FWD: URGENT Call to Protect Stony Coral Trade - April 5 Deadline

wscttwolfe

wscttwolfe

Active Member
Cyclist said:
Insults?
Never mind, protect your personal reef as the wild reefs continue to dwindle. Lets not protect whats there so future generations can enjoy.
You can't talk to a person who is deaf to outside opinion.

But do answer this question! How many corals do you think die in the collection/ shipping process so the you can enjoy 1 in your tank. Also answer this question. Does a coral plucked from the ocean survive as long as it could have in your tank?
Click to expand...

No one knows the answers to both of these questions. That is one of many reasons why more research is needed. Get it?

I would posit that the wild-collection of corals has an incredibly minor impact on the global health of coral reefs, relative to the effects of climate change on coral reefs.

Futhermore, as I have stated before, I have no problem with banning further wild collection, since corals can be captive-grown just fine. The problem is that this rule would make owning and trading certifiably captive grown corals a crime.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
wscttwolfe said:
No one knows the answers to both of these questions. That is one of many reasons why more research is needed. Get it?
Click to expand...
Yea, I get it, but we know it happens right? We don't care because its the price they pay so we can enjoy our entitlement.
We also know that many corals die in our own hands because we lack the knowalge and resources to properly care for them.
 
J

jerry26

Member
Cyclist said:
You can't talk to a person who is deaf to outside opinion.
Click to expand...

This seems to me to be more of a push to stop them from banning the captive side as wolfe stated. But i guess the quote i highlighted is right. The fact is, we all have our own opinion and are doing the respectable thing and standing by them. Just because he/we are not conforming to your system doesnt make us stubborn. if it did, by your own standards, the same would apply to you. You seems completely unaware of what this thread is about. Yet he/we are wrong? He/we stand willing to sacrifice luxurys and all he/we ask is we be allowed to continue our current ownership and propagate in a sustainable fashion. Where you stand saying we should just throw everything away? Theyre like plants, once we have it, itll grow, we wont need more. We can keep our hobby alive without wild collection.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
wscttwolfe said:
Futhermore, as I have stated before, I have no problem with banning further wild collection, since corals can be captive-grown just fine. The problem is that this rule would make owning and trading certifiably captive grown corals a crime.
Click to expand...
Do you not understand supply and demand and the effect it has on people that want to profit even if it means breaking the laws?

Do you know about elephant ivory? Do you know that the elephant is protected, but yet they are still destroyed "families of them" for their ivory. Why? because we desire it and feel that we are entitled to have such items. Will we ever be able to fully protect them? NO, but it is a start to label them as endangered and this allows us to start protecting them. This does not say that each person who can should go pluck an elephant from the wild and put it in their yards and say they are helping protect them.

Oh and guess what, we know this will pass, why? there is not enough support not to!
 
C

Cyclist

Member
Actually Jerry26, I am support my opinion, one many more agree with. So yes, I think your wrong and I am right? But don't you think I am wrong and your right? Is that not what arguments are the base of? Is that not what courts are for?

We keep pointing out there there is no data, Yes I agree. But we do know that there is a problem and until we understand the problem we must protect that which is endangered.
 
landshark

landshark

Member
Removing any endanger species for the wild is wrong period. With that said what‘s done is done we can’t change the past we can only try to change the future of reefs. Like any species humans have driven them to extension and some time it needs a helping hand. How we go about it is what this tread is about. Banning all wild collected coral is a start; I assume we can all agree on that right? The next is what to do with the captive grown corals? Simply making them illegal to own, trade or sell will not solve the problem of bring the species back. a better solution was be to have the captive grown corals by reintroduce to the wild IMO.
 
J

jerry26

Member
Cyclist said:
Actually Jerry26, I am support my opinion, one many more agree with. So yes, I think your wrong and I am right? But don't you think I am wrong and your right? Is that not what arguments are the base of? Is that not what courts are for?

We keep pointing out there there is no data, Yes I agree. But we do know that there is a problem and until we understand the problem we must protect that which is endangered.
Click to expand...

Im sure there are plenty that supports both sides.

I said we are both doing the respectable thing by standing by our beliefs. He merely presented a way for everyone to cast their own opinion. And this has simply grown into one person forcing their opinion on another. This will change nothing. Just post your opinion to the people that makes the decisions and keep the fighting out of here.

Landshark....
Someone already posted a news story about businesses putting metal frames in the ocean to create artificial reefs aand the goverment does it too when they sink ships. One thing i agree with cyclist on is that there will always be demand. I believe, and of course this is opinion, that banning the captive side will do more harm then good. If we cant propagate, that leaves only the wild to obtain these corals. Are you really going to risk prison time stealing corals from the ocean when you can just get on craigslist or any businesses website and buy a captive grown?

And no cyclist, i do not think you are wrong. I think you ask too much when a balance can be struck.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
wscttwolfe said:
Cyclist, do you own coral?
Click to expand...
I own nothing that is on that list. Everything I own came from someone who could no longer care for it. The only fish I purchased from a LFS was a red mandarin who was nearly dead from starvation. I don't have a tang in a 30 gallon which we do see people do. I don't own an anemone that has such a short life span in the tank compared to its life span in the wild.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
landshark said:
Removing any endanger species for the wild is wrong period. With that said what‘s done is done we can’t change the past we can only try to change the future of reefs. Like any species humans have driven them to extension and some time it needs a helping hand. How we go about it is what this tread is about. Banning all wild collected coral is a start; I assume we can all agree on that right? The next is what to do with the captive grown corals? Simply making them illegal to own, trade or sell will not solve the problem of bring the species back. a better solution was be to have the captive grown corals by reintroduce to the wild IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree, but until we figure out how this can be regulated, we must take steps to protect whats left.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
jerry26 said:
Im sure there are plenty that supports both sides.

And no cyclist, i do not think you are wrong. I think you ask too much when a balance can be struck.
Click to expand...
Spot on, and until that balance can be struct, we must protect that which needs protection.
 
wscttwolfe

wscttwolfe

Active Member
Cyclist said:
I own nothing that is on that list. Everything I own came from someone who could no longer care for it. The only fish I purchased from a LFS was a red mandarin who was nearly dead from starvation. I don't have a tang in a 30 gallon which we do see people do. I don't own an anemone that has such a short life span in the tank compared to its life span in the wild.
Click to expand...



Oh really? You own nothing on that list?

I find that hard to believe... here is a pic you posted of your frogspawn which you posted on 2/14... IE Euphyllia paradivisa, which is very definitely on the list.


Cyclist said:
I am going to try to run it stock for a while except I did ditch the pump that came with it for the Maxi-Jet 1800 Premium Aquarium Utility Pump. This pump draws a little less power and runs a tad bit cooler than the original pump. I also placed flex tube under the pump and now have a 100% silent system.

I have a chiller, but not 100% sure I will need it as the temp has been very stable at 77.2 and topped out once at 78. So I packed the chiller up and put it into the garage.

The AI sols are only able to run at about 50% during the day. I am using the sun/set, and moon options of the Apex to control the lights. I still need to tweak the sunset part of it. I spent some time updating the seasonal table and now it is within minutes of actual.

Happy Frogspawn
frogspawn.JPG
Click to expand...



As you would have it, please let us know what your plans are for destroying that coral if this rule passes
 
C

Cyclist

Member
wscttwolfe said:
Cyclist, since it is now clear that you havent even read the proposed rule, here is the link List of Corals Proposed for US Endangered Species Status
Click to expand...
You have got to be kidding me? Just because you did not recognize the proper name for the frogspawn I have in my tank does not mean I did not read the proposed rule. Who needs to get off their high horse?

When this proposal goes through, I'll take it to the aquarium and let them maintain it as I am sure others will do. A true reefer would not "destroy" what they have as you indicate.

wscttwolfe - as I stated in my first post, I would give up anything in my reef
 
wscttwolfe

wscttwolfe

Active Member
Under the Endangered species act, it would be illegal for you to do even that, since you cannot, under §9 Prohibited Acts, Part D: "possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, any such species..."

Full text of the ESA: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/esa/text.htm

.... and even if you did get it to the aquarium legally, what would do if the aquarium refused to take it? I assume that there are hundreds if not thousands of frogspawn (wild + captive grown) in socal
 
wscttwolfe

wscttwolfe

Active Member
One more point... If you agree with NOAA that your frogspawn is endangered, I would imagine you will be removing it from your tank as soon as possible.
 
C

Cyclist

Member
wscttwolfe said:
Under the Endangered species act, it would be illegal for you to do even that, since you cannot, under §9 Prohibited Acts, Part D: "possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, any such species..."

Full text of the ESA: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/esa/text.htm

.... and even if you did get it to the aquarium legally, what would do if the aquarium refused to take it? I assume that there are hundreds if not thousands of frogspawn (wild + captive grown) in socal
Click to expand...
Then when that time comes, and I have exhausted every avenue to get it to someone who can take care of it. I would do what is nessary.
 
wscttwolfe

wscttwolfe

Active Member
I've enjoyed this debate cyclist, I hope you have to, and I also hope that the others watching along have been able to learn something new. Thank you for keeping reefsanctuary a place where everyone feels welcome to express their ideas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top