# Issues with local collection



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

It seems that the legal/moral issues concerning the local collection of rocks, wood and plants is becoming increasingly discussed of late so I believe it is time to dedicate a topic specifically to that. Plus, I am sick of all the bickering and snide comments in various off-topic threads

First, lets keep this civil and remember that sarcasm, humor and implied tones are very hard to pick up on with written word. I am sure some confusion has happened recently simply because people were not sure if a post was intended to be serious, joking, etc. 

As the hobby grows, the topic of collection (and many other unrelated topics aswell) is become more important. Already salt folks are passing rumors of licencing, etc for the purchase, ownership and sale of corals. Why?-because the enormity of the SW industry has had an impact on the environment as wild collection of natural reefs is very prevalent. FW enthusiastic can find similar issues with habitat destruction, breeding stock depletion, etc of natural ecosystems. 

Remember, what may seem insignificant on an individual level can really add up when you think of thousands of people over many years. I would guess that just considering the major plant forums the are 10,000+ individuals in the hobby and probably twice that many never set foot on a forum. Imagine the impact 20,000 people can have on the environment over the next 10 years. So, in my opinion, this is an important issue.

Second, lets not forget the most important aside to this topic. Common sense Rules and laws are not there to keep down those with common sense or intelligence; rules/laws help protect everything(from people, to the environment to our grandchildren's environment) from those that lack the mental or moral fortitude to regulate themselves.

I can't condone someone for collecting a few rocks for their personal use, or grabbing a chunk of driftwood from the lake; however, there are certainly times, places and situations where that is acceptable. I do not think anyone should collect anything from public parks or protected lands, especially those were the park is "specially" defined (ie, Petrified Forest) There are a great many places to collect on private land, places set aside for public use but not protected (off-road locations, etc) and quite honestly, some of the nicest rock I have found was at my local landscape supply.... huge quantities of similar material for whopping prices of .25-.40 per pound and often as not, they said, "Heck, you only have 3 little chunks, don't worry about it" 

One last bit before I get off my box, If everyone did it..... right. Sounds silly and totally uncool, I know, but it is true. And yes, there are much bigger issues to worry about but why should we ignore small issues as if they don't exhiste? What's a few aerosol can's right? Little lead in the paint never hurt anyone? Mercury, just trace amounts...dump it in the sea and it will go away. So what if I kill a few dozen passenger pigeons, look how many there are? Its not all about us.


So, there are my opinions. Please share yours.


----------



## Bert H (Mar 2, 2004)

OK, I'll be the first to take the bait.  

I live in Florida. Practically everywhere you look in this state, you see water - from the ocean to lakes, rivers, canals, roadside ditches, etc. I have collected plants from ditches and rivers. I can travel from Gainesville to a small coastal town and for a good half of that trip (which is 45 miles) I have ditches on either side of the road. In those ditches, which are prevalent alongside many roads, I can find Ludwigia, Proserpinaca, Bacopa, Myriophyllum, Hydrilla, Micranthemum, Saggitaria, Vallisneria, Hygrophilla, just to name a few plants. Personally, I don't have a problem stopping by one of those ditches and occasionally grabbing a sprig or two of a plant. I don't believe I am doing any environmental damage by doing that. If someone with a backhoe and bulldozer come along and started raping the land alongside the road, I would be upset with that. I am not a commercial vendor who would be collecting with the intent of re-selling. (I checked that out with state environmental folks once, and one would need a license to do that commerecially.) 

If I am in one of the beautiful, pristine, clear freshwater springs which are so common in northern and central Florida, I can also see a plethora of plants in there. If you have ever wanted to swim in an planted aquarium, go snorkeling or diving in one of our springs. The Ichetucknee, the Rainbow, the Silver River to name a few. If the spring is a state, local, or federal park, I wouldn't remove anything from it. The land there is protected for us and for future generations to enjoy. I have occasionally picked up a plant or two from a canoe on a river or lake not in a protected piece of property. Common sense needs to prevail. Of course, I don't condone ripping off every stalk of tapegrass or Ludwigia on the banks, but I guess I have never felt guilty taking a stem here and there. As far as collecting rocks and wood, I guess I feel the same. If on public lands, 'leave nothing but footprints, take nothing but pictures' is my edict. If not on public lands I don't have a problem with folks taking a rock or a piece of wood that might strike one.

