Bounty to be posted on marine enemy #1

| 26/11/2012

lion-fish.jpg(CNS): Lionfish are heading for the governments wanted list after the members of the Legislative Assembly voted to accept a private members motion on exploring the possibility of placing a bounty on the invasive species and fund the initiative from the environmental protection fund. The House was united last week in its support for some kind of major plan to reduce the number of lionfish, which is a serious threat to the local marine eco-system. The environment minister pointed out a number of initiatives underway at present to tackle the problem but said government did need to step up efforts and co-ordinate and promote the taking of these fish.

Ironically, the last time legislators were in such strong agreement on a topic was also over the need to cull an invasive species, when Alden McLaughlin’s private member's motion was accepted to address the green iguana problem. 

This time it was Ezzard Miller’s turn to ask government to explore the idea of a $5 bounty on lionfish to encourage Caymanians to catch more of the fish and join divers and others who have been trained to remove the spinney species.

He said that if the Department of Environment was to give the specialist spearguns to local people as well as volunteer divers, introduce a bounty using the Environmental Protection Fund, which the Department of Agriculture could help recoup by selling the fish to local restaurants, he believed that the country could at least make a serious dent in the population.

“Government needs to encourage the elimination of this dangerous threat,” Miller said. “We know some people are forced to supplement their income by poaching and I believe if we offered $5 per lionfish and did the appropriate training, they could assist in the fight and … stop poaching,” the independent member for North Side stated. “We need to do all we can and not just depend on the volunteers who have been working on the problem … Government needs to get more directly involved and offer an incentive to the people.”

Miller said there was plenty of evidence now that the culling works, and with lionfish destroying the reefs, government needed to take some of the $40 million plus from the EPF and use it for this critical issue

“I don’t have a hard and fast rule on the $5, that’s up to government, but we need to look at how we can get people involved directly in trying to control this invasive species,” Miller told the LA as he asked for support for his motion.

All of the members were in agreement and the environment minister said the lionfish had become “a scourge on the environment”, particularly as they had no natural predators in the region. “It’s a tremendous problem and government agrees we need a solution,” Mark Scotland said.

He said the environmental fund is the appropriate place for the money for such an initiative, but it would have to be done subject to the provisions of the Framework for Fiscal Responsibility.However, he said he could not foresee any problems because, left unaddressed, the proliferation of the species could lead to an environmental disaster.

He said government was putting together a request for proposals to invite people to submit a culling programme. He said he was not sure whether government would give $5 or base the bounty on weight but he agreed in principle.

“But what we want to see in any exercise is a structured programme that is monitored," the minister said. "When there has been sustained efforts, we can see it works, so we need to see where and how long takes,” he added, stating that it could not be an open-ended initiative. 

He said government was supporting the motion in general and working towards arriving at a solution. Miller thanked him for that support and said he hoped that the debate would also raise awareness of the threat.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Science and Nature

About the Author ()

Comments (33)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Guys I am a dive master and can tell you that if something is not done to keep the populations down of thesepredators Caymans beautiful diversity of fish will be gone along with the tourists. These lionfish have no mercy and bottomless stomachs.

    Come down and participate in the lionfish Derbys they are fun and keep these dangerous fish in manageable numbers. And if you catch any be very very careful their sting is something you will never forget!

  2. Anonymous says:

    Culling lion fish DOES WORK. Look at our reefs compared to other Caribbean islands that have had their dive tourism industry wiped out (Bahamas) because there is nothing but lion fish on their reefs.

    Please people with high opinions of themselves and no knowledge of the subject keep it to yourself. The facts speak for themselves. These are an invasive species in the Carribean with no natural predators. These fish can single handily wipe out our dive tourism industry. They lay up to 30000 eggs a year, reach maturity in only a few weeks, are gluttons and absolutely devastate reef populations.

    The lionfish are an epidemic and will destroy all other reef fish if not continually culled.

    I have seen fish hand reefs here that are constantly culled and those that are not. There is a HUGE difference in the number of other juvenile fish.

    Unfortunately like rats you cannot eradicate them once they are here. Every effort to destroy these fish should be supported.

    Please help promote the culling of these lionfish to save our reefs!

  3. Anonymous says:

    These fish are extremely delicious. Let the market establish a price for them. Fishermen have done very well so far almost extinguishing the Grouper populations, so let them have a go at the Lionfish. The Government should keep out of it. They are not biologists, and never pay much attention to the Department of the Environment's advice anyway, except when it suits them. This crisis will last for decades until Nature finds a solution. Paying bounties will be a waste of money and will prove totally ineffective.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I have never heard such crap! Let the lion fish hunters sell their own fish to restaurants
    , why should government be paying a bounty.

    Ezzard this proves how little you and the rest of the MLAs know about poaching, do you think for one moment that a poacher is going to pass by conch and lobster for a couple of 5 dollar lion fish? Poachers will just be given the excuse to be in the water with a spear.

    How are these bountys to be paid? Who delivers the fish to the restaurants? Who confirms the fish count?

    5 dollar for chef, 5 dollar for me, 5 dollar for chef, 5 …..”……………

    This needs to be looked at very closely before ANY bounty.
    Ezzard why don’t you pay the bounty then sell the fish to restaurants, surely such a good idea is worth the effort.

  5. Anonymous says:

    In other words they need to figure out a way to use this to funnel funds to the tribe without having to account for it.

  6. Anonymous says:

    So what's to stop people from raising lionfish in barrels and aquariums and then turning them in to get the bounty? Realy. Does this government ever think anything through?

  7. Anonymous says:

    I often go out and hunt loinfish then simply hand out to restaurants who pay me handsome cash and who need government to pay. The government have been buried their heads in sand and be slowest people to learn in real-life.

  8. Kraken says:

    Who will be eligible ??
    As most things go on this rock, the bounty will only be payable to Caymanians.
    I know many people who have taken the DOE culling course and cull lion fish on
    a regular basis. Non of them are Caymanian. Most Caymanians I know don’t even
    go to the beach, let alone snorkel or dive.

  9. Anonymous says:

    They willing to negotiate with the fishermen now that they a problem!

  10. R.U. Kidden says:

    Five dollars per lionfish?  You can't be serious.  I will agree that a bounty will cause the removal of thousands of lionfish from Cayman waters, and probably thousands from other places in the Caribbean!  I also agree with those who say it isn't a good idea to encourage a poacher to get in the water with a spear.  While hunting lionfish I have yet to see any kind of marine enforcement down where the lionfish are.  My feeling is that licensing reputable divers to hunt lionfish is a great idea, but the bounty opens the door for those who are after money, not necessarily environmentally oriented people who want to try to keep our reefs healthy.  I have speared around a hundred lionfish and know some who have killed over five hundred.  I have no idea how many lionfish are being taken, but doling out public funds for it is unwarranted!  As already mentioned, lionfish cannot be eliminated, but their numbers can be reduced on our reefs so that native species can survive.  A better idea would be to promote the sale of them in restaurants and markets…… cheaper, too!

  11. Anonymous says:

    Well, this is stupid.

    1. “give the specialist spearguns to local people”. I'm Caymanian and I have mine. So the preceding must be code for “give the poachers spears”, as I've heard suggested. Please, please, please, for all that's rational, don't give people with a history of poaching a spear to go and poach with, much less a licence to go up in the Marine Parks with a spear. They've already shown they are open to temptation, can't be trusted, just don't care. (Your choice.) So don't encourage them.

    2. Yup. Next paragraph makes it clear. We're going to pay the poachers. No, I do not want my taxes going to pay poachers.

    3. “There is plenty of evidence that culling works”? There is? Site one piece of evidence where government paying poachers to shoot things has worked out well. (Note, bounties on agouties and parrots are not a good example. We've all heard the old guys talk about keeping the agouti heads until they were rancid before bringing them in so that they could over-claim on their catch. And don't tell me that a poacher wouldn't lie, especially if the reason he's poaching and not working is to feed his drug habit.)

    4. It never ceases to amaze me how politicians always want to tap the Environmental Fund for anything that can put money into the hands of people who might vote for them instead of using it for what it was for: buying land to preserve it. Have they finished buying Barkers Park yet? No. Made any move to offer the landowners a fair deal for the GT Ironwood Forest (if they want to sell, or just to get them to agree to not develop it themselves) – or just to buy land for an alternate road route, so that the owners can continue to protect it as they have in the past? Not that I've heard of. But they want to pay poachers with it.

    5. Also, on the practicalities, any fish over a pound you're still going to want to sell. (I know the $5 isn't set in stone.) The small ones you give to government for the bounty. So any hope of recouping some costs by the Govt. selling the fish will not occur. (I've heard some people suggest that.) Unless you set the bounty higher than the market rate. This will be nothing but a money-suck and a way of equipping poachers at our expense and turning them loose in our protected areas.

    6. On the one hand the Government (DoE) is going out saying we need more marine parks because our fish and reefs are going down. On the other hand they (Minister of Environment) want to increase poaching. Left hand and right hand don't even seem to be attached to the same body on this one.

    • Anonymous says:
       
  12. Anonymous says:

    There are already quite a few restaurants that will pay anyone who brings in lionfish. Why should government pay the bount?. Dont bother waiting for the LA – let these peoplego out today, catch lionfish and sell them directly to restaurants.

    What Government the (DoE) should be doing is trying to get more pole spears into the hands of respomnsible divers and snorkellers.. there simply arent enough to go arouind at the moment.  

  13. Anonymous says:

    What I found interesting in the article and not a small omission was that there was no projected cost for this bounty in terms of governmental liability. Usually Ezzard prides himself on his professionalism and great grasp of business models but will this cost the government $5,000, $50,000 or $500,000 a year or perhaps it doesn't matter.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Should give rewards for people turning in poachers as well!

  15. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps if there was equal concern for passing a NCL and catching and fining the well known recidivist off-season poachers in our districts (and the clients that support them), then we might have money to pay bounties.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Can we do the same for the chickens ?

  17. Anonymous says:

    This would be excellent to help divers and fisherman supplement their income.

  18. GR says:

    I like the concept but I don't think it is workable.  

    On a recent dive, 3 friends and I caught 20lbs of fish and for the sake of simplicity let's assume each fish weight 1lb so based on the article, this would net us $100.  Nitrox tank fills cost $6/tank (total of $24) and we used 4 gallons of fuel ($23 or so) so our direct costs were cost to $50.  So for 3 hours of our time (an hour to prep and launch the boat & get to the dive site, an hour's dive and an hour to return and clean up) we will 'earn' $12.50 each ($50/4).  This doesn't take into account the cost of training, gear or the boat.  Yes a smaller boat (mine is 18 feet long) will use less gas and snorkelling will be less expensive than scuba diving but then the rewards are likely to be less.

    A good idea in theory but I doubt it will work in practice.

    • Anonymous says:

       

      You talk of it like a business, but I would guarantee you do if for fun just like most of us. So to collect a few dollars and have a day of fun on the water does not sound like a bad idea to me.

      • Anonymous says:

        But remember the proposal is to pay poachers to make it worth their while not to poach. You and I (I am not the OP but I lionfish occassionally) are not the target audience. We're already shooting a few, grilling a few, selling a few. Its the other people who aparently need to get paid more than the restaurants are paying now to make it worth their while to not shoot snappers and squabs and to shoot lionfish instead. If they were seeing so many lionfish that it was worth their while to shoot them and go to the restaurants at all. But I digress with logic.

    • Anonymous says:

      What about free diving from shore? Cost = negligible

      • Anonymous says:

        Then you have to haul the catch back to shore. Try dragging many pounds of anything throught he water. Now tell me how much that's worth to you?

    • The Real Beenie says:

      What about a basic diving bell or a snorkle hose?  Sure you cant go past 50 feet with that but it would be much cheaper and allow you to stay around the reef for longer in certain spots where the lionfish are doing the most damage.

      Also in your example, if the lionfish are as saturated as some of the commenters implied, heck, catching 20 fish in 30-45 minutes of bottom time at a shallow depth should be easy.  7 fish a man, especially when you're not being picky size wise as you would when looking for other fish.

      But heres the all time greatest technicality, if you catch a female spawning and somehow collect the eggs and allow them to hatch, say 1 million hatchlings, will you still get the 5 per fish? Doubt it.

      By the way, getting the breeding females would be the best bet.  Do they have a special time when they spawn like groupers?

  19. Anonymous says:

    Give spearguns to poachers?!  Having a court record for poaching should be a permanent bar to ever qualifying. It is well known that poaching and heavy drug use are closely related and that users are relentless. Currently, Lionfish can be sold to restaurants and grocery stores for a fair market price. A bounty might be a good idea, but it would need to be carefully administered and enforcement would have to be increased (more salaries, boats etc for DoE) if more people (especially "ex"-poachers) have access to spearguns.  The dive industry has a vested interest in a healthy reef with plenty of fish and they can be depended upon to use their spears ONLY for Lionfish and not protected lobster or grouper. While Ezzard may think it a nice idea to give environmental funds to NS poachers, there are far better uses for that money.  

    • Anonymous says:

      One of the requirements to obtain a DOE sling speargun is that you present a clean criminal record. This should alleviate some concerns.

      • Anonymous says:

        Except that Ezzard's proposal is specifically to give poachers spears so that they can shoot lionfish so that the government can pay them. Might as well just put them on the dole and save a few poached lobsters along the way.

  20. Anonymous says:

    When each female lionfish releases up to 2 million eggs a year, we are fighting a loosing battle.  The species propagate at depths over 300 feet, well beyond recreational scuba diver limits.  Even at $5 a fish, eradication is simply impossible by humans, although everyone trained to do so is welcome to try.  Far better to spend our limited resources training indigenous species to eat them 24/7 while we're above water (as is being done in other countries), and continue to run local derbies to cull the numbers in the first 100 feet.  If the CIG wants to help with that, it would be appreciated! 

    • durrrr says:

      Another hare-brained idea from Hazzard. Fish tank sales will go through the roof! A good breeding pair will make you a millionaire in no time! LOL

      Aren’t those funds intended to be used to buy land for the National Trust anyway? That would be a far better use in my opinion.

    • Anonymous says:

      Why do you have to be trained to kill a fish?(squerel anyone? of cource the expats dont know what that is ).