The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0333.162 2010-2012Murashige, Laura From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Collecting bill September 2011... COUNTY CLERK COUNTY (IF 4AWA11 Matthew Ross [matt.htfa @gmail.com] zn11 OCT —4 AM $: 1 9 Monday, October 03, 2011 10:30 PM counciltestimony @co.hawaii. hi. us Testimony from Dr. Andrew Rossiter in opposition to Resolution 130 -11, for Oct. 5 council meeting Collecting bill September 2011.doc I was asked to forward this to the county council by Dr. Andrew Rossiter from the Waikiki Aquarium. The attached file is testimony in opposition to Resolution 130 -11, relating to aquarium fish, at the Oct. 5 county council meeting. Forwarded message From: Andrew Rossiter <andrewro @hawaii.edu> Date: Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:35 PM Subject: Fish collecting bill - Big Island To: Matthew Ross <matt.htfa @gmail.com >, Matthew M Ross <rossmatt @hawaii.edu >, "John E. Randall" <jackr @hawaii.rr.com >, Brian R Bowen <bbowen @hawaii.edu> Matt, Here's my 2c worth... Please submit as is. Thanks! Andy 1 Comm. No. Ref. To: Arose 3.l4Z Ref. Date naa_5 2011 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