The U.S. wholesale market for marine ornamentals SHERRY L. LARKIN and ROBERT L. DEGNER Department of Food and Resource Economics, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Key words: aquatic invertebrates, saltwater fish, survey, tropical fish, live rock ABSTRACT The market for marine ornamentals encompasses all live marine species (fish and invertebrates) destined for the aquarium trade. In 1998, U.S. imports and exports were valued at approximately US $1.5 billion at the border (all dollar values cited in this paper are $US). In Florida, cultured freshwater and collected saltwater species accounted for $70 million and $4 million, respectively, in annual dockside revenue. To help explain Florida’s marine landings and provide suggestions for future resource management and market campaigns that reflect the perceptions of the industry, a survey of wholesalers was initiated in 1999. Preliminary results indicate that there are several intermediate wholesale markets. Florida firms are closer to the supply as many also collect. Wholesalers in other states handle more freshwater product, are larger, and tend to import a larger share of their inventory. Consolidation is expected to continue, but niche markets for eco-friendly firms are expected to grow. In Florida, marketing strategies should focus on the observed higher survival rates and increasing supply of the popular invertebrate species. Many wholesalers are concerned about additional regulations that could reduce the number of collectors and thereby increase supply variability, a noted weakness of the Florida industry.

INTRODUCTION

The U.S. market for marine ornamentals is part of a larger market for live aquarium species, which includes fresh and saltwater species of fish and invertebrates. The invertebrate component of the industry is comprised of such species as anemones, giant clams, crustaceans, starfishes, plants, corals, live rock, and live sand. Recent trade statistics indicate that U.S. imports and exports of all live tropical fish (species code ‘TROP’) totaled nearly $1.5 billion in 1998 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1999). In addition, live invertebrates included in shipments with live tropical fish (species code ‘OLIN’) were valued at $30 million in 1998. Although these statistics convey the magnitude of the domestic trade for all live aquarium species, they do not provide an estimate of the submarket for marine species. According to Chapman et al. (1997), however, approximately 20% of the total value of live tropical fish imported into the U.S. consists of marine species. In addition, virtually all of the invertebrates that are traded in the aquarium hobby are marine species. If so, the 1998 U.S. trade of marine ornamentals is estimated at $330 million, which is the total invoice value of live marine products provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (note that this value excludes corals). Approximately 80% of the trade represented imports into the U.S. Consequently, the wholesale value of live marine ornamentals that remained in the U.S. market in 1998 is conservatively estimated at $180 million. This figure should be considered conservative since Aquarium Sciences and Conservation 3: 13–24, 2001. © 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

14

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER

the market is characterized by several wholesale sectors and this figure excludes domestic sales of species cultured and collected in the U.S. The marine aquarium industry in general has experienced a number of technological changes that have helped to increase popularity and demand. Most recently, lighting that enhances the survivability (and coloring) of invertebrates has become available. Discoveries of culture methods that allow for captive breeding and rearing have also greatly enhanced the supply and diversity of species on the market. Perhaps foremost in terms of marine species trade, which is primarily dependent on wild collection, is the improved availability of air transport from remote locations. The commercial collection of marine ornamentals in Florida (where virtually all of the wild-collection activity in the continental U.S. occurs) was formally recognized as an industry in 1990, at which time data collection began. Since 1990, commercial collectors have landed approximately 180 species of marine finfish and 150 species of marine invertebrates, nearly 65% (in total value) from the Florida Keys region (Florida Marine Research Institute, 1999). The Florida industry has experienced a number of changes in recent years, particularly in regards to resource management. This industry has also experienced a shift away from the collection of fish species toward the collection of invertebrates beginning in 1994. Using data collected by the state of Florida, the total commercial harvest of all live marine life (including such products as live rock, live sand, angelfish, starfish, clams, crabs, plants, sharks, rays, etc.) has been valued at less than $5 million annually (Florida Marine Resource Institute, 1999). This value represents the dockside value of the landings, which is at the point of the first transaction. Based on our survey, it is likely that the product value increases four-fold as it moves through the marketing chain. If so, the retail value of Florida-caught products is estimated at approximately $20 million. To our knowledge, similar data is not available on the Hawaiian industry. The objective of this paper was to summarize results of an ongoing survey of U.S. marine ornamental wholesalers. The survey was designed to collect information on firm characteristics, marketing channels, and owners’ and operators’ opinions on various issues. The results were expected to yield information needed by collectors, wholesalers, retailers, and resource managers regarding the state of the industry and to provide suggestions for successful future management policies and marketing campaigns. Survey results obtained as of November 1999 are presented in this paper. The results include (1) the response rate, (2) the characteristics of the responding firms, (3) the market channels utilized by the responding firms in 1998, and (4) respondents opinions regarding Florida products and the state of the wholesale market. These preliminary results are used to show how such information can be helpful to the industry and resource managers. MATERIALS AND METHODS

