Improving the survival rates of transported fish.

[Kalkbreath]

You really think collectors kill 9 out of ten fish when they collect? Nine out of ten Blue tangs .......nine out of then blue face angles? Do you realize that this would mean that more then fifty percent of the time the collectors would have to kill 100% of the fish ?

how does 9/10 fish become 9/10 of each species of fish?????

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Have you ever considered why it is the collectors would not decrease the level of cyanide they are fishing with?{you must really think these guys are dumb} I mean if you as a collector,swam around mile after mile {remember, according to you there are only 500 fish per square kliometer......so a diver must swim twenty kilometers a day to collect :wink: }and almost every time you squirted , all the fish you we targeting died right there before your eyes.......you would never think of decreasing the level you were using? I hope to have the pleasure of meeting you at the next MO get together:wink: {Ill be the one asking the questions out loud}

It doesn't ........90% on average would mean some fish species would have higher moralities and some lower.............Just ten percent of the fish species like hardy Groupers comming in at only ten percent DOA ..would require the remaining 90% of species to average what ?.{fill in the blank}.......For the total 100% of species to average 90%? Thats why many species would need to approach 100 percent Dead to fulfill Peters 90% DOA.Average! You really think collectors continue to squirt with 100 percent moralities? Even 90% is preposterous!

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Do you deliberately distort the facts or is it that you really don't get it?

Now you claim that I claimed there is 90% DOA in the trade. Presumably this is at the retail level?

The only place I have used a figure of 90% is for the cumulative mortality. At MO (and previously) I presented a graph showing that if one adds the numbers that die at each step of the chain from the reef (50% acute mortality), and delayed mortalities from the collector (30% at the village level), the exporter (30%), the importer(30%), and retailer (30%) the CUMULATIVE mortality (out of the original number exposed to the cyanide) is over 90%. This is not an average DOA figure like you claim.

As far as the mortality at the exporter level, Christine Schmidt presented an interesting talk at MO 04. She monitored mortalities at CVDinar, one of the largest Indonesian exporters. The DOA was about 2%. Mortalities rose in subsequent days and exceeded 30% by day 5 then declined thereafter. She proved that the mortality DOA+DAA at this exporter's facility exceeded 30%.

 

[mkirda]

preposterous!

Preposterous isn't the proper word.

How about intolerable or outrageous or scandalous or shocking?
Especially when demonstrated to be possible and/or likely.

 

[Anonymous]

wasn't there a picture of a panel in this thread? there was an interesting detail i noticed that i wanted to touch on

 

[clarionreef]

Yeah,,
Were we deleted for...for something?
Comon now. we were just sitting there behaving!
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

i had noticed the rather conspicuous absence of a 'lei' (sp?) on one of the participants

 

[Kalkbreath]

And for the NINTH TIME, 500 fish per square kilometer is a low end number for extremely depleted reef zones, not an average for the entire reef system for the PI! If you have a problem with the 500 fish per square kilometer number, I suggest you take it up with ReefCheck as they are the ones who supply the scientific world with these sorts of numbers, not me.

So how many fish do you think the average for PI is per kilometer? Its too easy to simply use the 500 number at times and the 10,000 number at others......... Its the average which sheds light on the real state of the reefs. Yet no one whats to admit what the fish count is on the average Phipiine reef? Whats the average fish population per kilometer. If you have no idea , how can you access the situation?

 

[Kalkbreath]

preposterous!

Preposterous isn't the proper word.

How about intolerable or outrageous or scandalous or shocking?
Especially when demonstrated to be possible and/or likely.

alright , you got me .......bad choice

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, Do you deliberately distort the facts or is it that you really don't get it?

Now you claim that I claimed there is 90% DOA in the trade. Presumably this is at the retail level?

Sorry I miss read the wording

(it is over 90% if the acute mortality at the time of collection is included).

Yet fifty percent is still to high.at collection

As far as the mortality at the exporter level, Christine Schmidt presented an interesting talk at MO 04. She monitored mortalities at CVDinar, one of the largest Indonesian exporters. The DOA was about 2%. Mortalities rose in subsequent days and exceeded 30% by day 5 then declined thereafter. She proved that the mortality DOA+DAA at this exporter's facility exceeded 30%.

I dont think many importers could withstand a thirty percent DOA DAA from Bali. The freight is too high and the fish costs are as well . Also not many importers keep their fish for five days......Usually they ship them out again before day five. This would mean the data is tainted by fish which were in low demand.

 

[Anonymous]

Kalk, Do you deliberately distort the facts or is it that you really don't get it?

Now you claim that I claimed there is 90% DOA in the trade. Presumably this is at the retail level?

Sorry I miss read the wording

(it is over 90% if the acute mortality at the time of collection is included).

Yet fifty percent is still to high.at collection

As far as the mortality at the exporter level, Christine Schmidt presented an interesting talk at MO 04. She monitored mortalities at CVDinar, one of the largest Indonesian exporters. The DOA was about 2%. Mortalities rose in subsequent days and exceeded 30% by day 5 then declined thereafter. She proved that the mortality DOA+DAA at this exporter's facility exceeded 30%.

I dont think many importers could withstand a thirty percent DOA DAA from Bali. The freight is too high and the fish costs are as well . Also not many importers keep their fish for five days......Usually they ship them out again before day five. This would mean the data is tainted by fish which were in low demand.

a low demand fish is less dead when it expires? :?

why do you think the importers try to get the fish out by day 5, kalk-is it, maybe....

to avoid the losses that may happen after day 5?

could this be why the the retail end of the equation has such a high percentage of the total DAC (dead after collection)?

 

[hdtran]

Can you folks get back to chemistry? E.g. what is the metabolic production of ammonia of a marine fish? What is the buffering capacity of Sodium Bicarb/Sodium Borate?

