Fish Mortality Study. Part 1

[clarionreef]

Everyone,
...has had a disasterous shipment or two. Some new exporters have a number of them until they get in the groove.
But if the story of one such disasterous event gets out into the hyperbolic press or equally irresponsible characters, it becomes...the norm?
Throw out the highs and lows, calculate the average and analyze whats left. Then you get a more realistic picture or whats really happening.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

John,

I see you are accusing me of "misrepresenting" mortality data. As far as Frank's study is concerned I mentioned it in the following paragraph published in the Net-Caught Cyanide Free paper (Aquarium Sciences and Conservation 3:37-51 published during 2001). Frank Lallo is a co-author of that paper).

Page 45 second paragraph.

"An IMA telephone survey, conducted by one of the present authors (Frank Lallo) during 1997, of over 300 U.S. retailers determined that mortality of marine fish (DOA and during the following three days) was on average:60% on the east coast, 35% in the mid-west, and 30% on the west coast of the U.S.A. It generally takes 20-25 h to ship fish from the Philippines to Los Angeles, and more than 40 h for fish shipped through to New York. Aquarium fish shipped greater distances for longer time intervals experience higher mortality."

You stated that I misrepresented the mortality as being within 3 days when Frank's recent posting stated he looked at the dead on arrival mortality DOA (first day) and DAA within 2-4 days. My quote about DAA above agrees with Frank's statement. The "following 3 days" is "2-4 days" after the first day.

Frank and I had not exchanged the detailed data that he has now started to post. So, if I stated "over 300 retail stores" in 2001 and the actual number is about 280, that is based on what Frank told me (5 years ago). There was no intent by either myself or Frank to mislead or misrepresent anything.

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

From Rubec's "Cyanide-free, net-caught fish for the marine aquarium trade" 2001: "The IMA has been collecting data to document fish mortality at each step of the chain from the villages, the Manila export facility, and at North American import facilities situated in Las Vegas-Nevada, San Jose and Los Angeles-California, in the USA, and Vancouver-British Columbia, in Canada. A telephone survey by IMA, during 1997, of over 300 US aquarium fish dealers, determined that mortality at the retail level of marine fish was on average: 60% on the east coast, 35% in the mid-west, and 30% on the west coast of the USA, during the first three days after their arrival at the stores."

Frank- did you do this study for the IMA or or they taking credit for some one esles work, yet again?

San Jose? Must have been Eco-V before Steve took over for Keith.

the Manila export facility - which one, AMRI?


PETER BEAT MY POST - HE ANSWERED SOME QUESTIONS IN HIS POST

 

[Anonymous]

Peter - sorry I didn't see your post, with the IMA answer to the Frank question.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham, At the time this study was done Frank Lallo was a member of IMA-USA. Frank did the study and consulted with me. There was no grant to cover the costs of the study. Most of the costs were born by Frank.

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

There are several East Coast retailers in here and none of them has supported the claims the data is making. Why is that?

I have been reading this thread and been afraid to respond to it,until the above quote. May still get blackballed for it or flamed. But am going to speak out now in response.
I DO believe Frank Lallo's DOA/DAA research !!!! Things are BETTER in the last few years and future research should prove it. But, 60% DOA--you better believe it !!!! I went to door to door delivery with the MUCH higher costs involved to cut down on that number. It has helped, but in the older days, every single order of fish was a panic as to whether it would come in mostly alive or all dead. Each and every current order of fish is still a big worry !!! I buy from the best suppliers, but the shipping end of things is TERRIBLE. If I can get the animals in alive and in reasonable shape, I can then KEEP them alive--but getting them in this way, is the BIG problem.

Why don't some of us report our losses for credit ????
That one is easy, we would be either blackballed or made to feel like we were just looking for a refund to cover freight or for free fish ... so to keep my supply lines open and suppliers "on my side", I, for one, just rarely report any loss . But, losses ARE there !!!!!!!!!!!
The dry goods and propagating are the only ways I have stayed in business this long.
And , I treat ALL animals as if they were my babies-as visitors to my shop can testify !!!!!!!!!

judy,

do you tranship alot?

those are the only shipment types i've ever had come close to 60%- and only because the entire occasional shipment came in toast

the worst iv'e ever witnessed, from a 'typical' wholesaler was 20-25%-and this was due more, i personally feel, to handling/starvation issues

we here invest a HUGE amount of time and effort in getting our fish to eat as much as possible, as quickly as possible, and as varied a diet as possible-our yellow tangs, for example, come in severely pinched, and w/in 2 days are eating nori, garlic, blendered silversides, chopped clam, etc.-w/in a week they are almost fat

even our pi and indo fish do quite well, on the whole-we treat proactively w/Cu, formalin, and malachite green-our 'reasonable/typical' daa rates are already dropping- i attribute most of it to feeding issues-alot of the fish haven't eaten in quite awhile before getting here :wink:

 

[flameangel1]

vitz,,
I NEVER, EVER transship !!!!!!!! The problems I have are with SHIPPING !!
Whole orders can be delayed for days in Memphis, left on the tarmac in Pittsburgh, boxes come in smashed from Fedex or the airlines- boxes come in with animals in empty bags (no water ) almost EVERY shipment comes in with water in the boxes and broken/torn bags.
I have had the airlines put boxes of animals in the REFRIGERATER , thinking they were food fish--have had shipments come in where all the bags of animals were in a GARBAGE bag due to the boxes being in such bad shape--have been in the office trying to get the animals when I can
SEE the boxes on a flat trailer out in a snowstorm outside the office for a half hour or more--you name it, it has happened.
I do have a rapport with my local airlines and with my Fedex delivery people now and both apologize to me for the condition of the boxes or late deliveries.
Complaining to anyone does NO good as they just say "it is ship at your own risk".

I have no problem teaching the fish to eat (and yes, they usually do come in very thin ) or keeping them alive when they come in, IF in reasonable shape. It is just GETTING them in , that is the problem.
Better packing methods need to be developed for those of us on the East coast. Triple bags would sure help. Also, it would help if the airlines people would learn to read the simple words-"HANDLE WITH CARE-LIVE ANIMALS" !!!!!!

 

[flameangel1]

By the way, I do not use medications of any kind and have no reason to either. I keep the stress levels waaaay down-baby the fish-make even the customers walk slower around any newer fish, may feed 9 or 10 times a day with the resultant daily water changes for the new fish or for the customers to watch the fish eat-and yes, they do fatten up quickly and most will eat out of my hand within a week.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham,
Did you quote come from the version of the Cyanide-Free Net-Caught paper published in the Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin? The text was amended to mention the names of export/import facilities in the Acknowledgements of the final paper published in Aquarium Sciences and Conservation. Anyway, reference to a San Jose import facility refers to the EcoVitality facility that was buying net-caught fish from Asian Marine Resources International (AMRI) at the time (1999-2000).

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

So you got #'s from a start-up outfit? They hadn't even worked out any of the kinks yet, of course the data would be skewed. They didn't even use med at that point. As for AMRI, I'll say it again, weren't they caught with cyanide in the boat? At the time, they were on the honor system, submitting non-target fish. I have one CDT certificate from them, outa of 12 or so (that I could find recently), that showed 2 target fish, a Koran and a blue tang(never seen that one on any CDT certificate before). They sent some amazingly poor shipments, butg man did they get large green chromis.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham, I think you stated that I got mortality numbers from EcoVitality. Actally, I didn't. I wanted to get data from companies dealing in net-caught fish. EcoVitality was one of them. They had a lot of problems (some of which had to do with their holding facility). They did not provide any detailed fish mortality numbers to me. As far as I know, they were not one of the companies that participated in the study conducted by Frank Lallo.

There is a need for a new study that would compare mortalities through the chain of custody using best practices (MAC standards?) with what is the norm in the trade with existing practices for collection, handling, and transport.

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

I got my quote from this thread Peter.

The IMA has been collecting data to document fish mortality at each step of the chain from the villages, the Manila export facility, and at North American import facilities situated in Las Vegas-Nevada, San Jose

reads as though only 1 exporter was contacted, and a facility in San Jose provided some numbers as well, and that the IMA did it.

They did not provide any detailed fish mortality numbers to me. As far as I know, they were not one of the companies that participated in the study conducted by Frank Lallo.

Man, I'd get some place faster, if I didn't have to keep banging my head against the wall Peter. Both the above quotes are from this thread. One states the numbers came from San Jose facility and another says the San Jose facility was not used for number colletion. Hmmm, strange. Which one Peter, you can't have both.

As for Eco-V's problems, holding was an issue at that time, by the source was the biggest issue. One of AMRI's stomping grounds in PI, Apri(sp?), has a reported 6 out 50 divers using nets(you've seen what I'm talking about). AMRI has well over 6 divers in that area, so is mixing going on? I wonder. You blew right over this comment once again, come on PeterIMA, whats the real deal. Taking numbers from a known bad shipper, seems like cookin the books to me. Enronesc.

 

[clarionreef]

For the record,
I took over EcoVitalty and soon after put a stop to importations from Amry on account of cyanide fish in the inventory.
Then EcoVitality began importing from a bonafide source of all netcaught fish, Marivi of Habitat. But the lack of variety doomed tham as it does all netcaught enterprises that don't have extraordinary advantages with some other country. This is why MAC dealers and other would be netcaught supporters mix in cyanide variety...shoring up sales.
Good for them, say most. But now they are no longer netcaught. Now they are pregnant, although less than some.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

And I worked there before and after Steve took over. I have nothing bad to say about Eco-V, Project Goodfish, keith Redfield or Howard Latin. The only complaints I have, are with AMRI and the possiable use of records from Eco-V for the IMA paper.

 

[Anonymous]

Why are you all always fighting each other all the time about something that each of you seem to be passionate about? I am just curious.
David
_________________
schrom pics

 

[Frank Lallo]

Dave,
I have been trying to figure that one out myself for the past 20 years...

 

[PeterIMA]

I mentioned in my paper Cyanide-Free Net-Caught fish that I was collaborating with several companies (including AMRI and EcoVitality) to get data on mortalities on net-caught fish. This stopped when IMA lost its contract with BFAR (September 2001) since I no longer had a means to confirm that these companies (and others) were net-caught or not. That is why I stated I still need data on the mortality associated with net-caught fish. I have some data but not from EcoVitality. Why is that hard to understand?

As far as AMRI, they appear to now be a reliable supplier of mostly net-caught fish. They are supplying Aquarium Services, a Canadian retail chain, which has 15 stores across Canada. I have a lot of data from Aquarium Services (shipment by shipment) concerning their mortality data (by species) on shipment from AMRI. Mean mortality in the Toronto store last year was 3.7%. So, I suggest you stop maligning AMRI's reputation.

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

Why are you all always fighting each other all the time about something that each of you seem to be passionate about? I am just curious.
David

methinks it's because they're so passionate about it that they fight all the time

that, plus some ego :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Why are you all always fighting each other all the time about something that each of you seem to be passionate about? I am just curious.
David

methinks it's because they're so passionate about it that they fight all the time

that, plus some ego :wink:

But,where does that get us? It gets us back to square one.If you all really care about this hobby you would work together instead of fighting each other all the time,the constant BULL about your numbers do not match my numbers is a bunch of BULL!!! We all know that we have big problems that need to be addressed!!! So we all agree on that correct??? But the constant attacks on each other get us nowhere,think about it :?
_________________
Paintball Bunker

 

[PeterIMA]

Vitz, I agree there are serious problems in the trade. We need to work together to help find solutions. The bickering gets us nowhere.

Peter Rubec