Reef nutrition

Folks we need to act

HiFidelity

HiFidelity

Guest
BARcard
A few days ago a bitter individual who decided to start a coral business out of his livingroom (not kidding) took to the web and posted this on 8 different facebook reefing groups:

"I'm gonna make it real clear to everyone of you non licensed coral farmers out there in la la land, get licensed quick or stop selling coral where I can see it because I'm sick of this sh** dipping into my pocket... Sh**s gonna change and fines are gonna be dealt until it stops"

without going into detail about what this idiot was on about in short the entire facebook community of reefers was in an uproar and unleashed the most insane virtual attack on his business page and bringing it to shambles in less than 12 hours.

It was nice to see the entire online reef community unleash on a single irrelevant douche for attacking our hobby but consider the fact that he was a single harmless loud mouth. We need this kind of noise and support when it comes to bureaucrats who hide behind their horribly ill informed and unsubstantiated political agendas trying to take our hobby away, they are the real danger.

If you don't know yet, NOAA is at it again and they are trying to ban keeping, growing, propagating, fragging, transport and sale of a list of corals (some of which most of us keep in our tanks) it's no joke and this can become law very quickly and it's not limited to commercial trade, this would apply to frag swaps and trades as mundane as handing a frag to your friend out of your tank. This can be very damaging if we don't react in a civilized and intelligent fashion against their pseudo science. The word ornamental sounds like a luxury or something that you don't need but sadly the implications of the proposed laws will have wide reaching devastation. Basically they're arguing that "if we stop touching corals in the ocean they'll be fine" we all know that's not true, natural changes are wiping out corals, not reefers, in fact reefers are the only mass body of people who can grow corals faster than nature is capable of in the present.

So I urge you to take a look at the page, post a comment and let's stop this nonsense from happening.

Proposed Law:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0158-0001

Here's someone we all respect speaking on the subject:
 
launching a "viral attack" is FAR more damaging to the industry and hobby then a guy wanting people not registering as a business (legal) to register as a business. Its puts us in a totally different light.

So what we have here is a person the Feds would commend, getting his website attacked (Fed offense). I suggest you make the call to action based on just the proposed NOAA regulations, which are in fact not an attach on the hobby/Industry. To some its a hobby, to others its their livelihood, like me (20+ years).
 
"...react in a civilized and intelligent fashion..." - not a viral attack.

The guy is not going to be commended by anybody, he has no website, he was literally selling corals that he grew in his living room via FB page, he's practically a flea on a dog's back.

I made the comparison because one got the attention of the entire web-reefer presence yet when it comes to regulations that actually do threaten what we do the matter gets brushed aside. Advanced Aquarist posted an article today pretty much saying "this doesn't affect us and we should celebrate NOAA's efforts" also at the end of the day sure we're not all heroes who are keeping tanks to save the ocean but efforts of aquaculture and farming for purpose of conservation are also aspects that would be affected, the counterargument here is all these entities would each be licensed & permitted but the lingo on permits is so loose it leaves too many available options for eliminating that as well.

Frankly I don't bring this kind of thing to the spot light for the sake of the retailers and if I may be brutally honest, I don't rely on retailers for my hobby, dry goods like salt, food or a skimmer are things I may purchase from retailers but my livestock is 100% aquacultured not wild collected (except for my fish but I can live without them if it meant to protect their existence) and that's what I'd like to see protected. So to be clear, I'm concerned about aquaculture of corals, not fish, not retailers, not the ornamental trade industry and whether you can or can't have one without the other I feel that a cold cut decision that affects everyone across the board is more detrimental than sustainable.
 
And your comparison is on the net now... for all to see that Google the subject. Don't think for a second that those that actually seek to end the hobby aren't internet savvy.

Coral conservation efforts are vastly more paid for via non industry parties..IE. LGU, NGO, GOV, etc. Yes, we have quite a few in-situ coral farms that supply us... guess what, most got money from elsewhere to start and that forced their hand into conservation efforts (that and in most areas, government regulations). They are entirely money driven. They'll exist on a conservation scale if the trade is closed to those species. We've seen the closer of a numerous corals and locations in the years the hobby has existed. Those very areas have funded coral conservation to this day!

Coral conservation will not be effected. Those in the US that actually do it, are fully permitted to do it in the US. It will effect in-situ coral farms that supply the trade, oh there it is again, the trade.

Aquaculture of corals (note: aquaculture as in tanked, not in-situ) could not take place without the industry behind it. The economy of scale is what affords you this luxury.
 
BAYMAC said:
I suggest you make the call to action based on just the proposed NOAA regulations, which are in fact not an attach on the hobby/Industry.
Click to expand...

I'm confused. Do you think the proposed inclusion of these corals in the endangered species list is NOT a problem for U.S. ornamental aquatics?

That view seems to be in direct opposition to the linked vid.
 
aqua-nut said:
I'm confused. Do you think the proposed inclusion of these corals in the endangered species list is NOT a problem for U.S. ornamental aquatics?

That view seems to be in direct opposition to the linked vid.
Click to expand...

Lets be clear... it only effects the US marine ornamental aquatics ;) I doubt FW dealers will feel much bite from it, well, other then probably a decrease in economy of scale resulting in higher prices.

and that is not what I said. I said its not an attack on the hobby/industry. It effects us, sure, but that is NOT what brought this about. Read up on the subject.

Starting point for your reading/research: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/..._of_biodiversity/extinction_crisis/index.html

That is whom instigated this move by NOAA.
 
My opinion is a bit different:

First, they often put a lot of species up for "status review."
The final proposed list will almost certainly be MUCH shorter.

Second, the GOP is in charge of congress.
Putting corals on the endangered list means admitting reefs are in trouble,
which means admitting global warming is an issue.
Not likely to happen.

Third, if they are truly endangered, I have no problems with these restrictions.
Sorry, but if I have to switch to other corals, or even no corals, perhaps that is the price we pay.
Yes, I know that restricting our hobby will have little to no impact. We are collateral damage.
But the endangered listing will have an effect.
 
who actually knows who I'm talking about outside of those who directly saw what happened? the individual posted on closed groups, as in you have to be a member to see his name and the reactions he instigated. Not sure about NOAA but I work in the marketing industry and frankly I don't conduct my "professional research" on facebook, if an entity does and can't differentiate between hearsay and logic than that further bolsters my opinion about the validity of their "research" furthermore continuing on with the fear of "what if they get the wrong idea" than we might as well not say anything at all and just roll the dice.

I put a lot of thought into what I dish out on the web, I have a professional image to maintain in my life outside of this or that community, if my opinion is lumped together with everyone else who has a word to say than frankly the day that affects me is the day I say good bye to the hobby all together. I have no vested interest here other than continuing to do what I do, I consider myself to be conservation minded and I make decisions in the hobby based on that mindset. Sure there are plenty out there who make the hobby look bad, just look at the fu**ery that goes on in facebook pages and the things people do with their livestock, it's appalling which is exactly why I bother to say something or else we all look like a bunch of ill informed selfish individuals hell bent on stuffing animals in glass boxes.

What was BAR's mission statement again about propagation? I'd like to think that it's worth defending in some sense or another...
 
Last edited:
rygh said:
My opinion is a bit different:

First, they often put a lot of species up for "status review."
The final proposed list will almost certainly be MUCH shorter.

Second, the GOP is in charge of congress.
Putting corals on the endangered list means admitting reefs are in trouble,
which means admitting global warming is an issue.
Not likely to happen.

Third, if they are truly endangered, I have no problems with these restrictions.
Sorry, but if I have to switch to other corals, or even no corals, perhaps that is the price we pay.
Yes, I know that restricting our hobby will have little to no impact. We are collateral damage.
But the endangered listing will have an effect.
Click to expand...

The coral list has been shortened. The big issue is the species are not easily distinguished. Regulators have historically taken the 'if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck' approach. This is predicted to severely restrict all similar corals.

The ESA was proposed by Richard Nixon and passed during his administration. Since NOAA, FWS and NMFS are somewhat independent of Congress, that doesn't seem to be an guaranteed result.

One of the big issues is determining if they are truly endangered. Another issue is will listing as endangered actually help? For example, the native fishers have to be able to make a living. It has been shown that the aquarium trade has motivated them to protect the reef. Take that income source away and what motivation is left?

I agree we will be collateral damage. I'm not happy with that and am not willing to just accept that.

I'd like to see these rules be based on science not the emotional PETA approach. All the restrictions and proposed restrictions in Hawaii fishery indicate this is far from what is happening. Emotion is so much more compelling than boring science!
 
rygh said:
My opinion is a bit different:

First, they often put a lot of species up for "status review."
The final proposed list will almost certainly be MUCH shorter.

Second, the GOP is in charge of congress.
Putting corals on the endangered list means admitting reefs are in trouble,
which means admitting global warming is an issue.
Not likely to happen.

Third, if they are truly endangered, I have no problems with these restrictions.
Sorry, but if I have to switch to other corals, or even no corals, perhaps that is the price we pay.
Yes, I know that restricting our hobby will have little to no impact. We are collateral damage.
But the endangered listing will have an effect.
Click to expand...

I suggest you read up on this as well. The species for review were chosen by CBD originally

aqua-nut said:
The coral list has been shortened. The big issue is the species are not easily distinguished. Regulators have historically taken the 'if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck' approach. This is predicted to severely restrict all similar corals.

The ESA was proposed by Richard Nixon and passed during his administration. Since NOAA, FWS and NMFS are somewhat independent of Congress, that doesn't seem to be an guaranteed result.

One of the big issues is determining if they are truly endangered. Another issue is will the inclusion as endangered actually help? For example, the native fishers have to be able to make a living. It has been shown that the aquarium trade has motivated them to protect the reef. Take that income source away and what motivation is left?

I agree we will be collateral damage. I'm not happy with that and am not willing to just accept that.

I'd like to see these rules be based on science not the emotional PETA approach. All the restrictions and proposed restrictions in Hawaii fishery indicate this is far from what is happening. Emotion is so much more compelling than boring science!
Click to expand...

NMFS is part of NOAA FWIW. Its their enforcement arm.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/

BTW... check the about us:
NOAA Fisheries is responsible for the stewardship of the nation's ocean resources and their habitat. We provide vital services for the nation: productive and sustainable fisheries, safe sources of seafood, the recovery and conservation of protected resources, and healthy ecosystems—all backed by sound science and an ecosystem-based approach to management.
Click to expand...

CDB brought forth a threat of a lawsuit if NOAA didn't take action on reviewing those initial species. Science was thrown out the door in many respects with how NOAA proceeded. Veron was contracted via PIJAC to provide missing data of which must have been disregarded as they still continued to go down that path. sound science? BAH

Hawaii I'm afraid will probably be closed in the next few years, via emotional
 
HiFidelity said:
who actually knows who I'm talking about outside of those who directly saw what happened? the individual posted on closed groups, as in you have to be a member to see his name and the reactions he instigated. Not sure about NOAA but I work in the marketing industry and frankly I don't conduct my "professional research" on facebook, if an entity does and can't differentiate between hearsay and logic than that further bolsters my opinion about the validity of their "research" furthermore continuing on with the fear of "what if they get the wrong idea" than we might as well not say anything at all and just roll the dice.

I put a lot of thought into what I dish out on the web, I have a professional image to maintain in my life outside of this or that community, if my opinion is lumped together with everyone else who has a word to say than frankly the day that affects me is the day I say good bye to the hobby all together. I have no vested interest here other than continuing to do what I do, I consider myself to be conservation minded and I make decisions in the hobby based on that mindset. Sure there are plenty out there who make the hobby look bad, just look at the fu**ery that goes on in facebook pages and the things people do with their livestock, it's appalling which is exactly why I bother to say something or else we all look like a bunch of ill informed selfish individuals hell bent on stuffing animals in glass boxes.

What was BAR's mission statement again about propagation? I'd like to think that it's worth defending in some sense or another...
Click to expand...

You post under a screen name for a reason :lol:

I work in marketing as well... I in fact do some research on FB, and forums. Its been extremelly helpful in the last decade of my doing this.

In a meeting with NMFS, a stack of printouts was shown to me... Reef Central, Reefs2Reefs, 3reef, Nano-reef and numerous other forums were present in the stack. This was during the fledgling years of FB, when it was pretty much college students, so FB wasn't part of the internet fabric that it is today. I can assure you they do indeed Google as part of research. What stock is put into that I don't know, but I do know they do it.

I helped write that mission statement, thanks!
 
Somewhat off topic...

FaceBook was down a few days ago. There were quite a few calls to '911' services because of the 'emergency'.

Just another indication that we, as a society, are DOOMED! :D

Live long and prosper. V (best Vulcan salute I can do with text)
 
"I'm gonna make it real clear to everyone of you non licensed coral farmers out there in la la land, get licensed quick or stop selling coral where I can see it because I'm sick of this sh** dipping into my pocket... Sh**s gonna change and fines are gonna be dealt until it stops"
Click to expand...
So wouldn't everyone who owns corals technically be a farmer, since they're providing a way for those corals to grow? If they sell them it doesn't necessarily make it a business either any more than selling a baseball card on eBay puts you in the hobby business.

I am curious who this is though, make sure to never do business with him, the fact that he decided to go with the angry troll move to get rid of "competition" sounds more like a hollow threat than a business who was truly concerned going after people who are running unlicensed businesses. Was he threatening reef clubs? Or places that have a global presence like ReefCentral/NanoReefs/etc?

A quick look online found in LA county you do not need a business license if you're farming coral. Say it's a side effect of your hobby, and not a business that you are running :)
 
the guy appears to be just some scumbag with a "I am better than thou" complex who got upset because his R.O.I. didn't turn out to be what he expected (what do you expect out of a living room operation?) he was basically threatening everyone who trades local to him, basically any grower selling off clippings, for the most part you do not need a license to do what we do and he had that fact shoved down his throat very quickly, the only thing you could possibly need is a business license. So does the lady in town that somehow has a stroller yard sale every month for the past 2 years but no one's knocking on her door lol.

It was rather amusing to watch the mayhem unfold, most of the FB groups i've seen are a bunch of people laughing at one another or posting pics day & night. Recently I found myself finding more substance on the "Reef Hackers" group which is all about DIY.

This is interesting, there is an FB group which is technically a reef group but you are not welcome to post reef content, pics & such are aplenty but mostly stupid memes, jokes, random unrelated posts about super models, cars, gadgets, etc. basically the most pointless group you have ever come across and entirely comprised of crass offensive comments. I scratch my head every day, I've been watching it the way you would watch a Jerry Springer episode... in shock, disgust & awe haha.
 
is it true if the Hawaii thing passes most tangs are off the market?
I don't know too much about Tangs since I've never owned one or had a big enough tank to consider them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top