John Brandt's MAC-Philippines Report

[John_Brandt]

This is all fine and well and looks lovely when the westerners arrive, but it has been seen in other areas that the designated collection areas are not adhered to by the trained collector, the marker buoys are removed for other uses, and put back when the westerners arrive again.

MHA,

The MAC Certified net fisherman don't move buoys for Westerners :lol:

John Brandt

 

[John_Brandt]

John,

Many thanks for sharing the wonderful experience you had while visiting the Philippines. I know the feeling, myself had the opportunity to see the kind of work that committed fisherfolks are capable of doing to provide the industry with net caught fish properly handled and held.

Most of the damage inflicted to net caught fish is due to poor handling and holding techniques to community level. The holding pen technique is something that must be used by collectors in countries where the economic condition doesn't allow the construction of real holding facilities.
Most fishers, in isolated areas, are keeping their fish in plastic bags for extended periods of time.

Holding pens are key elements that will help to diminish unnecessary mortality contributing to a more sustainable operation.

Jaime Baquero

You are quite right about the holding pen.

I love the knickname Barangay Batasan has given theirs...Wall Street. The center of high financial dealings

I took some great pictures of Wall Street that I'll be posting on the MASNA site pretty soon. I actually climbed onto Wall Street several times on consecutive days while the fishers were having their catches examined and invoiced by Epi. After all the fishers have been checked in it's time for everybody to drink tuba (village-made coconut flower wine). And there's a bowl of nudibranch eggs to snack on too. I chased the eggs with the tuba. Now I'm hooked on both!

Batasan used to keep their fish in bags on the island. They couldn't keep the mortality low enough to have them consistently be MAC Certified. Now with Wall Street, the problem is solved.

Any village with access to bamboo could construct their own Wall Street in a weekend.

Jaime, where are you now?

John Brandt

 

[dizzy]

But many on this forum seem to think that the USL is to be used as a template for legislation. It is not, and never was. The USL is an example of the hobby/industry wishing to police itself. In the case of MAC, an USL might serve as a list of fish that cannot be certified. If the USCRTF had their way, the hobby/industry would voluntarily reject unsuitables. They would probably be willing to throw a bunch of money at a functional Educational NGO that would bring the demand for unsuitables down near zilch by teaching everybody that it's crazy to collect or purchase these fish. They don't want to write laws, they want the industry to act responsibly.
John Brandt

John,
Do you really think the USCRTF would be willing to fund a drive to educate wholesalers/retailers/hobbyists about which fish are better left on the reefs? I have worried that the USL would one day be used to slowly shut our industry down, one species at a time. And the 1%DOA/1%DAA numbers MAC chose for certifed fish, did nothing to calm my suspicions.

With the growing conscientiousness we are experiencing today I think hobbysists could soon get the word to the lfs that they were making theirself look very bad by carrying fish that had poor track records. Same thing for the e-tailers, everytime a hobbyists saw they were offering a redlist fish for sale they could point it out. We could start a wall of shame and if it were on all the bb and in all the fish mags I think change would happen very quickly. I don't want to see laws made that will slow down the process of getting live fish through customs, because this will ultimately cause far more loss of livestock than it saves.

 

[John_Brandt]

But many on this forum seem to think that the USL is to be used as a template for legislation. It is not, and never was. The USL is an example of the hobby/industry wishing to police itself. In the case of MAC, an USL might serve as a list of fish that cannot be certified. If the USCRTF had their way, the hobby/industry would voluntarily reject unsuitables. They would probably be willing to throw a bunch of money at a functional Educational NGO that would bring the demand for unsuitables down near zilch by teaching everybody that it's crazy to collect or purchase these fish. They don't want to write laws, they want the industry to act responsibly.
John Brandt

John,
Do you really think the USCRTF would be willing to fund a drive to educate wholesalers/retailers/hobbyists about which fish are better left on the reefs? I have worried that the USL would one day be used to slowly shut our industry down, one species at a time. And the 1%DOA/1%DAA numbers MAC chose for certifed fish, did nothing to calm my suspicions.

With the growing conscientiousness we are experiencing today I think hobbysists could soon get the word to the lfs that they were making theirself look very bad by carrying fish that had poor track records. Same thing for the e-tailers, everytime a hobbyists saw they were offering a redlist fish for sale they could point it out. We could start a wall of shame and if it were on all the bb and in all the fish mags I think change would happen very quickly. I don't want to see laws made that will slow down the process of getting live fish through customs, because this will ultimately cause far more loss of livestock than it saves.

