Study of Mortality

[sdcfish]

Continuing on from the previous discussion from the truth about our industry in regards to mortality issue.

In the recent past, I have discussed a reporting process with Marshall Myers of PIJAC. If importers could send data to PIJAC in a unified format, we could gather lot's of information to use in "real data" reporting.

Of'course the reportings would have to be verified by having random verification from outside and neutral people, such as our local vet that visits every week, public aquarium employees that are visiting to purchase animals, Fish and Wildlife inspectors that frequent our business, etc.

Those people visiting our warehouse, can oversee incoming shipments and sign off on the shipment reports where doa's are listed. When enough data is collected and verified, we could show reliability of the data and get a true example of our industry....in regards to shipping mortalities.

If Peter Rubec wants actual data, he should come and see it first hand. We invite him to visit us anytime and oversee any shipment he would like. Spend a week or two in Los Angeles and do a study. Shipments are coming every day from multiple regions and from multiple suppliers. Two weeks would give anyone interested a real perspective of what's happening today.

All this would prove is that our industry isn't as unsuccessful shipping fish as people exaggerate. Industry and fisheries still need better management and improvement which is an ongoing process and much work is currently being done in those areas and it shows.

The other side of the coin is obviously the exporting areas. I would imagine that most of the work is needed on that end, although still much work to be done here.

It's been a while, but I think another phone call to Marshall might be in order to set this up once and for all.

Best regards,

Eric

 

[bookfish]

I have found SDC's feedback to be specific, detailed and useful. The last shipment to them from Tonga was reported back to me at 1.24% fish mortality.-Jim

 

[spawner]

Eric,

I would also like to see a real world study done on shipments received to pet stores and also a more in depth study where 5-10 species of the top traded groups are looked at as far as survival over a 4-6 week period once they have reached the store.

I know that most fish have a very high survival rate when received by wholesalers and fish stores that know what they are doing.

I commonly ship 3-5 lbs. fish over 48 hours, up to 60 hours in duration and we get 95-98 % survival.

I would expect similar survival rates in the MO business as well. This whole issue needs some real data; by this I mean data from wholesalers, LFS and post shipment mortality. I would be happy to send out a student or two your way to collect data. Maybe we could put something together with most of the 104th street crews so that we could get a large data set complied.

A study looking at a random set of fish shipment, survival over for a 4-6 month period would be very helpful to show people real numbers. This would require people who are use to receiving and holding fish with the proper equipment, such as a well-staffed LFS. You can easily get numbers of 90% mortality if the people who run the study have not experience holding fish.

Once a fish is caught it is ecological dead. While all efforts should be made to ensure high survival, economics demand it.

andy

Jim, any cool shrimps lately?

 

[bookfish]

Nothing in the lysmata variety yet, but I've got my goggles on for them. I think the LFS holding (30 day) curve would actually reveal more about the quality of the chain of custody.
sick or thin fish will still survive the stresses of transit but may be too thin, stressed or weak to eat again. We feed our fish between shipping cycles based on the thinking that a fish in transit is using up it's reserves at an accelerated rate, so any extra energy reserve they enter transit with is all to the good. I think the results of something like that are best seen towards the end of the chain of custody, nearer the consumer.

 

[sdcfish]

I think that sending some students down to oversee some shipments or all shipments in a two or three week period would be great. I would hope that all on 104th Street would cooperate. I think that at least Underwater World, Quality Marine, and SDC would be a great indicator. Then ask some others from outside Los Angeles to participate in the repoting and see how close their reports resemble those of LA wholesalers.

How do we get started?

Eric

 

[bookfish]

I hope a Tonga order comes in during the test period!

 

[PeterIMA]

I applaud the willingness of some importers in providing mortality data. Dr. Jerry Heidel has been working with Sea Dwelling Creatures (SDC) and conducting post-mortem analyses of the fishes arriving at SDC. He reported on the studies conducted by his team of veterinarians from Oregon State University at MO06. In addition to disease etiologies, he has been collecting mortality data (DOA, not sure about DAA) for shipments received by SDC for at least the past three years. This is the kind of scientific data that is needed. Eric Cohen is to be commended for cooperating in this study.

