L46 and the Belo Monte dam

[nvcichlids]

I just wanted to say, I have the same feelings as Mike, but I know that you guys are trying your hardest and doing everything you can. I do hope these fish WILL find a way to survive in the altered environment. ( I also hope that I am able to keep these prior to their wild demise)

[Janne]

If we would go after the negative feelings that the majority of people on this planet feels concerning nature we would do nothing, I think it's better to do something... doesn't matter if we fail or succeed. If all people would do something, the majority of the people on this planet would have a positive feeling.

Janne

[nvcichlids]

I am extremely grateful that something is being done rather than nothing. Any attempt to save what will be destoryed is positive in my book. I am sad that I will not make it there before anything is done (expecting 10 years out until I can make it down there.)

[Shane]

I did some collation of the occurrence data on Loricariidae in the Cat-eLog, and the single body of water with the most number, of species is Rio Xingu with 42 species, with another 10 if we count upper/middle/lower Xingu as well. All species listed for the Amazon is 46.

Not to under value the diversity of the Xingu, but I am not sure how "scientific" this is. 1) Commercial collection for the hobby has been heavily focused on that area for some time. This fact seriously throws the stats when we are looking at a database that records aquarium fish. Same would be true in and around other commercial collection hubs like Villavicencio or Iquitos or Leticia. 2) I suspect that in the count you included "L Numbers" which are not described species making the number "42" invalid.

-Shane

[Mike_Noren]

Not to under value the diversity of the Xingu, but I am not sure how "scientific" this is.

One of my main gripes with the Xingu project is that there does not exist a species list for the affected area.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I find it hard to avoid the suspicion that it is by design that no one, absolutely no one, knows which or how many species live in an area about to be destroyed in a 15 billion dollar project. At present, searching international biodiversity databases like UNEP or GBIF will tell you that the Xingu is an unusually species-poor river, with a grand total of ONE species of fish listed in the IUCN red list (a 'data deficient' ray, in parts of the river not affected by the dam).

I mean, people might object to destroying a biodiversity hotspot with dozens of endemic species, especially in the International Biodiversity Year, but why would anyone object to Brazil, a signee to the legally binding Convention on Biological Diversity, damming a river with lower biodiversity than the Elbe River in Europe or Lake Superior in the US?

[andywoolloo]

I also feel the same way Mike feels. And I agreed alot with Larry on the prior locked thread.

If they are going to destroy all that and partially for bauxite(?) to make aluminium as per what Mats said? in the locked thread. Why is it so bad to want to get them the hell out of there? As many as possible?

I know I am a newbie and naive a bit, but it's how I feel after reading all of these threads on this topic over the few years I have been around.

and yes I did read this

http://www.planetcatfish.com/shanesworl ... n+Amazonas

and as much else as i could online. But maybe I am missing something. Quite likely.

I believe Janne is doing fine work, no offense to Janne at all. I am worried that most of the fish and other creatures will be lost tho and wonder why it is bad to want to get them out prior.

[MatsP]

I did some collation of the occurrence data on Loricariidae in the Cat-eLog, and the single body of water with the most number, of species is Rio Xingu with 42 species, with another 10 if we count upper/middle/lower Xingu as well. All species listed for the Amazon is 46.

Not to under value the diversity of the Xingu, but I am not sure how "scientific" this is. 1) Commercial collection for the hobby has been heavily focused on that area for some time. This fact seriously throws the stats when we are looking at a database that records aquarium fish. Same would be true in and around other commercial collection hubs like Villavicencio or Iquitos or Leticia. 2) I suspect that in the count you included "L Numbers" which are not described species making the number "42" invalid.

-Shane

It is by no means scientific, I agree. But it's the best data _I_ have. I'm by no means saying it's accurate - and yes, it includes "undescribed" species. If we count ONLY described species, there are only 10 species listed for Rio Xingu - which I don't think is particularly accurate either (neither of the numbers count tributaries to Xingu).

--
Mats

[Janne]

One of my main gripes with the Xingu project is that there does not exist a species list for the affected area.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I find it hard to avoid the suspicion that it is by design that no one, absolutely no one, knows which or how many species live in an area about to be destroyed in a 15 billion dollar project. At present, searching international biodiversity databases like UNEP or GBIF will tell you that the Xingu is an unusually species-poor river, with a grand total of ONE species of fish listed in the IUCN red list (a 'data deficient' ray, in parts of the river not affected by the dam).

Yes. it's true, sometimes hobbyist's knows more then scientist's. IUCN list species that not is threatened like Potamotrygon when there are lots of other species that really are threatened not listed. There are a study made very poor by a local university (not federal) for some years ago, maybe that have been the reason for scientist to not put so much efforts before concerning Rio xingu. I hope we can present a complete list of species before the construction work have begun together with the federal university here in Para.

I know I am a newbie and naive a bit

Yes, you are not alone. As long no construction work have begun there are always something we can do, how knows if we find or can have effect on these future constructions making it possible for some or many species to survive in nature... it would be extremely sad if all species already was gone before that... right? The day we know exactly that nothing can save them I will borrow you a boat so you can start to collect the threatened species... before that we have to do what is possible to do. Once again, the illegal trade undermine all efforts for conservation or put pressure on governments to do something and it affects people's mind around the world making it useless for all people that are trying to do something.

Janne

[Zebrapl3co]

...I know I am a newbie and naive a bit, but it's how I feel after reading all of these threads on this topic over the few years I have been around.
and yes I did read this
http://www.planetcatfish.com/shanesworl ... n+Amazonas
and as much else as i could online. But maybe I am missing something. Quite likely.
...

I used to be a believer of the ban, but seeing how recent events unfold. I can't help but notice that the only reason the ban was in place was to drive the fishermen away from this region making it easier for the company to build the dam. Fishersmen are now label poachers and what they do for a living are branded illegal activity by the laws the government setup. The same government that doesn't give a damn about the people and biodiversity and who is going to wipe out everything in this region. I am not so sure I am a fan of Brazilian ban anymore ... it's getting very very blury.

[Janne]

I can't help but notice that the only reason the ban was in place was to drive the fishermen away from this region making it easier for the company to build the dam.

That is absolutely not true.

Janne

[Bas Pels]

I can't help but notice that the only reason the ban was in place was to drive the fishermen away from this region making it easier for the company to build the dam.

That is absolutely not true.

Janne

You are on the spot, I'm not

But even if it is not true, it is still very convenient for the government one agency has arranged to stop all fishery, and than another destroys the whole habitat - without any witnesses around anymore

[Jools]

Some Brazilian ichthyologists are working on species descriptions and there is a real focus on getting these done. Descriptions, like dams, aren't created overnight.

I just think that we as aquarists want to find moral high ground reasons where we can justify something between illegal action and flaunting the spirit of the ban so that we can keep nice fishes and then that comes down to what an individual is comfortable with.

We also discuss L046 too much, the thing is safe in our tanks at present. There are many, many other plecos (and many other species, not even just fish) that are at significant risk. As I've said before, who cares about the Xingu's dull grey L070 Zombie Pleco?

As humans we do like a good conspiracy theory, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I do not hear any contrary voices to Janne's with a Brazilian accent. We would, in my opinion, do well to understand and learn from our man in Brazil.

Jools

[MatsP]

As I've said before, who cares about the Xingu's dull grey L070 Zombie Pleco?

I do not hear any contrary voices to Janne's with a Brazilian accent. We would, in my opinion, do well to understand and learn from our man in Brazil.

Hear, hear! I know Shane will say "that's not very scientific", but I just doubled the number of L070 pictures the other day. I added the second picture, thanks to the nice Mr. Evers in Germany. To double the number of pictures of H. zebra, we would need about 4 dozen pictures... There are a huge number of keepers of H. zebra, and they will continue to live in captivity based on those large number of keepers. From memory, there are two registered keepers of L070... Even if both of those have dozens of fish, it would be hard to maintain a stable captive population from these two keepers...

--
Mats

[Janne]

But even if it is not true, it is still very convenient for the government one agency has arranged to stop all fishery,

But this is not true either, you are living a lie... all species except L46 was not allowed before the ban and all these species was exported illegaly. So how can they stop a fishery that not was allowed ever before? What they did was to stop the illegal trade of species... they didn't "Ban" anything... this is one of the worlds largest missunderstanding in this hobby where we can expect to find people caring for wildlife and animals???

It seams like I have to write an article so everyone can understand what is true and what is faulse, Brazil is not more worse than any other country and they do work hard to save what they can save. It's not perfect and they are quite incompetent in their pofessionals but that is many others too in other countries.

Janne

[drpleco]

Janne, thank you for the valuable work you're doing, and also for keeping us informed of what's happening in Brazil and why.

I've noticed that importers of L046 also bring in L082 so I'm assuming that they come from similar areas? In any case, will the L082 be affeced by the dam?

Thanks!

[Mike_Noren]

But this is not true either, you are living a lie... all species except L46 was not allowed before the ban and all these species was exported illegaly. So how can they stop a fishery that not was allowed ever before?

That's not really true, is it. The Belo Monte dam was in the final stages of approval when Brazil changed from having a list of banned species to having a list of allowed species.
AFAI remember it was at about the same time IBAMA was turned from an environmental protection agency to an approval rubber stamp, specifically to avoid it derailing the Belo Monte dam.

I don't know if Brazil throttled export of live fish because they didn't want people knowing and caring about their dams (because, let's face it, no one but aquarists so far have) or if they just wanted to do something forceful yet completely meaningless wrt conservation, but the facts of the matter remain:
1) no species of animal has ever, anywhere, in the entire world, been extinguished by the trade in aquarium fish, but
2) this dam alone is likely to extinguish a number of species.

That's why I say that it's irrational to complain about poaching in a river about to be destroyed. I'm still curious as to what conservation programmes you're talking about when you say that poaching is the biggest problem to conservation.

[Janne]

I've noticed that importers of L046 also bring in L082 so I'm assuming that they come from similar areas? In any case, will the L082 be affeced by the dam?

Yes, like many other species.

That's not really true, is it. The Belo Monte dam was in the final stages of approval when Brazil changed from having a list of banned species to having a list of allowed species.
AFAI remember it was at about the same time IBAMA was turned from an environmental protection agency to an approval rubber stamp, specifically to avoid it derailing the Belo Monte dam.

No Mike, you are totally wrong and your memory is playing with your mind... you mix things up.

That's why I say that it's irrational to complain about poaching in a river about to be destroyed. I'm still curious as to what conservation programmes you're talking about when you say that poaching is the biggest problem to conservation.

You just need to read some of the earlier statements in this thread to understand some of the problem it creates and how it affects peoples mind, then I think it would be quite nice and extremely polite to let the scientists here in Brazil to do their work as best they can under the circumstances they have without people around the world shouting "We want fishes from Rio xingu and we don't care a shit if it's legal or not". And the native population really likes you too, in their efforts to save what they can save and are doing all they can to stop the dam, you mean they shall also just give up and invite you to plunder their nature!? A tip, if you one day want to visite this river, use the right T-shirt so they recognize you.

Janne

[Mike_Noren]

No Mike, you are totally wrong and your memory is playing with your mind

The political push for the Belo Monte dam was in late 2007, Brazil switched to a whitelist in 2008, in 2009 IBAMA lost the right to do anything but approve of development projects and in february 2010 the dam got the official go-ahead. What am I misremembering?

You just need to read some of the earlier statements in this thread to understand some of the problem it creates and how it affects peoples mind, then I think it would be quite nice and extremely polite to let the scientists here in Brazil to do their work as best they can under the circumstances they have without people around the world shouting "We want fishes from Rio xingu and we don't care a shit if it's legal or not".

You are not responding to any of my questions.

My question are these:
1) in what way do poaching of fish affect conservation efforts or species descriptions?
2) what conservation project in Xingu is affected by poaching?

Again, I am not asking for Xingu fish. I am saying that poaching is a negligible problem under normal circumstances and completely irrelevant in this context. It's a non-issue.

[Borbi]

Hi,

[...]Brazil switched to a whitelist in 2008,[...]

the (a) whitelist existed long before 2008. It´s just that virtually nobody knew about it. We "know" since 2008, because it was only then that the Brazilian government (IBAMA) actually enforced it. Typically human, I guess..

Cheers, Sandor

[Janne]

Brazil started to use a positive list in the beginning of the 90's, all species not in this list was forbidden to export. All exporters used Peckoltia for more or less every pleco species because in these earlier list's all Peckoltia sp was allowed for export. The knowledge within IBAMA and the custom and most other authorities is poor but at that time it was extremely poor, so Brazil was no better than Peru at that time. Then 2004 they took out H. zebra from the positive list just for one reason, before and until that year fishermen caught aprox 1000 H. zebra per 100 kvm but that year they only caught 100 H. zebra per 100 kvm... Ibama took a preventing decission and maybe that this was the bell they needed. 2008 Ibama got a new boss with knowledge and under him he has a new employer very good to identify fish species, now they enforced the exporters and the whole organisation to follow the positive list... they just started to follow the law that was created in the beginning of the 90's.

