Return to Gulf or euthanize ??

[Agu]

I colllected 7 dwarf seahorses and a pipefish for a peaceful, low flow tank from a local bay.

The pipefish was carrying babies and now I have 40+ babies in a 4 gallon tank. Obviously most of them have to go, so here's my dilema...

I could siphon out most of them and return them to the bay....which is the preferred choice. However the 4 gallon sump has about 5 pounds of indo pacific rock in it. Although the chances are slim, it's still a possibility of introducing something exotic to the gulf waters.

Or I could euthanize them............

Agu

[Cosmo^Kramer]

Can you give them to people with seahorse tanks?

[Steven Pro]

I agree. Give them away to other hobbyists. That is the safest route.

[Freed]

Giving them away not only almost ensures they will survive, it lessens the chance that someone else will buy more and deplete the already decimated stock in the oceans.

[DgenR8]

I think finding 40+ people with suitable environments for these pipefish might be more than a little bit of a challenge.
Agu, I would try to find homes for as many of them as I could. I have 5 of them that I caught up here, off the south shore of Long Island, happily living in my 'fuge. They don't necessarily have to wind up in a Seahorse tank.
Even considering that, finding homes for that many of them will take some work.

[MarkS]

I was looking for both seahorses and pipefish for my 35 gallon seahorse tank. I'm not ready for fish and will not be for about three months, but if you can hold off, I'll buy a pair from you.

[grim]

Under no circumstances should these be returned to the wild. It's dangerous as it might introduce a non-native disease to the local population. While the intentions are good, it's probably most beneficial for all local species if they aren't returned.

jb

[coralprincess23]

You could also see if any of your LFS wanted them. They would be better able to sell them, and at least my LFS here would love to have some pipefish.

[ReeferMac]

Sorry for your situation Agu. Grim makes some good points. Granted, the carelessness of commercial shipping companies these days makes me wonder why a hobbiest would be so concerned, but regardless, the foundation to those remarks is sound.
Use your best judgement. I'd be happy to offer a few a new home, but... am a bit more than a short distance away. Perhaps one of the facilites in Florida could help you (ORA?). What about a local Zoo/Aquarium/(marine)biology department of a University?

- Mac

[dendronepthya]

I agree that anything is an option except releasing them back into the wild.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by dendronepthya
I agree that anything is an option except releasing them back into the wild.

Ditto.

I think that if you look around, you have 70,000+ people you can send the SOS out to, and I'm sure you can find homes for at least a few of them.

Dave

[dendronepthya]

Granted, the carelessness of commercial shipping companies these days makes me wonder why a hobbiest would be so concerned

I can think of a very good reason. The powers that be can erase this hobby from the face of the world on a whim. Those same powers are much less likely to infringe upon international shipping because of the huge cost to benefit. Notice that there was no outcry to ban international shipments to the Great Lakes after the zebra mussels arrived from overseas.

Our hobby on the other hand would disappear with little to no impact on the vast majority of the people and still give politicians a platform to stand upon and proclaim they are defending the environment. I would venture to guess the hobbyist has a very good incentive to keep the hobby clean regardless of what anyone else is doing.

[DgenR8]

They can make it tough on us, and more expensive than it already is, but those of us that are hard core will continue to keep our tanks, and obtain live stock for them. There would be an increase in hobbyist trading, and underground coral farming. I wouldn't give up my tank, that's for sure.

[dendronepthya]

The big fear with legislation eradicating the is not so much it limiting the availability of livestock, but rather forcing companies like Aquarium Systems to stop making salt mix based on economics alone. If I was a manufacturer that specialized in salt water and knew that the market would dip upwards of 70% as a result of legislation, I would pretty much have to be crazy not to close up shop immediately and find something else to do.

We as hobbyists would have to resort to breaking out the chemistry kits every time we wanted to do a water change.

[DgenR8]

Originally posted by dendronepthya
The big fear with legislation eradicating the is not so much it limiting the availability of livestock, but rather forcing companies like Aquarium Systems to stop making salt mix based on economics alone. If I was a manufacturer that specialized in salt water and knew that the market would dip upwards of 70% as a result of legislation, I would pretty much have to be crazy not to close up shop immediately and find something else to do.

We as hobbyists would have to resort to breaking out the chemistry kits every time we wanted to do a water change.

OUCH! I had not considered that angle. The problem, or potential for a problem is bigger than I had realized.

[enitnelaVeyaF]

Than-

I'm glad you have some idea the peril of the reefkeeping hobby. Many people do not realize what freedom we have, taking wild species and experimenting with them without any degree in the field. Can we, the general public, nab a tiger out of the wild, or a smaller cat species, take it home and experiment with maintaining it? How about knowing it gets bigger than a dog crate and still trying to maintain it in one? (haha, that's a 'tang police' slogan)

Plus, there are laws in place that state that you are not allowed to maintain native animals and release them back. The spread of disease is very likely.
We all know that when Euopean settlers came to what is now the continental United States that the disease they carried wiped out the native people. This isn't just an analogy, this is what happens when one population meets another. Just becasue you dont know you have a disease another population may not have, doesnt mean it wont effect them.
I never condone thinking of fish as humans, they do not get happy and sad or have abstrat thought as we do, but disease does spread in the same manner.
If you love your fish and want to help the native species (read: wild species) of that fish, don't kill them by releasing your population.

[ab5ebdxer]

I agree with the statements above but what do you think the chances are that the seas are still as isolated as North America was from Europe 600 years ago. There have already been mass infestations of species that have been shipped all around the world. You might be hard pressed to find a disease that has not already had the opportunity to take hold of every ocean in the world.

It basically comes down to where the disease can survive. In theory I agree with everything above but it seems unlikely that putting a fish back into its native water after being exposed to a possible disease would be anything new, the gulf is not exactly virgin territory. I am not suggesting to put them back but I dont really think it would be the first time it had happened.

As for the fish trade, as long as people in third world countries can make a living at collecting corals and fish in a responsible manor their governments will support it, which means the U.S. government will most likely go along. I also keep dart frogs which has created much debate but as people in central america started breeding them with governments permissions then the talk of banning the trade has decreased.

[enitnelaVeyaF]

I understand youre thinking, "if it's already done, what does it matter if it's done more?" Well, this is a hobby that needs to lend itself some responsibility. Sure, for other reasons the worlds oceans arent virgin areas, but lets unsure its not us, the aquarium hobby, doing it.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

You can't say, "Well there's millions of ferral cats in the world, what does it matter that I add a small portion to the population by not spaying or nutering my pets? What's done is done."
In an irresponsible world, sure that's a valid thought. And, well, our leaders aren't exactly showing us, Americans at least, how to act responsibly.

But that's a whole other, off topic, thread.

[ab5ebdxer]

Well I think adding ferral cats would be a little different, that would be adding to a known problem. I dont know that you could point out a known problem, like a specific disease that will take over the gulf or even a local area from adding them back. I agree that it is the right thing to do by not putting them back but I also think it is good to think about why we say such things.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by ab5ebdxer
Well I think adding ferral cats would be a little different, that would be adding to a known problem. I dont know that you could point out a known problem, like a specific disease that will take over the gulf or even a local area from adding them back. I agree that it is the right thing to do by not putting them back but I also think it is good to think about why we say such things.

There was a disease that wiped out around 95% of the Carribean's black-spined urchins over less than 2 years. There's an interesting article about it in this year's Marine Fish and Reef. It was believed to be bacterial, but that's not for certain. It's not believed to have anything to do with the hobby, but it certainly demonstrates the potential for rapid spread through the region.

Dave

[ab5ebdxer]

Dave, I dont see how this applies to the discussion, was it a introduced bacterial infection, or was it caused by an overgrowth of a already present disease?

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by ab5ebdxer
Dave, I dont see how this applies to the discussion, was it a introduced bacterial infection, or was it caused by an overgrowth of a already present disease?

That's unknown.
The reason it applies is that many people (especially not in a medical profession) have serious doubts about how quickly something can spread in the right environment, and how devastating it can be. I mentioned this as an illustration of that potential.

Dave

[ab5ebdxer]

Ok,

Yea I think I remember this, wasnt it mainly the elkhorn corals? I am not debating if infections can spread quickly, I really just wanted to bring out a few points that are often quickly over looked.

[Agu]

An update, deciding returning them to the Gulf I tried to feed them a nonstop drip of phyto/rotifers. I figured if that was too small it would feed the numerous pods in the tank. I also fed bbs 3X day. The babies didn't last 48 hours .

The seahorses and daddy pipefish however now enjoy hunting for pods in my "hair algae" tank.

Agu