CNN Marine Ornamental Fish Story from Hawaii

[Kalkbreath]

Bleach, cyanide and blast fishing are rampent in the food fish trade. It takes all day to get a fish out of a reef tank , just think of how hard it would be on the reef. Because with sea food you can use extreme concentrations of poison and it matters not to the food fishermen or the end consumer who eat food fish because dead fish are always eaten" DEAD"
Pet fish buyers are a little more picky about whether their fish are dead when they buy them. You cant collect fish alive with high concentrations of any poison.unlike cyanide, even a little bleach burns the gills to the point that the fish is sick for days after and usualy dies from secondary infection. bleach fishing might be used sparingly as a last resort on big fish only.
The boat would need to have contained many bottles of bleach to supply a day of bleach fishing they way the author is insinuating ........... its more likely they use the bottle as a back up for the chance a really rare angel fish or such was seen ducking into structure. then the bottle is used to scare the fish out.The main fish species in demand from HI are very easy to collect using barrier nets. The idea that bleach is used as the main tool in MO fishing that day is silly. One squirt bottle of bleach would not last long enough to collect very many fish. Again the questions are

What nationality were these nameless fishermen. (Philippino habit ?)

What species of fish did they collect. ("reef fish" collected on a reef is a silly term") food fish are reef fish as well.

The white reef areas could not have been cause by that days fishing. ( Maybe brown gooey reef)

And what reason do the authors think a connection to the MO industry is in order?

Without these questions answered the event had no place being included in a MO industry attack ad.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, Answering a question with more questions? Methinks you are blowing smokeagain. Nice try Kalk. You have no credability.

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

Im sorry what was your question?
if this CNN artical is the first time the bleach fishing suggestion has been presented to you and you like me think wide spread bleach fishing by the MO industry is a difficult idea to swallow, then why was you criticizm of the CNN bleach bottle insinuation absent?
Senator Case has heard examples where the MO industry uses blast fishing and dredging to collect pet fish. Why then are you so surprised that I find most of what these anti industry reporters spew forth is silly propaganda?

 

[mkirda]

It takes all day to get a fish out of a reef tank , just think of how hard it would be on the reef.

I dunno Steve... Does this one rank in the top Ten most uninformed Kalk posts? Sure seems like it...

Kalk, it isn't that hard catching an awful lot of species. Just because you haven't figured it out yet doesn't mean an awful lot of collectors that do this day in and day out for a living for the past two or three decades haven't perfected the techniques needed to catch marine ornamentals on the reef with nets efficiently.

Maybe if you actually went diving with some collectors in the Philippines or Indonesia, you'd actually understand something that you keep prattling on about. Maybe.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk,

None o fthe articles cited by me or posted by Mike King had an anti aguarium trade stance. The one posted by Mike King did not even mention the use of bleach for fishing (chlorox). My posting stated that chlorox was being used to catch certain food fishes for human consumption (for expatriate Japanese in Hawaii).

You stated chlorox was being used to capture MAF ALIVE. My question was: IS THIS TRUE OR DID YOU MAKE IT UP?

Peter Rubec

 

[mkirda]

Why then are you so surprised that I find most of what these anti industry reporters spew forth is silly propaganda?

If someone was caught and found guilty for bleach fishing, were they just pawns in this propaganda too? Were they just washing their socks between dives, Kalk?

You keep referring back to unrelated things, i.e. Ed Case. Did Ed Case write the CNN article? Was Ed Case even mentioned?

For a second time, you asserted that Hawaiian fish populations have remained constant for decades, despite fishing pressures.
WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE TO BACK THAT UP?

Did you ever bother contacting the reporter, and the scientists he/she interviewed, to voice your concerns with the article? What did they say?

To believe in your world view, a CNN reporter has decided to target the hobby, had access to the raw data of decades of research of marine science and was able to manipulate it without the scientists knowing. He was able to get huge areas of MPAs created, all with the intent of writing this article.

