The Right Way to Go!

[Ad van Tage]

Ah Kalkbreath , I just love it when you flail your verbal arms around in haymaker style hoping to hit something, anything!

I will duck a bunch of the wilder shots and just parry the more obvious flails.

(1)Your{SIC} kinda new to the board.......
......................

(2) I dont think you have demonstrated why this way is "the right way to go"?

(3a) Yet you seem to be supporting the choice of words?
(3b) You seem to have followed the other sheep .....

(4) Or did you just jump in line with the rest of the reeformers?.Chanting "save the reefs"?

(5a) Can you do math?
(5b) Have you ever bothered to do the math ?


(6) see you only care about the Hobby and its image .........

(1) Major assumption on your part! I have read more of your posts than I care to enumerate or debunk.

(2) Indeed I have not "demonstrated" for sure. I have asked a few questions. Here is another one: What is this way ... " in your"why this way is..."
I was simply trying to find out WHO will be speaking on the TOPIC
Go back and re-read this thread.

(3a) Where have you seen me post that? What support?
(3b) Again, where have you seen me post that? And what sheep?
Gosh, it must be awful when you are surrounded by all those "seems" Just leads to more and more useless flailing, don't it!

(4) Did you "hear" me chant?
My 'friend', not only are you "seeing things" , you are also "hearing things"... When have you last had an E&E check-up??? Overdue are you?

(5a) I LOVE simple questions; here's MY answer: YEP! And I didn't even have to ask about how many hectares there might be in a km2 ...
(5b) Now which "the math" might that be Kalkbreath? I'm still working out the return on my investment todate in this "business" AND I'm doing some projections on where MAC certification co$t$ might put me...
[ but I don't think that's where we want to go now, do we? Maybe in another thread, at another time; let's keep it simple here in view of your flailing.]

(6) What on earth makes you think I give a rat's ass about "The Hobby" and "its" IMAGE? Another MAJOR ASSUMPTION!!!

I think THAT about sums it up. You, Kalkbreath have NO information! In this case you can not even pretend to extrapolate from your local observations in your tank, nor from staring at any coffeegrinds. Which is not to say you didn't.

Don Quichote at least rode on a horse... although that nag looked like it had been cyanide squirted right along with her tilting rider.
Best spur on your ass to keep up Kalkbreath.

 

[clarionreef]

Ad Van Tage,
A few points when regarding the Kalk miester,
He has already been soundly thrashed and *****-slapped on this forum a dozen times...but, like big, brown damsels on a dead reef, he just keeps hanging on...for lack of anywhere else to go. In a land of peer review...he would not fare well.
1] He represents a thousand times more supporters then we few cursed with a consciounce on trade matters. The sheep are the vast numbers who want to continue the cash and carry ethic as usual until its bitter end....exporters, importers, dealers and hobbyists.
Commercial extinction, legislation, inept institutional reform schemes all threaten the viability of the trade in marine ornamentals...yet this mindless consumptive mass of Orcks have scant few spokesman. Kalk with his unique "What, me worry" schtick ...occupies this niche that the others would not...at least publicly.
2] A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Kalk is the reason we need genuine scientists. Front men everywhere use the semi scientific justification for the continuance of plunder as we have seen in the timber, whaling, commercial fishing and of course aquarium industries. "Its all them"... the routine goes...not us.
3] His routine of false speculations and assumptions proffered not thru reason but thru repetition endures beyond defeat.
"The vast areas couldn't possibly be depleted by our small impacts because 44,000 sq kilometers divided by the number of fishes exported make it only blah, blah, blah per sq. kilometer" Of course if everything could be couched like that we could also say that "the number of sqare kilometers of Indo reef area divided by the number of corals exported"...the number of whales taken divided by the oceans surface, the number of trees cut compared by the number in the Amazon Basin, the number of people on the planet if spaced evenly across the globe...etc. etc.
Starvation in the Horn of Africa??? Kalk would argue no....because evenly spaced the carrying capacity of Somalia would be sufficient to provide enough food, firewood, etc.
4] Kalk, [ as well as GMAD and MAC ] all seem to put faith in 'landings reported' or boxes shipped as indicators of something. Something useful, no. But the need for the outsider or the uninitiated to get a handle on things to simplify it is great...
Futhermore there is a world of difference between extraction without habitat violation and extraction with habitat violation. 1,000 angels taken with only nets and a thousand taken by killing all the critical coral niches is an extremely different affair. Something akin to taking 1,000 apples w/out killing the tree and taking them by cutting down the tree. Two acts that bear no relevance to each other. In print however...two shipments of a thousand apples exported looks like the same thing.

