This has probably been asked before, but is cyanide still used to collect most of the aquarium fish today? How do ya'll feel about it and its effects on fish? From what i have heard cyanide caught fish may look healthy, but they usually die in a couple of months. What countries have outlawed the use of Cyanide?
Cyanide
- Thread starter bigj11
- Start date
greenbean36191
Premium Member
Cyanide never was used to collect most aquarium fish. Cyanide collectors have always been in the minority, even in the countries where it has been a problem. Even then, it's normally only used on certain, hard-to-catch fish. It's still a real problem with fish coming from the Philippines and Indonesia especially (which are the two biggest exporters of ornamental fish), though I'm sure there are still a few rogue collectors in most exporting countries.
There's really nothing good to say about the practice. It's destructive to the reefs and it drastically reduces survival for the collectors and shippers. The majority of fish will die before they can even be sold and many more will die within days to weeks of making it to their final destination, usually from breathing problems, starvation, and/or liver problems. That's why it's illegal virtually worldwide, including in the Philippines and Indonesia.
There's really nothing good to say about the practice. It's destructive to the reefs and it drastically reduces survival for the collectors and shippers. The majority of fish will die before they can even be sold and many more will die within days to weeks of making it to their final destination, usually from breathing problems, starvation, and/or liver problems. That's why it's illegal virtually worldwide, including in the Philippines and Indonesia.
Greenbean,
You wrote:
"Cyanide never was used to collect most aquarium fish".
Can you back up your opinion, or are you just trolling?(grin)
Of course, you didn't say MARINE aquarium fish, so your statement is technically true (as roughly 85% of freshwater fish are farmed raised, and cyanide isn't used to collect the wild ones)
However, your implication is that you are discussing marine fish, so I would take serious exception to this blanket statement. It goes against all of my knowledge regarding this issue dating back to 1971.
Jay
You wrote:
"Cyanide never was used to collect most aquarium fish".
Can you back up your opinion, or are you just trolling?(grin)
Of course, you didn't say MARINE aquarium fish, so your statement is technically true (as roughly 85% of freshwater fish are farmed raised, and cyanide isn't used to collect the wild ones)
However, your implication is that you are discussing marine fish, so I would take serious exception to this blanket statement. It goes against all of my knowledge regarding this issue dating back to 1971.
Jay
greenbean36191
Premium Member
I agree never was a bit much. Chances that the majority of fish collected in the 70s to mid 80s were cyanide caught are pretty good. Within the past 20 years or so that it's become a hot topic I don't think there's much evidence to support that the majority of wild marine ornamentals are cyanide caught.
There are lots of estimates of 70-90% of fish from the Philippines being cyanide caught for the 80s and 90s, but the methods of estimation are extremely questionable and the numbers are highly incestuous. You have authors looking at single reefs (that often aren't major players in the hobby) and extrapolating from that small sample to the whole country or other authors assuming that all dead loss along the shipping chain is due to cyanide or that all boats that carry cyanide use it to catch all of their fish.
During the same time period in the 90s that many authors were estimating 80-90% of the aquarium catch in the Philippines was cyanide caught, actual testing by the Phillippine BFAR only showed even trace cyanide in 18-43% at all levels of the collection and transfer chain throughout the country. Those numbers are much more in line with what I've actually seen of cyanide and quinaldine collectors.
There are lots of estimates of 70-90% of fish from the Philippines being cyanide caught for the 80s and 90s, but the methods of estimation are extremely questionable and the numbers are highly incestuous. You have authors looking at single reefs (that often aren't major players in the hobby) and extrapolating from that small sample to the whole country or other authors assuming that all dead loss along the shipping chain is due to cyanide or that all boats that carry cyanide use it to catch all of their fish.
During the same time period in the 90s that many authors were estimating 80-90% of the aquarium catch in the Philippines was cyanide caught, actual testing by the Phillippine BFAR only showed even trace cyanide in 18-43% at all levels of the collection and transfer chain throughout the country. Those numbers are much more in line with what I've actually seen of cyanide and quinaldine collectors.
