If it can be documented (with appropriate paperwork) that USFWS did indeed transfer ownership of confiscated animals to a private party -- rather than, as sometimes happens, USFWS retains ownership of specimens that are in the care of private parties -- that would be a relevant consideration.

But since Lacey's criteria for legality involves the actual history of the very specimen in question, supposing that such transfers of smuggled animals do happen doesn't entail that any given specimen has such a history.

Given that sellers won't even show (even in private; I've asked multiple sellers and not only here) their claimed CITES paperwork to back up the claims that a given specimen is legal, I doubt that there is any paper trail of the sort you point out to be theoretically possible that will see the light of day. Lots of hand waving and 'possibility' on these sorts of things, but so far no evidence whatsoever.

There is a lot of bluffing in these sorts of discussions, of all sorts of species, and always has been. When someone seems to be bluffing and won't show their hand, that means that they don't have the cards they want others to think they do.

All these assumptions and you are all wrong. lol.
The babies offered recently have been imported twice and are of legal origin STRAIGHT from Indonesia and cleared by both indonesia as well as USFWS.
Indonesia allowed two exporters to set up a limited breeding group with confiscated animals the Indonesian government GAVE THEM, and gave them a strict limited export basis (aka only can export what the adult group can actually produce)
So that is why they are expensive, and that is why there is only 10-12 animals total that came in on two shipments instead of 50-100.
That is it till next season. There is photographic proof of eggs, hatching, breeding, etc at these farms and being such high profile, they are inspected regularly.

EVERYTHING you think you guys know cause of an animal rights group articles (traffick) is pretty much wrong. If there was 50-100 of these babies on market, or adults etc right now those would be illegal, and then you would be correct.

The babies on the market are 100% legal. 100% cleared, verified, and were on conditional release (not cleared) till the apropriate government channels and such did their due diligence and cleared them with flying colors.

also FYI the CITES database is WRONG all the time and things are not updated or reported. Please look up ERYMNOCHELYS MADAGASCRIENSIS and see how many exported in last 10 years from USA. I personally exported over 200 with CITES docs issued by USFWS and they are not on the database. Others have exported atleast 500+ So explain how a 3rd world country updates accurately if our own USFWS doesnt?

Well, that claim is false. There are specimens on the market that didn't come from Indonesia. There is the Italian import mentioned earlier in this thread, and those specimens are demonstrably illegal in the US. There are possibly specimens that were USCBB from previously smuggled animals (I talked to a seller on another site very recently who was ignorant enough to claim his were exactly this), and those are illegal in the US.

Simply because some specimens were imported with CITES documents doesn't mean all of those on the market were. And that is a big part of my point about bluffing -- a seller may claim they are selling permitted animals (because such permitted animals do or at least could exist) but if they don't provide evidence that the very animals they are selling are the permitted ones, such claims aren't credible given all the other considerations around this species. The market price is still high enough that trafficked specimens will continue for some time, and it is high enough to encourage all sorts of deception.

But on the CITES-permitted laundered exports from Indonesia, that seems to be true. There's a section in 'Poached' (good book, BTW) about it, reprinted here on Wired. None of these permitted animals are yet listed in the CITES database, though, so without seeing actual permits and a paper trail back to those permits from the actual animal for sale (bills of sale or other financial documentation leading back to the names on the permit), this is all just theoretical.

Thanks Michael.
I figured these may have been from confiscated animals since they have never been legal to collect from country of origin. Cool they allowed them to be bred instead of destroying them like many officials do since they have no way of keeping them other than turning them over to a zoo or a facility which poor countries have few of and these may have little funding for those kind of things.
This is not the first time I've discussed this with importers. The rules are getting harder and harder but they are also allowing more to become available because there is an advantage to allowing founder stocks to be held in captivity, particularly if these are properly regulated for genetic integrity so as to be capable for restocking wild populations in the future. Also, proper numbers of CB animals can reduce or eliminate poaching of said species because of supply and demand. Captive breeding projects may be the only hope for some species futer existance.
Most animals are not endanger from over collecting for the pet trade anyway, they are mostly impacted by other factors like loss/change of habitat, pollution, use by native people for food and from feral animal introductions that eat or out-compete them and from emergent deseases.
Some are just naturally low number or cryptic species being either rare or rarely seen.

The animals in question are the ones posted. There has been two imports legally in 2022 and these are from import. One person imported them, and that person sold to resellers.
All you have to ask is who imported them and you get your answer if legal or not.
Few enough animals that its easy to keep track of where they go.
PS: progeny of animals imported for scientific purposes and sold to private market are LEGAL.

USARK
 

Seeing as USARK just posted a fundraiser with the prize being a trio of Borneo earless, we can put this to bed unless anyone wants to bring up the legality of their imports from Europe cleared with CITES paperwork. I do not personally know enough about this topic to have any say in it, but I would assume USARK would have some legit animals.

Yes, the Indo animals were mentioned above. We'll see how long that takes to reduce numbers of trafficked animals.

Buyers being very persnickety about legality details and demanding complete documentation on animals they purchase, and understanding all the relevant legal and conservation issues, will help this.

I see you’ve corrected yourself keyboard warrior. They in fact did legally enter the US, and were very prolifically produced out of California after Paul Miller “Legally” imported them from Italy.

Have a nice day.

Yes, my friend imported many and they were donated to USARK by a gentleman whose name I will keep disclosed. This John Zillmer needs to get other hobbies to keep himself busy it seems.

FYI they are being captive bred overseas very very successfully.