> If we do that there will be no rainbowfishes offered for sale ;-) Almost all
> New Guinea species were illegally imported into this Country???
Is this before or after the ban took effect? I think that the newer
species are those that are coming in.
> Add to this list 80% of all Cichlid species plus a host of other tropical
> fish that are still comimg in and you will find that probably 70-80% of all
> fish species in the Australian Hobby were illegally imported at some time.
I was not claiming that all species were equal in their undesireability
status.
> What does that suggest to you all. I know what it suggest to me and that is
> for any law to work properly it must have the respect of the majority of the
> people. Thats how democracy is supposed to work and I haven't meet anyone
> yet who refused to take some Praecox when offered to them.
>
In the words of Obelix "Zigackly"
> If we think that a two week quarantine period will discover all beasties
> coming in with legal tropical fish shipments we are just fooling ourselves.
> In fact I would think that fish or eggs coming from a private hobbyists
> would be more free of diseases than commercial suppliers, particularly if
> you look at the health of fishes that are being supplied from commercial
> growers. Australia is quickly becoming part of the Gobal village and as we
> rely more and more on the tourist dollar (seeing we can't live off the back
> of the sheep anymore) pressure will be applied to speed up the processing of
> tourists and it is becoming more and more difficult to monitor what is
> coming into this Country.
The amended laws would change much of what you are talking about here.
All species are to have a two week, prior to export, quarantine combined
with a vetinary inspection and certification. That is then followed by
another inspection on arrival and another two week quarantine. For
identified problem species this would be extended to 4 weeks in each case
with multiple inspections and the possibility that only fish breed from
imported fish to be released. Diseased fish are to be subjected to
histological examination by qualified vet staff, with the view to
destruction of the entire shipment.
>Add this this the growing number of cargo
> containers entering our shores everyday and you can see the magnitude of the
> problem. Tropical fish are only a very small part of the problem - plants,
> seeds, poultry eggs and animal sperm comimg in for Agriculture and cargo
> containers carrying all sort of beasties are flowing into Australia everyday
> eg. the Giant African Snails found in Brisbane the other day. Are we fooling
> ourselves that this was the only container that had some. I think not!
I can tell you what the import restrictions are for plants, for LOW risk
species like our beloved Cryptocorynes, it is 3 months quarantine in a
pool that is at least three metres from any other plant! The laws are
there for a reason and deliberate breaking of those rules is something
that should not be taken lightly.
You are presenting a very good case to say that they still should be
disallowed for sale and distribution within ANGFA. Should we even tacitly
approve of those who deliberately break the law? Just because we can not
stop it happening does not mean that we should put our head in the sand,
say it is too hard and then accept the fish! We should accept that we
have a role in risk management of importation and as such we should look
after what we have responsibility for. Saying that someone else is worse
is like, taking a 44gal barrel of oil to tin can bay finding a nice little
creek with P. mellis, leaving the barrel there and then saying that the
Exon valdez was a much greater disaster than the potential one.
>
> I know it would be nice to think that we are free and protected from all
> dieases and virusus and live in a fantasy world but I afraid we have to face
> reality.
I was not implying that we are protected from the diseases, just that
having someone else check what you are doing is always a good idea, as an
editor that should be reasonably apparent. It also allows supposedly
objective people to determine the potential risk of what is being
imported. The only way to acheive zero risk is to stop all movement of
all fish species permanently. That will not happen, Lake Eachem is a good
example of that.
>Noble gestures won't achieve anything!
True but they may start people thinking about what they are doing and why
and then perhaps persuade them to change their minds.
> Adrian T.
> ........................................
> Adrian R. Tappin
> atappin at ecn.net.au
> http://www.ecn.net.au/~atappin/home.htm
> ........................................
>
>