As Dennis said, it is much easier to pick up wood and rock from a vendor than it is to find one oneself. There is a place just up the road from here which sells cypress and cedar - beautiful weather beaten pieces. More wood than you would use if you were to set up tanks for everyone in your family once a year. They also sell some petrified Florida wood - heck I never knew Florida ever had petrified wood. But the fact is, I can go there and legally and for a pittance, get any hardscape I want for my tanks. 

Dennis, I understand your point about 'what's one aerosol, or one small mercury spill, etc... The last couple of years mother nature has dropped hundreds of trees in Florida, obviously some of them in waterways. Maybe that's why I don't feel like grabbing a small branch of a waterlogged piece of wood is a problem. I also don't see that there are the numbers to worry environmentally speaking. Coral reefs are a much more endangered ecosystem than plants growing in roadside ditches, lakes and canals.

OK, now I shall put on my suit of armor and await the comments...


----------



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

Thanks for a well thoughtout response Bert. To be honest, I agree with the plants in situations like you mention. Common sense should prevail and the top potrions of a few stems of Ludwigia will grow back, possibly 2 or 3 fold. Same for the wood really. Again, common sense must prevail.

Time and a place for everything and there is a big difference between sustainable, replenishing resources and protected, endangered, or slow developing ones.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

Nice points, and a reasonable discussion. Might I just add that just because something is on sale by a vendor doesn't mean that they obtained it in an ethical manner. Governments have a way of issuing permits to any corporation with enough money to buy them.

OTOH, our entire economy relies on strip mines, wholesale logging, and diversion of natural waterways, just to name a few. Go visit a timber operation or a mine if you ever get a chance. The scale at which we take from the land is actually quite impressive. Picking up a few rocks on public, but unprotected land out west, where one can see for 100s of miles in every direction isn't much of a sin next to driving a Hummer or leaving your lights on during the day. As near as I can tell we have a pretty good supply of rock out there. Trying to sell the rocks is probably a little over the top though.

I'm far more concerned about introducing invasive species where they don't belong, inbreeding and crossbreeding fish, and collecting rare plants to the point of depleting the natural habitat. I sure wouldn't feel guilty about snipping a few leaves of a plant that grows along the road by the millions. All the plants we keep got snipped from somewhere.


----------



## Lauren (Mar 18, 2006)

I agree with gualic about the species introduction. inproper disposal of clippings should be a far greater concern to the hobby than picking a branch out of a water way.

I simply do not believe that enough people are doing this to make it distructive. Take your 20,000 hobbiests, most of them will buy their materials instead of collect them. But assuming they all do wild collections, devide those hobbiests by the 3,718,711square miles of the United States. Even if every single hobbiest collected, that is one collection per every 185square miles. Honestly, I think everyone has much more pressing things to worry about than someone picking up a rock nearly 200 square miles apart from the next person picking up a rock.

I do not believe that limited collection does any harm to the environment. That log will just decay and rid itself anyways, those rocks will just break down into sediments. As long as you do not collect on protected land, where those itemsmay be protected, I think that there is ethically NOTHING wrong with collection. Scientists take collections from the wild all the time, the geology department at my school is filled with hundreds of beautiful specimins, many hand collected by the professors.


----------



## mrbelvedere138 (Jan 18, 2006)

I can certainly condone the collection of most rocks (come on, they are everywhere), driftwood (trees fall down all the time) and plants (they are usually invasive species if you can find them growing here in the States). You are right, dennis, certain thing shouldn't be taken i.e black sand from Hawaiin beaches, Petrified Forest rocks, etc. I feel the impact is so minimal from the planted aquarium hobby that it pales to marine collection. They throw cyanide off boats to catch fish in some areas. All we might do is collects a few stems or a couple rocks. No collateral damage as we sometimes see in marine environments. Plants in the wild grow extremely quickly, whereas corals take years. The only plants I cannot condone taking are the very rare wild ones (Ludwigia guinea, eriocaulons, toninas, certain crypts, etc.) and even then they aren't usually from highly poulated areas where collection is likely to take place (remote jungles, etc.).


