Bonnethead sharks for sale

[JHemdal]

Sharklover,

You wrote,

"Of course public aquariums are against the private individual keeping sharks. Sharks are one of the primary attractions of a public aquarium. If you've got sharks at home you won't need to pay $40-50 to see them at the local public aquarium. "

You need to preface that with, "In my opinion" because you really have no way to back up that assertion. Same about public aquariums "killing more than their fair share of sharks" - you have no data, so it is simply your uninformed opinion.

Public aquarists decry keeping sharks in unsuitable conditions, because either the animal dies, or the public aquarium is called upon to bail out the person with the oversized shark, simple as that.


Jay Hemdal

p.s. - and Carch melanopte knows better than to come to me to try to find a home for his big female bonnethead<grin>.

 

[sharklover]

sharks

sharks

JHemdal
I didn't preface my statement with "in my opinion" because it is not my opinion. You assume that I have no knowledge of the public aquarium industry. What you don't know is that I am actually more "in the loop" than you know. As far as lacking facts go, shall I cite a couple of recent examples? The Pittsburgh Zoo & Aq. recently killed a bunch of sharks (their second time that I know of) as well as the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, CA. I can't remember what species Pittsburgh wiped out (bonnets, btrs and sand tigers?) but Long Beach killed all of their Bonnetheads and Sandbars. For a long time the Living Seas in Orlando was known in the industry as "The Dying Seas" because of all the losses they would incur on a regular basis. There are smaller, lesser known public aquariums that bear losses as well. The statement was not intended to be a slam on public aquariums. It was meant to show that nobody is perfect. That goes for large, well funded aquariums as well as hobbyists. You do make a valid point with the fact that aquariums don't like or want the majority of sharks that outgrow the average home aquarium. Although I've never seen an aquarium turn down a large bonnethead or other exotic. Those sharks cost a small fortune for public aquariums to buy or collect and a freebie would be most welcome.

 

[mhltcob]

Public aquariums have a need for sharks to generate public interest and revenue to support their efforts. Important research on shark behavior is made much easier and cheaper in a public aquarium setting.

Certainly some public aquariums have killed many sharks in the past and some will continue to do so in the future, you cannot compare the relatively small percentage of deaths occured for their noble cause to that of a private aquarist. Almost all home aquarium leopards, blacktips, bonnetheads, smoothhounds, and nurses die within a couple of years. While there are a handful of private individuals that can provide adequate housing to these species in their home, the vast majority cannot.

 

[JHemdal]

Sharklover,

Nope - I'm correct in what I said, your information needs to be prefaced "in your opinion". What you offered in your second post are just random statemnts (mostly vague and incorrect), and not usable statitistics.
The mortality rate of every animal is 100% You saying that "this shark died here" or "these sharks died there" is meaningless without a time frame. And even then, what would you compare it to? Hobbyists longevity rates? IN MY OPINION, the rates would be even higher for sharks kept by hobbyists. How about compared to the rate in the wild? Again, I opine that sharks in the wild have comparable mortality rates. I have a BT reef shark that I acquired as a pup in 1989, hows does that figure in? The sharks that live on and on aren't newsworthy, so you wouldn't have read about them in the newspaper.

You didn't even mention your completely undefendable statement that public aquariums don't want home aquarists to keep sharks because that would adversely impact their gate receipts. Do you have ANY data to support that claim? No? Then it is your opinion! Actually, an uninformed opinion, because public aquariums have long known that people with home aquariums are actually quite ardent visitors!

I could go on, but in my opinion, don't think I need to....<smile>


Jay

 

[stykthyn]

wow,since 1989 huh? good job!

 

[vareefer4life]

AMEN JAY!!!!!

 

[sharklover]

sharks

sharks

JHemdal

I apologize for not responding to the comment about private individuals not attending public aquariums if they have sharks at home. I got wrapped up in citing my other examples. You're right that I have no data to share with you or the forum to back up my claim. Unfortunately, one can't be expected to back up every claim made in this type of arena. This is not a court of law where I've got to have evidence for the defense to look at. I'm sure you don't expect me to have audio/video recordings of private conversations I've had with numerous aquarists and curators at public aquariums. I would not want to jeopardize my position nor their trust that they placed in me. That being said, if it is necessary to provide such backing to that statement than I'd rather retract it than back it up citing more examples. As far as the other statements go, I made them because there is a portion of the forum population that is dead set against private aquarists keeping sharks like bonnets and other exotics even though they know nothing about keeping them nor have they actually tried keeping them. So it seems that they can make such statements without data to back them up, but I can't make mention of public aquarium mortalities even though I provided data for you. Most of the naysayers on the forum cite books they've read or other aquarists as their source of information and the basis for their claims that these sharks should not be kept by the private aquarist. As I said earlier, it is not a slam on public aquariums. I think that if a private aquarist wants to make an attempt at keeping sharks like bonnetheads they should try it as long as they have the proper size aquarium and enough aquarium experience. If no one ever tried these things then no one would ever succeed. It sounds like this guy actually had quite a large system (12000 gal.) He's not attempting to keep a species that is endangered or threatened. As far as mortality rates go in the hobby, I don't think sharks die in higher proportions than other fish. The private aquarists I know that keep sharks as well as my own track record is actually pretty good. I see people losing angels and anthias far more than their sharks. We all go through tragedies sometimes. Tank wipeouts just happen sometimes.( Whether it be a power outage, ozone overdose, equipment failure, etc.) If you look at the hobby as a whole you'll find that many species of fish are now being kept that were thought to be impossible a few years ago. Why can't sharks fall in to that category. If we don't try we surely won't succeed.

 

[mhltcob]

Re: sharks

Re: sharks

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7785422#post7785422 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sharklover

You're right that I have no data to share with you or the forum to back up my claim. Unfortunately, one can't be expected to back up every claim made in this type of arena. This is not a court of law where I've got to have evidence for the defense to look at.

no you don't, but you won't have any credability either.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7785422#post7785422 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sharklover
I think that if a private aquarist wants to make an attempt at keeping sharks like bonnetheads they should try it as long as they have the proper size aquarium and enough aquarium experience.

How many private aquarist have suitable knowledge and resources to adequately house the adult size of the species in question?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7785422#post7785422 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sharklover

I made them because there is a portion of the forum population that is dead set against private aquarists keeping sharks like bonnets and other exotics even though they know nothing about keeping them nor have they actually tried keeping them

I don't have to have personal experience keeping elephants in my backyard to know that I don't nor does 99.9999999% of private individuals have the capibilities to adequately house these animals.

 

[angels mcgee]

Carch, what exactly do you keep in those two humongous aquariums besides bonnets?

 

[sharklover]

sharks

sharks

mhltcob

It doesn't matter to me whether I have credibility with you or not. I have nothing to gain nor lose from having or not having credibility on this forum. But I find it interesting how you make statements referring to elephant husbandry and ask how many aquarists have aquariums large enough to house sharks to adulthood. If you don't have the answer to that why would you ask? Even if I responded with a number how would you verify it? I don't mind healthy debate on a subject but if you're going to throw out immature responses I won't respond further. If you actually have any hard numbers I will gladly listen. I don't just support the idea of keeping sharks in captivity because I have an axe to grind or have nothing better to do but take heat from you. I have kept sharks for over twenty years and find that they can make great aquarium inhabitants. I would think that that would lend me some credibility in and of itself. I don't ask you guys for "data" for every claim you make. Such a process would be fruitless and clog up the forum. I like to assume that the people who post here are honest (whether I agree with them or not) and speak from personal knowledge, not hearsay. If you're going to claim that a shark should not be kept by the private aquarist you should expect and want to hear from private aquarists that have actually kept them. Whether you agree with them or not you shouldn't close your mind off to other opinions and experiences.

 

[mhltcob]

I can't tell you how many private aquariums in the country are even of the correct size and shape to house adult bonnetheads (not even considering other care requirements). I can tell you in michigan its less than a half dozen. That's funny cause i've seen no less than 3 dozen for sale at local shops-so where are they all going-out of state? I have also seen at least 100 leopard sharks for sale at local shops. How many private aquarist in michigan have a suitable size and temperature controlled facility to house one of these guys? 0. Apparently they must be going to appropriate homes out of state as well.

I'm not against private aquarist housing sharks given appropriate conditions, I just never have met a private individual who has adequate resources to maintain the species mentioned into adulthood. I have on the other hand seen many public aquariums with adequate facilities.

 

[sharklover]

sharks

sharks

Perhaps in states like MI the problem is weather conditions in the winter. Large systems would require large amounts of heating to keep them warm. I'm in CA where temperatures are far more moderate in most of the state. There is also a great deal of money here. Rich people seem to have no problem spending the dough to keep exotic animals like sharks. I knew one guy in Orange County who spent $80,000 modifying his swimming pool to keep sharks. (This was back in the 80's so I'm sure it would cost double that now). He kept that pool up for four years before the wife insisted on selling the house. During that time he kept adult bonnets, btrs, leopards and white-tip reefs. He tried to obtain sand tigers but never was able to do so. Most other aquarists use ponds as aquariums of a large size are expensive to build. Ponds are far more economical than acrylic aquariums. If you read some of the other shark pond posts on this forum and others you'll see that it is a growing interest.

 

[mhltcob]

Re: sharks

Re: sharks

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7785894#post7785894 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sharklover
During that time he kept adult bonnets, btrs, leopards and white-tip reefs.

So he kept sharks together with completely different temperature requirements? Did he also keep garibaldis in his reef tank?

 

[sharklover]

sharks

sharks

Temperature requirements for the leopard and the tropical sharks is not that far apart. If you study the range of the leopard shark you'll find that they range pretty far south. A temp. in the low 70's is comfortable for the leo and the tropicals. Not to make you totally sick, but I've seen leopards live in 80 degree water for years. And no, they did not eventually die on the aquarist. They got too big and were traded in at the local pet store or I found homes for them. The leo actually ranges from OR (where water temps hover around 50) to Mazatlan and the Gulf of California (where water temps reach the upper 80's in summer). Here in CA the leos live in water temps from 57 in winter to 74 in summer.

 

[mhltcob]

Re: sharks

Re: sharks

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7786021#post7786021 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by sharklover
A temp. in the low 70's is comfortable for the leo and the tropicals.

There is a polar bear now living at the detroit zoo's new exhibit that lived for years in mexico in a cage at a circus. Was he comfortable?

There is a HUGE difference between small seasonal fluctuations and permenant holding at too high or too low of temperatures. We are talking about cold blooded fish that require temperatures close to what they have evolved to occupy.

 

[JDrex]

I dont understand why people are so fired up about this whole topic. The truth is no one can recreate the natural habitat of these animals. The point of this whole hobby is so that people can try to recreate a similar and stable habitat in order to keep these creatures healthy and alive. There is no doubt in my mind that this can be seen as being somewhat inhumane on all levels, but believe it or not we are at the top of the food chain. What we say goes. I mean why don't you go boycott meat. How inhumane is that? I'm sure its worse than putting a tang or two in a 40 gallon tank. Ultimately what we say goes. Yes it sickens me to see people putting sharks in 30 gallon aquariums, but as long as stores continue to sell livestock to ignorant uneducated individuals its not going to stop. I personally take pride in being able to keep fish healthy and hopefully happy. While it is inhumane, it takes true dedication to keep these animals alive for any amount of time. I mean I am so delighted when my friends come over and they are simply and utterly amazed at what I have accomplished. Thats what this **** is all about folks. Proving to ourselves and everyone else that we can keep something so exotic alive.

 

[Lrgclasper]

I am disappointed that this discussion has degraded into a bunch of dumb comments about people keeping elephants and polar bears. Geeze, the guy has a huge tank and is taking care of a shark species very common to public aquaria. In fact, if he could get these guys to breed, more power to him.

I also think we should be very careful about making the conservation argument. The level of shark mortality accrued by hobby isn't even on the radar when compared with commercial fishery harvest or pollution. Moreover, the amount of money spent on each animal is far greater in the aquarium industry than the commercial. The argument is about the quality of life for the animal.

This fellow has obviously provided a huge house for his sharks, and is removing a shark because of aggression. Why chastise him for this? Moreover, you’re applying a human trait to the quality of life issue. Maybe from a sharks perspective there is plenty of food available without have expend much energy hunting.

I did not really understand the arguement that sharks are different from fish? Fish are applied to a large group of animals: teleosts are the bony fish, and elasmobranchs are the cartlaginous fish. I think the arguement was focused on the teleosts. As for the longevity of teleosts, many have reproductive parameters simular to sharks (e.g., species of sebastes (rockfish)): late age at maturity, low fecundity, vulerability to overfishing. I would also argue that many bony fish have just as much "personality" as a shark.

 

[Lrgclasper]

I agree Drex. Our Bamboo shark just spit out her first couple of egg cases. It was amazing to actually have that happen in your house. We don't plan on breeding them, but we had a bunch of neighbor kids in and out of the house all day looking at the thing.

 

[mhltcob]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7788507#post7788507 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Lrgclasper

I did not really understand the arguement that sharks are different from fish? Fish are applied to a large group of animals: teleosts are the bony fish, and elasmobranchs are the cartlaginous fish. I think the arguement was focused on the teleosts. As for the longevity of teleosts, many have reproductive parameters simular to sharks (e.g., species of sebastes (rockfish)): late age at maturity, low fecundity, vulerability to overfishing. I would also argue that many bony fish have just as much "personality" as a shark.

Actually, the shark species mentioned have extremely long doubling times (14 + yrs as opposed to 1-5 yrs) compared to that of many teleost kept in captivity because of much lower fecundity/late age of maturity. This makes them much more susceptable to overharvest than many teleost. I would have thought you would have known that given that you are a fisheries policy maker and all.

 

[mhltcob]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7788507#post7788507 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Lrgclasper
I also think we should be very careful about making the conservation argument. The level of shark mortality accrued by hobby isn't even on the radar when compared with commercial fishery harvest or pollution. Moreover, the amount of money spent on each animal is far greater in the aquarium industry than the commercial. The argument is about the quality of life for the animal.

O.k. so smaller scale mortalility for the aquarium trade is acceptable because others are killing more?