Hi Dusty I carefully read your post and I decided I needed to coment it. First of I respect your previously gattered knowlege and your role as snake breeder (checked them myself, very nice snakes by the way!) however I feal that you have a very uncessarily pristine view of what is aceptable and that ultimatly is much less dinamic then nature itself. Please dont feal ofended or anything, just sharing my knowlege of the almost 20 years Ive been on this hobby and contless papers, books,etc Ive read and my own experience.
(quote)
First off, before I respond, I'd like to say that I am all for people keeping and breeding reptiles (I myself have a small business breeding Trans-Pecos Ratsnake and Baja Ratsnake morphs), and I'm very leery of new laws prohibiting these activities. Primarily, because valuable lessons can be learned from engaging in them. Darwin, himself, gathered data and compelling evidence for his still-reigning theory by enjoying his hobby of the artificial selective-breeding of pigeons, which is akin to breeding for snake morphs. Youth and adults alike can discover the predictive power of science by doing breeding experiments and learn about Mendellian genetics, learning animal medicine, and simply enjoying interacting with animals. There are perhaps countless reasons why keeping and breeding herps, as an activity, is valuable.
(100% TRUE and as it can be as well a VERY powerfull conservation tool!)
Despite all of this, I'm not so certain that some extra regulation concerning imports for the commercial trade is a bad thing. (*Please, do not take me out of context -- this is not an endorsement for ANY former, existing, or pending laws.)
(Agreed however I view it more as needed to prevent sick or desiased animals from reaching the general public, for example there was that recent discovery that wild cauth tokay geckos had in them many diferent strains of Salmonella from a range of organisms because in the wild they are like rats and not only eat everything but are also cauth in very insanitary conditions such as in bathrooms, that is a very important sign that wild cauth tokays should only be avaible to experts, cb ones to the average hobbist, Florida is full of them and its unecessary to import them in the quantitys they are, if a child becomes sick very bad publicity and public histeria will come. If a brand new morph comes then a special import permit may be granted and hobbists only will need to be patient)
If you do, in fact, read peer-reviewed papers and edited textbooks on herp declines, there are MANY species that are declining BECAUSE of collection for the commercial trade, whether in part, or in full.
(That is true and we are seeing that in the present and we saw that in the past,thats why CITES exists (even if it isnt 100% eficient) ironicly however the reason many species are still around and are avaible to the general hobbist and if need be to reintroduction programs its because someone brough them and bred them! Also colecting for the pet trade doesant necessarily has to be destructive, I used to be against wc however if the local people can see that they can get profit from these animals, they can be educated to make a sustainable harvest IF they dont destroy the habitat in wich thouse live. If they cant sooner or later the habitat WILL be destroyed and replaced with something profitable)
The fact of the matter is that any specimen that is removed from the wild for any reason equals a reduction in the gene pool. That animal had to survive its highly vulnerable infancy, duke it out with other adolescents and adults for food, territory, and mates, only to be removed by a collector, which possibly allowed some less-fit genes to be perpetuated in the wild.
(That is a excidingly pristine view, most wild populations are some way or another threatned by humans and forms of human related mortality being by road kill, hunting for food, habitat destruction,etc, what if insted of being eaten or destroyed as a pach of forest is cleared, the animals are used as founder for a cb program? And it doesant necessarily equals a reduction in the gene pool, thats why population genetics exists, you should have known that, some species are very diverse in their genetics wille some are naturaly low in genotipes. Either way the particular genetics of the founders would be hopefully preserved and that would increase the gene pool in captivity, many years later that particular genotype may already gone in the wild. However if you would be so conserned about removing wild animals because of genetics, there is a simple trick: remove only hatchlings, one from each laying, their number is already naturaly higher then what the ecossistem can normaly sustain and depending on the species quite a few may be lost naturaly)
Further, I sometimes hear these cliams that "had such-and-such species been allowed to be cared for by lay herpetoculturists, they might not be extinct in the wild." Our track record has nothing to back that claim up. Even among academics, next-to-nothing is known about headstarting captive-bred assurance colony herps in the wild, much less any success stories to garner that responsibility being placed on our shoulders anytime soon.
(HUN? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Now I can count with the fingers of one hand the number of Asian turtle species that is very likely already extinct in the wild and except one sad case are doing VERY well in captivity. If we include very close to extinction but likely still existent in small wild population species the number of fingers in both hands wouldnt be enough to couth them all, BUT MOST are doing very well in captivity. In a very sad and ironic move, the same laws like CITES wich were supossed to help animals are in reality endagering them furter by not allowing experienced western breeders to have acess to furter species and bloodlines and that is the sad reason why some species havent yet been completly extablished in captivity. Im much into asian turtles and the sad reallity is that in the next years we are likely going to see more species getting extinct in the wild as they are eaten out of existence. BUT most are already triving in captivity. The serious hobbists that have them are true real life Noahs! And much more sucess storys exist of rare in the wild species that are triving in captivity! Axolotls and many other Caudates, sulcatas, many frogs, ALOT of turtles, Fidji iguanas, rhinocerus iguanas, Canary island lacertids, New Zeland geckos, RADIETED TORTOISES,etc. Want more? If go to the aquarium hobby we have white clowd minows (wich are NOW BACK into the wild), alot of killies, alot of Poecilids and Goodeids, many Ciclids, a few labirint fish,etc. And some of these have no place else to go but our tanks and terrariums, WE SAVED THEM for the time being. However for the ones that can go back into the wild once the treats have disapeared and the habitat is recuperated, that can be acomplished with the tecnology we have now, these are instictive animals, they can 100% look after themselfes. Even dogs after 10000 years of human domestication can form feral populations with ease let alone herps!
In fact, the little that is known shows us that...well, we know absolutely nothing about it at all. Most of the efforts to re-introduce assurance populations have failed. There is simply too much to consider: (a) Will one phenotype survive where it is released? (b) Will a captivity contracted disease be undetected and wreak havoc on the remaining few wild populations? etc.
First I dont recall many faliures in reintroducing cb reptiles, in fact most Ive followed have been very sucessfull. The last one was of a midwife toad species that was considered extinct, rediscovered and brough back from the brink into the wild. As for desiases there is many things we can do to prevent them and to see how wild speciemens react to organisms present in cb ones. As for phentypes, we should understend that its not a black and white situation so to speak, many natural color morphs ocurr due to vicariance and genetic drift and have litle inpact on the individuals survival, of course the closest phenotype to the one of the natural population should be used)
If you look at wild Trans-Pecos Ratsnakes, for example, there are places on the River Road within walking distance that exhibit COMPLETELY different phenotypes of TPRSs. Yellow Subocs are found west of Terlingua, and Orange Subocs are found west of the Big Hill. Just a couple of miles apart. And guess what, they match their rock backgrounds too. Do you think those phenotypes play an important role in survival and speciation? Certainly. And what do we know of the intricacies of locality phenotypes of imported exotics? Very little, if anything useful at all. It isn't enough to know what a Biak vs. a Sorong chondro look like. It is MUCH deeper than that.
(That is true however be aware that wild populations of the same species naturaly form integrates and thouse are not less "natural" then any of the original forms. People now and then are criticized by making integrates and hibrids themselfes, I normaly agree however from time to time I have to hit miself as new molecular evidence is found and Im astonished as even the most intricate breeder´s "experiences" have litle imagination when compared to what happens in nature. If someone came with a biak x sorong you would classify such animal as unsitable for release, however what would you do if it was discovered that thouse 2 forms naturaly form integrates? Now all the previously unnatural animals suddenly became natural? And why would not be natural a similar cross just because it wouldnt happen in the wild? What about Cystoclemys trifasciata? This "species" is a ancient hibrid between Cuora aurocapitata and Cystoclemys galbinifrons, if it was made in captivity everyone would BBBBBBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO it. If one subspecies of a taxa is extinct I see no harm in reintroducing a close subspecies, likely in time natural selection would form a similar animal.)
As for the diseases example, here in Utah, the Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) has been decimated by a respiratory disease that came from captive animals being released. I have been out with herpetologists and field biologists and have seen the effects firsthand -- the remaining living animals are walking around in a veritable tortoise cemetery -- you can see bleached white carapaces on the ground just yards from where living ones are grazing.
(Excuse me but the last time I checked (please pardon me if Im somehow outdated and if that is the case please tell what has been going on, would love to know)desert tortoises WERE NOT reintroduced legaly to the wild by a group of skiled biologists and herpetologists, they were DUMPED back ilegaly in large numbers by incoscious and ignorant people that kept as pets, alongside sulcata and leopard tortoises from wich they contracted this desiase, and abandoned them when they grew tyerd of caring for there pet. Unless your talking about a diferent case, this DOES NOT count as responsible atempt to reintroduce a species, it just shows how inresponsable some people are!)
Using the "animal ark" method for conserving wildlife is not a last-ditch effort to save a single species from the brink -- it is THE last-ditch effort, and should be. Too often, I hear the aforementioned to be the justification which some commercial importers use for ALL species being imported, and I think it's often a cop-out for their own commercial interests. Most academic conservation biologists agree that ex situ conservation is FAR less effective than conserving nature in the wild, in the first place. IMO, if we are herpers who claim to care about species survival, then we must be intellectually honest with ourselves FIRST. We need to put our money where our mouth is and support the existence of life on earth, in the wild. And use our resources for the BEST methods before we resort to unproven last-ditch-effort methods. I would rather have 100 Blue Iguanas left in a protected, healthy habitat than 100,000 in people's homes, including mine.
Pere davids deer, horses, catle and dromedarys survived to be seen by us because they were at some point DOMESTICATED (not the first one, but was held in captivity likely for milenia), and now there are wild "feral" populations of thouse across the globe and they were not that altered by humans to the point of being incapable of surviving in the wild! If they were not seen as usefull they would have fallen victim to us as did so many modern megafauna. Also insurance colonys must be extablished when the animals are still fairly numerous, and with a strong gene pool, not when there is only left a handfull! And I beleave its not unatural to held animals and organisms to our own and theirs benefict, or are you going to tell me that leaf cutter ants are untatural as well because they grow a species of fungus that exists no were else on earth? Keeeping this animals is a matter of their survival, of our well being and a way we have to heal the wounds we have done to nature. I dont mind having 10000 blue igs in captivity specialy if the grand sons of my grand sons are going to have the chance to see them outside a photo. And what would you descrive as a ecossistem? A AQUARIUM IS A ECOSSISTEM! In a huge green house I could teoricly recreate with a good amount of precision the gran caiman land ecossistem, how that would be any less natural then the original one? Because its outdide gran caiman? But organisms and ecossistems naturaly cross the globe, how would be me doing that any less natural then a seed in a goose feet?
Sorry but that is YOUR OPINION, not a fact, thats your way of viewing the world...
As an "industry", we are LIGHT YEARS from being directly involved in ex situ conservation methods and well-researched reintroduction efforts. Particularly with the latter, ambitious research universities will have the first stab at that, and then perhaps a very small group of zoos with even less funding and fewer trained individuals capable of doing GOOD, meaningful research. We are kidding ourselves if we think herpetoculturists are going to "save" any species. So far, "extinct in the wild but not in captivity" hasn't yielded too much success. Again, I feel compelled to forget about my own hobbyist interests before I use them as an excuse to continue in them, while not doing anything at all to conserve them in the wild.
For all of the above, conservation doesant need to be directly on the wild, a species can be put back even milenia since the last time it roamed a particular habitat, and as for we havent saved species, gess what? We just did...many actualy...
>>Wild Collected Imports support species survival.
>>There are plenty of things wrong about not being able to import wild collected reptiles.
>>
>>You would not have Dwarf Burmese, Albino Burmese, Hypo Burmese or any of those awesome Ball Python morphs etc. if wild collected reptiles were not allowed to be imported.
>>In many countries native snakes are only valued for their skin and/or meat.
Having these fun-looking morphs is all fine and good, but there is overwhelming evidence to support just the opposite!
THOUSE MORPHS WERE OBTAINED FROM THE WILD! Its true some are "less fit" but they are a normal part of a species genetic patrimony! Also would being albino matter that much for a animal that spends most of its life burried outside of allmost everyone sigth? Also may come a time in the future in wich thouse phenotypes may be usefull in a particular envoiremental situation...albino ball pythons living in a cave? Ive seen weirdier...
That escaped wild collected imports supports species extinctions rather than survival. Just keeping it real here. No, I don't believe for a second that Burmese Pythons are going to leave the Everglades and start eating Red Wolves in the Carolinas and goodness knows what else in other states. (But I assure you that those Burms are there to stay, and that none of the native wildlife have evolved to adapt to evading 15-foot pythonids!)
Agreed however if people putted on the same decline causes this snakes face in the wild on full strength you would see how many would be left after a cople of years. Someone felling like using a burmese bag?
But all you have to do is look at other introduced aliens -- from plants to fish to feral cats -- and see the damage they have done. And you could sink an entire fleet of battleships with the printed evidence.
Actualy new evidence shows that at least in SOME places non native species actualy have good evect on the previously existent ecossistem. But yes many invasive species hre harmfull, however only a small part are anywere related to the theme on our agenda! Of corse we have to remenbar that for a non native species to cause harm it needs to escape is containement first and responsable hobbists would never allow that. Once again its inconsequensial people the problem, better education, comon sence and better regulations are in order.
>>There are several species of reptiles that are not allowed to be imported...in each of these species, inbreeding is now a major concern. >>
Sorry to be devil's advocate again, but not sure I agree that Golden Toads were 'protected to death', as you say. Whether protected a lot or very little, more than 160 species have gone extinct since the early '80s. It's depressing as heck but even the captive-breeding efforts of the El Valle Amphibian Conservation Center in Panama is experiencing significant losses from Bd in captive colonies.
Ok now that is a problem! All this is valid IF a species can trive in captivity, if it cant and the habitat destruction doesant stop or the habitat becomes inospitable then we have a serious prob in our hands. However its better failing wille trying then dont do anything at all. In the amphib case the bigest prob is that we know so lilte about some of them, some times what it takes to breed them is something simple, the prob is figuring out what that is.
>>Bearded Dragons (Pogona viticeps)...
>>This lizards are only native to Australia.
>>However there are likely more Bearded Dragons hatched in captivity (outside of Australia) than inside of Australia in the wild. Most of the Bearded Dragons in the pet trade originated from animals that were purchased and imported from breeders in Germany and in the Czech Republic. Where did the Europeans get them? Most were likely smuggled out of Australia (which has blanket laws banning import and export of flora or fauna.)
>>Smuggling is not the way to go about obtaining animals...
>>However, these few smuggled Bearded Dragons have created a huge population of wonderful pets that help to educate many people who are new to reptiles.
>>What did Australia lose? It lost the ability to capitalize on legally exporting a few animals at high prices. It lost the opportunity to utilize that capital to further the research about their own herpetofauna and fund the protection of crucial habitat. It lost the chance to be the government that fostered an education for millions of people about a wonderful animal that is only native to Australia....which also happens to make a good pet. They could continue to export small number of fresh stock to insure that inbreeding is not a concern. By practicing such ideas instead of Blanket Laws that forbid Import and Export, their government would eliminate existence of a black market in Australian Wildlife.
I'm not sure that Australian conservationists would agree with that viewpoint. And certainly, you aren't suggesting that wild Bearded Dragon populations are suffering from inbreeding depression? I mean, wouldn't removing a group of them from the wild decrease the population and add to the effects of genetic drift and inbreeding depression?
HOOLY TOLEDO! WOW and it already causes inbreeding depression!
Ha Ha, oh boy...Have you any idea of how many aussi reps die during wildfires, roadkill and cane toad infestation? Many yep, if only a small fraction of thouse were cauth and used in cb programs the genetic diversity of western populations would be much better. If made causiosly removing a few wild specimens DOESANT harm a numerous population. And wild beardys are more then plentyfull...
For one thing, Australians certainly don't have to worry too much about their herpers allowing too many exotics to escape and establish feral populations.
They dont need thouse, they have more then enough cane toads
Dusty Rhoads
I mentioned the Turtle Crisis. Asian Turtles species are being wiped out by over collection...NOT over collection for the Pet Industry....but for the Table Market. Humans are eating them into extinction. This should not be considered over collection....but over predation.
)