Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquarium Collection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs resolution urging state ban on commercial aquarium collection after wide public testimony
Summary
After extended public testimony from residents and conservation groups, the Hawaii County committee voted to forward Resolution 4‑22‑25 to the full council urging the state legislature to prohibit commercial aquarium collection in state marine waters; the motion passed with nine ayes.
The Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs voted to send Resolution 4‑22‑25 to the full Hawaii County Council with a favorable recommendation after hearing sustained public testimony urging a ban on commercial aquarium collection.
The resolution, introduced by Council members Inaba and Galimba, asks the state legislature to prohibit harvest of aquatic life from Hawaii’s marine waters for commercial aquarium purposes. Supporters said the practice removes culturally important and ecologically significant reef species and undermines community stewardship.
"Commercial aquarium collection is a for‑profit, export‑based industry that removes reef fish essential to ecosystem balance and cultural practice," said Kehaunani Springer, a practitioner and researcher from Keaau, in opening testimony. "These are not surplus resources. They are species our kupuna have recognized as indicators of reef health."
Multiple testifiers raised scientific and enforcement concerns. Uilani Naipo told the committee that collection historically targeted South Kona and threatened subsistence villages, and said the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) should be held accountable to the public‑trust doctrine. Corey Horden, testifying by Zoom, said proposed DAR permits would generate about $700 a year while estimated management and enforcement costs would be “over 400 times greater.” Mike Nakachi and other long‑time advocates recounted years of local activism and noted that poaching persists despite previous closures.
Supporters cited a mix of cultural, ecological and practical arguments: reefs already face climate stress and bleaching, enforcement capacity is limited, and local communities bear the costs while few commercial actors profit. The committee’s discussion echoed those themes; members commended activists and DAR officers on the front line and said the county’s resolution was meant to send a clear message to state lawmakers.
The motion to forward Resolution 4‑22‑25 to the full council passed with nine ayes and no opposing votes.
The resolution does not itself change state law; it asks the Hawaii state legislature to act. The committee record shows broad local support in testimony and references to pending state rulemaking by the Division of Aquatic Resources. The full council will consider the committee’s recommendation in a future meeting.
