Reform?Ban?limit?.......Get your heads out of the araganite

[blue_hula]

Kylen,

I'll keep sparring as long as I have or can find the evidence.

Glad to provide opportunities for humour but I hope I'm helping highlight the problems associated with the the scale of exploitation as well. That's why I'm so charmingly persistent

Blue Hula

 

[kylen]

BH,

I think what you are doing is great...I'm learning some too. I will overlook the fact that you support "le rouge, bleu et blanc". I guess we all can't be perfect :wink: .

 

[clarionreef]

Blue babe,
You don't need any help at all. Science, experience and common sense are more than adequate to deal with the defenders of the staus quo.
The idea that most fish come from near Manila used to be more true. That is until the circle of life around Manila got compromised and depleted.
Still, a lot of common fish come from there. Especially wrasses, gobies and common butterflyfish. Batangas and Zambales are the nearby areas and they have been pounded for decades.
It is rare to find better fish here and especially top species. Thats why the trade ranges far and futher afield every year in desperate effort to keep up supply...Appari, Bicol, Mindinao, Buhol, Palawan, Real etc.
This nearby low diversity species mix has carried the netcaught movement for many years. However, it has also ruined the marketing of netcaught fish by its common, boring, ho hum variety. These fish are netcaught?? No one cares! One has to go futher and futher away to get fish that raise eyebrows. Then and only then will the netcaught fish be seen as something special.
Even blue damsels come from far away now...and the heat ,ammonia, low oxygen [ HALO] effects take a terrible toll and make this hardiest of fishes and high mortality fish.
I wish these notions were accurate ie. most fish caught nearby, low damage to reefs, trade innocent and all that...but there isn't even a second supporter of them.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

O.K...................... I will go back to the notion that one fish per square kilometer is being collected..............12,000 km2 ........6million fish per year.......equals one fish per day...............Even if only one out of ten fish make it to export...................this would be tewnty fish per square mile!...........Or the same as a few groupers eat ...........ONE trawler in the Philippines collects more fish per day or year then this intire hobby! :roll:

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, What are the top 10 collected species that you are referring to? There were 625 species of aquarium fishes tested and 348 species of food fish tested (assuming no overlap for species found in both trades) for cyanide by the six CDT laboratories (based on analysis of half of the database). The CDT database contains test results on over 48,000 specimens tested from 1993 to 2001.

Peter Rubec

The top ten exported fish in number as by John in this forum....

 

[Kalkbreath]

Blue babe,
You don't need any help at all. Science, experience and common sense are more than adequate to deal with the defenders of the staus quo.
The idea that most fish come from near Manila used to be more true. That is until the circle of life around Manila got compromised and depleted.
Still, a lot of common fish come from there. Especially wrasses, gobies and common butterflyfish. Batangas and Zambales are the nearby areas and they have been pounded for decades.
It is rare to find better fish here and especially top species. Thats why the trade ranges far and futher afield every year in desperate effort to keep up supply...Appari, Bicol, Mindinao, Buhol, Palawan, Real etc.
This nearby low diversity species mix has carried the netcaught movement for many years. However, it has also ruined the marketing of netcaught fish by its common, boring, ho hum variety. These fish are netcaught?? No one cares! One has to go futher and futher away to get fish that raise eyebrows. Then and only then will the netcaught fish be seen as something special.
Even blue damsels come from far away now...and the heat ,ammonia, low oxygen [ HALO] effects take a terrible toll and make this hardiest of fishes and high mortality fish.
I wish these notions were accurate ie. most fish caught nearby, low damage to reefs, trade innocent and all that...but there isn't even a second supporter of them.
Steve

Funny how you keep avoiding my questions...........How many of the top ten collected fish are collected almost exclusivly in the rubble zones and coral rubble? {not directly on the main reefs} I say }and others}80% of the exported fish like damsels cromis clowns mandarins dartfish etc. are not even collected in the main reefs...........so only 1million fish are collected in the reefs themselves...............and second ,is two fish per square mile per day a sustainable rate? given that most of these two fish are damsels?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, In my most recent paper in the book Collection, Culture and Cultivation I presented data summarizing cyanide testing on 12,852 food fish and 7703 aquarium fish specimens. Overall, 44% of the food fish specimens and 25% of the aquarium fish specimens were found to have cyanide present in their tissues. In the family Gobiidae, there were 13 genera representing 30 species of gobies tested (79 specimens tested). 24% of the gobies tested were positive for cyanide. In the case of blennies (family Blenniidae) there were 7 genera representing 11 species tested. Out of 53 specimens tested, 13% were found to have cyanide present. The dragonets (family Callionymidae) which includes the mandarine fish were represented by 2 genera with 6 species. Out of 109 specimens, 23% were found to have cyanide present in their tissues.

