Reply, To Kalk: Where do you get off concluding that collecting bangaii cardinals is sustainable? I read the article in TFH and the authors of the article concluded that the present level of harvest was unsustainable. As a fisheries scientist who has done stock assessments, most populations might be sustainably harvested at 15-20% per year, not by 50%. Bangaii cardinals have a low fecundity as you know. So this adds to the concerns of potential overharvest.
Similarly, you keep claiming that the reports by Dr. Elizabeth Woods claim present marine ornamental fish harvesting (without cyanide) is sustainable. I obtained the summary of the Woods 2001 report (still unpublished as far as I know). It concludes that the present levels of harvest of marine ornamentals is cause for concern (e.g., unsustainable).
So where and how do you reach your conclusions? The problems are many. Cyanide is a big problem, but so is the fact that there are too many collectors (even if they use nets) in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Hawaii. I agree that we both need to start our discussions on this with good data (that in some cases does not exist). I would not start with the unsubstantiated claim that the "only problem is cyanide" or that marine collecting is "sustainable". Prove it if you can with direct quotes from reports that are publicly available.
Peter Rubec