Re: In defence of the aquarium hobby
Walter Ivantsoff (wivantso at rna.bio.mq.edu.au)
Wed, 22 May 1996 19:07:19 GMT+1000
I must stand corrected for the wrong use of the word "aquarist". I did
not even think of the serious participants of the hobby but of those
who purchase an occasional sword tail, loach, neon tetra (all of which
are now found in the wild; on Adrian' information, 12% of our freshwater
fish are introduced species!) and then get rid of it "humanely" by tipping
them in to the first available creek. Those who sell fish will probably
know the exact number of importations from Singapore and other centres
which breed fish cheaply and will come up with a very large number
imported per annum. Increasing the number of importations, seems to
me only a logical thing to do if there are reasonable studies to indicate
potential effects on the local fauna and the environment. Rainbows occur
in Australia and there are no studies that I know of that would indicate
that their placement on the list of permitted fish would or would
not have an effect on the local scene. If you or I could buy a pair of
Boeseman's rainbowfish, so can little Johny from Cairns who could then
release it "humanely" into the local stream. And 500 needed to start a
colony? I wonder how many weather loaches were released to have them dispersed
so well throught the south-eastern states.
And on the other point that Adrian makes about moggies: Importation
of mammals requires stringent quarantine as he says (6 months?)But
try and import Felix silvestris, common moggie's closest relative
and see if you will get permission.
Is pleasure the sole driving force for having untested importations?
For pleasure's sake, should we make a less perfect world potentially
even less perfect?
Yours sincerely,
Walter Ivantsoff
(e-mail wivantso at rna.bio.mq.edu.au)
(phone 61 02 850 8167)
(fax 61 02 850 8245)
(and if all above fails write a letter to:
School of Biol Sciences, Macquarie University
N.S.W. 2109, Australia)