If you were going to rewrite HR 4928....

[naesco]

Horge it is not the US that is attempting to legislate the cyanide using countries it is the world who condemns this unacceptable practice.

I speak weekly with a number of Philipinos weekly in Canada all of them are shocked when I tell them what industry is doing to their reefs as we speak.
Soon the word will get out to your people particularly the youth and they will condemn industry and even seek criminal charges and financial restitution for the damage industry has done.

 

[Anonymous]

:roll:

You got what was coming to you.

What exactly is it that they've gotten Wayne? - Nothing has actually been put in place yet and there is no solid indication as yet that it will actually fly. (Though they'd be stupid not to attempt to guide it through and actually get it passed as then theres maybe some possibility of leveraging the same type of restrictions on the food fish industry.) - With both of these in place maybe/hopefully localized management programs might begin to bloom and a more widespread growth with sustainable harvests will result. (Those are three big maybes though so you can guess where my money is... - Yep, in my pocket or going to CB/propped livestock as usual..)

IMO though, the whole blasted thing will languish in the land of apathy and (to steal a phrase from Steve) slowly go nowhere. THEN in about another 20-30 years you just might get your vengeful wish.. - Otherwise, don't hold your breath. (Or actually.......... - No, I won't be that mean..) :wink:


Norm

 

[naesco]

Grateful you used the right word.
Industry is stupid.
They not only allowed the Bill to see light by their stupidity, they really believe nothing is going to happen even though the consequences are that most of them will lose their livlihood. They blindly follow the dated right of Attila the Hun philosophy that the government has no business in their business so that they fail to see that the government will put them out of business

The BILL will never languish because every environmentalist and conservationist has been given a Christmas present in July. Legislation without one cent spent on lobbyists. They will take the cause and run with it .
This BILL will never lanquish because no one can speak against it.
Who in their right mind would defend the use of cyanide and the destruction of the reefs.

 

[Anonymous]

Alright, well, pardon my ignorance but what stopped the last one?

 

[naesco]

Alright, well, pardon my ignorance but what stopped the last one?

Good question
I don't know. Maybe someone has the answer.

 

[Anonymous]

If HR 4928 were to pass as a bill aimed to reform the marine ornamental industry it would be entirely funded by American taxpayers. If reasonable licence fees were charged for compliance with HR 4928 there could be some return of revenue and "funding" by the trade itself. There is no suggestion of a "tax" or "tariff" on the trade in HR 4928.

i consider a 'fee for certification' to equate to a tax or a tariff, who administers it is irrelevant to me

sorry for the semantical difference of opinion :wink:

 

[MaryHM]

Maybe, naesco, you are one of the lucky few operations that will be able to wheather this and perhaps even profit from it,

Alfbennet,

Naesco does not have an "operation". He's never packed/unpacked a fish order in his life!! He is not an industry professional- he just plays like he's one on rdo. Badly, I might add.

 

[horge]

Horge it is not the US that is attempting to legislate the cyanide using countries it is the world who condemns this unacceptable practice.

A lot of 'condemnation', is cheap.
Huffing and puffing and pretending at relevance is sad.
I'll take action where the salt meets the skin, over all the
hand wringing and doom-prophesying I've seen on this forum over the years,
any day.

I speak weekly with a number of Philipinos weekly in Canada all of them are shocked when I tell them what industry is doing to their reefs as we speak.

ROFL...
Why even refer to expat Filipinos as Filipinos?
As far as this issue is concened, they're functionally no different from other Canadian residents --potential consumers and a potential voting bloc.

Soon the word will get out to your people particularly the youth and they will condemn industry and even seek criminal charges and financial restitution for the damage industry has done.

Wayne, this might be a blow to any sense of superiority (white man's burden and all that) out there...
but the word is already out, and had been out for some time.
Virtually every relevant Filipino and his dog knows cyanide fishing is bad.
That Filipino fisherfolk nevertheless resort to it indicates both desperation and duress.
We've covered the mechanics of the Philippine cyanide trade before.

I'd ask you to save the boilerpate alarmisms and visionary generalizations.
I've already indicated what I feel can hamstring this proposed legislation:
a dearth of realistic implementing guidelines; and the general, historic impotence of such legislation to effect change from without.

 

[naesco]

But you understand Horge that industry had and may possibly still have the opportunity both in your country and the US to reeform itself so that government interference is not necessary.

Do you believe that the Philipino industry will abandon cyanide in order to stay in business?

BTW in Canada you get to keep your culture, language traditions etc. As a matter of fact, it is encouraged so it is common and accepted for new Canadians to call themselves Philipinos or Ukrainians

 

[JennM]

BTW in Canada you get to keep your culture, language traditions etc. As a matter of fact, it is encouraged so it is common and accepted for new Canadians to call themselves Philipinos or Ukrainians

And? :roll:

You think that's any different here? Have you ventured south of the border lately, Wayne?

There are more "hyphenated" Americans than just plain "Americans" anymore or so it seems. Works for me, I like a good party with great food, and I have yet to try out a culture that couldn't fill that bill We celebrate Cinqo de Mayo, Canada Day and the Fourth of July Diversity is a wonderful thing. But I digress...

What you're not thinking about is that the majority of immigrants from anywhere, come from money and privilege, where they could AFFORD to emigrate and meet the criteria to enter Canada (or the US). Exceptions are those who claim refugee status, but those aren't as numerous as they once were, and I doubt that many of those can be found in your social circle. It wasn't even that easy for my family and I to move to the US -- had to jump through all kinds of legal hoops, had to have a certain level of eduation, assurance of gainful employment, and it took 6 years to complete the process JUST to become a permanent resident. (My kids got their green cards on Monday... yipee!). Have to wait a few more years to apply for citizenship if we choose to... but again I digress...

My roundabout point is that I doubt that many of the immigrants or second or third generation individuals you encounter, were ever fisher folk, or lived in remote villages. They are more likely from urban areas, with more education and skills more suited to the western lifestyle than the good folks who get into the water every day to feed their families.

Your sampling of Filipino aquaintances and assumptions that they represent all Filipinos is offensive.

Your constant mutterings to ban all imports from PI or Indo are offensive - because not ALL fishers in those areas use destructive techniques, but you would through the baby out with the bathwater, and without any regard to how these people will support themselves. Your over-simplification of the whole thing shows remarkable ignorance on your part. Why don't you get on a plane and see for yourself?

I have never been to the Philippines. However I do understand simple economics, and sociology.

I too, would like to see where your statistics are coming from regarding mortality -- that 50% just seems a little too constant all along the chain of custody... and I can tell you that I don't lose half of my fish -- I wouldn't be in business if I did. My clients don't either, unless they have a catastrophic event in their tanks.

Nobody here will argue that cyanide fishing is good -- that would be absurd. The biggest issues as I see them, is how best to clean up the trade, I think at the supply end is best, and how this proposed legislation will affect us, or more importantly, how we can encourage the bill to be changed to permit the trade to continue in a sustainable way.

While the mom and pop store will probably be the most affected, think about the "ripple effect"...

It's not just about fishers, exporters, importers and retailers. It's about dry goods and hardware manufacturers...

Without the marine ornamentals trade, what happens to companies like Central Garden & Pet? Yes they are full line but a good chunk of their interests include Oceanic, All-Glass, Kent Marine....

What about Marineland/Aquarium Systems?

What about Coralife/ESU, Seachem, Current USA...

Most of these companies do not have all their eggs in one basket, but the ramifications of shutting down the MO trade will have a HUGE impact on them. Some are more marine-specific than others, and it will most likely mean that they will have to either re-invent themselves, or they will disappear too. If you don't care about overseas jobs (fisher folk) you might care about Stateside jobs...

If lobbying is what's going to get changes made to this bill, it is going to take unity not just from wholesalers and retailers here, but the manufacturing sector. It's as important to them as it is to us.

Jenn

 

[Jaime Baquero]

The aquarium hobbyist in Ottawa is paying up to $79 canadian dollards for a one and half inches Blue Tang. You can add shipping cost, mortality, overhead etc etc, but $79 CDN is a huge amount of money for that particular fish.

How much money of those $ 79 are going back to the reefs? ..... Zero! Those $ 79 could be the motivation for reform, but it is not the case. This trade-cide must be stopped.

Well that price is not out of line compared to what hobbyist in Atlanta are paying in US dollars. Factor in the exchange and it's pretty much in line. What do you consider a 'fair' price, based on the cost price, freight, box, and typical store overhead? My store system gets 100 gallon water change weekly... that's a lot of water and salt, plus food, vitamins, filter media, electricity...

I can only speak for the few wholesalers I deal with but P. hepatus have been scarce... so yeah they are fetching a higher price. I don't know what the mainstream wholesalers are doing - perhaps they have an abundance, but my suppliers don't. My customers are willing to pay for a healthy one.

No, no money goes back to the reefs - the diver, the exporter, any middle-man, the importer, the retailer and the airlines all get a piece of the pie... but unless some sort of (gulp) tax is imposed that would be channeled back to the reefs in some way (after all the top-heavy administrators and tax collectors took their bit), none of that money will ever go back to the reefs.

Jenn

Jenn,

If none of that money will ever go back to the reefs...none of the natural ressources (fish and invertebrates) will ever go to the importers, wholesalers, retailers and hobbyists. That is the reality you all will face.

I understand there are expenses related to the commercialization of one fish, from collection points to hobbyists tanks. The industry MUST consider the coral reefs as the farms from where they produce their livestock. A percentaje from sales of fish, invert, books, lighting systems, medications, "supplemnts" etc...etc should go to those developing countries to help the different programs in place tackling issues as the cyanide use.

The natural motivation the industry people "should have" are the huge profits they are making because of the sale of products associated to the fish and invertebrates keeping. Remove the fish and invertebrates from the picture to see what you have.

 

[JennM]

Jenn,

If none of that money will ever go back to the reefs...none of the natural ressources (fish and invertebrates) will ever go to the importers, wholesalers, retailers and hobbyists. That is the reality you all will face.

I understand there are expenses related to the commercialization of one fish, from collection points to hobbyists tanks. The industry MUST consider the coral reefs as the farms from where they produce their livestock. A percentaje from sales of fish, invert, books, lighting systems, medications, "supplemnts" etc...etc should go to those developing countries to help the different programs in place tackling issues as the cyanide use.

The natural motivation the industry people "should have" are the huge profits they are making because of the sale of products associated to the fish and invertebrates keeping. Remove the fish and invertebrates from the picture to see what you have.

Ah the Canadian solution to everything: Another tax. :roll: Collect money and pay most of it to those who collect and distribute it, so we can feel all warm and fuzzy, and maybe a few bucks trickle back to the reefs to buy what again? More corals and fishes? No... those are produced naturally by the reefs. Education? Well we've seen millions squandered by this organization and that one and we're still stuck in the dark ages. I'm all for education... but I feel that if enough key collectors can be trained in the short term, good fishing practices can become a way of life. Don't need ongoing money for that.

Huge profits? Who the hell is making a huge profit? Sure isn't me. I don't doubt that a well run operation can make a good buck... I aspire to that someday myself. I'm happy to see black ink in the ledger. However I think there is more profit to be realized by a clean supply and responsible chain of custody. If profits are a demon, you're fighting for the wrong side. If doing things the right way were more profitable across the board, don't you think more people would jump on the bandwagon? Money is a wonderful motivator.

Another tax is just that - another tax. Don't want it, don't need it.

Jenn

 

[dizzy]

Alright, well, pardon my ignorance but what stopped the last one?

