20 species of coral added to the US Endangered Species List

[Luiz Rocha]

Title says all, here is the article:

http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/stories/2014/08/corals_listing.html

I hope it doesn't affect the aquarium trade too much. Also, I think some of these species are very hard to ID, so not sure how to enforce.

 

[alton]

I noticed Euphyllia paradivisa is on that list since I have a bunch of it what happens now?

http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/prod_display.cfm?c=597+321+519&pcatid=519

http://www.reefs2go.com/product/C-FROGSPAWN-1BRANCH/Frogspawn-Coral-Euphyllia-paradivisa.html

 

[bigswaug]

Looks like the price just jumped on your frags.. Jk..

 

[Steveb]

I noticed Euphyllia paradivisa is on that list since I have a bunch of it what happens now?

http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/prod_display.cfm?c=597+321+519&pcatid=519

http://www.reefs2go.com/product/C-FROGSPAWN-1BRANCH/Frogspawn-Coral-Euphyllia-paradivisa.html

Its been over a year since I read through it... but I think you can give it away as long as it doesn't cross state boundaries.

I'll take one for the team and come take some off your hands I'm in Spring :lolspin:

 

[Rot26]

They're now illegal to take from a reef. They are still perfectly legal to have.

If you're going to sell or buy them though, you want to ensure that they're captive grown. If someone poaches them from a reef and sells them to you, technically you're breaking the law as well.

 

[billsreef]

They're now illegal to take from a reef. They are still perfectly legal to have.

They weren't declared "endangered", but just "threatened". That means the the measures that would have automatically occurred under the "endangered" heading will not automatically apply. So right now it is not much more than a label, though a label they can justify making later restrictions with.

 

[Steveb]

They weren't declared "endangered", but just "threatened". That means the the measures that would have automatically occurred under the "endangered" heading will not automatically apply. So right now it is not much more than a label, though a label they can justify making later restrictions with.

So if I understand it correctly... based on the "threatened" classification they could implement a ESA 4(d) rule with prohibitions for Euphyllia paradivisa like they have with Acropora palmata and Acropora cervicornis.

 

[Fish Biscuit]

I don't see this changing anything now. Maybe the 2 caribbean acroporas will be eventually Cites Appendix 1 listed down the road but I don't think that will happen until the next Cites meeting which I vaguely remember to be coming in 2016 or 2018.

 

[billsreef]

So if I understand it correctly... based on the "threatened" classification they could implement a ESA 4(d) rule with prohibitions for Euphyllia paradivisa like they have with Acropora palmata and Acropora cervicornis.

Yup, pretty much how I understand it as well. What they will do with this remains to be seen. Could do nothing more, or turn around and do some restrictions. On the bright side, unlike with "endangered", they could exempt existing aquarium specimens and future aquaculture of them from regulation while still restricting imports of wild collected specimens.

 

[alton]

They probably will come up with some kind of permit to buy and sell? I can see it now, For sale 2 headed Euphyllia paradivisa $50, permit $500

 

[Steveb]

Yup, pretty much how I understand it as well. What they will do with this remains to be seen. Could do nothing more, or turn around and do some restrictions. On the bright side, unlike with "endangered", they could exempt existing aquarium specimens and future aquaculture of them from regulation while still restricting imports of wild collected specimens.

Thanks Bill.

Do you know if exempting requires an amendment to ESA or is there a rule making body that overseas its implementation?

 

[billsreef]

Thanks Bill.

Do you know if exempting requires an amendment to ESA or is there a rule making body that overseas its implementation?

Right now there are no rules in place in regards to these corals. So such a pre existing aquarium specimen exemption could easily be written into any rules they do write...assuming they choose to do so. I expect NOAA is likely to be rule making body if any rules do get made in the future based on current "threatened" declaration.

 

[alton]

In the case of the Oryx in Texas a judge in some other state mandated an expensive permit system which I believe has since been over turned because the prices have been reduced? Our court system in our great country is out of control.
http://www.petersenshunting.com/big-game/60-minutes-on-hunting-endangered-oryx-in-texas/

 

[alton]

http://www.reef2rainforest.com/2014...-coral-listing-for-the-marine-aquarium-trade/

 

[jcolley]

Hypothetical question here.

