End the Trade?

[jojackson]

Leo,
very simply put, if people are not interested in 'natures jewels', they wont care about them either! The illegal trade is damaging, but then, so is an uncontrolled legal trade.
But if you abolish the pet trade entirely, (will never happen anyway) you diminish peoples
desire to care about conserving nature aswell.
Australia has already, for all intents, abolished the trade of fauna years ago. A zoo or similar establishment must pull off a beurocratic miracle just to import non native species.
One result of this is that its created an illegal trade in non natives.
Back to square 1.
It destroyed livelihoods and created a new class of criminal, of which I am now a member, only because I own 2 non imported, multi gen Aussy cb chams.
Its also created a desire for criminals to smuggle fauna in/out, and a vast underground of now illegal keepers, and no way to know what species or how many are out there in our
ecosystem.
It cost the public a small fortune to manage our shores against smuggling, and has had a big dampening effect on the growth of the reptile hobby here.
Todays petlovers are tomorrows conservationist, no petlovers, no conservation either.

Your apparent passion would be better spent on understanding the economy's of nations that allow the import of rarer species and their need to feed their familys, and working on international trade deals to allow them other means of fair economic play than the current trend of slash and burn agriculture and palm oil plantations, that do much more to destroy nature than the pet trade.

And the preservation of genetic diversity is even more important than just saving animals themselves. Without genetic diversity the species is doomed no matter how many there are.

'No matter how many there are?". Did you think that one through?
I might have mentioned the conservation of natural habit as no1 right up there with genetic diversity, both are essential and of the greatest import. The extinction of a species in nature due lack of habitat is also very undesirable. Millions in captivity is pointless if there is no habitat to reintroduce them to anymore.

It’s a an argument of consciousness, not power. It’s about what is morally right (conservation projects, habitat restoration, breeding and reintroduction projects etc.) and what’s not (regarding animals as mere stocks for profit or economical means).

Leo, dont you eat mate? You cant be 'a little bit pregnant', you either are, or you are not. If you want to cease the use of other species for economical means/profit, then you wont be eating anything unless you catch it yourself, kill it yourself. Most of the world wont do that mate, me included.
Going vegan wont solve it either, fruit and veg, nuts and grain are also part of the global economy.
Your intentions are good but misguided, much like Peta.

 

[Cainschams]

First off, I support the legal “trade” as long as it is for conservation purposes, which is then not a “trade market”, and as long as the individuals are qualified to maintain the species. However, I do not support this kind of trade for market purposes. Which is what I see most of the time.

I dont see any of us helping to repopulate the wild with our animals or animals offspring. Its been said many times on here. Reintroducing an animal that has been kept in captivity in the US to a different country can prove more harmful than helpful. Introducing new "ailments" an animal may get in country of non origin into a population that doesnt have an immunity built up for it can destroy the populations also.

Pshh and ricardo- I agree that some projects have been successful in the conservation and reintroduction of endangered species, therefore they are needed. I never stated that our pets should be returned to the wild or that others should not enjoy the privileges that I currently enjoy, (I only have captive bred species). What I’m trying to get at is the fact that it is essential that we diminish the amount of wild animals taken into captivity (ideally to nothing) for market purposes, because while some projects have been successful, when have any of us have contributed to the reintroduction of the animals that we own?



No doubt that to address this issue there are many factors that should be emphasized and taken into account such as political, social, and economical. however, regulations are a good way to start in my opinion, since now a day’s corruption can make an “illegal” trade “legal”.


I am guessing you are not aware of this? http://cites.org/ Maybe you should read it. There are regulations on the amount of animals that can be taken from the wild each year. A lot of countries participate in the CITES program and if they dont a lot still have their own regulations so their native species do not get depleted from collection.

fluxlizard- You definitely need to re-read my first post and try to, if you can, critically analyze the content of it. It is unfortunate that you feel your happiness derives from keeping animals in captivity, and focus more on their economical power than their right to remain free.
You wrote: “remove countless jobs and businesses that provide for many thousands of people's families in the economy.” That’s exactly the problem I’m trying to address, the fact that we focus more and worry on other species for their economical profits that anything else! Such as natural conservation, habitat, etc.

I hope you would be a little more mature than to declare someone with an opposite point of view than yours, an enemy.

"If you don't like the trade, use your freedom of speech to speak out against what you see as its negative aspects and encourage people to vote with their dollars (or vote by with-holding dollars)."
That’s exactly what I’m doing using my freedom of speech to state my opinion on animal trade for market purposes. And I try to encourage people to vote with the knowledge they have, not with their economical power unlike you. It’s a an argument of consciousness, not power. It’s about what is morally right (conservation projects, habitat restoration, breeding and reintroduction projects etc.) and what’s not (regarding animals as mere stocks for profit or economical means).

