FuEl wrote:Read this, even better news.
http://www.ava.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/1116 ... ul2010.pdf
I just hope this is not true. Look at point 2.3.2.3.
If it is true, Singapore is effectively banning all import of captive-bred marine ornamentals but encouraging the capture of wild fish.
That will be sad, and utterly stupid.
2.1 Consignment details
i. Name and address of the aquaculture establishment of origin or location of harvest
ii. Date of the shipment
iii. Name of the exporting country
iv. Name and address of the exporter
v. Name of the competent authority of the exporting country
vi. Country of destination
vii. Name and address of the importer
2.3.2.3 The fish are wild caught and have not been bred or hatched on a farm or other
premises.
Biosecurity Australia recently issued a report which, if implemented, would result in a drastic reduction in imported fish and substantially increase the costs of importing all other species. (fish prices will double or more – can you and your customers afford this?)
This issue has potentially serious implications for the industry. Of particular concern is the large numbers of fish that are needed testing – in most cases it is nearly 50% of each batch of fish imported.
That means for eg 100 discus are imported, 45 are frozen for sampling ( remember - the importer has paid for these fish) and the importer is charged a $250.00 fee for every type of fish tested. So if there are 4 types of fish to be sample its $1000 and hundreds of fish that WERE healthy will be destroyed.
Clownfish75 wrote:sounds good to me Paul.
Im all for it.
Christian
learnt from our mistakes from importing other species that later became invasive
snowmaker wrote:learnt from our mistakes from importing other species that later became invasive
Has anyone considered the taking on and dumping of ship ballast water and sediments? This is likely responsible for most invasive species introductions world wide. It is NEVER mentioned when it comes to talking about marine ornamentals, disease and pathogens, but it happens on a huge scale on a daily basis.
Regarding the whole Atlantic lionfish mess, most are very quick to blame aquarists for this - as ships in port in Miami are pumping out millions of gallons of sea water that came from who knows where. I know there are laws that try to manage ballast water dumping, but I can't imagine how they could be enforced.
I only mention all this in case someone in an official capacity for the marine ornamental trade might read up and argue this side of the point .
Braddo wrote:The main thing that is going against them with the virus report is manpower there is no were near enough of it to carry out all tests. Some importers will be made to quarentine fish for up to 6 months until testing is done.
I seriously doubt the government will test a quantity of different colour variations of a fish as they have no way to define them as different, they are the same species after all.
Ornamental aquaculture will only have the same rules applied to it as food fish aquaculture does, so i dont see the introduction of anything that doesnt already need to be done, many viruses are notafiable.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest