FREAQ Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Found this article doing the rounds, yes it was first posted on Feb 13th 2015 but it was last updated as of Jan 4th 2016. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-13/virus-testing-for-ornamental-fish-delayed-after-backlash/6090946 Has anyone else seen this or is it just a furphy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intangcity Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 only way to find out would be to contact the correct authority i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intangcity Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 what i would like to see is a change by the authorities on what we can import and im sure a lot of other keepers would too.eg why can we only import certain types of neolamprologus.it is really stupid to only be able to import certain neolamps and not the rest of them.there are alot of species that we can only import certain variants of a species seriously it really aggrevates me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egyptshn Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Phoned Department of Agriculture yesterday to clarify the the effective date of the new laws, and the Department confirmed they commence today, 1st March, 2016, and there has been a "grace" period of 21 days granted for any orders that were placed prior to 1st March and not yet arrived in the country. I agree with the inconsistency of the "allowable" imports. Petrochromis is another one. Only one variant legally able to be imported. And it is a long way short of being the nicest of the Petro variants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buccal Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The way Australia's regulators are, is that to deem a species safe for whatever purpose it may be (in our case ornamental fish), and make it allowable, they have to research it in all aspects to determine acceptance,,,,, the time, money and resources they just don't have, also Australia does not see ornamental fish as any importance and will not fund these costs,,,, so so so much easier just to say everything is not allowed in, and just the allowables are. Actually, when you think about it, we pay tax to the government buying all our fish, accessories, foods, anything fish, and yet this industry still gets treated like this. Pretty sad thow really, no effort from governments to listen or meet half way or anything,,,, many countries over seas, Hongkong as example, not only is the industry over there very profitable due to pure demand,,, but it's kind of a tradition but more religiously. Its a full heart beefy industry over those places, Australia has had its heart ripped out then kicked stiffly and hard straight in the achers ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intangcity Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Buccal i keep hearing that story all the time to make sure they are safe for importation etc but yet a neolamp is a neolamp so why not let all variants of them in.frankly all the responses i get when i say what i said previously are the same.i call B.S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buccal Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Because they don't know this, and they have to research it to know it. And if you told them that, then they'd laugh, because they don't care and have no intention in supporting the industry not one little bit. These people that govern us and make the rules, have absolute no idea about fish or the market,,, and I mean no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intangcity Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 anyways just read the article over again a few times trying to find something it hasnt been delayed again.Always read the fineprint.dated last year lol at the bottom of the article one little thing i missed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengaBoy Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 3 hours ago, intangcity said: anyways just read the article over again a few times trying to find something it hasnt been delayed again.Always read the fineprint.dated last year lol at the bottom of the article one little thing i missed yeah, I think the article is old even though it has a 3 Jan 2016 last edited date. there is no mention of sentinel fish which was the give-away for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.