Simple Questions for MAC

[Jaime Baquero]

Mr. B.
To back up the rhetoric, I import and deal in netcaught fish every week of my life.
As I explained a number of times already, I could no longer work with your favorite NGO in question as at that time they refused to deploy the funds and program and netting as intended. To continue with this knowingly would've made me an accomplice to both the 'shrinkage' of the funds and a 'planned failure' of training.
I spent ten years of struggling to get to that point and they just "absorbed" our budget into their general fund of activity and ruined the net training project developed by Dr. Don McAllister and I. Can you imagine the feeling of losing the decade of the 80's to such a thing?
As this group abandoned our project, there was no point in remaining with them and trying to train trainers or divers without nets...
What would a program be that did that?
Please save this response to refer to the next time you ask me why I resigned from the organization in question.
Steve
Head Field Trainer, Haribon 1992

Steve,

One aspect you are not saying is that you were and are, as we can see, an antagonistic person, you didn't know and still don't know how to approach and deal with people. Without doubt that you are someone with talent in your field, but your antagonistic feature kills all the good things you could offer. Don McAllister couldn't support and tolerate you any longer, he was receiving daily complains from the Haribon Foundation about your personality.

Jaime

 

[JeremyR]

I fail to see how steve's past personality issues could possibly have anything to do with MAC's current failings. We get it that you don't like steve & mary. We get it that Mac doesn't either. What *I* have never gotten is why MAC seems to be all propaganda and no substance, and won't answer simple questions without sidestepping or glossing. When I asked hard questions of which ever MAC rep was at appma last year in chicago, I felt like I was talking to a used car dealer. Again in the reefs.org chat, paul failed to answer many of our questions including mine.. again, it felt like it was a political speech with no substance. It's not just mary who doesn't get an answer, it's alot of people... maybe they have promise, and maybe they don't.. but they have dug their own PR grave and untill they can get someone who actually knows how to communicate I can't see how they are going to regain credibility. If I was chairman of the MAC board, I would never tolerate the type of public behavior that has gone on in this forum.. it is inexcusable.

 

[mkirda]

With all of this distracting conversation we're never going to get anywhere.

{Cha-ching!} All net-caught money fish go to Mary this week!

Jaime,

No offense, but you are starting to sound like Steve did a few months back...
Such a turn-around. Now he is spouting off words of sense and you are resorting to mud-slinging.

Can you get past the personality thing? I still believe you have something useful to contribute, but it sure is not in evidence during the past week...

Or maybe you are vying for John's old position being point man on the MAC picket-fence defense team?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[JennM]

It must be the lunar cycle because it's not just this circle of "friends" that has had some personality troubles in the last 7-8 days....

Personalities of people asking questions are IRRELEVANT. The questions are valid, and relevant, and MAC and it's cheerleaders have no better answer than to provide smoke and mirrors while they avoid accountability.

Jaime, respectfully, I perceive you as antagonistic - but that doesn't let me dismiss what you have to say - I still read it and consider it, and respond in kind when I choose to. However I always try to be civil, even when I don't agree.

For what it's worth - I've known Mary for a couple of years, speak to her on the phone from time to time, but most of our communication is electronic, and I've never found her to be PERSONALLY antagonistic. Passionate, definitely, frustrated with some industry issues, absolutely, but never have I found her to be one to bury an issue in a personality. Issues are issues. Facts have no emotion.

Jenn

 

[clarionreef]

Character problem?
I think I'd have a bigger character problem if I went along with a organization that embezzled the project funds and ruined the chance to train divers properly. I think that the disposition to "sell out" is a character problem.
Steve
PS. As Jaime has pointed out, blowing the whistle on embezzlers, is not condusive to getting good character references afterwards.

 

[Anonymous]

MAC says they are intent on working on the collection/training side of things.

Is there a training team in place? If so, who are they and what are their qualifications? If not, when is a team going to be in place?

Does MAC currently have the proper netting material to distribute collectors? If so, how is it being distributed? (Given away, sold, etc...). If not, is this a goal of MAC? What is being done to procure the proper materials?

Philippines: Industry Commitment to Responsible Practices Expands; MAC Training of Camotes Collectors Underway

Going beyond the strong, clear commitment to a sustainable, responsible and cyanide-free trade in their February 2003 statement (reported in the previous MAC News), the Philippine Tropical Fish Exporters Association (PTFEA) on June 5 signed a covenant with the Philippines Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) for the mutual goals of protecting the environment and advancing the live tropical fish industry. The public pledges made by PTFEA in the covenant include 1) providing fisher folk with nets and equipment, 2) training fisher folk in proper handling to minimize losses and unnecessary waste, 3) rejecting any fish suspected to be illegally caught, 4) never allowing their collectors to use cyanide or other forms of illegal fishing...

Reading the MAC report it looks like most of these questions should be addressed to PTFEA, not MAC. Local industry (in the guise of PTFEA) said they are going to take care of it. If they do not follow through in supplying netting and training it looks like the blame should fall on PTFEA at this point. They appear to understand the problem, have a source of revenue (from their livestock sales), and they are ultimately are the folks that really should be addressing these issues.

Sincerely,
Lee

 

[Anemone]

Reading the MAC report it looks like most of these questions should be addressed to PTFEA, not MAC. Local industry (in the guise of PTFEA) said they are going to take care of it. If they do not follow through in supplying netting and training it looks like the blame should fall on PTFEA at this point. They appear to understand the problem, have a source of revenue (from their livestock sales), and they are ultimately are the folks that really should be addressing these issues.

Lee,

Possibly the questions should be addressed to PTFEA (per this info in the MAC report). But MAC is thumping their chests and saying they're handling the issue - so why shouldn't the questions then be put to MAC?

Kevin

 

[MaryHM]

Oh hooray! We're saved! The PTFEA is going to take care of it for MAC!! Well we can all rest easy now. Thank god MAC has the foresight to work with such a prestigious organization like the PTFEA.

Oh wait. Can I please direct everyone's attention to www.ptfea.org. Click on About Our Association. Read under "Past Activities"

In the mid-1980s, Mr. George Blasiola, then PIJAC president, headed a cyanide fact finding mission in the Philippines. The mission was composed of several wholesalers and dealers. They were assisted by Richard Ty, the first PTFEA president. The mission found that there were generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. Although, there were isolated cases of cyanide users who were either food fish fishermen or fish suppliers to non-member exporters.

Hallelujah!! They have already determined there is generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. And this was in the 80's at the height of the whole mess. What are we in such an uproar about cyanide for? There isn't any use of it going on! I guess we can close this forum down and go home. Let the cyanide free certifications continue! :roll:

 

[MaryHM]

Also, since it is MAC that is doing the certifying and not the PTFEA, then MAC should be able and willing to answer any and all questions pertaining to implementing their own program.

 

[Anonymous]

Mary,

I couldn't get the link you posted to work. Here is a link that worked for me.

http://ptfea.org/home.html

I realize you hold a similar level of esteem for PTFEA as you do for MAC.

 

[clarionreef]

Lee,
Lets try something different.
The PTFEA has supplied the cyanide at a profitable mark-up to fisherman from the early 60's til quite recently when they moved the distribution of it into the hands of the middlemen to keep it out of their wharehouses.
They hosted the PIJAC whitewash in the 80's and found no cyanide hardly at all.

Yet...they just "agreed" to exclude all cyanide fish from their inventories... [ which would end the supply of almost every clown trigger, blue tang and non-Luzon based angelfishes from the trade tomorrow.]
Is that not what people want to hear? You don't think they'd fib do ya?
What is it about them that would convince Mary to hold them up a role models and in "higher esteem?"
Steve


PS They have a defense. Its is that the old guard is still decompressing out of the Marcos era of burning thru everything worth a dollar. This mindset is difficult to cure. The newly emerging generation will accept reform better.

 

[MaryHM]

I realize you hold a similar level of esteem for PTFEA as you do for MAC.

Lee,

Do you think I made up that "no cyanide use" comment from the PTFEA? Geez, I provided a direct link to it. Don't comment on my feelings toward the exporter's association, comment on their feelings toward cyanide use. Why some consider facts to be invalid just because I present them boggles my mind. Get off the Mary rant and let's hear some opinions on the PTFEA's cyanide stance. And here's another interesting FACT. Neither Imperial or Marivi want to belong to the PTFEA- they are the two 100% net caught exporters. You tell me why that might be....

 

[mkirda]

Oh wait. Can I please direct everyone's attention to www.ptfea.org. Click on About Our Association. Read under "Past Activities"

In the mid-1980s, Mr. George Blasiola, then PIJAC president, headed a cyanide fact finding mission in the Philippines. The mission was composed of several wholesalers and dealers. They were assisted by Richard Ty, the first PTFEA president. The mission found that there were generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. Although, there were isolated cases of cyanide users who were either food fish fishermen or fish suppliers to non-member exporters.

Hmmm... If there is generally no cyanide use, then why is it that so many of their fish tested positive for cyanide when tested by the IMA/BFAR lab?

Must be a government conspiracy...

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

Oh hooray! We're saved! The PTFEA is going to take care of it for MAC!! Well we can all rest easy now. Thank god MAC has the foresight to work with such a prestigious organization like the PTFEA.

Oh wait. Can I please direct everyone's attention to www.ptfea.org. Click on About Our Association. Read under "Past Activities"

In the mid-1980s, Mr. George Blasiola, then PIJAC president, headed a cyanide fact finding mission in the Philippines. The mission was composed of several wholesalers and dealers. They were assisted by Richard Ty, the first PTFEA president. The mission found that there were generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. Although, there were isolated cases of cyanide users who were either food fish fishermen or fish suppliers to non-member exporters.

Hallelujah!! They have already determined there is generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. And this was in the 80's at the height of the whole mess. What are we in such an uproar about cyanide for? There isn't any use of it going on! I guess we can close this forum down and go home. Let the cyanide free certifications continue! :roll:

Mary,

I wasn't on a "Mary rant". Based on the level of sarcasm you intentially placed in your post, my offhand comment isn't out of line. Please do not take my restating of your obvious view as some sort of ploy to "swing the topic off course". It isn't.

