A
Anonymous
Guest
Race":mf45wzq6 said:
Well said. I agree.
MAC Interim Director
- Thread starter PeterIMA
- Start date
Well said. I agree.
A
Anonymous
Guest
SciGuy2":28wfvq8p said:
i agree as well-the first time i broke a tractor while on kibbutz, the fisheries head said-you can break it if you aren't using it-that stuck with me since
there's a huge difference, however, between failure from attempting, and lying about failing/bogus attempts to begin with, with other people's money
if the attempt was genuine to help the reefs and fisherfolk get it right, rather than inventing a certification/paperwork scheme, i'd also be cutting mac more slack now than i'm willing to presently
sour grapes? mebbe-but given the scale and damage done, i think some sour grapes might be appropo
Dave,
I read your posting. In fact the more I read your posting the more I feel sad. I have come to realize that MAC and its cronies are hopeless. All the "Mea Culpa" is not enough. Nice words and excuses will not correct what MAC has done and will continue doing. You still do not get it. MAC standards are full of weaknesses. To continue the same way makes the problem worse than it is at present and no one in MAC wants to admit it. Your standards are a haven for cyanide users and its supporters. You have driven cyanide users deeper underground and harder to detect, reach and reform. You cannot even train fishermen the right way and kill more fishes than ever. Facing up to responsibility and correcting the problems you have created is important but I do not think you will be able to do it. Years of high spending did not do it. What more now? I wouldn't care less if you waste your funds just finish it as fast as you can. Your funds have caused more havoc than good. We are the ones in Asia that suffer more from all your irresponsible programs and methods Not only do real net collectors suffer but others that depend on the same sites for their needs. The ongoing misinformation and GREENWASHING should stop. If you are all worth your salt all the weaknesses are right in front of your faces. Study your methods. Or if you are in denial continue the way you have done in the past your legacy is made, A GREENWASHING ORGANIZATION. Lately your people have been more unpleasant and meddlesome. An act of desperation.
Listening MODE..... "Conservation value of MAC standards"? What conservation? Just recently I told one of your country directors that fish from MAC certified collectors were dying like flies. With a straight face I was told "what MAC collectors?" We have none in that area. We never certified in those areas." I repeated it again when I met the country director with one of your BOD. It all fell into deaf ears. It must be a fake MAC certification.
What economic impact are you talking about? Prove it.
And what about this CERTIFICATION CARD from an Indonesian? What do you notice? Why is it in english and Tagalog (a Philippine dialect) and not in Bahasa (Indonesian language)?
All this are just a drop in the bucket of what you all have done. There are more but no need to elaborate and open a can of worms if it is not needed. The whole thing is a mess and it saddens me because you all still want to continue down the same road.
Another unsolicited advice: Your picture in your website should be changed. That Mandarin outfit send mixed signals and one might read too much of the psychological profile in it. I guess you know what the Mandarins were in china before. When you are supposed to project and inform people of who you are and the seriousness of your undertaking you do not wear a costume. It does not ring well with us here in Asia. People are just too polite to tell you. It also brings back the horror stories of colonial occupations that brought with them the wannabe's and the carpetbaggers that exploited and profited from the problems and resources of Asian countries.
Ferdinand Cruz
East Asian Seas And Terrestrial Initiatives
I read your posting. In fact the more I read your posting the more I feel sad. I have come to realize that MAC and its cronies are hopeless. All the "Mea Culpa" is not enough. Nice words and excuses will not correct what MAC has done and will continue doing. You still do not get it. MAC standards are full of weaknesses. To continue the same way makes the problem worse than it is at present and no one in MAC wants to admit it. Your standards are a haven for cyanide users and its supporters. You have driven cyanide users deeper underground and harder to detect, reach and reform. You cannot even train fishermen the right way and kill more fishes than ever. Facing up to responsibility and correcting the problems you have created is important but I do not think you will be able to do it. Years of high spending did not do it. What more now? I wouldn't care less if you waste your funds just finish it as fast as you can. Your funds have caused more havoc than good. We are the ones in Asia that suffer more from all your irresponsible programs and methods Not only do real net collectors suffer but others that depend on the same sites for their needs. The ongoing misinformation and GREENWASHING should stop. If you are all worth your salt all the weaknesses are right in front of your faces. Study your methods. Or if you are in denial continue the way you have done in the past your legacy is made, A GREENWASHING ORGANIZATION. Lately your people have been more unpleasant and meddlesome. An act of desperation.
Listening MODE..... "Conservation value of MAC standards"? What conservation? Just recently I told one of your country directors that fish from MAC certified collectors were dying like flies. With a straight face I was told "what MAC collectors?" We have none in that area. We never certified in those areas." I repeated it again when I met the country director with one of your BOD. It all fell into deaf ears. It must be a fake MAC certification.
What economic impact are you talking about? Prove it.
And what about this CERTIFICATION CARD from an Indonesian? What do you notice? Why is it in english and Tagalog (a Philippine dialect) and not in Bahasa (Indonesian language)?
All this are just a drop in the bucket of what you all have done. There are more but no need to elaborate and open a can of worms if it is not needed. The whole thing is a mess and it saddens me because you all still want to continue down the same road.
Another unsolicited advice: Your picture in your website should be changed. That Mandarin outfit send mixed signals and one might read too much of the psychological profile in it. I guess you know what the Mandarins were in china before. When you are supposed to project and inform people of who you are and the seriousness of your undertaking you do not wear a costume. It does not ring well with us here in Asia. People are just too polite to tell you. It also brings back the horror stories of colonial occupations that brought with them the wannabe's and the carpetbaggers that exploited and profited from the problems and resources of Asian countries.
