# Big ideas



## Waterrat (Jun 17, 2011)

Everybody interested in conservation and animal keeping / breeding should listen to this program. Greg Miles, Mike Archer and Rosie Cooney discuss the state of our mismanaged wildlife and reptile keeper's (i.e. us) contributions to the body of knowledge about reptiles and our role in conservation. Give yourself 50 minutes and listen to what the great minds have to say.

cheers
Michael

[FONT=Comic Sans MS, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]ABC iview [/FONT]


----------



## Wild~Touch (Jun 17, 2011)

Thank you Michael, this is essential for everyone to take on board


----------



## saximus (Jun 17, 2011)

I know what I'm gonna be doing instead of work for the next hour. Thanks for the link


----------



## Snakeluvver2 (Jun 17, 2011)

Thanks I'll watch after my exam today.


----------



## Fuscus (Jun 17, 2011)

As stated in that program, every single idea has been around for ages and just meets a wall of bureaucratic indifference and/or stupidity. They mentioned sugar gliders, which is one of the animals very suited to captivity but Queenslanders are apparently too immature to keep, despite the amazing success that overseas and South Australian breeder have had. Heck, we can't even keep Hopping mice! Every time I have to deal with DEA/EcoAccess/DERM or whatever they are called this week I come away with the feeling that their primary purpose is to justify their own existence and put a wall between people and wildlife ( unless you own a bulldozer ).
And on a related note ( or a continuation of the above rant ) it appears that in order to get or continue to do snake relocation in QLD you are now required to hold a senior first aid certificate.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 17, 2011)

Fuscus said:


> it appears that in order to get or continue to do snake relocation in QLD you are now required to hold a senior first aid certificate.



Very true mate, next thing you will have wear protective gear, hard hat, goggles and have an isolated compartment in your car to transport reptiles (approved by some gov. body).

But lets not get side-tracked, the discussion was a very important event, uniting some high calibre influential scientists and us reptile keepers in many principles.


----------



## imported_Varanus (Jun 17, 2011)

Many thanks for the link, WR! Let's hope we see some action along these lines sooner rather than later.


----------



## Laghairt (Jun 17, 2011)

Thanks for posting Michael, I'll have a listen tonight.


----------



## Snakeluvver2 (Jun 17, 2011)

It really does seem that goverment bodies have got the idea of conservation backwards. 
On a lighter note I'm buying that book they mentioned at the end. Going Native.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 17, 2011)

I hope that every APS member and visitors will have a chance to view this program over the weekend, it's so topical and it's important to understand that we are here to play very important role and why.
This is the beginning - thing have to change!


----------



## Kenno (Jun 17, 2011)

Great program with some very refreshing ideas.


----------



## jahan (Jun 17, 2011)

May be if private keepers were allowed to
keep Tassie devils,they might have been in a
better position today.


----------



## Renenet (Jun 17, 2011)

Thanks for the heads-up, Michael. I wanted that program to keep going, the ideas and the panellists were so interesting. 

When it comes to conserving fauna, the hands-off, softly-softly school of thought clearly isn't working. It's getting to the point where we're losing species at a frightening rate and we need to actively do something to save what's left. Maybe we'll make a few mistakes along the way, but we stand to lose so much more if we do nothing.

It's always frustrated me that human beings need to place an economic value on things in order to consider them valuable, but that strategy might be just what we need to bring conservation to a wider audience. Private money is sorely needed and if that's what it takes, I'd be quite happy to see most of the ideas mentioned put into practice. I'd like to get directly involved if I ever get a chance. 

The fundamental question seems to be: why do we have bureaucrats in charge of wildlife management? Bureaucracy moves slowly and is the last to embrace new ideas. Sadly, they can't even keep up with the cane toad front. I want to scream with frustration! :x


----------



## ramzee86 (Jun 17, 2011)

That was really reallly interesting, thanks Michael!


----------



## Dan40D (Jun 17, 2011)

Fantastic link Michael, the best discussion i have heard on the conservation of native wildlife yet.

There are many species that this theory could be applied to, take the Orange-bellied Parrot for example, less than 35 birds left in the wild now and doomed to extinction, governments have long since given up caring. There are only a few captive collections of OBP that produce less than 20 young per year which are released, this is never going to sustain the species, yet if at least some of the young had been kept and bred out then released to the private collectors like virtually every other native parrot species, there is very little doubt that they would now exist in far greater numbers at least in a captive sense, which would have ensured that the species at least survived rather than been lost forever. The wild population only exists now by being artificially propped up by feeding tables and artifical nest boxes, how does this differ greatly from keeping them in captivity??


----------



## cement (Jun 17, 2011)

"kneels down and bows with respect"

With the encroaching of human activity just around here in my backyard (the central coast NSW), we can only guess at how the wildlife is taking it. I have years of records of captured, released or cared for wild reptiles and our organisation has the same for marsupials, macropods, all bird species, mammals and others but there is no research that i know of, being done to monitor it. I am up for it, but it is such a huge task sorting through the records that the time to do it just won't present itself......yet.

Cheers Michael, lets hope that something good comes from this show and that it is seen by many. Keep the ball rolling.
The government dept's that control the destinies and so forth of this countries native species needs waking up and a good shake.If they won't do anything about the situation, then get out and make room for some one who will.


----------



## saximus (Jun 17, 2011)

I finally got a chance to watch this because my work computer was playing up. All I can say is wow. This has really motivated me to research more information and ways that I can help with things like this. That was just amazing


----------



## Laghairt (Jun 17, 2011)

Some very interesting discussion, really highlights how misguided the current policies are - especially the discussion relating to the captive breeding of RSPs.


----------



## daveandem2011 (Jun 18, 2011)

Cheers for the great link Michael. Was well worth the watch very informative.


