Why are Asian Arowanas Illegal in the US?
- Thread starter soulFish
- Start date
In case someone releases a pair in the wild and they start multiplying and threatening the eco system... just like certain snakeheads
Arofanatic;1371917; said:
not the case in the US other aros are legal.its the lacey act which protects endangered species
PoopSmart;1372143; said:
true, but theres always those people who say this particular fish is captive bred, but are really wild caught. especially with the prices of asian aros being so high, im sure people are more than willing to go catch a fish and sell it for a couple of Gs.
Well the microchips and certificates help ensure that they are captive bred. At this point, like John said, it is simply due to the Lacey Act, and ammending it to legalize cb Asian aros isnt very high on big brother's list of priorities. Sort of a crappy situation that doesn't really make tons of sense, but life is not always fair.
Source
United States Government Accountability Office
Report to the Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives
PROTECTED SPECIES
International Convention and U.S. Laws Protect Wildlife Differently
September 2004
Taken verbatim
"While the Convention and the U.S. laws all allow trade in protected species in certain circumstances, some uses allowed by the Convention are not allowed by the Endangered Species Act. For example, the Asian arowana, a freshwater ornamental fish considered in some cultures to bring good luck, is protected but may be traded commercially under the Convention because of Convention-approved captive breeding programs. However, the fish is also recognized as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, so its import into the United States for purposes that do not enhance the survival of the species is prohibited."
"Another species for which the United States imposes stricter trade measures than the Convention is the Asian arowana, also known as the Asian bonytongue. The arowana is a fresh-water ornamental fish that is traded around the world and considered by some to bring good luck to its possessor. Although the species is protected by appendix I of the Convention, some exporting countries have arowana populations in Convention-registered captive-breeding programs; these populations are treated as appendix II species and thus may be traded. However, the arowana is also protected as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, and the Service has not determined that trade in captive-bred arowana will contribute to the conservation of the species in the wild. As a result, U.S. consumers cannot import Asian arowana and, therefore, cannot participate in some activities allowed under the Conventionactivities in which citizens of other countries may participate."
"The Endangered Species Act accommodates Convention-approved trade in threatened or endangered species when the trade meets the requirements of section 10 or 4(d) of the act. Section 10 allows the Service to issue permits for take of a protected species,15 as long as the permitted action is incidental to carrying out a lawful activity, is intended for scientific purposes, or can be shown to enhance the survival of the affected species. Although section 10 of the act is more frequently used than section 4(d) when foreign species are involved, according to Service officials, the Service issues section 10 permits for foreign species only for the enhancement purposes allowed under the act (e.g., scientific research,conservation, and education); it does not issue section 10 permits for incidental take of foreign species. The Service has issued numerous section 10 enhancement permits for Convention-allowed trade in species that are protected as threatened or endangered under the act. For example, it has issued permits for the import of endangered giant pandas, cheetahs, and Asian elephants for the purpose of scientific research. The Service has not, however, used section 10 permits for some uses of endangered species, such as for the import of Asian arowana for display purposes or for the import of sport-hunted cheetah trophies, becauseaccording to agency officialsthe Service has not been able to show that such activities would enhance or conserve the species in the wild. The Service proposed a draft policy in August 2003 on the various circumstances under which the agency might be able to conclude that uses such as these do enhance the status of endangered species in the wild and would thus warrant a section 10 permit. However, the Service received a significant amount of negative comments on this proposal. In particular, several conservation groups indicated that allowing trade in endangered species for uses other than display and scientific purposes is contrary to the historical U.S. philosophy on species conservation; some groups asserted that killing or capturing wildlife is not the best way to protect endangered species. The proposal has not been finalized and is still under deliberation within the Department of the Interior."
United States Government Accountability Office
Report to the Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives
PROTECTED SPECIES
International Convention and U.S. Laws Protect Wildlife Differently
September 2004
Taken verbatim
"While the Convention and the U.S. laws all allow trade in protected species in certain circumstances, some uses allowed by the Convention are not allowed by the Endangered Species Act. For example, the Asian arowana, a freshwater ornamental fish considered in some cultures to bring good luck, is protected but may be traded commercially under the Convention because of Convention-approved captive breeding programs. However, the fish is also recognized as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, so its import into the United States for purposes that do not enhance the survival of the species is prohibited."
"Another species for which the United States imposes stricter trade measures than the Convention is the Asian arowana, also known as the Asian bonytongue. The arowana is a fresh-water ornamental fish that is traded around the world and considered by some to bring good luck to its possessor. Although the species is protected by appendix I of the Convention, some exporting countries have arowana populations in Convention-registered captive-breeding programs; these populations are treated as appendix II species and thus may be traded. However, the arowana is also protected as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, and the Service has not determined that trade in captive-bred arowana will contribute to the conservation of the species in the wild. As a result, U.S. consumers cannot import Asian arowana and, therefore, cannot participate in some activities allowed under the Conventionactivities in which citizens of other countries may participate."
"The Endangered Species Act accommodates Convention-approved trade in threatened or endangered species when the trade meets the requirements of section 10 or 4(d) of the act. Section 10 allows the Service to issue permits for take of a protected species,15 as long as the permitted action is incidental to carrying out a lawful activity, is intended for scientific purposes, or can be shown to enhance the survival of the affected species. Although section 10 of the act is more frequently used than section 4(d) when foreign species are involved, according to Service officials, the Service issues section 10 permits for foreign species only for the enhancement purposes allowed under the act (e.g., scientific research,conservation, and education); it does not issue section 10 permits for incidental take of foreign species. The Service has issued numerous section 10 enhancement permits for Convention-allowed trade in species that are protected as threatened or endangered under the act. For example, it has issued permits for the import of endangered giant pandas, cheetahs, and Asian elephants for the purpose of scientific research. The Service has not, however, used section 10 permits for some uses of endangered species, such as for the import of Asian arowana for display purposes or for the import of sport-hunted cheetah trophies, becauseaccording to agency officialsthe Service has not been able to show that such activities would enhance or conserve the species in the wild. The Service proposed a draft policy in August 2003 on the various circumstances under which the agency might be able to conclude that uses such as these do enhance the status of endangered species in the wild and would thus warrant a section 10 permit. However, the Service received a significant amount of negative comments on this proposal. In particular, several conservation groups indicated that allowing trade in endangered species for uses other than display and scientific purposes is contrary to the historical U.S. philosophy on species conservation; some groups asserted that killing or capturing wildlife is not the best way to protect endangered species. The proposal has not been finalized and is still under deliberation within the Department of the Interior."