Illegal to do service calls on certain tanks?

[voksbug]

Well if you know it's illegal to keep one smaller than 3 feet and you service a system with one less than 3 feet then yes I would have to agree with your friend. @Katrina71 might have more insight to the legality of the issue...

You need to get info on the exact laws in question. If the law only states it is illegal to purchase and own something, you are not breaking the law by servicing the tank because you don't own the tank or its contents.

 

[JPK]

I still see two issues with this topic. For starters, are we speaking about the Pacific variant Triakis Semifasciata, or the Japanese variety Triakis Scyllium? Additionally, I'm not sure why you think live fish export from Mexico is Illegal. Where do you think Clarion Angelfish are from? I feel like you are a california wildlife game warden, not USFW officer... I think this may be leading to lots of confusion (on my side mostly). As far as I know the 36" rule is in relation to fishing bag and tag rules, not ornamental use. Are you saying there is an import ban on them from out of state per California law? I'm not in California so this is where my confusion is. I work with a lot of USFWS clearance officers as I'm a licensed importer and I've never once heard any of these things..... Also, how is it going to be proven the fish came out of protected waters and not from Oregon or Mexico? Courts would view the case as innocent until proven guilty. Somebody would have to be pretty dumb to take a tagged shark. Not sure how else it would be proved.

Kuzko,
re-read what I wrote, I said the take of fish under a (Mexican) sport fishing license for ornamental purposes is unlawful, and it is (google "Mexican sport fishing laws"). The sport take of a Clarion Angelfish alive and bringing it into California is 100% illegal. I also said taking a fish commercially in Mexico is a different, Fish that are legal to possess in CA can be collected commercially in Mexico under their equivalent to marine aquaria permits and imported into California, they have to conform to the guidelines of the Federal Lacey Act.

ALL fish imported into CA from anywhere are required to have a bill of lading documenting what is being imported and from whom. The Feds require that the shipper and receiver be marked on the package and the package be marked as at least "Live Fish"

In relation to my knowledge as a California Game Warden, my position is funded by the NOAA/NMFS under the Joint Enforcement Agreement between CA and the Federal government, and I am federally deputized to enforce federal regulations. That Is what I do, I work with the feds in relation to violations of Federal groundfish (ie leopard shark) and other federally managed fisheries, such as highly migratory species and Coastal pelagic species.

To simplify things, California law related to leopard sharks is possession, not where a fish came from, such as Oregon. In reference to proving the take from protected waters, I'm not sure why we are talking about that in this scenario.

In relation to the person cleaning the tank. From a legal perspective, that person would not be charged with anything unless they conspired with the owner to keep, hide etc the shark or obstructed the duties of enforcement.

Possession of a leopard shark under 36" would be a violation of California Code of Regulations Title 14 (CCR T-14) 28.56(b)(c) 36 inch size limit TOWIT CCR T-14 1.62 Minimum size. That is what the owner of the shark would be charged with.

Selling a sport caught undersized leopard shark would be charged with Fish and Game code (FG) 7121

Commercially selling an undersize leopard shark would be charged with FG 8388.5

FG 8388.5
(a) A person shall not take, possess, sell, or purchase for commercial purposes any leopard shark less than 36 inches in total length.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), leopard sharks less than 36 inches in total length possessed by a person for aquarium display on or before January 1, 1994, may be retained by that person if a letter declaring that the shark was legally obtained prior to January 1, 1994, is provided to the Sacramento office of the department on or before January 1, 1995.

So unless they had it prior to 1994 it is a no go

Jason

 

[Halal Hotdog]

Kuzko,
re-read what I wrote, I said the take of fish under a (Mexican) sport fishing license for ornamental purposes is unlawful, and it is (google "Mexican sport fishing laws"). The sport take of a Clarion Angelfish alive and bringing it into California is 100% illegal. I also said taking a fish commercially in Mexico is a different, Fish that are legal to possess in CA can be collected commercially in Mexico under their equivalent to marine aquaria permits and imported into California, they have to conform to the guidelines of the Federal Lacey Act.

ALL fish imported into CA from anywhere are required to have a bill of lading documenting what is being imported and from whom. The Feds require that the shipper and receiver be marked on the package and the package be marked as at least "Live Fish"

In relation to my knowledge as a California Game Warden, my position is funded by the NOAA/NMFS under the Joint Enforcement Agreement between CA and the Federal government, and I am federally deputized to enforce federal regulations. That Is what I do, I work with the feds in relation to violations of Federal groundfish (ie leopard shark) and other federally managed fisheries, such as highly migratory species and Coastal pelagic species.

To simplify things, California law related to leopard sharks is possession, not where a fish came from, such as Oregon. In reference to proving the take from protected waters, I'm not sure why we are talking about that in this scenario.

In relation to the person cleaning the tank. From a legal perspective, that person would not be charged with anything unless they conspired with the owner to keep, hide etc the shark or obstructed the duties of enforcement.

Possession of a leopard shark under 36" would be a violation of California Code of Regulations Title 14 (CCR T-14) 28.56(b)(c) 36 inch size limit TOWIT CCR T-14 1.62 Minimum size. That is what the owner of the shark would be charged with.

Selling a sport caught undersized leopard shark would be charged with Fish and Game code (FG) 7121

Commercially selling an undersize leopard shark would be charged with FG 8388.5

FG 8388.5
(a) A person shall not take, possess, sell, or purchase for commercial purposes any leopard shark less than 36 inches in total length.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), leopard sharks less than 36 inches in total length possessed by a person for aquarium display on or before January 1, 1994, may be retained by that person if a letter declaring that the shark was legally obtained prior to January 1, 1994, is provided to the Sacramento office of the department on or before January 1, 1995.

So unless they had it prior to 1994 it is a no go

Jason

I don't think we can get more black and white then that. Specific codes were named, I believe that is referred to as 'game set and match'.

 

[Marie7]

Hello, have u ever hear a

Hi guys, I hope this is the correct forum, if not if anyone can redirect me to the correct section I would greatly appreciate it. So here is the situation:

I was having a discussion with someone about sharks, specifically leapord sharks, we"re located in california and it is illegal to have any sharks smaller then 3 feet if I'm correct. So we started discussing about if we can get in trouble even if we just service someone tank who has leapord sharks smaller then 3 feet. He was saying that you can get in trouble for servicing tanks and to just stay away from those tanks and service calls but I told him it doesnt make sense if you just service a tank, I understand if you sell them or anything like that but does anyone know for sure if you can actually get in trouble for just servicing a tank? We got into a pretty heated debate about this and thought I would check on here since there are a lot of knowledgeable people. Thanks guys and gals.

Hi, have u ever here the saying ..... as guilty is the one thats hold the cow as the one who kill it? If I’m in your place, I do stay away to protect myself u never know what can comes out of it, if it’s illegal and u are servicing That tank they feel u are covering for something its illegal and of course eventually u can be pull into something u are not at fault but doing what u feel is right doing your job.

 

[Marie7]

Hello, have u ever hear a

Hi guys, I hope this is the correct forum, if not if anyone can redirect me to the correct section I would greatly appreciate it. So here is the situation:

I was having a discussion with someone about sharks, specifically leapord sharks, we"re located in california and it is illegal to have any sharks smaller then 3 feet if I'm correct. So we started discussing about if we can get in trouble even if we just service someone tank who has leapord sharks smaller then 3 feet. He was saying that you can get in trouble for servicing tanks and to just stay away from those tanks and service calls but I told him it doesnt make sense if you just service a tank, I understand if you sell them or anything like that but does anyone know for sure if you can actually get in trouble for just servicing a tank? We got into a pretty heated debate about this and thought I would check on here since there are a lot of knowledgeable people. Thanks guys and gals.

Hi, have u ever here the saying ..... as guilty is the one thats hold the cow as the one who kill it? If I’m in your place, I do stay away to protect myself u never know what can comes out of it, if it’s illegal and u are servicing That tank they feel u are covering for something its illegal and of course eventually u can be pull into something u are not at fault but doing what u feel is right doing your job.