Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I have a point I would like to make regarding herpetoculture. In defending against the arguments of anti-exotic politicians, we often say that breeding reptiles in captivity is one way to prevent the extinction of these animals. Since reptiles are disappearing across the planet, this is a very penetrating statement for someone who wants to conserve nature.

But is this really what we are doing? Let's look at the ball python, for example. Python regius has been bred en masse for decades, and this popularity has been fueled by the "production" of some very striking morphs, including albinos and leucistics. However, any biologist will tell you that such creatures cannot survive in the wild. Albinos can hardly be exposed to sunlight, or their health is threatened. Other morphs create problems as well; how on earth could a lavender ball python avoid detection by predators if its camouflage has been stripped away? Since many of these traits are recessive, the pythons' offspring wouldn't be any better off, though whether such an animal would live long enough to breed is debatable.

What I am saying is, if ball pythons were to become critically endangered in the wild, how could captive-bred individuals serve the wild populations if the vast majority of them were unable to survive in the wild? A reintroducing program would certainly be a dramatic failure if all of the captive pythons were genetically anomalous.

So is the captive breeding of such species as the ball python, corn snake, king snake, bearded dragon, and leopard gecko really giving us a reservoir of specimens in case wild populations were to become endangered? It would appear not. My point is this: perhaps it is unwise to continually be trying to "engineer" oddball reptiles simply because they are more visually pleasing to someone who cannot appreciate reptiles otherwise. Instead, why not concentrate on exploring "normal" animals for all their ordinary glory? Is a normal ball python really all that bad? And when the wolves come knocking at our doors with things like HR 669, can we really say that professional breeders are aiding conservation?

Best regards,
Pinstripe

Every animal bred in captivity is in a sense one less taken from the wild. It is not that we are building an ark, but that we keep desirable animals readily available to the public that might otherwise turn to importers that are taking them from nature, the fact that they are a "morph" is only a distraction to that point.

Also, lets face it, having animals to put back is a moot point if there is no place to put them back into. The real threat for extinction is habitat loss, not herping.
-----
___________________________
Herp Conservation Unlimited

If people really learn from their mistakes, I should be like the smartest guy in the world

"Also, lets face it, having animals to put back is a moot point if there is no place to put them back into. The real threat for extinction is habitat loss, not herping."

I said the same thing on one of the other forums.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

To piggyback on Lance’s comment, hardly anyone is putting forth the argument that herpetoculture (= captive breeding) is somehow stemming the tide against extinction. There are a few legitimate instances where captive breeding programs, under the auspices of zoos or other institutions, produce animals for repatriation to the wild (e.g., Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs at the San Diego Zoo). Typically, these captive assurance colonies are comprised of individuals removed from a particular population (same gene pool). Hobbyist herpetoculture has nothing to do with this aside from moral and (sometimes) financial support. I would argue that, instead, herpetoculture has the potential to engage large numbers of its participants/practitioners in developing knowledge about and appreciation for living amphibians and reptiles. Theoretically, this should lead to political support for conserving wild things and the places they live. In a time where ever-increasing numbers of citizens are utterly disconnected from the natural world, anything that can forge such connections is worth supporting, IMHO.

Cheers,

Bob

Thank you guys for the responses -- I wanted to see if I could get ahold on an issue that's been bothering me for a while. It just seems to me that all this genetic mutation might not be such a great idea if people lose their appreciation for the wild animals.

Best regards,
pinstripe

To each his own. If you don't like it, that's your call, do not participate. Making your point, however, is worthy and I appreciate your input. You seem a bit put off by what others are doing in the herp trade. Be aware that though they are the minority, there are people that agree with you on this topic. I believe that if the poop ever did hit the fan, and by some crazy reason we did need to come up with some stock, I would bet money that we could find stuff 'close enough' to call it good for recovery purposes (depending on the species).
-----
Brad Alexander

FullSpectrumHerps.com

Locality, locality, locality

Many folks only breed local specific normal herps. Most people on this forum have normal locality specifics and so do pyro, zonata, klaub, suboc, baird, pic, lep, mitchelli and rosy boa folks. True these are not exotics but not all folks are doing the recessive morphs or exotics. And these species are exotics to the rest of the world. If Mexico would open again I am sure many here would love to get in some new species, locales and blood.

This is why we need a legal pathway to conduct our business locally, nationally and globally. This includes wild harvest and commerce (the life blood of the world economy). Some folks chose to say that their animals are non-locality because of laws prohibting the sale of wild caught or to avoid the negativity some throw about. Some prefer to do just captive born stuff but with all the current and future habitat destruction around existing cities and with the negligable effects to populations from rural collecting, sustainable harvest should be encouraged and legal pathways established. This is why all herps that are not endangered or threatened should be allowed to be sustainably harvested in some numbers and sold, kept or whatever. Most herp species are not bred in captivity just the popular, easy and financially viable ones. This needs improvement, encouragement and legal pathways. The hobbyist assumes the financial burden of maintaining these species in captivity and commerce insures they are able to be bred and sold to expand and spread the captive population globally. Gene pools are preserved in captivity long after the habitat turns into a Walmart or a sub-division. That is conservation and it costs the tax payers as a whole nothing!

Welkerii