[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Supposed contradiction in Philosophy
Hello all,
Seems we have a lively discussion going on here about species
introductions and to a lesser degree Aquarist having greater access to
native fishes via proffessionall breeders.
I thought I'd chime in here on both issues. On the issue of species
relocations and outright introductions. Let me say that as a society we
tend to have a I can fix it attitude. From fisheries on down to
individiuals there is a tendancy to believe that if this river just had X
it would be nicer. For the most part these introductions have been
failures in the least and disasters in the most. As an Organization I
feel confident that I can speak for the entire BOD in saying We are
OPPOSED to any relocations, introductions, or otherwise fiddling with
fish in water sheds where they do not belong. I however think we must be
carefull and allow room for scietifically based reintroductions in cases
of ecological mishap !
On the percieved contradiction in philosophy by NANFA profiting from the
breeding and sale of North American speices in Europe here is my take on
the whole thing. Conservation is fueled by two things money and public
opinion. Unfourtunatly until people give a damn about something they wont
give a dime to preserve it. Our Native species are suffering from a
disease called apathy that is threating to be their very exiastance. IF
and I repeat IF a large enough group of Aquarists in this country or
abroad becomes involved in keeping native species they will become
involved in their preservation. Take the African rift lakes as a example
the pressure to preserve those lakes comes not from the Africans but from
the Aquarist around the world who fell in love with their inabitants.So I
believe in greater access for Aquarists for the following reasons.
1. Greater participation by Aquarist = greater public concern
2. Greater participation= greater research and life history studies
3.Greater particpation= greater influence by Aquarist in conservation
issues.
4.Greater participation= greater financial resources
5.Greater participation=greater chance for species survival
Downsides:
1. Greater participation=greater chance for introductions
2.Greater participation=greater influence on fisheries issues by the
general public.
Anyhow tell me what you all think I probably missed a point or two. Oh
and by the way NANFA really is an aspiring conservation organization like
the Nature conservancy not a fish club (we just havent gotten there
yet.!! )
Have a Nice weekend ,
Robert Rice