[Coral-List] banning wild collection when mariculture sources exist [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Charles Delbeek
delbeek at waquarium.org
Sun Mar 2 16:39:47 EST 2008
margiea wrote:
> Les
> I agree - my personal view is that the key word in this entire debate is
> "sustainable". From a conservation point of view it should be prefixed
> by the word "ecologically" sustainable. The trick is definitely in
> getting the triple bottom line-balance sorted, to foster stewardship. I
> would be keen to see some more dialogue about other people's efforts to
> resolve this one.
>
> Cheers
> Margie
>
> Margaret Atkinson
>
> Project Manager
> Fisheries Issues Group
> Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
> 2-68 Flinders St
> PO Box 1379
> Townsville, Qld 4810
>
Then we need to start a dialog with those in the field actually trying
to run such a business so that we can better understand the issues and
problems facing these operations. We need to understand how the other
half "lives" instead of condemning and/or lumping them all under the
label of unsustainable "reef rapers" and recognize that there are some
out there who want to, and are trying to, do the right thing for their
business, the industry, the local population and the environment. Unless
one can show the value of the living reef to those who live next to
them, then you will not have much chance to convince them that using
coral to make concrete for roads, houses and bridges, allowing logging
and construction run-off to flood over a reef, or blasting reefs to get
the fish, may not the best use of that resource. With all the economic
pressures that reefs are placed under, the trade in aquacultured coral
from the source, may well be one of the few of these with the most
concern for their recovery and survival. Most other industries using the
reefs are strictly consuming them with little regard for the long term
survival of the reefs.
Aloha!
Charles
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list