66 species of coral proposed for endangered or threatened listing by US

[jmaneyapanda]

I think everyone isnt understanding the law in this. If you currently own it, they WILL NOT come and take it, and put you in jail. However, if you try to engage in "commerce" with a species that is federally protected, then you will need to have documentation.

 

[rdnelson]

jmaneyapanda;817448 wrote: I think everyone isnt understanding the law in this. If you currently own it, they WILL NOT come and take it, and put you in jail. However, if you try to engage in "commerce" with a species that is federally protected, then you will need to have documentation.

Cant speak for anyone else but yes, I understand that. Never thought they would break into my house in the middle of the night and incarcerate me for having the wrong corals. LOL

But, my point is, while I can understand it would be very difficult to police what has been recently collected from the wild and what has been in someone's tank since before the law was changed, it is a shame that existing specimens cannot be shared and thereby ensuring that they remain regardless of what happens in the wild. And before anyone goes off on me, I did say "it would be very difficult to police".

 

[jmaneyapanda]

rdnelson99;817460 wrote: Cant speak for anyone else but yes, I understand that. Never thought they would break into my house in the middle of the night and incarcerate me for having the wrong corals. LOL

But, my point is, while I can understand it would be very difficult to police what has been recently collected from the wild and what has been in someone's tank since before the law was changed, it is a shame that existing specimens cannot be shared and thereby ensuring that they remain regardless of what happens in the wild. And before anyone goes off on me, I did say "it would be very difficult to police".

It is a matter of documentation. It's not difficult to police. It's difficult for you to engage in commerce. Policing is easy when you require documentation.

 

[midas]

I read the "reefbuilders" article and was disappointed to see the word <u>could</u> used so many times, (as in this could happen, or that could be affected</em>) so I read some of the actual report, and it is clear that the reefbuilder author is doing more speculating than reporting.

Nothing that I read in the actual report indicates that corals already collected would be affected, and in fact the report specifically excludes them. It also excludes aquacultered corals.

The focus of the report is protecting wild specimens, and not just from collection. The report addresses problems with water quality, storm-water runoff, habitat destruction and other factors affecting coral reefs. If you can say anything about this report, it is very comprehensive.

 

[jbadd99]

jmaneyapanda;817461 wrote: It is a matter of documentation. It's not difficult to police. It's difficult for you to engage in commerce. Policing is easy when you require documentation.

Sure. But then we'd have to create and fund a new government agency that does nothing but document legal coral and the "offspring" of said legal coral so that we would have some way to enforce what was illegal coral.

Then of course there is always the legal challenges that are sure to arise from such a spat.

Personally, I say we continue the conservation efforts and leave the rest as it may fall. The last thing this country needs more of is legislation telling us what we can't do -- and I'll stay off my soapbox about that too.

 

[ralph atl]

Just hear me out a bit for the future.....what if everything we did & saw was in the news? Fish Deaths, Coral Deaths......

The News is stating that the Caribbean is at 80% loss....The other parts are crazy loss yet we still extract?

I believe what we are doing is not appropriate; not ethical; worse, OMG, not great consumer news.......

The news is just starting to appear mainstream......

We should not be getting certain corals from the wild, period. Certain Fish, etc. The Public is aware of so many things, it's not going to be too long that they are aware of death rates among aquariums, including corals & fish that are on this endangered list (it does not matter one way or the other.....public opinion can rule)

 

[ripped tide]

We are at a point in time where a lot of things are sitting on a fence. If a heavy gust comes either direction, we'll be bound to one side. If we want this hobby to fall on the side that will allow it to maintain and survive, we need to jump before the wind comes from the other direction.

I urge you to purchase farm raised corals and fish as much as possible.

Do the corals need healthy oceans to live? Yes

Do numerous species reside and depend on coral reefs? Yes

Do we need corals to live? Not one bit. We bring them into our lives because it brings instant gratification/accomplishment of defying many odds as well as appreciation of nature. If our motives are both selfish and selfless, where do we stand? Is there a divide? IMO, yes. It is up to each individual to choose what animals they house in their aquariums, where they buy the animals, and how they are harvested. If you truly feel that you want to be part of a positive change, research your purchases. Don't buy into the "fad of owning illegally harvested corals".

 

[jmaneyapanda]

jbadd99;818264 wrote: Sure. But then we'd have to create and fund a new government agency that does nothing but document legal coral and the "offspring" of said legal coral so that we would have some way to enforce what was illegal coral.

Then of course there is always the legal challenges that are sure to arise from such a spat.

Personally, I say we continue the conservation efforts and leave the rest as it may fall. The last thing this country needs more of is legislation telling us what we can't do -- and I'll stay off my soapbox about that too.

I dont know if I follow. The government already has this branch. The USFWS agency does this. They currently do it with all the species that are currently classified as endangered and CITES protected. This would merely be adding species. All the additional "work" would fall on the individuals.

I, for one, welcome and applaud any regulations that will, in ANY way, shape, or form, help with conserving a species which is endangered. If our greatest concern with opposing it is that it makes it harder for us to trade or sell it personally, I think that concern is SOOOOO far down the totem pole, in the grand scheme.

FWIW, if genuine conservation is at heart, the steps and methods required for involving in trade will not be problematic. That is how and why zoos and aquariums do it all the time.

 

[sewer urchin]

Maybe there is a light at the end of the tunnel

If one queries the CITES database for Acropora</em> spp. corals exported from INDO for 2010-2011, an even more startling trend is observed with respect to wild vs. maricultured corals. Wild corals accounts for only 15% of the exports whereas maricultured accounts for 85%!

That that this was an interesting read...

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/blog/long-term-aquarium-trends-can-lead-to-economic-and-sustainability-benefits">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/blog/long-term-aquarium-trends-can-lead-to-economic-and-sustainability-benefits</a>

The article did not post any links to the study, just excerpts from it. I would like to read the whole thing

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Sewer Urchin;819748 wrote: Maybe there is a light at the end of the tunnel



That that this was an interesting read...

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/blog/long-term-aquarium-trends-can-lead-to-economic-and-sustainability-benefits">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/blog/long-term-aquarium-trends-can-lead-to-economic-and-sustainability-benefits</a>

The article did not post any links to the study, just excerpts from it. I would like to read the whole thing[/QUOTE]

Well, it IS enlightening, until you consider what an actual maricultured coral is.