A ban on aquarium fishing off Oahu moved forward Tuesday, with the Senate passing by a vote of 19-6 its third reading of a bill received from the House.
In its current state, HB 2101 prohibits commercial aquarium fishing in counties with a population greater than 500,000, which would only apply to the City and County of Honolulu. It also would only last until the
Holomua Marine Initiative, the Division of Aquatic Resources nearshore resource management approach
establishing rules for the practice.
Previous versions of the bill asked for a ban in counties with populations between 200,000 and 300,000 — which only applied to
Hawaii County — as well as a statewide ban.
It will now move on to conference committee, where members of each chamber will further discuss whether the bill requires changes, should pass or not move forward.
Those in support of the ban say the trade harms reef ecosystems and is at odds with Hawaii’s pubic trust doctrine, which requires the state to manage water, land and natural resources for the benefits of the public. The doctrine also prioritizes Native Hawaiian rights, ecosystem health and public use over private commercial interests.
Specifically when it comes to marine resources, the doctrine said, the state must ensure any approved mariculture trade protects the public’s use and enjoyment of the reefs.
Those against the bill, however, argue it hurts family and small businesses that depend on aquarium fishing for income, despite the trade not being allowed since 2017, when a court declared all aquarium fish permits illegal and void because the permitting process did not comply with environmental assessment requirements.
Prospective aquarium fishers say they have spent large amounts of money and time going through environmental review processes to comply with state law and the court’s decision, only for a ban to move forward in the Legislature, which they say isn’t fair.
The legislative move comes on the heels of the Division of Aquatic Resources, known as “DAR” and a part of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, holding two public meetings soliciting public comment to modify rules that would reopen the trade in West Hawaii, where the controversial issue is most prevalent.
The two meetings were held back-to-back on March 31 and April 1, with one being on Zoom and the other in-person at Kealakahe High School in Kailua-Kona.
The proposed rules would establish statewide requirements for aquarium fishing permits, which would include Hawaii Environmental Policy Act compliance. They would also repeal the permit and rules that were specific to West Hawaii and replace it with new terms and conditions, an approved-species list and impose annual catch limits specific to the area.
It would also establish enforcement parameters and additional registration
requirements.
Both meetings drew dozens of residents who opposed reopening the trade altogether. Many cited environmental concerns while others questioned the government’s ability to effectively enforce its rules.
“Our coral reefs have already been under extreme stress,” Inga Gibson, policy director for Pono Advocacy LLC, said in the March 31 meeting. “It’s just really irresponsible to, of all times, consider reopening the trade.”
David McGuire said reopening the trade would “swing wide the doors for poaching.”
“We’re going to have rampant poaching, as we had before,” McGuire said. “We know that will happen because DAR has essentially no presence over here, they’ve never done significant enforcement of the aquarium collection trade.”
McGuire said DAR would have to be on the water and at docks and boat ramps
frequently to effectively enforce its rules, but said the agency shows up only about once per year asking to look for fire extinguishers and life jackets. He also expressed concern about fishermen misrepresenting their reported catches to authorities.
Renee Umberger said reopening the trade in West Hawaii was “a deep betrayal of trust” that went against a community-driven effort to protect coral reefs.
“The reality is simple,” she said. “We need more
native fish — not fewer.”
Lena Alalei, with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, said the agency opposed the reopening of the trade because it has negatively impacted
Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices through unneeded commercial extraction and environmental risk. Alalei said DAR should pause any rule-making and progress on reopening until current litigation and the bill in the Legislature have outcomes.
Those who supported aquarium fishing reopening contend data shows fish populations are healthy and that the trade did not negatively affect coral reefs.
Ron Tubbs, who spoke in support of the trade, said instead of focusing on aquarium trade, those worried about coral reefs should turn their attention to addressing pollution and storm runoff. He said data showed aquarium fisheries could be
sustainably managed.
“If we have healthy reefs with no runoff and without tourists chasing them out of their area, then we end up with healthy fisheries to go,” Tubbs said.
Darryl Smith said there shouldn’t be a difference between commercial fishers collecting for food and fishers collecting for aquariums.
“There’s no difference
between that and a person who collects an aquarium fish in a sustainable manner and then sells it to provide food for his family, they are equivalent,” Smith said. “We’re using it for a purpose you may not agree with, but the biomass percentage is like minutia compared to food fishing in general.”
DAR is expected to submit findings and recommendations to the Board of Land and Natural Resources soon, but did not give a specified date. If approved, the rules would then go to the Attorney General’s Office then the governor for final approval.