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

*Many other things to worry about*

At the present moment, the impact of wild collecting of items such as driftwood, rocks, and even plants by freshwater hobbyists is minimal. I understand that even though it may be a small impact, there is an impact nonetheless.

Do I condone the taking of such products of nature...not necessarily. However, I believe there are many things in the world that are of a greater concern than taking items for your planted tank.

For example, the Industrial shrimp aquaculture. Tilling the ocean, lakes, and rivers for consumable shrimp impacts those ecosystems far greater than the taking driftwood off a lake, or nabbing a few clippings of plants. For every pound of shrimp collected hundreds of acres, and hundreds of pounds of aquatic life is destroyed and wasted. There has been a move to shrimp farms, but those have significant socio-economical impact on local economies. Only way to prevent this carnage on both the environmental and social scale is to reduce the demand for shrimp. But it's not going to happen.

The demand for freshwater goods that are collected from the local environment will not cause a significant impact to our environment since currently there's not a large demand. Until the demand, and rampant abuse of collection of freshwater items rises, taking a rock, plant, etc. doesn't top my list to warrant me calling the Forest Ranger.

-John N.


----------



## YuccaPatrol (Mar 26, 2006)

I collect all of my own driftwood and rocks. With the exception of two pieces of driftwood collected from a beach, all of it has come from my family's private property.

Removing wood and rocks from protected lands such as national parks where such actions are not legal is something I would never do.

It is certainly hypocritical to preach against the collection of driftwood while stocking your tank with wood that you purchased rather than collected. That wood still had to be collected by someone somewhere and you have not removed yourself from the loop just because you purchased the wood and were not the one who actually collected it. Can you really be certain that the driftwood and bogwood collection practices in Malaysia are environmentally friendly? I don't think you can, but my best guess would be that commercial driftwood harversters in a third world country are less likely to be concerned about the environment than I am when collecting in a natural stream on family property.

And what about rocks? Is the rock you buy in a store that is removed from the earth by heavy machinery and dynamite from an unnatural quarry and then transported by diesel truck to your landscaping materials retailer more environmentally friendly than the one I pick up off of the ground and carry home in my backpack? I don't think so.

But I really do not see the collection of driftwood as a terrible threat to the environment. Certainly collection of wild-caught living specimins for our aquariums is much more detrimental. I have several types of fish that I know are only available as wild-caught specimins. When/if these species become extinct, I will know that I was part of the problem.

If you want to buy it, fine with me. If you want to collect it like I do, I highly encourage that if you collect it with some sensitivity to the environment and local laws.

I think that it would be most helpful and a very positive effort for those posting here who are most against the unlawful collection of driftwood to do some research and post a list of laws and regulations concerning driftwood collection. If it is important enough of an issue to someone, then it is important enough to spend some time creating something useful that could actually help people who may not know that they are collecting driftwood unlawfully. If I knew that it was not legal to collect on a beach that I am planning on visiting, then I certainly would comply with the law.

I am visiting Hawaii later this year and had planned on looking for more good wood. Because of this thread and some recent comments I have read on this site, I have done some preliminary searches and have found no laws restricting driftwood collection on the beaches there. If someone can point me to such a law, I would appreciate it.

Edit: I did some additional searching for rock and driftwood collection regulations in the state of Hawaii and found these regulation for the Hawaii State Park System and it looks like collecting driftwood and rocks on the beaches on some protected public lands is perfectly legal:

http://www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/dsp/rules/13-146.pdf

§13-146-32:

(c)* A person may gather or collect for personal use,
reasonable quantities of natural products of a renewable
nature, including, but not limited to*, seashells, fruits,
berries, flowers, seeds, pine cones, seaweeds,* driftwood*,
and marine objects of natural origin. . . .No person shall gather or
collect these products for the purpose of sale. The
quantities of these products may also be restricted by the
board or its authorized representative.

(f) A person may gather or collect small quantities
of pebbles or small rocks by hand for personal use, except
in prohibited areas which shall be posted. The quantities
of these items, however, may be restricted by the board or
its authorized representative. No person shall collect
these objects for the purpose of sale.

Another Edit:

Here in Alabama, it is against state park regualtions to remove any items from the parks.


----------



## standoyo (Aug 25, 2005)

hi all,
IMHO
anything that's endangered and not renewable with exceptions are not to be collected...a little here and there with common sense perhaps...

two grey areas regarding topic happening in my country...

1.a lot of the driftwood from malaysia comes from dams. which are protected areas...the dead trees from damming done decades ago.
container loads are exported
erm how do you rate that? it's not renewable but it's not really important to keep in the water...so an exception perhaps.

2.the limestone hills along the north south highway in the peninsular malaysia doesn't look the same anymore... a lot of it is being quarried to horizon level.
the limestone, granite etc are used for construction . whatever that's nice and small; fossilized wood etc are sold as decoration. 
i don't like what's happening here. however, third world country...we need to house the people properly no? another exception?
-----

My point of view on wild fauna/flora collection...
i doubt there's enough to satisfy our thirst...i believe it should be done in a sustainable manner. the beautiful ones should be quickly studied and bred to satisfy hobbyists' demand. not continue to be harvested from the wild till endangered.
Parks are parks and only pictures taken and tracks left behind...not my words but something i will never forget.

Some people are stuck up enough to say they don't like hybrids or line breds calling them whims of man... wow...luckily people like this are minority. if you are a scientist...fine. however if all hobbyists think like this we will soon make everything endangered or gone...

[i think there's more channa in america than in malaysia now, water is better there...sic]

lastly, competition breeds desire...theres more and more competitions for nicest best of whatever...no end in sight. 
it is unfortunate that this gives rise to pillage of mother nature.

what do you think happens to the stuff we have collected/bought...rocks, wood and stuff...will our children appreciate it or will it end up in bin?

i'm certainly not out of the loop, but i'm only enjoying mother nature's crumbs...


----------



## banderbe (Nov 17, 2005)

standoyo said:


> anything that's endangered and not renewable with exceptions are not to be collected


It seems to me that endangered and non-renewable plants _should_ be collected, studied, grown and re-introduced. Many species of fish and some plants would be totally extinct but for the efforts of hobbyists in preserving them.

Standing back and just letting an endangered plant fade into history is irresponsible.


----------



## Tiapan (Jun 14, 2006)

I agree that limited collection is fine. sometimes the reintroducing of species in not however, not when its endangered, but look at the wild environments of texas and florida. in the waterways you have oscar and pacu, on land in florida there are free breeding colonies of caimans, burmese pythons, and green iguanas let loose by reptile hobbyist (which i am one of, hobbyist not a releaser), water lettuce a common pond plant made its ways into texas water systems and was reeking havock just a few years ago. 

Whats truly sad is the massive collection of animals for salt trade, pacific hard corals take years apon years to grow. and they are dying in droves from temperature fluxuation and pollution almost faster then they can collect it, that is when they arent blasting it apart to get a few more "Nemo" fish. and look at texas where there is a law not to sell turtles under 4 inches, who on this site has not seen baby turtles for sell at their LFS. 

Now i dont have a lot of rock in my tank, but most of my wood came from my own back yard from deadfall, there is plenty of deadfall wood in the world that could probably be fine in a tank, i think mine is a type of birch, hasnt fallen apart and been in the tank for over a year, and has not changed my water quality much at all, i find it funny that a specific type of wood became sooo popular because it was what the stores were selling, not to say i dont have a few very small pieces of drift, but i cant afford what they charge for that wood here, not it large quantities. 

So do i think its alright to collect, most assuredly, but not on protected land and not it large quantities,a few pieces of dead wood fall is actually safer to pick up, look at yellowstone, they have to use controlled forest fires to get rid of their deadfall, they had a disastrous one when they didnt do controlled burning, and the rate at which aquatic plants grow is so fast when compared to any kind of coral it would be easier to compare our hobby to just another form of gardening with a little more water, and you never hear anyone protesting again Houston garden center for selling hybrid plants, or excessive planting and harvesting. So respect laws, write your congressman or woman(i do) about the larger negative environmental practices, and dont worry so much about me using dead wood from my own back yard.


