Sustainability in the Aquarium Trade, Longevity and Animal Costs

[Jay Hemdal]

This thread is for the general discussion of the Article Sustainability in the Aquarium Trade, Longevity and Animal Costs. Please add to the discussion here.

 

[Tony Thompson]

Thanks for the article @Jay Hemdal .

I have read countless papers on the same related subject matter. The problem I often have, is the historical nature of the data and how the current data may possibly have changed during that period due to changes in practices across the trade.

However the conclusion is still very relevant today as it was then.

Sustainability is a much often used phrase in the hobby. But how one derives a calculated value which can truly represent the term "sustainable" is far more complex.

If we take "sustainable" as a term that represents ,

"able to continue at the same level for a period of time":
combined with
"causing, or made in a way that causes, little or no damage to the environment and therefore able to continue for a long time:"

Then how can the trades media and representatives seriously combine both sustainability and promote growth of the hobby in the same subject matter. If the hobby is to grow, what impact dose that have on the core subject of sustainability.?

Is the rate of development of aquaculture and best practice in sync with the trades economical incentives. Or are those areas simply a means of positive marketing?

The problem I personally have is:

Who is the Trade? is this an inclusive term or just a sample of the trade, used as a selective term to negate negative aspects.?

What and who are the "Hobby" ? Again is this the selective term for those more heavily involved or invested in the aquarium Hobby.? Or is it to include the significant portion of those owning aquariums short term as a whim, possibly without any concern for animal welfare , sustainability or even basic concerns.?

The much often discussed subject of food fish and pet fish is one I am always confused by, specifically in context to sustainability. The vast majority of food fish are not collected from the planets reefs, they are collected from the open seas.

Although all animals are intrinsically part of a particular environments cycle of life. The animals that inhabit the tropical reefs are intrinsic to a particular environment that is bound geographically to a much smaller footprint. The reefs are under immense pressure from many sources including but not exclusive to global warming. They unlike other species can not migrate with changing conditions, there environment have developed over a significant period of the earths life.

Therefore to calculate the sustainability of reef fish collection (the majority of marine aquarium species) one also needs to take into account current and future stressors when making the calculation of sustainability.

What I personally require is far more openness and details from the trade so that a least "conscientious" aquarists can make an informed decision.

This is not a intended as a criticism of the trade or hobby, it is born out of a personal frustration with what appears to myself to be a lack of central point of information within the hobby that brings both science, research, hobby and trade together in a non partisan manner. Not a lobbying group but a source of information and education.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I only wish you have addressed the invertebrates as well. I've read from reputable sources (unless I misunderstood which is possible) that Blue Linckias account for 3% of all wild collected invertebrates. It's safe to say their survival is absolutely terrible, yet they continue to be collected in enormous numbers despite the mortality rate because they aren't threatened. When one dies after a week (this is speculation since I haven't run a poll and supported by the collection rate), a new one takes its place. I doubt it does better sadly.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I only wish you have addressed the invertebrates as well. I've read from reputable sources (unless I misunderstood which is possible) that Blue Linckias account for 3% of all wild collected invertebrates. It's safe to say their survival is absolutely terrible, yet they continue to be collected in enormous numbers despite the mortality rate because they aren't threatened. When one dies after a week (this is speculation since I haven't run a poll and supported by the collection rate), a new one takes its place. I doubt it does better sadly.

I agree that invertebrates got left out. Mostly, that was due to the data I had on hand. I did list some invertebrates to avoid, in this article:

MARINE FISH AND INVERTEBRATES TO AVOID

Knowing which species have extra challenges helps home aquarists avoid heartbreak down the road. The following are some species that may pose problems for you, despite the level of care that you offer them.

www.reef2reef.com

Linkia, red fromia and red serpent stars all have very poor survivorship in aquariums.


Jay

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I agree that invertebrates got left out. Mostly, that was due to the data I had on hand. I did list some invertebrates to avoid, in this article:

MARINE FISH AND INVERTEBRATES TO AVOID

Knowing which species have extra challenges helps home aquarists avoid heartbreak down the road. The following are some species that may pose problems for you, despite the level of care that you offer them.

www.reef2reef.com

Linkia, red fromia and red serpent stars all have very poor survivorship in aquariums.


Jay

Jay, in your opinion, why do people buy some of these notoriously difficult to keep inverts and fish and just replace them after they die after a few weeks? I'm not trying to start any ethical argument or anything similar but it would seem obvious that a second isn't going to fare much better rifght after the first dies? Do you think they just assume it was bad luck? I feel like certain species such as those which are incredibly difficult to maintain should be the more expensive ones...

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Jay, in your opinion, why do people buy some of these notoriously difficult to keep inverts and fish and just replace them after they die after a few weeks? I'm not trying to start any ethical argument or anything similar but it would seem obvious that a second isn't going to fare much better rifght after the first dies? Do you think they just assume it was bad luck? I feel like certain species such as those which are incredibly difficult to maintain should be the more expensive ones...

IMO - in the US, people buy these animals out of ignorance, not understanding that they will die. Once they die, these people rarely buy them again. Do you know, the impression I get is that in some cultures in SE Asia, the fish can be considered much like cut flowers - buy some and then replace them when they die. I ran into this mentality when I was buying deep sea creatures from a collector in Japan - they would sell stalked crinoids that looked really cool for a month or so, then always died, and they knew that they would always die....but sold them to us anyway.

Sometimes - the presence of these animals is dictated by the supply chain: it is pretty common for exporters to run substitutions on an order. They often fill in with nudibranchs, coral eating butterflies, etc. that the importer didn't order, but they get sold to them anyway. Then, the importer doesn't want to get stuck with them, so they sell them to a fish store, and then they are purchased by the unwitting consumer.

Jay

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

IMO - in the US, people buy these animals out of ignorance, not understanding that they will die. Once they die, these people rarely buy them again. Do you know, the impression I get is that in some cultures in SE Asia, the fish can be considered much like cut flowers - buy some and then replace them when they die. I ran into this mentality when I was buying deep sea creatures from a collector in Japan - they would sell stalked crinoids that looked really cool for a month or so, then always died, and they knew that they would always die....but sold them to us anyway.

Sometimes - the presence of these animals is dictated by the supply chain: it is pretty common for exporters to run substitutions on an order. They often fill in with nudibranchs, coral eating butterflies, etc. that the importer didn't order, but they get sold to them anyway. Then, the importer doesn't want to get stuck with them, so they sell them to a fish store, and then they are purchased by the unwitting consumer.

Jay

I'd absolutely agree with what you're saying about how fish are treated in SE Asia since I live here. I don't agree at all with any totutuous practices such as you'll encounter in some areas such as eating live octopus. However, although I'm sure you're worldly enough to understand, fish for most people on this side of the world are just food, nothing more, nothing less. I apologize I'm getting away from the discussion there though. Would you ever propose a price hike on some of these animals with extremely high mortality rates to discourage a portion of I'll purchases that result simply from them being cheap?

 

[Jay Hemdal]

I'd absolutely agree with what you're saying about how fish are treated in SE Asia since I live here. I don't agree at all with any totutuous practices such as you'll encounter in some areas such as eating live octopus. However, although I'm sure you're worldly enough to understand, fish for most people on this side of the world are just food, nothing more, nothing less. I apologize I'm getting away from the discussion there though. Would you ever propose a price hike on some of these animals with extremely high mortality rates to discourage a portion of I'll purchases that result simply from them being cheap?

Not a price hike to keep people from buying a fish, but i have long supported paying more to collectors for not using cyanide, and to have better handling practices. Trouble is, when you offer to pay more for good quality fish, the money doesn't funnel back to the collectors, the middleman keeps it.

The finances work out - just making up some rough numbers here - right now, a diver is paid 30 cents for a cyanide caught pygmy angelfish. That fish sells for $50 in the US. If you paid a diver $5 for the same fish to be caught in nets, it would sell for about $75 US, but would have half the mortality rate.


The Lini Foundation in Indonesia is trying to get divers more money for good fish by working with them in the source country.

Jay

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Not a price hike to keep people from buying a fish, but i have long supported paying more to collectors for not using cyanide, and to have better handling practices. Trouble is, when you offer to pay more for good quality fish, the money doesn't funnel back to the collectors, the middleman keeps it.

The finances work out - just making up some rough numbers here - right now, a diver is paid 30 cents for a cyanide caught pygmy angelfish. That fish sells for $50 in the US. If you paid a diver $5 for the same fish to be caught in nets, it would sell for about $75 US, but would have half the mortality rate.


The Lini Foundation in Indonesia is trying to get divers more money for good fish by working with them in the source country.

Jay

I'll look into that foundation since I'm only a short flight away! It would be interesting to see them work together with the fishermen to better their livelihoods. I have a friend down there and he's told me about the wages.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

@Jay Hemdal I'm curious about something else as well...why in your experience are practically all corals marked with an Australian stamp a great deal more expensive? I e wondered that for a while and even looked into the financial reports and couldn't find a reason...of course the divers and boats cost more but as I remember not only do prices rise as more corals are imported from Australia, but they continue to increase profits y/y if I remember correctly. It seems more like a marketing tactic than anything due to the GBR being located there despite the Coral Triangle being 10x more diverse.

