only 5% of sold fish are cyanide collected.

[mkirda]

What better way of ending cyanide then to end the demand for cyanide fish.?

How about ending the supply of cyanide fish?

No one DEMANDS cyanide fish, Kalk.
The very notion is patently absurd.

Excuse me, sir? Can you sell me a fish that will very likely waste away and die in a couple of months because it was caught with cyanide?

How often do you hear that in your store, Kalk?

 

[Kalkbreath]

The point is that very few reef tank fish are collected with cyanide. {Other then blue tangs } And most tiny regals sold today are not collected with cyanide. Thats because PI and Jakarta only supply about30% to 40% of the Dorys sold . The Solomon islands , Christmas and Vanuatu islands account for 60 to 70% of this fish. The type of fish reef tank owners demand tend to be very small . Not only does this help keep more of the large adult fish on the reef ........{and inturn making thousands of more tiny MOs}no reef tank owners want a twelve inch adult diamond goby for their reef tank! So the adult gobies stay on the reef to make tens of thousands of babies to collect next year! But the fact that reef tank fish are usually tiny helps cut down on the DOAs during transport. {another plus for my reeformers!} . How many of the The top twenty reef tank fish are collected with cyanide? top selling fish like Diamond gobies, Yellow watchman , Kole tangs ,mandarins , algae blennies , yellow tangs . Naesco tangs, Cardanals , fire fish ,Clownfish , Damsels, flame Angels, etc. The demand for fish like Big cyanide Bluefaces or large triggers is at an all time low. Sunpets in Atlanta supplies 500 south east stores .....and they sell very few big angels , big triggers or big Blue tangs {and what they do sell are from Hawaiii} but they sell millions of damsels and chromis. The fish species that require cyande are not that much in demand today and what little demand is left will continue to shrink as it has every year since 1995. The reeform is in full swing...........And reeformist had little to do with it! :wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
The most hepatus tangs come from Bali exporters now who scour the Sulawesi, Manado and other islands for them. Not Solomons and Vanuatu as you said.
Blue tangs from Hawaii?
These are knowing falsehoods. You know already that most by far come from Indo but told a fib here on purpose.
How many other things do you fabricate like that?
You may fib to your customers but don't bring that junk here.
Blue tangs in Hawaii?
Remember when your case was that the small gobies and blennies couldn't be caught without cyanide? Now you claim the reverse to support the new dogma.
This nerve to manufacture information whenever convenient tells a lot about how you operate there son.
Steve

 

[Kalkbreath]

I think you need to recheck your lists. Check a weekly list from Solomon's, you will find they have more available then anyone......Its the number one fish in total dollars I believe from that island. Have you ever even seen a list from the Solomons? I thought you would still be in contact with your old Clarion reef fishing buddy? Lets say for a moment I agree that reef tank owners do purchase some cyanide collected blue tangs. What percentage of blue tangs tested for cyanide? Peter? How many blue tangs are exported from PI and the INDO? I would guess that some where around 60,000 ? How many blue tangs are collected as a group? 90%? and how many on average each cyanide squirt? there are usually ten or so per school per coral head. That works out to around 6000 squirts ........even if all blue tangs world wide are cyanide collected. BUT they are not. maybe 40% are collected with cyanide. {if 80% of PI and indo are} SO , thats 40% of 6000 squirts. OR about 2400 cyanide squirts world wide..........thats one squirt per year for every 20 square kilometers of reef. ONE boat every 15 square miles or "boat anchor" landing on a coral head setting anchor to net fish {Certified fish}, causes the same damage as one year cyanide fishing for blue tangs. But net collectors and their boats fish weekly. That means net collectors setting anchor cause 50 times more damage then cyanide fishing for blue tangs............ :wink:

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk,
Remember when your case was that the small gobies and blennies couldn't be caught without cyanide? Now you claim the reverse to support the new dogma.
This nerve to manufacture information whenever convenient tells a lot about how you operate there son.
Steve

Yes I remember, and just like Peters data and the DOA DAA data of which you all hold in such high reguard.......I was setting you up to use it now to highlite the facts about todays industry. I am using your position to affirm mine. :wink: What better way to find the truth?

