Cyanide: What it does to the reefs

[kylen]

Wayne,

Come on...I've had higher mortality rates with certain captive bred species than I have wild caught (in the same system even). How do you explain that.

Mary is truly correct. How can anyone directly attribute any death in a fish on this side of the pond to cyanide? Am I defending it...no of course not. You've got to understand that there are numerous factors that affect the health of fish, that any death cannot be directly tied to cyanide. Is it a factor, probably, but the only factor...no.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Even Peter has agreed that cyanide might actually lower the death rates caused by Stresses during capture .......Stunned fish seem to panic less during the traumatic event. { Just like heart transplant patents} I am sure cyanide exposure does eventually kill some of the collected fish . But it sure seems like fish not collected with a tranquilizer die at even a greater rate?

 

[dizzy]

Wayne,

Come on...I've had higher mortality rates with certain captive bred species than I have wild caught (in the same system even). How do you explain that.

Mary is truly correct. How can anyone directly attribute any death in a fish on this side of the pond to cyanide? Am I defending it...no of course not. You've got to understand that there are numerous factors that affect the health of fish, that any death cannot be directly tied to cyanide. Is it a factor, probably, but the only factor...no.

I agree with what Kylen is saying. I have gotten in orders from both of the big two culture facilities and on occasion have experienced higher loses than some general orders from conventional sources on 104th st. Even the almighty MAC certified fish have failed to be able to walk on water. We have got to realize that a certain amount of lose will be inevitable. No standards should have been set until the situation was properly analized. Picking 1% DOA/DAA was possibly the single most stupid thing the MAC did. It forever labeled them as industry outsiders. No one likes it when fish die while in their custody. It is profit lost, plain and simple. Wayne is right about MAMTI and hr4928 hurting the mom & pops. Just remember this was all the brainchild of Rick Horn of Petsmart. What would y'all really expect the outcome of such a plan to be? The ironic thing is that Petco is more likely to use certification to eliminate competition than Petsmart, but I don't rule out the possibilty of Petsmart splitting the pie if MAMTI ever produces any fish.
Mitch

 

[MaryHM]

Wayne, if you're going to throw accusations at me, I expect you to either own them or shut up.

Mary, I am getting tired of you defending the cyanide cartel.

Please show me where I defended the cyanide cartel. Show me one place where I have ever said that cyanide is good, that it's use doesn't harm reefs, that cyanide isn't even a problem anymore, or anything else along those lines. SHOW ME JUST ONE TIME. And don't take something out of context.

and cause irrepairable harm to the Mom and Dad shops that you pretend to represent.

Please show me one time where I've said that I represent Mom and Dad shops.

Leave the fight against cyanide to those who care.

To those who care, or to completely ignorant people like yourself who refuse to listen. Why aren't you attacking Kylen and Dizzy?? Why aren't you calling them supporters of the cyanide cartel?? Is it just because I happen to think you're an insipient idealist who refuses to educate himself and prefers to run totally on emotion?? Are you attacking me just because I can't stand you? If so, then say so. I really don't care. But don't throw untrue accusations about me and expect that I'm going to sit by and let you.

 

[PeterIMA]

Some points that I agree with:

1) Without a US-based cyanide test or a test for cyanide metabolites (e.g., thiocyanate) it is impossible to know whether or not a fish that dies, died because it was caught with cyanide. Likewise, it is impossible to prove that it was not related to cyanide capture.

2) Cyanide may have some kind of tranquilizing effect. At least, the study of Hall and Bellwood indicated that the mortality rate was lower for cyanide+stress (about 33% if I recall correctly) than for cyanide alone (37.5%). More experimentation is needed to clarify this question.

3) You all seem to be hung up on cyanide. I have already published a paper in 2001 that discussed all potential factors. Stopping cyanide use is necessary. Coming up with improved methods for shipping and handling net-caught fish is also necessary. I have initiated research in this area and have a paper (that I cited yesterday) that discusses the need for research using chemical additives in sealed plastic bags to a) stabilize pH in the bags using a buffer, b) neutralize ammonia/ammonium in the bags, c) control the proliferation of bacteria, and d) sedate the fish (cyanide is not a true sedative) to help reduce their metabolism in order to reduce excretion of carbon dioxide and ammonia/ ammonium.

Let's get past the bickering over cyanide and recognize that the trade has more than one problem that needs to be dealt with in order to reduce excessive mortality in the trade to produce better fish (fish that live) for marine hobbyists. The MAC could help with these efforts, since it is consistent with their goals. Members of the trade can help by providing feedback to such a scientific study (participants would remain anonymous).

