Sea Shepard turns its attention to our hobby

[pactrop]

Hawaii has many regulations on aquarium fish collectors. There are many conservation zones in Hawaii. There are many places that are either rarely or never accessed for collection simply because of accessibility (wind, waves, currents, distance).
There are many things weighing on Hawaii's reefs, aquarium fish collectors are not even registering on the scale.

I am a fish collector in Hawaii and the main threat to the aquarium industry in Hawaii is extremist like snorkel bob and people like Nano Dog. Not over collection.
Snorkel bob because he is a loon. Nano Dog because he does not really know anything about fish collecting in Hawaii and still pushes for government action. I know he can pull up facts on collection etc. but then in the same breath he says that the data is under reported and incorrect.
He may have interesting arguments for more regulation but when it really gets down to it he knows nothing about the day to day fish collection process or actual survival rates.

The average hobbiest while yearning for eco friendly aquariums will take in what he says as fact because he boasts a "Biology background in Hawaii". It would probably be better if he did not to come off like an expert in the collection process and disclose that his background is in Single Cell Bacteria. he is trying to appear to be knowlegable of the aquarium trade.

I know I will not be popular for using Nano Dog as a target but in our fight against snorkel bob people like Nano Dog using their "marine biology" title are unknowingly feeding the snorkel bob machine without any real time knowledge of our field.

 

[duncaholic]

My marine aquariums (several) have had a total of about 30 fish in them over my two years in the hobby. About 18 are still alive and going strong. Of the 30 total fish I have bought over the years probably a third were tank bred. All have been common species that are widely available in the several LFS in my area.

Yes I have had almost half of the fish I have bought die in my aquariums. Most when I first got into the hobby and didn't know what I was doing. Does this make me sad? yes. Do I feel responsible for a negative impact on our planet's reef system? NO! Long lining and shrimp trawling and the ridiculous shark fin soup fisheries are clearly many orders of magnitude more damaging to our oceans as a whole than colleting for this hobby. Now I know they are not targeting reefs in these examples, but commercial fisheries of many other types are. I don't have any scientific data to back up my statements, but I do live near the coast in North Florida, and have seen the catches come in at the docks. The shrimp trawler guys spend most of the return trip from their coastal trawling sorting their catch and dumping their by-catch through chutes in the side of their boats. I know some of the shrimp guys, and they say they average about a five to one ratio. one part shrimp and five parts by-catch. The article in the first post of this thread estimates 10 million yellow tangs per year with some pretty wonky math if you ask me, but these shrimp trawlers kill EVERYTHING caught in their nets. I've seen the by-catch up close. It's almost exclusively juvenile fish.

Even with the net dragging death machines roaming around, recreational fishing around here is solid. I just ate a redfish I caught last night. That one fish had more bio-mass than everything that's ever been in my tanks. How can I still catch quality fish in abundace here? Twenty odd years ago these fish were on the decline. Commerial fisheries and the indiscriminate gill nets that were being used at the time had them on the ropes. The key to any conservation effort is sustainability. If a species becomes threatened then they need the right kind of protection. That redfish I caught is the result of a well thought out conservation plan put into action by Florida fish and wildlife commision after they did research on WHY these fish were becoming threatened. Now even with the trawlers killing who knows how many juveniles, and recreational fishermen such as myself being allowed to keep one per day, their numbers are fantastic. They are literally everywhere. Slot limits and banning gill nets worked here. Commericial interest still won out with respect to the shrimp trawlers though. I can't imagine how awesome fishing would be if they closed that fishery even just one out of every five years, but that isn't likely to happen.

Anyway back to the point. sustainability! If there's a place where I can go and donate time or even a little money to help the effort of establishing and enforcing well thought out startegies and laws to protect the sustainabilty of collection, then sign me up. Seriously I do beach clean ups and derelict crab trap round ups around here at least a few times a year, so if I can help, I'll put in my share. But usually when people start to talk about banning any king of fishery I get worried. There is a place somewhere between shark fin soup fisheries and the "Don't touch" mentality, and that's where I fall.
JMO
Any divers on this site been to Hawaii recently? If so what did you see?

 

[pactrop]

I don't know if asking a diver that has been here "lately" will give you a good "State of the Reefs" assessment.

I have been diving in Hawaii since I was a little kid. The state of the reefs is not the greatest. But the largest factors are runoff, over fishing (food fish), and pathetic politics.
The Waikiki aquarium (State run facility) is not even allowed to collect coral or rock. Neither are any other "reef" scientists. Even for the betterment of the reef.
There could be reef replenishment going on here (like in Fiji) to help the fishery but the State is so scared by the threats of snorkel bob they won't let even the scientists who specialize in corals do their job.

