Anyone have an update about EASI?

[PeterIMA]

The are other alternatives than what Naesco has suggested.

Peter Rubec
a small "r" reformist

 

[PeterIMA]

PS-If you know how to do it "right" its EASI

 

[naesco]

Vitz
Thank you for your interest, and comments on my recent post. As the post was addressed to Ferdinand, I want to address some of the points you raised after Ferdinand has had an opportunity to consider my posting and replies to the post.

 

[Anonymous]

The US industry and the US government has done nothing to stop the import of cyanide caught fish into the US.
Likewise the Philippine industry and government have done nothing either.

Why do you think this is? Do they just not know the facts, or do they not care? I'm really curious as to why you think the hobby has existed for so long with the same bad stuff going on, even though it's a fairly well known occurence.

Phillipino environmentalist and students need to publically demonstrate to force their govenment to impose export bans until such time as proper training, and a CDT is in place.

Wouldn't that be just as difficult as imposing a CDT test in the Phillipines?

Once a ban is imposed by the Philippine government, our own governments should ensure that funds are available for training and CDT testing.

What reason would our government have for doing this? Is that a legitimate role of the government? Do you think that *all* taxpayers in the entire US want to pay for this?

IMO, unless the export/import
of fishis immediately halted, nothing will happen, and the Philippines will continue to be raped of this resource.

Well at least the price of fishsticks will be lower.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Why worry?
MAC is on the job!~
They've only had about 7 years, give em a break.
Lolita, the L.A. importers, MAC all have the best of intentions do they not?
Steve

The truth is that your comments and attacks didn't, do not and won't help. I must say that if Ferdinand wants to achieve positive results, he has to dissociate EASI and himself of individuals as Steve Robinson otherwise the status quo will prevail. I do not think large exporters in the Philippines will support EASI initiatives if they know there is any association or link between EASI and S. Robinson.

 

[dizzy]

I think we should start a petition to ask the Canadian government to stop allowing greedy land developers in Vancouver, to turn pristine wilderness into housing subdivisions. The rest of Canada will be happy to take care of their needs once they're out of work. :wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

Some quick comments.

It is not true to state that the U.S. government has done nothing about these problems. It was the U.S. government (Clinton Administration) that created the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force. Implementing CDT in the USA is possible, but difficult. Hobbyists have to demand it from congress. So far, hobbyists don't seem to mind being ripped off and having cyanide-caught fish die in their aquaria.

A lot of the funding for IMA's programs and that of the MAC, WWF, and TNC has come from USAID (which is part of the US government). Notable programs are the USAID funding program called East Asian Pacific Environmental Initiative (EAPEI). Go to the EAPEI website. It lists the funding amounts that each organization received over the past 5 years, and provides reports for various projects.

It also in not true to state that the Philippine goverment has done nothing about CDT. Who do you think funded the CDT labs (six) run by IMA for the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)? Perhaps Naesco should state that recent efforts of BFAR running CDT need "improvement". But, they are still running 3 CDT laboratories (at least one is actually doing testing that I know about).

 

[naesco]

Some quick comments.

It is not true to state that the U.S. government has done nothing about these problems. It was the U.S. government (Clinton Administration) that created the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force. Implementing CDT in the USA is possible, but difficult. Hobbyists have to demand it from congress. So far, hobbyists don't seem to mind being ripped off and having cyanide-caught fish die in their aquaria.

A lot of the funding for IMA's programs and that of the MAC, WWF, and TNC has come from USAID (which is part of the US government). Notable programs are the USAID funding program called East Asian Pacific Environmental Initiative (EAPEI). Go to the EAPEI website. It lists the funding amounts that each organization received over the past 5 years, and provides reports for various projects.

It also in not true to state that the Philippine goverment has done nothing about CDT. Who do you think funded the CDT labs (six) run by IMA for the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)? Perhaps Naesco should state that recent efforts of BFAR running CDT need "improvement". But, they are still running 3 CDT laboratories (at least one is actually doing testing that I know about).

I accept your comments fully
Dr. Rubec and did not mean to say that nothing has been done.
Efforts both in the US and the Philippines both by govenments, NGOs and individuals have attempted to change the cyanide dependency.
What I meant to say is they have failed to stop the use of cyanide and we can no longer depend on governments or industry to do anything.I have come to the conclusion that a ban on the export of fish from the Philippines is necessary.
We can certainly build on what has already been done, utilize the facilities and the people there and the expertise in CDT and training here and there.
But, we are kidding ourselves if we think we can accomplish anything further without a mandatory CDT in place.
The only way industry both in the Philippines and the US will agree will be if it is forced upon them.

 

[clarionreef]

JAIME,
Your dire assesment of the lack of commitment and sincerity of the industrys stakeholders, the exporters and the Philippine government suggests that you have given up on them. You said that the majority of them don't even care.
So when I agree with you...you say that EASI must somehow work with the 'larger exporters'... to have a chance????'
What kind of flippity flop nonsense is that?
Do you really think that the exporters must be placated and wooed in order to be successful? Do you think that Ferdie and Dante are the kinds that will kiss up to their agenda and 'be nice to them' as you did in your little stint over there?
Comon now. Not everyone thinks that one can only win by pandering and selling out ones convictions.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

The way I see it, both Jaime and Steve are partly right. Twenty years of trying to reason with Filipino and Indonesian exporters to reform and support net-training have failed. The CDT run by IMA was effective, but was undermined by these same business interests (in the Philippines).

