The Lightning Project

With the looming release of my very limited stash of Lightning Maroon Clownfish to the open market, one of the questions that’s been struggled with is what to sell them for.  That question generated many more thought provoking discussions about the origins of the fish, and the ethics of producing it in the first place.  You might recall my post in August of 2012 covering the retail pricing of other PNG Maroon Clownfish; what you didn’t know was that this post had been drafted, and has been sitting there while we debated whether it should be posted or not.

Ultimately, at LOT has changed since August 2012, but we’ll get to that at the end…

The Going Rate?

Let’s start with “price”.  I paid a 4-digit figure for mine – a huge risky investment – the most expensive fish I have ever owned.  I got lucky that it didn’t die, made it, and successfully spawned.  I got even more lucky to find that the trait was genetic.

Over the past few years, most truly NEW and or RARE captive bred clownfish are released into the market at around a $300 to $400 price point.  But that’s with a steady supply backing them up.  To date, the Lighting Maroon pair has not spawned again (I have not overtly coerced them into it again, preferring to let them come to mating naturally), which leaves me with only a handful of fish to release.  So what are they worth?

Well, back when investigating the prices of PNG Maroons I spoke with Dan Navin, head of EcoAquariums PNG.  He gave me some great insights.  Before we get to that, it bears mentioning that the reality of a THIRD Lightning Maroon Clownfish being caught and exported from PNG is hypothetically plausible.  Case in point, collector Steven Paul, who caught the Lightning Maroon I now own, has been attributed as saying “…he knows where more lightnings are, he just hasn’t gotten around to catching more of them for us yet…” at Reef2Rainforest.com.  So it’s certainly POSSIBLE that some other day, some other year, some other lifetime, another wild-caught Lightning Maroon could show up.

Which brings me to the question – what’s that next wild-caught Lightning Maroon Clownfish worth?

“I would not let the next wild lightning go from here for less than a $5000 retail price. For less than that, Id keep it here and try to breed it ourselves. Or send it to a successful breeder with a community kickback contract in place.”  That was Dan Navin’s initial response in 2012 – I assume he was talking $5000 USD.

The Impacts of Captive Bred Lightning Maroons

Of course, I did point out that he might be hard pressed to get that amount once there are 10, 20, or 2000 captive bred Lightning Maroons running around, to which he responded, “You hit the nail on the head though, when you said that we will not be able to fetch as high of a price for our next lightning maroon, after you start making these available as captively produced. The same can also be said about our other, much more common but less aberrant maroons, like our horned and mis-barred. This reduced value will have a direct impact on our collectors.”

Navin’s concerns are certainly valid given that the current “sustainability” model in place in PNG does require, among other things, that divers be “well-paid” for their fish.  A diver who finds a slightly aberrant maroon clownfish currently has a little bit of a financial bonus awaiting him, and as I showed in a prior blog post, that’s a fairly regular occurrence so far.  The restricted supply is what keeps the value of these wild fish high, and that could change in the future, directly impacting a diver’s bottom line.

To extrapolate the issue, Navin believes that the Lightning Maroon I possess was sold for far too little, the diver paid way too little, and the community missed out on receiving long term benefit from this fish.  On some counts, knowing the numbers Navin conveyed, I’d perhaps agree.  I too have long since wondered if exporting this Lightning Maroon was the right thing to do, or if this amounted to a case of “bio-piracy”.

The Decision To Export the Lightning Maroon

David Vosseler, head of SEASMART PNG, was the one responsible for making the export decision.  The only other option would have been to keep the fish in PNG and to attempt to breed it there.  Vosseler conveyed to me that the notoriety generated by exporting the fish was good for PNG and the fishery; at the time it brought more marketing value than the fish itself could fetch.  The fact that this fish wound up residing with me, where it would get full ongoing coverage on this website, was another main goal…the marketing merits of this fish as the ambassador for PNG, as well as a feather in the cap for the SEASMART brand, are certainly proven and haven’t faded from communal memory.

But perhaps most important, SEASMART did not have the facilities, resources, or technical expertise to breed any marine fish, so that was clearly off the table, leaving export as the only option.  If they had retained the fish in PNG, it’s doubtful that there would be any Lightnings to speak of today either, as the program was cut well short in 2011, and this fish would’ve either been returned to the ocean, exported to someone else if they even could have pulled off one last export, or maybe ended up in some aquarium somewhere in PNG.  Ultimately history has proven, in my opinion, that Vosseler made the right call to export this fish…an opinion as unbiased as I can offer.

Future Wild Lightning Maroon Clownfish May Come With Added Obligations

Still, I can empathize with Navin’s view that the PNG community was not rewarded sufficiently for the production of the fish, and that production of them in the future may cause more harm than good to the people of PNG. Navin elaborated –  “[It] just seems fair to me that a good portion of the proceeds of any captive breeding efforts go back to those people who would otherwise be getting a better price for their catch. They have no ability to breed the fish themselves, and have no ability to stop anybody from doing so. They are simply just trying to etch out a meager existence in this quickly developing world which has essentially passed them by. Again, I think you can get a higher price for these fish if you promote the fact that a community kickback is in place. This benefits the villagers, and you.”

Certainly a compelling argument, but when Navin had initially proposed that I give a 50/50 split of my own sales to a hypothetical entity in PNG, my jaw hit the ground!  After all, I’m the one who did all the work, invested all the money, and took ALL the risk.  The next biggest investor in me, was perhaps Blue Zoo, who skipped out on offers many times more than what I paid.  They avoided the quick buck (they didn’t LOSE money though), but they could’ve gotten far more.  They avoiding “cashing in to the max” on the premise that this fish ought to go to a breeder to be preserved and propagated, vs. a collector of rare fish who’d just watch the fish.  Navin seems to disagree with that sentiment, and this disagreement is echoed in his opinion of who should get these Lightning Maroons I’ve produced.

“Regarding you selling [the F1 Lightning Maroons] to breeders, I would much rather see them go to a rich people, who will simply pay you a good price, and put them in a big old aquarium where they will live out there lives… and die,” wrote Navin.  “Send them to more breeders, and I think you will be compounding the problem. The end result will be that lightning patterned maroons become a dime a dozen, and all value will be lost. You are better off, as are PNG collectors, if you keep these more exclusive.”

