industry reform stuff (split from ricardea thread)

[greetin]

I realize we all have an impact, some being negative, on the reefs because of the trade we are in, but there are legal and illegal ways of collecting the animals. I just like to try my best to buy livestock from suppliers that practice legal collecting. I realize there is no way of really knowing unless you are in the ocean, swimming along side them, blah blah blah. I'm sure most of you know what I meant by not wanting to support the illegal harvesting of these Ricordeas by buying from someone who is collecting fist size rocks which is well known to be illegaln the Florida waters.

 

[clarionreef]

PIERO,
IN THE NAME OF THE TRADE....AND SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES... millions of dollars have been raised and spent.
This steady contribution has been enough to make huge and exciting changes.
The fact that they have not occured is the real problem.
The fact that the money and energy was squandered, misspent and wasted is the real crime.
The trade has anchored plenty for its own reform. It has however allowed the wrong team to speak for it and adress its issues.
It has allowed its responsibilty to be farmed out to others and watched as their slow motion failure rendered nor image repair, reform or clean fish.
The groups servicing the trade and feeding off its problems can slink away and leave it defenseless still and that will probably happen.
If the boogey man or the USCRTF come calling...will they will only see the trades culpability or will they take into account this hijacking of the reform cause by people they used to listen to?

If funding agencies wouldn't be so incredibly naive when handing out the cash...we could have reformed this trade for good by now.
Who is more to blame? The scoundrels who blew the wad or the fools who gave it out to the wrong crowd?
I think its a cowardly argument is to lay blame on the faceless, nameless intangible "aquarium trade"...and hide from this history of embezzling the issues for profit by money grubbing carpetbaggers from some sectors of the professional eco-research community. ...for the last 20 years.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

I do support fish farming of course, and anything that increases the sustainability of seafood consumption.

Slightly off the topic, but I'd read up on some of the negative sides of fish farming (consumables) before supporting it. There's more than just taking fish from the oceans. To give you an idea think large land based cow farms, and how they impact the environment around them.

 

[bookfish]

" If funding agencies wouldn't be so incredibly naive when handing out the cash...we could have reformed this trade for good by now.
Who is more to blame? The scoundrels who blew the wad or the fools who gave it out to the wrong crowd?
I think its a cowardly argument is to lay blame on the faceless, nameless intangible "aquarium trade"...and hide from this history of embezzling the issues for profit by money grubbing carpetbaggers from some sectors of the professional eco-research community. ...for the last 20 years.
Steve"

But Steve, you speak about our industry as if it's in a perpetual infancy, able to be scapegoated, exploited by NPO's and then, in the end, unable to withstand the scrutiny of an outsider (i.e USCRTF). You also blame other organisations for feeding on our issues for direct profit to themselves. If reform was needed and the money was available, why hasn't the industry attempted to reform itself or be more directly involved in reform and what makes you think that the grant money, if it had been given to industry insiders would have been used more effectively, or would be going forward? We are in an industry made up of private businesses, each one operating with profitability in mind.
I know that you also feel, as I do, that the organizations in our industry (AMDA, PIJAC etc...) are not the proper vehicles for reform both from an efficiency and also a vested interest perspective.
You asked earlier who's to blame but I don't think it's about blame. I think all parties (private businesses, NPO's, industry org.'s) simply did what it was in their nature and mandate to do.
The private businesses focused on their bottom lines without too much concern (read: money spent) on reforming their industry. Besides, they really wouldn't be eligible for the type of funding that the likes of a MAC gets.
Industry organizations focused more on regulation and issues within the industry and the public perception of those issues. Certainly an industry advocacy org. isn't likely to funded for this type of reform work.
By my way of thinking, and by legal definition of a charitable contribution, that funding was only available to NPO's and will only be available to NPO's going forward.
If you maintain that they were the wrong NPO's then it should have been possible to create the right kind and capture the funding. If we needed to be more involved with those NPO's who received the funding then that too was possible to achieve.
I certainly think there's good reason to reform our industry at many/all levels but as long as you're talking about an industry of private businesses all competing with each other, that will be difficult to do from within the industry itself.
I know we've discussed eco-labeling before and IF (a very big if) that could be done in a productive, verifiable and sustainable manner, it might provide the incentive and funding for genuine reform. But is the MO buying public really willing to pay a premium for value added product?
-Jim

 

[clarionreef]

Jim,
The industry is a term of convenience for simple thinking and soundbite rhetoric. No one despises the dirty factions in the industry more then some of us in that same industry
I ment no blanket defense of it.
Clean factions emerge....ashamed of the rest. The sharpest and most effective revelations have come historically from within the trade....
They probably would have amounted to a lot more and long ago if the dirtiest players were not mollydoddled and protected, covered for and sanctioned by the NGOs in question.
They have provided a get out of jail free card with their decade of claiming support from each other.
This partnership against sustainability has been effective in each side taking validation from the other and doing everything well except saving coral reefs from poison and crowbars.
The corporate fix is on and the NGOs are part of it.
Selling out to the constraints of funders is a natural behavior as the prime directive is the cash not the cause.
The Haliburtonization of the reform process makes it 'top heavy, top down' and alienates the very locals we need to win.. This formula has a poor track record and ruins reform as it has in Iraq.

Without alternative funding streams and more sincere players there will be no significant trade reform as the Packard-US AID-Macarthur-WWF-TNC-MAMTI buffet table is reserved for like minded folks...and like minded folks protect and cover for each others errors.
Its their party and they're sticking to it.

Steve
PS the MO buying public WILL NEVER reallybe willing to pay a premium for value added product? In fact the trend is the opposite.
This is why consumer side schemes are a doomed strategy path.
All power to the locals and local efforts.

 

[Jaime Baquero]

PIERO,
IN THE NAME OF THE TRADE....AND SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES... millions of dollars have been raised and spent.
This steady contribution has been enough to make huge and exciting changes.
The fact that they have not occured is the real problem.
The fact that the money and energy was squandered, misspent and wasted is the real crime.
The trade has anchored plenty for its own reform. It has however allowed the wrong team to speak for it and adress its issues.
It has allowed its responsibilty to be farmed out to others and watched as their slow motion failure rendered nor image repair, reform or clean fish.
The groups servicing the trade and feeding off its problems can slink away and leave it defenseless still and that will probably happen.
If the boogey man or the USCRTF come calling...will they will only see the trades culpability or will they take into account this hijacking of the reform cause by people they used to listen to?

If funding agencies wouldn't be so incredibly naive when handing out the cash...we could have reformed this trade for good by now.
Who is more to blame? The scoundrels who blew the wad or the fools who gave it out to the wrong crowd?
I think its a cowardly argument is to lay blame on the faceless, nameless intangible "aquarium trade"...and hide from this history of embezzling the issues for profit by money grubbing carpetbaggers from some sectors of the professional eco-research community. ...for the last 20 years.
Steve

NGOs activities to tackle problems related to the collection of marine ornamentals for the marine aquarium trade were concentrated mainly in the Philippines during the last two decades. Support from the industry was almost nil. Is only now that "very few caring people from the industry" are taking some action to face the situation. This is happening after two decades of abuse to coral reefs, fish populations and fish collectors. The sincerity of some of those "caring people" is questionable due to their backgrounds.

As I said before most of NGOs efforts were concentrated in the Philippines. However, the industry has known that the problem in Indonesia is even worse than in the Philippines but is DOING nothing. My question is How is to blame for the lack of initiative, willingness and commitment to address the cyanide problem as well as problems related with handling, holding and unnecessary mortality of collected fish in Indonesia? During decades the collectors of MO in Indonesia are getting just morsels from this lucrative trade while coral reefs are being destroyed . Do not forget that a great percentage of wild corals comes from Indonesia. Once again... How is responsible for this Eco/cide?

 

[clarionreef]

Jamie,
During the past years, MAC and MAMTI got millions based on the whole enchilada.... Indo is in their portfolio.
We not turn that keen inquiring mind onto them and ask where the effort and the money went?
The Les village co-op has solved the collecting problems already and are now worth stealing and claiming credit for.
steve
Why are malpractice, malfeasence and sqaundering the budgets in the name of the trades issues not also a crime?

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Jamie,
During the past years, MAC and MAMTI got millions based on the whole enchilada.... Indo is in their portfolio.
We not turn that keen inquiring mind onto them and ask where the effort and the money went?
The Les village co-op has solved the collecting problems already and are now worth stealing and claiming credit for.
steve
Why are malpractice, malfeasence and sqaundering the budgets in the name of the trades issues not also a crime?

Steve,

Well, the fact is that in a previous thread "Les Villages...Net Caught Co-operative" Feb 22 2006 you wrote " They are looking for buyers of their net caught product and have had a hard time doing so as NO WHOLESALER have been ineterested so far except for Aquatic Specialists". I understand you work for A.S now, meaning that if you were not working for them NO ONE had responded to the calls of the Co-operative.

As I have stated before collectors, federation or cooperatives of fish collectors are willing and committed to change but they can not do that by themselves, they do need all wholesalers behind them supporting their efforts. Your earlier statement confirms the fact that the industry as a whole is doing nothing to help initiatives tending to tackle the different environmental, social and economical problems this trade has created. Isolated efforts won't make any dent.

 

[clarionreef]

"the fact that the industry as a whole is doing nothing to help initiatives tending to tackle the different environmental, social and economical problems this trade has created. Isolated efforts won't make any dent." :roll:
Isolated efforts won't make any dent."?
Did you really say that?
That was truly indicative of your thought process wasn't it?
Mass, spontaneous, immediate behavioral change first...?
Has anything ever worked that way?
Did Jesus, Gandhi, MLK, mother Teresa wait for society as a whole to come on board before starting w/isolated efforts to make a dent?

All significant change begins w/ something smaller.
START WITH THE WISDOM THAT IF YOU FIX YOURSELF UP IN A SINGLE VILLAGE, AND SUCCEED, THE REST WILL FOLLOW.
So we are to call you when all the harder work is done then?
Gandhi


This is indicative of your thought process isn't it?

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Yes, I said that. No because someone told me, but because we worked, and very hard, that kind of iniciative. One of the reasons of failure was lack of support from the same industry.

I hope Les Villages project works. But to succed they need the support of a great number of wholesalers in North America.

 

[clarionreef]

a great number of wholesalers...???

They just need a loyal 2 or 3.
The Europeans and public aquariums could also do a lot by supporting in real purchases what they say they believe.
Steve

 

[clarionreef]

:roll:huh yourself...
Geez Louise...
We were on about tactics of social influence...not comparing anyones resumes.
Personalizing all dialogue is a good way to take everything too personaly and never share and improve strategies together.

Steve

 

[bookfish]

Steve is right and I try to depersonalize my on-line discussion as much as possible. Steve also knows that I agree with him on some ,but not all, issues and we've enjoyed plenty of lively face to face discussions in the past.
Actually my point was more about how we can make reform of the individual private businesses, by the businesses themselves, a profitable activity. Proper business decision making is driven by profit considerations and, short of legislation, threat of boycott, shift of market or some other profit based/ threatening issue, I don't see why anyone would change their practices.
I think this approach is most needed when dealing with suppliers from abroad who aren't interested in high handed eco babble. They are already selling their natural resources to the foreign market, probably unwillingly, and out of necessity.-Jim

ps. I like this discussion so I'll split it off from the ricordea thread in a bit.
Let's see if we can't keep it polite moving forward.