These are the kind of mind games that enough genuine scientists have lost patience with our hero on....and they move on to more worthwhile pursuits.
Like crabgrass after a sound mowing down however....he keeps popping up. Hes lucky he doesn't matter. Hes lucky he has no official role with any company or institution. If he did he would've been called on the carpet ages ago and muzzled. Still, this is a free and open forum and as such we fear no ones nonsense. Truth, genuine whistleblowing and attention to scandal however are another matter.
Sincerely, Steve
PS. If only Kalks irreverance and hardheadedness were put to good use. Like Whitney Houstons voice...it could do some good...or buy some cocaine. Such a shame.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Which is it ?On one hand you like to pretend we as a hobby are decimating the entire region ...........but when you are reminded of the numbers involved .......you revert back to the idea that we only collect in a few areas .....{so the math works better in your favor} Which is it ? If my numbers are wrong , then what are your numbers? I cant remember the last time you actually committed to a figure? {actually it was disputing the 1200 Clarions perboat in 1980s} See it s all to easy to perpetuate the lie .......if you never actually state any thing concrete.. Tell the folks at home ,how many fish are removed from PI each day for this hobby?Then explain how this can possible effect more then a few small areas......The math is your enemy , not me......Are we harming a few areas and leaving the vast majority of the reefs untouched ? ....No matter how you slice the 3million fish per year .....its tiny.....Further explain how the iMAC meeting is the"right way to go"?...............If you cant do either , the why do you blindly support both issues? You keep claiming victory......in these debates........but Did you explain how 12 million dollars of Austrailian fish are exported each year? No . ......Did you explain how the unsuitable species list would not cause an increase in collection pressures on the remaining suitable fish ? Did you explain how in the world Fanks numbers reached 60% DOA? Did you explain how its possil\ble for there to only be 500 fish per square kilometer in PI? And more importantly did you explain why Peters and you testimony in 1985 for some reason is no longer valid today? ............Until you do .............All the ***** slapping in the world wont make you correct......it mean you dodnt have the ability to prove yourself any other way...... :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Mr. Advantage,

Since you're probably reading this post, it seemed like a good place to introduce myself.

My name is James Wiseman - what's your name? I'm an ocean engineer who lives in TX. I am also an avid aquarium hobbyist.

I would be delighted if you'd introduce yourself to our group.

Cheers
James

Why do you keep avoiding this question Mr. Advantage?

 

[clarionreef]

Uh oh...uh oh....
Hes starting to lose his cool folks.
Numbers of fish taken isn't the issue Kalk.... Its critical habitat destruction for target species that WE take impairing the recruitment of more of the fishes that WE want.
For just 'numbers taken' to make sense we need controls of numbers taken WITH habitat loss and without.
But if its numbers we need to make a case...shall I follow your lead and invent em out of thin air or just repeat anecdotal gossip? Or perhaps I should wait another decade for the scientific community to catch up to the obsevations of frontline observers.
This need for intelligent and honest resource management is clear wether the reefs on yellow alert or orange alert. I really don't even care which.
This trade is guilty of institutional and regional habitat destruction by virtue of its collecting methodology. A methodology promoted by the very business elite that exports the fish to us...making us receivers of illegal property and accomplices to the crime. However...the convenience of a CDT in the hands of an honest and above-board agency eludes us, aided and abetted by lethargic and inattentaive fishery departments in Indo and the Philippines.
The illusion of NGO inspired reforms allow those departments to point to "progress attempted' as Rome burns. And so here we are in 2004 with a one step forward two steps backward track record that fools only the distant or uninvolved...ie service people, funders, good time hobbyists...etc.
On my recent trip to Bali I as shocked to hear how widespread cyanide [purtas] use has become and even more so by how dead the coral was on the North shore. The locals said it was cyanide...years of repeated cyanide fishing. "Dynamite? Why not dynamite", I asked. Cause we don't bomb here in Bali...we only bomb tourists." Was the answer.
"Food fish cyanide?" I asked again." What food fish? "...was the answer...
Pelagics are the food fish there now. Skipjack tuna every day til you get sick of eating it. The reefs support little in the way of fish big enough to eat now.
Mile after mile of dead acroporas and pocillipora coral heads fronting one collecting village after another. Rather complete and utter destruction where the trade has lived for the past decade and a half...and been the dominant user. What a control group I thought. What a research project! But of course there was none to find. No figures to point to , no "research" in progress and no alternative explanations to hide behind.
The truth on the other hand was clear and simple. Supported by testimony of the locals. What as needed was nets and training. If that were in progress....we could then waste time arguing for fun with Kalk. For fun I said. Why else?
Recreational banter and pretend coral politics is a luxury to indulge in while constructive work actually goes forth.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve, Very well stated. I commend your candid statements. Now, if only the trade could get behind net training, to reverse the tide and make the trade sustainable.... Otherwise, it does not deserve to exist.

Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

Thank you Peter,
I am to be sure ashamed of the industry I find myself in. Its only defense is in its "potential" for good and for reform.
The good it creates for fisherman is negated by the net negative it produces in ruining the livlihood of other fisherman. To defend this trade must always carry the qualifier...."IF it behaves and conducts itself in a sustainable manner".
The only thing I'm not sure of now is which is the greater evil. A trade based on cashing in a dollar of coral reef to make a dime...or the front groups that have elected to act as its defenders WITHOUT first reforming it.
If we're just going to ride this thing til the wheels come off and then look for another bike to steal...let it end now.
If we're going to make it a viable trade with a future of service to all stakeholders anchored in sustainable practices...then let that begin now.
There will be netting funding proposed and there will be fresh plans for training. Since MAC shot down the last coalition formed to do this, they now forfiet the right to remain involved in the process.
Stay tuned...
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

Once again ..........you wander away from the topic at hand ..Does this hobby collect its three million fish from a few areas or the whole 25,000 square kilometers? If you dont know then perhaps you should find some one that does {other then ME}How many cyanide fish are collected in PI each day is relevant, because it shows how little cyanide is being used by our industry ? .......If only one fish per square kilometer is collected each day per square kilometer .......then at best this would translate into one cyanide squirt per square kilometer One squirt =one fish .And if you think that the good folk in Bali dont eat snappers and grunts from the reef .....In a country that sells clownfish for seventy cents or twenty cents for green chromis ........fetching 20 dollars for a nice red grouper is music to their ears ......You know as well as I do ......that the cyanide damage is from LIVE food fish collectors exporting to Asian countries ......The live food fish market is a hundred times greater in dollars and more profitable then hobby fish ..... :wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
You really got to get some new stories and new advisors. The dogma you have memorized has little point to it and the threat was not about you anyway.
To be sure you find happiness in the thought of someone else to blame for what we do collectively as a trade..
To be sure the fish still available in the wilder areas is proof that nothing occurs to the detriment of any areas....huh?
Although difficult to follow...your attempt to minimize all extraction by dividing the square mileage of the nations water surface by the numbers of fish concocted is just plain bogus. As the steam roller advances from remaining area to remaining area, leaving dead coral in its wake...there is scant little to gloat over and be happy about.
The decimation of the Lapu Lapu, coral trout and napolean wrasses in one region after another leaves behind ruined areas which you still factor into your bogus math.
You don't know what you're talking about and the falsifications and generalities you weave into sweeping false conclusions belies a less sinister purpose after all.
Your lasting tribute is to be seen in the threads you've hijacked, the dialogue you've interrupted and the messages you've watered down for no particular reason then to get a rise out of people.
No one is afraid or in hiding from any of your spew...they just leave it be as there is no referee to declare your ass kicked in issue after issue. Oh how I wish you were linked to something larger...but alas, with zero following and no supporters, no mission and belief in nothing....you have simply served as filler while waiting for more worthwhile contributions.
Then again with MAC afraid to come out and interact with the on-line community, you have perhaps served some small purpose afterall.
Steve

 

[mkirda]

If only one fish per square kilometer is collected each day per square kilometer .......then at best this would translate into one cyanide squirt per square kilometer One squirt =one fish

You know, Kalk, this stupid "LOGIC" you use was inviscerated months ago.
Using the same logic, a Hummer and a Prius get the same gas mileage, about 25mpg, because that is the national vehicle average. When you divide the population of the US by the number of acres, New York city can't possibly house more than a few thousand people either. Same logic, same fallacy demonstrated, same sort of nonsense results.

Can't you come up with something else?
I mean, we pointed this out to you months ago, yet you still keep making the same mistake. Its like calling your wife by the wrong name...

 

[mkirda]

more profitable then hobby fish ..... :wink:

Based on what measure?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Kalkbreath]

more profitable then hobby fish ..... :wink:

Based on what measure?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

Based on how much more money a collector can make collecting live food fish ........And how much more cyanide it takes to stun a grouper then a blue tang.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk,
You really got to get some new stories and new advisors. The dogma you have memorized has little point to it and the threat was not about you anyway.
To be sure you find happiness in the thought of someone else to blame for what we do collectively as a trade..
To be sure the fish still available in the wilder areas is proof that nothing occurs to the detriment of any areas....huh?
Although difficult to follow...your attempt to minimize all extraction by dividing the square mileage of the nations water surface by the numbers of fish concocted is just plain bogus. As the steam roller advances from remaining area to remaining area, leaving dead coral in its wake...there is scant little to gloat over and be happy about.
The decimation of the Lapu Lapu, coral trout and napolean wrasses in one region after another leaves behind ruined areas which you still factor into your bogus math.
You don't know what you're talking about and the falsifications and generalities you weave into sweeping false conclusions belies a less sinister purpose after all.
Your lasting tribute is to be seen in the threads you've hijacked, the dialogue you've interrupted and the messages you've watered down for no particular reason then to get a rise out of people.
No one is afraid or in hiding from any of your spew...they just leave it be as there is no referee to declare your ass kicked in issue after issue. Oh how I wish you were linked to something larger...but alas, with zero following and no supporters, no mission and belief in nothing....you have simply served as filler while waiting for more worthwhile contributions.
Then again with MAC afraid to come out and interact with the on-line community, you have perhaps served some small purpose afterall.
Steve

Still running from the math ....Im sorry I missed the part where you explained how many fish and from how large an area.?...Simple question ;"How many fish does this hobby collect from PI and from how many square kilometers?" You wont answer because you know what the truth will bring with it ............Remember, when it was discovered that children in third world nations were working in sweat shops to make clothing for American companies.{Kathy Lee}......America stepped in and forced the children to stop working in such "horrible conditions".......Well, one of the networks did a follow up story a few years later and found that most of the children were still employed and working ..........Not with the same sweet shops , but in industries like child prostitution and agriculture {in the fields all day long !} ..........Not quite the quality of life improvement that we expected them to enjoy now that we Americans had freed to be children again. The results of this follow up study were so horrifying that the network canceled the idea of enlightening the public altogether.............Sea , many times the truth is an ugly thing. What is the truth? You keep stating that my version of the truth is incorrect.........but you fail to explain what the facts really are . Why? ............

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk,
You really got to get some new stories and new advisors. The dogma you have memorized has little point to it and the threat was not about you anyway.
To be sure you find happiness in the thought of someone else to blame for what we do collectively as a trade..
To be sure the fish still available in the wilder areas is proof that nothing occurs to the detriment of any areas....huh?

No , I am demonstrating that we do not collect enough fish to impact the reefs like you suggest.

Although difficult to follow...your attempt to minimize all extraction by dividing the square mileage of the nations water surface by the numbers of fish concocted is just plain bogus.

