Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
i get what you're saying and you're not wrong. politics do change.relax.
temporary till some new politicians take office with a different view.
remember when Indo closed?
oh, I'm sure you are right about prices getting jacked up even more. when indo closed, we saw price increases on stuff that was already in the LFS.i get what you're saying and you're not wrong. politics do change.
however, I should mention why i clearly remember when indo closed, because Australian coral prices shot up 100% very soon after. the same way that across the board surgeonfish likely will as well.
fingers crossed i'm wrong!
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Hawaii is not Indonesia. Its politics are very stable. Currently there are only five elected republican officials in the entire state government. 92% of the state legislature are democrats.relax.
temporary till some new politicians take office with a different view.
remember when Indo closed?
I chose the wrong time too buddyAgreed, I guess if you want it enough youll pay the costs... I chose the wrong time to get into this hobby haha
Exactly. With Covid, we're told we must listen to the scientists and the experts. But here, the scientists and experts aren't suiting their narrative, so they must be completely dismissed. Just goes to show you how full of crap these people are.@Zionas they do listen to science but only when it supports their theory.
Neither. It is strictly a political and emotional issue. The science is pretty solid and enforcement is pretty reliable.Is it a conservation and collection issue or an enforcement issue? Adding laws and regulations does nothing if no one is enforcing them.
This is incorrect. The science supports the ban, or at least it support stricter regulations.Exactly. With Covid, we're told we must listen to the scientists and the experts. But here, the scientists and experts aren't suiting their narrative, so they must be completely dismissed. Just goes to show you how full of crap these people are.
Very well said.I am going to try to be as diplomatic as possible while expressing not just a difference of opinion but a difference in outlook and ultimate world view. Frankly this is not the best format for expressing these differences but it is an important topic that more people in the hobby should engage in.
I got my first job working at an LFS while I was in college studying biology. I was initially planning on going into Medicine but I loved aquariums and loved working at the LFS. One day my boss made a comment about the large pachyseris colony in the shop display. "These corals are so easy to grow here but they are almost all gone from the reefs in SriLanka I used to dive on" I immediately felt an urge to stop focusing on med school and work to focus on animal conservation and ecology. I wanted my children to enjoy the same animals I did.
My experience getting a degree in ecology and conservation turned me off to the modern environmental movement more than any other experience possibly could.
In short I learned that professors with PHDs lived in a bubble world of credentials where an article published in a peer reviewed paper ment more than the experience of divers and collectors who had been practicing for sometimes as much as 40 years. Additionally this elitism led them to say things like we can't trust hobbyists to keep these animals only I can because of my special permit. All the while they regularly consulted private hobbyists for help in caring for their animals when they were at a loss.
My disrespect for academia only increased after working at a public aquarium and seeing some of the worst most unethical and I'll informed treatment of aquatic animals imaginable. Just because someone has graduated from a prestigious school with an ichthyology degree does not mean they know the slightest about how to care for animals in an aquarium. In fact many of the mentors I most respect in this hobby dropped out of school.
Whenever anyone insists upon only accepting information if it is supported by peer reviewed journals I immediately question this individuals sinserity. So often this is used as an attempt to dismiss those who haven't done their dues sucking up and going into debt to pay homage to intellectual institutions. Instead they left, started their own businesses came up with innovative new ideas and technology to share the ocean we all love with more people.
I have never seen a single studying showing any conclusive evidence that aquarium collection has led to any significant threat to Hawaiian reefs. I have spoken to numerous collectors who have collected at the same spots for decades and report finding the same number of fish now as before.
Additionally Hawaii has been highly regulated for years. Collection receives far more oversight than nearly anywhere else in the world.
More importantly this matches with what any ecology 101 class will tell you about coral reefs. Reefs are space limited. Fish reproduce in huge numbers and the only reason more larva don't survive is because there is such aggressive competition for habitable space. In fact I remember learning statistical modeling based on this premise as one of the only ways to show how it is possible for reefs to have such great diversity.
The collection needed to negatively impact reef fish density would have to be incredibly great given the ecosystems natural ability to fill empty space.
Given the magnitude of food fish collection and more importantly habitat reduction through environmental changes reducing the size of habitable areas, it makes no sense to focus on the aquarium industry.
After my experience I fundamental believe that academia and NGOs are more interested in raising money by spreading fear than solving problems.
After hearing professors tell me that studies showed that the factors with the greatest correlation with stake holder satisfaction with wildlife management were local controll and well defined property rights, I then heard the same professors insist that huge federal or international legislation was needed and that more land should be public owned and less private.
Never is the solution to trust the private collectors to purchase and manage their own collection rights. This has proven extremely successful in increasing stake holder satisfaction but it doesn't require academic funding or government regulations so why would intellectuals or politicians even consider it.
What science is that? The people who have researched this fishery for decades say it is not only sustainable but probably the best managed aquarium fishery in the world. Can you cite your source?This is incorrect. The science supports the ban, or at least it support stricter regulations.
There is substantial evidence that the aquarium collection practice has detrimental effects. A studied on the issue concluded "There was a significant difference in the abundance of aquarium fishes between control and collection sites but no differences in the abundance of nonaquarium species between these sites." https://www.researchgate.net/public...ollectors_on_Coral_Reef_Fishes_in_Kona_HawaiiWhat science is that? The people who have researched this fishery for decades say it is not only sustainable but probably the best managed aquarium fishery in the world. Can you cite your source?
I am going to try to be as diplomatic as possible while expressing not just a difference of opinion but a difference in outlook and ultimate world view. Frankly this is not the best format for expressing these differences but it is an important topic that more people in the hobby should engage in.
I got my first job working at an LFS while I was in college studying biology. I was initially planning on going into Medicine but I loved aquariums and loved working at the LFS. One day my boss made a comment about the large pachyseris colony in the shop display. "These corals are so easy to grow here but they are almost all gone from the reefs in SriLanka I used to dive on" I immediately felt an urge to stop focusing on med school and work to focus on animal conservation and ecology. I wanted my children to enjoy the same animals I did.
My experience getting a degree in ecology and conservation turned me off to the modern environmental movement more than any other experience possibly could.
In short I learned that professors with PHDs lived in a bubble world of credentials where an article published in a peer reviewed paper ment more than the experience of divers and collectors who had been practicing for sometimes as much as 40 years. Additionally this elitism led them to say things like we can't trust hobbyists to keep these animals only I can because of my special permit. All the while they regularly consulted private hobbyists for help in caring for their animals when they were at a loss.
My disrespect for academia only increased after working at a public aquarium and seeing some of the worst most unethical and I'll informed treatment of aquatic animals imaginable. Just because someone has graduated from a prestigious school with an ichthyology degree does not mean they know the slightest about how to care for animals in an aquarium. In fact many of the mentors I most respect in this hobby dropped out of school.
Whenever anyone insists upon only accepting information if it is supported by peer reviewed journals I immediately question this individuals sinserity. So often this is used as an attempt to dismiss those who haven't done their dues sucking up and going into debt to pay homage to intellectual institutions. Instead they left, started their own businesses came up with innovative new ideas and technology to share the ocean we all love with more people.
I have never seen a single studying showing any conclusive evidence that aquarium collection has led to any significant threat to Hawaiian reefs. I have spoken to numerous collectors who have collected at the same spots for decades and report finding the same number of fish now as before.
Additionally Hawaii has been highly regulated for years. Collection receives far more oversight than nearly anywhere else in the world.
More importantly this matches with what any ecology 101 class will tell you about coral reefs. Reefs are space limited. Fish reproduce in huge numbers and the only reason more larva don't survive is because there is such aggressive competition for habitable space. In fact I remember learning statistical modeling based on this premise as one of the only ways to show how it is possible for reefs to have such great diversity.
The collection needed to negatively impact reef fish density would have to be incredibly great given the ecosystems natural ability to fill empty space.
Given the magnitude of food fish collection and more importantly habitat reduction through environmental changes reducing the size of habitable areas, it makes no sense to focus on the aquarium industry.
After my experience I fundamental believe that academia and NGOs are more interested in raising money by spreading fear than solving problems.
After hearing professors tell me that studies showed that the factors with the greatest correlation with stake holder satisfaction with wildlife management were local controll and well defined property rights, I then heard the same professors insist that huge federal or international legislation was needed and that more land should be public owned and less private.
Never is the solution to trust the private collectors to purchase and manage their own collection rights. This has proven extremely successful in increasing stake holder satisfaction but it doesn't require academic funding or government regulations so why would intellectuals or politicians even consider it.
I sure hope so. Would be great for the world’s reefs and for hobbyists. At the end of the day, we are privileged to have such spectacular animals in our homes, and as reef enthusiasts we owe it to coral reefs to be respect the animals we keep and to support sustainability of coral reefs. Nothing hurts me more than hearing clients at LFSs ask about BASIC care requirements and “what fish is that?” as they ask the store owner to pack it up for them to take home. Makes me sad to know there are many people out there that do not do the research before purchasing species.I wonder if captive breeding programs will intensify.
Just want to point out that this study published in 2003 is using data that is around 20 years old. I believe more recent data contradicts this data.To say that the entire practice was banned due to a few bad actors is a wholly erroneous statement.
There is substantial evidence that the aquarium collection practice has detrimental effects. A studied on the issue concluded "There was a significant difference in the abundance of aquarium fishes between control and collection sites but no differences in the abundance of nonaquarium species between these sites." https://www.researchgate.net/public...ollectors_on_Coral_Reef_Fishes_in_Kona_Hawaii
You don't get denied by the state Senate, state House, and unanimously rejected in your appeal by the Hawai'i Supreme Court and Hawaii’s Environmental Council without strong evidence that mismanagement is occurring, especially when you are on the side of the industry, which loses relatively rarely, especially on environmental issues.
Maybe because they’re juveniles? I haven’t noticed any difference other than thatHow do the captive bred yellow tangs look these days? When they first came out they weren’t very appealing to the eye.
No, not because they were juveniles. Those that I saw were deformed.Maybe because they’re juveniles? I haven’t noticed any difference other than that