NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn Corals

[Hawkeye]

Not sure how we can best help, but I plan on emailing the person in charge below to voice my support...I figure the more of us that do - perhaps the more likely the proposed protections will pass?

NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn and Staghorn Corals. NOAA is proposing to extend most of the prohibitions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to the threatened elkhorn and staghorn corals. Both species were listed as threatened in May 2006. Species listed as endangered under the ESA are automatically covered by a suite of protective measures and prohibitions in the law; however, these same measures and prohibitions do not automatically apply for threatened species. Therefore, NOAA Fisheries Service developed a separate proposed rule, called a 4(d) rule after section 4(d) of the ESA, detailing the prohibitions necessary to provide for the conservation of elkhorn and staghorn corals. The proposed rule would prohibit the take, trade and all commercial activities involving elkhorn and staghorn corals. Allowable activities are limited to qualified scientific research and enhancement and restoration activities carried out by an authorized agency.

The public has 90 days to comment on the proposed rule, the comment period ends on March 13, 2008, which is available at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov, by contacting NOAA’s Jennifer Moore at Jennifer.moore@noaa.gov, or by fax request sent to 727-824-5309.

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods and should reference (RIN) 0648-AU92 in the subject line:

* E-mail via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov
* Fax to 727-824-5309, Attention: Jennifer Moore
* Mail to Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
=============

EDIT: Note this caveat:
All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.govwithout change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do no submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

Here's a more direct link to post comments - again only the red Star section is required- name/address etc. is all optional.

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=0900006480379d4e

 

[Phyl]

What do we do with the Elk/Stag in our tanks if we are no longer able to sell or trade it? It grows like weeds and will need pruning from time to time?

Of course I agree that we shouldn't be taking any more into the hobby... Maybe we should be able to trade it?

 

[DaveK]

Re: NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn Cor

Personally, I see this as another over restrictive rule proposed by a government agency. Does this mean we can't trade frag, or sell captive raised corals? What about corals grown in the ocean specifically for sale?

I can understand restricting collections on a reef, but not a complete ban.

We also need to consider that only a very small fraction of coral damage is caused by collection for the hobby. Much more is done by pollution, water runoff, improper fishing methods, boats when the anchor, dredging, etc. etc. etc.

 

[harryk]

Re: NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn Cor

I totally agree wild harvesting of the species should be banned. But i think if it's already in the hobby people who have it should be able to trade/sell it to other hobbyists. it makes no sense to ban something that's already been harvested and in the hobby. Sometimes hobbyists are key in reintroducing decimated species because they have such a great genetic variety of the species which in the future might be of great value to someone trying to save the species

Thanks
Harry

 

[Phyl]

The problem with just banning collection is then you don't have any way of proving what was brought in illegally v. what was brought in prior to the deadline (except that I have pictures from 2004 of these corals in my system ). There needs to be an easy way to manage it, and the only way for that is to ban ALL sale/trade.

If this is the ONLY way we can save the ocean species, then I think it is something we need to do. I just wish there was some alternative.

 

[harryk]

Re: NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn Cor

The problem with just banning collection is then you don't have any way of proving what was brought in illegally v. what was brought in prior to the deadline (except that I have pictures from 2004 of these corals in my system ). There needs to be an easy way to manage it, and the only way for that is to ban ALL sale/trade.

If this is the ONLY way we can save the ocean species, then I think it is something we need to do. I just wish there was some alternative.

I didn't think of that aspect. In any event, i think this will be a long and complicated process with plenty of bickering. But i'm all for whatever is in the best interests of the oceans and corals whether i like it or not. But sometimes measures are too drastic. Hopefully some compromise will be established.

 

[Phyl]

Re: NOAA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Protections for Threatened Elkhorn Cor

... whether i like it or not. But sometimes measures are too drastic. Hopefully some compromise will be established.

Exactly! Hopefully someone will come up with a way for a compromise. If anyone has ideas to propose for a way around the full ban please be sure to send them to NOAA.

 

[jimroth]

I think if you read the legislation you will see that it does not apply to all staghorn coral, just to Acropora Cervicornis and Acropora Palmata, the yellow-brown acros familiar from the Florida Keys, at least in days past. As I interpret the legislation, they want to make illegal the trade in those species above and beyond their harvest, which is already illegal in most places.
The thing to be most cautious of is that the people administering CITES at the enforcement level have very limited knowledge, and this could easily be misinterpreted by them as a ban on all staghorn coral. I highly recommend anyone who feels strongly about this to read the book Orchid Fever.
(http://www.amazon.com/Orchid-Fever-...d_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201467330&sr=8-2). The wild orchid trade was completely and unnecessarily ruined by CITES enforcement, complete with raids, huge fines, and imprisonment.

 

[ReeferNets]

Whats already here will be grand fathered. I think this will ban the future export and import of this coral. Coral already in your tank is not covered under this ban.

Guys come on you cant tell me you think they shouldnt do this?
Its becoming engangered... the reason why thier making laws is to stop people from doing it. When they do get caught, the money goes back into the system and to pay for various NOAA projects. With out a complete ban on there will become a histeria to get your hands on the last little peice.

The government needs to create laws like this cause as people we are not consious enough to put the coral down and say im not gonna buy it. Just like we are not consious enough to not download, watch, and support people like britney and amy whinohouse.

 

[blange3]

According to page 3 of the proposal, NOAA does not believe that these species have been in the aquarium trade. So it seems they haven't considered what to do with the stock we may have.

Barry, I don't think anyone disagrees with stopping collection, but if there is a significant captive stock, it should be allowed to grow and spread as a way of preserving the species.