Blogs FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 


Welcome to Koi Forum - Koi-Bito Magazine
Go Back   Koi Forum - Koi-Bito Magazine > Hobbyist Koi Forums > General Koi Forum

General Koi Forum The main koi forum. Most posts should be made here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 09-18-2006   #91 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
Did you invent a cure for SVC now JR? Oh I can't wait to hear about this. lol

I guess being a dumb ingrate and insulting folks for no reason never gets old for ya does it?

The hobby isn't going anywhere, although it looks like some restructuring might be on the horizon.

Last I checked noone mentioned SVC on their sites, I think cuz everyone was worried about khv. I noticed sakai and others have made no official announcement about whether they have the certs goin back 2 yrs.

PS- Please tell my wife the stuff I am doing is imaginary, that way she will stop wanting to discuss the money and hard work these imaginary things take.
__________________
'Sometimes it take a talking donkey to turn things around in the right direction, ask Balaam."
junglegeorge12 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #92 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
Trading partners? Risk management? You touched the tip of things. Care to go deeper old man? Sure ya can handle it? Mafias are illegal now. CLinton is gone. The hsd oversees it all now. Wish your mafia partners luck JR, they r gonna need it. If you want you can borrow my shovel so they can dig their own grave again.
Didn't anyone tell you and your friends? The 90s are over.
junglegeorge12 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #93 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
bekko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Hakipu'u
Posts: 1,383
I have been looking for the particulars of the Japanese testing and certification program for over a year. I asked a couple of people to root it out when they were over there, but it is too sensitive a subject and no one wants to risk appearing rude. However, it appears that SCV and KHV testing go hand-in-hand for the routine certification program.

Hopefully, someone going over this fall can make some quiet inquiries and bring back more details on the certification process?

-steveh
bekko is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #94 (permalink)
Honmei
 
KoiCop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,673
hey bunglejorge12 . . .

you got any "inside" information on why some folks are beginning to wonder whether Momotaro might possibly have been the source for Yumi Koi's recent KHV outbreak?
KoiCop is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #95 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
Sure don't Don, other than the typical pm rumors and post habits by folks like you. Simple historical analysis of data does show certain trends and patterns in terms of how such diseases and outbreaks affect economic concerns though. Rather odd how the same people and families always benefit isn't it?

Not really my concern. That's really a topic a mature person would discuss with Mike at Yume or Momotaro directly. None of that affects how effective Bacteria House Media is, and I don't sell their koi, so it isn't my concern.

Hey how did all those incredible tategoi tosai turn out?
junglegeorge12 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #96 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
Also interesting how 35 breeders in Nigata have admitted to having it so far. How many more hid it? Yet those 35 names remain hidden from the public. Rather odd don't ya think?

One guy has probs, folks assume things, then post one name all over, yet the larger number of 35 noone even looks into or mentions. I wonder if any of those 35 are the ones on the list russel posted that supposedly have certs they can 'get'. Of course you all will jump to assert how that is impossible without really having a clue. Gotta secure those high dollar sales somehow.

Personally, I wouldn't put any real money or other stock at risk with koi from Japan this year. It's simply too risky. The whole thing has gone nuts and I am glad to see APHIS and USDA are on top of it. Brett is right, it has to be done and is past due. What happened to Mike is a perfect example of why.
junglegeorge12 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #97 (permalink)
Tategoi
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 304
David you make this too easy -- JR
johnsmith is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #98 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
well I appreciate your deep concern JR, but honestly, I think what you do and why you even post at all speaks for itself. You are not a decent human being. You want to irritate me, that is a given, you never post here unless your goal is to irritate, or attempt to bait and trap me in something to harm my reputation. That's the only thing reliable about you. Pretty pathetic actually.

I posted on this thread to get some solid answers, that obviously noone actually has- why did you post?

You don't seem to be discussing the topic at all. Instead you are making your usual slimeball, thuggy, tactic of childish mockery and switching from the topic at hand to slandering me with false innuendos etc based on your usual ignorance and arrogance, in your typical slimeball way. You even got your girlfriend Don in on the action again. Are you two dating? You seem to go everywhere together.

Congratulations, you have now ruined two threads within two days. You are the champion. King Bendejo.
junglegeorge12 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006   #99 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by junglegeorge12 View Post
Russ I agree the problem is not on the US side of the deal. The difficult part form what I read is over in the shipping country, to get the permit.
Here is an excerpt from the site. It speaks for itself if one looks closely.

"List of Nishikigoi farms eligible to receive fish health certificates for export issued by Niigata office
These koi farms abide by “Guidelines for issuing Nishikigoi health certificates for export”, and take
KHV & SVC tests every 6 months. The list has been renewed on 11, 08, 2006. "

The list of breeders is quite extensive, but makes no mention of past certs, and the ones on the site do not appear to be in English.


Now here is the parts of the document from APHIS with the areas of concern I am bringing up in bold. I think the guy in MD is the perfect one for the job btw, he is centrally located.

[Federal Register: August 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 168)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51429-51437]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30au06-5]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Peter L. Merrill, Aquaculture
Specialist, National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700
River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 734-0649; or Dr.
Jill B. Rolland, Fishery Biologist, National Center for Animal Health
Programs, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301) 734-7727.




In April 2002, a koi farm in North Carolina experienced an outbreak
of SVC. The outbreak occurred shortly after the facility spawned koi
that had been imported from a production facility in an Asian country
where the SVC-status is unconfirmed. At the North Carolina farm,
incoming fish had not been pre-screened for SVC and, apart from new
stock importation, the U.S. farm did not have any known risks for SVCV
exposure. The farm sent a sample of the diseased koi to the Fish
Disease Diagnostic Laboratories of the University of Arkansas at Pine
Bluff, an APHIS-approved diagnostic laboratory. After a tentative
positive diagnosis for SVC, the Arkansas laboratory forwarded the
sample to the OIE reference laboratory for SVC in Weymouth, England.
The OIE laboratory confirmed the tentative diagnosis of SVC on June 25,
2002. The confirmed case was reported to APHIS on July 3, 2002. The
affected koi farm operated sites for hatching and resale in North
Carolina and Virginia. Due to multiple transfers of fish between sites,
both of the farm's sites were considered exposed to SVCV.
Two additional cases of SVC were confirmed in the summer of 2004,
in Missouri and Washington. In the Missouri outbreak, a shipment of
fish to the facility preceded the SVC outbreak by 2 weeks. These fish
came from a U.S. facility where a disease with symptoms similar to SVC
had been previously encountered in the spring of each of the 2 prior
years. This U.S. facility where the fish originated had also imported
fish from Asian countries prior to the onset of its disease problems,
but had ceased importations afterwards. In the Washington outbreak, a
hobbyist had acquired fish from a U.S. distributor who had obtained
SVC-susceptible fish from a pet store supplied by Asian sources. In
both situations, the imported fish had not been screened for SVC prior
to importation.
An APHIS review of the details in both of these cases concluded
that domestic U.S. populations of SVC-susceptible fish were not
considered to have been at prior risk from SVCV exposure other than
from fish of direct or indirect Asian origin brought onto their
premises. After SVC outbreaks were reported, the site in Washington,
owned by a backyard hobbyist, and the site in Missouri, a commercial
operation, were completely depopulated, cleaned and disinfected, and
restocked with SVC-negative fish.
Tracebacks conducted at the affected facilities in North Carolina,
Washington, and Missouri indicated that all three of the outbreaks in
commercial facilities followed the introduction of imported fish from
countries where SVC was known to exist or where the SVC status is
unconfirmed. Furthermore, subsequent genetic identification of the
viral strain involved in all U.S. farmed fish outbreaks of SVC
determined that the virus was of Asian, rather than European, genotype,
which is the only genotype of SVC that has been identified in previous
testing of wild fish populations in the United States. As the Asian
strain of SVC had not been previously detected or reported in the
United States, or in the Western hemisphere, APHIS concluded that the
SVC outbreaks in U.S. farmed fish were linked to the importation of
SVC-infected fish.
Currently, there are no Federal regulations that restrict the
importation of SVC-susceptible species of fish to prevent the
introduction of SVC. Based on our review of the 2002 and 2004 cases of
SVC in the United States, we have determined it is necessary to
restrict the importation of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of
SVC-susceptible species to ensure they are free of SVC.
Accordingly, we are amending the animal import regulations in 9 CFR
part 93 by adding a new subpart I, ``Aquatic Animal Species''
(Sec. Sec. 93.900 through 93.907, referred to below as the
regulations). The regulations will restrict the importation of live
fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species. In
addition, the importation of live cultures of SVCV, preserved SVCV
viral RNA or DNA, tissue samples containing viable SVCV, or other
specimens intended for diagnostic or research purposes and which
contain viable SVCV may be imported only under permit in accordance
with 9 CFR part 122, ``Organisms and Vectors.''
The regulations in new subpart I are explained below, by section.


Paragraph (b) of this section provides the address from which
prospective importers may request import permit applications and to
which completed applications should be sent. An application for an
import permit must be submitted for each shipment of live fish,
fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species.
Paragraph (c) specifies the information that must be included on an
import permit application. It states that the application must include
the name and address of the exporter; the proposed date of shipment;
the name and address of the importer; the species and number of live
fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes to be imported into the United
States; the purpose of the importation; the ports of embarkation; the
mode of transportation (airplane, boat, car, etc.) to be used to ship
the live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes to the United States; the
route of travel, including all carrier stops en route; the port of
entry; the proposed date of arrival; and the name and address of the
person to whom the shipment of live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes
will be delivered in the United States. APHIS

[[Page 51432]]

needs this information to determine whether the live fish, fertilized
eggs, or gametes are eligible for importation, to respond to an
applicant, to identify the shipment at the port of entry, to ensure
that inspectors and facilities are available for inspection in the
United States, and to contact appropriate persons if any questions
arise concerning the importation.
Paragraph (d) explains what happens after we receive and review the
application for an import permit. This paragraph provides that if,
following our review, we determine that the live fish, fertilized eggs,
or gametes are eligible to be imported, we will issue an import permit.
This paragraph also specifies that an import permit does not guarantee
that any live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes will be allowed entry
into the United States; the fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes will be
allowed to enter the United States only if they meet all applicable
requirements of the regulations.

Health Certificate for Live Fish, Fertilized Eggs, and Gametes (Sec.
93.904)

Paragraph (a) of Sec. 93.904 requires that SVC-susceptible species
of live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes that are imported into the
United States from any part of the world be accompanied to the port of
entry in the United States by a health certificate. The health
certificate must be in English or contain an English translation and
must be issued by a full-time salaried veterinarian of the national
government of the exporting region, or issued by a certifying official
and endorsed by the competent authority of the exporting region. The
health certificate will be valid for 30 days from the date of issuance.
In addition, the health certificate must state that the shipment
was inspected by the veterinarian or certifying official who issued the
certificate and found to be free of any clinical signs of disease
consistent with SVC within 72 hours prior to the shipment being
exported from the region of origin and that the live fish, fertilized
eggs, or gametes covered by the health certificate meet the
requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires the live fish, fertilized
eggs, or gametes to meet the following conditions to be eligible for
importation into the United States:
The live fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes must be under
the supervision of the competent authority and must participate in a
health surveillance program for SVC.
The region or establishment from which the live fish,
fertilized eggs, or gametes originate must demonstrate freedom from SVC
through a minimum of 2-years' continuous health history, supported by
laboratory testing by a pathogen detection facility approved for SVC
viral assays by the competent authority.
SVC-susceptible fish populations in the region or
establishment must be tested at least twice annually, with at least 3
months between the tests and at times or under environmental conditions
that would facilitate the detection of SVCV if it were present.
Sampling procedures must utilize an assumed pathogen prevalence of 2
percent, with a corresponding confidence level of 95 percent. Samples
must be collected and submitted by a certifying official or
veterinarian recognized by the competent authority. The standard
screening method for SVC must include isolation of SVCV in cell
culture, using either the epithelioma papulosum cyprini (EPC) or
fathead minnow (FHM) cell lines. However, the Administrator may
authorize other assays for SVCV detection in lieu of virus isolation
through cell culture, if the Administrator determines that such assays
are robust enough to provide equal assurances of the SVC status of an
exporting region or establishment. All viral testing results must be
negative.
These requirements will ensure that SVC-susceptible species of live
fish, fertilized eggs, or gametes imported into the United States are
not infected with SVCV.
Immediate Action

