A message from REEForm

[Anonymous]

actually, it should be split into thirds....

naesco's folly

the good informative discourse w/bluehula

and the ever so old but never dying kiddie spat between jaime and steve :evil: :? :roll:

 

[blue hula3]

actually, it should be split into thirds....

naesco's folly

the good informative discourse w/bluehula

and the ever so old but never dying kiddie spat between jaime and steve :evil: :? :roll:

Thanks for the compliment on part 2 but why did I get left out of the sandbox ?

I was having fun !

 

[clarionreef]

Vitz,
Your fire-bombing of Naesco and getting away with it broke new ground in permisivity on this board.
Between that vicious attack and Jaimes 'expleted deleted' observations, you guys have struck a blow for freedom...or anarchy. Not sure which.
If that stuff is OK...what is not OK?
Just what is the role of a moderator now? I really want to know.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz,
Your fire-bombing of Naesco and getting away with it broke new ground in permisivity on this board.
Between that vicious attack and Jaimes 'expleted deleted' observations, you guys have struck a blow for freedom...or anarchy. Not sure which.
If that stuff is OK...what is not OK?
Just what is the role of a moderator now? I really want to know.
Steve

why are you so obsessed w/the nitty gritty inconsequential and irrelevant? :?

why not let the moderators worry about what their responsibilities are?

you and jaime both have said many a thing that should have gotten threads locked left and right and dead center, by your own whining's criteria

i said what i honestly meant and felt, w/no hidden agendas, or inuendos

anyone who got what i gave could and should, defend themselves- i take as good as give(most of the time :wink: )and it was an honest 'attack' :wink:

why can't all of you's guys just cut to the chase, vent once, and move on?

now get back to the good interesting topic and discussion, goddammit, or this thread will have to be quartered!!! :wink:

 

[Kalkbreath]

If the exporters are letting fifty percent of the fish die during holding........that alone proves there is no such thing as fish shortages out on the reefs........ :wink: Perhaps what we need IS a fish shortage{there sre too many fish!}..........less fish would mean better handling :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

If the exporters are letting fifty percent of the fish die during holding........that alone proves there is no such thing as fish shortages out on the reefs........ :wink: Perhaps what we need IS a fish shortage{there sre too many fish!}..........less fish would mean better handling :wink:

no- it doesn't prove there's a shortage-mebbe it helps to cause it? :idea:

do you really think that less fish would mean better handling? :?

less fish would mean the same handling, done less expensively :?

 

[clarionreef]

Vitz,
You said what you honestly felt ...and that is your defense of the viciousness of your attack on Wayne?
You make my point better that I have.
So if we honestly feel what we say...then anything goes??
Believe it or not, some of us censor 90% of our thoughts here. If the 10% that gets out is so sharp, imagine the other 90% getting out.
In order to remain critical of others issues AND DRAMAS, you'd have to first retract your thesis that it is OK 'so long as you honestly feel' the things said. That defense would open up and justify a death match approach to conflict resolution.
After decades on the front line in this saga...I have a few honestly held views myself. [ if you just popped in, I understand how much could appear confusing though ] That could never justify an anything goes approach to public discussion however.
My most recent contributions have been centered on ...thread drift and response to expetives.
Steve
PS. And Kalks charge that silly stuff like 10 million in Aussie collecting figures never goes unchallenged by 'you guys'. Was it not challenged and discredited, explained and analysed? Is that not what the forum is for?

 

[Anonymous]

ah-nm

i just wish you and jaime would quit the babyfight and move on-w/out further insinuations/inuendos

if either of you wants to call the other an a-hole for x thing, specifically named-then just do it, and move on

that's all i'm tryin to say

 

[Anonymous]

less fish would mean the same handling, done less expensively

I have to agree with Kalk on this one, less fish would mean better handling *IF* the importer would allow a looser pack with the fewer fish. Vitz is right is the importer won't allow a looser pack.

 

[Anonymous]

[PSA] A moderator is not a nanny, babysitter, or playground monitor. Stick to the truth, be able to verify it, CYA with "IMHO", and play nice and you should be fine. I'm not here to spare anyone's feelings, break up spats, or put people in the corner. This is not a hobby forum, but an Industry one, and I expect the behaviour to reflect that. You have a problem with someone personally, use the PM button, other wise we will all know you are just looking for attention and the remarks will be treated as such.[/PSA]

Carry on.........

:wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Vitz,
You missed a few years its clear.
The quintessential issue has centered around WHY the collecting, handling, field reforms did not get resolved with all the NGO activity adressing it during the past 15 years or so.
I say the reform ..[ like Reeform ] groups that gave it a shot failed... miserably and predictably. No one has been as critical of phoney reform as you. So as brothers in arms on this, may I suggest that my issues with Haribon and the IMA are pretty much like yours with REEForm and MAC.
In other words it is a pattern which began back then that has continued til now. The fraud you so oppose was first opposed by me long ago. I have explained it often in scholarly fashion and sometimes not.
I am happy to pass the baton to you if you want to carry it. The anti=MAC message on your posts and the REEForm dissertation suggests that you are more cantankerous, more obstreporous and radical than I.
And...I don't hold it against you. I just ask that you see the timeline and the pattern better and not portray my differences with the previous groups as petty, personal bickering. There are serious issues of fraud, misallocation of funds, none or wrong nets in the net trainings etc. that can be learned from. These same defects are being repeated. Of all the looting and diverting of reform for personal ends, only my esteemed colleague from Canada defends it.
He has therefore become a poster child for this eco-fraud in my view. Hence the disagreement of history between us.
Its not personal per se. I don't even know him...only the fraud and failure represented by him IMHO as successful and sincere.
They were pretty much the same issues that you have with the current crop of reeform...er reform groups.
I have already seen how you handle disagreements with them...and it ain't pretty!
I don't see how we can seperate the crook from the crime, the con man from the con. REEForm from the reformer the faker from the fraud or the pond from the frog.
If you front for a fraud...witting or not...be forewarned. That is a message of deterrant for future ones..
Sincerely and on topic,
Steve
ps. Prepare for a nasty one but hey...they're accepted now I guess.

 

[Kalkbreath]

If the exporters are letting fifty percent of the fish die during holding........that alone proves there is no such thing as fish shortages out on the reefs........ :wink: Perhaps what we need IS a fish shortage{there sre too many fish!}..........less fish would mean better handling :wink:

no- it doesn't prove there's a shortage-mebbe it helps to cause it? :idea:

do you really think that less fish would mean better handling? :?

less fish would mean the same handling, done less expensively :?

I think all three of you missed my point.......there is no shortage of fish in the Philippines.......this is why the exporters treat the fish being held poorly.........kind of like why you dont worry about the sand you track home on you sandles after a walk on the beach..........Will the Ocean miss the sand? ........With so many fish abound the exporters just get some more if something happens to this batch........kinda like the way we treat feeder fish........does a feeder goldfish somehow have less of a right to be nicely cared for then a blueface Angel? Do you cry when a feeder guppy dies ........like you do when a conspic or clarion does the huffy ?Why?.............. If there truly was any shortage of fish in PI .....then each fish would be harder to replace.......thus more treasured and more valued...... :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

If the exporters are letting fifty percent of the fish die during holding........that alone proves there is no such thing as fish shortages out on the reefs........ :wink: Perhaps what we need IS a fish shortage{there sre too many fish!}..........less fish would mean better handling :wink:

no- it doesn't prove there's a shortage-mebbe it helps to cause it? :idea:

do you really think that less fish would mean better handling? :?

less fish would mean the same handling, done less expensively :?

I think all three of you missed my point.......there is no shortage of fish in the Philippines.......this is why the exporters treat the fish being held poorly.........kind of like why you dont worry about the sand you track home on you sandles after a walk on the beach..........Will the Ocean miss the sand? ........With so many fish abound the exporters just get some more if something happens to this batch........kinda like the way we treat feeder fish........does a feeder goldfish somehow have less of a right to be nicely cared for then a blueface Angel? Do you cry when a feeder guppy dies ........like you do when a conspic or clarion does the huffy ?Why?.............. If there truly was any shortage of fish in PI .....then each fish would be harder to replace.......thus more treasured and more valued...... :wink:

oh man...

that's a logic stretch, even for you, kalk :wink:
but not the first time i've seen you try to establish an unrelated reverse cause and effect relationship

feeder fish(whether the whole feeder thing is moral or not is a whole other can o' worms) are mass bred on farms-so in a sense, they ARE 'disposable'-as food for other fish, cheapo beginner fish

and they aren't being taken out of a wild environment via destructive means

you see any conspics, or clarions or tangs being mass bred on farms?

how can you even begin to compare the two, and expect anyone to take you seriously?

:?

 

[Kalkbreath]

.Your still missing the greater point, exporters treating the the fish like crap is undeniable PROOF that there are no fish shortages in PI or anywhere............they would not kill what they have trouble replacing regardless of price...The price is a reflection of availibility.There are soo many fish in PI that no one cares how many they kill.......................If you only had acess to fifty fish in your store a week ........ you would take the best care possible of those fish even if those fifty fish cost one cent each .........Think about it ................... You cant sell fish that you dont have {except on E-Bay} :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

.Your still missing the greater point, exporters treating the the fish like crap is undeniable PROOF that there are no fish shortages in PI or anywhere............they would not kill what they have trouble replacing regardless of price...The price is a reflection of availibility.There are soo many fish in PI that no one cares how many they kill.......................If you only had acess to fifty fish in your store a week ........ you would take the best care possible of those fish even if those fifty fish cost one cent each .........Think about it ................... You cant sell fish that you dont have {except on E-Bay} :wink:

er- i haven't missed your point at all

it's just completely invalid,ridiculous, and it's certainly no proof. :wink:

i guess you'll be tellin me next that the very industries you yourself claim are doin more damage than the hobby collection, like logging, food fishing, aren't doing any damage because they're still doing it so much? :roll:

kalk-now you're just trolling, and doing a fine job of insulting your own intelligence w/out any help from me :wink:

exporters treat the fish like crap because all they see is a commodity, plain and simple-they do not relate to the animals as i do-a being that deserves humane-ness, and responsible care

nor do they relate to the environment as i do :wink:

 

[Kalkbreath]

.....The Question is .....how could fish populations be low in PI if exporters and their collectors feel its easier to replace fish rather then take care of the fish they have currently.......................You keep deflecting the focus..........if fish were truely harder to find out on the reef.......the supply would decrease...or the price would increase...and fish sellers would view each individual fish as something difficult to replace.....then take better care of them.......but they dont ........? Maybe if one day fish truely become scarce in PI the whole system will adjust for the better both in PI and the USA........This is THE issue that makes importers buy PI fish week after week........If thirty percent die ......so what?..... they are fifty percent cheaper ........It still works out for the better................................{well, not for the fish} :twisted:

 

[Anonymous]

.....The Question is .....how could fish populations be low in PI if exporters and their collectors feel its easier to replace fish rather then take care of the fish they have currently.......................You keep deflecting the focus..........if fish were truely harder to find out on the reef.......the supply would decrease...or the price would...and fish sellers would view each individual fish as something difficult to replace.....then take better care of them.......but they dont ........? Maybe if one day fish truely become scarce in PI the whole system will adjust for the better both in PI and the USA........This is THE issue that makes importers buy PI fish week after week........If thirty percent die ......so what?..... they are fifty percent cheaper ........It still works out for the better................................{well, not for the fish} :twisted:

and the answer is-'the fish populations ARE low in PI BECAUSE exporters and their collectors feel its easier to replace fish rather than take care of the fish they have currently'


see, kalk-only takes changing two little words to show what a troll you are :wink:

no go do some serious research,learn to use proper logic, and quit spamming nonsense

 

[Kalkbreath]

What would make it easier to replace fish ,then take care of the ones you have......?there is only one answer........zillions of them at your fingertips........do you really think removing one fish a day per square mile could have any effect on the reefs...in PI..? If so explain how?

 

[Kalkbreath]

And what happened to Naesco? I got into this thread to speak with him..........about his thread and now he is no where to be found ? I know Im scarry, but how could he know what I look like 8O ?

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
Logic as practiced here will make it difficult to understand logic as practiced in the merchant/exporter class over there.
Living in the short term... on a permanant basis is exactly what competetive merchants in Manila have honed to normal routine.
They would have a special on the final clown trigger...
They will sacrifice a dolphin to catch a whale and
they will lose money on fish in order to snag the sale.
They will also bait and switch, steal suppliers and put anything on sale that doesn't sell quickly to avoid it starving on them...which it will by next weeks sales. Towards this end, merchants will drop prices to move product and in turn dictate to divers lower prices. Divers don't have to take it? If they can find someone to pay higher than market standard they are in luck. Higher prices for fish others are putting on sale or keeping cheap. Divers from the more depleted areas with fewer nice species have less bargaining power and are most at the mercy of market forces. Divers who work the final frontiers can still come up with the better stuff and bargain more from a position of strength. These guys tend to be far away and have higher costs than ever to bring fshes to Manila.
Regardless of the 'resource perspective' on things the merchant perspective regards all this in a way alien to most.
The scrape for fish has led to depletion of many coveted species. HOWEVER, this does not mean that the increasing effort expended deeper and futher, deeper and futher has not come up with the volumes needed to fuel the trade.
The mounting numbers of dead and crippled divers attest to this and the distances to maintain supply where once it was easy to do nearby belies the truth of such things to 'market people.'
The Philippines is not as filled with fish and as abundant as we'd like to believe....except for half black angels, punctato butterflies, firefish and other fast recruiting common fishes...that people are getting bored with. Why the reef trade alone has slowed the demand for butterflies and angels not to mention other fishes that bother the precious corals from Indonesia that has captured so much of the hobbys attention and subsidy.
If not for the reef trade, the scrape for fish would have been even more intense.
Conversion to all nets or other livlihoods is needed very much.
Extracting fish may be bad enough,
OVER extracting fish worse still
but extracting fish with cyanide/habitat destruction is really indefensible. How would the question read if the cyanide factor did not exist? How many thousands and thousands of important coral niches would still be alive and productive? Niches most critical for the target fishes we seek most.
We cannot know this as the prevalance of the cyanide factor has ruined much of the the research picture.
How fast do fishes recover? Depends. How much damage to critical habitat was caused to extract them?
What a mess. The more you know, the more complicated it becomes!
Steve