Apparently you have very little trust on your local and national leaders, but I’m not a politician. I’m a student who has gained the consciousness through an education, and regret that at a point bought animals to keep as pets. Nobody’s trying to push their ideas onto nobody, so please next time try to analytically analyze the info or ideas given, rather than let your emotions take over an argument and take it personal .

So after your chameleons die you wont be buying anymore? You wont be buying aquarium fish? Dogs or cats? You say you have CB animals. That justifies nothing. The breeders you got yours from have more than likely had WC animals and your $ keeps supporting their business which at some point they are going to want to introduce "new blood" into their projects. Besides maybe veileds none of these species are going to survive on what is left in the states if all trade is stopped. Even if panthers would actually continue reproducing after the trade is stopped, I wouldnt keep chameleons.


Jessica- Thank you, that is something that i plan on doing for i believe these factors to have a great impact on this matter.

Edit: I do agree that some of the numbers of chameleons allowed out are rather astonishing. Especially when you rarely see or hear about those species reproducing in captivity. Although, the forums does not have every cham keeper in the states on it. So one must remember that there could be more success out there. As to how much, I doubt its very abundant.

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

'No matter how many there are?". Did you think that one through?

I meant that more in a long term scope in that if you only have only a handful of animals and let them repopulate a species by generations and generations of incest then eventually you will see the demise of that species from genetic defects, immunocompromised individuals or some ailment that wipes out all of them due to genetic similarity. Animals too closely related will eventually have severe reproductive failure, nature's failsafe. So regardless of how many you make from that one original handful of animals, without genetic diversity you're not doing any service to that species and it will eventually fail. It's one of the current concern with cheetahs and a few other endangered species in protection plans. I should have been a little more clear, but that was the thought I was trying to convey.

 

[Cainschams]

"Apparently you have very little trust on your local and national leaders"

I certainly dont. They go around raping other countries for oil and natural resources for their own gain while not giving a hoot about the people in whatever country. They might act like they care or start a war claiming its to help a country out when there is a much larger hidden agenda for their motives. They throw out some BS propaganda so we back them up but it is just that, propaganda.

This is human nature to be arrogant. We, as a whole, think we are the pinnacle of existance and go around with our own motives to benefit us with no care about anything else. Dont get me wrong on what I am about to say. I love my friends, family and life in general. But, to better this earth, every human should be fixed at birth thus letting our species die out.

 

[leo]

What is morally right to one is not to another. There is no agreed upon 'right' or 'wrong.'
In trying to "fight for what's morally right" you are basing it completely off of your ethnocentric views and opinions.

I think you're right on that we will never agree on what's morally right and not. I guess I should of stated that on my opinion this is not right, although I'm not trying to force anyone to believe on what I believe, that's why I wanted to hear opinions on the matter.

I still think you should fight to improve lives before taking on this task as the majority of people think it is okay and should be done. There are several good arguments for both sides.

Without doubt this is also something I know that has to be addressed and I would plan on doing it.

Leo,
very simply put, if people are not interested in 'natures jewels', they wont care about them either! The illegal trade is damaging, but then, so is an uncontrolled legal trade.
But if you abolish the pet trade entirely, (will never happen anyway) you diminish peoples
desire to care about conserving nature aswell.
Australia has already, for all intents, abolished the trade of fauna years ago. A zoo or similar establishment must pull off a beurocratic miracle just to import non native species.
One result of this is that its created an illegal trade in non natives.
Back to square 1.

Todays petlovers are tomorrows conservationist, no petlovers, no conservation either.

I love this quote for I guess this is what happened to me. However, to be an animal lover doesn't mean that you own one.

Your apparent passion would be better spent on understanding the economy's of nations that allow the import of rarer species and their need to feed their familys, and working on international trade deals to allow them other means of fair economic play than the current trend of slash and burn agriculture and palm oil plantations, that do much more to destroy nature than the pet trade.
this also seems tied with pssh's argument to better the lives of those who are for many reasons forced to traffic animals illegally. which is also part of the problem, and perhaps had not stated

The extinction of a species in nature due lack of habitat is also very undesirable. Millions in captivity is pointless if there is no habitat to reintroduce them to anymore.

This is a great point which can hopefully make both sides realize on how dependent they are to one another.

Edit: I do agree that some of the numbers of chameleons allowed out are rather astonishing. Especially when you rarely see or hear about those species reproducing in captivity. Although, the forums does not have every cham keeper in the states on it. So one must remember that there could be more success out there. As to how much, I doubt its very abundant.

