Cali Kid Corals

U.S. Considers Endangered Species Protection for 82 Stony Coral Species - a call to action!!!

G

Guest

Guest
Please take the time to read this and follow the links. This is pretty serious and if you read the bold parts you'll understand why. This will pretty much end reef keeping as well know it.

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a90b1f

http://www.coralmagazine-us.com/content/us-considers-endangered-species-protection-82-stony-coral-species

U.S. Considers Endangered Species Protection for 82 Stony Coral Species

A move to place more than 80 species of stony corals on the Endangered Species list appears to be gaining traction with the U.S. federal government. A petition from an Arizona-based environmental group calls for protection of 8 Caribbean and Western Atlantic species, 9 corals in the Hawaiian Islands, and 66 species from the Indo-Pacific.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Department of Commerce have opened a 90-day finding period seeking to hear “scientific and commercial information” on whether a long list of stony coral species would be given protection under the Endangered Species Act.

The 83 species included in the original petition range from four species of Acanthastrea, 22 species of Acropora, 3 species of Euphyllia, 8 species of Montipora, and 4 species of Turbinaria. Among the corals on the list are such commonly kept aquarium species as Euphyllia parancora, Galaxea astreata, Pavona cactus, Turbinaria reniformis, and many species of Acropora.

The move was initiated by the Center for Biological Diversity, headquartered in Tucson, Arizona, a non-profit dedicated to conservation. The Center claims the petition, originally submitted October 20, 2009, was ignored until they threatened to sue the National Marine Fisheries Service.

The announcement that the group’s petition had been accepted came February 10. Of the 83 original coral species, 82 were found to have significant enough evidence of compromise to justify further status reviews. The Fisheries Service ruled that there was not enough evidence to consider a listing for the Western Atlantic Ivory Tree Coral, Oculina varicosa, but that the others warranted further consideration.

“This is a call to action,” said Marshall Meyers, CEO of the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) in Washington. “There may be some species that do need protection, but to list all of these corals demands serious science-based, credible studies demonstrating that each of these species is endangered.”

If listed, the corals would be banned from collection in U.S. waters, banned from import into the United States; interstate shipment would become illegal. Captive propagation would require a federal permit, and corals could only be bought and sold within states. “Effectively, this would end the international trade in stony corals to the United States,” Meyers said in an exclusive interview with CORAL Magazine.

“I think many people have been taken by surprise and don’t yet know the implications. In addition to the marine aquarium hobby, this could impact anyone who comes near a coral reef in U.S. waters, including boaters, fishermen, divers, and tour operators. Using the Endangered Species Act in this way is part of a crusade, the breadth of which we have never seen before.”


Once a species is listed as endangered, sanctions are levied against anyone who “takes” a specimen. “Taking” is defined as “harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, collecting, or any attempt to do these things to a member of the endangered species.” The petitioners believe that they can use the Endangered Species Act to bring legal action against entities emitting CO2 and to force the government to establish marine protected areas.

“The status review is an important step forward in protecting coral reefs, which scientists have warned may be the first worldwide ecosystem to collapse due to global warming,” says Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director at the Center for Biological Diversity, based in San Francisco. “Endangered Species Act protection can provide a safety net for corals on the brink of extinction.”

The group says it has "255,000 members and online activists," and in its tax filing for 2008 showed total revenues of more than $9 million. Among its current campaigns are efforts to save sea turtles, Beluga Whales, ancient Redwood Trees, and the Okinawa Dugong. Other activities of CBD include the distribution of 100,000 free “condoms for endangered species,” in hopes that human population growth will be slowed. Handed out across the country on Valentine's Day, the slogan on one of the six different condom packets reads: “Wrap with care, save the polar bear.”

Galaxy Coral, Galaxea astreata: a rampant grower in many aquariums, but said to be endangered in nature. Photo by Janine Cairns-Michael.

Coral biologists have started to dissect the group’s petition, and John Bruno, Ph.D., of the University of North Carolina, writing on the Australian based blog, ClimateShifts.org, took particular note of the assertions of loss of coral cover in many areas that the petition uses to justify protecting stony corals. Bruno himself did some of the studies cited by the petitioners.

“Now this, as they say here in Oz, is some dodgy science.... Given what we have have seen happening in the media recently, e.g., the IPCC reports, scientists should be really careful about the accuracy of their gloom-and-doom stories.”

Some observers believe that, should this petition be approved, it could pave the way to a wholesale listing of all or most stony corals and coral reef fishes under the Endangered Species Act.

Meyers asks that anyone in the CORAL audience who can help provide an informed response to the petition contact PIJAC. The deadline for responding to the National Marine Fisheries Service is April 12, 2010.

For more information, or to weigh in with your expertise, see the following:

Center for Biological Diversity (The Petitioners)

The Finding (National Marine Fisheries Service) and The List of Corals

Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council
(PIJAC) (Who Will Offer Expert Testimony and Information)

Climate Shifts.org (Coral biologist John Bruno, PhD, starts to dissect the science cited in the petition.)

CORAL® Magazine Staff Report: Eli Nadeau, James Lawrence.
Contact: editors@coralmagazine-us.com

http://reefbuilders.com/2010/02/17/80-species-stony-corals-added-endagered-species-list/

http://www.reefs.org/forums/topic134794.html

The 83 species included in the petition are: Acanthastrea brevis,
Acanthastrea hemprichii, Acanthastrea ishigakiensis, Acanthastrea
regularis, Acropora aculeus, Acropora acuminate, Acropora aspera,
Acropora dendrum, Acropora donei, Acropora globiceps, Acropora horrida,
Acropora jacquelineae, Acropora listeri, Acropora lokani, Acropora
microclados, Acropora palmerae, Acropora paniculata, Acropora
pharaonis, Acropora polystoma, Acropora retusa, Acropora rudis,
Acropora speciosa, Acropora striata, Acropora tenella, Acropora
vaughani, Acropora verweyi, Agaricia lamarcki, Alveopora allingi,
Alveopora fenestrate, Alveopora verrilliana, Anacropora puertogalerae,
Anacropora spinosa, Astreopora cucullata, Barabattoia laddi, Caulastrea
echinulata, Cyphastrea agassizi, Cyphastrea ocellina, Dendrogyra
cylindrus, Dichocoenia stokesii, Euphyllia cristata, Euphyllia
paraancora, Euphyllia paradivisa, Galaxea astreata, Heliopora coerulea,
Isopora crateriformis, Isopora cuneata, Leptoseris incrustans,
Leptoseris yabei, Millepora foveolata, Millepora tuberosa, Montastraea
annularis, Montastraea faveolata, Montastraea franksi, Montipora
angulata, Montipora australiensis, Montipora calcarea, Montipora
caliculata, Montipora dilatata, Montipora flabellata, Montipora
lobulata, Montipora patula, Mycetophyllia ferox, Oculina varicosa,
Pachyseris rugosa, Pavona bipartite, Pavona cactus, Pavona decussate,
Pavona diffluens, Pavona venosa, Pectinia alcicornis, Physogyra
lichtensteini, Pocillopora danae, Pocillopora elegans, Porites
horizontalata, Porites napopora, Porites nigrescens, Porites pukoensis,
Psammocora stellata, Seriatopora aculeata, Turbinaria mesenterina,
Turbinaria peltata, Turbinaria reniformis, and Turbinaria stellula.
Eight of the petitioned species are in the Caribbean and belong to the
following families: Agaricidae (1); Faviidae (3); Meandrinidae (2);
Mussidae (1); Oculinidae (1). Seventy-five of the petitioned species
are in the Indo-Pacific region, represented by five families (nine
species) in Hawaii: Acroporidae (4); Agaricidae (1); Poritidae (1);
Faviidae (2); Siderastreidae (1); and 11 families and one order in the
rest of the Indo-Pacific region: Acroporidae (31); Agaricidae (7);
Poritidae (6); Faviidae (2); Dendrophylliidae (4); Euphyllidae (4);
Oculinidae (1); Pectiniidae (1); Mussidae (4); Pocilloporidae (3);
Milleporidae (2); Order Helioporacea (1). All 83 species can be found
in the United States, its territories (Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin
Islands, Navassa, Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa,
Pacific Remote Island Areas), or its freely associated states (Republic
of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, and Republic
of Palau), though many occur more frequently in other countries.
The petition states that all of these species are classified as
vulnerable (76 species), endangered (six species: Acropora rudis,
Anacropora spinosa, Montipora dilatata, Montastraea annularis, M.
faveolata, Millepora tuberosa), or critically endangered (one species:
Porites pukoensis) by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). Montipora
dilatata and Oculina varicosa are also on our Species of Concern list.
 
Figures that some environmental group in Arizona would know all about reefs....

Out of curiosity how serious is this? This is some group who has made a petition, I mean I would think that there'd be environmental groups doing this left and right.
 
The review committee that did the review last year is a list of who's who in the real reef world.

The group in question isn't doing any of the research, they put that onus on NOAA/Feds.

It's no joke Mike, rather serious in fact.
 
Oh hell yah they do. It's a lawsuit driven legislation and with the world a buzz about the climate, and with the Dems in control, don't poo poo this one.

Just how big and strong do you think the MO industry really is? It's far smaller and far less important then I think you think it is.

Let's put it this way, as an industry we have NO voice in Washington and the NPO does. Our only voice is a full pet industry group, PIJAC. They have a lone lobbyist.

I'm scared and I've seen a half dozen bills sort of like this. If this passes and HR 669 passes there will be no hobby and no trade and the government can careless about that fact.
 
