The Endangered Species Act and how it affects reef keeping

[Formula462]

still cannot stand Julian Sprung...

[Formula462]

that's all I have to offer on this thread lol.

[seabass]

I'd suggest you get moving on your legislation. The NOAA isn't going to wait around when they have authority under the ESA and there's no evidence not to list these corals.

I think you're right, they will list these corals (and others in the future). And you're right that legislation has to be passed in order to protect the aquacultured coral trade within the US.

 

I believe that an import ban would be enforceable; that's what customs does. My comment on the "no take" ESA Section 4(d) provision will include a call for this legislation. I also plan on writing my senators and congressmen.

[markalot]

How is it a gross exaggeration?

 

As it has already been proposed, I see the additional protections being placed on these 20 species (not an exaggeration). Identification of specific species will be difficult (not an exaggeration). Even without similarity of appearance cases being listed, even knowledgeable enforcement personnel will have difficulty identifying specific species of Acropora, Montipora, Euphyllia, Pavona, Porites, and Seriatopora (not an exaggeration). So would these be confiscated and held? Held where?

 

Additional listings have already been proposed (not an exaggeration). Most people anticipate more listings and proposals are on the way, making identification, confiscation, and holding even more difficult. I think all of this is realistic.

 

The question is, what will this do to reef keeping and the associated industries? Besides fighting these and future listings, what can we do to save reef keeping in the US (while protecting truly threatened species of coral)? My solution would be to ban imports of live stony corals (if that is too difficult, to ban imports of all live coral). By restricting the supply of wild collected coral, it would be unnecessary to regulate the coral trade within the US.

 

Sure this solution seems very aggressive and contrary to benefiting reef keeping. However, this would be preferable to the slow dismantling of our hobby via ESA listings.

 

 

I agree with this, for the most part. Any import of live coral would have to be limited to those who are explicitly licensed for propagation or whathaveyou. No more simple import of live Aussie corals for direct sale. The industry would have to get behind this now and suggest ways to pay to make this effective, otherwise the ESA is the simplest and cheapest course of action.

 

So is that viable? Coral prices would rise and I'm not sure the size of the market that would remain. No one really knows if this is viable, including the resident 'expert' troll. I also assume prices will rise, but what the hell do I know. Unfortunately, based on those I've met so far in this hobby, the real experts seem to be few and far between. I think about ORA and how they've tried to manage their business by propagating corals and selling them to vendors. You'd need a bunch of these types of outfits to keep the supply viable. Most of the suppliers I am familiar with, and it's very limited, are simply middle men trying to make some money via whatever coral they can get their hands on.

 

And then there's the fact many if not most of these corals will be killed by the hobbyist, especially acropora.

 

For every one good idea there are hundreds of naysayers who 'expertly' claim it can't be done. If we paid attention to these people we would still be in the dark ages.

 

Bottom line, the industry has to be a player here.

[seabass]

Considering the alternative, I think that higher prices is an acceptable outcome. I also feel that the industry would be better off with suppliers like ORA. As a consolation, unfortunate deaths would not affect our wild reefs.

[evanski]

that's all I have to offer on this thread lol.

More than some...

[seabass]

I was asked about my public comment regarding the "no take" ESA Section 4(d) provision. For anybody interested:

I have been a reef keeper for over a decade, and have even started a small coral propagation company. My comment isn't to dispute the ESA listings. More knowledgeable people like Charlie Veron are better suited to interpret the data. In fact, I support the protection of truly threatened coral that is in the wild.

Arguments for and against these listings have already been presented. Plus, the data hasn't significantly changed since these 20 species were listed as threatened. So as it stands, I believe that these corals will eventually receive additional protection under Section 4(d). More listings have already been proposed; and most people familiar with this issue, feel that even more are on the way. However, I have a few issues with how this would be enforced, how to best protect the wild reefs, and how listings would affect the aquaculture and related aquarium industries.

One of my biggest concerns about enforcement is species identification. Without similarity of appearance cases being listed, it can be difficult, even for experts, to correctly identify specific species. This can be true even with the polyps and flesh fully extended; however, shipping stress often prevents these ideal viewing conditions. Would similar looking specimens be confiscated and held by enforcement personnel until a proper identification can be made? Will facilities be built to house these live corals?

The primary goal of the ESA is to protect and reestablish threatened wild populations (so they can be delisted). Protection, related to reef keeping, can be achieved by banning wild collection and restricting imports of live coral into the US. However, restricting ownership and trade within the US does nothing to either protect or reestablish wild populations. In fact, the opposite is true, advancing aquaculture techniques have assisted in coral restoration efforts, and captive populations of threatened coral can be used to help restore habitats where these species have already become extinct.

Not only would such regulation changes better protect threatened species, but they would be easier to enforce. US customs would be able to control live coral entering the US without having to identify particular species. In addition, enforcement personnel wouldn't have to police individual ownership or trade across state lines.

As a reef keeper and proprietor of an aquaculture company, I am concerned about losing the privilege to buy, possess, and sell captive grown coral. The ESA listings are put in place to protect truly threatened species of coral in the wild (a goal which I agree with). But by restricting collection and imports of live wild coral, we can still protect the wild reefs, while allowing ownership and free trade of cultured coral within the US (which wouldn't be allowed under current law).

Please do not just repost this same comment (as reposts are ignored). Also, stating that you are against listings, without documentation that these species aren't endangered, will probably also be ignored. However, if you have thoughts regarding the Section 4(d) Rule for Theatened Corals, and wish to post your own public comment, you can do so here: www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0158

[seabass]

So I'm thinking about contacting one of my congressional representatives, requesting help to draft a bill to modify the ESA. This bill would:

• ban the collection of live coral from it's natural habitat, except by permit, for the collection of broodstock to be propagated for use in licensed reef restoration, research, or aquaculture
• ban the import of live coral, except by permit, to provide broodstock to be propagated for use in licensed reef restoration, research, or aquaculture
• exempt corals within US borders from ESA protections, making them legal to posses and to sell in interstate commerce

Such a bill would help save jobs, money, and wild coral habitats. There are few bills that do all three, basically taking politics out of the equation (so that members from both parties could get behind it).

 

I'll discuss the impact that the ESA listings will have on our industries, the alternative (which requires a legislative action), and how such a bill would help to save jobs, money, and the environment.

 

I have yet to draft this letter, but will share it with you when I'm done. I'm kind of thinking out loud here (using this post as a sandbox) to get started.

 

 

Edit: I might decide to enlist the resources of PIJAC. They have staff that could be instrumental in introducing a bill into Congress. Otherwise, I might still work with my senator's staff to draft a bill.

 

I might write to PIJAC, and go from there. It would be nice to at least have them on board. Once a bill is introduced, then we could all ask our representatives to vote for this specific bill.

 

However, PIJAC is currently trying to fight the ESA listings. This is contrary to what I'm proposing, so I'm not sure that they will be in agreement. However, I do feel that this achieves many of the same goals that they are trying to accomplish.

 

 

The main objective is to exempt coral within US borders from ESA protections. This would obviously benefit reef keepers, as well as the US aquarium and aquaculture industries. In exchange for this exemption, I'm also suggesting that collection and import bans be passed to simplify the customs process (and reduce the associated costs), while better protecting the wild reefs.

[GHill762]

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/blog/reefkeeping-is-not-under-attack

[(oYo)]

stop voting for democrats and you will live and work free once again

[GHill762]

stop voting for democrats and you will live and work free once again

while I agree with the sentiment, don't think for a minute that republicans are any better. they're all politicians and they're all there for the same thing, power.

 

they say power corrupts but I say power attracts the corruptable.

[(oYo)]

Republicans are vastly less likely to regulate every minute of your life, work, and the resources we own. Since you have to pick a side, it's an easy choice right now.

