TRANSPORT AND HANDLING: iINDUSTRY MUST CHANGE

[horge]

Put a man on the moon, Mary?

I think --and this is just me, with the Filipino psyche in mind-- that if you show fishermen/collectors that sodium cyanide is destroying their bottom line : habitat destruction = fewer target fish stocks, or at least longer trips to unsoiled reefs, then yeah, you get improvement.

A Filipino ekeing out a living to keep his family fed isn't really going to listen to the US House of Representatives, and the US isn't the only market for cyanide-caught fish. Chinese restaurants everywhere, no?
But once it gets to where it's been this past decade, where cyanide damage has reduced ALL ability to catch food or ornamental fish... you're going to get a ready audience for alternatives among the dosers themselves.

I personally DISAGREE with Peters interpretation that cyanide abuse decreased in the late 90's and then rebounded thence. There's constantly more consciousness of the issue, and better reportage of abuses, and that may be inflating more recent figures, rather than actual increase in incidents. I don't pretend to have figures, but base this on oculars of common collection areas. Anecdotal.

I think it's been a decrease continuously since the Asian economic crash, or at least it'as held steady. Less available wealth in the region to throw away on reeftanks or live-grouper courses in east Asia. The abuse is still there, but I can't deny the recoveries I've seen, so not all our efforts have been in vain.

Consider the remarkably good reception that MPA's have gotten from many fishing communities. MPA's provide them a better bottom line, despite the apparent initial sacrifice. With the pickings getting scarce, netcaught can be shown as a similar tool for maintaining and even improving their bottom line.

Quick fixes don't really exist the way quick crashes do.
Same as with reef tanks.
Stay the course.

 

[MaryHM]

Well thank you for giving me something I rarely have about this situation anymore. Hope. Now I have a new question for you. How??? How do we show them that cyanide is destroying their bottom line? What method, what program, what plan of action?

I also disagree about a dip in cyanide usage. Because if that's the case, you should have seen a dip in the fish supply as well. Without training and proper material, I would assume a former cyanide fisherman would not be able to keep up with his former catch amounts.

 

[kylen]

The Philippine and Indonesian exporters are the most guilty of poor transport conditions.

Bah..ha..ha...ha. What about the airlines??? They've left product on the ramp for 14 hours in subzero temperatures, blown connections left right and centre, and have put full containers of rock and fish in the cooler (2C or about 35F), only to blame my supplier because they didn't put "Do not put in cooler" on the airwaybill. I think they have probably killed more fish than I have.

Again, only part of the picture is given. Don't forget, I have to entrust this third party (airline) with my product of upwards of 40 hours. I worked for one of them for 10 years...I know what they do.

 

[horge]

Hi, Mary

The collectors already know that what used to be an afternoon's work is now a 3-day trip out to open reefs. It's becoming expensive, and that eats up the profit. There's also the undeniable exhaustion of what ought to be a self-renewing natural resource.

The problem is that it makes sense to the colectors themselves, usually. It's often the wholesalers and exporters who can't bring themselves to think beyond 24 hours. They're just moving merch, right?

The exporters generally had their heads up their heinies when it comes to shipping. The densities in some of the bags I saw in the late 90's was appalling. I'm told it isn't so bad now --and if it's improved, then why? Because their clients demanded better? Because it was hurting their bottom line? Dunno. You tell me:

Has the shipping technique really improved since '99?

-----

I think cyanide abuse declined from the mid-90's and continues to.
It wouldn't necessarily result in a drop in available ornamentals, States-side:
A lot of material exported from the Philippines to the US isn't even taken from the Philippines anymore. It's from international waters, collected by either Chinese, Vietnamese or Filipino collectors who'll deal with any buyer or middleman. Hell, boats from Manado carry Indonesian/Filipino material back and forth, depending on what'll sell on the other side.

 

[keethrax]

Honestly, a fish that leaves the reef is basically "dead fish swimming" whether it lives for 2 minutes, 2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years, or 2 decades. It will never go back to the reef and fufill it's ecological niche. It's dead to nature. It's the damage to the reef that is the true problem.

It's of course not that simple though.

Yes once a fish is removed, it is dead as far zas the environment is concerned. But (and I'm simplifying too...) the higher the mortality rate, the more fish need to be removed to get the same number of fish into the trade. I'll be the fisrt to admit it's not that black and white (twhat in the real world is?), but part of the reeef destruction is the removal of the fish. Not all of it certainly.

So if half of the fish die lets say. we get 2 fish "dead to nature" for every fish that ends up in a tank. If 90% die,that's ten "dead" fish for every one that reaches teh aquarium. Once again, I know this is a gross simplification, and I pulled the numbers more or less out of the air (see, I'll admit it when I do that).

The reason I tend to focus on the fish, is because many of the inverts are farmable. Doesn't mean it's being done at teh sacle needed, but it is possible at least for anything that you can frag and propogate. But we're a lot farther off from being able to breed and raise most of the fish species.

I'm against cyanide capture more for the additional damage it does rather than the damage to the target fish, but higher fish mortality does also equate to more damage due to higher collection pressure to meet demand. And if the method in use for collection is itself damaging, higher collection pressure = even more damage for the same number of organisms in the consumer's tank.

I do agree that the level of uneducated posturing in here has reached an all time high and is detrimental to any positive insight.

I'll be the first to admit to being uneducated. My biggest experience in "the industry" was working ina LFS for a while. And the occasional conversation with an importer quite a few years ago. But I'm always willing to learn.

 

[naesco]

Wayne, how many shipments of fish coming from the Philippines or Indonesia have you personally witnessed?

None. Why do you ask?


Kylen
As you pointed out in the cyanide thread there is more to the DOA rate than cyanide alone. Poor carriers are a problem.
The point is some of the problems, like the bags, (waiting to hear from some experts), bag size, water volume and number of fish are some things that industry can change.

If not the government will mandate these standards. They have been told about the problems (see 2.9) What are the solutions?

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, I did some experiments with breathing bags with a Filipino exporter. Some fish sat on the shelf for over 3 weeks. We also packed them in a shipping box with individual breathing bags inside a thicker breathing liner bag for 80 hours with good results. I also brought about 24 fish back to Florida with fish packed this way. The box got heavily damaged by Delta airlines, but 8 fish 5 clownfish and 3 lionfish survived and ended up in my local petshop (as a donation).

However, there are problems with fish puncturing the bags as Mary stated. I believe that if the outer liner bag is sealed, all the fish die. At least that is what happened when Dr. Labbish Chow tried it with neon tetras in the Amazon.

Kordon sells the bags. There are 4 sizes. Three sizes of shipping bags ranging from 9 cents to 17 cents each and the liner bags. Kordon recommends double bagging the fish in the shipping bags with paper between the two bags to prevent the bags being punctured by spines. Has anyone tried this? If this worked one could ship the fish without a liner bag. The bags need to be separated with, cardboard, paper, or styrofoam sheeting to allow then to breath. Air can pass through styrofoam boxes. More experimentation is needed with breathing bags, but I am also working with regular bags and chemical additives (as mentioned in previous posts). Suggestions/comments on how to improve the process are appreciated.

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

Wayne, how many shipments of fish coming from the Philippines or Indonesia have you personally witnessed?

None. Why do you ask?

Wayne, you need to post proof of the things you state as fact. It's as simple as that. If you don't have the proof, then don't post about things you state as factual.

Peace,

Chip

 

[Anonymous]

<voice of bugs bunny>

tempah, TEMPAH!

he does contribute plenty :wink:

his posts are funnier than the sunday comics, that's for sure! :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

he does contribute plenty :wink:

PPOR, vitz. PPOR.



Peace,

Chip

 

[MaryHM]

Peter,

Why would I want to spend extra money and time dealing with breathable bags when I'm not experiencing high DOA/DAA? What would it accomplish, other than wasting money and time? I offered to help you with breathing bag experiments on different occasions. We did it once. I do remember feeling really bad for the valentini puffer who you wanted me to leave in the box for 3 days. Did you record what we did/what the outcome was? It was probably 3 years ago that we did that, if not longer.

Seriously people, am I just an unusual industry professional?? Are my DOA rates just abnormally low? I asked for people to speak up about high mortalities. ONE retail employee said they had high mortalities- but they also were extremely an small store and had just a couple of tanks to sell fish out of. No one else has come forward and said "Our DOA regularly exceeds 10%, 20%, 30%, etc...". Why is that? Could it be because it's just not happening on that scale regularly?

