IS reefs.org aiding the sale of cyanide caught fish?

[spawner]

Vita,

I disagree with your point, if hobbyist knew the truth they would not buy drugged fish, by lying to them, these companies are aiding to the problem, by allowing them to place ads on this board, this board is aiding to the problem. We need clean fish, true, we need them now. I am up todate on the issue of cyanide fishing, I have several conversation with Cruz at MO meetings. I read the threads, I listen to people like Mary, one thing is clear. People would never know that fish are drugged will by the cheaper fish. Once we are honest with hobbyist, truly honest, the drug problem stops. But don't lose the point of my question. Allowing false ads allows cyanide fish to be sold to hobbyist. Tell them the truth, it is that simple.
When a company is allowed to buy influence, it is allowed to control your thougths, our thougths, and most importantly new hobbyist thougths.


andy

 

[dtiedke]

My company hosts websites on a SONET oc-192 backbone. How much bandwidth are we talking per month for reefs.org? It can't be that much.

Am I missing something here? How much overhead are we talking to run reefs.org? My company might be willing to make a contribution of services to reefs.org if it means not having to rely on sponsors with questionable intent/practices....


Dave

 

[King Jason]

My company hosts websites on a SONET oc-192 backbone. How much bandwidth are we talking per month for reefs.org? It can't be that much.

Am I missing something here? How much overhead are we talking to run reefs.org? My company might be willing to make a contribution of services to reefs.org if it means not having to rely on sponsors with questionalble intent/practices....


Dave

I'm sure they use a lot of Bandwidth, they also require a large database back engine like SQL. Not sure how they have it setup. Our Database server cost $45,000 and we probably get about as much activity as this website. With all the queries to the database this site would easily tie up a "normal" webserver.

All our servers are housed in our Data center with a T3 connection. The T3 has a reoccurring cost of about $1700 per month.

 

[MaryHM]

Here is the "disclaimer" from my site that's been there since day 1:


*********************************************************
Remember: Our fish selection is smaller than other companies because we only offer net caught fish. Over 80% of the fish imported into the United States come from the Philippines and Indonesia. These are the two countries with the worst record of cyanide use, however they provide the industry with the largest variety of fish and the cheapest prices. To be blunt, companies that claim to offer only net caught fish but have a fish selection that includes practically every species you can think of are LYING to make you feel good about buying from them. After all, you have no way of verifying it. Why do you think they only list the country of origin for certain species and not all species like we do? It's the same lie that has been perpetuated to retailers for years by their wholesalers "Sure it's net caught- how many do you want?". Here's a good example. Mandarinfish come from the Philippines. I called up a company that claims to not import fish from there and asked them where their mandarins came from. They said the Solomon Islands. Now to an unsuspecting hobbyist, that sounds like a good answer. But I know for a FACT that mandarins do not come from the Solomons. If these companies claims were true, they should be shouting from the rooftops that they have a huge variety of guaranteed net caught fish available- not burying the information on some "guarantee" page within their website.

Another lie is that some companies claim to have exclusive divers in the Philippines or Indonesia in order to guarantee their fish are net caught. Impossible! The collection areas of these two countries are so vast that not a single export company has the capability of employing exclusive divers in all areas. You will notice that we do import certain species from the Philippines. We have consulted with Steve Robinson to determine which fish are not cyanide targets. He is known as the father of the net caught movement in the Philippines and spent years there training divers to use nets instead of cyanide. He has been gracious enough to give us a list of which fish are cyanide targets, which fish are sometimes cyanide caught, and which fish aren't. We only buy fish in the "never cyanide caught" list. All of our other fish come from countries where cyanide use is non-existent. With these strict standards in place, you can be 99% sure that the fish you receive from *** are hand caught. (I would never be so brazen to say 100% unless I was there collecting them myself!) One more thing that makes us stand out from the crowd...you aren't going to see sharks, fish that get huge, or known obligate feeders (fish that only feed on things like sponge or coral polyps) on this website. I feel it's irresponsible to sell animals with known requirements that can't be met by the average hobbyist. You will see animals that are considered to be difficult, and they are noted.

Sorry for the long rant, but I get really frustrated by "pseudo-reformists"...
********************************************************


Now as hard as I strive to not import cyanide caught fish, I still don't claim to be completely cyanide free. What makes me ill are the companies that aren't even trying to stay true to net caught fish, but claim that they do. This sets back the reform agenda because people think "Well, if big companies like **** and **** don't have a problem getting 100% net caught fish then there must not be much of a problem". It is pure fraud, plain and simple. If a sponsor were to come to reefs.org and say "Hey, all of our fish are cyanide caught and we don't care. We just want to make a buck", I have a feeling that the administators would say "Thanks, but no thanks". But just because a couple of sponsors (and we're only talking about a couple of companies here that are doing the blatant lying) are putting pretty little environmental policies on their sites that give everyone warm fuzzy feelings then everything is A-ok. It's akin to MAC putting pretty little certification stickers on drugged fish. It's irresponsible, it's wrong, and it harms the true reform movement. All these companies have to do is REMOVE the statements saying they are clean. That's it. If not, they are opening themselves up to a nasty lawsuit. There are other companies out there who do business without making such boastful and fraudulent claims, why can't these few do the same??

 

[dtiedke]

What do you consider a "lot" of bandwidth?

A T3 is nice, but this is an OC-192 backbone.....no bandwidth issues at all.


And the next time you need to buy a SQL server for $45,000 please call me....we sell SQL servers for around $8,000


Dave

 

[spawner]

Thanks Mary for explaining the collection side of things.

See Chucker, people really want to do the right thing. Believe me I would not spend the later part of two days on this post if I don't firmly beleive that we have to take stand. I have several groups of data here and a boss that is waiting for me to give him a manuscirpt. I will be here as long as it takes keep the fire warm, until we make a difference. I can't make much of a difference by myself, but this board can. We don't need the posioned fruit to live, there has to be another way, there has to be.


Dave,

Just the mention that you are willing to help, will keep Dr. Evil's feet in the fire.

Mary, I think they have to go a bit further than that, they have to remove the statment that they are vets that sell fish, that they are the most moral, all lies. The day that I saw that ad in the Mag, it took it to my wife and asked what does this say to you. "That vets are feeding, caring and selling fish." that was her response. I told her that company was the one that had its fish shipped out of that importer near LAX. Her reply, pure fraud.

andy

andy

 

[Oldguy]

spawner,
Thanks for the answers.
I am now going to reach them more and see what they say.
I did look at the site and beleive that it impossible to have all net caught fish.
I also think that it may be hard for the board to tell them to take their banner and go, for legal reason.
Right now word of mouth maybe the best way to go.

 

[Anonymous]

They also sell products for all the other pets as well. Those stupid lab coats really bug me.

And for what it's worth (and I realize this is my problem), I run a full line retail store, and gladly refer as many of my customers as I can to this site for information and realize that they will be exposed to some mail order sites (and will probably be referred to them by others here), but that is a price I am willing to pay for my customers to get good info. But since "they" have started popping up here, I do it with a little cringe because then you are talking dog and cat stuff, and that's what pays the bills.

 

[Anonymous]

Just because there is a sponsor's logo on a board doesn't force people into buying their goods.

Whoa! wait a minute.... I wasn't aware of that! I'm pulling my ads, James cut me a check for the balance I've prepaid for! :wink:

 

[liquid]

Ok spawner, you now owe us for Inland Reef's banner ad.

You say you don't have an agenda, but reading everything you've posted says otherwise and at this point I have not seen any viable alternatives suggested.

Let me take this one step further...if our hands are stained as you so put it, your hands are also since you're using this board.

Shane

 

[dizzy]

liquid,
King Jason should get credit for the collar.

 

[spawner]

checks in the mail.



