TRANSPORT AND HANDLING: iINDUSTRY MUST CHANGE

[Anonymous]

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

Do you just not read Mary's replies to your posts?

The claim is in here, and only a few posts above this one...

Peace,

Chip

 

[MaryHM]

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

You say you've never seen a single shipment from PI or Indo, yet you make this statement. Where is your proof of the "plague"?

 

[naesco]

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

You say you've never seen a single shipment from PI or Indo, yet you make this statement. Where is your proof of the "plague"?

From the discussion on wholesale tank conditions.

Whether a system is run hypo(1.010 to 1.014) or at nsw (1.025 to 1.026) does not really make to much difference if the fish are from the Philippines or Indo. Fish from the Philippines, ime, usually have problems while the same species from the Sth Pacific don't. Another point to consider is the Philippines pack very light(small bags and minimal water) which seriously weakens fish. My Philippine shipments come in at a ph of 6.6 to 6.8 after a 30 hour trip in a bag. My Hawaii supplier packs heavy, lots of water and a big bag. Their fish come in with a ph of 8.1 after 24hours bag time.

The comment was from Tim Tessier.
Note that the same exporters that bring you cyanide also pack poorly which seriously weakens fish.

The beginning of reeform of the industry must include an immediate embargo on all fish from the Philippines and Indonesia until problems with cyanide and poor transport is corrected.

 

[MaryHM]

Man, how did I miss this one?

Kordon recommends double bagging the fish in the shipping bags with paper between the two bags to prevent the bags being punctured by spines

What kind of paper, Peter? It would have to be pretty thick and heavy, and I would think that would impede the oxygen flow. Seems like the point of the liner isn't to necessarily prevent the fish from puncturing through the first bag, but to keep them from puncturing through to the second bag, which would allow the water to drain out. Let me try to give a visual on this:

Our bags consist of a 2ml platic bag placed inside a 4 ml plastic liner placed inside another 2 ml plastic bag. If the fish punctures the first 2ml bag, the liner is thick enough to keep the bag intact and prevent the fish from puncturing through the outer bag. Of course, if the outer bag gets punctured, the water drains out and it's bye-bye fishy.

Now let's use the Kordon example. Desparately thin bags (my guess is 1/2 ml to 3/4 ml- any idea on the ml size, Peter?). So we would pack thin bag, paper, thin bag. Let's say little Dory gets upset during his trip to America. He thrashes around in sheer frustration. The "knife" on his tail slices the inner thin bag. No problem, we still have a paper liner and an outer bag, right? Hold on, what happens to paper when it gets wet folks?? I bet even Wayne could answer that one. It turns into a sopping mush glob. Dory is further upset when the plane hits some turbulence and he jumps around again. "Knife" easily slices through paper mush and outer bag. Poor Dory sits there in stunned silence as his life force- water- slowly drains to nothing. Breathable bags don't work very well without water. Sorry, but I'd rather have a plastic bag and plastic liner any day over plastic bag and paper liner.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, The breathing bags are thin. The paper does not have to be thin. Acutally it may be advantageous if the paper is not thin.

My question was has anyone tried this?

Peter

 

[naesco]

Mary
Do you disagree are agree with the Tim Tessier post?

Chip is this the kind of facts to back up my statements that you are looking for?

 

[MaryHM]

Another point to consider is the Philippines pack very light(small bags and minimal water) which seriously weakens fish. My Philippine shipments come in at a ph of 6.6 to 6.8 after a 30 hour trip in a bag.

It must be stated that Tim's experience in the Philippines was limited to the net caught dealers as far as I know. Worst packers on earth. My PI shipments come in at about the same pH as Tim is saying. So do the Indo fish, so do the Solomons fish, so do the Bali fish. Fiji fish come in about 7.2, but of course they have a nice direct flight. Lord knows Solomons doesn't pack light (are you listening, Dave? ). But the pH is about the same. Just takes longer to drip PI, Indo, Solomons fish than it does Fiji fish.

And why would it take 24 hours to get fish from Hawaii to Vancouver? It's a direct flight. I don't get that statement. It should be far less. No more than 15 hours from pack to arrival in Vancouver.

A weak fish isn't a dead fish either. I'd be weak too if I went on the trip these fish do. But they pull out of it astonishingly well. As long as they are properly acclimated. And I don't know any wholesalers that don't know how to acclimate fish.

Question for retailers out there. What pH do your fish come in at?

