Wholesaler Labels Aquaculture as Immoral!

All good points gcarroll, but the fact that their statement must be interpreted to come to a conclusion just raises eyebrows to me. There are certainly companies here that don't truly aquaculture their corals but there are also others that do. It seems unlikely that they accidentally lumped companies like ora and reefhab into this group when they were really trying to single out a technique within the technique. I think they know enough about the industry to realize what they were saying and they left it in broad terms so that they could fall back on any argument they chose. Companies must be accountable for the verbiage on their public websites, and I doubt they really want to own up to saying that ora breeding and selling clownfish or hobbyists cutting zoas from their tanks to trade is a moral and ethical problem. I'm all for helping native populations learn to fish, but the idea behind this is to make them more self reliant. Teaching them to export to makes them rely on us so we might as well just keep giving them fish.

 

I'm sorry, but I must agree that currently the best way to spend money is on wild collected fish. I've looked at the trade from collector to store and although aquaculture is great, helping out local island economies is the best possible use of our dollars. I don't think they are trying to label aquaculture itself as bad, only certain companies...

 

Mike that is downright rediculous! Importing and exporting is a form of international business. It's not like they build cars in Fiji, should they all ride bikes? Hmm, they probably don't build bikes their either, should they all walk? We certainly don't get by without importing and exporting. Why should they?

 

Their way of living is completely different than ours' as well. Most hunt for their food and walk around barefoot. That doesn't mean we should encroach our ideas and beliefs upon them and make them do things the way we think is best.

 

Agreed

I wouldn't go that far Sean. From what I have seen the money coming in from fish collection has allowed local economies to improve along with more contact with the outside world. This is also not true of all collecting as well.

I agree Dave voiced his position a bit weird but I think you're taking it a bit farther than needed/mis-interpreting it a bit.

This hobby cannot get by without wild collection. Prominent fish breeders were against the Hawai'i collection ban since they would go without brood stock.

Also, we're talking corals here not fish.

 

I have dealt with countless collection villages and they are not as you speak. But you are 18 so you have limited life experience, especially in this realm.

Understand, we are not just entering these areas. Its been 40+ years in some, more than double your life. We are not the only trade to enter into their lives. Money has long since been infused into their culture. Most depend on money in some form or another. The fact of the matter is, our trade give a much greater value to the reef than any other industry and if conducted properly, is entirely sustainable.

With out out trade, many areas go to destructive fishing... a short sighed method that has no future, or any value to the reef or villager.

Not to mention the ol Bio-Piracy issue.

 

Great input Gresham!

 

Poorly poorly, let me say that again...POORLY written article. Whoever their publicist is, if they have one, should be fired for posting such an article that is so hard to understand and is all over the place.

 

How about letting people do things the way they think is best? If people want jobs, want money, want modern goods, foods, medicines, conveniences, and luxuries, should they be denied so we can feel better about sparing them the indignities of modernity?

When people derive benefits from new ideas, its not the imposition of ideas and beliefs, it is all of history. The story of humanity is the story of people incorporating new ideas that improve their lives. If those new ideas have down-sides as well, that is well known. Condemning all progress because it sometimes is less than perfectly utopian is wishing us all short, miserable lives.

 

This basically sums it up for me. I have no confusion over the definition of aquaculture. PAF, however, mis-used the term several times in that article which has led to confusion over what exactly they mean. In particular, the last paragraph comes off as more of a rant than coherent statement. It actually made it seem like PAF does not want local governments to impose stricter conservation measures, which are desperately needed in many of these areas.

PAF should re-write and clarify their statement.

It would be interesting if bloggers starting calling out the LFS's that are re-branding wild captured specimens as "aquacultured"