> No argument Steffen, these are good _reasons_ when paired with the law, not
> rationalizations. :)
>
> I was specifically addressing the notion of collection because:
> "But theeey do it tooooo!"
I don't think anybody is claiming that hellbenders are in decline due to
overcollecting or by-catch, or that either is contributing to their decline.
All I hear is that "this could POTENTIALLY affect this", etc. To me that's no
better than the snake oil salesmen claiming that their miracle-HGH pill makes
you look and feel 20 years younger because "clinical studies indicate that there
MAY be a benefit..." This is the same mindset that germinated the breast implant
scare, AND PEOPLE FELL FOR IT!
I'll admit I haven't followed the literature on hellbenders, so if the evidence
is there then I stand corrected. But denial based on lack of evidence is not
the same thing as rationalization. My point was not intended to be "they do it,
therefore so can I" but rather "I don't see any facts showing that removal of
hellbenders by fishermen is contributing to their extinction, therefore there is
even less rationale behind the suggestion that aquarists are causing harm."
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org