Hawaii fish ban update

[zoomonster]

Current what, came from? Flame angel…I agree Hawaiian is best

Yes, flame angel I have now. Had a while and don't remember exactly but I want to say Marshall.

 

[albano]

Yes, flame angel I have now. Had a while and don't remember exactly but I want to say Marshall.

Usually Marshall or Christmas Islands. IMO, very few people
have actually seen or owned a true Hawaiian Flame … was very rare to find any to purchase.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Truly sad situation and not much better here in Florida. Never got the obsession with pigeon of the sea yellow tangs but to each his own. IME they were always the most prone to disease especially lateral line but hey they were the most affordable of tangs. I'll take purple, powder blue and hippo any day over yellows. On the other hand, I do fully support Hawaiian fisheries where if nothing else I want a replacement for my Potter's angel and maybe another Hawaiin flame angel. Forget where my current came from but IMO not as vivid as Hawaiian I had long ago.

How vivid the colors appear is just phenotypic variation... regardless of the fish's origin, the individuals making up every population are going to vary inevitably...most likely you just happened to get a darker one by chance... people focus on the coloration of the fish to such great extent and Hawaiian fish just happen to be perfect...i really think it's due to the fact people want what they can't have and therefore they're hyperfocused on identifying any variation of any sort that they don't think is characteristic of the image they've formed in their mind which is the perfect Hawaiian (whatever species)

 

[metalle]

At the end, from a science standpoint it comes to numbers and factual statements.
1- is it true that the population is being reduced by collection
2- is it true that the collection has been responsible and impacted the reef health
3- is it true that collection and not diving destroy the reefs
4- is it true that prohibiting collection will solve or counter environmental change reef impact.
5- is it true that responsible collection is not possible
6- is it true that collecting is mainly a native Employment industry
7- is it true that collecting generates $25,000 per year to the state while costing $500,000 in resources
8-is it true that prohibition is the only solution.

If based on science and facts, not emotions the legislators should receive testimony in line from each interested party and reach a mid point in which state, environmentalist and consumers compromise. Which would be a regulated industry that is respectful, controlled. Creates economic activity and not a burden for the state.

Not politics, science based on data.

Thanks

 

[zoomonster]

Usually Marshall or Christmas Islands. IMO, very few people
have actually seen or owned a true Hawaiian Flame … was very rare to find any to purchase.

Been in the hobby 30+ years and yes had a couple real deal Hawaiin flame angels. Also, at one point had a Hawaiin cleaner wrasse I managed to keep alive a few years. Much of the live rock in my tank came from Hawaii very early 90's when someone supposedly had a dredging permit for a marina. That was pretty much a one shot deal I got in on. Rock was pretty much already banned at that point as I recall. Bottom line is the loss of Hawaii is a huge loss to the hobby. There is so much that could be responsibly harvested. The irrational eco nuts only know one word "no" but big companies continue stripping the oceans for food fish or manmade islands/military bases in China's case where they plowed entire reefs. Did I not see someone earlier said the natives want it banned because they eat some of the tangs??

 

[Kona Diver]

Thanks for the resposne.. Ya, I remember when you could get a box of assorted tangs to eat. . Wonder what the apposing side thinks about that.

The crazy thing is that the research has been done, peer-reviewed and accepted but the apposing side seems to be ignoring it. I guess they don't understand that enabling a financial benefit for any natural resource almost always leads to better protection of the resource by those who benefit from it.

At the end, from a science standpoint it comes to numbers and factual statements.
1- is it true that the population is being reduced by collection
2- is it true that the collection has been responsible and impacted the reef health
3- is it true that collection and not diving destroy the reefs
4- is it true that prohibiting collection will solve or counter environmental change reef impact.
5- is it true that responsible collection is not possible
6- is it true that collecting is mainly a native Employment industry
7- is it true that collecting generates $25,000 per year to the state while costing $500,000 in resources
8-is it true that prohibition is the only solution.

If based on science and facts, not emotions the legislators should receive testimony in line from each interested party and reach a mid point in which state, environmentalist and consumers compromise. Which would be a regulated industry that is respectful, controlled. Creates economic activity and not a burden for the state.

Not politics, science based on data.

Thanks

1. No it’s not true. When you look at the open verse closed areas in West Hawaii, there is an obvious pattern that emerges. Population dynamics. In closed areas, where collection is forbidden. The populations of yellow tang in the 30-60 feet range, tend to be less numerous, and of larger size. When you look at closed areas, you have less med to med large fish (3.5-5”) but way more small fish or what is scientifically described as YOY(year of young) My theory on this phenomena is that when juvenile fish recruit onto the reefs, there’s only so much real estate for the new arrivals. Once a drop of fish becomes established, they defend their turf militantly and will fight off any subsequent waves of recruits. (Which means these fish are driven off and killed. Literally wasted waves)These established fish, as they grow in size, their territory increases in size and they police the area and con specific aggression takes place. In the open areas, the juvenile fish are being periodically clipped and the overall population trends towards a smaller size of HIGHER density. Many fish make it through collection practices and join the adult populations in the shallows but it opens up vacancies for the constant wave of fish recruitments to take hold.
2. There little to no impact as noted by fishery management
3. The reefs aren’t destroyed. They’re doing great in most areas and the places where they’re not, it’s from land based activities such as injection wells, sewage plants or run off from golf courses.

5. It is possible and proven
6. The fishermen are local, Hawaiian citizens of the state of Hawaii

7. this is just a fabricated story by environmentalist who are proven liars. To think that the permit fee is the only benefit to the state is a joke. There is much more created by AQ fishery than that. This fishery generates more local wealth than any inshore fishery and is only outdone by pelagic commercial fishing.
8. Obviously not. All of this was discussed in detail for the last several years during the environmental review process and court proceedings. Then again in the legislature. The Land board, the courts and the peoples representatives decided it’s worth maintaining. This fishery isn’t a burden, it’s a fishery. Just like any other fishery and it shouldn’t be held to higher standard as a way to besmirch it because you can’t find scientific fault with it. Turns out, this fishery is very unique and peculiar and just happens to differ with most fisheries by having a natural sustainability factor built in. Instead of catching the big fish which is the target when food fishing, the juveniles are targeted which are in a constant state of flux by design.(collection, predation, and conspecific infightingWhether we catch these juveniles or not, the reef will ONLY hold certain amounts of certain sizes.

This may sound crazy to you but can assure you if you come here and witness spawning season for these reef fish you will come to realize this is accurate and true

 

[Tamberav]

I wished BIOTA would grow them and sell them at different sizes. Who has a big BIOTA now? I’d love to see what they look grown up/are bigger.

There is a pic somewhere on here of a biota vs wild in the same tank. I can not tell which is which... see if I can find it...

 

[Kona Diver]

Usually Marshall or Christmas Islands. IMO, very few people
have actually seen or owned a true Hawaiian Flame … was very rare to find any to purchase.

I used to specialize in catching Hawaiian flames. There is way less populations in Hawaii overall. We would get big recruitments from Christmas Island when we have the right current and weather patterns. Tends to happen every few years and many flames would appear with other Xmas island fish such as fire fish! IMO, the Hawaiian flame is the best on earth.

 

[albano]

! IMO, the Hawaiian flame is the best on earth.

100%… so upset that I didn’t get some when Karen B was breeding them!

 

[Tamberav]

@AydenLincoln found it...

Post #63

Captive bred yellow tangs

I have been soaking my frozen foods in the AB+ twice a week. Corals and fish get the benefits that way. I swear I read someplace that AB+ can be used as a food soak to help HLLE. I remember reading about someone posting feeding AB+ soaked food to their Biota yellow tang(it was you Duude). So...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[metalle]

1. No it’s not true. When you look at the open verse closed areas in West Hawaii, there is an obvious pattern that emerges. Population dynamics. In closed areas, where collection is forbidden. The populations of yellow tang in the 30-60 feet range, tend to be less numerous, and of larger size. When you look at closed areas, you have less med to med large fish (3.5-5”) but way more small fish or what is scientifically described as YOY(year of young) My theory on this phenomena is that when juvenile fish recruit onto the reefs, there’s only so much real estate for the new arrivals. Once a drop of fish becomes established, they defend their turf militantly and will fight off any subsequent waves of recruits. (Which means these fish are driven off and killed. Literally wasted waves)These established fish, as they grow in size, their territory increases in size and they police the area and con specific aggression takes place. In the open areas, the juvenile fish are being periodically clipped and the overall population trends towards a smaller size of HIGHER density. Many fish make it through collection practices and join the adult populations in the shallows but it opens up vacancies for the constant wave of fish recruitments to take hold.
2. There little to no impact as noted by fishery management
3. The reefs aren’t destroyed. They’re doing great in most areas and the places where they’re not, it’s from land based activities such as injection wells, sewage plants or run off from golf courses.

5. It is possible and proven
6. The fishermen are local, Hawaiian citizens of the state of Hawaii

7. this is just a fabricated story by environmentalist who are proven liars. To think that the permit fee is the only benefit to the state is a joke. There is much more created by AQ fishery than that. This fishery generates more local wealth than any inshore fishery and is only outdone by pelagic commercial fishing.
8. Obviously not. All of this was discussed in detail for the last several years during the environmental review process and court proceedings. Then again in the legislature. The Land board, the courts and the peoples representatives decided it’s worth maintaining. This fishery isn’t a burden, it’s a fishery. Just like any other fishery and it shouldn’t be held to higher standard as a way to besmirch it because you can’t find scientific fault with it. Turns out, this fishery is very unique and peculiar and just happens to differ with most fisheries by having a natural sustainability factor built in. Instead of catching the big fish which is the target when food fishing, the juveniles are targeted which are in a constant state of flux by design.(collection, predation, and conspecific infightingWhether we catch these juveniles or not, the reef will ONLY hold certain amounts of certain sizes.

This may sound crazy to you but can assure you if you come here and witness spawning season for these reef fish you will come to realize this is accurate and true

Yes, my questions were rhetorical not looking for specific answers. My point is it does not appear there is correlation between the claims of damage and the remedy. Same as your points. Banned is the wrong approach.

 

[Roli's Reef Ranch]

You can get one today. Biota sells captive bred / raised.

Also the article is a bit misleading when it says "When are Yellow tangs coming back?" or "just as we thought we might be getting our beloved Yellow Tangs"

Neither side can have a discussion which is why nothing is getting solved.

Sooner or later, someone will just let some loose in FL, and it'll be just like the lion fish epidemic. They'll cost next to nothing, be considered an invasive species, and we can eat them since FL is a free state.

 

[zoomonster]

Sooner or later, someone will just let some loose in FL, and it'll be just like the lion fish epidemic. They'll cost next to nothing, be considered an invasive species, and we can eat them since FL is a free state.

LOL yes restaurants here will pay for nice Lion fish. I know there is one at Port Canaveral that has them on the menu. The state even has had a bounty program on them for $500-5000 during challenges. Not sure what it is this year.

 

[metalle]

Ok, lots of energy…. Here is what you can do. Gather all your energy and rationale on the data to support why a ban is the wrong course of action and prepare a formal write up to the committee. Request an amendment to the language SB505 to allow continued collection.



Register as a witness and submit your write up, clearly state why you oppose. Examples attached pdf.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=505&year=2023

 

[KrisReef]

What isn't true? I can buy a yellow tang today. I get the direction of the article and it is fine. However I felt it was a bit misleading with the parts in italics and bold. Other fish are not available.

Or is it the part that the discussion? Over generalization sure but the point is that neither side hears, it is full of emotion, activism, politics, and no compromise.

The point from my perspective is not just that they are talking past each other, but that the no- fishing community lost in court, rejected the scientific evidence that went against their position and then they filed more papers to prevent the fishing side who had prevailed in court and proved that the fishing was sustainable to prevent fishing because they cannot except any other solution or compromise, the aquarium trade cannot fish because they don’t want any fishing for an aquarium trade. The frustration of the poster was perhaps reflected and communicated with the italics? The argument that people should listen to each other does not make sense when anti fishing will give no ground in their position and they use the court system to crush their opponents. They refuse to listen unless we agree with them. The fishing should be wide open in Hawaii and the court agreed but new legal challenges were brought, not because the environment changed but because the environmentalists argument failed to accomplish the goal of ending aquariums trade fishing.

Being able to buy a homegrown yellow tang is now available, that is true. That is not the same thing as being able to legally acquire lots of previously popular Hawaiian fish that were banned from taking because the environmentalists made a spurious legal claim that the fisheries were harmful and not sustainable. The long legal battle demonstrated that the fisheries are sustainable but the response from environmentalists was to try again in court and that is why the aquarium trade can’t legally fish many popular species of fish in Hawaii. These fish are ok to catch and eat if you’re a native? I believe that all of this nonsense is true, and I think that frustration is worthy of italics under the circumstances.

The other side is not listening to learn and compromise, imo, so it’s not true that a compromise can happen. You’re correct that I can buy some captive bred Hawaiian(?) Yellow Tangs, or were these tangs from Biota? Wherever Biota is, I’m glad they are breeding them. Is the yellow color the same? I have heard that they are not, but I don’t know that is true or not.
The point is that I do try to consider what other people believe, and I think you and I are light years closer to each other than the two points of contention that are back in Hawaii dragging each other along in the reef mud.

Hope my comment is constructive and not offensive, no sense in the latter.

 

[Kona Diver]

Ok, lots of energy…. Here is what you can do. Gather all your energy and rationale on the data to support why a ban is the wrong course of action and prepare a formal write up to the committee. Request an amendment to the language SB505 to allow continued collection.



Register as a witness and submit your write up, clearly state why you oppose. Examples attached pdf.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=505&year=2023

What is this about? This bill died already months ago. The legislature killed it in the first reading of the first draft. It didn’t make it out of committee. Dont send testimony as it’s not accepting any

 

[vetteguy53081]

What is this about? This bill died already months ago. The legislature killed it in the first reading of the first draft. It didn’t make it out of committee. Dont send testimony as it’s not accepting any

As this thread is once again active, Realize Kona Diver is both a diver and resident of Hawaii and is getting the very latest info and has been accurate thus far.

 

[KrisReef]

100%… so upset that I didn’t get some when Karen B was breeding them!

Was she breeding the flames in Hawaii? Someone else mentioned that the flames were from Christmas Island spawning with recruits drifting to Hawaii where they settled. Amazing fish knowledge on here! I’m thinking that when talking about “Hawaiian flames” these fish may be born far away from Hawaii but they have a known population of highly desirable fish that are found in the wild around Hawaii.

 

[albano]

Was she breeding the flames in Hawaii? Someone else mentioned that the flames were from Christmas Island spawning with recruits drifting to Hawaii where they settled. Amazing fish knowledge on here! I’m thinking that when talking about “Hawaiian flames” these fish may be born far away from Hawaii but they have a known population of highly desirable fish that are found in the wild around Hawaii.

Yes, in Hawaii, I believe that her name was Karen Britton (hopefully got that right). She succeeded in breeding True Hawaiian Flame Angels and was selling them, I’d say about 5-6 years ago (maybe more).

 

[JaimeAdams]

Yes, in Hawaii, I believe that her name was Karen Britton (hopefully got that right). She succeeded in breeding True Hawaiian Flame Angels and was selling them, I’d say about 5-6 years ago (maybe more).

Karen Brittain is who you are talking about.