# asian arrowana



## KingJeff (Jul 22, 2003)

Just curiouis, does anyone know the consequenses of getting caught with one? THanks.


----------



## lemmywinks (Jan 25, 2004)

are they illegal? 
probly a fine and have the fish taken away. I doubt if it would be too serious. why do you ask this?


----------



## KingJeff (Jul 22, 2003)

just out of curiosity, I would like to own one someday. Arnet asian arrows on the endangered species list? SOmeone said it was a federal offense.


----------



## DiXoN (Jan 31, 2003)

in the USa it is a federal offence but being from the UK i dont know what the penalty is.
dixon


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

KingJeff said:


> Just curiouis, does anyone know the consequenses of getting caught with one? THanks.


 I believe it is HUGE fines, but whatever it is, it is not worth having one - get a silver or something legal, or move!!!


----------



## k7q (Mar 3, 2004)

i never heard of someone gettin caught with one. but i know some lfs that sells them.


----------



## vaporize (Apr 11, 2003)

wow I didn't know they were on the endangered list.. guess I learn something new everyday... as far as I know.. I don't think they are illegal here in Canada anyway. sorry to derail the thread from the U.S.


----------



## tecknik (Jul 18, 2003)

You will get a hefty fine and could go to jail. It's that serious here in the United States, especially Cali. Asian arows are the king of illegal fish and are an endangered species. If you get one, be very very quiet about it......


----------



## Lonald (Jan 10, 2004)

or just get a silver and you wont have to worry about it :nod:


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Jail time and a big-ass fine..

and a nice fellony on your record.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

vaporize said:


> wow I didn't know they were on the endangered list..


 They are listed as a CITES Appendix I, the highest there is...


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

> CALIFORNIA MAN INDICTED FOR IMPORTING ENDANGERED ASIAN FISH: On July 25, 2002, the Service issued a news release announcing that Lloyd Gomez of Modesto, California, is scheduled to face trial on September 17, 2002, in U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon, on charges related to the illegal importation and sale of Asian arowana (Scleropages formosus), a unique colorful fish native to Malaysia and Indonesia. The fish, which can sell for as much as $10,000 each, is listed as endangered under the ESA and is also listed in CITES Appendix I. Importing them into the United States is illegal.
> 
> The trial was scheduled after Gomez pleaded not guilty July 19. A Federal indictment alleges that Gomez and Joe Lian Ho Luah of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, conspired to import and sell the endangered fish, illegally transported them into the United States in violation of the ESA, and falsified documents in an attempt to pass through U.S. Customs. The men also face one count of wire fraud, which charges them with using the Internet to communicate illegal activities via E-mail. Gomez faces an additional charge of making false statements to law enforcement officials. Each of the charges carries a maximum penalty of $250,000 and/or five years imprisonment. Gomez is free pending trial. Luah remains in Canada.
> 
> ...


Found at http://international.fws.gov/cites/update84.html


----------



## tecknik (Jul 18, 2003)

I dont know if it's really worth the consequence to have one


----------



## piranha45 (Apr 8, 2003)

id take a jardini over any asian, myself


----------



## KingJeff (Jul 22, 2003)

that would suck to go to jail over a fish.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

An Asian arowana is well worth the risk..

Trust me................


----------



## badforthesport (Jan 8, 2004)

not to get off subject but i still dont know the consequenses would be for my fish. anyone know?

fish in sig.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

whatever they are... they are blown way out of proportion. I know lots of people in california that have them.. in fact there is someone who has a large indoor breeding ponds in cali, which is breeding them legally with special permission from the federal goverment.


----------



## mason999 (Feb 16, 2004)

just move to england there not illegal here most LFS can order them for you for around £10.00 same with red snakeheads aahhhhh the pleasures of england


----------



## englishman (Aug 14, 2003)

> mason999 Posted on May 18 2004, 03:21 PM
> just move to england there not illegal here most LFS can order them for you for around £10.00 same with red snakeheads aahhhhh the pleasures of england


if you can get me a asian aro for £10 i will give you a £40 finders fee but i dont think you can lol :rasp:


----------



## mason999 (Feb 16, 2004)

there is a company called B.A.S in bolton that imports from asia and africa weekly ive seen arowanas in there regulary

i have also seen 2 different breeds of snakeheads in there a red one and a brown one with a slightly bigger head they are still very young


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

mason999 said:


> there is a company called B.A.S in bolton that imports from asia and africa weekly ive seen arowanas in there regulary


 Other types of Arowanas are being bred on farms in Asia. I think you must have seen an Australian and thought it was an Asian.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

Poseidon X said:


> whatever they are... they are blown way out of proportion. I know lots of people in california that have them.. in fact there is someone who has a large indoor breeding ponds in cali, which is breeding them legally with special permission from the federal goverment.


 Somehow I highly doubt the government would give someone permission to breed Asian Arowanas with the intent to sell them. Now, if they were breeding them as a conservation agency, then that would be a different story.


----------



## KingJeff (Jul 22, 2003)

Peacock said:


> An Asian arowana is well worth the risk..
> 
> Trust me................


 want to explain?


----------



## nf9648 (May 18, 2004)

Buy from Hawaii shops, they sell over there all day, I killed off plenty trying to grow them when they still have the yolk sac hanging from them, they have a better chance of living if you buy them after they lose the sac.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

nf9648 said:


> Buy from Hawaii shops, they sell over there all day, I killed off plenty trying to grow them when they still have the yolk sac hanging from them, they have a better chance of living if you buy them after they lose the sac.