 

[clarionreef]

That was a classic Calk!
Every paragraph had something ridiculous and made up!
Every falsehood, exaggeration and twisted conclusion all put into a blender that came out...anchor damage from net collectors causing 50 X more damage then cyanide fishing!
Bravo! You'll not top this one. It really needs a sticky as it does in fact prove a rambling insincerity in your approach masked somewhat by buffonery.
You are really here for fun aren't you? Pure recreation and shock value....kinda like a Reefs.org Howard Stern. He doesn't care either. Hes just there for the rantings....and ratings.
Steve
PS. Anchor damage avoidance training should be the number one focus now ...WWF had it wrong, they sent MAC to 'fiddle' w/ the wrong issue.

 

[Anonymous]

No one DEMANDS cyanide fish, Kalk.
The very notion is patently absurd.

Seem to me that when hobbyist demand the cheapest fish possible, they are in essence demanding cyanide caught.

 

[clarionreef]

BINGO!
Which is why the old..."lets educate everyone" movement is DOA.
For every consciencious hobbyist or dealer you educate there are another 20 easily....who negate the achievement.
This thing is to be solved in S.E. Asia for fishermans reasons. Local law and local culture exert far, far more impact on fishermans behavior and disposition to change then a slight minority of ' educated' consumers in America.
Matrurity in this movement is shown by the appreciation of this fact and a movement of effort to the scene of the action.
AMDA NET FUND is based in this reality.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve, I agree. The MAC believes that the cyanide problem will be solved by educating marine hobbyists to buy net-caught fish. They have not ensured a net-caught fish supply by dealing with the needs of the fishermen. Since, it is the fishermen using the cyanide, the problem needs to be solved at that end (the source).

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

I agree, you must replace the act of cyanide fishing with something else? You expect the collectors to chase blue tangs around the reef with hand nets. If collecting fish like blue tangs were so easy with nets , then why dont Hawaiian collectors take the time to do so? Because its very very hard. And almost impossible to collect without crow barring the live coral to get at the fish. Your not going to get these guys to spend an extra five hours in the water. You must give them a better alternative ....not one in which a two inch blue fish makes you feel like a fool........with cyanide the collectors have the power..not the same when you have a dip net and a prayer as your tools............. I like the idea of mariculture...... taking small cuttings from the corals and growing out the frags . You must give the natives a reason to value live coral. The people of Bali are getting 30 and 40 bucks for some of their aquacultured corals. Thats more then they receive for a blue face angle or five blue tangs. Those same collectors wont spray a mother colony to collect the fish in it. They value the long term relationship with the acropora mother colonies. One bright colored mother colony can produce four thousand bucks a year. It takes 200 blue face to equal that . Or 400 blue tangs. Coral export is getting so big an industry that my supplier in Tonga stopped collecting fish altogether. They said that they have more orders for coral then they can fill. why spend hours in the water chasing fish ......when we can frag the millions of coral heads that the fish hide in instead? The average reef tank once filled has about twenty corals for every one fish. and the dollar value for both the industry and the collectors is about thirty or forty to one. With the modern reef tank industry .......everyone wins. Well maybe not the cyanide fish industry.......but thats the point isn't it?

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk writes;

"If collecting fish like blue tang were so easy with nets then why don't Hawaiian collectors take the time to do so?"

Kalk...I'm starting to think you do in fact write your own stuff...sometimes because no importer is silly enough to coach you w/ things like that. Then again, its Sunday and they must be out of touch.
Blue tangs don't live in Hawaii and Hawaiians do 'take the time' to catch their fish with nets.
Then again I must keep in mind that you were the one that thought Bali was a country and not a state in Indonesia. Innocent mistakes for detached hobbyists and beginners. Not so for a leader of the industrys coral farming movement.
Steve

PS. I'm gonna ask my Hawaiian supllier why he doesn't catch blue tangs w/ nets.
Naah...I'd never pull it off. Hawaiian shippers all know that there are no importers that dumb.

 

[JennM]

Once a wholesaler told me that their yellow tangs were from PI... :roll:

Hey Kalk - here's a news flash ... not EVERYBODY keeping marines, is keeping a reef tank... including yourself - after all, that big tank with King Neptune in it, in your shop, is a Fish-Only tank, is it not? It's been a while since I was there, but if my memory serves, you had some large angels in it, and whatnot...

Perhaps the reef hobby is gaining in popularity, but there are a lot of long-timers still keeping FO thinking it's "easier" (read: cheaper) than reef ... but you failed to account for the increasing popularity of the hobby as a whole... after all, could the hobby have supported the number of stores concentrated in your area, perhaps 15 years ago? Methinks not. For all the hobbyists that want to grow clams and Acroporas, there are just as many who like triggers and eels and butterflies... there are many aspects to this hobby, and to presume that the market for "non-reef-tank-appropriate" fishes is going away any time soon, is short-sighted on your part.

Following Kalk's thinking, it's hard to believe that anybody would even bother worrying about the cyanide trade, since it's so "minimal"... what a waste of time for IMA, Haribon-OVI, MAC, all the contributors to the netting funds, and the industry reformists as a group...

Geez, we should all quit wasting our time and just stick our heads back into the sand, eh?

:roll:

 

[Kalkbreath]

Then explain away these issues ..........fish imports are half what they were ten years ago. Yet there are twice as many hobbyists? That means one forth as many fish per hobbyist! Thats a 75% reduction!!! Invertebrates sales have increased ten fold. There are half as many cyanide fish coming out of places like PI today then there were fish exported in late 1980s early 199Os. The number of message boards like this one {geared to reefs ],out number fish only boards in number and participation ten to one. How many of you preach that fish only style tanks are better for the health of the fish? Yes there are old style hobbyist still in the hobby ...........but many of these people also use oldstyle undergravel filters. And I had three people ask me {today} if they can put nemos in fresh water systems. There will always be people that dont get it. Until we "reeform them" But more and more hobbyists today do get it compared to the past. The reeform will continue this year and next and the next. As a reef tank becomes cheaper and cheaper to set up.{thanks to the Internet} More and more of the "old style" fish killers will change over to the new way of thinking ...........will you?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk writes;

"If collecting fish like blue tang were so easy with nets then why don't Hawaiian collectors take the time to do so?"

Kalk...I'm starting to think you do in fact write your own stuff...sometimes because no importer is silly enough to coach you w/ things like that. Then again, its Sunday and they must be out of touch.
Blue tangs don't live in Hawaii and Hawaiians do 'take the time' to catch their fish with nets.
Then again I must keep in mind that you were the one that thought Bali was a country and not a state in Indonesia. Innocent mistakes for detached hobbyists and beginners. Not so for a leader of the industrys coral farming movement.
Steve

PS. I'm gonna ask my Hawaiian supllier why he doesn't catch blue tangs w/ nets.
Naah...I'd never pull it off. Hawaiian shippers all know that there are no importers that dumb.

I understand that the blue tangs people like Wayne's ocean world in Hawaii sell are collected in Micronesia It even states it on the lists. But I also understand that Hawaii is actually the USA. But we still refer to that area in the world separate from collection in other parts of the USA. {even though its incorrect according to you} Like wise with Bali. Yes , when I wire money there and pull CITES permits ,I do understand that its part of Indonesia. I fill out the forms. But I also understand that its considered a very different collection area then Jakarta. {Kinda like the reason we refer to The Keys separately then Kona. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

kalk wrote:

fish imports are half what they were ten years ago. Yet there are twice as many hobbyists?

please cite where you get this data from

Invertebrates sales have increased ten fold.