I have broken the data down further by species, but this was not presented in the paper because of inadequate sample sizes for species in the above genera.

Peter Rubec

In this testing , did you test any large fish like napoleon wrasses? If almost half of the food fish were testing positive for cyanide........and the total of fish collected as food fish is more then fifty times greater then aquarium collection {and at much higher doses of poison} .What is the mathematical chance that the twenty percent positive rate in aquarium species is mostly due to the by catch from seafood fishermen?............ ie. each aquarium fish has a fifty times greater chance of being juiced by a seafood fishermen then an aquarium collector!{if every fish is being collected with juice} Have you ever come up with a mathematical formula the expresses the percent of fish exposed to cyanide by the food fishing industry and how these fish would end up finding their way into hobby fishermen's nets? If there are so few fish on the reefs in PI ......then does it not make sense that most of these fish are being exposed to seafood collectors fishing presence?

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk,
Just for the point of argument. Blue Hula estimated from the 6 million fish exported that this was equivalent to 350 fish per sq kilometer per year (caught and exported). The Bolinao study found about 500 fish per sq km as the standing stock (what was present on average on the Bolinao coral reef based on underwater visual census). About 70% of the numbers listed in the species list in the McManus report were aquarium fish. Hence, one can estimate the annual mortality rate of aquarium fish taken from the Bolinao coral reef. Guess what? It is close to 100%. The reefs are extremely overexploited. Now, do you get it?

Peter Rubec

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Yes, Napoleon wrasse were tested for cyanide. The figure overall for food fish being positive was 44% not 50%. The figure overall for aquarium fish tested positiv was 25% (not 20%). I agree that the problem with food fish is serious, but so is the problem with the use of cyanide to collect aquarium fish.

One reason the problem with food fish is serious is that many of the species positive for cyanide, are commonly consumed in the Philippines (e.g., they are not solely live food fishes for export like groupers). Considering the numbers of food fishermen (over 700,000) and the volumes harvested (about 170,000 metric tonnes) the food fish collecting is cause for serious concern.

But, you don't have to worry, the reefs are being destroyed by cyanide from both trades (food and aquarium) and the supply of aquarium fishes is markedly reduced. So, if the aquarium trade does not support reform, it will soon collapse (no longer a viable supply of fish from the Phils and Indo). Get it?

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk,
Just for the point of argument. Blue Hula estimated from the 6 million fish exported that this was equivalent to 350 fish per sq kilometer per year (caught and exported). The Bolinao study found about 500 fish per sq km as the standing stock (what was present on average on the Bolinao coral reef based on underwater visual census). About 70% of the numbers listed in the species list in the McManus report were aquarium fish. Hence, one can estimate the annual mortality rate of aquarium fish taken from the Bolinao coral reef. Guess what? It is close to 100%. The reefs are extremely overexploited. Now, do you get it?

Peter Rubec

The 350 fish ,was the number of fish removed per year.............or one a day............Also stop beleiving what you read..........if you actually beleive that there are only 6.25 million fish in 25,000 square kilometers ..........{500 fish per sq km} I cant help you.........{even the Fla Keys have ten times this amount}

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, Yes, Napoleon wrasse were tested for cyanide. The figure overall for food fish being positive was 44% not 50%. The figure overall for aquarium fish tested positiv was 25% (not 20%). I agree that the problem with food fish is serious, but so is the problem with the use of cyanide to collect aquarium fish.

One reason the problem with food fish is serious is that many of the species positive for cyanide, are commonly consumed in the Philippines (e.g., they are not solely live food fishes for export like groupers). Considering the numbers of food fishermen (over 700,000) and the volumes harvested (about 170,000 metric tonnes) the food fish collecting is cause for serious concern.

But, you don't have to worry, the reefs are being destroyed by cyanide from both trades (food and aquarium) and the supply of aquarium fishes is markedly reduced. So, if the aquarium trade does not support reform, it will soon collapse (no longer a viable supply of fish from the Phils and Indo). Get it?

Peter Rubec

Once again I am using your numbers..........If there are so few fish in the Philippines500 per sq.km} and 170 mertic tonns of food fish are being collected each year from the same reefs as aquarium collectors ..........then .......is it not true Mr. Rubic that simple math would show that almost every single fish in PI will, over the course of its life be exposed to food fishermens cyanide?........and would not this intern result in a huge number of aquarium fish catches turning up positive for cyanide exposer...........wether or not those aquariun collectors used juice or not ?{MAC knows this } Is it not a mathematical certainty that at least 25% of any fish in PI would test positive for cyanide exposer........even if collected by YOU............... Yes or NO?