 Wow, you must have a lot of money to spend on fish if you can sound so comfortable with saying that you've "killed off plenty." The cheapest Asian around (Green) is at least $250, and that's in the legal countries. Are you sure you don't mean Australians? They closely resemble Asians and the only true way to tell two juveniles apart is by the amount of scales. Juvenile Jardinis can be purchased around here for about $50 and that's on the high end of the scale.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

of course your correct in your assumption that the feds would not allow someone to breed for the sale of the fish... however, this is a very influential individual who knows the right people. Just think conservation effort, with some sales on the side to fund the operation :nod: and i dont think they are aware of that part.


----------



## KingJeff (Jul 22, 2003)

where can i find pix of nice asian arrowanas?


----------



## nf9648 (May 18, 2004)

dracofish said:


> nf9648 said:
> 
> 
> > Buy from Hawaii shops, they sell over there all day, I killed off plenty trying to grow them when they still have the yolk sac hanging from them, they have a better chance of living if you buy them after they lose the sac.
> ...


 Nevermind, I didnt read far into the post, I thought all arowanas were asian, in hawaii you see mainly jardinis and silvers.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)




----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

KingJeff said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> > An Asian arowana is well worth the risk..
> ...


 Send me a PM....


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

Peacock said:


> KingJeff said:
> 
> 
> > Peacock said:
> ...


 Put it for everyone to see how owning a federally listed fish 
Without a proper permit is worthwhile.

I'd really like to know why I'd like to risk a $250.000.00 fine
and five years in prision for a fish,

for that matter I'd like to know why it's acceptable to promote
breaking the ESA, why is it right to do so?

Are you above the rest of us, you have special rights and privilages to
illegally keep animals?

and please think really hard about this: 
What does this attitude add to the perception of those
keeping predatory exotic fish?

Helping any to improve our image?

Put your self in the shoes of a USFWS conservation officer or ignorant
government official and listen to what you just said:

"It's worth it to Break federal law and go against the ESA and Lacy act,
because I'm special, I'm above the law and I do not care, I'm not at all informed,
I have no actual understanding of the Issues involving endangered species,
I'm a Hobbyist so what I want is right and your efforts to protect a species is
wrong because it keeps me from getting a new novel species to masterbate over,
I'm special and can break any law I want, even if it puts that species in
danger of extinction, thats fine with me because I do not care about that,
it's ok to ignore that as long as I get my status symbol, and look cool because I have it "

Your one statement of "An asian Arowana is worth the risk" can speak volumes
to those working in Endangered species and to why it is still nessesary to enforce
these laws or make them stronger.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

Poseidon X said:


> of course your correct in your assumption that the feds would not allow someone to breed for the sale of the fish... however, this is a very influential individual who knows the right people. Just think conservation effort, with some sales on the side to fund the operation :nod: and i dont think they are aware of that part.


 You made it sound like the government was allowing it. In reality, it's still being done illegally, but by knowing the right people they are getting away with it.


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

For now


----------



## BoomerSub (Jun 23, 2003)

Poly, could you please explain how buying a captive-bred fish from DFI or Poseidon's clandestine farm negatively impacts _S.formosus_ populations in Asia? For what it's worth I agree with some of what you said, if you buy wildcaughts you deserve anything and everything they can throw at you.

This'll be good.

-PK
-Zipping up my asbestos undergarments.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

I've heard that some farms will illegally take stock from the wild and then tag them, claiming that they are captive raised. Is there any truth in that? If so, then I can see why there is a concern with harming the wild stock considering that you can never know where the fish came from. You can only hope that you aren't being fed a line when you buy.

Then again, I've also heard of places selling untagged ones too, which is a big no-no.


----------



## Poseidon X (Jan 31, 2003)

good points, i think this is a big concern for exporting the fish, however there are many reputable farms out there. And you have to respect those like arofanatics who have supported them. I think if you know what your looking at in terms of a quality aro it would be very difficult to come across a masterpiece that touches on some of the quality of farm raised arow.. which is good because it would be awful for this creature to be removed from its natural habitat.

I agree with the point that you should clearly not be purchasing wild caughts, unless you have the resources in order to breed them in a conservation effort... and who has these resources? well unless your keeping a massive pond and have studied the breeding process then you dont have much chance.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

BoomerSub said:


> Poly, could you please explain how buying a captive-bred fish from DFI or Poseidon's clandestine farm negatively impacts _S.formosus_ populations in Asia? For what it's worth I agree with some of what you said, if you buy wildcaughts you deserve anything and everything they can throw at you.
> 
> This'll be good.
> 
> ...


 agreed.

I would never buy a wild cought. thats is wrong.

Draco-

Unless the buyers WANTED a wild cought i doubt they sell them.. they are nothing compared to the farm raised.


----------



## a*men (Mar 23, 2004)

nahh.. don't like em
like silver arros more..


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

you wont get busted with an asain arro, unless your trying to clear them in customs. Once they are inside the US, youd really have to do something stupid to get busted. Like invite the fish and game over to your house for a BBQ lol


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

BoomerSub said:


> Poly, could you please explain how buying a captive-bred fish from DFI or Poseidon's clandestine farm negatively impacts _S.formosus_ populations in Asia? For what it's worth I agree with some of what you said, if you buy wildcaughts you deserve anything and everything they can throw at you.
> 
> This'll be good.
> 
> ...


