MAC's full page ad in FAMA

[mkirda]

And what percent did you state as being an acceptable amount?

I did not give a specific figure because the number is not as important as the implementation. As I seem to keep explaining to you, over and over and over again.

Will you do us all a favor and remember that this time? :wink:

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[MaryHM]

The acceptable percentage is equal to the amount of error one would expect to find with whatever testing procedure is used. I don't know enough about it to be able to give an exact number.

 

[clarionreef]

Strange question ya'll,
After years of effort...since the percentage of certfied fishes may well approach 1/2 of 1% of the Philippine fish supply now and 0% of the Indonesian fish supply... .theres not much to talk about is there?
That is unless you like to speculate for the sport of it and imagine what if they ever took the fish supply, the fisherman and the field seriously.
'NEWSFLASH!'...Satisfying the mandate of the funders is the goal with this group...not fixing the aquarium trade. That goal had to do with experimenting with a consumer choice driven realignment of buying habits, aided and abetted with a label, a certified label like 'dolphin safe' tuna. [Since all tuna marketed in the US is 'dolphin safe'...its not even remotely the same thing.]
Consumers and dealers of tropical fishes are hardly the kind of eco-friendly crowd imagined. In fact the reverse is true. Virtually all our 'celebrities', the guiding lights and prima-donnas in our speakers rosters at the trade shows are coral people...not fish people. The redirection of talent, intellect and energy into the coral trade came at the expense of the fish trade. The fish trade is dumber, number and thanks to direct internet sales, cheaper than ever before.
Appealing to this newly evolved target audience on ethical grounds is doomed...from the start.
Depending on this coveteous, unenlightened, Nemo fan type consumer base to accept "value added certified fish " [ to put into their 10 gallon eclipse system] is a huge marketing error. And thats assuming that such fish were even being produced...as claimed they would be...which they are not!
Still, a few fish from Buhol may satisfy someones [ an outsider or a service guy] notion of evidence of progress and their addition [ ie mixing in] to the thousands and thousands of other fish being sold that week...to the same certified dealer... well never mind those other fish... Just focus on the token trickle of MAC fish!
All this hype about a fraction of a percentage of fishes exported as if it were worthy...my goodness. Might be different if there were signs of progress in the field or evidence of a better team being forged that could actually do the work... work already claimed to being done...
In the end Packard will be left with a little brain teaser ......"Was it a flawed concept we experimented with?... or was it a flawed team we backed to do the job?
We on the other hand, we in the industry will be left with an unaltered fish supply that will be scraped from diminishing returns and produced as badly as before...unless we accept that if we don't reform our own trade, it won't get reformed.
Contracting out to amatuers is just plain nonsense. Did you really think they were doing the job people...? Or were you just hoping someone would do it for free?
Sincerely, Steve

 

[dizzy]

God knows we need some comic relief from the kalk/kirda exchanges. I'm not much familar with the word limerick, but I will offer up my own little ditty.


There once was an NGO named MAC,
who seemed under constant attack.
Our fish they would track and drugs they should lack,
for everyone taken one should come back.


Who thought of it all no one can recall,
but make no mistake the plan had a flaw.
Enough paper it seems to make bean counters cream,
with fish supply almost nothing at all.


Few divers were trained and no netting was sent,
the more grants that were given the more money spent.
If not for a clown frustrations might vent,
Nemo to MAC was Heaven sent.


Their goal was so worthy their progess so slow,
if this were a business heads would roll.
With victory claimed to Fiji they go,
Cause they say it is,
don't mean that it's so.


Spin to win but risk a fall,
say something nice or nothing at all.
Beatle freaks you may recall.
The Walrus was Paul.

 

[MaryHM]

The silence from the MAC camp is deafening on this topic, so I guess we can safely assume that MAC has not followed through on their promises of CDT implementation. Guess things like that get in the way of pushing certification forward. :?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Yes, it appears that reeform is finally over ... .......good thing too. ........................No need to worry that the fish you are purchasing are 100 %true to their labeling....Years from now I will be telling my grand children how three ordinary Americans single handedly silenced and ended the evil and dishonest reeform movement known as MAC.......Thank you Mary , Steve and Blue hula......Without your constant efforts none of this would have been possible........"Now where did I put my squirt bottle"? :wink:

 

[Caterham]

I don't know enough about this issue to even comment. I do, however, find it interesting that there is no comment from a representative of the MAC.

I wish that someone who represents them would let us know the answers to some of the questions that have been asked.

 

[MaryHM]

Caterham,

As you may know, the person who represents MAC on this board is John Brandt. He has made posts in other threads in this forum since this question was asked, so I have no doubt he has seen it. Unfortunately, MAC seems to think that by ignoring the problem it will go away. It won't. I also hope to see some response from them concerning this subject, like when they are planning on following through with the promises they posted here over 6 months ago concerning cyanide testing. However, I have learned not to hold my breath waiting....

 

[JennM]

I'm thinking a letter to the editor of FAMA might be in order, regarding truth in the advertising they publish.

FAMA has a disclaimer about advertising, but since attempts to resolve issues with the advertiser seem to fall on deaf ears, perhaps some of us might consider writing to FAMA and let them know what we think?

I'm going to try to make the time.

*I* am a paying advertiser in FAMA too.

Jenn

 

[mkirda]

how three ordinary Americans single handedly silenced and ended the evil and dishonest reeform movement known as MAC.......Thank you Mary , Steve and Blue hula......Without your constant efforts none of this would have been possible.

Oh, yeah. Love that revisionist history.
Mary, who spearheaded a fund to send over enough hand netting material to supply the Philippine and Indonesian fishermen for many, many years.
Steve, who brought the issue of cyanide fishing to the masses, and has spent 20 years trying to fight it.
Blue Hula, who got into the fight so late, who lived in Bohol, in and around the villages MAC certified, dove on those reefs, and has some idea what she is talking about. Who brought MAC down by asking annoying questions.

Sounds like you found credible patsies... :roll:

 

[clarionreef]

Mary et al,
MAC has not been silent on this board at all.
In fact, their new representative is the most vocal contributor there is.
As the biggest proponent of doing nothing, Kalk has become the biggest proponent of MACs need [ and policy] to also do nothing.
The bigger business interests in the trade are also silent and speak thru their only vocal & willing disciple, Kalk. As these clients and prospective clients of MACs style over substance campaign are certified and in the process of becoming so...the do nothing approach has become the new approach.
The sell-out of the reform agenda to the bigger business interests, ie the status quo requires either silence or a patsy willing to float the defense for free. Earlier more sincere believers of the original dogma must've become embarrassed to continue a public defense of a group that has become a defender and a chamber of commerce for the cyanide trade in tropical marines.
Kalk...I salute you and the good you have enabled by giving people who care a punching bag to practice on and show that all the trade hasn't sold out yet.
Sincerely, Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

I call it as I SeaitOline.........As for my" connections" to MAC or the Philippine import industry..............all one has to do is look at my record on this board ..I was the first to blast MAC for the 1% silly notion .......and the exchanges between John and I not too frienly..........YET,.If the use of logical thought SUPPORTS MAC .........then I guess Im in their camp........

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
The 1 % DOA notion was abandoned under the threat of losing the importers outright. The MAC-tracking [ie. retreat] on this allowed them to get close to the importers again. What wealthy importer couldn't use some free P.R. for a painless smidget of paid-for certification.? You Pay...you play.
All I'm saying is that the "we're all OK and blameless" schtick you espouse dovetails nicely with the new MACs defense of the most guilty in the trade and opposition to its reform elements.
You and they share more in common now.
You and John have also become de-facto allies. At least he has the common sense to remain quiet as the 'sell-out' continues. John contents himself for now with cut and paste-up of various fishery stories pulled off the web.
Sincerely, Steve
He seems, however to have missed the latest where MAC certified exporter Tomas Heeger was just deported from the Philippines...after having the whistle blown by ex IMA members!
That leaves them with the Cartel president for life and the two dwarfs...Marivic and HD Aquapets...[ neither of which are believers anymore} After all these years...some progress! Oh well...at least the Americans can use the hype...and have the money to pay for it.

 

[Kalkbreath]

Look, I stated two years ago that our industry telling the world that our hobby is responsible for the reefs declining .........and then not being able to change either the culture of the collectors {Squirt fishing is ingrained into the culture } or the heath of the reefs {our hobby has so little impact and the other industries are so much greater that even our total absence from the region would would go un noticed}...is setting the hobby up for useless negative press and will help the reefs not.............I publicly stated that they should have left PI last in line to reform, because they are not ready to take on the "World champion "so early in their prize fighting career..........I also asked the question ;is "MAC worthy"? Anyone silly enough to think 1% is possible is an idiot. The more cyanide fish my competition sells the better it is for me............and for you ......... and Mary included..........I stiil stand by what I said during the first week this board opened up ............The Philippine waters are too "sullied" {I changed the word} too far outside our control as an industry........lets focus on the other ten plus other collection island nations and highlight how sustainable pet collection is on healthy reefs.........PI is a lost cause.......unless we can find a substitute collection aid to replace Cyanide {a reef friendly one} and one that the food fish industry can adopt as well.....................Everything I preached and you all scoffed at has come to fruit...........That does ot make me the winner ..........IT MAKES THE REEFS THE LOSERS................

 

[Anonymous]

Kalkbreath wrote:

Look, I stated two years ago that our industry telling the world that our hobby is responsible for the reefs declining

i don't think that was ever really the message, kalk, and i do believe that many here have repeatedly stated the correct message to you over and over again


the hobby is partly responsible, -and the percentage to which it contributes is not the issue

the issue is to make the hobby contribute as little as is humanly possible, to the reefs decline, because it deserves to be treated w/respect, and because there is really no longer any justification for the hobby to do otherwise, for any reason.

do you get that?

all of your 'numbers' arguments are pure kaka

it isn't about whos numbers are right, or wrong-it's about trying to proactively make those numbers as small as possible, simply because it's the right and moral thing to do, both as custodians of those resources, and as benefactors who wish to ensure the continued source of revenue from those resources

it's also called 'smart management',- something, that as simple a concept as it is, is one you and mac, and others, keep missing

 

[Anonymous]

you've been making the same mistaken argument for two years?! 8O

what are ya, a friggin post? :lol:

 

[Kalkbreath]

you've been making the same mistaken argument for two years?! 8O

what are ya, a friggin post? :lol:

It is impossible to remove even one fish and not have some impact..............To take the literal stance is fine .........I dont argue with people that say its not right to force wild animals to be our pets.........If thats your stance then I wont challenge it.........But Its not ........you sell fish ........you keep fish ......True ZERO impact collection is impossible at any level........if there are ten million fish in the school of yellow tangs ...and we collect one of those fish ,then now there is only nine million nine hunred thousand nine hunred and ninty nine...................even one fish or one coral has an impact ........Even aquaculture in a lagoon displaces the native animals to that lagoon......... So the question is how little of an impact is reasonable .......and you cant answer that.......so how do you know our hobby is not already within the boundaries of reasonable collection?

 

[Chucker]

Actually Kalk, I'd like to know something. Since this industry's practices are so abhorrent to you, and the hobby itself is continuing to kill fish every day from collection to import and purchase, why are you still in it?

 

[mkirda]

Even aquaculture in a lagoon displaces the native animals to that lagoon......... So the question is how little of an impact is reasonable .......and you cant answer that.......so how do you know our hobby is not already within the boundaries of reasonable collection?

Globally, it may well be. Locally, it may well not be.
The only way to know for sure is to do fish counts. Real, actual surveys. The numbers will have to be tracked and tied to the amount of extraction, then decisions need to be made about what are sustainable levels of collection or extraction.

As far as answering what you say I cannot answer, let me spell that out for you again: I advocate managed sustainable collection. If the fish counts go down below what the level of what the area is capable of recruiting/producing, then the targetted species must be relieved of collection pressure. In addition, I highly advocate having protected no-take areas, the larger in area the better, and would look at a desirable percentage as being 20-40% of the total reef area.

Lastly, there is no reasonable defense that can be made of destructive fishing practices. None.

The aquarium fish trade can be a force for enlightened sustainable development in areas like the Philippines and Indonesia. I'm hoping that it can live up to this promise.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Kalkbreath]

Actually Kalk, I'd like to know something. Since this industry's practices are so abhorrent to you, and the hobby itself is continuing to kill fish every day from collection to import and purchase, why are you still in it?

I dont think these things....?........why do you think I do?