rosco Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Hi all, At the CDAS meeting last night someone brought this to the clubs attention. It is AQIS and their attempt to regulate noxitious species. I have not read it fully but it looks to me that it could have a significant impact a lot the local hobbists (and thus the perpetuation of our hobby with regards to the breeding and selling of fish to LFS. I really don't have an opinion as yet, I just thought that I would throw it open to the floor since it is open for public comment. It may be worth a read and perhaps a formal reponse from an organisation. I will have a more through read of it when I get the time. here it is Ornamental fish keeping as always non-commttal (for now anyhow) cheer rosco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patto Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Have a look at page 24 of this document - page 29 within Adobe. http://www.affashop.gov.au/PdfFiles/ornament_fish6.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 I have not read it fully but it looks to me that it could have a significant impact a lot the local hobbists (and thus the perpetuation of our hobby with regards to the breeding and selling of fish to LFS. ← Yo Rosco - where does it give you that idea? The noxious list at the back of the PDF (link/page# provided by Patto) looks like the same old one that's always existed & won't affect the cichlid breeder in the slightest - it only seems to have outright banned fish in the list, not non-importable but already here species. Does it say somewhere LFS can only buy from licenced breeders or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mianos Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 It's a very well written and fascinating read. On the other had it's full of contradictions so typical of government departments. On one hand they are saying that the problems with regulation in the past have been the 'heavy handed approach' (their words) yet the terms of reference include: "5. a process for dealing with species already in the country deemed to be undesirable, including but not limited to recall/removal/licensing, monitoring, and surveillance". Of course the only way to enforce this would be by legislation and licensing, i.e. the heavy handed approach. I also loved this bit: "Details of the procedures for applying to amend the list of specimens suitable for live import are available on the DEH website.5 Amending the list may take 6–12 months, depending on the complexity of the case." They make it sound so simple they obviously never consulted anyone involved. How long did it take for the few items to be added most recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mianos Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 p.s. if anyone has Mark Lintermans original paper you will also see that the majority of exotic species that have become established are not from the ornament aquarium industry. Not that this is an argument against control of noxious pests but it's certainly not as strong an argument as used in the paper. On the other hand a strong focus on education as suggested sounds like an excellent way to address the core problem. I.e. the main problem is not at all the existence or sale of exotic species but that they are and can be established in the wild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patto Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Maybe the Government just want a piece of the $350 million a year industry by introducing licensing and MORE fines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwboy53 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 I can see where the government is coming from, to avoid further pests in our waterways, but I am not certain if it is a good idea. Most responsible fish owners don't dump their fish and plants in the waterways. It's the irresponsible who do that and give everyone else a bad wrap. Maybe it would be more suitable to have some sort of education scheme to go on, than just ban certain species. Its kinda like people with cars, most people drive sensibly , but there are some which are complete idiots. Does that mean we should ban all people from driving cars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colfish Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 hi i can see this hobby going the same way as avriculture and herps, completely liceinced and controled. having to keep a register of births, deaths and sales, names and address's, fee's and levies on everything you buy and sell jmo, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dobbin4 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 If thats the case Col,, What a pain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patto Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Maybe it would be more suitable to have some sort of education scheme to go on, than just ban certain species In the Draft Proposal they have mentioned an educational program as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwboy53 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Maybe it would be more suitable to have some sort of education scheme to go on, than just ban certain species In the Draft Proposal they have mentioned an educational program as well. ← Oh I must of missed it, Im glad their considering that option too. But I think the government has preference for fees than education. But we will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosco Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 Does it say somewhere LFS can only buy from licenced breeders or something? Not in so many words hi i can see this hobby going the same way as avriculture and herps, completely liceinced and controled. having to keep a register of births, deaths and sales, names and address's, fee's and levies on everything you buy and sell jmo, I concur and once they do that then there is nothing stopping someone knocking on your door to inspect your fish stocks. big brother is watching. Or it that could be my suspicious, conspiracy theory, television influenced, sleep deprived nature. . cheers rosco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmj Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Hi all, Policies Policies Policies!!! I am suspicious, perhaps the licencing / registering of sales and capturing of paying GST are the only ways the government can self fund the new education programs and resouce the new regulatory departments that all us conciencious fish hobbist/breeders need. (sad joke) The only thing this brings to my mind is, if they can not control Europian carp in our waterways I am not too sure how effective these nicely written policies will be. We could have fish catchers just like dog catchers armed with the Axelrod reference material/net and bucket. It would be heavily reliant on informants and surveillance and when little johnie wants to release his guppy into the backyard pond a Fish Administration Response Team (FART) will be available for deployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patto Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Fish Administration Response Team (FART) will be available for deployment. That is very funny. Now when my misses has a go at me for those mysterious smells, i can blame it on the Government!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wui39 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Fish Administration Response Team (FART) ← HAHAHA how long did it take to think up that name? Who are they kidding? This will just increase the amount of black market fish trading that is already going on. Anyone remember the GST? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mianos Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 The herp licensing system does really help to monitor native reptiles but it also forced keepers of exotics underground. Contrary to what the government thought, people did not get rid of their breeding exotics. It's been said on other forums there are probably more exotics kept than natives but no one really has any records of them. The net result is positive but really has not addressed the possibility or exotic reptiles establishing themselves in the wild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 How many breeders/keepers of exotic herps sell to retail stores? Probably not many so the licensing system doesn't catch them. But if LFS are required to keep the licence details of people they are buying fish from then a lot more people will be caught by the licensing regime. Maybe this is all a tactic to catch terrorist cells plotting fish-based attacks everything else the government does revolves around protecting our freedom and way of life from terrorists . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mianos Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 How many breeders/keepers of exotic herps sell to retail stores? Probably not many so the licensing system doesn't catch them. But if LFS are required to keep the licence details of people they are buying fish from then a lot more people will be caught by the licensing regime. ← "Commercial trade in reptiles is prohibited in NSW. Pet shops are not allowed to buy or sell reptiles or even to have them on their premises.. " so not even native herps are sold to retail stores. On the other hand there are not many (if any) species on that noxious list that would normally be sold in a pet store. (There a lot of plants that should not be sold). On the whole it's not a bad thing, it's just the libertarian in me does not like to see any further regulation in any area without significant positive outcomes aside from great income and employment for a government department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John McCormick Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I concur and once they do that then there is nothing stopping someone knocking on your door to inspect your fish stocks. big brother is watching. Or it that could be my suspicious, conspiracy theory, television influenced, sleep deprived nature. Rosco, I am pretty sure that they can come knocking on your door right now if they have information that you have illegal/noxious species in your possession, in the event that you do they will confiscate the fish/animal and you can/will be charged for being in possession of that animal. If they brought in licensing for fishkeepers it would be one hell of a job for them to police, just think of the manpower required to keep check on all the fishkeepers in Australia, I think that they would be reluctant to go down this path but then then again the thought of extra revenue might be too much for them to resist. Cheers, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wui39 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 How often do they inspect fish shops at the moment? Not often I would think. If they want to make money out of this "venture" they have to spend a hell of a lot to get everything in order so that inspections could even start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 *snip* If they brought in licensing for fishkeepers it would be one hell of a job for them to police, just think of the manpower required to keep check on all the fishkeepers in Australia, I think that they would be reluctant to go down this path but then then again the thought of extra revenue might be too much for them to resist. ← Yeah, extra revenue until all the LFS go broke cause the mums buying a new goldfish for their 4yo every 3 months won't fork out for a licence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobaltcraig Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Interesting Read I think it would become more of a money raising exersise than anything else I love how goverment bodies always talk about protecting the enviroment The biggest enviromentle teriosts thus far is the "csiro" another Goverment body Who gave us the Gambise and Cane toad Cheers craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwboy53 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I know of a friend who keeps snakes and other reptiles. He used to run a pet shop and regularly they would inspect it to make sure he does not sell any. Further, he is also a breeder of snakes, and they raided his place a while back and seized heaps of his snakes. I think the reason was that he had too many. The people who seized the snakes had destroyed them all instead of giving them to a zoo or etc. Or they probably sold them in the blackmarket. I think they were from the national parks and wildlife association but am not certain. Who ever they are, I am told they are very corrupt and only after money in terms of bribes or selling blackmarket reptiles. Imagine if it comes to this with owning fish? Its a shamble. Sir do you have a license for that goldfish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.