To anwser that simply, it does not, aside from what Dracofish
has brought up, that being the guarentee that the fish
is truly captive bred is suspect, and that wild caught fish are regularly being taken
to prop up the captive breeding for the Hobby trade.

I have stated before in other threads, I'm not at all thrilled about
the regulations placed on these fish, I do beleave there are some flaws
in the governments thinking here.

I also though see the reason in an abstract way how it came about, 
Most Hobbyists in this country have proven themselves to not be very
good or intelligent with Endangered species issues.

I have very little concern for, or reason to dwell on the logic of
listing the Asian arowana in the ESA,

My concern is more in the additude that some people posess, thinking they
can circumvent wildlife laws just because they think they are
special, 
This Idiotic attitude only increases the probability of these laws 
sticking around for a long time.

It also reflects poorly on the ethics and responsibility of those who keep
Predatory fish as a hobby.
Generally showing us all as a bunch of blood lusting, selfish, Dumbasses
An image I resent and deplore and I refuse to allow it to prosper
Un-questioned.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Polypterus said:


> circumvent wildlife laws just because they think they are
> special,
> This Idiotic attitude only increases the probability of these laws
> sticking around for a long time.


 seroiusly.. who thinks they are "special"? i have not met 1 person who thought they where above the law.

doing something illegal does not make you above the law. Nor does it make you special..

im not following you here.. i see your point but in reallity i have not yet found a single person who thinks they are special and/or above the law.

yes i have had experience with Asian Arowanas but i dont consider my self "Special" or above the law. i Broke a law, and if i had gotten cought, i would have accepted my consequences.


----------



## kdblove_99 (Jul 17, 2003)

Peacock said:


> An Asian arowana is well worth the risk..
> 
> Trust me................


 Agreed.

No, I dont own one. But, have seen a couple in person and the Red was incredible..


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

Peacock said:


> Polypterus said:
> 
> 
> > circumvent wildlife laws just because they think they are
> ...


So it is perfectly fine to support an Illegal animal trade just because you 
are willing to accept your consequences?

I really do not think you understand the Big picture beyond: 
ME ME ME

Your not even slightly considering the MILLIONS of
illegally smuggled animals and animal parts in to this country each year.
or the animals themseves that are subjected to this trade.

your one fish was a drop in the bucket for the many thousands of
others, the concept that you think that by buying that one fish you are not actually
a contributer to the problem is what makes me say:

"Thats what makes you think your special",
Your not the problem............. those other people are...... right?
Not you? your not part of that..... are you?

Your exempt from that problem in your mind when you know damn well
Your just as guility of creating the market for illegal fish,

This is much bigger than your moral willingness to accept
consequences to your illegal actions. It's not about You,

it's about the future of our world's biota and about the future of
this un-nessesesary hobby to it, "Pet owners" do not do sh*t for the
Conservation efforts of endangered animals.

By actually suggesting and promoting this trade, as it is now, 
you are not doing much toward lifting or easing restrictions,
you just add more fuel to keeping them in place.

Saying "f*ck the Law" does not validate a reason to change
wildlife law, this only puts more smugglers in business and in
return stronger laws placed on all the rest of us.

But not you..... you accept Your consequences,
After all it's not going to affect you.............Right?


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

oh sh*t.... i got owned.

I totaly see your point man.. and i agree, this is why i did not buy any asian arowana in the USA or from smugglers.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

I agree in theory to your argument. But when it comes to asian aros (AA), this argument doesnt apply. The US is the only major country in the world still closed off to the importation of AA. I have called US F&W in DC and talked to the head biologist. I posed the question, can I import AA microshipped from a federally certified farm say from Singapore etc. He said which is pure BS "That we dont accept this method of verification. I said well Japan and other countries which have just as high as standards as the US and accept this method. Well, he had no anwser other then we arnt them. I said "what is an accepted method", he said "there is none". So i said "there are standards and certification for products they are traded worldwide that are accepted. Why cant a method be invented and satisfy your requirments", he said "more or less its not an important issue to the US F&W". So i asked him one more question. "Assuming there was an accepted verification technique. That indeed this AA is captive bred from a federal cerified farm in asia would it then be legal to import them. He said yes, but said we dont have that as of this moment. So there it is folks. Our wonderful lazy ass federal gov at work.
So bringing this back home. I myself have no problem with people owning AA here in the US. They are all from FARMS and captive bred. Just beaware like anything else if you do get caught most likely you wont get busted maybe a small fine and have in confiscated. If your smuggling them into the US from canada etc. Then youll get into alot more trouble probably including some jail time. So if you have to have one, let some other person take the risk to bring them in. Its just not worth it.


----------



## Gibbus (May 23, 2003)

Asian arowanas are legal to own in canada. They are illegal in the states.

If you get caught with one fish they are going to fine you and take it away. If you sell them or have lots of them they are going to fine you, take the fish away, and maybe you could be placed into a fed prison.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

BraveHeart007 said:


> I agree in theory to your argument. But when it comes to asian aros (AA), this argument doesnt apply. The US is the only major country in the world still closed off to the importation of AA. I have called US F&W in DC and talked to the head biologist. I posed the question, can I import AA microshipped from a federally certified farm say from Singapore etc. He said which is pure BS "That we dont accept this method of verification. I said well Japan and other countries which have just as high as standards as the US accept this method. Well he had no anwser other then we arnt them. I said what is an accepted method, he said there is none. So i said there are standards and certification for products they are traded worldwide that are accepted. Why cant a method be invented and satify your requirments , he said more or less its not an important issue to the US F&W. So i asked him one more question. "Assuming there was an accepted verification technique. That indeed this AA is captive bred from a federal cerified farm in asia would it then be legal to import them. He said yes, but said we dont have that as of this moment. So there it is folks. Our wonderful lazy ass federal gov at work.
> So bringing this back home. I meaning myself have no problem with people owning AA here in the US. They are all from FARMS and captive bred. Just beaware like anything else if you do get caught most likely you wont get busted maybe a small fine and have in confiscated. If your smuggling them into the US through canada etc. Then youll get into alot more trouble probably including some jail time. So if you have to have one, let some other person take the risk to bring them in. Its just not worth it.


 what Poly is trying to say is.. Funding the smugglers that smuggle in the AA is the same as Funding the stupid asian poachers that kill tiger tigers for their testicals.

its part of the Black market of Animal trading.. AAs are part of this.. most of the same people that get AAs smuggled in, are the same morons who smuggle in other endangered animals and animal parts.


----------



## the grinch (Feb 23, 2004)

interesting post. I really like those aa's that color from the pic is amazing. I like them more than silver. Hopefully they will be legalized soon


----------



## BoomerSub (Jun 23, 2003)

Peacock said:


> its part of the Black market of Animal trading.. AAs are part of this.. most of the same people that get AAs smuggled in, are the same morons who smuggle in other endangered animals and animal parts.


 A problem that would not exist if tagged animals could be sold legally and openly.

-PK


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

BoomerSub said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> > its part of the Black market of Animal trading.. AAs are part of this.. most of the same people that get AAs smuggled in, are the same morons who smuggle in other endangered animals and animal parts.
> ...


 But, the problem of poaching and then tagging would still exist, obviously for the color strains that aren't only found on farms from massive selective breeding.

I read an article once concerning the legalization of Asian Arowanas in the U.S. and it bascially said that the Fish and Wildlife Dept. will not even consider trying to legalize it until they see the farms trying to re-establish the wild population. I know, why would they want to dump their precious and expensive stock into the wild, thus losing money, but...that's what the article said needed to be done. We once emailed a representative of our state D.E.P and they said the same thing.


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

dracofish said:


> BoomerSub said:
> 
> 
> > Peacock said:
> ...


 This is precisly the requirement that has been around
for some time and there has been no move by the breeders to do so,

In some ways I'm glad they are not releasing fish, as most the fish being
produced are selectivly bred for color or shape , they are not being bred
to the standards of a typical wild fish. Nor are perticular populations 
being bred pure to their origin.

The USFWS is not looking at the fact these fish are slowly becoming 
"domesticated" and most are fancy forms,

There is still the issue of the fact many wild fish are being used to prop
the fancy trade, and a number of Wild fish themselves are being offered in the pet 
trade.

There is a total lack of detailed information regarding the sustainability of a 
commercial fishery on these fish. Actual numbers per a given location is
scant, little information exists also on the different Locational varietys,

I tend to agree with the position of the USFWS to keep these fish banned
for those reasons, Too little is known about the wild fish, so it is a risk
to create a market for them.

I disagree in that, these farms producing these fish are not actually creating
pure representations of the animal, these animals are useless for conservation,
and have no point except to be displayed.

Still regardless of that fact they are an Illegal animal, and I hope the reason
the USFWS is being so tough about this is to make these Breeders begin to focus 
more on the captive conservation of the wild stocks and less on the commercial market.

In any way it is not acceptable to obtain one of these fish the US
They are Illegal, If you buy one you are only supporting the Illegal
Pet trade, This does nothing for anyone and only causes more harm.

Learn about the animal and then teach the Lawmakers what they need to know,
This is the only way to effect real change in this listing.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

Polypterus said:


> I tend to agree with the position of the USFWS to keep these fish banned
> for those reasons, Too little is known about the wild fish, so it is a risk
> to create a market for them.
> 
> ...


You can agree all you want but your buying the propaganda. Because its pure beauracy, Ive made the calls, Ive done the due diligence, Ive talked to them in person. And when it comes to the AA your arguement is totally boiler plate in its support and ideology. Trust me there is no weapons of mass destruction as you claim. Opening the US to import AA will only help the breed in the wild. Here is a program Id propose allow AA into the US, allow only chipped fish from certified farms only. Place a tax on each AA that will go into a fund. Which will support a federal AA farm dedicated to breeding and stocking wildlife populations in various countries of Origin. Trust me the monies raised by this tax and the strong american dollar. You could open and support a very large operation in these countries where the Asian Arros live in the wild.

Yours Truly
BH


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

BraveHeart007 said:


> huggers and spotted owl communist hippies


 Every ounce of respect I had for your argument was lost with that statement.


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

BraveHeart007 said:


> Polypterus said:
> 
> 
> > I tend to agree with the position of the USFWS to keep these fish banned
> ...


 You just do not get it do you?
Think bigger,

I'm proud to be a spotted owl communist








Makes a hell of alot more sense than your Ditto head idiology
of consume without responsability.

Sick of dealing with this one:
KRE352 Clear................Polys exited the subject


----------



## BoomerSub (Jun 23, 2003)

Polypterus said:


> You just do not get it do you?
> Think bigger,
> 
> I'm proud to be a spotted owl communist
> ...


