Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Has anyone seen this website? http://www.ecodigital.com.ar/Biodiversidad folder/CuriyuIng.htm
I came across it a while ago, interested in that I hadn't heard of any researchers I know doing a recent poulation estimate on notaeus.

I quickly read through it, mentally filing the repeated use of
"sustainable management" as a typical catch phrase. I read it a couple times, not really sure what exactly the stated purpose of the study was, besides gathering DNA.

I went back to it, and this time clicked on the photos - argh! Since when do you have to kill and skin the animal to get DNA? We managed to get the blood of several hundred animals, and didn't kill any...

I can't tell if this is lazy research using DNA as an excuse to do graduate work/get funding, or if the people are being funded by an institution that wants to sell the skins and they decided, what the heck, let's study the DNA and call it research so we can get more funding...either way, when I re-read the summary it sounded a lot more like BS.

One thing I know is, there is not a high demand for notaeus skins (as they try and say there is) - any more, luckily, so why create, or fuel a larger market for them? What about CITES?

Secondly, I have written a paper on conservation and the anaconda, and the conclusions were profoundly obvious that non-consumptive use (="use" that does not constitute killing the animal) in the form of land preservation and ecotoursim are a lot more feasible, and profitable, to locals than hunting/farming Eunectes ( whose skin gets lots of scars the more it grows, from prey injuries, one of many reasons consumptive use is not lucrative).

There's a reason they don't describe their research well - obviously they are getting money for the skins (and it's not those dudes in the photos collecting them that are getting most of the money).

If you like your yellows alive and well, feel free to write CERC, at Columbia University, that is supporting the research, and ask them why they are supporting such poor science and calling it conservation? How can they justify killing all the specimens when they are saying "population is unknown,and that's why we are sudying them" - rather ass-backwards logic, if you ask me.

This sort of acceptance of killing large numbers of animals in the name if science opens up a real Pandora's box, other institutions like to follow suit, especially ones in latin America, especially when they can point to the U.S. and say "they do it".

R

` Renee, you definitely got my attention. I can't get the site to open, though. I definitely want to learn more about this.
` Do you have any other web address for this information? Also, do they have an English version, porque mi espanol falta mucho.
Rich
-----

Yeah Renee that was a dead link. I too would like to see the site you are refering to. Please re-post.

Arik

Well, here it is again, correctly BUT I have just tried it several times, via several search engines giving me the same address, and I too could not bring it up. Perhaps the web site is down - the timing to that is a bit odd, though.

http://www.ecodigital.com.ar/Biodiversidad folder/CuriyuIngles.htm

Supposedly the Spanish version is the same, without the "inlges" at the end - but still no luck, right now.
Maybe it will come back up? Even the search for curiyu gave me the same dysfunctional site.

Anyway, it was a rather vague summary of some Conservation genetics to be done last year, with the genetic analysis to be done at CERC, Columbia University (various of the Wildlife Conservation Society people are faculty at CERC, including the fellow who helped get the Venezuela anaconda project get funded.)

When you click on "fotos", it shows a few, primarily of snake collection, and over a dozen skins already collected "for DNA". It is all a bit strange, to be posting that on the web under "conservation" - it's not as if the trade of skins is a new, hot idea that could change the Argentinian economy... There was a bigger market for notaeus skins in the 80's, which is greatly reduced now thanks to CITES. This is why a photo of a bunch of collected skins for U.S. data analysis is very odd - it took YEARS - 7 - just to get the blood from our snakes shipped legally to the U.S. for genetic analysis.

Sorry. Guess I'll try it again later...

Renee

Ok, not that this helps, but when I send the post, the website comes up different than the typed version.

Here is the website ONE more time, basically there is a " ", with no spaces between biodiversidad and folder...this time I'll leave off the http:// so it fits differently (I know, makes little sense, especially if THIS post looks different than how it is typed...)

www.ecodigital.com.ar/Biodiversidad folder/Programa

and

www.ecodigital.com.ar/Biodiversidad folder/CuriyuIng.htm

OR just go to the search engine www.dogpile.com and look up curiyu and CERC....

R

Ok, you learn something every day: after making the same mistake only a dozen times, now I know that when you type the symbol for 'percent', followed by the typed number twenty, it comes out as a (blank) space in the posted message on the web.

Is this common knowledge? It took me long enough just to figure out what LOL means - which I'm not doing at the moment...

R

I hope they were not sacrificing these notaeus in the name of science, and I had a little different take on the situation. I hope I am not wrong with this observation. Several studies on P. reticulatus and the P. curtus complex in Indonesia found, unfortunately, that the most efficient way to obtain tissue samples for DNA analysis and inspect large numbers of specimens was to go to the snake skin processing camps where all the fresh caught snakes were coming in from that localized area. These snakes were unfortunately going to be killed anyway and they knew there was nothing they could do about it, so they decided to use the situation in a way that the scientific community could at least get something back out of a bad situation. It looked to me that from the photos on this site that this is what could have been occurring here. I have seen films and photos of these camps, and this looked like a typical third world skin operation. I could be wrong, but I hope this was the case. I obviously would not like to see these snakes killed for any reason, but it would be unconscionable to kill large numbers of these anacondas strictly for scientific research. And in an issue related to the skin trade, I know several countries in South America are in trouble with CITES agreements and I believe Argentina is one of them. I ‘m not sure, however, what the protection status is for notaeus in Argentina, but it would be interesting to find out. I am in total agreement with you in that the non-consumptive use of these animals is much more profitable to the local community than their harvesting.

Kelly

Redhed,
As soon as I put my thoughts to paper I am going to write to Columbia U. and ask them why did they fund a project that kills. I just recently got a yellow anaconda. I love all snakes and reptiles & amphibians in general. I'm not an expert but I do know that DNA can be collected without killing the animal. If they are killing them for skins and it is not regulated wouldn't that violate CITES. My understanding is that they are on Appendix II list. Whether they are or not it is, to me, a cruel and disgusting way to do research on such an amazing snake. To me, those that conducted the research and funded it are nothing more than butchers. I'm glad you brought this to, at least, my attention. I'm sure all the other conda keepers and lovers are glad to. And on a personal note, I love what you and your husband are and have been doing for anacondas. I have seen the shows on National Geographic, Discovery and Animal Planet. Thank you very much. STEVEN

Thanks for that, Steven.

I can only hope my (ex) husband and my work can contribute to something good along the lines of conservation. The Llanos are a herper's heaven.

I re-checked the website on notaeus "conservation genetics", it is still down.

Kelly, I would hope what you say is true, but I have serious doubts; the photos had the same guys catching live snakes, and then tagging the skins in an atypical way. They did look like locals, though, not researchers, so it appears they were hired. Hmm.

Killing animals to do research was commonplace decades and centuries ago, and although that attitude has changed somewhat, unfortunately it isn't as different as you would expect. Many scientists are either brainwashed into thinking it is necessary, or else they rationalize it so that they can continue their research and get published by the easiest means possible, the ends justifying the means, so to speak - they'll throw out some (often unsupported) statistics about how it won't effect the population, to justify it.

I don't know for sure what is going on here, but I know the idea of killing to collect information is still pretty standard in 3rd world countries, however that doesn't make it OK for a genetics lab (in the U.S.) to condone it. It is illegal to trade their skins under internationally CITES, although internally it is not highly regulated, although illegal in areas.

I know no researcher could readily justify needing an entire skin to get DNA, if that were the argument. For several years now, for example, ornithologists have been collecting DNA from birds by plucking a couple feathers and using the skin cells from the shaft. DNA can be extracted in many ways these days.

R