Peter Rubec

 

[dizzy]

Peter,
Someone needs to develop a simple software for reporting and tracking loses. I agree with Mary that it gets very difficult to track DAA much beyond a few days. DOA would be simple and a geat place to start. I never liked the MAC idea of creating the "hot potato" certified fish. Get it out of your custody quick before it dies and you lose certification on the entire batch. I think they may have changed that some, but I'm unsure. I have previously been against such reporting out of fears that the information would be used to build an "unsuitability" list. If you give the guys who thought up the 1%DOA/DAA standards this information they might decide to hold all fish to this unrealistic standard. It is certainly one of the possible consequences one must consider when providing information of this sort. What assurances can you give us, that this information will not be used to get the trade shut down?
Mitch

 

[PeterIMA]

Peter,
Someone needs to develop a simple software for reporting and tracking loses. I agree with Mary that it gets very difficult to track DAA much beyond a few days. DOA would be simple and a geat place to start. I never liked the MAC idea of creating the "hot potato" certified fish. Get it out of your custody quick before it dies and you lose certification on the entire batch. I think they may have changed that some, but I'm unsure. I have previously been against such reporting out of fears that the information would be used to build an "unsuitability" list. If you give the guys who thought up the 1%DOA/DAA standards this information they might decide to hold all fish to this unrealistic standard. It is certainly one of the possible consequences one must consider when providing information of this sort. What assurances can you give us, that this information will not be used to get the trade shut down?
Mitch

Dizzy, I see your points. I am not sure that what I am proposing is intended to support either the MAC or to counteract what may happen with regard to pending legislation. As a scientist, I am more concerned with problem solving (high mortality in the trade) for the benefit of the trade.

I did not create the 1% DOA, the MAC did. They then found out it was impossible to achieve with present "best practices" for handling and transport through the chain-of-custody. The 1% is a desireable goal, but it will require research and improved methods for collection, handling, and transport to be able to achieve 1% or less mortality at each step of the chain-of-custody. That is what the suggested research may help to achieve.

As far as the proposed legislation (H.R. 4928) I interpret what I read to mean that all species will be banned, if exceptions are not made to allow certain species to be traded. The proposed bill implies that "unsuitable" species should not be traded, whereas "suitable" species" that can be harvested sustainably will be allowed to be traded. Without information on which species are suitable and which are unsuitable, they may all be banned permanently. So, in my humble opinion it is in the trade's interest to supply information on which species are unsuitable (don't eat, obligate coral eaters, too high a mortality for whatever reason) so that the suitable species can be traded.

Any information provided to me under a scientific study will remain confidential concerning who is supplying it, which stores/businesses were involved, and from which cities the data originated (regions will be cited). Actually, this is what Frank Lallo also did. So far, he has not revealed any of his souces of information (not even to me). So, his sources of information are safe. Since I also wish to help the trade, I also am willing to keep my sources of information confidential. Only the aggregate results would be released to define overall mortality rates with either net-caught or cyanide-caught fishes under different transport conditions.


Peter Rubec

 

[keethrax]

Some points that I agree with:

3) You all seem to be hung up on cyanide.

In general can't argue with that. There are plenty of other factors. Howver, in this particular thread we should be hung up on cyanide, as that's the topic of the thread. It's the more general reform/conservation threads where being hung up on one particular topic is a problem.

 

[kylen]

This is where the problem stems with this discussion. There are people that, IMO, seem to equate any mortality in MO as a cyanide problem. Obviously not the case. It's only part of the problem.

 

[Anonymous]

Peter,
Someone needs to develop a simple software for reporting and tracking loses. I agree with Mary that it gets very difficult to track DAA much beyond a few days. DOA would be simple and a geat place to start. I never liked the MAC idea of creating the "hot potato" certified fish. Get it out of your custody quick before it dies and you lose certification on the entire batch. I think they may have changed that some, but I'm unsure. I have previously been against such reporting out of fears that the information would be used to build an "unsuitability" list. If you give the guys who thought up the 1%DOA/DAA standards this information they might decide to hold all fish to this unrealistic standard. It is certainly one of the possible consequences one must consider when providing information of this sort. What assurances can you give us, that this information will not be used to get the trade shut down?
Mitch

it's called a 'log' :wink:

i've tracked losses by supplier and species both in fw, where some species HAD to be tracked only enmasse (like a batch of 1500 neons in one fw order), to sw, which is quite easier to track individuals.

