from Coral Magazine:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Bills Call for Total Ban on Hawaiian Fishery
Open Season on Marinelife Collectors in the Hawaiian Islands in 2012
By Ret Talbot
January 19, 2012
The State of Hawaii’s twenty-sixth legislature is open for business for the new year, and, dismaying to many scientists and marinelife collectors in the state, there are a total of five new measures that have been introduced seeking to ban outright or further regulate the marine aquarium trade in Hawaii.
It is anticipated that several more measures will be introduced before the cut-off date next week. In addition to the new measures, there are at least seven aquarium-related bills re-introduced automatically from last year’s session. In short, it will be a busy season for people on both sides of the marine aquarium fishery debate in Hawaii, and it has never been a more important time to be educated on the issues.
Not a Surprise
The introduction of certain measures like Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 1 (SCR 1) and Senate Resolution No. 2 (SR 2), both introduced on January 18th, is no surprise and does not indicate any documented change in the fishery. The introduction of these two resolutions—as well as two of the other three measures introduced yesterday—was assured when Kauai attached an anti-aquarium trade resolution to its County Package in December of last year.
At that time, and as reported by CORAL, Kauai passed a resolution nearly identical to Big Island’s October resolution urging the State to ban the aquarium trade. As such, both SCR 1 and SR 2 are essentially identical to the Kauai and Big Island resolutions.
At their collective heart, these resolutions, led by dive industry veterans Robert "Snorkle Bob" Wintner (right) and Rene Umberger (below), claim “Hawaii’s indigenous and endemic aquatic species are being devastated by collection for aquarium purposes.”
The Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), the state agency charged with managing fisheries, disagreed with this statement when testimony was given in opposition to the Big Island resolution seeking to ban the trade last October, and they disagree with it today. DLNR maintains the data actually shows a trend toward sustainability, and while DLNR is currently working on rules packages that will further regulate both the Oahu and the West Hawaii marine aquarium fisheries, the agency contends a statewide ban is unwarranted.
DLNR Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) aquatic biologist Dr. William Walsh stated in testimony last October responding to the allegations of devastation, “This is not devastation.” Walsh was speaking specifically to the marine aquarium fishery in West Hawaii, which is by far the largest aquarium fishery in the State.
It is also one of the most studied fisheries statewide. Walsh and his colleagues, as well as independent researchers, believe there is no credible scientific data showing a total ban on Hawaii’s marine aquarium fishery is warranted at this time. “We know a lot about what’s happening out there [in the fishery],” says Walsh, who believes whatever is ultimately decided regarding the aquarium fishery will have wider repercussions in other fisheries. “If we can’t successfully manage the aquarium fishery,” Walsh asks, “what hope is there for management of our other fisheries here in Hawaii?”
Trade Opponents Cry "Unsustainable" and "Wildlife Trafficking
Of course many anti-trade activists do not believe the aquarium fishery is being managed sustainably, and they have successfully taken that message to the County Councils in the past year. Some individuals closely watching the County Councils’ deliberation over the aquarium issue expressed surprise that, at least on Big Island, emotion and anecdotal testimony appeared to trump the State’s data, especially since the same County Council had passed a resolution “recognizing that effective management of the West Hawaii aquarium industry can be achieved through several different management approaches.”
In at least one situation, a councilmember voting in favor of the ban said he did not believe the aquarium issue was a “resource issue,” and he said he trusted the State’s data showing sustainability—yet he voted for the resolution.
In the case of Kauai, current fishery data was neither solicited from the State nor presented by the State prior to the Council’s vote. A councilmember who voted in favor of Kauai’s resolution to ban the trade told CORAL at the time that there would be plenty of time to look at the data once the measure reached the Legislature.
Nonetheless, anti-trade activists are encouraged by what they refer to as “momentum against the trade.” “By now everyone knows that coral reefs are the world’s most endangered ecosystems,” says Rene Umberger of the anti-trade group For the Fishes.
“Hawaii is not a Third World country needing to exploit resources, regardless of costs, and it’s time to stop acting like one. SCR 1 and various measures proposed to ban or restrict the trade are responses to this fact, as well as a simple cost-benefit analysis showing the true value of Hawaii’s coral reef wildlife.” Umberger, who interprets the data differently and who helped craft the language behind resolutions like SCR 1, believes 2012 “is going to be a very good year for the fishes.”
Some anti-trade activists are not particularly concerned with the data at all, and they simply scoff at the word sustainability used in the context of the marine aquarium fishery. “Trafficking in marine wildlife for the pet trade cannot be justified with a buzz word,” says Robert Wintner, longtime anti-trade activist and owner of Snorkel Bob’s, which rents snorkeling gear to tourists. Wintner claims “sustainability is as nebulous as ‘virtue’ at a debutante ball.” His argument against the trade, while at times referencing data, is most accurately a moral and ethical argument against keeping animals in aquaria. As such, he not only refuses to discuss sustainable aquarium fisheries, but he also rebuffs “the ‘f’ word” altogether.