HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0031.001 2014-2016Greggor Ilagan
Council Member
District 4 — Puna Makai
MEMORANDUM
HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL
25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720
DATE: February 11, 2015
TO: Dru Kanuha, Chair
and Members of the Hawaii County Council
FROM: Greggor Ilagan, Council Member
P/AWESG
WOro c
Office: (808) 965-2712
Fax: (808) 965-2707
Email: gilagan@hawaiicountv.gov
SUBJECT: Re: Comm. No. 31; Requests a presentation by Dr. Bill Walsh, aquatic biologist
for the Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Aquatic
Resources, on the sustainability of aquarium life.
Attached is a Report on the Findings and Recommendations of Effectiveness of the West Hawaii
Regional Fishery Management Area, which is prepared by the Department of Land and Natural
Resources with Dr. Bill Walsh as its author.
Please make this report available to the members of the Agriculture, Water and Energy
Sustainability Committee for the meeting on February 17, 2015.
GI/ps
Att.
Hawaii County Is an Equal Opportunity Provider And Employer
Comm. No
Ref. To:W Sj a —
Ref. Dote FEB 1 7 201 ___-
Report to the Thirtieth Legislature
2015 Regular Session
Report on the Findings and Recommendations of Effectiveness of
the West Hawai'i Regional Fishery Management Area
Prepared by
Department of Land and Natural Resources
State of Hawai'i
in response to
Section 188F-5, Hawai'i Revised Statutes
December 2014
PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
This report is submitted in compliance with Act 306, SLH 1998, "Relating to the West Hawaii
Regional Fishery Management Area" and subsequently established as Chapter 188F, Hawaii
Revised Statutes (HRS). This Statute requires a review of the effectiveness of the West Hawai'i
Regional Fishery Management Area be conducted every five years by the Department of Land
and Natural Resources (DLNR), in cooperation with the University of Hawaii (§ 188F-5 HRS).
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area (WHRFMA) was created by Legislative
Act 306 (1998) largely in response to longstanding and widespread conflict surrounding
commercial aquarium collecting. The Act's requirement for `substantive' community input in
management decisions has been described as `revolutionary.'
In order to accomplish the mandates of Act 306, a community advisory group, the West Hawaii
Fishery Council (WHFC) was convened by the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) in 1998. .
The first accomplishment of the WHFC was the designation of a network of nine no aquarium
collecting- Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs), comprising 35.2% of the coastline.
In addition to the development of the FRA network the WHFC has been successful in achieving
a number of other notable management actions including lay gill net rules, species of special
concern (e.g. sharks/rays) protection, a ban on SCUBA spearfishing and further comprehensive
management of the aquarium fishery.
Several other West Hawaii initiatives are in the works including no -take Fish Reserves and
establishment of a limited entry commercial aquarium fishery. Based on over a decade and a
half of experience, the WHFC has been found to be a model system for the resolution of issues
surrounding reef fisheries resources.
The Hawaii marine aquarium fishery is currently the most economically valuable commercial
inshore fishery in the State with FY 2014 reported landings greater than $2.3 million.
The West Hawai'i aquarium fishery has undergone substantial and sustained expansion over the
past 38 years. Total catch and value have increased by 22% and 45% respectively since FY
2000. Approximately 70% of the fish caught in the State and 67% of value presently comes
from West Hawaii.
Concerns over continued expansion of the aquarium fishery and harvesting effects in the open
areas prompted DLNR to establish in 2013 a `White List' of 40 species which can be taken by
aquarium fishers. All other species of fish and invertebrates are off limits.
Of the 40 collected aquarium species, Yellow Tang comprise 84.3% of the total and Kole 8.3%.
Since the FRAs were established the value of Yellow Tang has increased 79% while Kole have
increased 10%.
2010 and 2014 Hawai'i island aquarium catch report validation did not indicate substantial
underreporting of catch by aquarium collectors. Dealer reports of purchases from collectors were
11 % and 40% lower than the number reported sold due to the lack of a Hawaii Administrative
Rule requiring dealer reports.
The West Hawaii Aquarium Project (WHAP) has been monitoring West Hawaii reefs since
1999 and a number of long-term studies extend over multiple decades. Over 16 years of
monitoring, a total of 70 survey divers have conducted over 6,700 transects for the WHAP
project in addition to hundreds of other surveys for related projects. This information is utilized
to monitor the condition of the West Hawai'i's reefs and the impact of aquarium collecting.
The no-aquarium collecting Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs), implemented in 1999, have been
very successful in increasing populations of Yellow Tang (Zebrasoma flavescens) which is the
most heavily targeted aquarium fish accounting for 84% of the total catch. Fifteen years after
closure, the population of Yellow Tang has increased 64.5% in the FRAs while its abundance in
the Open Areas has not declined significantly.
Overall Yellow Tang abundance in the 30'-60' depth range over the entire West Hawaii coast
has increased 58% (over 1.3 million fish) from 1999/2000 to 2012-2013 to a current population
of 3.6 million fish.
Two of three sites at long-term studies in South Kohala and South Kona have found Yellow
Tang populations have increased to levels found over three decades ago before the expansion of
aquarium collecting.
Outward movement of adult Yellow Tang from protected areas into surrounding areas
(`spillover') augments adult stocks in Open Areas up to a kilometer or more away.
There are no significant differences in the abundance of adult Yellow Tang in Open vs. closed
areas in shallow water (10'-20' depths). Total estimated coastwise population of adult Yellow
Tang in this depth range was estimated to be >2.5 million individuals.
West Hawaii had a significantly greater percent change in Yellow Tang density within its
networked MPAs (and Open Areas) as compared to the non-networked sites on Maui. Five of
the 10 most collected aquarium fish in West Hawai'i were significantly more abundant in West
Hawai'i's Open Areas as compared to Maui MPA closed areas.
The FRAs have also been very successful in increasing Kole (Ctenochaetus strigosus)
populations. This species is the second most aquarium collected species, representing 8% of the
total catch. The number of Kole increased significantly in all management areas, including Open
Areas, from 1999/2000 to 2012/2013. Overall Kole abundance in 30'-60' depth range over the
entire West Hawaii coast increased 49% (over 2.1 million fish) during this time period with a
current population of about 6.5 million fish.
Long-term West Hawaii studies have found Kole populations to have decreased from 3 l % in
South Kona to 71 % in South Kohala. Given the length of protection at these sites and the overall
decline in habitat quality and fish populations in South Kohala it seems unlikely that the declines
are due primarily to aquarium collecting.
Comparative surveys utilizing DAR and NOAA data indicate Kole are substantially more
abundant in West Hawaii over most size ranges than in any of the other islands in the Main
Hawaiian Islands or the Northwest Hawaiian Islands.
Commercial aquarium landings of Achilles Tang (Acanthurus achilles), the third most aquarium
collected species, have declined in West Hawai'i over the past two decades in association with a
recent dramatic increase in its value. This is strongly suggestive of declining availaility (i.e.
abundance).
Achilles Tang have declined in FRAs and Open Areas over the last 15 years tempered somewhat
by a slight increase in the last year or two. A similar declining trend is apparent within MPAs
except for the last four years when their numbers have increased. Open Area populations are
higher than FRA (albeit both being low).
Achilles Tang has had low levels of recruitment over the past decade and substantial numbers of
larger fish (i.e. `breeders') are taken for human consumption.
Achilles Tang is the only species on the `White List' which is listed as an "Ecologically
Unsustainable Species" by the Sustainable Aquarium Industry Association (SAIA) and
monitoring data suggest there should be concern for the sustained abundance of this species.
Attempts to institute `Adaptive Management' (i.e. a catch moratorium) both administratively and
legislatively to address such situations as with Achilles Tang have not been successful.
Of the other top 10 collected aquarium species, two species (Forcepsfish — Forcipiger
flavissimus and Potter's Angelfish — Centropyge potteri) increased in one or more of the
management areas while two species (Ornate Wrasse —Halichoeres ornatissimus and Fourspot
Butterflyfish — Chaetodon quadrimaculatus) declined. While the latter two species declined in
the Open Areas, they also declined in one or the other of the protected areas. (FRA or MPA)
suggesting that factors other than aquarium collecting were also affecting their populations.
For 24 other species on the White List, five showed a significant population increase in one or
more of the management areas while 1 I decreased. Of the species which declined, only a single
one - Bird Wrasse (Gomphosus varius) declined exclusively in the Open Areas indicating that
factors other than aquarium collecting were also affecting the populations of the other species.
For the Bird Wrasse, reported annual take is so low and such a minimal percentage of the total
Open Area population (< 0.5%) it's difficult to see how collecting alone could be the cause of
this species' population decline in the Open Areas.
For most of the species on the White List, collecting impact, in terms of the percentage of the
population being removed annually, is relatively low with eight species having single digit
percent catch and 23 species having catch values <1 %.
In terms of the yearly differences in a species' abundance between the Open Areas and the FRAs
six species have been consistently more abundant in the FRAs than in the Open Areas. Eleven
species showed no consistent pattern and 17 species were consistently more abundant in the
Open Areas.
Besides harvest impacts, species abundances change over time due to both extrinsic and intrinsic
factors. This is exemplified by the Saddle Wrasse which underwent significant declines in all
management areas since 1999/2000. This species is consistently more abundant in the Open
Areas than in the FRAs or MPAs.
Of the 40 species on the White List, 11 (27.5%) are considered endemic to Hawai'i. This is just
slightly above the overall average (25%) of Hawaii marine fish endemism. All but one of the
endemic species (Psychedelic Wrasse - Anampses chrysocephalus) also occurs at Johnston Atoll.
Endemic fishes are often the most abundant in their genera or families presumably because they
have had ample opportunity to become fully adapted to the local environment. A number of
Hawaiian endemics are important food species and are harvested in substantial numbers both
commercially and non -commercially.
Six of l 1 endemic species on the White List are common in suitable habitat. Collecting pressure
on 8 of these species takes <9% of their Open Area population annually. Seven of the 8 species
have <1 % of their population collected annually.
Survey data is lacking for six species which typically occur in deep water. Meaningful trends in
catch report data for these species aren't readily apparent although there is some indication of a
downward trend in catch for Tinker's Butterfly (Chaetodon tinkeri). Value isn't increasing,
however, as would be expected if scarcity was affecting prices. It is clear that collection of
Hawaii Longfin Anthias (Pseudanthias hawaiiensis) is a relatively recent development.
Based on deep diver observations, Tinker's Butterflyfish and Psychedelic Wrasse are
substantially more common in the long term protected areas (MPAs) while Flame Wrasse and
Hawaiian Longfin Anthias are more abundant in the FRAs. Sightings for all these species did
not exceed 25% of observational dives.
Herbivore biomass is significantly higher (1.8X) in the West Hawaii MPAs than in the FRAs or
the Open areas, both of which are declining. Herbivore biomass is slightly but significantly
greater in the FRAs than in the Open areas. Other types of fishing (i.e. food fishing) are likely
responsible for observed differences between these areas and the more protected MPAs.
In West Hawaii the aquarium fishery takes 1.8X the number of reef fishes taken by recreational
and other commercial fishers combined. If Yellow Tang, which is primarily harvested at small
sizes and not targeted by other fishers, is excluded, the recreational and commercial fisheries
combine to take 3X the number of reef fishes caught by aquarium collectors.
in terms of reef fish biomass caught by the different fisheries in West Hawaii, considerably
more biomass is taken by the combined recreational and commercial fisheries either including
Yellow Tang (2.8X) or excluding it (8.6X).
The total take of reef fish by commercial and non-commercial fishers on other Main Hawaii
Islands greatly exceeds the numbers and biomass of the fish taken by aquarium collectors.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of this review and evaluation, the following recommendations are proposed:
1. Biological and fishery results to date indicate the FRAs are clearly working and are
expected to increase in importance as time progresses. Since the recent inclusion of a
new FRA at Ka'ohe (Pebble Beach), South Kona, there are no compelling reasons at
present to alter the makeup of the existing network of protected areas.
2. As monitoring and evaluation of the FRAs is required by law and necessary to further
understand the dynamics of our coral reef ecosystem, a dedicated monitoring program
similar to WHAP needs to be continued and financially supported by the State of
Hawai'i. As of now the monitoring program is wholly dependent on extramural funds
(i.e. NOAA) for its continued existence.
3. Community input and co-management responsibility has proven to be critical in the
establishment and legitimacy of the FRA network. Community advisory groups such as
the West Hawai'i Fishery Council should be encouraged and supported by DLNR.
4. Maintain and continue support and implement co-management efforts at Ka'upulehu,
Ho'okena, Puako, Miloli'i, and other interested communities.
5. Experienced facilitators preferably with training in environmental dispute resolution need
to work with community advisory groups when addressing complex and contentious
marine resource issues. This would also be desirable for DAR when holding particularly
contentious community meetings and public hearings.
