MSI Philippine Net Fund

[Jaime Baquero]

Steve,

What would you say about the situation described in Indonesia where NO big money has been given to NGO's? Who's responsibility to deal with all the problems facing the trade of MO,and deterioration of coral reefs (because of this activity) in that country?

Jaime

 

[clarionreef]

Jaime,
Too obvious to mention is the national and state and local fisheries bureacracies. They clearly are supposed to do a great deal for their countries reefs, the fishers , sustainability etc.
The entire foundation of the NGO invasion is the assumed non performance of this duty.

Fisheries collects bribes from the fishers often, they sell CITES permits and quotas and they generally refuse to play a positive role in the whole issue owing to their long tradition of being the problem and not the solution.

Rather then defining this as the central problem to address, we NGOs often take it as an opportunity to serve ourselves.

However.... If the local bureaucracy is genuinely sincere and wants the help of an NGO to assist and co-operate in a sincere and mutual effort...that would be wonderful!!!

Did this happen in the Philippines and in Indonesia....?
The twin dictatorships of those countries are long gone and have become less an excuse now.
Just letting NGOs do it has not generally been a good way to go at all as they tend to see the issues very differently then the way a local patriot would see it.
We like to define things as scientific issues while they tend to see them as social and economic.
These cross purposes have produced a mixed result to say the least.
Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Steve,

I do agree completely. But what's the role the MO industry should play? You have said many times, and I agree, that the industry people are the ones who know how to tackle the problem, meaning collection, handling and holding. Is time to create alliances "with compromises" between the industry both sides of the pond, after all they need each other..right?

jaime

 

[naesco]

Gresham, good for you. (thumbs up)

Jaime, You hit the nail on the head. It is an industry problem that has to be fixed by industry if this hobby is to survive.

To date no industry leader has the courage to lead the charge of reeform.
Just wait until the energetic hoard of Omaba reformers get involved.

Wayne

 

[naesco]

Steve,

I do agree completely. But what's the role the MO industry should play? You have said many times, and I agree, that the industry people are the ones who know how to tackle the problem, meaning collection, handling and holding. Is time to create alliances "with compromises" between the industry both sides of the pond, after all they need each other..right?

jaime

Bingo! Now is the time!

 

[clarionreef]

We like to define things as scientific issues while they tend to see them as social and economic.
These cross purposes have produced a mixed result to say the least.

Good point Steve,
We like research as we think it constitutes good judgement and policy.
While it can provide a basis for good judgement and policy, it ignores the large influence of socal, economic and political pressures on the local officials.
We have no poor relatives in that country and tend to not understand what the fuss is about. We seem to think that research alone will drive enlightened policy instead of being smart enough to relize that it most certainly willd not.

I guess we all tend to define the issue according to our own skills and experiences. If we are scientific people we may seek solutions in a certain way.
If we are wiser, we will see that science may be taken selectively by the politicized people in power and not respected as much as we like.
So?
Its their country and unless you offer something that connects with more then like minded people, what are the chances for success?

If we are from the social development community of people , we may approach the issues in another way.
I think that science become a lot more effective if driven for social concern and human benefit. Even if you think it is....if not presented and percieved that way, you still lose out.

The "Trojan horse" if you will on the aquarium reform thing had to do with helping the fisherfolk by helping them earn money in a non destructive way. That allows the entry into other peoples country.
Clearly, science can serve that proposition. However, some scientists become bored with the social aspect [ as its not their forte] and want to just run research...to service, well, themselves.
Self service will grow thin in another peoples country.
You have to connect with the culture and its agenda better in order to survive and become relevant.

A foreign project may be tolerated...but they will not thrive.
And thats what happened a lot this past decade.
Steve

.

 

[clarionreef]

But what's the role the MO industry should play?

The MO is not a collective entity.
It is not the Borg.

The criticism is about its lack of unity and organization is it not?

The industry has a huge dry goods sector that has been largely silent .

It has a huge public aquarium sector that has been largely silent.

The industry has a huge livestock sector that has been competitive and by definition not working that well together.
Its a prickly, collection of competitive loosely aggregating organisms for its own benefits.

If the competitive livestock sector cannot work together so well, why would not the other sectors not referee and mediate and lead?
Afterall....they are based on the fish supply to fuel interest in their produce.
They consume the reef as surely as the rest! Why not more initiative from the other legs of this table?
Ie. our more professional cohorts?
Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Steve,

Yes, all sectors should be involved. Dry goods, public aquariums and anyone else making money because of marine ornamental fish.