Just for clarification for those who see numbers like 90% (used out of context by Kalk), this is a cumulative mortality estimate based on adding the estimated percent mortalities on the reefs, at the villages, at export facilities, at import facilities, and the retail level. In 1987, I estimated that the mortality on the reefs was 50%, and that mortality at each step of the chain of custody was 30%. If you wish to repeat the estimate, start with 1000 fish then remove 500, then remove 30% of the remaining for each step of the chain. In Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin No. 15 published during 2004, Ferdinand Cruz and myself concluded that mortalities had decreased over those presented previously, but were still high.


During November 2005, I visited the Philippines for two weeks and worked at an export facility and at a location in Bicol to assess mortality (and survival) of fishes kept in plastic bags with and without chemical additives over various durations. Five fish were kept in plastic bags for 110 hours with no mortality. Other fishes were kept in plastic bags for over 65 hours.

We looked at adding chemical additives to the acclimation water and also to the water in the shipping bags. Additives added to the acclimation water appeared to be necessary to reduce the mortalities of the fishes subsequently added to the bags, either with no additives or with additives. Without additives used in the acclimation water, the mortalities of the fishes in the bags after 48 hours was over 50%. With additives in the acclimation water, mortalities in the bags (with or without additives) was under 8% after 48 hours. We believe that the main effect of the additives was to reduce the stress on the fish from handling prior to placing them in the bags.

My main point about my present study is that we are investigating the whole chain of custody. We are gathering mortality data through the chain of custody, not just from the LA-based importers. However, if they are willing to share their data, I will be happy to include it in the study I am conducting with Ferdinand Cruz and Tomas Cabagay. The study is also looking into the economics of reduced mortality through the chain of custody. Of more importance is that we are evaluating chemical additives that can prolong the survival of fishes in plastic shipping bags. At MO06 I mentioned the studies we conducted during November 2005.

More recently we have been shipping fishes to European buyers with encouraging results. Chemical additives used to acclimate the fish and added to the shipping bag water markedly reduced the mortality associated with shipments in comparison to shipments where no chemical additives were used for shipments of the same duration (over 40 hours).

I would welcome working with U.S. importers and retailers (indeed some are already collaborating with us). So, if there are others who are willing to share data to help solve the problems of shipping and handling, please contact me by either sending me a PM or by emailing me at [email protected]

Sincerely,
Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

 

[spawner]

Peter

I completely agree that mortality needs to be looked at in the export facilities. However I think the best way to test survival of shipments is to ship them and see what lives after acclimation. I ship fish for well over 48 hours and we have great success. Our success is partly due to the type of fish but also the additives we use. We use a prophylactic, a bit of Q, and Amquel. Once the airlines get them lots of things happen to the fish. I know that I bagged most of my fish/shirmp during the 2004 hurricanes and had them in the bags for 5 days with no deaths, but I don’t think they would have done well if they were moved around very much.

Eric,

Find out what type of interest their is for this type of monitoring and I'll get the man power to do the study; undergrads are cheap and willing most of the time. It needs to be done at a time with large fish shipments before the summer time, and at a random time period. I can get GG to go in with the study if you can get UW and QM that would be four places. 2-3 weeks would give only a window in to the situation but it would be a good start. I can dig up a $1000 bucks for funding; maybe AMDA could chip with some lodging money or something as well. Maybe we can get ASM in Miami to join in as well.

I would also like to look at survival over the long term here in Florida from LA suppliers; maybe even the largest mail order company as well. I worked for years at an LFS; survival was very high once I switch suppliers to someone that knew what they were doing and stopped ordering fish that didn’t do well.

 

[naesco]

I would like to thank Eric for taking the initiative to get this important study started and Dr. Rubec for looking after it all.

I would like to see a list of participants together with a list of those who were asked but refuse to participate.

I would like to see MAC and non-MAC participants identified both on the export and import side.

Thanks again. This is real progress.

 

[sdcfish]

Sounds good......all positive comments.

I think it's best to give a call to Marshall on Monday and discuss the study with him so we can get PIJAC involved. As I previously mentioned, we had discussed this process before and it would surely be a huge step forward in collecting real data for those to study.

A simple reporting format needs to be made.....an excel file that can be emailed by each reporting company. I am sure PIJAC can handle mounting all the data into one spread sheet if the data is presented in an organized and uniform manner.

Both retailers and wholesalers can send the data to the same location. I can easily make an excel sheet this week, and present it to PIJAC for their input.

We can have students and others spend some time reviewing shipments and the reporting to verify the accuracy at different locations.

I will follow up here tomorrow after a hopeful and positive conversation with Marshal Myers.

Best regards

Eric

 

[dizzy]

I think the guy who would really be interested is Dr. Andy Bruckner and also Dr. Barbara Best. They told me they want to better understand the trade. Someone needs to show Andy the wholesalers are not nearly as secretive as Eric B. suggested in Coralmania. I think he might even come up with some funding if needed.
Mitch

 

[PeterIMA]

Respone to Spawner.

As far as the study I am initiatiing, we have a laboratory here in St. Petersburg, FL where we will assess water quality on arrival, DOA, and DAA. We also have several pet stores and importer/wholesalers also willing to do the same and provide the data.

I should note that the IMA submitted several proposals to PIJAC (4 to be exact) from 1987 to 1991. One was in conjunction with the New England Aquairum. One IMA study was to assess mortality and to measure stress hormones in aquarium fishes. Another proposal was from Steve Robinson to have PIJAC support net-trainings. I should note that PIJAC did not fund any of these proposals for CDT, net-trainings, and to assess the causes of mortality. The East Asian Seas And Terrestial Initiatives (EASI) has its own sources of funding and does not need funding from PIJAC.

I have asked the speakers at the Sustainability Symposium at Marine Ornamentals 06 to prepare papers that will be submitted to the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and hopefully published in a scientific journal. I have also asked John Brandt and Gayatri (MAC rep from Indonesia) to also prepare papers. If the trade conducts its own mortality study over the next six months, I am willing to include their paper in the report being prepared for the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force.

As far as the mortality issue, my motivation for conducting the study with EASI is to find better methods for handling and transport of net-caught fishes. The mortality data gathered are not intended to be used against the trade. LIkewise, Dr. Bruckner reiterated at the Conference that the Task Force does not wish to shut down the trade. However, he expressed concern that the trade must solve these problems. Otherwise, there are others on the Task Force and in the U.S. Congress that may eventually seek to enact legislation similar the proposed bill by Hawaiian Congressman Ed Case.

Sincerely,
Peter J. Rubec, Ph,D.

 

[bookfish]

Peter, you start with a 50% mortality on the reef. I'm afraid I don't understand how this # could be so high unless you're talking about fish which have been juiced and then then hide and die. I know that if a fish escapes our divers it is usually completely uninjured (having swum over or under the netting).
Please explain further if you have a moment.
Thx-Jim

 

[clarionreef]

Another proposal was from Steve Robinson to have PIJAC support net-trainings...

Peters right on this;
PIJAC has never supported net training and worked against us for many years. They helped the cyanide trade when it needed them the most and helped fortify them against reform initiatives from 1985-1993.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

Peter, you start with a 50% mortality on the reef. I'm afraid I don't understand how this # could be so high unless you're talking about fish which have been juiced and then then hide and die. I know that if a fish escapes our divers it is usually completely uninjured (having swum over or under the netting).
Please explain further if you have a moment.
Thx-Jim

In order to hold fast to the notion that MO collectors kill coral, Peter must hold onto the notion that pet fish collectors fish with intense levels of cyanide. even though it cant be done to collect tiny ornametal fish (Alive).
Once he admits that cyanide fishermen control the doses they fish with to where they the fishermen can collect fish they can sell.
Or that these collectors understand that after spending hours or days searching out fish like blue face angels, Humma triggers or Blue tangs ( all cyanide prone due to these fish liking to hide in coral.......the fishermen is not about to kill half of these rare fish by over juicing them.
They unders juice and then increase the rate until it stuns the fish.
Not the other way around.
Oopse all the fish died , let me find some more fishs and lower the dose.
Does Peter really think these guys are that backwards?
Some even hold fast to the notion that MO collectors use blast fishing and throw pellets over board to collect pet fish. (as seen in House bills and such) in order to keep the blame on the Marine Ornamental industry.
Peter knows that when fish dont die at the point of collection no coral was harmed either.
Its impossible to kill the coral with cyanide levels that dont kill the fish, (other then extreme repeat exposures)..........so the reeformers hold fast to the story that half the fish die when MO collectors fish.................... to keep the MO collectors culpable for vast dead coral reefs.

 

[PeterIMA]

Yes, the 50% mortality figure on the reef is related to the uncontrolled use of cyanide for fish collection. Net-collecting does not produce this mortality. Which is one of the reasons we favor the use of nets. Nets do not kill either the corals or the fish.

As far as Kalk's belated arguements, they are wrong as well as scientifically unsubstantiated. There is no way to control the cyanide concentrations on the reef. One 20 gram tablet is equivalent to 20,000 mg per liter. Cervino et al. (2003) found damage to corals at exposures of 300 mg/L. The divers use at least 2,000 mg/L while fishing, even if you take into account the fact that the tablets are serially dissolved and dilution of the cyanide plume.

Fish die at concentrations of less than 5 mg/L (ppm) if exposed for more than 2 minutes. Hence, there is no safe concetration of cyanide. Cyanide fishing is illegal. Everyone importing cyanide-caught marine aquarium fishes are guilty of violating the Lacey Act.

 

[Kalkbreath]

No one has ever established that there is a problem.
Lets use your numbers.
Peter your numbers on cyanide and the Philippines during the most recent four years , found that less then 25 percent of the fish tested were found to have cyanide present.
That means less then one in four fish.
But 75 percent of the fish are not collected with cyanide using your test results.
That means five fish to collect four. ...not eight fish to collect four
How is it that this small amount of cyanide fish have come to represent not only the remaining clean fish comming out of PI , but fish from Tonga , Fiji Vanuatu and such?
You have used the scant 21percent of dirty fish you found in the testing to represent the entire industry fish supply.
"Fifty percent of all fish collected for the trade die out on the reef"is what you chant.
But its actually only fifty percent of the cyanide collected fish, which is only 21 percent of PI fish and less then ten percent of the entire world wide fish supply.
Your data .
Its like the Frank data , in order to get to an average of 60 % there would need to be hundreds of stores with 80 to 90 percent DOA DAA. BEcause just a few stores with my kinda DOA DAA (5%) would swing the data the other way. It takes four stores with 80 percent to counter one store with a 5 percent DOA DAA.

Kalkulas strikes again..... :wink:

 

[bookfish]

That makes sense, except that if I had 30% fish loss on shipments I could never sustain any profit, let alone look myself in the mirror!
I look forward to a data set on this but I'd suggest that 2 might be better.
I say this because I feel that to saddle every net collector (say, like everyone in Tonga) with an initial 50% death rate on the reef would not tell the real tale.
I'll even say that I believe fish caught with cyanide may suffer the double whammy of being poisoned and then put into a chain of custody that is less geared towards the fish' needs than achieving the absolute lowest cost.

 

[clarionreef]

People,
I don't know how many folks online know anything about the fish business but understand this;
The final 20% of an incoming shipment from Bali of the Philippines represents the potential profit.

This 20% ideal profit competes with the mortality.

If 5% is DOA and/or DAA....then you may make 15% on the shipment.
If the losses acumalate to 10% then you make just 10% profit.
If you lose much more then that...you must have another revenue stream or look for another job before too long.
The only folks who would lose that much in the fish business would have to be new folks trying to figure it ll out from scratch.
Its just simple math... regular math.
Steve
PS.
Now coincidentaly, a biologist from BFAR in 1983 [ Vic Albaladejo] said that 50% of the fishes collected in Bolinao, Pangasinan never left the Philippines alive.
Thats a 23 year old citation from a place that has since become the cleanest area in the Philippines today....and the home base of collectors now working with nets in Saudi Arabia, Belize and Vanuatu.

 

[nanocat]

I noticed someone mentioned something about funding and "lodging" for potential student volunteers? Why not just use locals? No lodging necessary. :?: