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 09-05-2006   #31 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,228
It looks like they will be taking comments up to Oct. 30.

From the way it reads to me, the breeder's facility must have undergone 2 yrs of APHIS approved testing with vets certified with them and their local government for such testing, and have all tests be negative to be able to import into the country. Then, on top of that, each shipment must be tested by the vet at the shipping port, at the shipper's expense. Am I reading it wrong or is that the intent there?

Brett (and I do not intend to speak for him, just relay what I understood from his posts) is saying it is a very serious issue, and past due for something to be done. He expressed that he could foresee temporary import bans to get things under control, and see it as necessary to do so. He feels it is a huge risk the way things have been, that could endanger the fishing industry as a whole and important wildlife populations in the US seriously if nothing is done.

An importer from the US is saying on koiphen that NONE of the Japanese or Malaysian breeders meet the requirements, and won't for two years. Does anyone know anything to either verify or confirm that take on things? If so, please post it, as alot of us are on the edge of our seats wondering exactly how this will play out.
__________________
'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 09-05-2006   #32 (permalink)
Tategoi
 
dizzyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by junglegeorge12 View Post
Then, on top of that, each shipment must be tested by the vet at the shipping port, at the shipper's expense. Am I reading it wrong or is that the intent there?
Do you mean the port the fish enter into the US? How long does this test take? Testing for viruses takes time. What happens to the fish while the test is being done, if it takes several days? Does the importer need to quarantine them until the test results are in? Or does the vet keep them until the test results are in? If it takes several days then transshipping will be no more. I would think the importer would have to be carefully inspected to make sure his facilities were up to snuff. Probably regularly, and at his expense. Then what happens to an importer if he has a positive test? If he was holding the fish, are all fish on his premises destroyed? Lots of important questions about how implemenation will effect the industry.
Mitch
dizzyfish is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #33 (permalink)
Tategoi
 
dizzyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 464
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/pubs/tn_ahspringcarp.html
Tech Note
Spring Viremia of Carp

April 2003
Veterinary Services
Introduction
Spring viremia of carp (SVC) is a viral disease of fish, primarily common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Although the disease and its causative agent, spring viremia of carp virus (SVCV) or Rhabdovirus carpio, was first described in 1971, there is evidence that the disease has been present in Europe for at least 50 years and, potentially, since the Middle Ages. Before the disease was recognized, it was variously called infectious dropsy, infectious ascites, hemorrhagic septicemia, or rubella.
In Europe, the disease has had substantial impact on the production of carp, with estimated losses of 10–15 percent of 1–year–old carp or about 4,000 tons annually. In some cases, mortality rates of young carp can reach 70 percent. This impact of the disease has led to its listing by the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) as notifiable.
Susceptible species and geographical distribution
Although common carp, which includes the variety called koi carp, is the main species of fish affected by SVC, there have been several other species that are susceptible to the disease under non–experimental (natural) conditions. These species include crucian carp (Carassius carassius), grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella), silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix), bighead carp (Aristichthys nobilis), goldfish (Carassius auratus), tench (Tinca tinca), and sheatfish (Silurus glanis).
Under experimental conditions, other species including roach (Rutilus rutilus), pike (Esox lucius), guppy (Lebistes reticulates), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), goldfish (Carassius auratus), zebra danios (Brachydanio rerio), and golden shiners (Notemigonus crysoleucas) have been found to be susceptible to the disease.
Many species in the minnow family (Cyprinidae) are indigenous to the United States, including endangered species; the susceptibility of these has not yet been determined either under natural or experimental conditions. A SVC–like virus has been isolated from diseased penaeid shrimp (Penaeus stylirostris and P. vannamei).

