Proactive agenda for making it happen

[clarionreef]

Thanks Lee,
The more everyone knows about the next push for training and reform the better. Transparency has to be the new theme. Then, there can be less chance for controlling types, nepotists or other insincere chieftains to make this their own private milking cow.
Video feeds from the field, electronic Democracy, witnesses and monitors, peer review and transparent accounting of training budgets all have to become the norm. If we had this capability before, the issue wouldn't have gotten out of hand and controversial as it has.
MASNA, AMDA and others can and should have their own representatives present at the seminal events if the trade is to be really put on a sustainable track with all the good P.R. that can flow from that. MASNA and Amda are natural allies and can work together sooner than you think.
We'll get back to you!
Steve Robinson
President, AMDA

 

[Jaime Baquero]

It took me a while to decide if I should or I shouldn't respond to S. Robinson's accusations. I though it would be necessary to clarify Robinson non sense as a personal responsibility before the other readers.

Readers could get the wrong impression when they see posts as the ones sent by Steve Robinson.

Ocean Voice International is a serious organization and has never been involved in wrong doing with funds obtained from the Canadian government. Readers could think that OVI and Haribon had projects in the Philippines totalizing millions of dollars as S. Robinson stated. It is absolutley false. OVI/Haribon got from the International Development Research Center (IDRC) and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) modest amounts of money to implement the programs in the Philippines.

The Environment and Sustainable Developmen Program (ESDP) from CIDA allows a maximum of $75,000 a year to implement a project in a developing country at least 61% of the money has to go south. In OVI's case and knowing Don McAllister 80% of the funds went south. OVI/Haribon got funding for three different projects under ESDP.

The projects administrated by OVI had different components, NET TRAINING was only ONE of the components of the projects. The $75,000 were allocated to the different items (components of the project) in the budget as follow.

Environmental Education
Alternative Livelihoods
Organization and Development of Microenterprises
Gender Equity
Net Training
Community organizing
Workshops

To develop all those activities the Southern NGO in our case the Haribon Foundation had to provide the human ressources to implement each one of the activities described in the workplan respecting deadlines.


The Haribon Foundation did a very good job. Interim and final reports as well OVI's visits to our partner and the communities showed the implication of the Haribon Foundation in addressing problems to community level including collectors. They did provided financial reports with invoices for all the expenses registered during the execution of the projects. OVI has to produce every year an AUDIT FINANCIAL REPORT as a requirement from our funding agency in this case the canadian government.

Steve Robinson NOW you have an obligation before the readers. Could you please clarify your statement "MILLIONS SPENT DOZEN TRAINED"
From where did you get the millions? Please elaborate.

You are compromising the integrity of many people here, including Don McAllister and myself. Honesty is something very precious in my personal life.

 

[clarionreef]

Jaime,
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
OVI nor you existed in the timeframe we're speaking of.
Millions have been raised and spent on the issue collectively...without solving the problem or even getting near it. No one said Haribon alone squandered this kind of capital. The groups I mentioned have all had their turn.
I said Haribon was guilty of squandering the money and the issue...not OVI! I said OVI was duped. I spent a lot of time with Dr. Mcallister on this and reporting this and he was no where near as certain as you seem to be as to Haribons innocence.
The paperwork and reports suggests that all was done so well that we have no more issue to worry about... Would that be true! What is it with you guys that claim fantastic successes and can't point to more than self generated paperwork as accomplishments!!
You weren't there and you don't have a clue except for reading the self praise generated by Haribon on this scandal.
And so...today, we're still trying to solve it.
Steve

 

[kylen]

Here is a "self praise" report that was produced in 1997.

http://www.idrc.ca/library/document/089980/

One thing that was made evident, to me anyway, is that net training was only part of the solution and much more work needed to be done in other areas. One concern was the lack of ability to manufacture the appropriate netting in the Philippines. Another interesting recommendation was for CDT at the importer level and subsequent refusal of shipments containing cyanide similar to what Mary supports.

 

[clarionreef]

Dear Kylen,
It was a decade ago and all that survives is the report. If only there were reality to go with it, the problem could be solved by now. Anything as successful as we have heard would have been funded again and again until the problem had been solved. Why terminate such a success?
Answer. Because it wasn't a success. It was a terrible scandal and a blueprint of how not to implement village projects in reality. The report looks "nice" except for the huge percentage of collectors that admittedly WENT BACK TO CYANIDE COLLECTING!!

I blew the whistle on them to the IDRC but could tell it would go nowhere as it would be too embarrassing to them. Funding failure is what many granting agencies do all to often and they too must share the blame.
If only the netcaught fish collectors alledgedly converted, produced netcaught livestock to displace the cyanide trade.
Since the report itself however, mentions the incredible percentage of backsliding that occured [after the netting ran out] and I left] ...it wasn't perhaps even a victory on paper after all.
They didn't even relize how damning the report was in light of the training admitted failures.
NEVER, SHOULD NON AQUARIUM PROFESSIONALS BE ALLOWED TO WASTE AND SQUANDER OUR TRADES CHANCES FOR REFORM WITH THEIR INCOMPETENCE AGAIN!
THANKS AGAIN FOR BRING IT TO LIGHT!
Steve Robinson, EX Field trainer
Haribon netsman project

 

[dizzy]

Jaime, Mike Kirda, latecomers,
Anyone that has joined the Industry board recently may have missed the thread that contained Mr. Howard Latin's letter on the first page. The letter confirms what Steve is saying about Haribon and also is critical of IMA and MAC. It also says that millions were wasted on the cyanide issue. The thread is titled "If you build it they will come won't they." and it should be easy to find.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

NGO's working in the Philippines have researched and provided results and recommendations to solve problems the collection of marine ornamentals has created in the area. The aquarium industry has failed to follow the recommendations.

OVI/Haribon projects didn't include cyanide testing.

I think it wouldn't be productive to continue with this discussion. I want to contribute to solve the problem no to make it worse.



Jaime Baquero
Ocean Voice International

 

[clarionreef]

Morning!
"...results of the monitoring showed that 28% of the trainees monitored were fully converted to net-users while the majority of the trainees persisted in using sodium cyanide..."

and...lots of discussion about the LACK OF NETTING MATERIAL!

Haribon report on their own project...

I have to give them credit. They did acknowledge their own shortcomings as trainers and thats exactly what I said.
Sincerely, Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Reply to Mitch Gibbs,

There are many truths in Howard Latin's posting. He called the MACs programs a "Whitewash" before I called it "Greenwash". On this he is right.

However, I disagree that "millions" of dollars was wasted by Harobon/OVI and IMA on Net-Training. The IMA obtained about $300,000 that it used to train about 1100 collectors from 1997 to 2000. This was obviously not enough (since the job is still unfinished). I support Steve's enthousiasm to do more net training. I just hope that enough funding is obtained from the MAC or other sources to do it.

The IMA now has offices in ten countries and operates in others throughout SE Asia and the S. Pacific. So, what funding it gets is thinly spread over many programs in these countries. It has done more to implement solutions than any other NGO (such as net-training, coral farming, TURFs, cyanide testing, business training for collectors, research, underwater surveys, publications, conferences organized and attended) that benefit the marine aquarium trade and the marine hobby. The hobby and the trade on the other hand are quick to criticize but have provided very little assistance (financial or anything else). Howard Latin's comments and those of Steve Robinson accusing IMA of fraud are false.


Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

People,
For clarification purposes, when I said millions spent, dozens trained collectively...I mean that mathematically.
In the last 20 years, this issue has spawned the formation of a number of "non profit" organizations and projects from existing NGO's to deal with the cyanide problem and bad press generated as a result of it. To name a few, Project Compassion, The Environmental Center of the Philippines, Haribon, The IMA and now MAC.
The infrastructure created specifically on this issue, combined with salaries of people focused on this issue and the project costs relating to this issue exceed several million dollars already.
To show for what??? Well, I'm holding two very limited stock reports of the the two certified, net trained export outfits in the Philippines and its clear that the money wasn't spent very well at all. Very little progress was made compared to the sheer amount of money spent. From a business point of view, everyone involved needs to resign or should be fired .
The paltry amount and limited variety of netcaught fish available after all these years and all these years budgets is a scandal.
Costs per diver actually reformed and using nets comes a staggering figure.
Or is the work not quite done yet? Does it need still more time and money?
How do you simultaneously fail to convert divers year after year and plead for more grant money with a straight face??
The professional trade in eco-related, organizations needs to hire out professional expertise instead of trying to wing it from old paperwork in order to save money. Then again, professionals resign when witnessing too much monkey business and incompetent management .
Millions gained, dozens trained...yes, thats about right. Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Steve Robinson,

You don't know what you are talking about. You were not there. When you left the Philippines the world didn't stop turning. You do not know the work that was done at community level. The approach to tackle an environmental problem as is the use of cyanide in the Philippines needs to be holistic. Probably you do not understand that because of you background.
Instead of blaming people from the NGO community that worked hard and produced results blame the ones from the industry who didn't respond to the calls for help.

Now, I see why people said that you are a very controversial and problematic person. I do not think your approach is going to help solving the problem.

Is AMDA endorsing all the things you are saying here?

 

[clarionreef]

Jaime,
If you have another way of measuring success in village trainings I'm all ears.
Filipinos depending upon netcaught fish are in danger of going out of business because of the lack of productivity from the efforts I mentioned.
They need netcaught fish to survive and make remain responsible business people. The glaring lack of product despite such an amazing amount of alledged field training is tragic.
But then again, its right there in the Haribons own report. ....
"28.98% of the trainees monitored were fully converted to net-users..."
Lets see, that means 71.02 divers remained using cyanide!
Enough said, case closed!
If thats a successful effort, I'd hate to see what you call a failure.
Haribon refused to pay for or secure netting despite plea after plea and despite the fact that money was in the budget for it. This effectively ruined the program....Haribon had other debts and misspent the funds provided...but you were not there and wouldn't know.
You were innocent and not involved. I relize that.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Steve,

1) Yes, it is true that many collectors went back to cyanide. Why that happened?

Two major reasons:

A)Middlemen/women and exporters didn't increase prices for net caught fis. Collectors were getting the same money for the extra effort.

B)Cyanide pushers controlling the market were and are clear "You (fisherfolk) buy my cyanide I buy your fish.


2) After the netsman project Haribon and OVI had other projects:

A) Environmental Education and Sustainable Livelihood
B) Eco-Marketing and Fair Trade for Aquarium Fish Collectors

Trainings by qualified trainers among them Meme Purgatorio were a component of the projects.( but no the most important) We had many collectors complaining because they didn't see any benefit by using nets.

Environmental education to community level and community organization were the key components of the programs. As a result fisherfolks and their families knew important facts about coral reefs, their importance to local and global leves.

Members of the communities involved created microenterprise as alternative livelihoods.

Fisherfolks created santuaries close to their communities where fishing is not allowed. This is a big success from the environmental point of view. Don't you think?

Fisherfolks from different communities, part of the project, got organized. The most important result of those projects was the creation of the Federation of Fish Collectors of the Philippines. Only fisherfolks that had followed the net training course were part of the Federation. The formation of a Federation reffered as PMP aquarium multi-purpose cooperative was a necessary step to affecting desired changes in the aquarium fish trade. The PMP is a group of aquarium fish collectors committed to reform the industry through adherence to net use and proper fish handling. The concept of Eco-marketing and fair Trade was introduced to enable PMP gain a market edge. It was conceived both as a marketing strategy and educational tool to make the consumers aware of a supplier - base that adhered to and provided premium on the sustainable use and preservation of the natural resources.

The PMP program was a pilot project. If you are intersted in knowing more about it please go to the library of reefs.org and you will find a document about PMP. (February 1999)

Why it didn't work. Almost because of the same reasons Marivi is facing.
You'll find the reasons in the document I mentioned above.

All the PMP members are still collecting fish with nets, the Haribon/OVI project made them realize about the importance of using environmentally friendly methods to collect ornamental fish. They learnt how to get organized. The PMP fisherfolks are today named MAC CERTIFIED COLLECTORS. Isn't it a good success?

Haribon/OVI didn't have plans to train all collectors in the Philippines.

Steve, our work after the netsman project had a holistic approach.

The net use training brought us closer to the systemic problem in the aquarium fish trade. These, however, achieved minimal impacts as problems on cheap price of fishes took the front seat and is responsible in the whole gamut of issues and problems in the industry. This is one of the reasons that dragged many trained collectors back to the clutches of cyanide.

As far as I know the problems in the Philippines were identified back in 1984. The industry as a whole knows it since then, but has failed to deal with it.

Net training was only a part of Haribon/OVI programs, our approach has been holistic. Holistic approach is the only way out.

 

[clarionreef]

Hello all,
The question of holding out for higher prices for net caught fish has been long based on the assumption that net collecting is more difficult than cyanide collecting.
This has predictably raised expectations among the new netsman and has caused a lot of grief when the higher reward was not delivered.
There was little chance of the conventional exporters accepting economic justice for the divers as the game has always been based on poverty and injustice from the beginning.
I agree that the divers deserve more...however...
I never let divers think that they should convert to nets for more money...never. That would ruin the original incentive and would forment the wrong rebellion at the wrong time.
I trained hundreds of divers and dozens of them now work around the world for more money . They were trained with the following incentives:
1] Stop losing money to the cost of cyanide.
2] Stop losing money with large DOAS and rejects due to cyanide and bad handling.
3] Stop losing money to bribe corrupt fishery officials and police.
4] Stop losing money to higher gasoline costs as cyanide fishing drove them futher and futher afield.
5] Stop losing money from accidents and death from diving deeper and deeper.
6] Stop losing money from inefficient cyanide collecting. Good netsmanship always out collects dopers.

Having worked in villages my whole professional life, I knew only too well the trouble caused by PROMISING THINGS YOU CANNOT DELIVER.. to poor people.
If you had an agreement BEFORE hand that the exporters would cooperate then yes, it could work. However, since when did the PTFEA [philippine tropical fish exporters assn.] ever show any social, cultural or environmental intelligence?
In Polilio Island where we counted 40 diving deaths in the previous 5 years [from catching the trades baby clown triggers], not once were flowers even sent to the divers funeral or a small stipend to the widow. Knowing what kind of people these were, I knew that pitching better prices for net caught fish would doom our progress.
Only recently, the failure to deliver on the promise of higher prices for MAC fish has driven divers to revolt, to strike and the head trainer to resign. Thats why MAC has been in serious meetings all week over there.



Pegging the success of net training to higher prices insured failure in the marketplace and in the business community. Besides...you can catch more fish without cyanide and this is something every commercial collector in Australia, the South Pacific, Sri Lanka, Mexico and Hawaii already knows.
Its not even debateable...except among non-commercial people who simply can't imagine how it could be true.
Poor training and without the basic and inexpensive netting material insures that cyanide is preferred. Hence the argument that you have to pay more for more work and difficulty. No...not so. Netsman can kick cyaniders butts and we proved it in the village of Bolinao, Pangasinan in the early days. Our boys, led by Mie Mie, the one you spoke of, challenged the village cyaniders to a contest... and out of fear of certain defeat, they declined. This event alone won us critical respect in the early days and brought over more trainees from the ranks of the cyaniders to join us.
This and much more potential achievement was lost as trainings got environmentalized and rendered into grant milking machines...too bad. We could 've trained a thousand or more each year and be done with this thing long ago...if only allowed to.
Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

We NEVER promised to collectors more money from using nets. The first goal was to stop the cyanide use, collectors were though that how they catch fish today may affect wheteher their children will catch fish tomorrow. Better quality fish and low mortality rates are the aspects that should motivate the industry to reward collectors' efforts. Less cyanide means that the industry could have better fish farms (coral reefs) from where collect fish in the future.

All the incentives that you mentioned (1 to 6) were explained to collectors, we do call them "Reasons to avoid cyanide" Protection of the environment was top on the list.

I just want to add a brief note to my previous message. Since cyanide is not the only factor responsible for coral reef degradation, our projects targeted a broader audience. OVI/Haribon produced a manual "Save Our Coral Reefs". This manual was publiseh in English and Tagalog for the Philippines. This educational conservation manual provides aguide to the benefits of the healthy coral reefs in the seas of southeast Asia around the Philippines. Written with few technical terms it uses numerous illustrations to help carry its message.. Many of the messages in the manual apply to other regions with coral reefs around the world where coral reef conservation information is needed.

The production of this manual has been a tremendous success to the point that we got response from different organization around the world to produce a version for their own countries. There is an Indonesian version ready to be published, also the English and Spanish versions of the Manua "Save Our Coral Reefs" for the Caribbean region is ready to be published

Steve, do you have a copy of it? you should have one. It would be a good help.

Haribon/OVI also produce a video, a good one! "Divers Say No to Cyanide" it has been a good educational tool for people from the industry who are far away from the problem. If someone needsone let me know. Steve, Do you have one?

Jaime

 

[DBM]

Jaime,

Kind of off topic here but I don't know if things had changed, but I'll tell you why I didn't deal with the PMP; because of the horrible DOA rate. When I enquired about doing business with the PMP years back, the DOA rate was obscene. Tim at Seacare in Vancouver, who frequents this board may have dealt with them in the past, maybe he can let us know what the DOA rate was like.
Marivi's having a tough go of things because of the lack of certain fish ie. blue tangs, clown triggers etc. not because of DOA's. Do you think the high DOA rate might have something to do with the failure of the PMP? I'm curious, do you know what the average DOA rate was when the PMP closed their doors?

Doug

 

[clarionreef]

Hello,
The development of good socio-economic theory is important practice...but it is the tempering it with village experience can make it useful. There is a tendency among many idealists, to offer the purity of ideas as an accomplishment instead of the doable, viable, implementable stuff.
The PMP was a perfect example. Economic justice, cut out the middleman etc. etc. Mie Mie, my best and favorite trainer was miscast in this effort and of course it was a failure...predictably so.
I am so little impressed with outlines, position papers and bureaucratic eco speak. All that stuff is easy to produce, but not with a straight face. The challenge is in the successful implementation of the program in another land where the city based elite is usually more out of touch with field reality than the foreigners!
The worth of any program is in its implementation and this means its not an acceptable excuse to blame it on the bad guys forever.
Sure the exporters wouldn't support the good reform notions. Of course they abuse, manipulate and cheat the divers. Naturally they're going to hell ...but what else is new? They've always been that way and blaming them is like blaming a rattlesnake for being poisonous.
This thing can be won with reference to what villagers teach us, ie. what works on them, what they respond to, what they will go for, what they want and what is in their capability to deliver. We must become field heavy and Manila light... village based and less city based. The city people on this thing have filtered the heart and soul out of it, the money out of it and rendered it more theoretical than practical.
Manila people need to learn more about and care more about fisherman before they pretend to speak for them and represent solutions for them. That is a lot to ask because most city folk spent their lives trying to distance themselves from poverty...not go back and immerse themselves in it. This kind of work is not for everybody and frankly I met few Filipinos in Manila that have a passion for it.
They exist...we need to find them.
Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Hi Doug,

Yes, PMP did have mortality problems with some of their shipments. It happens in this kind of business. I monitored a shipment to Critter Jungle in Ottawa, the carrier was Northwest, someone in Chicago forgot to transfer the boxes to the connection flight. The fish arrived to Montreal the day after. It was winter time and the DOA was over 80%. The same situation happened with shipments to Europe. Who's fault was it? If you are an importer you know what I am talking about. Right Steve? Also, I did witness some of the shipments to Aquarium Sevices in Toronto. DOA was low <7%. We were in close contact with this importer to follow up mortalities after arrival. It was not bad. Some fish developed parasites but Christ Whitelaw's good husbandry practices solved the problem.

Only one trial shipment is not good enough to evaluate the performance of a supplier.

I think you exagerate things when you said that DOA was obscene and horrible. The benefit of the doubt is important here. Doug, since you did not deal with PMP I am affraid you can not say a word about them.

One of the major problems PMP had was the variety of fish in their stock list .

You are right , this is kind of off topic. It is not the time to be talking about something that doesn't not exist. It is a shame you didn't help with trial shipments when you could.

jaime

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Hello...Steve,

My purpose is not to impress you . I wanted to educate you about some important aspects of development. I was thinking about elaborating a bit more to a higher level, to the development level, but according to your comments to Hello I see that it is better no to waste my time. Your intentions are destructive.

Frankly, Steve I didn't know you were like this. I am very disappointed.

As the president of AMDA you must be carefull. You can not treat people of criminals as you are treating the exporters in the Philippines. You have been treating NGO's of thieves. I suppose your records are 300% straight. Right? You are making things worse. I know some AMDA members that must be very mad.

AMDA members who can control the president? 8O Hurry !

 

[Fredfish]

Fascinating post.

I must agree with Steve. Success is measured in the desired results.

In this case the desired results are a sustainable net caught supply chain leading to greater availability of net caught fish in respective markets (the US being the largest.

From what I read here, there is no sustainable supply chain. I do not believe that there is an increased supply of net caught fish here in North America, even if some claim there is.

Off hand, I would say that state side captive breeding has been more of a success. I see captive raised clowns, some gobies and clowns in my local store regularly, but not a single net caught fish!

It would seem to me that you need some point of leverage at each point in the supply chain in order to be successful. Starting with the weakest link in the chain - the fisherfolk - seems like a tough way to go at it unless you can convert a majority.

What if North America were to approach this the way California did automotive exsaust emissions?

eg: by 2004 you need to supply xx% of your fish net caught, by 2006 yy% etc. Of course you need a reliable method of testing compliance and a good stick (like banning importation from a non compliant country).

We as hobbyists could be a strong leverage point, but as someone else pointed out, we're cheap SOBs.

Perhaps another leverage point is to ban one or two species that are successfully captive bread here in North America as a shot across the bow.

No matter what we do, I believe that in the long term, in order to succeed in protecting reefs, we hobbyists will have to pay more for our livestock.

just my $ .02 worth ($ .0152 CDN)

Fred.