Lawmakers hear hours of pro-and-con testimony on bill to ban commercial aquarium collection

A lengthy public hearing on HB2101 HD1 — a proposed statewide prohibition on commercial aquarium collection — filled the House Finance committee room and Zoom on March 2, drawing dozens of testifiers on both sides.

Supporters framed the measure as a cultural and ecological safeguard. Lena Allaya, appearing for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, told lawmakers the bill ‘‘is part of our 2026 legislative package’’ and urged restoration of a statewide ban rather than a narrow, county-only restriction. Conservation groups, including For the Fishes and Friends of Hanauma Bay, described what they called repeated reef harms and argued the aquarium trade imposes costs on public enforcement and on communities that rely on healthy reefs for shoreline protection and subsistence.

"Wild marine fish experience high mortality even under expert care," said Renee Ambberger of For the Fishes, citing mortality figures and permitting records to argue the trade raises serious ethical and ecological questions. Earthjustice attorney Kylie Wigger Cruz told the committee that "no one has legally collected aquarium fish in West Hawaii since 2017 or on Oahu since 2021," and said the regulatory record and community petitions persuaded the Land Board to seek a legislative fix.

Opponents — including several current and former aquarium fishermen, local businesses and trade groups such as the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council — urged the committee to preserve the state’s administrative and science-based regulatory path. Pet industry attorney Art Poola said the West Hawaii fishery "has more data and management than any other fishery in Hawaii" and warned that a statutory ban would remove tools for adaptive management and local livelihoods.

Commercial fishers described substantial upfront costs and years of delay tied to state environmental reviews. "We are all in, as they say. We are financially locked into a process that we paid for," one fisherman said, summarizing an oft-repeated complaint that permit-holders invested heavily in HEPA/ EIS processes and now face a new, prospective ban.

The Division of Aquatic Resources said it is developing administrative rules and monitoring plans; officials noted survey work and annual permits would allow adjustments in catch levels if population declines are detected but also acknowledged limits on monitoring frequency. Officials cited a West Hawaii yellow tang population estimate of about 3.9 million as a baseline used in technical analyses.

Lawmakers repeatedly pressed both sides on enforceability, cultural impacts and monitoring capacity. Supporters urged a statewide law as the most administrable approach; opponents argued previously approved rules, localized closures and adaptive limits could provide conservation while preserving livelihoods.

The committee did not take a final vote on HB2101 on March 2 and postponed decision-making until after additional briefings and the committee’s next session. Committee members asked the Attorney General and agency staff for legal and enforcement analyses to inform the next steps.

Why it matters: HB2101 would change longstanding regulatory practice and decide whether Hawaii adopts a statutory ban or continues with case-by-case administrative management — a policy choice with cultural, economic and enforcement implications for coastal communities.

What’s next: Committee decision-making was postponed; sponsors and agencies were asked to provide clarifying legal language, enforcement cost estimates and monitoring plans.