6. While FRAs are an excellent strategy to manage the most abundant and heavily collected
aquarium species, uncommon, rare or ecologically important species require species-
specific harvesting limitations in open areas.
7. Legislative authority for the BLNR to adopt `Adaptive Management' is essential for real
time response to emerging resource issues. This will become increasing important as the
effects of global climate change become manifest.
8. A limited entry aquarium fishery should be established in West Hawaii to curtail possible
unsustainable expansion in the future. Clear legislative authority for such a limited entry
program is desirable and possibly necessary.
9. DLNR should prioritize the adoption of a Hawaiian Administrative rule required a marine
dealer report. This would allow for a comprehensive verification of aquarium dealer and
collector catch reports to determine reporting accuracy.
10. An effective DOCARE enforcement "presence" on the water and along coastal areas is
essential for long term sustainability of our marine resources. Legislative authority
permitting DOCARE to inspect catch/fish boxes/coolers is imperative for effective
enforcement.
11. The effectiveness of the West Hawaii FRAs for aquarium fish suggests it would be
prudent to establish MPAs for other resource species throughout Hawai'i as a
precautionary measure against overfishing and for restoration of marine resources.
Currently, less than 1 % of the Main Hawaiian Islands is fully protected by MPAs.
12. MPAs should be large enough for self-recruitment of short distance dispersing
propagules and spaced far enough apart that long distance dispersing propagules released
from one reserve can settle in adjacent reserves.
AUTHOR: William j. Walsh Ph.D. Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources
CONTRIBUTORS: Stephen Cotton, Laura Jackson, Megan Lamson, Kara Osada-D'Avella, Brian
Tissot Ph.D., Ivor Williams Ph.D., Jill Zamzow Ph.D. and Todd Stevenson Ph.D.
N
BACKGROUND
The West Hawai'i Regional Fishery Management Area (WHRFMA) was conceived and
established primarily in response to the activities of aquarium collectors along the West Hawai'i
coastline.
The aquarium collecting industry in Hawai'i and especially in West Hawai'i has long been a
subject of controversy. Walsh et al. 2003 provides an historical overview of the commercial
aquarium fishery in Hawai'i. This controversy continues to this day with repeated efforts by
anti -aquarium advocates to shut down the fishery by one stratagem or another. A recent Hawai'i
County Council initiative (West Hawaii Today 2014) and an anticipated proposed legislative ban
(Evans, pers. Comm.) attest to this ongoing controversy. As such, particular emphasis is placed
in this report on the West Hawai'i aquarium fishery and related findings of coral reef monitoring
on West Hawai'i reefs.
In contrast to other areas in the State, in West Hawai'i, the aquarium fishery has undergone
substantial and sustained expansion over the past 30 years (Figure 1). In FY 2014 there were 51
commercial West Hawaii aquarium permits. Of the issued permits, 41 reported some aquarium
catch with 19 reporting substantial catch (>I OK) of Yellow Tang, the prime species in the
fishery.
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
C1
300,000
U
2 250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
West Hawai'i Aquarium Fishery
1976-2014
,q, ,moo, ,o, N:N ,o, Nq N(: -�6 ,q, Nq ^g
Fiscal Year
80
70
60
50 42
E
d
40 d
w
O
30 Z
20
10
0
Figure 1. Number of aquarium animals collected and number of commercial aquarium
permits in West Hawaii for Fiscal years (FY) 1976-2014.
As the number of collectors in West Hawai'i began to rise in the 1980s and the numbers of
animals collected increased markedly, conflict escalated along the coast, most particularly
between dive tour operators and collectors. A short-lived informal "Gentleperson's Agreement"
was reached in 1987 whereby aquarium collectors agreed to refrain from collecting in certain
areas. In return, charter operators agreed not to initiate legislation opposing collecting and to
cease harassment. In 1991, four of the areas from the Gentleperson's Agreement were
established as the Kona Coast Fisheries Management Area (FMA) within which aquarium
collecting is prohibited (HAR § 13-58).
In spite of these management efforts, controversy and conflict over aquarium collecting
continued unabated. Various meetings were held and legislative resolutions and bills were
drafted to address the issue. A 1996 House Concurrent Resolution (HCR 184) requested the
Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), in conjunction with a citizens' task force,
to develop a comprehensive management plan to regulate the collection of aquarium fish. A
West Hawai'i Reef Fish Working Group (WHRFWG) involving over 70 members of the West
Hawai'i community including aquarium collectors and charter operators and other stakeholders
held nine meetings over a 15 month period. The WHRFWG opened a dialog between user
groups and community members and provided a forum for the education of its members on
social and biological issues involved in resource management.
The WHRFWG identified "hot spots" along the coast where conflict over ocean resources was
especially intense and ultimately proposed a wide range of management recommendations, some
of which were included in the 1997 DLNR legislative package. Working directly with the
people of Ho'okena and Miloli'i, DAR also developed comprehensive FMA rule proposals for
each of these communities. To finally begin investigating the biological impact of collecting,
DAR commenced a joint research project with the University of Hawai'i-Hilo. Due in part to
opposition by Oahu aquarium collectors and a lack of agency and political support, only two
legislative recommendations of the WHRFWG passed; establishing dealer licenses and
increasing commercial license fees. Similarly, recommendations involving the DAR FMA rule
proposals languished.
Act 306, SLH 1998
In response to the perceived lack of success in adequately dealing with aquarium collecting, a
number of citizens, including several members of the WHRFWG formed a grassroots
organization, the Lost Fish Coalition (LFC), to push for a total ban on aquarium collecting in
West Hawaii. They collected almost 4,000 signatures on a petition to ban such collecting. In
January 1997, Representative (Rep.) Paul Whalen (R -Kona, Ka'u) introduced legislation (House
Bill (HB) 3349) which proposed an outright ban on all collecting between Kawaihae and Miloli'i.
Shortly thereafter, Rep. David Tarnas (D -N. Kona, S. Kohala) introduced HB 3457. This bill
proposed establishing a West Hawai'i Regional Fishery Management Area (WHRFMA) along
the entire 147 mile West Hawai'i coast (Upolu Pt. to Ka Lae) to provide for effective
management of marine resources. Among several provisions of this bill was a requirement to set
aside 50% of the WHRFMA as Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs) where aquarium collecting
was prohibited. in February 1998, HB 3348 was put on hold. During committee hearings on HB
3457, the 50% provision for FRAs was reduced to "a minimum of 30%." Aquarium collectors
and other user groups endorsed the bill and it was passed by the Legislature as Act 306, SLH
1998; effective 13 July 1998. It was subsequently codified as Hawaii Revised Statue — HRS
188F.
Given the longstanding and contentious nature of the aquarium issue in West Hawaii, the
importance of legislation in finally addressing the issue cannot be underestimated. It was only
when organized and concerted community effort was applied directly via the legislative process
that the means for resolution was made possible. It seems highly likely that without the direct
legislative mandates of Act 306, SLH 1998, little progress would have been made in successfully
managing this controversial fishery.
Act 306, SLH 1998 established a West Hawai'i Regional Fishery Management Area along the
entire west coast of the Island of Hawai'i (§ 188F-4, HRS). Overall, the purposes of Act 306
were to:
(1) Effectively manage fishery activities to ensure sustainability;
(2) Enhance nearshore resources;
(3) Minimize conflicts of use in this coastal area.
There were also four specific management objectives to be accomplished by DLNR:
(1) Designate a minimum of 30% of coastal waters as Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs)
where aquarium collecting is prohibited.
(2) Establish a day -use mooring buoy system and designate some high -use areas where no
anchoring is allowed.
(3) Establish a portion of the FRAs as fish reserves where no fishing of reef -dwelling fish is
allowed.
(4) Designate areas where the use of gill nets is prohibited.
A review of the WHRFMA management plan was to be conducted every five years by DLNR in
cooperation with the University of Hawaii.
Additionally, Act 306, SLH 1998, also provided for "substantive involvement of the community
in resource management decisions." This mandate was a unique and key aspect of the legislation
which allowed the community to actively participate in the development of resource
management actions. This approach was at once both innovative and far-reaching. As noted by
Maurin and Peck (2008) "The Act's requirement for `substantive' community input before
management decisions can be taken to achieve the goals has been described as `revolutionary.'
It required, explicitly and for the first time, that the state agency regulating ocean use go beyond
the standard public hearings which often occur late in the rule -writing process, and engage in
active and ongoing consultation with its constituents.
The West Hawaii Fishery Council (WHFC)
In order to accomplish the mandates of Act 306, SLH 1998, with substantive community input,
The West Hawai'i Fishery Council (WHFC) was convened June 16, 1998 under the aegis of
DLNR and the University of Hawaii Sea Grant. Consisting of 24 voting members and 6 ex -
officio agency representatives from DLNR, Sea Grant, and the Governor's Office, the WRFC's
to
members represented diverse geographic areas and various stakeholder, community and user
groups in West Hawaii. Four aquarium representatives (three collectors and one aquarium shop
owner) were members of the WHFC, 40% of the WHFC were maka'ainana and most of the
members were previously on the WHRFWG.
The West Hawaii Fishery Council provided the vehicle for stakeholders to participate directly in
the development of management recommendations. Such participation has important benefits
for increasing legitimacy of decisions in the eyes of stakeholders, as well as increasing
compliance with decisions and rules subsequently established (Kessler 2004). More detailed
information on the background, activities and membership of the WHFC is available on their
website:littp:/hvesthawaiifisherycouncit.orLj,,.
The first mandate of Act 306 was the establishment the FRAs. FRAs were mandated to address
concerns over user conflict and localized resource depletion caused by aquarium fish collectors
in West Hawai'i. Working under a punishing deadline, the WHFC, by determination, consensus
and vote, developed an FRA plan consisting of nine separate areas along the coast (Figure 2)
encompassing a total of 35.2% of the West Hawaii coastline (including already protected areas).
Perhaps somewhat surprisingly the areas specifically recommended as FRAs by the aquarium
collecting representatives on the Council showed remarkable congruence with those selected by
the WHFC as a whole.
The WHFC and the FRA development process have been the focus of a number of in-depth
reports and scientific case studies (Walsh 1999, Capitini et al. 2004, Tissot 2005, Maurin and
Peck 2008, Tissot et al. 2009, Gregory 2009, Rossiter and Levine 2013) making it one of the
most intensively studied community driven management efforts in the State of Hawai'i.
The WHFC's FRA plan was subsequently incorporated by DLNR into administrative rule. The
28 April 1999 public hearing on the FRA Rule (BAR 13-60.3) was the largest public hearing
ever conducted by DAR with at least 860 attendees. The draft rule received overwhelming
support (93.5% of 876 testimonies) from a wide range of community sectors. The FRA
administrative rule was signed by Governor Benjamin Cayetano on 17 December 1999 becoming
effective 31 December 1999.
The FRAs prohibit all collecting of aquarium animals within their boundaries as well as non -
fishing related fish feeding. The seaward boundaries of the FRAs extend to a depth of 100
fathoms and distinctive signs mark the boundaries on shore.
Figure 2. Locations of Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs) in West Hawai'i and DAR
monitoring sites (5 MPAs, 9 FRAs and 9 open sites)
In addition to the development of the FRA network, the WRFC, in conjunction with DAR and
UH Sea Grant, has been successful in achieving a number of other accomplishments:
Sea Urchin Limited Harvest: The WRFC developed a management plan permitting the
sustainable harvest of wana (long-spine/black sea urchin) at Makae'o, the Old Kona
Airport Marine Life Conservation District (MLCD). This recommendation was adopted
by DLNR as an administrative rule amendment in 2005.
The West Hawai'i Youth Fishery Council: An outreach component of the WRFC, the
Youth Fishery Council worked with the Hawai'i County Council to ban smoking at
Kahalu'u Beach Park.
12
Gill Net Rules: The WRFC developed a set of gill net rule recommendations focused on
limiting impacts of large-scale commercial netting while providing for subsistence
netting. This recommendation was adopted as an administrative rule amendment in 2005
and served as a model for the statewide gill net rule (HAR §13-75-12.4) which was
adopted in 2007.
• Day -Use Mooring Buoys: In collaboration with the Malama Kai Foundation, the WHFC
is a working partner in the site selection process and educates communities on the value
of day use moorings to preserve our coral reefs.
• Ka'upulehu Marine Reserve: DAR worked with the WHFC and the Ka'upulehu
Marine Life Advisory Committee (KMLAC) to develop draft rules to re -designate the
Ka'upulehu Fish Replenishment Area as a Marine Reserve where the take of nearshore
marine life will be prohibited for 10 years, with exceptions to allow for the continued
harvest of pelagic and deep benthic species using specific fishing gear. The proposal is
the initial first step in complying with the statutory mandate of HRS § 188F-4(3) to
establish a portion of the Fish Replenishment Areas where no fishing of reef -dwelling
fish is allowed. in October, 2014 the BLNR approved holding a Public Hearing on this
rule amendment. Several other local communities are actively engaged in developing
management recommendations which include some form of a highly protected nearshore
area.
• SCUBA Spear Fishing Prohibition: The WHFC proposed banning SCUBA (and
rebreather) spear fishing in West Hawai'i as is the case in most other Pacific island
jurisdictions.
• Pebble Beach User Conflict: The WHFC drafted recommendations addressing a conflict
between aquarium collectors and this South Kona community. It recommended creating
a new FRA in the Pebble Beach area and opening up to collecting a similarly sized
section of another FRA (by a non-residential area). The latter part of the `swap' was
subsequently rejected by aquarium collectors.
• Aquarium `White List': Working with commercial aquarium collectors the WHFC
established a list of 40 fish species permitted for aquarium take. Only those fish found on
the White List can be collected live for aquarium use. All other fishes and all
invertebrates are off-limits to collecting. Size and bag limits are also established for three
of the species on the White List. (See Table 5 for list of White List species).
• Species of Special Concern: Prohibition on the take or possession of nine species of
inshore sharks and rays and two invertebrate crown-of-thorns predators (Table 1).
Table 1. List of species for which all take or possession is prohibited within the
West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area (WHRFMA)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Hawaiian Name
Spotted Eagleray
Aetobatus narinari
Hihimanu
Broad Stingray
Dasyatis lata
Hihimanu
Pelagic Stingray
Pteroplatytry on violacea
Hihimanu
Hawaiian Stingray
Dasyatis hawaiiensis
Hihimanu
Tiger Shark
Galeocerdo cuvier
Mano/niuhi
13
Whale Shark
Rhincodon typus
Lele wa'a
Whitetip Reef Shark
Triaenodon obesus
Mano lalakea
Blacktip Reef Shark
Carcharhinus melano terus
Mano pa'ele
Gray Reef Shark
Carcharhinus ambl rhynchos
Man6
Triton's Trumpet
Charonia tritonis
'Ole
Horned Helmet
Cassis cornuta
Pu puhi
The last four bulleted recommendations (above) received overwhelming support during the
Hawaii Administrative Rule public hearing process (Figure 3) and were adopted as an new
administrative rule (HAR 13-60.4) which became effective December 26, 2013 after being
signed by Governor Neil Abercrombie.
900
800
700
m
a 600
E
v 500
H
6
a
400
3 30C
Z
20(
10(
N= 1206 Total Testimonies
Ka'ohe
Figure 3. Summary of all public testimonies on WHRFMA rule (HAR 13-60.4)
The creation and functioning of the WRFC is entirely attributable to the volunteer commitment
of time, energy and resources of its members. The 70 members of the community who have
been members at one time or another of the WHFC have contributed thousands of hours of their
own time at no cost to the State. While not directly authorized by state law, this community-
based advisory body represents a valuable tool to state government in terms of its approach to
and recommendations on marine resource management. These efforts have.been assisted by the
support of community organizations such as the Hawai'i Community Foundation, The Nature
Conservancy, Community Conservation Network, the Malama Kai Foundation and especially the
Harold Castle Foundation, all of whom recognize the significance and value of the WHFC and
its role in assisting in effective management of our marine resources.
14
West Hawaii Aquarium Fishery.
The marine aquarium fishery is currently the most economically valuable commercial inshore
fishery in the State of Hawai'i with FY 2014 reported landings greater than $2.3 million (Figure
4). It should be noted that the dollar value of these fisheries represents only the ex -vessel value -
what the fishers are paid for their catch, and does not include the value which would be
generated by additional dealer and retail sales. The actual economic value of the catch is thus
substantially greater than the ex -vessel values shown in figure 4.
Although specific export data does not exist for the aquarium fishery, it is clear that most of the
aquarium catch is shipped out of the state to dealers on the mainland United States, Europe and
Asia (Dierking 2002). This is neither surprising nor atypical for commercial fisheries in Hawaii.
For example, seafood exports of various Hawaiian species exceed 3.7 million pounds annually
(Loke et al. 2012).
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
L
Q $1,000,000
$500,000
$0
P Q- AIo �•
�Q
p Species Group
Figure 4. Economic value for various inshore fisheries of the main Hawaiian Islands.
Value ($ adjusted for inflation) averaged over FY 2012-2014
Presently 78% of fish caught in the State and 68% of the total aquarium catch value comes from
the Big island and almost exclusively from West Hawai'i (Table 2). The total aquarium catch
and its value have continued to increase since the FRAs were established in 2000 while the
number of collectors has declined in recent years from a peak in 2005/2006.
Even though initially there was substantial opposition to the implementation of the FRA network
by aquarium fishers and their supporters (Walsh 1999, Capitini et al. 2004, Maurin and Peck
2008) it's clear that overall catch has not declined and recent work (Stevenson et al. 2013) has
15
indicated that the economic status of West Hawaii aquarium collectors has significantly
improved since the FRA network was implemented.
Of the 40 fish species which can now be collected in West Hawaii, two surgeonfishes comprise
the overwhelming portion of the catch. Yellow Tang (Zebrasoma flavescens) currently
constitutes 84.3% of the total catch while the Goldring Surgeonfish — Kole (Ctenochaetus
strigosus) makes up 8.3%. Since the FRAs were established the ex -vessel value of Yellow Tang
has increased 79% (currently $4.04/fish) while Kole has increased 10% ($2.47/fish). It is
interesting to note that on a price per pound basis Yellow Tang is easily the most valuable
marine organism in Hawaii which are commercially caught in relatively large numbers. Based
on mean size at capture data (6.1 cm SL - Stevenson et al. 2011) the ex -vessel price for Yellow
Tang exceeds $250/lb. which currently is about the price of silver bullion.
Table 2. Changes in West Hawai'i aquarium fishery since implementation of the FRAs.
Dollar value is adjusted for inflation
Earlier studies suggested that the reported aquarium catch may have been underestimated by a
factor of approximately 2X to 5X (Cesar et al. 2002, Walsh et al. 2003). However, an analysis of
FY 2010 and FY 2014 data comparing Hawai'i Island aquarium catch report data with dealer
purchase data from collectors found a good correspondence in reported numbers of animals
caught and sold by aquarium collectors. In FY 2010 there was a 3.5% difference between the
numbers of animals reported caught and sold and in FY2014 the difference was only 0.4%
(Figure 5). These small differences likely represent both live releases and mortality.
Dealer reports of purchases (including retail sales) from Hawai'i collectors were 10.9% lower in
FY 2010 and 40.1% lower in FY 2014 than the number reported sold by collectors. There are
two likely reasons for this discrepancy. First, and most importantly, unlike with aquarium
collectors, there currently is no Hawaii Administrative Rule (HAR) requiring dealers to report
aquarium purchases (or food species) even though the department has long had statutory
authority (HRS § 189-10 — last amended in 1997) to adopt such rules.
DAR currently has a commercial marine dealer license and a commercial marine dealer report
which clearly states that Commercial Marine Dealers are required to submit monthly
reports. However DAR is not enforcing this requirement because of the lack of an applicable
HAR and apparently some dealers are aware of this. Thus dealer reporting is essentially on a
voluntary basis and a few dealers are not reporting in whole or in part.
FY 2000
FY 2014
0
No. Permits
48
51
6%
Total Catch
279,606
339,898
.22%
Total Value
$1,081,980.
$1,573,078
45%
% of State Fish Catch
70%
78%
8% T
% of State Fish Value
67%
71%
4% T
% of State Total Catch
55%
58%
3%
% of State Total Value
59%
68%
9%
Earlier studies suggested that the reported aquarium catch may have been underestimated by a
factor of approximately 2X to 5X (Cesar et al. 2002, Walsh et al. 2003). However, an analysis of
FY 2010 and FY 2014 data comparing Hawai'i Island aquarium catch report data with dealer
purchase data from collectors found a good correspondence in reported numbers of animals
caught and sold by aquarium collectors. In FY 2010 there was a 3.5% difference between the
numbers of animals reported caught and sold and in FY2014 the difference was only 0.4%
(Figure 5). These small differences likely represent both live releases and mortality.
Dealer reports of purchases (including retail sales) from Hawai'i collectors were 10.9% lower in
FY 2010 and 40.1% lower in FY 2014 than the number reported sold by collectors. There are
two likely reasons for this discrepancy. First, and most importantly, unlike with aquarium
collectors, there currently is no Hawaii Administrative Rule (HAR) requiring dealers to report
aquarium purchases (or food species) even though the department has long had statutory
authority (HRS § 189-10 — last amended in 1997) to adopt such rules.
DAR currently has a commercial marine dealer license and a commercial marine dealer report
which clearly states that Commercial Marine Dealers are required to submit monthly
reports. However DAR is not enforcing this requirement because of the lack of an applicable
HAR and apparently some dealers are aware of this. Thus dealer reporting is essentially on a
voluntary basis and a few dealers are not reporting in whole or in part.
16
Additionally, the catch of aquarium collectors who sell fish to out of state dealers disappears
since these dealers have absolutely no requirement (however tenuous) to file dealer reports with
DAR. Even with these onerous limitations in catch report validation, the 2010/2014 comparison
did not indicate substantial underreporting of catch by aquarium collectors.
500,000
400,000
_h
10
E
Q 300,000
w
0
(D
.0
E
Z 200,000
100,000
Caught Sold Purchased
Figure 5. Comparison between Hawai'i Island aquarium collector report data and dealer
purchases of aquarium animals from the collectors. Green bars represent FY
2010 data and blue bars FY 2014 data
West Hawai'i Aquarium Project (WHAP)
Although Act 306, SLH 1998, mandated review and evaluation (thus monitoring) of the FRAs in
conjunction with UH, no funding was provided to accomplish this. In order to investigate the
effectiveness of the FRAs to replenish depleted fish stocks, a consortium of researchers
established the West Hawai'i Aquarium Project (WRAP) in early 1999. Funding was secured for
the early years of the project through the Hawai'i Coral Reef Initiative Research Program (HCRI-
RP), a federal initiative under the aegis of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). Subsequent funding has been provided by Coral Reef Monitoring Grants under
NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program. The initial project researchers were Dr. William
Walsh, DAR/DLNR, Dr. Brian Tissot, Humboldt University, and Dr. Leon Hallacher, University
of Hawaii Hilo. They have been joined in recent years by Dr. Ivor Williams and Dr. Jill
Zamzow, National Marine Fisheries Service, Coral Reef Ecosystem Division and on related
projects by Dr. Mark Hixon, University of Hawai'i Manoa and Dr. Helen Fox, Rare org.
17
WRAP established 23 study sites (Figure 2) along the West Hawaii coastline in early 1999 at 9
FRA sites, 8 open sites (aquarium fish collection areas) and 6 previously established Marine
Protected Areas (MPAs) to collect baseline data both prior to and after the closure of the FRAs.
The MPAs are Marine Life Conservation Districts (MLCD) and Fishery Management Areas
(FMA), which have been closed to aquarium collecting for at least 9 years and were presumed to
have close to "natural" levels of aquarium fish abundances. They serve as a reference or
`control' to compare with the FRAs and open areas. It should be noted that after several years of
study and observation, one of the MPA sites (Lapakahi MLCD — subzone B), was found to really
not be closed to aquarium collecting due to its remoteness and poorly defined seaward
boundaries (i.e. 500 feet offshore). As such the Lapakahi survey site is considered an Open Area
for data analysis.
The overall goals of WHAP were two -fold: 1) To evaluate the effectiveness of the FRA network
by comparing targeted aquarium fishes in FRAs and open areas relative to adjacent control sites
and, 2) To evaluate the impact of the FRA network on the aquarium fishery.
Detailed explanations of the study sites and survey methodology are contained in Tissot et al.
2004 and Walsh et al. 2013. To briefly summarize: Densities of all fish and selected invertebrate
species are visually estimated along four 25mX4m strip transects at each of 23 permanent sites in
the three types of management areas. All survey divers either have extensive experience in
conducting underwater fish surveys in Hawai'i or received training through the UH's
Quantitative Underwater Ecological Survey Techniques (QUEST) training course prior to
collecting data (Hallacher and Tissot, 1999). In addition to the transect surveys, a 10 minute
`free -swim' survey is also conducted by two divers in the areas surrounding the actual transects.
The purpose of this survey is to better census uncommon or rare species and species of particular
ecological interest such as Taape, Roi, terminal phase parrotfish, Cleaner Wrasses and Crown -of -
Thorns Starfish. All sites are presently surveyed four times a year. As of December 2014, a total
of 75 survey rounds of all study sites have been completed (>6,500 transects). Six rounds were
conducted prior to FRA closure in 1999.
