Phil,

Why do you keep posting when you obviously are not willing to listen to others views? You have your mind made up so all the debating in the world will not change your views. You are blinded by agenda. You continue to degrade me with your snide comments. This shows everyone here that you are an “agenda” pusher. You say that most biologists don’t support the boa and python ban. Well the ones who wrote it do. Their superiors do. The colleagues who made manuscript comments do. The peer-reviewers at the journal it was published in do. Bob Reed has also made comments as to testing his results at conferences with agreement from those folks. So I think you are dead wrong.

You forget that I have been around in this profession for over 20 years. I am not a newbie academic like yourself. Ask your fellow NC colleagues what I was like when I was a newbie? I was an agenda pusher! Ask Davenport and Beane how I was. I have seen things from both sides of the fence. Many academics abuse the precautionary principle at the cost of private stakeholders. This is where the similarities to the AR agenda begin. You can live in denial all you want. I know you are unwilling to look at the big picture and find fault with any professional herpetologists, obviously.

I, too, suggest herpetoculturalists examine the evidence. First task would be to look through the box turtle papers. Is the conclusions that were reached in those papers the only conclusion that could be reached? Are the methods sound? Was the data skewed? Do they have enough data or samples? Now, look at the authors of those papers. Do they work with or support any preservation or conservation box turtle groups that say or publish negative statements about collecting, commercial harvest, hobbyists or the pet trade?

Just do a general read through of many of the popular herp books written by academics (like field guides). Do they state or imply that collection, the pet trade and commercial collection are bad? Do they give any evidence to prove this? Look through any herp papers whose subject is “status in the wild” or any complete natural histories. Are statements made as to the negative affects of collecting, commercial collection and the pet trade? Do they have any evidence in those papers to support these statements?

When state wildlife departments have public comment meetings, do academics give testimony that could be harmful to private herp interests? Do they use the same academic papers that have debatable results, methods, data processing that were discussed above? Are the papers used geographically relevant to the species being discussed? Do they offer opinion and conjecture? You should also look at where these new regs and laws came from. Who suggested them? Who pushed for them? The academics themselves? You must also look at where the agency biologists came from. Are they academics? What do their papers and books say? Who was their academic advisor? What kind of statements have their advisor made in their books and papers? Do they have evidence for their statements?

So, yes, please do some research. But you must have an open mind. If you have any preconceived ideas either way that could affect your interpretation. Study AR groups, their positions and their modus operandi. Do you see any similarities with the statements and actions of academics and agency biologists? What about over all goals and agenda? Do you see any similarities? Don’t let the disagreement about the use of research animals affect the general trends and similarities between the two.

Also look at what you have seen over the years. Have you made comments that were ignored? Have you seen your rights and privileges slowly deteriorate over the years? Have you attend meetings and seen for yourself? Do you agree with how you have been treated as a stakeholder and an American citizen? Has progress been made on stopping the big conservation issues like habitat destruction? Do you think the focus has been adequate?

What positives have you seen? Do you have areas where you can collect? Is it difficult to participate in your hobby because of all the rules and regulations? What methods can you use to collect? Are they fair and reasonable? Are bag limits reflective of data? Are they sufficient to allow the collection of captive breeding groups? Can you sell herps? Can you seek to possess all legally acquired herp species? Can you possess natives? Can you possess exotics? Can you possess venomous? Have you seen regs and laws put in place to supposedly protect herps but they end up just banning your activities while the bulldozers of habitat destruction roll on? What has been done to get your opinion and participation? What new regs or rules have you seen that promote the hobby and your activities? Do you feel like a partner, a victim or a nobody? You tell me.

Finally, I have never said that ALL academics and agency biologists are agenda pushers. I do not believe that all peer-reviewed papers are full of agenda. Most are not. But these things are out there. There is sufficient evidence as to much of what I say. Intent and motivation is a hard thing to prove. I know that many professional herpetologists do care about herps and that’s why they do what they do. When I debate the issues I focus strictly on proving my point not talking about the exceptions or other trends or other truths.

Remember, I am the one that posted my response to the Model Herp Regs. My opinion and views are not the only opinion and views. Phil’s response “showed” that I was correct, at the very least, about how we as stakeholders are treated. It is that kind of disregard and denial to provable facts (boa and python ban) that is the problem. I say there are agenda problems. Phil says that there is no agenda and that I am crazy. Who do you believe?

Yes, we do all need to take the time to work together. But how are we supposed to work together when people like Phil live in a world of denial? When we are treated like our opinion doesn’t matter? When we have to deal with academic and agency biologists elitism and ego? You have to acknowledge there is a problem before you can start to fix the problem, Phil. If you want to keep fighting about and denying that many privates feel this way then you are the one that is not stepping up to help solve our problems. You need to only look in the mirror.

I would start by looking outside of NC at the rest of country. And this MUST be done with an open mind. So if you can’t hang, Phil, step back and get out of the way. There are tens of thousands of stakeholders out here who have opinions and a right to be heard. The sooner you figure this out the better.

Welkerii
El Paso, TX

[ Show Entire Thread ]