----------



## Wild~Touch (Jun 18, 2011)

I downloaded the audio version and put it on my ipod - everytime I hear those "Nature Gods" speak I get more out of it


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

It's great to see so many positive comments. We have to fight for our wildlife - after all, it is OUR wildlife, not theirs! The wildlife agencies are merely appointed as managers and they failed in big way right across the board. 
Their huge city offices are packed with bureaucrats, the many knowledgeable and dedicated Rangers are being reduced to toilet and BBQ cleaners in National Parks and there is no one to look after out wildlife in real terms. They don't listen to scientists, instead they keep on applying ancient methods that proved to be useless ages ago and there is no prospect of any changes soon. We have to make those changes and we will. Treat the Big Ideas debate as a preamble, there is more to come.


----------



## Wild~Touch (Jun 18, 2011)

We have to make those changes and we will. *Yes I agree*

We as Reptile Keepers must give these "Nature Gods" back up and support in an intelligent way....that is all they are asking for....listen to their words and pass their message on.


----------



## SteveNT (Jun 18, 2011)

Too true. The beurocracy just gets fatter and the people in the field disappear. 

Heaps of our Ranger stations have closed and as a result the desk drivers are making absurd decisions based on data that is decades old and no longer relevant. Hundreds of thousands of dollars wasted on computer modelling of bushfire regimes and consequences without factoring in Gamba and Mission grass which is rapidly changing the face of Country up here. Woodland is becoming grassland but these clowns dont seem to notice.


----------



## yommy (Jun 18, 2011)

this should be make a sticky


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

SteveNT said:


> Woodland is becoming grassland but these clowns dont seem to notice.


 
Steve, they are noticing it but they are too embarrassed to admit that they don't know what to do about it and too bloody proud to let private enterprise to help.


----------



## Fuscus (Jun 18, 2011)

The only way to get changes made is to agitate by forming a lobby group or political movement with other stake holders like bird keepers and (prospective) mammal keepers. Has anyone here got skills in this area?


----------



## saximus (Jun 18, 2011)

Do you guys have info on what we can do or where we can go to actually help?


----------



## Red-Ink (Jun 18, 2011)

Thank you you much for that little gem of information Michael...


----------



## Gabriel.G (Jun 18, 2011)

as a zookeeper once told me recently whilst visiting a park, there's no better way let an animal go extinct than let our government take care of it.....


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

Fuscus said:


> The only way to get changes made is to agitate by forming a lobby group or political movement with other stake holders like bird keepers and (prospective) mammal keepers. Has anyone here got skills in this area?


 

PM sent.

There are Big Ideas and Big Issues to deal with. For example, the State wildlife authorities are breaking constitutional law by hindering the _free interstate trade_. They have no right to impose import / export permits. And that's just one such issue, there are many more.


----------



## Laghairt (Jun 18, 2011)

Yes agreed! It's too much for reptile keepers to do on their own. Look at the traction the fishing/hunting party was able to achieve in the NSW state election. I'm sure there are just as many reptile/native animal keepers as there are hunters, they just need to be organised.

It's a shame that the misguided views of the delusional and ignorant activists seem to carry more political eight than evidence based practices that will be more successful and economically viable.



Fuscus said:


> The only way to get changes made is to agitate by forming a lobby group or political movement with other stake holders like bird keepers and (prospective) mammal keepers. Has anyone here got skills in this area?


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

I think alot of people posting here are getting rather starry eyed. Cherry picking the information that was in that video and thinking that we are contributing to conservation efforts by housing a coastal or childrens. The simple fact is that bringing an animal into the pet trade does *nothing* for conservation in itself.

The idea of bringing threatened species into captivity is nothing more than an extinction insurance policy. What use are these animals to the environment if they are stuck in glass cages? The answer to this is *nothing*! They are as good as dead in their contribuition to biodiversity. I can hear you all shouting at me through your computers right now 'BUT THEY CAN BE REINTRODUCED GORDO!!!!' To that point i will say this, reintroduction is futile unless the threatening process has been reduced or eliminated and the average keeper will never be asked for their stock to be part of a reintroduction program. Greg Miles agrees with these points.

It will take a very dedicated and special individual/group to maintain an insurance population. It will be very expensive and the use of these animals for successful reintroduction will probably never happen, unless something very drastic and expensive is done with our landscape to restore it.

The RSP story in the pet trade is not a win for conservation, it is a win for the pet trade. Research that was collected during the project on them is a win, or atleast a stripe on the shoulder for conservation but 1000 of them in glass boxes is not.

Like one of the audience members said, this is treating a symptom and leaving the problem to fester. 

With that said, i think insurance populations are a good idea so long as they are one tiny tiny part of a much larger conservation effort.

I also have no problem with sustainable use of any species, so long as the use is humane, and i think the pet trade should be included in that idea of sustainable use.

Just be genuine about the reasons why we want these animals in the hobby. It is for our own selfish reasons.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

Gordo, I absolutely agree with your last sentence, actually the last two in particular. My point is, why are our money being wasted by gov. deps. on creating conservation policies and strategies that don't work and why even more money is wasted on reptile keeping regulations and compliance when these animals (CB reptiles) are of no conservation value. Why are reptile keepers (in other than Qld) being screwed for import / export permits when tracking CB animals is a futile exercise? Do any of these things do anything for conservation? I don't think so!


----------



## mummabear (Jun 18, 2011)

Your right. But that is the point it is an insurance policy. As they said the look but don't touch method of conservation has not stopped the decline of our most vulnerable species. If faced with a choice which it seam we are, lose species to extinction or have some-many in private hands. What should we choose? Sensibility tells me that i would rather them alive in captivity than extinct. But here lies the problem, sensibility. Also on a selfish point is it wrong to want to have out native animals as pets? We as a human species will always want to keep pets why not have our native ones and if is preserves a species then great.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

I'd be interested to find out if the fees we pay go toward any (even if they are ineffective) conservation efforts or if the money only goes to pay for the administration of permits and tracking etc. 

I do agree with having a permit system though. Simply to reduce the effects of large scale poaching.



mummabear said:


> Your right. But that is the point it is an insurance policy. As they said the look but don't touch method of conservation has not stopped the decline of our most vulnerable species. If faced with a choice which it seam we are, lose species to extinction or have some-many in private hands. What should we choose? Sensibility tells me that i would rather them alive in captivity than extinct. But here lies the problem, sensibility. Also on a selfish point is it wrong to want to have out native animals as pets? We as a human species will always want to keep pets why not have our native ones and if is preserves a species then great.


 
Even though i think our reasons for keeping are selfish i don't think keeping is wrong, i'm all for it. I can't see a reason why we shouldn't keep any animal we feel like so long as the keeping is humane and it doesn't have a negative impact on wild populations.

But hobby keeping and 'conservation' keeping are entirely separate and they need to be kept this way to keep genetically diverse and strong bloodlines that resemble an average wild animal that has the potential to be released, if that is what we want. Other wise we may aswell keep the animals in glass jars of spirits.

Sensibility also tells me that species going extinct, in the short term, is actually a rather rare event. Most species still survive, albeit in differently, in isolated populations and they can recover in their own time. Not always but it does happen. Sensibility also tells me that reintroduction programs usually don't work.

The majority of our conservation efforts need to be focused on restoring a balance to our environment. Fix the environment and we won't need insurance policies.


----------



## imported_Varanus (Jun 18, 2011)

Interesting points Gordo! Can anyone give any examples of where the private keeping of native animals has aided in conservation efforts, in any country? I guess the croc farm example mentioned in the doco comes to mind.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

imported_Varanus said:


> Interesting points Gordo! Can anyone give any examples of where the private keeping of native animals has aided in conservation efforts, in any country? I guess the croc farm example mentioned in the doco comes to mind.



Croc farms aren't really private collections though. They are businesses/organisations.


----------



## saximus (Jun 18, 2011)

The private keeping this is only a minor facet of the overall effort though. They even said in the doco that it's purely an insurance thing. Sorry of this was said earlier but I don't understand why you're attacking that specifically?


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

I'm not attacking anything Sachs. I'm just telling it like it is. I think captive populations are a good idea, i've said that already, as long as they are labelled as what they truly are. 

But i think you are wrong, the private keeping is nothing in the overall idea of wildlife/biodiversity conservation as it stands right now. Alot of people posting in this thread seem to me to be saying that these animals need to be brought into the pet trade for conservation reasons. I am of the opinion, and it will take alot to convince me otherwise, that the pet trade will have no long term positive effect on conservation the way it is structured now.



saximus said:


> The private keeping this is only a minor facet of the overall effort though. They even said in the doco that it's purely an insurance thing. Sorry of this was said earlier but I don't understand why you're attacking that specifically?


----------



## imported_Varanus (Jun 18, 2011)

Yes, true.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

waruikazi said:


> I'm not attacking anything Sachs. I'm just telling it like it is. I think captive populations are a good idea, i've said that already, as long as they are labelled as what they truly are.
> 
> But i think you are wrong, *the private keeping is nothing in the overall idea of wildlife/biodiversity conservation as it stands right now.* Alot of people posting in this thread seem to me to be saying that these animals need to be brought into the pet trade for conservation reasons. I am of the opinion, and it will take alot to convince me otherwise, that the pet trade will have no long term positive effect on conservation the way it is structured now.


 
Except for raising awareness!

Lol @ arguing with myself! I feel a bit like MMAfan... :lol:


----------



## saximus (Jun 18, 2011)

Haha ok fair enough. Well yeah when I get time I'll read the whole thread properly but to me the main message on the doco was general conservation and like you said the pet trade does very little for that


----------



## wokka (Jun 18, 2011)

Isn't a CB Oenpelli better than a wild one killed by a cane toad. They might never be reintroduced to the wild but a CB Oenpelli is better than none. ther is a chance that if the effect of cane toads can be reduced CB Oenpellis could be reintroduced or that data gleened from CB individuals could benefit wild animals. Even if they dissapear from the wild is it so wrong to have them remain in captivity?


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

wokka said:


> Isn't a CB Oenpelli better than a wild one killed by a cane toad. They might never be reintroduced to the wild but a CB Oenpelli is better than none. ther is a chance that if the effect of cane toads can be reduced CB Oenpellis could be reintroduced or that data gleened from CB individuals could benefit wild animals. Even if they dissapear from the wild is it so wrong to have them remain in captivity?



Wokka in terms of wild biodiversity a dead wild one is more useful than a captive live one in a private keepers hands, atleast the dead one is going back into the food chain...

Either way, if they become extinct in the wild but still exist in captivity the effect on the environment is exactly the same. 

I think it is much better to have them in captivity than no where. But to me, having them in the average private keeper collections, that isn't conservation.


----------



## cement (Jun 18, 2011)

How about solutions Gordo?
The problems are well known, and the CB hobby/industry is its own animal.
Satellite colonies are only as good as their genetic diversity, but what else is there.
If these types of colonies had no potential, then where does that leave the tassie Devil. Would people as passionate and knowledgeable as JW get involved in a lost cause?
It is private funding that will save the day for conservation. The politicians will fight tooth and nail to save their sorry backsides and be able to drink coffee and eat donuts at OUR expense. 
The way i look at it, in this present moment, is that we need a Juggernaut of support from individuals to combine to add weight and numbers to apply pressure to the govt immediately. Call it network marketing if you like, with branches all over the country like chapters in a book, who can at the right time come together and apply the pressure when needed.
I am talking about this tomorrow at a general meeting of our organisation and will be asking for support in making others aware of this situation. Its a start.
If anyone has some real grunt going in the right direction regarding this, and would like support, feel free to contact me.


----------



## mummabear (Jun 18, 2011)

Do you not think that more people would care for our native animals and the natural environment if they were exposed to them as pets? The point is the general public don't know much about out native species so they don't have as much interest in their conservation. It's not all about saving the species buy having them in captivity. It is also about encouraging the general public to love and therefor want to save our native species, and their environment, by being exposed to these creatures through pet ownership.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

waruikazi said:


> Except for raising awareness!