 

[MaryHM]

So what kind of paper do they recommend, Peter?

 

[keethrax]

The comment was from Tim Tessier.
Note that the same exporters that bring you cyanide also pack poorly which seriously weakens fish.

Umm.. Ever acutally shipped a fish yourself?

LWEss water is not necessarily bad. IT means less dilution of wastes, but it also means *more* space for air/oxygen.

As I said (and you ignored) simple economics take care of this "problem" jsut fine. It is *expensive* to ship fish. The more live fish you get at the other end the better off everybody's bottom line is. As such the businesses that pay less for each live fish (even if it means paying a little bit more per fish sent) are going to do better than those that don't. Why regulate taht which is inherently self-regulating?

I'm sure that the current shipping mehtods of any of the big players are diesgned to minimize losses, as that makes them moremoeny in the long run. If you can't come up with any claims other than blind stabs in the dark wiht no backaup, and in this case not even anecdotal evidence, why bother?

So answer this:

Why would afish importer not find the best deal in teerms of live fish/dollar? And if that's the case, the business goes to the exporters who provide just that. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

 

[MaryHM]

Note that the same exporters that bring you cyanide also pack poorly which seriously weakens fish.

THAT IS SO WRONG. The same exporters that bring us net caught also pack poorly which seriously KILLS the fish. Remember, that's why I had to quit buying from them?? The older exporters know how to pack fish. Don't think they don't for a second. They've been doing it for years- decades. For someone who admits to having never seen a shipment from anywhere, you sure do have lots of (wrong) opinions about it. Ask Steve, he'll tell you who packs better.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, I don't believe that Kordon specified what kind of paper to use with the breathing bags. Go to their web site for the description with recommended methods. What do you think should be used?

Peter

 

[MaryHM]

2ml plastic bag with a 4ml plastic liner and another 2ml plastic bag.
What I'm using now. If I have no problems with that, why would I want to change?

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry to Sump-ify this thread a bit, and sorry to break the discussion up, but I can't help it :

CONGRATS ON 2x{squat}, Mary!!!

Woo-hoo!!! 2,000 posts!!!

WOO-HOO!



Now back to your regularly scheduled MAC-Naesco-Kalkbreath-bashing.



Peace,

Chip

 

[dizzy]

[
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.

keethrax,
I hate to disagree but I want to make a point based on 20-years experience. I think the high mortality rate, whatever it happens to be, has done wonders to help hold the hobby back and to keep the numbers of fish exported in check. Sure an unsuccessful quick in and quick out of the hobby takes it's toll on the fish. Still these people are far less responsible for killing massive amounts of fish than someone like myself who has been doing it for 20-years. Most of us never stop killing fish entirely if we remain intense hobbyists. As our skills grow so do our desires to take on the challenges of increasingly difficult fish. Not only does high mortality get people out of the hobby, it also helps to keep their friends and relatives from ever getting in, in the first place. These beautiful creatures from the coral reefs have a very strong appeal. The fact that they can be expensive and delicate, also helps to protect them to some degree.
Mitch

 

[keethrax]

[
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.

keethrax,
I hate to disagree but I want to make a point based on 20-years experience. I think the high mortality rate, whatever it happens to be, has done wonders to help hold the hobby back and to keep the numbers of fish exported in check. Sure an unsuccessful quick in and quick out of the hobby takes it's toll on the fish. Still these people are far less responsible for killing massive amounts of fish than someone like myself who has been doing it for 20-years. Most of us never stop killing fish entirely if we remain intense hobbyists. As our skills grow so do our desires to take on the challenges of increasingly difficult fish. Not only does high mortality get people out of the hobby, it also helps to keep their friends and relatives from ever getting in, in the first place. These beautiful creatures from the coral reefs have a very strong appeal. The fact that they can be expensive and delicate, also helps to protect them to some degree.
Mitch

I agree with you almost completely, actually. But I think you're observation misses something. I was primarily (don't know if this came across or not) concerned with mortality before reaching the aquarists tank. The fish don't magically become easier to keep in the long run just because they survive shipping/holding/etc. (assuming that one lets a fish stay at the LFS for a while before purchase and so the store absorbs the cost of poorly transferred fish that are still alive, and thus the LFS is more likely to buy fish from places that ship healthy fish to protect *their* bottom line).

Advances in husbandry techniques have made it easier to keep these fish, and thus increased demand to a certain extent, but that's a seperate issue, and you certainly can't advocate not finding better ways to keep the fish healthy once we've received them.

