Grading aquaculture clownfish

[elegance coral]

IMHO, they're awesome fish no matter what you call them.

 

[WaffleWalffle22]

IMHO, they're awesome fish no matter what you call them.

I know right? Even though they're not worth as much as Onyx which is what I originally hoped they were, less people have SA Fancies than Onyx which makes them even more special. I just wanna get them graded for the halibut.

 

[elegance coral]

I think there should be a grading scale, but only for those fish that meet a given standard. Fish that have obvious deformities shouldn't even get graded. I've seen "grade A" Picassos going for $300 a pair, that looked like they grew up on Three Mile Island. Pale, skinny, deformed skulls. If the fish meets the standard we see in the typical WC fish, of that species, then we should grade them on pattern.

 

[deangelr]

we need to agree on a set of standardized categories..

1. Heath Strength
2. Full Bold Colors and Appropriate Pattern, Healthy scalation, etc.
3. Correct Body Build for the Species

I think those are what everyone can agree on so far.. Now a way to combine factor and come up with a grade or number..

 

[clowns101]

I have a little bit of a problem with a grading system. As a former clownfish breeder, there is absolutely no reason that sub-quality clowns(deformed faces, mis-markings, less than wild type colors) should ever be produced. The deformities and less than vibrant colors we commonly see in CB clowns doesn't just show bad husbandry practices, it shows reeeally bad husbandry practices. I fear that having a grading system would only serve to raise the price of fish that should be just the common everyday CB clown. The deformed fish would still be sold at normal prices.
I think a better idea would be to boycott some of the large producers and support the individuals(or groups) that are doing it right.
When CB clowns first started being produced the only problem I remember was that the colors were all washed out. In the early 90's some better foods came out and you couldn't tell CB from WC. Now that the designer morphs have come out it seems that husbandry has gone out the window in an effort to get more fish out there as fast and cheaply as possible.

I don't think the qualities in your Grade A3 should be the elite, commanding the highest price clownfish. I think it should be the norm. They are just not that hard to produce. Unfortunately ORA has lowered the bar so low that fish that shouldn't make their bottom 1% have become their norm and are being sold as their prime specimens. I don't understand why a LFS would have them in their tanks and I don't know why anyone would buy a clown with even the slightest hint of a "bulldog" face.

I like your grading system, I just think you should send it to the large commercial hatcheries and tell them that "we won't buy anything less than Grade A2 from you guys. Get your acts together."

Sorry for the rant.

I agree 100%,exacltly Phil!

 

[trueblackpercula]

All of this is simply great but what high end company will use it? I am also going to say the only fish that should be graded are of perfect body shape and then points added from there for color. example: If a fish has 35% white then it should be worth 35% of what a 100% white fish would go for. lets try and keep it simple so it does not leave room for error.

 

[WDLV]

I think there should be a grading scale, but only for those fish that meet a given standard. Fish that have obvious deformities shouldn't even get graded. I've seen "grade A" Picassos going for $300 a pair, that looked like they grew up on Three Mile Island. Pale, skinny, deformed skulls. If the fish meets the standard we see in the typical WC fish, of that species, then we should grade them on pattern.

This is probably the best practice. Nobody should be sold a deformed fish unless they are aware that there is a defect and that they are OK with it.... So, maybe the scale SHOULD be limited to certain coloration and barring as dictated by the particular species and or designer traits. That said, defects in dogs are counted against their pedigree scale when they are rated. So, we have to ask ourselves "where should we draw the cull line?" If I were sold a pedigree and sent a dog with a severely deformed spine I could sue the person who sold the animal. With the way clowns are being priced, I'm not sure this won't eventually apply to our animals. If I spent $5,000 on a designer McCulloch's (for arguement's sake) I would be pretty upset to see a missing eye on the side of the fish that wasn't in the photograph.

 

[BonsaiNut]

All of this is simply great but what high end company will use it?

If the market requires it, ALL companies will use it.

A system like this benefits customers as well as breeders. It protects the good breeders from bad ones.

If people only buy online clowns that state something like "all our clowns meet A1 quality standard as defined by CBA (Clownfish Breeders of America) quality standards for health, conformation and type"

 

[WDLV]

Why not set it up.... Like the AKC.... Or the GAC (Global Aquarist Coalition) or some such thing. Why limit it to clownfish?