Greenbean,
As you know, cyanide testing is fraught with difficulties, it is so biological active that it leaves little residue - so trace measurements of 18-40% is actually pretty damaging to your case, as it relects the reality that more than 50% of the fish still being collected with cyanide are being exported from Manila and Jakarta - knowing that many fish collected that way show negative test results later on down the supply chain.
In 2003 the WWF reports no abatement in the use of cyanide (although by the kilogram use-basis, it is still being used mostly for the Hong Kong live fish trade).
I've seen the changes that take place when cyanide collection becomes prevalent in a region - most notably when it took over the Jarkarta trade in the early 1980's. First it was only a decrease in the quality of adult imperators (They admitted that "batman fish" was being caught with "special method"). Then, everything went to crap. Same exporter (who is still in business by the way) same pack rate, inverts still high quality, but suddenly most of the fish were junk. An associate of mine had to go over there repeatedly to try to figure out what was going on. It turns out that the reality was that over 75% of the fish were being collected with cyanide - including ocellaris clownfish! Many Jakarta fish remain junk to this day - although fish originating in Bali are a bit better, despite the additional travel time.
Ultimately, the original poster was primarily concerned with "will the fish I buy survive?" So forget arguing about the actual cause (since there is no reliable test, you can't prove it either way) and just look at overall mortality rates. I've worked on this EXTENSIVELY, here is the synopsis of a study I did in 2006:
In the summer of 2006, we had a unique opportunity to test the efficacy of our methods at avoiding fish collected by unsavory means. The history of this event is as follows: A mixed shipment of fish and invertebrates destined for a pet store was confiscated by the USFWS and sent to us for holding. The manifest listed fish from a discount aquarium wholesaler and the species all originated from Indonesia and the Philippines. The shipment had originated the previous afternoon from the wholesaler in Los Angeles (probably the xxth largest such firm in the city). It was seized at XXX around 1pm and was acclimated to three of our quarantine systems by 6pm.
These same three quarantine systems also happened to house a new group of fish that had arrived a few days before. These fish included a mixture of MAC certified anthias and other species seleccted by the aquarium’s curator from one of the top two wholesalers in Los Angeles. There had been zero mortality in the control fish prior to the arrival of the confiscated shipment.
At the same time, a group of invertebrates that were confiscated along with the fish were acclimated to our two coral propagation systems.
Forty days following their arrival, 55.9% of the confiscated fish had died, 25% of the confiscated invertebrates had died, 0% of the control invertebrates were lost and only 6.2% of the curator-selected fish had died.
And things weren't any better when I wrote this is 2002 for my Advanced Marine Aquarium Techniques book:
C. TFH Publications
" Cyanide collection issue:
The collection of marine aquarium fishes with sodium cyanide has been well documented. Exporters handling these fish either categorically deny that this takes place, just side-step the issue, or quietly agree that while their fish are collected in this manner, maintain that no major harm is done to the captured fish or the reef structure itself during this process. In during 4 months in 1985, 448 directly imported reef fishes were tracked through the first 30 days following their importation: of this sample, 28.7% of these fish died. All fish were housed in a central water system that also held 11 control fish (None of which died during the study). 31% of the Philippine fish in the sample died. 9.3% of the non Philippine fish died. Many of the Philippine fish were hardy damselfish. When these were removed from the calculation, fully 61% of the non damsel Philippine fish died. The non Philippine fish (no hardy damsels in the samples) included those imported from Sri Lanka, Hawaii and the Seychelles.
After these facts are presented, many aquarists still feel that they are running up against a brick wall. All a fish dealer has to do is to advertise their fish as "net caught", and many of their customers blindly accept this as fact, and the dealer can then continue selling the same cyanide collected fish. Some have argued that there are other, more detrimental impacts to coral reefs than the use of cyanide. They cite pollution, siltation, dredging, and the harvest of coral as building material. Most agree that these other impacts ARE major problems, but that does not allow anyone to condone this added insult to coral reefs! That is just like a person saying that it is ethical to make a copy of a friend's computer program for their own use, since this sort of thing happens on a much larger scale all the time in major corporations. "
As you know, cyanide testing is fraught with difficulties, it is so biological active that it leaves little residue - so trace measurements of 18-40% is actually pretty damaging to your case, as it relects the reality that more than 50% of the fish still being collected with cyanide are being exported from Manila and Jakarta - knowing that many fish collected that way show negative test results later on down the supply chain.
In 2003 the WWF reports no abatement in the use of cyanide (although by the kilogram use-basis, it is still being used mostly for the Hong Kong live fish trade).
I've seen the changes that take place when cyanide collection becomes prevalent in a region - most notably when it took over the Jarkarta trade in the early 1980's. First it was only a decrease in the quality of adult imperators (They admitted that "batman fish" was being caught with "special method"). Then, everything went to crap. Same exporter (who is still in business by the way) same pack rate, inverts still high quality, but suddenly most of the fish were junk. An associate of mine had to go over there repeatedly to try to figure out what was going on. It turns out that the reality was that over 75% of the fish were being collected with cyanide - including ocellaris clownfish! Many Jakarta fish remain junk to this day - although fish originating in Bali are a bit better, despite the additional travel time.
Ultimately, the original poster was primarily concerned with "will the fish I buy survive?" So forget arguing about the actual cause (since there is no reliable test, you can't prove it either way) and just look at overall mortality rates. I've worked on this EXTENSIVELY, here is the synopsis of a study I did in 2006:
In the summer of 2006, we had a unique opportunity to test the efficacy of our methods at avoiding fish collected by unsavory means. The history of this event is as follows: A mixed shipment of fish and invertebrates destined for a pet store was confiscated by the USFWS and sent to us for holding. The manifest listed fish from a discount aquarium wholesaler and the species all originated from Indonesia and the Philippines. The shipment had originated the previous afternoon from the wholesaler in Los Angeles (probably the xxth largest such firm in the city). It was seized at XXX around 1pm and was acclimated to three of our quarantine systems by 6pm.
These same three quarantine systems also happened to house a new group of fish that had arrived a few days before. These fish included a mixture of MAC certified anthias and other species seleccted by the aquarium’s curator from one of the top two wholesalers in Los Angeles. There had been zero mortality in the control fish prior to the arrival of the confiscated shipment.
At the same time, a group of invertebrates that were confiscated along with the fish were acclimated to our two coral propagation systems.
Forty days following their arrival, 55.9% of the confiscated fish had died, 25% of the confiscated invertebrates had died, 0% of the control invertebrates were lost and only 6.2% of the curator-selected fish had died.
And things weren't any better when I wrote this is 2002 for my Advanced Marine Aquarium Techniques book:
C. TFH Publications
" Cyanide collection issue:
The collection of marine aquarium fishes with sodium cyanide has been well documented. Exporters handling these fish either categorically deny that this takes place, just side-step the issue, or quietly agree that while their fish are collected in this manner, maintain that no major harm is done to the captured fish or the reef structure itself during this process. In during 4 months in 1985, 448 directly imported reef fishes were tracked through the first 30 days following their importation: of this sample, 28.7% of these fish died. All fish were housed in a central water system that also held 11 control fish (None of which died during the study). 31% of the Philippine fish in the sample died. 9.3% of the non Philippine fish died. Many of the Philippine fish were hardy damselfish. When these were removed from the calculation, fully 61% of the non damsel Philippine fish died. The non Philippine fish (no hardy damsels in the samples) included those imported from Sri Lanka, Hawaii and the Seychelles.