I dislike the "generally no cyanide use" quote because it is well accepted to be false in the broad sense. It does a disservice to the problems that do exist. However, the claim of "generally no cyanide use" appears to be targeted at the PTFEA members because later there is the statement "Although, there were isolated cases of cyanide users who were either food fish fishermen or fish suppliers to non-member exporters".

Neither Imperial or Marivi want to belong to the PTFEA- they are the two 100% net caught exporters.

Honestly, is there any real data showing that Imperial's or Marivi's fish are any better than what comes from the PTFEA exporters? Without a CDT a person can't say. Even with a CDT in use saying that anyone is 100% netcaught is a stretch. Your statement tends to show that if you trust someone you assume them to be 100% netcaught, if you don't they are inferred to be part of the cyanide problem.

Sincerely,
Lee

 

[mkirda]

Your statement tends to show that if you trust someone you assume them to be 100% netcaught, if you don't they are inferred to be part of the cyanide problem.

Lee,

The only 100% certified cyanide-free fish all happen to be dead. All fish to be tested end up going through a blender.

What Mary is saying is that those two suppliers handle fish from collectors that only use nets. They basically refuse to deal with anyone else other than collectors they know use nets and only nets.

Yes, trust is a part of it, but so is knowing your suppliers. Bringing in a representative of the collectors, housing them and feeding them while they learn how to handle different fishes. They base their business on this, and the collectors soon realize something: They know a good thing when they see it. They realize that slipping in cyanide-caught fish will jeapordize their relationship. And they do not wish for this to happen, Lee.

I can barely begin to describe Marivi's setup. She has a dormitory for all of her staff. They sleep on-site. The board and meals are paid for. They may not get a wonderful salary by our standards, but their lives are easy in most ways. It may be almost feudalistic, but Marivi is benevolent. The workers are almost like family to her.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[MaryHM]

All I have to say to you Lee is that the vast majority (I'd guess upwards of 90%) of the "big boy" PI exporters are PTFEA members. Who do you think has been pushing, using, and abusing the cyanide trade for decades?? The tiny fringe exporters?? Think about it. If cyanide is a huge problem and the vast majority of big exporters are PTFEA members, please put 2 and 2 together for a minute. There is a big picture here people. A huge one. Think about it.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

With all of this distracting conversation we're never going to get anywhere.

{Cha-ching!} All net-caught money fish go to Mary this week!

Jaime,

No offense, but you are starting to sound like Steve did a few months back...
Such a turn-around. Now he is spouting off words of sense and you are resorting to mud-slinging.

Can you get past the personality thing? I still believe you have something useful to contribute, but it sure is not in evidence during the past week...

Or maybe you are vying for John's old position being point man on the MAC picket-fence defense team?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

Mike,

I feel that the frustration level has gotten to it's highest level. I understand that there is plenty of work to be done in the PI, but also know that some good was done. There are many collectors that learnt to use nets and are still doing it. Many years of work and sacrifice to come here and read the different threads where you find posts misinforming and misleading the readers by saying that nothing was done. Our work was honest, the only thing I have been asking for .. is just to recognize it.

Is true that it was not perfect, we did the best we could with the resoucers we had .

I am coming to this forum on behalf of myself and the fishcollectors we helped in the Philippines. Please do not keep ignoring them by saying that nothing was done!

Jaime

 

[JennM]

Quote:

The mission found that there were generally no cyanide use in the Philippines. Although, there were isolated cases of cyanide users who were either food fish fishermen or fish suppliers to non-member exporters.

Why does that statment remind me of this one:

I did NOT have sexual relations with that woman!

Lee, maybe there is no scientific evidence out there, but as a retailer who is buying from wholesalers who buy from Imperial and Aquarium Habitat, I have SUCH a difference in mortality. You have no idea. Yes I'm sure a part of that comes from handling - I think that the wholesalers I deal with now, care more for their fish, and take more care in handling/packing, but mortality is next to nil, when I ordered from the big boxes, I had much more mortality - but what I considered to be "normal" based on the mortality where I used to work - he bought from the big boxes too. Selection isn't bad either - sometimes I have to wait a bit for a given specimen, but when it does come, it's alive and healthy.

So MAC has left it in the hands of the PTFEA - isn't that convenient? So who is footing the bill?

Jenn

 

[Anonymous]

For some clarity:



http://www.reefs.org/library/talklog/p_holthus_121502.htm

http://www.reefs.org/library/talklog/j_brandt_033003.html

 

[JennM]

This jumped out at me in John Brandt's chat log:

The batches of fish remain marked with id numbers throughout the chain of custody all the way to retail.

Glenn, didn't you say that the certified fish you ordered were not in marked bags? You mentioned that the invoice indicated MAC Certified - did the invoice have a batch number?

Kyle, do you receive fish with batch numbers on them?

Jenn