NGO cyanide reform vs. non-NGO reform

[mkirda]

Your case is not really rested if naesco's question goes unanswered. Surely there must be honest answers, even if they are bad news.

There are two answers that seem most likely:

1) Back-sliding
2) Net fishermen are selling to many different exporters, most of whom mix the net-caught and cyanide-caught fish together and make no effort to differentiate them into two separate 'products'.

The first reason was noted in several papers.
The second reason is evident from the recent evidence provided by Peter Rubec after his analysis of the CDT database.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[jamesw]

Maybe it's so hard to get net caught fish (at the retail level) because most of the importers would rather pay less for the other kind. That's what I'm hearing at least.

My opinion only,

Cheers
James

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe it's so hard to get net caught fish (at the retail level) because most of the importers would rather pay less for the other kind. That's what I'm hearing at least.

But isn't it the shipping that's the real bugger? ie It costs the same to import a dead fish as it does a net caught one. Seems like any increase in the actual cost of the fish would be minimal compared to the freight. And far worth it as the mortality *should* be lower, making the risk of paying for shipping a bag of water lower. Me thinks this has more to do with lack of avaliability, than price.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

So with all the hundreds of thousands of dollars or perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training.
So with all the hundreds of fishers trained.
Why is it that it is so tough to get net caught fish?

Naesco, This is a good example of how the readers are getting the wrong information. You think that thousands of dollars perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training. Is not true period. In our case the Canadian government funded programs that had different components as:

Community organizing
Environmental Education
Alternative Livelihoods
Production of educational material ( Save our coral reefs Manual and a video Divers say no to cyanide)

To implement this work human resources were required, and those people had a salary.

Only a percentage of the project was allocated to training. Development is something more than just getting to the community with a bunch of nets and tell fishers how to use them. There is a lot of work previous to that phase.

The canadian personnel didn't get any pay when traveling to the Philippines. They got money to pay air ticket, hotel (according with the requirements of the canadian government, meaning nothing fancy) and food.

To get a project approved the NGO needs to submit a detailed budget. It is CIDA requirement that most of the funds have to go south. In our case most of the money > 70% goes south. The rest of the money 30% is administrated by the canadian NGO and is used to travel(in this case to the Pi), food, hotel, materials, communications, administration fees and to paid for the production of an audited financial report.

As you can see, all the money didn't go to training. A project is more complex that many readers can imagine. Is why, I am saying, readers are being misinformed about this matter and others.

More net caught fish is getting into the system than before. One aspect to consider is the possibility that more net caught fish is being shipped to Europe than the US. Are importers in Europe tougher than americans?The participation of a large importer in the US to clarify this aspect would be valuable.

Thanks for taking the time.

Jaime

 

[blue_hula]

There are two answers that seem most likely:

1) Back-sliding
2) Net fishermen are selling to many different exporters, most of whom mix the net-caught and cyanide-caught fish together and make no effort to differentiate them into two separate 'products'.

The first reason was noted in several papers.
The second reason is evident from the recent evidence provided by Peter Rubec after his analysis of the CDT database.

Another likely reason is lack of availability in the wild. Certainly many of the Bohol reefs are heavily depleted. So if CAMPs are located in already depleted areas, it won't matter how many nets are used ... the fish aren't there.

Blue hula

 

[PeterIMA]

I think the reasons are a little more complex.

Mike Kirda is correct in stating there has been backsliding. So, while there were about 1900 collectors trained to use nets many reverted to using cyanide because they did not have buyers willing to pay more for net-caught fish.

Many of the reefs have been seriously degraded and a number of the higher priced species such as angelfish and clown triggerfish are becoming rare close to the Island of Luzon. They still occur
in other areas in the southern Philippines and off the Island of Palawan. There are higher costs with shipping these species longer distances to Manila.

Many exporters who are members of the Philippine Tropical Fish Exporters Association (PFTEA) refuse to pay the net-collectors more for net-caught fish. They have not accepted the idea that that they can afford to pay more for net-caught fish because of the lower mortality.

There is the problem that the several net-caught exporters being small have higher overhead and air-freight costs (because they don't export in large volumes). Hence, their export prices are higher than other exporters dealing in cyanide-caught fish.

The most highly desired species (less common and higher priced) that are net-caught fish appear to be going to one net-caught exporter. This export company is getting more of the most desireable fish because it has funded net-training in the more isolated areas (like Mindanao) and because it is willing to pay a higher price for the fish than other export companies.

Peter Rubec

 

[JennM]

The notion that I think net-caught fish are worth more, notwithstanding, WHY should exporters pay more for net caughts? (I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here, so please bear with me...)

