A collaborative approach to managing the invasion potential of aquarium species

[armthehomeless]

On April 11th I was invited to join in on a group discussion between fish stores, wholesalers, aquarist, the Houston Zoo, Moody Gardens, TPWD (Texas Parks and Wildlife) and HARC (Houston Advanced Research Center). Several other member of the houstonfishbox were also in attendance. I'll invite those members to chime in with any other information that I do not provide.

We met for 6 hours at the University of Houston are were shown survey results relating to what causes people to release fish into our local waterways. It turns out that many people think that they are doing what is best for the fish - when in fact it is quite the opposite. Plecos burrow into the sides of the waterways and cause bridge instability. If you are interested in looking at the surveys, PM me and I'll send you the info.

Long story short, this was a meeting geared toward finding a solution. I was pleased to hear that TPWD does not want to restrict species of fish or impose further regulations on the ornamental fish trade.
Several possible solutions were proposed - mostly involing education. Does anyone have what they feel would be a good solution to stop people from releasing exotic species into our local waterways?

[rgonzales]

Education of what a fishs true size potential should be told to the costumers when they purchase a fish and if a person could not provide adequete long term care the sale should be refused, the majority of releases I'm sure come from people who were not told in the first place what they bought wouldn't work

[armthehomeless]

Education of what a fishs true size potential should be told to the costumers when they purchase a fish and if a person could not provide adequete long term care the sale should be refused, the majority of releases I'm sure come from people who were not told in the first place what they bought wouldn't work

Agreed - most fish are released because the fish to too big for a tank. The most common offenders are plecos and pacus.

[Ca Nguyen]

it should be a requirement for purchaser to sign an agreement knowing how big the fish would get. followed by a 200 dollars fine for release

[rgonzales]

Or do the same thing they do with large constrictors and venomous, require a annual renewable permit for the purchase and sale of some of the larger species ie pacus, common plecos, monster cats, and arowana

[justdoit]

also attended the meeting in Houston.
#####THIS IS MY OPINION #####

there is a "list" being compiled of known /possible invasive species being rated as to thier havoc/effect on Texas ecosystem. some research went back 20 years.

came away with a definite feeling that it is very important that stores need more responsiblity over what they choose to sell

choice to sell from this "list" should have stipulations:
INCLUDE-- the store's responsibility to also accept back ALL species from that "list" . talking no $/free as by then the fish is usually so big or nuisance there
little sale value by comparison to tank space or available customers. store then has choice of fish's destiny. this may include contacts of
sources to rehome or humane disposal.
INCLUDE-- store's plainly marking resident's tanks within thier store on that "list" and info as to valid reasons they are so listed.
INCLUDE-- recorded ownership of sale of "listed" fish & the "I AGREE" info form stating facts of this species were discussed or/ listed on the sale receipt

was told that BIG BAG stores basically buy from same inventory time & again. many of the species sold from thier stores are on the "list". lots of thier employees are fast turnover and also in the learning stage. these stores need to be presented w/ safe choices to replace invasives from being sold at thier stores. many of the public's false info & 1st time experience starts right there. believe if some of above type restrictions were in place this would also influence what species they thought were a marketing asset.

this is solely MY OPINION on what is a problem that is worsening and will have much damage to the enviroment and the fish hobbiest .
many of these things stated above are obligations I endured when marketing exotic parrots /birds the last 20 years. they were in protection of CITES listed birds & not unrealistic to follow & still allow pocession of that species.

HARC is doing this study and still very open to suggestions but time is closing in. got an opinion ? time to step up

stores that DO NOT sell from the "LIST" would not fall under any of these guidelines good work practices/ welfare of the fish & the enviroment hopefully falls into the picture when presented w/ a "LISTED" fish & they accept it or direct the person to a source to keep fish from being released or inhumanely harmed.
this is not survival of the fittest but a irresponsibility.

[Gene D]

While I agree with most of ideas I think they may be a little more than some retailers and buyers would care to go through to complete a transaction. The other side of that is it could raise prices for the buyer. If the retailer has to put more time and effort in the cost of labor would likely be passed on to the buyer.

The easiest solution I can see is:

A) require retailers to label holding tanks with the maximum size that the fish will grow to and a recommended minimum size tank to house the fish
B) have buyers sign/initial a form (could be included with/ on the receipt) that they are aware of the size this fish will grow to and the recommended min tank size
C) a standardized state wide handout to be given to anyone purchasing fish advising buyers of the possible consequences of introducing non native species to Texas waters

That would still allow the sale of the fish with a minimum of paperwork and hopefully no increased costs. I think the idea here is to inform and educate rather than make it an unpleasant and cumbersome ordeal for all involved. Keep in mind that regardless of intention or well meaning government involvement is rarely a positive thing. As well TPWD already has its hands full with its current responsibilities.

[jhenry]

The only problem with you thinking that a retailer would pass on making a sale is alittle hard to believe. When someone wants to spend money as a retailer you take it when you can. Sorry to say that but people want to eat before they will be worrying about what will happen after the fish leaves there store. And without sales these people can't make money

[wesleydnunder]

I was also at the workshop.

Honestly, I didn't come away with a feeling that any concrete solution had been reached. Due to the litigatory powers of the Big 3 I doubt we'll ever see a "white list"...just my opinion.

Since there is no state funding for any program, any and all costs of a mandated program will be born by the stores and passed along to the customers.

It seems to me that the most impact we can have in this is education; tank stickers, handouts and anything else designed to educate the folks who would release fish in the first place are, I truly believe, wasted. If education worked we wouldn't have drug problems, aids or undesirable historical events repeating themselves.

Sorry, my natural pessimism asserting itself. I didn't come away from the workshop with any warm fuzzies.

Mark

[jhenry]

I agree Mark. Most people dont care about the environment. They live there life not caring about others. These are the people dumping fish and not caring about the impact

[fshfrk]

Some off these large species should be on the no import list. The common pleco,lg girraffe cats and pacu for starters. There are many others. If people want them they could buy from a dealer that has a permit to sell them. Too many of these fish are bought and out grow the tank. Then they are dumped in a private pond. When winter hits they die and the owner shrugs their arms and says OH WELL.

[justdoit]

document/paperwork inconvience should ONLY apply to listed invasive species.

many many more fish to choose form for the ignorant / inconsiderant who care not. we are in the ultimate "EASY WAY OR NOTHING" society
there are informed serious hobbiest that do not want to be governed w/ restricted choices & have the capabilites of correct care considerations of these fish.

the informed fish keeper who wants to have a "listed" fish [guppy is even on that list] is going to suffer for carelessness of the EASY PEOPLE. agree only very very small percentage of the EASY PEOPLE would do what is right when no one is looking. those who "love thier fish & rather set it free" we will suffer for thier mistakes


making sales & ownership accountable will deterr some of those EASY PEOPLE for just that reason education : directed toward the young have effect over long term if it's supported & reinforced over again the long term

Texas school's lessons seem behind in respect to managing & protecting it's resources when compared many state's school teaching. teachers too busy trying to keep control & safety don't envy thier job which leaves little room to be expanded passed day to day problems

[Mzungu]

This is kinda like telling people not to have kids if they don't have the means to care for them, or not to buy a dog if they don't know what's involved. People are gonna do what they want, unfortunately.

That being said, if employees of the stores responsible for selling fish like Pacu to people with 10g tanks actually cared, something might happen to curb this practice. I know that when I worked at a pet store in Florida, we would always ask people what they had at home when we sold ANYTHING - from fish, to reptiles, to birds, to even gerbils and bunnies. If people didn't have the proper facilities at home to care for them, and weren't willing to buy said facilities from us, we refused the sale.

I understand that not all (or even most) stores will do this. However, I think they should be required to do this. Whether this will actually happen...well, there's probably not a good chance of that. But if the government is looking for a solution, I think that, ultimately, that's it. Like I said, though, if stores/breeders selling dogs don't inquire as to whether the customer understands what they're buying and has the means to keep said dog, it's unlikely a law will be passed to regulate fish sales in this way.

[armthehomeless]

I think Virginia has a good idea - requiring stores to fill out forms and take back invasive species. The stores that choose not to do this have plenty of options - they could sell BN plecos instead of common plecos, silver dollars instead of pacu, and dwarf giraffe cats instead of regular giraffe cats. That would mean Petsmart, Petco, and Walmart would be out immediately. This is (generally) who puts the fish in the local waterways. Those that chose to continue selling plecos, pacu, and giraffes would most likely relay any increase in expenses on to the consumer - which is something that I'm fine with. Those that legitimately can take care of these fish should still be allowed to have them.

As to any of our ideas becoming laws . . . I'm perhaps a bit jaded in my old age. I'll never stop dreaming though. :)

[Zebvance]

also attended the meeting in Houston.
#####THIS IS MY OPINION #####

there is a "list" being compiled of known /possible invasive species being rated as to thier havoc/effect on Texas ecosystem. some research went back 20 years.

came away with a definite feeling that it is very important that stores need more responsiblity over what they choose to sell

choice to sell from this "list" should have stipulations:
INCLUDE-- the store's responsibility to also accept back ALL species from that "list" . talking no $/free as by then the fish is usually so big or nuisance there
little sale value by comparison to tank space or available customers. store then has choice of fish's destiny. this may include contacts of
sources to rehome or humane disposal.
INCLUDE-- store's plainly marking resident's tanks within thier store on that "list" and info as to valid reasons they are so listed.
INCLUDE-- recorded ownership of sale of "listed" fish & the "I AGREE" info form stating facts of this species were discussed or/ listed on the sale receipt

was told that BIG BAG stores basically buy from same inventory time & again. many of the species sold from thier stores are on the "list". lots of thier employees are fast turnover and also in the learning stage. these stores need to be presented w/ safe choices to replace invasives from being sold at thier stores. many of the public's false info & 1st time experience starts right there. believe if some of above type restrictions were in place this would also influence what species they thought were a marketing asset.

this is solely MY OPINION on what is a problem that is worsening and will have much damage to the enviroment and the fish hobbiest .
many of these things stated above are obligations I endured when marketing exotic parrots /birds the last 20 years. they were in protection of CITES listed birds & not unrealistic to follow & still allow possession of that species.

HARC is doing this study and still very open to suggestions but time is closing in. got an opinion ? time to step up

stores that DO NOT sell from the "LIST" would not fall under any of these guidelines good work practices/ welfare of the fish & the environment hopefully falls into the picture when presented w/ a "LISTED" fish & they accept it or direct the person to a source to keep fish from being released or inhumanely harmed.
this is not survival of the fittest but a irresponsibility.

While this is a good Idea and might work or might not, It is appointed towards retail stores, correct? They might have to follow these guild lines if this law was passed to keep there business license. However.. What about the "under the table" retailers, As in people that breed and sell fish out of there house as a second source of income or even Only source. Mike here is college station I think is a perfect example of this. Of course we all know he doesn't deal with any of the "monsters" to my knowledge, but there is people out there just like him, that are running a small business out of there garage. I'm sure most of the Vendors on MFK are these people. Anyway, my point is that nobody is going to tell them what they can and cant sell if they are doing it under the table.

I'm not trying to be negative about this in any way, nor am I trying to offend anybody, just trowing out examples of this situation, and stating my thoughts about this topic.