A message from REEForm

[Jaime Baquero]

Jessica,

Back in 1998 Lyle Squire a wholesaler from Cairns Marine Aquarium Fish in Qld. Australia gave a talk about the trade of ornamental fish in Australia during a workshop in Manila.

According to his talk, in Australia there were in 1998 only 180 licensed fish collectors which exported around US$10 million. In the Philippines we know there are around 4000 colectors and according to the Bureau of Agriculture and Statistics of the Pi for the year 1998 the value of marine ornamentals exported was US$8.5 million.

The value of ornamental fish in Australia is a factor tha makes a huge difference, collectors in Australia are well paid and DO not need to collect hundreds of fish to be capable of putting food on the table.

We must admit that something is really wrong in the PI and IN. This is due to the cheap fish price structure. As a result the trade is not environmentally sustainable, too many fish collected and very high unnecessary mortality.

Do you know how many fish collectors are active in Australia and what is the value of exports?

Regards

Jaime

 

[clarionreef]

Look folks,
The value of fish exported from the Philippines is vastly underreported and has been for 35 years giving bean counters a whacked picture of true values. Repeated published figures...cough...fibs..cough. does not make them accurate. The true values were triple and quadruple the reported values. [small shipments however, were often processed on true values.]
Even US Fish and Wildlife Service inspectors crack a smile when 35 boxes comes in at an 'invoice value' of $800.00. The true invoice was traditionally faxed over and now emailed as an attachment.
Undereporting avoids the appearance of wealth in Manila and those pesky taxes.

Australians on the other hand traditionally CATCH MORE per diver than Philippine divers. Expensive labor? Yes and more productive ones at that. Better gear, fins, nets etc. all contribute to making the basic Aussie collector efficient and productive to run his gas guzzling heavy boat!
However, given a level playing field, proper nets and good training...the Filipino net collector is the best in the world. The Filipinos now working in the South Pacific, the Red Sea and Belize prove this every day!
Steve

 

[blue hula3]

So how many fish do the natives collect for themselves daily? You are posting comercial and recorded numbers......How many Philipinos can affort to BUY their fish from these guys

The reefbase estimates are generally from the municipalities so will be a bit better than estimates at the national level and probably represent a bit of both subsistence and commercial fishing ...

However, you can also tackle it by looking at reef productivity. Estimates for this in the Philippines are between 5.5 and 10.6 tonne/km2 (www.reefbase.org). This works out to 4.5 - 8.8 g per person per day using the same numbers as before. Or, if you take the high end estimate of 32t/km2 (from protected areas), you'd get 26 g per person per day. Pretty comparable to what you get based on the fish stats.

The point of all that was to demonstrate that seafood isn't the main source of protein and thus the blow out numbers Kalk is suggesting for food fishing aren't really the whole issue.

I say one in seven Philipinos eat fish each day thats 12 million.......are you saying 4%? if so thats still still three million fish each day.......or one hundred times more then our hobby ...................then add the exported food fish total which is not only fifty times more ,but fity percent cyanide positive and also includes thousands of groupers and wrasses to Asia.......... .......larger fish to boot and fish that require much greater cyanide blasts to stunn.....{then one ounce damsels}....you still have 150 time more fish and poison fishing per year USING YOUR NUMBERS then our hobby...... :wink: Next please

Kalk you switch from numbers to guesses with bewildering speed.

That was 4% of dietary energy supply ... not 4% of 83 million Filipinos. If you wanted to get super technical about it, you'd have to work out the daily energy intake and the number of joules per gram of fish or some such.

You wouldn't add in the export fish ... that is already in the accounting for total reef productivity.

My best guess is that aquarium collecting represents some where around .5 to 1% of all reef fish removed via exploitation. So we're not that far off when push comes to shove and after a bit of reassessing guestimates.

I guess the difference is in interpretation ... to some, 1% sounds like a little bit but say that cyanide is used for 50% of this exploitation, each squirt kills habitat. In 5 years time, that is approximately 2.5% decline ... and so on.

Given all the other stressors on reefs, why would you feel complacent about adding to it just because it is a small amount?

