DOA/Shipping and Handling in the Trade

[MaryHM]

I tell you what Peter. I will admit that I could have used better phrasing yesterday toward you, but I still believe everything I said. I was mad yesterday when I stumbled upon all of this stuff. More angry than I've ever been in this forum. Why? Because I felt completely betrayed by you. I know Len likes everything to "not get personal", but what he doesn't understand is that most of us in here have personal relationships. It's not like I'm some newbie who has no clue who you are. I would venture to guess that between the two of us, our phone bills to each other would supply several dozen villages with netting. We worked very closely for a couple of years. Last year, when you started up your talk of "shutting down the trade", I distanced myself from you. And I told you why. That when you say that you are effectively saying "Mary Middlebrook I want to end your livlihood.". I take that personally. But yesterday, when I found out how you published those shoddy numbers and just how shoddy they were, it was a breaking point. Because you did that during the time that I really thought you cared about this industry and trying to fix it. When I learned that you, as a scientist, published such garbage- knowing that it could potentially be devasating to the industry- I snapped. You have a huge responsibility as a published scientist. You have a responsibility to the truth. Whether that truth agrees with your personal feelings/agenda or not. Especially when you know what is at stake- the livlihoods of thousands of people. To take my future, my family's future, and potentially harm it with some really poor information is irresponsible. I think you did, and do, know better. And to say that you couldn't analyze the data more throughly because it was delayed getting to you is no excuse. If that is the case, then you delay the publishing of your paper. There was nothing in there that was time sensitive that couldn't have waited another year.

At this point, the only way I can ever respect anything you say again is if you right this wrong. If you contact the sources that have this information publicly available (SPC and whoever else) and ask them to remove it from their archives. You admit you didn't see the data when you published the paper- that it was information provided by Frank. A hobbyist and a plumber- by no means a scientist or verified source of information. Prove your credibility Peter, and ask that this flawed paper be removed. I don't think you're a bad guy- I think you made a huge mistake (not accident) and it would go a long way if you would rectify it.

 

[PeterIMA]

Vitz, I would be interested to hear from any of the 300 retailers who were interviewed by Frank. They should be able to judge whether or not the questions posed were biased or not.

Peter

 

[MaryHM]

But of course Frank refuses to reveal who they are.

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, I don't believe I can get SPC Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin or Aquarium Science and Conservation to retract anything. I am not convinced that it is necessary. I still stand behind the data presented. Only one line was data obtained from Frank Lallo. Other information came from numerous other sources (that tended to corroborate what I learned from Frank).

One source was John Tullock, who you probably know. He like you lost money trying to sell net-caught fish and pushing for reform of the trade. He experienced high mortality at his store in Knoxville TN. His last email to me was that he believed that these problems would not be solved until the U.S. government stepped in and shut down the trade.

Peter

 

[MaryHM]

I'll analyze some of the data for you, Peter:

Here is John's list of the top 20 most imported fish:
1) Green chromis (Chromis viridis)
2) Yellow tang (Zebrasoma flavescens)
3) Ocellaris clownfish (Amphiprion ocellaris)
4) Blue damselfish (Chrysiptera cyanea)
5) 3-stripe damselfish (Dascyllus aruanus)
6) Domino (3-spot) damselfish (Dascyllus trimaculatus)
7) Yellowtail damselfish (Chrysiptera parasema)
8> 4-stripe damselfish (Dascyllus melanurus)
9) Cleaner wrasse (Labroides dimidiatus)
10) Mandarinfish (Synchiropus splendidus)
11) Royal gramma (Gramma loreto)
12) Firefish (Nemateleotris magnifica)
13) Blue tang (Paracanthurus hepatus)
14) Percula clownfish (Amphiprion percula)
15) Coral Beauty (Centropyge bispinosus)
16) Flame angelfish (Centropyge loriculus)
17) Scooter dragonet (Synchiropus sp.)
18> Clark's clownfish (Amphiprion clarkii)
19) Lyretail anthias (Pseudanthias squamipinnis)
20) Six-line wrasse (Pseudocheilinus hexataenia)

So one would naturally expect numbers for these species to be much higher than other species. Now let's do with Mandarins what we did with the Yellow Tangs:

Frank's data:
Total mandarins- 493
Total Stores surveyed- 276
276x25shipments= 6900
493/6900= .07 mandarins per shipment, or only one mandarin for every 14 shipments. Absolutely insane.

Moorish idols:
Frank says 680 of them were in the study. Moorish idols aren't even in the top 20. But more of them were supposedly purchased than mandarins?

HOLY MOLY. I have found the holy grail. I had only planned on analyzing some of the species, then I ran across Kyle's compilation numbers again. Here's his quote:

After finishing the spreadsheet with the data that Frank supplied, here are some simple calculations. Bear in mind that there may be discrepencies while transposing numbers as well as rounding off Franks's DOA numbers. As well blue/black ribbon eels were lumped together and general laziness tends to make for a few mistakes. Anyway, it should give a little different slant on the numbers that Frank has presented.

Total Fish Reported
West - 11965
Midwest - 6947
East - 12177
TOTAL - 31089

So using Frank's spreadsheet that Frank provided, Kyle figured there were a total of 31089 fish included in the study. For kicks, I did the calculations on that. As soon as the calculator spit out the answer, I spit out my Dr. Pepper.

31089 total fish reported in approximately 6900 total shipments equals a whopping

4.5 fish per shipment!!!!

No wonder these retailers were claiming such high DOA!!! Heck, the freight costs were about $15 per fish!!! Got to recoup that astronomical charge somehow. :lol: :lol: :lol: My god, why didn't any of us catch this a year ago. What a bunch of total garbage!!! 4.5 fish per shipment is such a ridiculous figure that even a newbie hobbyist could see that something was screwy. Unless Kyle's calculations (based on Frank's data) are off by about 75% or more, then this is the final nail in the coffin of the Frank Lallo "study". Are you standing behind the numbers, Peter, or hiding behind them?

 

[MaryHM]

Other information came from numerous other sources (that tended to corroborate what I learned from Frank).

Numerous sources. Let's see, you state in your paper that:

Several retailers on the east coast of the US have reported higher mortality with fish purchased from trans-shippers (>60%) in comparison to fish obtained from traditional importers (30—40%) situated in Los Angeles.

Several retailers on the east coast can not be considered to be confirmation for what Frank did. You say several, but only mention Rick and John. Who are the others? Two isn't several. And frankly, even several isn't science by any stretch. Mitch has a store in KY, which is mighty close to TN where John's store was and Mitch says he sees no where near that kind of mortality. Who is more believable? For every one who says there is out of control mortality, there are at least 5 saying there isn't. So whose "data" carries the most weight? I guess it depends on your agenda. Peter, the fact is that this paper (at least the mortality within the US chain of custody portion) was garbage.

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz, I would be interested to hear from any of the 300 retailers who were interviewed by Frank. They should be able to judge whether or not the questions posed were biased or not.

Peter

it ain't just the questions

you would have to have an obsersver present and monitoring the TRANSFER OF DATA received from each phone call, and on the other end, where the data is given, to ensure it's factually backed up by WRITTEN RECORDS, hehe (all of your data is anecdotal :wink: )

the entire phone study is based on/influenced by so many biases it ain't even funny

there is absolutely NO WAY that any of the source data can be independently checked to make sure it was free from heavy bias, no way at all

and since when does someone make prejudgemental belief statements on uncorroboratable data 'scientifically'?

:?

either way you slice it, something is very amiss with the whole lallo study scenario, from almost every angle, and at almost every step
*************************************************************
i worked at an lfs in south jersey from about '77-end of '81-it was, at the time, one of the most well known sw/fw lfs's in the tri (south joisey) state area, specializing/selling mostly fish

my boss actually hired a marine biologist for a day or so to advise him on the filtration setups/husbandry in the store, not because he didn't know anything, but thought it was the prudent thing to do, as backup for what he might not know


in '79-80, our sw dept was doing marvelously well, and i don't recall doa/daa's anywhere near even 20%, with one exception involving hot weather, where our entire invert section, and reef display tank, crashed from the heat in august (a/c was gone, too)

(if anyone from the area remember's 'martin's' in PA, that's who we used to steal customers from occasionally, hehe)

i would think that he'd have been an lfs frank should have approached, if frank had any idea who the major retailers were, in the northeast

how de we know frank didn't talk to mostly strip mall type lfs's, which are usually the biggest black eye for the entire retail industry, re: the way they treat ALL animals ?

i must insist on the study being published w/the list of the sources, if i'm to even consider giving ANY type of weight to the 'data' :idea:

edited 2x for typo's :wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

Mary, Why didn't you present these interpretations when this was discussed with Frank on line last year?

Peter

 

[dizzy]

This all tends to remind me of the inflated numbers Eric Borneman used to make it look like more stuff was coming out of Fiji than it really was. :roll: Once the damage is done, no one listens to the retraction. Elwyn gets drunk in a bar at MACNA in Kansas City and says some stuff that sends Peter and Jaime on a crusade. Elwyn later recants. Rick Oellers reports high loses. Frank Lallo does a phone survey. The trade gets shutdown via hr4928. Unbelievable. I don't believe it was ever anywhere near as bad as some suggest but it is over now. So it goes.

BTW Mary that thread sort of went into a holding pattern while we were waiting for more data from Frank. Where is old Frank BTW? He didn't show up at MO. I can tell you Elwyn sure disputed the numbers there. People want this trade shut down, but no one really knows why.
Mitch

 

[Anonymous]

it's never over 'till the fat lady sings :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Do any of the AMDA member stores keep records of DOA/DAA as a part of their business practice? Could a voluntary study be started by AMDA members, or even the participants in this forum? It could provide a current view into the DOA/DAA issue. It might even provide ammunition when talking with legislators.

Humbly submitted,
-Lee

 

[PeterIMA]

Lee, I think the idea of AMDA doing its own survey is a good idea.

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

i would suggest that ANY survey has to be done by a completely independent entity, and that the data NOT be collected via this incredibly full of holes method

w/out logs, or some concrete proof, even if it's overall sales records for a dept as a whole it's again, all anecdotal :roll:

 

[dizzy]

Do any of the AMDA member stores keep records of DOA/DAA as a part of their business practice? Could a voluntary study be started by AMDA members, or even the participants in this forum? It could provide a current view into the DOA/DAA issue. It might even provide ammunition when talking with legislators.

Humbly submitted,
-Lee

The best place to get information on DOA/DAA would be from the MAC certified stores. These guys are experts on tracking this sort of stuff. You can be sure it was properly done too, as these guys wouldn't want to risk losing MAC certification. Pruess Pets and Living Seas would be a couple of good ones to start with.
Mitch

 

[dizzy]

Oh yeah another would be Absolutely Fish in NJ. They move mountains of fish through that store so the margin of error would be minute. How far are you away from there vitz?

 

[Anonymous]

i would suggest that ANY survey has to be done by a completely independent entity, and that the data NOT be collected via this incredibly full of holes method

w/out logs, or some concrete proof, even if it's overall sales records for a dept as a whole it's again, all anecdotal :roll:

Agreed. Surveys generally do not make for good science, especially voluntary surveys with data coming from individuals with a vested interest in the outcome.

 

[Anonymous]

The best place to get information on DOA/DAA would be from the MAC certified stores. These guys are experts on tracking this sort of stuff. You can be sure it was properly done too, as these guys wouldn't want to risk losing MAC certification. Pruess Pets and Living Seas would be a couple of good ones to start with.
Mitch

Mitch,

Don't forget that one of the MAC criticisms that has been leveled here is that the accuracy of paperwork relies largely on the honor plan.

-Lee

 

[Anonymous]

Oh yeah another would be Absolutely Fish in NJ. They move mountains of fish through that store so the margin of error would be minute. How far are you away from there vitz?

er- i live in MI atm

 

[Anonymous]

You got a bike, dontcha!

 

[Anonymous]

nope


was stolen 2-3 weeks ago


heh