Good Morning Mitch,

Yes, even though it was April Fools Day yesterday I meant everything I said. One of the primary goals of the USCRTF is to fund educational fora that would bring about greater consciousness and conservation of coral reefs. The USCRTF is primarily focused on American reefs, but their USAID arm is concerned with reefs worldwide (and is fully aware that America accounts for the majority of trade in marine ornamental species).

I can tell you that after spending 3 years with the Task Force I feel that their position, priorities and spirit are pretty much right on. The biggest problem with the USCRTF is that it lacks teeth. It is very difficult to actually stop land-based pollution of reefs, and this is their #1 priority.

Wall-of-shames and things like them, are always going to blow up in your face. Go forceful but gentle, man. Gentle man. Gentleman.

Yes, I know about your suspicions Mitch. They are legendary :wink: I took a picture in Washington DC just for you. You had voiced your strong suspicion to me that World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and The Nature Conservancy (NC) were sitting on the MAC BOD for the specific purpose of using the MAC as a vehicle for shutting down the aquarium industry. You said that your suspicion of this was fueled by your other suspicion that WWF and NC were anti-aquarium keeping.

So, I took a picture of the reef aquarium in the library of the World Headquarters of the World Wildlife Fund, where MAC held our most recent BOD meeting. If I had more time I probably would have also photographed the reef aquarium in the home of the Vice President of WWF.

Mitch, friend, if you have fears or paranoias please run them by me. My only request is that you do it gently. I'm here to help.

John Brandt

Legislation Representative-MASNA
MASNA Representative and board of directors-MAC
Vice President and Programs Chairman-CMAS/Chicago

 

[clarionreef]

Hello John.,
To be sure the free for all type forum where all are 'experts' or at least free to 'pile on' tends to send away the calmer type of reason you represent. The misunderstandings and confusions about the sword of Damocles hanging over the head of the trade was however helped by groups sounding the alarm about shutdowns is people didn't sign up and join. Shutdowns on CITIES 2 items it was implied, were not the only items in danger. Cyanide caught fish are not in appendix 2 and are the most serious issue of sustainability, illegality and immorality in our future .. Scleractinias, tridacnas, rock and seahorses are all bred now with increasing fervor and the field of new outfits pushing projects and businesses are growing fast enough as to suggest that many of these items will become domesticated stock as a matter of routine before too long.
That will leave us with the non- cultured and the not to be cultured hundreds of other species that the trade consumes with scant understanding and regard for sustainability.
If USCRTF will be irrelevant to that issue, then the hue and cry to join MAC to save the industry would be reduced I would think.
Of course USL meant something other then the pun I spun. I ment that nothing is more unsuitable to me then something caught w/ poison. If trifasciatus butterflies are taken occasionally by numb traders...thats a lesser crime.
Most dealers that I know would laugh if I sold them... It is my experience that most already know about the majority of these species and act on it. The issue is blown up more I think by new semi environmental types hoping to mark territory and define themselves as good guys with simple issues that no ones really against. Coral feeding butterflies are not more numerous but more omnipresent and obvious by the dimunition of conventional trade species populations [ in heavy collecting areas ] that the trade really wants. This of course already suggests selection towards suitable species. Many divers already know that coral feeders are low on the list unless the exporter wants some ornatissimus for his Asian buyers [generally].
The USL thing is similar to the reptile situation where reminders and admonitions are given about reptile USLs routinely. But USLs are defined by various and often unable to agree upon criteria. One persons USL is anothers challenge and it tends to push the frontier of discovery to work with them if only to protect the investment. There are species considered to be USLs that do well if collected well and not starved to death like juvenile pinatus batfish. Since 99% of them are starved before shipping, how does one ever get a handle on it unless you can work w/ them w/in a day or two of collection and see how well they really feed? 5-6 days of processing later...its too late as their feeding stimulous is already shutting down.
More helpful observations can be made like this when more of us get involved "over there". Now that you are more involved "over there 'John, you'll no doubt be a part of this evolution of understanding.
Steve

 

[naesco]

Steve with respect you need to be updatedon the issue of the Unsuitable SpeciesList (USL)
This forum spent months developing the criteria and reviewing most common species.
One doesnt have to be an egghead to determine which ones are on the list although as the list expands there will be grey areas.
Don't believe for one moment that the LFS knows the USL critters and avoids them through there own experience.
Well they know, but they still buy them and sell them to unsuspecting newbies to have them die and pollute their tanks.