 

[WayneSallee]

The reform has to be done in a profitable manner, otherwise, those that try to do otherwise will fail. For example, the fishermen need to be taught how to use nets, not just tell them not to use cyanide, and not help them with nets. By properly using nets, they will be more profitable, If fish arriving to the wholesalers and stores, have fewer deaths, then it will mean more profit, so proper packaging and housing needs to be addressed at the same time. The mail order crowd is not interested in this, so it is left up to the stores. Most chain stores are not all that interested in this as well. So this leaves it up to the independant stores (the ones that are dissapearing like mom and pop hardware stores did).

Yes, most of what I have said, has already been said, and I am simply repeating it, but I think this fact needs to be made obvious. And I also agree with the previous poster that said that the reform is best done by small groups, and not by large corrupting organizations.

It can't be said that people need to just start throwing money at it, and forget about the profit and loss of the businesses.

Wayne Sallee
Wayne's Pets
[email protected]

 

[clarionreef]

Wayne,
You're right about running reform measures as if results really mattered.
But the office work that getting funded entails is a different skill set and as a result, the ones who secure funding for their projects are of course not as well versed in hands on wet-work as they were in funding aquisition...and googling up writings by others who googled up writings from others....
I can not even imagine saying the things I say without direct, repeated experience. Trying to understand, let alone solve these issues is impossible for the layman/outsider.

Its their ball and thats been made abundantly clear.
Its their ball...but our game...
They have carjacked an issue they don't well understand....but they are still in control of the car.
Steve

 

[Piero]

There's more than just taking fish from the oceans. To give you an idea think large land based cow farms, and how they impact the environment around them.

A valid point certainly. too much, too big. It's the 6 billion h.sapiens thing again. and with current population trend, i read somewhere that we should see double that in the next 50-80 years. scary. I honestly don't see the planet sustaining that bioload.
_________________
Mercedes Benz 770

 

[clarionreef]

I honestly don't see the planet sustaining that bioload.
_________________
You're right of course.
Imagine if these will be remembered as the new "good ol days"...when you could swim out and see real coral and live schools of fish.

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

PIERO,
IN THE NAME OF THE TRADE....AND SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES... millions of dollars have been raised and spent.
This steady contribution has been enough to make huge and exciting changes.
The fact that they have not occured is the real problem.
The fact that the money and energy was squandered, misspent and wasted is the real crime.
The trade has anchored plenty for its own reform. It has however allowed the wrong team to speak for it and adress its issues.
It has allowed its responsibilty to be farmed out to others and watched as their slow motion failure rendered nor image repair, reform or clean fish.
The groups servicing the trade and feeding off its problems can slink away and leave it defenseless still and that will probably happen.
If the boogey man or the USCRTF come calling...will they will only see the trades culpability or will they take into account this hijacking of the reform cause by people they used to listen to?

If funding agencies wouldn't be so incredibly naive when handing out the cash...we could have reformed this trade for good by now.
Who is more to blame? The scoundrels who blew the wad or the fools who gave it out to the wrong crowd?
I think its a cowardly argument is to lay blame on the faceless, nameless intangible "aquarium trade"...and hide from this history of embezzling the issues for profit by money grubbing carpetbaggers from some sectors of the professional eco-research community. ...for the last 20 years.
Steve

i'm not so sure that they're that naive, or clueless, as to what goes on with their cash, and i'm willing to bet that some know of what will occur in advance

 

[bookfish]

Perhaps so, but is there some way to harness that resource for the good of effective reform?

 

[clarionreef]

i'm not so sure that they're that naive, or clueless, as to what goes on with their cash, and i'm willing to bet that some know of what will occur in advance"

Wow...
You mean like keeping alternative fuel sources down for a century and banking on the cancer industry or the annex of Iraq?
Milking the inequity instead of solving it?
It would explain the segue into projects where failure is absolutely certain.
Speculate Spock.
Steve