I've been in this industry since 1988. I came to California to work for wholesalers in 1995. I can tell you that the wholesaler I worked at then had VERY high DOA/DAA rates. The packing of the fish (from the export end) was horrendous. Fish were literally crammed into bags with tablespoons of water. It was appalling. I worked for 3 different wholesalers from then until 1998. I definitely saw packing improve drastically over that time period. Some people have alluded to the fact that freight costs went up astronomically during this time. That would make sense. At that point, you wouldn't be able to absorb all of the DOA because the cost per fish would be so much higher. I don't know for sure, because I wasn't in a position to know what the freight costs were. And when I opened my business in 1999, I didn't do fish for the first year. Since then, I have used 3 suppliers out of the Philippines (2 net caught only), 3 out of Indonesia, and 1 out of Bali. I never see tight packs, like 300 damsels per box, anymore. Never. If anything, there are times when I say "Wow, the ocean level must have dropped an inch after they packed this order." But I'd rather have more water than less. Because better pack=less DOA/DAA=more profit. It's simply a bottom line solution.

 

[logicalreef]

Wayne's world, Wayne's world! Party Time, Excellent!

Where do these types like Wayne get the energy? It boggles me. Someone must be paying him.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, Thanks for the comments. I am willing to concede that shipping practices may have changed for the better and that mortality rates may be lower. As I stated, the original estimates (30% mortality through each step of the chain-of-custody were done in 1986, and Lallo's survey in 1997. I am seeking more recent information.

Thanks,
Peter

 

[MaryHM]

Someone must be paying him.

A job where someone pays you to act like an idiot and a fool?? Where do I sign up??

 

[naesco]

It would be nice to have Kordon add to this discussion.
It appears to me that there industry does not want to use the bags because of their cost, does not know how to properly use them and has failed to invest the money necessary to improve them.
IMO it is a slam dunk that the use of this type of product will be mandated by the government as well as minimum/maximum restrictions to cover the abuse by the P/I exporters that I posted about earlier.

Chip just what statement in this thread do you find objectionable?

 

[MaryHM]

IMO it is a slam dunk that the use of this type of product will be mandated by the government as well as minimum/maximum restrictions to cover the abuse by the P/I exporters that I posted about earlier.

Really, Wayne? Where is the scientific study (conducted properly) that shows breathable bags are a major improvement over 2ml plastic bags? Or is the government just supposed to take your word for it? Peter knows what a pain these bags are. We've had many discussions about them in the past. Just because he got 8 fish to live in them does not mean they are the savior of industry transport.

 

[Anonymous]

Chip just what statement in this thread do you find objectionable?

Everything you claim that you do or have as far as industry knowledge needs to have its basis in fact. If you can't post those facts, then please don't bother letting us know your claims. It makes you look laughable...

Peace,

Chip

 

[naesco]

Mary, I agree with you. Industry will be required to provide an independent study satisfying the government that the existing bags are the only answer. If the study finds breatheable bags or another technology is better or needs improvements, the government will mandate theire use.

Ditto for dealing with the minimum size/maximum fish issue that plagues P/I shipments.

Why do you think all of this is part of the BILL? The government knows the problems and is going to enforce compliance.

 

[PeterIMA]

Horge, The decline in cyanide use from 1996 to 1999 and the increase in 2000 was derived from over 7,000 aquarium fish samples taken from 1996 to 2000 and over 12,000 food fish (both showed the declining trend from separate datasets) tested in 6 CDT laboratories run by IMA under contract with BFAR. The samples were gathered all over the Philippines from collectors, at sea and in the villages, at regional facilities, and at central export facilities.

There are some who state (e.g., Dante Dalabajan) that the use of cyanide is higher than the percentages presented in my paper. Maybe he is right. All I can report is the trend monitored (published in my paper in 2003). I am not aware of any other dataset to contradict this for the years stated.

More recently, Dante Dalabajan conducted interviews with fishermen in the Calamian Islands in NE Palawan. He documented over 250,000 reported incidents of cyanide use over about a two year period. He has a paper that will be published soon.

As far as CDT for recent years, perhaps you can get BFAR to release their data. I have obtained some of it, and I stand by my assertion that cyanide use has increased since 2000 (not decreased).

Peter Rubec

 

[naesco]

Chip just what statement in this thread do you find objectionable?

Everything you claim that you do or have as far as industry knowledge needs to have its basis in fact. If you can't post those facts, then please don't bother letting us know your claims. It makes you look laughable...

So what claim did I make in this thread that lacks fact?