Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Hi, i know what diet you give them, the humidity which is around 60%, day time temp which is 85 and then basking temp which is around 95, and that they are aborial (sp) and you can house a 1.2 in a tank that is about 5hx3wx3l if they are compatable. What i dont know is, is where you can get healthy parasite free PTS. Where can you get Pathos plants (sp). Also i posted a message below saying that PTS have a very similar diet to uromastyx, that doesn't mean the exact same diet, and that doesn't mean i think they have the same enviormental needs. My statement ment that they both need a variety dark leafy greens. Just want to let all of you know that i know this is a tropical lizard, lol.
-----
Mike
1.1.1 maliensis (Spike, Marshmellow, Hummer)
1.0 acanthinurus-werneri (Mongas)
0.1 ornata (Chubs)
0.1 Pit Bull/German Shephard/Lab/ect. mix (Kodak) - looks like an over grown toco bell dog.

Uromastyx Pics

Hi Mike. The temps you listed are on the high side. I would say that you want low 80s for your ambient daytime temp and high 80s for your basking spot. Much hotter than 88 or so and my skinks will avoid the basking spot entirely.

Pothos (Epipremnum aureum), aka Devil's Ivy is pretty easy to find at most US nurseries. Hardware mega-stores like Lowe's or Home Depot have them in stock year-round. Just make sure you clean the leaves thoroughly before feeding them to the skink, as you have no idea what cleaning agents, pesticides, etc. may be on the leaves. If you plan on putting the entire plant in with your animal it's a good idea to replace the potting soil that it comes with. You want to use soil with no perlite and no vermiculite. These can be accidentally ingested by the skink and are not digestible.

As for where to get a PTS - That's a tough question. They breed infrequently (once a year or once every other) and have few offspring, so there are no captive breeders that have PTS constantly available. You just need to start looking at the classifieds and asking around. Find out who has bred them in the past and is planning to breed again. Look for rescues or adoptions, etc.

I do not advise buying a wild caught specimen, even if it does seem healthy. The overcollection of these animals for the pet trade is one of the reasons they're in trouble in the wild and there are no conservation programs on the islands that I'm aware of that would make sustainable collection possible. Protect the wild populations by buying captive bred individuals.

-Z

Z,

There are no more imports of Corucia; thus how can the wild populations be affected by purchasing the very few still available on the market ??? You seem to be running on a premise that Corucia are adversely affected by the reptile trade only. Actually, It is too bad that aren't being allowed in. It may be the only future they have. The Solomon forests are being denuded at an alarming rate! There will soon be no intact old-growth forests left for this species to inhabit. I'm surprised your not aware of this, but there many references to this for you to research since you would no doubt not take my word for value. Also they is quite a market for food on this species. Even if they are no longer shipped to the markets in Taipei, they still will be consumed at home. Actually, since the Natives there cannot export Corucia overseas to either reptile fanciers or the food market, They may just sell them locally for food as they are considered a delicacy in this region.

Best Regards,
Jean

The ban took place last fall. Any WC animals available are long term captives that were held back. They were probably released from dealers frustrated by the fact that there is no quick profit in so unprolific a breeder.

Liz

n/p

There are a few reasons why I feel that it’s counterproductive to buy wild-caught Corucia.
The first reason is that I don’t believe that the current ban is permanent. The following is largely speculation, as no one seems to be able to figure out who the ban came from or the nature of it. But I believe it’s fairly reasonable speculation. What we do know is that any current ban is not imposed by the IUCN or the US, so I assume it comes from the Solomon Islands. Since they currently have no government to speak of, the Australians are the most likely suspects. Corucia are still listed on appendix 2 of CITES, making them legal to collect and sell, so the IUCN would have no reason to ban export. Of course, since the S.I. are not signatories to CITES, they wouldn’t have to comply anyway. The US has not banned importation. For this to happen the USFWS would have to place a notice in the Federal Register that they were imposing a ban, usually at the behest of the IUCN. This hasn’t happened. So that means that the current shortage of WC Corucia on the market is most likely a result of an export ban. The timing of such a ban coincides neatly with the military presence of Australian troops in the Solomon Islands to stabilize the government. The Australian government imposing an export ban makes sense, as they are well-known for not allowing export of any of the native fauna of Australia. Once they depart however, the local S.I. government will be free to do as it wishes in terms of export and import of Corucia. There will be no reason for the trade not to resume. Any purchase of WC Corucia indicates to S.I. exporters that there will be a market for more specimens once the ban is lifted.
The second reason I oppose purchase of WC animals is that the current ban is imperfect. I believe it was just 2 weeks ago that someone pointed out an ad for a new shipment of Corucia. Animals are still getting through, whether on the black-market or from some exemption to a ban. Since it is almost impossible to tell a long-term captive from a fresh import a buyer can’t be certain they are not buying a new import when they buy WC. Even worse, there is no way to tell the difference between a legally WC animal and one that was imported through a black market. This circumvents any controls that may be in place to limit export.
The last reason is that any purchase of a WC animal that is not being sustainably harvested promotes the unsustainable collection of other species. Corucia are a threatened species. Current harvest levels are unsustainable. When you buy a WC animal you are saying “Your practices are okay with me” to the exporter, and you provide no incentive to create sustainable practices.

Someone made a point that by purchasing WC Corucia we may be saving them from going extinct. In the extreme, this is true. However, by buying WC at this point (or when they become available again) we are contributing to their demise in the wild. Yes, many conservation programs do have captive breeding as a component. But captive breeding programs are a last resort measure, usually triggered when population numbers fall below some critical threshold (usually 100 individuals). Corucia are nowhere near this stage. Another component of captive breeding programs for conservation purposes is that they are undertaken with the intent to re-introduce the species to all or part of it’s range some time in the future (even if that future is very distant). This means that care is taken to protect local variation (for instance, not breeding individuals from different islands together), and to maintain careful breeding records and genetic management of captive populations. All of this is outside the scope of the hobbyist.

So what are we doing when we buy WC? Well, we’re further reducing the wild populations (that are also reduced by logging and consumption) and more quickly bringing the species to a point where it will be critically endangered and disappear from the wild.
If your conservation goal is continued existence of Corucia, full stop, then buying WC is definitely a good plan. However, if your conservation goal is continued existence of the species in the wild, your money is better spent on supporting in situ conservation efforts by groups such as WWF or Conservation International.

Sorry this is so long, but I wanted to be certain to be clear and to cover the major issues. I know there’s much more that could be discussed, but I think I’ve taken up my share of space for now!

-Z

Well said, I love to read rationaly written forum posts. WC vs CB/CB can be a difficult topic to discuss, as there are many strong opinions out there.
cheers, Jess b

Diversity would be non-existant. Severe genetic problems would arise from inbreeding.

For Corucia 100 might be a low number, considering the genetic diversity they appear to have based on geographical phenotypic variation. However, that's just a standard number that gets used alot, mostly for mammal and bird species. I don't know that anyone has really looked at reptile species. However, the basics of genetic health are the same.

For an interesting discussion of the topic take a look at "Conservation Biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective" edited by Soule and Wilcox. Pages 157-164. If you're interested and can't find a copy I might be able to scan it and email it to you.

-Z

Hi Jean. After posting a very long message below, I realized that I still hadn't really addressed the issues you brought up. I'll attempt to do that now, and I'll try to be a bit less long-winded.

I am aware that loss of old-growth forests and use of Corucia as bushmeat are also threats to wild populations. However, I don't see this as a reason to purchase WC animals. I’d like to break my reasoning down into 2 categories; logging and consumption as bushmeat.

Logging will continue whether we import Corucia or not. There is a chance that by creating a market for non-timber forest products (like flora and fauna that are forest obligates) we can create an incentive to sustainably manage the resources. However, for a system like that to work you need 2 things that the Solomons don’t currently have; a stable government with the authority and the ability to regulate resource use, and buy-in from the local people. Buy-in can be created if there is financially more to gain from the exploitation of the non-timber products than from timber. An adequate political situation is much harder to come by. The Solomon’s, as I’m sure you know, are years (if not decades) away from this.

As for bushmeat consumption I can’t say precisely what the situation is in S.I., but if it’s anything like the bushmeat situation in Africa or Latin America then the ban or lack thereof will make very little difference in terms of local consumption. The majority of folks who eat bushmeat do so because there are simply no other protein sources available, usually due to financial restraints. If/when trade is reopened it will make little difference, as the people who do the actual field collection do not make enough money from this work to put them in an economic class where they could afford commercially produced meat. Studies in Africa and Latin America have shown that consumption of bushmeat does not change based on the availability of the animals for export.

In addition to all of that, I'll reiterate a point I made in my other post, which is that Corucia haven't declined to the point yet that we should give up on the wild populations. Anything we do at this point to remove more of them from the wild contributes to other factors of decline and pushes the species closer to the edge.

Jean (and anyone else too), if you find the topic of sustainable use of wildlife as incredibly fascinating as I do, you may be interested in the book “Hunting for Sustainability in Tropical Forests” edited by Robinson and Bennett or “Integrating People and Wildlife for a Sustainable Future” edited by Ables and Hamre. The first one especially is very well written, is relatively up-to-date and has quite a few herp-related articles, which is rare.

Well, I think I was a bit more concise this time. Fire away!

-Z

n/p

n/p

WWF cares so little that they have a conservation program in the Solomon Islands.
So does Conservation International.
So does the Nature Conservancy.

Just because the programs don't deal specifically with Corucia doesn't mean they don't help. Any protection afforded to old-growth forests also help the skinks. Any development initiatives that help preserve the ecosystem as a whole benefits all of the species that live in it.

I have posted the link to the WWF's website. Unfortunately I can't figure out how to post more than one link, so you'll have to look the others up yourself.

-Z
Link

Yes, the are extant but they haven't done much with them either. I think that was Brian's point. Whether they have intentions for Corucia alone or the whole ecosystem is not germaine to the point. When you contact them, they show little interest. It is if they are burned out. Which considering the state of the natural world, it is understandable how one can get that way -fast. It is probably why we have lost SOOO many good Skink people.

Sincerely,
Jean

You mentioned that when you contacted them they seemed burned out. What was your experience with these organizations? (Please read that question as genuine interest, not as sarcasm). I'm surprised because I recently had a meeting with the DC chapter of TNC and they all seemed very enthusiastic and optimistic about their work. I've had the same experience at a number of wildlife conservation organizations (NWF and CI especially).

As for them not doing much, I do know that Greenpeace, at least, is seeing results. They actually have local communities producing and successfully selling sustainably harvested timber.

I don't know how successful other projects are at this time, simply because I haven't seen information about their projects outside of what they post on their websites. If you know more about what they are (or aren't) doing, please share.

I'm curious about where you get your information about conservation efforts in the Solomons from. I read journals like Herpetological Review and Conservation Biology as well as following international news (via things like NPR and CNN). But to find relevant info on the issue at hand I usually have to search the web pretty thoroughly to find anything. What is it that you're looking at that I'm not?

-Z

A very informative and respectful post Brian.

Thanks so much for your contribution to the discussion.

-Z

respond most vigorously if you downplay the seriousness the deforestation going on in the Solomons. Your an avid reader Z, How can you be missing this! I'm sorry but there is no forseeable future in the remaining forests over there. As it stands, The forests will be completely gone within 8 years. I see no miracle in stopping the Mauving brothers or other Asian Logging companies from completing what they started.
I went to great lengths awhile back to try to establish Preserves on some of the larger Solomon Islands but to no avail. The WWF and others plan no last minute step in to intercede at this time. And..The magic wand is broke. If you've acquired some good news that I've missed- please enlighten me!

Sincerely,
Brian
LCRC

Forgive my directness, but this is a most sensitive issue to me.

I don't believe that I am downplaying logging in the Solomons. It is a dire situation. In the last decades logging has been occuring at 2-3 times sustainable rates. In 1994 it was predicted that the forests would be gone within 10 years. This was predicted again in 2000. The forests are greatly diminished, but still there. Why? Programs like Greenpeace's Eco-Timber program and others are promoting sustainable harvest.

There is still a very serious threat to old growth forests in the Solomon Islands, but I don't believe that it is time yet to throw our hands in the air in defeat. Neither do the organizations that are currently on the ground working on the problem and I think they have a better perspective on it than you or I.

-Z