The Endangered Species Act and how it affects reef keeping

[HecticDialectics]

So you are saying that since it can't be enforced what is the point? What is the point of the ESA listings then? Can the NMFS enforce better than the CBP? just trying to follow the argument...

You have to understand the difference between what seabass is proposing and what the esa actually does... My post is only directed at seabass's naive proposal

[Sailfish]

I'm sorry to barge in, but when I read HecticDialectics' seemingly immature and ignorant responses in this thread I got curious to see how this user had 45,476 posts on this forum. I was also surprised that a user with this many posts, did not have a link to a personal tank thread or anything in his or her signature, but that is not necessarily a bad thing (just caught my curiosity).

When I checked out HecticDialectics profile, there was a few things that shined through.

This user mostly posts short posts, uses immature language and grammar, and seems to be much more interested in non-reef related topics.

 

His or her lasts topics were "The Refrigerator Review Thread", "German Nationalism", "Slingbox", "Fantasy football lounge league", "Golfing".

I totally understand that some users come to this forum mainly for the community and not so much to discuss reefing, and that is totally OK. Although, in a serious discussion like this I will not take a person that is clearly not interested in discussing the data, or in this case the lack there of, seriously.

 

Edit: I urge everybody to watch the video in the beginning of this thread. There really is no point in taking part of a discussion if you are not up to date with the data that your fellow discussion partners has. Asking questions is of course fine.

[Pinner Reef]

Hectic hangs in the lounge... He's been around as long as I have. Sure he might come off as "abrasive" but the lounge will harden you to the world of online forums as a whole.

 

I for one like this, "Always question the norm" then "Stick it to the man" IMHO. I don't know if he has a tank but he knows the science and has valuable input if only for his ability to stand and say "That's ####ed Up/idiotic"

 

If you don't agree with what he has to say or want him to back up his theories with data call him out on it. I dare you

 

Thing is, this particular thread is very opinionated don't expect people not to spout off on any little thing that pops into their heads.

[seabass]

I feel that HD, for the most part, has added to the discussion. I was going to post the video and leave it at that; but he made me to look harder at this subject, and I've learned a few things in the process. We're obviously not in agreement, but that's alright.

[Sailfish]

I just can't stand people that are presented with serious arguments, substantiated by hard data, that just goes:

Meh

 

 

Hectic hangs in the lounge... He's been around as long as I have. Sure he might come off as "abrasive" but the lounge will harden you to the world of online forums as a whole.

 

I for one like this, "Always question the norm" then "Stick it to the man" IMHO. I don't know if he has a tank but he knows the science and has valuable input if only for his ability to stand and say "That's ####ed Up/idiotic"

 

If you don't agree with what he has to say or want him to back up his theories with data call him out on it. I dare you

 

Thing is, this particular thread is very opinionated don't expect people not to spout off on any little thing that pops into their heads.

If dinosaurs would still be around today, it does not mean that they would have any more integrity to be taken seriously in a discussion just because they are old.

 

Absolutely, I agree. Our current science paradigm is based upon trying to disprove hypotheses and theories. Still, when you try to do that, a certain level of seriousness is required for other scientists to listen to what you have to say. I don't feel HecticDialectics have responded in a matter worthy of being taken seriously.

When I get provoked by simply reading his responses to other forum members, I know better then hoping to get anything productive out of "calling him out on it". Sorry, dare denied. Same reason why I don't feed trolls. I would rather be dared to jump from an airplane without a parachute trying to illustrate and prove my mindblowingly good aikido roll, since that would much more likely generate something positive for me and the rest of the world in the form of gained knowledge.

 

I understand that, but in a serious discussion we need to have our opinions based on data, and not on unsubstantiated guesses, like for example that NOAA will choose to not act on their right to treat "threatened species" as "endangered species". Unquestionably, when people are given power, they tend to use that power in any situation that they feel even the slightest insecurity about just to save their own ass for later possible sanctions.

 

I feel that HD, for the most part, has added to the discussion. I was going to post the video and leave it at that; but he made me to look harder at this subject, and I've learned a few things in the process. We're obviously not in agreement, but that's alright.

I truly believe in Sokrates' philosophy, that two individuals taking part in discussion can both evolve to higher levels of knowledge through the act of discussion itself. So it is great that you learned more by being challenged by HecticDialectics' (immature) counter posts. I'm just saying that all parties in a discussion should respect each other and refrain from using subjective and non-relevant arguments to try and bully the others to agree with them. Phrases like "lol" and various emoticons utilized to try and discredit the other discussion parties does not belong in a discussion as serious as this one, directly associated with the future of our hobby.

 

In my opinion we have so many examples today of how fencing in technology and over-regulating progress is showing to hold us back as a global society. Open-source vs. patenting quickly comes to mind.

We will not help save corals by simply saying "as long as we don't touch them, it will not be our fault if they perish". Aqua-culturing, ocean farming, bio-rock, and the list goes on, is highly necessary if we should stand the slightest chance of saving the coral reefs that we reefers all care so deeply about!

[Cameron6796]

I think your being a little high standard. Not everyone has to write an essay in every post.

Also if you can't deal with the occasional lol then the Internet isn't the place to hold people to those standards.

[Sailfish]

I think your being a little high standard. Not everyone has to write an essay in every post.

Also if you can't deal with the occasional lol then the Internet isn't the place to hold people to those standards.

I can totally relate to that. Actually, I've been taught to write and say what you want to mediate as short and concise as possible, while still getting your message through. I think politicians skipped that class Still, "meh" doesn't really qualify as a serious and respectful answer to a long and documented post made on the same person's request.

[Cameron6796]

Why it's a public forum not a gentlemans club.

[HecticDialectics]

Wow serious case of stick in ass disease with that dude. Anyways...

[CrazyCarl]

I would think that exceptions to the ban (like a shipment of broodstock for research) would have to have a permit. I also feel that allowing imports of aquacultured corals in general would not be allowed without a permit, because it would be too difficult to determine if it was cultured or collected from the wild. Thus, my current thought is that the ban would be placed on all live coral, unless accompanied with a proper permit.

The shipping ban on imports seems like it is enforceable to me, like I said, I was more thinking along the lines of if say a NMFS or ESA agent were to search your home (however unlikely that is), how would you be able to prove that the endangered animals you have are not wild collected, and are aquacultured. Also not to mention an LFS. How would they prove their livestock is legit? Are you saying they wouldn't have to since the ban is on imports? Trying to convince any supporters of the listings would be extremely difficult IMO. Too many opportunities to skate the law. The fear would be an emergence of a huge black market. Some kind of paperwork that is regulated by the gov't would need to be presented, which would cost taxpayers $ to execute and enforce. That is usually the death knell with this stuff. Only if the industry people can prove that lost tax revenue from the hobby combined with job loss would make it more costly, would it be considered IMO. This would also be difficult to prove, since you're only outlawing 20 corals, there are countless more that we can "play with". The similar appearance argument comes into play here, but it is a tough one. I see why PIJAC is taking the stance they are.

[seabass]

I was more thinking along the lines of if say a NMFS or ESA agent were to search your home (however unlikely that is), how would you be able to prove that the endangered animals you have are not wild collected, and are aquacultured. Also not to mention an LFS. How would they prove their livestock is legit? Are you saying they wouldn't have to since the ban is on imports?

Yes, I'm saying that enforcement should occur at the border, and coral already within the states would be part of the US captive population (exempt from ESA protections). This means that resources wouldn't have to be spent on policing individual ownership or interstate trade.

 

Trying to convince any supporters of the listings would be extremely difficult IMO. Too many opportunities to skate the law. The fear would be an emergence of a huge black market.

This legislation would go a long way to protect the wild reefs. I'm proposing a ban on importing all live coral (not just species listed as threatened or endangered). Plus, even with unrestricted trade, the threat that reef keeping poses to the wild reefs is small. The proposed ban would go even further toward eliminating this threat.

 

Every law will have some violators (including the "no take" restrictions being proposed). By outlawing imports, you are restricting the supply of wild coral being brought into the US. It also reduces the demand, as the major vendors wouldn't want to risk dealing in illegal coral. Violators should be issued penalties great enough to legitimately deter smuggling.

 

This would also be difficult to prove, since you're only outlawing 20 corals, there are countless more that we can "play with". The similar appearance argument comes into play here, but it is a tough one.

You don't have to look too far ahead to realize that it will be more than 20 corals. This is just the beginning. Look at global warming and CO2 models. Warming and acidification are two of the main reasons for listing corals. As you project these threats to other corals, it is easy to make a case that their populations will be reduced. Again, it doesn't matter what the threat is (warming, acidification, fishing, agriculture, shipping, pollution, etc), any threat can cause a species to be listed.

 

The "Similarity of Appearance Cases" isn't a factor today; but currently, there are no listed endangered corals either. As they get listed, and the number of listed corals increases, it will get harder and harder to identify each specific species of coral. You would have to build holding facilities until a proper ID could be made in order to release a shipment. Eventually, similar looking coral would be listed to get around this problem.

 

I see why PIJAC is taking the stance they are.

I can too. But I believe they're wrong. It doesn't make sense to fight listings for species that are actually threatened or endangered, and need protection in the wild. It's not what the hobby or even most industries want. However, it's being done because they see no alternative, and because it has basically worked up to this point. We need to change our thinking, not fight listings. However, to save reef keeping as we know it (and the associated jobs and industries), I'm proposing this alternative.

[Cameron6796]

I don't know if this happened anywhere else but near where i live. The purchase and breeding of pit bulls was banned however if you currently owned one you did not need to get rid of it. Of course pit bulls are not endangered but why couldn't the same occur. You have a few of the 20 endangered we just leave you to have them because you paid for them fairly and likely before any ban. Now that brings to question people's legitimacy and if said enforecers did show up what are they going to do. "Do you have proof of purchase" "do you have proof of it being aquacultured?" No matter what kind of rules they enforce people will challenge them and they won't realistically be able to check every single house. Not likely, they will have to or atleast try and find some middle ground.

 

I like an above users comment... "Some species are only alive in our tanks in FW."

[seabass]

Since it's impossible to assess the opinions of members that are just reading this thread, I posted a poll last night to help get a better feel for what our community thinks about this subject. I also wrote a summary of information presented in this thread, which might be helpful to those who haven't read all of these posts. If you haven't already, I encourage you to click the link and complete the poll.

[HecticDialectics]

I don't know if this happened anywhere else but near where i live. The purchase and breeding of pit bulls was banned however if you currently owned one you did not need to get rid of it. Of course pit bulls are not endangered but why couldn't the same occur. You have a few of the 20 endangered we just leave you to have them because you paid for them fairly and likely before any ban. Now that brings to question people's legitimacy and if said enforecers did show up what are they going to do. "Do you have proof of purchase" "do you have proof of it being aquacultured?" No matter what kind of rules they enforce people will challenge them and they won't realistically be able to check every single house. Not likely, they will have to or atleast try and find some middle ground.

 

I like an above users comment... "Some species are only alive in our tanks in FW."

Technically esa actually creates an exception if you already own it before listing bit burden of proof is on the person... Don't think I've seen a case testing this but haven't looked very hard.

 

You can't sell or trade it, of course...

[CrazyCarl]

Yes, I'm saying that enforcement should occur at the border, and coral already within the states would be part of the US captive population (exempt from ESA protections). This means that resources wouldn't have to be spent on policing individual ownership or interstate trade.

 

This legislation would go a long way to protect the wild reefs. I'm proposing a ban on importing all live coral (not just species listed as threatened or endangered). Plus, even with unrestricted trade, the threat that reef keeping poses to the wild reefs is small. The proposed ban would go even further toward eliminating this threat.

 

Every law will have some violators (including the "no take" restrictions being proposed). By outlawing imports, you are restricting the supply of wild coral being brought into the US. It also reduces the demand, as the major vendors wouldn't want to risk dealing in illegal coral. Violators should be issued penalties great enough to legitimately deter smuggling.

 

You don't have to look too far ahead to realize that it will be more than 20 corals. This is just the beginning. Look at global warming and CO2 models. Warming and acidification are two of the main reasons for listing corals. As you project these threats to other corals, it is easy to make a case that their populations will be reduced. Again, it doesn't matter what the threat is (warming, acidification, fishing, agriculture, shipping, pollution, etc), any threat can cause a species to be listed.

 

The "Similarity of Appearance Cases" isn't a factor today; but currently, there are no listed endangered corals either. As they get listed, and the number of listed corals increases, it will get harder and harder to identify each specific species of coral. You would have to build holding facilities until a proper ID could be made in order to release a shipment. Eventually, similar looking coral would be listed to get around this problem.

 

I can too. But I believe they're wrong. It doesn't make sense to fight listings for species that are actually threatened or endangered, and need protection in the wild. It's not what the hobby or even most industries want. However, it's being done because they see no alternative, and because it has basically worked up to this point. We need to change our thinking, not fight listings. However, to save reef keeping as we know it (and the associated jobs and industries), I'm proposing this alternative.

I see your point, but I just think it would take a lot of convincing. It is like saying since it's illegal to import cocaine, we don't have to check if anyone is using it. Its not a spot on comparison, but you get the point. Illegal importers will be "safe" once the livestock makes it through the border, no one will be checking after that, so what would deter someone from buying illegal "wild" corals in the US. They just play dumb. "I bought it from someone in the US, they told me it was aquacultured etc..." That's what makes me think you would need some kind of certificate.

 

But I do agree banning all imports would make things simpler and be like a proactive response to make the hobby looked upon more favorably.

 

I agree with you on most points, and I am not saying these are my personal opinions or arguments, I am just playing devils advocate and trying to look at it from an oppositional point of view.

 

I just see us as hobbyists being looked at as whiny babies by the government "waaaaah! you're taking my toys away!", and not really listening to anything we have to say (that shouldn't stop anyone from trying though). Its the economical impact that needs to be considered, and the industry that really needs to speak up. Not just in the US, but the rest of the world, some remote places rely on wild collections and mariculture as their main source of income, as well as manufacturing that is going to take a hit. Just my opinion. I do plan on commenting though. When is the deadline?

[seabass]

It is like saying since it's illegal to import cocaine, we don't have to check if anyone is using it. Its not a spot on comparison, but you get the point. Illegal importers will be "safe" once the livestock makes it through the border, no one will be checking after that, so what would deter someone from buying illegal "wild" corals in the US. They just play dumb. "I bought it from someone in the US, they told me it was aquacultured etc..." That's what makes me think you would need some kind of certificate.

It's a compromise at best. Without question, a ban would reduce imports. No law that will prevent all illegal activity. However, imports of wild coral is such a small part of the problem now; and by banning all imports, it would be much less. Plus, legitimate vendors wouldn't go anywhere near a questionable source of coral. I fear that the alternative is losing everything.

 

Certificates have their own obstacles. How do I get certificates for existing corals? Does the government issue them, or is it just something that a vendor prints out? What if I frag my certified coral, would I have to destroy the frag because I don't have a certificate to go with it? Obviously I couldn't destroy a protected coral, so what then?

 

I do plan on commenting though. When is the deadline?

The public comment period expires on 03/16/2015.

[CrazyCarl]

It's a compromise at best. Without question, a ban would reduce imports. No law that will prevent all illegal activity. However, imports of wild coral is such a small part of the problem now; and by banning all imports, it would be much less. Plus, legitimate vendors wouldn't go anywhere near a questionable source of coral. I fear that the alternative is losing everything.

 

Certificates have their own obstacles. How do I get certificates for existing corals? Does the government issue them, or is it just something that a vendor prints out? What if I frag my certified coral, would I have to destroy the frag because I don't have a certificate to go with it? Obviously I couldn't destroy a protected coral, so what then?

 

The public comment period expires on 03/16/2015.

I am not talking about legit vendors, but ones that are maybe not so legit and the hobbyists that might want something even just for the mere fact that it is endangered. I agree with the difficulty of the execution of certificates, I think I even stated I don't know how it would work or how much it would cost. That is why I said it would be difficult to convince opposition, and again I agree with you that what you propose is the better option for hobbyists, but in the end we aren't trying to convince hobbyists. You're points are all logical, while saying that there will be much less imports is true, well, the argument will be that there would be even less if it was illegal to buy, sell or trade these corals. Like HD said, people sneak things over the border all the time, now we are just making it a little easier for them and opening the door to this kind of behavior by not attempting to stop trade after the fact. By allowing trade, it leads to a trail of logic that requires at least some regulation of trade IMO(whether it be certificates or something else) within the US. We have all been to the LFS that has questionable business ethics and only care about $ and I am nearly positive some wouldn't hesitate to buy anything if they knew they had no way of getting in trouble. The banning of all coral imports would also cause increased prices, making illegal imports even more tempting and profitable. These are the arguments you will have to contend with.

 

The trade off like you said would be to stop all coral imports, not just the 20 listed, and I get that. It will be a tough argument in the end. That is all I am saying. I hope there can be some middle ground on the issue and I will make my comment as should anyone else with an opinion or strong feelings on the matter, one way or another.

[seabass]

You're points are all logical, while saying that there will be much less imports is true, well, the argument will be that there would be even less if it was illegal to buy, sell or trade these corals. Like HD said, people sneak things over the border all the time, now we are just making it a little easier for them and opening the door to this kind of behavior by not attempting to stop trade after the fact.

I believe you are right, the other option is to make these corals illegal. As more species are protected, more coral will be illegal. However, I still feel that identification will become a problem. As potentially hundreds of species might be protected in the future, it will become harder to identify specific species. In the end, similar looking corals will likely be listed too. The kicker is that captive raised specimens will be illegal too.

 

But I don't see smuggling as being a real threat. Plus, stiff penalties can tip the reward/risk scale against the smugglers. And as far as prices are concerned, the market always works that out in the end.

[seabass]

So I just had lunch with an ex-staffer of one of my senators, to discuss this. He gave me the name of someone currently on my senator's staff to talk to about this issue. I will be writing to him to see if there is anything they can do, or to give me the name of someone who is better able to deal with this issue. I'll also be contacting PIJAC to see what they say.

 

I'm not sure what will come out of this, but we'll see. I'll keep you updated.

[seabass]

This February 23rd and 24th, Bulk Reef Supply will be donating 10% of all sales to PIJAC's Aquatic Defense Fund. Vertex, EcoTech and AquaIllumination have also offered to match our donation on their products (bringing the total to 20%).

[HecticDialectics]

Use temporary credit card numbers

[seabass]

Haha, yeah I got my letter from them too. Better yet, just use PayPal; although I think they've got it locked down now.

[HecticDialectics]

[Cameron6796]

I think that this is a very good test on how far we are willing to go to protect our hobby.

[AcroObsessed]

Julians a nice guy