OK. So I've read a little bit more and I gotta say, I do get tired of the "That depends on what the definition of 'is' is".
I get tired of all the semantics and the personalities...can't see the forest for the trees mentality.
I would suggest that a prudent practice would be to protect habitat from development before getting into population viability issues. If there is any question at all, the population's territory should be preserved before anything else.
It's just so easy to scapegoat the collector/hobbyist. Especially, since the "Deciders", those who are the ones destroying habitat as a matter of their livelihood are the ones so critical of our herptile heritage. Do they concern themselves with habitat? No!
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

[ Show Entire Thread ]