And such complacency also ignores the biodiversity implications of aquarium collection. Given the value placed on diversity in the trade, aquarium collecting hits a wide range of species, some of which are less able to handle exploitation, and most of which, we have little information on.

Again, why would you be complacent about this ... which I guess brings us back to Kylen's rhetorical question: why worry about food fish when we need to clean up our own backyard. I agree ... use of cyanide and overexploitation in the trade are reason enough to care regardless of what else is going on ...

I simply got distracted by the unsupported allegations ... but perhaps this is in part how the battle, if not the war, is won ... distract and conquer

Jessica

 

[blue hula3]

Do you know how many fish collectors are active in Australia and what is the value of exports?

Active is hard to define ... the Queensland Dept. of Primary Industries would be able to give you the number of collectors for QLD. In Western Australia, there are 13 licensed collectors. There is also decent trade in temperate species as well as tropical.

My point was that even in Australia, at a reasonable guess, wild abundance doesn't correlate real well to market demand, leading to overexploitation of species for which demand is disproportionately high compared to wild abundance. And this apparently can happen even in countries where poverty doesn't drive collection. Not sure what the link is to the number of active collectors and export value?

Jessica

 

[clarionreef]

Jessica,
I submit to you that the reason for the defense of the status quo and de-facto defense of a cyanide based methodology is based on feelings of guilt over complicity with this crime and the need to minimize it in order to feel 'OK'.
In order to justify knowingly cyanided angels, triggers and tangs one needs to feel blameless or at least insignificant in the greater panorama of inequity. On this forum and even AMDAs own BOD...we have seen defenses of cyanide fishing for the sake of variety and uninterrupted business momentum.
"Yes. yes...fix it by all means, but meanwhile, how are we supposed to do business if we stop buying cyanide fish cold turkey?"... the reasoning goes.
Nearly every exporter, importer, dealer, and consumer of Philippine and Indonesian fish feels the same way, but few are willing to voice it out loud.
Kalk is an exception and in a way, worthy of respect for being honest enough to stand up for something. The rest of the trade just subsidizes the anomalie...quietly and without public comment.
Steve

 

[blue hula3]

And a focus on cyanide excuses ambivalence to straight forward overexploitation .... 'cause it's a "bigger" problem

 

[clarionreef]

Why yes,
Thats how it works.
We need to ban this lady if she catches on to us so quickly!
Steve

 

[clarionreef]

But...
There is a difference between focusing and fixing the problem.
Focusing on it and cleansing the trade with a paper fix or white wash would be the biggest crime of all. Getting credit for 'saying you're doing something' is a time honored political tradition. In academia its the old...clearly more research [...cough...grant money...cough...] is warranted.
Actually fixing it is a serious step to progressing towards a non exploitive sustainable trade. Its kinda like a knife. Its 'good' depends on the use it is put to.
This is the heart of the struggle within the reform activity.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

Once again ......you let a statistic like 10 million dollars in ornamental fish from Australia whiz by you ........No way in halibut................Thats eight hundred thousand a month! $200,000 a week! How many thirty dollar scribbles does it take to reach ten million? .........This is a perfect example of why I am not letting you people get away with this kinda nonsense...any longer ......either you all are totally incompetent........or completely dishonest........which is it?

 

[clarionreef]

Ten million a year from Oz?
Of course not. Perhaps the entire trade but certainly not exports!
Steve
ps. Kalk...some times things are let pass because...because...ahh, whats the use...never mind. See, I just did it!

 

[Kalkbreath]

Steve, thank you for perhaps seeing my point.......but can you explain how a number like 10 million in Australian fish can possible be taken seriously and allowed to stand as an accurate statistic? .......If the Australian government hears that crazy number they will crap their pants and shut the hobby down.I have seen many a collectors list from that part of the world and the fish are not that expensive ......large Angels being the most costly and at thirty bucks each that would .......tally 300,000 angels.....a year .? to reach 10 mil........LAX only gets in 25 boxes of fish on a good week , many weeks no shipments ....... Whats the most ..the utmost you think the USA imports a year? my friends say 150,000........and Japan is not that much more if at all..........Europe in many places does not allow Angels ..........so that leaves Mexico and Canada.......I have had a Mexican personifier taco and it aint that tasty .............just how many Angels does Naesco have in his tank? :wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
Such an absurd figure had to be taken out of context. All fresh and saltwater fish combined perhaps, including domestic consumption from Perth to Sidney. Maybe it even included dry goods.
ON top of that its Aussie dollars we're talkin here, not real dollars. [ hope no Aussies read this!]
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve, What about Canadians living is Australia (like Blue Hula)?
Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

I understand that there are times that its more trouble then its worth..............But when these numbers are soo overboard it has a lasting and sour taste on the onlookers both hobby and Government alike..........The greatest threat to the hobby is stuff like this.......

 

[clarionreef]

Peter,
Hula ain't one of them. Shes just on loan.

Kalk,
On the figure from outer space...consider the source. It was not shared by others and perhaps was let pass because it was so silly. Some of us may have been working all day and just got in.
Steve
ps. Hey...this is not a REEFform thread anymore.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Do you know how many fish collectors are active in Australia and what is the value of exports?

Active is hard to define ... the Queensland Dept. of Primary Industries would be able to give you the number of collectors for QLD. In Western Australia, there are 13 licensed collectors. There is also decent trade in temperate species as well as tropical.

My point was that even in Australia, at a reasonable guess, wild abundance doesn't correlate real well to market demand, leading to overexploitation of species for which demand is disproportionately high compared to wild abundance. And this apparently can happen even in countries where poverty doesn't drive collection. Not sure what the link is to the number of active collectors and export value?

Jessica

Jessica,

Seems that the management of the marine ornamentals fisheries in Australia produces good results for the collectors and the government. Other countries could learn from their experiences. Mr. Lyle Squire is a serious individual, the numbers he gave back in 1998 merit to be verified. Could be possible to get the phone number of the Queensland Dept. of Primary Industries.

Kalk,

US$ 10.000.000 /year total of the trade
$10M/180 collectors = $55,555 collector a year
$55,555/12 months = $4,629/month/collector
$4,629/20 days(average) = $231.45 day/collector

Do you think that $231.45/day is too much for a "professional collector" that is using the "state of the art" equipment for his fishing operations. Is possible that that collector has to pay a fee to obtain his license. The cost for using his/her boat and related expenses come from those $231.45. As you know diving is an expensive and dangerous activity. Personally, I do not think the $10M number is exagerated.

What I find is a threat for the industry is the fact that the industry itself is not only ripping off the coral reefs but also ripping off the system by avoiding paying the taxes in the PI and the US. As stated by someone earlier who probably does that frequently.

I wonder how much money a diver in Florida can make/day when collecting fish for the marine aquarium trade?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Dont let reality or the truth spoil you fantasy.......The US imports about 200,000 dollars a year and Japan less then that....in Marine ornamentals from Aust. ..........Ten million is a pipe dream ........Maybe if we include Steve Erwin ........and "Girls gone wild Aussey style" videos........But this Marine fish and corals................ you need to move the decimal point one position and you will find the truth..........But since when did the truth play an important role in reform?

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
It is precisely the lack of truth in the reform movement that has given us so little...er, reform.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

What better then go to the horses mouth. Heres a response from a hard working Ausiie collector:

I don't think the US$10M is correct and the 20day/monthis too high for our business. Our $/day/collect is much more than $231 stated but I think the diving days would be 10 or less per month average taking into account packing(yes all our divers pack as do office staff), travelling 1-2 days per trip, bad weather(everyday laterly). On the export from here 10M is way to high that's a lot of Harlies. Domestically it would be more than the export but I think it's only a fraction of 10M. I doubt any collector gets US$55000

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Dont let reality or the truth spoil you fantasy.......The US imports about 200,000 dollars a year and Japan less then that....in Marine ornamentals from Aust. ..........Ten million is a pipe dream ........Maybe if we include Steve Erwin ........and "Girls gone wild Aussey style" videos........But this Marine fish and corals................ you need to move the decimal point one position and you will find the truth..........But since when did the truth play an important role in reform?

.

Could be possible that Australia is a good supplier of fish (Lg- Xlg) for public aquariums? If that is the case, I am closer to the truth.