USL- Last Set of Animals from the List!!!
- Thread starter MaryHM
- Start date
Thanks to everyone for your hard work. It appears that this is a comprehensive and well researched list of unsuitable species. I have two comments:
1) The nudibranchs in the trade actually fall into two groups: "true nudibranchs" are all carnivorous and obligate feeders on such things as hydroids, sponges, other nudibranchs, etc. However, "sea slugs" such as Tridachia crispata, sea hares (Aplysia), sea cats (Dolabrifera) and other species seldom seen, are herbivores, and can be maintained successfully. Tridachia feeds on Caulerpa, Aplysia on a variety of large seaweeds, and Dolabrifera eats filamentous and "slime" algae. Since we would not want to discourage people from keeping these species, I think the distinction should be made. In the case of Aplysia, they might be placed in the "too large" category, since they have a huge appetite and are therefore a challenge to feed unless one lives close to the shore.
2) Seahorses are becoming endangered throughout the world, and are extremely challenging to feed successfully. Only about 1 in 100 survives in captivity for a normal lifespan. These should be included in the obligate feeder list, until further research develops a suitable captive dietary regime.
Thanks, and best regards,
John
1) The nudibranchs in the trade actually fall into two groups: "true nudibranchs" are all carnivorous and obligate feeders on such things as hydroids, sponges, other nudibranchs, etc. However, "sea slugs" such as Tridachia crispata, sea hares (Aplysia), sea cats (Dolabrifera) and other species seldom seen, are herbivores, and can be maintained successfully. Tridachia feeds on Caulerpa, Aplysia on a variety of large seaweeds, and Dolabrifera eats filamentous and "slime" algae. Since we would not want to discourage people from keeping these species, I think the distinction should be made. In the case of Aplysia, they might be placed in the "too large" category, since they have a huge appetite and are therefore a challenge to feed unless one lives close to the shore.
2) Seahorses are becoming endangered throughout the world, and are extremely challenging to feed successfully. Only about 1 in 100 survives in captivity for a normal lifespan. These should be included in the obligate feeder list, until further research develops a suitable captive dietary regime.
Thanks, and best regards,
John
Naesco:
You seem to be refusing to look at the point of collection/handling problems from a certain region where heavy cyanide use and poor packing reigns.. which happens to be where alot of these problem fish come from. Bicolor angels for instance.. properly collected... are actually HARDY. If you go back into the lit and read about them.. you'll find they were once considered hardy.. then the survivability of them declined (collection issues!).. but the ones I've seen from fiji recently are very good.
You seem to be refusing to look at the point of collection/handling problems from a certain region where heavy cyanide use and poor packing reigns.. which happens to be where alot of these problem fish come from. Bicolor angels for instance.. properly collected... are actually HARDY. If you go back into the lit and read about them.. you'll find they were once considered hardy.. then the survivability of them declined (collection issues!).. but the ones I've seen from fiji recently are very good.
Jeremy what you say re Fiji bi-colour angels may be true.
I have read the current literature and searched the web for more but have not found anything but negative on the bicolour.
We are discussing category 7, Tullock's impossible to keep because of feeding issues.
Tullock also has another category of Fish with a high likelihood fo problems resulting from improper collecting and handling techniques (9).
I note that the bi-colour is on that list also. It appears than that the bi-colour has a feeding and collection issue.
FYI the powder brown, powder blue and hippo as well as the coral beauty angel is on that poor collection list. I don't advocate a ban on them yet.
I have read the current literature and searched the web for more but have not found anything but negative on the bicolour.
We are discussing category 7, Tullock's impossible to keep because of feeding issues.
Tullock also has another category of Fish with a high likelihood fo problems resulting from improper collecting and handling techniques (9).
I note that the bi-colour is on that list also. It appears than that the bi-colour has a feeding and collection issue.
FYI the powder brown, powder blue and hippo as well as the coral beauty angel is on that poor collection list. I don't advocate a ban on them yet.
John Tullock - "Junior Member" -
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by naesco:
<strong>Think about Humane Society advertisements with pictures of mommy seahorses with babies in their tummys and the industry scooping them up with nets and placed to die in our tanks.
Sensationalism or Fact?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Other than the fact that it'd be daddy seahorses.....it'd be sensationalism
But seriously, I have no problem with a ban on seahorses, if a provision is left in for limited collection to renew captive bloodlines - since most hobby species can be captive bred. Now, if we could just convince certain cultures not to use seahorses in their "homeopathic" medicine (aphrodesiac anyone?), I think the seahorses would stand a better chance of rebounding in the wild.
Kevin
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by naesco:
<strong>Think about Humane Society advertisements with pictures of mommy seahorses with babies in their tummys and the industry scooping them up with nets and placed to die in our tanks.
Sensationalism or Fact?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Other than the fact that it'd be daddy seahorses.....it'd be sensationalism
But seriously, I have no problem with a ban on seahorses, if a provision is left in for limited collection to renew captive bloodlines - since most hobby species can be captive bred. Now, if we could just convince certain cultures not to use seahorses in their "homeopathic" medicine (aphrodesiac anyone?), I think the seahorses would stand a better chance of rebounding in the wild.
Kevin
I don't sell wild seahorses, and don't advocate their sale because of their difficult nature and low surviveability, BUT, this is just another example of the wild pressure not coming from the aquarium industry.. and a ban that will change nothing. Until the asian market quits collecting them by the millions, seahorses will continue to decline in the wild.
Jeremy;
So let us as a hobby ban them and get the brownie points from both government and the ecology people. It is like the forest industry. Nobody disagrees that it is OK to log our forests.
Everybody is however against clearcutting.
Mary
Yes we have been busy but that does not leave you off the hook.
Please let us know who are the reef keepers who have excellent success with raising dendro?
Why is it so difficult for you to accept the unanimous opinion on experts on the fate of the Regal Angel? If things change they could always be removed from the list. God knows we would all love to keep them.
Are you serious in your view that this coral, other species and fish that cannot be successful kept in our aquaria, should continue to be collected and sold to the masses?
So let us as a hobby ban them and get the brownie points from both government and the ecology people. It is like the forest industry. Nobody disagrees that it is OK to log our forests.
Everybody is however against clearcutting.
Mary
Yes we have been busy but that does not leave you off the hook.
Please let us know who are the reef keepers who have excellent success with raising dendro?
Why is it so difficult for you to accept the unanimous opinion on experts on the fate of the Regal Angel? If things change they could always be removed from the list. God knows we would all love to keep them.
Are you serious in your view that this coral, other species and fish that cannot be successful kept in our aquaria, should continue to be collected and sold to the masses?
I think that the seahorse that John brought up is an excellent example. These animals are now being tank raised and the tank raised horse is superior to the wild caught in every way. Their numbers in the wild are declining due to different factors, one of which is the collection for the aquarium hobby. This to me seems like the poster child for what we are trying to accomplish here. What am I missing?
Steve
Steve
I'm not against banning seahorse import.. in fact I'm probably in favor of it (I dont' sell wild ones myself).. I just think people need to be aware that their ban on this species is going to have zero impact on the wild success of the species due to the asian curio/aphrodesiac collection.. and the rarer they get.. the MORE they are going to want them.
Jeremy, your exactly right, thats why I belong and donate to the World Wildlife Fund, that is my way of trying to help out with the other problems facing the seahorse. If that problem is solved by the various conservation groups, and the aquarium industry is still business as usual, then that leaves us the main target, and might I add rightfully so.
Steve
Steve
Well John Tullock has commented on the slugs and nudies.
So, do we as hobbyist and industry take a leadership role in banning wild seahorse collection? Or do we wait for the Feds to do it as it now appears to be a preservation issue as well as a survivability issue, and risk that they might delve a little further; maybe read this thread or a marine book or two.
SUMMARY
I think it is a good time to summarize the fish.
I fully support keeping all the listed species on the list. There has been mere comment but nothing or any substance that justifies there removal from the list. Support for the list comes from well recognized marine authors like Tullock, Fenner, Wilkens and Hemdal. Indirect support comes from leading LFS who recommend against purchase of these species.
I mean who is their right mind would consider the removal of the Moorish Idol or, the Ribbon eel, when the only evidence presented was that only one per cent survive?
I mean, is a 10% survival rate for the seahorse acceptable?
The only species that might be considered for removal is the flasher wrasse. I say this from the comments of this thread and articles I have read that appear that they are hardier than first thought.
I would also request that wild seahorse be added to the list based on the fact that they are an endanged species.
I want to thank Mary and the industry people for their input on the fish.
For the industry lurkers who think this forum is for eco freaks to vent, I want you to think about this.
Think about Humane Society advertisements with pictures of mommy seahorses with babies in their tummys and the industry scooping them up with nets and placed to die in our tanks.
Sensationalism or Fact?
So, do we as hobbyist and industry take a leadership role in banning wild seahorse collection? Or do we wait for the Feds to do it as it now appears to be a preservation issue as well as a survivability issue, and risk that they might delve a little further; maybe read this thread or a marine book or two.
