Again, i think it's one of those things where you do what's within your power to slow down the resistance rather than just saying "someone else had a much bigger impact so it's 'more' his fault"
I think what’s tryna be said is that goin after the ones really making the impact is where focus needs to be. Not on a bunch of fish loving folk that couldn’t hold a candle to the amount farms dump. Kinda like asking the guy who dumped a glass full of toxins into a river to stop his madness and ignoring the company up steam dumping hundreds of gallons in.
Doesn't the guy pouring the glass full of toxins contribute to the degradation of the environment in that case as well? Is it ok for him to do it since someone else is worse? Are people who rob gas stations less guilty of a crime than those who launder millions and therefore should go unpunished? I think everyone who contributes bears a responsibility even though someone else might be "worse"...just my opinion though
I think that's a yes, but not sure...
Now I'm confused because i thought you were against the use of Cipro in the hobby...i think it is a serious risk but now it sounds almost as if you are now saying a little bit is ok? Dumping toxins into a river is a very serious risk as well. Are you belittling that??
I’m all confused here… sorry too many questions.
The way I see it……a river has a way better chance at biologically removing said full glass of water vs the hundreds of gallons being poured in. In no way am I saying that it’s ok to dump toxins in rivers but scolding the individual(s) throwing a glass of toxins in and not putting blame where blame really belongs is futile in the fight to stop river pollution. We, and I’m including myself in this, play an almost insignificant roll in changing the biome of the world vs companies that use and apparently discard tons of the stuff.
I’m with you but your voice is better heard with a coalition of doctors who address the problem. I just have a hard time believing that we as hobbyists can make a dent big enough to notice compared to the ones actually cause harm like the companies who dump on the daily.
I'd rather accomplish something by discouraging the guy dumping oil or whatever into the river whether or not he's the primary cause because at least there would be some progress made in the reduction of pollution vs none at all.
I guess my point is. How does it benefit the river by stopping the dude with a glass full of oil when practically nothing is being done about the company with barrel fulls? Same goes here. I get a that a little can be detrimental but, how is up to us to help stop it, when the company up the street isn’t being regulated to do so?
Pouring antibiotics down your drain means you, specifically, are risking creating antibiotic-resistant bacteria in your household. Bacteria that can make you sick, or your neighbors. It's not really comparable to the glass-of-oil metaphor, assuming you aren't pouring the antibiotics down the same drain that someone else is dumping loads down.