While working with OVI as volunteer and along with our dear friend Dr. McAllister (R.I.P) we believed that the solution to the problems facing this fishery in the Philippines has to have a holistic approach. I still believe that the solution will come only when all stakeholders interact together to tackle each one of the problems, I mean technical (net training/handling/holding/shipping), environmental, social and economical. To do that, it is required to have government entities responsible for the management of natural resources being active and leading. Those entities must regulate the trade. It has been demonstrated that during the last 40 years the industry itself failed to do so.

The role played by NGOs should be secondary, all involved should understand that it is not NGOs responsibility to solve the problems created by an industry that makes millions of dollars by exploiting coral reefs in developing countries. NGOs responsibility is to help those who need help, meaning fisherfolks and honest NGO people working in developing countries helping their fellow citizens to protect their natural resources.

Also understand that NGOs credibility went down to the drain, some people took advantage and made good money because of this environmental problem. Instead of being there to help, they became the main actors and became part of the problem instead of being part of the solution. Shame on them.

A new approach is needed since isolated efforts won't make any dent. Importers, wholesalers, retailers and hobbyists have been silent. Can they afford closure of the trade because of their silence?

Jaime

 

[PeterIMA]

Jaime, Despite your past experiences, you still are advocating an alliance among various factions in the "trade" that will never happen. By definition, those in the business view other businesses as competitors. They do not want to work together. Another problem is that each step of the Chain of Custody acts to maximize profits by pushing for lower prices from its suppliers. The collectors become the losers, forced to provide fish at prices that do not allow for a reasonable profit. Why fish if you give them to the exporters, who low ball the prices paid, and use screening to reject about 30% of what the collectors have to sell?

The MAC thought it could succeed by forming an umbrella group of both trade groups and conservation groups. Unfortunately, they also thought they could do it alone and cut out sharing the grant money with their collaborating member organizations (including Reef Check, CCIF, and other organizations represented on the MAC BOD).

Success can only come from the bottom up not from the top down. The collectors in the villages control the supply. Benefits need to come to them, if there is to be conservation and sustainable harvesting of MO species. I think there is an important role for NGOs in this process. But, it is NGOs from the exporting countries that need to do this. It should not be foreign NGOs milking large grants to the detriment of the collectors, the exporting countries, and the trade.

I believe that there are honest people in government agencies in the exporting countries, and that they are now willing to do more to manage the MO trade. There is also corruption that needs to be dealt with. But, I am optimistic that change can and will occur to the benefit of the coral reefs, coastal communities, and the MO trade.


Peter

 

[clarionreef]

Success can only come from the bottom up not from the top down. The collectors in the villages control the supply. Benefits need to come to them, if there is to be conservation and sustainable harvesting of MO species.

Wow Peter,
An inconvenient truth to be sure but not one many groups like to accept.
Sharing the center-stage with poor fisherfolk [ as well as funding ] is not something the prima donna led NGOs like to do.....
If the pendulum will now swing back to the villages and become fashionable ...we will have a chance to score before the next trend diverts it.
Steve

 

[Jaime Baquero]

[q

Success can only come from the bottom up not from the top down. The collectors in the villages control the supply. Benefits need to come to them, if there is to be conservation and sustainable harvesting of MO species.

Peter[/quote]

Peter,

To achieve such success the ones from the bottom (fish collectors) must have the support from the ones on the top. It won't happen by itself.

Fishers need the fish buyers overseas supporting the initiatives, but most important, those from the bottom must be ready to satisfy quickly the demand of fish buyers willing and committed to fill their holding systems with variety and quality of priced fish asked by their customers. Meaning that the ones that control the supply in the villages must have big enough holding facilities to be competitive with the exporters that today have control of the trade.

One problem this type initiative faces is the actual relationship between exporters/importers, it is very close, to the point that importers wouldn't dare to buy fish from other suppliers, otherwise they would be in serious trouble. Importers are in debt with exporters, we're talking about BIG MONEY, that's why they do not dare.

The ideal situation is given if the initiative has good support from fish buyers overseas committed and willing to be on board, as well as considerable healthy and good quality livestock always available to satisfy the demand.

Jaime

 

[clarionreef]

The ideal situation is given if the initiative has good support from fish buyers overseas committed and willing to be on board, as well as considerable healthy and good quality livestock always available to satisfy the demand.

Right,
And Peters point was the real world point about that not happening as its the ideal situation and not the one with any chance of success anytime soon.
Choosing doomed strategy is not exactly a good way to go as opposed to evolving one, forging one, earning one with successes that are built upon.

Pegging success to a moral revolution among the consumer is very risky and may insure failure.