SUMMARY
I think it is a good time to summarize the fish.
I fully support keeping all the listed species on the list. There has been mere comment but nothing or any substance that justifies there removal from the list. Support for the list comes from well recognized marine authors like Tullock, Fenner, Wilkens and Hemdal. Indirect support comes from leading LFS who recommend against purchase of these species.
I mean who is their right mind would consider the removal of the Moorish Idol or, the Ribbon eel, when the only evidence presented was that only one per cent survive?
I mean, is a 10% survival rate for the seahorse acceptable?
The only species that might be considered for removal is the flasher wrasse. I say this from the comments of this thread and articles I have read that appear that they are hardier than first thought.
I would also request that wild seahorse be added to the list based on the fact that they are an endanged species.
I want to thank Mary and the industry people for their input on the fish.
For the industry lurkers who think this forum is for eco freaks to vent, I want you to think about this.
Think about Humane Society advertisements with pictures of mommy seahorses with babies in their tummys and the industry scooping them up with nets and placed to die in our tanks.
Sensationalism or Fact?
Geez. Leave for the evening, miss a lot
You guys have been darn busy in here!
Thanks to John for coming over and contributing. Hopefully he will continue to do so. I wish he had made some comments concerning the angelfish we're having troubles with...
Anyway, let's revisit the list once more and look at the angel species in question:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr> Centropyge boylei boyle's- Can't find any diet information and I've never even heard of one of these, much less seen one.
C. multifasciatus multi-barred- Eats algae, coral, sponge and tunicates.
Apolemichthys arcuatus bandit- After I figured out that the genus was wrong on this one, information was much easier to find! Sponge and tunicates compose 91% of this fishes diets (according to Fish Base. Notice how I give a specific statistic and then back it up with a reference??? )
Holacanthus tricolor rock beauty- 98.2% of diet composed of sponges and tunicates. Again, from fish base.
Pygoplites diacanthus regal- Feeds on algae, tunicates, and sponges. I tend to agree here with Jeremy. The ones that come from countries where proper collection and handling techniques are utilized do quite well (like from Red Sea or Fiji). I have a Fiji regal here that I've had for almost 4 months. Fat as a pig.
<hr></blockquote>
C boyleyi- First of all, it's never imported. Second of all, I haven't seen any information pertaining to the feeding habits of this particular fish. I say leave it off the list.
A. arcuatus and H. tricolor- Seems to be no arguement from anyone that these are obligate feeders. I say they should be on the list.
P. diacanthus- Ah, the regal. The sticking point in this list. The one thing I really like about Fish Base is that it gives SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE to back up it's information. Not "This is what fish base has observed". For the regal angel, there is cited literature stating that algae is a staple of the regal's diet, along with sponges and tunicates. Thresher, R.E. and P.L. Colin, 1986. Trophic structure, diversity and abundance of fishes of the deep reef (30-300 m) at Enewetak, Marshall Islands. Bull. Mar. Sci. 38(1):253-272. I don't have access to a scientific library, but if someone does I'd appreciate it if they could look up the reference.
I am solid in my belief that collection and handling plays a MAJOR role with regal angels. You cannot say that a regal angel from the Philippines is the same fish as one collected from Fiji. Here's a good example: Green Chromis. They are collected and handled poorly in the Philippines and while working at the major wholesalers I would guess that 4 out of 10 died, if not more. From the Solomon's, I experience almost 0% mortality with these animals. Why? Because they are collected and handled properly. This is something we need to take into account.
(Moderator's Note: I'm not saying "We're going to do it my way so shut up". Just expressing my opinion. Continue to give me yours. Who knows? Maybe one of us with change the other's mind
)
Thanks to John for coming over and contributing. Hopefully he will continue to do so. I wish he had made some comments concerning the angelfish we're having troubles with...
Anyway, let's revisit the list once more and look at the angel species in question:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr> Centropyge boylei boyle's- Can't find any diet information and I've never even heard of one of these, much less seen one.
C. multifasciatus multi-barred- Eats algae, coral, sponge and tunicates.
Apolemichthys arcuatus bandit- After I figured out that the genus was wrong on this one, information was much easier to find! Sponge and tunicates compose 91% of this fishes diets (according to Fish Base. Notice how I give a specific statistic and then back it up with a reference??? )
Holacanthus tricolor rock beauty- 98.2% of diet composed of sponges and tunicates. Again, from fish base.
Pygoplites diacanthus regal- Feeds on algae, tunicates, and sponges. I tend to agree here with Jeremy. The ones that come from countries where proper collection and handling techniques are utilized do quite well (like from Red Sea or Fiji). I have a Fiji regal here that I've had for almost 4 months. Fat as a pig.
<hr></blockquote>
C boyleyi- First of all, it's never imported. Second of all, I haven't seen any information pertaining to the feeding habits of this particular fish. I say leave it off the list.
A. arcuatus and H. tricolor- Seems to be no arguement from anyone that these are obligate feeders. I say they should be on the list.
P. diacanthus- Ah, the regal. The sticking point in this list. The one thing I really like about Fish Base is that it gives SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE to back up it's information. Not "This is what fish base has observed". For the regal angel, there is cited literature stating that algae is a staple of the regal's diet, along with sponges and tunicates. Thresher, R.E. and P.L. Colin, 1986. Trophic structure, diversity and abundance of fishes of the deep reef (30-300 m) at Enewetak, Marshall Islands. Bull. Mar. Sci. 38(1):253-272. I don't have access to a scientific library, but if someone does I'd appreciate it if they could look up the reference.
I am solid in my belief that collection and handling plays a MAJOR role with regal angels. You cannot say that a regal angel from the Philippines is the same fish as one collected from Fiji. Here's a good example: Green Chromis. They are collected and handled poorly in the Philippines and while working at the major wholesalers I would guess that 4 out of 10 died, if not more. From the Solomon's, I experience almost 0% mortality with these animals. Why? Because they are collected and handled properly. This is something we need to take into account.
(Moderator's Note: I'm not saying "We're going to do it my way so shut up". Just expressing my opinion. Continue to give me yours. Who knows? Maybe one of us with change the other's mind
clarionreef
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- San Francisco
from; DECEMBER 2001
Blast from the past;
Far better and more scientific dialogue about difficult species contained herein....and years ago of course.
It simply goes to show that the trade itself has so much better comprehension of its own faults then outsiders sometimes.
tHE INTERNAL DEBATE HAS GONE ON AND EVOLVED FOR YEARS.
The trade is not however...united in all things and could never be.
Simplistic criticism from the outside assumes that we are all are the same, that irresponsibilty in one part taints all parts and that the minority should be able to control the majority somehow.
Meanwhile, the USL has become a saleable product.
Steve
Blast from the past;
Far better and more scientific dialogue about difficult species contained herein....and years ago of course.
It simply goes to show that the trade itself has so much better comprehension of its own faults then outsiders sometimes.
tHE INTERNAL DEBATE HAS GONE ON AND EVOLVED FOR YEARS.
The trade is not however...united in all things and could never be.
Simplistic criticism from the outside assumes that we are all are the same, that irresponsibilty in one part taints all parts and that the minority should be able to control the majority somehow.
Meanwhile, the USL has become a saleable product.
Steve
More comments on the angels....
Paracentropyge multifasciatus has been captive bred, raised and sold, implying that it is not an especially difficult species. You might want to check out Frank Baenschs site.
Personal experiene tells me C. bicolor, correctly collected and maintained is not a difficult species. I have yet to see a Centropyge species that, if correctly collected, is a terribly difficult species.
Paracentropyge multifasciatus has been captive bred, raised and sold, implying that it is not an especially difficult species. You might want to check out Frank Baenschs site.
Personal experiene tells me C. bicolor, correctly collected and maintained is not a difficult species. I have yet to see a Centropyge species that, if correctly collected, is a terribly difficult species.
wayne in norway":8xdm8fiw said:
What, because a scientist can spawn and raise the larvae, that means it's not a "especially difficult species"? How so? It took years for him (Frank B) to break thru with that, so I'd say just the opposite. It's it's so easy, why is Frank the only one doing it?
Well to the best of my knowledge I don't think Frank Baensch is doing anything super super clever to keep the fish in good shape, he's just applying careful care.
I'm not saying this is an easy fish, however it is not true to say it is impossible either. Stick it in a FOWLR or FO tank and it will die - put it in a reef enviroment and it seems to do better.
Raising the larva is difficult - noone is going to argue with that. Who knows how tricky tp raise F2 will be.
Naesco - I have a q? Do you only want to see 'easy' fish available for sale? What about fish for the 'advanced aquarist'?
I'm not saying this is an easy fish, however it is not true to say it is impossible either. Stick it in a FOWLR or FO tank and it will die - put it in a reef enviroment and it seems to do better.
Raising the larva is difficult - noone is going to argue with that. Who knows how tricky tp raise F2 will be.
Naesco - I have a q? Do you only want to see 'easy' fish available for sale? What about fish for the 'advanced aquarist'?
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
