• Why not take a moment to introduce yourself to our members?

DBM

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James,

Marivi has been very diplomatic and the biggest supporter of MAC from the onset. I used to deal with another one of MAC exporters and had in fact when I started up a few months ago, tried an order with this other exporter.
I then found Marivi and posed a question somewhere along the lines of "I've dealt with this company in the past and was happy with what I was getting, I notice your prices are significantly more than hers and was wondering, is there a reason for this?" (she was a referral from Steve Robinson). Her response was that I was very fortunate to be dealing with this exporter and that this competitor is also MAC certified. She then informed me that because she (Marivi) is purchasing all her fish from MAC certified divers that she has to pay more for her fish, thus the reason for more expensive fish.
Not once did she say a single thing against her competitor. She was very diplomatic about it. In fact I would not have given her a try if it weren't for the fact that she was a referral from Steve and that the size of the fish I received from this other supplier were too small for my liking.

Just sticking up for Marivi. She's a class act.

James, I expect Sunday's #reefs discussion to be very busy but I'm hoping you can do your best to post Mary's questions, I think her questions are ones alot would like to have answers to.

Doug
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James,

The emails on Fenner's site are a cummulation of over 18months worth. The emails operate like this forum. Hot for a few days and then practically nothing for a few weeks. Is there some dirty laundry that is aired? Yep. I try to keep mine focused on the topic at hand, especially since I only personally know a few of the people involved. But anytime you correspond about something people are extremely passionate about and dedicated to (industry reform) there are going to be some heated moments. As far as spending time on our businesses, should I quit moderating this forum and shut down my website- neither of which contribute to my income? In actuality it's the same type of thing. I guess all of the industry reformists should just quit talking about reform and work on our businesses instead. Oh wait, industry reform is a big part of my business!! Just because I don't get paid for it doesn't mean it's not important and worthy of my time and energy. You and other people spend a lot of time on here educating hobbyists about issues- many of those issues are more gray than black and white. I guess you should shut this forum down so people can spend more time with their businesses, families, etc...

Concerning Marivi, you have no idea what you are talking about. When all of the information is allowed to be posted in the upcoming weeks, I will expect a retraction of your statement that she is complaining only because she's worried about competition. I've heard you gripe about another board that is similar to reefs.org on numerous occasions. It must be because you're jealous and wanting their ad revenue- not that you have any valid complaints.

Why are we decrying the flawed certfication process?? You yourself said


The first law of certification is that there can BE no certification process without enforcement.

Let me point this out one more time. Animals are being certified as cyanide free and there is no test in place. That is certification without enforcement of the highest degree. Whether it started this week, last week, or 6 years ago is irrelavant. That is why we are decrying the certification process. Fish should not be certified without a test in place to prove it. If you disagree with that, then you must be ok with implementing a psuedo-reform vehicle just so the industry will be allowed to operate for another few years unchecked- or so people can have a warm fuzzy feeling when they buy a PI blue tang with a MAC sticker, even if it was caught with cyanide.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James,

It's been a long time since I have read most of the emails on Fenner's site (9+months). So I went back to see for myself all of the "backstabbing" you referred to. There are hundreds of thousands of words between those two links. I only found 2 personal jabs, and they were quite tame. The other billion words were about MAC problems that aren't getting addressed by MAC and how the industry could better organize to address these issues. All discussed in a civil manner by industry professionals. Nothing to puke about! (Hope your stomach is feeling better :) ) James, I realize that you do not derive your income from marine ornamentals so MAC really doesn't mean a whole lot to you if it gets implemented in its current flawed state. But to those of us who make a living doing this and to those of us who try to make a living and are passionate about industry reform ;) , it's a big deal. Worthy of numerous discussions. The MAC discussions marked the first time that the LA wholesalers all met in a room together to discuss our industry. I don't find that sickening, I find it necessary. So you see, all of this talk about MAC is business- because whatever MAC decides to do it is going to directly impact all industry professionals for good or for bad. We're just trying to insure that's its for the good of the reefs and the animals we work with. If you have any specific examples of things that made you particularly ill, I'll be happy to explain them to you. It's hard to get a complete picture of everything that has happened in the past 18 months from a bunch of emails.
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James,

The manner in which you discredit Marivi reminds me of the defense attacking the rape victim. I guess you will support flogging Peter as well. I too hope to see your apology, for I believe people who speak the truth do not deserve to be treated in this manner.