The scientific information presented in this report represents the cumulative efforts of 70 survey
divers (See Acknowledgements) who conducted over 6,700 transects for the WHAP project over
the past 15 years in addition to hundreds of other surveys for other related projects.
FINDINGS AND EVALUATION
Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs)- Aquarium Collecting Impacts
The overall changes in abundance since FRA establishment for the top 10 most collected
aquarium fishes are shown in Table 3. The p value in the far right column of Table 3 (and
reported elsewhere) is a measure of the significance of the difference between populations, in
this case the density (i.e. abundance) between the Before and After periods. The p -value is a
number between 0 and 1 and interpreted in the following way (after Rumsey 2011):
• A small p -value (typically < 0.05) indicates strong evidence against the hypothesis that
there is no difference between the populations — in other words, there is a real (i.e.
`significant') difference in the abundance of the two populations.
18
• A large p -value (> 0.05) indicates the opposite; that there is no significant difference in
the abundance of the two populations.
These -10 species represent 98.3% of all the fish collected in West Hawaii in FY 2014. The two
most heavily collected species, Yellow Tang and Goldring Surgeonfish (aka Kole) alone account
for 92.6% of total fish catch and thus are key indicators of the protective value of the FRAs and
the sustainability of the aquarium fishery. Since 1999/2000 both of these species have increased
markedly (and significantly) in the FRAs and MPAs and in the Open Areas for Kole as well.
Table 3. Changes in abundance of the top ten most collected aquarium fishes in West
Hawaii. 'Before'= Mean of 1999-2000; 'After'=
Mean
of 2012-2013. Shaded
cells show statistically significant increases (green) and decreases (red). Young of
Year (YOY) not included. Bold = statistically significant
t-test
OVERALL
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
MDENSITY NSITY
MEAN
(EAN
% CHANGE
p
IN DENSITY
Before
After
.....
Yellow Tan Zebrasoma avescens
Tang
FRA
12.73
20.94
+64._5%
<0.001
....... ....
......... _..
Open
10.24
9.75
-4.7%
0.08
MPA
23.08
25.32
+9.7%
<0.001
Goldring Surgeonfish Ctenochaetus strigosus
FRA
28.38
35.27
+24.3%
<0.001
Open
21.18
26.99
+27.5%
<0.001
MPA
28.56
40.56
+42.0%
<0.001
}Achilles Tang achilles
16
0.09
-64.2%
L;
0.31
0.20
-35.4%
0.07
MPAH'
0.42
0.54
+28.4%
0.33
Oranes�ne Unicornfish Naso lituratus
FRA
081
0.67
�1.3I
-17.6%
0.11
O en
MPA
1.12
1.59
1.57
+17.1%
0.16
0.89
_....� - _
-1.4%
.. ... .................................
IBlack Surgeonfish Ctenochaetus hawauensis
FRA
..............
0.18
0 28
+57 7%
` 0.14
....
I
Open
0 17
0.25
+50.8 o
/0
0.09
.........
MPA
0.53
0.48
1 1.1 /o
I 0.58
...... . _ .... .. _........
JForcepsfish For Igerflavissimus ....
FRA
0.41
0.68
+67.0%
0.002
....
d. Open
0 41
0.41
+I. -P.% _ .........i...
0 95
iI
MPA
0.84
0.71
-15.2%
0.34
. ..................................... ....
,Potter's AngelfishCentropyge potteri
FRA
1.38
1.75
+27.2%0.001
Open
1.65
2.21
+33.9%
<0.001
_____..._..__
MPA
1.54
1.84
! +19.7%
0.09
Ornate Wrasse Halichoeres ornatissimus
Fourspot Butterflyfish Chaetodon quadrimaculatus
Orangeband Surgeonfish Acanthurus olivaceus
Yellow Tana
19
MPA 1.24 ! 1.15 -6.9% 0.56
FRA 0.05 0.05 -7.1% 0.93
FRA
0.13
0.16_
+25.0%
0.63
Open
0.31
0.24
-22.2%
0.34
MPA
0.56
'' 0.46
-16.8%
0.49
The overall average changes in Yellow Tang abundance in the three management areas are
shown in Figure 6. Prior to the year 2000, the areas which would become FRAs were not
significantly different than the Open Areas in terms of Yellow Tang abundance. Yellow Tang
subsequently exhibited an increase in abundance in all areas following a strong recruitment year
in 2002. Relatively low recruitment in six of the following years resulted in subsequent
downward trends in all areas. A similar pattern was evident in 2009.
30
25
_ 20
0
0
15
w
C
a�
10
61
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 6. Overall changes in Yellow Tang abundance (Mean f SE) in FRAs, MPAs and
Open areas, 1999-2013. Yellow vertical bars indicate mean density (May -Nov)
of Yellow Tang Young -of -Year (YOY). YOY are not included in trend line data
The FRAs have been very successful in increasing Yellow Tang populations. The most recent
findings indicate that the number of Yellow Tang, excluding Young of the Year (YOY),
20
increased by 64.5% in the FRAs since they were established almost 15 years ago and 9.7% in the
previously protected MPAs (1999/2000 — 2012/2013 comparison). Their slight decrease (4.7%)
in the Open Areas over this same time period is not statistically significant thus. Yellow Tang
abundance in the Open Areas has thus not declined since the FRAs were established.
Yellow Tang abundance is however, substantially lower (53.5% for 2012/2013) in the Open
Areas relative to the FRAs due to the fact that aquarium collecting occurs in these areas. The
difference in Yellow Tang abundance between the Open Areas and FRAs has been less in recent
years likely due to decreases in aquarium catch and effort (Figure 7) and reliable recruitment.
0%
-10
N
-20°%
LL
M
c
-30%
N
10
d
Q -40%
c
m
CL
a -50%
M
N
d -60%
a
m
U
d -70%
C
d
0
-90%
-100%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 7. Difference in Yellow Tang abundance in West Hawaii Fish Replenishment
Areas (FRAs, n=9) relative to Open Areas (n=9). Bars represent the %
difference in abundance for each year from 1999 to 2013. Bars below the x axis
indicate greater abundance in the FRAs than the Open areas
Even with lower Yellow Tang abundance in the fished Open Areas, overall Yellow Tang
abundance in the 30'-60' depth range over the entire West Hawaii coast is estimated to have
increased 58% (over 1.3 million fish) from 1999/2000 to 2012-2013 to a current population of
about 3.6 million fish.
Summer 2014 recruitment in many areas has been very strong and continued upward trends for
Yellow Tang are anticipated. Indeed, at a number of locations around the state, summer
recruitment has been termed `biblical' (Talbot 2014). At the most southerly WHAP survey site
(Manuka, Ka'u District), the number of Yellow Tang recruits in July was 390% higher than on
any other previous survey at the site over the previous 15 years. A few other sites exhibited
similar robust recruitment.
21
In addition to the WHAP surveys, DAR has three long-term studies which provide a more
expansive overview on changes in the abundance of aquarium targeted species over several
decades. One of the sites at Honaunau in South Kona will be resurveyed over the next 4
summers beginning in 2015 and thus is not included in this report. Another of these studies was
conducted at two sites in South Kohala. One site is at Puako which has been a Fishery
Management Area (FMA) since 1985 in which the use of all nets, except thrownets, is prohibited
(thus no aquarium collecting). The other site is 2.5km to the south at Pauoa Bay which became
an FRA in 2000 and was also closed to laynetting in 2005. As can be seen in Figure 1, there was
not much aquarium collecting occurring in West Hawai'i during the time period of the original
study (by the UH Hawaii Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit) and thus population estimates for
Yellow Tang at this time represent a largely unfished state given that they are not a highly
desired food fish.
Yellow Tang abundance has declined by 9% at Puako but has increased by 14% at Pauoa Bay.
(Figure 8). Unfortunately, due to how the data was presented in the original study, statistical
analysis of this change is not possible. Yellow Tang is one of only a few species which has not
undergone substantial declines in both these areas - indeed it increased somewhat at Pauoa. Both
the Puako and Pauoa sites have suffered major habitat degradation and fish declines over the past
3+ decades (Walsh 2013). Aquarium targeted species are not the only ones which have declined
but rather major declines were apparent in all trophic levels and most fish families. As noted
above, both areas have been off-limits to aquarium collecting for quite some time and thus it is
not reasonable to attribute the extensive changes in habitat and fish populations at these sites to
aquarium collecting.
10
E 6
0
0
ti
5
a
E
Z= 4
1979-1981 2007-2008
Figure 8. Long-term changes in Yellow Tang abundance at two South Kohala sites
22
Another long-term study underway at Ke'ei, on the south side of Kealakekua Bay, South Kona
provides a more detailed view of decadal changes in fish populations. As with the South Kohala
sites, the earliest surveys (i.e. 1970's) represent a largely unfished population. As aquarium
collecting increased in West Hawai'i (Figure 9), Yellow Tang populations declined. Ke'ei
became an FRA in 2000 and since that time populations have rebounded to where they are
essentially the same nowadays as in the 1970's. Note the 4% difference between the 1970's and
the 2010's is not statistically significant (t-test - p=0.2).
Figure 9. Long-term changes in Yellow Tang abundance at Ke'ei, South Kona
The reserve (i.e. FRA/MPA) effects described above in enhancing and sustaining targeted West
Hawai'i fish populations are striking, but also of importance are the effects of the reserve
network on the breeding populations of these species. While Yellow Tang can occur over a wide
range of habitats (Ortiz and Tissot 2008) including the deeper (— 70' -130') mesophotic reef
(Bogeberg 2014), the bulk of the adult population occurs in relatively shallow reef areas. When
Yellow Tang reach sexual maturity most leave the deeper coral rich reef areas where they settled
(and where DAR transects are located) for shallower reef habitat (Claisse et al. 2009). For
females this occurs at approximately 4-5 years of age and for males at age 5-7. To supplement
long-term WHAP monitoring, DAR initiated a series of surveys in 2006 using Diver Propulsion
Vehicles (DPV) of the shallow reef habitats (10'-20' depths) utilized by adult Yellow Tang.
Adult densities were highest within protected areas and in 'boundary' areas (open areas adjacent
to protected areas) (Williams et al. 2009). Densities were lowest in open areas far from protected
areas (Figure 10). The high densities in boundary areas are indicative of `spillover' (outward
movement from reserves into surrounding open areas) and indicate that protected areas
supplement adult stocks not only within their own boundaries, but also in open areas up to a
23
kilometer or more away. Thus, the 35% of the coastline in reserves sustains Yellow Tang (and
other similar species) breeding stocks in about 50% of the coastline.
40
Within MPA Outside MPA
-6400 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000
Distance to Boundary (m)
Figure 10. Yellow Tang abundance in adult habitats relative to distance of survey site from
nearest protected area boundary. Data points represent mean f 1 SE by site (n =
5 surveys per site). The trend line was generated using a LOESS smoothing
function (after Williams et al. 2009)
If all Open and Protected Areas are considered together there are no significant overall
differences (Figure 11 t-test p=0.71) in the abundance of adult Yellow Tang in open vs. closed
areas based on shallow reef DPV surveys (2006-2010). Total estimated coastwise population of
adult Yellow Tang in this depth range was estimated to be >2.5 million individuals. It should be
noted that with the latest West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area Administrative Rule
there is now a bag limit of 5 Yellow Tang per person per day for fish > 4.5" Total Length (TL).
This limit applies to all fishers and thus helps to ensure the productivity of the breeding
population of Yellow Tang. There is also a similar bag limit for the smallest (<2") Yellow Tang
which do not survive handling and transport very well.
For Yellow Tang it is clear that populations are robust and have been increasing in protected
areas and in some cases have reached levels found decades ago before aquarium collecting
expanded along the coast. In the shallower shoreline areas open to aquarium collecting, breeding
populations of Yellow Tang are not significantly different than closed areas and in deeper
WHAP survey site areas (30'-60') the population of smaller, aquarium -targeted, Yellow Tang
has not significantly decreased over the last 15 years.
30
25
20
E
0
0
15
CD
E
Z
10
AQ Open Areas AQ Closed Areas
24
Figure 11. Adult Yellow Tang abundance (Mean ±SE) in West Hawai'i shallow water (10'-
201) habitats
The effectiveness of the West Hawaii FRA network in increasing Yellow Tang populations
within the protected areas is clear. The benefit of such increases extend beyond just the FRAs as
larvae from a West Hawaii FRA has been documented to seed unprotected areas (Christie et al.
2010). There is thus high connectivity among populations through larva dispersal and adult
movement.
The importance of having multiple MPA sites (i.e. network) was also documented by a recent
study by Grorud-Colvert et al. 2014 which compared Yellow Tang abundance in the West
Hawaii FRA network with that in non -networked Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Maui
County. The researchers found that West Hawaii had a significantly greater percent change in
Yellow Tang density within the networked MPAs (and Open Areas) before vs. after network
establishment as compared to the Maui non -networked sites during the same time period.
Another comparison with Maui using 2002-2010 WRAP and NOAA data (CRED -Coral Reef
Ecosystem Division) found that for the 10 most collected aquarium fish in West Hawaii, five
were significantly more abundant in West HawaiTs Open Areas as compared to Maui MPA
closed areas Molokini MLD and Ahihi-Kina'u (Figure 12). This disparity is particularly
noteworthy given that most of the current opposition to the West Hawaii aquarium fishery is
being prompted by a few activists from Maui.
25
Figure 12. Comparison of aquarium fish abundances in West Hawai'i Open Areas with
Maui MPAs 2002-2010. A - Asterisk indicates a statistically significant
difference (t — test p = 0.005 or less)
26
Kole
The Goldring Surgeonfish (Kole - Ctenochaetus strigosus) is the second most collected species
in the West Hawai'i aquarium fishery. Recruitment patterns are markedly similar between Kole
and Yellow Tang likely due to similarities in spawning seasonality, location and daily timing
(Walsh 1984, 1987). As with Yellow Tang, recruitment has been variable but generally reliable
over the past 15 years. The number of Kole (excluding YOY) has increased significantly in all
management areas, including Open Areas, (Figure 13) from 1999/2000 — 2012/2013.
50
E1.1
40
35
1 30
S25
aa) 20
0
im
10
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 13. Overall changes in Goldring Surgeonfish (Kole) abundance (Mean f SE) in
FBAs, MPAs and Open areas, 1999-2013. Vertical bars indicate mean density
(June -Nov) of Goldring Surgeonfish Young -of -Year (YOY). YOY are not
included in trend line data
Kole abundance is lower (23.7% for 2012/2013) in the Open Areas relative to the FRAs but not
as low as for Yellow Tang. This reflects the substantially lower take of this species in the
aquarium fishery. The difference in Kole abundance between the Open Areas and FRAs has
been largely stable over the years (Figure 14).
As with Yellow Tang, an effort was made by the WRFC to protect the breeding populations of
Kole by establishing a bag limit of 5 Kole per person per day for fish > 4." TL. This limit, which
applies only to aquarium collectors, was included in the latest West Hawai'i Regional Fishery
Management Area Administrative Rule.
Overall Kole abundance in 30'-60' depth range over the entire West Hawaii coast is estimated to
have increased 49% (over 2.1 million fish) during this time period with a current estimated
population of about 6.5 million fish. As with Yellow Tang, summer 2014 recruitment for Kole in
many areas has been very strong. Recruitment at the Manuka survey site for example was 254%
higher than on any other previous survey at the site over the last 15 years.
27
0%
-10%
N
go -20%
LL
"a
c
m -30%
N
l0
d
Q -40%
C
a
M 0-50 %
m
d
-60%
a
d
U
d -70%
C
100%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 14. Difference in Kole abundance in West Hawaii FRAs (n=9) relative to Open
Areas (n=9). Bars represent the percent difference in abundance each year
from 1999 to 2013. Bars below the x axis indicate greater abundance in the
FRAs than the Open areas
Long-term West Hawai'i studies have found Kole to have decreased at both study sites. The most
pronounced decreases occurred at the two South Kohala sites (Figure 15).
Figure 15. Long-term changes in Kole abundance at two South Kohala sites
28
The Pauoa FRA has been closed to aquarium collecting for 15 years and lay netting for 10 years.
The Puak6 FMA has been closed to aquarium collecting (i.e. no nets other than thrownets
permitted) for 40 years. Given the length of protection at these two areas and the overall decline
in habitat quality and fish populations at the South Kohala sites (Walsh 2013) it seems highly
unlikely that the decline of the Kole population is due primarily to aquarium collecting.
At Ke'ei there has been an increasing trend in Kole abundance since 2000 when the area became
part of an FRA (Figure 16) but current abundance is still significantly below what it was in the
past (1970's — 2010's p<0.001).
Kole is regarded as a highly desired food fish by some fishers and targeted accordingly. Given
the low aquarium catch of this species relative to its West Hawai'i population in Open Areas
(0.79%), it seems inescapable that non -aquarium harvesting activities are an important
contributor to observed population declines in West Hawai'i.
Figure 16. Long-term changes in Kole abundance at Ke'ei, South Kona
Even with the documented long-term declines in Kole populations in West Hawai'i, the species
remains very abundant, at least in the smaller and mid-size ranges. Indeed, comparative surveys
around the Main Hawaiian Island utilizing DAR and NOAA Coral reef Ecosystem Division
(CRED) data (2006/2008) indicates Kole are substantially more abundant over most size ranges
in West Hawai'i than any of the other Main Hawaiian Islands (Figure 17). Somewhat
surprisingly, this is also true if West Hawaii Kole populations are compared with Northwest
Hawaiian Islands populations (Figure 18).
29
Figure 17. Comparison of size distributions of Kole at various Main Hawaiian Island
(MHI) sites 2006/2008
Figure 18. Comparison of size distributions of Kole at various Northwest Hawaiian Island
(NWHI) sites 2006/2008
30
Achilles Taniz
Achilles Tang is the third most collected species in the West Hawai'i aquarium fishery although
relative to Yellow Tang and Kole the numbers taken are low, representing only 2.1 % of the total
catch.
Commercial aquarium landings of Achilles Tang have been declining in West Hawaii over the
past two decades. This has occurred in association with a recent dramatic increase in the ex -
vessel value of the fish (Figure 19). Such opposing trends in catch and value are strongly
suggestive of declining availability (i.e. abundance).
25,000
20,000
15,000
t
3
M
U
L
a 10,000
E
Z
5,000
0
$25
$20
$15 ,,
10
4 °' y°' y°' y°' 4 4
$10 a
$5
$0
Figure 19. West Hawai'i commercial Achilles Tang aquarium landings and ex -vessel price
per fish
Substantial decline of Achilles Tang populations in West Hawai'i is evident from several data
sources. As can be seen in Figure 20, Achilles Tang have declined in FRAs and Open Areas
over the last 15 years tempered somewhat by a slight increase in the last year or two. Only the
FRA decline is statistically significant (Table 3). A similar declining trend is apparent within
MPAs except for the last four years when Achilles Tang numbers have increased.
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.1
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
31
Figure 20. Overall changes in Achilles Tang abundance in FRAs, MPAs and Open areas,
1999-2013. Vertical bars indicate mean density (June -Nov) of Achilles Tang
Young -of -Year (YOY). YOY are not included in trend line data
Average densities of this species are currently very low (x = 0.23/100M) on all transects. An
important caveat is that the reef areas where the WHAP transects are located are not the prime
habitat for adults of this species. Rather, large adults prefer the high energy shallower surge
zones more typical of the shoreline drop-offs areas in West Hawai'i. Presumably algal food
resources are more abundant in these areas. As such the bulk of the population is not adequately
surveyed by WHAP monitoring. These shallower reef areas are being surveyed by a different
type of monitoring program (Shallow Water Resource Surveys) presently being conducted by
DAR.
Unlike Yellow Tang and Kole, Achilles Tang have been more abundant over the past decade in
Open Areas rather than the protected FRAs (Figure 21). The exact meaning of this is unclear at
present but may reflect specific habitat differences in the management areas and/or habitat
preferences of Achilles Tang.
700%
600
N
LL
-c 500
c
R
w
m
Q400
c
d
CL
0 300
d
2d
F
200%
Gl
U
d
C
d 100
0%
-100%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 21. Difference in Achilles Tang abundance in West Hawaii FRAs (n=9) relative to
Open Areas (n=9). Bars represent the percent difference in abundance for each
year from 1999 to 2013. Bars above the x axis indicate greater abundance in the
Open Areas than the FRAs
Data from the long-term studies in South Kohala and South Kona also show a pattern of decline
over the past decades (Figs. 22 & 23).
Figure 22. Long term changes in Achilles Tang populations at Puako and Pauoa
33
At Ke'ei Kole have increased somewhat during the present decade. Achilles Tang abundance
(small ones) in the present decade is not significantly different than in the in the 1980's (t-test
p=0.19) or 1970's (p=0.65). Overall densities however are still very low.
Figure 23. Long term changes in Achilles Tang populations at Ke'ei, South Kona
Results from the WRAP monitoring program and the long-term studies suggest there should be
concern for the sustained abundance of this species. Achilles Tang are a very popular food fish
as well as an aquarium fish and thus are being harvested both as juveniles and adults. Low
levels of recruitment over the past I 1 years (x (May -Nov) = 0.01/100m) appear insufficient to
compensate for the existing levels of harvest. In order to address concerns regarding aquarium
impacts on this species, the new West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area Rule (HAR §
13-60.4) includes an Achilles Tang bag limit of 10 fish/person/day which applies only to
aquarium collectors.
Commencing in January 2012, DAR's monthly aquarium catch report was converted to a daily
aquarium fishing trip report. This daily trip report provided the opportunity to investigate the
potential impact of the newly instituted Achilles Tang daily bag limit.
In West Hawai'i in 2012, 38 commercial aquarium collectors collectively caught (and reported)
8,111 Achilles Tang over a total of 515 days effort. Only 21% of the daily catches per fisher
exceeded the proposed daily bag limit yet they represented 65.8% of the total catch. If the
Achilles Tang bag limit had been in effect in 2012 the total catch would have been reduced by
3,227 fish — a 40.3% reduction in catch.
34
It is difficult to precisely project the overall impact of the West Hawaii Achilles Tang bag limit.
On the one hand, if there is good compliance with the limit and existing conditions regarding
collecting, market forces and population abundances remain relatively stable, then a decrease in
overall catch would be anticipated. If targeted effort towards this species increases, even while
limited by the bag limit, total catch could actually increase. Achilles Tang catch subsequent to
this analysis have not decreased but rather have increased slightly (Figure 21). Given the clear
evidence for a marked decline in the population of Achilles Tang in West Hawaii, the aquarium -
only bag limit may prove insufficient to stem this decline.
It should be noted that Achilles Tang is the only species on the permitted aquarium "White List"
which is listed as an "Ecologically Unsustainable Species" by the Sustainable Aquarium Industry
Association (SAIA http•//www saia-online.eu/index.php/en/).
Adaptive Management of the Aquarium Fishery
When the White List of collectible aquarium species was being formulated by DAR and the
WRFC, it was understood that the dynamics of marine ecosystems are complex and often poorly
understood. Species populations can wax and wane over time and often this variability is
unpredictable. It was thus considered essential to incorporate some management flexibility in
the White List to respond to the changing situations of the various species. Such an approach
can be termed "Adaptive Management" (McGraw-Hill 2005). Achilles Tang was a species
which was in the forefront of the utilization of this approach.
To accomplish such adaptive management, the draft WHRFMA rule incorporated a provision
allowing the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) to impose a moratorium on further
collecting of a white list species. The moratorium would be triggered if DAR provided sufficient
data to the BLNR indicating that the population of a particular species in West Hawai'i might be
jeopardized (e.g. substantial decline in numbers) by overcollecting or other factors. A similar
BLNR moratorium provision (regarding urchin harvesting) was incorporated in another West
Hawaii rule (HAR 13-37 Old Kona Airport MLCD) which was amended in 2005. Somewhat
similar BLNR prerogatives also exist in other DLNR rules (e.g. HAR § 13-94-11 — regarding
bottomfish).
Although both the DAR legal fellow and DLNR's Deputy Director (a former Deputy AG
himself) concurred with the board moratorium approach in the rule, the Deputy AG reviewing
the rule would not approve such a moratorium and ultimately it was removed. The Deputy AG
asserted that any such changes to the rule (i.e. a species-specific moratorium) could only be
made by amending the rule via Hawaii Administrative Rule making (Chapter 91). Such a
process can take many years to accomplish thereby obviating any real-time adaptive
management.
Following this setback to effective management, an alternative strategy was attempted whereby
WHFC/DAR would seek specific legislative authorization to institute a moratorium process in
West Hawaii (only). Such bills were introduced in 2012 (1-1132129) and 2013 (HB 185) by
Representative Cindy Evans (and others). These bills authorized the Board of Land and Natural
Resources (BLNR) to impose temporary aquarium management measures (i.e., bag limits, closed
seasons or moratoriums) within the WHRFMA without the need to go through the lengthy
35
administrative rule-making process. It also required DLNR to establish a limited entry program
for commercial aquarium fishers. Neither of these bills was approved by the Legislature and thus
adaptive management of the West Hawai'i aquarium fishery is still not possible.
Other White List Species
Of the other top 10 collected aquarium species (Table 3) two species (Forcepsfish and Potter's
Angelfish) had significant population increases in one or more of the management areas while
two species (Ornate Wrasse and Fourspot Butterflyfish) declined significantly in one or more of
the areas. While the latter two species declined in the Open Areas, they also declined in one or
the other of the protected areas (FRA or MPA) suggesting that factors other than aquarium
collecting were also affecting their populations.