Unfortunately, the most info is on the rather negative effects of the numbers taken out of the wild, thus my opinion, although I accept that there are some that have been successful.

 

[leo]

But, to better this earth, every human should be fixed at birth thus letting our species die out.

Perhaps that's my point, that we are the ones making the damage. Wether is sounds good or not, it's the truth. But, we can also better things together, with agreements and disagreements, there's no need for anyone to take it personal.

 

[jojackson]

Ferret I understood what you meant perfectly mate, I was just amusing myself, sorry!

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

First off, I support the legal “trade” as long as it is for conservation purposes, which is then not a “trade market”, and as long as the individuals are qualified to maintain the species. However, I do not support this kind of trade for market purposes. Which is what I see most of the time.

Who exactly gets to determine who is "qualified" to keep pets? That definition changes wildly depending on who you talk to. I know thousands of people that wouldn't even be qualified to keep a houseplant, much less animals or children. Would you prevent anyone who doesn't have experience from ever getting one? How will you ever encourage responsible keeping without introduction of new enthusiasts? In a perfect world animals would be higher up on the list of priorities, but what you're talking about would be a massive overhaul of the system that in all honesty is unlikely to ever manifest. And by limiting "qualified" keepers you're only encouraging more questionable activities to obtain taboo species and limiting the knowledge disseminated. Just because hobbyist are not actively standing guard at forest's edge or releasing troves of little ones back into the wild doesn't make them evil destroyers of nature. You have to start somewhere and basic care should always come first.

Anyway, your intentions are in the right place I think, but you have to address things on a more than a superficial level. Even if you didn't mean it quite as literally as you said you have to be careful about how you word a controversial topic in (and against) a passionate community. There are some places where conservation has involved the local populations and by doing so has provided them with more income and better living situations and therefore they're more invested in the conservation and species involved. But it takes a lot of time, manpower and money to start something like that. I can try to find some of those projects to point you to if you'd like some inspiration.

 

[Cainschams]

But, we can also better things together, with agreements and disagreements, there's no need for anyone to take it personal.

I agree, we all get a little edgy, opinionated and emotional on subjects like this. Personally, I dont take offense. It is a good subject to bring up every once in a while

I would give up all my animals to go to Tanzania and farm chameleons. I know, keep dreaming but still

 

[Dupontman2]

if I ran around naked because I thought it wasn't a morally wrong thing to do, Others may find it very disrespectful (which I don't get, but whatever.)

I agree with this, I wouldnt find it disrespectful!!LOL Just trying to make everyone smile and calm things down. Laughter is the best medicine!!

 

[djfishygillz]

When something has a monetary value it will actually protect the animal. The black rhino was almost extinct until a company had money invested in keeping this animal alive for tourist to see. Placing a cost on wild animals will actually protect them more than damage them. It is like cows, they will never go extinct because we have so much value in keeping them alive. Although we aren't eating the chameleons, we are placing tons of value in keeping them alive.

 

[pssh]

Value can also cause animals to go extinct. Let's say I wanted a rhino horn. Well, since I already want something that is worth some money, why not get a black AND a white rhino horn because then I have the best. Now I can show off my illegal treasures and how I can afford such rare things. Now my friends want one too and may not stop searching until they get one.

 

[melric]

Wow, that's the wrong type of viewpoint for this forum. I don't think anyone would support you.

Do you feel the same way about horses, because I own 10. They too were taken from the wild some 1000's of years ago, lol. I've owned a lot of animals in my lifetime and obtained them legally.

Sure, end the illegal trade, but that's something that will always be around as long as you have legal trade.

 

[JackP308]

Value can also cause animals to go extinct. Let's say I wanted a rhino horn. Well, since I already want something that is worth some money, why not get a black AND a white rhino horn because then I have the best. Now I can show off my illegal treasures and how I can afford such rare things. Now my friends want one too and may not stop searching until they get one.

thats illegal pouching causing extinction driven by value but i dont see how that is relevant to chameleon trading.

 

[djfishygillz]

My point was in basic economic thinking if you place "private ownership" on a "public good" this will protect that good. If people wanted chameleon skin, then this could cause a fast extinction of the animal, but people value keeping them alive, and keeping them healthy as possible. People value the betterment of chameleon health. Like the black rhino is now protected by some private ownership because tourist like to see them. So now instead of being poached there is value in keeping the rhinos alive and healthy, and protected from poachers. This to me would correlate to chameleons and protecting them because so many people have value in them, and that some kind of group would intervene before such an amazing creature neared extinction.

 

[jojackson]

and that some kind of group would intervene before such an amazing creature neared extinction.

