Local fish shop QT?

[snorvich]

My concern with CP used prophylactically is evolving a CP resistant strain of a parasite; I have no problem treating with CP, however, since it is by far the best treatment for velvet. Guaranteed eating is excellent with a CBB and some leopard wrasses but their usage of copper worries me if it is not therapeutic and is less than 3 weeks.

 

[reefgeezer]

I would pay more for effective QT processes. Unfortunately, IMO, effective QT would be prohibitively expensive. Also, I'm not sure an LFS would put up with the audit it would take for me to trust that they were doing what they advertised.

 

[HumbleFish]

My concern with CP used prophylactically is evolving a CP resistant strain of a parasite;

But wouldn't the same hold true if prophylactically treating with copper? If so, a chemical-less prophylactic treatment (such as TT) would be the only way to avoid resistant strains from evolving.

 

[MrClam]

I wouldnt worry about creating any super-bug style strains of Ich. Resistant strains of parasites take far longer to develop than their bacteria counterparts. Selection requires many successive generations in order for natural selection to take place and the time between generations in Ich, for example, is several weeks (in bacteria it can be as little as hours).

A more serious concern about prophylactic treatment would be that it would mask, but not kill, an underlying infection. Fish would seem fine for possibly weeks and then infect your DT. I would rather a LFS do no copper at all than only treat for two weeks.

 

[snorvich]

But wouldn't the same hold true if prophylactically treating with copper? If so, a chemical-less prophylactic treatment (such as TT) would be the only way to avoid resistant strains from evolving.

As you know, I am opposed to prophylactic treatment with chemicals (for ich) and always would recommend TT. My recollection is that CP as an antimalarial in humans did result in a CP resistant strain, hence my reservation.

 

[snorvich]

A more serious concern about prophylactic treatment would be that it would mask, but not kill, an underlying infection. Fish would seem fine for possibly weeks and then infect your DT. I would rather a LFS do no copper at all than only treat for two weeks.

A nontherapeutic dose of copper can/does mask underlying parasites. I too would prefer that an LFS does no copper treatment.

 

[HumbleFish]

I would rather a LFS do no copper at all than only treat for two weeks.

Yeah, I'm not liking that either. But the LFS owners feel they are doing the right thing by doing it. I'd hate to burst their bubble. As it is, I think most of my local club members are sick & tired of hearing me preach about QT. :hmm4:

 

[Flashy Fins]

So, my experiences working for him has always made me wonder "what if" a LFS employed a similar QT protocol. It would have to be done "in the back", so a large shop would be required. Maybe "out front" you have a section of regularly priced, as-is fish for sale; and the QT'd/two week guarantee fish for sale in another section.

I see that going great in theory and terribly in reality. Customers like the cheap price of the un-QT'ed fish, but worry there is something wrong with them, since the store has pointed out the issue. They like the care/guarantee of the more expensive fish, but don't like the price. In the end, they buy nothing and go to another store with no such separation, where they can imagine all the fish were treated as well as the guaranteed fish at the first store. If the cheap fish has a disease that is not a quick killer, they won't figure things out until they've pushed the system too far, at which point they may be getting out of the hobby altogether, due to frustration.

Who is it better to cater to, from a business standpoint? The newbie with no fish in her tank (lots of potential sales), or the old timer with a fully stocked tank who just needs a pack of frozen mysis now and then? Sad, but easy to see how it goes.

Edit: I may have mis-read. If you meant the section of QT'ed/gauranteed fish would be hidden from everyday customers and only available to certain people, that's different than what I thought you were saying. Not sure how that would play out. Hmmm.

 

[Flashy Fins]

I would like to add another "what if" to the discussion... A lot of folks know their tank has Ich, would like to do something about it, but don't want to go through the hassle of catching/QT'ing all their fish for 72 days.

WHAT IF a LFS offered this service? They come out, catch all your fish, QT/treat back at the shop, and then return them to you once the fallow period has ended. What would that be worth to you? Only catch is you'd have to sign a waiver releasing the LFS from any financial liability if a fish doesn't make it.

I could see people going for this, but I could also someone paying for the service and adding frags they've swapped with friends during their fallow period and then blaming the service for not curing their fish if they broke out in ich upon return.

If you managed to convince a customer to not add ANY new livestock to their tank during that period, they may very well pay for the service, be happy at first, get a little too confident with their disease-free system, dump a new fish or other livestock straight in, and then be back at square one.

I have made plenty of friends in a local club and only know 1 who QT's everything, but there is no ich treatment unless ich is visible. He is mainly trying to keep things like brook and velvet out. Most locals QT nothing and act like I am a nutjob when I talk about it. :sad2:

 

[Flashy Fins]

Btw, I voted 100% more, but that is only under the hypothetical model that everything is done correctly and completely (which I wouldn't trust in reality). It also assumes fish under $75. Above that price point, percentages become a problem, because buying a typically $20 fish for $40 is a lot different than buying a typically $200 fish for $400. $40 is not going to be missed by many people, but I sure notice when I am missing $400.

This discussion is really interesting. Hope I don't sound critical of your questions; I assume you are looking for this kind of dialogue.

 

[HumbleFish]

My wife & I have contemplated several different variations under the "what if" we ever owned a LFS scenario. Obviously, cheap is what sells so you must maintain a large section of 'regular' un-QT'd fish. Same as every other LFS. However, I never thought that folks might equate that to mean "sick fish" if you also carried 'premium' QT'd fish. It's a good point and something to think about.

As snorvich will be quick to point out if I don't , every brick & mortar LFS must have a maintenance side to carry the business. And being I would have to QT each & every fish for my clients; I don't see why I could not do the same for at least some of my customers. The QT process itself would be done in the back; you don't want customers seeing sick fish or fish they can't buy yet. But whether the QT'd fish would be presented in their own 'premium' section of the store, or it would be more of a, "Psst hey buddy, look what I've got in the back" sorta thing I don't know yet.

Look, if I can pull this off, do you realize the implications?! Just the bragging rights from snorvich (whom I highly respect, btw) finally saying, "I was wrong" would be huge! :lmao:

 

[HumbleFish]

This discussion is really interesting. Hope I don't sound critical of your questions; I assume you are looking for this kind of dialogue.

Not at all. Your input, along with all the others, is exactly what I'm looking for.

 

[snorvich]

Look, if I can pull this off, do you realize the implications?! Just the bragging rights from snorvich (whom I highly respect, btw) finally saying, "I was wrong" would be huge! :lmao:

And I will happily say so. After two years of profitability. I am intimately familiar with the financial and marketing issues of an LFS and I would love to say I am wrong but the odds are highly against that.

 

[snorvich]

On the other hand, most maintenance services (which are profitable although difficult from a marketing perspective) do quarantine and guarantee their fish.

 

[Flashy Fins]

My wife & I have contemplated several different variations under the "what if" we ever owned a LFS scenario. Obviously, cheap is what sells so you must maintain a large section of 'regular' un-QT'd fish. Same as every other LFS. However, I never thought that folks might equate that to mean "sick fish" if you also carried 'premium' QT'd fish. It's a good point and something to think about.

As snorvich will be quick to point out if I don't , every brick & mortar LFS must have a maintenance side to carry the business. And being I would have to QT each & every fish for my clients; I don't see why I could not do the same for at least some of my customers. The QT process itself would be done in the back; you don't want customers seeing sick fish or fish they can't buy yet. But whether the QT'd fish would be presented in their own 'premium' section of the store, or it would be more of a, "Psst hey buddy, look what I've got in the back" sorta thing I don't know yet.

It might work if you carried completely different species in the premium section, where there could be some info posted about how they are more delicate types of fish that need a little extra love and care, here's what we do for them and why they cost more, etc. I just think as soon as you have a fish of the same type or even very similar looking on both sides of the store, you invite doubt with the cheap fish and objection to price with the expensive version. The secrecy thing wouldn't last long with the internet and local clubs around.

 

[snorvich]

There seems to be confusion in this thread. There are two perspectives at play: the hobbyist perspective and the business perspective. My comments are primarily from a business perspective: the business model will not sustain this way of doing business as a brick and mortar local fish store. Execution is doable (execution is not really ever the issue with folks that start an LFS), but making a profit is problematical at best with most lasting about 2 years or whenever their credit card balances cut them off.

 

[formsix]

I'm not sure I would pay more for QT *time*, but I WOULD pay more for stringent QT protocol. What I mean by that is that I would pay more to get a fish that came straight from the distributor and was kept in a clean/sterile tank (not mixing with other fish or store water). I don't need my LFS holding onto the fish for any significant length of time or prophylactically treating for anything, but I would like it if my new fish didn't run the risk of picking up extra diseases or parasites by virtue of having passed through the LFS.

 

[snorvich]

I'm not sure I would pay more for QT *time*, but I WOULD pay more for stringent QT protocol. What I mean by that is that I would pay more to get a fish that came straight from the distributor and was kept in a clean/sterile tank (not mixing with other fish or store water). I don't need my LFS holding onto the fish for any significant length of time or prophylactically treating for anything, but I would like it if my new fish didn't run the risk of picking up extra diseases or parasites by virtue of having passed through the LFS.

That would be a good thing. Since LFS share water in their fish systems, whatever any fish has, new fish will get if exposed to that water. But distributors have holding tanks too . . .