Being careful of what we buy.

[Gools]

Not sure if this should be put in the lounge. But illegal activities in a hobby will only hurt us down the road, if they shut everything down for hobbiest.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Cana...88206-sun.html

[mseepman]

Yikes...I'm not sure how his customers would ever know what was legal or not. We really rely on the stores to tell us the truth.

[Delphinus]

I don't understand, I'm totally shocked. I've always believed that Jayson was doing the right thing when it came to conducting his business.

Hopefully the allegations will prove to be false, or the result of just bungled paperwork on the part of the supplier.

I wish Jayson the best of luck through this, I'm sure this will be a very difficult time for him and his family.

[ElGuappo]

WOW the fines are pretty steep. i am sure its justified thou. hope evertything works out fot that shop and the owners.

[hillbillyreefer]

Wow. Hopefully it works out for the guy. I've wondered about situations like this. You order livestock from halfway around the world. The exporter probably doesn't speak good english. The collectors don't speak any english and are probably uneducated. They just go out and catch stuff for a few pennies so they can feed their family. Stuff gets labeled boxed up and shipped, with the appropriate documents. The importer gets it and it's not what is labeled on the box. Off to court he goes and spends his life savings defending himself for a mistake made on the other side of the world.

[Delphinus]

Actually, I have several problems with the way this article is written. This is is borderline sensationalism.

I quote:

The organisms -- which Saltwater Connection sold for as much as $200 a piece -- are protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

So is it illegal to sell corals or live rock or clams or seahorses? Of course not! Just about everything we deal with in the hobby is protected under CITES. That doesn't, in and of itself, make us all worthy of going to jail.

From CITES.ORG:

Appendix I lists species that are the most endangered among CITES-listed animals and plants (see Article II, paragraph 1 of the Convention). They are threatened with extinction and CITES prohibits international trade in specimens of these species except when the purpose of the import is not commercial (see Article III), for instance for scientific research. In these exceptional cases, trade may take place provided it is authorized by the granting of both an import permit and an export permit (or re-export certificate). Additionally Article VII of the Convention provides for exemptions to this prohibition and these requirements.
Appendix II lists species that are not necessarily now threatened with extinction but that may become so unless trade is closely controlled. It also includes so-called "look-alike species", i.e. species of which the specimens in trade look like those of species listed for conservation reasons (see Article II, paragraph 2 of the Convention). International trade in specimens of Appendix-II species may be authorized by the granting of an export permit or re-export certificate. No import permit is necessary for these species under CITES (although a permit is needed in some countries that have taken stricter measures than CITES requires). Permits or certificates should only be granted if the relevant authorities are satisfied that certain conditions are met, above all that trade will not be detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild. (See Article IV of the Convention)
Appendix III is a list of species included at the request of a Party that already regulates trade in the species and that needs the cooperation of other countries to prevent unsustainable or illegal exploitation (see Article II, paragraph 3, of the Convention). International trade in specimens of species listed in this Appendix is allowed only on presentation of the appropriate permits or certificates. (See Article V of the Convention)

In short, there is CITES Appendices I, II, and III. If an animal is recognized as threatened or endanagered it will (or should) be listed in one of these appendices. Unless you're a medical researcher, don't try to import anything on App I, basically, there's no way you can legally do it. App II, it is not illegal to sell. It's just illegal to import without the proper documentation.

This article is making it sound like any of the things we have in our hobby are illegal to sell .. and that simply isn't the case.

I wish the author of the article, or the editors of the newspaper, would have tried to do some rudimentary fact checking before publishing this. This article practically amounts to a smear campaign for its lack of proper details.

I'm sure that the agencies involved wouldn't move on charges had there been nothing to go on, but it sounds to me like there's a lot more to this story than what we're seeing here.

I still wish Jayson the best through all of this. I hope he's innocent. I know another person who went to jail for trying to import (into the U.S.) some plants that were App I. This is serious business, you don't mess with CITES. Jayson knows this. That's why I think there's far more to the picture than what this haphazardly written article is telling us.

[fishoholic]

Originally Posted by Delphinus

Actually, I have several problems with the way this article is written. This is is borderline sensationalism.

I quote:
So is it illegal to sell corals or live rock or clams or seahorses? Of course not! Just about everything we deal with in the hobby is protected under CITES. That doesn't, in and of itself, make us all worthy of going to jail.

From CITES.ORG:
In short, there is CITES Appendices I, II, and III. If an animal is recognized as threatened or endanagered it will (or should) be listed in one of these appendices. Unless you're a medical researcher, don't try to import anything on App I, basically, there's no way you can legally do it. App II, it is not illegal to sell. It's just illegal to import without the proper documentation.

This article is making it sound like any of the things we have in our hobby are illegal to sell .. and that simply isn't the case.

I wish the author of the article, or the editors of the newspaper, would have tried to do some rudimentary fact checking before publishing this. This article practically amounts to a smear campaign for its lack of proper details.

I'm sure that the agencies involved wouldn't move on charges had there been nothing to go on, but it sounds to me like there's a lot more to this story than what we're seeing here.

I still wish Jayson the best through all of this. I hope he's innocent. I know another person who went to jail for trying to import (into the U.S.) some plants that were App I. This is serious business, you don't mess with CITES. Jayson knows this. That's why I think there's far more to the picture than what this haphazardly written article is telling us.

That's what I was thinking. I hope everything works out for him too, those fines are very steep!

[michika]

Somone should write something about CITIES and submit it to the Sun. See if they will print some clarifications.