livingart

+1

this article makes for a very good read it is the Import risk analysis: Tropical, subtropical and temperate freshwater and marine ornamental fish and marine molluscs and crustaceans REVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS ON SUPPLEMENTARY RISK ANALYIS dated June 2010 http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/bi ... un2010.pdf from this it appears ma have taken submissions on board and are working with importers for the future of businesses whilst protecting our natives as well

because of the differences in water chemistry you may find colour chart results slightly different

maybe something in this Risk Management Proposal is of concern to otthers http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/bi ... 1-2010.pdf Risk Management Proposal for the importation of ornamental fish and marine invertebrates The purpose of this document is to provide a summary of the decision processes that led to the Draft Import Health Standard for Ornamental Fish and Marine Invertebrates from All Countries. Background Live ornamental aquatic animal imports represent a known pathway for the introduction of both exotic pathogens and invasive pest species. To afford some level of control over this pathway an import health standard (IHS) was introduced for the importation into New Zealand of ornamental fish and marine invertebrates from all countries. The IHS included a list of, mainly, genera of fish and marine invertebrates permitted to be imported. In November 2005 MAF released a risk analysis on the eligible genera list from the import health standard for the importation of ornamental freshwater and marine animals. The risk analysis presented a number of measures to manage the risks posed by the 13 hazards identified. Meanwhile, the list of eligible fish species was reviewed under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act, to include only those species present in New Zealand before 1 July 1998. The amended eligible list was finalised in March 2007. Consultation on MAF’s 2005 risk analysis revealed that a number of genera of animals had not been included on the agreed list, and as a result, it became necessary to conduct a supplementary risk analysis on a further 158 genera of aquatic animals. Following these risk assessments on the additional genera of fish, a further six organisms were classified as actual hazards in the commodities as well as the 13 already described in the 2005 risk analysis. Risk assessment considerations The majority of the fish species (approximately 1300 species) were classified as ‘low risk’ – they are not susceptible to the 19 identified hazards. The low-risk fish species not already present were added to the existing import health standard as an amendment in December 2009. These fish are subject to a post-arrival quarantine period, and biosecurity clearance is issued to all surviving fish free of clinical signs of pests and disease at the end of the quarantine period. The remaining fish species were classified as ‘high-risk’ species – they are susceptible to one or more of the 19 identified hazards. Some of these high-risk species are on the existing IHS, and this revision proposes to add another nine species. More stringent risk management conditions are justified before these species are given biosecurity clearance. Risk management options have been developed for the 19 identified risk organisms. The proposed IHS will identify the high-risk fish species and the risk hazards to which they are susceptible, which will allow any required disease investigation to be conducted in a targeted manner. It is recognised that the importation of live aquatic animals may also carry biosecurity risks from pathogens that are as yet unknown. A quarantine period, as well as being an important risk mitigating measure for the identified hazards, offers some protection against any potential unidentified risks, as during the time of high stress following transportation it is likely that MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Risk Management Proposal: Ornamental Fish and Marine Invertebrates  2 subclinical disease harboured by the fish will become clinically apparent. It is logical to base the length of quarantine on the epidemiology and pathogenesis of the 19 identified risk organisms. On this basis, a quarantine period of four weeks will be required for freshwater fish, and three weeks will be required for marine fish and marine invertebrates. Summary of risk mitigation measures 1. Ornamental fish and marine invertebrates from the permitted list must remain in quarantine for not less than four weeks in the case of freshwater fish, and not less than three weeks in the case of marine fish and marine invertebrates. 2. Permitted ‘high-risk’ fish and marine invertebrate species (susceptible to one or more of the identified 19 risk organisms) must undergo risk management measures in addition to the above quarantine periods. The risk management options for the 19 hazards are given in the IHS. 3. The supervisor may investigate batches of high-risk or low-risk fish for pathogens of biosecurity significance to New Zealand if deemed appropriate from clinical signs of illness or death of fish. 4. If an exotic disease or pathogenic disease agent is found, the Chief Technical Officer may direct any or all of the fish to be detained in quarantine for further testing, or order their destruction.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=49105

i think a few have already started

neither one of us has an onegar

have heard that said a few times over the last 35+ years and the hobby is still here 1 importer still there and a couple of retailers still going, others have come and gone maybe the recession has put more stress on viability and maf adding more the fnzas has more people on board to help move it in a new direction and is making moves now to help the hobby more

so matt and i will have a face off or is that more of a background off

sitting on the outside looking in it is hard to make an evaluation outlining how these procedures are adding cost may give a better understanding of the problems you face on the coal face as an industry the live stock is necessary to be able to sell the hardware is their more profit through less costs involved in importing the hardware

so we should marry up profit making and non profit then?

will these increased costs make your business less viable and stop you importing fish reef?

we are supposed to be discussing the issues reef raised the issue as it affects him directly as an importer and thi will have to flow on to the hobbyist as i imagine he will have trouble absorbing the costs alan has merely pointed out his point of view surrounding the issues from his experience in the field there is no need to post in such a way to denigrate his opinion

you are correct David, the hobby and fellow hobbyists are the most important thing business and industry will ebb and flow through trends in market forces and other influences and there will always be a market where people are prepared to spend money MAF are doing what they consider necessary to prevent any future problems that may arise from imports the past has proved the vulnerability of our native flora and fauna, they don't need more possible threats coming in good to be able to have these discussions on here as there are always 2 sides to a story

yes the taxpayer funds many sports, but they don't fund the industry behind them

i used one of the big gravel vacs with a short length of rigid pipe then about 19mm dia hose on it i cut the clear plastic tube down a bit though after observing where the turbulence for stirring up the gravel muck was greatest the extra length i the rigid bit allowed me o observe from the front of the tank while manipulating the vac

anything is possible in the confined space of a tank and single fish of different species

New Zealand Cup corals? retrieved from 10 metres of water anyone got a scientific name for them? shell on the left is a brachiopod i think

can always make more your design or mine

sad to hear

that is probably the crux of the matter and why the new system is being put in place