Historically, SVC has been reported from many countries in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, but recently the disease has been reported in South and North America as well.
Clinical signs of SVC
First signs of the disease may be a change in behavioral patterns of the fish. Fish may congregate in slow–flowing water, near pond banks, or lie on the bottom. Over time, the rate of respiration will decrease, as will reaction to stimulation and
swimming speed. As the disease progresses, the fish become sluggish and may swim and lie on their sides.
Externally, the fish can exhibit a number of non–specific physical signs including darkening of the skin, swollen abdomen, exophthalmia (pop–eye), hemorrhages in the skin, gills and anterior eye chamber, anemia and pale gills, and a protruding vent.
Internally, the signs are dominated by building up of fluid (edema) in all organs and in the body cavity, hemorrhages in the swim bladder, and inflammation of the intestines.
Temperature and seasonality
Research has shown that the optimal temperature for development of SVC in experimentally infected carp is between 16 and
17° C. At this temperature, 90 percent of the fish died within 5 to 17 days after being infected. At lower temperatures, 11–15° C, the percent of fish that died was similar but the mortality was delayed (2–3 weeks). Mortality was reduced at temperatures between 17 and 26° C. The optimum temperature for in vitro virus replication is 20–22° C. Other experiments have investigated the influence of increasing and decreasing temperatures on the rate of disease. Research has also demonstrated that a gradual decrease of temperature (11 down to 5° C) caused low mortality, while increasing temperature back to 20° C caused massive mortality as the temperature changed from 7 to 14° C.
These results correspond with the field observations that most SVC outbreaks occur in the spring with warming temperatures.
After water temperatures rise above 15–18° C, the immune system of carp becomes capable of rapid interferon and neutralizing antibody synthesis that suppresses viral replication. Thus, in the countries where SVC has been reported, there are only sporadic reports in June and July. The temperature constraints make tropical and subtropical climates unfavorable for SVC outbreaks. The replication of virus as temperatures rise also has implications for detecting virus in fish populations. All viral isolations for SVC were from samples taken in May when the water temperature was between 10 to 18° C. Virus detection likely would be more difficult during the other seasons of the year.
Transmission
Infected fish can shed virus in feces and possibly in urine and gill mucus. Horizontal transmission likely occurs when virus enters fish through the gills. Research has demonstrated that SVC was easily transmitted horizontally through water from
experimentally infected fish to uninfected fish. Reservoir hosts include sick fish and fish that have survived an outbreak. In addition to carp, other cultured and wild fish may serve as reservoirs for the disease. Vertical transmission may be possible since SVC virus has been found in ovarian fluids, but the lack of outbreaks among fry and fingerlings suggests that it is not an important route of transmission.
Parasites such as the carp louse, Argulus foliaceus, and the leech, Pisciola geometra, have been shown to be passive vectors in the transfer of disease to healthy carp. Mechanical vectors can also be a problem since SVCV can maintain infectivity for a long time in water or mud or after becoming dry.
Diagnosis
In 2000, OIE set the international standards for diagnosing SVC virus. The diagnosis of SVC in clinically infected fish can be accomplished through virus isolation or by using an immunological test such as direct immunofluorescence (IF) test or an enzyme–linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA). A virus neutralization (VN) test is the confirmatory identification test. Immunofluorescence tests and ELISAs should be followed by virus isolation and a VN test.
The OIE has specified criteria for declaring countries, zones, and aquaculture establishments free of SVC. The International Aquatic Animal Health Code and the Diagnostic Manual for Aquatic Animal Diseases have complete details on all of the
requirements so only some general criteria are presented here. The appropriate Web sites for these documents are listed at the end of the document. A country declared free must meet these conditions: 1) no recorded outbreak of SVC for at least 2 years; 2) no detection of virus in any of the susceptible fish species tested during an official surveillance scheme
during the past 2 years; and 3) requirements met for importing live fish from other countries.
For a zone to be declared free of SVC, both aquaculture establishments and wild populations containing susceptible fish species must have been tested in an official surveillance scheme and SVC must not have been detected in the past 2 years.
The zone must also be one or more entire catchment areas or be part of a catchment area where upstream migration of fish from downstream areas cannot occur.
For an aquaculture establishment to be declared free of SVC, it may be part of a free country or zone. An aquaculture establishment in an infected area can still be declared free if it: 1) has been tested under an official health surveillance scheme for at least 2 years without detection of SVCV; 2) is supplied by water from a spring, well, or borehole only and is free from wild fish; and 3) is not connected to a watercourse or there is a natural barrier that prevents the migration upstream of fish from downstream stretches of the waterway.
The OIE Diagnostic Manual for Aquatic Animal Disease has specifications for surveillance programs to achieve and maintain health status. Briefly, fish culture units on aquaculture establishments must be inspected twice annually for 2 years. Each inspection should be conducted in order to detect a 2 percent prevalence with 95 percent confidence level. This
represents collection of approximately 150 appropriate–age fish at times of the year clinical signs are most likely to be observed and isolating pathogens is the easiest. Ovarian fluid samples can be used if available. To maintain free status, twice annual inspections of 30 fish are required. Wild fish populations need to be sampled only once a year for 2 years and 150 fish from different fish crops may be pooled. Maintenance of health status of wild fish can only be attained by annual sampling of 150 fish including as many broodfish as possible.
Prevention
There are several recommendations for preventing the disease from becoming established on commercial farms. Using a source of water that is free from disease such as a spring or a well is necessary, especially in an endemic disease area, to exclude disease. Other on–farm measures include disinfection of eggs by iodophore treatment, regular physical and chemical disinfection of ponds, disinfection of equipment, and proper disposal of dead fish. Also, new fish being brought onto farms should be purchased from an SVC–free source. Movement of ornamental fish to shows and returning to
operations should be undertaken with caution.
Currently, no commercially available vaccine exists for SVC. However, some studies hold promise for the development of a vaccine.
Addition Information
For more information on SVC contact:
Otis Miller, Jr.
National Aquaculture Coordinator USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services
4700 River Road
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231
Phone: (301) 734–7697

For the OIE’s International Aquatic Animal Health Code– 2001, visit their Web site at http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/fcode/A_summry.htm.
For the OIE’s Diagnostic Manual for Aquatic Animal Diseases visit their Web site at http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/fmanual/A_summry.htm.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD).
To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Click here for printable version (PDF)
dizzyfish is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #34 (permalink)
Honmei
 
dick benbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 4,527
In addition to the concern about how long this test would take while fatiqued fish wait in a warehouse for release is the fact of how many Vet types do you know that can administer such tests. most vets i know don't have a clue about fish, hence the scramble each of us has had to go thru to learn how to
treat our own koi?

many of ther better/bigger farmers i know in niigata have been independently testing for SVC for close to 18 months. I don't know if that will be accepted within the new regs.

I'll see if I can find out how long it takes to administer one of these tests....
dick benbow is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #35 (permalink)
Honmei
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Martinez,CA
Posts: 4,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by dick benbow View Post
In addition to the concern about how long this test would take while fatiqued fish wait in a warehouse for release is the fact of how many Vet types do you know that can administer such tests. most vets i know don't have a clue about fish, hence the scramble each of us has had to go thru to learn how to
treat our own koi?

many of ther better/bigger farmers i know in niigata have been independently testing for SVC for close to 18 months. I don't know if that will be accepted within the new regs.

I'll see if I can find out how long it takes to administer one of these tests....
I just received an e-mail from Torazo asking me if we know about the new SVC regulations. I sent an e-mail back asking him if Niigata is an SVC free zone or not and can they ship Koi under these new regulations. With the time difference it may take a day or so, but I will post whatever information I get.

Russ

P.S.
The regulations require port of entry inspections in the U.S. by a certified veterinarian. It looks like it would be a visual inspection only, but I do not know for sure. I have the complete USDA regulations and I can not find anywhere a requirement for testing as they enter. Only Vets certified by the USDA can do these inspections and there are only 11 listed for the entire US and one for Puerto Rico. California only has one and he is in Sacramento. If they do not train more vets then every one in Southern California that brings in fish has to PAY to bring this vet down for inspections.$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Russell Peters is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #36 (permalink)
Tategoi
 
dizzyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 464
Does anyone know if what the Japanese call "Sleeping disease of koi" from Nishikigoi Manuel (Nishikigoi varieties and their disease) is the same thing as SVC? If it is you can likely rule out Niigata as an SVC free zone.
Mitch
dizzyfish is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #37 (permalink)
Oyagoi
 
Sangreaal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,770
I don't know how old this article is by Joel Burkard/Pan Incorporated, but this is what was said within the text:

The 31st All Japan Koi Show also marked the first time that the show had been closed to entries of Koi from outside of Japan, much to the disappointment of many who had planned to send their Koi to Japan for the Show. This precaution was taken in response to an outbreak of SVC that was identified in a shipment of Koi shipped from China to England. SVC is a virus that is deadly to Koi, but has not yet entered Japan.

Full text at: http://www.koi.com/reference/unique/4.php

Marie
__________________
Marie

http://www.koi-bito.com/forum/koi-gr...wout-form.html

"Every artist dips his brush in his own soul, and
paints his own nature into his pictures."
--Henry Ward Beecher
Sangreaal is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2006   #38 (permalink)
Honmei
 
dick benbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 4,527
Initial information garnered in regards to length of time it takes to accomplish tests indicate it's not going to be something that's done in a timely manner....so there will be serious concerns regarding that issue
dick benbow is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2006   #39 (permalink)
Tategoi
 
dizzyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 464
Clinical signs of SVC
First signs of the disease may be a change in behavioral patterns of the fish. Fish may congregate in slow–flowing water, near pond banks, or lie on the bottom. Over time, the rate of respiration will decrease, as will reaction to stimulation and
swimming speed. As the disease progresses, the fish become sluggish and may swim and lie on their sides.
Externally, the fish can exhibit a number of non–specific physical signs including darkening of the skin, swollen abdomen, exophthalmia (pop–eye), hemorrhages in the skin, gills and anterior eye chamber, anemia and pale gills, and a protruding vent.
Internally, the signs are dominated by building up of fluid (edema) in all organs and in the body cavity, hemorrhages in the swim bladder, and inflammation of the intestines.


If you read the part embolden above. And then the look at the attached file from Nishikigoi Manual you will notice some similarities of the signs of the two diseases.
Mitch
Attached Thumbnails
possible-ban-koi-goldfish-195_9549.jpg  
dizzyfish is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2006   #40 (permalink)
Sansai
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 252
From the document on their site, its a APHIS rep that does the inspection. Billed at $84/hour (business hours, otherwise $100/hour) including travelilng time. But their is not traveling "expense". They were estimating the total cost of a inspection to be in the $378-504 on average. Also concerning are the koi importers that are not located near one of the 11 ports, they are going to have other significant expenses or have wholesale or arrangements with other dealers.

Costs:
Importers of SVC-susceptible species
will be affected by the user fees that will
be charged for processing applications
for import permits and for conducting
inspections at the port of entry under
APHIS’ regulations in §§ 130.4
(processing import permit applications)
and 130.30 (hourly rates for services).
The user fee for processing an initial
import permit application is $94. In the
beginning, import compliance
assistance ($70) might be necessary,
which would raise the cost to $164 for
each shipment, but we estimate that
most importers will not need import
compliance assistance. The user fee rate
is $84 per hour ($21 per quarter hour)
for inspection services, including travel
time, during normal business hours. At
other times, the user fees are $100 per
hour ($25 per quarter hour) Monday
through Saturday and on holidays. The
user fees are $112 per hour ($28 per
quarter hour) on Sundays.

According to APHIS’ Veterinary
Services, the average inspection takes an
estimated 41/2 hours, including
inspectors’ travel time to the port.
Therefore, the total cost of inspecting a
shipment can range from $378 to $504,
depending on whether the inspection is
done during normal business hours.7
The projected average cost of inspection
to an importer with four or more
shipments annually is between $2700
and $3650.8 The average cost of import
permits, based upon an average of 7
shipments per annum per importer, will
be $685.9 A small number of entities
currently import more than 40
shipments of SVC-susceptible species
annually. Permit and inspection costs
for these importers are expected to range
between $15,000 and $20,000. The
projected total annual cost to importers
of live SVC-susceptible species is
between $237,384 and $316,512 for

6 Global Trade Atlas, 2003.

7 Total cost of an average inspection during
normal business hours is derived as follows:
($84*4) + $42 = $378. Total cost of an average
inspection on Sundays is derived as follows:
($112*4) + $56 = $504.

8 Based upon 2004 SVC-susceptible species
import records of 628 shipments from the
Automated Target System Inbound Production Web
Server.

9 The estimated total average cost for import
permits does not include the import compliance
assistance fee of $70, which is only incurred until
the application process becomes familiar to the
importer.

inspections, and about $59,032 for
import permits.10

Import permit and inspection
expenditures by entities will be roughly
proportional to the number of
shipments imported. We do not have
data on the average value of shipments
of SVC-susceptible species by importers,
or the range or distribution of shipment
values. Imports of SVC-susceptible
species are often a mixture of the less
expensive ornamental fish and the more
expensive koi. APHIS invites comment
on the average revenues and operating
costs, and average number of shipments
per year, of small-entity importers that
may be impacted by this interim rule.

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.

APHIS considered several alternatives
to the import requirements for SVC-
susceptible species set forth in this final
rule. One alternative was to list regions
where SVC is known to exist in our
regulations and to only impose import
restrictions on SVC-susceptible species
imported from those regions. This
approach would allow for regions
maintaining SVC-free status to export
SVC-susceptible species without the
added import permit and health

10 The projected total annual cost to importers for
inspections during normal business hours is
derived as follows: $378 per inspection*628
shipments = $237,684 for inspections. The
projected total annual cost to importers for
inspections on Sundays is derived as follows: $504
per inspection*628 shipments = $316,512. The total
annual cost for permits is derived as follows: $94
per permit*628 shipments = $59,032.

certificate requirements. However, it
was determined that due to the complex
epidemiology of SVC, and the present
inability of APHIS to monitor or assess
the veterinary infrastructure of countries
maintaining SVC freedom, that the
establishment of a list of SVC-free
regions could not be done with any
reliable assurance of initial or ongoing
validity.
Ryan S. is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




©2008 Koi-Bito Magazine