Immediate action is necessary to prevent further introductions of
SVC into the United States. SVC is not currently present in farm-raised
populations of fish in the United States. Each time SVC has been
discovered in commercial fish sites, the disease has been eradicated.
Tracebacks conducted at the affected facilities in North Carolina,
Washington, and Missouri indicated that all three of the outbreaks in
commercial facilities followed the introduction of imported fish from
countries where SVC was known to exist or where the SVC status was
unknown, and genetic identification of the viral strain involved in all
U.S. farmed fish outbreaks of SVC determined that the virus was of
Asian, rather than European, genotype, which is the only genotype of
SVC that has been identified in previous testing of wild fish
populations in the United States. The facilities did not have any known
risks of SVCV exposure other than through such imports. Despite its
current SVC-free status, the United States remains unprotected from
continuing introductions of infected fish, since there are a number of
known or suspected SVC-positive countries that export fish to the
United States, and pre-testing of imported SVC-susceptible fish is not
currently required. Therefore, it is necessary to implement regulations
that will restrict such imports in as timely a manner as possible.
Under these circumstances, the Administrator has found that notice
and public procedures with respect to this action are contrary to the
public interest and that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 for
issuing this rule as an interim rule, rather than publishing a proposed
rule.
This rule will take effect 30 days after the date of publication to
prevent detrimental effects to live fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes
that were in transit to the United States prior to the publication
date.
We will consider comments we receive during the comment period for
this interim rule (see DATES above). After the comment period closes,
we will publish another document in the Federal Register. The document
will include a discussion of any comments we receive and any amendments
we are making to the rule.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule
has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive
Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
We are amending the regulations to establish restrictions on the
importation into the United States of live fish, fertilized eggs, and
gametes of fish species that are susceptible to SVC.