AMDA dirty landry was not meant to be aired out in public. Much of the AMDA discourse was an attempt learn who MAC was and what they stood for. The problem was, that the more we learned about MAC the worse they began to look. Mary has covered many of the reasons MAC cannot be trusted and I feel no need to repeat them.

What goes on between the AMDA members is really none of your business James, and if it makes you sick just keep your noise away from where it doesn't belong.

MAC has a lot good decent people on their board. I apologize to them for ugly way in which all of this is coming out. I hope we can work together to make a better industry and a better MAC.

Mitch Gibbs
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yesterday Peter Rubec was reprimanded in an email by Chip Barber (VP of IMA) that was distributed to numerous people involved in the MAC process. Peter had sent out an earlier email exposing some of the problems with MAC that we have all been addressing. In response to Mr. Barber, I distributed my own email to all of the people that received his email (follow me! ;) ) I emailed them the first response I posted to this thread (the really long one with all the links). This morning there was a response to my email- from someone I have never heard of -and I have received permission to distribute it to all of you. This letter was distributed to all of the same people who received the original- including Paul Holthus. An argument could be made (incorrectly) that Marivi has ulterior motives for complaining. What about this guy? What about Peter Rubec? What about Fenner, Borneman, Latin, Goreau- what are their ulterior motives??


***************************************
I agree 100% with Ms. Mary Middlebrook.
As an enthusiastic scuba diver, I'm fighting since many years against
illegal fishing with destructive methods. I was traveling already more than
40 times to Asia. I went diving together with ornamental fish collectors,
especially in Indonesia, the Philippines and in the Red Sea. I could watch
trainings from IMA in Indonesia and the Philippines.

Since we want to establish a certification for net caught marinefish in
Switzerland, I traveled to the Philippines three weeks ago to look after the
progress of MAC certification there. What I could see there was shocking!
Peter Rubec is right, what is going on with MAC in the Philippines is a
fraud and greenwashing the industry, especially the association of the
exporters that 90% sells cyanide caught fish. To list only a few points:
- The total volume of net caught fish in the Philippines is not even enough
to feed 2-3 exporters. But as I heard, more than 10 are already certified.
(?)
- No random tests are made in the Philippines. Only low-end fish were
tested, most damsels, clownfish, chromis, etc.
- Sometime, the testers from Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources uses
only quick-tests, which are not sensitive enough to detect cyanide after one
or two days after catching.
- As I heard from collectors, net caught fish were mixed together with
cyanide fish in the aquariums of certain exporters.
A detailed report will follow within the next couple of days.

The idea of MAC itself is good and could help to fight against illegal
fishing. But what is going on in the Philippines cracks this idea down.
Therefore we decided to do our own certification with own cyanide tests in
Switzerland. The tests will be made from an independent organization,
preferably from Swiss Animal Protection. As for the moment, we can't trust
the tests from the Philippines.

Mr. Charles Barber is good advised, not to lean out of the windows too wide,
without to know what really happens. It could destroy also the name of IMA
as he make the inappropriate comments on things that he don't know or don't
want to know. Things have to be brought to the table. To put the dust under
the carpet will worsen the situation.

Josef Steiger
KFI GmbH
Switzerland
Tel. +41-61-903 12 12 / +41-76-377 12 12
[email protected]
[email protected]
www.asia-adventures.ch
********************************************

In addition, Mr. Steiger said I could distribute a letter he wrote to Paul way back in 1999- when MAC was first getting noticed.

