Hobby responsible for 1/100thof 1% reef collection
- Thread starter Cappuccino Bay Aquarium
- Start date
Kalk, just a little tip- instead of quoting yourself like that to fix something you posted, just edit it, takes up much less space. I've read this whole thing several times, and all the numbers that have been thrown around have only confused me. Someone needs to start at the beginning with real numbers, not speculation, and make some sense out of this, please. But, I must agree with cjdevito on his post.
The first post{200,000 m/tons} now you say was overstated by one hundred times? I have noticed a lot of typos when people, whom are aginst collction give numbers? wonder why?
_________________
Honda CBX750
_________________
Honda CBX750
But, I must agree with cjdevito on his post.
Don't think I'm trying to pick on kalkbreath's spelling. I'm not. I'm picking on the idea that what was obviously a typo on Dr Reef's part may have had some deliberate motivation, as evidenced by his statement:
I have noticed a lot of typos when people, whom are aginst collction give numbers? wonder why?
It's obvious both his typo and kalk's spelling errors are both simple mistakes, and neither represent ulterior motives. Kalk's implication was otherwise.
Don't think I'm trying to pick on kalkbreath's spelling. I'm not. I'm picking on the idea that what was obviously a typo on Dr Reef's part may have had some deliberate motivation, as evidenced by his statement:
I have noticed a lot of typos when people, whom are aginst collction give numbers? wonder why?
It's obvious both his typo and kalk's spelling errors are both simple mistakes, and neither represent ulterior motives. Kalk's implication was otherwise.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote
_________________
Acura Legend
... To recap: Dr.reef posted a claim that you cannot fit five years of hard coral onto a barge because that amounts to 200,000 metric tons ! The link he offered did not work ? Then Dr.Reef posted a CITIES or NOAA graf to which somehow they came up with a number for the total kilograms of reef harvesting imported to the U.S in prior years.....since a Kilogram is a dry weight, how they came up with the kilograms a live and wet plate coral weights is beyond me? Still I used these numbers to show that since the 200,000 metric tons,of which because I knew it was too great to only be including Hobby related collection....I thought it was a total for ALL collection....cement ,curio,construction etc. I then took the 200,000 and divided it by the 94,000 and got @ 1/1000th! Now Dr. reef states that the 200,000 metic tons was a typo and only shown to be 2,000 metric tooonees? Either way if the 94,000 kilos{206,800 lbs}or{ 103 US tons} is true then the barge in the, link which they used to transport one MILLION US TONS at a time of coral rock to seed the manmade liverock.This picture shows a man on a pile of coral rock which would reflect ten years of HARD CORAL collection into the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? That is if MY math and the CITIES math is or are correct. Please feel free to work out the math for yourselves.....TEN YEARS?
_________________
Acura Legend
Let me first say that if Dr.Reef says that it was a typo, then I believe him. I also want to point out that I respect what he is involved in , I also want again to point out that I speak of CORAL collection having vary little impact on the reefs, not that fish collection does no harm.Also Did you do the math? that barge isnot so big? You could sink that on a reef in the Indo Pacific and never find it again........Now for the real trick......If you did not do the math 94,000 kilos {206,000 pounds}or 103 tons a year of HARD coral imported into the US each year? Now do the math again...then look at the barge..... ......silly?
[ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: Kalkbreath ]</p>
_________________
Ferrari 575M Maranello
[ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: Kalkbreath ]</p>
_________________
Ferrari 575M Maranello
[
In 1997 over 500,000 items and 15,000 kg of stony corals, and 410,000 items and 600,000 kg of reef substrate (live rock) were imported into the U.S. In 1998 the U.S. imported 550,000 items and 94,000 kg of stony corals and 570,000 items and 890,000 kg of reef substrate.[/QB][/QUOTE]..............Why is it that the number of items is not increasing each year, only the kilos ? This would mean that each piece is bigger.
_________________
BMW K100
In 1997 over 500,000 items and 15,000 kg of stony corals, and 410,000 items and 600,000 kg of reef substrate (live rock) were imported into the U.S. In 1998 the U.S. imported 550,000 items and 94,000 kg of stony corals and 570,000 items and 890,000 kg of reef substrate.[/QB][/QUOTE]..............Why is it that the number of items is not increasing each year, only the kilos ? This would mean that each piece is bigger.
_________________
BMW K100
If you really want to know some general figures as to the amount of removal for other reasons such as construction and road building, read the first couple of pages of my online paper. Again though, I contend that if the only realm of impact we as Americans can have is on the hobby, then I think we should focus on the hobby impacts. It is quite difficult for me to become personally involved with their construction pratices, and this is why I argue for common sense studies that can determine on a reef by reef basis what each sustainable yield can be.
http://www.arches.uga.edu/~btfreak/management.PDF
http://www.arches.uga.edu/~btfreak/management.PDF
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Dr. Reef:
<strong>Kalkbreath, aka Capp,
What you are is someone who is trying to run a store that capitalizes on the trade of endangered species.
Lastly, if you are so concerned with keeping the coral trade completely unrestricted, why are you not more involved in preventing losses to the reef from pollution and lime removal? If you could stop those two areas, then there would likely be higher sustainable yields from affected reefs. Yet I have heard no contributions from you regarding your desire to really help.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No reply as to your interests on this issue? Don't you think that being more involved in these other issues will help to absolve any impact the hobby has? Why are you not more interested?
<strong>Kalkbreath, aka Capp,
What you are is someone who is trying to run a store that capitalizes on the trade of endangered species.
Lastly, if you are so concerned with keeping the coral trade completely unrestricted, why are you not more involved in preventing losses to the reef from pollution and lime removal? If you could stop those two areas, then there would likely be higher sustainable yields from affected reefs. Yet I have heard no contributions from you regarding your desire to really help.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No reply as to your interests on this issue? Don't you think that being more involved in these other issues will help to absolve any impact the hobby has? Why are you not more interested?
Hey,!I do my part! I burry my turds in the backyard and exhale into jars to curb sewage effluent and co2 global warming respectively?
_________________
Insurance Forum
_________________
Insurance Forum
Why do you think the total numbers of pieces is not increasing with the total weight?
_________________
free online grant applications
_________________
free online grant applications
I truly thought you would respect the concern of so many hobbyists by showing your understanding of the subject.
Instead, you deride me and the rest of us concerned hobbyists by making light of the issues.
I'm truly saddened by this display and I hope you will reconsider your treatment of potential customers before opening the doors to your store in Atlanta.
[ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: Dr. Reef ]</p>
Instead, you deride me and the rest of us concerned hobbyists by making light of the issues.
I'm truly saddened by this display and I hope you will reconsider your treatment of potential customers before opening the doors to your store in Atlanta.
[ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: Dr. Reef ]</p>
Best guess? Because the industry has never reported accurate numbers, but the weight info is accurate. Why are the numbers inaccurate? Because the industry has to play it safe when sending corals internationally; CITES makes them provide detailed breakdowns by genus (I believe; someone correct me if I'm wrong) of every shipment they make. In order to insure no problems at customs, they pad their numbers out to allow for incidents were identifications and counts may be questioned.
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:
