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

Captive breeding helps conversation simply by providing animals to the pet trade who are not wild collected or hatched from eggs collected from the wild.

As ball pythons are not endangered in the wild and if I remember correctly, still quite wild spread, they are not really in need of conservation in the wild.

There are many species of reptiles kept and bred in captivity who are seriously endangered in the wild. Most breeders of these animals are not breeding for morphs, but producing normal samples of these particular animals. Many turtles, frogs and others are actively bred in captivity to preserve the species, as they are either rare in the wild now, or very endangered.

I wouldn't say all breeders of reptiles are working towards conservation, other than providing captive bred specimens to lessen the demand for wild caught animals. Many morph breeders are looking more towards making money than preserving the wild type for future re-introduction into suitable habitat in the wild. Or simply the challenge of producing something that hasn't been done before.

There are many ways a breeder, even a morph breeder, of reptiles can help conversation. It may not just be in breeding animals which will be, or could be, reintroduced into the wild. Bringing more awareness of reptiles and how they can make wonderful pets, especially for people who like something a little different or due to allergies or space, can't keep your typical cat or dog or wish a pet that doesn't die of old age in under 10 years.

Taking part in local events to educate the public around reptiles is a very influential way for breeders and reptile keepers to enjoy their pets. Educational shows offered to schools, libraries, mall shows, etc. brings more awareness to these fine pets and help change the view that they are expendable and its perfectly fine to have them go extinct in the wild. Often its amphibians who feel the effects of pollution and climate change far more than the cute fuzzy mammal or bird.

Conservation is more than just breeding animals to reintroduce back into the wild...it is also education, providing animals for purchase who have not been collected from the wild and increasing interest and knowledge of the hobby to others. If nobody is willing to buy the wild caught normal adult ball python when there are plenty of captive hatched and captive bred/hatched normals or even morphs available for the same price or a little more babies, free of internal/external parasites and disease, not to mention the inherent stress on a wild animal to be in captivity...animals won't be collected from the wild. Even the demand for captive hatched babies imported out of Africa is becoming less, despite the chances of getting something unusual from these babies...but ball pythons are rather unique in the fact they have such a wild variety of morphs available, many of which are naturally occuring, like pastels, spiders, mojaves etc which will survive fine in the wild.
-----
PHLdyPayne

I think you are confusing two different things.

HR669 would have eliminated pet ownership in a single generation. It was anti pet legislation, not focused on conservation. The support by R. Bordallo of this horrible bill, was based on the introduction of the brown snake to Guam. Oh yeah, HSUS gave her an award as a politician of the year! Brown snakes were not pets in people living rooms with names and were not part of families. The were "stowaways" in aircraft tires and were an accidental introduction. Anti pet organizations like PETA (group responsible for the deaths of more pet animals than any other organization in the country) and H$U$, who do nothing for animals anywhere, sponsor legislation like that to foster their selfish agenda of no animals for food, experimentation, entertainment (circuses and Zoos) and NO PETS.

Hobby and commercial breeding has to be split into two types. Species preservation and selective breeding. NO, hypotrans would not survive in nature and I do not kid myself when I produce them that I am saving the species. HR669, would have affected zoos and private breeders who, in fact do breed reptiles and amphibians for species preservation. If you ever go to the San Diego zoo, notice the number of signs indication that this species only exists in captivity. Your sponsors of bills like HR669 and the python ban, H$U$ and PETA really are not interested in the animals. WE now have the python ban looming. The Bermese python was the issue (although they arent and all evidence points to that), but thanks to special interest groups, lets add boas and Deseanseans Anaconda. My understanding is there is not even a zoo specimine of Deseanseans Anaconda in the united states. Don't quote me on the spelling. So why were they added? Pressure from special interest groups.

So can we say that breeders are saving the species, yes we can, but not all of them. These bills are based on very flawed logic and misrepresentation of the facts. And for the most part, they do not distinguish between breeding for species preservation and morphs. Beacause legislation is not written by legislators, but by special interest groups, the line is blurred. The invasive species bills are based on the random number of 6 billion dollars in damage annually as a result of the introduction of invasive species, focused at the pet trade. Here is a little fact that no one talks about. Most of those invasive species are federally funded, deliberate introductions of non native species. Kudzu is always brought up...introduced by the US govenment to aid in the prevention of soil erosion. Yes your tax dollars paid for that. That is one of dozens. Florida spends 60 million in the persute of the elimination of a South American tree that up until about 5 years ago was sold for landscaping and was planted in yards all over Florida.

What is my point. Don't lump our politicians being bullied or bribed by H$U$ and PETA, animal rights group who want to take away your right to own a pet and make millions for themselves in the process, breeders who enjoy breeding animals and creating new morphs, and people who are trying to save the species we are responsible for destroying in the same bowl.

I think the new trailer for WhaleWars, clearly an animal right endevor, says it all.

"It is not about whales....it is about 72 die-hards on a mission".

That is the core of animal rights in a nutshell......the hell with the animals, we want our money and 15 minutes of fame.
-----
www.moonstonedragons.com

No ones pet is ever going to be released back to the wild.

But, exotic pets make us aware of and appreciate species we may otherwise misunderstand and fear. Education is the key, and captive bred reptiles have educated millions.

This will lead to their conservation in the wild.