Eric Borneman coral controversy

[Anonymous]

and that matters how?

No one can cry sour grapes, after the fact.

 

[Anonymous]

I have never seen a thread on any board that shows the true colors of this hobby better than this one.

The same people that cry "save the reef", buy Mac certified corals, give lectures on the reefs dying, lectures on conservation, and preach " we have to do something before the hobby is regulated out of business"

a bunch of lip service

Let's all take off and go to Puerto Rico.

 

[sihaya]

this stuff was once considered

But it never was considered his... you're looking at this too much like a hobbyist. These corals were *never* considered his. They are, and always were and always will be, the property of the American public.

 

[sihaya]

I have never seen a thread on any board that shows the true colors of this hobby better than this one.

Oh please don't say that... remember, I'm still a hobbyist and still young and optimistic. And if I'm not entirely jaded even after all this, you can see how much hope I have. So maybe Calfo is right when he says hope is all one really needs.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, I was not speaking to that point at all.

You had been though, and others still were asking questions on the topic, then you switched topics.

Eric was not an employee of NOAA, FKNMS, or US Navy.

That's nice. It has zero relevency, though. You don't have to be an employee to have legal responsibilities.

He had at one time a permit for those corals from FKNMS, but they revoke it. He then no longer has posession nor "ownership" of those corals.

Yes, he did have a permit. Him, not the CDHC. Nor did he ever have ownership, or even "ownership" of the corals. This has been pointed out. Why do you still use this word?

And, of course, in the very act of revoking the permit the corals in question are ordered to be returned from his custody. They are still in his legal custody at the time, and he is still legally responsible for them. The fact that he no longer has any legal right to continue to possess them does not absolve him of his legal responsibility to return them. Until such time as they are returned, he is still considered responsible for them.

And honestly, I simply cannot believe you don't already know this.

Excuse me judge, this stuff was once considered mine, but is no longer, but I would still like you to order the people who currently have it to turn it over to me so I can give it the to rightful owners.'

Spin. Pure and simple spin. Did Eric ever show a judge the paperwork where he was ordered to return the corals? If not, or if you don't know, how can you possibly claim this in any way complicated the process of getting them back? If he didn't show it to a judge, why not? And if he did show it to a judge, what was the response?

 

[Liquid4ce]

Oh please don't say that... remember, I'm still a hobbyist and still young and optimistic. And if I'm not entirely jaded even after all this, you can see how much hope I have. So maybe Calfo is right when he says hope is all one really needs.

excuse me while I barf... :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Steven, can't you just tell us where the corals went?

The documents Sara has produced showed they went to Craig Watson, a little less than 500 pieces. What happened after that is what I want Sara to look into.

What happened then?

 

[Anonymous]

No judge would ever touch this. They are not stupid enough to believe some one owns the Grand Canyon.

The very people in the hobby that preach conservation, are the people that are either trying to spin it, or sitting back keeping their mouths shut. Which is just as bad.

 

[fcmatt]

aerosmith,

i do not think we will ever find out because the person who could tell
us EVERYTHING, who was online so much, ran away to hide.

where are you eric? you used to be online so much, i see your papers
and articles. not much to say anymore? worried people won't care to
listen to you anymore?

 

[Liquid4ce]

Maybe someone could explain to me what exactly is the story here?

EB got protected corals, larger ones than he should have maybe, but no biggie.

EB fails to continue to maintain said corals properly and is ordered to return them.

Corals are returned.

Am I missing something?

 

[sihaya]

or sitting back keeping their mouths shut.

In their defense... it's not all that easy to speak on contentious topics. My mother is an Italian woman who grew up on the rough side of the Queens, so I have the genes for it, but I can understand forgiving the people who don't.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe someone could explain to me what exactly is the story here?

EB got protected corals, larger ones than he should have maybe, but no biggie.

EB fails to continue to maintain said corals properly and is ordered to return them.

Corals are returned.

Am I missing something?

Someone was awarded a permit to keep endangered corals. The conditions of the permit were not met.
If the agency issuing the permit had checked out the story, they would have known that it was impossible to meet those conditions ahead of time.
The permit would have either been denied or issued under another set of conditions.

The holder of the permit did not notify the issuing agency when the conditions of the permit were not met. The agency was notified second hand that the conditions were not met. The agency initiated the contact with the permit holder and the permit holder left the country (Puerto Rico) in the middle of it.

The agency tried to rectify the situation but was finally forced to contact the permit holder in writing to inform him that they were initiating Special Condition #1 which states, "The FKNMS Superintendent may request in writing that coral specimens, or portions thereof, be returned to the Sanctuary for restoration, research, or other purposes."

Portions of the corals regulated by the permit were returned to Craig Watson, Mote Marine Laboratory, Florida. The disposition of the corals was decided to no longer be suitable for restoration and could not be returned to the Sanctuary.

 

[Liquid4ce]

Yeah... so what I said, only with less words

 

[shred5]

I agree with sihaya on this point. You have to have a starting point. Sometimes it takes years to get to the truth. and it's even harder when the people involved won't speak up. I really think they are hiding the facts and are hoping this will all go away

Yay! You're open-minded! This is exactly my point. You have to start somewhere. It might not be the same place you end up, but it's gotta be somewhere.

No this has started and ended. your are just bring up peices for flame bait.

Dave

 

[Liquid4ce]

If the agency issuing the permit had checked out the story, they would have known that it was impossible to meet those conditions ahead of time.
The permit would have either been denied or issued under another set of conditions.

So you're saying the regulatory agency supervising these corals was negligent... who's fault is that?

 

[Anonymous]

and what people in the hobby do not seem to realize

While people in the hobby might be trying to defend him, people on the other side are not.

They are going to use his own resume against him.

Paint him as a representative of the hobby, not a representative of the scientific community.

For the exact same reasons that the hobby is trying to defend itself, the scientific community will try to distance itself from him and paint it the other way.

 

[StevenPro]

Apparently the judge down there disagrees with you all.

Let me put it this way. Joe loans Tim a car. It is Joe's car, but he authorizes Tim to use it indefinitely. Tim has a girlfriend, Melissa, who uses the car as well. Joe knows about Melisssa and has no objections to her using the car. After some time, Tim and Melissa break up. She packs up all her stuff in the car and leaves. Joe hears about the breakup and demands his car back from Tim. Tim goes to the local authorities to get the car back from Melissa. Melissa tells the judge the car is not Tim's in the first place. It is Joe's. The judge tells Tim he has no right to the car. He can get his CD's and gym clothes that he left in the truck, but not the car. Joe needs to claim the car. Joe can scream at Tim all day, everyday, but there is nothing Tim can go but ask nicely for Melissa to return the car.

Sara, go find the rest of the documents.

 

[Anonymous]

If the agency issuing the permit had checked out the story, they would have known that it was impossible to meet those conditions ahead of time.
The permit would have either been denied or issued under another set of conditions.

So you're saying the regulatory agency supervising these corals was negligent... who's fault is that?

The agency for issuing a permit to someone and not checking out their story.

I've said all along, Eric is just collateral damage. He is not the big story.

 

[Anonymous]

Apparently the judge down there disagrees with you all..

Not at all. The judge can't say that someone owns the Grand Canyon.

 

[StevenPro]

Apparently the judge down there disagrees with you all..

Not at all. The judge can't say that someone owns the Grand Canyon.

Exactly! An authorized representative of the government would have to appear before the judge. Having a revoked permit apparently did not count as authorized.