A
Anonymous
Guest
Define success.
LA Cherry Picker Wanted.
- Thread starter Bryan Thompson
- Start date
- Status
MaryHM":2fa3g59o said:
Not an obligate feeder, eh! You are a cop out and you know it.
Vitz said it all when he posted a long time ago on goniopora and the USL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what about goniopora? seems to be obligate to something we don't even know about!
_________________
yesh li gar'inim shel avatichim l'loh gar'inim
this post is vitz's
TANSTAAFL
www.corl.org
clarionreef
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- San Francisco
Wayne,
The more I read, the more Mary is convincing me to list gonipora on my stock reports as well.
You know why?
Because it is in fact very common and this I know from experience. Its a junk coral in fact, blanketing the bottom like cobblestone in vast areas. It offers little coral cover for fish and has less fish associated with it then most any other coral. 90% is beyond taking for the trade as the average piece is a 3-4 lb. cannonball! This 'reserve' certainly protects it from plunder. If it has a big enemy it will be one far beyond our trade.
How is it that putting ones 'money where their mouth is' on coral killing poison caught fish is a small issue compared to taking gonipora among so many?
Besides, maybe evey common coral people buy will help fill their needs and keep em away from the green torches, hammers, bubbles and all the other unsustainable corals that are the real coral conservation issue. Real reefers don't keep em anyway. Only beginners will buy em then and I'd rather they kill a gonipora then a scarcer coral species. You relize that beginners kill most of their coral, right? So better this one then a better one!
The cut-flower list, I mean USL Suddenly makes everyone a deep thinker w/ alledged "environmentalist leanings" . Or is it just a placebo pill for the conscience instead of the real thing?
"Hey look at me everyone...I don't buy moorish idols and gonipora!" 'I'm greener then thou! Hail victory...Meanwhile out on the reefs...
Steve
PS. Yes, we do need cheap, painless little things to do to make us feel that we contribute to making the world a better place, don't we?
On a scale of 1-100 I'd rate the busting up and poisoning of 50 year old corals 100 and the gonipora thing a 1. I can't summon the need to take it seriously as it is so trite and symbolic.
Whats next on the heavy debate list?
Gonipora, to dye em or not to dye em?
The more I read, the more Mary is convincing me to list gonipora on my stock reports as well.
You know why?
Because it is in fact very common and this I know from experience. Its a junk coral in fact, blanketing the bottom like cobblestone in vast areas. It offers little coral cover for fish and has less fish associated with it then most any other coral. 90% is beyond taking for the trade as the average piece is a 3-4 lb. cannonball! This 'reserve' certainly protects it from plunder. If it has a big enemy it will be one far beyond our trade.
How is it that putting ones 'money where their mouth is' on coral killing poison caught fish is a small issue compared to taking gonipora among so many?
Besides, maybe evey common coral people buy will help fill their needs and keep em away from the green torches, hammers, bubbles and all the other unsustainable corals that are the real coral conservation issue. Real reefers don't keep em anyway. Only beginners will buy em then and I'd rather they kill a gonipora then a scarcer coral species. You relize that beginners kill most of their coral, right? So better this one then a better one!
The cut-flower list, I mean USL Suddenly makes everyone a deep thinker w/ alledged "environmentalist leanings" . Or is it just a placebo pill for the conscience instead of the real thing?
"Hey look at me everyone...I don't buy moorish idols and gonipora!" 'I'm greener then thou! Hail victory...Meanwhile out on the reefs...
Steve
PS. Yes, we do need cheap, painless little things to do to make us feel that we contribute to making the world a better place, don't we?
On a scale of 1-100 I'd rate the busting up and poisoning of 50 year old corals 100 and the gonipora thing a 1. I can't summon the need to take it seriously as it is so trite and symbolic.
Whats next on the heavy debate list?
Gonipora, to dye em or not to dye em?
This is so long ago but this is my recollection that the USL defined by Mary covered 3 species.
1. Poisonous species (like the blue spot octopus)
2. Too large species (like sharks)
3. Obligate feeders (like many butterflys)
Obligate feeders were defined as species whose food requirements could not be met by the hobbyists or if they could be met were too expensive.
All definitions were advanced by Mary.
Never was the USL to exclude species that were in any of the above categories that happened to be plentiful or self sustaining.
Rover can I ask you to dig up the original thread setting up the industry forum as it discussed the terms of reference
Can you also let me know how I can access the original USL thread as this is where Mary defined the requirements of the USL and the definitions of too large, obligate poisonous etc.
It is trite to say that all of the leading authors in this hobby recommend against keeping flowerpots for the simple reason that their nutritional requirments cannot be met.
1. Poisonous species (like the blue spot octopus)
2. Too large species (like sharks)
3. Obligate feeders (like many butterflys)
Obligate feeders were defined as species whose food requirements could not be met by the hobbyists or if they could be met were too expensive.