Take a safe analogy;
How would you like to blame foreigners for the slaughter of black bears for their gall bladders in Wyoming?
I wouldn't want to wait for those impotent fools in Hong Kong to change their consumer habits to save any bears...[ not gonna happen anytime soon]. I want the onus to be on the Wyoming fish and Game Dept. and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Gresham, I was not involved with Les when the events you described occurred. Neither was Ferdinand Cruz. Ferdinand presented a graph at MO08 that showed a decline in the mortality of MO fish in the Les holding facility from over 70% to less than 5% over the past year. So, I believe that the problems you mentioned with mortality have been rectified. Likewise, the fish I receive from Les do not have disease problems. Ich is almost non-existent on the fish that I have been receiving.

Peter

Sorry Peter, your wrong about Ferdy "not being involved at the time". Shale I dig up the picture with Steve and Ferdy @ Les? Ferdy was helping them at the time, when he wasn't jet setting around the planet

While we're at it, Ferdy was "helping" one of the PI netcaught exporters we tried to help. One of the ones I mentioned in a previous post on this thread. The one that shipped our stuff to LAX instead of SFO as a matter of fact.

I tried to keep names and companies out of this, but you insisted on outing them all. The people don't matter really, it's the actions that count.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham, Ferdie may have helped Telapak with some short-term trainings in Indonesia and so did Steve. But, most of what happended in Indo stems from trainings that Arsonetri (an Indonesian) obtained from Ferdinand in the Philippines in about 2001 associated with the MAC Feasability Study. Arsonetri then went back to Indonesia and trained others. These trainings did not cover all areas like how to collect fish in deep water, or proper decompression, holding and handling techniques. So, the facility in Les had problems with high fish mortality, that eventually forced them to stop operating. It was only after, Ferdinand moved to Indonesia in December 2006, and focused on helping the villages of Les and Serangan that the problems were solved.

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

They didn't need deepwater training at the time as they weren't going after deepwater species, besides, Decom wasn't a problem we experienced with them as they couldn't produce any deepwater stuff. Now I'll need to go back and locate the emails from back then to illustrate just how much Ferdy was working with Les at the time.

Ferdy went to that village many times, he even showed them his underwater coral killing airgun device he designed to "aid" collectors in "catching" fish.

I must say what ever he did back then, it didn't help. They listenned to Steve for a few shipments but slid back into what ever it was that was thought to them by whom ever. You can't put it on Arso and if your trying it would be more a reflection of his trainings obtained by Ferdy.

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham, Is any of what you mentioned (that happened 4-5 years ago) still relevant? The rest of the thread is more meaningful. I would rather discuss things that are necessary for future reform like the role of govenment, NGOs, and the trade, than to rehash past problems (mostly pertaining to business) with which I was not involved.

Peter

 

[Jaime Baquero]

The ideal situation is given if the initiative has good support from fish buyers overseas committed and willing to be on board, as well as considerable healthy and good quality livestock always available to satisfy the demand.

Right,
And Peters point was the real world point about that not happening as its the ideal situation and not the one with any chance of success anytime soon.
Choosing doomed strategy is not exactly a good way to go as opposed to evolving one, forging one, earning one with successes that are built upon.

Pegging success to a moral revolution among the consumer is very risky and may insure failure.

Take a safe analogy;
How would you like to blame foreigners for the slaughter of black bears for their gall bladders in Wyoming?
I wouldn't want to wait for those impotent fools in Hong Kong to change their consumer habits to save any bears...[ not gonna happen anytime soon]. I want the onus to be on the Wyoming fish and Game Dept. and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Steve

Steve, Lets forget the bears and talk about fish :lol:

To evolve, forge and earn an strategy with success in this real world you need minimum requirements. In the case of The Village Les, as you said, is necessary to have people from the industry how really know about fish, individuals who know about fish behavior and disease and more important individuals who know what to do before is too late. The capacity of the holding facilities is also important, it must be big enough to maintain constantly the livestock (quantity and variety) required by fish buyers. Don't forget the cash flow, is a must. If they have all that..... success will come. I hope so.

Jaime

 

[PeterIMA]

Jaime, I agree with the points made in your last posting. Steps are being taken to ensure that the conditions you listed will be achieved.

Peter

 

[PeterIMA]

duplicate posting deleted

 

[Anonymous]

Gresham, Is any of what you mentioned (that happened 4-5 years ago) still relevant? The rest of the thread is more meaningful. I would rather discuss things that are necessary for future reform like the role of govenment, NGOs, and the trade, than to rehash past problems (mostly pertaining to business) with which I was not involved.

Peter

So when it's not in your best interest, it's dragging up the past. But when it's on your favor you'll drag up the past in a heart beat. Sorry Peter you don't get both. You are more then welcome to open a thread about that subject Peter, got anything to ad to this thread on netting?

FWIW while it is related to business did you happen to notice the sign on the door when you enterred this forum? Care to take a stab at the meaning of the name of this forum? If business has no place in this thread, you as a business man need to find some where else to play :lol: