100% Certified Cyanide Free Reef Fish for Sale.
 

100% Certified Cyanide Free Reef Fish for Sale.

Now that is a stamp I would like see on livestock offered by wholesalers and the LFS.

Would you pay double for your fish if you knew they came from a source that did not use reef destroying practices?

I know it would be VERY HARD to police but not impossible. Is there a market? What percentage of you would pay double the regular price?

I am not sure I would pay double, but I would definitely pay more if there were some way of proving the fish were caught in an ethical manner.

I would but again how would you know if it was or not....

Usually you dont start to see the effects until after a few months but I would definately pay double if I could get one that wasn't cyanide caught forsure. I think it's important to keep the reefs clean as long as possible and instead of buying 2-6 of the same fish over and over, paying double is considered pretty cheap but the best would be captive bred because there wouldn't be any impact on the natural enviroment.

In a way the hobby of keeping corals and fish is pouring gas into the flaming fire atleast they have a handle on the fire extinguisher to put it out if it got out of control. By no means am I any better than the next as I have lots of gasoline to burn however I would much rather buy cultured than wild tank bred over wild caught I wish there was a way that they could breed larger fish like wrasses, angels, rabbitfish puffers and so on....

Yes.

I would pay 50% more.

YES!!! If there was proof the fish was caught ethically. I would be upset if the fish died a few months down the road for no real fault of my own.

I have seen a few fish in my tank that look perfectly healthy all of a sudden look faded and pass away. This has happened months after purchase. With no sign of a parasite and the fish previously eating well I have come up with a hypothesis that many of our fish are cynaide caught and who knows how this comprimises the health of the fish.

I would pay more, but probably 50% more, not double.

Yes. It saves a lot of money. I am not sure why people are even saying they would not pay double...It will save you lots in the long run when you have the fish for years and do not have to "replace" it. Not to mention this is such an environmentally unfriendly hobby that is already expensive and you should be doing anything to help the situation even if that means paying double or triple. Thats the only way things would ever change.

The problem is how to guarantee they are not cyanide caught? The cyanide exits their system right away. It does permanent damage while in the fishes system but then cannot be detected easily. After death there is a way to test but it includes some very expensive equipment and putting the fish in a blender.

I would pay more for a 100%Cyanide free fish just for the fact that chances are it will live a lot longer life. I would prefer having a nice fish for three years not months.

I hope you are not assuming that all fish perish because they were caught with cyanide. I suspect the majority of fish do not survive in captivity because the purchasers buy them on impulse with no idea on how to properly sustain them.

So you both voted no?? Just wondering b/c you technically should have... there should be more options on the poll :)

Cyanide poisoning if fast acting. If it's the cyanide that killed them they would be DOA. It certainly does play a large roll in adding stress. I would pay more, maybe not double... but i said that about gas prices hitting 1.50/litre and I still drove. There is no way of policing this IMO and one could be easily led to believe they were not caught with cyanide. I'm totally against cyanide, but from what i understand about foreign policies (Next to nothing :P) it would be hard to get this rolling, but definitely worth the try.

I wouldn't buy the fish if I thought it was juiced - but I was in the industry for awhile and have a better handle on what's suspect (a large portion of it is). Paying more for a clean fish is probably the way to go, and alot of the confusion can be had by avoiding suspect countries of origin or avoiding commonly juiced fish altogether.

I'm not sure the fish that's dying in your tanks can be attributed to collection with cyanide but more likely poor handling and packing from the collector through to the retailer. It's the damage to the fishes habitat and larval fish that's the bigger problem with cyanide collection.

I've got no problem paying more for a clean fish.

when I was in indonesia, the collectors there told me that there is no such thing as cynanide-free bigger fish such as large tangs or angels.
I talked to a few different ones all saying the same thing - if you don't knock them out temporarily, they mark themselves up too much in the net. (this was just for the big fish that would damage themselves)
that is straight from the horses mouth and when you think about it, it makes sense.
the trick is how much is used and that it is used directly at the fish they are collecting.
just thought I would my add my 2 cents worth.

^hmm when you think about it that way it makes alittle sense, less of a fight from the fish, less stress and easier to catch. But I wonder what the long terms effect of these cyanide catching do to the fish. Maybe a few here are right when saying that the fish died after six or whatever months because they don't have the proper/condition enviroment. We are all still learning to keep certain fish for longer than a few months here but at what price?

well of course it makes sense. he works getting fish in. that is why i knows this.. and another thing that people will blame the LFS and other factors to the fish deaths. and not consider that its them making the huge mistake

It sounds good in theory, but I don't think it is possible to police so no I wouldn't pay double for "cyanide free" fish. Cyanide caught fish don't look any different from cyanide free fish. You can not test every fish for cyanide. There are too many chances along the supply chain for unscrupulous dealers and fisherman to substitute for more profit. Just look at MAC, they have been trying for years to regulate the industry, but with all the hassles of paperwork and the cerification process, many along the supply chain have given up or not even bothered. There is one MAC certified wholesaler in canada and no certified shops. So technically there are no true MAC certified fish available ( shops can not call fish MAC certified unless they are certified themselves) There is also the problem of pre exposure to cyanide from other fisherman, so even if the fish was net caught doesn't mean that it is cyanide free.

at the mark up that a lot of stores here in victoria.. i dont even wana pay the price they have for fish that may be cyanide caught! i worked at a number of pet stores and the price they pay and the mark up is horrible! thus i buy from vancover.. stores that i know are reliable. they are cheeper.. and i know im getting good quality! im not sure about the rest of the country but i know JandL and ocean aquatics are very reputable and there product is awsome. so why bother with other stores ? with higher prices for 100%Cyanide free fish
when these stores offer awsome selection anyways?

It is tricky business. I will say that I would like to support stores that claim to source responsibly captured fish....and that I would easily accept that it might cost more to deal with those stores.

Sure, I'll pay more. I actually don't care how much more I would pay. If it costs triple then I'll pay triple .. but only if the certification means something I can trust. Problem is the certification process is the industry policing itself and that is basically a conflict of interest. I think technically this certification already exists (MAC certification) but hardly anyone seems to bother with it.

My opinion on the whole big fish thing marking themselves up .. if you can't do it without cyanide then it probably shouldn't be done. Maybe big fish oughtn't be collected anyhow. Removing a breeding size adult has more impact than removing a nonbreeding juvenile.

LOL...no. I have been in the hobby long enough to know not all fish perish because they are cyanide caught ;)

no I would not pay double, but I would certainly pay more.
But as everyone else is saying, how, and who would police this?
Would I trust this certification? Probably not.
Twice have I bought a rabbitfish and have it expire within 2 weeks.
Just bought one from J&L and we will see whether this " easier to care for fish" will live.

Yes I would not hesitate paying double if I could get irrefutable proof of net or container caught fish. Every Vendor says they do not sell cyanide caught fish but ????.
Kevin

Yeah of course...

Can you imagine a vendor actually admitting they are selling cyanide caught fish? They all do whether knowing it or not but admitting it is another story.

I think how close the poll is to 50-50 says a lot about why things like this will not change very quickly.

I voted no, just because there is no way to differentiate without a certification body and supply-chain monitoring.

This sort of exists in the form of the MAC certification but that has just turned into a pointless mess.

There is currently no way to do any kind of cyanide testing on fish in the supply chain. It's not an easy testing procedure and it requires some significant investment in equipment. You can see what is currently being worked on here: http://coralreef.noaa.gov/Library/Pu...yanide_doc.pdf

With that considered there is no way for a retailer to offer 100% cyanide free fish, we don't know if they are or not. Now we can make some pretty educated guesses sometimes, I can tell you that a fish caught in the Sea of Cortez is almost certainly not but I can't prove it. In the case of Indo or Philippine fish I would be less certain. If I ever saw someone selling Indo fish with a No Cyanide guarantee I'd fall down laughing.

Until the infrastructure is in place for testing everybody is on the honor system, sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. Retailers are doing everything they can at this point.

That wasn't the question/vote though. It was a "what if" thing...

Should also have a "depends" catagory....as it would really depend on the fish.

So do you mean it depends on the species to you? So some species are ok to be cyanide caught? Or do you mean something totally different?

Retailers do not do anything as they really have no say in the whole thing. Unless there are stores that have employees going to the collection sites. I know of a few major US retailers that DO have this in place and have their own collectors in some areas but that is rare and I am not so sure it happens at all in Canada. I could be wrong though.

I would pay double for SUSTAINABLY caught fish. there are lots of ways to catch a fish and a lot of them are baaaaad. I would pay more for a captive bred, but I know there are limits on what can be raised in captivity.

It's BS to say there's no alternative to knocking out big fish with cyanide. Using clove oil is a well-known solution that has no long-term effects, unlike cyanide.

I have to admit... IF I could cyanide catch the black striped damsel in my tank right now, I would do it in a blink of a eye... too bad I would bomb everyone else.:lol:

No cyanide should not be used at all, but it would depend on how badly I want a certain fish and from where I am purchacing it..from a friend, fellow Canreefer,or if it is a lfs, there are a lot of variables..personally I would like to see cyanide banned altogether....

Ok yeah thats what I thought you meant :biggrin:

I would have been surprised to hear anyone here thinks cyanide is ok to catch any fish.

Its been said already but if a fish is too hard to catch properly with humane techniques, then it should not be caught. IMO those big fish should never be caught anyways...but that came up in a whole different thread :wink:

I just don't see why people want to miss raising a fish from a few inches and enjoying all the growth.

I learned a lesson first hand about buying mature reef fish. Now my new guys are little but larger then a puffer mouth, and I am happy to see the baby cuteness, and ease of feeding. My puffer ate all my mouth sized little guys, and my Naso almost died of starvation. Never again, unless the larger fish is from a member.

I wonder how people discovered cyanide was good for catching fish in the first place... I know it stuns them, but does it kill them if they use too much? In this day and age, you would think there are better options for breeding these fish in captivity.

I do understand from trying to catch my own fish their instict to vanish when a net comes out. It doesn't even have to go into my tank before I suddenly have not a single fish in sight. If clove oil is an option, why don't they just use that instead of cyanide? Is cyanide cheaper or more effective? I know if I was a fish collector I would want to catch my fish without hurting them or the reef.

How do large zoo aqauriums take care of their fish when they need to catch them? The fish are display animals and are valuable, so they must have a way of dazing them without netting or harsh chemicals. At least I would think so.

Its not quite that simple...if you were a collector in say the Philippines, you would most likely be quite poor and not have the same "values" you do now. I have been over there a few times and seen the poverty first hand. Many of these collectors just want to feed their family. If cyanide allows them to make $20 a day instead of $2-3 a day, they are going to use it, regardless of how destructive it is. I am not necessarily defending the collectors but the governments in both the collection countries and import countries do little to help the situation.

Do you think Canada cares much if ornamental fish being imported are caught legally or not?

Many large aquariums collect animals themselves properly or get them from other aquariums/breeding programs.

Clove oil does work to sedate fish but I am not so sure it would be strong enough to stun fish out on a reef. Maybe I am wrong but when I have used it, it works quite slowly. Seems like you would need a lot to use it as a collection tool. Maybe not though, I don't know for sure.

I voted yes because one cannot support the cyanide trade.

Here is how the cyanide trade works.
They squirt cyanide into the reef and 50% of the fish die and the rest are stunned.
By the time the fish reach the shore another 50% die.
A large % of the rest die in the holding tank at the source, the transit to the exporter, the exporters facility, the transit to us, the wholesalers tank, the transit to the LFS and the LFS tanks.
The ones that survive this end up in our tanks.
Like many of you have experienced, the fish appears healthy enough but with months dies of no apparent reason.

In the meantime the reef that has been squirted with cyanide dies together with all the critter that live therein.

The reality is that most of the cost to us of the fish is airfreight so paying double is not necessary. But if the fisher is paid double he most certainly wont use cyanide.

With respect, the posts that say their is not guarantee are not facing the issue

If we just refused to buy the fish species (like mandarins and cryptic wrasses, one half the problem goes away).

I agree 100% but people want what they want. Its easier for most people to not think about it. I think I hear this the most..."it was already in the store and if I didn't buy it someone else would have". I have to admit that I had that kind of an attitude until I saw the effects first hand earlier this year. When we stumbled upon dozens of dead, poisoned fish in the Philippines that one morning, I have never looked at the hobby the same. Kind of like how they sometimes show kids in school accident pictures caused by drunk driving or what a smokers lung looks like.

Having said that, I still bought a Copperband a month or so ago (promised I would only try one more time) :rolleyes: So I am being fairly hypocritical. To be honest I justified it by telling myself they were the best batch I had ever seen and did not look cyanide caught. I know better though, CCB from the Philippines are pretty much a guarantee to be cyanide caught.

I'm not sure if I'm one that you mean but I did say something like that .. but you may be misinterpreting what I meant. I said that the idea of certification sounds neat but if it's self-imposed by the industry then it has less teeth to it. Ie., as far as I know, I already buy fish that I believe to be non-cyanide caught. I have to take the word of the person who sells me the fish, who has to take the word of the person who imported it, who has to take the word of the exporter .. etc. .. How do we really know? Even if there's a piece of paper that says "we promise we didn't" how can I really know?

But the flip side is .. what fish is guaranteed never caught with cyanide? If I refuse to buy a fish that "might" have been caught with cyanide, .. what's left? .. Is the solution that if I want a fish, I have to travel to Fiji with my fishing rod and take back only what I've caught myself?

Why is there even cyanide so easily accessible? What is its commercial value? Isn't this the stuff movie spies keep in their teeth in case they get caught? Why wouldn't something like that be heavily regulated if not outright banned?