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, I stated "Just for the point of argument".

Extrapolations of fish densities from one reef area (Bolinao) to the whole of the Philippines is not recommended. Even a small miscalculation can lead to a large degree of error in the estimates.

First the estimate of 350 fish per square kilometer may be too high since Blue Hula cut the area from which it was applied. A lower harvest estimate might be in order. For most years the number of boxes was lower than in 1995, so one could probably cut in half the estimated numbers of marine aquarium fishes exported to say 3 million. Densities on the reef differ markedly depending on whether the reefs are heavily degraded as opposed to pristine. In one of my first posts on this thread I stated that the density could be as high as 10,000 on a healthy (non degraded/pristine) coral reef. Reefs in Excellent condition are now less than 5% of the total area (one recent estimate was 3% of the total reef area in the Philippines).

It is recognized that coral reefs occur scattered over sand or coral rubble bottoms. The total reef area determined by remote sensing by ICLARM includes these other habitats like bare sand and seagrass beds within the areas delineated by ICLARM.

The Bolinao reef is heavily degraded with annual yields of about 2.5 metric tonnes per square kilometer per year. At least 60% of Philippine coral reefs are in poor to fair condition. The 500 fish per square kilometer standing stock estimate from the Bolinao reef is most probably fairly typical of the situation in the Philippines. The Florida Keys is undoubtedly in better shape although we may still speak of the Keys as being degraded to some extent.

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, I stated "Just for the point of argument".

Extrapolations of fish densities from one reef area (Bolinao) to the whole of the Philippines is not recommended. Even a small miscalculation can lead to a large degree of error in the estimates.

First the estimate of 350 fish per square kilometer may be too high since Blue Hula cut the area from which it was applied. A lower harvest estimate might be in order. For most years the number of boxes was lower than in 1995, so one could probably cut in half the estimated numbers of marine aquarium fishes exported to say 3 million. Densities on the reef differ markedly depending on whether the reefs are heavily degraded as opposed to pristine. In one of my first posts on this thread I stated that the density could be as high as 10,000 on a healthy (non degraded/pristine) coral reef. Reefs in Excellent condition are now less than 5% of the total area (oEnd Quotene recent estimate was 3% of the total reef area in the Philippin}es).

It is recognized that coral reefs occur scattered over sand or coral rubble bottoms. The total reef area determined by remote sensing by ICLARM includes these other habitats like bare sand and seagrass beds within the areas delineated by ICLARM.

The Bolinao reef is heavily degraded with annual yields of about 2.5 metric tonnes per square kilometer per year. At least 60% of Philippine coral reefs are in poor to fair condition. The 500 fish per square kilometer standing stock estimate from the Bolinao reef is most probably fairly typical of the situation in the Philippines. The Florida Keys is undoubtedly in better shape although we may still speak of the Keys as being degraded to some extent.

Peter Rubec

You kinda lost me ..........Quote.{.The Bolinao reef is heavily degraded with annual yields of about 2.5 metric tonnes per square kilometer per year}...........{The 500 fish per square kilometer standing stock estimate from the Bolinao reef is most probably fairly typical of the situation in the Philippines.}END Quote........Does this mean 500 fish equal 2.5 metric tonns? I think not? OR How manyfish do you have to remove a day , from a standing stock of 500 fish {mostly damsels} to equal 2.5 metric tonns?every 365 days?

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Sorry to have lost you. Most estimates of fisheries harvest (yield) are in terms of weight. I agree it is difficult to equate numbers harvested, numbers observed along transects underwater (standing stock) and fisheries yields in metric tons. Undoubtedly most of the yield pertains to fisheries species caught for human consumption. Lets discuss in future numbers (where these are available) it will be less confusing.

Peter Rubec

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Sorry to have lost you. Most estimates of fisheries harvest (yield) are in terms of weight. I agree it is difficult to equate numbers harvested, numbers observed along transects underwater (standing stock) and fisheries yields in metric tons. Undoubtedly most of the yield pertains to fisheries species caught for human consumption. Lets discuss in future numbers (where these are available) it will be less confusing.

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, Sorry to have lost you. Most estimates of fisheries harvest (yield) are in terms of weight. I agree it is difficult to equate numbers harvested, numbers observed along transects underwater (standing stock) and fisheries yields in metric tons. Undoubtedly most of the yield pertains to fisheries species caught for human consumption. Lets discuss in future numbers (where these are available) it will be less confusing.

Peter Rubec

Will do.........sea what you can dig up! :wink: