Lake Nawampassa (was re: tubarosa revisited)

Cynthia.Teague (20676CMT at MSU.EDU)
Tue, 02 Apr 1996 17:07 -0500 (EST)

Les Kaufman said, in part:
> Now, the key is the long-term market. Most likely aquarists would
> have to volunteer not to sell or gift captive bred stock in the US to each
> other, or some such restriction. If this were not done, the trade would
> trickle off and die after only a few months, and the fishes would no longer
> be there the next time the fad reawakens. Does anybody have ideas on this?

This is a very thought-provoking suggestion. Is it your experience that
demand for new species from Africa is that short-lived? I hadn't realized
that.

It would be very hard to regulate the disposition of offspring -- especially
if these fish are as prolific as Victorian cichlids. Some aquarists want to
make money, others just want to share -- but few would be happy just saving a
handful of fry and using the rest as live food, especially if the species in
question were endangered. ("they're endangered, but I'm being asked to kill
them?")

I thought at first that perhaps the local fishery could concentrate on selling
colored-up adults -- but if these fish are similar to Victorians, they
probably color up very small.

As Adrian Tappan pointed out in regard to eachamensis, it's important to
explode a tiny population into a large one as quickly as possible to keep as
much heterozygosity as possible -- so doesn't it make sense for aquarists to
start breeding & circulating these species? Or are you saying that population
levels would just drop back down again when these are no longer "poster fish"?
But then at least the remainer would have more genetic variety than what you'd
have if the fishery at Lake Nawampassa maintained a small colony of breeders
for the same period of time (since there would be more American-bred &
therefore cheaper fad fish than there would be imported single specimens or
their moral equivalent)

Perhaps clubs could "sponsor" certain species -- for every bag that went
through an auction, a certain percentage (perhaps substantial) would go back
tothe fishery. Or individual aquarists could sign some sort of licensing
agreement -- though bookkeeping seems complicated.

Very interesting.

Cynthia Teague
20676cmt at msu.edu