Hello All -
Currently, I own 2.1 burmese stars, and have much financially and emtionally invested in these animals. In this post, I'd like to discuss their legal status, under international trade conventions and under domestic (USA) legislation.
Hypothetically speaking, if individual Geochelone platynota were exported without a permit from Myamar (Burma), after they were listed on CITES Appendix II, that would be a violation of CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species). If those animals were later exported into the U.S. (from the third country) that would be a violation of the Lacy Act, since they originally didn't have the permits they should have had from Myamar.
It's my understanding that Myamar has never issued any permits for export, meaning all those G. platynota that have made their way to the Chinese food markets are there illegally. They are also eaten frequently in Myamar, and their shells apparently are used to store cooking oil. They are not even commonly protected in the wildlife refuges; a blind eye is reported often turned to the illicit trade. This is by the same game wardens who occasional will carry out a swift captial sentence in the field for other offences, such as Tiger poaching.
It's quite possible that some of the founding stock of Burmese stars were exported to other countries either (1) prior to Myamar being a signatory party to CITES, or (2) prior to platynota being listed on Appendix II. In either of these two cases, those tortoises and their progeny could (theoritically) be subsequently legally imported into the U.S. from those countries with those legal captive born populations.
Realistically, I agree, most Burmese Stars probably did find their way into this country illegally. However, morally, I believe that it is good to have a healthy captive population since they are dying off the wild, due to large part their lack of protection in Myamar. I don't think that the Chinese in the food markets care if the tortoises weren't exported with the proper permit. However, in Hong Kong, for example, if were to buy one from the food market you'd better be sure that you have the correct paperwork. Thus, at least in Hong Kong, you don't need the correct paperwork to eat them, but you do to breed them or keep them.
Somehow this state of affairs doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in the current legal system (CITES and the Lacy act). Geochelone platynota is listed as Critically endangered by the IUCN (see www.redlist.org), but they aren't listed on the US department of Interior's Endangered Species list. Of course, this is a good thing, if you wish to facilitate the domestic (interstate) commerce of this species and encourge captive breeding. Once platynota is added to the Fed's endangered species list, then interstate commerce will be restricted to people and institutions with a current USF&W's Captive Bred Wildlife permit (for this species).
There's is a "gray market" for many of these animals, especially if it's obviously a wild-caught animal. However, over time, it is difficult to prove that the animal, or it's parents, were illegally imported. Thus, the USF&W attaches a very low priority for going after these types of animals. It does become a problem if one every desires to export a Burmese Star from the U.S., since the feds then require a paper trial showing that the animal (or it's parents & grandparents) were legally imported into the U.S.
Please feel free to correct me or to add information to this thread. My name is Scott Alexander and I'm Vice-president of the Bay Area Amphibian and Reptile Society (checkout www.baars.org).
Sincerely,
Scott Alexander
Vice President, BAARS
Bay Area Amphibian and Reptile Society (www.baars.org)
issues the cites export permits (which it has never issued before) the animals that exist here are all considered descendants of illegal animals. i have personally witnessed captive bred populations in thailand and taiwan. from indonesia, cites export permits can be issued but are not considered valid from u.s. fish and wildlife b/c they are not the country of origin. what do i think of all this? what a bunch of bunk!@#!@ yes, i realize regulating international trade of animals such as burm stars are important however, in a third world country like burma, who the hell is protecting them there? the only reason the burmese stars are not on appendix I is b/c no one ever conducted a census on their population status in burma. it's the like the planicaudas of madagascar. there are 100x more wild radiated tortoises than planicaudas but some rocket scientist decided to issue export permits on them a couple of years ago and now the wild stock has been depleted to a couple of hectares (not even acres!@#!@#). the zoos in the u.s. are overloaded with animals to protect and it's up to the individual breeder/hobbyist to eventually protect such a fragile species like the platynota with the help of a studbook keeper like bill holstrom of the new york zoological society. and yes, peter liu does have a great site. i contacted him via e-mail several years ago and he was very knowledgeable on stars in general. unfortunately, when i returned to taiwan last year, i didn't get a chance to visit him. johnny c.