And also research. Ecological research is more important for wildlife management strategies but if it wasn't for private breeders, we (and the scientists) would know little or nothing about species' reproductive biology and behaviour. Although we have draw a line between per owners and investigative breeders.

On another note, crocodiles in Australia are a huge success story. Once on the brink of extinction, listed on Appendix I of CITES, .... two decades later, they are our best protected species wild thriving wild populations and a thriving crocodile industry along the side of it. 
Step outside the square and ask a question: "why can't we the same with snakes, lizards and turtles?" .... and, we are not talking about utilising these animals for their skins or meat, we want to produce them for the pet trade. I guess the answer is - it's the bureaucrats who would have to step outside the square.


----------



## wokka (Jun 18, 2011)

Looking from the other side, What is the problem with having native animals in private collections even if they dont create awareness or educate and provide data?


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

Nothing at all but pet keeping and nothing else does nothing for conservation just like it does nothing for edvancement of this hobby. I guess your next question will be "what's wrong with that"? lol


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 18, 2011)

cement said:


> How about solutions Gordo?
> The problems are well known, and the CB hobby/industry is its own animal.
> Satellite colonies are only as good as their genetic diversity, but what else is there.
> If these types of colonies had no potential, then where does that leave the tassie Devil. Would people as passionate and knowledgeable as JW get involved in a lost cause?
> ...


 
I don't have any big solutions, sorry. I do my part by living a life of minimal impact, hunting ferals, volunteering a relocation service in my community and i try to get involved with interesting projects going on in my area but i don't have any solutions to offer.

But i know that if we keep looking at the animals all we are doing is treating the symptoms, not the problem.

Like i said in most of my posts, i don't have a problem with any of the ideas being thrown around. It is pretty obvious that we need a new approach to conservation. But i think we need to be honest about what we want and what we will acheive with the measures that are being suggested in this thread.

I know Greg Miles, he will get this project going. It will take a while and it will likely be a species at a time but it will happen. Luckily, i think, he has no illusions about what he hopes to acheive.

The Tassie devil project is a great project. It has a plan and it is well set up. But the people keeping them aren't keeping them for the pet trade (as far as i'm aware), they are not average keepers and they are dealing with what is threatening the tassie devils. 

I'll say it again, i'm not agaisnt having these animals in captivity and i am not agaisnt insurance populations. But we need to separate the idea of private collections and insurance populations, they are not the same thing. And we need to have an idea or atleast an intention of doing something about the threatening process, otherwise all our efforts are useless.


----------



## Wally (Jun 18, 2011)

I wonder if conservation could, in part at least, be taken away from government departments and the bureaucracy that controls it and given to the private sector. It would of course require oversight by these government departments, but by doing this you can remove the fiefdom ideology that constrains state government agencies. I work closely with state and local government departments with my employment here in Vic and to say it can be enormously frustrating at times would be an understatement. But through well thought out design of policy, the company I work for has been able to persuade government departments, at times, into doing things differently. It doesn't always work, but some of the spending of public money on ridiculous programs has been negated in some instances.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 18, 2011)

There is no need for a hand over but there is urgent need for collaborative approach between wildlife dps and private sector. The bureaucrats need to realise that no one will put their money into conservation programs if there is not going to be any financial return. Unfortunately, as it stands, no commercial component is allowed in any wildlife involving projects (with the exception of crocodile farming and maybe another one or two enterprises). It is ridiculous attitude - would the bureaucrats work for nothing?


----------



## Mr.James (Jun 18, 2011)

Bureaucrats..Aren't they a non-for profit organisation.. ;-)

Thank you for providing the link Michael, what a great & important discussion. Lets hope we can get this message to the government bodies in control & maybe just maybe they will pull there fingers out and start making some serious changes.


----------



## cement (Jun 18, 2011)

Hey gordo, not having a dig, mate and you don;t need to justify yourself to me.
I don't know Greg miles, but he looks and seems to be tarred by the same brush as a bloke that I know. Head ranger of a huge National park in NZ, who flew me and some mates up into the back country for a week of hunting deer, into country that has never been logged and hardly ever walked by humankind. Passionate blokes that walk the walk, in fact i had trouble keeping up and I train regularly, and he was in his 60's! The sort of knowledge he has comes from years (a lifetime) of walking the mountains, and living in pristine mountain country. 
Offer Greg support, and keep in touch there are so many people who would lend support but feel impotent. Almost everyone i meet on a callout is concerned for the native animal. They may still be scared of them and not know a lot about them but their hearts are in the right place (after all, they made the call!). This is a huge untapped resource for lobby power. And lets face it, thats the only thing that turns a govt! And I am all for making money from wildlife if that money is spent on the right objectives. Mainly, securing safe, vermin free habitat, or setting up satellite colonies until the habitat situation is sorted out, whatever, as long as its action in the right direction!!


----------



## DanN (Jun 18, 2011)

Apart from creating a captive population to safe-guard against species extinction, what can private keepers do to conserve species and their habitats in situ?

Say I want to conserve green pythons. What is the pet trade going to do which will help in any way to conserve that species?
IMO breeding a species for reintroduction isn't enough. Can anybody come up with an extremely novel approach whereby we apply the principle of "sustainable use" to conserve green pythons?

I am genuinely asking...


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 19, 2011)

Hi Dan, you always come up with a curly one. lol

First of all, we have to ask "does the species need any extra protection? In case of Aussie GTPs, the answer is no. If the wild population was threatened and a reserve collection required, then I would like to be able to take 5 pairs from the wild every 5 years. They would be mixed with my existing stock and the old breeders then phased out. That would ensure a sound genetic diversity and also healthy stock dispersed into the herp community.

I am actually quite surprised that John Weigel is not thinking that way. All those hundreds, if not thousands of captive bred RSP in collections are from the original snakes. I can't remember how many he brought back but it wasn't many. It's going to be an interesting test for inbreeding - time will tell if we start seeing progeny with congenital deformities or compromised reproductive fitness.

Back to GTPs - if you want to save the species across its distribution range, you would need to hire a small army and take out all the poachers on Biak and other hot spots ...... you know more about that than I do.

Private keepers can't do anything to conserve habitats or species in situ. They can effectively reduce the temptation of poaching by making the species readily available for a lower price that the cost of a field trip. That's about all.


Cheers
M


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 19, 2011)

I completely agree with what you have said. There aren't that many people who i look upto more, in this context, than Greg. He's one of the few people that can talk the talk and walk the walk and he has my support 100%. 

I'm saying what i say because if his ideas are going to work and be accepted by the beaurocrats we, the 'lobbiests,' need to keep it real in respect to what his private keeping idea will acheive. If we base our want to keep alot of these animals and introduce them to the pet trade (in the way our hobby stands now) on the idea that it is for conservation, we will be laughed out the door by the decision makers. If i give you a northern quoll, critically endangered according to John Woinarski, what good is that going to do for conservation?

There is an awful lot more to Greg's idea than just hobby keeping that we didn't see in that video. I agree with his ideas and what he wants to acheive. He's a pretty difficult bloke to disagree with, he managed to convince a PETA representative that captive keeping is a good idea lol, if he can do that you know his ideas are good. Lets just be real about what this tiny little part of his idea will acheive. 



cement said:


> Hey gordo, not having a dig, mate and you don;t need to justify yourself to me.
> I don't know Greg miles, but he looks and seems to be tarred by the same brush as a bloke that I know. Head ranger of a huge National park in NZ, who flew me and some mates up into the back country for a week of hunting deer, into country that has never been logged and hardly ever walked by humankind. Passionate blokes that walk the walk, in fact i had trouble keeping up and I train regularly, and he was in his 60's! The sort of knowledge he has comes from years (a lifetime) of walking the mountains, and living in pristine mountain country.
> Offer Greg support, and keep in touch there are so many people who would lend support but feel impotent. Almost everyone i meet on a callout is concerned for the native animal. They may still be scared of them and not know a lot about them but their hearts are in the right place (after all, they made the call!). This is a huge untapped resource for lobby power. And lets face it, thats the only thing that turns a govt! And I am all for making money from wildlife if that money is spent on the right objectives. Mainly, securing safe, vermin free habitat, or setting up satellite colonies until the habitat situation is sorted out, whatever, as long as its action in the right direction!!





DanN said:


> Apart from creating a captive population to safe-guard against species extinction, what can private keepers do to conserve species and their habitats in situ?
> 
> Say I want to conserve green pythons. What is the pet trade going to do which will help in any way to conserve that species?
> IMO breeding a species for reintroduction isn't enough. Can anybody come up with an extremely novel approach whereby we apply the principle of "sustainable use" to conserve green pythons?
> ...



As keepers i don't think we can do an awful lot except for promoting awareness and best practice. But as herpers i think there is alot we can do. One of the biggest problems facing conservation is that no one has any really good idea of what is actually going on. If you go out as regularly as you feel like, look around and take notes on what is going on in the environment and do it over a long period of time the information you collect will become pretty valuable. I met a lady 2 years ago when i was teaching in Kalkarindji, she'd kept herping journals for 20 years! The ammount of people who wanted that information was astounding because it would show a pretty good long term picture of what was going on in the herp world of the areas she visited. It wouldn't be a perfect record but it's something that no one else had.

A pet idea i have is to setup a data base that amateur herpers, twitchers, botanists, mammal folk, fish folk etc can access and update with information they collect in the feild to help paint a picture of what is going on. Only i have no idea how to do.


----------



## DanN (Jun 19, 2011)

I managed to delete my lengthy reply, sorry...

Good points, but preservation will last only so long. Species that are currently not under threat may be in the future. Human beings are only going to conserve something if they value it. The minds in the talk are busily trying to come up with sustainable use plans to conserve our wildlife. 

Sustainable harvest, eco-tourism etc... unfortunetely conservation is really just economics..

Does this community have any bright ideas?


----------



## Fuscus (Jun 19, 2011)

Waterrat said:


> I can't remember how many he brought back but it wasn't many. It's going to be an interesting test for inbreeding - time will tell if we start seeing progeny with congenital deformities or compromised reproductive fitness.


 Some snakes seem remarkably immune to inbreeding, many isolated populations of tigers live on very small islands. Of course culling needs to be done, this happens automatically in the wild but may not occur in captive populations


----------



## colubridking (Jun 20, 2011)

WR, i dont agree with your comment _"The bureaucrats need to realise that no one will put their money into conservation programs if there is not going to be any financial return" _
i am not as much i would like to be and willing to be - only thing that is stopping me at the moment is space. However i know people who have given up with the bureaucrats and waiting for laws to change and have purchased legal, captive bred animals from SA, VIC or NT and are breeding them in NSW and releasing youngsters (or once old enough to be released how ever old that is) back into the wild by selectively breeding them and making sure genes are are not crossed etc. I guarantee there are other people doing this with other mammals. and i will to get into it when space is available and honestly i dont really give a **** if people tell me otherwise because i am more them capable of obtaining vulnerable or threatened animals, breeding them and releasing and i will happily do it out of my back pocket. The Bureaucrats waste to much and I, along with many others have given up and taken matters into their own hands.

CK

BTW thanks for the video it was very good!


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 20, 2011)

You are more than likely doing more damage than good, along with the others doing this.



colubridking said:


> WR, i dont agree with your comment _"The bureaucrats need to realise that no one will put their money into conservation programs if there is not going to be any financial return" _
> i am not as much i would like to be and willing to be - only thing that is stopping me at the moment is space. However i know people who have given up with the bureaucrats and waiting for laws to change and have purchased legal, captive bred animals from SA, VIC or NT and are breeding them in NSW and releasing youngsters (or once old enough to be released how ever old that is) back into the wild by selectively breeding them and making sure genes are are not crossed etc. I guarantee there are other people doing this with other mammals. and i will to get into it when space is available and honestly i dont really give a **** if people tell me otherwise because i am more them capable of obtaining vulnerable or threatened animals, breeding them and releasing and i will happily do it out of my back pocket. The Bureaucrats waste to much and I, along with many others have given up and taken matters into their own hands.
> 
> CK
> ...


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 21, 2011)

Colubridking, that's fine if you don't agree with me, no sweat. What you're doing is not accepted practice, I hope you have a good handle on population genetics and dynamics (doesn't look like you do). Do you really believe you're doing something for conservation? It's like a religion - you can pray five times a day and nothing will change .... but you will feel good. That's all.


----------



## imported_Varanus (Jun 21, 2011)

Chances are that most of these releases end up further down the food chain, so your not even doing the animals themselves any favours! Any idiot can see how wrong this is, surely?! It reminds me of the Dingo lady on Fraser Island.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 21, 2011)

imported_Varanus said:


> Chances are that most of these releases end up further down the food chain, so your not even doing the animals themselves any favours! Any idiot can see how wrong this is, surely?! It reminds me of the Dingo lady on Fraser Island.



The biggest problem i see is that you are messing with population densities without adressing the issues for the decline in numbers. The environment will support as many of any particular species as it can. Introducing more into an area that is already at its current natural saturation point only increases the pressure on the species and others that compete with it, which will either mean the reintroduced animals will die off, other animals in competition will die off, prey and feed items will die off or the overall health of the population will decrease. Which at best makes the exercise futile at worst detrimental.

This is one reasons why the panel on that video agree that insurance populations are not something that the general keeper wont be the people to get involved.

When people get involved with the environment things get out of balance.


----------



## Wally (Jun 21, 2011)

I certainly couldn't agree with that approach either colubridking.


----------



## Elapidae1 (Jun 21, 2011)

colubridking said:


> WR, i dont agree with your comment _"The bureaucrats need to realise that no one will put their money into conservation programs if there is not going to be any financial return" _
> i am not as much i would like to be and willing to be - only thing that is stopping me at the moment is space. However i know people who have given up with the bureaucrats and waiting for laws to change and have purchased legal, captive bred animals from SA, VIC or NT and are breeding them in NSW and releasing youngsters (or once old enough to be released how ever old that is) back into the wild by selectively breeding them and making sure genes are are not crossed etc. I guarantee there are other people doing this with other mammals. and i will to get into it when space is available and honestly i dont really give a **** if people tell me otherwise because i am more them capable of obtaining vulnerable or threatened animals, breeding them and releasing and i will happily do it out of my back pocket. The Bureaucrats waste to much and I, along with many others have given up and taken matters into their own hands.
> 
> CK
> ...


 
This practice as well as probably doing more damage than good, is damaging to the whole concept of captives for conservation. When the bureaucrats get wind of this type of stupidty it gives them reason to put a wall around the whole idea to stop it from escalating. Even for someone like myself with only basic understanding of ecology would realize that this practice is wrong and could likely be detrimental to the released species and any other species that occupy the release site.


----------



## colubridking (Jun 21, 2011)

Like i said, im not doing it, yet...so i don't see why people are saying i don't have a hold of genetics and such things. there are lots of people in on this thing they are doing, and they have it very organised. i don't know who knows who but they do have a good grasp of things which is being organised through conservation parks etc. I don't know enough to go into detail about but some of them have been working with legal capture/release programs to great effect. like i said i dont know how it works, but from what i know, its slowly, getting better.

CK


----------



## DanN (Jun 21, 2011)

Colubridking,

The initiative you mention poses an unacceptable disease risk. A number of studies document serious disease problems that result from the translocation of animals (see Deem et al. (2001) Putting theory into practice: wildlife health in conservation).

The removal of any animal from the wild, followed by its containment in a non-sterile facility and subsequent release provides a means for introduction of novel pathogens into wild populations. Considering you want to breed threatened or range restricted species for introduction, the effects of a potential disease introduction could be serious!

While the motives behind your proposed actions are no doubt noble (and I think I understand better than most the frustration conservationists have with bureaucrats), doing what you propose will do nothing for the species - but has the potential to do a lot of bad.

I hope that if, you, and your friends, choose to go-ahead with this then you invest considerable (and I mean considerable) time and money so that you are ACTUALLY ultimately benefiting the conservation of the species. Because, anything but perfection, could result in the serious endangerment of the very species you were hoping to protect.

Dan


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 22, 2011)

If they are doiong it legally then they obviously have all the relevant approvals from the beurocrats and to get that they would most likely have all of the science backing them up, which flies in the face of what you said in your original post. I would be interested to hear a few more specifics from you, like the species, areas and who is doign this.



colubridking said:


> Like i said, im not doing it, yet...so i don't see why people are saying i don't have a hold of genetics and such things. there are lots of people in on this thing they are doing, and they have it very organised. i don't know who knows who but they do have a good grasp of things which is being organised through conservation parks etc. I don't know enough to go into detail about but some of them have been working with legal capture/release programs to great effect. like i said i dont know how it works, but from what i know, its slowly, getting better.
> 
> CK


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 22, 2011)

By the looks of it, you know very little about what "the others" are doing and perhaps the reality is quite different. Sounds like a lo tof bulldust to me.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 22, 2011)

CK it sounds like this is something you have an interest and passion in. If you are really keen to get into these types of things I would encourage you to do it properly. Krefft has been kind enough to let us know that Greg Miles is doing a talk http://www.aussiepythons.com/forum/...n-42/attention-nsw-members-greg-miles-164665/ in NSW, if you are in the area i would encourage you to go along and have a good listen to his ideas in this regard. 



colubridking said:


> Like i said, im not doing it, yet...so i don't see why people are saying i don't have a hold of genetics and such things. there are lots of people in on this thing they are doing, and they have it very organised. i don't know who knows who but they do have a good grasp of things which is being organised through conservation parks etc. I don't know enough to go into detail about but some of them have been working with legal capture/release programs to great effect. like i said i dont know how it works, but from what i know, its slowly, getting better.
> 
> CK


----------



## silverback (Jun 22, 2011)

the problem has no simple answers. captive breeding is only part of the solution, and release of progeny may never happen - some animals are already on the conveyor belt to extinction and nothing is being done to protect their habitats. for some species, extinction in the wild is inevitable (due to government inaction) and their only opportunity for survival is in captivity - Lake Eacham Rainbow Fish, Spix Macaw, probably Gastric Brooding frogs and Paradise Parrots, ......... they are better bred than dead.

everybody should get along to this Attention all NSW members - Greg Miles at the AHS if for no other reason than to broaden your views, but you will be both entertained and informed.


----------



## Waterrat (Jun 22, 2011)

Have to check my frequent flyer points, it's not to be missed.

M


----------



## Jackrabbit (Jun 22, 2011)

Fuscus said:


> And on a related note ( or a continuation of the above rant ) it appears that in order to get or continue to do snake relocation in QLD you are now required to hold a senior first aid certificate.


 
Not sure why this is a problem? apart from the additional cost if you don't get paid to relocate. But then a first aid course isn't a bad thing to have anyway. JMO


----------



## Slickturtle (Jun 23, 2011)

waruikazi said:


> Wokka in terms of wild biodiversity a dead wild one is more useful than a captive live one in a private keepers hands, atleast the dead one is going back into the food chain...
> 
> Either way, if they become extinct in the wild but still exist in captivity the effect on the environment is exactly the same.
> 
> I think it is much better to have them in captivity than no where. But to me, having them in the average private keeper collections, that isn't conservation.



Hi Gordo. Thanks for your thoughtful contribution. But reading your words I get the impression that your are arguing against your own preferred position. IE would you preserve your own live snakes in a jar because keeping them live does not contribute to 'conservation'? You could save a lot of money if you did!

But firstly I used to have your view that captive breeding of rare animals was an "anti extinction" strategy. But recently I have changed that and I now see it as a conservation strategy. I now argue that captive breeding in private hands is 'conservation' for a couple of good reasons: 1.Look at the following international definitions of conservation very closely. 
*The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary defines conservation as: 
“The action of conserving; preservation from destructive influences, decay or waste”. (1973) 

and 

The IUCN/UNEP/WWF, World Conservation Strategy (1980)
“Conservation is the management of human use of the biosphere so that it may yield the greatest sustainable benefit to present generations while maintaining its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of the future generations.”*

I would argue under those definitions, that keeping animals in captivity (even if they are extinct in the wild with no prospect of release) is conservation - who am I to argue against the Oxford English and the IUCN/WWF?! Thus, according to the WWF etc., the RSP story *is* a win for conservation.

and 2. you say "What use are these animals to the environment if they are stuck in glass cages? The answer to this is nothing!" You have to put that in context Gordo. I would counter argue "What use are Oenpelli Pythons to the environment if their population has crashed to only 20% of the original? Same answer - nothing. Look at quolls in your area. They have crashed to about 5% of their pre toad population. What use are the remaining ones to the environment? The answer is nil. In north Australia now - because of toads - we have lots of native animal species which are now "useless" in the environment because their numbers have been reduced below the point of "ecological extinction".

You talk about our selfishness. Selfishness in humans is a force for good as well a force for bad. Your mother possibly had you for selfish reasons - and mine me etc. You could mount the case that a lot of conservation effort is done for selfish reasons - ie people like to live in a nice place.

Finally, we all know that extinctions are just starting in Australia (and we should not get too hung up on the word extinction "population crash" is almost as bad as absolute extinction in my view) so you have to ask the question - Why not? 

Forget about reintroductions for the moment, if a species is heading for, or experienced a population crash in the wild - why not let people keep, breed and sell them? What are the reasons against this?
 
Sorry for being too lengthy. Keep working up your ideas Gordo - we really need good thinkers in our midst.

Greg Miles

Hi Gordo. You say - "The majority of our conservation efforts need to be focused on restoring a balance to our environment. Fix the environment and we won't need insurance policies."

Well after more than 30 years as a Chief Ranger in one of Australia's largest, most famous and wealthiest national parks - I can tell you that for th past 40 or more years the majority of our conservation effort HAS been focused on restoring or maintaining the balance but it ain't working. *We can't fix the environment!* in countless cases.

Almost all of our protected area are going backwards in terms of environmental quality. Have a walk around the outskirts of your town of Oenpelli and you will see a landscape under mortal attack. Nothing will save it from Mimosa, Para Grass, Mission and Gamba Grass, Olive Hymenacne, Salvinia, destructive fires and Cane Toads. It is because we cannot fix the environment that we must think outside the box to save our wildlife. Commercial utilisation is one thing which can help and because it costs the Government very little, it is doable.

Cheers

GLM


----------



## Pythoninfinite (Jun 23, 2011)

CK, there's no point in captive breeding and release if we don't know why stuff is going down the tube in the first place - if the habitat is buggered, you're just sending good animals to a certain death - what's the point in that? Habitat restoration may NEVER occur, but if we have a suitable population of captives which can be reintroduced IF the habitat secrets are exposed and dealt with, THEN we MAY be able to put some of them back. That's only an IF, not a primary objective at this point in time.

Jamie


----------



## Red-Ink (Jun 23, 2011)

Would it be a feasable idea as such for private breeders/hobbyist who have specimens in their collection that have threatened wild populations to give back to a professional conservation body (what ever that may be) a portion/percentage of progeany of their specimens... The conservation programs governing body can then decide the issues of re-introduction if and when that is applicable from the specimens they have.

It'll be like increasing the breeding programs by employing the amateurs. I know quarantine issues will arise from the idea but if there was a way to risk manage and access this, i think it would be a help towards increasing a breeding population program for some threatened species.


----------



## waruikazi (Jun 23, 2011)

Greg fantastic that you have joined us once again! I was hoping and dreading that you would!

I don't keep many snakes any more, because i prefer to see them in the bush and i do have a much larger preserved collection than live lol. I don't see my keeping of animals as conservation, i keep them/it because i enjoy interacting with them. Right now i encounter dozens of wild reptiles in the environment each week so i really don't feel the need to keep them. But you are right, if i had to choose between seeing a live captive, a preserved animal or nothing at all i would choose the live one any day. But i don't think even you could argue that a live captive is having more of an effect on biodiversity than a preserved one?

I personally see a big difference in 'conservation' keeping and hobby keeping. I haven't got a problem with either and i am all for it, but the way our keeping hobby is currently structured i don't think it can do an awful lot for 'wild' conservation except raising awareness. And i think to preserve a species in captivity, true to its wild counterpart, would take people with more expertise than the average keeper. I'm pretty sure you have agreed with me on that in the past.

I know our current efforts aren't working and we need to try some new things, i think the ideas that you have and the other panel members are fantastic and should be given a crack. I would follow you to the centre of the escarpment and back to get it done! But i still think that the ideas can only be a small part of a greater effort, all of which are as important as each other. 

I don't have the experience to argue your point of ecological extinction, so to that all i will say is i get a whole lot more satisfaction out of seeing an animal in the bush than in captivity (and i finally got to see a wild pig nose a month back!) 

I'll finish be reitterating that i totally support these ideas and we need to explore more and new methods of conservation if we are to keep many of aour species from total extinction. I think i'm a little more grounded than most people in what we really can acheive but i still think they need to be explored and i support them.


----------



## Elapidae1 (Jun 23, 2011)

Hi Greg, could you please explain "below the point of ecological extinction" a little further, Im assuming it means that said animals are at a point where they can no longer bounce back because their ecological niche is so far degraded it's beyond restoration and extinction is just a matter of time.


----------



## Slickturtle (Jun 23, 2011)

*About national action*



cement said:


> How about solutions Gordo?
> The problems are well known, and the CB hobby/industry is its own animal.
> Satellite colonies are only as good as their genetic diversity, but what else is there.
> If these types of colonies had no potential, then where does that leave the tassie Devil. Would people as passionate and knowledgeable as JW get involved in a lost cause?
> ...


 
I am right there with your Juggernaut concept. Cement.

I think Australia is nearing a tipping point where things will change if we get organised. People have tried in the past but failed. BUT the big difference now is that - we have in hand all the evidence we need to show that the Government wildlife agencies are failing to do the job. That means that for the first time ever, we can now fight them on more even terms. And the general public (I assume and hope) would support us in respect of our goal of saving animals from extinction by keeping, loving and breeding them. 

As someone else mentioned, we also need the get the mammal people and the aviculturalists, ANGFA (Aust. Native Fish mob) on board as well. I have written a road map for how we would do this.

Slickturtle


----------



## Elapidae1 (Jun 23, 2011)

Have our attempts at conservation excellerated the decline of our protected areas? Should we accept that captive coservation is the only option available? Should the majority of focus from conservationalists be captive conservation or should we still be striving to protect the areas in which these animals occur or just accept it doesn't work? Do win run the risk of people accepting the wild extinction of a species simply because we have it in captivity?


----------



## Slickturtle (Jun 23, 2011)

steve1 said:


> Hi Greg, could you please explain "below the point of ecological extinction" a little further, Im assuming it means that said animals are at a point where they can no longer bounce back because their ecological niche is so far degraded it's beyond restoration and extinction is just a matter of time.


 
Hi Steve1

Roughly speaking, "ecological extinction" is when a species falls so far below its natural population density and distribution that it no longer fulfills the ecological role that it evolved to do. In other words, its presence or absence in the environment is irrelevant at the ecological level.

Cheers



steve1 said:


> Have our attempts at conservation excellerated the decline of our protected areas? Should we accept that captive coservation is the only option available? Should the majority of focus from conservationalists be captive conservation or should we still be striving to protect the areas in which these animals occur or just accept it doesn't work? Do win run the risk of people accepting the wild extinction of a species simply because we have it in captivity?


 
Gosh Steve1

these are excellent question. Can you make it to the ASH meeting in Sydney?! It takes a bit too much space to deal with these on a forum.

GLM


----------



## Elapidae1 (Jun 23, 2011)

LOL Unfortunately I can't make it, I'm in Perth but please don't feel obliged to answer. I allready have my opinions and was merely trying to stimulate further conversation on a subject I enjoy.


----------



## abnrmal91 (Jan 31, 2012)

Sorry to drag up an old thread but, I watched this video again today fantastic is all I can say. Its a pity the powers that be don't have the same understanding of wildlife.


----------



## waruikazi (Jan 31, 2012)

abnrmal91 said:


> Sorry to drag up an old thread but, I watched this video again today fantastic is all I can say. Its a pity the powers that be don't have the same understanding of wildlife.



Things are getting underway. They can only go species at a time.


----------



## Daryl_H (Jan 31, 2012)

Wasnt there a turtle brought back from the brink? by captive breeding and release? margret river turtle maybe?


----------



## waruikazi (Jan 31, 2012)

And the bizzo going on in this thread, http://www.aussiepythons.com/forum/australian-snakes-37/oenpelli-python-179071/


----------



## ricky_91 (Jan 31, 2012)

witch one is it ?


----------



## abnrmal91 (Jan 31, 2012)

Yes there has been progress on the Oenpelli since that video. Hoping to go on the Oenpelli safari with Gavin, I can't do much but it may help a little.


----------



## MathewB (Jan 31, 2012)

Can someone link the video again please? The original one is coming up with a video about bullying for me


----------



## abnrmal91 (Jan 31, 2012)

The Hot Seat: They Shoot Lions Don't They? - Environment - Browse - Big Ideas - ABC TV


----------

