EliMelly
Well-Known Member
Hello, I agree that food consumption is not the same. I was merely pointing out that there are lies being said that these fish are in danger of going extinct. I was not trying to compare food to a hobby.
Hawaii aquarium fish update: renewed request for a ban
- Thread starter Reef Builders
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)
SteveMM62Reef
Valuable Member
When I visited the Big Island in August 2008, the Yellow Tangs were so Numerous, they formed a Yellow wall. Was on Oahu several years earlier, than that, and Yellow Tangs were numerous in some areas, and sparse in other areas. My Wife was at a Marina and they were begging to be fed. Has any one Dove or Snorkeled there since?
spsick
Valuable Member
I snorkeled several locations on big island 4 years ago and 4-5 locations all across Oahu 3 years ago and yellow tangs were pretty spotty.
Hawaiians don’t like anything taken from their islands and I don’t blame them for wanting a ban to stay.
Went to Hawaii years ago with the sole reason of seeing Achilles Tangs.
On a few dives and a few snorkeling trips, I only found 4.
I don't agree with overfishing, but maybe issuing permits over a full our ban.
On a few dives and a few snorkeling trips, I only found 4.
I don't agree with overfishing, but maybe issuing permits over a full our ban.
Last edited:
AquaDaniel
Active Member
Went to big island 1 year ago and yellow tangs were literally everywhere. You can easily see them even standing from some beaches. I didn’t know much about this hobby back then and was like, why there’re so many this kind of yellow fish!
Tony Thompson
Active Member
505 public hearing of testimony is now live, just click on the final YouTube link in the previous post above this one.
Tony Thompson
Active Member
Motion 505 TO BAN fails 2 to 3
Committee water and land passes 3 -2
Committee water and land passes 3 -2
Last edited:
Kevin@Nemos
Community Member
So no ban?
Tony Thompson
Active Member
Update just to clarify.
SB 505 Prohibits the harvesting of aquatic life for commercial aquarium purposes, regardless of the method of collection.
Voted as follows
AEN Committee of Agriculture and Environment
For 2
Against 3
Fails
WTL Committee of Water and Land
For 3
Against 2
Passes.
SB 505 Prohibits the harvesting of aquatic life for commercial aquarium purposes, regardless of the method of collection.
Voted as follows
AEN Committee of Agriculture and Environment
For 2
Against 3
Fails
WTL Committee of Water and Land
For 3
Against 2
Passes.
So it sounds like since it made it out of one committee it might go to the floor or did it have to pass both committees?
Tony Thompson
Active Member
Sorry its late here in the UK 3am.
I am no expert on Hawian state law, however I believe the The recommendation (to pass without amendment )was not adopted.
I presume that means no ban?
www.capitol.hawaii.gov
I am no expert on Hawian state law, however I believe the The recommendation (to pass without amendment )was not adopted.
I presume that means no ban?
Measure Status
Kona Diver
Active Member
No it doesnt
The bill failed
Kona Diver
Active Member
The people of Hawaii have spoken. Even though we were disenfranchised multiple times by the author of this bill, we still had more testimony by a wide margin supporting this science based fishery.
Kona Diver
Active Member
Achilles tangs and many reef fish aren’t just anywhere, they live in specific habitats. You may come across one or two here or there but unless you really know where to look, that’s all you will see. A typical spot where they hang there will be hundreds
Kona Diver
Active Member
No ban. The people of Hawaii have spokenSorry its late here in the UK 3am.
I am no expert on Hawian state law, however I believe the The recommendation (to pass without amendment )was not adopted.
I presume that means no ban?
Measure Status
Kona Diver
Active Member
As a local fisherman in Hawaii and a direct participant in this process, i respectfully disagree with some of your characterizations. It just comes off as an outsiders perspective that lacks a strong grasp on what actually takes place here in Hawaii. Many people get wrapped up in concepts that no longer exists and overlook important facts that are currently a reality. I do appreciate you sharing information so others can see what’s taken place and to participate in our local civics process. AlohaI for one respect the democratic and legal process of the peoples of Hawaii, its their decision and their decision alone.
Hi @Tamberav , I respect your position, however, when comparing the harvest of natural food source for consumption by indigenous population (something that is ingrained in their culture) is in my opinion not directly comparable with taking their animals and shipping them around the world for the aquarium industry.
Society, the law and democracy is about far more than just science.
I would like to add, that I feel great empathy for those indigenous fishers who made a living through the collection trade. I hope they can find alternative economic subsistence using the skills in an alternative to supplying the aquarium industry.
As a open source of the democratic process and for individuals to have an informed view , I have linked here the relevant information. Also attached is the original draft EIS (Environmental Impact Statement that was rejected and amended. The main body of data is still relevant.
The proceedings and arguments for and against the proposed ban 505 included as an attachment at the end of this post. Please follow the links below.
Please take the time to watch and read if you would like a more informed view.
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessions/session2023/Testimony/SB505_TESTIMONY_AEN-WTL_01-30-23_.PDF
Testimony was also allowed to be heard live at the public meeting of the committee, including video link testimony. This is the first hearing available on the website or here on YouTube.
Dated 30 Jan 2023. 505 is discussed between these time points on the video 45:28 seconds to 1:43:08 seconds.
AEN-WTL, AEN Public Hearings 01-30-2023 1:00pm
Hearing Notices:AEN-WTL 1:00PMhttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2023/hearingnotices/HEARING_AEN-WTL_01-30-23_.pdfAEN 2:00PMhttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/s...
www.youtube.com
There was problems with submitting testimony by some users due to a technical error with the web portal. However at this meeting it is proposed to delay for further submissions. this was discussed on meeting 3rd Feb 2023 video section 1:20:14 and 1:20:57
AEN-WTL, AEN, AEN DEFER, AEN-WTL DEFER Public Hearings 02-03-2023 1:00pm
Hearing Notices:AEN-WTL 1:00 PMhttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2023/hearingnotices/HEARING_AEN-WTL_02-03-23_.PDFAEN 1:30 PMhttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov...
www.youtube.com
The next meeting will be on YouTube on 10th Fed 2023. Link is here if you would like a notification when it begins.
AEN-WTL, AEN DEFER Public Hearings 02-10-2023 1:00pm
Hearing Notices:AEN-WTL 1:00 PMhttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2023/hearingnotices/HEARING_AEN-WTL_02-10-23-1_.PDFAEN-WTL 2:00 PMhttp://www.capitol.hawa...
www.youtube.com
liddojunior
Well-Known Member
Aren’t these being captive bred?
If something can be tank bred, it has no business being harvested from the wild for the hobby.
Tank bred fish and aquaculture’s corals are much more hardy and better for the hobby anyways.
Obviously the ban should extend to fishing for food/sport.
If something can be tank bred, it has no business being harvested from the wild for the hobby.
Tank bred fish and aquaculture’s corals are much more hardy and better for the hobby anyways.
Obviously the ban should extend to fishing for food/sport.
Kona Diver
Active Member
A couple pieces of testimony that really hit the mark. One from the Lost Fish Coalition in West Hawaii. This activist group used to be the main opposition to the fishery but after years of community based collaboration, a comprehensive management plan was implemented which resolved the issue.
Chairs Inouye and Gabbard and members of the AEN/WTL Committees Re: Testimony in OPPOSITION of Senate Bill 505
RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Submitted by: Xxxxxxx Kona, Hawaii on behalf of herself
To be heard: on February 10th, 2023, at 2:00 PM in the conference Room 224
The bill you are hearing today (SB 505) to ban the aquarium industry from the State of Hawaii, would have been appropriate 25 years ago. At that time there were virtually no rules or regulations from DLNR and local citizens were seeing dive sites crushed and mangled, barren of fish. There was a dumpster of dead yellow tangs and other ocean creatures, the sight of which infuriated the local people. Threats were made on both sides. I myself was threatened.
However, this bill is totally uncalled for now. The problems and issues that made the topic so controversial then have almost totally been remedied.
In those 25-ish years good people from many different ocean interests worked together as the West Hawai’i Fisheries Council, an advisory body to DLNR. We would listen to concerns that came up and try to find a reasonable solution. We would then vet the proposal throughout various communities to see if there was enough support that DLNR would take it into their rule- making process. Everything that we proposed ended up being put in Hawai’i Administrative Rules. Some things that were accomplished:
• Establishment of nine Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs), comprising more than 35% of the shoreline along the Kona Coast, where aquarium collecting was forbidden.
• Appropriate markings for AQ boats; gear restrictions when in an FRA, etc.
• Brokered a deal between a local community and the aquarium collectors to swap FRAs
due to public antagonism. In the long run the aquarium collectors graciously gave up
their section
• No spearfishing at night anywhere along the Kona Coast.
• Net size restrictions on lay gill nets. This proposal went on to become effective state-
wide.
• Assistance to the Ka’upulehu Marine Life Advisory Council as they put together a proposal to present to DLNR for a no-take zone in their ahupua’a. Help with drawing up the document and taking it out to local communities for input.
There are many more. The scientific data taken and compiled for these long years show that the populations of the most heavily collected fish are rising and the management plan is working. This is one of the most highly regulated fisheries in the state and the most successful.
It is safe to say that the AQ industry today is not the same industry it was 25 years ago.
Please don’t waste the legislature’s time and effort. The problem has already been resolved. Xxxxxx,
Original director of the LOST FISH Coalition
Comments:
Testifier Position
Oppose
Testify
Written Testimony Only
We are at a point in this debate where these bills need to just stop being submitted. The battle over Hawaii's Aquarium Fishery is far from fair and balanced. The agency tasked with managing this fishery has done an exemplary job, employing sound scientific management practices with positive results. There is now a documented history of endless attempts to close Hawaii's Aquarium Fishery with year after year of ban bills, yet every last one has failed when coming up against the test of science and logic. We're talking over a decade at this point. I would ask all who are considering this bill to look back to all the prior attempts to close this fishery, and all the commentary and evidence submitted at that time. The fishery and those who manage it have endlessly proven their side, while those opposed have failed to do so.
However, when years of attempts to legislate the aquarium fishery out of existence failed, those looking to scapegoat the trade turned to the courts, arguing successfully that the fishery was somehow subject to laws requiring environmental impact statements. As a result, the fishery was hampered and then closed, while fishermen did the required homework to meet this latest challenge and obstacle to their livelihoods. Meanwhile, no other comparable fishery in the state has been held to this high standard. Other fisheries that target the same fishes, such as spearfishing, were allowed to continue uninterrupted. And during all this the Marine Ornamental Aquarium Fishery actually successfully passed the test, and is slated to reopen, while confronted with endless attempts to stop it.
And now, with fishermen ready to return to their livelihoods, the judicial backdoor ultimately proving ineffective, those opposed have just returned to the same annual parade of trying to legislate a proven-sustainable, "gold standard" fishery out of existence. Why?
I can only presume at this point that it's easier to scapegoat a small, well-managed fishery, for all the problems one might find on Hawaii's coastal waters, rather than examining anyone else. Hawaii's fishermen were simply an easy target...particularly if you need to turn a blind eye to coastal pollution and development.
I'd ask everyone tasked with considering this bill to ask one simple question. If Hawaii's fishermen must successfully defend their trade year after year, with no end in sight, while those opposed must only win once to enforce their will on the little guy, is this a remotely fair fight? At what point do we say "enough is enough" and end the relentless attempts to close a fishery and put fishermen out of work, when the science and data say there is no reason to do so?
I am all for a well-managed, sustainable fishery. Some point to the idea of captive propagation and aquaculture as suitable alternatives, but we seldom ask whether these practices are actually truly BETTER than the sustainable, managed harvest of what is naturally produced on the reef. In some cases, aquaculture may actually have a larger, negative impact on the environment, particularly if contrasted against a small-scale, well-managed, sustainable fishery.
If Hawaiii's marine aquarium fishery is to be legislated out of existence, it will be abundantly clear that sound science and logic are being thrown out as well. Hawaii's legislators ought to put a moratorium on the re-raising of this issue, and focus on dealing with actual problems, not on the scientifically proven, well-managed fishery that is controlled by the states DLNR / DAR.
It is high time that legislators ask the hard questions of those who oppose this fishery, yet turn a blind eye to all the other LARGER impacts that actually may be negatively affecting Hawaii's reefs? This endless debate is clearly one of ulterior motives and scapegoating, as one must ignore all the science and data to make the argument that the fishery on the whole is being mismanaged or is detrimental
Chairs Inouye and Gabbard and members of the AEN/WTL Committees Re: Testimony in OPPOSITION of Senate Bill 505
RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Submitted by: Xxxxxxx Kona, Hawaii on behalf of herself
To be heard: on February 10th, 2023, at 2:00 PM in the conference Room 224
The bill you are hearing today (SB 505) to ban the aquarium industry from the State of Hawaii, would have been appropriate 25 years ago. At that time there were virtually no rules or regulations from DLNR and local citizens were seeing dive sites crushed and mangled, barren of fish. There was a dumpster of dead yellow tangs and other ocean creatures, the sight of which infuriated the local people. Threats were made on both sides. I myself was threatened.
However, this bill is totally uncalled for now. The problems and issues that made the topic so controversial then have almost totally been remedied.
In those 25-ish years good people from many different ocean interests worked together as the West Hawai’i Fisheries Council, an advisory body to DLNR. We would listen to concerns that came up and try to find a reasonable solution. We would then vet the proposal throughout various communities to see if there was enough support that DLNR would take it into their rule- making process. Everything that we proposed ended up being put in Hawai’i Administrative Rules. Some things that were accomplished:
• Establishment of nine Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs), comprising more than 35% of the shoreline along the Kona Coast, where aquarium collecting was forbidden.
• Appropriate markings for AQ boats; gear restrictions when in an FRA, etc.
• Brokered a deal between a local community and the aquarium collectors to swap FRAs
due to public antagonism. In the long run the aquarium collectors graciously gave up
their section
• No spearfishing at night anywhere along the Kona Coast.
• Net size restrictions on lay gill nets. This proposal went on to become effective state-
wide.
• Assistance to the Ka’upulehu Marine Life Advisory Council as they put together a proposal to present to DLNR for a no-take zone in their ahupua’a. Help with drawing up the document and taking it out to local communities for input.
There are many more. The scientific data taken and compiled for these long years show that the populations of the most heavily collected fish are rising and the management plan is working. This is one of the most highly regulated fisheries in the state and the most successful.
It is safe to say that the AQ industry today is not the same industry it was 25 years ago.
Please don’t waste the legislature’s time and effort. The problem has already been resolved. Xxxxxx,
Original director of the LOST FISH Coalition
Comments:
Testifier Position
Oppose
Testify
Written Testimony Only
We are at a point in this debate where these bills need to just stop being submitted. The battle over Hawaii's Aquarium Fishery is far from fair and balanced. The agency tasked with managing this fishery has done an exemplary job, employing sound scientific management practices with positive results. There is now a documented history of endless attempts to close Hawaii's Aquarium Fishery with year after year of ban bills, yet every last one has failed when coming up against the test of science and logic. We're talking over a decade at this point. I would ask all who are considering this bill to look back to all the prior attempts to close this fishery, and all the commentary and evidence submitted at that time. The fishery and those who manage it have endlessly proven their side, while those opposed have failed to do so.
However, when years of attempts to legislate the aquarium fishery out of existence failed, those looking to scapegoat the trade turned to the courts, arguing successfully that the fishery was somehow subject to laws requiring environmental impact statements. As a result, the fishery was hampered and then closed, while fishermen did the required homework to meet this latest challenge and obstacle to their livelihoods. Meanwhile, no other comparable fishery in the state has been held to this high standard. Other fisheries that target the same fishes, such as spearfishing, were allowed to continue uninterrupted. And during all this the Marine Ornamental Aquarium Fishery actually successfully passed the test, and is slated to reopen, while confronted with endless attempts to stop it.
And now, with fishermen ready to return to their livelihoods, the judicial backdoor ultimately proving ineffective, those opposed have just returned to the same annual parade of trying to legislate a proven-sustainable, "gold standard" fishery out of existence. Why?
I can only presume at this point that it's easier to scapegoat a small, well-managed fishery, for all the problems one might find on Hawaii's coastal waters, rather than examining anyone else. Hawaii's fishermen were simply an easy target...particularly if you need to turn a blind eye to coastal pollution and development.
I'd ask everyone tasked with considering this bill to ask one simple question. If Hawaii's fishermen must successfully defend their trade year after year, with no end in sight, while those opposed must only win once to enforce their will on the little guy, is this a remotely fair fight? At what point do we say "enough is enough" and end the relentless attempts to close a fishery and put fishermen out of work, when the science and data say there is no reason to do so?
I am all for a well-managed, sustainable fishery. Some point to the idea of captive propagation and aquaculture as suitable alternatives, but we seldom ask whether these practices are actually truly BETTER than the sustainable, managed harvest of what is naturally produced on the reef. In some cases, aquaculture may actually have a larger, negative impact on the environment, particularly if contrasted against a small-scale, well-managed, sustainable fishery.
If Hawaiii's marine aquarium fishery is to be legislated out of existence, it will be abundantly clear that sound science and logic are being thrown out as well. Hawaii's legislators ought to put a moratorium on the re-raising of this issue, and focus on dealing with actual problems, not on the scientifically proven, well-managed fishery that is controlled by the states DLNR / DAR.
It is high time that legislators ask the hard questions of those who oppose this fishery, yet turn a blind eye to all the other LARGER impacts that actually may be negatively affecting Hawaii's reefs? This endless debate is clearly one of ulterior motives and scapegoating, as one must ignore all the science and data to make the argument that the fishery on the whole is being mismanaged or is detrimental
Similar threads
