I for one am in favour of added fisheries protection. More specifically, not of a no-take position, but a managed fisheries position.
I've been in a debate within my tank journal thread on this topic. Here it is pasted from there:
Here's some eye openers from my article in Freshwater and Marine Aquarium Magazine (FAMA):
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2j...jRieDNlcnQyU2M
The point is... the hobby can be a sustainable wild fishery so long as wild captures are properly monitored, enforced, and managed. Within the article, you will read about MPAs (Marine Protected Areas) that serve to protect small regions of the whole area, and also provides recruitment to the surrounding areas. Outside the article, hobbyists would be wise to be aware of what and where they support. There are nations that have poor records of fisheries management, and there are nations that have achieved sustainable fisheries.
-Two divers used to be able to harvest 1000 Mandarins in 3 hours, now two divers typically catch about 30 in 3 hours.
-Average size of mandarins caught is 3 cm (down from 6 cm), this is near sexual maturity
-118,000 Banggai cardinals are exported per month, but this is after an 85% mortality rate post-catch
-Arraial do Cabo (Brazil) used to land 600 Condylactis per week, now they are locally extinct
-Cebu (Philippines) have protected and unprotected areas. Differences between fished and unfished Sebae anemones (Heteractis) is density (1 per 200 square yards vs 1 per 40 square yards) and size (16-32 square inches vs 64-80 square inches)
-same comparison above for clownfishes... density (1 per 10 square yards vs 1 per 200 square yards) and size (6 cm vs 2.5 cm length)