HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0345.014 2010-2012County of Hawaii County Council
Hearing on Resolution 14011
Council Members:
Yesterday, I presented testimony from Dr. John Randall. Dr.
Randall has authored over 400 peer reviewed papers that have
been published on reef fish. He is THE expert the experts go to on
issues involving reef fish.
With me today are some of the many volumes he has written
regarding reef fish. In the past 50 years of his career, he has
discovered and named more species of reef fish than anyone in
history. He is an utmost authority and his recommendations must
not be taken lightly. He absolutely knows of what he speaks. How
can any of you sitting on this council this morning continue to
ignore the science and on what basis?
Dr. Walsh, our resident PHD at our local DAR office, has also
stated unequivocally that the fisheries is sustainable and is being
properly managed. All recent reports to DLNR reflect and support
this position. Again, how can you continue to ignore the
science and these experts?
Comm. No.3 443.1 4
Ref. To: Irrremeip tintYLLZ 1
Ref. Date SEP 2 1 2011
Dr. Andrew Rossiter, PHD., director of the Waikiki Aquarium and
professor at the department of Zoology at U H Manoa whose full
testimony I have provided to each of you today makes the
following points.
>There is no scientific evidence to support the contention that
"devastating" declines in fish populations have occurred.
>The use of lay nets is likely having a much greater effect on the
fish populations than collecting because lay netting is unselective,
catching all fish species present whether desired or not. Fish are
usually severely injured or die when caught in this net, greatly
reducing and removing adult breeding fishes.
>Aquarium collecting focuses on juvenile reef fishes, not breeding
size adults. Numbers removed by collectors of juveniles are an
"infinitesimally small fraction of those present at any given time ".
He goes on to say that factors such as disease and predation are far
more important and result in only a fraction of a percent of
juveniles ever reaching breeding size.
>Dr. Rossiter takes great issue with the claim that pelagic fish are
somehow related to reef aquatic life and the algae they eat as
suggested by this resolution. Larger pelagic (offshore) predators
feed on other pelagic (offshore) fish and have no contact
whatsoever with the reef community. This assertion is biologically
incorrect.
>Overgrowth of corals by algae in most cases is attributable to
increased nutrient loading from land based runoff, allowing it to
run rampant and grow at a rate that grazing by herbivores cannot
control.
Dr. Rossiter concludes by stating that the "evidence" used to
support this resolution is not factual. Statements based on
historical perspectives MUST be based upon real numbers and not
just on unfounded perceptions or on sentiment.
He concludes by restating his oppositon to this bill and urging that
it is not passed.
In conclusion, not one of our Hawaii PHD's whom are the most
qualified to have an opinion support this resolution. In fact, they
have found serious fault with its assertions and claims that have no
basis in fact or science.
1 urge you to kill this legislation.
Judith Perino
73 -4492 Kohanaiki Rd.
Kailua Kona
Written Testimony of Dr. ANDREW ROSSITER
I thank you for this opportunity to present testimony to you today, and must apologise
for being unable to be here and do so in person.
My name is Andrew Rossiter, and I am Executive Director of Waikiki Aquarium, the
State Aquarium of Hawaii. I am also a professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa,
and have over 30 years experience of professional university -level research on, and
teaching about, fish ecology, behavior and evolution.
At the outset you might well ask — with justification, I might add - what on earth
someone from Oahu is doing `interfering' in the affairs of the Big Island! I apologise if
this perception troubles you, and assure you that the issue you are considering today
has implications that extend well beyond the shores of the Big Island.
I would like to register my strong opposition to the amendment being considered today
that seeks to ban the sale and collection of most living marine fishes for aquarium
purposes. My reasons for doing so are not based upon any self interest, but because
the arguments presented therein to justify the bill are, in most cases, purely anecdotal
and not supported by solid scientific evidence, or are downright wrong.
WHEREAS the aquatic life of the reefs within the State of Hawaii are being
devastated by the collection of reef fish and other aquatic life especially native
fish species
First, the sentence does not make sense. Essentially it says that, "Reef fishes are
being collected in Hawaii, especially Hawaiian reef fishes ".
Second, there is no scientific evidence to support the contention that 'devastating'
declines in fish populations have occurred, and that aquarium collecting is the sole
cause of this decline. There is a paucity of rigorous scientific data on which to point the
finger exclusively at professional aquarium collectors, and to single out them, alone, as
being responsible is, quite frankly, somewhat disingenuous.
Instead, the use of lay nets is likely having a much more devastating effect on the fish
populations in any area where used. Lay netting is unselective, catching all fish species
present, whether desired or not; it is usually severely injurious or lethal to those fishes
caught; and it removes adult breeding fishes — the source of future generations - unlike
aquarium collecting which 'focuses on juvenile reef fish'. Just why lay netting has been
ignored as a factor in the depletion of fish populations is disturbing.
WHEREAS despite the provisions set forth in Section 188F 4 Hawaii Revised
Statutes West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area Plan, scientific
research proves that collection of reef fish diminishes the number of fish
reaching reproductive age thereby reducing the number of adult fish contributing
to the genetic pool and that while some of our reef fish are increasing specific
species have not increased in numbers
First, I would like to note that fish do not reach a breeding 'age', they reach a
breeding 'size'.
Second, aquarium collecting focuses on juvenile reef fishes, not breeding size adults.
