> Much more damage is done by pollution as well as the rape and plunder, than
> by bringing in a few illegal imports which were originally part of Sahul
> when it is all said and done.
That's the same as saying that logging of our forests causes more damage
to galaxid populations than trout stocking so lets just keep stocking
trout anyway.
When it is all said and done Sahul doesn't exist today. Further, as I
have stated before Australian natives pose just as much threat or
probably a higher threat than NG fish. It's just that Australian fish
are presently unregulated cf NG fish. That doesn't justify bringing in
NG fish though either without adequate study/evaluation.
> It's high time another case was put forward
> to allow the legal imports of rainbowfish.
I agree with this statement provided the appropriate study/evaluation is
undertaken as I have discussed in earlier posts.
> How many New Guinea rainbows exist and crossbreed in our streams ? Have the
> boffins done any work to say one way or the other? ANGFA has tried for many
> years to "be listened to" when it comes to NG 'bows.
No work has been done on crossbreeding. That is part of the argument.
Some of us are arguing for caution while others seem to want open slather
on rainbows as I see it in part.
Cheers
Peter Unmack