But he does have me thinking, and this concern is what drives the “community kickback contract” that Navin mentioned earlier.  He elaborated; “if anyone has any intentions of breeding it, there will be a community kickback policy in place. Not an EcoAquariums kickback, but a community kickback, specifically targeting the village school, from whichever community reef the next one comes from.”

What’s My Responsibility The Breeder of Lightning Maroon Clowns?

The other side of me looks at my project and realizes that my goal here was the preservation of rare biodiversity.  I have perfectly ugly endangered species of freshwater fish in my basement that I am trying to breed solely for the preservation of their genetics.  There is no one telling me I should be “kicking back” anything to a town in Mexico simply because I am breeding Characadon lateralis.  When I look at this topic through that lens, I realize quite quickly that if the fish didn’t carry a quadruple digit price tag, I don’t think we’d be seeing the same ideas coming forth.  After all, is Dan Navin sending out every fish he collects with a contractual agreement that if you breed it, you are required to pay a royalty back to the PNG fisher who caught it?  Not that I’m aware of.  Should he?  Maybe?!

I certainly have no legal obligation to convey any future profits from this fish to anyone other than my family, my fishroom, and my son’s college fund!  I could argue that, just as David Vosseler had suggested, the ongoing spotlight on the PNG Lightning Maroon, and thus on PNG fisheries in general, has paid off in non-monetary ways by continuing to feature this fishery, and thus, create the market demand for the PNG fish.  That IS the dividends they elected, and are now collecting.  They’re getting payment from me right now as I take my personal time to write yet another blog article talking all about EcoAquariums and sustainably-harvested Papua New Guinea reef fish.

How Could A “KickBack” Work?

Still, I have thought about the concept of the “kickback”.  In the discussions about retailing my offspring, I have indeed considered the idea of “giving back”, and I stumble mainly on the logistics of doing so, and of getting other people to buy in.

I’ve looked into patenting the genetics, which would then make it illegal to propagate the fish without a license – such a license could then enforce payments back to the patent holder.  However, since the animal is not cloned, and is not a GMO, it’s not something that can be covered under patent law. Such a patent would cover my ongoing investment, and could also facilitate a community kickback program akin to the one Navin asked for.  Regrettably, no such patent can be had.

In other interest groups…for example Hostas, there ARE patented plants that require a license to propagate.  However, this is not some 50/50 split of gross sales (as Navin initially propose), but a flat fee paid per plant produced and sold..a royalty.  I believe these patents last for 14 years (I’d have to check that), during which time nurseries do have to pay the patent holder a royalty.  This is however a reasonable fee, perhaps anywhere from $0.25 to $1 per plant.

There need not be a patent to create a contract that is agreed to on the purchase of these fish; we even have examples such as Ocean Rider, who’s checkout process required you to agree to NOT propagate certain of their strains/hybrids.  That of course stops no one, and is very difficult to enforce.  In the case of the Lightning Maroon, I very well could create such a contract on all fish derived from this line, which in turn would require people to pay a kickback for each fish sold.  And if you think about it, in the LONG TERM, it would be really cool if each Lightning Maroon sold, until the end of time, produced a $1 kickback going back to Fisherman’s Island.

The reality, however, is that no one wants to keep track of this kickback, and it’s incredibly easy to skirt the system.  While I could see a professional organization like ORA, Sustainable Aquatics, Propaquatix, etc, being willing to participate in such a program, the moment hobbyists get the fish they’ll start undercutting retail prices and I don’t think for a second the hobbyist breeder who’s anxious to cross a Lightning with a Gold Stripe really cares one bit about paying a $1 royalty per fish to someone in PNG.

In my ideal world, I’d love to see something like $1 of every Lightning Maroon clownfish produced from now until the end of time go back to the village in PNG where my fish came from. However, there is also the issue of WHO collects all these funds, and who gets them to PNG, and how is that done in a transparent, non-corrupt manner?  I just don’t see that happening!  Pragmatically, Navin probably wont’ be able to enforce any community royalty agreement on any future wild Lightning Maroon they produce, specifically because after a couple years, it’s entirely plausible that the fish being produced could be a mixture of my currently “license free” fish, vs. fish out of whatever contract he’s had a breeder enter into.

Another Outgrowth of the “Contract” Concept – Preventing Hybrids

Of course, this all relates to another concern of mine, and that is the future hybridizing of Lightning Maroons with Sumatran Gold Stripe Maroons.  I have TREMENDOUS issues with that cross…it’s irresponsible and could be extremely damaging to the long term genetic preservation of a CLEAN PNG line of Lightning Maroon Clownfish.  I truly want any breeders to only use other White Stripe Maroons from PNG, which in 2012 were only available  through UniqueCorals.com (the US source for EcoAquariums PNG, which is the only export operation in PNG).  I can probably make a contract that you can’t do this, force people to agree to it, and yet still, no matter how much a rail against it, there will be some smart-ass breeder somewhere who is thinking about the short-term profit, and not the long term responsibility that they have as breeders.  I will have no problems villainizing such a breeder for such greedy & shortsighted pursuits.

Is there a verdict?

I am not writing off the notion of agreements for royalties to PNG, and agreements to only breed to PNG White Stripe Maroons.  Still, I suspect that any giving back that comes from my Lightning Maroon Clownfish could only be a one-time thing led by me and a partner retailer if we decided we wanted to do it, and I think the only real prevention of hybridizing these wonderful fish is that the breeding community polices itself.  At the moment, no final decisions of any kind have been made, but I suspect neither royalties or breeding contracts will be pursued as they’re terribly unenforceable.  I assume these fish will enter the market largely as their mom came to me – no contract, no royalty, just a fish to do with as I pleased.

What do you think?

I absolutely welcome ideas and thoughts on the topic of “royalties” and “breeding contracts”; are you for it, against it, do you know of situations where this is implemented successfully?  Do you have ideas on the legal framework to set this up?  Can the aquarium hobby and industry embrace such an idea voluntarily, or is my pessimism well-founded?  Does doing this open a Pandora’s box for all other geographic lines and distinctly wild-sourced mutations in clownfish?

The Odds of Another Wild Caught Lightning Maroon Showing Up (and the future of EcoAquariums PNG)

As I alluded to at the start, a LOT has happened since this first conversation was had.  At the end of 2012, EcoAquariums PNG ceased operations, as 2012 they had been operating at a loss.  In late February, 2013, Dan Navin relayed that “[while] the business generated cash for the collectors and our employees, it barely made enough to cover the high operational costs in PNG, and certainly never put a penny in my pocket”.  The net result – at the moment, all this talk of a $5000 wild caught Lightning Maroon with a kickback is moot; the odds are currently nil that any more PNG fish are going to be showing up in the near term, let alone any more Lightning Clownfish.

Still, this could change.  When asked about the future of EcoAquariums PNG, Navin is looking at a more pragmatic approach to the business.  “EcoAquariums is in a state of dormancy for now. I hope to resume with small, boutique exports later this year.” Navin’s hope is that he can secure a full time income from another source of employment, providing a cushion of funding for the unforeseen problems that can crop up in a business like this.

PNG fish are certainly taking center stage right now; between Lightning Maroon Clownfish babies, and the new introduction of sustainably-collected PNG fish from EcoAquariums PNG via UniqueCorals.com, there is no shortage of news on the PNG front.  The speculation about what Lightning Maroon Clown offspring will sell for hasn’t abated, and to that end, I can still say that nothing has been decided.

I did, however, contact Scott Fellman (of Unique Corals) and Dale Prichard (of Ecoreef UK) to ask  how much it cost, at retail, to get one of Dan Navin’s wild-caught PNG White Stripe Maroons, as well as the unique “Horned” and other “Unique” versions that come out of PNG once in a while.  What I found is that sustainability does carry a small premium, and by the same token, uniqueness carries it’s own premium pricetag as well.  The part that people will find interesting is that these prices suggest a minimum or baseline starting point for what the non-Lightning offspring could go for.  That said, it’s safe to assume that there will be additional value on these Lightning-Maroon siblings given the genetic dice-role involved.

Dale Prichard is quick to point out that the UK market is smaller than the US market, as if to suggest that “demand” might be lower and thus, prices would be lower.  Maybe, but on the flipside, Dale has been supplying retailers with PNG fish for several months now, so the UK may represent a more valid market to look at.  A small normal white stripe maroon from PNG would start retailing at £27; or roughly $45 USD based on recent exchange rates via the Google Currency Converter.  That said, Dale relayed that more maroons retail around £40 / $63 USD.  A “Horned” Maroon is really going to set you back; while the retail value may be placed at £80 / $126, the reality is that retailers are normally selling these special fish paired with normal white stripes.  The net result is your more likely to spend £100 to £120, or $157 to $189 in order to have a PNG “Horned” Maroon Clownfish in your aquarium in the UK.  Here’s some examples of the fish Dale Prichard has been seeing come through the Ecoreef UK under his watch, some of which may have been held back for breeding efforts.

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

Scott Fellman and the team officially  launched UniqueCorals.com today, August 22nd, 2012.  The opening price for a regularly-striped white stripe maroon from PNG?  They’re going to start around $39 each for the smallest size:

courtesy UniqueCorals.com / photo by John Ciotti

A representative shot (not WYSIWYG) – Small normal WS Maroon for – $39 - http://uniquecorals.com/index.php/default/fish-28/anemonefish/premas-biaculeatus-png-maroon-clownfish-small.html

courtesy UniqueCorals.com / photo by John Ciotti

A representative shot (not WYSIWYG) – Medium normal WS Maroon –  $49  -  http://uniquecorals.com/index.php/default/fish-28/anemonefish/premas-biaculeatus-png-maroon-clownfish-med.html

A uniquely-patterned Maroon from PNG?  Expect to be paying in the neighborhood of $150-ish as a starting point, going up as the markings become more elaborate / intricate.

courtesy UniqueCorals.com / photo by John Ciotti

WYSIWYG a “misbar” (has a spot) maroon from PNG – $149 and already sold - http://uniquecorals.com/index.php/default/fish-28/anemonefish/premas-biaculeatus-png-horned-maroon-clownfish-misbar-007247-wysiwyg.html

courtesy UniqueCorals.com / photo by John Ciotti

WYSIWYG, a “horned” maroon from PNG – $200 and already sold - http://uniquecorals.com/index.php/default/fish-28/anemonefish/premas-biaculeatus-png-maroon-clownfish-horned-008131-wysiwyg.html

courtesy UniqueCorals.com / photo by John Ciotti

WYSIWYG, a “unique” maroon with lightning-like tail misbarring from PNG – $395 - http://uniquecorals.com/index.php/default/fish-28/anemonefish/premas-biaculeatus-png-maroon-clownfish-misbar-extreme-eco-labeled-png-009764-wysiwyg.html

So realistically, an unusually-marked  PNG Maroon with a White-Stripe mate from the only current US-source for wild-caught PNG fish, UniqueCorals.com, is easily going to set you back $200 to $450.

Judging these maroons with other wild caught maroons probably isn’t a fair comparison; owing to the more remote PNG location and the higher level of transparency and data availability, you should fully expect the fish to cost more.  For that matter, this might be a real world example of a slow shift towards more expensive wild caught fish ultimately producing the same level of income despite lowered volumes.  That could be a very good thing.  Scott takes this price discussion one step further when in is quick to remind me that the divers are paid significantly better in the first place.  Scott relayed that, “Dan’s fishers are paid a good wage for their work, which, and of itself, helps drive the cost up. Of course, with the higher wages, the fishers place a real economic value on their home reefs, and thus are less likely to resort ot potentially damaging and non-sustainable techniques (ie; dynamite, blast fishing, etc.) to catch as many fishes as they can just to earn a living wage.”

On top of all this, PNG is always going to represent a potentially restricted supply; the government-set TACs (Total Allowable Catches), aka. a “quota” in most fisheries, will automatically place a cap on the number of any species of fish that can be exported from PNG in a given timeframe.  This number could further be restricted if updated surveys were to conclude that population numbers were dropping; this is almost textbook fisheries management 101 in my opinion.  But apparently I’ve come to learn that this methodology, and the setting of any specific quota, is quite rare marine ornamental fisheries around the globe.

PNG fishes are more than just nice fish with a good back story and a limited supply; they might represent the current ideal in terms of broodstock for captive breeding efforts.  Indeed, as breeding moves forward, getting fish from good supply chains with known provenance should represent the bare minimum that a breeder uses in selection of wild stock for propagation.  Eg. don’t just settle for any old clownfish; if you’re going to breed Pink Skunks, know if they came from the Marshall Islands, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Australia, or somewhere else!  You never know when some taxonomist or geneticist is going to come along and say “hey, that Marshall Islands form of Pink Skunk is actually not the same species”…wouldn’t it be nice to know that you had that “new species” already breeding in your broodstock collection?

But getting back to PNG and “Horned” Maroons, remember that the EcoAquariums Ltd. fish aren’t just going to the UK, and now the US, but also to other Asian markets. Remember that there is an encounter rate only 1 unique maroon found every 11 days, or roughly 3 per month.  If this represents ALL the fish available to the worldwide market from PNG, let’s just hypothetically give the UK, the US, and Asia equal weight.  If the unique fish are divvied up equally, at best, we here in the US could expect to see roughly one “Horned” Maroon land here per month.  Now, maybe there will be more collecting with the US market coming online, and that could offset some of this (eg. maybe the encounter rate for unique maroon clownfish will go up with more divers in the water looking for more fish to fill more demand), it’s hard to say.  But given the track record to date, look at this this way – 12 of these might come into the country per year.

courtesy EcoreefUK ltd and Digital-Reefs.com

Is $150 to $400 a fair price? Well, the market decides that, but think about all the designer and hybrid clownfish being sold in the three digit range without consumers batting an eye? Yeah, I’m talking about the insane Black Ice Clownfish fad that’s going on right now, where no one can get enough.  Nevermind that the Black Ice is a hybrid, and that it’s really not that far off from a Picasso Perc (which as it turned out is a naturally occurring variation), but I suppose it goes to show how fickle people’s tastes really can be, and perhaps how uninformed consumers really are.  Of course, how many hundreds of Black Ice are sold each month here in the US?  Compared to a possible 12 wild caught Horned Maroons per year?  I think, if anything, a potentially restricted supply might suggest that the price of a “Horned” Maroon might in fact be much higher, at least in the current setting.  Of course, there’s the notion that maroons are “evil”, and having had a lot of ‘em in the last few years, I think that’s overblown.  Most of my Maroons have shared tanks with other fish, and not one has killed a fish it was housed with.  Hardly the murderous tyrants some folks make them out to be.

All of this now brings me back to the bucket full of babies in my basement.  If we take the market prices from wild caught fish and ignore everything else, it’s reasonable to assume that a small F1 baby that is 100% normally barred should fetch at least $40.  A baby showing some extra markings?  Well, that right there could represent a fish valued at $150 or more.  Definitely, any babies showing up with “Horns”  wouldn’t sell for less than $150-$200.  Really funky ones?  Maybe they’re going to fetch $300-$500 a shot?  What I can’t tell you yet is how much a 33-38% chance of the babies carrying Lightning genetics ads to the price of a non-lightning baby.

In a subsequent installment, we’ll talk about Lightning Maroon pricing, and how a hypothetical third wild-caught Lightning Maroon Clownfish might be handled and priced, straight from Dan Navin, director of EcoAquariums PNG.

Steven Paul is the PNG fisherman responsible for collecting the illustrious Lightning Maroon Clownfish.  With the new EcoAquariums PNG now in full swing, Dan Navin has been proud to show off the unprecedented level of transparency and traceability of marine aquarium fishes collected in Papua New Guinea.  With that transparency comes a narrowing of the gap; I now know a little more about Mr. Paul, via the EcoAquariums PNG Website - http://www.ecoaquariumspng.com/steven-paul

…and this is how it will go down.

OK, the fact that lightning maroon clownfish shows up as the 4th and last auto-fill option for “lightning” already has me impressed.  Pat yourselves on the back fellow aquarists – you’re obviously searching enough that this is now a relevant and popular search term!  But it gets more interesting.

Now I’m flattered.  Lightning Maroon Clownfish actually beats out Lightning McQueen from the movie CARS?! Oh, but you just wait.

I find it particularly interesting that the very first image shown for the Lightning Maroon is none other than a fantastic FAKE by Guin!  I also find it interesting, although not surprising, that two of the four autofills are now suggestive of purchase interests.  But we’re not done.

So..hmm…looks like I know what’s on all of your minds.  No news yet on when or where you can purchase your own Lightning Maroon Clownfish…but soon, I promise.

OK, so I have to chuckle because people are already speculating about the going asking price on the F1 offspring I’ve produced.  I’ve seen the hypothetical numbers ranging from $300 to $600 to $1000 to $1500.  And then there’s this post on Nano-Reefs.com that takes the cake.  User iball1804 is making some pretty bold statements, starting with:

“My LFS is getting a pair in.”

I can state officially, on the record, that I have not made any agreements with any LFS anywhere to sell any Lightning Maroons to them.  But that’s not all that is claimed:

“They are $5,000 apiece. And everything’s already lined up. Our client is willing to pay, and so it will be. “

Now that’s awfully presumptive since that’s the first I’ve heard about this.  It may very well be that the highest bids for F1 Lightning Maroons may well be much HIGHER than $5000.  Who knows?  Of course, I’d love to know who’s willing to offer $5000 a piece for Lightning Maroons, but that’s getting ahead of things.  Why?

Because as I’ve stated all along, back when I purchased the Lightning Maroon from Blue Zoo Aquatics, I made a gentleman’s offer to Mark Martin that I would offer right-of-first-refusal to him on any offspring I might produce.    Mark (Blue Zoo), Dave (Pacific Aqua Farms) and David (SEASMART), all took a gamble on me being the best choice for this fish.  It’s my opinion that now it’s time for BZA to receive some of the monetary benefit they gave up in deciding to sell this fish to me vs. simply the highest bidder.

Now, there is no contract, no agreement, I am free to sell these fish to whomever I want and do what I please with them.  That said, Mark is aware that it looks like there will be some Lightnings to be made available in the coming months.  But that is the extent of anything that has been discussed, and I will be seeing what we want to do together before going beyond that… after all that’s what “right of first refusal” means.  And to my surprise, it seems the general aquarist community at large has been aware of this, and hasn’t been flooding my inbox with inquiries for the last 2+ years (thanks for that everyone).

So while I LOVE the enthusiasm and bold statements, I can categorically state that anything you read on “price” or “availability” that you didn’t read directly from my keyboard is speculation.  I have some ideas on how I’d like to see these fish be distributed, and I can tell you that making sure this natural variation is preserved is at the top of my priorities…a far higher priority than price.  I took this project on as a conservation-minded breeder, and until these fish are out in the hands of other breeders, that mission wont’ be complete.

I don’t think it’s a secret that I like Rod’s Food, and I consider the folks behind Rod’s Food to be friends who I look forward to seeing time and again.  There’s more to it though; so often businesses in the aquarium industry are wrapped up in business, although I gotta be honest in my assessment that it seems companies are doing better in the customer relations department (and I say that from observing company Facebook pages and the stories I hear from fellow aquarists).

So there’s bad customer service, good customer service, but then there’s the companies that still love, and I mean LOVE, what they do and why they do it.  Now, I’m not saying every company needs to do this for every customer at every turn they get, but there are certain times when a company has the opportunity to leave a customer wowed, when they go beyond not because they have to, but simply because they want to.

Rod told me last week he was going to be sending me some samples of some new food to look at while he was recouping from surgery (glad to hear you’re doing well!), and he sent me some other foods he knew I needed (for the record, I do try to BUY his food whenever he’ll let me).  But this post isn’t at all about his food.  This is about that “Wow” factor.  This is about remembering that this is a hobby that’s more fun when we’re engaged with our fellow hobbyists. This is about remembering that our hobby helps us cross the geographic divide; all the more reason to make it a point to connect with online friends and acquaintances both at local club meetings and events, but also to forge and renew friendships with hobbyist from around the globe at events like DFW MACNA this coming September.

So here’s some pictures from what turned out to be the highlight of my day, an “impromptu” baby show for the Lightning Maroon, thrown by my friends at Rod’s Reef, attended by a small, but intimate family gathering where we devoured cupcakes from Swirlz. Amazing how touched and excited I was as a result of this simple gesture from some really great people – Thanks to you all one more time.

I keep tabs on the internet and once in a while go out and scour for new links to add to the links page here.  One of the many I found this evening is a lively discussion that cropped up on SoCaliReefs.com.  First, thanks for the enthusiasm guys; I hope you all enjoy the journey!

But I have to jump out there and do a little bit of mythbusting.  I have to bring up my good friend Rich Ross, author of a fantastic series of articles called the “Skeptical Reefkeeping” – see Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.  To drastically paraphrase, he would probably tell you that perhaps you shouldn’t believe everything you read, particularly on the internet, and especially in a reefkeeping forum.  Rich’s articles are MUST-READS for anyone using the un-curated internet as their primary information source.

So too, now and again, I have to simply point out misinformation as it pertains to this project.  You can use Rich’s methodologies to determine if I am truly an authority on the subject of the Lightning Maroon Clownfish or not.  And once you’ve decided whether or not I’m a trustworthy author on this topic, here’s some choice quotes, from some great fans (no sarcasm intended) at http://www.socalireefs.com/forums/showthread.php?31195-Lightning-Maroon-Clown-Fish-Spawns - I am guessing this is a classic example of how information travels from person to person, and takes on a life of it’s own, completely separated from the actual factual basis for the info.  You know, like that phone game you used to play on the bus ride to school…

GBoy66 asked, “So he bred a lightning with just an average maroon? Why not 2 lightnings? Wont that drastically decrease the amount of lightnings in the clutch..?”

Yes, I did breed this Lightning Maroon clownfish with another maroon, but specifically another white stripe maroon clownfish collected from the same small island (Fisherman’s Island) in Papua New Guinea.  Certainly not a random “average” maroon, but a very specific broodstock choice.  Why not 2 lightnings?  Because I only have the one.  As far as decreasing the amount of lightnings in a clutch – well, frankly that’s jumping 10 leaps ahead of where our knowledge base is at this point.  First, we don’t know that this is genetic.  Second, if it is genetic, we won’t know what type of genetic trait it is.  It could be recessive (like albinism), which could mean NO lightnings in F1 generation (unless the mate carries the recessive gene as well).  It could be straight up dominant (which would mean potentially 100% Lightnings).  It could be something far more complicated, be it partially dominant (Snowflake in A. ocellaris is an example of a partially dominant trait; mate two snowflakes together, and you get 25% Wyoming Whites).  It could be co-dominant, multiple alleles…who knows.  No one.

LotsaFishes wrote, “I believe in all of recorded fish-collecting history, only two have been caught. He had both of them at one point, but one died. He has tried for 2+ years to get his remaining one to get along with and mate with a second clown.”

On the first count, yes, as far as I am aware, there was the first one, collected in 2008, and the second one, in 2010.  Where you’re incorrect is in suggesting that I had “both of them” at any time…I have only owned the one.  Yes, I have been working for 2+ years on this breeding project, but not all of that time was spent directly attempting to pair the fish; many months were spent holding out for more broodstock from Seasmart in PNG, which unfortunately never materialized.  Only once I knew that the requested large Female PNG Maroons I wanted weren’t going to come, did I change plans to start working with what I already had on hand.

gumbii stated, “nope… the first pair was auctioned off for twice as much as the 2nd pair, but some random ballin’ guy killed them… then they said we’re only gonna auction them off to professional breeders and this kat got them… good thing too…”

Simply put, categorically incorrect.  There has never been any “Lightning Maroon PAIRS“.  The first one collected…I’ve heard rumors about its fate.  Ultimately, the single fish I obtained did have offers on it that were stratospheric, but in the end, through the decisions of multiple people, the fish wound up in my hands.  I DID pay quite dearly for them, as some of my local hobbyists can attest (I sold tons of valuable livestock to help fund this purchase, and even then it did not cover the total investment in this project).

gumbii, not picking on you but man, I gotta ask where you’re getting your “facts”?  You went on to subsequently post, “so far only two females were caught… but they gave him a male from the same spot she was caught… hoping that it might have the same genetic make up or heterogeneous for “lightning”…”

Unfortunately again, these statements are simply riddled with misinformation.  To say two females were caught is not knowable; both fish were brought in as singles, without mates, and in the case of the Lightning Maroon I now take care of, I am beyond convinced that the fish was originally still male when sent to me.  Also, I may have to take issue with your choice of the word “gave”, as in fact all fish in this project were paid for.  No free lunches here.  But you are right; the reasoning behind using other Maroons from the same geographic area is simply to increase the odds that if genetic, and if recessive, we could stumble upon some offspring in the F1 generation due to the mate being heterozygous; in layman’s terms, the odd chance that the mate carries a “hidden” Lightning gene.

GBoy66 then asked, “Oooohhhhh, ok. So, are these fish endangered? Weak? Why are they so hard to catch/keep..”

Maroon Clownfish are not endangered to the best of my knowledge.  To answer your other questions out of order, I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that clownfish are probably among the easiest marine fish to collect in the wild simply because they are so site-attached and aggressive (willing to defend their anemones against far larger intruders..like divers).  Regarding the “weak” question – well, I assume you’re referring to the recent spates of illness.  At the moment they seem to have everyone stumped; I would at times ponder whether the Lightning is in fact much older than we might think (it is CERTAINLY a possibility; clownfish can live for decades in captivity, and in the wild, while perhaps not common, I am aware of a single Percula Clownfish in the wild that was said to be 32 years old upon examination).  Imagine if this fish was already 10 years old when I got it; if that’s the case, it could already be quite near the end of it’s life (not ALL clowns live for decades of course).  At the moment, it is anyone’s guess.

Regarding these fish in general being “hard to keep”; wild caught clownfish are prone to diseases, particularly Brooklynella, which can make them far more difficult to work with.  Wild caught fish can take months or years or more before spawning for anyone, if they ever do. Most aquarium hobbyist have been spoiled (in a good way) by the readily available and abundant supply of captive bred clownfish (of many species these days).  Thus, there have been hobbyists who see the problems I have had with the PNG Maroons as a group over the past 2.5 years, and they question my abilities as a marine fish keeper and breeder.  Then I talk to people who I truly respect, and know they speak from a viewpoint of experience, and I get told things like “you’re doing FANTASTIC” or “most people wouldn’t have made it this far.”.  Knowing what I also personally know, I tend to look towards those with large experience bases who by and large, are supportive of my overall progress and have yet to question my abilities.  The message to the everyday hobbyist, particularly the beginner?  Make sure you start with captive-bred clownfish; save the wild caught ones until you have some experience.

el dude quipped, “Its a rare genetic variation…” [Update #3 - in rechecking the posts (due to Gumbii's comments), I see that the word "genetic" is no longer present in the post by el dude...a case of a quick edit?  I'm pretty sure I copy & pasted all my excerpts, but I'm not infallible; then again such changes are why I tend to copy things over in the first place.  Only mentioned out of respect for el dude in case I misread what he wrote]

Optimistic thinking my friend, as we certainly do not know that yet.  In fact, back in CORAL a while ago, I believe Wittenrich went on the record in a pro-genetic stance, while verteran Moe took the opposing viewpoint.  If these two wind up on opposite ends of the prognostication, well, I’d say making definitive statements like that are simply premature.  I HOPE you are right el dude, but you have no way of knowing yet.

It’s amazing how even when the information is publicly out there for anyone to read (as this project has been online since day one), that so much misinformation can be floating around out there.   In fact, I’m pretty sure this isn’t the first ‘fact check’ post I’ve had to do (given that I have a “tag” for “Fact check” already in the system!).  Of course, it’s fun to speculate and debate, and to the casual web reader, just remember that just because you read it on the internet, doesn’t make it even remotely true.  Updates on the babies coming soon!

- UPDATE -

The very next web post I came across is this one - http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20437213 - wow, more mis-info.

reefstew stated, “They have been out for about a year now. Very expensive. ”

I will simply respond – news to me.  Would LOVE to see the retail source that’s offering them  Thankfully, nwcronauer1242 came in and provided information that, to the best of my knowledge, is correct.  The irony here is that this perfectly illustrates a point Richard Ross makes about not believing what you write solely based on “post counts”.  It just so happens that reefstew is a veteran ReefCentral post with 1000+ posts; nwcronauer1242 has a whopping 32.  Nw also happens to be the one who’s probably right.  I say probably, because of this next statement:

lostmyz wrote, “there was another lightening maroon clownfish at the wholesalers in LA about 1 month ago and it was being sold for 1200…. ”

I can’t say this is untrue, although here’s some things that call this into question.  First, I believe I have enough industry contacts going around that someone, somewhere, would have spilled the beans knowing about this project.

Second, back in May, there was this fish - http://blog.aquanerd.com/2012/05/lightning-maroon-clownfish-precursor.html - also harvested from PNG, although Dan stops short of calling that fish a Lightning Maroon.  Now, the “timeframe” roughly fits – throw on a ton of assumptions and viola, you have the info that lostmyz is presenting.  Afterall, there are still people who believe that there have been three full on Lightning Maroons collected, one only weeks after I got mine.  You might want to go read that post - http://www.lightning-maroon-clownfish.com/?p=844

Third, and perhaps most importantly, while I have heard some rumors, I have seen no official words of ANY PNG fish being shipped to the US at this time.  (Update #2 - it’s been minutes since I wrote the above, but I just got word straight from EcoAquariums PNG moments ago, on their facebook page, “ First shipment to the USA SHOULD happen this week!”

So unless Dan Navin is a lying, that categorically means that there have been no PNG Maroons of any kind, let alone Lightning Maroons from PNG (the only place they’ve been found thus far), entering the US, let alone a wholesaler on 104th street in LA, since SEASMART last shipped fish in mid 2010.  So unless “last month’s LA Lightning” was collected in another location (certainly possible), all the information and experience I have is pushing me to think that lostmyz is not correct.  Oh, and just a hunch; any LA wholesaler who got their hands on a new wild-caught Lightning Maroon would have talked it up to the world; we probably would’ve seen pictures and a bidding war.

Obviously, I am not alone, and other RC members did start asking questions…

…to which lostmyz replied, “I didn’t purchase it at the wholesaler in LA so I can’t really tell you anything about it. And as for papertrail I am pretty sure they aren’t coughing that over. And it was wild caught.”

