What would happen....

[Kalkbreath]

Now that you finally got my drift...blue hula ........How can you be so certain.?.......Explain to me why .....when you go diving and do not sea any fish around .....what do you think happened to the fish? Where did all the non hobby target fish go.......? You know,the fish that this hobby does not collect? Keep in mind that Damsels ,clownfish and chromis make up 75% of our imports from PI .......the remaining 2.5 million triggers ,angels, tangs and such .......only amount to ten fish per square kilometer per year.......{.25,000 square kilometers of reefs divided by 2.5 million fish ..}... Ten fish per year cannot deplete the fish stocks....{anywhere}..So .. what happened to the NEVER targeted fish like brown grunts or the other ugly fish that are not collected by us.......? They have been decimated by seafood cyanide fishing. If seafood fishermen can kill off every last brown grunt...{{thats why you dont sea them when you dive}...then they surely have also killed off many of our hobbies targeted ornamentals......They kill our fish by juicing them when they go after the food fish........is it so hard to imagine that some of these fish swim away stunned by alive? Why is it impossible to think a few might be inadvertently caught the next day by a net collector?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Now that you finally got my drift...blue hula ........How can you be so certain.?.......Explain to me why .....when you go diving and do not sea any fish around .....what do you think happened to the fish? Where did all the non hobby target fish go.......? You know,the fish that this hobby does not collect? Keep in mind that Damsels ,clownfish and chromis make up 75% of our imports from PI .......the remaining 2.5 million triggers ,angels, tangs and such .......only amount to ten fish per square kilometer per year.......{.25,000 square kilometers of reefs divided by 2.5 million fish ..}... Ten fish per year cannot deplete the fish stocks....{anywhere}..So .. what happened to the NEVER targeted fish like brown grunts or the other ugly fish that are not collected by us.......? They have been decimated by seafood cyanide fishing. If seafood fishermen can kill off every last brown grunt...{{thats why you dont sea them when you dive}...then they surely have also killed off many of our hobbies targeted ornamentals......They kill our fish by juicing them when they go after the food fish........is it so hard to imagine that some of these fish swim away stunned by alive? Why is it impossible to think a few might be inadvertently caught the next day by a net collector?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Now that you finally got my drift...blue hula ........How can you be so certain.?.......Explain to me why .....when you go diving and do not sea any fish around .....what do you think happened to the fish? Where did all the non hobby target fish go.......? You know,the fish that this hobby does not collect? Keep in mind that Damsels ,clownfish and chromis make up 75% of our imports from PI .......the remaining 2.5 million triggers ,angels, tangs and such .......only amount to ten fish per square kilometer per year.......{.25,000 square kilometers of reefs divided by 2.5 million fish ..}... Ten fish per year cannot deplete the fish stocks....{anywhere}..So .. what happened to the NEVER targeted fish like brown grunts or the other ugly fish that are not collected by us.......? They have been decimated by seafood cyanide fishing. If seafood fishermen can kill off every last brown grunt...{{thats why you dont sea them when you dive}...then they surely have also killed off many of our hobbies targeted ornamentals......They kill our fish by juicing them when they go after the food fish........is it so hard to imagine that some of these fish swim away stunned by alive? Why is it impossible to think a few might be inadvertently caught the next day by a net collector?

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, If you don't dive in the sea you won't see the truth.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, If you don't dive in the sea you won't see the truth.

I cant do division unless Im under water? Not sure what you mean?

 

[blue hula3]

Now that you finally got my drift...blue hula .....

The only drift I got, Kalk, was of the potential sweet rationale you raised for MAC to use to justify walking away from their lack of progress in the Phils.

How can you be so certain.?.......

Certain of what Kalk?

I am only certain of the fact that the reefs in the Phils are decimated and that resource assessments must be done to assess what level of exploitation is acceptable for aquarium fish ... like any other.

Explain to me why .....when you go diving and do not sea any fish around .....what do you think happened to the fish? Where did all the non hobby target fish go.......? You know,the fish that this hobby does not collect?