Walk into the LFS nearest to you and what you will see is a mess. Half dead anenomes, sick powder blues, skinny polyp eating butterfly and the usual assortment of cleaner wrasse, wild seahorse, and yes batfish.

Your the President of the Marine Dealers. Get them to clean up their act first and than you can take on the world. Get them to insist that the fish they order for us are cyanide free.

I was shocked in Johns Report to see that that everyone was so gleeful and proud about what was accomplished. A lot has been accomplished. But how can anyone feel good watching a bunch of natives hauling in cleaner wrasse for the industry

 

[clarionreef]

Hey Boss,
Its a question of priority thats all.
No one sells suitable or unsuitable species off a dead coral reef... and the viability of the coral reef is where my primary focus is.
That is not to say that efforts to educate, teach, inform, shame , boycott or annoy USL [ whoevers version of what the 'official' list should be] friendly retailers could not go forth.
You seem to have the motivation to stop the trade in cleaner wrasses from the two provinces they all come from...but understand this. Theyare not collected from all over the country. Far from it. Almost all the trades cleaner wrasses come from Batangas and Mindoro as they have for 30 years or so. Same areas all the time. They are clearly one of the better recruiting species around for some reason. To me that removes the environmental crisis from the picture and makes it more one of ...the ethics of keeping fishes not long for this world in captivity. Geez...we've got a fair bit in that lot now don't we?
I have 1,000 times more energy and passion for saving blue tangs and their generations old acropora table top coral homes than I do yearling, seasonal cleaner wrasses.
How do you legislate such a notion as a banned list? Pardon me for relizing that that is not as 'not happening'. That one could be useful as a policy, a pledge, an article and a flyer on the counter etc...but a USL fish police action?
Hey, I know something of passion overtaling practicality. Believe me. I don't want to belittle the cause there. I just see it futher back in the line in a series of issues of coral reef sustainability and therefore trade survival.
Thats my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Sincerely, Steve
PS. AMDA is also working on and considering the issue. I don't rule there, I participate and there is a process and I respect it. Others are involved and welcome to speak...of course.

 

[dizzy]

Yes, I know about your suspicions Mitch. They are legendary :wink: I took a picture in Washington DC just for you. You had voiced your strong suspicion to me that World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and The Nature Conservancy (NC) were sitting on the MAC BOD for the specific purpose of using the MAC as a vehicle for shutting down the aquarium industry. You said that your suspicion of this was fueled by your other suspicion that WWF and NC were anti-aquarium keeping.

John it's good to hear I'm good at something. :lol: I don't believe I ever suggested WWF or NC people are anti-aquarium keeping. What I think I suggested is that WWF or NC people, or at the very least some of the people who donate money to them, don't like the concept of animals being taken from the wild. I do feel that the USL has the potential to be abused and that is why I'm against it. I support the efforts of the WWF and the Nature Conservancy to protect endangered species.

 

[John_Brandt]

Hello John.,
To be sure the free for all type forum where all are 'experts' or at least free to 'pile on' tends to send away the calmer type of reason you represent. The misunderstandings and confusions about the sword of Damocles hanging over the head of the trade was however helped by groups sounding the alarm about shutdowns is people didn't sign up and join. Shutdowns on CITIES 2 items it was implied, were not the only items in danger. Cyanide caught fish are not in appendix 2 and are the most serious issue of sustainability, illegality and immorality in our future .. Scleractinias, tridacnas, rock and seahorses are all bred now with increasing fervor and the field of new outfits pushing projects and businesses are growing fast enough as to suggest that many of these items will become domesticated stock as a matter of routine before too long.
That will leave us with the non- cultured and the not to be cultured hundreds of other species that the trade consumes with scant understanding and regard for sustainability.
If USCRTF will be irrelevant to that issue, then the hue and cry to join MAC to save the industry would be reduced I would think.
Of course USL meant something other then the pun I spun. I ment that nothing is more unsuitable to me then something caught w/ poison. If trifasciatus butterflies are taken occasionally by numb traders...thats a lesser crime.
Most dealers that I know would laugh if I sold them... It is my experience that most already know about the majority of these species and act on it. The issue is blown up more I think by new semi environmental types hoping to mark territory and define themselves as good guys with simple issues that no ones really against. Coral feeding butterflies are not more numerous but more omnipresent and obvious by the dimunition of conventional trade species populations [ in heavy collecting areas ] that the trade really wants. This of course already suggests selection towards suitable species. Many divers already know that coral feeders are low on the list unless the exporter wants some ornatissimus for his Asian buyers [generally].
The USL thing is similar to the reptile situation where reminders and admonitions are given about reptile USLs routinely. But USLs are defined by various and often unable to agree upon criteria. One persons USL is anothers challenge and it tends to push the frontier of discovery to work with them if only to protect the investment. There are species considered to be USLs that do well if collected well and not starved to death like juvenile pinatus batfish. Since 99% of them are starved before shipping, how does one ever get a handle on it unless you can work w/ them w/in a day or two of collection and see how well they really feed? 5-6 days of processing later...its too late as their feeding stimulous is already shutting down.
More helpful observations can be made like this when more of us get involved "over there". Now that you are more involved "over there 'John, you'll no doubt be a part of this evolution of understanding.
Steve

Hi Steve,

Of course to some people this resolution will come as a relief, as many do dread any sort of government regulation. I have not had a chance yet to find out the who/what/where/and why of the resolution. It is possible that the USCRTF does not have the legal authority to write laws at all. Now that is only a speculation, and lacks any confirmation.

This war is quite likely to scuttle plans for the next USCRTF meeting in Guam/Saipan this fall. It is possible that it will be held in Washington DC again instead.

But the situation with MAC remains unchanged. They will forge ahead with the net training and the conversion of villages from cyanide to nets. The idea of quality net-caught fish that have been handled responsibly is appealing under any circumstances.

Your comments about the handling of fish affecting their ultimate outcome hits the mark. After decades of frustration with many species, it may turn out to be that cyanide fishing and poor handling has caused many instances of poor survivorship. There are reasons to think that properly collected and handled fish represent a "clean slate", and that unsuitability needs to be reevaluated.

I know you know I know that certain fishes from the Philippines are difficult to maintain, yet the same species from other regions aren't. The more I think about it the more complicated the USL becomes.

Speaking of "over there"....I don't know about you, but I left a part of myself in the Philippines. And that is not a pun.


John Brandt

 

[John_Brandt]

"Your the President of the Marine Dealers. Get them to clean up their act first and than you can take on the world. Get them to insist that the fish they order for us are cyanide free.

I was shocked in Johns Report to see that that everyone was so gleeful and proud about what was accomplished. A lot has been accomplished. But how can anyone feel good watching a bunch of natives hauling in cleaner wrasse for the industry" naesco.

Well naesco, I shouldn't be speaking for Steve concerning AMDA, but clearly the problem dealers would be among those who would not join, nor have any dealings with, AMDA. Steve, drilling the idea of unsuitability into the present members of AMDAs heads, might be like preaching to the choir.

Onward....
Your shock and awe might be a bit misplaced. The fishermen were (and presumably still are) happy and proud. But remember what I said about them not knowing about unsuitable species? They collect what is sustainable and allowable within the CAMP (Collection Area Management Plan). Right now the harvest of cleaner wrasses is ecologically sustainable from the Batasan/Tangaran area.

John Brandt

 

[naesco]

The fact that it is sustainable is irrelavent.
The fact is that it is unethical.
Why is not someone telling this to the fishers?
John, do you support the catchment of cleaner wrasse which have no chance of survival in our tanks.

There were numerous other obligate feeder species identified in this forum as impossible to keep (USL)

 

[John_Brandt]

"Almost all the trades cleaner wrasses come from Batangas and Mindoro as they have for 30 years or so. Same areas all the time. They are clearly one of the better recruiting species around for some reason."

Steve,

I'm going to speculate that their rapid and consistent recruitment rate may be based on one of their outstanding features. Cleaner wrasses are virtually immune to predation.


John Brandt

 

[John_Brandt]

The fact that it is sustainable is irrelavent.
The fact is that it is unethical.
Why is not someone telling this to the fishers?
John, do you support the catchment of cleaner wrasse which have no chance of survival in our tanks.

There were numerous other obligate feeder species identified in this forum as impossible to keep (USL)

naesco,

I am right there with you man. But have a seat and take a deep breath, because reality and practicality are about to hit you upside the head.