All definitions were advanced by Mary.
Never was the USL to exclude species that were in any of the above categories that happened to be plentiful or self sustaining.
Rover can I ask you to dig up the original thread setting up the industry forum as it discussed the terms of reference
Can you also let me know how I can access the original USL thread as this is where Mary defined the requirements of the USL and the definitions of too large, obligate poisonous etc.
It is trite to say that all of the leading authors in this hobby recommend against keeping flowerpots for the simple reason that their nutritional requirments cannot be met.
Sorry, but I can't be a USL cop out when I have clearly in the past stated my criteria for USL and am still following those criteria. Show me, Wayne, where I stated that I was against goniopora importation. Show me. You seem to be so convinced of what I believe, then PROVE IT OR SHUT THE HELL UP. And yoo-hoo, but they've been on my lists for forever- you know, the very lists you claimed to Jenn you were so familiar with?? IMO, goniopora needs FILTHY WATER. Seems that the hobbyists who have the best luck with it are those that either feed heavily or don't have every single water sterilizing device known to mankind crammed on their aquarium, overloading their circuits. And anyway, HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A COP OUT. You, who doesn't know a damn thing about this industry and who makes that excruciatingly clear with every post. YOU, who declare industry problems either completely cured because MAC has put out a memo, or hopelessly impossible and in need of a complete ban. Walk a mile in my shoes, Wayne. Heck, walk 10 feet (3 meters if you prefer). You'd sing a different tune. I am so sick of inexperienced holier than thous such as yourself telling me how I should run my business. You and your opinions truly disgust me. Unless you can prove where I stated that I will not import goniopora, then you need to leave me out of your pontifications.
And here's an oldie but a goodie resurrected from Dec. 2001. And guess what? The quote was something you wrote, Wayne, and below is my response.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goniopora
We all know it will not survive in anyones tanks.
Ban the import of it just like black coral is banned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantify "we all know". Do my friends and colleagues that are actively propagating gonioporas "know" they will not survive in ANYONE's tanks??? Let's look back at a quote from my original post to this thread: I do not believe in banning any species that does not not have the reasons backed up by scientific data and research. For example, someone saying "I can't keep a bubble coral alive and I know 6 other people that can't either, therefore it should be banned". I would want to see documented scientific research that yes indeedy it is practically impossible to properly provide for bubble corals in captivity.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goniopora
We all know it will not survive in anyones tanks.
Ban the import of it just like black coral is banned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantify "we all know". Do my friends and colleagues that are actively propagating gonioporas "know" they will not survive in ANYONE's tanks??? Let's look back at a quote from my original post to this thread: I do not believe in banning any species that does not not have the reasons backed up by scientific data and research. For example, someone saying "I can't keep a bubble coral alive and I know 6 other people that can't either, therefore it should be banned". I would want to see documented scientific research that yes indeedy it is practically impossible to properly provide for bubble corals in captivity.
As usual, you take something that is said and twist it completely out of context. Since I advanced the definitions, I think I have a better understanding of what I meant than you do.
THE DEFINITION OF OBLIGATE FEEDER: An animal that is known to be an obligate feeder on a specific type of food that is either impossible to obtain or too expensive to maintain regularly.
Sorry charlie, but goniopora does NOT fall under that definition.
Wayne, if you would ever take a few moments to do your own research instead of relying on everyone else to do it for you, you might actually learn something. And then you might be able to use your gained knowledge to construct a sensible post. Gee, it took me about 15 minutes to find the information you were asking Rover to find for you.
http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14196
MaryHM":1dyh9fr2 said:
Thank you for finding this almost original thread. I spent 30 minutes trying to find it before asking for help.
I have been on the board for almost four years and this is the first time I asked for help in finding stuff. Asking the mod who may have access to the very first threads at his fingertips seemed like a reasonable reguest.
I see you continue to be bitchy. Why don't you take my advice and rest awhile!
It's not an almost original thread. It is THE original thread.
A rest will not cause me to be less bitchy toward you, Wayne. You see, I am a person who puts a lot of value in respect. And I have lost all respect for you. You should be honored, it's an extremely short list of people that have managed to act so stupid on such a continual basis that I lose all respect for them and their opinions. And once you're on the list, you aren't getting off. So you see, a rest will not help my viewpoints where you are concerned.
I'm still waiting for you to show me how I'm a cop out where the goniopora is concerned. You made an accusation, I expect you to defend it or apologize. Can't you say anything and back it up with proof? Or is your MO to just ignore your blatant mistakes in hopes that everyone forgets about them?
Wrong again, Wayne. The list is short, like I said. It's my list, so I should know. There are a lot of people that I don't agree with, but still respect their opinions. Some more that I do agree with, but don't like. Even some that I don't agree with, don't like, but still respect. And then there's the short list of those that have lost all respect from me. Out of the "industry/hobby" types, there's only 3 people, of which you are one. Paul Holthus and Randy Goodlet are the other two. Again Wayne, you're making a statement about me, so back it up with some proof. Name the people on the list since it's so long. If you can't, THEN QUIT TELLING ME WHAT I THINK. I'm getting quite sick of it.
naesco":2b7boo01 said:
Did he ever really answer that question - methinks he did not. He never stated whether he is an aquarist either.
naesco":2b7boo01 said:
I can't speak for Mary. I agree that certain obligate feeders should probably not be bought by "average" hobbyists at this time, but I've seen a Moorish Idol that was fat and happy after 2 years in captivity. Exception rather than rule, yes.
But you'd add Mandarins to your list, n'est-ce pas? Well I've had mine going on 2 years soon - fat and happy.
You could also define "unsuitable" as anything that would outgrow a 55-gallon tank (the "average" and most popular tank size)... that would eliminate a helluva lot of fish, including all the ones I have in my 1000 gallon tank (psst and there's more than one tang in there too... so you had better get your tang police after me...).
Better to collect ONLY the no-brainers to the point of extinction, than to take a variety in a sustainable manner... :roll:
I really gotta wonder sometimes...
Jenn
Jenn,
The original definition for obligate feeders was that their food source must be clearly identified and that said food source must be either impossible to get or too expesive to obtain (like a coral polyp eater or a species that feeds on one species of sponge). There was never any inclusion of any species that did not have documented dietary requirements. So the moorish idols and mandarins were not on the list. The list that was created on reefs.org a few years back and the list that Wayne has created in his mind are two different things.
The original definition for obligate feeders was that their food source must be clearly identified and that said food source must be either impossible to get or too expesive to obtain (like a coral polyp eater or a species that feeds on one species of sponge). There was never any inclusion of any species that did not have documented dietary requirements. So the moorish idols and mandarins were not on the list. The list that was created on reefs.org a few years back and the list that Wayne has created in his mind are two different things.
Naesco--
If you are going to make accusations against people you should be able to back them up. In this forum where we discuss the livelihoods of most involved (I'm still not sure what your actual role is), being called a "cop out" is no light thing. Especially when the charge is baseless. If you would honestly like to debate the pros and cons of harvesting based on aquarium suitability vs. species sustainability I suggest you start a new thread where the matter can be discussed in a civil manner. Putting words into someone's mouth, and twisting someones efforts at reform into your own purposes is very poor form indeed. I work hard to invoke an atmosphere where everyone is free to express their opinions (and that means everyone), but I will not stand for personally demeaning comments simply because you disagree with someone (or because someone doesn't think what you thought they thought).
Mary--
It's quite obvious you don't care for Wayne all that much. My suggestion is to ignore him and move on. If anyone feels they have been personally attacked please let me know and I will do my best to handle it.
Everyone--
Please chill on the personal insults. We are all mature adults here (in theory at least), and I expect you to act like it. I'm not going to do a lot of hand holding, and appeasing as I like a good argument and "online tussle" as much as the next guy. Just try to keep it respectful. I realize that for the most part everyone who particiaptes here can take care of themselves, but I do wonder if such a boisterous forum has been something of a deterrent to outsiders. I have heard several comments from people who say they no longer read the forum because of all the bickering. 'Twoud be a shame for the message to be lost amidst the clamor of the battle.
/carry on.
If you are going to make accusations against people you should be able to back them up. In this forum where we discuss the livelihoods of most involved (I'm still not sure what your actual role is), being called a "cop out" is no light thing. Especially when the charge is baseless. If you would honestly like to debate the pros and cons of harvesting based on aquarium suitability vs. species sustainability I suggest you start a new thread where the matter can be discussed in a civil manner. Putting words into someone's mouth, and twisting someones efforts at reform into your own purposes is very poor form indeed. I work hard to invoke an atmosphere where everyone is free to express their opinions (and that means everyone), but I will not stand for personally demeaning comments simply because you disagree with someone (or because someone doesn't think what you thought they thought).
Mary--
It's quite obvious you don't care for Wayne all that much. My suggestion is to ignore him and move on. If anyone feels they have been personally attacked please let me know and I will do my best to handle it.
Everyone--
Please chill on the personal insults. We are all mature adults here (in theory at least), and I expect you to act like it. I'm not going to do a lot of hand holding, and appeasing as I like a good argument and "online tussle" as much as the next guy. Just try to keep it respectful. I realize that for the most part everyone who particiaptes here can take care of themselves, but I do wonder if such a boisterous forum has been something of a deterrent to outsiders. I have heard several comments from people who say they no longer read the forum because of all the bickering. 'Twoud be a shame for the message to be lost amidst the clamor of the battle.
/carry on.
- Status
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:
