Koi Dealer Best Health Practices Certification Program

[JasPR]

O yes, I'm aware. They made the public aware ( limited awareness as most buyers of marine fish are not interested in those details) . But the missing funds, questions about the actual collectors themselves taking the nets and still using the 'juice' because it was easier, over promotion of Robinson as a persona and the total ignoring of the fact that Chinese businessmen were not going to allow their margins to be shrunk, kinda made the 'program' a kind of con on the donating hobbyists that thought they were actually changing things.
So I ask you because I never followed the story through, did Robinson finally get busted for the missing funds? Curious minds want to know? I know when he began inviting my wholesalers to come and spend a day of diving for the best collected cyanide free fish, there was a large premium placed on the fish as it was more difficult to collect them. Many started wondering if this was an ingenious marketing plan or a plan to save the reefs- or both?

As I said, I'm a big Reagan fan " trust but verify". It takes people of good will and often a higher sense of service to work thru challenges that are frought with opportunities for corruption and personal gain. And personal gain is not always money.
So I'll stick to my suggested plan. A panel of professionals and in the know amateurs hammering out what is needed and practical. And beyond that, realistic protocol/education for the members of the amateur association. Rather than top down management, lateral integration of knowledge and transparancy- and above all, accountability.
JR

[bekko]

I do not know what happened to Robinson of late.

Getting that premium for net-caught fish over cyanide fish has always been the problem. I was the first marine ornamental breeder to become MAC certified under their mariculture plan. All the dealers were anxious to get fish from a MAC-certified breeder, but none of them were willing to pay more than the going rate for wild-caught fish. I had to finally get out of marine ornamentals because I can not grow them more cheaply than Mother Nature.

Quote: A panel of professionals and in the know amateurs hammering out what is needed and practical. And beyond that, realistic protocol/education for the members of the amateur association. Rather than top down management, lateral integration of knowledge and transparancy- and above all, accountability.

I agree. Even better if an industry organization is in the mix.

-steve

[JasPR]

no kidding! What species did you breed? And do you know anything about that seahorse breeding farm out your way? JR

[bekko]

Ocean Rider (seahorses) is at the Natural Energy Lab complex on the Big Island.

I was raising Banggai Cardinals, True Percula, False Percula, and Tomato Clowns, a few Dottybacks, seahorse (H. kuda), Upside-Down Jellyfish, Lysmata shrimp, Berghia nudibranchs. I was spawning Yellow Tang and several types of pygmy angels but could never get them through to postlarvae. We raised a few Lavender Tang and Indo-Pacific Sargent from wild-caught postlarvae.

I am in the process of rebuilding the last of the saltwater ponds to make more room for goldfish. When that space is full, we start getting rid of koi. They're free-loaders and don't pay their keep.

But, to get back on topic, I think AKCA is going too far afield with this dealer certification program. For one thing, a true ISO certification program is damned expensive to operate because you need to pay trained third-party agents to do the inspections and have clerical help to maintain the books. If you start cutting corners on the ISO process you open yourself up to lawsuits and other forms of criticism. AKCA will have to pass most of that cost on to the dealers. So, on top of the extra facilities, equipment and man-power required to comply with the technical aspects of the guidelines, the dealer is going to have to pay for the inspections and part, or all, of the program overhead. I just don't think it is going to happen.

AKCA should be able to find other, equally constructive, things to do in their own sandbox.

This reminds me of an old guy in our local club. He has probably been keeping koi since before I was born and you can tell he thoroughly enjoys it. He knows a good koi when he sees one and could easily afford the best. But he chooses to buy young fairly inexpensive fish which he puts directly into the pond without thought of quarantine, diagnosis or treatment. I once asked him what would happen if he introduced some new disease that killed his other fish. Don't you worry about it? He replied that koi are for relaxation, not for worrying. If they all died he would get some more.

-steve

[Nancy M.]

Wow how time flys.........

Seems like yesterday, we were having the same debate, as we did a year ago.

[JasPR]

It's very interesting reading old posts, Nancy. Sometimes perspectives change and sometimes the words still ring true and positions are only re-enforced.
I kinda like the words of old timers like Bekko's club member. AKCA was formed at a time when the hobby was relatively new to America. Many challenges and no politics. Lots of frontiers to conquer. The thing I like about ZNA and AKCA and Bekko's old timer is the emphasis on the postive and the shear joy of koi keeping. We sometimes forget that- I know I have to be reminded regularly at 'feeding time' that the koi are truly innocent.

AKCA and the judging program are the corner stone of koi education. And in a positive way- the judging program promotes it's judges as ' the first teachers' ( a concept borrowed from ZNA and freely given by ZNA). Positive approaches to koi appreciation as living art, better husbandry techniques for keeping the koi looking good and better filter designs to keep the fish healthy- the emphasis is on prevention in all these cases. In the subtext of that mission statement is the reality that koi will not always be healthy. Especially while the keeper is learning about proper technique and koi's specific needs. So a health program was a wise decision on AKCA's part. But to create an entire separate organization around the negative- disease and death, was not the intention ( or at least should not be the intention IMHO). That would be to live in the world of the negative. Prevention and first aid is laudable. A culture of daily battles focused on what we are trying to PREVENT is misguided if it becomes a life style of our association's membership. Likewise, the health of a dealer's stock is the dealer's business and should not be the focus of our positive message. Bad dealers will fail as word of mouth is a powerful thing. Especially if the dealer is known by a local club. Conversely, a good dealer who promotes what he or she does to assure healthy and reliable stock as part of their marketing, will find that serious hobbyists appreciate and seek out that reliable source. In other words, you want the postive re-enforcement for dealers to strive for and not the veiled threat of boycott.
Educating the hobbyist regarding prevention should include instructions regarding quarantine and also the right questions to ask any generic dealer- Do you quarantine? how long before you sell your stock? Can I see them feed? Do you scrape for parasites? Have these fish been treated for parasites of infection? What do you use to treat? Any hobbyist will know if the answers sound right once they are educated. The important thing is this points no finger at any actual business but rather educates the consumer as to what to avoid and what to place trust in. In the end, raising membership awareness and, in effect thru market forces, demanding a minimum standard before spending dollar, is the most effective way to raise those standards. IMHO , JR

[dinh]

Well, since other thread was locked. Perhaps, this is the right place to post this. I hope Don will bring this to the next AKCA Board as well.

The AKCA Dealer BHP Certification Program has many flaws including liability and legality. AKCA Board should drop this program immediately. Period. This program will create more headache and more problem for AKCA. It can be a good program for FDA or other, where they have power of policy and enforcement, but it is not a good thing for non-profit hobbyists organization like AKCA.

This is not to finger pointing to any individual including Spike Cover. I know Spike has spent a lot of his time for those programs, his dedication to the hobby is exceptional. I personally just want to see AKCA knows their limitations and AKCA Programs need to heading to the right direction.
Having said that, if any one of you want to blame, it should be AKCA Board, the top board that decided to allow this program to be as part of the AKCA in the first place. Anyway, no one perfect, we all make a lot of mistakes from time to time. With that, I hope AKCA will make the right decision at this time.

--Dinh

[Nancy M.]

Quote: Originally Posted by dinh Well, since other thread was locked. Perhaps, this is the right place to post this. I hope Don will bring this to the next AKCA Board as well. The AKCA Dealer BHP Certification Program has many flaws including liability and legality. AKCA Board should drop this program immediately. Period. This program will create more headache and more problem for AKCA. It can be a good program for FDA or other, where they have poer of policy and enforcement, but it is not a good thing for non-profit hobbyists organization like AKCA. This is not to finger pointing to any individual including Spike Cover. I know Spike has spent a lot of his time for those programs, his dedication to the hobby is exceptional. I personally just want to see AKCA knows their limitations and AKCA Programs need to heading to the right direction. Having said that, if any one of you want to blame, it should be AKCA Board, the top board that decided to allow this program to be as part of the AKCA in the first place. Anyway, no one perfect, we all make a lot of mistakes from time to time. With that, I hope AKCA will make the right decision at this time. --Dinh

I agree with most of your post Dinh, but I think the AKCA board may have thought that many dealers were on board with this, and so they allowed it to be voted in. Perhaps, now with everything that has been brought to there attention, they will reconsider there position on this matter. I know that many hobbyist have contacted there AKCA rep, to voice there own clubs feelings and thoughts on this. I for one, have made my feelings known loud and clear since day one.

I have never agreed with this program, and never will. I think the AKCA would be better off using funds to provide clubs with more hands on teaching, such as having licensed vets teaching members how to draw blood, for KHV testing. If that is not feasible then perhaps the AKCA would be willing to help hobbyist with lab fee's for testing. The way I see it is if the AKCA is willing to spend $10K on marketing then, there are much better ways that money could be used, to benefit the hobbyist.

[JasPR]

There is nothing wrong with treating water! It is done thousands of times a day in fish aquariums across the country/world. This is the act of treating the environment that fish swim in. No vet or vet organization will be paid for this ( not enough to make a living or to justify the drive) nor will they get anywhere challenging these acts as they all involve over the counter meds/compounds.

The second point is-when is treating the fish directly a medical act? As Spike identified early on, this definition is state regulated ( thank you horse people!). In many states, the simple answer is when you use controlled perscription drugs without the guidance of a liscensed vet or when you invade the skin of an animal ( cut, stitch, probe).

And the third point is WHO is treating the fish themselves and who owns that fish. In most cases, you own the animal, you get a vet to give you the antibiotics and you buy the needle. No problem. Now what about using the 'left overs' on another person's fish ( a no no)

these three test questions can quickly tell you if you are running a risk of being sued or are liable.

I think in the case of the insurance, and as has been stated, you can not sue 'youself', a club affliated KHA that assists the owner who is also a club affiliated member, in how to treat their water to improve the environment and also how to test to identify diseases and parasites is 'bullet proof'.
A KHA that freelances in other unaffliated organzations, represents dealers ( or sells their products to the house call owner) or goes door to door into pet stores and garden centers and represents themselves as AKCA certified KOI HEALTH ADVISORS has a problem. They have left the umbrella of AKCA affliliations. They may still have a problem with state Vet organizations but the odds are reduced greatly when not dealing with the general public. IMHO.
The other very interesting point here is the koi board drama. I was once singled out by another board's owner for being an opinionated hobbyist ( all the time) because I am also an AKCA judge ( some of the time) in an attempt to destroy me and drive me off the boards and out of the hobby.
Can this not also happen to a rogue KHA working on non AKCA affliated boards? In my case there was no law suit potential as no one can sue me for picking their koi third place! But can someone non affliated with AKCA or an AKCA club working on an internet koi owner's fish be sued-- or more importantly be a pass to sue the organization that certified them?
Having done the KHA thing before the KHA program was even created, I can tell you that many people think of you as a 'free service'. But not as a fraternal brother or sister-- just a stranger who is coming to help and maybe made things worse!! ( in their minds anyway). Personally, I have never been sued for such things. But I know of two people who are quite competant that were threatened with some action after fish they were trying to help, died. They decided then and there not to do that hands on stuff any more.
yet, I've never heard of this stuff happening in a 35 member koi club where everyone knows everyone, breaks bread together and talks koi at koi meetings? can you see the difference? JR

[cppond]

I would really suggest that any KHA that has concerns about liability should consult with an attorney in their jurisdiction and not rely on the musings of hobbyists posting on the chat boards, no matter how well intentioned the hobbyists.

Now I know how it must sound to the koi judges when I talk about koi.