It is good that we are discussing the issues here. But what needs to remain clear is that Hawaii used as a good example of an aquarium fishery. Snorkel bob is making it out to be evil. The more snorkel bob gets publicity the more people actually think that is how it is.

 

[clownfreak]

What makes you say the indiscriminate gill nets? A gill net cannot catch a fish smaller than its mesh and would have issues catching anything far bigger. I have fished in Alaska, gillnetting for two summers and in that time we caught 5, at most 10 off species that weren't salmon in our nets. Thats 10 off species fish to about 100,000 targeted fish. All off species were released alive and I watched them swim off.

 

[billsreef]

How long are your average sets?

I've pulled gill nets that have been set overnight. They did a great job of catching every species that couldn't pass through, and tangling up larger species. The majority of the catch was either not alive or not in good enough shape to recover. The big issue with gill nets however, is the ones that get lost and continue fishing. Aka ghost nets.

 

[philosophile]

FWIW, being a professional philosopher (really I am), I can tell you that moral relativism isn't a very defensible position. Few people are consistently moral relativists. They think that being stolen from or being murdered would be bad, but if relativism is true, they would have to tolerate these things being done to them since they are simply in disagreement about something that is relative. Pushing it up to a societal level (social constructs and such) doesn't do much better.

I think there is a serious moral dimension in our hobby, which most people ignore. When others try to bring it up, they get defensive and never use the opportunity to really reflect upon how they could engage in our hobby in a more moral and environmentally sensitive way.

 

[cortez marine]

more moral behavior

more moral behavior

I think there is a serious moral dimension in our hobby, which most people ignore. When others try to bring it up, they get defensive and never use the opportunity to really reflect upon how they could engage in our hobby in a more moral and environmentally sensitive way.

The expose of the trades worst ills was done by the trade itself.
For several years reform projects converted the worst offenders in the Philippines. 'I was there and never saw any greenies at all.

Then, to be more professional, the helm was given over to green non profit organizations.
They took it to the bank , gave themselves 100 k salaries and ruined the reform movement.

Now we in the trade find ourselves attacked by greens again...as the other ones slink away.

So, before anyone blames the trade and the hobby they cannot do so with credibility without reference to what efforts that were sold out to convert the trade to sustainable practices.

If you doubt me...ask anyone in the know how and when the divers in Vanuatu, Tonga, Belize, Saudi, Palau , PNG etc. all were trained.

The pre-NGO period was when the real progress was made. Its when 90% of the reform achievements were really engineered.
Greens NGOs have misbehaved and committed treason to the cause of the reefs and are in no position to point fingers.
Steve

 

[cortez marine]

Let me try it another way;
leaving the people part out of the Pollyanna cry to save the reefs...will insure their demise.
People are primary in the equation.

If people ruin the reefs they must be re-trained, converted, lured into something better and given incentives ...just like you.

You will not change much of anything with a detached, top down, theoretical, culturally ignorant mindset like so many of those who have failed so far.

Fragging a few corals and selling wild tank raised clowns is to reef salvation as boycotting toothpicks is to saving the rainforest.

The thousands of aquarium fisherfolk need alternatives that they can respect and live on or their damage will be exponential as they return to just killing seafood marine life.
The semi-environmental hobbyist mentality in the West seems to not understand this nor have corporate inspired "non profit" organizations.

If they don't catch a tang, they will kill a turtle. If they don't net a coris wrasse they will spear a 3 foot Maori wrasse...if they don't fill a bucket with royal grammas they will fill the boat with conch and lobsters...and so on.

Conversion is a social endeavor... as in social development. It is not an empiracle science which means the power to change things in reality and save coral reefs cannot not led by scientific resumes. Thats perhaps in a nutshell, why the problems do not get solved. Milked yes...solved..no.

People have mistakenly assumed a wrongheaded approach to the issues.

With social/village level involvement comes greater respect and acceptance for change. Ignoring this and trying to force the salvation of the reefs from a safe and detached vantage point is just plying the flute while Rome burns.


Steve

 

[philosophile]

leaving the people part out of the Pollyanna cry to save the reefs...will insure their demise.
People are primary in the equation.

I'm not sure if anyone really is denying that people are at fault here, and that we have to be the ones to fix the problem.

The question is can we keep our hobby, and at the same time not damage the eco-systems that our hobby revolves around.

People usually want to do the right thing, but rarely do we know how to.

Its a complicated issue. Buying aquacultured livestock and corals might be one way to solve the issue, but does that really affect anything if we buy them from stores that also buy wild caught livestock? What about the food that we feed our livestock?

Does our hobby encourage conservation? Inspiring more people to engage in reefing might place even more pressure on the worlds reefs, even if we are more aware of them. Awareness that doesn't rise into action becomes something like going to the zoo then buying a bengal tiger. Now I know most people don't do that, but people do go out and buy some clowns after watching Finding Nemo.

I'm fairly new to the hobby, but I've noticed that many reefers are very defensive when it comes to questioning the ethics of our hobby. But this isn't much different from changing anyone's habits be it driving less, being a vegetarian, or raising their children. When there is no dialogue, there can't be any real progress.

 

[cortez marine]

I'm fairly new to the hobby, but I've noticed that many reefers are very defensive when it comes to questioning the ethics of our hobby.

Hobbyists are faraway removed from the scene of the crime as it were.
They are far from Indonesia....far from the Philippines and far from the 10 million dollars already spent on aquarium reform to no acclaim by eco-profiteers over the past 15 years.

So, its a new day...what shall we do?
What do you mean we?

Some are engaged in doing the right thing routinely but it doesn't make news....and doesn't improve sales.
Steve

 

[palmer373]

ill stop my 'devastating impact on the reefs' when the government stops making a devastating impact on my wallet. simple as that but frankly that wont happen.

 

[returnofsid]

ill stop my 'devastating impact on the reefs' when the government stops making a devastating impact on my wallet. simple as that but frankly that wont happen.

The 2 have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Frankly, your attitude does more to hurt our hobby, than help, and doesn't even belong in this "Responsible Reef keeping" forum!

 

[cortez marine]

I thought he ment the import wildlife authorities that take a $145.00 inspection fee for each importation and exportation.
In the last year, my company has paid $10,500.00 on wildlife import fees alone.

Tropical fish are not imported in secret. They are monitored, inspected and taxed.
Its all for conservation we are told but every illegal cyanide fish ever imported into America was cleared by the government....legally.
Steve

 

[JHemdal]

Steve,

Are you sure that just because USFWS clears a shipment, that for example, USDA-APHIS can't come back later and catch a Lacey Act violation? Part of the Lacey Act makes it a criminal offense to falsify documents, so it stands to reason that if they catch this after-the-fact, they could still prosecute.
IMO - until the Philippines and Indonesia make a stand and TELL the USFWS they want the trade in cyanide-caught fishes to stop (like enforcing their OWN laws in country!), nothing is going to happen because USFWS simply has bigger fish to fry.

Jay

 

[cortez marine]

Bigger fish to fry?
Jay, they may split a hair on a heliofungia vs a fungia and fine an importer 1k over it.


And they will enforce a countrys laws as a back-up measure, even if that country does not request it. There is a lot of precedent for this already; The assumption being that the country may be lax or miss things.
I have had the verified fish quota counts of the certifying foreign fishery officer re-counted to make sure that the officers count was correct.
To me this suggests that even if a country misses something, our officials may choose to back-up and enforce their laws.
Steve

 

[andrewk529]

There is a checkpoint at either at random intervals and/or routine, both before each deliverance/shipment before each load is accepted for further processing.
And same is for packaging out to stores.
Not particulary for that, but for lot of faults and problems.
See, Norway export two things: Seafood and oil. We don't have anything else
so when Russia a couple of years ago just made an public speculation about some flaw in our processing system, it went on to be a BIG IF and HOW and WHY. I even think some processing plant were shut down, not to proof, but speculation, no fault were ever discovered.
That is one of the reasons Norwegian seafood is widely sought after internationally and why we export ... something like 90% of our seafood products.

If Norwegian government doesn't routinely test for Mercury, then I personally would question the safety of the seafood.

 

[clownfreak]

Bill, to answer your question sets were about 1-5 hours, averaging abround 2-3. I think our major "bonus" in catching fewer off species is that there weren't very many off species to catch. Because salmon travel in the top 10 or so feet of water typically thats where our nets were and there weren't many others either.

 

[billsreef]

Interesting how different fisheries can be targeted. Those are short sets, and apparently the way the salmon run lets you target them. That manner of set seems reasonable. However, in most areas (other than your salmon fishery) gill nets are typically set overnight and catch anything in their path, which is typically a multitude of species in either a estuary or open ocean. The open ocean gill nets are huge, drift with marker buoys and radar reflectors to find them later, set for around 24 hours and very indiscriminate. They also get lost sometimes due to storm damage or shipping running over the nets. The lost nets fish until they totally collapse from decay, and that can take a decade or so with modern materials.

 

[cortez marine]

In Baja, I have seen sperm whales fouled in gillnets and run aground.
Drowned sea turtles are a common sight.
My goodness, if people had an inking of the collateral damage food fishing often does, they would perhaps develop a sense of perpective about the collateral damage the aquarium trade does.
Food fish collateral damage can be horrific and shrimping a notch above that!
Steve

 

[thebanker]

Are there laws in place so that net manufacturers use materials that are ultimately biodegradable?