Reptile & Amphibian Forums

The US wildlife conservation model has historically been opposed to commercial use of wildlife (e.g. game animals). As I'm sure that most of you are aware, most game species were severely depleted around 1900 by unregulated commercial market hunters. Unfortunately, it is very easy for those opposed to commercial uses of wildlife to tie our hobby to those bad old days of unregulated commercial market hunting, and to use those images from the past to put a scare into both wildlife agencies (who ought to know better) and into state legislatures.

Anyone who has been around the hobby for more than a few years has seen this in action. Remember the stated reasons behind "Operation Rockcut"? "100s of snakes per night" were supposedly being removed from Big Bend National Park in a "multi-million dollar poaching ring". Today, the huge (and mostly realistic) scare is the Asian food-turtle trade. The impetus for re-vamping the nongame regs is "to get a handle on unregulated trade in wildlife". In part, at least, I suspect the moving force behind HB 2414 is to close TX highways to commercial collection.

You'll note that the glaring problem here is that in all of these attempts to "regulate" or "monitor" trade in wildlife, that Texas has made no distinction between trade in wild-caught or captive-bred wildlife. I have personally been pushing for a captive-breeders permit, and hopefully we'll pilot one for turtles (since they'll be closing the trade in most wild turtles). Speaking only for myself (although I'm sure that the membership of the Texas Herp. Society would largely agree with me), I'd honestly like to see the trade in wild-caught animals closed (still allowing the collection for personal use) so long as the trade in captive-bred animals remains open (and therein lies the rub - I wouldn't support the closure of trade in wild until they legally distinguish wild from captive-bred).

It is my belief that so long as we support the commercialization of wild-caught animals that we will remain an easy target - the image of "snake collectors making millions (its never thousands or even hundreds, it it?) of dollars off of Texas Wildlife" is always going to have a knee-jerk emotional appeal in light of the US conservation model (unless we're talking about rattlesnake round ups . . . ).

This is all long-term planning stuff, and doesn't affect HB 2414 or any other current legislation or regulatory actions. I also know that the source of all captive-bred animals are wild-caught animals (and I wouldn't suggest closure of wild-caught to take, just commercialization). I'm very well aware that the take in most species that we are interested in is entirely sustainable (e.g. alterna, etc). Sustainability ought to matter, but in terms of taking the ethical high ground, I think that we (as a herp community) ought to seriously consider advocating for the closure of Texas wild-caught to commercialization so long as at the same time Texas provides a legal avenue for the commercialization of captive-bred herps.

I just thought it time to voice my opinion on the matter, especially in light of the discussion about "why HB 2414" that has run through some of the threads below.

Sincerely,
Troy Hibbitts
Camp Wood, TX

I agree, wholesale collecting for commercialization is wrong. But how is LE going to differentiate on a rock cut in the middle of the night? They can't simply go by sheer numbers, because there usually isn't a large amount of snakes collected on any given night.

I think that we all know that there is no "wholesale" collection of alterna, etc, from roadcuts (at least not by individuals for the commercial trade).

I think that they already have a mechanism of IDing commercial collectors in place, e.g. 10 individuals of one species or 25 individuals of all species (in possession). Over the years, I've always been able to tell the commercial collectors - they are the ones picking up every single animal, and have a car load of spadefoots, night snakes, etc.

The other side of the coin would be to have a captive-breeder's permit for sale - only allow registered captive-breeders to sell (details of how this would work would need to be worked out).

Troy

I am in agreement. Personal or sport take and captive breeding should be legal and commercial collection should be illegal. I am not 100% morally opposed to commercial take but I feel that it presents a huge image problem for herpers that causes the majority of us to suffer for the benifit of the few.
I like Californias captive breeding program but I would have it include more species and allow for yearly bag limits on wild caught stock rather than lifetime possesion limits.

Can you post or email me a link outlining CA's captive-breeding program?

Troy

Here's a link to the captive breeding regs. You also need to veiw the collecting regs as that will give the bag limits for what you can field collect to start your colonies. What sucks about CA's breeding laws is you can only sell rosies, getula and pituophis. For these you can only have your bag limit as wild caught but may possess unlimited captive born stock.

They really need to ad other common and pet worthy species such as zonatas, rubber boas, chuckwallas and alligator lizards to name probably the most popular ones. In letter of the law you can do these as noncommercial with up to 30 in the aggregate(including all wc and cb stock) but in practice when you apply I hear CAF&G will just cross out everything but rosies, getula and pits. At that point you may request a hearing with the Game Commision as to why you were revoked and can try to persuade them to allow you to breed them but I don't know anyone who has taken it that far.

Another major change I would make in CA is to make the bag limits yearly. Currently the bag/possesion limit is combined so as long as you keep the animals you can never collect another one once you have reached your bag limit. And considering how common zonata are and how hard it is to develop their prefered habitat it is rediculous that the bag limit is only one. I would change it to two per subspecies per year.

The problem with bag limits is that they should be based on scientific studies of what amounts to a sustainable "take"-and from what I understand, CA's aren't.

For animals such as quail, deer, and rabbits these numbers are pretty well worked out based on such factors as the yearly number of licensed hunters, carrying capacity of habitat, and species fecundity.

As far as I'm aware, none of this is known for the various species of desirable herps in Texas. And if it were known, I'd be willing to guess that, based on the real number of collectors and the vast areas of inaccessible habitat, sustainable bag limits would be extremely high.

I say lets not mention bag limits unless TPWD insists. It's a can of worms.

Brad Chambers

>>I say lets not mention bag limits unless TPWD insists. It's a can of worms.
>>
>>Brad Chambers

If, God-forbid, the State of TX deemed the alterna count "too low", there are enough insurance populations available in captivity of practically every locality of every desirable W Texas herp imaginable. I mean...Ric Blair alone could rerelease and replenish just about every alterna locale all by his lonesome, if we needed him to. He'd be like a modern-day Noah in W TX.

DR
Suboc.com

All,

You never EVER want to give up your ability to sell a wild caught animal. There are a whole slew of reasons why:

"Commercial" means selling ONE animal.

The captive population is a "safety net" for wild populations.
Development, roads, pollution, human population growth and economic growth are expanding exponentially with virtually no controls and no end in sight. Animals will be displaced and then they will die for sure because we can't harvest them and then sell them if we don't want to work with that species.

It costs a lot of money to go on collecting trips, house and feed herps so I can't sell a common species that nobody breeds but someone in NY wants? I can't sell a common wild caught species that is bred in captivity?

Are all species bred in captivity? Can all species be bred in captivity? Can everyone go herping to get the animals they want? The answer is no.

If I catch a suboc but decide later that I don't want it then I can't sell it?

Some people make a living acquiring wild caught animals for people, researchers, zoos, museums, etc.. Like me! I can't feed my family with no wild caughts.

Herps are a RENEWABLE resource.

Just because you don't want to sell any wild caughts doesn't mean you should shut it down for those who do.

If I catch an animal and want to sell it to cover trip costs I should be allowed to.

Harvest is harvest whether you keep it or sell it, it is still gone from the wild population.

You start sliding down the slippery slope and you lose all your privilages.

Who is going to breed toads and anoles for feeders?

Who is going to breed the very low end animals that will cost more to captively raise then it is worth?

If you want a certain species you have to go catch it yourself where ever it occurs.

If you have been trying to pair up an alterna for several years and someone has a wild caught and you can't buy it do you think they will just give it to you?

Where do you think founder animals come from? All were wild caught.

I need to inject some "new blood" into my collection but I have to go catch them myself because I can't buy them?

Locality, locality, locality.

I have to wait until I captively produce a species before I can sell that species?

Is the captive population viable? If not, everyone has to catch their own.

Come on! BAD, BAD idea.

Mike Welker
El Paso, TX

PS: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but you can't ruin it for other people. Now, bare in mind, I am not talking about allowing High Impact Commercial Collection. Bag limits on certain species at the MOST! But never, ever, give up your privilages.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but you can't ruin it for other people.

IMHO, that's exactly what the commercial people out there are doing to the rest of us.

Every single time I have conversations with LE, TPWD, or other conservation groups, the things they bring up basically boils down to issues regarding "commercial exploitation". Allowing commercialization, especially rampant commercialization, paints us all in a bad light. You must consider that most of these bureaucrats were trained in the game management model, which extolls the horrors of unrestricted commercial trade in wildlife. Ornithology organizations aren't on our side, because they gave up commercialization a hundred years ago.

Bottom line, most of us want to be able to catch herps, and sell captive-bred animals. If we stick to a stance of supporting unrestricted commercialization, then the day will come when we are shut down completely, and we won't be able to sell captive-bred either.

Troy

No, a very small amount, probably less than 1%, are High Impact Commercial Collectors and they are not most people. You have to make the distinction. In Alabama, they banned the possession of venomous because ONE yahoo had venomous snakes in cages with cardboard lids. So rather then coming up with FAIR regs like inspections and caging requirements, they banned it for the rest of the people including all the many, many people that keep their stuff in a safe manner. Low Impact Commercial Collection, to which I am refering too, has negligible or no impacts on wild populations. Why does everyone look at things so black and white? It is NOT like that in the real world. There is a HUGE gray area.

Who is LE? I can see why people have a problem with High Impact Commercial Collection. I have a problem with that level of take but there is a very small percentage of people doing that! If that is the problem then create laws accordingly! Don't ruin it for everybody. The world of herpetoculture needs to change the old "game law" mentality. Don't give into it, educate! We have concerns about possession and transportation of herps as well. If we fall back to the old "game law" mentality we will have problems with those two issues as a matter of fact we already do. The bottom line is that we need new and different laws for the herp community. We are the only group (outside of fish) that capture their "game" alive and then breeds and commerce's in it. That requires new thinking and new laws NOT the old "game law" approach.

I have NEVER said unresticted. We have "K" select species and "r" select species in the herp field. If you remember ecology class, "r" produce many offspring but less survive and "K" have fewer offspring but more survive. These characteristics need to be considered when talking about harvest amounts. Also, you have to look at population densities, overall range, access to habitat and cryptic-ness, as well as, the ability of searchers to find target species. With our present state of knowledge we can determine all these factors and come up with reasonable take laws. Remember, whether you take species for personal use or sell them for someone else's personal use they are removed from the wild population. So some level of take would have to be established no matter what you did with it after you captured it. In addition, there are conservation implications here. The captive population is a "safety net" for wild populations. With development, human population growth, roads, economic growth and other impacts out of control with no end in sight, harvest is a fantastic way to conserve wild populations and find homes for displaced animals. What about my other examples of why giving up the selling of herps should not be done?

You make a whole mess of assumptions in this statement:
"Bottom line, most of us want to be able to catch herps, and sell captive-bred animals. If we stick to a stance of supporting unrestricted commercialization, then the day will come when we are shut down completely, and we won't be able to sell captive-bred either."

"Some" of "us" want to be able catch herps and sell captive born not "most". I have sold wild caughts to people on this forum and some on this forum have done the selling. Some of "us" want to also collect herps to sell a few and captively produce. What about "us"? Again, I never said UNRESTRICTED. Many species, as I pointed out above, could stay in the unresticted category but others may require bag limits to eliminate High Impact Commercial Collectors. Further, if certain species are harvested at extremely high rates because of demand, isn't it time for a captive breeding program? My arguements are reasonable, fair and logical. You don't think we can convince trained wildlife biologists at TPWD that this is the answer? Also, far left wing conservation groups may never get it. A lot of them don't want you keeping or eating ANY animals so to appease them would not be to smart. We need to educate these folks. We need to stop thinking in black and white. Commercial is not a dirty word. The impacts and intensity are what is at issue here. Again, never, EVER, give up your privilege to sell ONE wild caught. Because banning the sale of wild caughts means ONE animal.

TPWD and those conservation groups are probably eating this up, fighting among the troops. They are probably saying, "It is working, it is working, they are considering giving up their privileges." Don't do it!

I will be happy to be part of a delegation to meet with TPWD or anyone else to work through our differences.

Please let me know,

Mike Welker
El Paso, TX
(915) 595-8831
OHI2007@elp.rr.com

However, I'm just calling it like I see it.

Commercialization (in general) gives herpers a black eye in the face of the conservation community, and commercialization of wild caughts makes for two black eyes, a bloody nose, and some knocked out teeth. Its just not a politically sound position to take.

Your "lets all band together" (on your viewpoint, I might add) sounds a lot like current Republican ideology in regard to the current war effort. I'm not vehemently arguing or even taking a real stance - just offering up some thoughts on the matter.

Let me be clear - IN MY OPINION - without distancing ourselves from the commercialization of wild caught animals, we will - again, IN MY OPINION - see the end of our ability to collect or sell any native species of herps, save perhaps those few things that are long established in captivity like corns, red ear sliders (and, of course, Diamondback Rattlesnakes . . . another matter entirely).

Troy