OK then from how many kilometers DO we collect fish from?

As the steam roller advances from remaining area to remaining area, leaving dead coral in its wake...there is scant little to gloat over and be happy about.

Yes, but our locomotive is a tiny toy

The decimation of the Lapu Lapu, coral trout and napolean wrasses in one region after another leaves behind ruined areas which you still factor into your bogus math.

Food fishing does that

You don't know what you're talking about and the falsifications and generalities you weave into sweeping false conclusions belies a less sinister purpose after all.

I turn that statement back at you......

Your lasting tribute is to be seen in the threads you've hijacked, the dialogue you've interrupted and the messages you've watered down for no particular reason then to get a rise out of people.

No , I have been carefull only to point out issues which are important to the health of the industry and the reefs. This thread was an attempt to show that the "right way to Go " is usually the oposite direction of that with which emotions leed....

No one is afraid or in hiding from any of your spew...they just leave it be as there is no referee to declare your ass kicked in issue after issue. Oh how I wish you were linked to something larger...but alas, with zero following and no supporters, no mission and belief in nothing....you have simply served as filler while waiting for more worthwhile contributions.
Then again with MAC afraid to come out and interact with the on-line community, you have perhaps served some small purpose afterall.
Steve

My position has nothing to do with MAC.........I know more then you think I know ...and from a perspective you still cant place.. :wink: .......Simple question ;"How many fish does this hobby collect from PI and from how many square kilometers?" You wont answer because you know what the truth will bring with it ............Remember, when it was discovered that children in third world nations were working in sweat shops to make clothing for American companies.{Kathy Lee}......America stepped in and forced the children to stop working in such "horrible conditions".......Well, one of the networks did a follow up story a few years later and found that most of the children were still employed and working ..........Not with the same sweet shops , but in industries like child prostitution and agriculture {in the fields all day long !} ..........Not quite the quality of life improvement that we expected them to enjoy now that we Americans had freed them to be children again. The results of this follow up study were so horrifying that the network canceled the idea of enlightening the public altogether.............Sea , many times the truth is an ugly thing.But always the truth is more important then the message . We know what the message is ...." The right way to go"................But "What is the truth? You keep stating that my version of the truth is incorrect.........but you fail to explain what the facts really are . Why? ............

 

[clarionreef]

Running from the math???
THE math?
Or ignoring false constructs?
You're on to nothing that hasn't already been delt with and have little else to say...except the observation that food fish to feed the world is a larger industry than the aquarium industry.
Brilliant and bravo! I regard with slack jawed incredulity at the mathematical genius it must have taken to come up with that.
Seriously Kalk...I am waiting to be impressed.
Steve

 

[Ad van Tage]

Still running from the math ....
......................................................
But "What is the truth? You keep stating that my version of the truth is incorrect.........but you fail to explain what the facts really are . Why? ............

Kalkbreath! Major squirt of SCOPE aimed at ya:

You speak of "still running from".

Heck my man, you have yet to ONCE explain what your version of the truth is!

So what is it then - YOUR "truth" - ? :

"NO MO fishies are caught with cyanide in PI! Nor anywhere else!"
"NO habitat is destroyed in the process of collecting those cheap lil beggars!"
"NO fishies ever perish after being caught, due to handling, transport, or other avoidable causes. That's just bad fishcarma!"
"NO one has ever bought any fishies for good hard greenbacks that were not in THE BEST of nick AND came with a certificate saying so!."

Want me to squirt some more?

What juice are ya on anyway???

Oh please don't answer that last one!!!!!