Dear Mr. Holthus,
Thank you for your e-mail with „MAC NEWS“.
I was surprised to receive this mail and my first thought was that there’s another group or export association of ornamental fish, that only has in mind to improve the battered image of this industry. I had so many talks with exporters in Asia and the Pacific area, as well with importers in Germany, Hong Kong, Singapore and USA: At the beginning, all of them stated that they sell only clean fish and no poison have been used to catch it. After insisting, that I know the scene from the base and that --beside a “handful” fishermen in the Philippines and Indonesia - all use cyanide to catch the fish, they started to defend that “they use only small doses” or that the “supplier assured that all the fish are clean”! Campaigns for clean fish are only an alibi to document an intact business and put all the rubbish under the carpet! Therefore I put your e-mail into the wastepaper basket. Sorry! Only after Mr. Ferdinand Cruz informed me about your activities and that you really want to safe the environment, I was looking to the MAC NEWS.
About my activities: I’m in the ornamental fish business since 1974 and owner of the KFI GmbH company (former KFI KORALLENFISCH-IMPORT AG). More than 10 years I’m active engaged in reef protection.
About 12 years ago I started to visit exporting countries like Philippines and Indonesia. I not only met the exporters in there office, but I think I was the first foreigner at all that went out to remote places to meet the fishermen, dive together with them, advise them for new species and taught people to collect invertebrates for aquarium cultivation. This was the time when I learned that fishermen started to use cyanide to catch more fish.
The technique to use cyanide was brought by Americans first to the Philippines and a few years later to Indonesia! That time I found that more and more fish died in the aquariums after a few weeks or months, without any visible reason. Fish got easier sick and couldn’t be treated with medicine.
The mean time I could observe how destructive the use of cyanide affected the reefs. I decided to start a campaign against cyanide fishing. Most of the involved persons such as exporters, wholesalers and transshippers were laughing at me as a dreamer.
In the beginning of the 90th, I stopped all importation of ornamental fish from Indonesia, because it was impossible to get clean fish. I concentrated on fish from clean areas, at that time from Sri Lanka, Red Sea, Caribbean Sea and Pacific Islands. In an Austrian TV movie about destructive fishing I heard about Reg and Rix in the Philippines. Immediately I rushed to the next travel office and booked a flight to the Philippines. This was the time when I met Mr. Ferdinand Cruz, now a director in IMA Philippines and founder of IMA Indonesia in Manado.
Since that time I traveled for and back to Indonesia and the Philippines, helping to build holding facilities for fish (in remote places), train and advice people in fish behavior and maintenance, teaching them about fish diseases and treatment. All together I spent more than US$ 100,000.00 for the project, without to get a single cent back until today. We are still at the beginning. Until now, no exporter is able to serve a wide variety of clean fish. At the moment, only Sta. Cruz, Davao can export clean fish in small shpts. From all other places, there are still bad fish (poisoned) mixed together with the clean.
Last year we had also a few good shpts from Manado, Indonesia. But after nobody want to finance a holding system and education of some leaders for the export, the export volume was too small and the fishermen went back to cyanide! Only to catch some expensive key fish for the exporters in Bali, Surabaya and Jakarta. Please see the statement below.
I want to support your effort for certifying quality and sustainability in the Marine Ornamental Industry. But what do you want to certify right now? There’s nothing to certify at the moment, except that little volume of fish that AMRI is able to export!
Don’t start building the house from the roof. A good foundation has to be placed first. Please believe me that I know the problems from the base. I met several people, even any from the board of MAC, during my trips to Indonesia and the Philippines. I never saw them carry any dive equipment and diving together with fishermen. Most of them concentrated to deal with the exporters in Jakarta and Manila. Not any of them know the real problems in the fishing areas, most in remote places.
