I_am_Elmo Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 55 year old Charles Yip Mou Lam was convicted in Auckland District Court yesterday for attempting to illegally import 700kg of tropical and sub-tropical coral into New Zealand. The consignment represents New Zealand's biggest single seizure of illegally imported coral to date. Lam was fined $8,500 and ordered to pay costs totalling $1,880 for one charge of “trading in (by importing) specimens of a threatened speciesâ€, namely, stony corals, under the Trade in Endangered Species Act 1989. Officers from the Wildlife Enforcement Group (WEG) – a joint agency initiative comprising of personnel from Customs, the Department of Conservation and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry – investigated the matter after the coral was discovered during a NZ Customs Service inspection of a shipping container which had arrived from China. Twenty large polystyrene cartons, each containing various large pieces of coral and six nylon sacks, each containing a large quantity of crushed coral, were seized by the officers. The coral was identified as the species Scleractinia. The defendant, Mr Lam, stated that he wanted to build a fish pond in his back yard, and asked his friend in China to buy the things he needed to build the pond. Colin Hitchcock, Senior Investigator, WEG, said “The coral was also found to be hosting some 627 "hitchhiker" organisms, attributed to 95 species. Such marine organisms have the potential to greatly damage New Zealand’s marine life and environment. The marine organisms could have entered New Zealand’s waterways if the fish pond or aquarium had been flushed.†The coral was hard or stony reef building coral, and was sourced from the central to western Pacific. The importation of stony coral is regulated by The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). “Stony coral is a living organism, and as such, it shouldn’t be imported into New Zealand without appropriate CITES importation and quarantine measures being undertaken,†said Mr Hitchcock. “Not all coral is CITES protected – most imported into New Zealand is by holiday makers and there is a personal exemption for this. Other corals are legally imported by the aquarium and pet fish industry.†Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OscarBoy Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 wow thats alot of coral Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tHEcONCH Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 So, what happens to the coral - returned at his expense, or just destroyed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drifty Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 I would imagine it would have been destroyed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasp Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Who is he? Anyone we know? Obviously it was not destined for a pond, for it to arrive packaged properly somebody knew what they were doing, he must have had other plans for it. Got a link to the article IAmElmo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zev Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 A 'Fish Pond' eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tHEcONCH Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 http://nz.news.yahoo.com/071207/3/33lr.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puttputt Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Reading that, you wonder whether it was actual corals or live rock?? Corals are not going to survive a container trip, and thats an awful lot of hitchhikers on SPS corals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaNs Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 For a pond aye....... Good that he got done Looks like it could have been dead rock Wonder what the value of it was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caper Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 The article said some bad things could end up in the waterways if dumped. So, would they have to destroy it then? Caper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coelacanth Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Lam was fined $8,500 and ordered to pay costs totalling $1,880 for one charge of “trading in (by importing) specimens of a threatened speciesâ€, namely, stony corals, under the Trade in Endangered Species Act 1989. that's a pitiful fine. That's the problem with the courts here: people get caught doing crap like this and the judges either can't impose proper punishments or simply don't see it as being as bad as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_am_Elmo Posted December 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 That's true, 8500 plus costs is hardly much of a deterant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markoshark Posted December 9, 2007 Report Share Posted December 9, 2007 Especially when the cost of the corals would have been in the tens of thousands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puttputt Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 Like I said, i don't believe it was 700kg of live stony corals, rather live and dead coral rock?? Maybe Reef can find what the clown was really importing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coelacanth Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 I agree it would seem more likely to be live rock rather than live corals. However in terms of the illegality of it, the actual coral species are still prohibited from import so whether the corals are live or dead is irrelevant to that. Which is to say that without a CITES permit you can't bring in the skeletons of protected coral that you find on the beach on your holiday any more than you can bring back a stuffed sea turtle or tiger bones. In this case it would appear the major thing is the number of other (potentially harmful) organisms contained in the shipment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 looks like it was dead coral like the 700 kg i have from deaths over the past 5 years. the guys most likely just got it from a shop as dead coral. i doubt it was alive. Maybe the guy did not know that you needed a permit for dead coral. If it was alive and he killed it then he deserves it, but if it was dead i think it is harsh. I think Maf as normal go over board. Its ok to to flush crap in the ocean and fish out all the fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.