Do Frank Lallo's Mortality Statistics Reflect Reality?

[John_Brandt]

Frank,

First, I want to thank you for all the work you did conducting your survey in 1997. Secondly, I want to also thank you for all the work you are doing now in posting the data from your survey.


QUESTION #1

Frank, do you think that Dr. Peter Rubec was accurate in reporting that your data reveals the following average DOA/DAA(3 days) at retail stores?

30% at West Coast retailers
35% at Midwest retailers
60% at East Coast retailers

QUESTION #2

Frank, do you think that the respondants to your survey were perfectly accurate, absolutely honest and withheld nothing with respect to the data they presented you?


In 1925, a young field researcher in the newly-formed discipline of anthropology was tricked by a couple of teenage Samoan girls into believing untruths about their, and their peers, sexual behavior. Samoans, like most Polynesians, are world-famous practical jokers. These stories, offered as fact, became part of a monumental and controversial book written in 1928 by the naive researcher Margaret Mead titled "Coming Of Age In Samoa". Mead unwittingly and almost single-handedly, established an antagonistic dichotomy within anthropology that remains to this day.

Good science and good statistical analysis that supports it demands that data and conclusions match the real world as closely as humans are capable of achieving. Skepticism of your data and Dr. Peter Rubec's characterization of it, does not come from the "left field" with an agenda. It comes from people who have seen and experienced the world of the marine aquarium trade and know it to be very different than has sometimes been portrayed. You owe it to yourself and everyone concerned, to be forthright and open to criticism and question without being hostile to those who engage in this.

 

[flameangel1]

John B.
on question #2--
Sounds like you expected Frank to have made all the respondents take lie detecter tests !! About the only way any one could be absolutely sure of what exactly anyone said or thought. Then again, Lie detecter tests are not always absolutely, perfectly correct either .

Your placement of the story about the Samoan girls, added after question #2, really is insulting, imo!!!!

 

[flameangel1]

You owe it to yourself and everyone concerned, to be forthright and open to criticism and question without being hostile to those who engage in this.

Hmmmm, would be much appreciated if the writer of the above words took them to heart himself. :wink:

 

[JennM]

You owe it to yourself and everyone concerned, to be forthright and open to criticism and question without being hostile to those who engage in this.

Hmmmm, would be much appreciated if the writer of the above words took them to heart himself. :wink:

Touche, Judy!!!

Jenn

 

[clarionreef]

Now girls!
Behave and stop hitting John.
You didn't take issue with his thesis...just him.
Now I'm married to a Polynesian girl and let me just say this... no, never mind. [ they make great sport fooling outsiders though...old tradition!]
OBVIOUSLY...if the figures were actually the true average...then we are all out of business. Those percentages are death plain and simple. Thats the fastest criteria for evaluation there is. All the reason to order more fish evaporates when all hope of profit and breaking even fails week after week.
Only the very rich could endure these loss levels for more than a month! And thats a mathematical certainity!
Aberrant examples, though sad are happily not, repeat NOT the norm.
Steve @ Cortez Marine
w/ 23 years of importing experience

 

[flameangel1]

Steve,,
I do believe those numbers from in the past, but things have gotten much better and a survey today, I would expect, would show those numbers much lower. At least for me, on the East coast, they have.
Ick was common back then also, and I have not seen a case of ick in years now.
But, things need to get even better, especially in regards to shipping.

 

[Frank Lallo]

John,
The answer to question #1 is yes. I gave those figures to Peter and stand by them. You must understand that it is exzactly what it represents an average. There are outlets in the data as I have stated before that were absolutely horrendous and there were outlets that were outstanding.

Frankie

 

[Frank Lallo]

John,
No I can not tell you if they were all perfectly honest in there answer's.
For what reason would they lie ?. Was there a possibility of mistaken identification in some case's yes I am sure there was. Here's an example of some of the things that were forwarded to me. One owner pasted on to me that an unsupervised new employee had released 25 chormis into 3 separt tanks which where housing Barsa tigers, groupers and Lions in the respective tanks. I appreciate the consturctive criticism. It is of great help for someone to point out possible error's and the like so I can go back and check. As you stated having the ribbons divide into Black & Blue. As you well know at one time they were thought to be two separte speices, and I think may owners think they are to this day. Black being the Juv'es. As far as the perfect quote, I dou"t very much any of us are perfect including the man upstairs, If he was we wouldn't be in this mess today. As far as a perfect study is concearned, it will never happen to many business come and go & as we have seen so many times importers/exporters reputations have gott'in so bad they change there name faster then they register them. As for the 1925 illustration too things, What does getting laid over 3/4 of a century ago have to do with this in any way shape or form ? and it is comments such as these that piss me off.

