Fish collection for aquarium trade in Hawaii - pending legislation to ban

[Llamaguy]

I would like to see this for sure. Unfortunately, this will have little to no effect on other, less developed countries that have reef access. Not only could it help the natural reefs, but it could make it more profitable for captive breeding of the larger fish not currently bread in captivity.

Anything that could lead to a better, long term stability in the hobby.



An instance on how this doesn't currently work is live rock. Somehow it's cheaper to ship it around the world than to aquaculture it :hmm3:

 

[suta4242]

Do I understand this correctly: theres a high probability that Hawaii will ban fish collection????

Not just more hype from snrkel bob?

 

[pacislandaqua]

The algae on the reefs in Hawaii are not native - the main algae used in the "to many tangs are being taken so the algae is overtaking everything" is gorilla ogo which is not native.. which means... ding ding, the tangs DONT eat it... has nothing to do with taking fish. They think it came in on Boats traveling to and from.

30% of the big island is closed for collection and has been for years. This is a good thing as it helps maintain popullations in these areas where they breed and then move over to the unprotected area. 30% of the coastline of Big island a HUGE section of reef...

I've said this before, if you want to protect the reefs, ban everything, especially tourism and golf courses. the run off from golf courses is crazy, and stupid people who know nothing about reefs walk all over them. it is difficult to teach people from mainland US (especially land locked places) about reefs and the ocean in 10 minutes - not gonna happen.

Dont target one aspect of something and leave the rest out... do it, and do it right. ban everything...

my .02... I personally believe everything is fine... the industry is very large right now, and the fish are still coming in good numbers and its February... wait until the drop !!

 

[auem]

those ,who think banning fish collection will encourage captive breeding, are naive and don't understand much about how the industry work.clownfish or dwarf angels are not all there are in this hobbies.In the market economy you need quick result,otherwise investors
will cease your funding...fishes which are relatively easy to keep like tangs,large angels etc.comprises a new hobbyist's first collection along with clowns and damsels...at the current situation,it need plenty of money and research to captive breed tang(which never happened as far as i know) and large angel(very few have spawned so far)...say for theory we ban all reef fishing around the globe,first thing that will happen is that reefing will be out of scope for average hobbyist with moderate budget.only clown fishes are captive breed in lot,but other fishes like dwarf angels which very few people breed will became out of reach for majority due to rocketing price.definitely a huge mass will leave/postpone their hobby.many LFSs will suffer and close their businesses.meanwhile those who ventured to push new frontier for captive breeding won't get a result immediately...it needed time to breed first and then perfecting the procedure will take more times...even if everybody share their techniques,by the time they are ready to release their offsprings,a very shrunken market awaits them.that will further hamper their any chance to make even,as usually 1st,2nd generations need to be sold at high prices to recover the cost.so unless someone has investors with bottomless pocket as backing,the business can't be sustained.
AND finally,as long as reef fishing is legal,nobody will take initiative to breed those common fishes in mass scale, eying to the future.....

so sustainable and controlled collection is only way to keep this hobby and the people associated with it financially,afloat...

 

[alton]

The algae on the reefs in Hawaii are not native - the main algae used in the "to many tangs are being taken so the algae is overtaking everything" is gorilla ogo which is not native.. which means... ding ding, the tangs DONT eat it... has nothing to do with taking fish. They think it came in on Boats traveling to and from.

30% of the big island is closed for collection and has been for years. This is a good thing as it helps maintain popullations in these areas where they breed and then move over to the unprotected area. 30% of the coastline of Big island a HUGE section of reef...

I've said this before, if you want to protect the reefs, ban everything, especially tourism and golf courses. the run off from golf courses is crazy, and stupid people who know nothing about reefs walk all over them. it is difficult to teach people from mainland US (especially land locked places) about reefs and the ocean in 10 minutes - not gonna happen.



Dont target one aspect of something and leave the rest out... do it, and do it right. ban everything...

my .02... I personally believe everything is fine... the industry is very large right now, and the fish are still coming in good numbers and its February... wait until the drop !!

I agree totally, ban boats with motors, fertilizers, make sure water coming from treatment plants are nitrate and phosphate free. And your right every time a ship docks it unloads unwanted pest and algaes, so ban shipping too. Like I said common sense is a thing of the past.

 

[LargeAngels]

if you want to protect the reefs, ban everything, especially tourism and golf courses. the run off from golf courses is crazy, and stupid people who know nothing about reefs walk all over them. it is difficult to teach people from mainland US (especially land locked places) about reefs and the ocean in 10 minutes - not gonna happen.

Bingo!!! How much damage has the agriculture, tourism and development done compared to taking a few fish?

 

[Jacob D]

...but unfortunately putting an end to the real issues means killing the cash cow and stepping on the toes of industry all at the same time. The politicians know a scapegoat when they see one. The aquarium hobby is insignificant compared to tourism.

 

[JamesJR]

I think a key to an issue like this is that it's not about what people believe.

What do the figures and data suggest? How can fish populations stay at their optimum levels with the collection numbers that we have? And what if Hawaii has some unforeseen natural disaster such as a prolonged bleaching event or some gargantuan typhoon that destroys huge sections of the reef? How are the reefs going to respond when the fish populations are low at a time when the reef is at its most vulnerable? I understand that fish population are resilient and dynamic but I don't think there is a way you can remove millions of fish every year from a relatively small area and not have some sort of negative consequence.

Note that I am still in favor of having collection of marine fish. But over the past few years it has weighed more and more heavily on me every time I go into a fish shop. I cringe whenever I see someone bagging up a ornate butterfly or moorish idol as I know that the liklihood of the fish surviving even 6 months is very low. If anything reading the legislation that has come up over the past few years that would restrict my beloved hobby has made me a lot more conscious about what I buy. I think as a hobby if we don't start restricting ourselves more often somebody else will do it for us.

 

[Sheol]

There is also that other Enviromental issue we are already banned from discussing. Well, regardless of causes, the Oceans are getting warmer. El Ninos much harsher. Coral Reefs have a narrow band of temps they can survive.
I think Bag Limits would be a much wiser course of action. Just my opinion. Plus, this will just encourage poaching!
My .02 only..

Sincerely,
Matt

 

[MrTuskfish]

I'm a firm believer in the "nature abhors a vacuum" theory. Fish spawn in such huge numbers and a given section of reef will support a given number of a species. Collectors are just another predator. If a section of reef has 300 yellow tangs and they are all wiped out (by hobbiests or big groupers); next year there will be another 300 YTs on that section of reef. There have been very few hobbyist-caused depletions of fish, Pterapogon kauderni is one. But the reasons for that decline are obvious and very rare. IMO this whole issue, while needing some minor attention, is just another P.C. attempt to make someone feel good about saving the planet. Like my kid's Science teacher who told the little darlings that recycling paper saved the rain forest. Yeah, they make paper from teak and mahogany.

 

[Swanwillow]

There were also 'plenty of' passenger pigeons.

And the thylacine was just a pest.. doesn't matter that now a worse predator is in its place.

The great auk prooobably tasted darn good, as with the dodo.

.... We kill so much. There's nothing wrong with banning one area from collection. No reason to be angry about it. I think its good. And hopefully soon we'll beable to propagate everything ourselves.

And I also hope that we stop over-fishing, and that we become a sustainable species instead of the out-of-control one we are now.

 

[Swim]

I smell politicians that see a chance to tax something so they can spend more money. For that reason alone I don't think there will be a total ban. I may sound synical here but in my state the DEC raised my fishing license fee 50% each of the last two years and didn't do anything they said they were going to do with the money and from the looks of things they will be back again this year to up my license fee again. Not saying we shouldn't be practicing sustainable harvesting methods, we should, I'm just saying I don't trust the motives of politicians.

 

[Stuart60611]

There is absolutely no viable ecconomic motivation to advance captive breeding of marine fish unless the situation exists where collection from the ocean is no longer allowed or is more costly than captive breeding. Therefore, any serious advancements in captive breeding of marine fish will remain non-existent until there is a viable ecconomic motivation. If there is substantial demand for marine fish for the hobby and this demand can only be satisfied cost effectively by captive bred animals, venture capital will fund captive breeding efforts as long as there is substantial profits to be made. Captive breeding of marine fish is not only essential for the sustainability of the hobby, but it is also essential for continuing the long term survival of many fish who are being threatened by a variety of things other than the hobby. To me, this is the real issue of why a ban of collecting marine fish from the ocean for the hobby may have a major possitive environmental impact. I agree that in most instances preventing the collection of marine fish for the hobby is not going to have that substantial of an impact on fish populations in the ocean, but advancements in captive breeding of fish could.

For example, going to the moon did not directly result in the U.S. reaping any meaningful ecconomic benefits. But the technology gained from making the trip resulted in massive ecconomic gain for the U.S. in a long list of industries and is largely responsible for much of the technology we enjoy today. Likewise, the science learned through advancements in the captive breeding of fish could solve countless environmental problems, improve the health and longevity of fish and our entire planet, and provide for medical advancements and improved breeding techniques for a variety of animals, including humans.

 

[Swim]

I would not be surprised to see $450 - $500 yellow tangs in the future. Unfortunately, historically, there will likely not be any major improvements derived locally by the extra money generated. It may help struggling captive breeding companies to continue struggling another decade or two by providing some grant money but only time will tell if anything will be achieved.

You can almost draw a parallel with "green energy". We can wish it were ready today but it's not going to be more than a novelty for at least another decade or two.

 

[Stuart60611]

I would not be surprised to see $450 - $500 yellow tangs in the future. Unfortunately, historically, there will likely not be any major improvements derived locally by the extra money generated. It may help struggling captive breeding companies to continue struggling another decade or two by providing some grant money but only time will tell if anything will be achieved.

You can almost draw a parallel with "green energy". We can wish it were ready today but it's not going to be more than a novelty for at least another decade or two.

Yes, and your analogy to green energy is imo a good one. As long as unclean energy is so much more affordable and available than green energy, green energy will never gain real traction. However, if oil truly became scarce or off the charts expensive you would see rapid advancement and greatly increased funding for green energy way beyond merely a few more dollars in grant money. It is all about ecconomics and the availablity of resources.

Also, if the demand for yellow tangs was high, wild caught yellow tangs cost $450, and captive bred tangs could be produced at $200, you would see quite a bit of resources go into producing captive bred yellow tangs selling at say $300. Thereafter, competion could bring the price down even further for captive bred tangs and so on.