Three of the top 10 species showed no significant change in any of the areas. It should be kept in
mind that scientific studies on reef fishes are notoriously challenging to analyze due to the often
high variability of fish abundance in both time and space. Even with a rigorous statistical design
and 16 years of study, it is difficult to statistically detect changes in abundances except for the
more common species that exhibit relatively large changes.
Table 4 shows Before and After changes for the other 24 species on the White List for which we
have solid survey data. Of these, 5 species showed a significant population increase in one or
more of the management areas while 11 decreased. Of the species which declined, only a single
one (Bird Wrasse) declined exclusively in the Open Areas again indicating that factors other than
aquarium collecting were also affecting the populations of these other species.
Table 4. Changes in abundance of the next 24 most collected aquarium fishes in West
Hawaii. 'Before'= Mean of 1999-2000; 'After'= Mean of 2012-2013. Shaded
cells show statistically significant changes. Young of Year (YOY) not included
OVERALL
MEAN DENSITY
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
(NO./100M2)
CHANGE IN
p
DENSITY
Before
After
Multiband Butterflyfish
.
Chaetodon multicinctus
....... ........ .........
Open
4.00
3.73
-.Q.....27..._ .
.. 0.74
MPA
4.94
4.64
-0.30
0.22
.....
Goldrim Surgeonfish
......
Acanthurus nigricans
......
...
FRA
....
0 04
.
0.04
+0.01
1.00
................
Open
0.01
0.07
+0.07
.....
0.09
MPA
0.11
0.14
+0.04
0.64
Saddle Wrasse
Thalassoma duperrey
.66
2.11'
-_ .
<0.001
....
_ Open
5.93
3.10
-2.84
<0.001
MPA
4.39
3.04
-1.35
<0.001
36
.......... .......
Yellowtail Coris
.. ..... ..
Coris gaimard
FRA
0.17
0.17
0.00
1.00
............. .... .........
Open
0.13
0.18
+0. 06
0.3 3
..
MPA
0.30
... ....
0.22
-0.08
0.40
Shortnose Wrasse
.._ ......
Macropharyngodon geoffroy
FRA
0.02
0.01
.. _..._._ .... _.....
0.0 .
_
0.57.....
......
.............
O en
0.02
0 03
+0.01__ .............0.87
.........
._.........
...........
MPA
.........
0.01
0.03
.......
+0.01
... ................
0.82
Bird Wrasse
Gomphosus varius
FRA
0.67
0.81
+0.13
0.12
MPA
1.04
1.16
-0.12
0.48 `.
Brown Surgeonfish
Acanthurus nigrofuscus
FRA 8.58.6fi`
= 9 s...
20.001
Open
11.20
14.23
+3.03
<0.001
MPA
7.68
10.16
+2.48
<0.001
Spotted Boxfish
Ostracion meleagris
FRA
0.05
0.06
+0.01
0.88
Open
0.10
0.09
-0.01
0.82
MPA
0.10
0.13
+0.03
0.69
Thompson's Surgeonfish
Acanthurus thompsoni _
FRA
0.72
1.62
+0.90
<0.001
Open !
0.69....._'
0 85
+0.16
0.35 .
.................................
MPA
0.66
0.88
+0 22
0.37
_ .... ......
Lei Triggerfish
.........
Sufflamen bursa .
....
FRA '
..
.........
0 53
0.39
.......
-0.14
0.09
........
Open
0.75
_ 0.71
-0.04
0.68
MPA
0.57
? 0.50
0.06
0.59
Pencil Wrasse
I ... . ... ..........
Pseudo uloides cerasinus
FRA
0.14
0.14
0.00
1.00
........ ...
_ Open
0.05
0.18
+0.13
0.01
_
...........
........_......................................_
MPA
0.04
0.02
..............__._..................._.............................................._......_
-0.02
0.73
_
Pyramid Butterflyfish
............
Hemitaurichthys polylepis
....
..
FRA
0 02
.._.
.-_.---
0 02
.._...._. _... ,.....__
...._..................................
0.00
..._._...._...._............
..
1.00
_._.._ ......
I
.............. ...
Open
0.66.....
0.53 _.
..
_..__..._ -0.13 ......
. . 0.30 ......
.......
.............
MPA
0.59
0.21
- 0.38
0.51
Black Durgon
'Melichthys neer
FRA
0.53
0.47
-0.06
0.62
_
Open
0.43
0.35
-0.08
0.52
Milletseed Buttei_sh
Chaetodon miliaris
FRA
0.01
+0.01
0.00
0.61
Open
0.04
0.07
+0.03
0.52
Fourline Wrasse
1,Pseudocheilinus tetrataenia
.......... ..................... ...............................
FRA
1.36
2.76
...... .................... .................................
........... ......................... -.1-1-1-11.1
Open
1.66
3.05
...........................
.......
... ......... ................................................. ........ ........
.. .......................
....................................... ...... ....... ... ...............
MPA
2.95
2.52
.............. ........ ........ .................. .......................... .... ......
Hawaiian Dascyllus
........................................................................ ...............................
.................................................... ......... - ............... ............ ........................
Dasgqys albisella
. ...................... .......... .......................... ..........
.............
FRA
... ................
... .......
0.02
................
.... ...................
0.11
..... . ... I ... . ......
................. ....
................
Open
0.51
............ . ....... .
0.54
............ I ..................
............... ....................................
.....................
..................................... ....................... .................
... MPA
0.12
...............
0.14
............................
.................. - ...................
Eightline Wrasse
....... .............................
.. ..... .... ................... ...... .......................... .... ............... . ...
Pseudocheilinus octotaenia
................. ...................... .............. .............. .. I ............. I ......... ..... ..............
FRA
2.20
1.28
pen 3.31 1.75
A 3.17 1.88
Blacksid�'Hawkfish Paracirrhitesforsteri .34
0.17
2.33
1
04M
MPA
- ---------
0.26
0.34
'Blacklip Butterflyfish Chaetodon Kleinii FRA
0.00
0.00
. ................. 1-1- . ..... ------- ----
_Open
0.00
0.05
......... . . ........ - ........... . ... .. . ... . . .......
MPA
0.02
0.02
!Cq-nthib,of L,I j CIL I "ill'
Gilded
open
3.48
2.33
MPA
2.87
1.21,
......... .......
FRA
. . ...............
0.14
............................
0.04
Open
-
Iml
. -1
'Im
7. M
+1.40
+1.39
-0.43
+0.09
+0.02
+0.02
-1.57
-1.29
+0.07
0.00
+0.05
0.00
-1.14
-1.67
-(). I ()
-0.20
37
<0.001
<0.001
0.09
0....0'.8
0.08
0.....7..8
t�--0.001
<0.001
<0.001
-0 004
0.54
0.77
0.12
0.98
<0.001
<0.001
1).()0
0.002
38
For most of the species on the White List, collecting impact, in terms of the Open Areas.
percentage of the population being removed annually, is relatively low with 8 species having
single digit percentage catch and 23 species having catch values <1%.
Besides harvest impacts, species abundances can, and do, change over time due to other factors,
both extrinsic (e.g. habitat degradation) and intrinsic (e.g. density dependence, reproductive
success). A prime example of this is exemplified by the Saddle Wrasse (Thalassoma duperrey)
which underwent significant declines in all management areas since 1999/2000 (Table 5, Figure
24). Note that it is consistently more abundant in the Open Areas than in the FRAs or MPAs
(see Figure 24).
i
04
.6 3
a�
M
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Figure 24. Overall changes in Saddle Wrasse abundance in FRAs, MPAs and Open areas,
1999-2013. Vertical bars indicate mean density (June -Nov) of Saddle Wrasse
Young -of -Year (YOY). YOY are not included in trend line data
The Saddle Wrasse is very lightly collected (0.1 % of total catch 2012/2013) and the catch
represents a miniscule portion (0.06%) of the substantial population found in mid -depth (30'-
60') Open Areas (Table 5). There is also no commercial food fishery for this species, at least in.
West Hawaii and it doesn't appear to be highly targeted by non-commercial fishers. The cause
of the overall declining abundance of Saddle Wrasse in protected and unprotected areas is
unknown but clearly it is not due to aquarium collecting.
39
Table 5. Open Area population estimates of `White List' species and % of that population
taken annually by aquarium collectors. "Catch" is the average aquarium catch
over FY 2013 - 2014 and 30'-60' Open Area Population" is an estimate of total
numbers of fish in collected Open Areas of hard bottom habitat in 30'- 60' depths
(CY 2012 — 2013). "Catch as % of Population" is the % of the species' population
in collected Open Areas taken annually by aquarium collectors. "E" indicates an
endemic species
Achilles Tang
Yellow Tang
Black Surgeonfish
Shortnose Wrasse
Goldrim Tang
Fourspot Butterflyfish
Orangeband Surgeonfish
Orancesnine Unicornfish
Forcepsfish
Spotted Boxfish
Yellowtail Coris
Milletseed Butterflyfish
Goldrinc Surceonfish - Kole
Pencil Wrasse
Bird Wrasse
Blacklip Butterflyfish
Potter's Angelfish
Ornate Wrasse
Black Durgon
Gilded Triggerfish
Lei Triggerfish
Blackside Hawkfish
Thompson's Surgeonf
Pyramid Butterflyfish
Multiband Butterflyfi;
Hawaiian Dascyllus
Saddle Wrasse
Redbarred Hawkfish
Eiglitline Wrasse
Fourline Wrasse
Brown Surgeonfish
HI Whitespotted Tob,
Bluestripe Snapper - "
Acanthurus achilles
Zebrasoma flavescens
Ctenochaetus hawadensis
Acanthurus nigricans
Chaetodon quadrimacula,
Acanthurus olivaceus
Naso lituratus
Forcipiger flavissimus
Ostracion meleagris
Coris gaimard
Chaetodon miliaris
Ctenochaetus strigosus
Pseudojuloides cerasinus
Gomphosus varius
Chaetodon kleinii
Centropyge potteri
Halichoeres ornatissimus
Melichthys niger
Xanthichthys auromargin
Sufflamen bursa
Paracirrhites forsteri
Acanthurus thompsoni
Hemitaurichthys polylepi.
Chaetodon multicinctus
Dascyllus albisella
Thalassoma duverrev
Pseudocheilinus octotaenia
Pseudocheilinus tetrataenia
Acanthurus nigrofuscus
Canthigaster jactator
Lu Janus kasmira
7,073
273,778
258
439
699
698
4,026
1,045
175
288
61
28,407
108
180
23
945
724
71
19
128
31
130
73
670
43
327
6
35
47
180
20
0
21,627
1,663,775
34,678
7,517
26,101
150,642
43,999
9,322
19,762
7,085
3,616,529
19,390
43,254
5,593
237,149
192,404
38,033
11,186
76,440
20,508
91,728
56,677
580,196
57,796
537,688
9,665
187,557
327,758
1,646,996
250,573
7,830
32.70%
17.26%
11.66%
8.01%
5.83%
3.18%
2.67%
2.67%
2.38%
1.88%
1.45%
0.85%
0.79%
0.56%
0.42%
0.40%
0.40%
0.38%
0.19%
0.17%
0.17%
0.15%
0.14%
0.13%
0.12%
0.07%
0.06%
0.06%
0.02%
0.01%
0.01%
0.01%
0.00%
40
Peacock Grouper - Roi
Cephalopholis argus
0
24,610
0.00%
Psychedelic Wrasse
Anampses chrysocephalus
E 236
N/A
N/A
Tinker's Butterflyfish
Chaetodon tinkeri
206
N/A
N/A
Longfin anthias
Pseudanthias hawaiiensis
E 130
N/A
N/A
Flame Wrasse
Cirrhilabrus jordani
E 67
N/A
N/A
Fisher's Angelfish
Centropyge fisheri
58
N/A
N/A
Eyestripe Surgeon
Acanthurus dussumieri
1
N/A
N/A
N/A — Species occurs in habitats not adequately surveyed by transects
Examination of the yearly differences in a species' abundance between the Open Areas and the
FRAs (e.g. Figures 6, 7 and 24) reveals that six species are consistently more abundant in the
FRAs than in the Open Areas. These include the heavily harvested Yellow Tang and Kole.
Eleven species showed no consistent pattern and 17 species were consistently more abundant in
the Open Areas.
Endemic Species on the White List
An endemic species is a one whose presence is restricted to a specific geographic area. Of the
662 species of reef and shore fishes in the Hawaiian Islands, it is currently estimated that 25% of
them are endemic (Randall 2007). Of the 40 species on the WHFC White List (Table 6), 11
(27.5%) are considered endemic to Hawaii - only slightly above the average level of overall
Hawaii marine fish endemism. All but one of the endemic species (Psychedelic Wrasse -
Anampses chrysocephalus) also occurs at Johnston Atoll.
A number of Hawaiian endemics are important food species and are harvested in substantial
numbers both commercially and non -commercially. These include Aholehole, 'Alai'ihi
'Aweoweo, Hapu'u, Kole, Kumu, Mamo, Nabeta, Nohu, Uhu, Banded Spiny Lobster and three
species of'Opihi.
Several researchers have commented on the relative abundance of endemic fishes. Gosline and
Brock (1960) noted "that many of the endemic fish of the Hawaiian Islands are the most
abundant of their genera" and similarly Hourigan & Reese (1987) state that "many endemic
species are the most abundant Hawaiian fishes in their families." Randall (2007) commented
that "native species have evolved in isolated outposts such as Hawaii for long periods of time
and therefore have had ample opportunity to become fully adapted to their environment."
Table 6. Endemic species on the White List. References relative to abundance are listed
below. Listed in the third column are population estimates on West Hawai'i reefs in hard
bottom habitat in 30'-60' depths. These estimates are derived from WHAP survey
densities (2013) and area estimates from NOAA habitat maps. The forth column lists the
% of a species population in 30'-60' Open areas which is taken annually by aquarium
collectors (based on FY 13-14 records)
8pces' Abuirdm
Area P� m '* en � '
Macropharyngodon geoffroy 3,222 8.01%
Chaetodon miliaris Most common B -Fly 1°2 7,085 0.85%
41
Ctenochaetus stri osus
Very common on HI reefs'
3,616,529
0.79%
Centropyge potteri
Most common angelfish'
237,149
0.40%
Chaetodon multicinctus
580,196
0.12%
Dasc llus albisella
57,796
0.07%
Thalassoma duperrey
Most common inshore wrasse'
537,688
0.06%
Canthi aster 'actator
Most common Toby'
250,573
0.01%
Anam ses chrysocephalus
NA*
NA
Cirrhilabrus 'ordani
Common in right habitat3
NA
NA
Pseudanthias hawaiiensis
Abundant at 40-199m4
NA
NA
NA* - Species occurs in habitats deeper than transects
1. Randall J.E. 2007, 2. Brock V.E. and T.C. Chamberlain. 1968, 3. Hoover J.P. 2008,
4. Chave E.H. and B.C. Mundy. 1994.
Six of 11 endemic species on the White List are common in suitable habitat (Table 6).
Collecting pressure on eight of these species, those for which we have adequate survey data,
takes <9% of their Open Area population annually. Seven of the 8 species have <1% of their
population collected annually.
Note that the population estimates presented in Table 6 represent only a portion of available
habitat where these species occur and populations in MPAs and FRAs are essentially not
collected. Thus total populations in all habitats are invariably higher than indicated for just the
30'-60' depth range indicated above.
Figure 25 shows the difference in an endemic species' abundance in West Hawai'i Fish
Replenishment Areas (FBAs) relative to Open Areas. Of the eight endemic species for which we
have good survey data, only Kole and the Multiband Butterflyfish (Chaetodon multicinctus) are
consistently less abundant in the Open Areas relative to the FRAs.
Kole are currently (2012/2013) 23.7% less abundant in Open Areas than in FBAs (avg. 2012-
2013). The Multiband Butterflyfish has also been consistently less abundant in the Open Areas
but this difference has been decreasing in recent years and now the difference is only 5.9% (avg.
2012-2013). The % of the Open Area population of both these species taken by aquarium
collectors in recent years is <1% (Table 5). Combined with the facts that the abundance of the
other six endemic species are not consistently lower in the Open Areas and none of the 8 has
significantly declined only in Open Areas, indications are that aquarium related impacts on these
species are very low.
42
Figure 25. Difference in the abundance of Endemic White List species in West Hawaii
Fish Replenishment Areas (FRAs, n=9) relative to Open Areas (n=9). Bars
represent the % difference in abundance for each year from 1999 to 2013. Bars
above the x axis indicate greater abundance in the Open Areas than the FRAs.
Bars below the axis indicate greater abundance in the FRAs than the Open
Areas
For three endemic species on the White List, Psychedelic Wrasse (A. chrysocephalus), Hawaiian
Longfin Anthias (Pseudanthias hawaiiensis) and Flame Wrasse (Cirrhilabrus jordani), we do
not have adequate population estimates to assess the impact of continued aquarium collection
due to their deeper water habitats. There is also another non -endemic species, Tinker's
Butterflyflsh (Chaetodon tinkeri), for which data is similarly lacking.
Wherever possible other sources of data should be utilized to monitor the status of these species
and their continued inclusion on the White List. Figure 26 shows the West Hawaii aquarium
catch and price paid per fish (adjusted for inflation) for the four species noted above.
Meaningful trends in catch report data for these species aren't readily apparent although there is
some indication of a downward trend in catch for Tinker's Butterfly. Value isn't increasing
however as would be expected if scarcity was affecting prices. It is clear that collection of
Hawaii Longfin Anthias is a relatively recent development. The value of individual fish received
by collectors has been increasing for Flame Wrasse and Hawaiian Longfin Anthias and
decreasing for Psychedelic Wrasse likely driven by market forces (i.e. aquarist preferences).
43
Figure 26. West Hawaii aquarium catch (vertical bars) and ex -vessel price per fish of
selected species
The only other relevant sources of information on these four species are observations at depth
from the dive logs of local technical divers Gerard and Dr. Vicky Newman.. Dives ranged from a
minimum depth of 60 feet to a maximum depth of 331 feet. Figure 27 presents Gerard
Newman's observations as percentage of dives on which a particular species was observed
within a given type of management area over the period 2002-2011.
3,tU0 "f OMP,.;e.S Chert ^ CeSdhtifU4
.'
Oar,'06,p rw*R f
P"d-tek vrr—
T�M, r �eM h'11 ,
soa
f E
d
f
[ 4
E
y'�'.ypha`$ 14>
4 ,4 14 .y4IP14;11-1 ,Y -T' .tl' 1661 -141 -.e 10 ,�5'�.IVI
11Y @'.b 11.S ryzl0 4.k'Y.
41111 vylb Sp'QQ 1*10,10 4#141$1 le- 1-+10 1-+
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year
"0
iirr#zJnDrus lsrderrn
Fseuttarztheds ler wuaeemu
t#smcta dsse
au C�m6� +�uhes,
sas
$49 s
I',
w 35D
-
E
t
_ Sn -
�•
a
k['
�• X Y E !, i,
S3�t �.
P
I Iq} Y """1 V
Z
s
il
a
a1
$Ilk
n
s`E
€t�■■■1pi
n
11# le 1*14#.1--01e �-e ..1 10 Op 111 le.`ti' .fe 01144,y1
le ,,°s'P IIPI le to I ryle le 'A O' le 1- ,fly, -ON, 44'1'y�1
Huai Year
Fiscal Yea*
Figure 26. West Hawaii aquarium catch (vertical bars) and ex -vessel price per fish of
selected species
The only other relevant sources of information on these four species are observations at depth
from the dive logs of local technical divers Gerard and Dr. Vicky Newman.. Dives ranged from a
minimum depth of 60 feet to a maximum depth of 331 feet. Figure 27 presents Gerard
Newman's observations as percentage of dives on which a particular species was observed
within a given type of management area over the period 2002-2011.
44
2>
m 20
v
a
or,
c
21s
�a
r
4 10
V
Sightings of DeepwaterWhitelist Species
In west Hawaii Areas (60'-331')
2002-2011 (N= 1127 dives)
a MPA (N=402)
• FRA (N=397)
• Opts (Nz328)
Tinker's Sutterflyfish
NI targfi+Anthlas
Figure 27. Deepwater sightings by West Hawai'i technical divers. N= 1,340 dives
Tinker's Butterflyfish and Psychedelic Wrasse were substantially more common in the long term
protected areas (MPAs) while Flame Wrasse and Hawaiian Longfin Anthias were more abundant
in the FRAs. Sightings for all these species in all management areas did not exceed 25% of
observational dives.
Aquarium reef fish catch vs. non -aquarium catch
The role of Herbivorous fishes in maintaining resiliency by exerting strong top-down pressure on
macroalgae growth on coral reefs has been well documented (e.g. Bulleri et al. 2013). Of
particular importance are the abundance of large herbivores such as parrotfishes (Ong and
Holland 2010). Herbivore biomass in the West Hawaii MPAs (Figure 28) is currently
(2012/2013) significantly higher (1.8X) than in the FRAs or the Open areas (ANOVA p<0.001).
Herbivore biomass is also a slightly but significantly greater in the FRAs than in the Open areas
(ANOVA p=0.001). In contrast to the MPAs, there are significant declining long term trends of
herbivore biomass in both the Open areas (p=0.01) and the FRAs (p=0.02).
Both the Open Areas and FRAs permit all fishers (excepting aquarium collectors) almost
unrestricted take of herbivores such as surgeonfishes and parrotfishes with few size limits (all
minimum sizes) and no bag limits. In contrast, the MPAs have additional restrictions affecting
herbivore take including a few highly protected or no -take areas. Other types of fishing (i.e. food
fishing) are likely responsible for observed differences between these areas and the more
protected MPAs A newly instituted SCUBA spearfishing ban hopefully will provide additional
coast -wide protection for important herbivores especially parrotfishes which are especially
vulnerable at night.
50
45
40
35
30
E
25
U)
R
c 20
m
15
10
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
45
Figure 28. Overall change in herbivore biomass in FRA, MPA and open areas 2003-2013.
Note WRAP fish sizing commenced in 2003
In order to gain a more balanced perspective on the generalized impact on reef fishes by
aquarium collecting vis a vis other types of reef fishing activities, reef fish catch by aquarium
collectors were compared with the catch of other commercial fishers and non-commercial
`recreational' fishers. Both aquarium collectors and other commercial fishers are required by
law and Administrative Rule to submit catch reports and thus island specific reef fish catch data
is available for each group. As noted previously (Figure 5), recent analysis suggests that
aquarium catch reports appear to fairly accurately reflect actual catch. Unfortunately, similar
assurance isn't available for other commercial catch reports and there is information suggesting
that commercial catches are likely substantially underestimated (Milne 2012).
Recreational fishers in Hawaii are not required to submit catch reports but such catch data has
been collected since 2003 by the Hawaii Marine Recreational Marine Fishing Survey (HMRFS)
and subsequently since 2007 by NOAA's Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP).
Species-specific recreational catch data on a statewide basis is available online:
http://vv,,A,w.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st] /recreational/queries/custom time series.html. All MRIP catch
data from 2008 thru 2010 was decreased by a factor of 81.96% (i.e., 1/1.22) because of a count
error made by NOAA in the population household numbers for Maui County (Hongguang 2012).
MRIP data is presented on a state-wide basis. Averaged over the period 2008-20011, the number
of reef fishes caught statewide by the recreational and commercial sectors has been quite
comparable averaging 1,511,025/yr. for recreational fishers and 1,554,010/yr. for commercial
(i.e. non -aquarium) fishers.
46
The combined catch however is 1.7X the total statewide take (1,810,402/yr.) of aquarium fishes.
The average yearly biomass (pounds) of reef fish caught by commercial fishers was similar for
both commercial fishers (1,199,520 lbs.) and recreational fishers (1,160,337 lbs.). A biomass
comparison was not made with the aquarium catch.
To compare total reef fish catches for the various fishing sectors on a more localized area basis,
it was necessary to apportion the recreational catch among island areas. An adjustment factor
was calculated based on the percentage of statewide commercial reef fish landings reported from
each area (generally island or county as well as West Hawai'i). A separate adjustment factor was
derived for both number of reef fishes caught and biomass. Biomass was estimated for aquarium
fish catch by specifying a targeted size or typical maximum size of collected species based on
information provided by active collectors (n= 7) and Stevenson et.al. (2011). Size data was then
converted to weight utilizing length to weight conversion factors (DAR database).
In West Hawaii, the aquarium fishery takes 1.8X the number of reef fishes taken by recreational
and other commercial fishers combined. If Yellow Tang, which is primarily harvested at small
sizes and not targeted by other fishers, is excluded, the recreational and commercial fisheries
combine to take 3X the number of reef fishes caught by aquarium collectors (Figure 29).
300,000
z 250,000
m
3
C
C
Q 200,000
L
3
lC
U 150,000
t
N
LL
d
100,000
w
O
N
a
E 50,000
3
Z
2008 2009 2010 2011
Figure 29. Comparison of the number of reef fishes, excluding Yellow Tang, caught by
recreational, commercial and aquarium fishers in West Hawai'i
In terms of reef fish biomass caught by the different fisheries in West Hawaii, considerably
more biomass is taken by the combined recreational and commercial fisheries either including
Yellow Tang (2.8X) or excluding it (8.6X) (Figure 30). Additionally, unlike the aquarium
fishery which targets mostly immature fish, the other fisheries selectively target the larger
breeding portion of the population which has profound implications for the sustainable usage of
the resource. This is reflected in Figure 28.
47
300,000
", 250,000
M
c
c
a 200,000
L
tM
3
M
V 150,000
_A
LL
CD
100,000
0
0
U)
3 50,000
0
CL
2008 2009 2010 2011
Figure 30. Comparison of the biomass of reef fishes caught by recreational, commercial
and aquarium fishers in West Hawaii
As in West Hawai'i (excluding Yellow Tang) the total take of reef fish by commercial and non-
commercial (`recreational') fishers on other islands also greatly exceeds the numbers and
biomass of the fish taken by aquarium collectors (Table 7). Note that in recent years the
aquarium catch on Maui has declined markedly as several collectors moved off island. FY14
Maui aquarium catch (3 collectors) totaled 278 organisms.
Table 7. Island comparison of the number and pounds of reef fishes caught by recreational
and commercial fishers relative to aquarium collectors 2008-2011. The far right
column represents Total Non AQ catch of reef fish relative to the catch taken by -
aquarium collectors
Reef Fish Catch Numbers
Recreational
Commercial
Total Non AQ
Aquarium
Non AQ/AQ
West Hawaii
146,176
48,498
194,674
343,729
0.6X
West Hawaii w/o YT
146,176
48,498
194,674
64,815
3X
Maui
218,474
71,730
290,204
13,316
22X
'Oahu
675,520
1 196,417
1 871,936
1 81,514
11X
Kauai
218,423
1 93,223
1 311,645
546
571X
Reef Fish Catch Biomass lbs.
West Hawai'i
153,193
55,468
208,661
75,274
2.8X
West Hawaii w/o YT
153,193
55,468
208,661
25,248
8.6X
Maui
342,769
122,268
465,037
3,217
145X
'Oahu
1 496,132
242,812
1 738,945
1 36,119
20X
Kauai
1 215,685
63,794
1 279,479
1 626
446X
48
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The West Hawai'i Aquarium Project (WHAP) would not have been possible without
initial support and funding by the Hawai'i Coral Reef Initiative Research Program
(HCRI-RP). HCRI-RP was established in 1998 to support scientific research and
monitoring to enhance the state's capacity to manage its coral reef resources.
Since 2002, the West Hawaii coral reef monitoring program has been funded by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Coral Reef Conservation
Program under the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NOAA/NCCOS).
Many people have played important roles in laying the groundwork for successful and
adaptive marine resource co -management in West Hawaii. David Tarnas is to be
especially commended for his innovative and forward looking legislation. Sara Peck of
UH Sea Grant College Program had been involved from the beginning and was
instrumental in ensuring community participation and education. Many other people
have played and continue to play important roles in West Hawaii resource co -
management. Some of them are listed below; Mahalo nui to those who are not listed:
Project & Data Mana eg ment:
Principal Investigators:
William Walsh Ph.D. Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources
Brian Tissot Ph.D. Humboldt State University
Leon Hallacher Ph.D. University of Hawaii Hilo
Ivor Williams Ph.D. NOAA Coral Reef Ecosystem Division
Jill Zamzow Ph.D. NOAA Coral Reef Ecosystem Division
Diver—
Mark Albins, Paula Ayotte, Josh Ballauer, Camille Barnett, Matt Barton, Zachary
Caldwell, Brent Carman, Katia Chikasuye, Paul Clark, Steve Cotton, Anne Creason, Jan
Dierking, Brian Doo, Jeff Eble, Katie Gaab, Karen Geisler, Jonatha Giddens, Jeffrey
Gomas, Brian Greene, Kathy Greenwood, Jim Gunderson, Cynthia Hankins, Pete
Hendricks, Ranya Henson, Jackie Holbrook, Marc Hughes, Jonathan Hultquist, Laura
Jackson, John Kahiapo, Lindsey Kramer, Caitlin Kryss, Darrell Kuamo'o, Megan
Lamson, Joe Laughlin, Ross Martin, Sara McCutcheon, Scarlet Mraz, Jeff Muir,
Elizabeth Murphy, Bob Nishimoto Ph.D., Shaun Norris, Daniel Okumura, Michelle
Oldenburg, Kara Osada-D'Avella, Rich Osada, Delisse Ortiz, Kim Page, Erica Perez,
Kanoe Phillips, Greg Polloi, Linda Preskitt, Noelani Puniwai, Julia Rose, Noelle
Ruscinski, Chelsie Settlemier, Jill Sommers, James Stilley, Kosta Stamoulis, Allison
Suhr, Jen Vandeveur, Dan VanRavensway, Cecile Walsh, Todd Wass, Lisa Wedding,
Darla White, Charles Wiggins, Amy Young, Rachael Younger, Brian Zyglicynski
49
REFERENCES
Bogeberg M.A. 2014. Habitat associations of the surgeonfish, Yellow Tang (Zebrasoma
flavescens), from shallow to upper mesophotic coral reefs (30-40m) in West
Hawaii. MS. Thesis, Washington State University. 35 pp.
Brock V. E and T. C Chamberlain. 1968. A geological and ecological reconnaissance off
Western Oahu, Hawaii principally by means of the research submarine
"Asherah". Pac. Sci. XXII: 373-394.
Bulleri F., Couraqudon-Reale M., Lison de Loma T. and J. Claudet. 2013. Variability in
the effects of macroalgae on the survival and growth of corals: The consumer
connection. PLoS ONE 8(11): e79712. doi:10.1371 /journal.pone.007912.
Capitini C.A., Tissot, B.N., Carroll, M., Walsh W.J. and S. Peck. 2004. Competing
Perspectives in Resource Protection: the Case of Marine Protected Areas in West
Hawaii. Society and Natural Resources 17: 763-778.
Cesar H., Beukering P.V., Pintz S., and J. Dierking. 2002. Economic valuation of the
coral reefs of Hawaii. Final Report. Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative Research
Program. 117 pp.
Chave E.H and B.C. Mundy. 1994. Deep-sea benthic fish of the Hawaiian Archipelago,
Cross Seamount and Johnston Atoll. Pac. Sci. 48(4): 367-406.
Christie M.R., Tissot, B.N., Albins, M.A., Beets, J.P., Jia, J, Ortiz D.M., Thompson, S.E.
and M.A. Hixon. 2010.
Claisse J.T., Kienzle M., Bushnell M.E., Shafer D.J. and J.D. Parrish. Habitat- and sex-
specific life history patterns of yellow tang Zebrasoma flavescens in Hawaii, USA.
Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 389: 245-255. doi: 10:3354/meps08114
Dierking J. 2002. Socio-economic study of the aquarium fish industry in West Hawaii.
Cesar Environmental Economics Consulting (CEEC). 22 pp.
Gosline W.A. and V.E. Brock. 1960. Handbook of Hawaiian Fishes. The University Press
of Hawaii. 372 pp.
Grorud-Colvert K., Claudet J., Tissot B. N., Caselle J. E., Carr M. H., Day J. C.,
Friedlander A. M., Lester S. E., de Loma T. L., Malone D. & Walsh W. J. (2014)
Marine protected area networks: assessing whether the whole is greater than the
sum of its parts. PloS One 9(8): e102298: doi:10.1371/iournal.pone.0102298.
Gregory R. 2009. USA -Hawaii (Big Island) — The West Hawai'i Fisheries Council: A
forum for coral reef stakeholders. The EcoTipping Points Project. 28 pp.
Available online: http•//www.ecotippingpoints.org/our-stories/indepth/usa-hawaii-
fisheries-council-community-participation.html.
Hallacher L.E. and B.N. Tissot. 1999. QUEST: Quantitative Underwater Ecological
Survey Techniques: A coral reef monitoring workshop. Proceedings of the
Hawai' i Coral Reef Monitoring Workshop, Dept. of Land and Natural Resources,
Honolulu, HI.
50
Hongguang M. 2012. Catch and Effort Estimates for 2003-2010 from the Hawaii Marine
Recreational Fishing Survey. PIFSC Internal Report IR -12-010. 08 March,
2012.
Hoover J. P. 2008. The Ultimate Guide to Hawaiian Reef Fishes, Sea Turtles, Dolphins,
whales and seals. Mutual Publishing. 388pp.
Hourigan T.F. and E.S. Reese. 1987. Mid -ocean isolation and the evolution of Hawaiian
reef fishes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2(7): 187-191.
Kessler B.L. 2004. Stakeholder participation: A synthesis of current literature. National
Marine Protected Areas Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. 24pp.
Loke M., C. Geslani, B. Takenaka and P.S. Leung. 2012. An overview of seafood
consumption and supply sources: Hawai'i versus U.S. CTAHR, University of
Hawai'i at Manoa Economic Issues EI -22. 9 pp.
Maurin P. and S. Peck. 2008. The West Hawaii Fisheries Council Case Study Report.
University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program. 32pp. Available online:
http://www soest hawaii edu/SEAGRANT/cominunication/pdf/West%20Hawaii
%20Fisheries%20Council.pdf
McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Bioscience. 2005. The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc. 972 pp.
Milne N. 2012. Hawaii Coral Reef Dealer Study. Western Pacific Regional Fishery
Management Council Contract No: 11 -Coral -07. 48pp.
Ong L. and K. Holland. 2010. Bioerosion of coral reefs by two Hawaiian parrotfishes:
species, size differences and fishery implications. Mar. Biol. DOI
10.1007/s002278 -010-1411-y
Randall J. E. 2007. Reef and Shore Fishes of the Hawaiian Islands. Sea Grant Program.
546pp.
Rossiter J.S. and A. Levine. 2013. What makes a "successful" marine protected area?
The unique context of Hawaii' fish replenishment areas. Marine Policy
ilttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/i.marpol.2013.08.022
Rumsey D.J. 2011. Statistics for Dummies, 2nd Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 384pp.
Stevenson T.C., Tissot B.N. and J. Dierking. 2011. Fisher behaviour influences catch
productivity and selectivity in West Hawaii's aquarium fishery. ICES Journal of
Marine Science. 68(5): 813-822.
Stevenson T.C., Tissot B.N. and W.J. Walsh. 2013. Socioeconomic consequences of
fishing displacement from marine protected areas in Hawaii. Biol. Cons. 160: 50-
58.
51
Talbot R. 2014. Biblical" Spawning Event on Hawaiian Reefs. Coral Magazine.
http•//www reet2rainforest.com/2014/08/29/biblical-spawning-event-on-
hawaiian-reefs/
Tissot B.N. 2005. Integral marine ecology: community-based fishery management in
Hawai'i. World Futures 61:79-95
Tissot B.N., Walsh W. and L.E. Hallacher. 2004. Evaluating the effectiveness of a marine
reserve network in Hawaii to increase the productivity of an aquarium fishery.
Pacific Science 58(2): 175-188.
Tissot B.N., Walsh W.J. and M.A. Hixon. 2009. Hawaiian islands marine ecosystem case
study: Ecosystem- and community-based management in Hawaii. Coastal
Management 37:255-273.
Walsh W.J. 1984. Aspects of nocturnal shelter, habitat space, and juvenile recruitment in
Hawaiian coral reef fishes. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Hawaii. 475 pp.
Walsh W.J. 1987. Patterns of recruitment and spawning in Hawaiian reef fishes.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 18(4): 257-276.
Walsh W.J. 1999. Community -Based management of a Hawai'i aquarium fishery.
Marine Ornamentals '99, Waikoloa, Hawaii, November 16-19, 1999.
Walsh W.J., Cotton S.P., Dierking, J and I.D. Williams. 2003. The Commercial Marine
Aquarium Fishery in Hawai'i 1976-2003. In: Friedlander A.M. (ed.) Status of
Hawai' is Coastal Fisheries in the New Millennium. Proceedings of a
Symposium sponsored by the American Fisheries Society, Hawaii Chapter. pp.
132-159.
Walsh W., Cotton S., Barnett C., Couch C., Preskitt L., Tissot B. and K Osada-D'Avella.
2013. Long -Term Monitoring of Coral Reefs of the Main Hawaiian Island. Final
Report 2009 NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program. 97 pp. Available online:
http•//dlnr hawaii gov/dar/files/2014/04/NOAA 2013 WHi -Mon -Rep.pdf
Walsh W.J. 2013. South Kohala Reefs in Dire Straits.
http://kaikuleana.net/DireStraits.pdf
West Hawaii Today. 2014. Council to consider aquarium collector regulations. Nov. 11,
2014. http://westhawaiitodav com/news/local-news/council-consider-aquarium-
collector-regulations
Williams I.D., Walsh W.J., Claisse J.T., Tissot B.N. and K.A. Stamoulis. 2009. Impacts
of a Hawaiian marine protected area network on the abundance and fishery
sustainability of the yellow tang, Zebrasoma flavescens. Biol. Cons. 142: 1066-
1073.