Hawaii SB1240 Could Devastate Fishery

[stunreefer]

I'm sure there are. but apparently not in terms of numbers collected and sustainability. Which is what the law pertains to. So therefore there is currently No Regulation for the topic at hand.

There are species-specific catch limits based on size and quantity, which differ from site to site. Here's an example from West Hawaii. You can find more on this DLNR site. You can find more info on the "White List" implemented in 2013 on that site or another excerpt here.

 

[VR28man]

That's the type of assertive attitude we all need to have. With higher standards, there would be less fish deaths from shipping whole salers, collectors, and hobbiest, which would also result in a greater respect for the aquarium hobby. I believe the first step in changing something like this would be to educate more people interested in the reefing hobby which would naturally result in less fish death in home aquariums, and less need for purchasing mass quantities of marine life for local fish stores. Businesses would lose money on this, but they could focus more on selling equipment to keep aquariums healthy long term.[emoji106]

Equipment is not a solution for retail sales because Petco or Amazon will always be able to undercut them. I think honestly retail stores the traditional way (lots of livestock that honestly has to move quickly else it's just a money trap that will soon die) is less and less profitable these days. And I think that's good - I would like to be able to buy straight from a (competent and ethical) collector.

I've put a few of my thoughts on this into a separate thread:
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/reef-aquarium-ethics-and-sustainability.308661/#post-3792724

And I'll write more on that in the next few weeks (when I get my planned tank thread running).

But again, IMO this bill is at its best knee jerk, at its worst a victory by anti-aquarium folks.

 

[N4sty T4te]

There are species-specific catch limits based on size and quantity, which differ from site to site. Here's an example from West Hawaii. You can find more on this DLNR site. You can find more info on the "White List" implemented in 2013 on that site or another excerpt here.

I skimmed through.

Let's look at Yellow Tangs:

You can possess no more than 5 specimens that are 4.5" + and no more than 5 specimens that are less than 2". Possess is not the same thing as collect. Since I'm sure multiple boat runs can be made in a single day.

It's important to note that between 2" & 4.5" it is a free for all.

Other than that all other restrictions are on a per day basis. And he only ones I see that don't directly relate to size is the Achilles Tang.

The bottom line here is that this method of regulation doesn't offer any type of definitive limit to the amount captured for aquarium use.

They aren't going to just completely eradicate a 3.2 million dollar industry, but it's their reef. They should have the right to do their best to take care of it.

 

[eatbreakfast]

In a study done last year more than half the fishes sold in LFS here in US (random sampling from different sellers) tested positive for cyanide. Most of these come from Phillipines and Indonesia, where even though its illegal, is still widely practiced. If US enforced Lacy act and testing for cyanide at import, this could be stopped immediately. Use of cyanide has destroyed a lot of the reef ecosystem in those countries.

That study is incredibly flawed, was not peer-reviewed, was supposed to have been peer-revieweed by now, and still hasn't been. Rather they propped up info for a headline and to further For the Fishes agenda.

Lfs used to run qts in their stores, you could not even bribe them to sell you a fish until it has passed. An lfs would ask you about your setup and tankmates and refuse to sell you a fish that would not work in your environment. If seen an lfs refuse to sell to customers all together when they observed negligent behavior. A lfs would agonize over every sick or dead fish. Lfs would not even carry fish that had such a huge mortality rate that their chances were slim.