[GHill762]

Republicans are vastly less likely to regulate every minute of your life, work, and the resources we own. Since you have to pick a side, it's an easy choice right now.

well they've certainly got you convinced, but believe me, there are few that go into government work that want less government

[seabass]

Reefkeeping is NOT under attack

Leonard Ho tries to make the case that since reef keeping isn't a target, it isn't in peril. Unfortunately, that logic doesn't hold up. However, I do agree that reef keeping isn't under direct attack; but for lack of a better term, it might get wounded by friendly fire. I also agree that fighting the listings to protect the hobby simply won't work (and isn't what people are actually against). The real fight should be to protect the aquaculture industry and individual ownership. Only new legislation will be able to do this.

[HecticDialectics]

Republicans are vastly less likely to regulate every minute of your life, work, and the resources we own. Since you have to pick a side, it's an easy choice right now.

Just FYI but staghorn was listed under Bush...

[GHill762]

Just FYI but staghorn was listed under Bush...

we lost a lot of liberties under bush..

[(oYo)]

well they've certainly got you convinced, but believe me, there are few that go into government work that want less government

 

It's harder to see in Illinois. You have sort of GOP there, hardly conservatives. But at least you are finally on the right direction from that deep hole the other party dug you into.

[HecticDialectics]

 

It's harder to see in Illinois. You have sort of GOP there, hardly conservatives. But at least you are finally on the right direction from that deep hole the other party dug you into.

No response to Bush huh

 

Both parties have destroyed every right and freedom we have. Be honest. Voting for Romney won't magically save reefkeeping

[GHill762]

It's harder to see in Illinois. You have sort of GOP there, hardly conservatives. But at least you are finally on the right direction from that deep hole the other party dug you into.

I've never been a liberal, ever, don't mistake my words.. I'd label myself as very conservative-libertarian-ish. the grand old party is just not very conservative, at least the establishment isn't.. bush was pretty progressive for a "Republican" imo.. the republicans are more liberal now than democrats were 30 years ago..

 

bear in mind that although I'm in illinois, I'm nowhere near chicagoland. I think most people downstate would prefer the state got cut in half.

[GHill762]

Voting for Romney won't magically save reefkeeping

or, gasp, jeb bush..

 

 

 

Both parties have destroyed every right and freedom we have. Be honest.

 

couldn't agree more. politicians are destroying our country.

[(oYo)]

I've never been a liberal, ever, don't mistake my words..

 

I didn't think you were a liberal. I lived in IL for a while and have family there so I get ya

[Mustang Boy]

Republicans are vastly less likely to regulate every minute of your life, work, and the resources we own. Since you have to pick a side, it's an easy choice right now.

 

Yea the GOP has definitely got you believing their every word. The truth is both parties want to take your liberties away, it's just that each party wants to take different liberties away.

[supernip]

as long as no one bans xenia, you guys can all gfy. I don't give a shit for one moment about the state of this asinine hobby if it means the health of entire ecosystems. we're so expendable I can't even consider us collateral damage.

 

just the fact that some of yous think you're playing a part in conservation by growing overpriced corals in your tanks is both grandiose and laughable.

[masterbuilder]

Supernip...next time say what you mean.

[CrazyCarl]

as long as no one bans xenia, you guys can all gfy. I don't give a shit for one moment about the state of this asinine hobby if it means the health of entire ecosystems. we're so expendable I can't even consider us collateral damage.

 

just the fact that some of yous think you're playing a part in conservation by growing overpriced corals in your tanks is both grandiose and laughable.

Yeah don't sugarcoat it for us, lol.

 

I would fully agree if reefkeeping and wild collections actually had any real impact on the ecosystems. If it was really the case I would get rid of my tank tomorrow. That's really the issue for me, No one is saying the hobby plays a real part in the health of the ecosystems, yet it will be severely affected by these rulings. While this hobby is purely a luxury for most, there is an economic impact that is quantifiable, and for many it is their livelihood that could be ruined. Those are really the people/companies who are going to need to speak up.

 

Kind of agree with your second statement. Maybe a large aquaculture facility could play a part in conservation though, and those could really only be supported by hobbyists.