----------



## npnailer (Apr 16, 2007)

Great thread, and worth a bump. Nearly everything in my tank, from the substrate(local lakeside sand) to the plants(every one collected locally) to the fish(ditto, save a lonely oto, and a half dozen flag fish).
I do not feel in the least "environmentally insensitive" when I'm out collecting(ALWAYS legally, mind you..I even have a collection permit for darters from the State of Michigan), as I KNOW where the fish and/or plants or hardscape came from and I know it was collected in a location and manner that does not in the least endanger any existing populations. A point that was brought up earlier is VERY valid. Theres seems to be some idea that "store bought" means more "green". IMO, nothing could be further from the truth. As long as a species(plant or animal) is not in trouble..then collecting locally is FAR more environmentally safe, then purchasing one of any number of species that may have(and often are!) collected in VERY "sketchy" manner with little regard to the eventual effect it may have on that species, or the local environment.
Even the sale of local specimens(particularly driftwood, which I plan on exploring), being subject to in most cases rather strict laws, IMO is much less impactfull then buying a piece of "driftwood" that's been hauled half way across the earth, after being dug up or chopped from the roots of a living rain forest tree!(seriously..do the research..). 
Remember..with some exceptions, EVERY rock, or piece of driftwood you purchase..was harvested from the wild, some place. The same can be said for many fish, as a good number of them(and nearly all salt water) fish are wild caught...again, often in areas and under regulations that leave a LOT to be desired from an impact standpoint.
Wouldn't you rather know exactly where it came from, and that it was done in a safe and ethical manner?
Well...it's easy to do, when you do it yourself.


----------



## Kurt Reinhart (Mar 4, 2003)

npnailer- dittos

I totally agree. Obviously, collecting from the wild is something that only a minority of aquarium enthusiasts are ever likely to attempt. Following state/federal rules is also important. In many cases permits are required but not a big deal to attain. 

Maybe its because I grew up in ponds, ditches, and canals but I feel much more personally connected to things that I catch. Because of this connection, the personal value of the flora/fauna is much greater and probably leads to more attentive care. Its sort of like assuming farmers don't care about the health & welfare of their animals because they ultimately end up sending them to be slaughtered. Couldn't be further from the truth.


----------



## nikitanain (Sep 6, 2007)

Malaysia is not a third world country 

the reason these things are freely collected in third world countries and developing countries is because majority of the people are not aware of the consequences of their actions. its hard earning a living in such places. the aquariums and fish business are hot things right now and collecting from the wild means more profits and less investment. 
this does not mean that all the people don't care about the environment. its just that less people are aware of the consequences. 
also a lot of these countries do not have good laws in place, to protect nature, and even if there are laws, there is no one to enforce the law.

IMO animals and other beings that are endangered should be collected and bred in order to improve the chances of survival for that specie which may not be possible, with the pollution, oil spills, poaching and other man made problems.....


----------



## Nelumbo74 (May 2, 2008)

the endangered flora and fauna *are* collected by professionals in the fish & wildlife resources, as well as, the experts with our local public zoos and aquariums. however, they only take what is needed to study and/or propogate in captivity. if lay persons (even hobbyists) were to take these endangered species, then they would disappear even faster. this is not an opinion, it is a proven fact.


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

I never knew taking rocks would be an issue. There is a whole hobby centered around rock collecting. They are called rock hounds. Some of these people travel the country going on rock collecting trips. Same with shells. I don't think it is illegal to collect driftwood or shells from any beach even state parks. When I was a kid I went clam digging on Cape Cod, no permit required. In fact one time it was a school class trip. Mostly you just need to use common sense.