Now let's fast forward to today. I see the same lfs get an order or 125 fish, over half of them dead in a bucket within a day aor two; no problem do it again in a couple of weeks. Lfs do not even care your setup or who's in the tank; I've overheard some of the most absurd advice and sales pitches to get the customer out the door with a fish. I've stopped customers from making huge mistakes, like putting a volitan lion in a 50g with small gobies and cryptic wrasses. Nano reef being sold huge blue sponges and sea apples that eventually wipe out their entire reefs. This is so rampant I could hardly even cover even 1% of what I've seen. I started a dwarf lion rescue tank after an owner of lfs that didn't know me give me a sales pitch on a pale dying fuzzy dwarf and telling me he was even eating flake food with gusto. After tracking nearly 20 dwarf lions over the last 3 years, only one lived more than a year; more than half died in the store. I watched lfs pass these guys on to customers that had no idea how to handle their feeding requirements. Disease is absolutely so rampant, there are 2 lfs in town that absolutely nothing they sell lives. I could go on and on...........Beginning hobbyist still rely on their lfs for support and advice; some don't realize that the internet is full of experts. But it still doesn't change the source and the route these fish travel. The issues from the source is huge and i've primarily covered the issues of just the lfs. On the flipside reptile stores and monitored and regulated in such a way that an lfs should be accountable to; each death is logged and a store can be shut down if the standards aren't met. Please don't give me examples of disgusting reptile stores, there's always going to be law breakers; but there are some standards that are the law.

This is just anecdotal. I have seen just as many responsible and ethical LFS as unethical.

If we support this hobby we need to be honest about its impact and push for practices and regulations that improve sustainability even if it means higher prices or some species completely banned from import. 20 million fishes are caught for the aquarium hobby every year and more than half are imported in US. There is no mandatory data reporting for import, no mnadatory cyanide testing, no vetting of exporters, no species specific limits. It has become a free for all and a race to the lowest price and highest quantity of sales. That is not sustainable and morally acceptable. How many lfs in your area properly treat the fishes vs how many just wants to make the sale? How many of those sold are going to tanks that are not suitable for those fishes or the owner is poorly rehearsed on husbandry? This is not sustainable. We the hobbyists should be the ones pushing for more accountability in this industry but we havent at all, so now we have activists who have stolen the mic.

Aquarium ornamentals are caught and shipped by the box, commercial fishing is measured by the ton. Aquarium ornamentals aren't even a drop in the bucket. However, much of that is a discussion for other fisheries, not Hawaii.

I feel like I might have a different view on this, but, don't get me wrong, I'm as passionate about the reef hobby as anyone. Our goal as responsible reef keepers is to keep these fish alive for their full expected lifespan, and with 300,000-500,000 fish being exported from JUST Hawaii every year, where are they all going?? If all these fish were living their expected lifespans we would need thousand of more tanks because saltwater aquariums cannot hold near as much live stock as freshwater. The magority of these fish are dying, it's obvious. Not anyone off the streets can keep a maroon clownfish for it's 15 year + lifespan. Or even a yellow tang for 7+ years. As much as I love this hobby it has taught me to have a large amount of respect for the animals as we are taking them from their natural home where the majority of them would live much longer in the ocean. I'm not a tree hugger, a hippie, and very far from a global warming activist, but I feel that anyone can se how were taking the majority of these fish from their homes to their graves.... I'm still not against the reef keeping hobby or taking some fish from the ocean, but I think we would all look a lot better if we pushed for more captive bred fish species and less amounts of fish being harvested. Maybe even a way to insure these fish aren't being sold to just any guy with 50 bucks off the street.

The vast majority of these fish are reaching their full lifespan in the wild either. Hundreds of thousands of eggs are fertilized per specimen each spawning event, a fraction of these ever live to settlement. Of those that settle, a fraction reach the maturity to spawn, and despite that reefs rebound incredibly fast. Ornamental fishing is not near the danger that it is presented as.

Were all in this hobby because we love keeping these animals and corals as pets, but we need to accept the same responsibility for them just as we would for our dogs or other pets.

That's 100% right, and improvements are being made, but improvements aren't instantaneous.

People who support this bill should go look up how much sea life is killed and thrown out from the fishing and restaurant industry - this bill does nothing to solve any actual problem

100%

I'm sure I'm not going to win any friends on this one... But heaven forbid Hawaii introduce legislation for collecting its reef inhabitants and try and protect the habitat to the best of it's ability.

I read the actual law instead of reading what everyone else wrote about said law. All it is saying is that there are currently NO SAFEGUARDS in place for over fishing by the aquarium industry. Why wouldn't we as a community want those safeguards to exist???