It would have been quite easy for me to point out (by way of translator) to the fishers, right there at Wall Street, that some of their catch was "unsuitable for hobbyist consumption", and that we don't want these fish. But that translates into island Tagalog as this, "You make $2 a day right now. Hobbyists are going to be much happier and better served if you make $1.75 instead."

Rational-thinking, humanitarian ethicists immediately realize that a compromise has got to be reached. Alternatives or substitutions have got to be in place before any meaningful cutbacks can be made. This was the point I tried to make in my Q & A about taking things one step at a time. In most cases some things have to be in place, before others can occur.

My mind was running at 240mph while I was there at Batasan. I immediately recognized species that were not being targeted, but are quite sustainable, and quite desirable. This is why the future is bright, but we need to tinker with it to get there. When you see Halichoeres melanurus swim right past your face, flashing in the sunlight, you immediately realize that wonderful alternatives are there. Gobies, blennies and interesting wrasses (among other fishes) abound there. The fishers however, are not necessarily trained, nor equipped for everything they could possibly catch. Remember they are almost entirely using breath-hold methodology.

The immediate important point, and Steve has mentioned this, is that these men are not using cyanide. When things begin to fall into place, like an escalation of supply and demand for MAC Certified, then these other things will rapidly be implemented. We are on a road to success, but we aren't there quite yet. You represent the kid in the backseat hollering out, "Are we there yet, Dad?" Naesco, we are all in the same car.

Now, I am a research scientist at heart, and I'm really curious how MAC Certified cleaner wrasses do in aquariums. But I'm also not too naive to get my hopes set very high.

Reform will come to this industry by working through these things. Not by sitting in front of a computer monitor and throwing bricks. Naesco you are right on track, and I wouldn't want you to change your spirit. But don't forget that you have people working towards your ideals right now.

What should really be shocking you is this industry's appetite for cleaner wrasses.

John Brandt

 

[clarionreef]

Naesco,
Thanks for making me appear moderate and reasonable...I appreciate it and needed it. [ I think] Your checks in the mail!
Sincerely, Steve
PS. If I could, I'd like to say that I have long been upset to see things like large Chaetodon Meyeri and Ornatissimus being collected by guys I trained not to. They explained that it was for Hong Kong, not the US, and their exporter wanted them.
They killed food fish to sell...and I came to see it as the same. The conversion of doomed butterflies into rice and food for their families. Oh well, a better use of the resource than some. If not for the socio-economic component, I would be more purist, more dilatory and flippant on stuff like this. I also asked them to cut down on smoking and drinking rum...also to no avail.

 

[mkirda]

In most cases some things have to be in place, before others can occur.
{snip}
When things begin to fall into place, like an escalation of supply and demand for MAC Certified, then these other things will rapidly be implemented. We are on a road to success, but we aren't there quite yet. You represent the kid in the backseat hollering out, "Are we there yet, Dad?"

John,

So what then is holding up the certification of the other areas mentioned in MAC's 4th Quarter 2002 newsletter? They clearly mentioned Bagac, Palauig and Coron by name, and that they were supposed to be on-line in early 2003. We are now in the second quarter of 2003, still no further certifications.
I know all three of these areas actually had resource assessments done in 2001 and all would be sustainable. All three have substantially better coral cover and fish species diversity than the areas around Tubigon. I just wonder what the holdup is.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[naesco]

I agree 100% with what you are saying. I am 100% supportive of all efforts made to put more industry money in the hands of the fishers and make sure cyanide is something in the past.

But John, you do not represent the fishers although it is obvious that we share your view.

Nor do you represent industy.

You represent us, the reefers, and what we want is cyanide free fish so that we are not wasting our money on fish that will die in our tanks.
(MASNA's goal is to educate hobbyists and promote ethical practices in the hobby.)

We reefers do not want fish sold to our fellow reefers that you know, industry knows and I know have no chance of success in our tanks.

As the representative of reefers it is your task to face both issues in our interests.

Perhaps you can encourage the 'scuba fraternity' to give the fishers some outdated equipment and educate them so that they can get the larger dollars and we get the fish you saw which they are not capable of catching now. There are other ideas to explore.
But we cannot allow industry to continue the slaughter of fish that have no chance of success in our tanks and we cannot turn the other cheek and allow it to happen .

I would like to think I am the kid in the back seat saying "Dad, Dad, please slow down, or you will run over someones pet.
Please don't be part of industy that is saying "Shut up, I'm driving!"

 

[mkirda]

I am 100% supportive of all efforts made to put more industry money in the hands of the fishers and make sure cyanide is something in the past.
{snip}
we get the fish you saw which they are not capable of catching now. There are other ideas to explore.

Naesco,

Do you agree with Steve Robinson's premise that net fishermen can not expect to get more per fish than juice fishermen? Or should we expect 'the system' to pay more for net-caught fish? How much more? And how should this translate to a retail price per fish in our LFS?

I see as an underlying assumption built into the entire MAC model- and I am not at all sure that the assumption is correct.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[naesco]

mkirda
IMO the market will determine this. I expect to see more and more demand for cyanide free fish. I expect exporters, importers and wholesalers who deal in juiced fish to be treated like the scum they are.
Online stores and LFS will demand cyanide free fish from wholesalers.
The names of online stores and wholesalers still dealing in juiced fish will be known by all boards.
The demand will come from the education of reefers on boards like reefs org. All newbies will be enlightened about the existance of these boards within weeks of their initial purchase, be educated, and make cyanide free demands.
IMO fishers, exporters, importers/wholesalers who are first in will get the added profit.

Therefor I do not agree with Steve. With respect, he is looking at backward experience rather than forward projections.

In discussing cyanide free fish with wholesalers and retailers, cyanide free fish added to the bottom line in heathier and low DOA which offset the added cost. I expect higher prices only because the reefer will be prepared to pay more. 10-20% would be reasonable.
Cheap fish will equate to cyanide caught Indonesian and Phillipine fish. Why would anyone knowingly buy them?

 

[mkirda]

mkirda
IMO the market will determine this. I expect to see more and more demand for cyanide free fish.

In discussing cyanide free fish with wholesalers and retailers, cyanide free fish added to the bottom line in heathier and low DOA which offset the added cost. I expect higher prices only because the reefer will be prepared to pay more. 10-20% would be reasonable.
Cheap fish will equate to cyanide caught Indonesian and Phillipine fish. Why would anyone knowingly buy them?

Naesco,

Well, at the moment, MAC-certified does not equal cyanide-free. And MAC certified does equal Philippine fish, which equals cheap fish in most people's minds...

The collector's collectives that participate in the MAC process do so for a reason- They expect a return on their investment.

Do the math.

If I, as a typical hobbyist, walk into a store and see two fish, same species, both with similar coloration, both eating. Only difference is that one is MAC-certified and one isn't. Oh, and the MAC-certified fish is 20% more... Do I have to say that many people I know can talk the talk but do not walk the walk? I don't think it unusual at all that people will vote with their dollars and buy the cheaper fish- in fact, 'the market' would prove me right time and time again.

Think, seriously think, about the money flows here. How does a store pay for certification, changing the way they handle things, setting up separate systems for MAC fish, etc., then maintain costs? DOAs will be that much lower?

Someone is going to get squeezed. And I think it will end up being the collectors, those whom we are ostensibly trying to help. I don't see people paying more for fish when they have an equivalent viable alternative.
You can increase efficiencies all up and down the supply chain. But at some point, squeezing out those efficiencies will become a profit squeeze. And I think I know who will get the smaller slice of the pie over time.

I guess I was hoping for a more balanced perspective. It doesn't seem to be forthcoming yet.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[naesco]

Mike we are not quite there yet.
But it will come
The reason the 20 percent is not possible right now is that most newbies and many reeferswill not appreciate the difference.
But once educated the issue will be clear.
In tank one is a cheap cyanide caught tang at 30 dollars and in tank two is a certified fish for 36 dollars.
Which one would you choose. You are educated.

I am convinced that the new reefer will not tolerate juiced fish and the damage juice does to the reef.

IMO the success MAC will have once they have a random cyanide test in place, will be a result of exporters in the Phillippines, stateside wholesalers, and larger online stores and LFS chains, racing to distance themselves from those who deal in jucied fish
Soon, tough questions on this and other boards to sponsors, and other livestock suppliers will be:
Do you deal in cyanide caught fish?
Answers like "we strive to ensure that our suppliers blah blah blah.. will not be accepted.
The stateside CEO's of the companies that do will be outed. Now they hide behind answers like the above.