Jump to content

The Future of the hobby in NZ?


David R

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We are discussing all of these things tomorrow at the executive meeting and will report back to the club delegates and the fish committee. I know I have approached a number of you about getting on board, now the ball is in your court whether or not you want to join the FNZAS. If you have recently become a member, send me a message if you would like to help the fish committee work on these issues.

There is some great knowledge and enthusiasm out there and with a little leadership to guide the cause, our combined energy will no doubt have quite an impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done enough work on adding fish to the allowable list, However

I can help coordinate it as i know what to do and have the correct contacts in MAF and ERMA.

MAF have agreed to the flow chart i posted and i am working with ERMA currently to see what is the best way to go forward.

ERMA can approve a application in 10 days. however has to meet the following

Rapid assessment for release:

If the biological characteristics are appropriate and there is sufficient information, we may be able to do a rapid assessment of the risks. But to do so, the fish species:

· must not be able to establish a self-sustaining population in the field (taking into account ease of eradication);

· must not be capable of displacing any native species within its natural habitat; or

· must not be able to breed with any native species.

In addition, the fish species must be able to pass the minimum standards set out in our legislation which requires the decision maker to decline an application if the new organism is likely to-

(a) cause any significant displacement of any native species within its natural habitat; or

(b) cause any significant deterioration of natural habitats; or

© cause any significant adverse effects on human health and safety; or

(d) cause any significant adverse effect to New Zealand's inherent genetic diversity; or

(e) cause disease, be parasitic, or become a vector for human, animal, or plant disease, unless the purpose of that importation or release is to import or release an organism to cause disease, be a parasite, or a vector for disease.

BUT this really gets me

Consultation:

Release applications will normally involve some level of Maori Consultation.

NOW as above rapid assessment

The information is not that hard to find, so we just need people who can put effort into finding the info and collate all the data.

Most of the questions above will not apply as the fish will be dead in cold water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a number of fish that Maf look at sideways now because they can survive and possibly breed in our natural environment (particularly in the North) Think of the discussions on this site about fish that should be tropical that are sold as cold water fish in the shops and the number of fish that can be kept outside unheated in the summer. In my view it would actually be quite difficult to prove all the things listed in the requirements by reef. This would particularly apply to livebearers, catfish and barbs amongst the many, and may yet be banned by Maf rather than added to. There is a member here who has recently submitted a PhD on some of the diseases carried by some reptiles in NZ. What do we know about these fish on your wish lists and who do we have that can make a convincing scientific arguement agains the "experts" at or available to Maf?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a number of fish that Maf look at sideways now because they can survive and possibly breed in our natural environment (particularly in the North) Think of the discussions on this site about fish that should be tropical that are sold as cold water fish in the shops and the number of fish that can be kept outside unheated in the summer. In my view it would actually be quite difficult to prove all the things listed in the requirements by reef. This would particularly apply to livebearers, catfish and barbs amongst the many, and may yet be banned by Maf rather than added to. There is a member here who has recently submitted a PhD on some of the diseases carried by some reptiles in NZ. What do we know about these fish on your wish lists and who do we have that can make a convincing scientific arguement agains the "experts" at or available to Maf?

The fact that the majority are "bred" stock not wild voids most of that. The problem is not just that of water temperature but quality ph, kh, tds etc and all of these would have to be within the temperature requirements only found up north restricting all possibility to a very minute area.

Maf is yet to state what makes information "Viable" or correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think bred stock or wild caught stock would be any different in terms of the criteria to be met. A very small geographical area where they can survive means they can survive and breed in the wild in NZ (ie mollies).

Maf will not tell you what viable means. It will either be defined in the relevent legislation or be the oxford dictionary meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The organisation/direction is probably the main reason to join a club.

At the conference/AGM in June each year, these things are set up. With the people putting their hands up now, Im sure that the exec abd sub committee will be excited and looking forward to working with people as keen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are not wrong. ERMA is trying to discourage anyone adding more fish species.

I understand this and in some cases it is for good reason. However, if the rules are followed and the species met the requirements then the fish should be added to the list. Not all species will get on the list just because we want them to be.

The two major factors that should be looked at before time and money is spent on a fish species is: to actually talk to the suppliers to or in NZ, to see what is available on the open market and the retail cost of it once it is here. These should be the deciding factors on what species are looked at. If people wish to pursue less likely or expensive fish that is their choice.

Personally I am looking to this as a challenge: Can some of the desired fish actually get on the list. "Better to try and fail, than never try at all."

As mentioned before, I am happy to do the donkey work for any dwarf African cichlid species and if it happens to be a species I would like to see in the country I will even throw some money into the pot for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...