OK…

And lostmyz wrote on, “The thing with these “lightening bolts” is that its a mutation. Beyond the actual patterning mutation that this fish is going through the gene that causes it most likely causes other issues with the fish. Hence the puldging eye on the current one alive and the fact that out of 300 eggs, 1 survived and most likely will grow to be normal.”

I’ll just hit these as bullet points

• mutation?  unknown and unproven.  No way you could know one way or another.
• genetics causing issues with the Lightning’s health? possible, but unlikely given that the mate has also shown problems in the past few months.
• out of 300 eggs, 1 survived? – categorically incorrect, top to bottom wrong.  And that’s provable right here on this blog, just one post prior (as well as in the forthcoming next post)

HANG TIGHT, no more updates to this post as I’ve finished my Google results for the week  On to the news!

I don’t test my water all that often these days – I’ve long since learned that you can assertain a lot of what is going on through observation, and the basics of pH and Temp are constantly monitored.  Still, I do check things once in a while to make sure we’re not too far off track.  Seeing a slight decrease in SPS coloration in the Lighting Maroon’s tank, it made me wonder where the Nitrates and Phosphates were sitting.  With Sanjay Joshi and Tal Sweet due to bet here next weekend, I’d like this tank looking its best.  So might as well use our low-key morning at home (our son has been sick with a 102-103F fever for 4 days now) to do an Easter-morning water test:

pH (Apex) – 8.15
pH (Seachem) – 8.0
Alkalinity (Seachem) – 2.0 meq/L

Looks like my pH probe is starting to drift again and in need of calibration (it could be old enough now that it technically should be replace).  After these  tests, I dosed with C-Balance 2 part, and then later, continued with water tests.

Nitrate (Instant Ocean) – < 10 ppm
Nitrate (Salifert) – 5 ppm
Phosphate (Instant Ocean) 0.4 ppm
Magnesium (Salifert) – 1275 ppm
Calcium (Salifert) – 400 ppm

Meanwhile, I did test the “restarted” display system.  This system to be exact:

I was surprised to see Nitrates of possibly 25-40 PPM, and Phosphates greater than 1.0.  Glad I recently started running GFO (Granular Ferric Oxide) in both these systems.  I had cut back on the Vodka dosing to the Lightning Maroon’s system, down to 1 drop per day, but maybe 2 drops is my magic number.  Meanwhile, the 450 gallon display system has been getting roughly 10 drops per day of Vodka, and I’ve been waiting for a Two Little Fishies Bio Pellet reactor.  Now seems like the opportune time to add it on.  I may also do some Kalkwasser dosing on the big system.  It will be interesting to see how the different ongoing nutrient management protocols I’ve been employing (in addition to water changes) will play out in the months ahead.

I hope you all had a wonderful holiday weekend and share the optimism that comes with this time of year.

Yes, made it a point today to check how things are going in my own “super [fish] bowl”…that is the Ecoxotic cube tank that holds the Lightning Maroon.  I’ve been Vodka dosing lately and it certainly seems to be helping the corals show their ideal colors, although the Green and Purple maricultured ORA Gonioporas really have not been doing well (meanwhile the ORA Red is growing like crazy, and my Aussie Pinks are putting on growth too…the Aussie Greens, I’m not sure).

At any rate, when I check water last week my nitrates were down to 5 PPM.  Lately I’ve switched my in-house salt use; since most of my tanks are not reef tanks, it made no sense to be putting in extra cash on reef-grade salt.  So, I’ve been mixing 50% Reef Crystals with 50% Instant Ocean.  I’m continuing with regular partial water changes as well as the vodka, iron, iodide, and Reef Plus.  The biggest thing I’m noticing is that I’m once again having pH swings that trend low – a quick pH test confirmed my probe is not out of adjustment.  This is all happening with daily doses of C-Balance 2 part (6 ML each).  So, where are things sitting today, on Super Bowl Sunday?

pH (Apex) – 8.06
pH (Seachem) – 8.0
Alkalinity (Seachem) – 2 meq/L
Nitrate (Salifert) – < 5 ppm
Calcium (Salifert) – 420 ppm
Magnesium (Salifert) – 1305 ppm
Phosphate – was going to test it as I’ve never bothered…test kit defunct.

Calicium and Magnesium look fine, so I’m thinking I just need to tweak the Alkalinity a little bit…so maybe a dose or two of either Seachem’s Reef Builder or Reef Buffer ought to do the trick and knock off the low end pH overnight.  Overall, I’m pleased with the results of my low-level routine Vodka dosing – colors on the Seriatopora have dramatically improved.

Nothing special to report on the Clowns…they just keep acting like a pair but no eager reproductive activity.

UPDATE

I did some digging and found that I DID have an Aquarium Systems Phosphate and Nitrate Test Kit sitting around – I bought this back when I lived in Chicago, so I know it’s old.  But there’s no expiration date on the kits, and as far as I can tell, they *seem* to work.  The results?

Phosphate (Aquarium Systems) – 0.4 ppm
Nitrate (Aquarium Systems) – < 10 ppm (gradations on this test are 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 – the resolution is pretty coarse)

With SOPA and PIPA making news this week, it’s all too timely to bring up a brief discussion about copyright.  I was 100% against these measures because they lacked the necessary protections of due-process…all it takes is an accusation to bring down an entire server, a server which could house dozens or hundreds of unrelated websites.  Never-mind whether the accusations are even true.

That said, copyright is some pretty serious business.  What people don’t realize is that some of the aquarium industries most valuable photographers are actually reducing what they publish because rip-offs are simply too prevalent.  To date, there have been only three people here in my home shooting high-quality photography of the Lightning Maroon Clownfish.

First is Tony Vargas.  He shot for over an hour, to the point of almost ignoring the other 16 tanks in my house!  Tony takes copyright so seriously that he releases few if any images from his work, and when he does, he’s forced to watermark right over the subject,  like this:

It’s a shame that Tony must do this, as a watermark is, in my opinion, very obtrusive.  However, Tony has been driven to this as a stern measure to help enforce the copyright over his work.  You (the vague, amorphous, internet community at large) are to blame.

Marc Levenson has been here too and photographed the Lightning Maroon.  It’s fair to say that Marc shares my dislike of watermarking over a photographs subject.  So instead, he places a photo credit within the picture, but off to the side or bottom so it doesn’t interfere.  For example, this:

Better yes, but certainly such a mark is easily cropped off this image.  I implemented such an image strategy in an earlier business, and routinely found my images being used by my competitors to sell competing products….they’d just cut off the watermark and use the image as if it was their own.  Policing this was a nightmare.  I invested thousands of dollars to create this photography to sell my products and they’re stealing it and underselling me.  You bet it drove me insane.  It was HIGHLY wrong and quite illegal to do what they were doing.

But in the end, I still did not choose to watermark my images as Tony had done.  So really, if I’m not going to watermark every image I put up here because I want this audience to enjoy unfettered images, what am I asking of you, the reader?

Well for starters, I’m asking you to not steal my images.  We’re not even through the first month of 2012, and I’ve already been notified of 2 unauthorized uses of my Lightning Maroon photography.  Certainly some of you may ask “what’s the big deal”?

First off, it’s because they didn’t ask.  Yes, often times all it takes is to say what image you want to use, why you want to use it, and often you’ll get positive response from the average photographer who isn’t doing it for a living.  Yes, Tony and Marc both gave their blessings for me to share their photography here on the website.

Of course, Marc and Tony were invited to my house.  They shoot photos of my property, without offering any compensation to do so, so there’s an understanding and respect there from the get go…i.e. I’d hope that these friends of mine would contact me and suggest me first if anyone came to them looking to license Lightning Maroon photography.  By the same token, Tony has one image that I’ve said “that’s the cover of my BOOK Tony, that’s awesome, and I’d hope he’d be kind enough to simply let me use the image gratis (since it is my fish in my tank afterall, shot with my permission)..but I’d still make sure he’s compensated in some way because man, a book cover of that caliber…he deserves it.

So yes, even with ALL of this “unspoken understanding”, I still showed my friends the courtesy of ASKING before using their images here on TLP.  And still, it’s important to note that technically, if Marc or Tony wanted to commercially use their photography of the Lightning Maroon in my home, they’d have to obtain a property release form from me in order to do so (and if I wanted to be a jerk, I could make them pay me for that release)- it’s that much more important because the Lightning Maroon is a one-of-a-kind, instantly recognizable fish that over time has also become synonymous with me.  Still, so much of this in the aquarium world functions on mutual respect and the understanding.  And despite that, every image I use in a story on Reef Builders is either creative commons, my own, or one that I’ve ASKED to use first.

But the fact that this month’s infringers didn’t ask to use my photography is almost trivial…in both cases this year if infringers had asked for permission, I would’ve said “no”, you can’t use this image in this manner.  But still, understand that I might say “yes” just as easily to some future inquiry, or I might say “for that use, I’d be willing to license the image”.

In the two cases this year, I didn’t get paid either way.  That’s theft.  Granted, I wouldn’t have offered to license these images either.  Doesn’t make it OK to steal them then.  If you can’t afford it, or it’s not available for purchase, theft is not the solution.  You’re not starving and my images are not a loaf of bread.

But the real conundrum here is that along the way, this iconic fish has become synonymous with my personal name.  So when someone uses my photography of a one of a kind fish that I own, people recognize it.  Instantly.  And I’ve found it directly associates back to me.

The use of my Lightning Maroon photography in commercial settings creates a connection between myself and the activities of the person who isn’t authorized to use the imagery in the first place.  It’s interesting because in both cases of infringement this month, I found out not by my own hand (it never happens that way) but because people contacted me to say “Hey, do you know this person that’s using the Lightning Clownfish in this way here on the internet?  What can you tell me about their product/service/business?”

Well guess what kind of response your business / project / service gets when I find out you’re stealing my photography and along the way, creating the illusion of an unspoken, unofficial endorsement by me?  Do you think I have glowingly wonderful things to say about you and your business?

I’m not going to go into the realities of copyright law here.  Yes, I’m trained in it; understanding copyright was crucial in my professional line of work.  Here’s the important pieces of advice, both for me, and in general:

• If you’re re-posting a Lightning Maroon Clownfish image of mine on a forum or something to say “Hey, check out this new shot” and you attribute it to me and link to the blog, I’m not going to have a problem with that, I get that, and you’re not causing me any harm by doing that.  However…
• If you find an image of the Lightning Maroon out there in any other capacity, that wasn’t published by me, a vendor who handled the fish (Pacific Aqua Farms, Blue Zoo Aquatics), or someone who’s known to have photographed the fish (Ret Talbot, myself, Marc Levenson, Tony Vargas, and soon to be Gary L. Parr), please let me know immediately as it is probably an unauthorized use.
• The Lightning Maroon’s likeness will never be licensed out for use as part of any brand identity..i.e. you’ll never see a logo with the Lightning Maroon in it unless it’s something I’ve done, for me (i.e. if  I have babies to sell someday).  Anything even remotely commercial at this point,  chances are it’s unauthorized and I want to know about it.
• If you want to use any images of the Lightning Maroon, in a commercial or journalistic setting, please ask first so we can discuss whether I’m comfortable with the use, and any potential licensing arrangement.

• Any image, text, etc, is covered by copyright the second it is created.  It does not require a copyright symbol, sign, watermark or any other notation to be copyright protected.  Just because it doesn’t say “Copyright Matt Pedersen 2012″ on the image, doesn’t mean it’s not my image.
• All you really need to know is a very simple test – if you didn’t create it yourself, and you didn’t license it from someone else who did, then you don’t have any claim of copyright on that work.  Using it in just about any setting could have you violating copyright.  Again, not going to get into “fair use” cases because frankly, in the aquarium hobby world and industry there aren’t many likely scenarios for a fair use claim to arise.
• In general, if you’re just rumbling around the internet and find a picture you want to use for something, ask first.
• If you don’t know who’s image it is, find out.
• If you can’t find out, move on and find another image.
• Or go find an image on Flickr that’s available for attribution only license via Creative Commons
• Bottom line, real simple, if you want to stay above board, avoid public embarrasment, avoid nasty emails, and avoid a bad reputation, make it yourself.

It’s really simple folks.  Life is better for everyone if we respect the creative works of other people.  It costs real money and time to create and publish these works for you to enjoy.  It is one thing to share and attribute those works to promote them (although you’re probably still violating copyright law), but it is an entirely different story to use images in a commercial manner of any kind, let alone in a manner that appears to create an   endorsement or partnership where none exists.