 

[Anonymous]

Don't forget to discuss the mortality issues prior to placing the animals on the airplane.

J. Baquero wrote in 1995 in the article "The stressful journey of marine ornamental fish" Sea Wind 9(1) 19-21.

The ordeal of net-caught fish starts when it is removed from the reef. But this is only the start of its miseries...Once ashore, there are no holding facilities and submerged cages are not widespread because of the lack of protected areas, the tide and theft. Thus the fish are dumped from the bags in to a bucket with up to 30 fish at once. The fish are then transferred abruptly into bags filled with new water from the shoreline.


Depending on the species, they are bagged individually if they are expensive, or by pairs in smaller bags, or several in larger bags. The bagged fish remain on the floor or on wooden structures usually 3-5 days before they are shipped. During this time, water is changed once a day. Expensive species get two water changes a day. The water changes are always abrupt. Small inexpensive fish do not get water changes for 3-5 days. I observed a large bag with for example more than 10 poisonous Lionfish per bag, 15 fragile Butterflyfish per bag and more than 70 Damselfish in the same bag. It is common to see fish dying from ammonia poisoning in the bags.


The fish are shipped to the exporter in Manila by bus, where they are first inspected for damaged fins, injuries or sickness.

I found the entire reference online for your review.

http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/LRF/1/8banquero.htm[/quote]

I don't know whether this still holds true, but it certainly is an eye opener.

-Lee

 

[dizzy]

I agree with you almost completely, actually. But I think you're observation misses something. I was primarily (don't know if this came across or not) concerned with mortality before reaching the aquarists tank. The fish don't magically become easier to keep in the long run just because they survive shipping/holding/etc. (assuming that one lets a fish stay at the LFS for a while before purchase and so the store absorbs the cost of poorly transferred fish that are still alive, and thus the LFS is more likely to buy fish from places that ship healthy fish to protect *their* bottom line).

Advances in husbandry techniques have made it easier to keep these fish, and thus increased demand to a certain extent, but that's a seperate issue, and you certainly can't advocate not finding better ways to keep the fish healthy once we've received them.

I'd have to say the high mortality has a ripple effect. How many wholesalers and retailers are out of the biz because of high loses in stock and consequent damage to the bottom line. I'd say it is an incredibly high number. I'm 100% in favor of better handling and better husbandry. I do believe rough handling has a delayed effect, as well as the obvious loses before the hobbyist level. Some fish may be strong enough to survive the rigors of moving through the chain of custody, but die prematurely from its effects. I'm just suggesting that better handling may not equal the need for less fish to be taken.
Mitch

 

[Rikko]

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?

Mary, my post was really to give a heads up of what I see of the LFS scene around Vancouver and how it's really almost a backwater. Don't take my comments as any relation to what "you guys" do, as my own store is an extremely small example that I don't feel sees enough turnaround to warrant statistics for this discussion, and I don't have enough intimate knowledge of the behind-the-scenes of any other stores.
I did have a rather long reply typed up for the previous thread but thought perhaps it would be wise to refrain from posting it until I'm no longer working in the trade as it wasn't particularly professional.

Wayne, I'm still curious what local stores you're basing any personal observations on.

 

[MaryHM]

I did have a rather long reply typed up for the previous thread but thought perhaps it would be wise to refrain from posting it until I'm no longer working in the trade as it wasn't particularly professional.

Oh poo. Don't worry about appearing professional in your posts. No one else here does. :lol: It's nice to hear other people's experiences. And it's nice when they themselves are willing to admit those experiences are limited or "small examples". Please continue to participate.

 

[MaryHM]

I think the high mortality rate, whatever it happens to be, has done wonders to help hold the hobby back and to keep the numbers of fish exported in check.

Here's a frightening thought (I think I've brought it up before). What is the number one thing a layperson says when you tell them what you do for a living (or a hobby)? "Oh my goodness! Saltwater aquariums! I've always wanted one, but it's so difficult and so much work. My friend's cousin's sister-in-law's stepmother had a saltwater tank and spent thousands of dollars, only to have everything die." Now, what if this industry/hobby reduced it's mortalities to near zero with better shipping/handling and technology. And everyone told everyone how easy saltwater tanks are to keep. Is it possible that we'd get a huge influx of new hobbyists and actually put MORE collection pressure on the reefs?? Just something to think about over pie.