IBAMA at L-numbers event

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 05 Nov 2011, 10:33

Just listening to Henrique Anatole from IBAMA at the conference.

The following list has been proposed to be added to the positive list. It has been proposed for sometime now and once the bureaucratic process is followed, these species will be exported without quota limit.

, , , , , , , & .

, & .

Pseudacanthicus sp. , , , , , , , .

Also 76 species of and a bunch of Apistogramma (28).

Jools

Taratron · Post by **Taratron** » 05 Nov 2011, 13:09

Holy crap, all these will be legal again? Exporting from where?

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 05 Nov 2011, 13:35

They are all Brazilian fish. Many of them come from Rio Xingu, but not all of them. [Sitting Next to Jools at the L-number days in Germany, where this was announced by a representative of IBAMA].

--
Mats

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 05 Nov 2011, 14:43

This is exciting. So are these the only Hypancistrus species that will be allowed or just some examples? I can see a few popular ones missing. Will any additonal species be allowed in limited numbers?

Haakon

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 05 Nov 2011, 14:56

HaakonH wrote:This is exciting. So are these the only Hypancistrus species that will be allowed or just some examples? I can see a few popular ones missing. Will any additonal species be allowed in limited numbers?

This is the current proposal not just examples.

Jools

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 05 Nov 2011, 15:37

So no L070, L173, L174, L236, L250, L287, L345, L399, L400, L401, L404, L410, L411, L450 or 'Lower Xingu'. These will still be difficult to obtain then. Will be interesting to see how they manage to separate some of these from L066 and L333...

Haakon

Suckermouth · Post by **Suckermouth** » 05 Nov 2011, 15:46

Is H. zebra on the positive list...?

Jools wrote:once the bureaucratic process is followed

So what is that, a few years from now?

HaakonH wrote:So no L070, L173, L174, L236, L250, L287, L345, L399, L400, L401, L404, L410, L411, L450 or 'Lower Xingu'. These will still be difficult to obtain then. Will be interesting to see how they manage to separate some of these from L066 and L333...

Haakon

I don't think they will distinguish many of these from the ones that are actually being proposed. Things like L399 and L400 will almost certainly come in with L66 and L333.

In any case, I reserve excitement until I actually see H. inspector before my eyes.

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 05 Nov 2011, 15:53

Ah yes, the inspectors. I miss them! I'm very curious about the added Apistogramma species though.

Haakon

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 05 Nov 2011, 16:03

Suckermouth wrote:Is H. zebra on the positive list...?

Nope.

Jools

AleGer · Post by **AleGer** » 05 Nov 2011, 18:10

Is there any news about L082?

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 05 Nov 2011, 18:46

Guys, I posted the changes to the positive list. If its not on there, it's not going on the positive list any time soon.

Jools

bidewaterkant · Post by **bidewaterkant** » 05 Nov 2011, 19:57

Hello from Germany, how about my favourites L114 and the "real" leopardus??

my biggest and most beautiful male four years ago, meanwhie 45cm

the female is now 40cm, both pics made the evening I got them with 37 and 33cm

apistomaster · Post by **apistomaster** » 05 Nov 2011, 20:53

Jools,
It looks like it might help if the link to the previous list or the list itself be posted again with the the new species recently added to the amended list.

Readers,
If the fish is not on the IBAMA "Positive, OK to collect list, then it is not legal to catch or possess any fish not on the list or parts of thereof without specific license from The Agency. If your fish of interest is not on the old and updated list then it is not supposed to be collected.
It is that simple.
I think most people are familiar with protected species lists rather than lists of unprotected species and thus are confused with the IBAMA approach.

geminiluna · Post by **geminiluna** » 05 Nov 2011, 21:07

Jools wrote:Guys, I posted the changes to the positive list. If its not on there, it's not going on the positive list any time soon.

Jools

Looking for said list. Thanks in advance for when someone has time to link it in.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 05 Nov 2011, 21:10

Right, so the new list is not yet approved - but it's close to being approved.

L114 is currently exported as P. leopardus - they are so close in looks that you need to be VERY much expert to tell the difference, and I doubt there will be any problem having them exported in the future. Same applies to L427(?).

--
Mats

geminiluna · Post by **geminiluna** » 05 Nov 2011, 22:19

Thanks, Mats... I may have misunderstood Jools' comment.

CanadaPleco · Post by **CanadaPleco** » 06 Nov 2011, 01:14

This is the same potentially newly added fish to the positive list as last year. when it was going to happen right away. Well 11 months later and still nothing, IBAMA works in umber slow motion.

I won't believe any of this until it actually happens, which could be another 3 years knowing IBAMA.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 06 Nov 2011, 09:32

Henrique seems fairly positive it will be accepted soon. But it's a big buereaucratic machine in Brazil, so things take time.

--
Mats

HaakonH · Post by **HaakonH** » 06 Nov 2011, 20:22

I wonder if it will be legal to export native species bred in captivity in Brazil, even though they are not on the positive list? Any news on this?

Haakon

Post by **Janne** » 06 Nov 2011, 22:10

This is the same potentially newly added fish to the positive list as last year. when it was going to happen right away. Well 11 months later and still nothing, IBAMA works in umber slow motion. I won't believe any of this until it actually happens, which could be another 3 years knowing IBAMA.

It will be this year, there are good reasons why the new positive list not was published 2010 and it was not because of IBAMA the new list are delayed.

I wonder if it will be legal to export native species bred in captivity in Brazil, even though they are not on the positive list? Any news on this?

It has always been legel to breed species not in the positive list and export the offspring in Brazil, but this is another bureaucratic process and different kind of licenses are needed etc. there are other problems involved like the culture to always cheat or fool each other in this country so i do understand why there are no bred fish exported within the ornamental trade from Brazil.

Janne

husky_jim · Post by **husky_jim** » 07 Nov 2011, 07:09

Hello to all.

Just on Hannover's airport.

One thing that i want to add is that (correct me if wrong) that some genuses will be permited entirely e.g. Ancistrus...

Let's wait and see the list.As of P.Leopardus it is in the possitive list already so nothing to discuss about.

Henrique told that this will clear up till the end of the month....

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 07 Nov 2011, 08:45

I had dinner with Henrique yesterday, and it's clear that this list has been in the works for a long time, and IBAMA provided it to the Ministry of Fisheries last year. Another talk at the L-number days was by a German PhD student that studied in Brazil, and he pretty much said that if Germany is good at Buereaucratic forms and having rules about anything and everything, then Brazil are the EXPERTS at making up rules, regulations, forms and other such things. Everything in Brazil is complicated, takes a lot of time, and just plain difficult.

The other new part with this list is that it's "future proof". With the old list, if species "Alpha beta" was on the list, and it became renamed to "Gamma beta" because some scientist decided that "Gamma is a better match for it's placement", then this would mean that the species (technically speaking) could not be exported. With the new list, any "move", "merge" or "split" means that if the fish was allowed before the change, it's still allowed after. So for example when the Corydoras gets shuffled around into 8-9 genera in the next few years, the list is still OK for these "new" names of the species.

The other key aspect is that there is a process for adding new species to the list via an official "wish-list". However, ONLY scientifically described species are allowed to be added. Fishing organizations can supply new species to scientists and when the description is published, there is the possibility to add the fish to the list. I'm sure that's not going to happen VERY often - but these changes are all good things.

And for anyone wanting H. zebra, if anything, the indications is that it will end up on CITES as "endangered" (which will make it illegal to ship any wild fish to/from ANY country, rather than just Brazil). So look after the ones we have in the hobby, and leave the ones in the wild, please!

--
Mats

CanadaPleco · Post by **CanadaPleco** » 08 Nov 2011, 00:52

I hope it goes thru soon, I really would like some more adult sized L24's. Sure is hard finding a nice big female.

Cristoffer Forssander · Post by **Cristoffer Forssander** » 08 Nov 2011, 09:28

So all these L numbers have been scientifically described species?
Is this the only reason? That these species like L82 hasn’t been described and then putted on the new list? Because of the description of the genera and species?
If I remember right, L heterodon is not on any list at all! It means that this species is endangered? It is a described species and should be fairly productive as in captivity.

To sum my question: What measurement do IBAMA use when decide witch species to add? Everything can not have to do with the descriptions, right?

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 08 Nov 2011, 09:35

No, all the L-numbers listed above are undescribed species. But to ADD further new species to the list, they need to be described.

--
Mats

Cristoffer Forssander · Post by **Cristoffer Forssander** » 08 Nov 2011, 09:47

But how did they do the selection? Way these species and not others?

Cristoffer

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 08 Nov 2011, 09:50

Cristoffer Forssander wrote:But how did they do the selection? Way these species and not others?

Cristoffer

Henrique (who produced the list) did say that he knows exactly why everything is or isn't on the list. But I'm afraid I can't really say - I think it's mainly "they can be sustainably collected".

--
Mats

Simon86 · Post by **Simon86** » 08 Nov 2011, 14:39

I've talked to Henrique and he told me they got like seven (I don't remember if it's really seven) aspects which they take care off for each species. Each point they rate from 1 - 10. Between 1 - 4 that species past for that point, 5 - 7 they take a closer look and if the species is between 8 - 10 for a single point it's not on the positiv list. And it sounds like they got that reported for each species

Cheers Simon

Yann · Post by **Yann** » 08 Nov 2011, 20:35

Hi!!

Yes correct...so it means intense field survey with Ichtyologs.
Basically, geographical distribution, occurence, size, human pressure (direct and indirect)are parameters taken into account.

Lets say a fish with a 3m size, not commonly found, with a small distribution facing intense pressure by the food market but also by human activities like industries where it is, is likely to be forbidden to export...

If other fish are not allowed yet doesn't mean they will not in the future, it could simply means they don't have enough data yet

Cheers
Yann

SilverDub · Post by **SilverDub** » 10 Nov 2011, 23:21

So if a CITES protected species is placed directly in the line of extinction by a certain dam(n) project will this be enough to stop the dam?