Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act

gdm42001 · Feb 5, 2011

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> [FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]S. 46: Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Sponsor: Inouye (D - HI)

Official Title: A bill to reauthorize the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, and for other purposes.

Status:
1/25/2011: Introduced in Senate
1/25/2011: Referred to Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee

Commentary: This bill reauthorizes the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000. With certain limited exceptions, the bill makes it unlawful to "destroy, take, cause the loss of, or injure any coral reef" or component; to "possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship" coral taken in violation of the Act; or to violate permits issued or regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act by the Department of Interior or Department of Commerce. A person who "knowingly violates" one of these provisions is subject to up to five years imprisonment, criminal fines, or both. The bill also criminalizes the refusal to permit federal officers to board a vessel for purposes of inspection and enforcement of the Coral Reef Conservation Act, and criminalizes "resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidating, harassing, bribing, interfering with, ... forcibly assaulting," or submitting false information to any federal official in connection with such searches or inspections. A person who "knowingly commits" one of these acts is subject to up to five years imprisonment, criminal fines of up to $500,000 ($1 million for organizations), or both. If a dangerous weapon is used that "causes bodily injury" to the officer or places him "in fear of imminent bodily injury," the maximum prison term is doubled to 10 years. [/FONT]

mscarpena · Feb 5, 2011

What region of the ocean or reefs does this apply to??

sucker_fish · Feb 6, 2011

is this strictly for the state of HI or will it affect all U.S.

gdm42001 · Feb 6, 2011

the bill can be read here http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.46: :spin2:

gdm42001 · Feb 6, 2011

mscarpena said:
What region of the ocean or reefs does this apply to??

It would appear the world

`SEC. 209. INTERNATIONAL CORAL REEF CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES.

`(a) INTERNATIONAL CORAL REEF CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES-

- `(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall carry out international coral reef conservation activities consistent with the purposes of this Act with respect to coral reef ecosystems in waters outside the United States jurisdiction. The Secretary shall develop and implement an international coral reef ecosystem strategy pursuant to subsection (b).

and it appears they don't remember the country is broke

`(4) Transfer of funds- To implement this section and subject to the availability of funds, the Secretary may transfer funds to a foreign government or international organization, and may accept transfers of funds from such entities, except that no more than 5 percent of funds appropriated to carry out this section may be transferred.

Accept transfers, yea, they are lined up, check books in hand...

atreis · Feb 6, 2011

It's a reauthorization, not something new. It's been in place since 2000, but has to be periodically renewed (sort of like the Bush tax cuts).

gdm42001 · Feb 7, 2011

Senators Daniel Inouye (D-HI), John D. Rockefeller (D-WV), John Kerry (D-MA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Bill Nelson (D-FL) introduced the “Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act of 2011” (S. 46) to reauthorize and strengthen the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 and for other purposes.

It's the other purposes we need to worry about......

The Bush Tax Cuts may allow you to purchase more reefkeeping equipment or corals
I doubt the "Other Purposes" will do the same.
IMHO

GreshamH · Feb 8, 2011

gdm42001 said:
It would appear the world

`SEC. 209. INTERNATIONAL CORAL REEF CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES.

`(a) INTERNATIONAL CORAL REEF CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall carry out international coral reef conservation activities consistent with the purposes of this Act with respect to coral reef ecosystems in waters outside the United States jurisdiction. The Secretary shall develop and implement an international coral reef ecosystem strategy pursuant to subsection (b).

and it appears they don't remember the country is broke

`(4) Transfer of funds- To implement this section and subject to the availability of funds, the Secretary may transfer funds to a foreign government or international organization, and may accept transfers of funds from such entities, except that no more than 5 percent of funds appropriated to carry out this section may be transferred.

Accept transfers, yea, they are lined up, check books in hand...

Sorry but the US does not make international law

Cerastes · Feb 9, 2011

GreshamH said:
Sorry but the US does not make international law

There are a whole lot of things that the feds aren't supposed to do that they do anyway. This would be a no-brainer for them. Which given their apparent lack of brains puts it right up their alley.

ccube · Feb 9, 2011

I completely support this.

Aquaculture

organism · Feb 9, 2011

GreshamH said:
Sorry but the US does not make international law

+1, this is just another environmentalist lobby group power grab, they're starting to worringly hone in on our hobby.

ccube said:
I completely support this.

Aquaculture

True, it's a good thing corals that get aquacultured are man-made in DNA labs.

Luiz Rocha · Feb 9, 2011

Everyone here should support this. The law is to stop careless exploration of reefs and affects all US waters, including places like Samoa, Guam and the Virgin Islands. Simply put, it forbids people to just go to the reef and collect what they want without proper permits, including live coral and live rock, which used to be a problem in Hawaii and Florida. All small businesses that collect for resale on the aquarium trade (including many in Hawaii and Florida) are fully authorized to do so and this law will not affect them.

Here are the purposes of the law:

SEC. 202. PURPOSES.

`The purposes of this Act are--

`(1) to preserve, sustain, and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems;

`(2) to promote the wise management and sustainable use of coral reef ecosystems to benefit local communities, the Nation, and the world;

`(3) to develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems;

`(4) to assist in the preservation of coral reef ecosystems by supporting conservation programs, including projects that involve affected local communities and nongovernmental organizations;

`(5) to provide financial resources for those programs and projects;

`(6) to establish a formal mechanism for collecting and allocating monetary donations from the private sector to be used for coral reef conservation projects; and

`(7) to provide mechanisms to prevent and minimize damage to coral reefs.'.

organism · Feb 9, 2011

Luiz Rocha said:
Everyone here should support this. The law is to stop careless exploration of reefs and affects all US waters, including places like Samoa, Guam and the Virgin Islands. Simply put, it forbids people to just go to the reef and collect what they want without proper permits, including live coral and live rock, which used to be a problem in Hawaii and Florida.

Then why would they mention anything international like gdm42001 quoted? This law is written so vaguely that it could be used for anything, when laws say "and for other purposes" it basically means "whatever we feel like doing down the line." The number of ways this thing could be exploited and misapplied is mind boggling imo...

Just as an example, environmentalists recently used the Clean Water Act and Marine Life Protection Act meant to address pollution concerns to single-handedly ban fishing in most of Southern California.

Here's a nice amendment for the 2011 bill that I'm sure environmentalists will exploit since they're so trigger happy on our hobby these days.

SEC. 10. STUDY OF TRADE IN CORALS.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall conduct a study on the economic, social, and environmental values and impacts of the United States market in corals and coral products.

(b) CONTENTS- The study shall--

(1) assess the economic and other values of the United States market in coral and coral products, including import and export trade;

(2) identify primary coral species used in the coral and coral product trade and locations of wild harvest;

(3) assess the environmental impacts associated with wild harvest of coral;

(4) assess the effectiveness of current public and private programs aimed at promoting conservation in the coral and coral product trade;

(5) identify economic and other incentives for coral reef conservation as part of the coral and coral product trade; and

(6) identify additional actions, if necessary, to ensure that the United States market in coral and coral products does not contribute to the degradation of coral reef ecosystems.

greenbean36191 · Feb 9, 2011

Then why would they mention anything international like gdm42001 quoted?

Because the US funds reef conservation and research programs internationally, both in US territories and outside of the US via programs like USAID.

Luiz Rocha · Feb 9, 2011

greenbean36191 said:
Because the US funds reef conservation and research programs internationally, both in US territories and outside of the US via programs like USAID.

What he said above, and because reefs know no country borders. It makes absolutely no sense to study and protect the reefs in Puerto Rico if we let the ones in Haiti (which are part of the same large system) go belly up.

Also note that no portion of what you quoted leaves any door open for stopping coral trade, it only asks for more studies about it, which is good and should be done.

organism · Feb 9, 2011

Luiz Rocha said:
Also note that no portion of what you quoted leaves any door open for stopping coral trade, it only asks for more studies about it, which is good and should be done.

No portion of the Clean Water Act and MLPA said to ban fishing, but that's what environmentalists did. You can gloss over the bill and take it at face value, and to be honest that's naive when it comes to environmental efforts. You've gotta read between the lines, there is a lot in this bill that could stop the coral trade. Easily. First of all, the study is going to be used by different groups in different ways, second of all, here are parts from the bill that could with no effort at all be used against the hobby.

If you look at any of those quotes and think "well they definitely wouldn't use that to..." Let me tell you from experience: yes, they would.

`The purposes of this Act are--

`(1) to preserve, sustain, and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems

`(4) to assist in the preservation of coral reef ecosystems by supporting conservation programs, including projects that involve affected local communities and nongovernmental organizations;

`(7) to provide mechanisms to prevent and minimize damage to coral reefs.'

`(b) GOALS AND OBJECTIVES- The action strategy shall include a statement of goals and objectives as well as an implementation plan, including a description of the funds obligated each fiscal year to advance coral reef conservation. The action strategy and implementation plan shall include discussion of--

`(9) conservation.'.

`(c) ELIGIBILITY- Any natural resource management authority of a State or other government authority with jurisdiction over coral reef ecosystems, or whose activities directly or indirectly affect coral reef ecosystems, or educational or nongovernmental institutions with demonstrated expertise (look up the "expert" group that's lobbying congress to make importing endangered corals like euphyllias illegal) in the conservation of coral reef ecosystems, may submit a coral conservation proposal to the Secretary under subsection (e).';

`(g) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL- The Secretary may not approve a project proposal under this section unless the project is consistent with the coral reef action strategy under section 203 and will enhance the conservation of coral reef ecosystems nationally or internationally by--

`(1) implementing coral conservation programs which promote sustainable development and ensure effective, long-term conservation of coral reef ecosystems and biodiversity;

Cerastes · Feb 10, 2011

The US federal govt has no busness telling Haiti what to do with its resources any more than Haiti has telling the US what to do with its resources. Given the current state of the US economy it makes even less than no sense at all to allocate financial resources to to tell other countries how to handle their own internal issues. Hawaii, Florida and the protectorates are another issue, but how is this any different from our current policy of "nation building", which I'll bet alot who would support telling Haiti how to utilize its reefs are against?

Luiz Rocha · Feb 10, 2011

What the hell... Nobody is saying that the US should tell other countries what to do, my example was merely to indicate that reefs are connected and it makes no sense to study (or protect) the ones in the US if we have no idea what is going on elsewhere, and this is what the law says. Would be the same as giving funding for NOAA to study hurricanes *only* after they enter US waters.

Organism: This law has been around since the year 2000, what makes you think that now environmentalists will try use it to end the aquarium hobby? Also, could you link me to the story of how environmentalists banned fishing in California? I was not aware of that one.

organism · Feb 10, 2011

Luiz Rocha said:
This law has been around since the year 2000, what makes you think that now environmentalists will try use it to end the aquarium hobby? Also, could you link me to the story of how environmentalists banned fishing in California? I was not aware of that one.

Everything I listed is from the amendments to the 2000 law, that's all new goodies they're putting in there.

As far as the CA fishing thing here you go.

http://www.wonews.com/t-LegislativeUpdate-DarrelTicehurst-MLPA-liesmorelies-051109.aspx

And here's the lawsuit filed last week by fishing groups to stop the closures since the whole process was decided behind closed doors, which is illegal. Everything was coincidentally paid for by a prominent environmentalist group who hand-picked the "scientist experts", so imagine a government program to put restrictions on the coral industry that happens to be paid for by sea shepherd, and they get to pick the scientists. The environmental lobby is huge in this country and they hate our hobby, our lobby is nonexistent.

http://www.wonews.com/Blog.aspx?id=1239
http://www.wonews.com/blog.aspx?ID=1244

PeterIMA · Feb 13, 2011

Reathorization Coral Reef Conservation Act

Reathorization Coral Reef Conservation Act

It is good to see some concern about the reathorization of the Coral Reef Conservation Act. When it was originally enacted there was a lot of concern by the aquarium trade and hobby that it would be used to shut down the trade in marine organisms such as corals. This did not happen. Having participated in all of the Marine Ornamentals Conferences I saw attendance drop as it became apparent that the US Government did not intend to shut down the trade.What I get from what was posted is that there may be more funding available for research and conservation programs in foreign countries (which is probably good).

However, I would suggest that representatives of the aquarium trade and marine aquarium hobby become more active in attending meetings of the Coral Reef Task Force. Concerns expressed by hobbyists (such as those
expressed on this forum) may not be misplaced. The petition to ban 83 species of corals under the Endangered Species Act shows what some of the Environmental NGOs are capable of doing. So, be vigilant and become involved where necessary in issues related to coral reef conservation, management, and the marine aquarium trade.
Peter Rubec

Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act

gdm42001

mscarpena

New member

sucker_fish

Member

gdm42001

gdm42001

atreis

New member

gdm42001

GreshamH

New member

Cerastes

In Memoriam

ccube

New member

organism

code monkey

Luiz Rocha

Salty Dog

organism

code monkey

greenbean36191

Luiz Rocha

Salty Dog

organism

code monkey

Cerastes

In Memoriam

Luiz Rocha

Salty Dog

organism

code monkey

PeterIMA

New member

Similar threads