If net caught fish are cheaper to catch (the diver does not have to keep buying cyanide, he simply buys his nets once, and perhaps materials to repair them), then is the potential for profit higher with nets? Assuming for a moment that the diver catches fewer fish with nets (and according to Steve, that's not necessarily the case, but for sake of argument), even though he doesn't catch as many, he is still further ahead economically because he does not have the expense of the cyanide....

Perhaps I'm over-simplifying, and I don't have a problem paying a bit more for quality - I'm doing that sometimes now (although the net-caughts I'm buying are reasonably priced, and the lower mortality makes up for the extra buck or two here and there....) but even if the prices are the same, why would the divers go back to cyanide and the cost of buying it??

Jenn

 

[jamesw]

If I'm a well trained and skilled net fisherman, and I go out tomorrow, will I catch more fish with:

A) Barrier and Hand nets
B) Cyanide

Which is "easier" to use to catch fish:

A) Nets
B) Cyanide

If I catch 40 fish with cyanide and it's easier, vs catching 20 fish with nets and busting my a$$ to do it, the choice is pretty clear why exporters are going to have to pay more for net-caught fish. The divers can collect 2x as many - until the reef is destroyed and the reef fish are gone. But then, there's always another reef - heck there are millions of islands, right? (tongue in cheek)

Unless my assumption is incorrect and it's just as easy and efficient to do A as B - people are going to naturally take the easier route that catches more fish...

Cheers
James

 

[naesco]

If I'm a well trained and skilled net fisherman, and I go out tomorrow, will I catch more fish with:

A) Barrier and Hand nets
B) Cyanide

Which is "easier" to use to catch fish:

A) Nets
B) Cyanide

If I catch 40 fish with cyanide and it's easier, vs catching 20 fish with nets and busting my a$$ to do it, the choice is pretty clear why exporters are going to have to pay more for net-caught fish. The divers can collect 2x as many - until the reef is destroyed and the reef fish are gone. But then, there's always another reef - heck there are millions of islands, right? (tongue in cheek)

Unless my assumption is incorrect and it's just as easy and efficient to do A as B - people are going to naturally take the easier route that catches more fish...

Cheers
James

So no matter how much we send over, or who we send over, cyanide will be used anyways.
Every day in every way I am leaning towards pressing for an outright embargo against Indonesian and Philippine fish.
Maybe with the real threat of an embargo, the fishers, the wholesalers and the government of the Philippines wil get serious about the use of cyanide.

 

[Anonymous]

Every day in every way I am leaning towards pressing for an outright embargo against Indonesian and Philippine fish.
Maybe with the real threat of an embargo, the fishers, the wholesalers and the government of the Philippines wil get serious about the use of cyanide.

One of the points being made is that with so much money at stake, this will never happen. Plus, I doubt any grass-roots campaign will ever get off the ground...too many differing opinions and too many agendas...

Peace,

Chip

 

[JennM]

If I'm a well trained and skilled net fisherman, and I go out tomorrow, will I catch more fish with:

A) Barrier and Hand nets
B) Cyanide

Which is "easier" to use to catch fish:

A) Nets
B) Cyanide

If I catch 40 fish with cyanide and it's easier, vs catching 20 fish with nets and busting my a$$ to do it, the choice is pretty clear why exporters are going to have to pay more for net-caught fish. The divers can collect 2x as many - until the reef is destroyed and the reef fish are gone. But then, there's always another reef - heck there are millions of islands, right? (tongue in cheek)

Unless my assumption is incorrect and it's just as easy and efficient to do A as B - people are going to naturally take the easier route that catches more fish...

Cheers
James

Steve Robinson has stated on numerous occasions, that a trained net fisher can catch as many fish as a juice fisher, so that cancels that out. However, if, for sake of argument, a fisher could only catch half, he still does not have the ONGOING EXPENSE of the cyanide (nobody gives him that for free), less of his catch would die (theoretically - if they were handled with care), so at the end of the day he might collect the same dollars, IF the fish are the same price whether they be net caught or juiced.

If the juice was that much more efficient, it would be used everywhere, but it is not. Australia, Fiji, Hawaii, and many other places, use nets to catch, and their fish are selling.

I know I'm in the minority, but I'm willing to pay extra, but I want the diver to get his fair share of it. It does not cost the exporter or importer any more to hold a clean fish vs. a juiced fish.

Jenn

 

[Jaime Baquero]

If I'm a well trained and skilled net fisherman, and I go out tomorrow, will I catch more fish with:

A) Barrier and Hand nets
B) Cyanide

Which is "easier" to use to catch fish:

A) Nets
B) Cyanide

If I catch 40 fish with cyanide and it's easier, vs catching 20 fish with nets and busting my a$$ to do it, the choice is pretty clear why exporters are going to have to pay more for net-caught fish. The divers can collect 2x as many - until the reef is destroyed and the reef fish are gone. But then, there's always another reef - heck there are millions of islands, right? (tongue in cheek)

Unless my assumption is incorrect and it's just as easy and efficient to do A as B - people are going to naturally take the easier route that catches more fish...

Cheers
James

Steve Robinson has stated on numerous occasions, that a trained net fisher can catch as many fish as a juice fisher, so that cancels that out. However, if, for sake of argument, a fisher could only catch half, he still does not have the ONGOING EXPENSE of the cyanide (nobody gives him that for free), less of his catch would die (theoretically - if they were handled with care), so at the end of the day he might collect the same dollars, IF the fish are the same price whether they be net caught or juiced.

If the juice was that much more efficient, it would be used everywhere, but it is not. Australia, Fiji, Hawaii, and many other places, use nets to catch, and their fish are selling.

I know I'm in the minority, but I'm willing to pay extra, but I want the diver to get his fair share of it. It does not cost the exporter or importer any more to hold a clean fish vs. a juiced fish.

Jenn

Jenn,

Depends on the species. To catch a high value fish, as for example the Clown Trigger, wich is a target specie of this trade, requieres of good trained collector and a good dose of patience to get it . You know what happens when the fish go into crevices. No doubt it will take longer to collect 20 clown trigger with nets than 20 with cyanide. That extra effort and fisher's patience to get a healthy and in good shape specimen merits an incentive. ... a good one.

Jaime

 

[Anonymous]

Depends on the species. To catch a high value fish, as for example the Clown Trigger, wich is a target specie of this trade, requieres of good trained collector and a good dose of patience to get it . You know what happens when the fish go into crevices. No doubt it will take longer to collect 20 clown trigger with nets than 20 with cyanide. That extra effort and fisher's patience to get a healthy and in good shape specimen merits an incentive. ... a good one.

Jamie,

Just out of curiosity, what do the collector's get paid for a single, say 5" clown trigger?

Peace,

Chip

 

[mkirda]

If I'm a well trained and skilled net fisherman, and I go out tomorrow, will I catch more fish with:

A) Barrier and Hand nets
B) Cyanide

Which is "easier" to use to catch fish:

A) Nets
B) Cyanide

James,

This is a loaded question:

A properly trained collector with a small amount of talent can catch more fish than an untrained cyanide collector. Cyanide is a crutch, something used to make things 'easier' for those who do not know the techniques for catching certain species.

Ferdinand explained how blue-faced angels are typically caught:
When they realize they are being chased, they typically dive straight into a hole in the reef structure. Cyanide fishermen target the hole, squirting in liberally. Sometimes they get the fish, sometimes they kill it. Sometimes it swims away, out another hole in the reef structure.

A net collector has to be smarter. He notes the hole the fish dove into. He then scans the reef structure itself, noting other holes where the fish might escape. He grabs and sets several hand nets across these escape holes. He will then go to the hole the fish initially dove into and will try his hand at scaring the fish out of the reef structure and into one of the nets. Typically, this will be via hookah hose- The sudden release of air into the hole makes a loud noise which can cause the fish to bolt out. Otherwise he might use a piece of palm frond as a tickler, scaring the fish out. If he sets his nets properly, the fish bolts out a hole into the net. A skilled collector already knows the holes the fish would try, having done this same scenario a dozen times before on the same patch of reef...

One very bad assumption to make: That uneducated fishermen do not know their fishing grounds. They may not have a college education, but they know their collection areas far better than any outsider could. One must not forget this.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Chip,

I'll doublecheck, I think is between US$ 15 and US$20. I'll get back to you.
Jaime

 

[Anonymous]

Jamie,

Don't knock yourself out over it...I just was curious as to a ballpark figure. Now let me ask you this...how much food does that buy down there? I'm just trying to get a picture of the life they lead.

I'd also like to hear more from Mike Kirda about the way they collect different fish...that anecdote about the angelfish was fascinating. I'm sure there's a sellable book there somewhere.

Peace,

Chip

 

[mkirda]

Now let me ask you this...how much food does that buy down there? I'm just trying to get a picture of the life they lead.

I'd also like to hear more from Mike Kirda about the way they collect different fish...that anecdote about the angelfish was fascinating. I'm sure there's a sellable book there somewhere.

Let's see... $10US translates into roughly 500-530 Pisos, so you are talking about maybe 800-1050 pisos. You can get a decent meal in most Filipino restaurants, even in Manila, for around 75-80 pisos. Western tourist oriented places may charge 300-350 pisos for a normal meal.
Food at a wet market is far, far less expensive. For example, I was served a Naso tang while in Palauig. That was considered a local delicacy and was also considered expensive at 35-50 pisos at the local market. You should consider that as your guide...

Mostly people will raise their own chickens and eat what fish they can catch or spear. They will grow what they can, and buy the rest, i.e. vinegar, soy sauce, patis, seasonings. Vegetables if they have to.
I've seen many who raise their own pigs as well. Beef is a rarity for most, sort of like seafood might be for those living in the Midwestern US states...
(i.e. I can get chicken for 49-69 cents a pound, but shrimp will cost $5-8/lb...)

Book, no way. Article on Coron is forthcoming. The outline was 5 pages, with like 10 written so far. I think it is already longer than the Palauig piece, with a heck of a lot needing to be added. It is far more in-depth, and may need to be edited down or split into two parts.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

For example, I was served a Naso tang while in Palauig.

Wow...what'd that taste like?

I'm just interested in how they catch the different fish...I think that's the most interesting part...

Thanks for the info and stories, Mike...

Peace,

Chip

 

[Jaime Baquero]

So with all the hundreds of thousands of dollars or perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training.
So with all the hundreds of fishers trained.
Why is it that it is so tough to get net caught fish?

Naesco, This is a good example of how the readers are getting the wrong information. You think that thousands of dollars perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training. Is not true period. In our case the Canadian government funded programs that had different components as:

Community organizing
Environmental Education
Alternative Livelihoods
Production of educational material ( Save our coral reefs Manual and a video Divers say no to cyanide)

To implement this work human resources were required, and those people had a salary.

Only a percentage of the project was allocated to training. Development is something more than just getting to the community with a bunch of nets and tell fishers how to use them. There is a lot of work previous to that phase.

The canadian personnel didn't get any pay when traveling to the Philippines. They got money to pay air ticket, hotel (according with the requirements of the canadian government, meaning nothing fancy) and food.

To get a project approved the NGO needs to submit a detailed budget. It is CIDA requirement that most of the funds have to go south. In our case most of the money > 70% goes south. The rest of the money 30% is administrated by the canadian NGO and is used to travel(in this case to the Pi), food, hotel, materials, communications, administration fees and to paid for the production of an audited financial report.

As you can see, all the money didn't go to training. A project is more complex that many readers can imagine. Is why, I am saying, readers are being misinformed about this matter and others.

More net caught fish is getting into the system than before. One aspect to consider is the possibility that more net caught fish is being shipped to Europe than the US. Are importers in Europe tougher than americans?The participation of a large importer in the US to clarify this aspect would be valuable.

Thanks for taking the time.

Jaime

Naesco,

Do you have any comments about the clarification I posted regarding the different components of projects implemented in the Philippines with canadian tax payers money? Those projects were oriented to contribute to find solutions to the environmental and social problems caused by the use of cyanide when collecting fish for the marine aquarium trade.

Your feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks

Jaime

 

[naesco]

So with all the hundreds of thousands of dollars or perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training.
So with all the hundreds of fishers trained.
Why is it that it is so tough to get net caught fish?

Naesco, This is a good example of how the readers are getting the wrong information. You think that thousands of dollars perhaps even millions spent in the Philippines on training. Is not true period. In our case the Canadian government funded programs that had different components as:

Community organizing
Environmental Education
Alternative Livelihoods
Production of educational material ( Save our coral reefs Manual and a video Divers say no to cyanide)

To implement this work human resources were required, and those people had a salary.

Only a percentage of the project was allocated to training. Development is something more than just getting to the community with a bunch of nets and tell fishers how to use them. There is a lot of work previous to that phase.

The canadian personnel didn't get any pay when traveling to the Philippines. They got money to pay air ticket, hotel (according with the requirements of the canadian government, meaning nothing fancy) and food.

To get a project approved the NGO needs to submit a detailed budget. It is CIDA requirement that most of the funds have to go south. In our case most of the money > 70% goes south. The rest of the money 30% is administrated by the canadian NGO and is used to travel(in this case to the Pi), food, hotel, materials, communications, administration fees and to paid for the production of an audited financial report.

As you can see, all the money didn't go to training. A project is more complex that many readers can imagine. Is why, I am saying, readers are being misinformed about this matter and others.

More net caught fish is getting into the system than before. One aspect to consider is the possibility that more net caught fish is being shipped to Europe than the US. Are importers in Europe tougher than americans?The participation of a large importer in the US to clarify this aspect would be valuable.

Thanks for taking the time.

Jaime

Naesco,

Do you have any comments about the clarification I posted regarding the different components of projects implemented in the Philippines with canadian tax payers money? Those projects were oriented to contribute to find solutions to the environmental and social problems caused by the use of cyanide when collecting fish for the marine aquarium trade.

Your feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks

Jaime

Celebrating today :wink: and hopefully in the mornng :wink: .
Later