I know that they are legal in Canada. I also know that they are endangered. I think I know that they aren't legal anywhere having been taken directly from asian waters. I do know that they are breeding them in captivity in asia. I kind of suspect that the deal in asia is "okay, we will licence you to breed these but for so many offspring you produce, so many have to be returned to the wild". I also know that the asians closely monitor these breedings and breeders are required to micro-chip them so that anywhere in the world they go, it can very easily be proven that your fish came from a breeder and not the wild. So, My question is "what is the problem that the US has with this process?" Is it environmental concerns?
Why "specifically" are asian arows illegal in US?
- Thread starter ospy
- Start date
Allowing availability in the US would only increase the demand for legal or non-legal species alike.
That is my guess.
If they keep it Illegal, people would be even further discourged from keeping them, legal or non-legal, micro-chipped or not.
That is my guess.
If they keep it Illegal, people would be even further discourged from keeping them, legal or non-legal, micro-chipped or not.
Its due to the fact that asian aros are endangered species and unless there is some form of
propagation by the farms, the us will not allow them in anytime soon.
Google Lacey Act or search through mfk if you want to find out more .
propagation by the farms, the us will not allow them in anytime soon.
Google Lacey Act or search through mfk if you want to find out more .
The answer is that the U.S. listed the Asian arowana as an endangered species under its Endangered Species Act. Thus, even if you have all of your CITES Appendix I paperwork (indicating that it's captive bred), you still can't get over the ESA hurdle.
I don't know, it is being bread in CAPTIVITY. What is the harm in that? Also, since they are, in fact, ALIVE and for sale to someone, why not the US? After all, I doubt the breeders going to wake up in a good mood one morning and decide out of the kindness of his heart that he'll just go ahead and turn an extra 50 Super reds loose in the wild. My point is, They are going to end up in a glass house, why not mine?
USFWS' stance has been the encouraging the sales of captive bred specimens does not increase wild populations. However, I would counter that it doesn't hinder the recovery of wild populations either. Regardless, it's a vain attempt to argue policy to an agency whose every action is subject to the burdensome requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. Every little change requires lots of paperwork, public comment, responses, etc.