After these facts are presented, many aquarists still feel that they are running up against a brick wall. All a fish dealer has to do is to advertise their fish as "net caught", and many of their customers blindly accept this as fact, and the dealer can then continue selling the same cyanide collected fish. Some have argued that there are other, more detrimental impacts to coral reefs than the use of cyanide. They cite pollution, siltation, dredging, and the harvest of coral as building material. Most agree that these other impacts ARE major problems, but that does not allow anyone to condone this added insult to coral reefs! That is just like a person saying that it is ethical to make a copy of a friend's computer program for their own use, since this sort of thing happens on a much larger scale all the time in major corporations. "
Greanbean,
My experiences over the years coincide very well with Jay's info. I've also known a few importers with direct ties to the Philippines, based on what I've learned from them, those BFAR numbers can't be trusted to be anyway near accurate. I've also been in online conversations with James Baquero, Ferdinand Cruz and a few others with direct first hand knowledge of the situation in the Philippines. Basically, lots of corruption involved those numbers as well as the problems with the testing methods themselves. I expect the situation in Indo isn't any better.
My experiences over the years coincide very well with Jay's info. I've also known a few importers with direct ties to the Philippines, based on what I've learned from them, those BFAR numbers can't be trusted to be anyway near accurate. I've also been in online conversations with James Baquero, Ferdinand Cruz and a few others with direct first hand knowledge of the situation in the Philippines. Basically, lots of corruption involved those numbers as well as the problems with the testing methods themselves. I expect the situation in Indo isn't any better.
JustinReef
New member
My father lives in Singapore and travels all over South Asia/Indonesia for dives/vacation. I joined him on a dive trip to the Philippines last year and was sicken on our very first dive at a popular tourist spot.
We had a guide for this dive and about 20 minutes in, he kind of lead the group away from an area...so of course my dad and I went right to it
We found what must have been dozens if not hundreds of healthy looking but dead fish. Everything imaginable. Also the strong, distinct smell of gasoline. After the dive we spoke to the guide for about an hour in the beach and he had some horrific things to say about the collection practices in the Philippines.
Apparently the collectors are even moving into the tourist areas with cyanide and gas. He said they come early morning before anyone is out. Apparently not too much is done to stop them. I guess he has been diving all over the Philippines since the 80's and said its always been a huge problem with little the government can do about it. I was surprised to hear they were even using explosives in coke bottles to stun the fish! I have no idea how that one works but I can tell you, it was a sad sight to see all these fish laying dead on the bottom of the reef (I don't know if I would even call it a reef anymore though).
We had a guide for this dive and about 20 minutes in, he kind of lead the group away from an area...so of course my dad and I went right to it
We found what must have been dozens if not hundreds of healthy looking but dead fish. Everything imaginable. Also the strong, distinct smell of gasoline. After the dive we spoke to the guide for about an hour in the beach and he had some horrific things to say about the collection practices in the Philippines. Apparently the collectors are even moving into the tourist areas with cyanide and gas. He said they come early morning before anyone is out. Apparently not too much is done to stop them. I guess he has been diving all over the Philippines since the 80's and said its always been a huge problem with little the government can do about it. I was surprised to hear they were even using explosives in coke bottles to stun the fish! I have no idea how that one works but I can tell you, it was a sad sight to see all these fish laying dead on the bottom of the reef (I don't know if I would even call it a reef anymore though).
loosecannon
New member
Bill and green bean are both coulees to the reality of what is rel going on around the world . I think they both work for Bush.
K' Family Reef
New member
:lol:
i was "coolee" to this information too
(and i DONT work for bush)
i was "coolee" to this information too
(and i DONT work for bush)
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13974189#post13974189 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by justinpsmith
My father lives in Singapore and travels all over South Asia/Indonesia for dives/vacation. I joined him on a dive trip to the Philippines last year and was sicken on our very first dive at a popular tourist spot.
We had a guide for this dive and about 20 minutes in, he kind of lead the group away from an area...so of course my dad and I went right to it
Apparently the collectors are even moving into the tourist areas with cyanide and gas. He said they come early morning before anyone is out. Apparently not too much is done to stop them. I guess he has been diving all over the Philippines since the 80's and said its always been a huge problem with little the government can do about it. I was surprised to hear they were even using explosives in coke bottles to stun the fish! I have no idea how that one works but I can tell you, it was a sad sight to see all these fish laying dead on the bottom of the reef (I don't know if I would even call it a reef anymore though).
Bombs are used for the food fish trade, not MO. Not a great way to collect fish if you want to sell them to exporters that know what bad looking fish looks like.
The gasoline bit is new on me and I have been active in the CN issue for quite some time. I'll take Bill's word on it though as I know he's been actively following the issue for years.
Knowing most groups involved with the CN issue I hesitate to say the problem is as bad as some of them claim (it's bad if even one person is using it though!!!). Some of their numbers don't add up.
None of my usual suspects from looking over past articles and emails last night. I couldn't find a single reference. In fact IIRC Steve Robinson stated they put it directly into water. One of the many pictures I touched up for him (water damage) had a diver breaking the tablet with his teeth
He then just dumped them into a water bottle with a pen spout. Gasoline and kerosene aren't cheap and those guys really don't have extra cash to burn on such things. The CN can be a hook, meaning the middlemen have been known to supply to divers CN on credit.Bill,
I'm not positive, but I think both KCN and NaCN are soluble in water to a high degree. I just checked the MSDS for the sodium salt and it said the solubility is: 48 g/100 cc @ 10C (50F)
I wonder two things - if gasoline might be used as a synergist, or perhaps they are using it alone, like they use bleach in Haiti - to drive the fish out?
Jay
I'm not positive, but I think both KCN and NaCN are soluble in water to a high degree. I just checked the MSDS for the sodium salt and it said the solubility is: 48 g/100 cc @ 10C (50F)
I wonder two things - if gasoline might be used as a synergist, or perhaps they are using it alone, like they use bleach in Haiti - to drive the fish out?
Jay
greenbean36191
Premium Member
The most recent published data is 18% figure, not the 40% figure from the early 90s, so I'm not sure how you can derive that more than 50% of the fish are still being caught with cyanide even accounting for the poor sensitivity of the test and corrupt reporting.
The tests are also being performed at all stages of the chain including directly from collectors to reduce the chances of testing fish after they've already cleared the cyanide.
There's no doubt that the BFAR numbers are low, but AFAIK they are the only hard numbers on the subject. They also have an extremely large sample size with wide coverage. The 70-90% estimates are exactly that- estimates. They're only as good as the assumptions they're based on which tend to be pretty bad and often intended to illustrate worst-case scenarios, not necessarily the best estimate. You can't look at the number of tons of fish passing through Manila, estimate how much is going to the food market, use the average weight of fish caught (food or ornamental) to determine the number of fish that represents, then estimate the average weight of cyanide used per fish, then divide by the amount of cyanide used each year and expect to come up with an accurate percentage. Likewise, you're going to get excessively high numbers if you assume that every boat with cyanide aboard uses it on every fish or that every fish lost in the chain of custody was due to cyanide.
I think it's pretty safe to say that the true number is somewhere between the best case scenario of 18-40% and the worst case scenario of 70-90%. Split the difference and you get ~55%. That would mean that about 71% of Indonesia's fish would have to be cyanide caught to make up the majority in the hobby since the two countries account for 80% of the industry. It's possible, but show me hard numbers that support it.
greenbean36191
Premium Member
FWIW, I've never heard of using gasoline either. Almost all of the cases I've seen the divers just crushed the tablets and dissolved them in water. Recently (in the Indian Ocean is as specific as I'll get) I did see one diver dissolve tablets in something other than water, though I'm not sure what. It was amber colored, but looked too dark to be gas.
Similar threads
