MAC Interim Director

[Anonymous]

Lots of CDT talk here.

But overall, why do you think MAC should design or fund the CDT product? This would help me understand where we can go with this discussion.

Dave

PS: Wayne, i agree with your points and will discuss them further with colleages and stakeholders.

seems to me that some aren't saying either-but rather that you USE the cdt that's already available, and be pro-active in using it to help enforcement of the laws that orgs like the ptfea keep circumventing, mebbe :idea:

there was no need for mac ala holthus to even request/design funding for such a venture to begin with-it was patently disengenuous to do so in the first place :idea:

who exactly do you mean when you say 'stakeholders' if you don't mind my asking ? i've always found that to be a nebulous, non descriptive, nonspecific term that really refers to no one in particular

 

[N1N2EGT]

Vitz wrote:

seems to me that some aren't saying either-but rather that you USE the cdt that's already available, and be pro-active in using it to help enforcement of the laws that orgs like the ptfea keep circumventing, mebbe :idea:

This one statement has to be challenge. I’m not speaking for the ptfea. But it’s common for all to assume, that the every exporter from this region are doing exactly what you said. “circumventing” the CDT testing. Officers from BFAR has visited our facility for random test on our stocks. Walked away and never came back to tell us the result of the test, negative or positive? only God knows. At one time, they wanted to do a test on one of the more expensive specie. I told them they have to pay for it if they want to take it for a test. They said they don’t have money to compensate me. Off they go fuming.

This board/forum is a nice place to visit. But a lot of being said here are very far off from everyday reality of MO industry. From the fisher folks to the airline cargo loaders.

And one more thing I know of one person who tried “circumventing” and got killed in the island of Cebu.
:wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

To Filipino exporter (whomever you are).

BFAR and other deputized wardens have the legal right to obtain marine aquarium fish from your facility. They are not legally obligated to pay for the fish. You are legally obliged to provide the fish that should be randomly sampled from your facility (and elsewhere).

Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

 

[Caterham]

This board/forum is a nice place to visit. But a lot of being said here are very far off from everyday reality of MO industry. From the fisher folks to the airline cargo loaders.

Very well said.

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz wrote:

seems to me that some aren't saying either-but rather that you USE the cdt that's already available, and be pro-active in using it to help enforcement of the laws that orgs like the ptfea keep circumventing, mebbe :idea:

This one statement has to be challenge. I’m not speaking for the ptfea. But it’s common for all to assume, that the every exporter from this region are doing exactly what you said. “circumventing” the CDT testing. Officers from BFAR has visited our facility for random test on our stocks. Walked away and never came back to tell us the result of the test, negative or positive? only God knows. At one time, they wanted to do a test on one of the more expensive specie. I told them they have to pay for it if they want to take it for a test. They said they don’t have money to compensate me. Off they go fuming.

This board/forum is a nice place to visit. But a lot of being said here are very far off from everyday reality of MO industry. From the fisher folks to the airline cargo loaders.

And one more thing I know of one person who tried “circumventing” and got killed in the island of Cebu.
:wink:

i do not assume that every one circumvents or tries, tried, will try to circumvent a cdt

i know for a fact that the ptfea has either encouraged, aided,abbetted, or watched and not spoken out against cyanide use in the past, in spite of their 'official vehement denial' and legal threat smokescreen kaka talk years ago-it's been documented and fairly well known that for many years they were one of the most corrupt ops with regard to 'surreptitious' cyanide use-i for one, would be hard pressed to believe that that's changed, as fillipino culture really hasn't changed

why should they have to notify you if a result is positive or negative? shouldn't you already be CERTAIN that you have negative testing fish ? why don't you know if your own fish are or aren't juiced? :idea:

the results need to be provided to the authorities, first and foremost, THEN, if the authorities deem it necessary, should you need to be notified

a 'cdt officer' should be able to walk into any facility and remove ANY and EVERY fish they choose with NO prior warning/notification for testing-just like a board of health inspection in this country

why should they have to pay for an occasional fish? are your margins so low that one 'expensive' fish taken at random weekly will break you? do you care more about the profit on that ONE fish than eradicating a practice that will help save THOUSANDS ??!!!

And one more thing I know of one person who tried “circumventing” and got killed in the island of Cebu.
:wink:

you're saying that someone got killed for evading a cdt ? and why a wink icon ?

seems to me that you're crying about some mild inconveniences, to justify obstructing what already happens to be law

 

[PeterIMA]

Peter,

How long it takes to process a sample of fish tissue using this method? I guess there is a difference between the detection of cyanide ion in water and fish tissues?

REPLY-Yes there is a difference between testing fish for cyanide ion in solution and testing cyanide in fish tissues. The IMA method involves weighing and blending the tissue in a blender, then digesting the slurry in a flask to vaporize the hydrogen cyanide which passes through a reflux condenser. Cyanide ion is captured in a vial containing sodium hydroxide where it can be measured by various methods such as ISE or colorimetric methods. The entire procedure takes about 2 hours. This digestion/distillation is needed to remove impurities in the sample. Hence, it should be used with all the recommended methods for measuring cyanide published in the ASTM methods publications.

What is the weakness of this CDT used by "big fish" (middlemen/exporters) to avoid prison?

REPLY-The weakness it not in the test, but in the unwillingness of law enforcement agencies to prosecute the middlemen/exporters. Other CDT methods could have the same weakness.

Lack of law enforcement, meaning willingness and commitment of the central government to tackle the problem, seems to be the major reason why cyanide is being used by collectors, middlemen/women and exporters involved in this trade.

REPLy- I agree. But, this could change if international donors provided the funding to recreate the CDT network that was established by the IMA. My conversations with Malcolm Sarmiento the Director of BFAR (several years ago) indicated his willingness to support CDT provided funds could be found to run the laboratories. I suspect that IMA's CDT contract was not renewed in 2001, because the funds provided to the Philippine Dept of Agriculture (over BFAR) through the FSP/FRMP programs ran out.

What would happen in NA if there was not law enforcement for speeders?

REPLY-More traffic accidents?

As I said before the Filipino government is failing to protect and manage their natural resources. Without its willingness and commitment nothing is going to be accomplished.

REPLY-Yes, but to solve the problem we need CDT in other countires as well, like Indonesia, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea. So, why lay all the blame just on the Philippine government? At least they funded the CDT labs with IMA and continue to run at least one laboratory in Puerto Princesa and have some equipment still with the central laboratory in Manila. I am not sure what happened to the CDT equipment from 4 other CDT labs that IMA also provided for free ( it belonged to IMA) to the regional BFARs.

Peter Rubec

Regards

Jaime

 

[N1N2EGT]

To Filipino exporter (whomever you are).

BFAR and other deputized wardens have the legal right to obtain marine aquarium fish from your facility. They are not legally obligated to pay for the fish. You are legally obliged to provide the fish that should be randomly sampled from your facility (and elsewhere).

Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

To Mr. Ph.D (or whatever you are)

First on the discussion was the accuracy/reliability of your “CDT test”. Now you’re talking about the legal aspects. The only thing I can say about this is, anything that’s in my tank is my property. And if the government thinks, it is a piece of evidence of a crime committed, we’ll then; they better produce a search warrant or subpoena. Otherwise, they’ll be talking to my lawyer, if they take any items inside my property without my consent. Not unless D. Rummy or F. Marcos come back to power, then, it's a complete different ballgame. Hey, were just like you, we want this country to be "land of the free and the home of the brave". :wink:

BTW, Mr Ph.D, ever heard of the radar clocking a tree doing 45mph on a 25mph zone? Guess what?! the tree sued the city in a traffic court and won. It was proven that, the radar was defective and the operator(cop) is not qualified to use the equipment(radar). Maybe, just maybe the same is true with your CDT test, that's why MAC is not buying it. Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way on the MAC side of the argument. I just enjoy watching circus, lotsa clowns. Not percula or sebae for that matter, just clowns.

 

[RichardS]

Dave,
Thank you for your efforts and response. My suggestion would be to not ignore Ecommerce this time around. It is here to stay and growing. To not let Ecommerce sell MAC certified livestock--as "certified" will hinder the advanced hobbyist's interest (and mine ) in your organization. It is this group that is educated enough to support you.The newbie may be just as caring but not yet educated to the supply chain. I think as the hobbyist advances, he/she becomes partially an Ecommerce buyer and potentially an MAC supporter. To limit your efforts to retail would ignore both of these groups and damper my interest to support your organization. Do not let this become an Etail vs. Retail issue, or in my opinion, it will not succeed.

Thank you, Dr. Race Foster

DrsFosterSmith.com
LiveAquaria.com
Etropicals.com
Peteducation.com

I would like to hear more info on how MAC will address the issue of etail vs. retail. As you stated, etail is the future (yeah I'm a B&M owner and I said it).

 

[Anonymous]

To Filipino exporter (whomever you are).

BFAR and other deputized wardens have the legal right to obtain marine aquarium fish from your facility. They are not legally obligated to pay for the fish. You are legally obliged to provide the fish that should be randomly sampled from your facility (and elsewhere).

Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

To Mr. Ph.D (or whatever you are)

First on the discussion was the accuracy/reliability of your “CDT test”. Now you’re talking about the legal aspects. The only thing I can say about this is, anything that’s in my tank is my property. And if the government thinks, it is a piece of evidence of a crime committed, we’ll then; they better produce a search warrant or subpoena. Otherwise, they’ll be talking to my lawyer, if they take any items inside my property without my consent. Not unless D. Rummy or F. Marcos come back to power, then, it's a complete different ballgame. Hey, were just like you, we want this country to be "land of the free and the home of the brave". :wink:

BTW, Mr Ph.D, ever heard of the radar clocking a tree doing 45mph on a 25mph zone? Guess what?! the tree sued the city in a traffic court and won. It was proven that, the radar was defective and the operator(cop) is not qualified to use the equipment(radar). Maybe, just maybe the same is true with your CDT test, that's why MAC is not buying it. Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way on the MAC side of the argument. I just enjoy watching circus, lotsa clowns. Not percula or sebae for that matter, just clowns.

what happens to someone who buys stolen property ?

:idea: :wink:

possession being 9/10ths of the law doesn't apply to illegally gotten goods, and the moment law authorities have reasonable suspicion to need to check if they're ill gotten, you DON'T have much in the way of rights to your property (at least, not in the u.s.)

the laws currently on the books pretty much state that anyone dealing in cyanided livestock is culpable for the use of cyanide (which is as it should be)-you could be in hot water for obstruction of justice and hindering an official investigation(under a scenario where the enforcement was ctually properly enforced)-but i'm sure you and your lawyer know what you're doing/claiming

if you know for a fact that your stock isn't juiced, why would you have any worries or concerns anyway ?

To Mr. Ph.D (or whatever you are)

why are you so ready to attack peter rubec's character ? the cdt as far as i know, has already withstood PEER REVIEW :idea:

'mr PhD' is irrelevant to the actual discussion at hand-the cyanide testing methods and protocols he contends should be used, however, are not

i don't know who you are, but something here smells fishy

 

[N1N2EGT]

Vitz wrote:

:wink:

i do not assume that every one circumvents or tries, tried, will try to circumvent a cdt

Confuscious says: Never ASSume anything. because your ASSumption could be a target for everyone else.

i

know for a fact that the ptfea has either encouraged, aided,abbetted, or watched and not spoken out against cyanide use in the past, in spite of their 'official vehement denial' and legal threat smokescreen kaka talk years ago-it's been documented and fairly well known that for many years they were one of the most corrupt ops with regard to 'surreptitious' cyanide use-i for one, would be hard pressed to believe that that's changed, as fillipino culture really hasn't changed

Like I said on the previous post, I’m in no way a member of the ptfea and I don’t speak for them. I don’t know and I don’t want to know, what you meant of the term “official vehement denial” of the ptfea. I’m not trying to change a culture here. What I’m doing is giving you guys a better picture of what’s going on. Whether you believe it or not is not my concern. Why, are you a Filipino to know for sure that, the culture has or hasn’t changed? And just what culture you are trying to address here?. Cuisine culture? Dance Culrture? Or what..

why should they have to notify you if a result is positive or negative? shouldn't you already be CERTAIN that you have negative testing fish ? why don't you know if your own fish are or aren't juiced? :idea:

Not getting any result or response from the test is another clear example of ASSumption. See Confucious again if you must. I'm in no way of knowing for sure if the fish are juiced or not. All I have is the trust for our divers/suppliers, that they are not doing anything that is contrary to what is legal. The feedbacks or shipment reports that I do get from our overseas customers reinforces my belief that our divers are honest to goodness people. Why, do you or any of the fish workers for the 104th row know for sure that the fish they are selling are juiced or not?. Answer your own question.

the results need to be provided to the authorities, first and foremost, THEN, if the authorities deem it necessary, should you need to be notified

How hard it is provide copies?.

a 'cdt officer' should be able to walk into any facility and remove ANY and EVERY fish they choose with NO prior warning/notification for testing-just like a board of health inspection in this country

We are not talking about health hazard here. Do you allow LAPD to pull you over and go over your glove compartment to check it out if you carry some illegal items? And if you don’t understand my point of view; sorry, try the next guy.

why should they have to pay for an occasional fish? are your margins so low that one 'expensive' fish taken at random weekly will break you? do you care more about the profit on that ONE fish than eradicating a practice that will help save THOUSANDS ??!!!

The simple answer is because I paid for it. And yes, I care about the money, that’s why I’m in the business.(somebody please show me the money) Unlike others who claim to care about the enviroment or whatever it is they want to claim, while they keep theirs eyes on the grant money. Now, that's complete baloney.
And if I could help some poor fisher folk in doing so, they can thank their God. If you are willing to wire me some money to cover the cost of fish that they want to test, then here’s my number. Bank of PI Account# 3496-0985. I’ll be more than willing to give it for(test) So, you and your self-righteous brothers could be happy. And oh, don’t forget to fax me the transmittal form.
Saving whatever THOUSANDS you are talking about by eradicating a practice whatever that practice might be will require more than a solid CDT test.

you're saying that someone got killed for evading a cdt ? and why a wink icon ?

You need to read some history books, Brother.

seems to me that you're crying about some mild inconveniences, to justify obstructing what already happens to be law

Again, I’m not here to cry about anything. I’m here so people like you who have no clue, will get a hint of what’s it is like to be in the battlefield. And it's not about inconveniences, it's about money, my money. And I don’t know what’s your definition of law

ciao!

 

[Caterham]

Again, I’m not here to cry about anything. I’m here so people like you who have no clue, will get a hint of what’s it is like to be in the battlefield.

All I can say is WOW. I don't know who you are and it doesn't matter but you are indeed a breath of fresh air. Welcome.

 

[N1N2EGT]

what happens to someone who buys stolen property ?

:idea: :wink:

possession being 9/10ths of the law doesn't apply to illegally gotten goods, and the moment law authorities have reasonable suspicion to need to check if they're ill gotten, you DON'T have much in the way of rights to your property (at least, not in the u.s.)

the laws currently on the books pretty much state that anyone dealing in cyanided livestock is culpable for the use of cyanide (which is as it should be)-you could be in hot water for obstruction of justice and hindering an official investigation(under a scenario where the enforcement was ctually properly enforced)-but i'm sure you and your lawyer know what you're doing/claiming

if you know for a fact that your stock isn't juiced, why would you have any worries or concerns anyway ?

To Mr. Ph.D (or whatever you are)

why are you so ready to attack peter rubec's character ? the cdt as far as i know, has already withstood PEER REVIEW :idea:

'mr PhD' is irrelevant to the actual discussion at hand-the cyanide testing methods and protocols he contends should be used, however, are not

Unless you are Mr. Ph.D spokesman, there's no need for your to answer this posting.

i don't know who you are, but something here smells fishy

I don't know you either and I have no interest in knowing you. Did you washed you hands after cleaning fish tanks? And ever smell a spoiled or coral that just died?.
ciao!

 

[RichardS]

as fillipino culture really hasn't changed

Like I said on the previous post, I’m in no way a member of the ptfea and I don’t speak for them. I don’t know and I don’t want to know, what you meant of the term “official vehement denial” of the ptfea. I’m not trying to change a culture here. What I’m doing is giving you guys a better picture of what’s going on. Whether you believe it or not is not my concern. Why, are you a Filipino to know for sure that, the culture has or hasn’t changed? And just what culture you are trying to address here?. Cuisine culture? Dance Culrture? Or what..

I don't know squat about Filipino culture but I always assumed (I know don't assume) that the culture of the "fisher folk" was work for dirt (by american standards) to feed your family. American culture is I want it all and I want it dirt cheap.

How do you change one culture without changing the other first?

 

[N1N2EGT]

what happens to someone who buys stolen property ?

:idea: :wink:

First we are discussing about the CDT test... now we are in stolen property. What's next, Britney Spears underwear?.. Sorry I can not answer your question. I'm not a lawyer. I'm into MO business, export side.

possession being 9/10ths of the law doesn't apply to illegally gotten goods, and the moment law authorities have reasonable suspicion to need to check if they're ill gotten, you DON'T have much in the way of rights to your property (at least, not in the u.s.)

All this time, I was thinking your country, the USofA is a free country where people enjoy liberty from persecution and prosecution unless of course proven guilty. Oh boy, where is Johnnie Cochran when you need him? Someone told me he died sometime ago.

the laws currently on the books pretty much state that anyone dealing in cyanided livestock is culpable for the use of cyanide (which is as it should be)-you could be in hot water for obstruction of justice and hindering an official investigation(under a scenario where the enforcement was ctually properly enforced)-but i'm sure you and your lawyer know what you're doing/claiming

Oh yeah?.. I tell you one more time, Pay attention please. I don't deal with cyanide. I've never seen one nor in possession of the said chemical. And again, as I said I'm not equipped to detect chemicals in a specimen. I'm not going to play a know it all "Mr. Cyanide Detector" like most of the regular poster here.

if you know for a fact that your stock isn't juiced, why would you have any worries or concerns anyway ?

Read again my post, I'm not worried or concerned about juiced being detected. I worry about the money that I paid for the fish. And if you don't understand any part of that sentence, let me know. I will get you an interpreter.

To Mr. Ph.D (or whatever you are)

To Filipino Exporter(Whomever you are)

Hey, what's good for the goose is good for the hen, right?

why are you so ready to attack peter rubec's character ? the cdt as far as i know, has already withstood PEER REVIEW :idea:

Can you point out the part where I tried to attack Mr. Ph.D's character?

'mr PhD' is irrelevant to the actual discussion at hand-the cyanide testing methods and protocols he contends should be used, however, are not

If the word Mr so and so is irrelevant, how come you mention it again? All this time I thought Ph.D was his last name :lol:

i don't know who you are, but something here smells fishy

Wash your hands very well after working in fish tanks. And that will help solve your problem.

ciao!

 

[PeterIMA]

Quote
the laws currently on the books pretty much state that anyone dealing in cyanided livestock is culpable for the use of cyanide (which is as it should be)-you could be in hot water for obstruction of justice and hindering an official investigation(under a scenario where the enforcement was ctually properly enforced)-but i'm sure you and your lawyer know what you're doing/claiming [Smile]

Oh yeah?.. I tell you one more time, Pay attention please. I don't deal with cyanide. I've never seen one nor in possession of the said chemical. And again, as I said I'm not equipped to detect chemicals in a specimen. I'm not going to play a know it all "Mr. Cyanide Detector" like most of the regular poster here.

Quote:
if you know for a fact that your stock isn't juiced, why would you have any worries or concerns anyway ?

Read again my post, I'm not worried or concerned about juiced being detected. I worry about the money that I paid for the fish. And if you don't understand any part of that sentence, let me know. I will get you an interpreter.



REPLY To unidentified exporter. Ignorance of the law is no protection from the law. Philippine law is clear. Selling fish caught with cyanide is illegal.

I am in possession of the CDT database with all the data collected by the IMA under contract to BFAR from 1993 to 2001. Almost all export facilities that were monitored were found to have a large proportion of their marine fish with cyanide present in their tissues.


Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

 

[clarionreef]

This board/forum is a nice place to visit. But a lot of being said here are very far off from everyday reality of MO industry. From the fisher folks to the airline cargo loaders.

Its probably better that they don't understand the "everyday reality" of the MO industry!
Especially when we here from locals things like the following;

And one more thing I know of one person who tried “circumventing” and got killed in the island of Cebu

.

Really...just how much more of truth of things in the Philippine fish trade would you like people to know?

Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

I am in possession of the CDT database with all the data collected by the IMA under contract to BFAR from 1993 to 2001. Almost all export facilities that were monitored were found to have a large proportion of their marine fish with cyanide present in their tissues.


Peter Rubec, Ph.D.[/quote]

Peter what happened after you guys found out that ? How many exporters went to jail?

Jaime

 

[clarionreef]

Only divers go to jail....lots of em have in fact.
Everyone else AT EVERY LEVEL OF CONCERN IN THIS ISSUE can buy "get out of jail free" cards.
Steve
PS. Theres an old saying..."everyone loves the fish, they just hate the fisherman."

 

[PeterIMA]

Jaime,

By the time I got the complete CDT database, IMA was no longer running the laboratories. Rumor has it, that another NGO undercut IMA's credability by making false claims about the reliability of the CDT.


Peter

 

[N1N2EGT]

REPLY To unidentified exporter. Ignorance of the law is no protection from the law. Philippine law is clear. Selling fish caught with cyanide is illegal.

Hello Mr UFO.

I don’t think you can follow a discussion very well. Sorry if you can’t understand what I’m trying to explain here. OK here we go again. In plain simple English, I do not for know for sure if the fish is juiced or not. Because I'm not equipped, in any way to know. And I said, if only the CDT busters will let us know the results. Negative or positive, It will help us identify the source of the good fish and the bad fish. The test may not be accurate as most people says, but at least we have something to work on.

I have a question for you. Does the Japanese who slices Tuna for sushi knows for sure if the Tuna is “Dolphin Free”?

I am in possession of the CDT database with all the data collected by the IMA under contract to BFAR from 1993 to 2001. Almost all export facilities that were monitored were found to have a large proportion of their marine fish with cyanide present in their tissues.

Surprise and welcome to the new world. I tell you what, Mr. Expert, with the wonder of bytes and chips spread out in a silicon wrapper, anybody can keep a database. Even the monkeys in the zoo can do that. And another thing, for a database to be accurate, it must be updated. 1991??!!!! Yeiiips!!!! That’s old, if not obsolete. The fastest computer back then most likely is rated in megahertz. We are now running in thousandths of Gigs. Hey wake up and smell the coffee. What media you used to store the database, 5 inch floopy disc?.
You don't get a tissue after you put the fish in a blender, you get a puree. And don’t forget the tapioca it will taste even better.

Peter Rubec, "Ph.D."

Batman