8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O

 

[Kalkbreath]

Running from the math???
THE math?
Or ignoring false constructs?
You're on to nothing that hasn't already been delt with and have little else to say...except the observation that food fish to feed the world is a larger industry than the aquarium industry.
Brilliant and bravo! I regard with slack jawed incredulity at the mathematical genius it must have taken to come up with that.
Seriously Kalk...I am waiting to be impressed.
Steve

Sorry I edited my last post post..After you responded............... There are less then 1 million fish exported for our hobby that are not damsels , chromis , lionfish , mandarins or clownfish .And you have stated many times that those fish are not collected very often with cyanide.............................. Explain , how the collection of those remaining 1 million fish representing fifty fish types? Thats not very many fish from any one fish species!{sustainability?} Even with twenty percent cyanide collection ,its hard to ..imagine that two hundred thousand fish spread out over thousands of square kilometers is going to result in more then one or two cyanide squirts each square kilometer?..Is all this collecting being done in only a few reefs ? if so then yes .........1 million fish would have an impact . But it has been demonstrated that fishing for this hobby takes place over many thousands of square kilometers. So which is it?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Still running from the math ....
......................................................
But "What is the truth? You keep stating that my version of the truth is incorrect.........but you fail to explain what the facts really are . Why? ............

Kalkbreath! Major squirt of SCOPE aimed at ya:

You speak of "still running from".

Heck my man, you have yet to ONCE explain what your version of the truth is!

So what is it then - YOUR "truth" - ? :

"NO MO fishies are caught with cyanide in PI! Nor anywhere else!"
"NO habitat is destroyed in the process of collecting those cheap lil beggars!"
"NO fishies ever perish after being caught, due to handling, transport, or other avoidable causes. That's just bad fishcarma!"
"NO one has ever bought any fishies for good hard greenbacks that were not in THE BEST of nick AND came with a certificate saying so!."

Want me to squirt some more?

What juice are ya on anyway???

Oh please don't answer that last one!!!!!

8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O

I am not sure what your question is ? Do you have and data to discuss? or questions other then what juice I am on?{ It is 3:45am in Atlanta :wink:} I do not dispute that cyanide collected fish are a poor product.......or that perhaps twenty percent of all PI fish are cyanide exposed...........Its the question of how much our industry really effects the reefs ........that is my chip......

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, There you go again. I already corrected you several times for misrepresenting the percentage of aquarium fishes that were exposed to cyanide. My CDT paper published in the book Marine Ornamental Species, Collection, Culture, and Conservation documented that the % cyanide present went from 43% in 1996, to 41% in 1997, 18% in 1998, 8% in 1999, and 29% in 2000. Over the same time period, the food fish CDT results were 73% in 1996, 68% in 1997, 39% in 1998, 8% in 1999, and 30% in 2000. The percentages in 2000 are of interest because they show sharp increases in the use of cyanide by both the aquarium fish and food fish collectors. Also of interest are the recent CDT results posted on the PSCD web site that showed that 49% of fishes tested in Puerto Princesa were positive for cyanide. The most recent numbers for both aquarium fish and food fish are higher than the 20% figure you pulled out of your hat. Cyanide kills coral reefs and has resulted in the depletion of key species (through destruction of coral reef habitat and overcollection)important for the aquarium trade.

The aquarium trade is as guilty as the food fish trade. You are right that attention needs to be made to stop the use of cyanide by fishermen to support the live and dead food fish trades. Attention also needs to be paid to stopping the use of cyanide to supply the aquarium fish trade. The difference is that our dollars support the aquarium fish trade. The US government can act to regulate or ban aquarium fish imports into the USA.

Peter

 

[JennM]

Why do you all continue to argue with Kalk?

You KNOW he's just doing it to get a rise out of you - and he does!

He's just trolling... you are biting. I don't know if he believes all the junk he spews or not, but let him dig his own holes by himself... If he really believes all that rhetoric that he's being fed, pity him, for he knows not what he does. If he doesn't believe it, he's just using you all as toys for his own entertainment, because he can always get a rise.

Personally, I get a chuckle out of chatting with customers who read this forum. You'd be surprised at who is watching all this - many more lurkers than posters. Inquiring minds want to know, and they get an eyeful here

None of us really takes him seriously - if you ignore him, perhaps he'll go away, and take his "math and logic" with him.

As entertaining as it is to watch these threads sometimes, I fear that some among us might need their blood pressure checked after a good session All that garbage isn't worth it.

Then the rest of us could move forward with more productive discussions.

JMHO... as usual.

Jenn