I'm just not following.

There are a degree of safeguards in place, that according to actual data is sustainable.

I would gladly give up all my tanks if they would shut the whole thing down. I see way too much of the ugly side of this hobby to think that it's ok and major changes don't need to be made. Most of the fish I have I am convinced would be dead by now if they were not in my tanks, most all have had special needs from medicating to hand feeding to feeding live foods. Me not buying a fish will do nothing to stop it, they will collect. collect. collect until there is nothing left to collect. On any given day, there's not enough tanks in the world to accommodate the fish for just today; not to mention adequate tanks. Do ever even think of that, where do all these fish and corals go; then the next day or week there's another shipment...sick

As long as you buy and support bad practices, you are just as accountable. You not buying today may not have an immediate affect but it may over time. Will your LFS continue to buy 'risky" fish if your not there as a 'safety net'? Businesses don't like to lose money" so there should be a natural apprehension to bring in delicate species if the clientel doesn't exist for it. But that is a discussion beyond what is happening in Hawaii.

It says new permits can be issued based on sustainability.

You guys are missing the point, there is currently NO REGULATION on aquarium trade collection. So it's not a problem now, Sure. But that doesn't mean it couldn't be later.

Someone showed spearing fish, no way Hawaii doesn't regulate its fishing industry.

Aquarium ornamental collection is actually quite limited as fars as areas where it is allowed. Much more so than sport fishing. Comparisons can be made for the islands where aquarium and sport fishing are allowed and where only sport fishing is allowed.

I'm sure there are. but apparently not in terms of numbers collected and sustainability. Which is what the law pertains to. So therefore there is currently No Regulation for the topic at hand.

What if all the sudden the market for these fish went up 100 fold. Where would that leave the ecosystem without any form of regulation in regards to sustainability.

So it isn't fake news. All of this information is in the OP's first message. Just have to read the actual words on the bill.

It is regulated.

It's actually only one area in all of Hawaii that can be collected from.

Still doesn't mean that area can't be depleted. And again the idea is to keep the fishery sustainable.

And the sustainability is what the size limits and collextion areas protect. They protect the mature, breeding size specimens that replenish the reefs.

Their tourism industry is worth 800,000,000 in annual revenue. Their aquarium trade industry is worth 3,200,000 in annual revenue.

Them doing everything they can to ensure their reefs are protected is more valuable than any contribution from any organization.

And it is the tourism that is far more dangerous, with commercial development, industrial runoff, and diver/snorkeler activity.

 

[AquaNerd]

Thanks for posting this stunreefer. We are helping you spread the word on the AquaNerd blog.

http://aquanerd.com/2017/06/hawaii-sb1240-could-devastate-fishery.html

 

[klp]

Sorry, Furam28, I gotta disagree with you.

Basic questions:

Who is pushing this bill for what reason? Probably the loudest voice on this bill and related bills/agitation are various animal rights groups and their sympathizers like Snorkel Bob (google a bit about the bill and you'll find his op-ed in the Huffington Post about it). It's very clear that these people don't think animals should be kept in aquaria. It's also very clear that they blame the "Big Aquarium Industry" and aquarists for cruelty and for signficant amounts of the destruction of coral reefs.

[yes, some local citizens are on board due to their agitation, as well as likely some of the grandfathered license holders, and especially some members of the snorkel/dive tour industry - which, as a snorkler and diver who often visits Hawaii, I believe has unavoidably been an equally, or even more, destructive force on the reefs in Hawaii. Case in point: Hanauma Bay. IMO donations from animal rights True Believers as well as the snorkel/dive tour industry are the number one source of money for this political movement. ]

Also, the assertion that the aquarium industry is doing significant damage to Hawaii's reefs and is unsustainable is false [look at the figures and facts presented. And if the DNLR contradicts them, they say the DNLR are bureaucrats in the pockets of the Big Aquarium Industry.