 What is your point? If we can help the wild populations using money from the sale of legal, farm-raised fish, why not do so? I agree, preserving the wild fish is more important than the fish remaining available to hobbyists. Braveheart's plan (or something like it) would allow for both, and you wouldn't have to support people that also deal in tiger gonads and powdered rhinoceros horn and the like.

-PK


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

thats NOT what Poly is saying... wtf, do you not read his posts? hes stating that BECUASE they are illegal you SHOULD NOT buy them.. becuase buying them WHEN THEY ARE ILLEGAL will suport BAD organizations..

does that make sence?


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

Here's something to think about...IF they are legalized, why should the U.S. government have to be the one's taking money from sales to help the wild populations when the ones that are actually breeding them should be doing so?


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

dracofish said:


> Here's something to think about...IF they are legalized, why should the U.S. government have to be the one's taking money from sales to help the wild populations when the ones that are actually breeding them should be doing so?


 Your missing the whole intent of this design. The tax or AA propagation fee or whatever you want to call it, is simply for the purpose. To satisfy the argument at the US F&W to meet there demands and create this vehicle to help boost the wild populations. In so doing that, it will accomplish a lifting of the ban. The fact of the matter is the breeders are not and will not stock the wildlife populations with there stock. So lets all agree on that fact. This is not about who is really is responsible to propagate the wild AA but about a solution to having AA legalized in the US. Structuring a deal like this would be a worthy and worthwhile investment. Hopefully someone who has the resources could draft such a proposal and get the backing of certified breeders like DFI etc. And have a meeting of the minds at the US F&W to get there stamp of approval.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

Polypterus " You just do not get it do you?
Think bigger,..I'm proud to be a spotted owl communist
Makes a hell of alot more sense than your Ditto head idiology
of consume without responsability."

You need to get it, and if you dont. Dont make your queered paradigm problem, my problem. I know alot more about this species and the correct approach to there preservation. Or at least Iam trying to offer a responsible legal solution to get AA's into the US as well as helping out the wild AA. Ive burned alot of my personal $$ in long distance fees and and hundreds of hours on the subject of this fish. Which as led me to develop relationships with a couple of leading farms in Indo as one in Singapore. So I understand the subject of this fish very well. Your grape nut idiology is purely ditto and is rooted in the Al Gore the sky is falling camp. This is america and if you want to be a liberal communist hippie tree hugger . Thats your preogative not mine.

Bottom line P..In all seriousness your thinking isnt original. But I listened to your point of view and when it comes to the AA i disagree. Thats all... no harm no foul.

BH


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

With your scenario I see the tax money going into someone's pocketbook rather than where it belongs...


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

braveheart = same old Braveheart from Pfish?


----------



## kdblove_99 (Jul 17, 2003)

Braveheart,

Sounds like you have done you research on AA. I like to hear facts and personal experiences on stuff like this.

Not someones personal views..


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

I think Polypterus has more than enough experience with endangered species to take part in this conversation...


----------



## fishypoo2 (Jan 29, 2004)

I am currently (legally







) keeping a 7 yr. old Red Asian for the New England Aquarium, which has the permits for her. Every time a shipment of arowana comes into the airport, an aquarist is called at the Aquarium to ID them. If they are indeed _Scleropages formosus_, they are confiscated and the importer is given heavy fines and jail time. Making them illegal counteracts their recovery, I think, because it is heavily restricted to collect them in the wild and many aquarists/facilities would be interested in breeding them. Blame that on CITES







.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

so the government is relying on some aquarist's opinion on weather the imported fish is an AA or a jardini?

thats stupid because most of these aquaium workers dont even have the slitest experience with these fish.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

Peacock said:


> braveheart = same old Braveheart from Pfish?


 Yea, Im the same Braveheart from P Board...However you better watch it, calling me old







"You sonofabitch" hahaha

Yea P board is getting really boring these days. So I thought id come over here and see whats going on. I see that your here which is good and others. Are you still banned from P Board?? So far as what ive seen, I really like the layout of this board. And the mod seems like a really good guy.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

BraveHeart007 said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> > braveheart = same old Braveheart from Pfish?
> ...


 lol..

ya this place took me under their wing and gave me a chance..

Im still banned from Pfish..
















Pfury kicks ass.. the Non P sections is allways busy and the people are kool.

welcome bro!


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

Peacock said:


> BraveHeart007 said:
> 
> 
> > Peacock said:
> ...


 Thx....I really like the diversity here plus the activity seems very high. As far as P Board goes its the good ol boy network over there. I wouldnt feel bad about being banned i was banned once because, one of the mods (possibly Josh) I think; had a hair up his ass. If it wasnt for Clay going to bat for me and getting me back in id probably still be banned. And for what you ask?? Because I was buying fish from Leo for my own personal use not for resale. Who was the only guy bringing in Congo at that time or at least in large shipments. Who (Leo) is so well liked on that board lol I was guilty by association. I started landing my own fish etc later. And some of the mods thought I was selling Leos fish on there board or something like that. And if I was buying Leos fish and reselling it to members on the board so what. Anyways they banned me for this horrible atrocity. Can you believe that wow, thats just unthinkable.....Shame on me. Anyways it spoke volumes about some of the people running the board. There was alot of poll positioning going and to many egos. In my case I saw that the heavy handed censorship in the end would be there demise. Anyways old stuff...water under the bridge, new day, new year yada yada yada. But I must say I do miss your posts, your one of the few people i know on that board. That really knew what they where talking about. So this place and its members are lucky to have you. 









BH


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

dracofish said:


> With your scenario I see the tax money going into someone's pocketbook rather than where it belongs...


 You know there is no free lunches in this world and everyone is entitled to make $$$ even on a propagation program. The fact of the matter is if 10% or 30% of the total revenues went to stocking the AA wildlife populations. Could you imagine what kind of an impact that would have. I bet in 5-10 years if this idea or something similiar where to be deployed today. The wild AA populations would bounce back and thrive so fantastically. It could be possibly delisted down to cites Appen 3.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

BraveHeart007 said:


> dracofish said:
> 
> 
> > With your scenario I see the tax money going into someone's pocketbook rather than where it belongs...
> ...


 good point.


----------



## fishypoo2 (Jan 29, 2004)

> thats stupid because most of these aquaium workers dont even have the slitest experience with these fish


Um...







These aquarists have been professionally trained in the field, it i required to have a masters or doctorate in an aquatic biology course to work in such a position. He is the more qualified person to do it. I don't know what aquarium you reference, but NEAq always hires people who know what they're doing and enjoy it too. This is not Petsmart we're talking about.
And, it's not his "opinion" whether it is an AA, it is a fact. Asian aros have a certain number of dorsal fin rays that differentiate from other species.
I suppose you're a more qualified aquatic biologist/ichthyologyist, or know one?


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

Peacock said:


> thats stupid because most of these aquaium workers dont even have the slitest experience with these fish.





















































Who keeps them after they are confiscated













































We are the professionals keeping them, Man,








We have way more experiance in them than a Hobbyist off the street 
buying one in a back ally.









God please tell me you did not just say Professional aquarists working in
accredited facilitys do not have the slightest experiance with these fish.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

every aquarium i have been to has had general work staff that DONT have degrees.. only the "head" person of the department does.

also, there are millions of species.. there is no way in hell a marine biologist who cares for the marine department has extensive experience with AAs..

you cannot tell me every Aquarium worker has the experience to judge weather its an AA or an S. leichardti. i wont believe you.. especialy when most of the little Info-cards on the display tanks have faulty information.


----------



## fishypoo2 (Jan 29, 2004)

> every aquarium i have been to has had general work staff that DONT have degrees.. only the "head" person of the department does.










Maybe the people visitors deal with do not have degrees/experience, that's because they don't deal with the animals. Visitors generally don't meet the actual aquarists that care for the animals, unless its a sea lion/dolphin show.



> also, there are millions of species.. there is no way in hell a marine biologist who cares for the marine department has extensive experience with AAs..










There are not millions of different arowanas, maybe several, but not millions. There are a lot of freshwater ichthyologists/aquarists working at an aquarium too. To say they are all marine is an arrogant assumption.



> you cannot tell me every Aquarium worker has the experience to judge weather its an AA or an S. leichardti. i wont believe you.. especialy when most of the little Info-cards on the display tanks have faulty information.










First of all, I never said EVERY aquarium worker could tell. The Senior Aquarist of Freshwater gallery usually goes, one of the top freshwater animal people. Second, I don't care if you believe me or not, but you can't go on thinking you know more than the next guy.

Hate to break it to you, but maybe there are some people in this world (not neccesarily me) that know more than you? I would like to see how many years you've had working at such an institution. You should put arrogance aside before you go blasting someone who sees things differently.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

fishypoo2 said:


> Hate to break it to you, but maybe there are some people in this world (not neccesarily me) that know more than you? I would like to see how many years you've had working at such an institution. You should put arrogance aside before you go blasting someone who sees things differently.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 i have lost all my respect for you.

you are an idiot.


----------



## dracofish (Jul 13, 2003)

Here's a very informative e-mail sent to a member of Pfish, ajb1971, when he inquired about the legal status of Asian Arowanas in the U.S.

_Dear ajb1971:
Thank you for your email concerning the importation and potential
downlisting of Asian bonytongue, Scleropages formosus under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). I have reviewed your email carefully, and would like to
share the perspective of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on this
issue of international importance.

The species was listed as endangered in 1976 under the U.S. Endangered
Species Act. Endangered foreign species, such as S. formosus, cannot be
imported to the United States for primarily commercial purposes even if
they are captive-bred. Importation for personal or hobby use would be
considered commercial activity. Furthermore, any importation of an
endangered species, captive-bred or not, must enhance the status of the
species in the wild in some direct way. In the past, the USFWS has
approved the import of small numbers of bonytongue for research and
captive-breeding purposes. The applicants in these cases are involved in
research or re-introduction programs that should help bolster wild
populations of the fish. Importation of farm-raised and selectively bred
bonytongue does not, in our view, enhance the wild populations directly.
While captive-bred populations of S. formosus may be abundant in Southeast
Asia, their use does not necessarily encourage the conservation of wild
populations and may result in unsustainable harvest for breeding stock.
These fears have been echoed by Indonesian scientists who I've consulted
while visiting the country and examining arowana farms.

It's important to note that these provisions of the ESA apply regardless of
the status of the species in the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), but that body has
recently concurred with an Indonesian report that the species remains
endangered throughout its range. There are no current or planned research
initiatives known from any range country (Malaysia, Myanmar, Cambodia,
Laos, Vietnam, and Indonesia) to study the conservation status of wild S.
formosus. Thus, there is no known scientific basis for downlisting from
threatened to endangered under the ESA in any part of the species' range.
Until data are presented to the USFWS or gathered, it appears that
downlisting is not warranted.

If we can obtain information that indicates that wild Asian arowanas are no
longer in danger of extinction, the USFWS will prioritize the species for
downlisting to threatened status. I am developing research initiatives to
gather this information. If the species is in fact downlisted to
threatened status, U.S. hobbyists could import captive-bred specimens with
the appropriate ESA and CITES permits. If you would like to learn more
about the Endangered Species Act, please visit our website at
http://endangered.fws.gov/. If you would like to learn more about the
USFWS, foreign species, and CITES, visit our website at
http://international.fws.gov/ or telephone me at 703-358-1708.

Thank you for your interest in and committment to the conservation of Asian
bonytongue. I look forward to working with dedicated members of the public
such as yourself as we continue our investigations of this species'
recovery in the wild.

John Field, Fisheries Specialist
Division of Scientific Authority
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
USA

(+01) (703) 358-2496
(+01) (703) 358-2276 fax_

link


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

thank you draco!!!


----------



## crazyklown89 (Aug 28, 2003)

Peacock said:


> fishypoo2 said:
> 
> 
> > Hate to break it to you, but maybe there are some people in this world (not neccesarily me) that know more than you? I would like to see how many years you've had working at such an institution. You should put arrogance aside before you go blasting someone who sees things differently.
> ...










You just went and proved him right, Peacock....


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

How? by making a comment stating that his comment was rather stupid?


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

Peacock said:


> every aquarium i have been to has had general work staff that DONT have degrees.. only the "head" person of the department does.
> 
> also, there are millions of species.. there is no way in hell a marine biologist who cares for the marine department has extensive experience with AAs..
> 
> you cannot tell me every Aquarium worker has the experience to judge weather its an AA or an S. leichardti. i wont believe you.. especialy when most of the little Info-cards on the display tanks have faulty information.


First,
thanks Draco,
that is an excellect and clear explanation
of the USFWS position, That was best said in full context
and from the "Horses mouth"

Peacock,
What weird part of the world do you live in?

Any accredited aquarium is staffed by people that have extensive experiance
in all areas of Ichthyology and related aquatic science, It is a general
requirement to have a degree in some Biological science 
in order to be an Aquarist.

they are not Knuckle
draging Walmart pet dept. employees,

From experiance I can tell you, 
a well run public aquarium does not just have a "head of a department"
that tells others what to do and owns the key to all information.

Each aquarist is positioned to the work they excell at and know about
every animal in the facility to some degree. ALL have extensive
experiance and training.

Most Acredited Public aquariums have very few people 
that actually care for the animals,

The One I work at has 4 aquarists and 1 curator. with over 3000
fish to care for, plus the work you do not see as a visitor to the
aquarium, The behind the curtian conservation and research
which is the real focus of their work.

These employees are very diverse in their knowledge, if they could not
ID an Asian Arowana I doubt they would be working there.

They would be at a pet shop counting "Feeders"
or working in a Mall to come home to a fish tank,
Not professionally working in this field.

These people make a habit of knowing every detail of any animal that
they care for or potentially will care for,

Signage is not the responsability of an Aquarist, thats a function of the Education
division, These people frequently have no Knowledge of the animals,
and often due to the fact so few people have time to review every little
sign, Mistakes occur once and awile,

Most signage being wrong, is an exageration and just not true.

Most in any aquarium I've been to, have been very accurate with what
little text is offered due to catering to the attention span limited.

Fishypoo is dead on in what He/she said and your comments
are not very in the Know about how these institutions work,

Fishypoo is not the one showing them self as very bad here,
Every comment stated tells me this person is one of my 
fellow collagues and does work in this field.

Fishypoo,
you are not an Idiot,

you have just run across an
unfortunatly difficult site to deal with when trying to explain
Some aspects of this Profession and hobby from a different
perspective Wish you luck! 
If you take point I'll cover your back.

It is often quite hard to get some people here to understand things that are 
totaly alien to them, Conservation and Animal welfare issues seem to be areas
too foriegn to mention most of the time and it always ends up like this thread,

A few interesting tidbits and alot of useless garbage.

(Unless your also
a sociologist and Psychologist then it becomes very interesting.
Ethology of _**** sapiens _is very unusual if not overly predictable)


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Do you consider the Modern world to be the "Natural" habitat for H. sapiens sapiens? if you dont then Ethology does not apply.

I was unaware of the "Knowledgable" aquarium workers in other facilities. I have had conversations with many aquarium workers. Not all of them where very knowledgable college educated aquarist as you stated. infact most of these people worked there part time and performed maintence and feedings..

i dont know, maybe im an idiot for thinking these people who were working AT the aquarium are THE aquarist. when infact i didnt get a chance to check out the "Back stage" group.

but Fishypoo is infact a dipshit for bringing up that comment about me.


----------



## Polypterus (May 4, 2003)

Ethology is the study of animal behavior
with many componets, genitic behavior, Learned Behavior, communication
ETC.

it would be impossable to study the behavior of H. sapians
with thinking that the world we have created is not the native habitat.

Of coarse the modern world is the natural habitat of
H. sapiens,

I do not really get how that would make the science of
Ethology apply or not though, we are animals, same rules apply
as they do to leeches.

(there are no subspecies in H. sapiens,
H. sapiens sapiens is a product
of racist and eugenic thought and has long been scientificly proven false,
No subspecific status is warented with our species.)

Those people you spoke to probley where never actual employees
but Volunteers (sometimes called Docents in some facilitys), these
people while very hardworking and devoted, are not the animal care staff,
but, sort of, trained education volunteers to interpret exhibits,
They have little or no access to the animals themselves in many facilitys.

Yeah they can be pretty stupid at times, Not many of them are trained 
as well as they should be.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Polypterus said:


> (there are no subspecies in H. sapiens,
> H. sapiens sapiens is a product
> of racist and eugenic thought and has long been scientificly proven false,
> No subspecific status is warented with our species.)


 I read something a while ago sugesting there was.. hmm.. at any rate i will take your opinion/advice over some online publication.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

Polypterus said:


> Those people you spoke to probley where never actual employees
> but Volunteers (sometimes called Docents in some facilitys), these
> people while very hardworking and devoted, are not the animal care staff,
> but, sort of, trained education volunteers to interpret exhibits,
> ...


 this could very well be.. good point


----------



## fishypoo2 (Jan 29, 2004)

OK, Peacock, I may have been a little caught up in the moment with my last comment. And if you felt I have overreacted than for that I am sorry... 
Though, I still feel that it was a little presumptuous (sp?) of you to call it stupid and say that Aquarists do not know much. That is all I have to say on the matter.

Thank you for helping clarifying it, Polypterus.









P.S. At what aquarium/zoo do you work Polypterus?


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

fishypoo2 said:


> OK, Peacock, I may have been a little caught up in the moment with my last comment. And if you felt I have overreacted than for that I am sorry...
> Though, I still feel that it was a little presumptuous (sp?) of you to call it stupid and say that Aquarists do not know much. That is all I have to say on the matter.
> 
> Thank you for helping clarifying it, Polypterus.
> ...


 its ok dude. no probs. sh*t happens.

sorry for my rude-ass comment. i got pissed off.









we kool?


----------



## BoomerSub (Jun 23, 2003)

Polypterus said:


> (there are no subspecies in H. sapiens,
> H. sapiens sapiens is a product
> of racist and eugenic thought and has long been scientificly proven false,
> No subspecific status is warented with our species.)


 There aren't? I could've sworn that there were a couple of extinct subspecies (_H.s.neathanderthalensis_?) and that we were the only extant one.

-PK


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

BoomerSub said:


> Polypterus said:
> 
> 
> > (there are no subspecies in H. sapiens,
> ...


 yes, you are correct.. I was correct.

dictionary= An extinct human species (**** neanderthalensis) or subspecies (**** sapiens neanderthalensis) living during the late Pleistocene Epoch throughout most of Europe and parts of Asia and northern Africa and associated with Middle Paleolithic tools.

thats what i couldnt remember.. thanks PK


----------



## piranha45 (Apr 8, 2003)

BoomerSub said:


> Polypterus said:
> 
> 
> > (there are no subspecies in H. sapiens,
> ...


according to what I recall from my anthropology class, neandertalis was more considered a subspecie in the pre-70s, but nowadays is considered something along the lines of a geographic variant


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

piranha45 said:


> BoomerSub said:
> 
> 
> > Polypterus said:
> ...


 then it could still be a subspecies.


----------



## piranha45 (Apr 8, 2003)

Peacock said:


> piranha45 said:
> 
> 
> > BoomerSub said:
> ...


 it COULD, but you'd be disagreeing with the majority of phD anthropologists out there :rock:


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

piranha45 said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> > piranha45 said:
> ...


 I disagree with the whole man from ape evolutionary theory.


----------



## piranha45 (Apr 8, 2003)

BraveHeart007 said:


> I disagree with the whole man from ape evolutionary theory.


 Good for you. But since we are discussing said theory, and you are in lack of evidence to support your views, we cannot further discuss your beliefs here.


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

piranha45 said:


> BraveHeart007 said:
> 
> 
> > I disagree with the whole man from ape evolutionary theory.
> ...


As long as im not breaking any forum rules I can discuss whatever I want to you punk.









I did not, nor was my intent to support my view with evidence. It was simply a statment of my position that I disagree with theory of evolution proposed by athiest scientists.


----------



## piranha45 (Apr 8, 2003)

I was reviewing your post for my own response when WOOMF! Huge paragraph's gone.

anyway, it seemed to me at the time that you were trying to bring up another religion vs science opening, which would naturally obscure/derail the current topic of evolution in this already-derailed thread, so I attempted to cut you off


----------



## BraveHeart007 (May 19, 2004)

piranha45 said:


> I was reviewing your post for my own response when WOOMF! Huge paragraph's gone.
> 
> anyway, it seemed to me at the time that you were trying to bring up another religion vs science opening, which would naturally obscure/derail the current topic of evolution in this already-derailed thread, so I attempted to cut you off


 Your attempt would be in vain. I added what i wanted to this post.


----------



## Peacock (Feb 23, 2004)

and ill add what i want to this post.

there is no god. there is PROOF of evolution.. there is no proof of god. the only "Proof" you have is an old book written by men over the years of civilization.

Why do you believe in god? Because you have Faith. You have Faith in something which does not exist because it helps you "grasp" the reality of life. You cannot be sane knowing there is no "higher-power" in controle. To help you controle this fear, you cannot explain, you make your self believe/have faith in something which does not exist.

its rather hard for me to explain because i lack decent vocabulary. maybe my fellow aitheist P45 can help when he gets to it..


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Hey guys, this is Lounge material, so please stay on topic (which was Asian Aro's and the penalty one gets for owning one...)

Feel free to start a Evolution vs. Religion thread in the Lounge, however


----------



## a*men (Mar 23, 2004)

come on kids don't fight


----------

