rshewfel
Established Member
It does not have to be published, just a tread or an online discussion where and individual talks about his/her experiences. This would be very interesting to read.
Minor chameleons
- Thread starter rsepiphyte
- Start date
It does not have to be published, just a tread or an online discussion where and individual talks about his/her experiences. This would be very interesting to read.
rshewfel
Established Member
Do you notice any problems with breeding the F4 or F5, that is not a problem with the F1?
rshewfel
Established Member
Thanks Carl
Dooley1
Avid Member
Kent67
Retired Moderator
Don't forget Dr. Anderson also said he believes most of these specimens are sourced from parents or grandparents that were illegally smuggled out of Madagascar. Sure, they may now have papers but that doesn't change the moral status of acquiring them. As he has also stated, animal laundering is still illegal, though.
Also, we've had the argument about saving a "doomed" species before. As far as I'm aware, there is still no species that has been saved from extinction through the efforts of hobbyists. Especially not through smuggling.
rshewfel
Established Member
No-I've never had a problem.
Thank you! I thought this would be your answer
Saldarya
Established Member
I see no where that he stated that he believed that 'these' particular specimens were sourced from illegal parents or grandparents.
He spoke to the possibility that it may be the case, as with all chameleons that exist in the world currently that fall under the same set of circumstances.
I will also pose a question to all here, if we as a hobby are going to trust and depend upon the CITES organization and what it stands for in our hobby, can we then pick and choose what parts of them to support?
As Chris mentioned earlier in this thread, for the paperwork to be obtained, it had to be PROVEN that the bloodlines of these animals could be traced to pre ban years. That was done. That is fact, otherwise the paperwork would not have been issued.
Last edited:
pigglett79
Avid Member
This is an interesting discussion. I did want to point out that just because someone may have created fraudulent paperwork that is good enough to convince CITES, that doesn't then make CITES a fraudulent organization.
Not that I'm saying the paperwork is for sure doctored, but just that the argument is not sound.
rshewfel
Established Member
From what I have read on this forum, I'm not sure there is a clear answer to this.
This is what I thought it meant. F1, F2 denotes the number of generations that the chameleon has been bred in captivity. F1's parents are wild caught, F2's grandparents are wild caught. This continues with F3, F4, F5, etc....
The part that doesn't seem clear is- what is a progeny considered to be if a , lets say, F3 is bred with an F5. I was under the impression that in this example the offspring would be an F4, because it's closest wild caught relative is four generations away. This does not seem to be the consensus, however.
Last edited:
Dooley1
Avid Member
I'm not wading into this argument about minor. But I do want to point out Kent-you're right about that! That will not change either.
rshewfel
Established Member
I don't believe so. To believe this, you would have to believe it is in the chameleons best interest to be kept in captivity. I believe it is in the chameleons best interest to be left alone.
biffle
Avid Member
Many species have been saved from extinction by captive breeding. Examples include:
Guam rails
black-footed ferrets
California condors
Przewalski’s horses
scimitar-horned oryx
Partula snails
Spix’s macaws
A goal of some captive breeding programs may also be to reintroduce animals back to the wild, as is the case with the global breeding program for the golden lion tamarin, the black-footed ferret, and the Guam rail.
http://nationalzoo.si.edu/scbi/endangeredspecies/capbreedpops/default.cfm
I agree 100%.....
I'm only saying these are chameleons currently in captivity and I believe that if more can be produced in captivity and sold with legal paperwork it could promote there future breeding in the US.
I don't see that as a bad thing but possibly as a benefit.
Dooley1
Avid Member
I think Kent meant chameleons specifically. I'm sure Kent realizes that other species (not chameleons) have had different outcomes.
frankpayne32
Avid Member
rshewfel
Established Member
Oh ok, I missed your point. If it was not effecting wild populations negatively, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
biffle
Avid Member
Dooley1
Avid Member
I don't know that I believe it is given everyone's track record, or even that it's relevant since it has nothing to do with the intentions of this import.
I don't have a problem with the import though. We all keep these animals for our personal enjoyment and I cannot sit on a pedestal and judge someone for keeping something I simply cannot or would not choose to afford.
I don't have a problem with the import though. We all keep these animals for our personal enjoyment and I cannot sit on a pedestal and judge someone for keeping something I simply cannot or would not choose to afford.
Psychobunny
Avid Member
Maybe stupid question, but what ARE the intentions of this import?
I assume to establish the species among select breeders?
