Hackman72;399310 wrote: The articles you're referencing contain information on statistics from the 90's and we all know the use of cyanide was running rampant back then. Since then, much has been done to improve the wild caught livestock and certain fisheries even pay to have randomly selected fish killed and autopsied to ensure they can be marketed as cyanide free. The practice of chemical collection still goes on today but it has toned down a great deal because the fisheries have learned that heavy losses will put them out of business. Walt Smith, Robert Fenner, and numerous others put a lot of effort into working to see fish were caught humanely.
I was simply asking as to whether or not this was the manner at which cyanide caught fish died. I can't say definitively how it happens as I've never knowingly seen it.
I don't mean to thread jack... and first before I forget - test your heater - turn it on and leave it on and test for voltage (be sure to return it to its normal setting afterward, if no voltage)
Now - back to that quote of yours.
I hate to say it, Craig, but it's STILL a huge problem.
To my knowledge, there is no CDT in place anywhere (cyanide detection test) and there has been much argument about the hows and wherefores because a fish will pee away all the evidence of cyanide within 24 hours.
Those tests effectively involve putting the test fish in a blender... so it's not like every fish that came in could be tested - but that's another point.
Plenty of spin-doctors in the industry would like you to believe that the cyanide issue has gone away... not even close.
Not every specie from the areas where cyanide is used, is caught that way - for example, mandarin dragonets and dartfishes are never caught with cyanide.
I'm not making any assumptions either way concerning your specimens - I'm just pointing out that if anyone thinks that cyanide-caught fish aren't making it to the US market, they are sadly mistaken. Of course every wholesaler and transhipper etc., will swear on anything you hold holy, that all of *their* fish are net caught, some are truthful and some are lying, period.
It's tough to discern sometimes - as retailers the best thing we can do is choose suppliers that we have come to trust through experience. There isn't anyone, anywhere who can guarantee that every one of their wild caught fish weren't caught with cyanide.
Unfortunately it's the industry's "dirty little secret" and I have been very outspoken about it over the years. If people think the problem has gone away, then I haven't spoken loudly enough about it lately.
Again - for clarity - I'm not making any accusations or assumptions about the source of your fish, and whether this was an issue in their demise - I just couldn't let your comments pass without letting you and other readers know that it still is and always has been, a serious problem in the industry. Philippines and Indonesia are the worst offenders. Not all divers in those countries use juice... but that's where it happens. There are plenty of other countries where divers do not use these methods, as well as Hawaii.
And yes, sometimes the difference between a cheap fish, and a more expensive one of the same specie, can be where it came from and how it was caught. A Marshall Island Flame Angel, for example, costs more than an Indo one (at least at the wholesale level)... but the Marshall ones (usually have better color) live, and the PI/Indo ones... well ya pays your money and ya takes yer chances.
Sometimes, the bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweet price is forgotten.
I'll get off my soap box now...
Jenn