What can MAC do?

[Anonymous]

I thnk th USL has been a good idea, although it is not the first list to have been done.

What if MAC accepted this list after forming a commitee or if only 2/3 of the list what then?

MAC is a not for profit organization consisting of 2 people in Honolulu. The fact that they can bring some of the industry people together for meetings is nice but it is only a voluntary membership.

Any member who decides not to honor the list has no repercussions for non particpation. I know that what they can offer is a certification but there are already these and the fact is the average and even the knowledgeable aquarist is not aware of most and they have shown to have little or no effect.

So again How can MAC make any real in roads without being able to enforce such a list?

Let me say again I think the list is a good thing.

 

[MaryHM]

MAC is more than 2 people in Honolulu. They have staff all around the world. Please visit their website.

 

[Anonymous]

I have been to their website. Bruce Bunting is the person who said they have two paid staff members.

Why not answer the question Mary, what can MAC do to ensure the list is complied with IF adopted?

 

[MaryHM]

Bruce is incorrect. I went and found the link for you http://www.aquariumcouncil.org/subpage.asp?page=71&section=12

There is at least one other person on the MAC payroll that I know of that isn't listed there- but he's kinda new so they probably just haven't updated the site.

As far as what can MAC do to enforce, here's the explanation. Except for a few details (that are being worked out as we speak), MAC already has support from most of the industry. At the meeting, every major US industry player was in attendance except for one company. That in itself shows there is serious interest in the program. The US industry is aware that if we don't start policing ourselves that something will be done for us, so that is the main reason we are currently working with the MAC program. Competition is another good way to help with enforcement- no one wants their competitor to be certified if they aren't. It's definitely a good marketing tactic. Is the MAC program perfect? No. Does it still need major work? Yes. But the industry is willing to move toward industry reform, and we think MAC is the best "game in town". Because it's a voluntary program, there will always be someone who refuses to comply, but like I said, in most cases simple competition will solve this problem.

I'm not sure that I fully understand what you mean by this sentence:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote

I know that what they can offer is a certification but there are already these and the fact is the average and even the knowledgeable aquarist is not aware of most and they have shown to have little or no effect.

If I am interpreting it correctly, you are saying that there is currently certification available for the hobby, but hobbyists don't know about it. If that's what you're saying, you are incorrect. There is not a certification program currently available, and never has been. There used to be net caught Philippines fish that would come with a cyanide detection test certificate, but that no where near resembles MAC certification.

 

[Anonymous]

Just wondering if Mary still thinks this orginization is going to help this hobby?

 

[MaryHM]

Dave,

Welcome back to the industry forum! Long time, no see....

It would only take a couple of minutes of reading any of my posts over the past year to see that I have completely lost all faith in the possibility of MAC creating any type of true industry reform. They do a lot of talking, but when you dig a little deeper (just under the surface) there is an immense amount of problems. Many of these problems, though difficult, are correctable. However, MAC has adopted a staunch line of "We don't want to hear anything bad, and if you say something we don't like we'll ignore you or villify you." Makes me seriously question their intentions.

This post from last March was when I was about 2" from the end of my rope. Basically, there was a LA Wholesaler/MAC meeting that very month, and that is when I realized that my hundreds of hours supporting them were a huge waste of time. That's when I finally started speaking out publicly against them. When I started this forum in December of 2001, I was still in private talks with them. That got me no where. And here we are, over a year later....

 

[Anonymous]

Fair enough,

Who do you see being the catalyst for change in the hobby then?

I do not see self regulation taking place, I can still purchase anything I want to, regardless of its ability to adapt to a glass box.

 

[MaryHM]

The key players I see emerging now are Ferdinand Cruz (dedicated and passionate field trainer working on his own), the collectors he is training, and the people (industry) that support all of them. My days of thinking that big, sweeping change type programs are the answer are long gone. I was so naive thinking we could reform this industry with one huge all-emcompassing program. I now think that we have to start small and work our way up. Successes can be measured that way, and problems worked out as they are encountered. Training one collector, one village at a time is the way. Provide those collectors with the education they need, the tools to implement it (nets), and a source that appreciates and is willing to pay more for net caught fish. Then move on to the next village. Check up on the trained guys periodically and see if they need any additional assistance. This idea that the collectors are a bunch of idiots that can't manage without some big NGO intervening is garbage. They have necessities. Feeding and housing their families. If you provide a better way for them to do that, they will. Now, as far as the sustainability side of things, this IS where NGO's could be involved. Having them concentrate solely on one thing- sustainability- just might mean they could get it right. Focusing on one thing rather than 1000. Is all of this a way to have industry reform complete within 3 years? No. But it's a way for there to be TRUE reform- not psuedoreform. I'd rather see true reform happen within 10 years than psuedoreform within 3 any day.

 

[naesco]

The key players I see emerging now are Ferdinand Cruz (dedicated and passionate field trainer working on his own), the collectors he is training, and the people (industry) that support all of them. My days of thinking that big, sweeping change type programs are the answer are long gone. I was so naive thinking we could reform this industry with one huge all-emcompassing program. I now think that we have to start small and work our way up. Successes can be measured that way, and problems worked out as they are encountered. Training one collector, one village at a time is the way. Provide those collectors with the education they need, the tools to implement it (nets), and a source that appreciates and is willing to pay more for net caught fish. Then move on to the next village. Check up on the trained guys periodically and see if they need any additional assistance. This idea that the collectors are a bunch of idiots that can't manage without some big NGO intervening is garbage. They have necessities. Feeding and housing their families. If you provide a better way for them to do that, they will. Now, as far as the sustainability side of things, this IS where NGO's could be involved. Having them concentrate solely on one thing- sustainability- just might mean they could get it right. Focusing on one thing rather than 1000. Is all of this a way to have industry reform complete within 3 years? No. But it's a way for there to be TRUE reform- not psuedoreform. I'd rather see true reform happen within 10 years than psuedoreform within 3 any day.

Mary, we both know industry does not have 10 years.
IMO they have only months before the Government steps in.

However, some of them might get 10 years less a day, if they continue to be a part of the cyanide cartel. :lol:

 

[dizzy]

Mary, we both know industry does not have 10 years.
IMO they have only months before the Government steps in.
However, some of them might get 10 years less a day, if they continue to be a part of the cyanide cartel. :lol:

naesco,
Saddam only had a couple of months before the government stepped. Well they stepped in and guess what? Out of all the people that post here you rank as the most clueless in my book.

 

[naesco]

Mary, we both know industry does not have 10 years.
IMO they have only months before the Government steps in.
However, some of them might get 10 years less a day, if they continue to be a part of the cyanide cartel. :lol:

naesco,
Saddam only had a couple of months before the government stepped. Well they stepped in and guess what? Out of all the people that post here you rank as the most clueless in my book.

So do you really think that industry can continue to do what they are doing and get away with it?
How much time do you think industry has?

 

[mkirda]

So do you really think that industry can continue to do what they are doing and get away with it?
How much time do you think industry has?

Answer #1: Yes.
Answer #2: 50-100 years. About long enough for global warming to kick in and kill off all the reefs.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

So do you really think that industry can continue to do what they are doing and get away with it?
How much time do you think industry has?

Answer #1: Yes.
Answer #2: 50-100 years. About long enough for global warming to kick in and kill off all the reefs.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

what he said

 

[naesco]

So here is industry's answer.
1. Industry can get away with whatever it wants.
2. The Government will never step in to stop the the cyanide cartel.

So that is precisely why the US Govenment will step as result of industry failure to reform and failure to acknowledge that reform is necessary.

IMO there are some industry professionals with common sense. They see the writing on the wall and are laying plans to avoid Goevernment intervention.
If I am wrong, Government control of all aspects of the industry will provide needed regulations allowing for import restrictions, required paper trail audits, testing and on site inspections.

But I must be wrong because we have industry's answer.
Some might say "Wisen up fools, you have your livelihood at stake"
But I would say "It is more important to maintain the appearance of unrestricted free enterprise because that is what makes this country great"
Now do you like me?

 

[Kalkbreath]

So do you really think that industry can continue to do what they are doing and get away with it?
How much time do you think industry has?

Answer #1: Yes.
Answer #2: 50-100 years. About long enough for global warming to kick in and kill off all the reefs.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

Global cooling would have kill the reef much quicker........did you know that the 1970s was the coldest decade in hundereds of years in North American and parts of Europe?......Much of the coral in the Fla Keys was greatly harmed by the cold........Good thing we Americans with our SUVs saved the day by heading off the beginnings of a new "ICE AGE" :wink:

 

[mkirda]

Now do you like me?

Who said I didn't like you?

But, guys, this Naesco/Kalkbreath posting in rapid succession is gonna give me whiplash. I think my brain is bruised.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Kalkbreath]

Ill keep quite....for a day or two.....Im off to the Trade show down the road from Mickey.......see if you can spot me in the crowd Steve? :wink:

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Mary,

From where did you get , I quote "This idea that collectors are a bunch of idiots that can't manage without some big NGO intervening is garbage" end of quote.

jaime

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Mary,

By the end of the day my english is worse than during the morning.

I think the question in my previous post had to be written. Where did you get from? I quote,".....

My apologies but english is my third language.

jaime

 

[MaryHM]

Jaime,

I get that idea from listening to NGOs. I don't know any of them that think the problem can be solved in any way other than pumping a ton of money and some staff into the situation. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. That's why I said "idea", not "fact".

On another note. I know nothing of Haribon or OVI and have never spoke one ill word about them. I'm not going to get dragged into this "Which NGO did what and how and without any help from the industry" conversation which has been so pervasive in this forum as of late.