Ferdinand Cruz
East Asian Seas And Terrestrial Initiatives
Ferdinand and Peter,
Both of you seem to have the responses to how to solve the problems related to the collection of marine ornamentals in your area of work (Philippines and Indonesia). I know that both of you have been working these issues for many years with money from different grants your organizations (IMA and EASTI) got from funding agencies. I know that IMA was around for many years before MAC.
Considerable amounts of money went to net training and environmental education...but the problem is still there. What happened, why you were not capable of fixing the problem?
What about the CDT? Why couldn't IMA get a reliable test?
By now, you should know what went wrong with the programs you were involved during MANY years. So, I invite you to move forward and help to improve what MAC is trying to do.
Dave is offering the opportunity. Please move on.
Both of you seem to have the responses to how to solve the problems related to the collection of marine ornamentals in your area of work (Philippines and Indonesia). I know that both of you have been working these issues for many years with money from different grants your organizations (IMA and EASTI) got from funding agencies. I know that IMA was around for many years before MAC.
Considerable amounts of money went to net training and environmental education...but the problem is still there. What happened, why you were not capable of fixing the problem?
What about the CDT? Why couldn't IMA get a reliable test?
By now, you should know what went wrong with the programs you were involved during MANY years. So, I invite you to move forward and help to improve what MAC is trying to do.
Dave is offering the opportunity. Please move on.
Jaime, IMA had (and still has) a reliable CDT test. Claims to the contrary by the MAC does not make their claims to be correct.
EASTI has programs that are solving the problems that the MAC cannot solve. Give us the funds that the MAC has wasted and you will get true reform.
Peter
EASTI has programs that are solving the problems that the MAC cannot solve. Give us the funds that the MAC has wasted and you will get true reform.
Peter
Peter,
If IMA has a reliable CDT, how come BFAR or the Filipino government hasn't adopt it as a tool to bring to jail all the users of cyanide from fishers to exporters?
If EASTI programs are working why don't you get funds from funding agencies?
If IMA has a reliable CDT, how come BFAR or the Filipino government hasn't adopt it as a tool to bring to jail all the users of cyanide from fishers to exporters?
If EASTI programs are working why don't you get funds from funding agencies?
Jaime,
BFAR is still using the test that IMA adopted that is the standard method published by the American Public Health Association (APHA), the American Association of Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Of course, we discussed all this on RDO at length and you already know this.
EASTI has grants, which we don't discuss on RDO. The programs are working and more funds are coming.
Peter
BFAR is still using the test that IMA adopted that is the standard method published by the American Public Health Association (APHA), the American Association of Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Of course, we discussed all this on RDO at length and you already know this.
EASTI has grants, which we don't discuss on RDO. The programs are working and more funds are coming.
Peter
Well i just found out that the page scrolls on this thread so i have missed quite a lot, but in some ways at least it brings out the reality that you can never please everyone in a web forum.
In general, I dont believe MAC to be a failure at all. Its just taking longer than expected and mistakes were made along the way. But we have achieved success, just not at the level predicted.
Going forward, we realize the need to rethink strategies and change approaches. We are working on this now. If you want to help, let us know your thoughts . If you have lost faith, maybe we can surpise you soon.
With respect to the Cyanide Detection Test (CDT) - we are working on designing a Request For Proposal with Reef Check Foundation. I have been advised both for and against CDT by a number of stakeholders. What are your thoughts? For starters, do you believe an effective test can be designed? If so, at what cost?
Let me know your thoughts. If i didnt answer your question, ask it again.
Thanks,
Dave
In general, I dont believe MAC to be a failure at all. Its just taking longer than expected and mistakes were made along the way. But we have achieved success, just not at the level predicted.
Going forward, we realize the need to rethink strategies and change approaches. We are working on this now. If you want to help, let us know your thoughts . If you have lost faith, maybe we can surpise you soon.
With respect to the Cyanide Detection Test (CDT) - we are working on designing a Request For Proposal with Reef Check Foundation. I have been advised both for and against CDT by a number of stakeholders. What are your thoughts? For starters, do you believe an effective test can be designed? If so, at what cost?
Let me know your thoughts. If i didnt answer your question, ask it again.
Thanks,
Dave
To answer one other question: we didnt dilute our resources working with establishing mariculture and aquaculture standards. We received specific grants to perform that work. Just like what is happening in Philippines and Indonesia, donor funded work, but at a much different scale.
Regards,
Dave
Regards,
Dave
and fer chrissake, will y'all stop using that ridiculous word 'stakeholder' ?!!
sounds like yer all a buncha amateur vampire hunters, or sumpthin'
seriously-would be nice (though abit far-fetched, given what i've gleaned from the mac replies here-which smell all too identical to a typical holthus rhetoric) if you incompetent non fish guys would leave the org altogether and replace yourselves with people WHO DON"T NEED 'ADVICE 'ABOOUT A CDT' and will get off of their duffs and implement the one available mac needs people who are knowledgeable enough about the technicalities to implement what's already there and usefull.
you gotta start somewhere, and more studies and grant suckups ISN'T the way to go
sounds like yer all a buncha amateur vampire hunters, or sumpthin'
seriously-would be nice (though abit far-fetched, given what i've gleaned from the mac replies here-which smell all too identical to a typical holthus rhetoric) if you incompetent non fish guys would leave the org altogether and replace yourselves with people WHO DON"T NEED 'ADVICE 'ABOOUT A CDT' and will get off of their duffs and implement the one available mac needs people who are knowledgeable enough about the technicalities to implement what's already there and usefull.
you gotta start somewhere, and more studies and grant suckups ISN'T the way to go
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
