only 5% of sold fish are cyanide collected.

[Anonymous]

:lol:

Or no one buys milk exoecting it to spoil before they drank it all.

 

[Anonymous]

i think most people just toss it out, and buy more milk

 

[clarionreef]

and...
People are also told it was their fault the milk spoiled.
Steve

 

[clarionreef]

But,
I think the real issue is what Mary revealed earlier. That there is not enough of a Philippine or Bali bonafide netcaught supply in one place to buy from...NOT IN THE COMPLETE VARIETY and low price DEMANDED BY THE TRADE.
This demand constitutes a witting or unwitting...'demand' for cyanide fish.

Wow! And thats after 20 years of reform activity, projects and annual funding. We get what we settle for I guess.
Steve
ps.

 

[Anonymous]

i think most people just toss it out, and buy more milk

My point exactly.

 

[Douglas S Lehman]

Hello
I think it's funny that were talking about milk in a aquarium forum?
Mike K. do you remember the story I told you about my father growing up on a farm in Wisconsin. As a boy on the farm they always had fresh milk to drink, and of course enough to sell. When the prices fell to pennies for a gallon (during the depression) they would just throw it out instead of taking it to market. To much work for so little return? Plus they had to do it tomarrow, again with no return for their work. My uncle wised up and built a chesse factory. Problem solved!
Doug

They had to milk the cows twice a day, or it turned into a udder disaster!

 

[mkirda]

i think most people just toss it out, and buy more milk

My point exactly.

We are dealing with a perishable good here.
Of course it will spoil over time.
Of course if the milk goes bad, people toss it out.
(Well, most people anyway... I've got stories... But nevermind...)

Maybe I am just weird, but if I buy milk and the Sell by date is April 15th, and I go pour some milk on my Cheerios on April 10th and get cottage cheese, darn straight I am taking it back to the store and demand my money back! It would not be my fault that the milk went bad in my fridge five days before the Sell By date- It would be the STORE'S FAULT for selling me milk that hadn't been handled properly BEFORE IT WAS SOLD.

(Assuming, of course, that my fridge hadn't been on the fritz in the first place.)

How does this relate to fish? Beats me!

But if one could somehow figure out that the fish had been caught by cyanide, I'd sure a pretty simple parallel could be drawn.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[clarionreef]

The clear distinctions are blurred as follows;
Cyanide caught fish provided good care happens a lot...and they are cheaper.
Netcaught fish provided bad care also happens a lot...and they cost more.
Otherwise, there would be more support for netcaught fish to be sure.
Cyanide dealers draw from decades of experience to get their handling procedures down better.
Netcaught dealers are amatuers for the most part and figure that just being 'green' will produce a better product automatically. These greenies are often not from the trade and came over because they believed a netcaught ethic alone would carry them. Often they were assured that eager buyers await the 'clean' fish supply.

Not so. Netcaught fish from anywhere can be left to suffer with crypt, flukes, oodinium etc and then overdosed with copper in water mixed 20 minutes ago!
The old timers do no do this...only new, well meaning eco-oriented netcaught dealers. The failure to see other issues beyond has hurt the 'movement' very badly. No one broke out and did it well.
This has allowed dealers the excuse they need to stick with the old fish suppliers...and besides, they're cheaper.
Green dealers and green NGOs have both tried to figure it all out without the required decade or so of experience in handling fish.
Ever wonder why all the big dealers do not involve themselves...and never go-green?
They will never go without the variety and the price afforded by an economy of scale...to out compete 'upstarts' and each other.
The issues we discuss here never enter into the equation.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk, I disagree with some of your assumptions. The supply of higher priced fish species from the Philippines has definitely declined. Species like Majestic angels and Blue-faced angels have definitely declined in availability from exporters because they are disappearing from the reefs. There are more collectors scraping down the remaining species using cyanide in ever more degraded habitats. The situation is similar in Indonesia. But being a bigger country with more reefs the supply of high priced species still exists in the more distant regions away from Bali. So, we have not yet seen these species decline at the importer and retail levels in the USA. They will sooner than some might expect. There has been a shift with more MO fish coming from Indonesia. Dr. Elizabeth Woods had estimates on this, but I have not yet see the estimates published.

I fear that in the not too distant future, net-caught MAC-certified MO fish will only be available from large chains like PETCO and PETSMART. They will monopolize the supply of net-caught fish.