"Somebody" will intervene? (I think thats everyones job, atleast everyone who cares!)

This is a little story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody.

There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.

Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it.

Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job.

Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.

It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done!

 

[djfishygillz]

"Somebody" will intervene? (I think thats everyones job, atleast everyone who cares!)

This is a little story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody.

There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.

Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it.

Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job.

Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.

It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done!

Okay, good point. I would and many other enthusiast would take action against the extinction, if it did happen to come anywhere near that point. I love these guys and would send money or whatever I could afford or manage to do to help these guys in the wild.

 

[jojackson]

This comes back to my initial point Fishy, People will want to prevent extinction of chameleons (or anything else) and to conserve the natural habitat, IF they care in the first place.
The pet trade, faults and all, contributes to public (global) awareness of, and respect for, and interest in so many species, and because of this awareness, catches the interest of researchers and scientist and of course, conservationist.
Where was interest in chameleons in the public eye before they began to appear in petshops, legal or otherwise (late 80's early 90's ?).
Had they not caught the notice and fascination of folk like us, some species may been driven to extinction by now.
Who cares if they bulldoze Madagascar into a giant carpark, if nobody knows whats there?

 

[ChameleonsInMyHouse]

Hi all,
I'm a politics major and have always dreamed about going into law school. I've always pictured myself helping out the most needed, at first helping people was my vision, but since got my chams and joined the forums, I can't help but notice the great unjust treatment we are giving nature by taking away it's "jewels" as I like to call them (flora and fauna). I've decided to set my focus on the animal trade, in order to help stop legal and illegal trade. I feel that as much as we might want to justify breeding programs or the importation of animals for a “better cause”, there is really no moral justification to it. I mean those who breed animals end up selling them for whatever their reasons might be thus creating a bigger market, for those animals don’t end up back in the wild. I’m not condemning anyone since I too have animals, but although I try to care for them as best as I can I know they belong in the wild, not as part of “my collection” or anyone else’s. I know it might seem a little too radical, but I personally believe that we should not “domesticate” other species and we should all be aiming to end the trade, as much as we appreciate close contact with these great species. What do you think; would you really support the end of animal trade (at least between countries)?

first off, i would like to say i respect the education you are receiving to make way for a career in politics. you have said some pretty hypocritical words as well, so i believe you will make a great one lol.

what i don't understand, is how can you appreciate these animals and want to be a part of the "stop the trade" movement when everyday you feed them, and care for them. i would just like to stop to ask "how much have you truly began to understand about these animals? how much have you truly learned from them? and how much more responsibility has exotic captivity taught you?"

for many of us, exotic captivity and being in the hobby, has taught many of us the fundamentals of life, and helping us prepare for future long term commitments. it has made almost all of us appreciate learning science, biology, taxonomy, etc. Point is, without these animals, we would have never learned many things, without these animals in the future, many will not be able to experience what so many of us love, what so many of us got into that we let change our lives for the positive.

did you know that every exported animal is listed on CITIES one way or another? did you know that even salt water marine fish can be on CITIES? I couldnt get a pair of seahorses for the longest time because of CITIES. CITIES is to classify the rarity and endangerment of the animal, and also protects a quantity from being WC and put into the trade, to conserve it longer in the wild.

I totally agree with stopping the illegal trade. anything done in those boundaries are dirty and not humane. though many are deceived by thinking illegal imports are to help conserve, i think they are sadly mistaken. they are illegal for trade for a reason, they are high on CITIES for a reason... THEY AREN'T READY FOR US, AND WE AREN'T READY FOR THEM!

i do however support the legal trade for those reasons, but still feel guilt in my heart seeing WC animals. That is human emotion that we just NEED TO GET OVER, if they are available, they are abundant enough for hobby and leisure. they are fantastic specimens of life that can open doors to so many. i hated reptiles and were terrified of them until i met a chameleon. Just honestly sit back and take that testimony to heart. HOW MUCH HAVE I LEARNED, LOVED & APPRECIATE BECAUSE OF IMPORT/EXPORTS OF WILD ANIMALS.

there are more PROS than CONS in LEGAL trade markets. I think the only CON of a legal imported/exported animal are parasites. well... guess what we did for that animal? got it better, and gave it a chance to live even longer.

i really think you need to take it cool with this movement Leo, I will not judge, but i get the vibe you dont yet fully realize what you've gotten into in regards to keeping exotics, but if you drop the legal and illegal sides to it, i'm sure your views will change too.


JMHO

 

[pssh]

Only parasites? There is much more to be cautious of than just parasites with WC. Why do you think we quarantine them?


And the rhino thing was in response to another post, thank you.