This sounds like one of the more far-out X-Files plots, Scully. I mean, Kalk.

Patently ridiculous.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[MandarinFish]

silly propaganda

When you actually spend time in Hawaiian reefs and study fish populations, your arguments will carry more strength.

The decimation of those populations of yellow tangs and flame angels off the Big Island is legitimate and shows the hobby's need for reform. The fish are virtually nonexistent in open catch zones now.

The hobby needs reform before it's forced from the outside, that's all. The depopulation of Hawaiian species is documented, and cannot continue unabated.

My friends are in those reefs every day, counting every day, charting and documenting what is happening. They make a very different case from you, Kalk, but they are actually conducting the scientific statistical analysis.

Hawaiian fish are in danger. If you want me to arrange to have UH divers take you out, I will help you to understand.

 

[PeterIMA]

The original posting by Mike King (the CNN article) did criticise the collection practices of MAF collectors in Hawaii. The last poster stated he felt the criticisms were justified (not hype).

My comments about the use of bleach were about its use by fishermen catching food fishes. As far as I know, the MAF collectors do not use bleach. But, Kalk stated that MAF collectors do use bleach (clorox). In either case (commercial fishing or MAF collecting), the use of toxic chemicals (like cyanide and clorox) is unacceptable, since it destoys the coral reefs which the fish inhabit. Overcollecting (the point of the CNN article) by the MAF collectors also appears to be happening and needs to be regulated.

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

I still have yet to sea any data to support the authors fears. A dive operator claiming that "its just not as prettyout on the reefs as it once was " hardly establishes how the MO collectors over collection of yellow tangs can be attributed for the entire reef looking " less pretty".
Studies like the ones used by this Author and others like it have suggested that less MO targeted fish are found in the collection zones then are found in the sanctuaries.Sure thats true, its because just like in the Florida Keys Marine sactuary....the best reefs are placed under protection and the less ideal habitats are left as municipal use areas.( like MO collecting, spear fishing , anglers and net fishing) These prime reefs habitats have always had more fish, even before mankind started fishing. Nicer reefs are better suited habbitats.
Its interesting to note that in the collection areas, its not only are the yellow tangs in short supply......But the numbers of most other fish species are lower as well. You would think over collecting yellow tangs would yield more food and territory for ugly tangs species( the types of fish we as a hobby dont collect) and that with the MO industry only collecting six or so species in any great number , that the remaining three to four hundred fish species would actauly respond varoribly with less competition or at least remain uneffected by the removal of yellow tangs, Naescos , etc.! However fish levels in the collection areas are lower for other species too!. Is it the industry or a greater force to blame for so few the brown grunts swimming around the beaches of Kona coast?
Its a poor quality scientist who doesn't point issues like theses out to the reader.
Its also quite easy to pick and choose when and where to conduct the study. Schools of Yellow tangs roam around spending a day or two as ahuge group on one reef area....... then the entire school of fish leave and swim away together some times many miles away to graze on another reef. One day there will be thousands of plant eating fish on a certain reef, then having cleaned the area free of excess algae........the next morning there all gone. To really conduct a truthful study, the entire coastline would need to be examined within a few day period. That way the total number of fish living in the region could be assessed. Other wise its too easy to wait until the conditions are perfect(like right after the fish leave) for whatever the data takers slant is and perhaps personal agenda. Dana Riddle and I once spoke about the interesting paradox in having less tiny reef fish on certain protected reefs and more tiny reef fish in the municiple waters? Seems The Game and Spear fishermen keep the grouper levels lower in areas that fishing is allowed. Thus the tiny fish are not eaten as often with less large predators hunting them down. It was documented that one of the newly designated protected sanctuaries was experiencing a decreasing fish count , due to the large number of groupers and other top level predators returning to the areas now that fishing pressures had ceased.
Seems too often that scientists omit the most obvious conflicting data to..........wonder why?

