Free Shark

[K9coral]

Oops, now that I have read all the posts. Sorry the poor F'er died. Sucks for our ignorance. At least you tried and better luck next time.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with Wade on this: Even though it's native to the east coast of Florida, releasing it to the wild is a BAD idea and potentially illegal. Please don't consider this suggestion.

Have you contacted the people at the new Georgia Aquarium (AKA Home Depot Aquarium)? I would think they might be interested since they're new and in the market for animals to exhibit.

Georgia would not be interested, nor are they "in the market". They open in less than a month.

 

[GSchiemer]

Poor shark, since you REFUSE to release it into it's native waters (Atlantic Region) it will probably end up dying (if it hasnt already). Many critters (wild and domesticated) are released by institutions such as the Audubon Society every year without ill effect to the ecosystem. Since these institutions spend millions of $$$$ on research I'm sure they know what they are doing (at least a lot more than you or I :lol: ). This is much different than letting nutria loose on Louisiana's coast or releasing Asian carp to destroy a freshwater ecosystem. But like you said, you arent letting him go! Hope you find someone or some company that can take the fish from you. Good Luck! Oh yeah - IMO - since I've caught nurse sharks while fishing in Lake Pontchartrain, I seriously doubt you would harm anything by releasing the fish, BUT you wont do that......(sarcastic remark kept to self).

That's a completely ignorant comment. Institutions that rehabilitate and release wild animals back into their native habitat employ special procedures and protocol, and it's done with the original intention of releasing the animal back into the wild. This situation differs completely because the animal in question had an unknown past in the hands of unknown aquarium hobbyists and was of unknown origin. It was raised in captivity from a juvenile and was most assuredly exposed to foreign bacteria and parasites. It probably could not have survived in the wild and if it could, there's a chance that it may have introduced unknown pathogens into the ecosystem. If you ask any zoologist or animal rehabilitation expert, they would tell you that the animal should be destroyed rather than released into the wild. I ask that you educate yourself before making another inflammatory and ignorant comment.

 

[Anonymous]

Poor shark, since you REFUSE to release it into it's native waters (Atlantic Region) it will probably end up dying (if it hasnt already). Many critters (wild and domesticated) are released by institutions such as the Audubon Society every year without ill effect to the ecosystem. Since these institutions spend millions of $$$$ on research I'm sure they know what they are doing (at least a lot more than you or I :lol: ). This is much different than letting nutria loose on Louisiana's coast or releasing Asian carp to destroy a freshwater ecosystem. But like you said, you arent letting him go! Hope you find someone or some company that can take the fish from you. Good Luck! Oh yeah - IMO - since I've caught nurse sharks while fishing in Lake Pontchartrain, I seriously doubt you would harm anything by releasing the fish, BUT you wont do that......(sarcastic remark kept to self).

That's a completely ignorant comment. Institutions that rehabilitate and release wild animals back into their native habitat employ special procedures and protocol, and it's done with the original intention of releasing the animal back into the wild. This situation differs completely because the animal in question had an unknown past in the hands of unknown aquarium hobbyists and was of unknown origin. It was raised in captivity from a juvenile and was most assuredly exposed to foreign bacteria and parasites. It probably could not have survived in the wild and if it could, there's a chance that it may have introduced unknown pathogens into the ecosystem. If you ask any zoologist or animal rehabilitation expert, they would tell you that the animal should be destroyed rather than released into the wild. I ask that you educate yourself before making another inflammatory and ignorant comment.

I love conversing with people who know it all, especially when they post and run and then never respond to any more inquiries in the same thead....

 

[Fishwise]

 

[K9coral]

GS, please do a little more research before "talking trash". That's my opinion and Im sticking with it :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

GS, please do a little more research before "talking trash". That's my opinion and Im sticking with it :wink:

What he said was correct though. :?

 

[GSchiemer]

Georgia would not be interested, nor are they "in the market". They open in less than a month.

"Galleon", I guess you didn't read all the posts either. Now that the shark is dead, it's a moot point whether the Georgia aquarium will accept the shark or not. But I'm curious as to why you're so sure that they would not have accepted the animal? Most new aquariums are in the market for display animals, even nurse sharks. I know Bruce Carlson personally and can refer the question to him, if necessary.

Greg

 

[GSchiemer]

Poor shark, since you REFUSE to release it into it's native waters (Atlantic Region) it will probably end up dying (if it hasnt already). Many critters (wild and domesticated) are released by institutions such as the Audubon Society every year without ill effect to the ecosystem. Since these institutions spend millions of $$$$ on research I'm sure they know what they are doing (at least a lot more than you or I :lol: ). This is much different than letting nutria loose on Louisiana's coast or releasing Asian carp to destroy a freshwater ecosystem. But like you said, you arent letting him go! Hope you find someone or some company that can take the fish from you. Good Luck! Oh yeah - IMO - since I've caught nurse sharks while fishing in Lake Pontchartrain, I seriously doubt you would harm anything by releasing the fish, BUT you wont do that......(sarcastic remark kept to self).

