A little confused, Who here justifies this hobby?

[DgenR8]

I don't think anyones saying we will destroy the planet itself, but we are certainly destroying life on earth. Surely when you say "mother earth" you mean mother nature? Look at what we are doing to mother nature.

We are causing the biggest and fastest mass extinction this planet has ever seen. No one species has ever knowingly done that before, or even come close, there really is nothing natural about that is there?

Well, yeah. We, as the animals we are will do what comes naturally to us. Just like Bears eat Salmon and poop in the woods. I admit/agree that the actions of our species are more damaging, but they are also far more advanced. Are we on the fast track to the extinction of our own kind? Possibly, but I think most scientists will tell you that some cosmic event is far more likely to kill us off before depleted ozone or too much green house gas.
I'll also admit/agree that we are damaging life forms other than our own, but I don't think that's unnatural in any way.
I'm not trying to tell you that it's a good thing, but I do believe it's nature at it's best (worst?), and I don't expect noticeable change in my lifetime, or that of my children or grandchildren for that matter.

 

[iamwrasseman]

you have a good point and thanks for pointing that out about the laws .

 

[49.35 North]

Just got home from a month of internet-free tree hugging on Vancouver Island. I hope no one minds if I reply to a couple of the excellent pots made while I was away.

Carlos, I think your analogy to African cats is spot-on and the aquarium trade could be a sustainable livelihood for poor people in places like the Philippines. But without a certification system like MAC, how do you know whether your corals and fish have been captured sustainably?

cortez marine, you said "MAC killed the chances for reform by their incompetence and squandering of the critical time period that there was concern and attention paid.

The assumption that they are...in 2010 some logical, knee jerk solution to the aquarium trades ills is galling and naive in the extreme....or perhaps just innocent and new."

I searched for the dirt on MAC, or a least evidence of incompetence, using both Google and Bing, and I didn't find anything. Could you amplify a bit, as I am new, though not, I think, innocent or naive. PM me if you don't want to post your comments.

BTW, I visited a MAC certified LFS on Vancouver Island. Half the store was dedicated to reef tanks and the other half to ... um, cultivation. If they opened up a home-brewing department they could be bigger than Wal Mart.

 

[49.35 North]

Wow nice to find others that feel the same way I do! I thought I was the only one who viewed this hobby as being selfish and stealing from the oceans. No real way to justify our hobby as being a positive thing to the ocean. :sad2:

Reefer08, as others have pointed out, I'm new and possibly naive, so I'm not trying to give advice, but when I set up my tank I will feel guilt free and totally able to justify the hobby if I:

- offset the energy used by the tank by reducing other household energy use
- recycle RO/DI waste water in the garden
- buy captive bred livestock wherever possible
- buy from MAC-certified sources
- donate 10 per cent of the total tank budget to reef research, conservation and rehabilitation, probably to The Coral Reef Research Foundation

Just my opinion, of course

 

[Rossini]

Well, yeah. We, as the animals we are will do what comes naturally to us. Just like Bears eat Salmon and poop in the woods


How on earth can you compare a beer eating salmon to the extinctions we are causing? Serious?
. I admit/agree that the actions of our species are more damaging, but they are also far more advanced. Are we on the fast track to the extinction of our own kind? Possibly,

but I think most scientists will tell you that some cosmic event is far more likely to kill us off before depleted ozone or too much green house gas.


Oh my days. I have heard some stuff before, but this one is up there. Please show me a sane scientist that says this.......I think I could be waiting a long time.

I'll also admit/agree that we are damaging life forms other than our own, but I don't think that's unnatural in any way.
I'm not trying to tell you that it's a good thing, but I do believe it's nature at it's best (worst?), and I don't expect noticeable change in my lifetime, or that of my children or grandchildren for that matter.

So you are saying we are forced into these action of greed an unsustainability and there is no hope. Seems like a cop out to me.............

If we carry on and do nothing we will go down as the most hated generation ever, because we knew where we were going wrong, we had been told for decades about the dangers, yet we did nothing.

The age of stupid.

 

[MCary]

Make sure your concerns are based on actual science rather than emotion or propaganda. If you are doing actual damage, then there is no justification and you either need to accept it and continue or quit.