The total value of SVC-susceptible species in the United States
industry was approximately $23.2 million in 1998.\2\ The small business
size standards for animal aquaculture, as identified by the Small
Business Administration (SBA), based upon the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code 112511, is $750,000 or less in
annual receipts. While the available data do not provide the number of
U.S. farms producing SVC-susceptible species according to size, it is
reasonable to assume that the majority of the operations are small
businesses by SBA standards because of the value of sales compared to
the total number of farms.\3\ In 1998, a total of 76 carp farms
accounted for approximately $3.2 million in farm sales; 34 feeder
goldfish farms accounted for approximately $9.3 million in sales; 115
koi farms accounted for approximately $3.9 million in sales; and 65
ornamental goldfish farms accounted for approximately $6.7 million in
sales. The data above do not reveal the number of separate U.S. farms
that produced the susceptible species in 1998, since some farms
produced more than one species. APHIS welcomes information that would
enable us to more precisely identify the number of small entities that
may be affected by this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ NASS/USDA, 1998 Census of Aquaculture. Note: 1998 is the
most recent year in which census data for aquaculture are available.
\3\ Based upon 2002 Census of Agriculture--State Data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Existing data suggest that domestic producers of SVC-susceptible
ornamental fish species (i.e., koi, Crucian carp, and goldfish) will
benefit from this interim rule. The United States is a net importer of
live ornamental fish. In 1998, the United States imported $45.1 million
in live ornamental fish, with approximately 57 percent of that arriving
primarily from Asia. In that same year, U.S. exports of live ornamental
fish were $10.6 million, less than one-fourth the value of imports.\4\
This rule will ensure SVC-susceptible live fish, fertilized eggs, and
gametes imported by these producers are free of SVC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ Global Trade Atlas, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The United States is a net exporter of live carp (i.e., common carp
(excluding koi), grass carp, silver carp, bighead carp, tench, and
sheatfish). In 1998, the United States exported approximately $1.7
million in live carp, while importing roughly $0.2 million.
Approximately 98 percent of U.S. exports of live carp are sent to
Canada. U.S. producers who export live carp will also benefit from this
interim rule because it will help to provide continued assurance of the
SVC-free status of U.S. exports.
U.S. imports of live carp come primarily from Japan, Hong Kong, and
Israel,\5\ which are considered to be potential sources of SVCV-
infected fish. Japan accounted for 87 percent of the U.S. live carp
import market in 2003,

[[Page 51434]]

and Hong Kong and Israel accounted for about 7 and 6 percent,
respectively.\6\ SVC-susceptible fish imported from these and other
regions of the world will have to be certified as being from a region
or establishment determined to be free of SVC.


The user fees set forth in this interim rule are financial targets,
with the goal of recovering the cost of agency operations. Profit
margins of some importers could decline due to the user fees, depending
upon the extent to which they are unable to pass these costs on to
their buyers. One possible response of buyers of imported SVC-
susceptible species to price increases may be to shift to domestic
sources for ornamental fish, and limit imports to the more expensive
species, such as koi. Given their limited domestic availability, price
changes that may occur because of the user fees incurred by importers
should not have a large effect on the quantities imported. APHIS
welcomes information from the public as to the domestic wholesale
supply of the various SVC-susceptible species, compared to quantities
imported. While it is anticipated that the permit and inspection costs
may have a discernable impact on prices of SVC-susceptible species, we
believe the benefits of preventing future introduction of SVC into the
United States, in terms of forgone depopulation and cleaning and
disinfecting expenditures, will exceed any negative price effects.
We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected
agencies) concerning our information collection and recordkeeping
requirements. These comments will help us:
(1) Evaluate whether the information collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our agency's functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
information collection, including the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses).

Region. Any defined geographic land area identifiable by
geological, political, or surveyed boundaries. A region may consist of
any of the following:
(1) A national entity (country);

[[Page 51436]]

(2) Part of a national entity (zone, county, department,
municipality, parish, Province, State, etc.);
(3) Parts of several national entities combined into an area; or
(4) A group of national entities (countries) combined into a single
area.
Spring viremia of carp (SVC). A disease caused by infection with
spring viremia of carp virus, a rhabodivrus capable of infecting
several carp species, in addition to some other cyprinid and ictalurid
fish species.


Sec. 93.902 Ports designated for the importation of live fish,
fertilized eggs, and gametes.

(a) The following ports are designated as ports of entry for live
fish, fertilized eggs, and gametes of SVC-susceptible species imported
under this subpart:
(1) Air and ocean ports. Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA; Miami
and Tampa, FL; Atlanta, GA; Honolulu, HI; Chicago, IL; Boston, MA;
Newark, NJ; New York, NY; Portland, OR; Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX; and San
Juan, PR.
(2) Canadian border ports. Detroit, MI; Buffalo-Niagara, NY; and
Blaine and Seattle, WA.
(3) Mexican border ports. Otay Mesa, CA.