Three things happened to the fish:
(1) lots got caught using nets, traps, hook and line, dynamite, cyanide etc
(2) others dnn't survive because degraded habitats support fewer fish
(3) many more were never produced because the remaining "broodstock" on the reefs is so depleted (recruitment limitation if you will)

Keep in mind that Damsels ,clownfish and chromis make up 75% of our imports from PI .......the remaining 2.5 million triggers ,angels, tangs and such .......only amount to ten fish per square kilometer per year.......{.25,000 square kilometers of reefs divided by 2.5 million fish ..}... Ten fish per year cannot deplete the fish stocks....{anywhere}..

Sorry Kalk, I am not going to do another rounds of maths with your numbers. I can't keep track where they come from.

So .. what happened to the NEVER targeted fish like brown grunts or the other ugly fish that are not collected by us.......? They have been decimated by seafood cyanide fishing. If seafood fishermen can kill off every last brown grunt...{{thats why you dont sea them when you dive}

I am a bit confused on the seafood cyanide fishing issue. I thought that cyanide was used for the live food export market (groupers, some wrasses) ... as opposed to a general technique for dead food capture. Much safer and easier to lob dynamite on that score. Have not heard of grunts being targetted with cyanide and if they're just bycatch, we're back to the issue of incidental exposure for which we apparently have little evidence.

 

[Kalkbreath]

.blue hula3......Thats one of the points I think many are overlooking......Cyanide is the method of choice for ALL fishing. in PI ..Live or dead..{Peters findings found 45% } I dont Know if the samples were live or dead?} .Blast fishing is too Loud...and too expensive for the average self employed fisherman....Which 90% of the collectors are low paid {freelance} . Blasting is used.......a lot .....but when you are fishing where your not supposed to ..{like Chinese boats do }......there is nothing as quiet or as soft as a squirt...{well maybe a kitten fart} :wink: ..................... I will say that I was quite impressed with your line of questioning of MAC...{so dont think I dont respect you.}...... And Dont think that I am in favor of MAC not owning up to their "certifications" ................IM looking out for the hobby .......not MAC......I dont think I have ever even talked to a MAC representative ......except on this board.......Im not even much of a fish importer......I like coral and clams.....I dont even sell fish wholesale....Only in my retail store...... On the Internet the only fish I sell are Fairy wrasses and Anthias From Bali or Vanuatu...Tonga............so while it may seem at times like I am supporting the collectors In PI.......I am really only supporting a search for truth......................................."reality falls where it wants to "

 

[blue hula3]

Kalk,
On what basis do you say that cyanide is the method of choice for ALL fishing ? Please tell me you have a report or souce to cite. I personally am not aware of any study that has been done to assess the relative effort that goes into the various fishing techniques.

Peter, were the cyanide tests on foodfish on those targetted for the live fish export trade or did they represent all fish on the reef including those eaten dead for local consumption? [Cheers mate and sorry to haul you in again]

And I don't know on what basis you say that blast fishing only occurs in remote areas. Many were the days on Danjon Bank where I'd be on the water or worse, in the water, when a blast would go off. BFAR and the municipalities are poorly resourced so blast fishing can occur with relative impunity even in heavily populated areas.

And as to who can afford it ? You'd be suprised. Blast fishing seems to be a technique that occurs by villages. Some villages won't use it (and alienate any local who does) ... in other villages, a large number are in on the game. It runs in families too ... I remember sitting in one Barangay - young lad had recently sustained his first loss of fingers from a blast that went off too early ... dad and granddad had similar missing bits. And this was a poor village ... IT IS NOT JUST CHINESE BOATS!

I also appreciate your compliment and you may be suprised, have appreciated the fact that you are doing back of the envelope type calculations to ask whether oft cited 'facts' are true. Such calcs, Kalk, are essential :wink: However, I think you'd contribute more to the search for truth by using numbers you can back up and taking on board the additional information that is provided in the course of these discussions. Being too one-eyed in a position with no evidence just bogs the quest down.

Respectfully,

Jessica

 

[mkirda]

.blue hula3......Thats one of the points I think many are overlooking......Cyanide is the method of choice for ALL fishing. in PI ..Live or dead..

Kalk...
Do you have a source that feeds this to you, or do you come up with this all on your very own?

There is not a single study out there that supports this statement.
One study I am aware of, with numbers that are current (date from last year and the early part of this year), shows that cyanide fishermen account for less than 10% of the total fishermen.

Blast fishing is loud, sure, but it doesn't matter when you are ten miles away from the next nearest person. It's not like they do it in Manila Bay.
The same study shows that cyanide fishing rates and blast fishing rates are close enough to be considered equal.

Again, Kalk, your agenda is showing.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Kalkbreath]

OK so Its not All cyanide maybe its Half......Maybe its 75% .......Cant tell without testing the local fish markets......Peter showed cyanide in 45% of samples.....{these were voluntary} ..... Every single program I have ever seen on The Discovery or Animal planet type show ........Supports the notion that for fish that hang out near reef structure......the method of choice is Juice .......not for anchovies......But Grouper, wrasses etc......Blast fishing is mostly used on schooling fish .......Blast fishing is decreasing due to a bit more enforcement.......by the villagers running off invading fishermen out of their waters..If your fishing in your own waters there is no need to hide from the locals...But if your fishing in someone elses back yard you want too keep quiet..........What I ment by method of choice.....is that many of the people that collect fish for a living are new at doing so.....There are constantly collectors dropping out and into the industry........when you cant find work or feed your family,you turn to the only free resource.....the Ocean.....The cheapest fishing gear is a squirt gun.

 

[blue hula3]

OK so Its not All cyanide maybe its Half......Maybe its 75% .......Cant tell without testing the local fish markets......Peter showed cyanide in 45% of samples.....{these were voluntary} .....

My understanding is that the fish being sampled were species considered likely to be caught with cyanide (e.g. for the live food fish trade). Thus the sampling was geared to assess rate of cyanide use in a trade where it is considered to be rampant ... not across general fishing.

Every single program I have ever seen on The Discovery or Animal planet type show ........Supports the notion that for fish that hang out near reef structure......the method of choice is Juice ........

Wouldn't be any sensationalism in the reporting would there ? Cyanide is an emotive issue.

when you cant find work or feed your family,you turn to the only free resource.....the Ocean.....The cheapest fishing gear is a squirt gun.

The cheapest fishing gear is actually a sharp stick - used while gleaning on the reef crest. Hook and line is also pretty cheap and the night breathholding fishers in Bohol use a spear and that's it. Crab pots effectively cost labour time as they are constructed from materials readily available in your backyard.

Sorry, how is cyanide the cheapest gear ?

Jessica

 

[Kalkbreath]

Because you can use one bottle to catch thousands of fish in one week.....It wont break........You can collect fish that you cant even see.............And you can collect a one hundred pound grouper without a two hour fight...........................The means of production is far cheaper

 

[blue hula3]

Kalk,

The fact that you think there are one hundred pound groupers to be caught in the Philippines by your average, cyande toting or any other gear toting fisher makes it pretty clear that you are a bit out of touch.

Fish are not being caught in the 1000s per week for food consumption by your average village fisherman.

Can you please also make it clear when you are talking about aquarium collecting or food fish for local consumption or LIVE food fish for export. All of these vary in terms of gears used.

Blue hula

 

[Kalkbreath]

I said it can be done.......if there is a 100 pound grouper to be stunned.........when a fisherman goes out he has the mindset that this will be the time he lands big.....Big takes do still happen especially with migrating fish ......Please look up the yearly exported food fish numbers from PI.......................... There you will see that there still are quite alot of fish coming out of PI ..{One of the largest in the world}The Asian market next to my retail store has thousands of bags of dried fish {gobies, dartfish and such } All of these are from PI and this one store has more reef fish then all Of Atlanta's retail fish store sell a year................... Then take into account the great consumption by the local people of 82 million in PI........The exported number of hobby fish has remained steady for two decades 12million...a year.....There are still many fish if you know where to look....As for juice fishing..........If a school of 500 grunts dashes into a reef ......... one squirt bottle{reloaded} can extract every last one........as long as they dont leave ..................The same reasons hobby collectors use juice, applies with any coral reef fishing...{got togetthosebuggers out of the coral} As for there not being any fsh left in PI.......... Name me one square Kilomter in the Fla Keys that supports as many fish as the average kilo2 in PI........There is still a lot of cyanide fishing left in those reefs.....And no one is doing anything to adress the greater consumers

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, I have analyzed about half of the CDT database and broken it down into two components, food fish and aquarium fishes. I previously stated that the food fish consisted of both live fish (groupers, snappers, Napoleon wrasse0 for export and dead fish for human consumption in local markets in the Philippines. We don't know much about the latter (dead fish trade). A study by Del Norte et al (1989) observed fishermen broadcasting cyanide tablets from a boat over a reef and about 30 fishermen on rafts retrieving the dead fish. We don't know how widespread this is or what species are targeted. I stated that 44% (not 45% as you stated) of the food fish tested from 1996 to 1999 had cyanide present. This figure is misleading in the sense that not all of the food fish species tested had cyanide present. There were uneven numbers of various species tested. For example there were over 3000 Plectropomus leopardus (a type of grouper) tested. I need to analyze the food fish database differently to be able to assess what proportion of the food fishes by species were being caught with cyanide. It is not all the species, hence one can not conclude (as you seem to have) that all the food fishes are being caught with cyanide. Mike, and Blue Hula have pointed out that other fishing methods are also widespread.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Your figure for 12 million aquarium fishes coming out of the Philippines per year is wrong. It may have peaked at about 10 million per year in 1995. Most years it is much less about 3 to 5 million per year (based on IMA's monitoring and extrapolations that I have made).

 

[Kalkbreath]

Thank you for pointing that out Peter, I try to use the data given in this forum by others .....{That way I can say it was your {the contributors}numbers not mine} Like the 12 million in yearly exports from Aust. ............or the 100,000 acros from Fiji...........I work with the data laid out by others and then attempt to show {usually} how silly it is.............Lets use the three million number....{.from now on.}..There are more and more fish comming in from new sources today in 2003..so PI fish imports are getting smaller each year....................... IF .....25,000 square kilometers of reefs means 2 fish a week per square kilometer.......or two fish removed from every five hundred football fields worth of reef structure......Sustainability seems kinda silly when viewed in those perspectives.........

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Considering the widespead reef destruction in the Philippines amd Indonesia, reef densities (standing stock) of about 400-500 reef fish per square kilometer commonly occur. This is much lower than what a healthy reef can sustain (about 10,000 per square kilometer). See the posting I made last July.

You continue to misquote and distort the numbers that I have provided. Your analogy I presume is that that 3 million fish exported come from 25,000 square kilometers (eg. 3,000,000/25,000=120 fish/square kilometer not 2 fish per square kilometer). How did you come up with the 2 fish per square kilometer? I guess it was by dividing 120 by 52 weeks? My guess is may areas produce nothing and the remaining healthy areas produce most of it (until they also are destroyed by cyanide). You are right to conclude that this is not sustainable.

 

[mkirda]

You are right to conclude that this is not sustainable.

The problem is, Peter, that Kalk continues to believe that this *IS* sustainable. Taking 120 fish out of a standing stock of 300-400, that is...

This is why I rarely get involved with Kalkbreath and numbers. His numbers are mostly pure fantasy. Or possibly riddled with addition, subtraction, multiplication or division errors? I don't know how else to explain them.

You'd think he'd finally understand that flawed analysis, built on flawed assumptions, built on fantasy numbers equals flawed/wrong answers.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[mkirda]

25,000 square kilometers of reefs means 2 fish a week per square kilometer.......or two fish removed from every five hundred football fields worth of reef structure......Sustainability seems kinda silly when viewed in those perspectives.........

Really?

I suppose so if you make a few faulty assumptions and guess at some baseline figures, then have no resource assessments to back everything up.

A couple of points here.

1) An underlying assumption here is that all fish are equal. They all have equal prices, they all have equal life histories and they all have equal market demand. None of these are true.
2) All fish do not reproduce at the same rate, nor grow at the same rate.
Two fish a week can very easily be unsustainable. Two fish per year can be unsustainable given the right species.

On the other hand, there can be some species that are "Fertile myrtles", with great levels of fecundity, and short life histories. These may be able to be harvested at greater levels even. These species will not represent the norm, however.

Regards.
Mike Kirda