In order to adequately characterize the U.S. wholesale market for marine life, and obtain industry opinions and expectations, a survey was designed and implemented

THE U.S. WHOLESALE MARKET

15

in 1999. All Florida wholesalers licensed to purchase marine life and having reported handling marine life species in either 1997 or 1998 (90 individuals) were considered potential respondents. At the suggestion of the (then) president of the American Marinelife Dealers Association, wholesale dealers outside of Florida were identified using the trade magazine Pet Supplies Marketing Directory, which has been renamed the Pet Products News Buying Guide (Fancy Publications Inc.). This directory listed an additional 91 domestic firms that are considered ‘saltwater livestock’ wholesalers. The survey questions were pre-tested during several personal and telephone interviews of Florida wholesalers conducted in March and April 1999. The pre-testing revealed that it would be necessary to interview all Florida wholesalers by telephone since none kept regular business hours and most operated out of their home. The out-of-state interviews were also conducted by telephone since the cost of travel was prohibitively expensive. To increase the response rate, however, all potential survey respondents were sent a personalized letter describing the project and asking for cooperation during the upcoming telephone survey. To reduce bias resulting from the discussions, only two interviewers were employed (one for the Florida firms and another for the out-of-state firms). At this stage, approximately one-half of respondents have been interviewed. The wholesaler survey was designed to obtain the relative importance of Florida products in the national market and reveal the disposition of all products by marketing channel, geographic area of the U.S., and export markets. To date, there has been little documentation on the economics of this industry in Florida. The data collected through these interviews was expected to provide quantitative information on the industry. Data were sought, for example, on relative prices and qualities of Florida’s ornamental marine life products and comparable imported species or products. Wholesalers were also queried on annual sales volume by species type, collection points, distribution outlets, and expectations about industry trends. Where quantitative measures were incomplete or unavailable, qualitative data were used to provide invaluable insights into industry-wide trends and developments. RESULTS

Response rate Florida firms. Of the 90 wholesale firms in Florida that handled Florida-caught marine life in 1997 or 1998, 22 (24%) had completed the survey as of November 1999 (Table 1). Forty-one percent of the completed Florida surveys were by top 25 firms, which are firms that collectively accounted for 75% of 1998 sales. Approximately one-fourth of Florida wholesalers were eliminated as potential respondents for either refusing to answer, they are no longer in the market (i.e., they claimed to not handle marine species any longer), or they could not be contacted (e.g., their phone was disconnected). Responses are still possible for the remaining 50% of Florida wholesalers. Each has been called at least once, but a definitive answer has not been obtained.

16

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER Table 1. Response rate to a survey of U.S. marine life wholesalers as of November 1999 Survey status

Completed Pending Not completed since firm. . . Refused to answer No longer in market Could not be contacted Total

Number of firms by location

All firms

Florida

Outside Florida

Number

22 45

20 49

42 94

23 52

2 8 13 90a

0 7 15 91

2 15 28 181

1 8 16 100

Percent

a The official landings statistics for 1998 contain only 78 of the 90 total Florida firms. Twenty-five of the firms with landings in 1998 accounted for 75% of the value of total landings, of those, nine have completed the survey and eight are pending.

Non-Florida firms. The response rate for marine life wholesalers located in states other than Florida (these are firms that were identified using the Pet Product News Buying Guide) has been very similar to the response rate of firms located in Florida. Twenty-two percent have completed the survey, 24% have been eliminated as potential respondents, and 54% are pending. Note that we have been unable to contact any of the firms located in Hawaii; these are all pending at the writing of this paper. All firms. In total, 42 surveys have been completed (52% in Florida) of the 181 identified firms for a preliminary positive response rate of 23%. This response rate should be considered a conservative estimate of the final response rate due to the ‘loss’ of firms that have exited the industry. For example, only 78 of the 90 Florida firms reported handling Florida-caught species in 1998; eliminating firms not handling Florida-caught species would reduce the population size by 13%. For now, however, 42 surveys with equal representation between Florida firms and firms located in other regions of the U.S. is considered adequate to draw preliminary conclusions. Firm characteristics Although the response rate (as of November 1999) of the firms located in Florida was very similar to that of firms located in other states, the Florida firms are distinctly smaller and relied more heavily on marine species and less on imports (Table 2). On average, only 5% of the value of livestock inventory held by Florida marine life wholesalers consisted of freshwater species. Wholesalers in other states, by comparison, maintained inventories consisting of 35% freshwater species (weighted by value) but this proportion was more variable as evidenced by the higher standard deviation. Wholesalers in other states also imported 69% of the value of their inventory, primarily from the Philippines. Florida