Thanks John
Frankie

 

[Frank Lallo]

John,
Just one other thing. And this is not in any way shape or form and attack or flaming. Why do you have too entirely different opinions on this matter. Your post's reflect one and your private message reflected something entirely different ? Also, you want me and others to responed to your post's to explain things, yet you seem forgetful in answering questions posted your way. I posted some questions to you in relation to cdt testing, fish mortalities and the like almost a week ago and find it strange as to how it slipped your mind to answer. In all honesty though I have to admit you are keeping everybody on toe's and making them answer for there statements, this is a good thing.

Thanks John
Frankie

 

[dizzy]

I'm going to have to jump in here and say my friend John raises a good question. IMO the numbers do not add up. I am beginning to wonder if Frank and Peter haven't conspired to play a hoax on the more gullible amoung up. The number of purple tangs in the study is roughly equal to the number of yellow tangs in the study. Is this realistic? The number of cube fish and ribbon eels is way high and the number of mandarins is way low by comparison. The number of spotted box is roughly equal to the number of porcupine puffers and so on.

John I think you can use your data on the most commonly imported species to prove these guys are just funin with us.

 

[Frank Lallo]

Hey Mitch,
Good idea Mitch, Lets use the most common, which I would guess are also the most hardy of the bunch. Then we can throw out the not so hardy and difficult so you feel better. Then we can all forget about the industries a big problem and all live happly ever after. Give me a freak'in break will ya. Oh and by the way Mitch, I am pretty sure if John has data on common species it will be real close to mine.

Frankie.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mitch,

Frank and I did not make up these numbers. They are real. Frank can (and is) providing you with some of the raw data that led to his calculation of regional averages for DOA+DAA (DOA 1st day +DAA days 2-4). I don't think that it is practical for him to post all of his data on this forum (he admitted as much in a posting today). The data needs to be more fully analyzed and published in aggregate form. Frank and I are committed to protecting the anonymity of the individuals, the names of the stores, and the locations used in the study.

Peter Rubec

 

[dizzy]

Peter,
I agree we have seen enough data to see certain trends. The thing that jumps out at me is that marine dealers must not be very intelligent. These dumb as*es kept bringing in incredibly high numbers of fish that they had to know would die before they could sell them. I would really like to know how long some of these dealers had been in business. As a small town dealer I was forced to learn which fish would live and which ones were difficult to keep. It didn't take me long to learn which fish to stay away from. If I hadn't learned quickly I would not have made it through my first year in business.

While my fellow retailers in your study were bringing in 805 ribbon eels in 1997 I brought in none. While they were bringing in 1390 box fish I might have brought in 2 or 3 in 1997. I probably brought in 50 or more royal grammas. BTW the number of O.Meleagris at 530 seems incredibly high for a fish that doesn't show up in high numbers on the availability lists, when compared to other common fish in the study. These bright retailers brought in 1243 hardy and plentiful Royal grammas and 1390 rare and touchy box and cube fish. They brought in 1061 yellow tangs and 917 purple tangs. I probably brought in 10 yellows to every purple. They brought in 680 difficult moorish idols and only 612 porcupine puffers which I find to be much hardier than the average dealer in the study. I also don't understand how the numbers on S. splendidus (green mandarin) and S. picturatus (psychedelic) ended up being so similar. S. splendidus is offered in much higher numbers and is more attractive. All things being equal I would sell about 7 splendidus to every one picturatus. The low number of green chromis compared to the other damsels doesn't jive with the numbers on the mostly commonly imported species John Brandt listed either.

It is my belief that even if you disregarded DOA/DAA, the percentages of certain species being brought in by the stores in the study, do not match the percentage of these same species that are being sold by the wholesalers. It will certainly be easy enough for a wholesaler or two to analyze the data and I would suggest having this done before publishing the study. Any volunteers?

 

[John_Brandt]

John,
Just one other thing. And this is not in any way shape or form and attack or flaming. Why do you have too entirely different opinions on this matter. Your post's reflect one and your private message reflected something entirely different ? Also, you want me and others to responed to your post's to explain things, yet you seem forgetful in answering questions posted your way. I posted some questions to you in relation to cdt testing, fish mortalities and the like almost a week ago and find it strange as to how it slipped your mind to answer. In all honesty though I have to admit you are keeping everybody on toe's and making them answer for there statements, this is a good thing.

Thanks John
Frankie

What the hell are you talking about, Frank?

You posted the questions below to me only 2 days ago, not "like almost a week ago." You will also see at the bottom of that message that you encouraged me to "bash the living hell out of you" if things don't add up or seem right. Frank, things don't add up or seem right.

I didn't bother to answer your questions because they were obviously bogus and meant to be spiteful. I don't have a CDT, Frank. I don't have a mortality study either. MASNA doesn't have a CDT, nor has MASNA ever done a mortality survey. The only organization that I know of with a CDT program is BFAR (Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources - Philippines). The only detailed mortality study that I know of is yours.

I don't believe the figures from your study. I don't trust your respondants. I don't trust you. I don't trust Dr. Peter Rubec. I don't trust IMA-supported propaganda. I'm tired of this whole drawn out expose of crap.





Frank Lallo
Reefkeeper
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2003 10:02 am Post subject: Enough is Enough

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Getting tired of the pissing match here. John Answer me just a few simple questions if you would please.

1) Where are the results of your CDT testing ?
2) Where are the results of your Mortality Study ?
3) Where are the results of....Mac's, Amda's, Masna, World wildlife fund, nature conservancy, Greenpeace, pijac, peta, and all the rest.CDT tests & Mortality Study's.

The problem in this industry & Hobby is quite simple as I see it.

The whole bunch of them see#'s 1,2,3 is they have spread so much crap, misconception, and failures that nobody including themselves can beleave anything that comes out of there mouth. When grant money is on the line and one of the groups has an edge the other 10,000 must bash it, do anything they can to discredit it so they can get the grant money.

I am going to tell you one more time John. SEE THE STUDY FOR YOURSELF before commenting. Then if things do not add up or don't seem right you can bash the living hell out of ME the source !.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mitch, You make some excellent points. I respect that they are based on your experience as a retailer. Frank appears to be saying that for every smart retailer (such as yourself) who cares about the fish, there are nine others who don't care, and don't take the time to learn what lives and what doesn't because they make their money on dry goods and equipment (hence they don't care whether they animals live or not)

John, Guess, what? I think you know something about the business you are in (Aquarium Maintenance). I think you are sincere to some degree in arguing with Frank about fish mortality.

I don't think you are sincere, when you bash me or the IMA. You are trying to represent the MAC's interests. The MAC has screwed up and does not appear to be sincere about reform. I objected and so did Ferdinand (who was part of the MAC Certification program) to the way it was implemented at Batasan Island and Clarin. The sites were not sustainable. The IMA should know, we trained 60 collectors at Batasan Island to use barrier nets. You acknowledged this in your recent article in the OFI Journal.

By the way, it is a nice article, except for the fact that it has three pictures of you. You seem to be more interested in promoting yourself and to a lesser extent the MAC; while not addressing the real issues (MAC Certification of unsustainable sites, MAC Certification of exporters who sell cyanide-caught fish, destruction of the CDT network by unfairly maligning the IMA, a lack of transparency, a failure to work with other organizations to promote net-training e.g., CORL etc.).

So, I guess I can say the same.
I don't trust or respect you.
I don't trust or respect the MAC
I don't believe the propaganda being spread by you or the MAC.

The IMA has or is still doing the following:
a) Trained 1100 aquarium fish collectors to use barrier nets.
b) Ran a network of 6 CDT labortories for 8 years and tested over 48,000 fish specimens.
c) Maintains a coral farm as a training center on Olango Island. The site as about 38,000 corals growing on the site as well as several thousand giant clams.
d) Is actively involved in other community-based programs.
e) Worked informally with Frank Lallo on a mortality study.
f) Organized coastal cleanups in four countries. The Philippine coastal cleanup has been the largest in the world dwarfing those organized by the Center for Marine Conservation (now the Ocean Conservancy).
g) Conducted a survey of live rock in Fiji that recently reported that the harvest is unsustainable.
h) Gathered data concerning the live food Fish trade.
i) Maintains offices and staff in 8 countries.
(There are other programs but I think this is enough to make my point).

Frank Lallo asked what the MAC has done with regard to running CDT laboratories (nothing so far), on assessing mortality through the chain of custody (nothing that I know about) associated with MAC Certification. If you and the MAC have not done anything in these areas, what makes you/MAC qualified to judge what IMA or Frank Lallo has done?

PS, With the $800,000 the MAC will soon receive, what will the MAC do to support real reform through MAC Certification?

Peter Rubec

 

[John_Brandt]

PS, With the $800,000 the MAC will soon receive, what will the MAC do to support real reform through MAC Certification?

For starters, ignore you :wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

John, You are free to ignore me. If the MAC ignores those in the trade and is not credible to them, how do you expect MAC Certification to succeed?

Peter Rubec

 

[Frank Lallo]

Well lets see here,
$800,000.00 Lets see here, Looking at the base salaries not including the cost of everyday operating expenses. This 800k is gone already and they don't even have it yet. I find that very interesting.

 

[Anonymous]

I thought we weren't allowed to flame MAC any longer, I mean attack them with the use of their name. Peter is saying things about MAC that the IMA did as well. If I even sneezed IMA's name on this bored, Peter would threaten to sue me and all who ever even utterred IMA's name.

I will pm my questions of IMA to you Peter, as I feel it the proper way of dealing with this. Last sentance deleted for PeterIMA (should be PeterR though, he say's he doesn't speak for the IMA). JohnB is a part of MAC, you don't see him going by JohnMAC.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham, I am going to let this one pass. I have replied to your PM'd messages. I expect you to stop this BS or I will retaliate.

Peter