Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I know many of you here would like to do more to help the environment. But its sometimes difficult to know what to do, or find the time. Last year I signed up for Audubon Advisory and have found it a great way to keep tabs on the latest government assault on the environment and react effectively to it. Basically, once you sign up, you get occasional email alerts that you can just "Reply" to. This sends a pre-written email to the important people involved.

If your interested just go to this web site to sign up:
http://www.capitolconnect.com/audubon/

There were some great victories for wildlife this year. Particularly an increase in funding for State Conservation Programs - money that goes to each state to help protect wildlife and wildlands. The gov't increased spending on this program by $10 million. You can check with your state's natural resources agency to see if they have earmarked any of this money for herp protection. It would be great if you do so to post what you've found out here.

States sometimes thnk converting wildlands to, essentially, game farms for huntable and fishable wildlife. If managed this way other species such as herps sometimes suffer. For example, some agencies "revitalize" lakes by dumping chemicals into them that dissolves all oxygen, kills everything. They then restock with game fish. Obviously this is very destructive to wildlife in general.

Have a great new year! I hope we can all work a little harder this year for the dwindling wildlife and wildlands of the world!

Joe

You might want to look a litle closer before you get too involved with Audubon. My mother....who was activly involved in animal (particulary bird) rescue was a member, till Audubon came out with an anti-captive breeding policy back in the seventies. They are also responsible for the quote you now hear from PETA; "Birds are better off extinct than in a cage".
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Audubon has worked tirelessly for wildlife and wildlands in the US for decades. I, for one, really appreciate that. They are one of the too few groups that work for non-game wildlife. I'm not at all afraid of getting "too involved with them" they're not a cult after all!

The email alert they send out doesn't have anything to do with captive breeding. They are focused entirely (as far as I know) with wildlife and now, the Bush administration attack on clean air, clean water, protected natural areas. Did you look at their web site? I think they are right on in their efforts.

May I ask where you got the information about Audubon promoting extinction rather than captivity for birds? Thats a very damning attribution to just toss out with no evidence. I'm not denying it is true, but it seems very much out of character. If it was said I wonder by who and how long ago.

Joe

Kind of hard to produce written evidence. The source was my mother, who was an active Audubon member until they objected to the work she did (wild bird rescue). They also objected to the concept of captive breeding for possible release (into safe areas) of captive bred endangered animals to repopulate. (she was one of the founders of the Snyder Park wild Bird care center in Ft. Lauderdale). This took place in the 1970's. I do not describe them as a cult, but like many ecological organizations, it is not allways on the right side of animal issues. I don't know if their philosophy has changed in the last two decades, but it used to be more like PETA.
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Frank,

I'm confused by your post. You said earlier that Audubon was the original source of an inflammitory quote: That birds are "better off extinct that in a cage". I guess my feeling is that if you really have no idea if thats true or not, it might be more fair if you didn't say it at all. I looked and could find no evidence supporting your assertion.

Its not just Audubon, but almost every wildlife and environmental organization that advocates against captive breeding for release. I believe this is based largely on the evidence and partially because it is a "simple" solution that anti-environmental forces use to placate wildlands defenders, ie, we'll plow this habitat down but release a handful of captive bred animals in the next county - it'll be great.

We know that transplanting wildcaught rarely works, releasing captive bred works even less often. (I know there has been some successes)

Audubon is nothing like PETA, and never has been as far as I know. I don't think you should just toss that sort of comment out here with no evidence.

It amazes me how many "hobbiest" seem to feel that their "right" to keep a few captive animals is somehow more important than the health of wild populations in general. I wonder what percentage of herp hobbiests even bother to work for or donate to environment or conservation causes, or how many work to protect wild populations of herps in their state.

And to see people who are presumably fans of wildlife berate conservation groups and environmentalists here is beyond my comprehension.

Joe

Your guess would be based I think on a desire to beleave that just because an organisation professes to be ecological it allways acts in the animals best interests. If you can go back to the 1970's and pull documentation you have far better sources than I do. The quote I mentioned, I read from Audubon liturature sent to my mother. Having never heard it elsewhere (PETA was unknown back then) it is my guess that they are the origional source. In any case the origion is not important...that they said it-is. I could say more but I don't have documentation of the kind this forum demands. I do remember my mother arguing with a local Audubon rep on the phone just before she quit.
From My earliest childhood, (1950's-60's) I was involved in animal rescue...long before it became fashionable. We joined organisations that were ecology based. So we were up on the liturature of that era. but since it is not what you keep, I cannot pull out 30-40 year old letters and mailings. Nor could I tape phone calls. So you can assure yourself that it is just my families word against theirs.
Breeding for release has risk. We all know that My family treated and released dozens of birds that would have died captive. Some probably died. Others flew back for years to visit us.
The point to Breed/release programs is that these animals are becoming rare in the wild and not replenishing the natural breeding stock is a sure road to extinction. The loss of some released animals is more than made up by the replenishment of the species.
I do not go out of my way to bash ecological organisations. But what I was advising was to check them out before you tote their banner. I did not come on this forum to debate this. Some of them used to do valuable work...some still do.
There is a post in the Herp Law /Cites forum you might want to check out. While it is mainly a link that exposes PETA, they also have quotes, news and press releases from other Eco-groups. It might surprise you who says and does what.
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

By the way...looking back at your statement about Breed/release ""simple" solution that anti-enviromental forces use to placate wildlife defenders..." Release advocates do not justify plowing down habitats with a promise to release elsewhere. What kind of a fool statement is that? As far as the bit about captive release rearely working, I guess we never should have bothered doing so with the California Condor, wolves or the blackfooted ferret. When I talked with our local wildlife people (FLA) they said (on Indigos) That releasing snakes to replenish would alter the gene pool and that was why they were against it (personally I'd prefer Indigos to be alive with fresh genetic material introduced over extinct). My herp society has a program we are working on with Eastern Hognose (which are practicaly extinct in Dade and Broward counties thanks to Bufo marinus). As I said, there are casualties...But if you do nothing...they become extinct anyway and gee, that's better? It kind of reminds me of those people who say never force feed a starving snake because it stresses them. Gee dead is a lot more stressful...
I don't have a lot of money...But I have put my time, my expenses, as well as my physical safety into many years of wildlife rescue. Some times that has even meant being physically assaulted by people who were stealing or killing snakes in their habitat. I did it for no reward except the satisfaction that I did something to help. I'll weigh mine (and my families) commitment against any one that sits at home and writes a check.
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

I did not mean to say anything negative about wildlife re-habbers at all. I was working with a wildlife renabilitation center myself not long ago. We dealt with all sorts of wildlife, even the "unloved" ones equally - coyotes, crows - even sparrows.

My point was only about Audubon's stance on wildlife captive breeding for release. Without knowing the specifics, my suggestion was they might be against it because most times it does not work (and again, I know there are some exceptions). I suggested to that they may be concerned that the idea captive breeding for release might be misused by developers for example as a simple solution to complex problems.

Anyway, Audubon doesn't have anything to do with captive breeding as far as I know, and they do a great job working to protect our natural heritage. I'm sorry your family had a falling out with them locally 30 or 40 years ago, but I don't think that fact should make anyone wary of working with them today.

Joe

By the way...looking back at your statement about Breed/release ""simple" solution that anti-enviromental forces use to placate wildlife defenders..." Release advocates do not justify plowing down habitats with a promise to release elsewhere. What kind of a fool statement is that? As far as the bit about captive release rearely working, I guess we never should have bothered doing so with the California Condor, wolves or the blackfooted ferret. When I talked with our local wildlife people (FLA) they said (on Indigos) That releasing snakes to replenish would alter the gene pool and that was why they were against it (personally I'd prefer Indigos to be alive with fresh genetic material introduced over extinct). My herp society has a program we are working on with Eastern Hognose (which are practicaly extinct in Dade and Broward counties thanks to Bufo marinus). As I said, there are casualties...But if you do nothing...they become extinct anyway and gee, that's better? It kind of reminds me of those people who say never force feed a starving snake because it stresses them. Gee dead is a lot more stressful...
I don't have a lot of money...But I have put my time, my expenses, as well as my physical safety into many years of wildlife rescue. Some times that has even meant being physically assaulted by people who were stealing or killing snakes in their habitat. I did it for no reward except the satisfaction that I did something to help. I'll weigh mine (and my families) commitment against any one that sits at home and writes a check.
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

The site is animalscam.com

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."