View Full Version : New IBAMA White List is out
Narwhal72
01-06-2012, 9:19 PM
The new IBAMA white list has been published. For those of you who don't know what this is it is a list of species authorized for export from Brazil.
There is some good news for us eartheater keepers! There are three species of Retroculus on the list (R. lapidifer, R. septentrionalis, and R. xinguensis). We may be able to see these very rare fish showing up in imports this year!
Bad news for pleco keepers though. Acanthicus and Chaetostoma species are not on the list (no Adonis, Hystrix, or Rubbermouth plecos!).
You can find the full list here. http://www.mpa.gov.br/#imprensa/2012/JANEIRO/nt_JAN_04-01-MPA-e-MMA-publicam-Instrucao-Normativa-Interministerial
Click on the hyperlink at the bottom of the page to open the pdf file.
Andy
slimbolen99
01-06-2012, 10:05 PM
Lots of apistos too!
Matt Quinn
01-07-2012, 7:30 AM
Thanks much for posting, Andy!
I've always wondered whether the ACA (and local clubs) should have positions or policies on fish from Brazil that aren't permitted for export but somehow find their way onto lists / into the US...
Matt
jb1edlover
01-07-2012, 10:57 AM
Why don't we do what we've decided to do with hybrids and turn the other cheek. I mean we can't really regulate what folks are keeping. I don't think we could have a policy against them as an organization. I mean we could not allow them to be sold on the website I guess.
JB
Matt Quinn
01-07-2012, 11:37 AM
Because animal smuggling is a violation of US, Brazilian and International laws...and whether or not someone keeps flowerhorns or other fancy fish is a personal choice.
Matt
Why don't we do what we've decided to do with hybrids, turn the other cheek.
cghiotto
01-07-2012, 12:12 PM
Im pretty sure you would not think like that if was the other way around and Brazilian people were importing fish under extinction from US... :mad:
Why don't we do what we've decided to do with hybrids and turn the other cheek. I mean we can't really regulate what folks are keeping. I don't think we could have a policy against them as an organization. I mean we could not allow them to be sold on the website I guess.
JB
Mikeinco
01-07-2012, 12:17 PM
Im pretty sure you would not think like that if was the other way around and Brazilian people were importing fish under extinction from US... :mad:
Totally agree with you on this.
Im pretty sure you would not think like that if was the other way around and Brazilian people were importing fish under extinction from US... :mad:
Excellent point!
Dean Hougen
01-07-2012, 1:26 PM
There is some good news for us eartheater keepers! There are three species of Retroculus on the list (R. lapidifer, R. septentrionalis, and R. xinguensis). We may be able to see these very rare fish showing up in imports this year!
These are wonderful fish, so that is excellent news! That is, assuming that the exporters recognize the shipping difficulties with these fish. I'd hate to see a bunch of them die in transit.
Dean
Mikeinco
01-07-2012, 2:24 PM
[QUOTE=Narwhal72;40652]
There is some good news for us eartheater keepers! There are three species of Retroculus on the list (R. lapidifer, R. septentrionalis, and R. xinguensis). We may be able to see these very rare fish showing up in imports this year!
This fish is at the very top of my wish list. I mean right at the very top so yes that is good news.
Narwhal72
01-07-2012, 6:28 PM
Top of my list too. Just hope my fish room gets done before then.
Keep in mind that Brazil limits exports of fish not because they are on the verge of extinction but because they want to keep scientific and economic control of the fish. The scientists want to keep the holotype specimens of Brazilian fish in their own universities and not in some university in Germany or the U.S. It's an issue with national pride and I don't see any problem with it as long as they are continuing to work on identifying new species and then make them available for export in the future if there are stable populations. Unfortunately projects like the Bello Monte damn may wipe out dozens or possibly hundreds of species that have never been described and the species that could be collected and identified or rescued in a CARES type program before the dam goes into effect would benefit greatly from the work of the international scientific community which will sadly be prohibited.
They basically don't want to export undescribed species and the "white" lists are working towards that. Many of the fish that are not legal to be exported are perfectly legal to eat in Brazil.
Some species that are not legal to export from Brazil are perfectly legal to export from surrounding countries such as Peru. While some smuggling of fish from Brazil into Peru and then outwards undoubtedly happened I am betting that most of what we see in the U.S. is legally caught.
Andy
Dean Hougen
01-07-2012, 6:53 PM
Very well said, Andy.
Dean
Touchy subject. I remember a conversation (that got shut down) on another site about a vendor importing fish illegally. The voices of want shouted down the voices of responsibility and respect. I wouldn't mind seeing the ACA take a stance on such issues.
By the way, does the IBAMA list make you think of hope and change?
(get it?)
The white list got started when the Brazilian government switched from a list of denied species to a list of approved. Prior to the switch anything could be exported unless it was specifically banned. The reasons for making the change varied (Andy stated them), but the ultimate reason was that the scientists in Brazil truly did not know what the impact of commercial (and hobbyist) collecting really was, and wanted to make sure they were not tossing out the baby with the bath water. It is nice to know that in Brazil the government actually listens to its scientists... except when money is involved (like with the damn dams). The intention was not to kill the fish industry, just protect a resource. The plan all along was to approve species quickly, but that has not happened. Lots of American ichthyologists are involved in the project (many from Dr. Winemiller's lab at Texas A&M).
A similar importation rule was a part of the defeated H.R. 669 a couple years ago. If that had been passed, the USFWS would have had to change from a list of banned species to a list of approved species, and each species would have to have been evaluated for its potential as an invasive species ANYWHERE in the USA. That would have killed the fish industry...
Matt Quinn
01-08-2012, 7:43 AM
Great perspectives here - (constructively) discussing the topic has merit in itself...especially if actual Brazilians are part of the conversation (thanks cghiotto!).
I don't admire the kinds of decisions that Brazil is having to make regarding its development vs. preserving its environment. No easy answers, especially with discovery of massive off-shore oil reserves: http://www.economist.com/node/18065645 (What could go wrong?!)...
Matt
Touchy subject. I remember a conversation (that got shut down) on another site about a vendor importing fish illegally. The voices of want shouted down the voices of responsibility and respect. I wouldn't mind seeing the ACA take a stance on such issues.
Regarding invasive species, is anyone aware of efforts to protect our native Floridian fishes from the impacts of the tropical fush industry? Certainly in general there is work being done, but is anyone aware of specific efforts to collect, breed and distribute natives? I truly have no idea.
Is there a crowd of folks who are as passionate about defending their local species as some are here about cichlids. I wonder if they split largemouth bass into a dozen colorfully named race, all separated by collection area, etc, and breed them true in home aquaria and ponds.
jb1edlover
01-08-2012, 9:22 AM
It's just ironic to me that folks are cool with creating fish being less ok than possession of illegal fish. (I will add I have no illegal fish). The most the ACA should do in my opinion is not allow trading or selling of illegal fish on the forum. As far as who actually keeps or has those fish.......
JB
Matt Quinn
01-08-2012, 10:07 AM
JB - the issue of whether people are OK (enthusiastic!) about the development and availability of non-wild-type fish in the (captive) aquarium hobby (i.e. aquarium strain fish)...is a really, really different one than whether people are OK (enthusiastic!) about the availability of illegal fish in the hobby.
It would be incredibly exciting if the ACA membership get behind working with IBAMA (perhaps through some of the people that Ted identified) to focus on making a positive difference...establishing captive breeding programs for some fish (still on the list or just taken off the list) and to raise awareness of threats to fish and their habitats.
Matt
It's just ironic to me that folks are cool with creating fish being less ok than possession of illegal fish. (I will add I have no illegal fish). The most the ACA should do in my opinion is not allow trading or selling of illegal fish on the forum. As far as who actually keeps or has those fish.......
JB
jb1edlover
01-08-2012, 10:26 AM
You said none wild type, I said Hybrid and you're correct there is a difference...
We could also show IBAMA that we can take a few of their fish and breed them with other fish and come up with some pretty cool "none wild type fish" as long as it's development and there is availibility of course.
Back to the topic,
So some of these fish that are "Banned from Export" I will assume are over here or this wouldn't have been brought up. If it's illegal and they are selling them on lists then I agree there is an issue and something should be done about it.
Matt Quinn
01-08-2012, 11:02 AM
JB - I have no desire to wade into the morass of trying to diffentiate the morality of keeping and breeding the different "types" of non-wild-type fish (random hybrids/mislabeled, random hybrids/properly labeled, aquarium strains that cross collection points, aquarium strains of unknown provenance, line-bred "sports" and deformed fish - high fin, long tail, triple red, albino, etc, intentional hybrids like flowerhorns, fancy discus, bettas, livebearers), etc. etc.
There's no end to it.
Matt
You said none wild type, I said Hybrid and you're correct there is a difference...
We could also show IBAMA that we can take a few of their fish and breed them with other fish and come up with some pretty cool "none wild type fish" as long as it's development and there is availibility of course.
Back to the topic,
So some of these fish that are "Banned from Export" I will assume are over here or this wouldn't have been brought up. If it's illegal and they are selling them on lists then I agree there is an issue and something should be done about it.
Indeed, no end to that discussion, and I don't want it raised any time soon in this crowd.
JB, I don't understand this sentence. Please clarify:
"It's just ironic to me that folks are cool with creating fish being less ok than possession of illegal fish."
jb1edlover
01-08-2012, 3:22 PM
I'll respond and then I'm done with this thread
first of all sorry for the bad grammar above...
Basically it was supposed to mean.... I don't see how folks can sit back and take various fish and put them together and breed them and make hybrids and be ok with that. Yet they expect the aca to take a position/stand against having a fish that's not supposed to have left the country. I guess Legality and Morals are two different things. Anyway, I'm sorry to have hi-jacked this thread but I am always going to speak up for what I believe in even if I'm dead wrong.
OK. I understand now. Thanks. I do think the ACA should be comfortable taking a stance against illegality for sure. There's nothing controversial about that.
Don't know who you're talking about with the other stuff though. Maybe I missed something.
Anyway (and back on topic), does anyone know if there's an exporters association in Brasil? Something similar to the Florida Tropical Fish Farmers? Perhaps a group like that would be able to guide the issue to everyone's benefit.
jb1edlover
01-08-2012, 9:58 PM
Matt was it hypothetical "if the fish make it onto a list" or are these fish already on any lists here in the USA? I can't find them and I've been trying.
d_frag
01-08-2012, 11:42 PM
How would the ACA differentiate lawfully collected fish from ones currently banned? An example being the adonis pleco(insert whatever cichlid you like), it has been imported into the states in droves. Now banned from export. Are we saying that since it is banned from export it now doesn't have a place on the forum? How can we as a club stop a sale of a lawfully kept fish?
Ultimately we have no footing to prove what has been taken lawfully or unlawfully. We are an organization that promotes fellowship. Not one that dictates or even has guidelines on what can and cannot be kept.
Matt Quinn
01-09-2012, 8:20 AM
Dave - I hope that having a stated policy would actually encourage constructive discussion around fish banned for export.
Why is a fish that was previously open for export...now banned?
What captive breeding projects are going on (or could be initiated) to provide the hobby with fish that aren't wild?
What questions should prospective purchasers of banned fish ask to ensure that they're not buying smuggled or otherwise illegally obtained animals?
Are there actual non-Brazilian populations of fish banned for export by Brazil?
There are probably more...
Matt
How would the ACA differentiate lawfully collected fish from ones currently banned? An example being the adonis pleco(insert whatever cichlid you like), it has been imported into the states in droves. Now banned from export. Are we saying that since it is banned from export it now doesn't have a place on the forum? How can we as a club stop a sale of a lawfully kept fish?
Ultimately we have no footing to prove what has been taken lawfully or unlawfully. We are an organization that promotes fellowship. Not one that dictates or even has guidelines on what can and cannot be kept.
Lotsapetsgarfhts
01-09-2012, 6:51 PM
Hi, Im new here. Retroculus have been on my wish list for a very long time. I hope they will be available soon.
Mikeinco
01-10-2012, 7:10 AM
Hi, Im new here. Retroculus have been on my wish list for a very long time. I hope they will be available soon.
Several of us are right there with you and welcome to the ACA.
Matt Quinn
01-10-2012, 8:15 AM
An LFS in our area (Riverdale Pets) had (I'd assume wild) Retroculus for sale last year.
A friend of mine bought a couple (for a pretty penny).
Are they found somewhere other than Brazil?
Matt
jb1edlover
01-10-2012, 8:34 AM
You also have to ask have they always been on the list. If someone got them before they became "Protected" then there shouldn't be any issues. I guess they'd be "Grandfathered in."
JB
Lotsapetsgarfhts
01-10-2012, 8:49 AM
I was employed in the trade when they were first exporting Retroculus from Brazil and never had the oppertunity to get any. I was told that the losses were very high and I suspect most of them were going to Europe and/or Japan at the time. I would expect to pay a pretty penny for them.
Thanks for the welcome Mike!
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.