As far as fish, many reef fish reproduce in the millions and their numbers are related to the amount of available habitat. Taking these fish does nothing to the population. The captured fish are merely replaced by others that would not normally have survived.

"- offset the energy used by the tank by reducing other household energy use"

No offense, but offsets are a feel good joke. If there are things that can be reduced and you are not already doing them, then you are wasting already. By saying you waste reef electricity by reducing wasting household electricity, well you see my point.

Corals. Corals take longer to grow and are not as prolific as fish, I believe. However, unlike fish, most of them can be propagated at home. There are good things you can do if you're serious and want to mitigate damage to corals, in my opinion. The best thing I can think of is to organize locally and create or join clubs. Every concerned reefer should have a frag tank and trade among themselves. Reefers should work together to help each other prevent tank crashes where livestock has to be replaced. These are common sense, non political, and financially beneficial things a hobbiest can do.

 

[49.35 North]

Using aquarium reform issues...is a story of mismanaged funding, premeditated fraud and predictable failure.
The entire history of the issue has actually been posted on the net for years.
Here's but a few recent links to give one some perspective. .

Like any business, organization or relationship. The people in charge of it make or break it and thats where 10 million dollars and 10 years went.

post1679552.html?hilit=marine%20aquarium%20council#p1679552

post1514828.html?hilit=mamti#p1514828

post1325090.html?hilit=mamti#p1325090

MAC killed the chances for refrom by their incompetence and squandering of the critical time period that there was concern and attention paid.

The assumption that they are...in 2010 some logical, knee jerk solution to the aquarium trades ills is galling and naive in the extreme....or perhaps just innocent and new.

Steve

cortez, I tracked down the evaluation of the project referred to in your first link, and I have to say it cooled my enthusiasm for MAC. The evaluation is highly critical of the way the project was implemented - though not the concept itself, which it said was "highly relevant" to the sponsors and to the Philippines and Indonesia.

But perhaps you could help a nubie out and tell me how, without a workable certification system, I can be sure that the livestock I purchase have been sustainably brought to market, either by captive breeding or by environmentally sensitive capture in the wild?

 

[cortez marine]

tell me how, without a workable certification system, I can be sure that the livestock I purchase have been sustainably brought to market, either by captive breeding or by environmentally sensitive capture in the wild?

The idea of certifying batches of fishes from hundreds of villages in Indonesia and the Philippines is at once unworkable and impractical.
The very thought of having city based and NGO paid "observers" verifying the veracity of every bicolor angel, copperband butterfly and triggerfish from 400 villages week in and week out thruout the year boggles the imagination.
Geometrically multiplying batches of fishes times all the villages in question would create an impossible pile of false data as the batches melt together with others ...week after week in any possible real world scenario.

3 scources of coral beauties this week not all sold evolve into 6 next week and so on. Keeping track would be a full time job for keen, motivated observers. Then... this dense matrix of data would remain integral as it follows exports to a wholesaler with several other suppliers of the same species?

The integrity and the credibility of such a scheme would not even be trusted with the paid observers....let alone without them.

A far superior solution to the problem that no one adresses these days anyway [ ie poison fishing] is simply training the divers to use nets....something that all divers in the world use except for a few countries.

The reason that training fish collectors to use nets is not popular is because the grants for aquarium reform are written by people uninvolved with and ignorant of the trade issues to begin with.

Google searches reveal things written by people who do google searches to reveal things written by others who did the same. This daisy chain of missing the point creates no nothing experts who continue to evolve a body of ignorance and irrelevance.
This is how professional, semi-Greens have ruined the environmental movement and lost touch with reality and workable solutions at field level.

Knee jerk sound bites echoing the same misfired notions and failed, unworkable solutions like certification ... [a frozen seafood scheme ] will not work in all but simpler, controlled situations with a paid data keeper and manager.
Then, he must still placate the divers and convince them that reefs are saved thru better bookkeeping, lots of paperwork and daily logs and compliances.

ELIMINATING THE PROBLEMS SHOULD BE THE POINT....and not some search for complicated, expensive and unworkable solutions that benefit only the group that wins the grant money.

Training and converting divers means you don't need a scheme to monitor and spy on them forever.... as you beg for budgets to continue in perpetuity.