 

[Tony Thompson]

Sometimes - the presence of these animals is dictated by the supply chain: it is pretty common for exporters to run substitutions on an order. They often fill in with nudibranchs, coral eating butterflies, etc. that the importer didn't order, but they get sold to them anyway. Then, the importer doesn't want to get stuck with them, so they sell them to a fish store, and then they are purchased by the unwitting consumer.

Jay

I would see this happen often at a particular wholesalers I would visit, mainly transhippers. Boxes full of criniods would arrive as substitutes for other inverts. I still see crinoids for sale in LFS and the staff have no clue what they are never mind their husbandry requirements.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

@Jay Hemdal I'm curious about something else as well...why in your experience are practically all corals marked with an Australian stamp a great deal more expensive? I e wondered that for a while and even looked into the financial reports and couldn't find a reason...of course the divers and boats cost more but as I remember not only do prices rise as more corals are imported from Australia, but they continue to increase profits y/y if I remember correctly. It seems more like a marketing tactic than anything due to the GBR being located there despite the Coral Triangle being 10x more diverse.

I can’t speak about Monsoon Aquatics, but Cairns Marine incurs huge costs to get corals - they have boats that go out to the Coral Sea to get corals, for a week or so per trip. Then, they have to pay first world wages and air cargo from Australia is very costly. I don’t think there is much price gouging going on, but just my opinion.

There is some evidence of mislabeling though - to cash in on this. For example, dealers calling SE Asian tuskfish as “Australian” in order to boost the price - could that happen with corals as well?

Jay

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Hey, they're a business and if they provide good products should make plenty of money! I have nothing against that...I just found it counterintuitive that more supply leads to higher costs so I was curious.

 

[Tony Thompson]

There is some evidence of mislabeling though - to cash in on this. For example, dealers calling SE Asian tuskfish as “Australian” in order to boost the price - could that happen with corals as well?

Jay

There has been a suggestion within the trade here in the UK, that some coral CITES paperwork may have misleading information as to collection area.

In both Europe and in the UK (separate temporary regulations due to Brexit) there is a moratorium (temporary prohibition) on import of certain genus of corals from Australia.

In the UK this moratorium is more specific to collection areas rather than genus. The Queensland collection area has a temporary import restriction as specified by the JNCC ( Joint Nature Conservation Committee UK). However there has been reported a possible violation in the way CITES export and import documentation is completed with reference to origin of species.

Certain colour morphs (more desirable by the hobbyists and extracting a greater retail value) of certain species are 'generally' limited to certain collection areas. However the publication appeared to suggest the appearance within the trade of colour morphs specifically encountered in Queensland as still appearing in the trade with an origin stated as outside the restricted Queensland zone.

A document was published containing information with this regard, however I personally believed this to be a poorly written and misleading document. The two specific UK importers who where instrumental in this publication may have a undisclosed incentive for such a publication.

I also could not understand why the document was given public distribution. The only persons who have access to the CITES documentation is the exporter and importer, not generally retail stores or hobbyists.

I contacted the publishers of the document and the UK importers concerned. I also made public the conversation on my FB group. Calling the bluff on the producers of the document, I was unexpectedly given the assurance that anyone who had read the document and had concerns , from any part of the chain, exporter to hobbyist, could have access to the CITES paperwork for any coral they wished to purchase.

In my opinion and experience within the trade, this would be highly impracticable.

This admission would seem to me to be an acceptance by the publishers that the document was in fact ill advised and certainly not fit for general distribution. The science behind the assertations in the document do not stand up to scrutiny and rely on anecdotal or law of averages rather than specific data.

As hobbyists we do have a voice and we should never be afraid to raise our concerns or ask for clarity from the trade and trade media.

 

[Lovetheocean]

This thread is for the general discussion of the Article Sustainability in the Aquarium Trade, Longevity and Animal Costs. Please add to the discussion here.

Not sure this document really says much. Though sustainability has also been a major concern to me and one of the reasons that I'm still dreaming about a tank rather than owning. Been out of the hobby for 20 years. Would love to get back in but the dino plague, sustainability, etc. keep me studying and on the sidelines. It's all so much more beautiful when I see it in the ocean.

 

[Jay Hemdal]

Not sure this document really says much. Though sustainability has also been a major concern to me and one of the reasons that I'm still dreaming about a tank rather than owning. Been out of the hobby for 20 years. Would love to get back in but the dino plague, sustainability, etc. keep me studying and on the sidelines. It's all so much more beautiful when I see it in the ocean.

As I said in the intro, that article is a bit of a mash-up. Still, the pricing data is not anything that I've seen elsewhere. Then, it can be combined with this article:

MARINE FISH AND INVERTEBRATES TO AVOID

Knowing which species have extra challenges helps home aquarists avoid heartbreak down the road. The following are some species that may pose problems for you, despite the level of care that you offer them.

www.reef2reef.com

Together, they will help home aquarists to make better decisions when buying fish.

Jay