A few years ago, I had a talk with Phil Shane over the burning problem. He didn’t believe me that we can realize a project in developing countries. Phil is going for High Tech! So far so good. His facilities in LA is probably the best that you can find. Hands away from High Tech in developing countries. We don’t need it, we have to use the materials that are there. Look at the holding system in Davao, it works! Look at High Tech systems in Jakarta: after a few months they removed the very expensive schemers from Germany, because nobody could maintain it well.
Go to the beginning of the marine aquariums: no technique, biological filters with synthetic wool and an air pump. Fish such as Powder Blue, Blue Tang, Emperor and Blue-Girdled Angel, survived more than 20 years in my aquarium! Look at the poisoned fish now: The survival rate is poor, in average less than one year - in High Tech Aquariums!
Start from the base! The following problems are not yet solved (starting from the sea):
Fishermen who use only nets can catch only about 20-25% of the volume that they get by using cyanide. Therefore they have to be paid double or three times the price of the poisoned fish. Otherwise they will go back to cyanide immediately.
The mortality from the fishing area to the export stations is still very high!
Ø Fish should not stay too long in remote areas. Floating cages are still the best to store fish for a short time in the sea. Many times I saw how fish were stored in plastic bags or steel drums (old petrol drums!) for several days or weeks! The mortality is very high this way what lowers the income (or makes the prize for the fish even higher).
Ø People have to be advised to build holding systems and trained to maintain the fish. Education in fish diseases and treatment has to start at the sea, not only in the centralized export stations. All this has to be founded!
Ø Especially young fish can’t survive long if they are not feed for several days. Many times we received small (tiny) Blue Tangs, Mandarin Fish, Gobies, etc. that were very slim, already half starved and with no chance to survive! Plenty! On the other hand, feeding has to be stopped at least two days before transportation, otherwise fish **** in the bags and die.
Many key fish are already extinct or very rare in the areas near the export stations because over-fishing and using cyanide. This fish - and only this! - are now ordered from remote places, like Manado or the Molukkan Islands in Indonesia. This has two very negative aspects:
First, this fish (Emperor, Blue Face and Blue Girdled Angel, Blue Tang, Apogon cauderni, only to mention a few), will be over-fished soon. I can document it in Manado.
Second: the fish becomes too expensive because the domestic transportation and the mortality up to the export stations. Therefore the exporters will pay less to the fishermen and they go back to cyanide! What can be proofed!!
To make it profitable for everybody, the fishermen and the exporters, one has to concentrate the ornamental fish business around the international gateways. This are Manila, Cebu and Davao in the Philippines and Jakarta, Surabaya, Denpasar, Lombok, Manado, Ujung Pandang and Medan in Indonesia. If the costs for domestic transportation and mortality can be lowered or saved, more money will left to the fishermen.
Intermediate trade between the fishermen and the exporters has to be minimized, to save costs. E.g. North Sulawesi: the fishermen sell the fish to a middleman in Manado and he sells the fish to the exporters in Jakarta or Bali. Direct export from Manado is the solution.
Holding facilities for Export have to be built in the Export areas. Peoples have to be educated in fish behavior and diseases, as already mentioned above.
Fisherman have to be supported with boats, nets, compressors, regulators, etc. At the moment, nobody wants to found it for net caught fish. This should be with a loan that has to be paid back from the income of the fish later. That means better (higher!) payment for the fish. (see above!)
The big exporters finances only the cyaniders that brings them the volume for the export!

