We all fall down....

[Kalkbreath]

Naesco, can you or anyone else that feels the time has come to end all collection of ornamentals.........can you list any damage that fish or coral collection has inflicted on the following islands....... 1.] the Solomon Islands 2.]THE KINDOM OF TONGA.......... 3.] SRI LANKA 4.] FiJi 5.] Phonape 6.] Vanuatu 7.]Kupang 8.] Timor 9.] The Red Sea 10.] Dominican Republic... 11.] Haiti 12.] Hawaii 13]Florida Keys 14.] East Africa 15.]Austraila .................................There are only two countries in which this industry collects coral and or fish , that has been documented to have had an ill effect on the health of their reefs. The fact that within each of these two countries {The Philippines and Indonesia} there are also a great many other industries inflicting even greater damage........makes determining the extent of our pet industries impact quite difficult. How ever lets assume that the collectors and exporters of these two counties HAVE collected fish and coral in a manor which has harmed the reefs. Would it be fare to punish the other fifteen collecting countries BECAUSE OF THE COLLECTION ETHICS OF ANOTHER NATION? That would be like punishing Canada for something that India was doing? What sense would that make? Micro soft is the biggest chip maker around. Just because MS has been convicted of illegal conduct .........does not make it right to punish the twenty or so smaller Computer chip makes? This idea that All collection must stop because a small portion of collectors in PI and INDO are mis behaiving{25% last count} is about as fare as demanding that All farmed timber exports stop in CANADA......because Peru is cutting down old growth rain Forrest lands ............please explain yourself.

 

[naesco]

Naesco, can you or anyone else that feels the time has come to end all collection of ornamentals.........can you list any damage that fish or coral collection has inflicted on the following islands....... 1.] the Solomon Islands 2.]THE KINDOM OF TONGA.......... 3.] SRI LANKA 4.] FiJi 5.] Phonape 6.] Vanuatu 7.]Kupang 8.] Timor 9.] The Red Sea 10.] Dominican Republic... 11.] Haiti 12.] Hawaii 13]Florida Keys 14.] East Africa 15.]Austraila .................................There are only two countries in which this industry collects coral and or fish , that has been documented to have had an ill effect on the health of their reefs. The fact that within each of these two countries {The Philippines and Indonesia} there are also a great many other industries inflicting even greater damage........makes determining the extent of our pet industries impact quite difficult. How ever lets assume that the collectors and exporters of these two counties HAVE collected fish and coral in a manor which has harmed the reefs. Would it be fare to punish the other fifteen collecting countries BECAUSE OF THE COLLECTION ETHICS OF ANOTHER NATION? That would be like punishing Canada for something that India was doing? What sense would that make? Micro soft is the biggest chip maker around. Just because MS has been convicted of illegal conduct .........does not make it right to punish the twenty or so smaller Computer chip makes? This idea that All collection must stop because a small portion of collectors in PI and INDO are mis behaiving{25% last count} is about as fare as demanding that All farmed timber exports stop in CANADA......because Peru is cutting down old growth rain Forrest lands ............please explain yourself.

Do you admit that both Indonesia and the Philippines are guilty of using cyanide in their reefs to harvest fish for export to the US and others?

 

[Anonymous]

Yah Kalk, do you LOL I can see where this is gonna go.

Nice answer neasco. Answer yet another question with another question, your on par

 

[naesco]

Yah Kalk, do you LOL I can see where this is gonna go.

Nice answer neasco. Answer yet another question with another question, your on par

That is right. Step by step.
My bet is he falls on the first step.

 

[Anonymous]

Thats not taking a step forward in the discussion wayne, its a step backwords. You never answer anyones questions with a clear answer, you ALWAYS fall back on your asking another question as your answer. Can you just answer a question posed to you with a clear and consise answer for once? No need to reply, I won't answer your rebuttle question answer.

 

[PeterIMA]

Hey, Kalk forgot to list the other countries using cyanide like Vietnam, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea. He never had much of a grip on the truth.

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

Peter and Naesco ...........the point is that if one country out of the bunch is guilty of a certain crime {or more then one} the other Nations should not bare the punishment. Should Canada be banned from exporting timber? Simply because a minority of timber exporters in Indonesia have been caught cutting down old growth forrest? Lets ban timber!

 

[kylen]

Hey Kalk...never mind cutting old growth timber in Indo...it's still happening up here. Try another analogy.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Hey Kalk...never mind cutting old growth timber in Indo...it's still happening up here. Try another analogy.

Okay but what is it exactly that you Canadians value as an export? Other the cutting down your trees .......what is it that Canada exports world wide other then its citizens and lumber? I know, how this analogy..........because Mexico has abused its immigration control into the US ..........would it be fair if we also put a fence across our northern boarder to stop the inflow of Canada's second largest export.......its Citizens! :wink:

 

[naesco]

Do you admit that both Indonesia and the Philippines are guilty of using cyanide in their reefs to harvest fish for export to the US and others?

Kalk as this is your thread would you kindly answer the above question. Thank you.

Wayne

 

[Anonymous]

Dear Wayne,
Kalk asked you a question as the the first post of this thread. Why don't you answer his 1st question first. Thank you.

Naesco, can you or anyone else that feels the time has come to end all collection of ornamentals.........can you list any damage that fish or coral collection has inflicted on the following islands....... 1.] the Solomon Islands 2.]THE KINDOM OF TONGA.......... 3.] SRI LANKA 4.] FiJi 5.] Phonape 6.] Vanuatu 7.]Kupang 8.] Timor 9.] The Red Sea 10.] Dominican Republic... 11.] Haiti 12.] Hawaii 13]Florida Keys 14.] East Africa 15.]Austraila .................................There are only two countries in which this industry collects coral and or fish , that has been documented to have had an ill effect on the health of their reefs. The fact that within each of these two countries {The Philippines and Indonesia} there are also a great many other industries inflicting even greater damage........makes determining the extent of our pet industries impact quite difficult. How ever lets assume that the collectors and exporters of these two counties HAVE collected fish and coral in a manor which has harmed the reefs. Would it be fare to punish the other fifteen collecting countries BECAUSE OF THE COLLECTION ETHICS OF ANOTHER NATION? That would be like punishing Canada for something that India was doing? What sense would that make? Micro soft is the biggest chip maker around. Just because MS has been convicted of illegal conduct .........does not make it right to punish the twenty or so smaller Computer chip makes? This idea that All collection must stop because a small portion of collectors in PI and INDO are mis behaiving{25% last count} is about as fare as demanding that All farmed timber exports stop in CANADA......because Peru is cutting down old growth rain Forrest lands ............please explain yourself.

 

[naesco]

Dear Wayne,
Kalk asked you a question as the the first post of this thread. Why don't you answer his 1st question first. Thank you.

Naesco, can you or anyone else that feels the time has come to end all collection of ornamentals.........can you list any damage that fish or coral collection has inflicted on the following islands....... 1.] the Solomon Islands 2.]THE KINDOM OF TONGA.......... 3.] SRI LANKA 4.] FiJi 5.] Phonape 6.] Vanuatu 7.]Kupang 8.] Timor 9.] The Red Sea 10.] Dominican Republic... 11.] Haiti 12.] Hawaii 13]Florida Keys 14.] East Africa 15.]Austraila .................................There are only two countries in which this industry collects coral and or fish , that has been documented to have had an ill effect on the health of their reefs. The fact that within each of these two countries {The Philippines and Indonesia} there are also a great many other industries inflicting even greater damage........makes determining the extent of our pet industries impact quite difficult. How ever lets assume that the collectors and exporters of these two counties HAVE collected fish and coral in a manor which has harmed the reefs. Would it be fare to punish the other fifteen collecting countries BECAUSE OF THE COLLECTION ETHICS OF ANOTHER NATION? That would be like punishing Canada for something that India was doing? What sense would that make? Micro soft is the biggest chip maker around. Just because MS has been convicted of illegal conduct .........does not make it right to punish the twenty or so smaller Computer chip makes? This idea that All collection must stop because a small portion of collectors in PI and INDO are mis behaiving{25% last count} is about as fare as demanding that All farmed timber exports stop in CANADA......because Peru is cutting down old growth rain Forrest lands ............please explain yourself.

I do not know whether these islands use cyanide. We all know that both the Philippines and Indonesia do and that cyanide destroys the reefs and the critters that live therein.
Industry had the opportunity to self regulate themselves, insist on random cyanide detection testing of fish coming from P/I and refuses to acknowledge there is a problem.
As a result the government must and will step in with far reaching regulations that fundamentally changes the ornamental industry and our hobby.
Industry had its chance to reeform and blew it.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Do you admit that both Indonesia and the Philippines are guilty of using cyanide in their reefs to harvest fish for export to the US and others?

Kalk as this is your thread would you kindly answer the above question. Thank you.

Wayne

Yes, there is a chance that a minority of collectors and perhaps 8% to 29% of the fish are cyanide collected. Thats what Peters testing exposed . But do we punish every collector world wide ? The islanders also collect protected wild clams to eat. Does that mean we end aquacultured clam farms from exporting clams into the US? There is always a percent of lawbreakers, is it right to punish non guilty parties half a world away? Can I hold you responsible for something a Haitian lawer did ? You being a lawer and all?

 

[naesco]

Do you admit that both Indonesia and the Philippines are guilty of using cyanide in their reefs to harvest fish for export to the US and others?

Kalk as this is your thread would you kindly answer the above question. Thank you.

Wayne

Yes, there is a chance that a minority of collectors and perhaps 8% to 29% of the fish are cyanide collected. Thats what Peters testing exposed . But do we punish every collector world wide ? The islanders also collect protected wild clams to eat. Does that mean we end aquacultured clam farms from exporting clams into the US? There is always a percent of lawbreakers, is it right to punish non guilty parties half a world away? Can I hold you responsible for something a Haitian lawer did ? You being a lawer and all?

No we do not punish every collector worldwide.
What we do is take a stand.
We will not deal with countries using cyanide.
We will charge convict and imprison those in the Philippines and Indonesia and their US importers.
Whether you are a LFS wholesaler, importer or online store you have a responsibility to refuse to deal in product from these countries until they clean up there act.
Nothing, I mean nothing justifies continuing to deal with them. Nothing justifies continuing to damage the reefs.
Canada won the gold medal at the world hockey tournament in Prague.

 

[Kalkbreath]

You keep insisting that US importers are participating in cyanide collected fish . What do you base this on? You must take into account that the same people that you respect and thank for exposing that 25 percent of PI fish during the 1990s were collected with juice..........also preach that 80% of the fish collected with cyanide die before they reach the consumers! Are you prepared to explain to a jury what possible reason US importers would want to have 80% of the fish they purchase from PI die before they can be resold? Remember that the cost of shipping and holding of a fish is much more then the cost paid to the collectors/exporters for the fish itself [even net caught}. Even if the fish are free........ there is no way to make money if only the remaining twenty percent left alive have to carry the total cost of the dead fish . It costs about 100 bucks to send from PI the box with customs , landing fee , freight and boxing fees . A box of Bicolor angels for example contains twenty or so fish. That means the cost to send that fish is about 5 bucks each if all individuals make it alive. But if only 20% actually live to be resold then it jumps to 25 Bucks per bicolor angel ! BUT wholesalers resell bicolors angels for twelve bucks! So you see the math doesnt work to the cyanide fish importers favor. Then it costs 30 to 40 bucks to resend fish to the rest of America,[which the storefront pays the new freight, but if more cyanide fish die during that leg of the trip both parties lose again] It is impossible to explain why an import company would willingly want cyanide fish knowing they must factor in 140 dollars a box regardless how cheap the fish are. You are unable to explain how cyanide fish benifit or are profitable to the US wholesalers? There is a big difference between putting up with some cyanide fish turning up in the shipments and Knowingly or willingly encouraging the use of cyanide. You have a big challange ahead of you explaining why one would want poisoned fish.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Actually, I agree with most of your last posting. Buying and selling cyanide-caught fish is not profitable. But, importers continue to nickle-and-dime the exporters ensuring that what they receive include many cyanide-caught fish because they refuse to pay a little more for net-caught fish (certified or not).

It is impossible for me to explain why an import company would willingly want cyanide-caught fish knowing they must factor in 140 dollars a box for air freight and broker fees regardless of how cheap the fish are (exporter's price for the fish). But, they do it every day because if they sell them fast enough (so they don't die in their facility at too high a rate) they still make money. It has not been demonstrated to them that they could make more money on net-caught fish, because these fish also experience high mortality from poor handling and shipping practices. So while I disagree with Dr. Goldstein that the problem is "all Stress-Stress-Stress", he is partly right. Too many fish die from other factors like stress, ammonia, ammonia, and starvation. We need to eliminate the poor shipping and handling practices in addition to stopping cyanide fishing.