Overall, the numbers of juveniles removed by collectors are an infinitesimally small
fraction of those present at any given time. In terms of these removed fishes
contributing to the population as breeders, numbers -wise they are exceedingly
insignificant. Natural factors such as disease, predation and completion are far more
important and result in only a fraction of a percent of juveniles ever reach breeding size.
Just as it is technically correct to state that by removing a bucket of water from ocean
you have made it shallower, it is also correct to state that the collection of reef fishes
diminishes the number reaching breeding size. And, likewise, it is somewhat vacuous
to imply that this effect is important or even noticeable.
The removal of fishes of breeding size is an altogether different matter. In this regard, it
is the use of lay nets is likely having a much more devastating effect on reef fish
populations in any area where used. Lay netting is unselective, catching all fish species
present, whether desired or not; it is usually severely injurious or lethal to those fishes
caught; and it removes adult breeding fishes — the source of future generations. The
singling out in this bill of fish collection and the ignoring of lay netting as a key factor in
the depletion of reef fishes is baffling.
WHEREAS in an economy based on tourism the continued protection of our reefs
and
its inhabitants increases the enhancement of the tourist experience bringing
millions of dollars into the State coffers and
WHEREAS the Council of the County of Hawaii urges the State Legislature to
protect our reefs and its aquatic life and promote increasing reef fish population
that will continue to attract and sustain the tourist industry of our State by
prohibiting the sale of aquatic life to the aquarium trade in the State of Hawaii
I would respectfully suggest that when considering measures designed to protect
and conserve the ecology and biodiversity of Hawaii's reef ecosystems, it is
inappropriate and somewhat unethical to give greater weight to the interests of one
commercially motivated enterprise (marine tourism) over another commercially
motivated enterprise (aquarium collecting).
It is entirely possible that frequent disturbance by marine tourist divers entering fish
habitats, and the incidental damage done to corals during such dives, has also
contributed to a decrease in fishes, corals and other invertebrates at popular reefs in
Hawaii. This is well documented for Eilat (Israel) and Ras Muhammad (Egypt) in the
Red Sea and at several sites on Australia's Great Barrier Reef.
WHEREAS the aquatic life of the reef protects the reef from being overgrown by
algae and also provides food for larger pelagic fish which in turn sustain humans
with food supplies
Firstly, this statement is biologically incorrect. Larger pelagic (offshore) predators
feed on pelagic fishes. They have almost no contact whatsoever with the reef
community.
Secondly, overgrowth of corals by algae is in most cases attributable to increased
nutrient loading from landbased runoff, which fertilizes the algae, allowing it to run
rampant and grow at a rate that grazing by herbivores cannot control.
No person shall puncture the swim bladder or clip the fins of marine or
freshwater fish taken for aquarium purposes
The use of fin clips is an internationally recognized method to obtain tissue
samples for use in DNA -based studies of fish populations. It is used routinely by
biologists throughout the world because (a) it is effective, (b) it does not harm the fish,
and (c) the alternative would be to kill the fish and use the body for DNA analysis. Far
better, I think, to carefully snip off a small piece of fin and let the fish swim away with no
lasting damage - just like a fingernail, the fin grows back over time.
Bringing a fish to the surface from depths requires piercing of the swim bladder with a
hypodermic needle. This is done routinely, and causes as much discomfort to the fish
as a flu shot in the arm at the hospital. To not do this would certainly mean the fish
would die. Instead, some fish brought from great depths and treated in this manner are
on now display at the Waikiki Aquarium 20 or more years after capture.
Any aquatic life collected for aquarium purposes shall be handled in a humane
manner.
In the context of professional fish collectors, this requirement seems wholly
redundant. In my experience, fish collectors show the utmost attention and care in their
handling of the fishes they catch. After all, their livelihood depends on it — who in their
right mind would buy a damaged, unhealthy or dead fish from them!
Scientific studies have shown that many species of fish are not recovering from
the heavy collection of aquatic life even though 30 of the reef in West Hawaii is in
Fish Replenishment Areas
If fish populations are not recovering in areas where fish collection is not allowed,
it is very clear evidence that fish collecting is not to blame.
Instead, it is essential to focus attention on the effects of other possible factors,
including sedimentation, pollution, coral damage by snorkelers and divers, fish removal
by lay netting, etc.
The inhumane method of capture and bringing such aquatic to the surface needs
to be stopped.
Fish are captured by gently netting them — the collector wants the fish with no
stress or damage from capture. I fail to see how this is 'inhumane'.
In summary, the `evidence' used to support this bill is not factual, but in the form of
sentiments along the lines of, 'The reefs have changed for the worse over the past 30
years ", and The number of fishes has decreased markedly', and 'The aquarium trade is
to blame'. Identical opinions have been voiced regarding Oahu's reefs. However, such
statements based on historical perspectives must be based upon real numbers, and not
just on unfounded perceptions or on sentiment.
Unfortunately, with the exception of a single study at the Kona Coast, Big Island, there
is an almost total lack of rigorous long -term scientific data on reef fish populations within
the entire State of Hawaii. To the best of my knowledge, there have been no scientific
studies whatsoever done on reef fish populations elsewhere. Not having this data
makes it almost impossible to arrive at credible decisions regarding management or
protection of the reef ecosystem. The bill is founded upon a poor understanding of fish
biology and reef ecology, and while perhaps well intentioned, is misguided and
completely misses the point.
I thank you for the opportunity to comment, and conclude by restating my opposition to
this bill, and urging that it is not passed out of committee.
Dr Andrew Rossiter
Director of Waikiki Aquarium
Professor, Department of Zoology
University of Hawaii at Manoa