It won't mean much at first to have the afilliation but as more sign on it would become an industry standard. It wouldn't mean that you couldn't sell an imperfect organism but more that you would have to disclose the condition and/or use WYSIWIG advertising.
WYSIWIG is a great tool in and of itself.

 

[trueblackpercula]

Ok does anyone no anyone at ORA that they can ask tgem if they are will to use tgis type of gradding system? Lets put it to the test....or does anyone bo someone at cquest?

 

[hawgdawg]

If the market is willing to pay 3 times more for their clownfish, I suppose a grading system like the one described above might work. A large producer like ORA grades thousands of fish a week. Most of the fish only get a quick glance at best. Just imagine how much time would be spent grading fish according to the proposed system, not a chance that would be viable. There is a simple grading system: if you don't like it, don't buy it, plain and simple.

Keep in mind, not every dog we breed/buy is perfect. Standards like the ones proposed above may be a good baseline to describe the "breed", but it is still up to the end customer if he wants the "runt of the litter".

 

[BonsaiNut]

Just imagine how much time would be spent grading fish according to the proposed system, not a chance that would be viable.

MUCH more time is spent grading koi every year, and trust me, it is more than viable. Google "grading culling koi" for some interesting reading. Here's one example:

"Koi are bred all over the world. They are sorted and sold many times before reaching the hobby pond. The process begins with the breeder. The breeder sorts (culls) the koi into several grades, the goal being to get the best price for the best fish. Once sold to a distributor, they might be sorted again. Sold to a dealer, they once again might be split into more grades. You can call them anything you like. So can the fish dealer. However, most hobbyists looking to spend several hundred or thousand dollars on a fish will know a good deal about the fish. What I am trying to say, I could price my fish any way I want, but if I want to sell any of them, I must be able to justify the price to the potential purchaser. "

"250,000 eggs, 100,000 fry stocked, 60,000 fingerlings harvested. From the 60,000, about 2000 to 3000 might be "keepers" in the first sort (separating keepers from non-keepers). Grow maybe 3 to 6 months, harvest the 2000 keepers and sort again. Maybe 500 throw aways, 1000 sold as cheapos, 500 put back to be graded next time. 500 brought in another 3 to 6 months. 400 sold, some as cheapies, some as "select" or "A" grade. 100 put back to grow some more. By now these are getting kinda big, maybe 6 to 8 inches or more. 100 brought in, 96 sold as fairly good fish, maybe "AA", and 4 put back for another year. 3 then sold as very nice koi, 1 kept to be watched for either a good "tategoi" ("keep koi") or perhaps as a brood animal. Maybe sold off at the age of 3 or 4 years for substantial money ($1000+). So, out of 1 million koi, maybe 4 very good ones produced. "

 

[BonsaiNut]

The entire reason we are even HAVING this conversation is that there are too many breeders dumping culls on the market. Nothing saddens me more than seeing culls in a LFS. Then people show up here on RC proud about their new fish, and other people get to point out the numerous flaws.

Is it the responsibility of every person that goes into a LFS to be as knowledgeable as a clown breeder, or else run the risk of getting a poor quality fish? Some faults can be hard to see at first glance if you don't know what to look for. Or do breeders have some responsibility to the market?

Right now it is my opinion that the majority of breeders follow the mantra "if it swims, it sells". There are DEFINITELY exceptions - and some of these exceptions are some of the bigger, more professional groups. But not always. I have seen great fish from small breeders, and culls from large breeders. Just look at the currently available A. latezonatus on the market to see the tremendous difference in quality between what one breeder will release on the market versus what another will.

 

[MelloW33]

I love this thread Bonsaii. It took me about 6 months to find a male Onyx that I thought was perfect enough to pair with my female. I now think that the male looks nicer than the female so I might be searching for a new female! I would hate to split up my pair since they regularly breed, but I think I can find a better female if I search hard enough.

I've gotten much more picky about the looks of my fish over the past year. I think that if we could just make everyone aware of the common deformities that we are seeing, we stand a chance of ridding the market of some less-than-stellar clownfish.

 

[BonsaiNut]

Keep in mind, not every dog we breed/buy is perfect. Standards like the ones proposed above may be a good baseline to describe the "breed", but it is still up to the end customer if he wants the "runt of the litter".

Remind me not to buy a dog from YOU

What you are describing is a well-known and sad fact of dog breeding. When a breed becomes popular, less scrupulous breeders charge into the market and start selling sub-standard dogs. Suddenly as the numbers of dogs of a particular breed sky-rocket, the incidence of genetic abnormalities, behavioral problems, etc, increase. The general quality of the breed crashes and the breed starts to pick up a bad reputation because so many people have had problems. It has happened over and over again in the last 60 years - probably starting with collies (driven by the Lassie craze) but including dalmations (101 Dalmations), cockers (Lady and the Tramp), and now for some reason chihuahuas. It is the reason why there are now professional dog registries that only certain breeders will qualify for - because only certain breeders believe in the hassle of meeting a very demanding standard. So yeah, if you are a family and just want a "dog" go for it. But don't kid yourself that you are getting the healthiest, smartest, or best-looking animal. You aren't. Most people have never even seen them to know what they look like - and most of the best breeders are so picky about who they sell to that you might not be able to get an animal even if you knew who to talk to and had the money to spend.

 

[hawgdawg]

Bonsai,

Not sure if you understood my point. ORA most certainly grades and cull their fish, but they most likely are only looking for the most obvious deformities, those that are easily seen in a round fiberglass tank that has no glass sides. That means that some deformities will slip through. I highly doubt that a reputable company like ORA would want to tarnish their reputation by knowingly selling sub par fish. As you stated with koi, grading should be done at every level. If your lfs is receiving sub par fish, they need to inform their supplier about it and sort it out. If they choose to sell them, then they are just as guilty. Someone suggested in this thread to boycott large producers. Well, I can guarantee you that if that happens, the market will be under supplied and prices will most definetely shoot up.

And yes, a lot of people don't care if their fish have only one eye, no tail and a camel hump. Not everybody is a clownfish nut, some just want a pet, regardless of it's look.

Bottom line is that nothing is perfect, there will always be deformed fish around and some will always slip through.

I do have a question: How come so many of you clownfish nuts buy a so called "onyx" juvie that does not have a spec of black on it? How would you grade a fish like that?

By the way, your koi grading description is exactly what clownfish hatcheries do. The unusual and rare will fetch high prices, such as snowflakes, picassos etc. The usual stuff goes to petco at a very affordable price!

 

[deangelr]

Another great reason to implement some sort of standard. So that hobbyist can be sure of what the the wild type breed standards are, and what those clowns might look like when purchased as juveniles.

It always starts somewhere small.. (with those of us who spend all day looking at clownfish). If it is a good system with applicable standards then it will grow.

 

[WaffleWalffle22]

Did anyone notice that the "Premium Picasso" on ORA's website has a bit of a pinch head?

 

[BonsaiNut]

I do have a question: How come so many of you clownfish nuts buy a so called "onyx" juvie that does not have a spec of black on it? How would you grade a fish like that?

Check out this site for fun:

Kodama Koi Farm

This farm buys direct from breeders in Japan, and then resells direct to mainland US. If you know what to look for, you can get amazing deals - at a substantial discount from retail. However you have to understand how koi develop and how their pattern comes up - or down in some sad cases Most beginners (myself included) tend to buy koi that looks great RIGHT NOW. The problem is that koi that color up early are more likely to lose color over time. Additionally, the black coloration is slower to develop than the red, and if you buy a koi where the black looks great at two years, there is a chance the koi will have too much black at five years. Koi in soft water develop richer, redder reds. Koi in hard water develop darker, velvet blacks. However keep a koi in water that is TOO hard, and it may drop all red altogether

The reason why I say this is sometimes, for some expensive fish, you need to look at the parents. How do you know what an onyx juvi is going to grow into? A good breeder should show the parents. In koi a sign of quality is perfect white skin without a hint of yellow or pink or grey. However this does not develop for years. The only way you know is to see the parents. Koi fry from champion koi will sell for a premium sight unseen - because of the reputation of the breeder and the quality of the parents.

By the way, looping back to subject of this thread, there is no WAY that a good koi farmer in Japan releases poor quality fish. It would be an embarrassment to them. Their fish may be higher or lower quality - and priced appropriately. But they ALL meet a certain minimum standard of "good" or better.

 

[trueblackpercula]

Ok here is a perfect example of a wild caught 100% true black onxy percula. I owned this female and sold it to MarinaP. lets see what grade you give this fish as i think its 100% A 1 nothing better. Let the grading begin......There is a reason for me doing this as we will soon see why.