Another idiot gets caught
- Thread starter FLYGUY
- Start date
aquapimp
New member
I'd venture to say that more has been learned about geckos (and other exotics) by the private sector than by most accredited zoological institutions.
I think smuggling geckos for herpetoculture (regardless of economics) is decidedly different than say... poaching rhinos for their horns.
For those so opposed to the "morals" regarding the smugglers, please keep in mind that demand does indeed contribute to the reasons for risking prosecution.
Simply posting all these great photos of Australian taxa on forums such as this helps to fuel the desire to work with "unobtainable" species.
I guess as keepers of Australian species, we are all "guilty" of every accusation listed to some extent.
I think smuggling geckos for herpetoculture (regardless of economics) is decidedly different than say... poaching rhinos for their horns.
For those so opposed to the "morals" regarding the smugglers, please keep in mind that demand does indeed contribute to the reasons for risking prosecution.
Simply posting all these great photos of Australian taxa on forums such as this helps to fuel the desire to work with "unobtainable" species.
I guess as keepers of Australian species, we are all "guilty" of every accusation listed to some extent.
DDReptiles
New member
Would that involve not working with the animals? You would have to see that it is very likely your animals are decendants of smuggled animals (I don't know any zoo bringing levis in ;-) ) so therefore you are still benefitting from the results of a theif. Can't just turn a blind-eye.
Not trying to attack you Ethan ;-) I am in the same boat as you..if not more guilty!! (picturing the cops pulling up and handcuffing me :lol
Edit, I figure I will post my overall view of this trade.....if there was someway that I could give back offspring to supplement wild populations I would do it in a heartbeat. I am much more interested in learning about the species and trying to help wild populations through captive breeding programs than I am about becoming rich by exploiting them. Unfortunately there isn't any program that would allow to do this.
Last edited:
Justin
New member
Excellent point.
aquapimp
New member
Am I erroneous in assuming that letting some specimens enter the hobby (smuggled or legally obtained) is nowheres near as deleterious to a species or ecosystem as building highways, decimating forests, depleting ozone, etc. etc?
I would imagine that most of us posting are driving cars, burning fossil fuels, eating meat, reproducing and other "negative" activities that have the potential to impact wild populations of Gekkonids and all other life forms.
I would imagine that most of us posting are driving cars, burning fossil fuels, eating meat, reproducing and other "negative" activities that have the potential to impact wild populations of Gekkonids and all other life forms.
Last edited:
DDReptiles
New member
I think everyone would agree to that, but one also has to realize that the undeground animal trade (granted reptiles (geckos specifically) are probably a small piece of the pie) is the 2nd largest illegal market in the world...after the drug trade.
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
My point is that I've done my best to purchase animals that are cb and from a cb source (when were talking aussies). I have no way to trace these bloodlines back to where they originated from. Not all aussie herps came from smuggled animals. Dr. Dan just a few years ago mentioned that he had a way to legally import/export from Aus. for zoological institutions. If you do a search you can probably find the thread. In any case, hypocrite or not for owning animals whos 20 year old relatives may or may not have been smuggled, does not justify current, ongoing, smuggling of animals.
And @ Tom's picture statement...come on man...saying that posting photos of rare geckos justifies smuggling of rare geckos is like saying that posting pictures of nice boobs would justify rape. Nor does the supply and demand analogy hold up. There's a demand for heroin...doesn't mean that it's right to provide it. There's a demand for assassins...doesn't justify murder.
The end simply does not justify the means. I'll man up and accept the title as a hypocrite if that really makes any difference. But as I said, it still doesn't justify ongoing smuggling.
And @ Tom's picture statement...come on man...saying that posting photos of rare geckos justifies smuggling of rare geckos is like saying that posting pictures of nice boobs would justify rape. Nor does the supply and demand analogy hold up. There's a demand for heroin...doesn't mean that it's right to provide it. There's a demand for assassins...doesn't justify murder.
The end simply does not justify the means. I'll man up and accept the title as a hypocrite if that really makes any difference. But as I said, it still doesn't justify ongoing smuggling.
Justin
New member
I don't think we are talking justification but the fact that you buy Aussie geckos from highly likely smuggled descendants perpetuates more being smuggled. If you were that against it you wouldn't buy them.
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
But that's simply not true. There's plenty of levis levis here. There's plenty of amyae here. There's nobody wasting time smuggling those. And my purchase of a captive bred levis doesn't perpetuate smuggling of anything. That's like saying my purchase of a dog perpetuates smuggling of rare wolf species.
DDReptiles
New member
Just before someone goes on a goose chase again,
I tried this to every extent possible last year, numerous emails to every email address I could find on Queensland EPA website, including the email Dr. Dan provided. I also talked to him extensively about it when I visited his place last year as to whether it was really possible. Granted it was a year or so after he originally posted the thread, there was no easy way to do it. There was one page on the QEPA website that I did find that mentioned exporting of live animals but the email address asscociated with it didn't work when tried.
I know it can be done, as Baltimore zoo got some fresh australian stuff for that new exhibit they have....but when I tried it was like trying to paddle up a class 5 rapids.
Last edited:
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
I certainly wasn't trying to imply that there was an easy way to do it. But only meant to imply that it has and can be done legally and that not all aussie animals in the country are a result of smuggling.
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
Maybe so but that doesn't mean that my owning of aussie animals perpetuates that. In fact, it would decrease it. By captive breeding, I'm decreasing said demand for a wild caught animal to the general public. The people that would purchase these smuggled bloodlines knowingly would be those that are perpetuating. I'm perfectly happy with the bloodlines that I have and would not knowingly purchase a smuggled animal.
Justin
New member
I'm not imlying you would intentionally buy a smuggled animal Ethan, sorry if you thought I was.
You have to consider that there are new bloodlines introduced to the hobby with or without your knowledge in order to reinvigorate stagnant genepools of amyae, levis levis etc.
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
I understand what you're saying Justin. And it's probably true. But that doesn't make every owner of an Aussie gecko a hypocrite if they don't like the idea of smuggling herps. That's all that my point is on that particular subject.
This topic obviously has many different facets (as well as many different opinions). It's nice that we can all have an adult conversation about it without anyone blowing up or freaking out. Good job on everyone's part for making that happen. Thank you all for helping to make (and keep) GU a place where we can have these sorts of debates on an adult level.
DDReptiles
New member
:lol: I hear Pseudothecadactylus poop works as a counteracter
WingedWolfPsion
New member
I see both of sides of the issue--I truly do. I think that conservationists are often making a huge mistake in barring any exportation of endangered species. I think captive breeding programs should deliberately sell animals to established and knowledgeable private reptile breeders, and secure the species on a global scale, as well as working to prevent illegal trafficking and protecting habitat, and reintroducing animals to bolster wild populations.
Proliferating an endangered species by selling it into private collections across the globe is being done with plants, successfully. Take the Wollemi pine--you can buy a tree species that's been around for 200 million years, and is currently represented in the wild by a mere 100 adult specimens in a secluded valley. The Wollemi pine will not go extinct now. If a raging fire takes out the entire valley, if a meteorite strikes it and destroys the entire habitat, Wollemi pines will continue to thrive. Proceeds from the sale of the trees is going to fund the protection of the valley and conservation efforts. Imagine new reptile bloodlines being offered through captive-breeding programs run by conservation organizations, and the funds from the sale of offspring going back to help protect the habitats of the animals being bred. This is the way it should be done--because it works.
I think that no species is so secure as it is once it's become widely captive bred for the reptile hobby. However, I think that many smugglers are raging idiots. They take animals from the wild without regard to the status or stability of the wild population, they take as many as they can get, and they do not transport them in a fashion that is likely to result in their continued health.
In his underwear? Seriously? How many animals died, being transported in that fashion?
So no, supporting the efforts of smugglers is not an ethical thing to do. Continuing to captive-breed species that are already here is, whether they were initially smuggled or not. As has been pointed out, you can't put them back, but you can make sure that the number undoubtedly lost in the process didn't die in vain, and that the species will be preserved even if wild conservation efforts fail. Which they will in some cases, because habitat loss is so thorough, fast, and impossible to stop in countries with many poor and hungry people, and political unrest.
We're losing species at an alarming rate--the illegal pet trade is responsible for accelerating some of those losses, without any doubt. It should never be thought that smugglers are doing a good thing. But I don't believe anyone should feel they're supporting smugglers by keeping species that were once smuggled in--if you didn't buy the animal from the smuggler, then you're not the one supporting him. The species benefits from having a reservoir population in captivity.
Proliferating an endangered species by selling it into private collections across the globe is being done with plants, successfully. Take the Wollemi pine--you can buy a tree species that's been around for 200 million years, and is currently represented in the wild by a mere 100 adult specimens in a secluded valley. The Wollemi pine will not go extinct now. If a raging fire takes out the entire valley, if a meteorite strikes it and destroys the entire habitat, Wollemi pines will continue to thrive. Proceeds from the sale of the trees is going to fund the protection of the valley and conservation efforts. Imagine new reptile bloodlines being offered through captive-breeding programs run by conservation organizations, and the funds from the sale of offspring going back to help protect the habitats of the animals being bred. This is the way it should be done--because it works.
I think that no species is so secure as it is once it's become widely captive bred for the reptile hobby. However, I think that many smugglers are raging idiots. They take animals from the wild without regard to the status or stability of the wild population, they take as many as they can get, and they do not transport them in a fashion that is likely to result in their continued health.
In his underwear? Seriously? How many animals died, being transported in that fashion?
So no, supporting the efforts of smugglers is not an ethical thing to do. Continuing to captive-breed species that are already here is, whether they were initially smuggled or not. As has been pointed out, you can't put them back, but you can make sure that the number undoubtedly lost in the process didn't die in vain, and that the species will be preserved even if wild conservation efforts fail. Which they will in some cases, because habitat loss is so thorough, fast, and impossible to stop in countries with many poor and hungry people, and political unrest.
We're losing species at an alarming rate--the illegal pet trade is responsible for accelerating some of those losses, without any doubt. It should never be thought that smugglers are doing a good thing. But I don't believe anyone should feel they're supporting smugglers by keeping species that were once smuggled in--if you didn't buy the animal from the smuggler, then you're not the one supporting him. The species benefits from having a reservoir population in captivity.
I find points of agreement with both sides of this debate. In the end, however, I think it comes down to all of us being too greedy, and almost feeling a sense of entitlement to own these animals in the first place. We are all guilty to some extent. It's an all too common scenario...leopard geckos become a bore, I want some Naultinus or Hoplodactylus. Zebra finches are "so yesterday", I must have a Spix's macaw. Similar cases play out every day in the "exotic' animal hobby. We grow tired of the same old same old, and we desire something a little more exotic...something a little rarer. I may get angry criticism for this post, but dare I say that I almost wished HR669 had passed. I think things have gone too far, and if the last exotics I owned were the ones currently in my personal collection than so be it. As far as morals. How many of you would turn down the chance to acquire a few Saltuarius moritzi, or Phyllurus kabikabi (two Aussie natives described as recently as 2008)? Hmmmm? I wholly agree that seeing images of new, exciting species fuels demand to obtain them, and that truly disturbs me, but at the same time we the general public would never be made aware of the amazing biodiversity we share our planet with otherwise.
In this day and age we can obtain aardvarks to zebras, fossas and lemurs, rhinos (yes I've seen them available), big cats and rare marmosets, Boelen's python, gazelles, cassowaries, hyenas, king cobras, radiated tortoises, virtually any fish, etc, etc, etc. I think the line as to what is acceptable to be "owned" as a "pet" was crossed long long ago. Can anyone who owns any of the Naultinus, Hoplodactylus, and Saltuarius spp. honestly with a clean conscience tell me that they would bother with them in the first place if there was zero chance of a profit? Kudos if you can honestly say yes! I love this forum and geckos in general, but I'll always be more conservation oriented than anything else, and I just think everything has gone too far, and needs to change drastically. I'll end my ramble here, but as I stated earlier it just seems as though we have this arrogant sense of entitlement with ownership of these animals, like it's a Constitutional right or something.
In this day and age we can obtain aardvarks to zebras, fossas and lemurs, rhinos (yes I've seen them available), big cats and rare marmosets, Boelen's python, gazelles, cassowaries, hyenas, king cobras, radiated tortoises, virtually any fish, etc, etc, etc. I think the line as to what is acceptable to be "owned" as a "pet" was crossed long long ago. Can anyone who owns any of the Naultinus, Hoplodactylus, and Saltuarius spp. honestly with a clean conscience tell me that they would bother with them in the first place if there was zero chance of a profit? Kudos if you can honestly say yes! I love this forum and geckos in general, but I'll always be more conservation oriented than anything else, and I just think everything has gone too far, and needs to change drastically. I'll end my ramble here, but as I stated earlier it just seems as though we have this arrogant sense of entitlement with ownership of these animals, like it's a Constitutional right or something.
Riverside Reptiles
Administrator (HMFIC)
These last two posts have brought the element of conservation into the discussion which adds an entire other can of worms to the conversation because it involves not just the smuggling and illegal side of our hobby but the legal side too. This could end up being a very long thread. So, I'm going to move it from the New Zealand forum into the more appropriate Ethics and Politics forum. Let's please keep this thread civil and at an adult level. Any newbies checking this out please take note as to how we relate to each other around here. Anyone not able to act as an adult will be removed from the conversation. Thanks again to everyone so far for keeping it real and keeping it adult at the same time.