In an unexpected twist of events, the invasive blackchin tilapia fish from Sanam Chai and Khok Kham canals in Samut Songkhram found themselves serving a different kind of role – being the star of the BKK Food Bank activity held on July 19 at Bang Khunthian district office in Bangkok. A somewhat ironic twist for a species causing significant unrest among local farmers and environmentalists. (Photo: Apichart Jinakul)
The drama around the blackchin tilapia isn’t just about what’s on the dinner table; it’s also about the heated discussions in some of Thailand’s top offices. Five major companies vociferously denied being involved in the export of these fish. The House Committee on Science, Technology, Research, and Innovation has pegged the damage caused by the blackchin tilapia to farmers and the environment at a staggering 450 million baht. On Thursday, this contentious issue summoned Praphan Leepayakhun, Deputy Director-General of the Department of Fisheries, to a House committee meeting spearheaded by Takorn Tantasith.
In a room buzzing with representatives from five companies—namely, Thai Qian Hu, Advance Aquatic, Samitra Aquarium Limited Partnership, P&P Aquarium World Trading, and Asia Aquatics—there was bound to be some fishy exchanges. Notably, three companies chose to stay quiet, igniting curiosity about their silence.
The Department of Fisheries had records indicating that 11 exporters sent a whopping 326,240 blackchin tilapia as ornamental fish to 17 diverse countries such as Pakistan, Turkey, Kuwait, Azerbaijan, Australia, the UAE, and the US between 2013 and 2016. These exports, regulated under the Animal Epidemics Act, surprisingly only required an invoice or health certificate without needing detailed sourcing information. This leniency perhaps led to the recent discovery that 212 out of 24,000 export orders were riddled with inaccuracies. Different fish species were branded as blackchin tilapia (Sarotherodon melanotheron), creating a bureaucratic whirlpool.
Praphan shrugged off these inaccuracies as mere clerical errors, but Takorn wasn’t convinced. He questioned why the department obsessively sifted through old export records instead of thoroughly investigating farmers’ complaints about the sprawling blackchin tilapia invasions. The representatives from the five companies, armed with invoices and purchase orders from those years, fervently upheld their innocence, denying any involvement in the fish exports.
The saga doesn’t end here. A dedicated subcommittee has been tasked with drafting a comprehensive report for the House committee. This report will detail the economic devastation farmers and the environment faced, pegged at around 450 million baht. The committee aims to present this report to Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin and the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, hoping it will spark the allocation of emergency funds to aid those reeling from this fiasco.
While this bureaucratic battle rages, there’s some silver lining on the environmental front. Suwat Wongsuwat, the Fisheries Department spokesman, reported on an enterprising project that’s converting blackchin tilapia into liquid biofertilizer. This initiative has impressively churned out 155 tonnes of biofertilizer from 168 tonnes of these invasive fish, turning an environmental menace into an agricultural boon.
In conclusion, while the blackchin tilapia saga unfolds with dramatic flair and far-reaching implications, it’s a powerful reminder of the interplay between ecology, economy, and community. From dinner plates to parliamentary debates, this fish has swum its way into becoming a symbol of how interconnected and, sometimes, convoluted our systems can be.
Turning a pest into an asset like biofertilizer is a brilliant solution! Why not make use of what’s already damaging the environment?
Sure, but what about the environmental impact before they turn into biofertilizer? It’s not a simple fix.
Exactly! Too late for my farm, lost tens of thousands already.
Of course, no solution is perfect, but we need to start somewhere. Better partial solutions than no solutions at all.
Why are we not hearing from the companies who stayed silent? Seems like they have something to hide.
Exactly! Their silence is suspicious. If they had nothing to hide, wouldn’t they want to clear their names?
It’s possible they are following legal advice. Talking less can sometimes protect them from further complications.
True, but it just doesn’t sit right. Transparency is crucial in situations like these.
So we just export our problems? Doesn’t seem right to me.
That’s not entirely fair. The fish were exported as ornamental fish, not for causing ecological harm.
Maybe, but the consequences are real. We need stricter controls.
450 million baht in damages and we still haven’t found those responsible? Ridiculous!
Shouldn’t the Department of Fisheries have tighter export regulations? This all seems way too lax.
Regulations are there, but looks like enforcement is where it falls short.
Agreed. There seems to be a gap between policy and practice.
Transforming this chaos into a productive measure like biofertilizer is noteworthy. Kudos to whoever came up with that project.
It’s a good idea, but is it enough to counteract the damage already done?
If those companies are innocent, why not just show us the proof?
Simple. They need to safeguard their business practices and confidentiality. Too much transparency can also be harmful.
That’s a fair point, but credibility matters too. In times of crisis, transparency might be the best route to take.
Wait, did the original investigation totally miss the fake export records? That’s incompetence at its finest.
Interesting how a fish can become the center of such a widespread issue. Shows how interconnected our world really is.
Very ironic, isn’t it? A fish affecting legislation, economy, and the environment!
The farmers should be compensated! It’s outrageous that they’re left shouldering the burden.
I agree. Setting up that subcommittee is a good start, but the farmers need immediate relief.
Yes, and 450 million baht in damages is no small amount. Timely action is important.
Shifting blame to clerical errors is convenient. Accountability seems scarce.
Converting invasive species into useful products like biofertilizer should be encouraged worldwide. A win-win for eco and economy.
The representatives better come clean. Dodging questions won’t fool anyone.
Does this situation expose flaws in our global trade systems? Mislabeling exports sounds like a serious breach.
If we have records of export, why can’t we track down every involved party?
Probably because there’s more bureaucracy than efficiency in these systems.
Are other countries facing similar issues with blackchin tilapia? Would be good to know we’re not alone.
If the House Committee is serious, they need to ensure consequences for those who let this slide.
It’s mind-blowing how something as mundane as a fish can disrupt so much.
True! Shows the importance of keeping tight control over natural resources and imports/exports.
If turning tilapia into biofertilizer was so successful, why not expand the project?
It’s concerning how some companies might prioritize profit over ecological responsibility.
Investigations need to delve deeper than old records. What’s the current ground reality?
Exactly my thoughts. Investigate the impact on farmers, not just paperwork.
It’s about time we have more stringent regulations for ornamental fish trade!
Absolutely. A lot of these issues might have been prevented with better foresight and control.