all it takes is some initial entry paperwork (assigning each wholesaler an identifier, and each species, and the date of the shipment arrival), followed by a sales log/dead log.

it's just time consuming-nothing a $7/hr data entry noobist/secretary couldn't do, if necessary

i never got why retail stores DON'T do that as standard practice :?

heh-i helped me last lfs employer realize how many hundreds of dollars/yr he was losing in dead goldfish feeders by paying attention to these types of livestock issue particulars, it should be part of regular bizness comon sense-lfs's throws craploads of money away yearly because they don't track these things

it's also a valuable tool to show a retailer which of their suppliers is constantly better, or worse, or equal, to others , as the case may be

crap, even pos (point of sale) systems at most registers can be setup for the sales logging-the only manual entry will at most be when the stock arrives from the airports, and dead runs

video rental/sales software ('CVS'(TM)'complete video store') is almost exactly structured for this type of thing

when tapes come in, each is entered w/a date, supplier,# of copies, etc etc

every rental/sale/'damaged goods' transaction is logged by the pos software terminal/register. the data can be tabled a whole buncha diff ways, performance of title in rentals,r.o.i., top ten, worst performing, etc etc etc

most of my job as asst manager of the video rental place was entering the tapes as they came in, hehe-other than the time factor, it was extremely easy

 

[horge]

Woo-haaa.
At least were not pulling numbers out of someone else's butt, and pretending, mmmmmm! It smells great!
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Try to follow me on this one:

Just what will it take to get HPL chroma units set up at/near LAX? There's enough cash floating around for all kinds of BS research. Anyway.. let's say it's up and running. Even if you can sniff out SCN traces in MO's landed, that's really only good towards possible punitives vs. Philippine collectors or exporters.

There's still no way to empirically correlate cyanide exposure to DOA/DAA figures. Not, unless you are willing to test carcasses for SCN at sample LFS and downstream sample hobbyists tanks and clinically rule out any other independent causes of death. Anything less is speculative and highly leveraged --just like 'anecdotal evidence'

But now, even without such simple, relevant and direct sampling, some people want to sell the idea that they CAN quantify States-side mortalities caused by CN, disregarding numerous other possible causes of death. Without real, directly-relevant samples, their claims --based on the anecdotes of others-- are themselves anecdotes dressed up in technical terms.

Between the anecdotes of a titled researcher who doesn't handle MO fish on a regular basis, and the consistent anecdotes of industry professionals who DO, who do you think I'm going to trust?



Anak ng tokwa naman, oo
:roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[clarionreef]

Horge,
No one will listen to you if you keep making sense.
I for one don't care how much is bad decompression, heat, O2 starvation, abrasions and torn skin prviding pathways for ammonia uptake and bacterial invasion compared to cyanide damage to gills, kidneys etc.
95 % of my own concern is for the undeniable damage inflicted on preferred, critical habitat that houses the fish. The incidental kills, the larvae, the eggs, the micro system etc. This in turn ruins fishing grounds and drives the fisherman into deeper poverty and desperation.

The mission is environmental...and social and then better fish for yanks and 'good time' consumers.
Trying to force fit the reasons for DOAS, and DAAs into pre-fabricated pigeonholes...is pointless as the matrix of variables that can kill are so varied...from shipper and collector.
Experienced dealers mixing cyanide fish generate better survival rates then inexperienced, newly mointed reeformers...egged on by promises of eager, eco-oriented customers and higher prices.
Real commercial collector training is the only thing that can ferret out and adress WHATEVER the collecting and handling issues are in each locale. This is an option not used in a very long time.
The truth is clear and present in villages thruout the Philippines and Indo. All you have to do is be there and make friends...and soon you may be trusted with the truths hidden only by OUR distance.
Our distance from 90% of the story leaves us with parroting others postings for evidence...and feeling for the truth like the blind men trying to figure out what an elephant was like.
The actual solutions may be easier to solve then the endless, recreational debate.
Here comes MACNA and the USCRTF meeting in Miami.
We are about to live in more interesting times.
One things for sure. The fisherman will be left out of it all as if he were a bit player in all this. As a longtime commercial collector, I find that absurd.
The debate needs to turn towards the sea again and the people living with it.
Steve

 

[MaryHM]

Peter,

I asked this earlier in the thread, but I think it got buried pretty quick and you missed it:

You say you had mortality statistics in your 1986 paper. Where did those (30% at each step) come from?