 

[Kalkbreath]

silly propaganda

When you actually spend time in Hawaiian reefs and study fish populations, your arguments will carry more strength.

The decimation of those populations of yellow tangs and flame angels off the Big Island is legitimate and shows the hobby's need for reform. The fish are virtually nonexistent in open catch zones now.

The hobby needs reform before it's forced from the outside, that's all. The depopulation of Hawaiian species is documented, and cannot continue unabated.

My friends are in those reefs every day, counting every day, charting and documenting what is happening. They make a very different case from you, Kalk, but they are actually conducting the scientific statistical analysis.

Hawaiian fish are in danger. If you want me to arrange to have UH divers take you out, I will help you to understand.

Explain to the readers how removing too many yellow tangs has the effect of causing other fish species to decrease in number as well? The fish populations of all fish species may be decreasing along the Kona coast. But so too are fish populations off California, South Carolina,Texas and so forth. Do you blame those fish declines in other states on the collection of yellow tangs in Hawaii as well? Acanthurus nigricans ,convict tang and many other species of tangs are not collected very often for the trade. why then are these fish species also in low numbers off the Kona coast?
The MO industry likes to point out that the Hawaiin fish populations were in decline thirty years before the trade started collecting yellow tangs or any pet fish. In the 1950s this grouper was introduced to the Hawaiin reefs to suppliment the declining native populations.
Roi, known scientifically as Cephalopholis argus, has long been perceived as diminishing native reef fish populations.
At
public meetings, dive tour operators, as well as spear and shoreline fishermen regularly talk of witnessing roi feeding on
yellow tang, lionfish or herbivorous species. Over half of aquarium fishermen surveyed in 2002 cited roi as one of the
major threats to West Hawaii’s reefs and fauna.
Although roi were originally introduced to reverse declining trends in Hawaii’s game and food fish, the state’s recreational
fishermen now avoid roi because of its reputation for being more ciguatoxic than native reef fish. Due to the lack of
fishing pressure and absence of native predators, roi have become a common sight.
It has been estimated that there are anywhere form several million of these fish to hundreds of millions (now fifty years later) of these tang eating fish swimming and eating reef fish uncontested. The pet industry collects less then half a million yellow tangs per year. It may actually only be around 100,000. fish. If these non native groupers eat only one yellow tang per year........thats easily forty times more yellow tangs removed from the hawaiin reefs then the pet fish trade.

:wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

Actually, Kalk's last several postings make a lot of sense. It is difficult to discuss an issue without knowing who is collecting the data and what type of data. Assuming it is similar to or the same data collected by Tissot and Hallacher that we discussed about a year and a half ago, I would agree with Kalk that declines of fish communities that include species NOT harvested by the MAF collectors, would indicate that there is more to the problem than simply overcollection of MAF species.

Several hypotheses have been presented in this thread:

1) Rubec has proposed that there is habitat degredation due to the use of bleach (Clorox) by collectors of food fishes.

2) Kalk has proposed that an introduced grouper (Cephalopholis argus) may have decimated MAF numbers (and species?) because it is not harvested (because it is ciguatoxic).

Are there any other hypotheses to explain the facts?

However, I am not sure we have seen the actual data. Would the person who has "friends in Hawaii" doing underwater surveys, please provide more information about what kinds of declines are being documented, what underwater survey methods are being applied etc.?

Peter Rubec, Ph.D.

Peter Rubec

 

[mkirda]

I still have yet to sea any data to support the authors fears. {snip}

Have you contacted the author(s) yet?

I've given you the name of the gentleman whose work so much of this is based on. You got a brain, I've pointed out that Google brings up his contact info... What more do you want?

It seems like it is a peculiarly American trait to prattle on incessantly about that which you are least informed...

There are two subjects you need to bone up on, Kalk. One is the interconnectedness of the food web. This is incredibly important, and it is also important to understand that removal of even one of the species can have unanticipated effects, just as additions of a single species can have devasting effects overall. For some things, there are pretty good understandings of what goes on... I.E. Removal of sharks from the reef have some pretty dramatic effects on the reef overall. Contrary to what you might think, the evidence shows that removal of this top-level predator actually lowers the overall reef carrying capacity, leading to LOWER fish counts overall. The reef ecosystem overall is harmed. There are several studies that point this out, and I've pointed out at least one of these to you in the past. Removal of the next level of predators, grouper and the like by fishing pressures have similar cascading effects down the trophic ladder. How the reef reacts to these are less well understood because it is nearly impossible to find reefs anymore where studies could be done.

Second would be just general Coral Reef Ecology- That much is clear from several of your recent postings. Try this book: Sorokin, Yuri. Coral Reef Ecology. Berlin; New York, NY: Springer, 1993. IZ&G QH541.5 .C7 S66 1993, or this one: Birkeland, Charles. Life and Death of Coral Reefs. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1997. Main QH541.5 .C7 L54 1997.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[mkirda]

2) Kalk has proposed that an introduced grouper (Cephalopholis argus) may have decimated MAF numbers (and species?) because it is not harvested (because it is ciguatoxic).

Peter,

Given what you know about grouper spawning, does this even make sense, Peter? If Hawaii wanted to get rid of this grouper, you know what they would need to do...

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Kalkbreath]

Again Mike, its the author who needs to publish complete works. Its his place to do so not mine. These writers are like School teachers, they owe it to the students to provide multiple points of view. not single minded sound bites.
Sound bites are the norm today. Let the snippet do the damage and shape the mind set of the reader. The Authors know that very few of the intended audience are going to substantiate the authors view point.
Take the Koran down the toilet story.
It was never substantiated in the least bit, but its been forever embedded into the mindset of the world as a true event .

 

[PeterIMA]

<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-05.gif>
[Threats: Home]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Alien and Invasive Species]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Fishing Pressure]
Monitoring Aquarium Fish Collection

Viability of Transplanting Herbivorous Fish

Permanent Versus Rotating Closure to Fishing

Habitat Type and Reserve Effectiveness
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/menu_left_submenu-04.gif>
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Water Pollution]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Climatic Impacts]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Nearshore Recreation]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Coral Disease in Hawaii]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-06.gif>
[Fish Disease in Hawaii]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-07.gif>
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-02.gif> [About HCRI-RP] [Call to Action] [Economic Value] [Assessment & Monitoring] [Threats] [Results by Island] [Reports & Publicattions] [Media Center]
[HCRI-RP Home]
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-02.gif>
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-02.gif>
Home: Threats: Fishing Pressure: Monitoring Aquarium Fish Collection <http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-02.gif>
<http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/t-04.gif>

Monitoring Aquarium Fish Collection <http://www.hawaii.edu/ssri/hcri/images/fishing_pressure-01a.gif>
West Hawai`i Aquarium Project (1999-2002)

Dr. Brian Tissot, Principal Investigator
Dr. Bill Walsh, Investigator
Dr. Leon Hallacher, Investigator

Management Issue

There is wide national and international interest in marine protected areas (MPAs) because they benefit fishery populations, protect marine ecosystems, and enhance human activities such as tourism. Few experimental studies, however, have focused on marine reserves because they require rigorous monitoring.

The Hawai`i State Legislature enacted Act 306 in 1998 which established the West Hawai`i Regional Fishery Management Area (WHRFMA). The major intent of the bill was to improve management of fish resources by declaring a minimum of 30% of the west Hawai`i coastline as aquarium Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs), where fish collecting is prohibited. Additional components of the bill specify the designation of no gill netting and no fishing zones. In 1998, the West Hawai`i Fisheries Council proposed the location and size of the nine FRAs in the WHRFMA. A public hearing was held in April 1999 on the management plan developed by the Council. The public hearing was one of the largest ever held in Hawai`i on a natural resource issue and there was overwhelming public support for FRAs. FRAs were closed to aquarium collecting on January 1, 2000. This project began in 1999 to monitor the impact of the management regime instituted in response to Act 306.

Results

Yellow tangs, which account for the majority of collected aquarium fishes on the big island (76% in 2001-2002), significantly increased (51%) in FRAs in 2002 relative to baseline levels in 1999 (prior to reserve establishment). This population growth was higher than increases occurring in areas open to collecting (20%) and previously protected areas (19%). These results are due to high levels of juvenile fish recruitment in west Hawai`i in 2001 and 2002. Moreover, analysis of the spatial distribution of juvenile yellow tangs suggest habitat may be an important factor influencing fish abundance and reserve effectiveness. Clearly greater complexity occurs in these systems than one might have previously considered.

Given the low frequency in which large recruitment events occur in Hawai`i, it will probably be several more years until additional events of sufficient magnitude occur to allow rigorous testing of the effectiveness of the marine reserve network in West Hawai`i for other aquarium fishes.

Management Implications

The State of Hawai`i is evaluating the system of marine protected areas that currently exists in order to develop a process to establish an integrated system of marine protected areas. One of the goals being discussed for the new system is to address the problem of fish stock depletion. The results of this project will help decision-makers evaluate the impact of fishery replenishment areas and demonstrate monitoring techniques that could be used in the new system of marine protected areas.
[Up to Top]

 

[PeterIMA]

I did a google on "Collection Aquarium Fish Hawaii" and was pleased to find numerous reports and powerpoints concerning the monitoring of reef fishes in Hawaii. There were data for almost every Island. The main idea presented as far as MAF Collection is concerned is that MAF populations have increased dramatically in the Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs) where collection of MAF is banned. It seems to be an excellent program and their results are well documented and easily obtained by searching the web.

If this is what Kalk is discussing, it looks like the scientists have the data to prove their point. I interpret that to mean that MAF populations are low in most araeas due to overcollection. Creation of Marine Protected Areas (the FRAs) clearly demonstrate how the fish populations increased in abundance after collecting was banned in 1998.

Kalk, What do you have to say about it? Be specific and use facts not speculations.

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

I would say that the researchers/data collectors finally had a good year. Choosing to release the study now before the population drops again. The first few years seemed to have little positive results with the sactuaries.. Yellow tang populations have had a history of periodic population explosions. I would like to see included in the graph a ten year pre MPA yellow tang population data which if included would show population spikes then as well.The reason yellow tang populations have remained the same for the last ten years is that the breeding stock fish have always been in the northern islands up stream from Kona coast. The entire western side fish populations of the islands is a great big metapopulation.
larvae from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands contribute significantly to stocks in the Main Hawaiian Islands.
Data shows that the Northwestern Hawaiian Island fish are genetically similar to the Main Hawaiian Islands populations. The past few years were good for yellow tang populations in the upper islands also. not because of marine sactuaries hunderds of miles away......., being that the anual algae blooms(like red tides} in the upper islands have not happened recently.This has allowed yellow tang larval to flow down from the upper islands and restock the lower main island.
A one year spike in certain areas does not establish that its do to the sanctuaries.(some sactuaries have less fish now.)
I do find it interesting that the authors of the data have chosen to use the wording...

Most current information, though not complete, suggests substantial increase in all areas

Why the use of data thats not "complete" ? The yet completed data is the single source for the positive findings! If this uncompleted data turns out to have been premature and incorrect .....the entire premise is false!
Again another fine example of "sound bite" journalism. Lets get the word out , and worry about whether its true or not later!
www.advancedaquarist.com%2Fissues%2Fnov2004%2Fmedia.htm

 

[Kalkbreath]

Also I did some Kalkulas........ 150,000 yellow tangs is less then five-hundred fish a day.
From an area 147 miles long. Thats three fish per mile of coast line.
The entire 147 mile Kona coast has on average 15 fish per 100 meters square. (using YOUR friends data) Thats 250,000 fish per square mile! Or 45 million yellow tangs along the Kona coast!
This industry collected 150 thousand fish per year during 2000 to 2003 .
Thats one fish for every 30,000 wild fish swimming about! one linear mile of coast two hundred meters wide holds 30,000 yellow tangs. (using the 15 fish per 100meters square as found in graph #5.
Your really are holding to the claim that removing one fish in every thirty-thousand yellow tangs is having an effect on the metapopulation of the Hawaian Islands! which might hold up to 600,000,000. yellow tangs!
What happens when one grouper eats a yellow tang?
If each day a toplevel predators eat one fish out of the 30,000 yelow tangs its the same impact as our trade! :wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk,
I am attaching the report by Tissot et al. (2003) to NOAA.
I hope that it is not too large to be uploaded.


Peter

 

[PeterIMA]

Here is a summary taken from Tissot et al.'s final report to NOAA submitted in 2004.


Evaluation

Four years after their closure of FRAs there were significant increases in the overall abundance of fishes targeted by collectors, especially the top targeted fish the yellow tang. Overall, four of the nine FRAs in West Hawai`i exhibited significant increases in yellow tangs, indicating the widespread effectiveness of the FRAs to enhance aquarium fish populations. This recovery appears to be associated with strong interannual variation in the recruitment of all fishes in West Hawai?i. This study documented high temporal variation in recruitment of reef fishes in Hawai?i, a similar result to that found by Walsh (1987) over a five-year period. Thus, although FRAs showed significant recovery in some species after only three years, the frequency of recruitment of protected species is likely to be an important factor determining the recovery of other species in reserves.

The results of this study demonstrate the MPAs can effectively promote recovery of fish stocks depleted by fishing pressures in Hawai?i, without significant declines outside of reserves. Within three years two species, the yellow tang and Potter?s angelfish, both reduced by over 40% prior to protection, displayed significant increases inside FRAs relative to reference areas. Yellow tangs, which accounts for over 80% of the aquarium industry in west Hawai?i, increased in density 73% between 1999 and 2003, or about 10.4 fish/100m2.

An examination of multiple factors associated with effective FRAs indicates that habitat, the size of FRAs, and the density of adult fishes are associated with significant recovery of fish stocks. These results should be explored further in others species and the results can be used to develop design criteria for creating new, effective FRAs in Hawaii and elsewhere in the tropical Pacific.

Based on these results it would prudent to establish additional reserves throughout Hawai?i as a precautionary measure against overuse of fishery resources. Currently, less than 1% of the main Hawaiian islands is protected by reserves (Clark and Gulko 1999). Further, as recruitment appears to be an important mechanism influencing the replenishment of nearshore populations, we also advocate for increased monitoring of recruitment and nearshore oceanography to help better understand the dynamics of recruitment processes.
Dissemination of Project Results

Tissot, B. N. and L. E. Hallacher. 2003.. Effects of aquarium collectors on reef fishes in Kona, Hawai'i. Conservation Biology 17(6): 1759-1768.

Tissot, Brian, William Walsh and Leon Hallacher. 2004. Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Marine Protected Area Network in West Hawaii to Increase the Productivity of an Aquarium Fishery.. Pacific Science (In Press)

Brown, E., E. Cox, P. Jokiel, K. Rodgers, W. Smith, B. Tissot, S. Coles and J. Hultquist. submitted Development of benthic sampling methods for the Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) in Hawai`i. Pacific Science (In Press)

Tissot, Brian. 2004. Integral Marine Ecology: Community-Based Fishery Management in Hawai`i. World Futures: Journal of General Evolution (in press)

Tissot, B. N., W. Integral Ecology: A new tool for fishery management. Western Society of Naturalists, Monterey, CA. (November 2003)

Ortiz, D. Tissot, B. N., W, J,. Walsh and L. E. Hallacher. Size variation in aquarium fishes in an MPA network in Hawai?i. Western Society of Naturalists, Monterey, CA. (November 2003)

·