The House just passed a bill that would possibly effect our hobby

[olonmv]

Personally, I feel that the ones with the biggest stake in this need to fight their fight. Peeps like BRS, Red Sea, etc etc etc. they’re the ones who should be worried about it. I also think not much will change because I also feel that those mentioned earlier won’t let this happen without fight.

It is what it is.

 

[biecacka]

The language will most likely change, things added, dropped etc. It passed the house but most likely wont pass the senate thus will open the table for discussion. Then the players in the industry will have a lobbyist argue their case to the senators and such, hoping to get the changes they want to the bill. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Some peoples livelyhoods could be on the line for sure the question just becomes why??? more money? worried about the animals? dont care, just want to attach it to pass a different bill? I haven't read the whole bill yet but am going through it now so i cannot say what is actually being proposed but do think things will change in the bill. Not sure if it will be in this part or not though. Its buried pretty deep in the bill....



corey

 

[Coralsdaily]

I honestly thought the bill was so stupid that it has to be a hoax… now I see our policy writers are really misinformed…

 

[Coralsdaily]

The hobby will never die it will just get more and more expensive

+1 to this. Paying $150-200 for a little fish aquacultured by biota will be a norm going forward, and in extreme shortage.
I imagine if this goes forward those with limited resources can only keep goldfish going forward

 

[damsels are not mean]

+1 to this. Paying $150-200 for a little fish aquacultured by biota will be a norm going forward, and in extreme shortage.
I imagine if this goes forward those with limited resources can only keep goldfish going forward

$150-200 is already not the norm at Biota. Currently nothing even in stock above $149 for a hawaiian yellow tang (maybe that's a little fish to you?). Most of what's out of stock and more expensive was rare before breeding anyways. All of the popular fishes they sell (as in 90% of what people, especially those "with limited resources" are buying anyways) are not much more expensive than wild ones, except the ones that need to be trained on certain foods (like mandarins). The fishes that tend to be expensive and rare at biota were expensive and rare long before any countries started shutting down.

Also, is it bad to pay more money for a fish? Maybe people will take better care of them and try harder and it will filter out people who aren't dedicated to doing it right. Most of the fish we keep can live 10-15 years if healthy and many species will live decades. I don't mind spending what amounts to $10-20 a year at the expensive end and it seems that's what biota and ORA are already providing.

The animals that were expensive wild, like peppermint angels and deepwater anthias, will become much cheaper as we get good at breeding them since the issue was not rarity but depth and remote locations. The cheap fish will get closer to wild species as breeders scale, and the better treatment and health of specimens will probably end up saving you money in the long run.

I think wild collection is good and I will always support reopening of fisheries with proper plans to manage them. I think well-managed wild collection is a net positive on the reef as it pulls people away from the more damaging industries. That said I am not going to declare the end of the hobby if it gets harder to import wild fish.

 

[mdb_talon]

Better to be educated about things, and keep your ear to the ground before beaurocrats , and politicians who love to get press over political correct decisions actually vote on something. If you wait until after they will never backtrack. I am not making any statement regarding this situation but will tell you what happened here in Canada. The veterinarians lobbied the Government to have all medications taken off the LFS shelves to prevent abuse of said " Drugs ". Now I cannot buy an antibiotic to treat my fish or any other treatment. Why? Pure greed by the Veterinarians who want to charge more money for same product. I lost 14 of my fish to Malawi bloat because of them. So lets not argue amongst ourselves just deal with facts without insults. Educate others if you have the facts in hand

That has been happening in the US also with the FDA forcing out some OTC pet meds. I been stocking up!

 

[Tamberav]

That has been happening in the US also with the FDA forcing out some OTC pet meds. I been stocking up!

put your powdered abx in the freezer and ignore the exp dates

 

[mdb_talon]

Yup i got some in there. Also been ordering more ciproflaxin as it seems some online stores from what i read are starting to require prescriptions.

 

[Coralsdaily]

$150-200 is already not the norm at Biota. Currently nothing even in stock above $149 for a hawaiian yellow tang (maybe that's a little fish to you?). Most of what's out of stock and more expensive was rare before breeding anyways. All of the popular fishes they sell (as in 90% of what people, especially those "with limited resources" are buying anyways) are not much more expensive than wild ones, except the ones that need to be trained on certain foods (like mandarins). The fishes that tend to be expensive and rare at biota were expensive and rare long before any countries started shutting down.

Also, is it bad to pay more money for a fish? Maybe people will take better care of them and try harder and it will filter out people who aren't dedicated to doing it right. Most of the fish we keep can live 10-15 years if healthy and many species will live decades. I don't mind spending what amounts to $10-20 a year at the expensive end and it seems that's what biota and ORA are already providing.

The animals that were expensive wild, like peppermint angels and deepwater anthias, will become much cheaper as we get good at breeding them since the issue was not rarity but depth and remote locations. The cheap fish will get closer to wild species as breeders scale, and the better treatment and health of specimens will probably end up saving you money in the long run.