I hate sounding like the NRA's rantings about guns, but it seems these people wish no one kept an aquarium. Honestly, the fanaticism and sanctimoniousness of the fish rights folks and Snorkel Bob is shocking, even for a church-hopper like me who's seen all kinds of strange folks behind the pulpit (and in the pews).


What is the effect of this bill? This will restrict fish collection to, as I recall, ten businesses, which automatically creates an aquarium oligopoly. I don't see that as a benefit to anyone, except for those ten. If any vendor is not one of the ten, then they are automatically gone.

Worst is the effect on Hawaiian residents; regulations are such that you cannot import saltwater life (besides fish) in (probably reasonable), you can't keep hard corals (because of previous legislation like this in, as I recall, the late 90s. Even though many of the Porites and Montipora that live in HI are very easily fragged and kept). With this bill, the way I understand it, it basically means that if you can't get it from one of the distributors, you cannot get it - since to do any noncommercial collection on your own you need a now unobtainable permit.

[tangential points]
Aquarium keeping -especially reef keeping - is a hobby, enjoyed by a small minority of people. A well funded and fanatical political campaign can agitate to restrict it for what they think are in the interest of "the oceans" - and reef keeping is especially vulnerable because of the worldwide state of the ocean. Once legislation is in place, aquarium keepers as an individual IMO are generally not the types to become very effectively political organized. In fact, I'm told that the aquarium hobby as a whole is declining - with Hawaii being especially so. (in the whole Big Island, as far as I've been able to see, the only store that sells aquarium stuff is the Kona Petco)

Pollution, runoff, and terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitat destruction from development I think is the most destructive thing for Hawaii's reefs, more so IMO even than global warming. However, there's too much interest and money there; in the end I guarantee you 90% of people wouldn't give up their lawns if it meant it could save the reefs (and yes, I'm making a false dicotomy, but I think the basic idea is true). I will also note that no one is talking about limiting tour groups to the reef or reducing commercial and recreactional fishing limits (which would cause a real outcry, unlike aquarium keeping.

As far as keeping corals go, I think a strong, responsible group of people keeping corals is critical to preserving coral reefs, especially in a developed ocean area like Hawaii. There's a saying that "you can’t save what you don’t love, and you can’t love what you don’t know". Scientists can go and test all kinds of theories, and identify all kinds of corals, and that's good. But marine scientists are a very small group of people - even smaller than reef aquarists.

Hawaiian aquarists, ideally, would not only know that a coral is a Montipora or Porites (whereas no one besides scientists and aquarists would know), know how to grow them and keep them healthy. They know if the water parameters are off, that algae can quickly can quickly destroy their tank. Ideally, they would volunteer to help maintain and heal some reefs, if it was somehow salvagable, helping the scientists with restoration projects with their otherwise unavailable practical experience.

The more people concientiously in the hobby, the better things could be for the wild reefs. Or, on the flip side, read reviews of the Waikiki aquarium on tripadvisor and see how poorly the general public appreciates this leader in coral keeping.
[/tangential points]

How else can Yellow Tang populations be not so cruelly exploited? If the Hawaii DLNR says that the current yellow tang catch rate (200k/yr from Kona, which fills most worldwide demand) under the current areas and season limits is sustainable, that amount's fine by me. The problem is in distribution, retail, and especially the end user. I would be fine, in generally, with lowering the limit by even as much as 90% - likely causing yellow tang prices to jump drastically- in the hopes that people would treat their tangs more seriously. (I do question how effective that would be).

But this bill does nothing for this, and the fact that the bill focuses on creating a collection oligopoly in Hawaii vice lower catch limits says to me that it's more about scoring points for an interest group (and about the pocketbooks of some potential oligopolists).

Sorry for the wall of text.

The NRA does not "rant" on guns but fights to protect your constitutional rights. Leave your politics away from this forum with snide remarks. I signed the petition but have little hope that it will do any good as the state is heavily Democratic. In the real world that means the animal rights activists hold the trump cards. I hope I am wrong. Time will tell on this one.

I hope we see the results of our petition posted here.

 

[lion king]

I love how people dismiss an individual's experience as anecdotal evidence when it hasn't been posted by a self proclaim expert in a study posted on an internet blog. Open your eyes, again if you can't see...you will never see. Can you really stomach even watching a youtube posting from a wholesaler, have you been to one of places; guess you just don't get it. I know the main point of the bill is sustainability, but I took it one step further to just plain humanity and ethics. I tracked not only the mortality of dwarf lions, but also anglers and scorpionfish. Some of these stores I've never bought livestock from, but it still doesn't stop them from killing fish. It been almost a year since I got a wartskin angler, since then I've seen 7 anglers die within weeks, one in a couple months. Is there a humane point to this, and again it starts from the collection point; they are still going to scoop up everything their greedy sick hands can find.

 

[eatbreakfast]

I love how people dismiss an individual's experience as anecdotal evidence when it hasn't been posted by a self proclaim expert in a study posted on an internet blog. Open your eyes, again if you can't see...you will never see. Can you really stomach even watching a youtube posting from a wholesaler, have you been to one of places; guess you just don't get it. I know the main point of the bill is sustainability, but I took it one step further to just plain humanity and ethics. I tracked not only the mortality of dwarf lions, but also anglers and scorpionfish. Some of these stores I've never bought livestock from, but it still doesn't stop them from killing fish. It been almost a year since I got a wartskin angler, since then I've seen 7 anglers die within weeks, one in a couple months. Is there a humane point to this, and again it starts from the collection point; they are still going to scoop up everything their greedy sick hands can find.

But your just as guilty of dismissing the observations of other hobbyists that have observed stores acting responsibly and ethically.

I've been to countless stores and quite a few wholesalers. The losses are not as astronomical as you are presenting them. They wouldn't be sustainable from a business standpoint.

 

[A Toadstool Leather]

If this fishery is truly sustainable than there is no reason to harm it like this imo. Im sick of the aquarium industry being blammed for the sometimes bad husbandry of hobbyists. Husbandry will only improve among hobbyists if we make an effort to inform people which is what our community does well. There are far greater threats to the reef than well regulated collection.

 

[lion king]

But your just as guilty of dismissing the observations of other hobbyists that have observed stores acting responsibly and ethically.

I've been to countless stores and quite a few wholesalers. The losses are not as astronomical as you are presenting them. They wouldn't be sustainable from a business standpoint.

There are real studies from respected sources that do state the mortality rates related to the aquarium trade, if you are interested do a simple search; you'll find what I'm saying is pretty close to the truth of things. I guess hundreds of fish lined up in acrylic cages just big of enough to turn around in is just ok your book. Lfs are finding out the hard way and some are getting creative how they do business and services they offer. There are obviously people that do ethical business, but it really does have to change; dramatically.

 

[A Toadstool Leather]

There are real studies from respected sources that do state the mortality rates related to the aquarium trade, if you are interested do a simple search; you'll find what I'm saying is pretty close to the truth of things. I guess hundreds of fish lined up in acrylic cages just big of enough to turn around in is just ok your book. Lfs are finding out the hard way and some are getting creative how they do business and services they offer. There are obviously people that do ethical business, but it really does have to change; dramatically.

Where do most fatalities occur? Im curious where the highest mortality rates. To be honest I would not be surprised if hobbyist mistakes are to blame for the most part. Im sure there are lots of uninformed reefers outside our forum. I used to be one, still am in some regards

 

[eatbreakfast]

There are real studies from respected sources that do state the mortality rates related to the aquarium trade, if you are interested do a simple search; you'll find what I'm saying is pretty close to the truth of things. I guess hundreds of fish lined up in acrylic cages just big of enough to turn around in is just ok your book. Lfs are finding out the hard way and some are getting creative how they do business and services they offer. There are obviously people that do ethical business, but it really does have to change; dramatically.

