Cyanide Testing

[DavidM]

I am open to CDT if it can work. I dont think $100k can deliver a final product to be used, but moreso to explore how it would and could be done and a prototype model.

That being said, im surprised there is so much debate on this topic here. If we can do it, why not do it? Maybe i am missing something here, or maybe Paul was so against it there is just the assumption that i would be against it.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I definately can not keep up with you all in the post forums, so please, if i dont answer a question, ask it again or email me at [email protected].

 

[Anonymous]

Dave,

What we're all saying is, there is a CDT and we can not fathom WHY a few hundred thousand needs to be wasted on a test that exists. Most of us HATE seeing good money thrown away like this. That amount could go a lot further elsewhere.

 

[PeterIMA]

Dave, BFAR has the equipment and the manuals for the ISE method for CDT that works and is reliable. The MAC and Dr. Renneberg in Hong Kong have maintained that it does not work. The position of MAC has been that there is not a reliable CDT. Despite the rubuttal provided to MAC by IMA-Philippines posted above, Paul Holthus (1999) and subsequently continued to assert that the ISE method was unreliable and obtained both MacArthur funding and World Bank GEF funding (MAMTI) to evaluate and develop a new CDT. Perhaps, if the MAC admitted that the ISE method developed by the ASTM is reliable, progress could be made to resolve the cyanide testing issue.

Peter

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Dave,

I understand how confuse you could be!

There is a CDT.... the one that BFAR/IMA put in place in different locations in the Philippines.

There are two opinions; the first one (Peter/BFAR/IMA) saying that their CDT is reliable. The second opinion (MAC/ Dr, Renneberg) that the CDT doesn't work.... that it is not reliable. By now this is what most of the "big fish" (exporters) in the Philippines consider ( the CDT is not reliable).

According to Peter the CDT is reliable but the weakness is that the Filipino government (BFAR) is not enforcing the law.

What I can tell you is that while in the Philippines I got information directly from exporters telling me about doubts they had regarding the CDT. By that time they were the ones giving the samples to be tested ( meaning they gave samples they knew were clean), the value of expensive fish has been an issue when collecting samples. I asked Peter about some "weakness" the CDT could have because that was the argument people had about the CDT. If the CDT is reliable how come NO ONE fish exporter in the Philippines has not gone to jail?

I think that the way to go is to identify the possible weakness the actual CDT has, and work on it to eliminate any doubts. You shouldn't go with the CDT the way it is because people DO NOT trust it, they have been said MANY TIMES that IT IS NOT reliable.. A third opinion from professionals could clarify the situation.

On the other, you MUST make sure that the Filipino government is committed and is willing to enforce the law.

 

[N1N2EGT]

Dave,

There is a CDT.... the one that BFAR/IMA put in place in different locations in the Philippines.

Does it work?

There are two opinions; the first one (Peter/BFAR/IMA) saying that their CDT is reliable. The second opinion (MAC/ Dr, Renneberg) that the CDT doesn't work.... that it is not reliable. By now this is what most of the "big fish" (exporters) in the Philippines consider ( the CDT is not reliable).

So how do you break the deadlock? Toss coin, maybe?

According to Peter the CDT is reliable but the weakness is that the Filipino government (BFAR) is not enforcing the law.

Having a reliable test equipment and enforcing the law are two different things.

What I can tell you is that while in the Philippines I got information directly from exporters telling me about doubts they had regarding the CDT. By that time they were the ones giving the samples to be tested ( meaning they gave samples they knew were clean), the value of expensive fish has been an issue when collecting samples. I asked Peter about some "weakness" the CDT could have because that was the argument people had about the CDT. If the CDT is reliable how come NO ONE fish exporter in the Philippines has not gone to jail?

I don't have problem giving them the more expensive specie as long as they cover my cost. The problem is, we don't know for sure if they really brought the fish in question to the labs or just sold to another exporter. Answer B. Even if using a reliable test unit, why should an exporter go to jail if a test indicates positive?. Explain further please.

I think that the way to go is to identify the possible weakness the actual CDT has, and work on it to eliminate any doubts. You shouldn't go with the CDT the way it is because people DO NOT trust it, they have been said MANY TIMES that IT IS NOT reliable.. A third opinion from professionals could clarify the situation.

You can bring in all the experts and there will always be that one percentage of error to affect the result of the test. Refer Murphy's Law on what could go wrong..

On the other, you MUST make sure that the Filipino government is committed and is willing to enforce the law.[/

We don't even need a law here. What we need is to educate the people, the fisher folk. Explain to them the consequences of bad/illegal fishing. How you effectively do this, is another question. It is my experience that fisher folks are always willing to do the right thing, if the right equipment is readily available.

ciao!

 

[PeterIMA]

Posting Deleted

 

[PeterIMA]

Jaime, The CDT method is not about your opinion or that of the exporters. It is a reliable scientific method that has undergone extensive peer review. It was extensively evaluated by the ASTM through round robin comparisons between six laboratories prior to it being used by the IMA.

Peter Rubec

 

[Anonymous]

Self deleted

 

[Caterham]

Peter,

Who are you going to contact at BFAR to get this done? It can be difficult to even pull a permit unless the situation is done in a manner that makes all involved happy.

It will never happen. Never. You dont have the contacts to get it done. Please move on.

 

[PeterIMA]

Jaime has correctly pointed out that there is a divergence of scientific opinion about the reliability of the BFAR ISE method for CDT. He called for a third prognosis by a recognized expert.

Please find attached a letter from Dr. George Dixon a recognized expert with cyanide research with fish and the Associate Dean of Science for Graduate Studies at the University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.

Peter Rubec

 

[naesco]

Peter,

Who are you going to contact at BFAR to get this done? It can be difficult to even pull a permit unless the situation is done in a manner that makes all involved happy.

It will never happen. Never. You dont have the contacts to get it done. Please move on.

You are wrong again Gaterham. It will happen!

Wayne Ryan

 

[bookfish]

Disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing is useless. Support your statement with sound reasoning and/ or examples or it carries no weight.

 

[PeterIMA]

Bookfish, I agree with Naesco. No need to disagree.

Peter

 

[Caterham]

Naesco,

Thanks so much for your contributions to this thread.

Unfortunately, with absolutely zero past or current involvement in the trade of marine ornamentals there are some folks here is this community that might take your comments somewhat lightly.

I respect your efforts and hope that you continue to stay involved. All good teams have people cheering for them on the sidelines, out of play.

Warmest regards

 

[clarionreef]

Wow....it seems that the CDT was well regarded afterall!

I was especially impressed where Dr Dixon said;
......."all SOPs are living documents that evolve and are refined as they are applied to an ever increasing number of situations...."

It could have evolved and improved over all this time if not dismissed by a mis-reading of things not understood.

Actually, it was envied by the MAC boys at the time. The problem with this test was that is was an IMA derived CDT and not a MAC one.
Therefore...it was not good enough. The test was denied on politics turf politics and nothing more.

Meanwhile, years go by as well as a great deal of money allocated for a CDT .
And all this time MAC has still not produced a rabbit....I mean a CDT.
I hope the new MAC folks are more environmentally focused and not so obsessed with politics and turf.
Steve
[ I always said that dog didn't hunt...]

 

[naesco]

Naesco,

Thanks so much for your contributions to this thread.

Unfortunately, with absolutely zero past or current involvement in the trade of marine ornamentals there are some folks here is this community that might take your comments somewhat lightly.

I respect your efforts and hope that you continue to stay involved. All good teams have people cheering for them on the sidelines, out of play.

Warmest regards

I am curious Gatorham.

Have you read any of the studies on CDT (sorry Cyanide Detection Testing) referred to in Dr. Rubec s postings?

Have you read any of the discussions on the USCRTF (sorry United States Coral Reef Task Force) web site?

I understand you own a pet store. Do you sell marine fish and coral?

And what are your qualifications? Ph.D? Please let us know.

I don't what to be disrespectful but if you want to post on a cyanide thread maybe you might take the time to educate your self a little about it or ask some questions instead of continuing with these childish postings, eh.

Wayne Ryan

 

[Anonymous]

Naesco,

Thanks so much for your contributions to this thread.

Unfortunately, with absolutely zero past or current involvement in the trade of marine ornamentals there are some folks here is this community that might take your comments somewhat lightly.

I respect your efforts and hope that you continue to stay involved. All good teams have people cheering for them on the sidelines, out of play.

Warmest regards

I am curious Gatorham.

Have you read any of the studies on CDT (sorry Cyanide Detection Testing) referred to in Dr. Rubec s postings?

Have you read any of the discussions on the USCRTF (sorry United States Coral Reef Task Force) web site?

I understand you own a pet store. Do you sell marine fish and coral?

And what are your qualifications? Ph.D? Please let us know.

I don't what to be disrespectful but if you want to post on a cyanide thread maybe you might take the time to educate your self a little about it or ask some questions instead of continuing with these childish postings, eh.

Wayne Ryan

naesco,

I am now just in the hobby.I don't have an interest in a fish store anymore.I find it disturbing that a hobbyist thinks that they (you) have some insite into the hobby that the players, (importers,wholesalers,retailers,legal authorities) somehow are missing.
do you have some self importance issues? I am curious to find out why you think you are some kind of authority on mo collections and you know the best for the industry.I guess my point is what makes you think posting in this section of the board without having industry concerns makes what you say credible?

 

[clarionreef]

I find it disturbing that a hobbyist thinks that they (you) have some insite into the hobby that the players, (importers,wholesalers,retailers,legal authorities) somehow are missing.
do you have some self importance issues? I am curious to find out why you think you are some kind of authority on mo collections and you know the best for the industry.I guess my point is what makes you think posting in this section of the board without having industry concerns makes what you say credible?

Really; Are we talking about MAC again?
Since lack of experience and productive history, relevance and talent are not required to claim to represent the industry...and gamble with its future, I see no problem with contributions from Wayne and other hobbyists.
We have just seen a decade of record attention, energy and capital given to the issues of industry reform with a very serious ...in fact staggering lack of results to show for it.
In fact, the failure may be blamed on the industry that sat by amused all this time and thankful for the excuse to continue as before and not to be more responsible.
The whole cyanide trade signed a letter of commitment ....and breathed a collective sigh of relief
It was as if the cyanide trade itself wrote the script!



Steve

 

[naesco]

coral addict

Welcome to reefs.org industry forum.

A bit of history first.
When issues like industry's dirty little secret, cyanide, was outed and issues like the collection and sale of fish and coral that had no chance of survival in hobbyist's tanks was discussed in the main forum, the mods and others agreed to set up the industry forum so that issues affecting both hobbyists and industry could be discussed and debated.
It is therefor not a forum for industry alone and never has been.

To answer your question. I am not concerned about what is best for industry. What is best for industry is continuing to dredge the reefs for coral, rock and fish, using cyanide, and importing tonnes of fish or coral without any concern for the reefs and the people who require the reefs to survive.
I am concerned about my hobby and the conditions of the reefs which ought to be a concern by industry as well. IMO if things continue the way they are there will be a closure and the use of cyanide will be the reason for the closure. Cyanide kills the reefs and all the creatures that dwell therein.

Most of the posters on this forum share the same concerns about cyanide use that I do. Many seek out net caught and aqua cultured fish and coral.
We differ on what to do to solve the problem.

But something has to be done to stop the use of cyanide and my opinion it involves three steps.
1. Approve a cyanide test. There are ones already available.
2. Do random cyanide testing at exporters facilities.
3. Lay indictments against stateside industry types who knowingly import fish that they know or ought to have known were caught with cyanide.
4. Provide funding for netting and training of fishers and pay them a fair price for there fish and coral.

When these steps are taken, cyanide use will be a thing of the past and the reefs recover and return to their healthy state.
A healthy reef attracts an abundance of critters which in turn provides asustainable marine life to our hobby.

As a hobbyist I am sure you are concerned about cyanide. Please take the time to read as much as you can on the issue including Dr. Rubec's studies.
Thank you
Wayne Ryan

 

[Anonymous]

Post edited for violating the User Agreement Addendum; The Industry Behind the Hobby Forum. The poster is now on time out from the Industry Forum until further notice - Thales