That's a completely ignorant comment. Institutions that rehabilitate and release wild animals back into their native habitat employ special procedures and protocol, and it's done with the original intention of releasing the animal back into the wild. This situation differs completely because the animal in question had an unknown past in the hands of unknown aquarium hobbyists and was of unknown origin. It was raised in captivity from a juvenile and was most assuredly exposed to foreign bacteria and parasites. It probably could not have survived in the wild and if it could, there's a chance that it may have introduced unknown pathogens into the ecosystem. If you ask any zoologist or animal rehabilitation expert, they would tell you that the animal should be destroyed rather than released into the wild. I ask that you educate yourself before making another inflammatory and ignorant comment.

I love conversing with people who know it all, especially when they post and run and then never respond to any more inquiries in the same thead....

Dearest "Knucklehead,"

I guess no one wants to read the whole thread before making comments today. First of all I've been involved in this thread since day one. IF you had bothered to read the thread, you would have seen that I made TWO posts on page one and TWO posts on page three, so your comment is both baseless and pointless.

Now what were you saying about people that post and run...? :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Poor shark, since you REFUSE to release it into it's native waters (Atlantic Region) it will probably end up dying (if it hasnt already). Many critters (wild and domesticated) are released by institutions such as the Audubon Society every year without ill effect to the ecosystem. Since these institutions spend millions of $$$$ on research I'm sure they know what they are doing (at least a lot more than you or I :lol: ). This is much different than letting nutria loose on Louisiana's coast or releasing Asian carp to destroy a freshwater ecosystem. But like you said, you arent letting him go! Hope you find someone or some company that can take the fish from you. Good Luck! Oh yeah - IMO - since I've caught nurse sharks while fishing in Lake Pontchartrain, I seriously doubt you would harm anything by releasing the fish, BUT you wont do that......(sarcastic remark kept to self).

That's a completely ignorant comment. Institutions that rehabilitate and release wild animals back into their native habitat employ special procedures and protocol, and it's done with the original intention of releasing the animal back into the wild. This situation differs completely because the animal in question had an unknown past in the hands of unknown aquarium hobbyists and was of unknown origin. It was raised in captivity from a juvenile and was most assuredly exposed to foreign bacteria and parasites. It probably could not have survived in the wild and if it could, there's a chance that it may have introduced unknown pathogens into the ecosystem. If you ask any zoologist or animal rehabilitation expert, they would tell you that the animal should be destroyed rather than released into the wild. I ask that you educate yourself before making another inflammatory and ignorant comment.

I love conversing with people who know it all, especially when they post and run and then never respond to any more inquiries in the same thead....

Dearest "Knucklehead,"

I guess no one wants to read the whole thread before making comments today. First of all I've been involved in this thread since day one. IF you had bothered to read the thread, you would have seen that I made TWO posts on page one and TWO posts on page three, so your comment is both baseless and pointless.

Now what were you saying about people that post and run...? :lol:

Oh, I read the whole thread, in fact I have read it several times since it started. I found the whole discussion quite fascinating.

My comment was more towards your "I am the be all end all to reefkeeping" attitued that you seem to portray, nothing personal, it just rubs me the wrong way. You might even say its one of my "pet peeves" :wink: The "post and run" was a reference to one of my threads that you made a comment in and then never clarified even when asked to....



edited to add the word attitude

 

[GSchiemer]

My comment was more towards your "I am the be all end all to reefkeeping" attitued that you seem to portray, nothing personal,...

I'm sure you meant "nothing personal." I don't see how I could take it that way. :wink:

I don't blame you though; I'm blame myself for exchanging posts with a person that refers to him/herself as "knucklehead." It's akin to arguing with a three-year old, which you may be for all I know. My daughter was typing on the computer at 3 years of age. Perhaps your a gifted toddler. If so, I apologize for my "attitued."

Greg

 

[GSchiemer]

Remember - there are no stupid questions, only stupid people!

Amen!

 

[Anonymous]

:lol:


See, now that post was funny, and had a point

I think I could get to like you man, your craaaazzzy!

and I spelled attitude wrong, which cracks me up since I spelled it right at the bottom of the post.


Now, keep that sense of humor while you are teaching people the correct way to go about reefkeeping and you will get more listeners. Like me for instance....

 

[GSchiemer]

:lol:


See, now that post was funny, and had a point

I think I could get to like you man, your craaaazzzy!

and I spelled attitude wrong, which cracks me up since I spelled it right at the bottom of the post.


Now, keep that sense of humor while you are teaching people the correct way to go about reefkeeping and you will get more listeners. Like me for instance....

I do have a dry sense of humor, which can be mistaken for "attitude" in print, but I can assure you that I'm only here to have a little fun and maybe help some people along the way. I stopped taking these Internet exchange boards seriously many years ago.

 

[Anonymous]

:lol:


See, now that post was funny, and had a point

I think I could get to like you man, your craaaazzzy!

and I spelled attitude wrong, which cracks me up since I spelled it right at the bottom of the post.


Now, keep that sense of humor while you are teaching people the correct way to go about reefkeeping and you will get more listeners. Like me for instance....

I do have a dry sense of humor, which can be mistaken for "attitude" in print, but I can assure you that I'm only here to have a little fun and maybe help some people along the way. I stopped taking these Internet exchange boards seriously many years ago.

That's good

I haven't taken anything serious since my first wife took me for the tusk of the wolly mammoth I killed to feed us for the winter...

 

[K9coral]

GS, do you believe that letting the shark go would actually harm the animal or the environment which he is released? Was the shark "trained" to live in an aquarium environment? I dont think the shark was brainwashed! Sharks and most other sea critters live on instincts. They are born with that and they KNOW how to hunt and fend for themselves. I dont think the fish forgot how to take care of it's eating needs by being fed salad and steaks in the home aquarium :lol: :lol: :lol: .

You are wrong (Matt too).

Also, lighten up, I wasnt trying to bash you. I just wanted to share my opinion. If you dont like it, ignore me :twisted:

 

[Anonymous]

GS, do you believe that letting the shark go would actually harm the animal or the environment which he is released? Was the shark "trained" to live in an aquarium environment? I dont think the shark was brainwashed! Sharks and most other sea critters live on instincts. They are born with that and they KNOW how to hunt and fend for themselves. I dont think the fish forgot how to take care of it's eating needs by being fed salad and steaks in the home aquarium :lol: :lol: :lol: .

You are wrong (Matt too).

Also, lighten up, I wasnt trying to bash you. I just wanted to share my opinion. If you dont like it, ignore me :twisted:

No, sorry, not wrong.

Do you believe that letting the shark go would actually harm the animal or the environment which he is released?

It is a possibility. I think it's been stated numerous times that there is a distinct possibility of the fish carrying a non-native pathogen.

I don't have the book "Aquarium Sharks and Rays" by Scott W. Michael with me anymore. In the book Scott relates a very similar story of an aquarist with a nurse shark whose size was nearly bursting the tank walls. Scott's advice? Find the shark a bigger home (slight possibily), or euthanize it, but don't release it back into the wild.

I would really like to ignore your misinformed opinion. The problem is that people who might be reading this thread in the future might not.

 

[GSchiemer]

K9: This is not a matter of differing opinions. There's a right way and wrong way to deal with unwanted exotic pets, and your thinking and suggestions are simply wrong. As I said previously, you should take the time to do a little independent research and educate yourself on the subject matter before continuing to make ill-informed statements. There's tons of information online and in books related to this topic. If you don't want to spend the time, perhaps call the curator of your local public aquarium or professor of marine biology/zoology at the local university; although it appears that you're not interested in the facts.

BTW, I too would love to ignore you, but it's important that this type of misinformation NOT go unchallenged.

Greg

 

[melas]

K9coral,

Since you don't want to do the research here's some. . . all you have to do is click on the links. . .

fyi Elasmobranchs = sharks, skates, & rays

site listing protocol for research institutions and public aquariums
http://www.colszoo.org/internal/elasmo_2005/page5.htm

Re-introductions

1. Draft and adopt a re-introduction policy consistent with IUCN Re-introduction Specialist Group (RSG) (www.iucnsscrsg.org) guidelines—i.e., to not release elasmobranchs into the wild, with the exception of coastal public aquariums and marine laboratories that have open systems and short-term specimen retention times, and to never release exotic species. Develop a corresponding rigorous re-introduction protocol. It should be clear that the release of elasmobranchs as a solution for surplus and unwanted animals is not acceptable.

site discussing the perils of reintroduction
http://www.captiveanimals.org/aquarium/aquaticzoos.pdf

There are many reasons for considering that non-conservation releases not only are not recommended,
but indeed can be very bad for the environment and/or the individuals involved. For instance, the
animals may have lost the ability to look after themselves in the wild and soon perish after release, they
can expose the wild community to exotic parasites or exotic genetic material . . .

a site advertising workshops on this topic
http://www.dce.ksu.edu/2004jointmeeting/presentation_symposia.html

Release and Reintroduction of Captive Elasmobranchs to Natural Habitats
Saturday Morning, May 29, Room JK
The release of captive elasmobranchs from display facilities, educational institutions, research facilities, or private collectors has become a major issue for states that wish to prevent release of exotic species into their waters or who fear introduction of disease or parasites into local waters. Such release has recently been prohibited in key states when animals have been held for periods greater than 30 days. This roundtable/workshop session will begin with presentations by speakers representing various constituencies, including commercial display aquaria, research and educational facilities, and state and federal managements specialists. The session will continue in a roundtable setting where discussion of the issues and formulation of a position paper will be developed.

Here you go a bunch of links that i found in 10 minutes on google from people with Doctorates. . . what was your phd thesis in again? please go away. . . kudos to matt and knucklehead for protecting this board from seriously erroneous information.

 

[gregx]

Let it go into the deep blue sea.