Thoughts on Hawaii Ban

Clownfish_Boy

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
730
Reaction score
902
Location
Rocky Mount, NC
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Governmental environmental regulations are extremely important. Not to mention the other services that government provides (schools, medicare/medicaid, social security, roads, 911, police/fire services, welfare assistance, regulations on business, etc.)
Certainly they are, when managed responsibly. But this action of the State of Hawaii is nothing more than an unnecessary slap in the face to free enterprise, and is based on their mistaken belief that the aquarium trade is a threat to those species of fish involved. It is a heinous totalitarian imposition on the people.
 
Last edited:

hds4216

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
1,811
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
It is a heinous totalitarian imposition on the people.
That seems a bit strong. The people don't have the right to do whatever they want to reefs and environmental regulations are vitally important to their long-term health. You can argue whether this specific regulation was misguided, but it's objectively not a totalitarian imposition, especially considering it was enacted by a democratic government (not the party, the system).
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think it's possible, but probably not in the near future. The environmental review that the courts want done in order to lift the ban apparently would cost $10 million and take 10-15 years.
This is devastating on all levels. For the hobby. For Hawaii. For marine biology, frankly. My concern for the care of the oceans has only INCREASED as a result of being introduced to reef keeping years ago. I am stunned by the ban and hope that Hawaii gets their act together and reconsiders. Apparently, the economic effect on the state will be minimal (in their opinion) or the illegal harvesting of fish was so high, they were forced to ban all fishing, OR (more likely) the "green" element of the Democratic/Left parties got the upper hand for now.
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That seems a bit strong. The people don't have the right to do whatever they want to reefs and environmental regulations are vitally important to their long-term health. You can argue whether this specific regulation was misguided, but it's objectively not a totalitarian imposition, especially considering it was enacted by a democratic government (not the party, the system).
I'm not sure I agree. It was enacted by a JUDGE, wasn't it. That's not ruling from the legislator, or even democracy. That's ruling from the bench. Maybe I'm mistaken on the "facts" of the ban, but if a judge indeed imposed the ban unilaterally apart from legislative action, then it was an imposition and not a democratic result.
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I will say that I would love to be in Biota Aquariums shoes right now. They have a virtual monopoly on Captive Bred Tangs. Is this crony capitalism at its finest? Either way, I checked out the website for Biota and was impressed with their work, but also disappointed in the small variety of livestock actually being captive bred at this point. We have to hope that others come along and break the monopoly. Only then will supply start to meet demand and lower prices.
 

hds4216

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
1,811
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm not sure I agree. It was enacted by a JUDGE, wasn't it. That's not ruling from the legislator, or even democracy. That's ruling from the bench. Maybe I'm mistaken on the "facts" of the ban, but if a judge indeed imposed the ban unilaterally apart from legislative action, then it was an imposition and not a democratic result.
In the American system of government, judges never have the power to impose completely new policies unilaterally. Their sole power to affect policy lies in how they interpret laws or governing documents that are already in effect. Sometimes this can be used to broad-ranging effect (like in Obergefell v. Hodges or Citizens United v. FEC), but judges never have the power to unilaterally enact policies outside of pre-existing law. In this case, the judge interpreted the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, which had already been passed by the legislature and signed by the governor some years ago, to include this ban.
 
Last edited:

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am a believer in social democracy, and yes since being introduced to this hobby my concern for the ocean and for reefs has only increased. I’m not one of these ill-informed people.
I am a believer in constitutional democracy. Social democracy is a rather new term that has dangerous un-democratic nuances (depending on how it is interpreted!) and is quite subjective if you ask me. I will refrain from any other comments on this matter as I don't want to stir political emotions either way. Just saying that since we are talking about a reef system here, the underlying foundation for any ban or lack of ban should not be public opinion, prevailing social winds or even a judge's individual interpretation, but the clear articulation of the law. If the law is unclear, the judge should push it back to the legislator to make it clear ...that's his job... If the legislator disagrees with the judge, they should refine the law to bring clarity or correction to such a ruling. That's their job.

I am appalled at how the USA has suddenly drifted into social justice, social democracy, social courtroom rulings as a complete end around the legislative bench. It doesn't matter which side of a particular issue we tend to lean on, if our standard for justice, democracy, or even fishing in Hawaii is no longer tied to concrete law and legislative clarity, then we have no more true democracy and we are edging closer to something America has historically never been.

The blame for all of the above (no matter which side you are on) falls to the state / federal legislators that have increasingly given power to judges, czars, agencies and groups to devise, carry out and enforce unwritten laws written by unelectable individuals.

I get off track a bit and apologise. Please do not seek to read into my opinions as either conservative or liberal on specific issues. That's beside the point. The point is that we are discussing the right of Hawaii to enact a fishing ban. That's their right. We can't complain, even if we disagree or are hurt as hobbyists in the matter. What is not clear is how a judge can suddenly drop the ban based on subjective interpretation. I don't believe the fishing industry (hobbyist industry) has the lobbying power to overcome this one. Is there really that much money in reefkeeping industry to overcome the massive reviews, bureaucratic paperwork and legal fees to convince Hawaii's government and judges to overturn a ban??? I doubt it very highly!
 

Zionas

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
5,602
Reaction score
3,472
Location
Winnieland (AKA “People’s” Republic of China)
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What I really mean by “social democracy” is just better ensuring that the average person and average family is taken care of. Nothing “Communist” or anything like that. Strengthening access to education, health care, welfare, all with existing (if not more) checks and balances with the ability to fight back using force when necessary.

But yes, I am quite disappointed as you said it was the decision of one judge. One judge.
 

hds4216

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
1,811
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am a believer in constitutional democracy. Social democracy is a rather new term that has dangerous un-democratic nuances (depending on how it is interpreted!) and is quite subjective if you ask me. I will refrain from any other comments on this matter as I don't want to stir political emotions either way. Just saying that since we are talking about a reef system here, the underlying foundation for any ban or lack of ban should not be public opinion, prevailing social winds or even a judge's individual interpretation, but the clear articulation of the law. If the law is unclear, the judge should push it back to the legislator to make it clear ...that's his job... If the legislator disagrees with the judge, they should refine the law to bring clarity or correction to such a ruling. That's their job.

I am appalled at how the USA has suddenly drifted into social justice, social democracy, social courtroom rulings as a complete end around the legislative bench. It doesn't matter which side of a particular issue we tend to lean on, if our standard for justice, democracy, or even fishing in Hawaii is no longer tied to concrete law and legislative clarity, then we have no more true democracy and we are edging closer to something America has historically never been.

The blame for all of the above (no matter which side you are on) falls to the state / federal legislators that have increasingly given power to judges, czars, agencies and groups to devise, carry out and enforce unwritten laws written by unelectable individuals.

I get off track a bit and apologise. Please do not seek to read into my opinions as either conservative or liberal on specific issues. That's beside the point. The point is that we are discussing the right of Hawaii to enact a fishing ban. That's their right. We can't complain, even if we disagree or are hurt as hobbyists in the matter. What is not clear is how a judge can suddenly drop the ban based on subjective interpretation. I don't believe the fishing industry (hobbyist industry) has the lobbying power to overcome this one. Is there really that much money in reefkeeping industry to overcome the massive reviews, bureaucratic paperwork and legal fees to convince Hawaii's government and judges to overturn a ban??? I doubt it very highly!
The problem is that there is no such thing as "the clear articulation of the law." It just doesn't exist. Laws are often extremely vague, or written in such a way that it is unclear how a given or novel circumstance falls under them. The process of judicial review is not new, it dates back to 1803 and the SCOTUS case Marbury v. Madison.

Judicial power is honestly the least of America's concerns regarding the health of its democracy right now. Strengthening and reforming electoral institutions is vastly more important.
 

hds4216

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
1,811
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What I really mean by “social democracy” is just better ensuring that the average person and average family is taken care of. Nothing “Communist” or anything like that. Strengthening access to education, health care, welfare, all with existing (if not more) checks and balances with the ability to fight back using force when necessary.

But yes, I am quite disappointed as you said it was the decision of one judge. One judge.
This is not correct. The most recent decision was the result of one judge, but he was just upholding the decision of the Hawaii Environmental Council, which voted 15-0 to uphold the ban in the first place. This judge just closed the unintentional loophole they left.
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The problem is that there is no such thing as "the clear articulation of the law." It just doesn't exist. Laws are often extremely vague, or written in such a way that it is unclear how a given or novel circumstance falls under them. The process of judicial review is not new, it dates back to 1803 and the SCOTUS case Marbury v. Madison.

Judicial power is honestly the least of America's concerns regarding the health of its democracy right now. Strengthening and reforming electoral institutions is vastly more important.
I agree on the electoral concerns. I also agree that judicial review is necessary - legislators cannot foresee every "unintended consequence" or "application" of the law. My only point is that judges should not legislate from the bench. Their job is to put the pressure back on the legislator to clarify. We have a democratic crisis right now - on all levels precisely because we are using the term "democratic" and "democracy" without clearly defining what that means.

Either democracy = a system of constitutional law which is maintained and defined via the electoral process and protected and preserved by the courts

OR democracy = whatever the people in power (whoever they may be) want regardless of the constitution or means necessary to achieve that end.

My only gripe is that Republicans and Democrats alike have descended somehow to the 2nd definition. That's why so many people hate Trump. That's why so many people hate Biden. Its unsustainable no matter who is in charge and thus the reason for so many protests...first in the summer by Dems and now in the winter by Republicans.

I promise, I'll write nothing further on this topic. We are not here to hijack the post :)

Hawaii...hope you open up soon. Otherwise the only way I'm going to see a Tang again is visiting you in person and trying some diving! :)
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
This is not correct. The most recent decision was the result of one judge, but he was just upholding the decision of the Hawaii Environmental Council, which voted 15-0 to uphold the ban in the first place. This judge just closed the unintentional loophole they left.
If the council is unelected or if its a judge, the principle is the same. It's not democratic if the people have no venue by which to vote in or out or repeal. It's not democratic if unelected officials are making policy and law outside the scope of the legislative branch. Even if we agreed with the policy enacted, it's not democratic.
 
Last edited:

hds4216

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
1,811
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
If the council is unelected or if its a judge, the principle is the same. It's not democratic if the people have no venue by which to vote in or out. It's not democratic if unelected officials are making policy and law outside the scope of the legislative branch. Even if we agree if the policy enacted, it's not democratic.
The 15 Council members are appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The people elect both the governors and the Senators.

Also, the most recent poll showed that 83% of Hawaiians supported the ban.
 

Reef GE

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
243
Reaction score
93
Location
Tbilisi, Country of Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Then no dispute from my end! :) Let Hawaii figure out what they want to do with Hawaii waters :)
The 15 Council members are appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The people elect both the governors and the Senators.

Also, the most recent poll showed that 83% of Hawaiians supported the ban.
 

SaltISlife

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
695
Reaction score
807
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Pretty sure i read that people with liscenses can still catch fish and that they had issued 3000 of them prior. So i doubt well see a increase in price anytime soon.


Are blue tang caught in hawaii ? I mean prices are already higher thanks to Covid-19.

Saw a blue tang a good 4 inchs long at petco yesturday for 109$ thinking.. maybe i should go grab him before someone else does. I dont see them that size usually in petcos or anywhere else. Usually theyre like 1 inch too small
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top