please cite where you get this data from

There are half as many cyanide fish coming out of places like PI today then there were fish exported in late 1980s early 199Os

please cite where you get this data from

The number of message boards like this one {geared to reefs ],out number fish only boards in number and participation ten to one

please cite where you get this data from

There will always be people that dont get it

indeed , kalk, indeed :lol:

 

[Kalkbreath]

Once a wholesaler told me that their yellow tangs were from PI... :roll:

:

Thats because mimic tangs are listed as yellow tangs on every list from PI. And Actually they ARE yellow tangs are they not? :wink:

 

[Kalkbreath]

kalk wrote:

fish imports are half what they were ten years ago. Yet there are twice as many hobbyists?

please cite where you get this data from

Invertebrates sales have increased ten fold.

please cite where you get this data from

There are half as many cyanide fish coming out of places like PI today then there were fish exported in late 1980s early 199Os

please cite where you get this data from

The number of message boards like this one {geared to reefs ],out number fish only boards in number and participation ten to one

please cite where you get this data from

There will always be people that dont get it

indeed , kalk, indeed :lol:

The Woods report...for one.. read it.......................... If you cant sight data that supports your notion.......then why demand that i do? Although unlike you I will be glad to support my position. Read the report , then explain why you disagree..... Even Peter has respect for this ladys work. Its twenty years of data in the making. Next read some Cites export data. US Fish and wildlife keeps records of every box of fish . Clearly huge changes in whats being landed today from 1990. Then lastly ask yourself why you dont seek out hard data like this for yourself? dont you really want to find the truth?

 

[Anonymous]

kalk wrote:

fish imports are half what they were ten years ago. Yet there are twice as many hobbyists?

please cite where you get this data from

Invertebrates sales have increased ten fold.

please cite where you get this data from

There are half as many cyanide fish coming out of places like PI today then there were fish exported in late 1980s early 199Os

please cite where you get this data from

The number of message boards like this one {geared to reefs ],out number fish only boards in number and participation ten to one

please cite where you get this data from

There will always be people that dont get it

indeed , kalk, indeed :lol:

The Woods report...for one.. read it.......................... If you cant sight data that supports your notion.......then why demand that i do? Although unlike you I will be glad to support my position. Read the report , then explain why you disagree..... Even Peter has respect for this ladys work. Its twenty years of data in the making. Next read some Cites export data. US Fish and wildlife keeps records of every box of fish . Clearly huge changes in whats being landed today from 1990. Then lastly ask yourself why you dont seek out hard data like this for yourself? dont you really want to find the truth?

posting a simple link or two would have been fine- can you do that?

 

[PeterIMA]

Vitz, I have the Woods report. The last time I tried to access it on the Marine Conservtion Society website, it wasn't there. I have some problems with her cyanide discussion. Otherwise, it is a good source of information. So is Reefs to Aquaria by the World Conservation Monitoring Center. Kalk is probably right that exports from PI have declined by about 50% since 1995. My guess is that there are still many more live marine fish tanks than reef tanks. Since, the concerns of IMA are coral reef conservation (read corals and fishes), I think regulatory agencies and the USCRTF need to become concerned if the number of live reef tanks have "increased tenfold".

Kalk has done such a good job of focusing the issue on the number of cyanided fish imported that the other issues of reef destruction (like coral collecting for the aquarium and curio trades) are not getting the attention they deserve. The IMA is concerned about protecting coral reefs and conserving (all) marine resources for the benefit of the local people.

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

does the woods report address factual data behind these assertions of kalk's?...

fish imports are half what they were ten years ago. Yet there are twice as many hobbyists...

Invertebrates sales have increased ten fold...


There are half as many cyanide fish coming out of places like PI today then there were fish exported in late 1980s early 199Os...

i, for one, have seen no reduction of fish imports in the 3 states i've lived in over the past 10 yrs, reflected in the retail outlets-shipment amounts seem to be coming in as strong as ever, and in the same numbers

only the variety seems to have changed, w/fish such as imp. angels, etc in good condition, and nice size, becoming increasingly infrequent

same goes for damsels-even chromi seem to arriving at about 1/2 the size they were available at circa '95-99