they know. They do it anyway. When a hobbyist buys something, he assumes a lot of things, IMO. It's like buying a medication, or a car, or whatever. "This must have passed FDA approval, or EPA standards, etc." We assume that our cars are not going to release radioactive substances into the environment, and that our pills are not made by testing them on human slaves. There are laws set in place to prevent this kind of thing.

I've told many a person that their new angelfish was most likely swimming on a coral reef in the ocean two weeks ago to vast astonishment. I think until a lot of information is relayed to hobbyists, a lot of blame has to be put on collectors for *cyanide use*.

The collection of cleaner wrasses, obligate corallivores, rock beauties, etc., is a different story IMO, however. They have no idea how well certain fish will fare in an aquarium--if someone is going to pay for it, they'll catch it. Until hobbyists stop buying these fish (and this is much simpler than trying to not buy cyanide caught fish), collectors will continue to catch them.

 

[Douglas S Lehman]

Hello Vitz
I can't find much fault with the average hobbist.
Were stuck buying fish that are mostly of unknown origin.
Were back to that trust thing again.
You have to remember this is a hobby for the most of us.
As enjoyable as it is, I could go back to model railroading or stamp collecting and maybe save some money along the way. ( I currently have a dozen aquariums going).
As to who's the blame, I think theirs enough to go around?
Those with the most to loose or gain are best left to figure it out.
The real value in fish are the ones we can all grow old with!

 

[Anonymous]

Hello Vitz
I can't find much fault with the average hobbist.
Were stuck buying fish that are mostly of unknown origin.
Were back to that trust thing again.
You have to remember this is a hobby for the most of us.
As enjoyable as it is, I could go back to model railroading or stamp collecting and maybe save some money along the way. ( I currently have a dozen aquariums going).
As to who's the blame, I think theirs enough to go around?
Those with the most to loose or gain are best left to figure it out.
The real value in fish are the ones we can all grow old with!

i disagree 100%.
those with the most to lose are those that are most likely to compromise what is right.
i also see plenty of fault with the average aquarist. most are not well versed in husbandry and few actually take the time to know how cyanide is used in collection and rarely do they ask their LFS if their fish are tank raised.

 

[Ghosty]

Since I am not personally the individual that captures, distributes or sells...the only control I have in the situation is to be personally responsible for the decisions I make. If I fail to ask the questions then I am responsible for being ignorant and supporting bad practices. I kind of see it as related to buying goods on the street corner -- If I were to ask the questions I would probably discover that the goods were not obtained through honorable means -- and I wouldn't buy them with that knowledge. So by failing to ask and demand the proper precautions I am endorsing the bad behaviour.