<< These accusers are the ones who lump everyone
together, and fire up to get laws past to ban even more things for the pet
hobby ( except the precious dogs that deposit there "presents" on my lawn,
destroy my flower beds and ponds, eat driftwood out of my ponds etc.) and
even with that instance, all dog owners aren't lumped together, usually you
here how those are singaled out as a careless person. yet when a species
turns up in a place it dont belong, right away, the cries of " there goes
them aquarists/exoctic pet keepers again". >>
Good point Ray, private fish keepers are unduly stigmatized by any exotic
fish releases, whereas dog owners are not stigmatized by any wild dogs
running loose. I think that the reason for this is because dog keeping is
more established in society compared to fish keeping and considered more
"normal". This doesn't excuse the fact that fish keepers are treated worse
than dog keepers. If fish are going to be banned because of a few ignorant
people, then dogs should be too, in all fairness. Not that I want dogs to be
banned or I have anything against dog owners, but come on, let's be fair. We
should be treated equally and not arbitrarily treated differently. And the
states, if they're truly concerned about exotics, should stop stocking them,
instead of banning the ones that are of no interest to fishermen.
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org