-
******* To read about the changes to the marketplace click here
Has anyone heard about this? - Reefing in danger of becaming ilegal?!
- Thread starter higorc
- Start date
I don't think it needs to be secret. These coral are "threaten" not "endangered". You can still freely trade them.
Even they are on the "endangered" list, there is a permit you can apply to own them as long as you have them BEFORE such coral is listed as endangered. The permit also allows you to propagated them but not selling them. But you can't bring or ship them across the state lines. Which mean you are going to end up with tank full of frogspawn and don't know how to deal with them. you can't kill them either.
The current problem is mostly on lack of man power and knowledge to identify coral at the point of importation, which LAX is THE port. Plus, there are some corals just almost impossible to correctly ID from their related species.
for example, a custom agent is most likely can't tell frogspawn from hammer from torch, so all similar looking coral will be banned.
not really though...as currently there are some Corals that are banned while closely related Corals are not...and those come in no problem....every once in a while the banned one comes in as the not banned one as well...
as you said the agents policing this really do not have the knowledge that they truly need to properly police this...Luckily for us, like most americans...they will be lazy at their job, and most things will not change at first. Until a bigger fuss is made about it...then everything will start coming in as maricultured,,,and it probably will just be fresh cut frags mounted to man made bases....really not doing much good for the ocean, but making Coral Farms rich. It is sad that politics has to rule over true sustainability...
as you said the agents policing this really do not have the knowledge that they truly need to properly police this...Luckily for us, like most americans...they will be lazy at their job, and most things will not change at first. Until a bigger fuss is made about it...then everything will start coming in as maricultured,,,and it probably will just be fresh cut frags mounted to man made bases....really not doing much good for the ocean, but making Coral Farms rich. It is sad that politics has to rule over true sustainability...
not really though...as currently there are some Corals that are banned while closely related Corals are not...and those come in no problem....every once in a while the banned one comes in as the not banned one as well...
as you said the agents policing this really do not have the knowledge that they truly need to properly police this...Luckily for us, like most americans...they will be lazy at their job, and most things will not change at first. Until a bigger fuss is made about it...then everything will start coming in as maricultured,,,and it probably will just be fresh cut frags mounted to man made bases....really not doing much good for the ocean, but making Coral Farms rich. It is sad that politics has to rule over true sustainability...
as you said the agents policing this really do not have the knowledge that they truly need to properly police this...Luckily for us, like most americans...they will be lazy at their job, and most things will not change at first. Until a bigger fuss is made about it...then everything will start coming in as maricultured,,,and it probably will just be fresh cut frags mounted to man made bases....really not doing much good for the ocean, but making Coral Farms rich. It is sad that politics has to rule over true sustainability...
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2014/9/fish
What happens next
Following the public comment period, NMFS will review the submitted testimony and other data to ultimately determine if A. percula warrants listing under the ESA. Following review there are four possible outcomes:
(1) NMFS determines that listing A. percula under the ESA is not warranted and rejects the petition. The process stops here for the species and would result in no change to the current trade in the species. This outcome is possible, but not certain.
(2) NMFS determines that listing is warranted and lists A. percula as Threatened, but does not enact a 4-d rule banning take for the species. This is what has happened with the 15 Pacific coral species which were recently listed under the ESA. This outcome would have no immediate effect on the trade in this species, but would involve the development of a recovery plan for the species. This outcome is also possible, but not certain.
(3) NMFS determines that listing is warranted, lists A. percula as Threatened, and enacts a 4-d rule. This outcome would immediately end all commercial trade in the species. Technically it would remain legal to possess A. percula in a home aquarium, but it would become illegal to import, export, buy, sell, or trade in the species. This outcome is possible, but probably less likely than the two above.
(4) NMFS determines that listing is warranted and lists A. percula as Endangered. This outcome would immediately end all trade in the species (commercial and otherwise) and the only A. percula which could legally be kept by marine aquarists would be fish they already own, which would be grandfathered in at the time of the new policy. Actually implementing the step of grandfathering in fish in home aquariums would be challenging, however, and would likely require some form of permitting. This outcome is possible, but I believe it is very unlikely
What happens next
Following the public comment period, NMFS will review the submitted testimony and other data to ultimately determine if A. percula warrants listing under the ESA. Following review there are four possible outcomes:
(1) NMFS determines that listing A. percula under the ESA is not warranted and rejects the petition. The process stops here for the species and would result in no change to the current trade in the species. This outcome is possible, but not certain.
(2) NMFS determines that listing is warranted and lists A. percula as Threatened, but does not enact a 4-d rule banning take for the species. This is what has happened with the 15 Pacific coral species which were recently listed under the ESA. This outcome would have no immediate effect on the trade in this species, but would involve the development of a recovery plan for the species. This outcome is also possible, but not certain.
(3) NMFS determines that listing is warranted, lists A. percula as Threatened, and enacts a 4-d rule. This outcome would immediately end all commercial trade in the species. Technically it would remain legal to possess A. percula in a home aquarium, but it would become illegal to import, export, buy, sell, or trade in the species. This outcome is possible, but probably less likely than the two above.
(4) NMFS determines that listing is warranted and lists A. percula as Endangered. This outcome would immediately end all trade in the species (commercial and otherwise) and the only A. percula which could legally be kept by marine aquarists would be fish they already own, which would be grandfathered in at the time of the new policy. Actually implementing the step of grandfathering in fish in home aquariums would be challenging, however, and would likely require some form of permitting. This outcome is possible, but I believe it is very unlikely
Similar threads
