| Literature DB >> 25082298 |
Susan L Williams1, Noel Janetski, Jessica Abbott, Sven Blankenhorn, Brian Cheng, R Eliot Crafton, Sarah O Hameed, Saipul Rapi, Dale Trockel.
Abstract
Ornamental marine species ('OMS') provide valuable income for developing nations in the Indo-Pacific Coral Triangle, from which most of the specimens are exported. OMS culture can help diversify livelihoods in the region, in support of management and conservation efforts to reduce destructive fishing and collection practices that threaten coral reef and seagrass ecosystems. Adoption of OMS culture depends on demonstrating its success as a livelihood, yet few studies of OMS culture exist in the region. We present a case study of a land-based culture project for an endangered seahorse (Hippocampus barbouri) in the Spermonde Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia. The business model demonstrated that culturing can increase family income by seven times. A Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats (SWOT) analysis indicated good collaboration among diverse stakeholders and opportunities for culturing non-endangered species and for offshoot projects, but complicated permitting was an issue as were threats of market flooding and production declines. The OMS international market is strong, Indonesian exporters expressed great interest in cultured product, and Indonesia is the largest exporting country for H. barbouri. Yet, a comparison of Indonesia ornamental marine fish exports to fish abundance in a single local market indicated that OMS culture cannot replace fishing livelihoods. Nevertheless, seahorse and other OMS culture can play a role in management and conservation by supplementing and diversifying the fishing and collecting livelihoods in the developing nations that provide the majority of the global OMS.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25082298 PMCID: PMC4232751 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-014-0343-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Manage ISSN: 0364-152X Impact factor: 3.266
Fig. 1Map of southwest Sulawesi showing Pulau Badi (location of the kuda laut project) in the Spermonde Islands, Makassar, and the Paotere fish market
Profit (‘laba’) and loss (‘rugi’) statement and production costs in Indonesian rupiah (Rp) for H. barbouri cultured on Pulau Badi
| Profit/loss | Per month | % Total cost | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Income | |||||
| Sales (total income) | 6,000,000 | 100 | |||
| Expenditures | |||||
| Establishment cost/depreciation | |||||
| Facilities | 166,667 | 8.0 | |||
| Energy system | 364,583 | 17.5 | |||
| Equipment | 233,333 | 11.2 | |||
| Licenses | 108,333 | 5.2 | |||
| Initial broodstock | 104,167 | 5.0 | |||
| Energy system | |||||
| Maintenance | 58,333 | 2.8 | |||
| Operational | 455,000 | 21.8 | |||
| Consumables | |||||
| Maintenance | 83,333 | 4.0 | |||
| Breeding system | 58,333 | 2.8 | |||
| Feed system | 145,833 | 7.0 | |||
| Water quality, disease management | 100,000 | 4.8 | |||
| Administration, licensing, certification | 205,000 | 4.8 | |||
| Total expenditures | 2,082,917 | 100 | |||
| Net profit | 3,917,083 |
The Profit/Loss statement is for one production unit at the current production quota of 200 animals per month. ‘Price per animal’ (30,000Rp) was based on €2/animal currently paid by exporter. The Production costs demonstrate how the profit changes with the allowable quota. The exchange rate used is approximately Rp11,976 to US$1 (June 2014)
SWOT analysis of kuda laut culture in the Spermonde Islands, southwest Sulawesi
| Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|
| Land-based | Complicated licensing process |
| Low capital and running costs | Production decline |
| Community-based | Lack of scientific input |
| Culturer-owned | Lack of experience |
| Direct supply chain (culturer to exporter) | Limited visibility for project results |
| Private business involvement | |
| Community–Private–Government cooperation |
Information provided by three major OMS exporters in Indonesia (Bali, Jakarta)
| Exporter | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| # spp./shipment | 1,000 | 300 fishes | 50 fishes; 40 invertebrates |
| # Individuals/shipment | 2,000 | 300 large–1,500 small | 300–400 |
| # Shipments/year | 1,000 | 720 | 20 (down from 40) |
| Destinations | Europe, US, AU | LAX primary, then MIA, Asia (Japan), Canada, Middle East (new market) | LAX; transship to JFK, MIA, etc. |
| CITES permits | Corals, seahorses, giant clam | Corals | Corals |
| Profitable species | Corals, seahorses (not much profit in fishes) | Fishes, corals, ‘dermata’ (invertebrates), damselfishes | Any; mostly sells damselfishes, angelfishes, butterflyfishes, clownfish ( |
| # Staff | 20 | 240 | 20 |
| # Middlemen/collectors | >20 | 40–42 | 20 (down from 40) |
| Challenges | Strict invoicing/inspection (US) | Strict invoicing/inspection (US) | Strict invoicing/inspection (US) |
| Multiple permits (Europe) | Multiple permits (Europe) | ||
| CITES paperwork (Indonesia) | CITES paperwork (Indonesia) | Quota reductions (US) | |
| Non-standardized taxonomic references | Educating middlemen/collectors | Increasing regulation (US) | |
| Habitat to raise coral broodstock | Loss of Bali collection sites due to beach tourism | Cost of coral broodstock set-up | |
| Information on species considered for listing | Increasing fees (airlines, USFWS) | ||
| Anticipating species considered for listing |
Fig. 2The major (by quantity) marine ornamental taxa imported into California (Los Angeles and San Francisco) in 2009 as recorded in USFWS’s LEMIS database. Quantities in each shipment can be reported by exporter as either weight (kg fresh mass) or # specimens. Each volume estimate is independent and likely an underestimate, as weight might be reported for only a portion of the number or vice versa. Many additional species imported in smaller quantities are not included
Fig. 3Numbers of seahorses (all taxa) exported from Indonesia to the United States and the rest of the world, as reported in CITES records. Data from 2004 begin in May
Fig. 4Quantities of seahorses (Hippocampus) and other marine ornamental fishes imported from Indonesia into California (Los Angeles and San Francisco) in 2009 and listed by species or genus (i.e., not as ‘marine tropical fish’) in USFWS’s LEMIS database. H. comes (‘tiger tail’ seahorse), H. histrix (‘spiny’ or ‘thorny’ seahorse), H. barbouri (‘Barbour’s’ seahorse), H. kelloggi (‘great’ or ‘Kellogg’s’ seahorse), H. kuda (‘common’, ‘estuary’, or ‘yellow’ seahorse), H. spinosissimus (‘hedgehog’ seahorse), Pterapogon (‘Banggai’ cardinalfish), Pomacanthus (angelfish)