Aquaculture vs Wild-Caught

Aquacultured Organisms Versus Wild-Caught Organisms for the Aquarium Trade The popularity of the aquarium trade has grown exponentially in recent years as more species and organisms become more readily available; there are an estimated 1.5-2 million households worldwide that keep marine organisms in an aquarium setting (Marine Ornamental). Nearly a thousand marine fish species and hundreds of coral and invertebrate species are available in the fish market, but oftentimes customers do not give thought to how the organisms were attained (Buckner).

Less than 10% of all marine species are successfully bred in captivity and are available in aquaculture facilities. These captive-bred species are well-suited for an aquaria setting; they can withstand parameter fluctuations and are less aggressive than wild organisms (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals).

The majority of marine species are obtained from the wild via various methods of capture; however, these methods are often harmful and carried out in an unsustainable and dangerous method. Fishermen illegally use cyanide and quinaldine to paralyze and capture the fish, which stresses the fish out and is likely to cause sudden death syndrome within the next twenty-four hours (Marine Life and Tropical Ornamentals).

The aquarium trade jeopardizes hundreds of wild fish when they are retrieved from the ocean; a more sustainable alternative may be to provide aquacultured organisms for aquarists.

Views on the different methods of harvesting organisms vary greatly, depending on who is asked. At first glance, wild-capture seems preferable; there is a much broader spectrum of species available, better coloration within species, and high quantities of fish are nearly always available.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified

Proficient in: Wildlife Conservation

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Wild capture from oceans results in an extremelBecausey high percentage of death, both in the retrieval process and the shipping process, with numbers upwards of 90% (Cunningham). Illegal practices jeopardize both fish and coral health; some illegal fishermen use explosives in blast fishing to demolish coral reef systems and stun fish and force them out of hiding (Bruckner).

Because these are wild fish, when they are introduced to aquaria settings, they are unaccustomed to the water chemistry of a closed system and become stressed due to foreign water quality. This stress can lead to sickness or death. Wild organisms also do not integrate well when placed in a tank with other species. Wild fish and certain large polyp stony corals are more likely to show aggression toward other organisms, and will often refuse traditional fish food such as pellets or flakes (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals).

Wild-captured organisms are highly susceptible to disease and illness; during the shipping process, the animal becomes stressed and their immune system plummets. By introducing this potentially ill creature to one’s tank, the entire aquarium is susceptible to foreign parasites or illnesses that can harm other livestock (Bruckner).

From an economic standpoint, the shipping of organisms is quite costly, as they come from all around the world. They need to be shipped quickly and efficiently, or else they’ll become too stressed out from temperature swings and die in the process. Vendors need their livestock to remain alive until they reach the customer, so they’ll usually choose one or two-day shipping, which has a hefty price tag. (Bruckner). On the other hand, numerous aquaculture facilities are found all over the world, and chances are that an aquaculture facility is closer to you than a wild-caught organism is. Therefore, the cost of shipping would be lower, and the organisms would remain healthier (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals).

The laissez-faire restrictions of marine harvest in Florida are clearly outlined in the reports of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. In 2009, over 75,000 seahorses were harvested from coastal waters, which lead to a decline in native populations. In 2013, over 3,000,000 crabs were collected for the aquarium trade (Marine Life and Tropical Ornamentals).

Allowable gear for collection includes various types of nets and a contraption aptly called a “slurp gun”, which is defined as “…a self-contained, handheld device that captures tropical fish by rapidly drawing seawater containing such fish into a closed chamber” (Recreational Harvest of Marine Life (Aquarium) Species). This stresses the fish, causing illness and a lowered immune system. The transport and shipping process that would follow soon after the capture would likely result in death, as companies usually don’t feed the fish during the holding period (Cunningham).

To collect over one hundred different types of marine fish and invertebrate species, all one needs is a traditional fishing license that can be acquired with as little as seventeen dollars (Recreational Harvest of Marine Life (Aquarium) Species). This nominal fee pays off indefinitely if one collects fish for profit. Some of these organisms, such as the Clarion Angelfish retail for around two thousand, five hundred dollars; it’s easy to see the appeal of manual collection for profit or 3personal gain (Ferraiuolo).

Within Florida, about“…1,500 marine ornamental fish species, 500 invertebrate species, and 200 coral species are wild-caught or farmed and sold into the trade” (Marine Ornamental).

Within this grouping of species, only about 40 species are commercially available as captive bred (Marine Ornamental). This is mostly because not much is known about the reproductive and growth cycles of various marine specimens. This is something that could be improved upon to help promote conservation and sustainable practices.

Although wild capture can be done sufficiently and responsibly, it is rarely done sustainably sustainable fashion. The negatives aforementioned outweigh the positives of wild captured organisms, for the health of the animal and the health of the environment are both threatened by several this practice.

As a foil to this, there are several advantages to aquacultured organisms and fewer drawbacks. The major consequence associated with aquacultured organisms is the fact that sometimes their coloration isn’t as striking as it is in wild organisms. Breeders, who rely on the purity of the wild-caught species, hesitate to use captive-bred animals because of the interbreeding required to produce an organism well-suited for aquarium life (Bruckner).

In addition to possible genetic impurities within a captive-bred species, only 10% of all marine species are available as captive-bred (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Aquarium Animals). However, these are materialistic drawbacks; the only subject it affects is customer preference for aquarium livestock.

There are virtually no environmental drawbacks to providing aquacultured organisms for aquarists, for no native species are being extracted from their natural habitat. Because these organisms are bred for the sole purpose of aquaria setting, they are already accustomed to the standard of living. Aquacultured organisms are easier to acclimate to a new system, can withstand chemistry fluctuations, are less aggressive, and carry exponentially fewer parasites and wild diseases (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals).

This is especially helpful because many new systems have naturally changing parameters, and aquacultured organisms will be able to not only withstand but thrive in these conditions. As a result, the mortality rate of aquacultured fishes, invertebrates, and corals is much lower than that of wild-caught creatures (Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals).

The overall health of both the environment and the organisms themselves is conserved and promoted through responsible aquaculture practices. It is clear that unlawful marine harvesting negatively affects the environment. Bruckner states that “…five of the top aquarium fish species were 45 to 63 percent less abundant in areas where tropical reef fish collection is allowed” (Bruckner). Not only does this collection affect natural biodiversity, but it affects coastal communities as well; ecotourism and food provisions are threatened by illegal collection (Cunningham).

Action needs to be taken to prevent these outcomes. According to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, a single person with a regular fishing license is allowed to collect twenty marine organisms a day, and there are more than one hundred species that are allowed to be collected (Recreational Harvest of Marine Life (Aquarium) Species Virtually anyone can obtain a fishing license for a low price to harvest such organisms.

One suggestion to help remedy the potential for overfishing is to place stricter regulations on the collection of marine species. This could be done through a higher fee for a license, that way it would deter those looking for some quick money. Australia has already made great efforts to improve conservation: there are specific areas in which species are flourishing, and here collection is permitted without it being detrimental to the natural biodiversity and ecology of a reef (Bruckner). If the rest of the world were to adopt similar policies, the impacts caused by the aquarium trade could be greatly reduced.

The biodiversity and availability of marine species in the wild may be conserved by aquaculture practices. The heavy demand for exotic and colorful marine species leads to the exploitation of natural resources; aquaculture could handle this demand responsibly and sustainably and sustainable manner. The ecological niche of these organisms would be protected rather than threatened. When coral populations become depleted, beach erosion is more prevalent. Stony corals break waves offshore and prevent possible storm surges (Cunningham). Keystone species such as the copper band butterfly fish control and manage pest populations within an environment; they are crucial to the ecology of a coral reef and thus should not be removed from its natural habitat (Bruckner).

If the populations of native fishes are protected, then coastal communities will still have a source of revenue and food; their economy won’t suffer from exploitation. This in turn could also lead to job availability; vendors in places such as the Philippines and Indonesia would benefit from a sustainable and reliable source of coral products, rather than depending on the ocean as a source. An increase in aquaculture practices could lead to education through conventions and in local fish stores; it is important to educate the consumer and increase awareness of the world around them.

Wild collection poses a threat to the natural ecology of the environment and encourages illegal practices within the trade. The use and expansion of aquaculture facilities would not only protect species but also provide job opportunities and promote awareness of marine organisms. Captive-bred and tank-raised organisms have an easier time adapting to aquaria setting because that is all they know, whereas wild-caught organisms have difficulty adjusting to a closed system. Although it is the consumer’s personal decision to buy either wild-caught or aquacultured organisms, aquarists should take the time to become informed on the effects and consequences of each method.

Works Cited

1. “Aquacultured Versus Wild-Caught Marine Aquarium Animals.” Blue Zoo Aquatics. N.p. N.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2015.
2. Brucker, Andrew W, “Trade in Coral Organisms Threatens Coral Reefs.” Are the World’s Coral Reefs Threatened? Ed. Charlene Ferguson. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. At Issue.
3. Rpt. From “New Threat to Coral Reefs: Trade in Coral Organisms.” Issues in Science and Technology Online. 2000. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.
4. Cunningham, Mary Ann. “Aquarium Trade”. Environmental Encyclopedia. Ed. Marci Bortman, et al. 3rd ed. Vol. 1. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale, 2003. 66-67. Global Issues in Context. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.
5. Ferraiuolo, Jean. “10 of the Most Expensive Tropical Fish”. The Richest. 23 May 2014. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.
6. “Marine Life and Tropical Ornamentals.” Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. N.p. N.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2015.
7. “Marine Ornamental”. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. N.p. N.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2015.
8. “Recreational Harvest of Marine Life (Aquarium) Species.”Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. N.p. N.d. Web. 25 Oct. 2015.