Conclusion:
At the moment It’s impossible to get more than one or two small shpt a week clean fish from Indonesia or the Philippines!
Fishermen that were trained from IMA for catching fish by net turned back to cyanide after a while (after the income with clean fish was not enough!)
It’s useless to found only the net training, without any support for the export.

There’s another thing that has to be discussed and solved soonest: What was still left intact from using cyanide and dynamite, is done well with hammer and chisel in Indonesia: Big reef areas are damaged - better than cyanide or dynamite can do - by collecting corals (hard and softcorals!) for the aquariums. I can show plenty of such areas, if somebody want to see.
So many species on hard and softcorals could be monitored and cultivated, what could give another income for so many people. The demand on invertebrates is especially in Europe big, but we should concentrate on species that easy and fast grow. A project for coral farming would not be very expensive, I already have my ideas.
If there’s an interest, I would like to bring a group of about 8 - 10 people together with me when I visit Indonesia and the Philippines next time. I would like to show and document what I stated above on site.
I’m willing to attend the Certification Workshop in Hawaii from 18-20 Nov. 1999, if you agree.
I would also try to find time for a speech at the briefing in Louisville from 10-12 Sept. 1999, but we had to find a way to get my expenses paid.
Waiting for your answer soon,

Very truly, yours
Josef Steiger


So it's nice to see that I wasn't the only one raising these questions to MAC years ago. Who knows how many other people out there did the same thing? It just goes to prove that they knew about these problems going in and have done nothing to address them for the past 3+ years. And now here we are at the doorstep of certification and the problems still exist with no solution in sight.


[/quote]
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Mary,

I'm willing to donate $500 toward sponsoring Josef Steiger as a speaker at next year's MACNA. If anyone else is willing to contribute perhaps Josef can make a trip to Louisville after all.

Mitch
 

jamesw

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I apologize in advance if any of the information I posted is incorrect. I read the links that Mary posted yesterday - and posted my "gut reaction" as a non-industry outsider based on what I read on Bob Fenner's website.

What I posted were my exact feelings at the time. I am hoping very much that my feelings will change over the coming weeks and I will be more than happy to apologize if necessary.

Cheers
James
 

jamesw

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Here's an interesting quote from Mr. Steiger's email:

- No random tests are made in the Philippines. Only low-end fish were tested, most damsels, clownfish, chromis, etc.

- Sometime, the testers from Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources uses only quick-tests, which are not sensitive enough to detect cyanide after one or two days after catching.

It sounds to me like there ARE testers and that cyanide tests ARE being made. I can understand if it's the wrong test or the test is not sensitive enough, but Mary and Dizzy and Steve, you guys are saying that NO cyanide testing is being performed.

Can you explain this "disconnect" please?

Cheers
James
 

naesco

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James I understand your reaction because I had the same reaction last night.
I thought things were moving ahead with reform in the industry. :cry:
 

dizzy

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
James,

Steve, will probably beat my answer. From what I understand the tests that are currently being performed are fairly inaccurate. They are also mostly being performed on fish that are not usually collected with cyanide which renders them practically worthless.

Mitch
 

flameangel1

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
and , the fish that are being tested- are VOLUNTEERED by the owner to be tested !!!!
not random tests on an unknown timetable--
That should also tell everyone something.
 

jamesw

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Is the MAC auditing procedure published on their website? The testing should be random, but I can understand that the exporters don't want to sacrifice one of their most high dollar fish for testing.

I'll bet that the procedure is just fine - but the exporters are allowed to volunteer their fish for testing, because they complained that MAC would start killing off their expensive fish like big angels, etc. This is just a GUESS on my part so please someone point me to the procedure to review.

Cheers
James
 

Mike King

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
During my month and a half trip to the Philippines in 2001 I had the chance to visit the main Cyanide Detection Center in Manila. I inspected the methods and equipment was used and I believe that although destructive methods are used it could detect cyanide even in small amounts. I did film much of the test and still have the footage if anyone would like to check it out let me know. What struck me as strange is the way I was treated after I told them I would stick around to see the results of the test. When things started to get heated I decided it was best to just be on the way, and asked them to please send me the results of the test (I never did receive those results). During my visit I asked several questions like, How many fish have tested positive? What species show a positive test? How many have been fined for having Cyanide caught fish? I never received a straight answer, I personally don’t think anyone really knew. I did have the chance to see a PI map which showed over 50 areas where positive CN tested fish were said to have been from, But when I asked the Lab manager again if anyone had been fined they said only one collector had. It really angers me that after IMA has received so much funding to combat CN collection and its detection there is so little to show.
Last I knew there was no CN detection labs operating and the IMA was taking BFAR (the PI equivalent of US Fish & Wildlife) to court.
By the way, the newest way to use cyanide for fish collection in the Philippines is the use of pressurized spray cans where the person upside pumps it down under pressure to the collector who has a handy spray gun to direct the blast. So squirt bottles are on the way out and now a even more destructive method of cyanide collection has started.

Mike
 

DBM

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Mike,

About 2 months ago I asked a former supplier of mine about CDT certificates (she's MAC certified). I was told she doesn't have her fish tested anymore because the test isn't accurate and if she wanted a certificate all she has to do is pick some fish out of her tanks and take them to the lab. :(
 

naesco

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes, but these comments on testing are what standards should not be. Standards should allow for random sampling of fish.
If you are certified and you fail, you lose your certification. It is as simple as that.
If the standards are there and they are not being followed, it has to be fixed.
 

MaryHM

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Been out all day, but here are a couple of things:

The IMA was conducted cyanide testing with the funding and support of BFAR. BFAR has since pulled their support and to my knowledge there are currently no tests that have been conducted in the past 6+ months. (What Mike said)


James, there is no auditing procedure for random testing because there is no test and MAC has not made it a priority. It is the high dollar fish that are cyanide caught in many instances- big angels, clown triggers, blue tangs, etc... Testing needs to be randomly conducted on random species that are chosen by the lab. It does no good to submit firefish, mandarin gobies, etc.. for testing because they are all hand caught.
 

SPC

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Posted by James:
The testing should be random, but I can understand that the exporters don't want to sacrifice one of their most high dollar fish for testing.

-But it is these fish that are caught with cyanide James.
Steve
 

PeterIMA

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Several months ago, I informed the readers of Reefs.org about the cyanide testing done by IMA under contract to BFAR from 1993 to September 2001. This sampling was at random from exporters facilities and from a variety of other sites throughout the Philippines. Six CDT laboratories were set up and maintained by certified chemists employed by IMA. As previously explained the methods involving reflux distillation and use of Ion Selective Electrodes (ISE) used were those described by the American Public Health Association (APHA) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). Hence, the methods were reliable. I can provide copies of the Standard Operating Procedures (that I helped to prepare) to serious parties. One person who recently received the manuals from me was Josef Steiger in Switzerland.

For those with short memories (who have not bothered to read the thread on cyanide testing held in September), I noted that the BFAR had practically stopped (not completely stopped) cyanide testing. As far as I know, there are 4 of the 6 laboratories still functioning. Unfortunately, I learned (from Tim Tessier of SeaCare Aquaculture Products in Vancouver) that BFAR last May was conducting testing using the picrate paper method. The latter test has been shown to be unreliable by SeaWorld in the mid-1980s.

I also learned that BFAR does not do random sampling (in fact Marivi Laurel of Aquarium Habitat recently told me they have never visited her facility). One exporter informed a Vancouver importer that all they had to do was to send the fish over to BFAR (presumably alive in a bag) for testing in order to obtain a CDT certificate.

Basically, I still maintain that the cyanide testing done by IMA for BFAR was reliable (so was the sampling). BFAR's testing needs to be examined closely (since even I don't have much information about what they are presently doing). I believe they are still using the ISE apparatus provided to them by IMA. They still owe us about $100,000 USD. The Ion Selective Electrodes and the ISE Meters mostly belong to IMA (but we handed them over to BFAR anyway).

Sincerely,
Peter Rubec
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Well GREAT!,seems like the Philippines are being rewarded for all their hard work over the years............now the Best fish for the hobby are from the Philippines..................... Hawaii ,Fiji, Tonga have been playing clean for years and this is how the hobby repays them? Reform has never really been needed anywhere but PI, now the problemChild{ PI}, is comming out smelling like a rose?. TOO bad the real harms facing the reefs {seafood collection and Agriculture runoff are now out of the limelight {because "MAC has saved the reefs"}................................................... Next reform ,how bout we define the problem before we try to fix it?
_________________
Accidental death and dismemberment insurance Forum
_________________
BMW 5 Series
 

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:


Top