Corals to be banned and it will be illigal to own them.

[Yariel0527]

Do you guys are aware of this?
It looks like we wouldn't be able to keep the majority of coral species that the majority of us currently keep in our tanks anymore..

Here's the list
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/invertebrates/corals.htm

Here's a few links
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/invertebrates/corals.htm
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/...htm#threatened

 

[Mikeyp1055]

Soooo if you already own them and they become illegal to own. Are you suppose to just throw them away? Kind of seems stupid if that's the case

 

[Andy V]

My understanding is that the original proposal would have made it illegal to own them, buy them, or kill them. In other words, you were breaking the law no matter what. I believe this has been amended to where possession would not be illegal.

 

[diverbh4]

I thought it was no new imports, so if you have them already, you can still do whatever.

 

[dz6t]

I went through their website and did a permit pre application test:
Here are what They said:
1. It is legal to own for private aqaurium if you have them prior to law passes
2. You can transport them over states or country
3. Can't kill them intensionally
4. Can't sell them, give them away or trade or buy
You can propagate them with a permit

 

[lex_lutha111384]

What about fish?? Why aren't they an issue

 

[diverbh4]

I wonder if Boston Reefers can pick one up for all of us!!!

What can I do if I am collaborating with other researchers?

There may be advantages for researchers to work together. In the interest of expediting permit processing, researchers are encouraged to collaborate with other researchers conducting related work by applying for a single permit together.

However, please note that a single person must be designated on the permit as the Responsible Party, an official who has the legal authority to bind the collaborating parties, organization, institution, or agency and who is ultimately responsible for all activities and individuals operating under the permit.

One researcher may then be listed as the Principal Investigator (PI) and additional researchers may be listed as Co-investigators (CIs) on the permit. The PI and CIs must be individuals who are qualified to supervise and conduct the activities.

A Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit does not cover issues such as data ownership, publication rights, etc. Separate agreements between the PI and CIs are encouraged to cover these questions.

 

[Moe_K]

One researcher may then be listed as the Principal Investigator (PI) and additional researchers may be listed as Co-investigators (CIs) on the permit. The PI and CIs must be individuals who are qualified to supervise and conduct the activities.

I don't think you'll find anyone in a position to assume authority for all BRS members, not even including non-members.
Not sure what kind of research data we would generate for them.
Not sure who's qualified.
I'd reject the group permit application if I was serious about this.

That being said, similar legislation/regulations have come up in the past and been dumped at the last minute as untenable.
Hopefully this will too.

 

[jarrodsanborn]

Odds of becoming law/passing?
Going to be alot of softies in this hobby soon ....

 

[Moe_K]

Do you guys are aware of this?
It looks like we wouldn't be able to keep the majority of coral species that the majority of us currently keep in our tanks anymore..

Here's the list
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/invertebrates/corals.htm

Which of those species do you have in your tank?
I don't think any of them are in my tank.

 

[jason401]

I have at least 5 on the list

Euphyllia paradivisa
Millepora foveolata
Pocillopora elegans
Staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis)
Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata)

And I bet the one acan I have is prob on that list too

 

[Yariel0527]

Well what I understand is the if you owned before the law became active you will need a permit but for you to have a permit you need to proof that you own them before the law. Now how can we proof it that's the issue.

 

[Yariel0527]

Which of those species do you have in your tank?
I don't think any of them are in my tank.

I own almost all of them..

 

[STiTCH87]

I see this same exact post made atleast 2 or 3 times a year for the past 3 years and nothing has passed yet so I'm not in the least concerned about it. Besides, I already own most of all the corals I want and worst case scenario, an "illegal" coral will be just as easy to get on the street market as an illegal drug I'm sure.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 4

 

[MisFit]

I have at least 5 on the list

Euphyllia paradivisa
Millepora foveolata
Pocillopora elegans
Staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis)
Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata)

And I bet the one acan I have is prob on that list too

Other than the first one on your list which is frogspawn, I HIGHLY doubt you have the other 4. The Acropora species are Caribbean species that have been banned from the trade for many years. The Pocillopora species you have is most likely damicornis. Millepora is fire coral, Im assuming you are confusing it with Acropora millepora.

 

[MisFit]

The final ruling has been delayed for 6 months http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2013/corals-09-19-2013.html There is quite a disagreement about effectiveness and necessity of the act. Some corals definitely need listing, but there is the huge complication for the few species that are actually in the trade and actively propagated in captivity such as Euphyllia

In the meantime the Center for Biological Diversity was successful in forcing NMFS to list A. cervicornis and A. palmata as endangered and produce a recovery plan. This is a good thing and has absolutely no affect on the trade since both have already been banned in the trade. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2013/corals-09-13-2013.html

The vast majority of the species on this list are not in the trade to begin with. There are a handful that are, some of them widespread and this is where the issues come into play.

 

[P-Nut]

My understanding is that the original proposal would have made it illegal to own them, buy them, or kill them. In other words, you were breaking the law no matter what. I believe this has been amended to where possession would not be illegal.

Sounds a lot like Massachusetts gun laws. No matter what you do you are breaking the law.

I am glad to see that things are so good in the country that they will put effort into saving corals...because we all know how making things illegal actualy stops people from buying them...

 

[Andy V]

Sounds a lot like Massachusetts gun laws. No matter what you do you are breaking the law.

I am glad to see that things are so good in the country that they will put effort into saving corals...because we all know how making things illegal actualy stops people from buying them...

Unfortunately, I am WELL versed in the insanity of the MA gun laws

 

[twiddledog]

Pretty soon only criminals will have coral!!

 

[new2saltyfish]

Sounds a lot like Massachusetts gun laws. No matter what you do you are breaking the law.

I am glad to see that things are so good in the country that they will put effort into saving corals...because we all know how making things illegal actualy stops people from buying them...

Aint that the truth lol.