Before you begin reading part two, catch up with part one.

Against the Ban

At the other end of the spectrum we have people with a solid and vested interest in the trade. Those gaining income or benefits from people and organisations in the trade or those supporting the industry for their own personal enjoyment. Hobbyists play a key role in this sector for being consumers of this natural resource and sometimes taking a strong stance to prevent increased prices or decreased availability. This group pick and choose data to suit their needs, often rejecting scientific data which goes against the hobby and rapidly circulating information that supports it. This group like the conservationists also fiercely defends its stance and is against government and its regulations which hinder the industry.

MASNA has released a new website outlining that its ”goal is to assess the accuracy of the information and educate the public about the facts concerning Hawaii’s marine aquarium fisheries and trade”. How can be this be done fairly, reasonably and without bias when MASNA “represents multiple marine aquarium societies across North America and thousands of aquarists worldwide”. A clear connection with the trade and its interest regardless of being non-profit.

MASNA supports a sustainable industry and science based management but fails to define the word ‘sustainability’. Within the scientific community, particularly those who  analyse sustainability of industries fail to reach a consensus on the word ‘sustainability’. It cites “The Yellow Tang population has increased by over 300,000, and the Kole Tang population has increased by over one million since 1999″. but fails to state how this was calculated, where this data comes from and the methodologies used to collect it.

Similar to For the Fishes it displays the same graph but with an added year. The figures displayed on the left and right indicate the total population and the delta symbol below, the change in population. Its seems odd, the graph or explanation fails to explain how the total population was calculated from the density and therefore which figure was used to express the geographical area to work this out.

Image - http://hawaiibanfactcheck.org/

Another image of surgeon fish dead within a ice box, portrays the difference between aquarium fishing and recreational fishing. A connotation to reach deep within the hearts of hobbyists in an attempt to gain their support. This is to allude to a state of fact that many more fish are caught recreationally than for the aquatics trade. Why should be become idealised on watching marine creates within an enclosed space and for this to take a higher stance than Hawaii population wanting to eat fish?

Images - http://hawaiibanfactcheck.org/

The two graphs above attempt to stun the reader with a stark contrast between the quantity of fish caught for recreation, commercial, and aquarium collectors. But how true are these figures given much as based on estimates? Their origin? Why display data showing the incredible difference between aquarium fishery in different parts of Hawaii? why does the data not include other areas? Using the West Hawaii reef fish catch statistics it is clear the amount of fish taken for the aquarium industry is substantial.

Then we need to ask, what are the types of fish included in the data? Recreational fish capture may be substantial but what fish are they targeting?……….a population of snappers over 10 billion or blenny of 1 million. The data displayed here is clearly lacking in related theory and seems to be very selected and misplaced.

Conclusion

The importance of this critique is to illustrate how selective certain parties represent their data and how they try to persuade and potentially manipulate parties towards an ideology. When taking an interest in the Hawaii ornamental fish debate, take into account the source of information and publisher. Ret Talbot, who represents MASNA, is providing a blog on the Hawaii debate but is an earner of the marine aquarium trade and therefore has a vested interest which may alter his perceptions and portrayal of the trade. Would you ask British Petroleum what the effects of oil exploration are to the natural environment?….probably not. It must be made clear to be skeptical and ask questions regarding ideologies and why is only some data available?

Make your view on the data and information provided by both sides but be clear on the persuasion of data and the aims of each party. The conservationists who wish to block the trade and prevent an industry as a whole, provide erratic and unproven data, and the aquarium industry who wish to keep extracting the natural resource for profit to create personal enjoyment but provide selected data tiered towards a certain outlook. If you have access to scientific journals, do some independent background research into the effects of aquarium fish capture in Hawaii, or give a simple email to a scientist asking his stance and why, but research his history and involvement in the trade.