While I do not agree with everything that Naesco (Wayne Ryan) has to say, I tend to agree with his thrust trying to get the "industry" to do something positive to deal with the "cyanide" problem. Actually, I see the "problem" as being much broader than that. The real issue is whether or not the industry (whomever they are) can take steps to rectify its problems, or whether it will be up to governments of importing and exporting nations to take action to rectify the problems.
Some of the problems facing the "industry" are:
1) Declining supply of MAF because of habitat destruction and overfishing in the exporting countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Malaysia
2) Pricing throughout the chain of custody that make it difficult to remain profitable. This is expecially true for the collectors, but also is a problem for exporters, importers, wholesalers, and retailers.
3) Retailers face additional problems in remaining in business due to competition from Web-based suppliers, dry goods suppliers (pricing too high for small independent stores), and competition from chains like Petco, Petsmart, and Walmart.
4) Rising costs for air freight of aquatic organisms is becoming a significant problem cutting into the profitabilty of importing and selling freshwater and marine aquarium fishes.
Wayne has been appealing to people on this forum to suggest what can be done by the "industry". Like always, the regulars on this forum have little to contribute in terms of proposed solutions. Most of you continue to display your unwillingness to become actively involved.
If all that this thread is for you is entertainmenet, then it will fall on governments to take action. Usually, the actions taken by government agencies are detrimental to the trade, and may also be detrimental to marine conservation. For example, one option of governments may be to ban the collection and/or transport of MAF. This is happening locally at the muncipal level in PI. A total ban on exports would hurt both the collectors and hurt every other part of the chain of custody.
Jenn prefers to be the one deciding on what she feels are unsuitable species. However, this option does not work, since it leaves others importing unsuitable species that may be harmful to humans. It does not deal with the hobbyist who acidentally gets spined by a poisonous fish (like a lion fish). Her choices do not prevent other retailers from selling stone fish or blue ringed octopus. Once one hobbyist dies from this kind of situation the whole trade will suffer the consequences (mandatory ban on unsuitable species or worse an overall ban on everything).
If MAC, ReefCheck, and CCIF are capable of playing a part in this through MAMTI, then they must demonstrate that their surveys and training programs are effective. MAC standards must mean something so that paying for MAC certification has benefits that support both marine conservation and the sustainable trade in marine organisms.
I put it back to the "MO trade" to do some of the following:
1) Raise funds to support the net trainings that are not being accomplished properly by the MAC.
2) Come up with a Unsuitable Species List and get various trade associations to endorse it (like PIJAC, AMDA and others). Send the list to exporters and inform them not to export the USL species because importers and retailers refuse to buy them.
3) Negotiate better freight rates and better handling practices from the airlines on live animals (this includes everything not just fish). This may avoid future bans like the one that occurred a few years ago on imports (everything from mammals to fish) from SE Asia to Europe because someone imported some CITES listed rodents from China (that had to be disposed of by being put through a paper shredder).
4) Try to work out some standard mark-ups that allow the collectors to get more for the fish they collect, and puts economic incentives (higher prices paid to collectors) on net-caught fish and disincentives on cyanide-caught fish.
I am sure that the members of the various segments of the trade can come up with more solutions (and better ones I hope) than what I have just suggested. I agree that it is up to you, not up to the NGOs or other non-trade members (like Naesco), to decide what is best to help create a sustainable trade in marine organisms (like fish and corals).
Peter Rubec
Some of the problems facing the "industry" are:
1) Declining supply of MAF because of habitat destruction and overfishing in the exporting countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Malaysia
2) Pricing throughout the chain of custody that make it difficult to remain profitable. This is expecially true for the collectors, but also is a problem for exporters, importers, wholesalers, and retailers.
3) Retailers face additional problems in remaining in business due to competition from Web-based suppliers, dry goods suppliers (pricing too high for small independent stores), and competition from chains like Petco, Petsmart, and Walmart.
4) Rising costs for air freight of aquatic organisms is becoming a significant problem cutting into the profitabilty of importing and selling freshwater and marine aquarium fishes.
Wayne has been appealing to people on this forum to suggest what can be done by the "industry". Like always, the regulars on this forum have little to contribute in terms of proposed solutions. Most of you continue to display your unwillingness to become actively involved.
If all that this thread is for you is entertainmenet, then it will fall on governments to take action. Usually, the actions taken by government agencies are detrimental to the trade, and may also be detrimental to marine conservation. For example, one option of governments may be to ban the collection and/or transport of MAF. This is happening locally at the muncipal level in PI. A total ban on exports would hurt both the collectors and hurt every other part of the chain of custody.
Jenn prefers to be the one deciding on what she feels are unsuitable species. However, this option does not work, since it leaves others importing unsuitable species that may be harmful to humans. It does not deal with the hobbyist who acidentally gets spined by a poisonous fish (like a lion fish). Her choices do not prevent other retailers from selling stone fish or blue ringed octopus. Once one hobbyist dies from this kind of situation the whole trade will suffer the consequences (mandatory ban on unsuitable species or worse an overall ban on everything).
If MAC, ReefCheck, and CCIF are capable of playing a part in this through MAMTI, then they must demonstrate that their surveys and training programs are effective. MAC standards must mean something so that paying for MAC certification has benefits that support both marine conservation and the sustainable trade in marine organisms.
I put it back to the "MO trade" to do some of the following:
1) Raise funds to support the net trainings that are not being accomplished properly by the MAC.
2) Come up with a Unsuitable Species List and get various trade associations to endorse it (like PIJAC, AMDA and others). Send the list to exporters and inform them not to export the USL species because importers and retailers refuse to buy them.
3) Negotiate better freight rates and better handling practices from the airlines on live animals (this includes everything not just fish). This may avoid future bans like the one that occurred a few years ago on imports (everything from mammals to fish) from SE Asia to Europe because someone imported some CITES listed rodents from China (that had to be disposed of by being put through a paper shredder).
4) Try to work out some standard mark-ups that allow the collectors to get more for the fish they collect, and puts economic incentives (higher prices paid to collectors) on net-caught fish and disincentives on cyanide-caught fish.
I am sure that the members of the various segments of the trade can come up with more solutions (and better ones I hope) than what I have just suggested. I agree that it is up to you, not up to the NGOs or other non-trade members (like Naesco), to decide what is best to help create a sustainable trade in marine organisms (like fish and corals).
Peter Rubec
