Japanese Deepwater Zoanthids.
- Thread starter Speg
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Bongo Shrimp
Well-Known Member
Sorry but until some sort of "paperwork" is produced it doesn't really mean anything to me- NOT because I don't trust you, but because of Speg's post above yours.
BlueWaterTropicals
Active Member
A little info on how things work...
You have a diver/collector (in some cases a co-op of divers).Who collect and hold the corals for 1-5 days or more... They sell to the wholesalers who hold the corals from 1 day to weeks at a time. Then the corals are shipped out from there to another holding station or wholesaler who then distributes them out to retail customers etc etc.
For the record.... How come nobody has a problem with Red Sea/African coral/fish? Its illegal to ship them direct from Africa, but people by them all the time from HK, Singapore, Thailand and other places. Its the same thing, its only illegal to ship direct to the US in most cases.
You have a diver/collector (in some cases a co-op of divers).Who collect and hold the corals for 1-5 days or more... They sell to the wholesalers who hold the corals from 1 day to weeks at a time. Then the corals are shipped out from there to another holding station or wholesaler who then distributes them out to retail customers etc etc.
For the record.... How come nobody has a problem with Red Sea/African coral/fish? Its illegal to ship them direct from Africa, but people by them all the time from HK, Singapore, Thailand and other places. Its the same thing, its only illegal to ship direct to the US in most cases.
ronnie
Acro addict
Are any of these for sale on here and being touted as Red Sea or African coral/fish?
So I guess our biggest problem now is that the person that wrote the article on glassbox isn't credible any more. I'd love to see some facts that state that he is lying.
If the pawn shop has purchased a stolen item, typically it's confiscated by police and an investigation is made. Unless the pawn shop knowingly purchased something stolen they're not held at fault, they lose the stolen item however. That's why most shops are required by law to hold items for a period of time before reselling. Thanks history channel! (and I'm assuming you're not calling me ignorant here, or was that what you were trying for? I apologise if I missed a dig :xd: )
It's a retailers job to purchase from trusted suppliers and resale. part of the "trusted" part is to deal with suppliers who aren't breaking laws, aren't going to get them in trouble, etc. Again, how many stores do you know who have paper work on their Red Sea Purple Tangs or their Hawai'in Yellow Tangs? They're African Flameback Angels?
You've also stated you're a consumer/hobbyist, but you have sold stuff before-what methods do you do to prove to your buyers what they're getting? What form of documentation?
To the people asking for paperwork- Remember, due to the fact there is no restrictions on exporting these species the extent of the paperwork is the same you would see with a blue Damsel: An invoice with one of the line items reading "Japanese Deepwater Zoanthid L" or something similar. If BWT posted that, would you be satisfied or state that's not sufficient?
Bongo Shrimp
Well-Known Member
I think it depends EXACTLY what it is and EXACTLY what it says. It goes for anyone selling japanese zoas claiming they actually got them from japan- it just depends.
OP
OP
I didn't take a shot at you. I wouldn't do that.
I watch the history channel too...keep in mind, you gave the scenario for what happens with STOLEN goods...but not illegal goods... contraband is not the same as stolen goods.
Right, I'm a consumer/hobbyist. If I sell something that is illegal, do you not think that I would or should be held accountable? If you were the seller, would you feel like you shouldn't be held accountable? Again, ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you don't like the word "ignorant" then not knowing the law is no excuse
that sounds less offensive right?and again...I'm not taking a dig
Agreed, provided both sides (including myself of course) continue the discussion with some allowance of facts vs opinions and an acceptance of our position (meaning if we're stubborn one way we accept that sufficient evidence may prove insufficient for us. I.E. if someone shows me a court case showing a guy getting fined for collecting Zoas in japanese water, I'm stubborn and might state that this is one case)
He was corrected on species, most likely. However the original article states that seemingly all corals or at least all Zoas are illegal to collect/export. By proving that at least one Zoa species is not a problem to export, at least the article loses some credibility, as well as showing that useage of other purpoted facts in that article could be subject (if I said the sky is brown, you would probably suspect my opinion on cat's being capable of flying an airplane, regardless of what efforts I may have put forth in training said cat.)
If you're going to put my name to a quote, please quote accurately, otherwise it's sort of offensive. In my statement I said it was conceivable to harvest the Zoa's on the layer of coralline (I mentioned no thickness nor "slab") and then allow the Zoas to reattach to a rock prior to shipping. Hence you having always received your Zoas on rock or dead coral is entirely in line with what I stated.
There's many Red Sea fish regularly sold in the hobby that command a higher price for being from the Red Sea. Likewise from Africa, so yes, this is very real. That noone is making a fuss about it is the "blind eye" that seems ok simply because it's an established part of the hobby as opposed to something new a.k.a. a "craze"
Our biggest problem is we have two sides to the discussion. One side states near totality statements, several of which have proven to be false. Thus the source lacks sufficient credibility across all his statements-a secondary source would be helpful, especially one that links to direct facts as opposed to opinions (grounded or otherwise.) On the other side of the debate is someone has shown to a degree comparible to much other aspects of the hobby that what they are selling is named appropriatley.
So since the OP is asserting that Japanese Deepwater Zoa's don't exist in the hobby and/or that if they do they have become so illegally, it would typically be assumed that OP should provide a reason for the statement. OP did so, using an article that has shown to be doubtful/innacurrate in at least a few ways. I wouldn't say anyone's calling the article write nor the OP a liar, simply incorrect or inaccurate in some of their statements. For the discussion to continue, it would seem additional reasoning for the OP's assertion need be brought forth and either confirmed, or discussed and shown to be false in some way.
Or else we can just stick with "guilty until proven innocent"
ronnie
Acro addict
Can you cite some facts as to the reason that we should doubt the article?
I don't know the author or the interviewed party personally, so I'm curious why they would state inaccurate facts like they've done. Especially on an open website like gb.
I don't know the author or the interviewed party personally, so I'm curious why they would state inaccurate facts like they've done. Especially on an open website like gb.
err...so using my example of a typical invoice, would that prove sufficient or not? I'm not talking too hypothetical, lets say he has a buyers invoice with a letterhead from a company in Hong Kong and one of the line items reads "Japanese Deepwater Zoanthid Md. Colony----------xx.xx ea." would that or would that not be sufficient? Unless a species is CITES, this is the extent of paperwork you will be provided. If you purchase a Red Sea Purple Tang, your invoice would read identically, as this is the standard within the industry. As such, is the standard in the industry sufficient, and if not, please explain what more you would like before being satisfied (keeping in mind we're not talking about $10,000 items or something.)
If you purchase a CITES species, you will receive the identical invoice, along with your CITES paperwork. The original invoice will read the same, it's only the seperate CITES documents that are proof of the legallity of the animal. With a species that is not covered by CITES, how does one aquire a paperwork showing as such?
I have a Hawai'in Yellow Tang that was legally collected, then exported, then imported. believe me?
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,873
- Reaction score
- 348
wait, wait. you're not in hawaii, so how could you have exported from hawaii then imported back and still have it? :wink:
Answer = Maybe
ronnie
Acro addict
Exactly - almost.
If there is a $10 yellow tang not from hawaii, and you have a tang that is "from" Hawaii, and you are asking $200 because of that name, but can't/won't prove it.
Which one are you going to buy?
Why?
That is my point I guess. Why claim a coral/fish is from somewhere, knowing it will drive a higher price, when you can't/won't prove it? To me, that is bad business.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,873
- Reaction score
- 348
If you consider it bad business don't buy it! It's as simple as that! Doesn't mean you have to sit here and basically accuse someone of false advertising when you can't prove it.
Once again, innocent until proven guilty. This is the US right?
I didn't take a shot at you. I wouldn't do that.
I watch the history channel too...keep in mind, you gave the scenario for what happens with STOLEN goods...but not illegal goods... contraband is not the same as stolen goods.
Right, I'm a consumer/hobbyist. If I sell something that is illegal, do you not think that I would or should be held accountable? If you were the seller, would you feel like you shouldn't be held accountable? Again, ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you don't like the word "ignorant" then not knowing the law is no excuse
and again...I'm not taking a dig
LOL, I didn't think it was a dig, but sometimes I miss them so I figured I'd ask just to clarify.
As far as illegal-yes, if you were selling drugs it's just downright against the law, and whoevers doing the selling is in the wrong. I think in the case of these Zoa's, BWT provided a source showing that the collection/selling of them was not illegal (the article stated all zoas are illegal or would have too much red tape to allow selling, BWT source countered that claim.) So I thought that issue was resolved. Next we're dealing with documentation of said location and legality (that the item is not 100% illegal, only illegal in certain situations (non-medical drugs, improperly collected corals, right?)
So we're not talking about you selling something that's illegal outright, we're saying where's the proof that what you're selling is what you claim it to be (at least that's my understanding as the first claim that JDZ are outright illegal-if we're still on that one any further discussion is pointless before resolving the overall legallity issue.) In such a case, industry standards are typically used. You selling frags of your stuff is industry standard- you say "this is this" and based upon visual evidence, your assertion is believed (I'm assuming here, I apologise if this isn't what you do as I don't mean to speak for you.)
This is what the sellers of JDZ are doing, using industry standards. If something more than industry standards is required, I guess I would have to ask what is needed?
The example of what I did at the store was industry standards-I purchased and sold Hawaiin Yellow Tangs and Red Sea Purple tangs based upon information supplied by my suppliers. Now if it was something outright illegal, such as selling a Garibaldi (illegal in california but legal to sell out of state) it would be on me-The known selling of an illegal item places responsibility of the seller.
Private plane that fly's faster than the cargo plane? Or perhaps I booked a flight in the cargo plane (ice packs were required, it was warm out) :tongue:
ronnie
Acro addict
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I'm simply asking questions which aren't being answered. So should I just not ask questions that people don't want to or can't answer?
Similar threads