Fer crying out loud Norm. How many times do I have to tell y'all this. The Coral Reef Protection Act of 2000 was killed by "hanging chads". Presidential endorsement of this bill was to be payback from Al Gore to the conservationists who donated to his election campaign. Even the Jack of all pundits will not try to disagree with this widely known fact. The Democratic Party typically supports stricter environmental measures while the Republican Party typically supports business interests and free trade. Passage seemed doubtful after the election, so it was postponed. Are you guys really so naive as to not know this stuff? :roll: The fate of HR4928 is not going to be decided this year. It was intentionally introduced as a lame duck bill, just so it could be at the ready. Someone forgot to tell Senator Case about rdo. :wink: Now I'm not saying the bill can't be passed with W at the helm, but the odds of a cakewalk though increase substantially if Kerry gets the nod. Let us all hope the best man wins.
Mitch

 

[naesco]

Jaime you are 100% correct.
We owe it to the Philipinos to repair the damage done to the reefs by industry and a levy on coral and fish is the way to go.

You note the reaction, eh. :roll:
When will they ever learn. When will they ever learn.

 

[Anonymous]

Fer crying out loud Norm. How many times do I have to tell y'all this. The Coral Reef Protection Act of 2000 was killed by "hanging chads". Presidential endorsement of this bill was to be payback from Al Gore to the conservationists who donated to his election campaign. Even the Jack of all pundits will not try to disagree with this widely known fact. The Democratic Party typically supports stricter environmental measures while the Republican Party typically supports business interests and free trade. Passage seemed doubtful after the election, so it was postponed. Are you guys really so naive as to not know this stuff? :roll: The fate of HR4928 is not going to be decided this year. It was intentionally introduced as a lame duck bill, just so it could be at the ready. Someone forgot to tell Senator Case about rdo. :wink: Now I'm not saying the bill can't be passed with W at the helm, but the odds of a cakewalk though increase substantially if Kerry gets the nod. Let us all hope the best man wins.
Mitch

<--- Smacks forehead />
Yeah, guess I should have looked at the title a little bit closer huh? - Coral Reef Protection Act of 2000..

Thanks for the morning wakeup.. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

You got what was coming to you. Don't lay the bleeding heart trip that some poor disadvantaged Philippino and his family will suffer when we are know that it is YOU who will suffer.

First off, my role in the "Industry" is as a consumer, and from the sounds of it you are too. This makes you complicit to the problem, no?

Secondly, I do not subscribe to the "Save a whale, Kill an eskimo" mentality. I would like to see constructive change in collection practices as much as the next person. I like to dive, and snorkle, and I have a captive reef, like most others that frequent this site. It is in my best interest to see that the reefs, and collection of marine ornamentals are sustainable.

I am, however, unimpressed with calousness toward the human equation in this. I am sure PETA would be impressed though.

 

[clarionreef]

Alf,
Good point. Save the reefs, kill the Filipino fisherman [ Not Philippino Wayne ] is hardly an intelligent answer...especially since the fisherman will never just sit down and do nothing if tropicals are banned.
As I said earlier, before Wayne ruined and diverted all attention to his public therapy sessions... the fisherman go straight back to food fishing and scraping the life off the reefs even harder. Lacking public welfare and subsidy....fisherfolk have to work to live every day and for better or worse, the sea is their venue.
It takes far more knowledge to fix a thing then to scrap it and uninvolved and distant internet ramblers may flippantly suggest the deletion of these people but thats just from ignorance or cowardice to hang in there for solutions.
We have Wayne here as comic relief [ ie. the claim of knowing the Filipino side from some Filipino Canadians... :lol: classic! ] and at times he serves as a chase rabbit. The downside is, when the moon is full, he posts constantly without thinking and from a knee jerk reaction to buzz words and phrases that set him off.
The admission today that his philosophy of coral reef reform is derived from perverting the postings of Peter, Mary and myself is disheartning. I join in Marys disassociation from the 'shutdown wing [nut] ' and will continue to work for solutions.
Anyone can call from afar for a ban on anything that vexes us. I have a few other proposed causes for Wayne to latch onto.
1] Cardinal tetras really do suffer the DOA figures in their processing alluded to by Lallos report. Sic em Wayne!
2] Scientific, certified whaling...go Wayne. We'll back you on that one.
3] How'd the seal slaughter go this past season on the St Lawrence seaway? Whats that? I shouldn't judge all Canadians for the actions of other ones? My point exactly!
4] Raising funds for alternative livlihoods for the several hundred collectors using only nets in Bali and the Philippines. They have shown the way and converted and should not be punished for it.

The real issue is how to build on and amplify the good thats already been achieved...the debate w/ the bill, MAMTI and MAC has been on HOW to do that...whats the best strategy...the best plan?
To ban anything would suggest that all roads and remedies have been exhausted and there is just no other recourse to save the patient.
Another reason to ban something is out of indifference, detachment, callousness, aloofness, lack of courage and imagination and plain ol self loathing and frustration. It is in this case a vengeful notion and a lashing out at detractors.
There is little chance of anything from the 'shutdown wing' [nut] catching on in this forum...but it does divert and dilute sincere threads in the search of remedies. In that way, it is a real diservice to those that still care enough to work for a better future.
Steve

 

[keethrax]

Jaime you are 100% correct.
We owe it to the Philipinos to repair the damage done to the reefs by industry and a levy on coral and fish is the way to go.

You note the reaction, eh. :roll:
When will they ever learn. When will they ever learn.

I would happily pay more for livestock if the added money went to do actualy good (I would double my cost (as a retial consumer) and not blink an eye). But unless you are a total fool, you should realize that in all probability none of even the new money will be spent doing anything productive. And to use a bill this vague to accomplish the task is pure foolishness.

You seem to conveniently gloss over any thoughts as to what the MO fisherman will do if they can't collect MO anymore wiht things like "good, glad they're out of a job" (not a direct quote).

But what happens when those guys go back to food fishing instead, takings tons instead of pounds of dfish, using cyanide even more rampanrtly (as the survival is no longer an issue) and taking the larger fish form teh reefs that will be much hareder to replace than the smaller fish generally collected for the MO business.

Yes the MO business is responsible for a small fraction of teh damage. But it is also responsible (simply by it's existence) for employing people in less destructive (though still destructive) methods of using the resources on the reefs.

If you can't respond to these types of claims you've demonstrated you really don't care about the reefs, you just want to feel like you've "done something" to stop the destruction, by actually increasing it.

 

[naesco]

Thank you for your post. Feel free to take on the issue of the food fishery and the use of cyanide. I will deal with the end of its use in the MO industry.

The foolishness is the lack of understanding that as we speak OUR industry is damaging the reefs by the use of cyanide. This must end.

There are issues in getting the proposed levies to those who will take the responsibility to use that money to restore the reefs. I will leave that to the experts in training, sustainability etc.

Jaime you are 100% correct.
We owe it to the Philipinos to repair the damage done to the reefs by industry and a levy on coral and fish is the way to go.

You note the reaction, eh. :roll:
When will they ever learn. When will they ever learn.

I would happily pay more for livestock if the added money went to do actualy good (I would double my cost (as a retial consumer) and not blink an eye). But unless you are a total fool, you should realize that in all probability none of even the new money will be spent doing anything productive. And to use a bill this vague to accomplish the task is pure foolishness.

You seem to conveniently gloss over any thoughts as to what the MO fisherman will do if they can't collect MO anymore wiht things like "good, glad they're out of a job" (not a direct quote).

But what happens when those guys go back to food fishing instead, takings tons instead of pounds of dfish, using cyanide even more rampanrtly (as the survival is no longer an issue) and taking the larger fish form teh reefs that will be much hareder to replace than the smaller fish generally collected for the MO business.

Yes the MO business is responsible for a small fraction of teh damage. But it is also responsible (simply by it's existence) for employing people in less destructive (though still destructive) methods of using the resources on the reefs.

If you can't respond to these types of claims you've demonstrated you really don't care about the reefs, you just want to feel like you've "done something" to stop the destruction, by actually increasing it.

 

[Anonymous]

experts ?