If they are listed as "endangered", would the species as a whole benefit from the hobbiest propogation?

If it were loosely agreed upon by all to forego profit margin on these and give away or sell frags at very low prices, perhaps the species could thrive in greater numbers in captivity allowing potential future reintroduction in the wild?

 

[Steveb]

Maybe. Depends on who's making the decisions... Read the article linked in post #13. Texas ranchers had more scimitar-horned oryx on their land than were in the wild. Yet due to a complaint by an environmental/animal rights group the trophy hunting was stopped by the Fed. Govt. at which point there was no longer any economic incentive for the ranchers to keep them. I think recently something was passed that allows them to be hunted again, so hopefully there numbers will come back up, but that is the "stupid" we have to deal with and overcome.

 

[HumbleFish]

I am guessing if you own any of these corals then the time to go underground is now! Hopefully we don't read about a fellow reefer getting arrested for selling a branching frogspawn in a dark alley next to a 7-11. :dance:

 

[Deinonych]

There was a lengthy panel discussion about this at MACNA yesterday, led by Julian Sprung. One of the biggest concerns about this listing was that NOAA based the decision on opinions and not scientific data. As a result, most of the listed corals aren't actually threatened, and the concern is that this listing could be expanded to include even more animals (including fish) under the guise of climate change. As Bill stated above, nothing is illegal now, but if we as aquarists don't get involved, this could have far-reaching effects on our hobby and the animals we keep. More info here:

http://www.pijac.org/marine
http://www.pijac.org/blog/pijac-and...nformation-noaanmfs-66-coral-species-proposed
http://www.petage.com/new-regulations-could-impact-coral-trade/

 

[Eric Boerner]

Right now there are no rules in place in regards to these corals. So such a pre existing aquarium specimen exemption could easily be written into any rules they do write...assuming they choose to do so. I expect NOAA is likely to be rule making body if any rules do get made in the future based on current "threatened" declaration.

Elkhorn and Staghorn are protected under section 9 of the ESA 'as if' they were listed as endangered, as of 2006. Any coral listed under the ESA after 2006 will fall under that ruling as well. After that ruling, the only two known captive stands of staghorn are at the national aquarium's R&D lab, and another university research lab. All other 'parts' of those species are considered black market trade.

All 20 species just listed will have a 25k penalty and 6 months of time for any "take" of the animal. "Take" can be a vast array of actions, from actively selling them to 'accidentally' stepping on them while swimming near them. NOAA will determine what "Take" actually means in regards to the hobby. But for sure, we won't see these imported any longer.

 

[Deinonych]

Elkhorn and Staghorn are protected under section 9 of the ESA 'as if' they were listed as endangered, as of 2006. Any coral listed under the ESA after 2006 will fall under that ruling as well. After that ruling, the only two known captive stands of staghorn are at the national aquarium's R&D lab, and another university research lab. All other 'parts' of those species are considered black market trade.

All 20 species just listed will have a 25k penalty and 6 months of time for any "take" of the animal. "Take" can be a vast array of actions, from actively selling them to 'accidentally' stepping on them while swimming near them. NOAA will determine what "Take" actually means in regards to the hobby. But for sure, we won't see these imported any longer.

The Coral Restoration Foundation maricultures both staghorn and elkhorn corals specifically for repopulating Caribbean reefs: http://www.coralrestoration.org/our-work-2/

Also, there are no penalties currently for the other species listed as threatened. From the NOAA website:

• There are currently no prohibitions relating to individual conduct, except for those related to the two previously listed elkhorn and staghorn corals in the Caribbean.
• We will consult with federal agencies on actions that they execute, fund, or authorize that "œmay affect" listed corals to ensure the action does not jeopardize the continued existence of these corals.
• In the future, we may also identify specific regulations for the conservation of these threatened species, because ESA prohibitions against "œtake" are not automatically applied as they are for species listed as endangered.