Peter

I agree that this has happened .....but this does not effect the total out put from PI . There were not that many higher priced fish like Blue face or Majestic coming out of PI ever. Do you really think rare fish like these account for 4million less fish per year? Thats a lot of blue faces ! Of the top thirty fish exported in 1989 through 1989.......What percentage of the total fishes fit the description of Higher priced? 2 percent? For the most part PI is still shipping the same species......{Damsels} just a lot less of them. And its not because they are scarce.....other wise the price would have increased ....... Even today There are not that many high dollar fish landing from anywhere ...{except {Nuel Caledonia and Australia} less then 50,000 tails out of a US market of 12 million tails? High dollar fish collection does not affect the Industry, market or reefs............. Never has.........and cant because its too few fish.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe I am just weird, but if I buy milk and the Sell by date is April 15th, and I go pour some milk on my Cheerios on April 10th and get cottage cheese, darn straight I am taking it back to the store and demand my money back! It would not be my fault that the milk went bad in my fridge five days before the Sell By date- It would be the STORE'S FAULT for selling me milk that hadn't been handled properly BEFORE IT WAS SOLD.

I understand what you are saying, and I would say the same thing. My point is that a large number of hobbyist would drink half the gallon and think they got there money's worth go buy another gallon.

 

[Anonymous]

Kalk, I disagree with some of your assumptions. The supply of higher priced fish species from the Philippines has definitely declined. Species like Majestic angels and Blue-faced angels have definitely declined in availability from exporters because they are disappearing from the reefs. There are more collectors scraping down the remaining species using cyanide in ever more degraded habitats. The situation is similar in Indonesia. But being a bigger country with more reefs the supply of high priced species still exists in the more distant regions away from Bali. So, we have not yet seen these species decline at the importer and retail levels in the USA. They will sooner than some might expect. There has been a shift with more MO fish coming from Indonesia. Dr. Elizabeth Woods had estimates on this, but I have not yet see the estimates published.

I fear that in the not too distant future, net-caught MAC-certified MO fish will only be available from large chains like PETCO and PETSMART. They will monopolize the supply of net-caught fish.

Peter

I agree that this has happened .....but this does not effect the total out put from PI . There were not that many higher priced fish like Blue face or Majestic coming out of PI ever. Do you really think rare fish like these account for million less fish per year? Thats a lot of blue faces ! Of the top thirty fish exported in 1989 through 1989.......What percentage of the total fishes fit the description of Higher priced? 2 percent? For the most part PI is still shipping the same species......{Damsels} just a lot less of them. And its not because they are scarce.....other wise the price would have increased ....... Even today There are not that many high dollar fish landing from anywhere ...{except {Nuel Caledonia and Australia} less then 50,000 tails out of a US market of 12 million tails? High dollar fish collection does not affect the Industry, market or reefs............. Never has.........and cant because its too few fish.

that's an assumption on your part, kalk-there is more than one reason why a price can stay low


are you saying the damsels are the same price they were 5, 10,15 yrs ago ? (adjust for inflation, too, please)

 

[Kalkbreath]

Not in the case of cheap fish from the Philippines. Fish that are in short supply like blue tangs and blue face angels have increased in price, while the remaining plentiful fish have actually decreased in value since 1995. It actually cost more for an adult blue face from PI then from Bali? Yet ,every other fish from Bali costs more then from PI . Its the lack of availability locally on certain fish from PI that keeps the price higher and the fact that there are too many people selling too many PI fish is what keeps the price on plentifull fish low. There are no fish in the market which are abundant and high priced. The two never go hand in hand. Take Rose BTA as an example, until the current China imports .....the retail price was around 200 bucks. Now , with 1000 pieces landing each week, both the current wholesale and retail prices are at all time low. When this supply cuts off ......the price will again seek a balance between availability and demand.

 

[clarionreef]

But Kalk,
'Where have all the blue face gone?
long time passing...
where have all the blue tang gone?
long time ago.
where have all the good fish gone?
vanished from ruined reefs every one.
when will they ever learn?
when will they ever learn?
Steve

ps. inspired by: Peter R, Paul H. and Mary M.

 

[PeterIMA]

Now, If I could just get my record player fixed, I could listen to my Peter, Paul, and Mary LP records.

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

But Kalk,
'Where have all the blue face gone?
long time passing...
where have all the blue tang gone?
long time ago.
where have all the good fish gone?
vanished from ruined reefs every one.
when will they ever learn?
when will they ever learn?
Steve

ps. inspired by: Peter R, Paul H. and Mary M.

You know those fish left the Philippines in the early 1990s. Not from over collection, but from a lack of deep coral cover as a direct result of blast fishing and food fishing and runoff starting long before the hobby begain collecting. The reefs were 70% degraded BEFORE hobby collection was in full swing. Destructive fishing techniques are thought to be the largest contributor to reef degradation in the Philippines.

[4] Muro-ami, a technique that involved sending a line of divers to depths of 10-30 m with metal weights to knock on corals in order to drive fish out and into waiting nets was extremely damaging to reefs, leading to its ban in 1986. Rampant blast fishing and sedimentation from land-based sources have destroyed 70 percent of fisheries within 15 square kilometers of the shore in the Philippines, which were some of the most productive habitats in the world.[5] Although increased enforcement, larger penalties, and educational campaigns slowed the damage in the 1990s

Not that MO collection did not play its role after 70% of the reef were dead .........but how many blue face angels and blue tangs were collected in the last twenty years compared to the food fishermen ?Since MO collection began , the reefs have actually only decreased slightly.{another 12%} But this was also when the live food fish trade was at its peak! So are we really to blame? The MO use of cyanide in PI is even more tiny today because there are no money fish worth squirting for and little deep coral left to hide in . Even you admit that. The days to save those reefs were the early 1990s. Even if we pull out of PI today .....the food fishermen and agricultural run off will finish the reefs off .......just like they have been for twenty years. Its time to stop beating a dead horse and save the remaining reefs worldwide which are still alive. This means No food fishing or agriculture near the remaining healthy reefs in the Indo Pacific..........And a huge Coral Farming industry is the best bet. That swiss gentleman growing 100,000 aquacultured corals in Bali is now shipping His first export this week ..........Zero impact farming and Kalk reeform are again Saving the reefs.......... :wink

 

[Anonymous]

Zero impact farming, so what, the frags appeared outa thing air?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Zero impact farming, so what, the frags appeared outa thing air?

.................. No,"Outa thick water".....

 

[Kalkbreath]

Zero impact farming, so what, the frags appeared outa thing air?

Thats why we reefer to them as "figments". not "fragments". .........{BSCF}...... "Bali Swiss Coral Figments" :wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
The trade had done much of the damage in the 60's and 70's by killing the most critical and preferred old coral stands for the most coveted species. Those ideal habitats for our most preferred fishes have not recovered to this day.
Muro ami was brought to the attention of the Aquino government by yours truly and was banned soon after. Muro ami did its part, as did siltation and dynamite etc. I have been underwater a dozen times with dynamite blasts going off and lived in a dynamite and cyanide fishing village for almost 2 years. [ Never saw muro ami there. It was never in our area.] Most dynamite blasts are for top feeding fish. Sure there are also destructive coral blasts but easily half the dynamite fishing is for pelagic swimmers.
The siltation problem occurs near the mouths of rivers [duh] and not in the offshore reefs and seamounts where a great deal of the fish are collected.

Every time a newbie apologist for the cyanide trade learns of the other assaults on coral reefs however, he attempts to bury our culpability in the crimes of others. This has always happened.
PIJAC, the pet industry 'advisory council' and long time MAC board member ran a whitewash 'fact-finding trip' back in the 80's and learned of other things to blame as well. 'Anything but us' was the motto...and the gist of their report.
Your whitewash revisited post is 18 years old.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk,
The trade had done much of the damage in the 60's and 70's by killing the most critical and preferred old coral stands for the most coveted species. Those ideal habitats for our most preferred fishes have not recovered to this day.
Muro ami was brought to the attention of the Aquino government by yours truly and was banned soon after. Muro ami did its part, as did siltation and dynamite etc. I have been underwater a dozen times with dynamite blasts going off and lived in a dynamite and cyanide fishing village for almost 2 years. [ Never saw muro ami there. It was never in our area.] Most dynamite blasts are for top feeding fish. Sure there are also destructive coral blasts but easily half the dynamite fishing is for pelagic swimmers.
The siltation problem occurs near the mouths of rivers [duh] and not in the offshore reefs and seamounts where a great deal of the fish are collected.

Every time a newbie apologist for the cyanide trade learns of the other assaults on coral reefs however, he attempts to bury our culpability in the crimes of others. This has always happened.
PIJAC, the pet industry 'advisory council' and long time MAC board member ran a whitewash 'fact-finding trip' back in the 80's and learned of other things to blame as well. 'Anything but us' was the motto...and the gist of their report.
Your whitewash revisited post is 18 years old.
Steve

Lets do some math........I know you hate it . But it seems to sobber you up a bit..... Just how many MO fish were exported during the 1960s and 1970s? And how many live food fish during the same twenty years period were collected by the other cyanide users[food fish}? Then divide the MO fish by the number of reefs killed off during those twenty years. Unless each MO fish was directly responsible for fifty square miles of dead reef ..........your suggestion that MO collection had much of an impact is not supported by math or even your own opinions recorded from twenty years ago.{Congress} If you still hold fast to the idea that the tiny volume of fish imports to the USA in 1960 had huge effects on the reefs of PI .......then explain how during the next twenty year span of time 1984 to 2004 caused such little damage even though ten time more fish were collected? Seventy percent of the reefs killed off in 1969 to 1984 and only an addintional 17%{even with global warming and its bleachings } during 1985 to today. Good luck :wink: