AMDA News (Split Topic)

[clarionreef]

Clarin and Batasan were severely depleted as MAC entered the area.
It chose the villages because they were already exposed to net training [ ie 1983 Project Compassion ] and were easy to work with.
A number of those 'trained' were trained prior.

The guy they just fired as country o-ordinator, Lino Alvarez....cobbled together the CAMPs out of a pre-existing template.
He had zero...repeat zero scientific credentials and cannot swim. :lol:
A famed ...and brief...."timed swim" ...by another guy...was used to count a few fish and justify the deed.
Divers in these cornerstone trainings were donated nets by AMDA after...their 'training'... during graduation ceromonies. :roll:
They later avoided working with MAC and brought their fish to other buyers who treated them better.
Yes, it was a disaster from the outset....and the start of many more.
Why do you think they finally fired their point man?
We know these things people....really.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Oops, I thought one was the project sea horse place. I blame it on my protein skimmer, dang thing smells something wicked right now and I think it's effecting my memory

I remember that now though, quite clearly. Wetsuits anyone? John B's treat :lol: I have the thank you letter around here some place

Dear John B. and MAC,

We'd like to thank you for promising us a gift of new wetsuits and not making good on your promised gift. We truly appreciate it. We're not using them everyday. Thanks.

The divers that made you cry, but you soon forgot

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham,

What Steve stated in his most recent posting is mostly correct (I have no knowledge that Haribon did net training near Batasin or Clarin). To start at the beginning we should note the following:

1) The IMA conducted net training in Batasin in 1998 despite the fact that the area was severely depleted and damaged by destructive fishing (cyanide, dyanamite, siltation). This is the general condition of most of the coral reef areas off of the Island of Bohol. Hence, the collectors in question were not trained by the MAC but by the IMA.

2) Lino Alvarez (MAC Philippines Coordinator) in 2002 created CAMP documents for both Batasin and Clarin. No underwater survey was conducted prior to the creation of the CAMP document or MAC certification of the sites (I was told that the MAC team of divers never even got into the water). A rapid underwater appraisal was conducted by Mr. Craig Shulman of ReefCheck about six months after the areas were certified (personal communication from Craig Shulman). Despite the fact that the MAC claimed there was a need for Ecosystem Management Standards, the MAC ignored the fact that the sites were unsustainable. They modified their standards to accomodate the fact that no underwater survey was conducted prior to certifying the collector associations situated in the villages of Batasin and Clarin.

3) The MAC claimed that the collection areas near Batasin and Clarin were sustainable since there were marine protected areas (MPAs) that they had created nearby, which were a source of juvenile fish recruits to the collection areas (personal communication from MAC coordinator Mr. Peter Scott). There is no evidence that the MAC created (spatially delineated) any Collection Areas (CAs) near Batasin or Clarin. Australian coral reef scientist Dr. Jessica Meeuwig (Blue Hula) got on Reefs.org and blasted the MAC for claiming they had created the MPAs, when in fact the MPA had been created by Project Seahorse (when she was employed by Project Seahorse in PI) and the Haribon Foundation. She severely criticized ReefCheck's underwater survey methodolgy (MAQTRAC) and took issue with MAC's claims that Batasin and Clarin were sustainable collection areas.

4) The fish species diversity near Batasin and Clarin is low (less than a dozen species present in any numbers that might be considered for harvest). The most important species of interest to the trade were Copperbanded butterfly fishes and Maroon Clownfish.

At the Marine Ornamentals Conference held in Honolulu last year (2004) John Brandt claimed the area was sustainable because it had abundant numbers of blennies. He forgot to acknowledge that the species in question were not attactive (not brightly colored) and that they had little or no commercial value.

5) The number of boxes of fishes provided to MAC Certified exporters in Manila was usually less than 5 boxes of fish per week. This was the entire supply of MAC Certified fish (to be MAC Certified they need to come from MAC Certified sites and be exported by a MAC Certified export company). The MAC Certified exporters were willing to pay about 10% above the normal price for net-caught MAC Certified fish. However, there does not presently appear to be any MAC-Certified fishes being exported.

It is rumoured that the MAC Certified exporters cheated the net-collectors by excessive screening, which allowed them to reject about 30% of the fishes delivered to their Manila facilities (this happened with net-collectors from Palauig who were promised MAC Certification, but then did not obtain it). Similar events probably occurred with the collectors from Batasin and Clarin. In any event the Batasin/Clarin collectors stopped selling their fish to the MAC-Certified exporters and have been selling their fish to a non-certified export company based in Cebu City (who presumably treats the collectors better and pays a higher price for their fish).

Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

What Steve stated in his most recent posting is mostly correct (I have no knowledge that Haribon did net training near Batasin or Clarin). To start at the beginning we should note the following:

1) The IMA conducted net training in Batasin in 1998 despite the fact that the area was severely depleted and damaged by destructive fishing (cyanide, dyanamite, siltation). This is the general condition of most of the coral reef areas off of the Island of Bohol. Hence, the collectors in question were not trained by the MAC but by the IMA.
Peter,
The training there were also done in 1983 by me w/ the Marcos era Project Compassion group.
and even then it was depleted!
Lots of coral feeding butterfliys, chelmons and premnas.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve has claimed that the net trainings near Batasin and Clarin were conducted by the Haribon Foundation through Project Compassion in 1993. First Project Compassion (if I recall correctly) was the name of the training program he did with another NGO in 1984. The Netsman Project was conducted by the Haribon Foundation for the Conservation of Natural Resources (in which Steve Robinson participated) in partnership with IMA-Canada (later to become Ocean Voice International-OVI) was funded by the International Development Research Corporation (a Canadian funding agency). It mostly occurred from 1990 to 1992 (there may have been some follow-up during 1993). My understanding was that almost all of the trainings occurred at sites around the Island of Luzon (not off Buhol). One training also occurred on the Island of Palawan.

That IMA-Philippines conducted net-training in Batasin is documented in its reports to USAID and in my Net-Caught Cyanide-Free paper published in 2001 (see attachment).

Sincerely,
Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

Training programs in Buhol;

1983 PROJECT COMPASSION
1993 IMA
1988 PROJECT SEAHORSE
and lastly...
2003 MAC

Yes,
MAC came to mine the same field and claim credit and achievement that belonged to others. This has unfortunately become the new m.o.
Steal and grab credit....and run with it.
Problem is that mimicking is a different talent then actually training.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve, OK-I now remember that we discussed this on the telephone. So, Batasin received net trainings from both Project Compassion in 1983 and the IMA-Philippines in 1998. Too bad the site was (and still is) depleted. I am sure that we all wanted to help the collectors.

Sorry about the misunderstanding,

Peter

 

[Anonymous]

Gresham,

What Steve stated in his most recent posting is mostly correct

Mostly? According to who, you? Why did you address that to me, I didn't question his accuracy, I asked about Project Seahorse. FWIW, you did it again. If you continue to post Jessica's name, she'll never come back. Last time you did that, she nearly lost her job, and had her tires slashed when visitting Canada. Please stop while your behind Quit outing the good guys/gals, concentrate on the bad ones please.

At the Marine Ornamentals Conference held in Honolulu last year (2004) John Brandt claimed the area was sustainable because it had abundant numbers of blennies. He forgot to acknowledge that the species in question were not attactive (not brightly colored) and that they had little or no commercial value.

To be correct, JB said is was a gold mine

Small blennies and gobies don't need to be all that colorful to gain interest from the nano keepers Peter. If it's small, they pretty much like it. Color is a bonus Not something a non hobbyist/non reef keeping person would know, such as yourself.

 

[dizzy]

At the Marine Ornamentals Conference held in Honolulu last year (2004) John Brandt claimed the area was sustainable because it had abundant numbers of blennies. He forgot to acknowledge that the species in question were not attactive (not brightly colored) and that they had little or no commercial value.

To be correct, JB said is was a gold mine

Small blennies and gobies don't need to be all that colorful to gain interest from the nano keepers Peter. If it's small, they pretty much like it. Color is a bonus Not something a non hobbyist/non reef keeping person would know, such as yourself.

Wow Gresham I was there at the meeting and don't remember seeing you there. I'll have to check the pictures I took and see if you show up in any of them. How do you know what JB said? What he actually said was that there was an abundance of small colorful gobies and blennies that were not being targeted for collection. I tend to agree with Peter that small, drab colored fish don't have much commercial appeal, unless it's something like a sailfin blenny. The nano nano crowd isn't what sustains this industry.
Mitch
PS
I believe eddie is beginning to influence your writting style.

 

[clarionreef]

Mitch,
I was there and the 'gold-mine' quote about such an impoverished area irritated the Bali and the Filipinos speaker on the panel.
I defended my countrymans remarks as simple ignorance...and asked them to cut him some slack.
True, there were orange spot sleepers and goldenhead gobies, but that sure did not a goldmine make.

However.....since sleeper gobys already get to Manila without extra domestic air cargo costs by Luzon based divers, no one wants them from Buhol. Thats simply an example of the kind of stuff the eco-tourist observer [ cough... MAC observer ] will never understand in the beggining.
Steve

 

[PeterIMA]

Gresham,

This is in response to your comments directed at me.

First, I have been an aquarium hobbyist since before you were born. I started keeping aquarium fish in 1958. My first marine aquarium was established in 1960. I have been keeping aquarium fish continuously since then. However, I do not keep reef tanks and I am sure I can learn from other hobbyists including yourself. As such, I am in favor of hobbyists and the trade being allowed to buy, sell, and trade marine marine organisms (e.g., fish, live rock, corals).

I am sorry to hear that Dr. Jessica Meeuwig had her tires slashed. However, she is a big girl and knows how to handle herself. I used her name and scientific qualifications (she has a Ph.D. in marine ecology from McGill University) to point out that the MAC's programs have a weak scientific justification, not to hurt her personally. I doubt that her present employer in Australia could object to statements she made that pertain to her experiences with Project Seahorse in the Philippines (not a conflict of interest).

I should point out that that neither I nor the IMA had anything to do with the creation of the draft bill (HR3469) submitted by US Congressman Ed Case. Just because I posted it does not mean I fully endorse it.

My activities with the IMA over the past 20 years have been directed to trying to get the aquarium trade to voluntarily reform itself. While the IMA supported the goals of the MAC, it is not responsible for the present situation (e.g. phoney certifications, lack of enforcement of MAC standards) that I have described in my recent postings. The IMA favors proper net training and honestly conducted programs concerning alternative livelihoods that can benefit the collectors and the rest of the aquarium trade.

As you probably know I am a fisheries biologist by profession. I have an Hons. B.Sc and an M.Sc. in Biology from the University of Ottawa, and a Ph.D. in zoology from Texas A&M University. I have been actively involved in fisheries stock assessments, research, and habitat suitability modeling associated with marine ecosystems for over 30 years. As such, I am more informed about the issues of sustainablility of marine ecosystems than you or most of the people participating on Reefs.org.

Most of the alternatives that have been suggested such as net training are scientifically justified. They also make good sense for the trade. So, It is frustrating to see so much resistance to their implementation by members of the marine aquarium trade. I am sure that the MAC coordinators share this frustration. Without true reform, the trade will eventually face punitive legislation.

I should also note that I have collaborated and continue to share information with various individuals in the trade to help solve the problems facing the marine aquarium trade. As such, I am not the enemy. So, please leave my tires alone

Sincerely,
Peter Rubec

 

[dizzy]

Here is a picture of the distinguished panel from that meeting. Perhaps you can get some idea of how much fun these things are by looking at the photo. :wink:
Mitch
PS
I don't believe John was talking about golden head sleepers. I also don't believe the little guys are the gateway fish that get people interested in the hobby.

 

[clarionreef]

In this last supper pic;
Left to right; me, Dr Rubec, Ferdie Cruz [ Philippines ] Ambrosius Ruwindrijarto [ Bali] Dr Vaughn Pratt [IMA] Paul Holthus [ MAC] and John Parks [ the un-lei'ed one ] .
Dr Pratt, Ferdie and I are already asleep.
Steve
PS.
Now Mitch, you know that all are restraining themselves....it was rather lively actually.
Ruwi typed his talk in as he spoke it...remember?...
and I tore up a spider-web barrier net in front for all to see to demonstrate how flimsey it was....to establish in public that MAC was warned about that phoney material that anchored their history of failures in the field.....then again in a later talk.
In fact, its been torn in so many talks, I'll need to get a new one.

 

[Anonymous]

At the Marine Ornamentals Conference held in Honolulu last year (2004) John Brandt claimed the area was sustainable because it had abundant numbers of blennies. He forgot to acknowledge that the species in question were not attactive (not brightly colored) and that they had little or no commercial value.

To be correct, JB said is was a gold mine

Small blennies and gobies don't need to be all that colorful to gain interest from the nano keepers Peter. If it's small, they pretty much like it. Color is a bonus Not something a non hobbyist/non reef keeping person would know, such as yourself.

Wow Gresham I was there at the meeting and don't remember seeing you there. I'll have to check the pictures I took and see if you show up in any of them. How do you know what JB said? What he actually said was that there was an abundance of small colorful gobies and blennies that were not being targeted for collection. I tend to agree with Peter that small, drab colored fish don't have much commercial appeal, unless it's something like a sailfin blenny. The nano nano crowd isn't what sustains this industry.
Mitch
PS
I believe eddie is beginning to influence your writting style.

Now when exactly did I post I was there mitch? What crawled up your, ah never mind FWIW, Eddie and I have never really gotten along, but you wouldn't know that as you really don't know me . I also never said nanos drive the industry or are "the gateway". From selling hundreds of those drab orange spot sleeper gobies and yellow heads, I can say for sure they sell good They sell great infact

 

[Anonymous]

Gresham,

This is in response to your comments directed at me.

First, I have been an aquarium hobbyist since before you were born. I started keeping aquarium fish in 1958. My first marine aquarium was established in 1960. I have been keeping aquarium fish continuously since then. However, I do not keep reef tanks and I am sure I can learn from other hobbyists including yourself. As such, I am in favor of hobbyists and the trade being allowed to buy, sell, and trade marine marine organisms (e.g., fish, live rock, corals).

I am sorry to hear that Dr. Jessica Meeuwig had her tires slashed. However, she is a big girl and knows how to handle herself. I used her name and scientific qualifications (she has a Ph.D. in marine ecology from McGill University) to point out that the MAC's programs have a weak scientific justification, not to hurt her personally. I doubt that her present employer in Australia could object to statements she made that pertain to her experiences with Project Seahorse in the Philippines (not a conflict of interest).

I should point out that that neither I nor the IMA had anything to do with the creation of the draft bill (HR3469) submitted by US Congressman Ed Case. Just because I posted it does not mean I fully endorse it.

My activities with the IMA over the past 20 years have been directed to trying to get the aquarium trade to voluntarily reform itself. While the IMA supported the goals of the MAC, it is not responsible for the present situation (e.g. phoney certifications, lack of enforcement of MAC standards) that I have described in my recent postings. The IMA favors proper net training and honestly conducted programs concerning alternative livelihoods that can benefit the collectors and the rest of the aquarium trade.

As you probably know I am a fisheries biologist by profession. I have an Hons. B.Sc and an M.Sc. in Biology from the University of Ottawa, and a Ph.D. in zoology from Texas A&M University. I have been actively involved in fisheries stock assessments, research, and habitat suitability modeling associated with marine ecosystems for over 30 years. As such, I am more informed about the issues of sustainablility of marine ecosystems than you or most of the people participating on Reefs.org.

Most of the alternatives that have been suggested such as net training are scientifically justified. They also make good sense for the trade. So, It is frustrating to see so much resistance to their implementation by members of the marine aquarium trade. I am sure that the MAC coordinators share this frustration. Without true reform, the trade will eventually face punitive legislation.

I should also note that I have collaborated and continue to share information with various individuals in the trade to help solve the problems facing the marine aquarium trade. As such, I am not the enemy. So, please leave my tires alone

Sincerely,
Peter Rubec

So what marine fish have you kept in say, the last 10 years

FWIW, I never said or even implied you where in favor of the bill. I know thats not the truth as you seem to be pretty animated about it. I was just bumbed you posted the text TWICE as it was so long

Blue Hula enterred this site as such, you are the one who printed her name and outed her. I feel you are fully responsiable for that, and the fact she won't post on this site. It was a nice break from "Peter's papers". Being one of the only scientists on this site, your work seems to quoted more then anything, mainly by you

Yup, I'm sure you know more then me, and I'm sure you can piss further


I offer zero resistance for true net training, only bogus ones get that from me

 

[dizzy]

Now when exactly did I post I was there mitch? What crawled up your, ah never mind FWIW, Eddie and I have never really gotten along, but you wouldn't know that as you really don't know me . I also never said nanos drive the industry or are "the gateway". From selling hundreds of those drab orange spot sleeper gobies and yellow heads, I can say for sure they sell good They sell great infact

Gresham your refuting what Peter said by using hearsay evidence. That's always a no-no imo. I wish JB would just jump in here and give his recollection of what he said. BTW I have mixed emotions about selling the sleeper gobies. They may sell well, but they deplete the sandbed of beneficial organisms and then often starve to death when the food supply is gone. Some go on to eat other foods, but IME many do not. I guess if they are abundant enough there is no great harm.
Mitch

PS
I just pulled this off Wetwebmedia.com:Valenciennea puellaris (Tomiyama 1956), the Maiden Goby. Indo-Pacific; Red Sea to Samoa. To a little over six inches in length. The most commonly offered member of the genus. Frequently starves due to a lack of fauna in its substrate to feed on. Skinny and healthy aquarium specimens and one in the Red Sea.

 

[dizzy]

And furthermore I found this in the Baensch Marine Atlas by Debelius and Baensch: This is on page 1110 under Valenciennea strigata (Golden head sleeper) " Unsuitable for normal reef aquarium, since the animals constantly search the sand for edible components. The sand is frequently spit over invertebrates. This is not tolerated for long by stone corals, colonial anemonies, or sponges. V. strigata is quite sensitive during acclimation. Additionally the fishes must be fed frequently, or they rapidly tend to become emaciated."

I don't disagree with any of the above and question whether or not conscience marine dealers should be selling many of them at all. What type of tank do you recommend them for?

 

[John_Brandt]

I wish JB would just jump in here and give his recollection of what he said.

Rub the lamp three times and...

I mostly swore off this forum because of dishonest argumentative tactics that are frequently used. Some are aimed directly at me, such as this.

What I said at MO '04 Hawaii were the thoughts that I had while diving at Batasan Island. I still maintain the same ideas.

I observed numerous species of goby, cardinalfish and wrasse that were in abundance within the collecting areas. These fishes do not appear in the trade (or are very rare in trade). The fishers catch to order and these species are not ordered. I recognized that many of them would interest hobbyists but are unavailable to them. I probably specifically mentioned the goby genera of Trimma and Eviota. Some of these fish form schools in midwater. I may have mentioned blennies but I don't recall seeing any in abundance that intrigued me. I never mentioned sleeper gobies and was never focused on those.

I made the strong point that there is a real disconnect between what hobbyists want (or could want) and what is ordered to be collected in field. The metaphor of "gold mine" (I did say this) was in reference to the abundance of fishes that could be collected and traded but are not. I went on to say that there are species being collected there that maybe ought not to be. Not so much because of unsustainability of harvest (this could be true), but because they are mostly inappropriate aquarium fish. I don't like the idea of just eliminating species from a fisher's catch order outright. This is essentially a cut in pay for an already poor individual. I spoke of switching species on an order list.

Two years ago, Blue Hula argued with me in this forum that "you can swim for 20 minutes in this area and not see a single fish" (or something like that). That is nothing like what I (and Mike King) experienced. I could count 20 fish in under a minute. Some of these goby and cardinal schools had more than 20 individuals. In the MPAs the fish were even more abundant. These collecting areas have been producing large numbers of Chelmon (copperband butterfly), Mandarin and clownfishes for decades. Many ornamental species are very scarce or absent from these collecting areas.

I characterized these reefs in detail in this forum 2 years ago. They are degraded and have been knocked silly by foodfishers. Yet they still produce (apparently) sustainable yields for many species. The primary degadation here is pretty much the same as it is on most coastal Philippine reefs - land-based runoff (sedimentation) and pollution.

 

[dizzy]

[Rub the lamp three times and...

I guess I need to buy a lottery ticket on the way home tonight, while my wishes are being granted. :wink: I knew you was out there lurking. I hope you appreciate the way I was taking up for you.

 

[John_Brandt]

Mitch, Your recollection of what I said (or may have said) was much better than others stated.

I read this forum but (obviously) rarely post here anymore. There are posters here who are not above spin-doctoring, spastic conspiracy theory and straight-up bullcrap. It became so impossible to appeal to reality and reason that abandonment was the smartest choice. But here I am again.

I appreciate you saying that you do not remember me saying these things in Hawaii. I have come to know that members of this forum willfully contort reality to suit their personal agenda. They are bold enough to say that others have said things that they never said. Such a shame. Such a waste of a forum.