Is this justice or what?

My machine is protected by a hosts file that blocks inline adverts.
It's a very good thing: "google" for "hosts file" and you'll find
several sources that will help you with this...

I have just now learned that our petition at petitiononline.com is
getting ads from google adwords for a business that sells live fish and
coral online! I won't repeat the URL and I hope you won't either.

Is this bad or good? The business is horrible, it makes a market for
all those poor people that dynamite and cyanide their reefs to collect
the specimens they sell. It doesn't matter what they [the advertisers]
do per se, they make a market.

It's REAL JUSTICE, that's what it is. These poor schlubs are PAYING
google everytime their ad is viewed, and they are paying more if the ad
is clicked. They are paying for views from people that will probably
never be customers.

Google has heard from me anyway. AFAIK, Google is an ethical,
responsible citizen and doesn't knowingly promote "guns for teens" or
"drug abuse" or anything else unethical. If the ad comes up on your
machine and you feel the same way, click on the ads_by_goooogle link at
the lower right of the ad box and you can send your comments to google
about the ad.

Though I am appalled at the business, I am delighted that Google (via
petitiononline) is charging them for "views" that will, by and large,
bring them no business. You can't wish them away no matter how much you
hate them. They will advertise somewhere, so why not here, where it
won't help? Its kind of diabolical.

In the end though, I don't even blame the business for selling. The
real criminals are the jack asses that *buy* the fish and corals.

sincerely,

BoyntonDiver

On Tue, 10 May 2005 11:19:21 -0700, BoyntonDiver wrote:

> Google is an ethical,
> responsible citizen and doesn't knowingly promote "guns for teens" or

What's wrong with teens having guns?

> I have just now learned that our petition at petitiononline.com is
> getting ads from google adwords for a business that sells live fish and
> coral online!

hmmm, so, IOW you know nothing about the marine aquarium trade. It is
perfectly normal to ship coral around the world by post (and received
alive). Actually, it is actually a good thing for the reefs. In areas such
as the Solomons and Indonesia, the only thing stopping the local fishermen
use cyanide or dynamite to catch fish is the fact that more money can be
made from the aquarium trade. If they use cyanide to catch fish then they
only manage one shipment and then the trade is shut down due to the
customers complaining about 100% death of their expensively purchased animal
after at most 3 weeks. Regarding coral, then the aquaculture of corals is
growing strongly and an increasing percentage of coral coming from tropical
climes has actually be grown specifically for the trade and does not impact
the reefs at all.

More and more coral is being propagated in home aquariums. e.g. I have been
keeping Acropora (stag horn) coral for the last 18 years and have put more
propagated coral back into the hobby that I've bought many many times over.

Sorry matey but you just haven't researched this issue at all. Trying
emailing Prof Veron at AIMS (used heard of AIMS right?) to get his view on
the aquarium trade ..... might be an eye opener ;)

There is always the "Finding Nemo" crowd in the hobby who sadly kill fish
but at least in the UK, a huge percentage of clown fish are actually captive
bred in the UK.

rgds

Andy

>It is perfectly normal to ship coral around the world by post (and
received alive).

Sure it is....

>Actually, it is actually a good thing for the reefs.

Say that often enough and you might even believe it's true!

>Actually, it is actually a good thing for the reefs. In areas such
as the Solomons and Indonesia, the
>only thing stopping the local fishermen use cyanide or dynamite to
catch fish is the fact that more
>money can be made from the aquarium trade.

That's too ridiculous to even comment on.

>Regarding coral, then the aquaculture of corals is growing strongly
and an increasing percentage of
>coral coming from tropical climes has actually be grown specifically
for the trade and does not impact
>the reefs at all.

What percentage has it grown to? .01%? Why is it coming from tropical
climes? Isn't that just *so* convenient? Where did it come from? Where
did you get your staghorn stock?

>Sorry matey but you just haven't researched this issue at all. Trying
emailing Prof Veron at AIMS (used
>heard of AIMS right?) to get his view on the aquarium trade .....
might be an eye opener

Never heard of Veron, but here is what AIMS says (as opposed to one
wanker on staff):

http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/researc...net-rar04.html

They pretty much condemn every aspect of your trade, bucko. Maybe your
the one that needs your eyes opened.

Fish collecting is horrid. The first best purpose of fish tanks is
death by neglect, preceded by slow torture, like the 4 foot moray in
the 3 foot tank at the restaurant down the street.

Thanks to fish collectors we have Taxifolia threatening the entire
world, lionfish and other exotics all over the East coast and who knows
what else that hasn't been found yet.

Now that you've told us you're in the business for money, we need to go
ask the fox if the henhouse needs guarding.

Thanks for straightening me out on all this.

BoyntonDiver

"BoyntonDiver" <BoyntonDiver@reef-rescue.org> wrote in message
news:1115847908.786731.287870@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

> Thanks to fish collectors we have Taxifolia threatening the entire
> world, lionfish and other exotics all over the East coast and who knows
> what else that hasn't been found yet.

What's wrong with lionfish on the East Coast? They seem to be happy.

All you have to do is look at the email address to know that you're
wasting your words with this guy.

Many reef tanks, like mine, are populated with home-grown corals and
fish. I supply corals and fish to local aquarists. This allows a
captive-bred supply to reduce the demand on natural collection. At
the rate idiots are using explosives to destroy reefs while catching
paltry fish harvests, the reef aquarium trade may one day be the sole
source of many varieties of corals and fish.

You're quite welcome for being straightened out on this.

Now wipe the spittle off your monitor.

On 11 May 2005 14:45:08 -0700, "BoyntonDiver"
<BoyntonDiver@reef-rescue.org> wrote:

>>It is perfectly normal to ship coral around the world by post (and
>received alive).
>
>Sure it is....
>
>>Actually, it is actually a good thing for the reefs.
>
>Say that often enough and you might even believe it's true!
>
>>Actually, it is actually a good thing for the reefs. In areas such
>as the Solomons and Indonesia, the
>>only thing stopping the local fishermen use cyanide or dynamite to
>catch fish is the fact that more
>>money can be made from the aquarium trade.
>
>That's too ridiculous to even comment on.
>
>>Regarding coral, then the aquaculture of corals is growing strongly
>and an increasing percentage of
>>coral coming from tropical climes has actually be grown specifically
>for the trade and does not impact
>>the reefs at all.
>
>What percentage has it grown to? .01%? Why is it coming from tropical
>climes? Isn't that just *so* convenient? Where did it come from? Where
>did you get your staghorn stock?
>
>>Sorry matey but you just haven't researched this issue at all. Trying
>emailing Prof Veron at AIMS (used
>>heard of AIMS right?) to get his view on the aquarium trade .....
>might be an eye opener
>
>Never heard of Veron, but here is what AIMS says (as opposed to one
>wanker on staff):
>
>http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/researc...net-rar04.html
>
>They pretty much condemn every aspect of your trade, bucko. Maybe your
>the one that needs your eyes opened.
>
>Fish collecting is horrid. The first best purpose of fish tanks is
>death by neglect, preceded by slow torture, like the 4 foot moray in
>the 3 foot tank at the restaurant down the street.
>
>Thanks to fish collectors we have Taxifolia threatening the entire
>world, lionfish and other exotics all over the East coast and who knows
>what else that hasn't been found yet.
>
>Now that you've told us you're in the business for money, we need to go
>ask the fox if the henhouse needs guarding.
>
>Thanks for straightening me out on all this.
>
>BoyntonDiver

Brad Isley wrote:
> All you have to do is look at the email address to know that you're
> wasting your words with this guy.
>
> Many reef tanks, like mine, are populated with home-grown corals and
> fish. I supply corals and fish to local aquarists. This allows a
> captive-bred supply to reduce the demand on natural collection. At
> the rate idiots are using explosives to destroy reefs while catching
> paltry fish harvests, the reef aquarium trade may one day be the sole
> source of many varieties of corals and fish.
>
> You're quite welcome for being straightened out on this.
>
> Now wipe the spittle off your monitor.


Okay, Brad, having home-grown aquariums sounds like a really spiffy
idea, but it still encourages the hobby by many who, in all likelihood,
don't have the time and other resources to stay 'green' with their
results. Assuming I wanted to give it a go, how would one get started
with a 'green' home aquarium?


--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'

"Jer" wrote

> Okay, Brad, having home-grown aquariums sounds like a really spiffy idea,
> but it still encourages the hobby by many who, in all likelihood, don't
> have the time and other resources to stay 'green' with their results.
> Assuming I wanted to give it a go, how would one get started with a
> 'green' home aquarium?

You start by making a lot of money so you can afford a large enough aquarium
and space and equipment to set it up and keep it running right and then
commit yourself to the aquarium instead of to having a life.

I'm a former aquarium owner. I worked my way up from 20 gallon, to a couple
of 30 gallon tanks, to a 55 gallon tank. Larger is better and easier to
maintain. I considered something 100 gallons or more before I decided I'd
rather have a life. My aquariums predated modern designs. Today's standard
filtration systems are far, far better than anything available when I still
kept marine fish. Mine had no live coral and little live rock. I caught my
own fish and, once I learned which ones did well in the aquarium and with
one another, I was pretty successful. I prefer juvenile fish and probably
returned about half of my fish to the ocean when the outgrew my size
preference. That means about half died. It's not great, but it's better
than most beginning aquarium owners have done.

I'm not a zealot on either side of this issue, but there are some points to
be made. It's nice to talk about breeding fish and coral for use by other
aquariums, but those fish came from someplace in the first place. So did
the coral. Coral aquaculture is also nice, but it would be a lot nicer if
it were dedicated to preserving natural reefs, ones that have been there for
100s of years, rather than ones in people's homes, ones that, for the most
part, won't last a single year. Like Bullshark, I seriously doubt that a
significant proportion of the fish, coral and live rock in aquariums came
from captive breeding and aquaculture. Bullshark asked the question. I've
not seen an answer.

Negative results far outnumber positive ones and, as has been said before,
one aquarium promotes the next and many, perhaps most aquarists are like me,
a large part of the enjoyment is being able to show the fish and other
living organisms you caught personally.

I conclude that keeping aquariums is not particularly ecology friendly. I
also conclude that all of life is a balance between the preferences of one
organism and those of another. I can live with the small impact my
aquariums have had on the environment.

Lee

"BoyntonDiver" <BoyntonDiver@reef-rescue.org> wrote in message
news:1115915475.388753.286710@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> >What's wrong with lionfish on the East Coast? They seem to be happy.
>
> Have you asked *them*?

If they're surviving, they're happy.

Meanwhile, thousands and thousands of divers who used to have to fly halfway
around the world to see lionfish can instead dive the East Coast, not only
bringing revenue to subsistence fishing villages of quaint southeastern
America, but also significantly reducing the adverse impact that
international travel has on our ecosystem. Think of all those gallons of
fuel conserved, the exhaust unexhausted, and all in exchange for the
discomfort of a handful of lionfish.

If it were up to me, I'd fly in a couple of whale sharks. Think of the
revenue those guys could bring in.

> Which one is the next taxifolia? Do you know?

I suppose you were against school desegregation as well. Typical
xenophobic.

> Enough of that, you're just pulling chains. Why don't you sign the
> petition Greg?

#95

But it sounds like S. Florida needs an alternative to dumping all the
treated sewage on the reefs. Would you prefer it be dumped further out?
Trucked to the Gulf? Maybe y'all need to wear Depends and then burn the
remains.

>If it were up to me, I'd fly in a couple of whale sharks.

We already have those. They come here on their own, using appropriate
channels.

> #95

Way cool.

>But it sounds like S. Florida needs an alternative to dumping all the
>treated sewage on the reefs.

I'm in favor of shipping it to California, they'll drink anything.
Pumping it further out would be better, possibly even harmless. But my
preferred solution is to put it on golf courses, and public rights of
way, like divided highways and roads that currently use potable water
to water their ornamentals. There are millions of acres of orange
groves and sugar cane too.

Thanks for signing the petition,

BoyntonDiver

http://www.petitiononline.com/lyngbya/petition.html