----------



## ghengis (Jun 11, 2008)

Just stumbled on this Thread. I agree with most of what has been said (only cos I've not read the entire thing, just parts of it...). We as hobbyists, indeed humanity as a collective, have a duty of care to the environment and the welfare of natural resources.
I live in the Far North region of Queensland, Australia. Much of this region, such as the Daintree Rainforest, Great Barrier Reef etc, is World Heritage listed and therefore protected from any form of pillage or destruction. The local area around Cairns is fortunate enough to have many rivers, streams and forest locations that are open to public access and use, where fishing, hunting and bushwalking (and collecting rocks and wood for one's aquarium) are permitted. Even still, there are limits and boundries on what a person is able to take from these places. 
Recently, I have found myself enamoured of the idea of a monster reef/saltwater aquarium, perusing page after page of Forum DIY tank building Threads. The thing is, I don't know if I can do it. Not for the reasons of cost or practicality (although they are, of course, highly influential factors), but for the fact that I simply cannot abide the idea of keeping "live rock" or coral, that at some point was still firmly attached to an ocean floor off Fiji (or wherever) and was literally ripped from it's location and eventually sold to a "hobbyist". I also have issues with wild caught fish. I am not solely pointing the finger at the Reefer crew here, as there are many species such as Betta's and Loaches that are caught for commercial trade. To me, and this may or may not be hypocritical, there is a marked difference between keeping something that is captive bred, such as Goldfish, Tetra's or Barbs and keeping Lionfish, Clownfish, or Clown Loaches. Of course, it could be argued that Goldfish were once common carp, Betta's never used to have a class called "Splendens"; it's only through many years of selective (and surgical) breeding, that we now have the Ranchu or Crowntail.
I digress. A recent issue of _TFH_ Magazine featured an article about Coral farming, where live Coral is, legally and sensibly, taken from reefs and propogated for commercial trade. It is through projects and initiatives such as this, combined with a liberal dose of common sense, accountability and the encouragement of each other (whether an experienced aquarist or Forum noob), that we should have little trouble in sustaining this environment, and the hobby, for many, many years to come.

This is a fantastic Thread, and a topic that warrants further discussion in all areas, and on all levels, of this hobby...


----------



## gokul (Jul 1, 2008)

I collect all my stuff locally. Thanks for raising such a relevant topic. I'm from South India. We have a plethora of aquatic life here. There are many rare fish in fragmented and specialized habitats in the hills and forests here. I collect common native fish found in the irrigation canals and other water bodies. All these fish can be sustainably collected without too much harn to their numbers. In spite of the ubiquitous Tilapia (introduced by the Govt. in mid 50's as food fish) many native species cling on tenaciously. IMO indiscriminate fishing in bio-diversity hotspots in the Western Ghats for export is a major concern. Trawling in marine fishery causes far more damage to the reefs. Our Govt. has banned the sale and use of live rock in the hobby! Collection is no problem if properly managed and vulnerable species protected. Even P.Denisonii can be sustainably harvested in the wild when properly managed.


----------



## nosoop4u246 (Aug 27, 2008)

YuccaPatrol said:


> Is the rock you buy in a store that is removed from the earth by heavy machinery and dynamite from an unnatural quarry and then transported by diesel truck to your landscaping materials retailer more environmentally friendly than the one I pick up off of the ground and carry home in my backpack? I don't think so.


I think this was among the most important comments made. If you want to talk sustainability, taking a quick drive to your local ditch and picking up a few small rocks, bits of wood, or plants _cuttings_ (which, as stated, will grow back in days) is much more eco-friendly (yuck... global warming talk) than paying $10 for a nice piece of wood shipped in from some other country, or even a different state, regardless of how friendly the collection method. Unfortunately, "common sense is so rare that it is often mistaken for genius."


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

I have accquired american val from lake ontario. Now, the peices I have collected were adrift. However with the zebra mussle infestation in our lakes, I had to make sure it was absolutely clean. 

I've also collected driftwood and some rock. Much of the driftwood is collected by beach side residents to burn. 

It depends. I won't object to taking home a rogue plant, but I would not go around digging them up.


----------



## brion0 (Dec 24, 2008)

I think collecting rock, wood, an plants makes a tank better. If things are just bought at your LFS its not the same. I dont see a problem if you just pick up a few things for your own tank. Non native plants and fish sould never be released.


----------



## elMichael (Nov 18, 2003)

banderbe said:


> It seems to me that endangered and non-renewable plants _should_ be collected, studied, grown and re-introduced. Many species of fish and some plants would be totally extinct but for the efforts of hobbyists in preserving them.
> 
> Standing back and just letting an endangered plant fade into history is irresponsible.


Haven't been here in a long while, but your views remind me of a debate raging at another forum about whale sharks, which are said to be endangered... whether a certain integrated resort company should proceed with its plan of catching one or two whale sharks and putting them in a show tank...for education and research or as cash cows... depending on which side of the fence you're on.


----------



## spstimie (Jul 2, 2009)

I was up in the mountains here in Colorado for the weekend. I started thinking about a rocky mountain tank. Very cold water so I thought I would see if any one had a similar tank anywhere, but then I read this thread. After doing some research, I am pretty sure any and all collection here in this state would have to be on private land.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

I often thought the same thing. I think a high desert scape with red sandstone similar to the canyons of southern Utah (Zions, Bryce's Canyon) would be phenomenal.


----------



## Gridspider (Mar 4, 2012)

New to this forum but very interested in both conservation and making a few bucks.

I think it's very simple. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE COLLECTING! and do NOT use heavy machinery. I collect driftwood and other beach finds up and down the coastal areas and inter-coastal areas that surround me. I feel that as long as you are aware of what you are collecting and what impact you may be having you are far ahead of the game. Industrial levels are the cause of deforestation and destruction of natural habitat. Heavy machinery destroys more of an ecosystem in just making a road or using heavy machinery to get to the resource than any individual with a shovel or bare hands could ever cause in their lifetime. For example I collected a large piece of driftwood about 100lbs or more using my hands and my canoe. It took a better part of four hours given the location and a heavy toll on my muscles just getting it in the canoe. One bulldozer could have built a road and taken down half the island in that time. a hobbyist even if he sells his finds has a limited impact simply by using limited means to collect in the first place. With living collections it's bit more tricky but with a simple field guide you can be aware of what species need help and what species are proliferating and even possibly becoming a problem. and as noted in a previous post if you collect breed and reintroduce an endangered species you are doing more good than harm.
Truth is buying from a local nursery could be more dangerous than getting it yourself, Unless there are regulations( and there are). Conservation is something we must do on an individual level. Be aware be kind and our world will be a better place for it.


----------



## catherine carney (Mar 12, 2012)

Great topic and responses.

The aquarium hobby is not the problem in most cases--look to "development" for loss of species and habitat--in many cases aquarists are the ones keeping species and developing the captive maintenance/breeding/propogation methods that allow re-introduction at a later time.

I think that collecting "wild" materials, whether it be rocks, wood, plants, or livestock can be done safely/sustainably as long as we are not greedy. 

Case in point: August 2011 I was on a collecting trip with the rest of the "fish nuts" in my local club, and we found more brindled madtoms in one stretch of river than any of us had ever seen (personable little fish and great for riverine aquariums). All told, we caught about 2 dozen of them. Did we take them all?? NO! We documented (photographed/counted) what we caught (which we forwarded to our state natural resources department), and at least 18 of them were returned to the river. The rest (one or two per person) went home with aquarists who will raise them and possibly breed them. Did we put a dent in this population by our actions? Highly unlikely, and any impact we had is considerably less than the impact of field (silt/fertilizer) and urban (pollutants of all sorts) runoff from upstream on this river every year.

Many of us also collected rocks/driftwood/plant samples on the same trip, but again, in moderation.


----------



## HDBenson (Sep 24, 2014)

Seeing this is an old thread I hope that this can be rejuvenated. 

I agree that collecting takes both common sense and, sensitivity. Also, the many points having been made regarding collection from protected/public premises is very valid. I collect from my family's private property and other private property with permission from the landholder. I live in rural MS and, with our economy being one of the weakest in the US, many landowners indiscriminately convert virgin ecosystems to agricultural land for a measly price. Is this worth the loss of both plant and animal species? Not in my opinion.
Many of the local water systems around me used to be full of a diverse range of plants, fishes and, reptiles. Now I find only a few species of each in a given ecosystem. Now, obviously this isn't from collection, rather land development. Thankfully, my family has owned the land we live on for almost two hundred years and, we have never allowed any commercial activity of any kind(go gramps!). Luckily in my "backyard" we still have very pristine ecosystems available for me to collect from. I do not feel that MY individual collection adversely affects even this small range of habitats considering I snag a few stems of this or, that every few weeks and, I never collect wildlife for keeps besides G. affinis, and sunfish species, prolific species with a rapid population re-doubling rate. I believe as aquariasts we should be conscientious of what and, where we collect from - whether it's from private land or, a LFS. As many have said everything was collected somewhere at some point along the way.


----------