What do other sponsors thing is fair?
Is it fair to pay for an ad and face a company that lies and cheats?
What does the honest hard working LFS owner think is right?
What does that hobbyist that is new to the hobby and had no idea what was really happening think?

andy

 

[Anonymous]

Vita,

I disagree with your point, if hobbyist knew the truth they would not buy drugged fish, by lying to them, these companies are aiding to the problem, by allowing them to place ads on this board, this board is aiding to the problem. We need clean fish, true, we need them now. I am up todate on the issue of cyanide fishing, I have several conversation with Cruz at MO meetings. I read the threads, I listen to people like Mary, one thing is clear. People would never know that fish are drugged will by the cheaper fish. Once we are honest with hobbyist, truly honest, the drug problem stops. But don't lose the point of my question. Allowing false ads allows cyanide fish to be sold to hobbyist. Tell them the truth, it is that simple.
When a company is allowed to buy influence, it is allowed to control your thougths, our thougths, and most importantly new hobbyist thougths.


andy

um-i've been in the industry for quite awhile, in retail, wholesale,and distribution, and i'm sad to say that you are quite wrong in your impression of the hobbyist mindset, by and large

most sw 'hobbyists' couldn't care less-and they will buy their fish with the initial price as the sole criteria for purchase.

most sw hobbyists don't even stay in the hobby for longer than 1.5 yrs

most sw hobbyists only care about the 'pretty tank', and relate to the creatures they keep as commodoties, not as living creature to whom they owe any kind of responsibility

this bb represents a fair minority of the hobbyists in the us amd abroad, and even here, those who are bothered by the morality of cyanide are a minority

again-declaring a sponsor to be evil, and ranting at the ops/mods to pressure them to remove those sponsors accomplishes absolutely nothing

if you truly want to contribute to the morality of this hobby, you should focus your attention at those who can put into place and enforce the cyanide detection practices at the collection export level

for every sponsor you 'evict', there are a hundred other businesses who don't even advertise here that are doing the exact same things as the ones you get rid of-you will accomplish nothing, other than placate your small world sense of morality

address the problem, not the symptom, or the problem will not go away

 

[dizzy]

for every sponsor you 'evict', there are a hundred other businesses who don't even advertise here that are doing the exact same things as the ones you get rid of-you will accomplish nothing, other than placate your small world sense of morality

vitz,
I honestly don't think all that many are playing the pretend you tank them, but actually drop ship game. That practice really does make it difficult for the good stores that try to hold and condition livestock.

 

[Anonymous]

As Mary said if you banned any livestock supplier because they sold cyanide fish you wouldn't have any sponsors. No supplier at this time can guarentee their fish are cyanide free. The company in question does make some outrageous claims and personally I was disappointed when I saw the first banner ad from them because of such claims and the general poor quality of advice they offer in their catalog - however until RDO can afford to be choosy about their sponsors I don't see any viable solution being proposed. The censorship is necessary until we get proper anti-SLAPP laws in all 50 states, or we get a national anti-SLAPP law passed.

I would encourage RDO to consider a sponsorship policy that includes evaluation of the ethical business practices of a sponsor before accepting their money - it could actually be a way to attract sponsors since some of us are leery about the company we keep.

Spawner I would suggest you put your money where your mouth is and start a website that not only states your claims but offers some proof to that fact (I actually agree for the most part with some of your claims, but disagree with your approach to this). You may also want to start an online petition to get the company in question to change their advertising to more reflect reality.

 

[ChaoticReefer]

I was trying to stay out of this thread, because theres no comprise from one side. Its totally "Its my way or nobody's way" attitude. So I know my opinion won't get far. But, I have to get somethings off of my chest.

Spawner,
I am totally offended and I am sure other moderators of this board are too. To call us money hungy is not only a slap in the face it is also a knee in our groan. Personally, I have put money into RDO out of my own pocket without a return. I am not talking about 5 bucks here and there too, I am talking about bigger amounts. I am at the low end too, other moderators have put in much more than me money wise. So please before you go around and say we are money hungry know your facts. No matter how much you back peddle it still offends us.

Now, as you pointed out, this board is only place where you can have this debate. Thats true, we believe in the 1st admendment, but it still doesn't give you a right to call "fire" in a theatre. I am not saying you are yelling "fire", but you are not showing any proof, no data once so ever. "I have seen it for myself" is not proof. You have to come up with something. Until than we have to stand by our sponsors and look at your agruement as baseless. Also, lets take your agruement a step further. Lets say we remove some of the sponsors. What about other sponsors? Every single sponsor on this board and all other boards have defaults in them. Living in Southern California, where 80% livestock goes through LAX, I have been to almost all wholesalers, they all have their defaults. So that means that will wipe off all of our sponsors. Which is not a solution. How can RDO exist to serve the hobbyist without any sponsors to keep this board operating?

Ever heard of the phase "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer"? I am not saying that our sponsors are enemies, I am just using that phase to kick off my next point. Would it be better to work with our sponsors so they will change? If they read the board where majority of the posts are saying CB and net caught only and they see the market is there don't you think they will be more willing to change? How do you think they will react if we just cut them off? They will just go somewhere else where the board is more friendly to them and ignore the blood dripping hungry board thats out on the hunt for him. So we should work with our sponsors not cut them off.

I admire your passion to change things. I, also, admire your goal, but you have not given an acceptable solution.

Well, thats my personal opinion, not RDO's opinion. I hope this changes some people's perspective.

 

[MaryHM]

Would it be better to work with our sponsors so they will change? If they read the board where majority of the posts are saying CB and net caught only and they see the market is there don't you think they will be more willing to change?

First, how many of the sponsors in question actually frequent this board as posters on a regular basis?? Second, they know the market is there. That's why they are LYING about having net caught. Why change if you can import cyanide caught fish under the guise of being environmentally correct??

 

[Anonymous]

for every sponsor you 'evict', there are a hundred other businesses who don't even advertise here that are doing the exact same things as the ones you get rid of-you will accomplish nothing, other than placate your small world sense of morality

vitz,
I honestly don't think all that many are playing the pretend you tank them, but actually drop ship game. That practice really does make it difficult for the good stores that try to hold and condition livestock.

dizzy,

i was reffering to the trade in cyanide, and nothing else-sorry for not being clear

it would be nice if claims (false) of tanking when actually drop shipping was the big problem we all had to worry about :wink:

 

[naesco]

Everyone we can only take the high road and that is to call a spade and spade and deal with it.
We cannot allow lies or even misleading information period.
The livihood of the critters are at stake together with our obligation to help our fellow reefers.

But I understand reefs.org cannot be the only board to challenge misleading information posted by its sponsors.
Therefor, I would ask Chucker to contact the other boards and develope a unified approach to dealing with the issue. They can stop advertising on reefs.org but they cannot stop advertising everywhere.
They need to be given 60 days to clean up their act or one we get to name names or reefs.org or any of the other boards pull their ads in unison.

Thanks Spawner for this most worthwhile effort.

 

[Anonymous]

Everyone we can only take the high road and that is to call a spade and spade and deal with it.

With what funds? RDO has already stated that they need income to keep this board running, how will they fund lawsuit defenses and the board if they have no sponsors because of the "high road" ??? How come the high road is always paved with other people's money?

They can stop advertising on reefs.org but they cannot stop advertising everywhere.

They existed just fine long before the internet got to the place it is today

They need to be given 60 days to clean up their act or:
one we get to name names

and RDO risks a SLAPP lawsuit that causes them to shutdown permanently

reefs.org or any of the other boards pull their ads in unison.

and risks not being able to pay their bills?

So far all I have seen are suggestions that increase the risk of this board exponentially with zero financial risk to those that propose it. Stick YOUR money where your mouth is before being to quick to offer up RDOs.