Anyone can petition for anything, They're trying to protect the reefs that's cool. But putting them on the endangered species list isn't the answer because they'll be treated like animals (the laws are there to protect stuff like tigers). Corals are easily self propagated, so the best route would be to make up an entirely new law ban imports and wild harvesting without a permit. Leaving room for stuff like the Florida aqua cultures and ORA farms and of course personal propagation.

Plus most LFS would become instantly illegal if they were put on the endangered species list, many jobs would be lost. It'd be political suicide, on the other a law hand closing off imports and wild harvesting would create new jobs in coral propagation.
 
So who's going to be doing the research on this? You mention NOAA being in on it. Won't science prevail in this case? Or is there fear of rushed science being done and getting lousy/false results?
 
NOAA spent all last year on researching it and what you see is what they signed off on. Read the stuff closely and you'll see who did the research.

Basically it's like this: the corals on the list live in areas prone to bleaching and therefor could be wiped out in one blow. To counter that they want to protect them. All but one coral made it on the over all list from the first list.

It's not about jobs otherwise the fisherman would still be catching salmon and the loggers would be logging ;) If the Fisherman can't win, and they have MUCH more political power and more money at stake, then just how is the meager pet trade going to go up against this?

Like I said, of all the bills I have been following this and HR 669 have REAL possibilities to make it through. Enough so where I am scared. No other bill or such has ever really scared me. Concerned me, yes, scared me, no.
 
Sfork said:
Anyone can petition for anything, They're trying to protect the reefs that's cool. But putting them on the endangered species list isn't the answer because they'll be treated like animals (the laws are there to protect stuff like tigers). Corals are easily self propagated, so the best route would be to make up an entirely new law ban imports and wild harvesting without a permit. Leaving room for stuff like the Florida aqua cultures and ORA farms and of course personal propagation.

Plus most LFS would become instantly illegal if they were put on the endangered species list, many jobs would be lost. It'd be political suicide, on the other a law hand closing off imports and wild harvesting would create new jobs in coral propagation.
They are treated like animals: see CITES (www.CITES.org).

I suggest you read on the Salmon fishermen's plight. Season looks to be closed once again. The commercial fishing union is very strong and has a lot of money and feet on the ground in Washington then we do. It's also a larger industry then corals. They're not winning the battle by any means and no "lost jobs" are being cried over by the Feds or CA F&G.

I also suggest reading up on HR 669. It has to do with invasive species and would effectively ban all imports of fish, birds, plants, etc... and yes, corals.
 
OK, I read this and want to know if this passes what are they going to do to US. i understand the LFS would be gone and there would be a devastating ripple effect that would take out most hobbyists. Will it then be illegal to have these corals in our tank and what could they do?
I understand the seriousness of this bill and do not like it one bit, but what can a sinlge hobbyist like me do? do we need to start a petition and deliver it to our local congressmen?
 
Read my post, especially the bolded part telling you what you can do :D Email NOAA via the link CORAL provided. Let you voice be heard.
 
Even if keeping corals in your tank isn't illegal, transporting, propogating, harming, etc. will just about eliminate the hobby. Without LFS, coral swaps and legal ways to trade, it's be black market trading. Basically the hobby as we know it would cease to exist. I hope this doesn't happen but I will contact congressmen/women and do what we can as citizens to promote the right type of laws, not ones based on dodgy science. Remember, we all have a vote, and there's an election not too far away. Everyone can complain, but actions are 10x better than complaints.
 
regardless of if it is right or not, I can see them implementing a total ban of new wild stuff. I can't even fathom how they would (in not so many words) tell all the LFSes and all the hobbiests throughout the world, that all they own is now illegial without permit and that they will have to properly destroy everything or face fines/imprisonment etc. I can't see the entire MO economy being shut down especially with the current economy. Sure, I can see the imports change, but not the big fisted smash job.
 
Tony it's only for the US. The problem is even if we pass this and stop, the growing markets in the EU and China will just pick up out slack. China is becoming a huge market for MO and they can care less about issues like this.

You're a FW guy as well, remember all the plants to were made illegal? CA AG used to visit most stores and levy fines for having those plants. Plants that you can find all over Cali waterways (damage done!!!)
 
LordHelmet said:
OK, I read this and want to know if this passes what are they going to do to US. i understand the LFS would be gone and there would be a devastating ripple effect that would take out most hobbyists. Will it then be illegal to have these corals in our tank and what could they do?
I understand the seriousness of this bill and do not like it one bit, but what can a sinlge hobbyist like me do? do we need to start a petition and deliver it to our local congressmen?

Meyers asks that anyone in the CORAL audience who can help provide an informed response to the petition contact PIJAC. The deadline for responding to the National Marine Fisheries Service is April 12, 2010.

The link didn't transfer to this post but if you check my first one the PIJAC part is a hyperlink to PIJAC contact page.

Likewise you could contact NOAA's NMFS but it's best to be part of the PIJAC petition to show strength and unity.
 
Here's the other bill still in committee (iirc)

http://www.nohr669.com/
 
Back
Top