This tells me that you saw statistics, but didn't look into them. The high figures of mortality that are stated as fact and often presented as founded are actually quotes from people that work with For the Fishes, but are not actually backed up by statistics. This approach has even gone so far as to put references on Wikipedia pages, but if you look at the regerence the reference work doesn't actually say those figures.

 

[Gil03]

It would seem that like a lot of things the truth lies somewhere in between both sides views. I've been in the hobby for approaching 15 years and I have no problem conceding the notion that there's a great deal of live stock that will die shortly after catch/transportation and sale due to lack of education on the consumer end, I'm not quite sure why someone would argue against that and as the hobby grows in popularity that will only increase this. We all would like to believe that people only buy live stock after doing their research but that's really not the case especially when we're now getting down to $10 tangs/clowns..that's getting into the "It's cheap and it's cool" category so i'll try it out it's only $10. We need to be honest here, the DATA exists in our experience and that data says things die all the time in this hobby for a multitude of reasons even for the experienced hobbyists, you can choose what side you want to be on but let's not deny that truth.

 

[eatbreakfast]

It would seem that like a lot of things the truth lies somewhere in between both sides views. I've been in the hobby for approaching 15 years and I have no problem conceding the notion that there's a great deal of live stock that will die shortly after catch/transportation and sale due to lack of education on the consumer end, I'm not quite sure why someone would argue against that and as the hobby grows in popularity that will only increase this. We all would like to believe that people only buy live stock after doing their research but that's really not the case especially when we're now getting down to $10 tangs/clowns..that's getting into the "It's cheap and it's cool" category so i'll try it out it's only $10. We need to be honest here, the DATA exists in our experience and that data says things die all the time in this hobby for a multitude of reasons even for the experienced hobbyists, you can choose what side you want to be on but let's not deny that truth.

Nobody is denying that there are losses, but there is a huge gap between 30% and 90% and relying on anecdote to arrive at that 90%.

 

[A Toadstool Leather]

I dont like the outright ban on permits, but the catch limits should be created for aquarium trade fish. Not to mention the damage fish collection causes to corals.

 

[eatbreakfast]

I dont like the outright ban on permits, but the catch limits should be created for aquarium trade fish. Not to mention the damage fish collection causes to corals.

Those collection practices that are damaging coral reefs aren't practiced in Hawaii.

 

[A Toadstool Leather]

Those collection practices that are damaging coral reefs aren't practiced in Hawaii.

I hope not. What the hobby needs is to slowly move towards captive breeding. We have made great strides in captive breeding of various fish such as tangs. I dont think this bill will help however. Wild caught fish will be taken elsewhere unfortunatly

 

[eatbreakfast]

I hope not. What the hobby needs is to slowly move towards captive breeding. We have made great strides in captive breeding of various fish such as tangs. I dont think this bill will help however. Wild caught fish will be taken elsewhere unfortunatly

Why is it that you think captive breeding is a solution? When looking at statistics in the Hawaiian fisheries it is sustainable there, and these practices should be spread to other locations.

A much greater threat to reefs and the fishes there is commercial food fishing. If ornamental fish collecters are no longer supported, they go from ornamental fishing to commercial fishing, which is far worse. So if you carr about the reefs you will whole heartedly support sustainable fisheries rather than captive breeding.

Captive breeding has an important role, but it is not a panacea.

 

[NickP13]

Both signed

 

[furam28]

The only reason captive-breeding hasn't progressed much is because of the free-for-all collection strategy from the ocean. A wild-caught yellow tang from Hawaii sells for $3 to $6 (diver's price). Why would there be any economic incentive to captive-breeding of yellow tangs when they are catching 300k from the wild every year?

Why is it that you think captive breeding is a solution? When looking at statistics in the Hawaiian fisheries it is sustainable there, and these practices should be spread to other locations.

A much greater threat to reefs and the fishes there is commercial food fishing. If ornamental fish collecters are no longer supported, they go from ornamental fishing to commercial fishing, which is far worse. So if you carr about the reefs you will whole heartedly support sustainable fisheries rather than captive breeding.

Captive breeding has an important role, but it is not a panacea.