I think it doesn't require governmental intervention

[Anonymous]

Here's an example.

Has anyone else here ever hear of UL? Underwriters Laboratories, you can't find an electrical device sold WITHOUT their stamp of approval. Guess what, folks. This organization is not ONLY international, they are a NON-governmental creation!!! Our very lives depend on approval by this organization, not at all like the lives of fish, which fall far below common household pets on the totem pole. (Just like trying to get the ASPCA or local Humane Society involved in any case of fish neglect - in other words, good luck!)

I have stated before that I feel the consumer needs someone to look to for a "stamp of approval" so that they can conscientiously buy their ornamental marine fish. I have also stated that I believe it does not require governmental organization or interference. What it does require is that whatever group or organization ultimately does take responsibility does so with the integrity of an organization such as the UL.

 

[dizzy]

Has anyone else here ever hear of UL? Underwriters Laboratories, you can't find an electrical device sold WITHOUT their stamp of approval. Guess what, folks. This organization is not ONLY international, they are a NON-governmental creation!!!

SM,
Actually your a little bit wrong here. There is no law that requires a product to be UL approved. A great many aquarium heaters, aquarium lights, and aquarium pumps are not UL approved. Some companies like Rio offer their pumps either UL or non-UL. Probably 70-80% of the Rios sold are the non UL variety. I once had heard that UL would only approve stainless steel heaters and not the glass ones, but. Ebo-Jager heaters say: Approved to UL 1018. Visi-Therm says: Listed by SA. Whatever those ratings mean. Not really all that many consumers appear to notice or care. Also you can get product liablity insurance without a UL approval on your product. Please note I am not suggesting it is a good idea to buy products that don't have the UL approval.

 

[Anonymous]

Ah, my mistake (I admit, it's been quite a while since I've purchased anything aquatic beyond books). However, I think the gist of the point still stands - if you want a product of a certain quality, do you or do you not look for the UL listing? I sure do, and my point is that they're a non-governmental group.

 

[hdtran]

UL is an insurance industry sponsored group. Many insurance companies pooled together to create the standards, etc.

A UL-listed appliance gets some protection in a lawsuit, more so than non-UL-listed.

The European Community (CE, actually) has developed a number of consumer standards that are more stringent than UL.

These standards are all voluntary, and the label is applied by the manufacturer. (UL does not test. They specify a test standard; your company goes and finds a testing company which will test your product; if it passes, then, you submit paperwork, and can now stick on the label. Oversimplified, but essentially the process).

 

[Anonymous]

And all, essentially, non-governmental organizations? (Which is really my point here.)

 

[dizzy]

Marina,
There are only two ways I see certification working. The first is the threat of the US government shutting us down if we don't embrace it. That bluff has already been tried, and may well come back with a change in the White House.

The second is to provide a superior product that the public is willing to buy. In order for this method to work the product (fish supply) will need to have a perceived value that is equal to the asking price. Apparently this has turned out to be much more difficult than originally thought, despite warnings from people like Steve.

At the risk of being called a conspiracy theorist, I can't help but wonder if just maybe we haven't gone back to plan #1. After reading Chip Barber's informative post on the other thread, it certainly doesn't sound like much is happening to make #2 a reality.

 

[Anonymous]

<sigh> I know.. it seems a losing battle. But, you know me, incorrigible USAnian, a Libertarian at that. It sure would be nice to see whatever action is necessary happen without governmental intervention (and I can't seem to swallow that it has to take such intervention).

You conspiracy theorist!

 

[naesco]

Well most everyone here has tried to make a difference and in a very, very small way have contributed.
Neither, it appears will MAC do it.
There are experts here like Peter and Steve and experienced industry types like Mary and others.
We should enlist the support of all who care about the industry and the hobby. We should forget our differences and our political philosophy.

We should join together with a committee of the experts and ask the US Govenment to institute random CDT testing stateside with sanctions against those who contravene.

IMO there is no other option.

 

[Anonymous]

Why start at the top Naesco? Why not try for a much smaller government, like Canada. It shouldn't be hard, not much MO arrives in Canada and the Canadians in general seem to think more about then environment the your average American. If Canada passes it, it'll give you ammo to take on Canada's big brother, the USA.

 

[Anonymous]

Gresh, that's just spooky. You used "big brother" and "USA" in the same sentence.. :|

Running to Uncle Sam still chaps my hide.. I need some salve.

 

[Anonymous]

On purpose to boot, go figure.

 

[Anonymous]

 

[naesco]

Why start at the top Naesco? Why not try for a much smaller government, like Canada. It shouldn't be hard, not much MO arrives in Canada and the Canadians in general seem to think more about then environment the your average American. If Canada passes it, it'll give you ammo to take on Canada's big brother, the USA.

Although you correctly stated that Canada is the leader in environmental protection issues so, is the State of California.

You and many other concerned industry types are located in California as are most of the importers.

If you are serious about your concerns, do something! You have the experience and the expertise.
Gather together, and see to it that the Government institutes random cyanide detection testing on all fish entering California.

 

[Anonymous]

Back in the day before *cough* USDA * cough, choke* got involved with ORGANIC Gardening, Cali had some of the most stringent certification procedures in the county. To be a CCOF (California Certified Organic Farmer) was a proud day. Now, IIRC, the only seal one can carry is USDA, which ain't near as good as the old CCOF.

If all the Cali. importers (or at least most of them) got together, formed their own standards and certification process, wouldn't that be the start of someithng good for our hobby/industry? Wouldn't that help the small guy in the long run, even if he didn't know it?

Getting "Big Brother" involved isn't gonna help. It will more than likely make things worse.

 

[Anonymous]

Don't they allow a certain percent of GMO's in the USDA standards for Organics?

If all the Cali. importers (or at least most of them) got together, formed their own standards and certification process, wouldn't that be the start of someithng good for our hobby/industry? Wouldn't that help the small guy in the long run, even if he didn't know it?

It truly depends on whom is running it. I don't see many wanting to change their ways, otherwise they'd all ready have sprung for training, nets and improved they're shipping protocals. Every one of them(LA wholesalers) makes a CLEAR choice to purchase the animals they do, source them how they want, ship them how want and treat them how they want. IMO if they wanted to change, they'd all ready have done it 3 years ago at the LA wholesalers meeting Mary put together (with Fenner).

Getting "Big Brother" involved isn't gonna help. It will more than likely make things worse.

It'll cause more delays and unneeded deaths to boot!! I fully agree. I was kinda poking fun out the USA's and Canadian's governemtals reletionship when it comes to Canada passing laws then anthing else. Don't get me wrong, I think Canada is great. I just loved to see them pass the same sex marrage and dicriminilize small amounts of marijuana, and make Bush sqirm .

 

[hdtran]

Seamaiden,

It is possible (your point) to have non-government groups creating and enforcing standards. But it takes a pretty good carrot-and-stick too.

UL works as a non-gov't imposed "standard" because the insurance industry is saying that they'll help defend you against lawsuits if you design & test to UL conformity. That's a pretty big stick. (I don't know what the carrots are, but I'm sure there's one somewhere...). IEEE-488 compatibility for computer peripherals (boy, I'm really dating myself here) is a big carrot, because the marketplace demanded IEEE-488 (it would assure interoperability of that data collection unit with this printer and the computer over there).

So, in theory, you're perfectly right. You don't need Gov't intervention. I don't know how you'd implement things in practice. (I'm not sure that Gov't intervention would do any good, quite frankly).

Hy

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the input, hdtran.

It seems everything looks good on paper, and I, for one, would like to see that whatever needs to be done about the current status quo, be done sans governmental intervention. This is why I picked Underwriter Laboratories. I was going to go with another insurance company group (the folks who test vehicles for safety/accident performance).. but honestly I forgot their names.