Real reformers put themselves out of business as they generate real progress in solving problems.
Steve

 

[Rossini]

Make sure your concerns are based on actual science rather than emotion or propaganda.

There is an absolutley massive amount of scientific evidence supporting the deteriation of our biosphere, whether it be anthropogenic climate change,deforestation,fisheries depletion,species extinction, you name it it's there.

QUOTE]
.

 

[cortez marine]

emotion or propaganda

Emotion and propaganda?
My goodness no.

Those are often the routine defenses of people hiding behind science when being discovered in financial mischief and anomaly.
Just because elements of science are involved in the issues....it is hardly a defense for wasting money, pretending expertise and missing the boat completely on strategies for social change.
Asking people not to become angry over wastage of the opportunities and the mispent budgets is what....? Rational? Cool?
Propaganda is an unfortunate code word for whistle blowing. Busting a corrupt politician or business executive we like but a scientist we don"t ?
Why? Are they special?
They are in fact human and vulnerable to the same temptations, insecurities and shennanigans as the rest of us. My profession right or wrong as a defense doesn't wash and if people really knew how many environmental projects were ruined by the wrong resumes at the helm they would be shocked.

The aquarium reform issues of the past 20 years are classic cases of squandering money and opportunity infinitum with scientific credentials at the wheel.

Read some of the cited links and get the drift.

Sincerely, Steve

 

[DgenR8]

So you are saying we are forced into these action of greed an unsustainability and there is no hope. Seems like a cop out to me.............

If we carry on and do nothing we will go down as the most hated generation ever, because we knew where we were going wrong, we had been told for decades about the dangers, yet we did nothing.

The age of stupid.

You're trying to put words in my mouth.
Like I said above, I'm not trying to tell you that it's a good thing, I'm trying to tell you that it's not against nature for us to do what we do.
You're concerned that our descendants will hate us, I'm betting that they'll be a lot more like us than you seem to think.
Again, not that it's a good thing, but the greed that drives us will also drive them. Humans are animals, expecting us not to act as such will only lead you to disappointment.

 

[Rossini]

You're trying to put words in my mouth.
Like I said above, I'm not trying to tell you that it's a good thing, I'm trying to tell you that it's not against nature for us to do what we do.
You're concerned that our descendants will hate us, I'm betting that they'll be a lot more like us than you seem to think.
Again, not that it's a good thing, but the greed that drives us will also drive them. Humans are animals, expecting us not to act as such will only lead you to disappointment.

They wont have anything to be greedy with. That's the whole point.

If you really beleive that scientists are more worried about meteorites than global warming then I really am wasting my time. :spin2:

 

[DgenR8]

They wont have anything to be greedy with. That's the whole point.

If you really beleive that scientists are more worried about meteorites than global warming then I really am wasting my time. :spin2:

Why not share your prediction with us; how long do you thing it will take Humanity to snuff itself out at our current rate?

 

[49.35 North]

Why not share your prediction with us; how long do you thing it will take Humanity to snuff itself out at our current rate?

Isn't the point that we can determine our future by changing our behaviour?

Someone in 1960 could (and probably did) make the argument that dumping crap into the air and water was "natural" and therefore unchangeable, but didn't the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act (and counterparts in other countries) make a huge improvement in our quality of life? Would you really want to go back to the era of rivers catching on fire on the grounds that it's "natural"?

I think Rossini's point is that our current behaviour needs changing. I can't see how anyone could disgree.

 

[cortez marine]

There is an absolutley massive amount of scientific evidence supporting the deteriation of our biosphere, whether it be anthropogenic climate change,deforestation,fisheries depletion,species extinction, you name it it's there.

I agree and cannot understand how the aquarium trades contribution to this is has been so incredibly mismanaged by full salaried green people for over a decade.

I think Rossini's point is that our current behaviour needs changing. I can't see how anyone could disgree.

And yet if the issues are characterized in such general, philosophical terms, people cannot get a handle on it. Everyone at the higher, general level wants to save coral reefs for example.
But, as you narrow it down to specifics ie. the aquarium trade for example, you will find systemic, routine misbehavior, especially amongst the so called reform groups and irresponsible, uninvolved, know nothing merchants and hobbyists.
The trade is a low ball one, price driven and ignorant as can be about the way product is brought to market. Questions of sustainability remain the very least of qualifiers for purchases.
Steve

 

[Allmost]

I think we are giving ourselves too much credit !!!!


we need to stop flattering ourselves.

US Humans are a TINY fraction of this universe and its stupid to think WE, the small fraction can make any dramatic changes.

history shows that earth goes through Ice ages and shifts in magnetic poles ! do you think dianasours were blaming themselves for the Ice age that took place at their time ? nope.

new findings at dean's Blue hole in carribean shows that last Ice ages and temp shifts took place much much faster than it is now, so why are we flattering ourselves thinking it was US ?>?!

 

[DgenR8]

I think Rossini's point is that our current behaviour needs changing. I can't see how anyone could disgree.

While I appreciate you jumping in to tell me what you think Rossini is trying to say, I'd really prefer to hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
So, Rossini, I stated that I believe more scientists will tell you that some cosmic event (I never said meteorite) is more likely to wipe this planet clean of humanity than green house gases or global warming. You vehemently disagreed, to the point that you took a shot at me, telling me that basically, I am too stupid to carry on a discussion with you. {You should lose your ability to post here for that one, but I'll let it slide, providing you answer my question, which I will ask again.}

They wont have anything to be greedy with. That's the whole point.

If you really beleive that scientists are more worried about meteorites than global warming then I really am wasting my time. :spin2:

Why not share your prediction with us; how long do you think it will take Humanity to snuff itself out (green house gases, global warming, you know, NON cosmic type race ending stuff) at our current rate?

**My last quote has been edited to include what's between the parenthesis**

 

[billsreef]

US Humans are a TINY fraction of this universe and its stupid to think WE, the small fraction can make any dramatic changes.

However, we are not a tiny fraction of this planet called Earth. We are a quite a sizable population of critters capable of moving and transforming vast tracts of habitat. We can easily transform woodlands to concrete jungles and transform clean air and water into polluted air and water. You can actually see the smog from city air pollution, to the point that one can navigate via old fashioned paper charts and compass by taking compass headings on that yellow brown smog cloud...while off the continental shelf, far enough that you can't even see land. You can also find plenty of human debris that far offshore as well

 

[andrewk529]

While I appreciate you jumping in to tell me what you think Rossini is trying to say, I'd really prefer to hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
So, Rossini, I stated that I believe more scientists will tell you that some cosmic event (I never said meteorite) is more likely to wipe this planet clean of humanity than green house gases or global warming. You vehemently disagreed, to the point that you took a shot at me, telling me that basically, I am too stupid to carry on a discussion with you. {You should lose your ability to post here for that one, but I'll let it slide, providing you answer my question, which I will ask again.}






**My last quote has been edited to include what's between the parenthesis**

Define "cosmic event"; because honestly if your deluding yourself about the dangers of anthropogenic climate change the conversation is probably pointless. Some people still debate evolution in spite of compelling evidence.Scientists can produce factual,reproducible evidence that global warming and climate change will cause significant negative changes to our one and only planet. These changes are being observed presently.There is nothing natural about humans taking sequestered carbon, volatilizing the substance and expelling the gas into our atmosphere. The self destructive nature of our current practices IMO isn't representative of any organism. We both can agree greed is a main driving force; that doesn't mean with should be dismissive about the entire situation.

 

[49.35 North]

And yet if the issues are characterized in such general, philosophical terms, people cannot get a handle on it. Everyone at the higher, general level wants to save coral reefs for example.
But, as you narrow it down to specifics ie. the aquarium trade for example, you will find systemic, routine misbehavior, especially amongst the so called reform groups and irresponsible, uninvolved, know nothing merchants and hobbyists.
The trade is a low ball one, price driven and ignorant as can be about the way product is brought to market. Questions of sustainability remain the very least of qualifiers for purchases.
Steve

Well, it would be great if there was a "growing movement of responsible industry fish people who can influence policy and accelerate progress while we still have productivity on coral reefs!", as you suggested on reefs dot org in 2001, but apparently it hasn't happened. Wouldn't it help if more reefers INSISTED that their livestock purchases were sustainably captured? And don't you need a certification program of some kind (maybe not MAC) to ensure that what is claimed to be sustainable actually is?