Time is running out, but I believe that by working together the reformists (not REEFORM) can make a difference. The pieces are there, we just need to work together. I am talking about an alliance of private companies and NGOs working together to implement net-training in both PI and Indo, ensuring equitable compensation to the collectors, reducing mortality through the chain-of-custody with the business partners, and documenting that net-caught fish can compete against the cyanide cartels. Basically, this is a business model. I believe it can be done, and will be done in the coming year.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

JAIME,
Your dire assesment of the lack of commitment and sincerity of the industrys stakeholders, the exporters and the Philippine government suggests that you have given up on them. You said that the majority of them don't even care.
So when I agree with you...you say that EASI must somehow work with the 'larger exporters'... to have a chance????'
What kind of flippity flop nonsense is that?
Do you really think that the exporters must be placated and wooed in order to be successful? Do you think that Ferdie and Dante are the kinds that will kiss up to their agenda and 'be nice to them' as you did in your little stint over there?
Comon now. Not everyone thinks that one can only win by pandering and selling out ones convictions.
Steve

steve,

It is true that the mojority of exporters in the Philippines do not care. It is true that the majority of exporters in Indonesia do not care. It is true that the majority of importers, retailers and hobbyists in the US and Canada do not care.

I said, that for some, Ferdinand and EASI, seem to be the last chance the trade has. They, Ferdinand and EASI, have their ideas and plans, which are different to the plans others had. Ferdinand, seems to me is an individual with carism and associating skills which are very good features.

What I said, is that Ferdinand, in order to achieve positive results and get more support from other exporters in the Philippines, MUST dissociate himself and EASI from individuals like Steve Robinson who are controversial and that with comments and attacks, directed to exporters in the Philippines, have promoted dissociation in the last years.

During my time in the Philippines, my little stint as you called, I did productive things, among one of them, I met many members of the PTFEA and worked together to improve things. One thing I did, for sure, was to associate.

You can not imagine the damage you have done with all your arrogance, disrespect and lack of savoir faire. It is a real shame because you WERE someone who KNEW what you WERE talking about.

 

[clarionreef]

Jaime,
Thank you for confirming that the cyanide trades primary figures in Manila and I do not see eye to eye.
Perhaps you have no problems dealing with such people, but I do.
To pander to them and then claim to represent the fisherman may seem natural to you but it doesn't to me.
I mean you hate what they do and at the same time claim to get along with them. Are you...er were you working undercover or something?
Thankfully control of the countrys resources is slipping back to Filipinos and away from your favored ones.
What did you do with the access you had with these fine people ?
Did you plead for justice for fisherman?
Did they want to share the peso devaluation with them?
Did they want to stop their middlemen from distributing cyanide to the divers?
Did they agree to stop fronting money to buy it?
Did they help import the missing netting that Haribon claimed anchored their failure?
How did this good will with the exporters manifest itself?
Results? Anything come of it besides buying you dinner and a smidget of validation as a 'player'?
Tell me you at least got a free dinner out of it all.
If its true, that the cyanide trade hates me...would you please tell more people?
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

I think that a ban might not be such a bad thing. It might bring all stakeholders to the table on the issues in the P.I., once and for all.

The CITES export ban of live rock from Fiji got near immediate action/reaction from their Parliament and Industry less than a year ago.

http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=39656

It is agreed that the issues in the P.I. are far more complex than the simple paperwork isses faced by Fiji; but what dynamic other than an outright ban could bring Govenment, Industry, NGO's and Hobbyists together in the P.I.?

-Lee

 

[MaryHM]

As you stated, the issue with CITES in Fiji was about a zillion fold less complicated than what we're dealing with in the Philippines. First of all, Fiji was in clear violation of a CITES mandate. Very definitive. How would one go about banning PI fish? It's so much more complicated. Here are a few things to consider:

1. Not all PI fish are cyanide caught. Why ban the good with the bad?
2. Why just focus on PI when it is widely thought that the problem in Indonesia is worse?
3. On what basis would a ban take place? Obviously cyanide use. However, without reliable, consistent testing and monitoring how do you prove it's happening right now?
4. Who implements the ban? The Philippine government? The US government? The governments of every single marine ornamental importing country?
5. Once the ban is in place, what would be the criteria for lifting it?
6. What would be banned? Fish only, or inverts and corals as well?
7. It's a fact that this industry revolves around the Philippines and Indonesia. What if it took (conservatively) 3 years to meet the criteria to lift the ban? What would happen to the industry in that time frame?

Just some food for thought. It's easy to say "ban, ban, ban", but the logistics are much more complicated.

 

[Anonymous]

I've seen those arguments before, and understand the concerns posed. However, unless there is a serious financial challenge to the status quo it appears that things in the Philippines, Indonesia and other problem nations aren't going to change. I can only think of two ways to create that type of financial challenge 1) tough law enforcement (fines/jail time), and 2) some type of ban. If the countries of collection refuse to enforce the rule of law then some sort of international ban is about the only thing left. I don't like the thought of government involvement; it's like opening Pandora's Box. Once opened who knows what will happen? Then again, we all know what will happen if things don't change.

On another note, how much do the truly ethical importers rely on P.I. and Indo. fish anyway? I get the feeling that the most ethical importers and retailers tend to get their livestock from other locations.

 

[Anonymous]

Question:

So you "ban" the Filipinos from exporting/collecting MO, what do you think they'll do?

Question:

How's banning MO tackle the greater problem of destructive food fishing (which BTW is all ready banned)?

Question:

So you ban both MO and food fishing exporting, what about all the long boats? Oh, they're "banned" as well, even shot at by the PI navy, but they still continue. Don't they know they're banned?

One small point, cyanide fishing is banned all ready, so is cocaine, crack and speed. Shows what a "ban" can do, huh?

This global ban, now thats a pipe dream. Hasn't worked yet, whaling jumps right into my mind. Most the world say's shooting whales is wrong, even Japan agrees, but Japan needs whales for "scientific research" so they contunue to whale (they even asked for a larger quota). The wild part is, that "scientific research" ends up in cans on the shelf of most Japanesse supermarkets.

Once you ban MO exports, you bring no one to the table, you burn the table. The "threat" of banning the trade MIGHT bring a few to the table, but only those who don't know how their own government works.

 

[Anonymous]

The only thing that needs to be banned, is hobbyists calling for a ban for PI to stop MO exports.


BTW, Canada has added to the reform movement as well, CIDA comes to mind. I'll let you all figure them out.

 

[Anonymous]

On another note, how much do the truly ethical importers rely on P.I. and Indo. fish anyway?

You mean you don't know this industry inside and out? I got the feeling you had the answers all ready hence your call for an outright ban of PI MO exports. PI makes this industry, you think people make a living selling ORA clowns, Tongan anthias or Fiji firefish? The last one was an inside joke (inside the industry joke) as other countries may have firefish, but they don't have many at all. When they catch firesifh in Fiji, they feel they've caught something really special. What do you think they'll charge for this special Fiji Firefish?

 

[Anonymous]

Wow, Gresham! You proved it to me, we should repeal all laws!

What do you think will fix the problem fisheries? Sending money to exporters and importers so they can go "vertical"?

 

[naesco]

As you stated, the issue with CITES in Fiji was about a zillion fold less complicated than what we're dealing with in the Philippines. First of all, Fiji was in clear violation of a CITES mandate. Very definitive. How would one go about banning PI fish? It's so much more complicated. Here are a few things to consider:

1. Not all PI fish are cyanide caught. Why ban the good with the bad?
2. Why just focus on PI when it is widely thought that the problem in Indonesia is worse?
3. On what basis would a ban take place? Obviously cyanide use. However, without reliable, consistent testing and monitoring how do you prove it's happening right now?
4. Who implements the ban? The Philippine government? The US government? The governments of every single marine ornamental importing country?
5. Once the ban is in place, what would be the criteria for lifting it?
6. What would be banned? Fish only, or inverts and corals as well?
7. It's a fact that this industry revolves around the Philippines and Indonesia. What if it took (conservatively) 3 years to meet the criteria to lift the ban? What would happen to the industry in that time frame?

Just some food for thought. It's easy to say "ban, ban, ban", but the logistics are much more complicated.

Details Details it doesn't really matter. Cyanide kills the fish and kills the reef and everything that dwells in it and its use must stop now.

What matter is that the Philippines government under pressure from their own citizens be the ones to initiate the export ban.

The Philippine government would need to establish a government commission that would do the following.
1. Establish and fund laboratories and training in CDT.
2. Establish sustainable areas and determine type and limits of fish available.
3. Determine a fair price payable to the fishers that take into consideration that it is their resource and that their occupation is dangerous.
4. License Philippine companies in the trade and have them post bonds to secure the terms of their license (prohibition of the use of cyanide and other destructive means and breach of limits for example)
5. Determine the funding necessary to repair the damage already done and establish an export surcharge which would be used for this purpose.
6. Determine a timeline for the reintroduction of clean Philippine fish into the international market. (likely two years).

In the meantime, international agencies would fund most of the above together with monies to assist fishers in the interim economic change.

You are correct that the situation is the same in Indonesia and therefore that country would be encouraged to intitute a ban as well for the same reasons.

As to your question as to what would happen to industry in the meantime.
The answer is US industry has had more than enough time to clean up their act and they have neglected to do so.
They have ignored the warning signs that the writing was on the wall and chose profit and greed instead, at the expense of the Philippine people and their marine resources.
Industry is responsible for their own lack of action.
What is vital here, which industry refuses to understand, is that every day in every way they are responsible for the destruction of the reefs in both the Philippines and Indonesia from the use of cyanide.
Silly questions like how do know or prove that cyanide is happening don't merit a reply. Sorry.