Reef_Geek's tanks

[Reef_Geek]

Originally Posted by Reef_Geek

Those tangs are long gone via outbreak during my vacation to Costa Rica. The current tangs are 3" only.

Fish Business / Aquaculture business doesn't have anything to do with morality. I'm not going to get into a debate on morality here as it's always a matter of perspectives. A non-fishkeeper would just as well call all confinement immoral. Let's pass on this topic.

Ok, so I wasn’t in the best of moods when responding to this. I’m now a bit cooled off and just want to better articulate this. By no means did I intend for this to sound uncompassionate. It is accurate, but lacking in explanation and perspective.

Any business’s first objective is to create shareholder value. Shareholders can range as anything from common stock buyers of a public company to a sole proprietor. Either way, if the company does not align its activities to create value for its owners, it will cease to exist as a going concern, or it’s not a business (it’s a charity rather). Next, a company would be wise to hold mission statements (and have tangible actions) in corporate social responsibility, holding values that matter to those it does business with and to those within communities that drive their business. Being corporate-socially responsible is not necessary for any company to remain a going concern, so it is not a mandate so much as a very wise and right thing to do.

Now transferring this to the aquaculture / aquarium business. The people employed in the aquarium business are everyday people, some of whom aren’t even hobbyists. The degree to which any given individual employed in this business "cares about animal welfare" varies as much as any hobbyist. Assuming that one must be conscientious or a conservationist would be just that, an assumption that is no more valid when applied to any other person. The aquarium business and aquaculture IS a fishery, only the end consumers do not eat the harvest. That said, there’s a whole lot of mortality among capture rates leading to the provision of the strongest specimens that survive to the market (capture, hold until landing, hold until export, hold until import, hold until shipped, hold until tanked at LFS, hold until your tank). So participation in this hobby is not an act of conservation nor compassion. Putting this back into a fair perspective, however, most species are those of sustainable wild populations and many (not all) are caught using sustainable practices. So just treat it as such, hobbyists are consumers of a fishery, but hobbyists are not noble providers of shelters. Hobbyists, however, would be wise to learn where poor fishing practices exist and avoid buying species from those regions, and would be wise to avoid species that are unsuitable for captivity.

Now onto the issue of stocking density. The objection is that 3 tangs at 4”-5” and 1 tang at 2” is overstocking a 65 gallon. This is as debatable as can be. You could put up a poll and likely the split would be 40-60 or 30-70… and many hobbyists exceed this without wanting to cause ripples here so publicly. At the very least, someone from the fish business is not likely to err on the conservative side of stocking density. It’s in fact ongoing improvement to push the envelope on stocking density through sound husbandry practices. You will see the same thing at public zoos and aquariums that are nationally accredited (e.g. AZA).

So to clarify this point, the fish business is first and foremost about business and science. It can be compassionate and conscientious, but it is not a prerequisite. I did not mean to sound so harsh.

By way of mention, the Cryptocaryon outbreak is not a stocking density issue. It is my fault, but not a stocking density problem. The fish were undergoing treatment at the LFS, and the owner was hesitant to sell so soon. So he had me wait and wait, and I grabbed them as soon as he'd let them go. So they were clearly not fully cured. The outbreak occurred within days of their arrival. My fault is that I rushed, plus I did not have a full quarantine tank set up. It's my fault for being too brave and impatient. I was used to using pharmaceutical grade chloroquine, chloramphenicol, and formalin which are more effective at protozoan eradication, and I over estimated whatever the LFS was using. In treatment, I tried to short cut using freshwater dips and Herbtana, but my 1 week vacation did the fish in. Since then, I now have a full quarantine tank where I can use copper. The new fish, have never lived one second in the main display, so one can knock the Berlin system all they want, but it has no influence on fish that never lived there.

[Reef_Geek]

To learn more about the aquarium fishery, see this article

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2j...jRieDNlcnQyU2M

[albert_dao]

That was a wordy way of saying "other people don't give a f__k, why should I?"

[Reef_Geek]

I don't understand how you interpreted I don't give a f__k.

I'm trying to say that the state of it is very different from what we believe. We would be wise to learn more about what and where we support and be smarter consumers. You cannot ignore that we're challenging wild populations, and hobbyists are the demand that drives this. If we choose to stay in the hobby, then we must be aware of our impact. It's not a "let's quit the hobby" issue... it's a "being an aware consumer" issue.

[albert_dao]

Of course you don't, and that's more or less the problem being enunciated here.

In any case, carry on

[Reef_Geek]

I'm sorry that you are getting that impression. You are wrong.

Here's some eye openers from my article in Freshwater and Marine Aquarium Magazine (FAMA):
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2j...jRieDNlcnQyU2M

The point is... the hobby can be a sustainable wild fishery so long as wild captures are properly monitored, enforced, and managed. Within the article, you will read about MPAs (Marine Protected Areas) that serve to protect small regions of the whole area, and also provides recruitment to the surrounding areas. Outside the article, hobbyists would be wise to be aware of what and where they support. There are nations that have poor records of fisheries management, and there are nations that have achieved sustainable fisheries.

-Two divers used to be able to harvest 1000 Mandarins in 3 hours, now two divers typically catch about 30 in 3 hours.
-Average size of mandarins caught is 3 cm (down from 6 cm), this is near sexual maturity
-118,000 Banggai cardinals are exported per month, but this is after an 85% mortality rate post-catch
-Arraial do Cabo (Brazil) used to land 600 Condylactis per week, now they are locally extinct
-Cebu (Philippines) have protected and unprotected areas. Differences between fished and unfished Sebae anemones (Heteractis) is density (1 per 200 square yards vs 1 per 40 square yards) and size (16-32 square inches vs 64-80 square inches)
-same comparison above for clownfishes... density (1 per 10 square yards vs 1 per 200 square yards) and size (6 cm vs 2.5 cm length)

[Reef_Geek]

Maybe I haven't articulated the corporate social responsibility part well enough? I'm trying to convey that while a company does not have to be engaged in extended social-community programs or hold such values (as we see many examples of this around us), I am by no means advocating this. I've worked for 7 different employers, 3 of whom are fortune 500 companies. The most successful have been those with proper corporate social responsibility mandates.