Clarion Angel experience?

[tylorarm]

My appologies Matt, that was pretty big miss. Thanks for correcting me Gresham. Oh, and not 100 but 10 not exactly small error either. Leafy or weedy? I should have taken notes. I believe they had both but I'm losing confidence in the story by the minute. Not only that, i was so engrossed in the story i forgot to take pics. Geesh.

 

[GreshamH]

No worries, Matt wouldn't worry about that I'm pretty sure As you saw, he's a great guy and doesn't sweat the small stuff. I think he'd get a kick out of it actually :lol:

 

[Vili_Shark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11820517#post11820517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda
If all available information shows that this is an illegal and unscrupuklous act done for mere profit, yes I am disgutsed at my speculation. Should I be proven wrong, I will be more than happy to apologize. Unless that happens, I will continue to believe that these were unethically and illegaly taken so the collector and seller can make money. As trigger said, it is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of illegal animal trade in that area of the world. Would you not agree?

Are you still disgusted sir?

Pls check the facts before jumping into conclusions or leaning towards them.

What you are saying is, that they are guilty unless they will find a way to prove that it was legal, and this is quite a wrong way to think, as it should be the other way around.

Anyway, as my friend Marine Betta said, Weedy Dragons can not be compared to Leafy, there is at least one guy who is breeding them and few are collecting.

Marine Betta, the resplendens mentioned are the ones from last year, I was too late, and now that Frank is not around it seems like impossible to get replendens.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11826408#post11826408 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Vili_Shark
Are you still disgusted sir?

Pls check the facts before jumping into conclusions or leaning towards them.

What you are saying is, that they are guilty unless they will find a way to prove that it was legal, and this is quite a wrong way to think, as it should be the other way around.

Anyway, as my friend Marine Betta said, Weedy Dragons can not be compared to Leafy, there is at least one guy who is breeding them and few are collecting.

Marine Betta, the resplendens mentioned are the ones from last year, I was too late, and now that Frank is not around it seems like impossible to get replendens.

As I stated, if in fact I am proven wrong, I will apologize. If this is the case, and these animals were legally collected than I do apologize. However, lets not delude ourselves into saying that all the people who have and unusual animals in Southeast Asia get them legally. We both KNOW that this is one of the HOTTEST areas for balck market smuggling and animal trafficking. So do I think these should be innocent until proven guilty- NO! Because the plain fact is that illegal animal transaction occur regularly in these areas of the world. To be honest, in wildlife law such as this, I dont think ANYONE should be innocent until proven guilty. I happen to work with wildlife here in the USA, and we are certainly not offered this luxury. If an animal transaction is to be conducted with a vulnerable or endangered species, the burden of proof of LEGAL determination is squarely my responsibility, as it should be. There is no practical way to enforce such law without.

But, nonetheless, I am straying way off topic. If the owner of this store in Bangkok is reading, and he has, in fact legally acquired all of these specimens (although I still don't think that to be feasible), he has my apologies.

Vili- I would be more than happy to keep discussing this with you in another thread or by PM. You seem to have the best interests at mind, and I certainly do not take ill will towrads your comments, as I hope you do not towrads mine.

 

[linyreefer]

It didn't work out with that wrasse for me.

 

[triggerfish1976]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11827020#post11827020 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda

But, nonetheless, I am straying way off topic. If the owner of this store in Bangkok is reading, and he has, in fact legally acquired all of these specimens (although I still don't think that to be feasible), he has my apologies.

I think it is a little unfair to single out one guy in this regard especially if we are all just guessing. I am sorry for bringing it up in the first place.
There is also many cases of illegal importation of wildlife for the private sector in the US. It may not be as rampant as other countries but it does exist.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11828598#post11828598 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by triggerfish1976
I think it is a little unfair to single out one guy in this regard especially if we are all just guessing. I am sorry for bringing it up in the first place.
There is also many cases of illegal importation of wildlife for the private sector in the US. It may not be as rampant as other countries but it does exist.

Agreed. But, does this mean just ignore them all? C'mon, you sound a lot marter than that. Any any one that would be brought up publicly on this forum would certainly be subject to my scorn. I am not singling out anyone for any other reason that a perceived unscrupulous action. As stated, if I am wrong, he has my apology. If I were this store owner, I would gladly and openly show the legality of these animals. You have nothing to hide unless you have something to hide, right? I am not calling him out, because what are the chances he is reading this, but if I were selling animals that were only collected very sporadically and rarely, and a legal permit was required (a la the Clarions....), I would be quite forwrad and glad to discuss how all the proper steps were taken, as was done in this thread by the Clarion collectors.

If there was a post on this forum about selling wild caught Hippocampus seahorses (which DO have a collection ban), I would react the same way, whether it was a store in my home town, or a store across the globe. I hop others would do the same.

 

[marinebetta]

If there was a post on this forum about selling wild caught Hippocampus seahorses (which DO have a collection ban), I would react the same way, whether it was a store in my home town, or a store across the globe. I hop others would do the same.

Bro...I think you need to moderate those blanket statements of yours. I know your heart is in the right place, but you do have a habit of making sweeping blanket statements.

There may be some collection bans on hippocampus seahorses in some countries, but it is definitely not in all countries. I believe that WC Hippocampus Reidii are being legally exported out of Brazil again - we just got some here.

Just to stay on topic - we should be getting some of those Clarions here pretty soon......

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11828778#post11828778 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by marinebetta
Bro...I think you need to moderate those blanket statements of yours. I know your heart is in the right place, but you do have a habit of making sweeping blanket statements.

There may be some collection bans on hippocampus seahorses in some countries, but it is definitely not in all countries. I believe that WC Hippocampus Reidii are being legally exported out of Brazil again - we just got some here.

Just to stay on topic - we should be getting some of those Clarions here pretty soon......

Oops, I was misinterpreted. It matter where you emphasize in the sentence. let me re-phrase- I would object to a post about the selling of wild caught seahorses species within the genus Hippocampus which do currently have a restriction. I did not mean to imply that all Hippocampus have a collection ban, but certain species absolutely do.

 

[GreshamH]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11828778#post11828778 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by marinebetta

There may be some collection bans on hippocampus seahorses in some countries, but it is definitely not in all countries. I believe that WC Hippocampus Reidii are being legally exported out of Brazil again - we just got some here.

What bans are you speaking of? Mexico is the only one I know of with a straight up ban on seahorse export/collection, but I haven't been in the import biz for several years now so I'm sure some stuff has changed.

If you haven't seen any Clarions where you are by now you will not see them exported to your country any time soon from the US. Some may trickle into your area from the mass that where exported, but there are no more to export here in the states.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Here is some information:

http://www.fws.gov/le/PubBulletins/PBSeahorsesTropicalFish.htm

its not necessarily a ban on collection, but instead import and export per CITES regulations. The last time I imported a CITES appendix II animal, I was required to prove it was a captive bred animal if it was to be used in a commercial application. And their defintion of "commerical" is very strict. Essentially, unless you are a non profit organization who will not benefit financially from obtaining the animal, it will be tough. I cant imagine importing to sell them would be considered "non-commercial".

 

[marinebetta]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11830825#post11830825 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GreshamH
What bans are you speaking of? Mexico is the only one I know of with a straight up ban on seahorse export/collection, but I haven't been in the import biz for several years now so I'm sure some stuff has changed.

If you haven't seen any Clarions where you are by now you will not see them exported to your country any time soon from the US. Some may trickle into your area from the mass that where exported, but there are no more to export here in the states.

Absolutely correct, Gresham. I know of no bans offhand.....

I expect these Clarions to be coming from maybe HK.....but a lot of it is just talk at the moment - I will believe it when I see them...

 

[marinebetta]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11831404#post11831404 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda
Here is some information:

http://www.fws.gov/le/PubBulletins/PBSeahorsesTropicalFish.htm

its not necessarily a ban on collection, but instead import and export per CITES regulations. The last time I imported a CITES appendix II animal, I was required to prove it was a captive bred animal if it was to be used in a commercial application. And their defintion of "commerical" is very strict. Essentially, unless you are a non profit organization who will not benefit financially from obtaining the animal, it will be tough. I cant imagine importing to sell them would be considered "non-commercial".

Again, you will need to check your facts before posting - CITES II animals and plants do not need to be captive bred and can be sold commercially. The restrictions you talk about are in relation to CITES I species.

As for the seahorse stuff, basically you said that there was a collection ban on all of them - now that is totally different from restrictions on import/export under CITES; something that nobody disputes....

You just need to be a bit more careful with you posts so that inaccurate information is not disseminated widely.....

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11832525#post11832525 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by marinebetta
Again, you will need to check your facts before posting - CITES II animals and plants do not need to be captive bred and can be sold commercially. The restrictions you talk about are in relation to CITES I species.

As for the seahorse stuff, basically you said that there was a collection ban on all of them - now that is totally different from restrictions on import/export under CITES; something that nobody disputes....

You just need to be a bit more careful with you posts so that inaccurate information is not disseminated widely.....

This I will argue tooth and nail with you about. I recently went through a huge ordeal with USFWS and CITES for trying to import a CITES I animal (which I couldnt get to go), and exporting a very common CITES II animal. In order to export the CITES II, I had to prove it was captive bred (which wasnt a problem), but it was a requirement of the permit. I personally spoke to Mike Carpenter at USFWS regarding this, so I am being very careful. This I know to be true. In fact, I really challenge ANYONE (public facilities aside) to show me that they have imported a CITES I animal- captive bred or not. They are strict about these permits.

You are correct, though, I did misword my argument. I do apologize for that, I too detest misinformation. If you would like to contact me, I would be glad to provide you with the pile of information I have on CITES regulated animal import and export.

I, like you, applaud the effort and intention to provide correct and accurate information, but I would urge you to not comment on what I know and dont know. If you believe me to be wrong, please show me with some information. If proven wrong, I am absolutely not above admitting it and apologizing. But, if all you are going to do is say "Hey man, you're wrong" and not provide any information beyond that, please be cautious of what you accuse me of.

 

[Vili_Shark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11827020#post11827020 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda
As I stated, if in fact I am proven wrong, I will apologize. If this is the case, and these animals were legally collected than I do apologize. However, lets not delude ourselves into saying that all the people who have and unusual animals in Southeast Asia get them legally. We both KNOW that this is one of the HOTTEST areas for balck market smuggling and animal trafficking. So do I think these should be innocent until proven guilty- NO! Because the plain fact is that illegal animal transaction occur regularly in these areas of the world. To be honest, in wildlife law such as this, I dont think ANYONE should be innocent until proven guilty. I happen to work with wildlife here in the USA, and we are certainly not offered this luxury. If an animal transaction is to be conducted with a vulnerable or endangered species, the burden of proof of LEGAL determination is squarely my responsibility, as it should be. There is no practical way to enforce such law without.

But, nonetheless, I am straying way off topic. If the owner of this store in Bangkok is reading, and he has, in fact legally acquired all of these specimens (although I still don't think that to be feasible), he has my apologies.

Vili- I would be more than happy to keep discussing this with you in another thread or by PM. You seem to have the best interests at mind, and I certainly do not take ill will towrads your comments, as I hope you do not towrads mine. [/QUOTE

jmaneyapanda, the only problem I have is that you are starting to accuse people or whole markets before you know any facts about anything that was or not sold there.

Sorry, but this is not the way.

I also think you see the whole picture wrong when it comes to SW fish in BKK.

Bangkok market is known for many smuggled wild life, parrots, monkeys and some other rare and sometimes endangered animals.

But because this is happening with parrots doesnt mean to say that the same is happening with fish, actually , for salt water, this market is not that attractive as one would think, besides Alex and maybe another guy none are dealing with the more rare fish ( I said rare,did not say illegal), so connecting the fish vendors there to the exotic animals smuglers is not right!

Goin on here and shouting illegal, smuggled, illegal smuggled, on any species that is not seen very frequently is not right either.

First check your data, then make the noise.

 

[Ed Ricketts]

I'm going to draw fire away at the risk of hijacking briefly the thread.

what kind of fish is this? I thought is was a spanish grunt but it's not that.
any help is appreciated. TIA

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11836526#post11836526 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Vili_Shark

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11827020#post11827020 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda
As I stated, if in fact I am proven wrong, I will apologize. If this is the case, and these animals were legally collected than I do apologize. However, lets not delude ourselves into saying that all the people who have and unusual animals in Southeast Asia get them legally. We both KNOW that this is one of the HOTTEST areas for balck market smuggling and animal trafficking. So do I think these should be innocent until proven guilty- NO! Because the plain fact is that illegal animal transaction occur regularly in these areas of the world. To be honest, in wildlife law such as this, I dont think ANYONE should be innocent until proven guilty. I happen to work with wildlife here in the USA, and we are certainly not offered this luxury. If an animal transaction is to be conducted with a vulnerable or endangered species, the burden of proof of LEGAL determination is squarely my responsibility, as it should be. There is no practical way to enforce such law without.

But, nonetheless, I am straying way off topic. If the owner of this store in Bangkok is reading, and he has, in fact legally acquired all of these specimens (although I still don't think that to be feasible), he has my apologies.

Vili- I would be more than happy to keep discussing this with you in another thread or by PM. You seem to have the best interests at mind, and I certainly do not take ill will towrads your comments, as I hope you do not towrads mine. [/QUOTE

jmaneyapanda, the only problem I have is that you are starting to accuse people or whole markets before you know any facts about anything that was or not sold there.

Sorry, but this is not the way.

I also think you see the whole picture wrong when it comes to SW fish in BKK.

Bangkok market is known for many smuggled wild life, parrots, monkeys and some other rare and sometimes endangered animals.

But because this is happening with parrots doesnt mean to say that the same is happening with fish, actually , for salt water, this market is not that attractive as one would think, besides Alex and maybe another guy none are dealing with the more rare fish ( I said rare,did not say illegal), so connecting the fish vendors there to the exotic animals smuglers is not right!

Goin on here and shouting illegal, smuggled, illegal smuggled, on any species that is not seen very frequently is not right either.

First check your data, then make the noise.

I will freely and honestly admit that I have never been to Bangkok, and do not know what the market is like. In my opinion, it is rather naive to assume that the balck market only exists for mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and insects, but not fish. But I do not KNOW this, as I have never been there. If this is true, perhaps you know better than I.

In retrospect, as I do not have the expereience in situ, perhaps my opinion is not and cannot be counted as credible or valid, so I will respectfully bow out of this conversation.

I truly do hope that any animals discussed in this thread were legally obtained and are properly cared for, and if I offended anyone, I apologize.

 

[marinebetta]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11836412#post11836412 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jmaneyapanda
This I will argue tooth and nail with you about. I recently went through a huge ordeal with USFWS and CITES for trying to import a CITES I animal (which I couldnt get to go), and exporting a very common CITES II animal. In order to export the CITES II, I had to prove it was captive bred (which wasnt a problem), but it was a requirement of the permit. I personally spoke to Mike Carpenter at USFWS regarding this, so I am being very careful. This I know to be true. In fact, I really challenge ANYONE (public facilities aside) to show me that they have imported a CITES I animal- captive bred or not. They are strict about these permits.

You are correct, though, I did misword my argument. I do apologize for that, I too detest misinformation. If you would like to contact me, I would be glad to provide you with the pile of information I have on CITES regulated animal import and export.

I, like you, applaud the effort and intention to provide correct and accurate information, but I would urge you to not comment on what I know and dont know. If you believe me to be wrong, please show me with some information. If proven wrong, I am absolutely not above admitting it and apologizing. But, if all you are going to do is say "Hey man, you're wrong" and not provide any information beyond that, please be cautious of what you accuse me of.

Bro...I hope you don't mind loosing a few teeth

I didn't provide any sources because I thought it was too easy to check....In any case, this is the short version from the horse's mouth. For the long version, you will have to plod through lots and lots of documents.

My guess is that you tried to export a CITES II species that was also under another US law eg the US Endangered Species Act, or the WBCA. These US specific laws are "better" than CITES rules and are often more restrictive. In any other country, CITES II animals can be freely traded commercially as long as you have the proper and legal CITES certificates. How do you think you have all those giant clams for sale in the US - not all of them are aquacultured!

As for CITES I species, nobody said that they could be traded...however, you are mistaken in saying that all CITES I species cannot be imported "captive or not". (I assume you mean commercially traded). CITES I species CAN be legally traded commercially as long as they are captive bred from a CITES registered breeding facility. You can legally import Asian Arowanas (except into the US as they are still on the US Endangered Sp list :eek1: ) pretty much anywhere in the world; Falconers buy and sell CITES I falcons bred at CITES registered farms in Europe; CITES I parrot species are traded across the world from CITES registered farms here and elsewhere.....USFW should have mentioned this to you, or you should have read about this in your efforts to import your CITES I animal.....

 

[jmaneyapanda]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11845975#post11845975 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by marinebetta
Bro...I hope you don't mind loosing a few teeth

I didn't provide any sources because I thought it was too easy to check....In any case, this is the short version from the horse's mouth. For the long version, you will have to plod through lots and lots of documents.

My guess is that you tried to export a CITES II species that was also under another US law eg the US Endangered Species Act, or the WBCA. These US specific laws are "better" than CITES rules and are often more restrictive. In any other country, CITES II animals can be freely traded commercially as long as you have the proper and legal CITES certificates. How do you think you have all those giant clams for sale in the US - not all of them are aquacultured!

As for CITES I species, nobody said that they could be traded...however, you are mistaken in saying that all CITES I species cannot be imported "captive or not". (I assume you mean commercially traded). CITES I species CAN be legally traded commercially as long as they are captive bred from a CITES registered breeding facility. You can legally import Asian Arowanas (except into the US as they are still on the US Endangered Sp list :eek1: ) pretty much anywhere in the world; Falconers buy and sell CITES I falcons bred at CITES registered farms in Europe; CITES I parrot species are traded across the world from CITES registered farms here and elsewhere.....USFW should have mentioned this to you, or you should have read about this in your efforts to import your CITES I animal.....

You see, it all depends on the prupose of the import. But, first let me state this, I cannot comment on any non -USA dealings- I work in the USA, and can only comment on that.
A CITES appendix I species will not be issued the CITES permit for US import or export unless the animals is proven to be captive bred (as you mentioned), the recipient has shown species specific enhancemnet or in situ conservation for this species in their native habitat, and the recipient will benefit in a non-commercial manner. And this "commercial" aspect is what screws most application. I work at a zoological facility that has all necessary permits to work with and maintain a CITES I species. Yet, a captive bred specimen in Europe, cannot be brought over into the US by us unless we donate money or otherwise participate in conservation in situ, and can convince the USFWS that it will not be a commercial venture. They do this as the do not wnat t be under the guise of "selling" permits for CITES I animals. So, the animal cannot be displayed, sold, or utilized in a manner that will allow the recipient to gain profit, unless they are listed as a non-profit entity. Period, no ifs ands or buts, bottom line. This is also from the horses mouth- the AZA liason for international permitting affairs. This is why their is no Pandas in the US that on anything but "on loan" from China. Because the permits cannot be issued if the recipient hopes to benefit from the presence. In my case, I had to argue that the purpose would be entirely beneficial to the domestic collection as introduction of new bloodline, but it is VERY HARD to convince them that you will not profit from it.

regarding your link to the CITES page, I refernce this all the time. What is it supposed to show me? It states that permits must be acquired. Look up into how to acquire those permits. Call some people, see what they say. I have done it hundreds of times already. BTW, the CITES II species I was trying to export was a very common lizard (a Panthers Chameleon) going to Bermuda. But, unless I could prove the chain of custody that it was captive bred, or show the documentation that it was legally imported, I would get no permit. And to legally import them requires work.

Unless you insist, I say lets discuss this by PM, rather than hijacking this thread- or start a thread about this, and we will go from there.

 

[marinebetta]

I'll just post this link CITES registered captive breeding operations as FYI; and also mention that your problem with the Panther Chameleon is pretty much an AZA and US specific thing from what I can read from your post. If my country allowed reptiles to be kept, I could easily import these from my friend's breeding operation in Bali. It's a local law that stops me from being able to acquire any, just like your local laws require you to make sure it is captive bred...

In other words, what I am saying is that you tend to generalize your situation to everyone else in the world. This is not the case. I apologise for this non PC statement in advance, but your posts just perpetuates the myth that Americans always think that what they do is right, and that everyone else should follow what they do, even if it is not in line with international policy....

Anything else, I will PM you but later after work....