The Belo Monte project started 1984 maybe 1 year earlier or later because I will not look up this information only for you Mike. As answer on your last questions, you show further one of the problems... decreasing morality.

Janne

[Mike_Noren]

Do you not understand my questions, or do you just not want to answer?
If it's a language issue I can try to rephrase, otherwise I'm just going to consider this topic done and drop this.

[MatsP]

I think Janne has explained more than once that he's often having difficulty with the authorities because they do not believe his intentions are honest when he's catching fish - they think anyone who is catching any "valuable" fish are doing so to export them.

--
Mats

[Janne]

Not really, but instead to sit on my ass and complain I do something.

2004 when Ibama put H. zebra on the endangered list they also stated that within 4 years a conservation program would be started for this part of Rio xingu classified as Nature reserve. They have not done this and now I fight with the court here in Brazil to enforce to do what they have said should have been done, I work in corporation with the federal university, the development department in Para and SEMA the nature department in Para together with a private company because someone has to put up some money too, making able to create a project for these species in one way or another. The dam is not built yet and the work to build the dam has not started and will for sure delay a few years more. If someone think it's just to take a plane to Brazil and start a conservation program or education program I welcome them, NGO's don't show any interest in fish species and no one else is prepared to finance any project to save any fishes. The university and the local nature department can have some affect on the construction of the Belo Monte dam, that is one of the demands in the contract for them that finally will build the dam.

I could instead do like all other, sitting home in Sweden in a much safer environment with a very good salery and complain over Brazil's stupid development planes and destroying of Rio xingu instead to be here with a very lousy salery in very small apartment in a city that I think should not even exist fighting against incompetent authorities that loves bureaucracy. I may be stupid that even give it a try but I like it and it feels good.

Mike,
You make a complex question easy and if everything was so easy I would be very happy, you know other countries is no better either... there are politic, laws, regulations both federal and local and bureaucracy like elsewhere in the world.

Janne

[Zebrapl3co]

I am sorry Janne, I did not think about the repercution of my post. My post was not directed at you in anyway and I have a deep respect for you and what you are doing.
I am just frustrated with the Brazilian government. Every move they make, it's to the detrimental effect of the Rio xingu and it's biodiversity.
Believe me, I lost faith in the Brazilian government pretty much 20 years ago when I boke my piggy bank and donate all the money I ever had to help buy forests in Brazil to save the planet. Now, that property is probably someone's back yard. They have a history of not living up to what they promise.

[apistomaster]

I do not understand how it is more moral to sit back and watch a river be dried up without a species preservation program is any better. Blind, strict, obedience of the law says we do nothing.
It isn't more correct for a species habitat to be destroyed without a species preservation plan in place than buying illegally exported fish from this river. Someone said in another thread that two wrongs don't make a right. This is generally a true statement but this issue is one where some moral relativism needs to be applied since to do nothing is the worst of all alternatives.
Now that I have finally posted my opinion, I guess it is time to lock up this thread. It would only be the third time.

[MatsP]

Janne is not sitting back watching the river be destroyed. He's actually setting up a breeding program to keep the fish bred for the Aquarium trade...

But what he's been saying several times is that the smugglers are making his work much harder, because many people are trying to PRETEND to do research and conservation projects, but the fish ends up being smuggled out of the country for the trade.

--
Mats

[apistomaster]

I know what Janne is trying to do and I believe his work is difficult for many reasons.
But this should be something a modern country should be doing on its own as part of their policy.
It should not fall to an under supported individual from another country. He no doubt needs and deserves a much support as Brazil can render but I don't think the Government is doing nearly enough.
If Brazil can afford to buy Gen 4 fighter Jets it certainly can afford to support species preservation projects.

[MatsP]

I know what Janne is trying to do and I believe his work is difficult for many reasons.
But this should be something a modern country should be doing on its own as part of their policy.
It should fall to an under supported individual from another country. He no doubt needs and deserves a much support as Brazil can render but I don't think the Government is doing nearly enough.
If Brazil can afford to buy Gen 4 fighter Jets it certainly can afford to support species preservation projects.

Absolutely agree with every single one of those points.

--
Mats

[apistomaster]

I edited my post because I left out "not". I meant to say, it should not fall to an individual.

[MatsP]

I edited my post because I left out "not". I meant to say, it should not fall to an individual.

That was indeed how I read it... ;)

--
Mats