Race, I think I agree with you. To expand on the idea that the problem lies with poor husbandry, we need to examine the problem from its source-the collectors through the chain of custody to retailers (or to the online etailer).
First, the problem of cyanide collection has not gone away. It has gotten worse (we just don't spend as much time publicizing that fact). I met a large wholesaler from Switzerland (in Jakarta last May) who emphatically told me that the mortality through the COC was over 80% (something I have repeatedly stated going back to 1987). He also complained about the condition of a Jakarta exporter's facility and showed me images on his digital camera. He was disappointed to learn that this MAC-Certified facility packed fish too tight in little cubicles, had dead fish lying around in their tanks. Fish from the field were still in the bags 4 hours after they arrived. The tanks were filled with algae and dirt etc.
My last conversation over the phone (yesterday) with Ferdinand Cruz pertained with a meeting he just had with senior staff at the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). I learned that there are many officials who would like to completely ban the export of marine organisms to the aquarium trade. Fortunately, Ferdinand convinced them that supplying netting to the collectors (it is still hard to obtain there) would be a better option.
If we look at the degredation of coral reefs in the Philippines and Indonesia, one cannot claim that it is all due to cyanide fishing. But, one has to admit that the degradation in both countries is widespread with over 95% of the reefs being highly degraded. Coral reefs are degraded and the abundances of marine resources are markedy reduced (including the aquarium fish fisheries). So, the arguement can be made that the MAF resources are declining and that the trade should be banned.
Basically, we need a sustainable trade (I know that sounds repetetive). Irrespective of what business model is adopted in the USA, we need more income to get back to the collectors and exporters, if we hope to continue to have an export trade from the Philippines and Indonesia.
I am associated with the East Asian Seas and Terrestrial Initiatives (EASTI) and have been importing small numbers of MAF for over 2 years. All the fish I receive are net-caught and I have data on their survival rates. I know that net-caught fish that are properly handled and shipped have lower mortality rates (both DOA and DAA).
The idea that MAF are cheap and expendible has to stop. For too long, the retailer has provided another cyanided fish to the hobbyist that also died. Why should hobbyists continue to keep marines if they die? Why keep tropical marines? At least the fish in my screen saver don't die.
Peter Rubec
First, the problem of cyanide collection has not gone away. It has gotten worse (we just don't spend as much time publicizing that fact). I met a large wholesaler from Switzerland (in Jakarta last May) who emphatically told me that the mortality through the COC was over 80% (something I have repeatedly stated going back to 1987). He also complained about the condition of a Jakarta exporter's facility and showed me images on his digital camera. He was disappointed to learn that this MAC-Certified facility packed fish too tight in little cubicles, had dead fish lying around in their tanks. Fish from the field were still in the bags 4 hours after they arrived. The tanks were filled with algae and dirt etc.
My last conversation over the phone (yesterday) with Ferdinand Cruz pertained with a meeting he just had with senior staff at the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). I learned that there are many officials who would like to completely ban the export of marine organisms to the aquarium trade. Fortunately, Ferdinand convinced them that supplying netting to the collectors (it is still hard to obtain there) would be a better option.
If we look at the degredation of coral reefs in the Philippines and Indonesia, one cannot claim that it is all due to cyanide fishing. But, one has to admit that the degradation in both countries is widespread with over 95% of the reefs being highly degraded. Coral reefs are degraded and the abundances of marine resources are markedy reduced (including the aquarium fish fisheries). So, the arguement can be made that the MAF resources are declining and that the trade should be banned.
Basically, we need a sustainable trade (I know that sounds repetetive). Irrespective of what business model is adopted in the USA, we need more income to get back to the collectors and exporters, if we hope to continue to have an export trade from the Philippines and Indonesia.
I am associated with the East Asian Seas and Terrestrial Initiatives (EASTI) and have been importing small numbers of MAF for over 2 years. All the fish I receive are net-caught and I have data on their survival rates. I know that net-caught fish that are properly handled and shipped have lower mortality rates (both DOA and DAA).
The idea that MAF are cheap and expendible has to stop. For too long, the retailer has provided another cyanided fish to the hobbyist that also died. Why should hobbyists continue to keep marines if they die? Why keep tropical marines? At least the fish in my screen saver don't die.
Peter Rubec