I think wild collection is good and I will always support reopening of fisheries with proper plans to manage them. I think well-managed wild collection is a net positive on the reef as it pulls people away from the more damaging industries. That said I am not going to declare the end of the hobby if it gets harder to import wild fish.

$150-200 is already not the norm at Biota. Currently nothing even in stock above $149 for a hawaiian yellow tang (maybe that's a little fish to you?). Most of what's out of stock and more expensive was rare before breeding anyways. All of the popular fishes they sell (as in 90% of what people, especially those "with limited resources" are buying anyways) are not much more expensive than wild ones, except the ones that need to be trained on certain foods (like mandarins). The fishes that tend to be expensive and rare at biota were expensive and rare long before any countries started shutting down.

Also, is it bad to pay more money for a fish? Maybe people will take better care of them and try harder and it will filter out people who aren't dedicated to doing it right. Most of the fish we keep can live 10-15 years if healthy and many species will live decades. I don't mind spending what amounts to $10-20 a year at the expensive end and it seems that's what biota and ORA are already providing.

The animals that were expensive wild, like peppermint angels and deepwater anthias, will become much cheaper as we get good at breeding them since the issue was not rarity but depth and remote locations. The cheap fish will get closer to wild species as breeders scale, and the better treatment and health of specimens will probably end up saving you money in the long run.

I think wild collection is good and I will always support reopening of fisheries with proper plans to manage them. I think well-managed wild collection is a net positive on the reef as it pulls people away from the more damaging industries. That said I am not going to declare the end of the hobby if it gets harder to import wild fish.

Sorry I am a bit lost with what you are trying to express… do you mean Biota’s price is already high now, not will not get that high? What I meant by the $150-200 range is what I predict the mean price to be in the future should this bill passes and affects vendors ability to trade wild animals. Some fish will remain 30-40 like a vanilla clown, but some will be in four figures like certain angels.


I don’t like the potential price hike and I dare say everyone on this forum will disagree that they pay less care to a fish because of the smaller pricetag. All fish are precious lives and all us passionate reefers will provide the best we can without discrimination. I dont want the hobby to become an elite sport.

I believe everyone with the same passion deserve to have access to the (ethically and sustainably obtained) livestock of their desire. And off course, care with responsibility to never release them into the wild to endanger the local ecosystem, no matter what creature it is.

 

[damsels are not mean]

Sorry I am a bit lost with what you are trying to express… do you mean Biota’s price is already high now, not will not get that high? What I meant by the $150-200 range is what I predict the mean price to be in the future should this bill passes and affects vendors ability to trade wild animals. Some fish will remain 30-40 like a vanilla clown, but some will be in four figures like certain angels.


I don’t like the potential price hike and I dare say everyone on this forum will disagree that they pay less care to a fish because of the smaller pricetag. All fish are precious lives and all us passionate reefers will provide the best we can without discrimination. I dont want the hobby to become an elite sport.

I believe everyone with the same passion deserve to have access to the (ethically and sustainably obtained) livestock of their desire. And off course, care with responsibility to never release them into the wild to endanger the local ecosystem, no matter what creature it is.

Biota's prices are already much lower than what you seem to think they are. And with scale their prices should go lower. Also, many fish which were once expensive will eventually be no more expensive than any other, since it is no more expensive to breed a peppermint angel than a coral beauty. I would argue that some fish that were completely unavailable to all but the uber rich could become as popular as yellow tangs are. Smaller fish that don't ship well would become less of a gamble. "Difficult" fish can become easier.

The average hobbyist these days, and I say this based on what I see in facebook groups (which is where the hobby is really happening in terms of volume) has a 10-30 gal nano with a few small, cheap fish. These sorts of fish are already being captive bred and most cost ~$35 at biota. Probably even cheaper from local breeders.

If the collection of wild fish becomes illegal or significantly harder some day, it would suck. But most people won't care and most won't be affected in the long run. We would adapt as we always do. It will also spur more investment and efforts towards more captive breeding programs which will in turn bring the prices down on more and more fish. I hope it doesn't happen, but your doomsday prophecizing is just nonsense. As a dedicated hobbyist I don't mind spending $150 on a healthy, conditioned, guaranteed disease-free tang that could live for 30 years easy!

 

[Coralsdaily]

Biota's prices are already much lower than what you seem to think they are. And with scale their prices should go lower. Also, many fish which were once expensive will eventually be no more expensive than any other, since it is no more expensive to breed a peppermint angel than a coral beauty. I would argue that some fish that were completely unavailable to all but the uber rich could become as popular as yellow tangs are. Smaller fish that don't ship well would become less of a gamble. "Difficult" fish can become easier.

The average hobbyist these days, and I say this based on what I see in facebook groups (which is where the hobby is really happening in terms of volume) has a 10-30 gal nano with a few small, cheap fish. These sorts of fish are already being captive bred and most cost ~$35 at biota. Probably even cheaper from local breeders.

If the collection of wild fish becomes illegal or significantly harder some day, it would suck. But most people won't care and most won't be affected in the long run. We would adapt as we always do. It will also spur more investment and efforts towards more captive breeding programs which will in turn bring the prices down on more and more fish. I hope it doesn't happen, but your doomsday prophecizing is just nonsense. As a dedicated hobbyist I don't mind spending $150 on a healthy, conditioned, guaranteed disease-free tang that could live for 30 years easy!

I agree to some, but not all of your thoughts. Aquarium traders are in it for the money. Research and breeding will all cost money and many initial launches are way over priced causing shortage of interest, which inhibits effort from companies oike biota to want to invest more. Fish price will fluctuate based on availability and demand. We shall see what soecies these companies choose to invest on and price them at.
Also you are paraphrasing me wrongly with exaggeration- what I fear will happen is not a doomsday prophecy: 1. I never mentioned anything about end of the world, or the aquarium trade and 2. I never put myself in the prophetic position.

 

[Freenow54]

Yup i got some in there. Also been ordering more ciproflaxin as it seems some online stores from what i read are starting to require prescriptions.

Good luck with prescriptions. I went that route. No one will give you one. They are not even familiar with any diseases. Oh and when you talk to the person on the phone, not a vet they say just bring it in Pardon? In larger areas they have mobile services for pets. $$$$$$$. If it comes to that we are all in trouble. I eventually got what I needed but was too late. I also don't know self life of different products

 

[fattytwobyfour]

I am not sure where I stand on this issue, I've just saw it mentioned on several sites that I should be against it. How does this affect the common reefer? I understand that it could make places charge way too much for frags, but in all honesty, we have almost hit that point today. Does this effect our ability to frag corals in our tanks and trade them with other reefers? At some point some kind of regulation will have to be put in place with the way global warming is hurting the oceans today. I know that in this hobby we are constantly trying to aquaculture, and save corals. So does the bill also prevent us from doing that too? Or is it just the initial collecting the coral and fish from the ocean? These are just some questions that I have about it.

 

[biecacka]

From my understanding one of the big causes for concerns would be crossing state lines. Whether it be moving and tanking your tank with you buying from online vendors.
I do not work for my state senators, however I do work in politics but more on the campaign strategy side. Because I have a vested interest in this (I have a tank and coral) I have asked my senator and asked them to ask around. Based on the information I received back, it leads me to believe that it will die in the senate and then go to negotiations. Just like most every other bill. Politics works that way….I’ll support your bill but I want to add something unrelated to it….if that person needs their vote then they often allow it and hope it all works out. I am NOT saying this doesn’t pass! I am just saying that the bill (America Competes Act 2022) will likely go to negotiations and things will be added and some thing will be dropped.

corey

 

[SlugSnorter]

It will die eventually when we get to the point were its a million dollars for a zoa frag

gotta stock on zoas for the end times, THATS THE TRUE MONEY YOU SHEEPLE OPEN YOUR EYES TO THE ZOAS, THEY ARE THE ONE TRUE DOLLAR, DO NOT LET THE LIES FOOL YOU, it will be like fallout, but with zoas instead of caps

 

[SlugSnorter]

I honestly thought the bill was so stupid that it has to be a hoax… now I see our policy writers are really misinformed…

or corru... sorry, taking money from lobbyists to shift the blame from them onto the hobby

"No! That crap spewing cruise ship isnt harming the reefs! its the aquriums that are doing it!"

 

[Ashish Patel]

Ridiciulous amount of fossil fuels being burned in our Earth is the root cause of all this. Focus on this, stop cutting down trees. Glad we have electric cars now but until its affordable its not going to get better for along time. At this rate i dont see the reefs surviving 30 years.

 

[WVNed]

All the electric cars here are powered by coal. The ones with giant placards saying zero emissions on the side amuse me the most.

We were all supposed to be dead now by the relentless heating of the Earth.

I have finally understood Green energy. The power grid is in such bad shape that loads are never connected so it doesn't matter what the generators make. Our whole house generator has run so much that while we haven't had it long it needs it's oil changed.

If you have a great need to call me bad names PM them to me so the thread doesnt get locked.

It saddens me that our society has gone exactly the way predicted by the great science fiction writers in the 50's and 60's.

 

[darrelh]

if one looks under the hood of “clean energy” battery-driven EVs, the dirt found would surprise most. The most important component in the EV is the lithium-ion rechargeable battery which relies on critical mineral commodities such as cobalt, graphite, lithium, and manganese all heavy metals! To begin with, about half the lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions from an electric car come from the energy used to produce the car, especially in the mining and processing of raw materials needed for the battery. This compares unfavorably with the manufacture of a gasoline-powered car which accounts for 17% of the car’s lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions. When a new EV appears in the show-room, it has already caused 30,000 pounds of carbon-dioxide emission. The equivalent amount for manufacturing a conventional car is 14,000 pounds. Do we need to reduce carbon emissions? YES! Is the EV the way to do it? NO! Plant trees they absorb carbon!

 

[mdb_talon]

Im confused i thought this post was for arguing about banning corals