Atrociously careless and deplorable media produced by SAIA…I was going to refrain from saying anything because I didn’t want to give more attention to this crap. Sadly, it looks like Brian got it and broadcast it, so now I must weigh in.

The biggest problem I have with this video is that it is STAGED. SAIA’s disclaimers at the end clearly state – “The shoot of the cyanide fishing was staged. For this movie now animals nor environment was harmed”. Don’t believe me? Go to the END of the video. Of course, it’s entirely irresponsible to put this out there as real. But more on that in a minute.

Of course, I don’t see how a mandarin being spearfished fails to fall under the concept of doing “no harm”…clearly 1 or 2 puncture wounds are “harm”. So SAIA loses credibility right there in that regard. Now, I’m not condoning or condemning the practice as I don’t know enough about it (see Gresham’s comments above).

These items raised, this video was first published on Digital-Reefs at
http://digital-reefs.com/?p=5735 – and there’s a few items that need addressing. First, there’s the cyanide fishing thing. The blog reads ”
The movie includes eye-opening footage of collection methods for marine aquarium fish in the Philippines including Cyanide fishing which has unfortunately become prevalent in the South East Asian marine aquarium fishery, and is a major threat to coral reef health.”

Problem #1 – according to the SAIA disclaimer, this is not cyanide fishing, it’s staged. So either they staged this with another chemical or other props, or this was real cyanide fishing done for the sake of the camera (which again, I fail to see how that could not harm fish or environment as claimed).

Problem #2 – This blog and opening comments suggest this is just a Philippines issue, but the “disclaimers” at the end of the video go on to say, “However, the silent killing goes on every day…not only in the Philippines.” With this careless statement, they have just lumped every potential source for marine fish as suspect with a blanket vague allegation. SAIA goes on to disclaim “Moreover losses along the chain of custody from collection to retail can range up to 90% and add to the sustainability concerns”. Where is this “up to 90%” figure coming from? Once again, careless, because to the public, all they will read is “90% losses”. We all acknowledge that a failed shipment (eg fish left in transit for any reason) could easily wind up being a TOTAL (100%) mortality, reflecting neither on the exporters nor the importers. I am making that point to PROVE a point – just because there could be a total loss one time, does not mean that we should say “losses range up to 100%”? This all makes me wonder, really, truly, is SAIA thinking when they craft their messaging? Who’s side are they really on here?

The blog post that released this video includes the following statement – “Neither movie nor exhibition are aimed at blackmailing the marine aquarium trade… rather these tools were developed to gain support for training programs in the Philippines and Indonesia to improve these sources.”

I fail to see anything remotely redeeming about the video that SAIA has produced. It shows only the worst (and it’s not even REAL). It fails to show how fish can be collected from the wild responsibly. It fails to show any examples of how wild fish collection / fishing can be done sustainably. It fails to call the industry to any kind of action, nor to praise anyone who is doing it better / right.

Ultimately, this video is akin to a pro-choice abortion group creating graphic depictions of an illegal back-alley abortion, claiming that this is how abortions are done “here”, “everyday”, and “not just here…” (could be anywhere, everywhere), and leave it at that. Um…what?

To say SAIA missed the mark is beyond an understatement. To fail to disclaim to the viewer IMMEDIATELY, and UP FRONT, that this is a staged/reenactment of an ILLEGAL fishing practice was beyond reprehensible. Anti-Aquarium groups will pass this along like wildfire because on the surface, it is a prime example of everything that is wrong with the trade, and the fact that it was created and broadcast by what they would consider a pro-trade organization is all the more damning.

SAIA’s actions are reprehensible in their carelessness. In the strongest possible terms, I am insisting that SAIA re-edit this video to make it clear that what is shown is A) NOT REAL and B) NOT what they are promoting. I also insist that this video include the SOLUTION to these problems, because as of now, it offers no hope, no redemption, and no ideas for CHANGE and IMPROVEMENT.

I am disgusted.

This reminds me of the fur industry film showing how they collected seal coats! I hope more people boycott them. go ORA!

SAIA does not aim at giving the impression that cyanide is the one and only issue in the aquarium trade. One always need to emphasize that the movie is part of an exhibition explaining the social and environmental impacts of the aquarium trade in the Philippines and Indonesia. So there is other materials that demonstrate why collectors use cyanide at all and that any improvements to collection and post-harvest handling in such source countries will only be successful when coupled to social development and poverty alleviation. There are also examples of trained fishermen in another movie presented, which demonstrates net collection methods. Exhibits include the handcrafted goggles, fins, barriernets, floating aids and transport means for the fish during collection. Once visitors had a chance to have a closer look and touch these ‘pieces of art’, they will understand where improvement needs in this trade lie.

^ this comment does not address a single point raised in my strong condemnation of this video, nor does it address any of the proposed / requested fixes that will prevent the misuse of this media in the first place. I have seen no other movie presented showing “examples of trained fishermen…[demonstrating] net collection”, which again, is independent of this one.

All the anti-trade activists need is THIS one standalone video, with no context, no proposed solutions, only condemnation, coming from a presumably pro-trade organization in SAIA, and the damage has been done.

Wreckless is an understatement.

I don’t think that logic makes sense.

Mr. Ross, take a look at your avatar…