And (for SM), what is the airspeed of a laden 747?

 

[PeterIMA]

Vitz, You meant to say Why do you think the "exporter" gets the fish out by day five? Right?
Peter

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz, You meant to say Why do you think the "exporter" gets the fish out by day five? Right?
Peter

i didn't mean to refer to a specific amount of days, other than to touch upon kalk's statement

Also not many importers keep their fish for five days......Usually they ship them out again before day five.

from my understanding the exporters end up holding fish (from point/timr of collection to actual ship) longer than 5 days, more often than not -due to logistics, if nothing else (i include bus rides to the airports, etc., as 'holding')

however, i'm sure (well, who isn't) that both exporters and importers (the high majority of both) try to 'get rid of' their stock as quickly as is humanly possible-in order to cut their mortality losses

it's a shame that these creatures are seen as a commodity 1st, and an animal 2nd, rather than as an animal that can also be responsibly used for a commodity

 

[mkirda]

So how many fish do you think the average for PI is per kilometer? Its too easy to simply use the 500 number at times and the 10,000 number at others......... Its the average which sheds light on the real state of the reefs. Yet no one whats to admit what the fish count is on the average Phipiine reef? Whats the average fish population per kilometer. If you have no idea , how can you access the situation?

Kalk,

You miss the point entirely again...

You do not assess the state of the reefs by fish counts. It is by percentage hard coral cover. The higher the percentage, the higher the diversity and the higher the associated fish biomass. Fish counts are notoriously fickle as, well, fish move: Coral doesn't.

Additionally, not all of the Philippines is fished constantly.
Depending on the local conditions, an area may only be fished (for MO) a few months out of the year. We may be able to figure what the fish counts are for those months, but the rest of the year, we basically have little to no idea. (Hard to do fish counts on a 30 foot deep reef when you have 10 foot swells coming in for six months of the year...)

If you want to actually get this info, I will point you in the same direction that I did last time: ReefCheck. You are not going to find it on their web site. You will actually have to talk to them.

 

[PeterIMA]

Vitz, I agree with you. I see the main problem being with the exporters, who refuse to pay the collectors more for net-caught well-handled fish. The reduction in mortality and the changes in the exchange rates justify an increase in prices paid to the collectors. I don't think we need a Filipino MBA to tell us that this can work, but a study to prove it is a good idea. With quality fish, and proper shipping and handling through the chain, everyone in the trade would benefit from lower mortality and higher profits (from fish that live). Why is it so hard for the trade to see this?

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz, I agree with you. I see the main problem being with the exporters, who refuse to pay the collectors more for net-caught well-handled fish. The reduction in mortality and the changes in the exchange rates justify an increase in prices paid to the collectors. I don't think we need a Filipino MBA to tell us that this can work, but a study to prove it is a good idea. With quality fish, and proper shipping and handling through the chain, everyone in the trade would benefit from lower mortality and higher profits (from fish that live). Why is it so hard for the trade to see this?

Peter

i'm not so sure that the trade DOESN'T see it :wink:

i do think that like so many trades and bureaucracies, inertia plays a big role, as well as the false impression that investing properly back into one's operation to ensure it's continued success is an expense :wink:

part of the industry (and a larger part than i think most here are comfortable with, assuming there's an acceptable small amount) just doesn't give a rat's ass, and doesn't care, as long as they can skim off the resource while it's there, only to move on to something else, like the cancer i sometimes see our species acting like :?


(childhood asthma is at an all time high, and more and more moms drive suv's-there's a strong message there, that's applicable here, too)

 

[Douglas S Lehman]

Hello
Having bought many fish over the years, I think I heard em all.
Must of been stress...
Your Nitrate is to high...
Did it catch a cold on the way home...
Could your tank be contaminated...
ph shock...
Yeah Doug I can replace it this time,but...
Funny thing is they never offer a refund, just another fish sic...
Until their is a CDT in place to identify poisoned fish at the local (hobbyist) level were spitting into the wind.
I don't think any body would knowingly purchase poisoned fish,without a test in place I'm at their mercy/trust.
Every one want's clean fish, but let me have the cheap one instead.
We don't sell poisoned fish here?
If we were to stop buying them, how long do you think it would take for the LFS to stop ordering them?
How long do you think it would take for the Wholesalers, Importers, Exporters and the collectors to figure it out...10 years?
If their were no market for their poisoned fish maybe they would stop?
Why do I want to collect that fish, if no body will buy it?

 

[Anonymous]

Excellent post, Doug! It is great to hear another hobbyist's opinion. Great job of describing the situation we hobbyists are in.

 

[Anonymous]

http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=46492

:wink:

 

[Kalkbreath]

Excellent post, Doug! It is great to hear another hobbyist's opinion. Great job of describing the situation we hobbyists are in.

Actually lets back up a little........What percentage of the fish sold to hobbyists do you think have been collected with cyanide? Its most likely only around ten percent. If we are to believe the tests that concluded that 25 percent of PI fish were collected with cyanide then that means even if you buy a PI fish its only got a one in four chance its been juiced. Then take into account that many of the cyanide fish die from the poison before reaching the hobbyist. More so then non cyanided fish so the 25 % will decrease to 15 percent. Then we must take into account all the fish that inter the market from non cyanide collecting locations. The fourth most popular fish the yellow tang and all Hawaiian fish , the Caribbean and Florida fish like the popular Royal gramma. About one-third of the fish interring the trade are not from the Philippines or Indonesia. That fact would cut the 15% figure down again to perhaps less then ten percent. ...........so perhaps we should rethink the idea that cyanide is to blame for fish dying in your tank. The facts just dont support that notion.