THE U.S. WHOLESALE MARKET

17

Table 2. Characteristics of firms that have completed the survey as of November 1999 Characteristic

Mean responses by location (standard deviation) Florida

Percentage of inventory from freshwater speciesa Percentage of inventory importeda Holding spaceb (gallons) Experience (years) a b

5 (0.24) 22 (0.37) 22,140 (48,803) 16.8 (12.1)

Outside Florida 35 (0.40) 69 (0.38) 98,118 (212,067) 18.5 (11.9)

Percentages are of averages weighted by sales volume. One U.S. gallon equals approximately 3.79 L.

wholesalers imported just 22% of their inventory (weighted by value) and the majority arrived from Haiti and consisted of species similar to those collected in Florida. In terms of firm size, Florida wholesalers averaged approximately 22,000 US gallons (83,910 L) of holding space although responses ranged from zero gallons (for collectors who immediately sell to dealers) to 200,000 gallons (758,000 L) (Table 2). Note that all gallons cited in this paper refer to U.S. units of measure. Wholesale firms in other states averaged approximately 98,000 gallons (371,867 L) with responses ranging from 700 gallons (2,653 L) to 800,000 gallons (3.032 million L). There was, consequently, much larger variability in firm size among the out-of-state firms (as evidenced by the higher standard deviation). These larger out-of-state firms also averaged nearly two more years of experience (18.5 years) compared to the smaller Florida wholesalers (16.8 years). Given that the characteristics of Florida marine life wholesalers differed significantly from firms located in other regions in the U.S., the sales-weighted distribution of inventory by product form, inventory by source, and sales by distribution outlet are distinguished by firm location in Figures 1–3, respectively. In terms of the value of inventory kept by Florida marine life wholesalers in 1998, fish species accounted for the largest component (50%), however, firms located in other states held relatively more fish (60%) in terms of value (Figure 1). In Florida, invertebrate species accounted for 42% of the value of inventories, which was far greater than the 28% of value reported by firms located in other states. Live rock and live sand were more important to firms located in other states as the value of inventories accounted for 12% of aquatic life holdings, compared to 8% reported by Florida wholesalers. Florida wholesalers obtained 34% of their inventory (weighted by value) from collectors employed by their firm full-time (Figure 2); many of these firms were ‘owner-operated.’ Florida wholesalers obtained 30% of the value of their inventory from other local collectors; these are individuals that were part-time collectors. The remaining 36% of inventory value was obtained from other wholesalers, of which 56% were located in Florida. Consequently, on average, nearly 85% of marine life inventories maintained by wholesale firms in Florida were obtained in Florida. For comparison, firms in other states did not employ collectors. Wholesale firms

18

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER Florida Wholesale Firms

Wholesalers Located Outside Florida

8%

12%

42%

28%

50%

60%

Product Form: Fish

Live Rock and Live Sand

Invertebrates

Figure 1. Mean composition of total 1998 marine inventory (by value) of survey respondents by location.

Florida Wholesale Firms

Wholesalers Located Outside Florida

(78% Located in Florida)

(56% Located in Florida)

34%

36%

34% 66%

30%

Product Source: Collected by Firm Purchased Directly from Other Collectors Purchased from Wholesalers

Figure 2. Mean composition of total 1998 marine supply sources (by value) of survey respondents by location.

THE U.S. WHOLESALE MARKET Florida Wholesale Firms (27% Sales in Florida) 2%

19

Wholesalers Located Outside Florida (0% Sales in Florida) 5%

1% 2%

9%

26%

71% 84%

Distribution Outlet: Wholesale Retail

Consumers

Other

Figure 3. Mean composition of 1998 sales (by total dollar sales) of survey respondents by location.

located in other states received the majority of their inventory (66% of the total value) directly from independent collectors (location unknown). These wholesalers purchased the remaining 34% from other wholesalers, of which 78% were in Florida. Thus, at least 27% of the value of livestock held by wholesalers outside of Florida in 1998 were purchased from Florida collectors. In 1998, 71% of sales reported by Florida wholesalers were destined for other wholesalers (Figure 3). The second major outlet for Florida wholesalers was the retail market (general pet stores or specialty aquarium stores), which accounted for 26% of sales in 1998. The remaining 3% was accounted for by sales to consumers, educational institutions, public aquariums, research facilities and the like. Overall, 27% of sales by Florida wholesalers were to destinations in Florida in 1998. Firms located in other states did not sell to firms in Florida in 1998 (Figure 3). The vast majority of sales were destined for the retail market (84%), many of which were located in large, urban centers. Sales to other wholesalers accounted for just 9% of sales by value. Firms located in other states were also less dependent on the other markets. Perceptions and opinions Respondents were asked a series of open-ended opinion-oriented questions. This paper reviews responses to three such questions. The questions concern: (1) the advantages and disadvantages of Florida-caught products relative to imports, (2) explanations for observed trends in the collection of fish and invertebrates

20

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER

in Florida, and (3) expected changes in the wholesale market within five years. The exact questions and top five responses, ranked from one to five (one being the most commonly cited response), are presented in Tables 3–5. With each question, the number one (i.e., median) response was cited substantially more than the second through fifth responses indicating strong consensus within the industry. Table 3. Ranked responses of U.S. wholesalers to the following question: ‘In comparing Florida marine species with an identical import, that is, the same species imported from the Caribbean or South America, what unique (dis)advantage, if any, do Florida species have?’ Florida species versus imports (Rank 1 = median response) Advantages (n = 28)

Disadvantages (n = 36)

1. Products are generally of higher quality (36%) 2. Products can be obtained at a lower cost (18%) 3. None (11%) 4. Product is unique, import is not identical (7%) 5. No import paperwork or other regulatory ‘red tape’ (4%)

1. Supply volume is limited (28%) 2. Products generally sell for a higher price (19%) 3. Attributes are ‘weak’ (18%) 4. Supply is seasonal, lowest in winter (14%) 5. Many collectors are unprofessional (11%)

Table 4. Ranked responses of U.S. wholesalers to the following question: ‘Annual landings collected by the state of Florida indicate that commercial landings of the majority of fish species peaked in 1994 and fell substantially thereafter. However, landings of most invertebrates have increased since 1994. First, what could have caused the decline in fish landings? Second, what could have caused the increase in invertebrate landings?’ Reasons for the observed trends in commercial collection of marine life in Florida (Rank 1 = median response) Decline in numbers of fish landed (n = 35)

Increase in numbers of invertebrates landed (n = 26)

1. Reduction in water quality (20%)

1. Ease of collection with least gear requirements (23%) 2. Improvement in knowledge of invertebrate care and corresponding technological advances (23%) 3. Increasing popularity of reef tanksa (8%)

2. Decline in demand for fish (14%) 3. Increasing competition from imports (11%) 4. Decline in number of part-time divers (11%) 5. More regulations governing the industry in Florida (9%)

4. Invertebrates provide functions necessary to maintain a successful reef tank environment (8%) 5. Invertebrate-based reef tanks are more interesting (8%)

a Reef tanks refer to saltwater aquariums that focus on invertebrates (e.g., anemones) and ‘live’ base products (e.g., live rock and live sand) while minimizing the number of fish.

When asked to state the unique advantage, if any, that Florida marine species have over imports, the most prevalent response indicated that wholesalers believe Florida products are of higher quality (Table 3). Respondents defined quality by survival rates and coloration. Higher quality products had higher survival rates

THE U.S. WHOLESALE MARKET

21

Table 5. Ranked responses of U.S. wholesalers to the following question: ‘What changes, if any, do you foresee at the wholesale level in the next 5 years?’ Opinions regarding the future of the wholesale market for marine ornamentals by location (Rank 1 = median response) Wholesale firms in Florida (n = 32)

Wholesale firms in other states (n = 36)

1. Increase in quantity of cultured products (19%) 2. Decline in sales of live rock and reef invertebrates (16%) 3. Reduction in the number of active firms (16%) 4. Increase in regulations governing the industry in Florida (13%) 5. Increase in imports (3%)

1. Increasing consolidation in the industry (19%) 2. Increase in the number of small environmentally-conscious firms (14%) 3. Decline in the number of trans-shippers (11%) 4. Increasingly stringent regulations that will increase costs (8%) 5. Increase in the number of cultured species (8%)

(primarily due to lower packing densities) and more vibrant colors. The second advantage cited the lower cost of local product; this response was primarily given by wholesalers that employed collectors. Interestingly, the third most prevalent response was that there was no advantage to Florida-caught species. The fourth response was that Florida products are unique since they are never identical to imports. Lastly, some wholesalers (particularly the smaller firms) felt that the ‘red tape’ associated with importing gives locally-caught products an advantage. The primary disadvantage of Florida-caught product relative to imports was that the supply is limited (Table 3). The majority of wholesalers stated that they could sell more Florida species if they were available. Many cited the relatively short length of the Florida productive coastline compared to competing nations. The second most cited response regarding disadvantages of Florida products concerned their high price due to higher labor costs. This is interesting considering ‘lower cost’ was an advantage of Florida products. Note, however, the lower cost advantage was offered by Florida wholesaler-collectors and the higher price disadvantage was cited by non-collecting firms located in other states. The third disadvantage concerned the ‘weak’ attributes (namely, smaller size, duller colors, and limited number of species) of Florida products. Many of these respondents referred to the vibrant colors and plethora of species from the Pacific (contrary to the instructed comparison). The seasonal variability in supply was the fourth most frequently cited disadvantage of Florida-caught products. Respondents stated that supplies were usually lowest in winter since ‘divers do not like the cold water,’ however, demand is greatest during the winter holidays. Several respondents (both in and out of Florida) stated having a bad experience with collectors in Florida. The negative experiences cited by wholesalers included low survival rates, incomplete or incorrect orders, and collectors who hustled them after gaining their business with a sample first order. Several wholesalers also cited unscrupulous collectors who fail to report all landings, produce high mortality

22

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER

rates, and garner the name of potential clients by examining shipments at the airport. When asked why landings of fish have declined since 1994, most Florida wholesalers cited a reduction in water quality (e.g., from Everglades run-off) that has lowered the availability of some species (Table 4). A reduction in the demand for fish was the second most prevalent response and reasons included their relatively high unit price (compared to invertebrates) and low survival rates in home aquariums. Other explanations for a decline in Florida landings of fish included increasing competition from (lower priced) imports, a decline in the number of part-time divers (due to a strong economy which has provided more economic alternatives), and an increase in the number of regulations governing the industry in Florida. Regulations specifically mentioned included a moratorium on marine life endorsements and bag and size limits on selected species. The relative ease of harvesting invertebrates species (such as sand dollars), including the virtual lack of gear needed to collect them, was one of two primary explanations for increased invertebrate landings in Florida (Table 4). This response was equaled by the belief that an improvement and transfer of knowledge regarding the care of invertebrates, and the development of the appropriate equipment, has allowed hobbyists to successfully maintain reef tanks. Consequently, as noted in the following reason, the demand for reef tanks has increased. Other explanations included the functions supplied by invertebrate tanks to the health of the reef ecosystem; that is, invertebrates are a necessary component for a successful reef tank. Also, invertebrate reef tanks are currently perceived as being more interesting in that there are more living organisms in the tank. The last question discussed in this paper concerns the future of the wholesale marine life market. These responses varied significantly depending on the location of the firms and, as such, are distinguished in Table 5. Florida wholesalers believed the primary change in the wholesale market will involve an increase in the number of cultured species whereas firms outside of Florida expected further consolidation as large firms continue to dominate the market. Florida firms also cited a reduction in the number of firms (reason 2), partially due to an increase in the number of regulations (reason 4). The regulatory concern was, however, behind an expected decline in live rock and reef invertebrates. This expected decline is surprising given an increase in the number of live rock lease sites (Antozzi, 1997) and landings of invertebrates species (Florida Marine Research Institute, 1999), however, many cited an increase in lower-cost live rock imports from Fiji as the primary reason for this opinion. Although firms in all locations agreed that increasing concentration and number of cultured species would occur, wholesale firms in other states posed a number of additional predictions (Table 5). In particular, these firms believe there is a growing market for small environmentally-friendly firms that do not use chemicals during capture or transport. For example, environmentally-friendly firms would guarantee their specimens were harvested without the use of cyanide or other anesthetics such as quinaldine. There is also a perceived decline in the number

THE U.S. WHOLESALE MARKET

23

of trans-shippers, a traditional component of the market chain, resulting from the advent and commercial usage of the Internet.

DISCUSSION

This paper discussed the preliminary responses of an ongoing survey of saltwater livestock wholesalers in the U.S. The survey emphasized the Florida industry and its role in the national market. Given the survey is ongoing, the following discussion of the use of the results should also be considered preliminary. However, the possible implications for resource management and industry-wide marketing campaigns may provide an example of the importance and need for such information. The market survey found that wholesalers located in Florida had significantly less holding capacity, and were more dependent on marine species (invertebrates in particular) and domestic supplies than wholesalers located in other states. Florida wholesalers were also distinct from firms located in other states in terms of marketing channels. Marine life wholesalers in Florida obtained a relatively large portion of their inventory from full-time collectors employed by the firm and sold the majority of their inventory to other wholesalers. For comparison, the primary source and distribution outlets for wholesalers in other states were other collectors and retailers, respectively. Thus, there are several intermediate wholesale markets for marine aquarium species in the U.S., wholesale firms in Florida are closer to the production end and, therefore, would be expected to handle smaller quantities, fewer species, and receive lower prices for their products. Marine life specimens collected in Florida are considered to be of higher quality in terms of having higher post-transport survival rates, but to most wholesalers the higher cost is not competitive with imports. Firms located in Florida that also collect do not consider imports a threat due to the additional inspection fees charged by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Perhaps the most significant disadvantage cited of Florida species concerns the lack of sufficient and consistent supplies, which are required to adequately support a retail enterprise. Supplies of fish, in particular, have been declining in Florida (at the collection level) as the quality of the environment has deteriorated and the popularity of reef tanks, which require invertebrates, has increased. In particular, the supply of fish has declined as many collectors (in response to the environmental and demand changes) have shifted their efforts away from fish and toward invertebrates. An overall increase in the number and type of regulations affecting the collection industry in Florida has also resulted in a reduction in the number of active collectors, which further exacerbates the supply problem (especially for the more-difficult-to-collect fish). Regardless of firm size and location, the importance of cultured products on the market is expected to continue as both the volume and number of species increases. Consolidation within the industry is also expected to continue with the exception of smaller niche firms promoting eco-friendly products, that is, the promotion of species collected using environmentally sound and sustainable methods

24

S.L. LARKIN AND R.L. DEGNER

(e.g., without cyanide or quinaldine). Lastly, increases in the number and type of regulations facing the collecting sector of the industry is expected to dampen the market and product availability. The wholesale market for marine ornamentals appears to consist of at least three market channels linking the following groups: (1) collectors-to-wholesalers, (2) wholesalers-to-wholesalers, and (3) wholesalers-to-retail. Many wholesalers also reported selling directly to consumers using the Internet via e-commerce websites. The multiple intermediate market levels are characterized by firms of varying size and dependence on marine and imported species. The ongoing market survey revealed that wholesalers believe the market is apt to experience continual changes in product demand, supply, and transaction mechanisms as advances in husbandry and equipment and the ease of information transfer continue to improve. The diversity of firms and continual change in the market for particular species (or types of species such as invertebrates) suggests that static, homogeneous market strategies will be inappropriate. Successful marketing plans will need to be dynamic and market-channel specific in order to be effective. Marketing strategies that attempt to develop a niche market among consumers (for example, by promoting the sustainability of collection and handling practices) hold particular promise. Small wholesalers in particular may benefit from the growth in e-commerce as participants in one of the most popular hobbies turn to the Internet for information, products, and supplies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the referees for their very helpful and constructive comments and the survey respondents for their cooperation and insights. This article was developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program with support from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, Grant No. NA76RG0120.

REFERENCES Antozzi, W.O. (1997) The developing live rock aquaculture industry. SERO-ECON-98-10, National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, FL, 8 pp. Chapman, F.A., Fitz-Coy, S.A., Thunberg, E.M. and Adams, C.M. (1997) United States of America trade in ornamental fish. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 28(1), 1–10. Florida Marine Research Institute (1999) Unpublished data. St. Petersburg, FL. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1999) Declaration 3-177 data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. Office of Law Enforcement, Arlington, VA. Address for correspondence: S. L. Larkin, Department of Food and Resource Economics, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, P.O. Box 110240, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Phone: +1 352-392-1826; Fax: +1 352-392-3646; E-mail: [email protected]