# Croc thrown from car in wildlife bust



## RoryBreaker (Feb 7, 2015)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-06/crocodile-thrown-from-car-in-wildlife-smuggling-bust/6076900


----------



## Umbral (Feb 7, 2015)

Hope they get the book thrown at them, preferably after they have been thrown from a moving car.


----------



## dragonlover1 (Feb 7, 2015)

Umbral said:


> Hope they get the book thrown at them, preferably after they have been thrown from a moving car.



mongrels need to be shot


----------



## RoryBreaker (Feb 7, 2015)

I wonder how the 16 year old boy's parents are feeling?


----------



## FAY (Apr 16, 2015)

Does anyone know who these people were that got caught?


----------



## RoryBreaker (Apr 16, 2015)

Everyone knows who they are, just ask around at your next herp meeting.


----------



## GBWhite (Apr 16, 2015)

From what I hear I think that unscrupulous, indiscriminate poaching of Ozzie reptiles has become a very common practise for both the national and international trade since the introduction of licensing throughout the states and territories. This is exactly what the authorities were concerned would happen if licensing was introduced. Weren't far off the mark, were they?


----------



## jack (Apr 17, 2015)

I fail to see how the introduction of licencing has resulted in poaching becoming common practise. Poaching was going on before licences. If any thing I would suspect there is less poaching (certainly of commonly kept species), as there are easily obtained captive bred animals now.


----------



## GBWhite (Apr 17, 2015)

Your obviously out of the loop Jack. Between blanket legislation and licensing being introduced I used to get out in the field quite a lot and the reptile numbers that had been depleted pre mid seventies had recovered quite well during the 20 year period that there wasn't much interest shown in the hobby, especially hops and the more common species around the Sydney Basin. I've visited a number of key locations since licensing and it's like the old days. On top of that it's pretty common knowledge that a lot of hobbyists are getting out and physically looking for herps, a visit to most popular locations throughout the country identifies massive habitat destruction from people turning rocks and not replacing them and people can't seem to help themselves when they find something they want. I'll add that you changed my opinion of you when you place that little unsolicited comment on one of the reptile facebook page some years back.


----------



## eipper (Apr 17, 2015)

They were members of this site. 

As for poaching caused by licensing- I disagree that it has a influence either way. As for more recent declines - what are you basing your assumption on.

Surely climate change, habitat destruction, pest species, habitat fragmentation has had an influence. To suggest that reptile keeping is the cause of an overall reduction in reptilian population seems far fetched to me.


----------



## GBWhite (Apr 17, 2015)

I haven't stated that it's the sole reason, in fact I don't see where I've stated that it is a contributing factor to anything I merely made the statement that it is common practice. However; it is more than possible that it is a contributing factor Scott in addition to all the above, not just from the removal of animals but micro habitat destruction. I've no doubt that licensing has just added fuel to the fire by providing a larger market. Whether it is poaching for profit or just removing animals to add to a collection or replace deceased licensed animals it is still poaching. Sure some people may take one or two animals but multiply this by the number that do and it has a dramatic effect on populations (especially from target areas). I'm not saying that everyone who holds a license is participating but I know first hand that it is a common practice.


----------



## Skipperandrew (Apr 17, 2015)

I believe its called "flipping over stock" . It is happening in WA lots by keepers looking for something better, cooking the books on captive offspring and replacing deceased animals rather than reporting them. Its all about attractiveness,colours, patterns etc. The poachers in question seem to be very misguided youth from big cities with no respect or apparent realization that raping national parks to make a quick buck is not ok in any way. They are after a get rich quick way and unfortunately the hobby supports them. Some without even knowing. I have seen licenced people selling SWCP on facebook poached from national parks by this person only days before. These charges are only the tip of the ice berg to what these guys have done. They were responsable for extensive habitat sheet rock destruction in the wheatbelt last year and removed large numbers of stimmies >140 animals only to realize they cant sell them because of all the captive bred stock. Not sure what happened to a lot of the animals but Parks confiscated a large number and removed the individuals licences.


----------



## Pythoninfinite (Apr 18, 2015)

I agree with George to some degree - as soon as reptile keeping became legal and the numbers of captive animals of many species skyrocketed, it becomes very difficult to ascertain what's legal and what's not, given that deaths will be replaced, animals will be swapped for more "desirably" coloured specimens found in the wild - things like Carpets & Diamonds vary greatly and it would be very easy for a fancier to swap a more "beautiful" wild caught one for a less desirable captive bred one. Also, unless wildlife authorities in all jurisdictions actually came out and counted the eggs in your incubator, it would be impossible to keep tabs on the numbers of the more common species that are bred.

Similarly with exotics, a blanket ban makes it obvious that any private individual with an exotic is breaking the law.

Jamie


----------



## snake-man (Apr 18, 2015)

George, yes hobbyists catch critters illegally and yes they smash rocks in the process and screw habitats. But in terms of the overall scheme of things, their impact on reptiles is (with few exceptions) negligible. Noting that collectors miss more reptiles than they can find and most populations have 30-60% turnover of individuals per annum by routine mortality, predation, etc, recovery from decline by unexpected disaster (bushfire, predation, etc) is usually measured in just a few short years.
And while humans are a net negative on reptiles, there are numerous instances of excellent habitat creation by our species, including when dumping rubbish everywhere, including in back yards.
For what it's worth, I have noticed an increase in reptile numbers across Australia's urban areas in the last 4 decades as species adapt and move into built up areas they were extirpated from.
Look no further than Lane Cove!
All the best


----------



## Brando_fish (Apr 18, 2015)

dragonlover1 said:


> mongrels need to be shot


true that, who would do such a cruel thing


----------



## GBWhite (Apr 19, 2015)

snake-man said:


> George, yes hobbyists catch critters illegally and yes they smash rocks in the process and screw habitats. But in terms of the overall scheme of things, their impact on reptiles is (with few exceptions) negligible. Noting that collectors miss more reptiles than they can find and most populations have 30-60% turnover of individuals per annum by routine mortality, predation, etc, recovery from decline by unexpected disaster (bushfire, predation, etc) is usually measured in just a few short years.



Hi Snake-man,

That's very interesting. I was wondering where these stats come from and who, when and how they were compiled/confirmed. I have some recall of reading a paper or article on the topic some years back and not agreeing on the result or the manner in which the study was undertaken, I think it involved assumption due to estimates (guessing) but I may be wrong and it might have been a discussion I had with someone. At the moment I can only assume that the data provided (re- turnover of individuals per annum) refers to natural selection and does not take into account any long term effect that continuous searching for and removal of target species combined with subsequent micro habitat destruction can have on the overall populations of an area. Anyone who's been around the scene that long must be aware of the effects collecting had on herp populations around Sydney, The Blue Mountains, Central Coast and South Coast during the 60's and 70's. It wasn't caused just by the removal of reptiles, more so the destruction of specific habitat by collectors. I'll add that I'm sure your aware that the more you get out in the field the better you get at understanding reptile ecology and locating animals. 

I agree that some of the more common and hardy species are adapting to inhabit urban areas especially in the outer suburbs and rural areas and that humans contribute to habitat in these situations by providing shelter spots by way of dumping rubbish etc (which by the way is often removed during the annual clean up Australia Day) however; these species appear to me to be limited compared to those that once inhabited the same areas, even Lane Cove...hahaha...and of no real interest to hobbyists. I also believe a contributing fact associated with this result is the general public becoming more aware and less fearful of reptiles through contact with hobbyists and educational displays. 

All the best to you my friend.

Kind regards

George


----------



## Pythoninfinite (Apr 19, 2015)

Yep, domestic rubbish, sheets of iron, asbestos, old lino & carpet used to be magnets for some species of herps, and were prime spots to look for critters back in the 50s, 60s & 70s, but as George said, most of that stuff has been cleaned up now and one rarely sees any of this "useful" rubbish in the bush these days. In any event, the species it harboured were reasonably limited - in & around Perth where I spent my childhood, Dugites, Tigers, Ctenotis skinks, Shinglebacks and a few other species were the most common find. You could almost predict the species you'd encounter. Target species with limited range and specialised habitat are the ones that are especially threatened by illegal collecting, and the Hops fit beautifully into that category.

On a related note, it has seemed to me for a while that our local Intergrade pythons are seen more frequently (by me anyway) in areas where Lantana is thick - anyone else noticed this, and could Lantana provide a degree of protection for these critters?

Jamie


----------



## snake-man (Apr 19, 2015)

George and Jamie, I knew it was only a matter of time before the Hoppo bogey got raised.
The data does not support any claim at all that private keepers have threatened populations, save for those immediately abutting major urban areas.
A significant paper on the matter was published in 2005, which later had it's key recommendations adopted by the NSW Government, most notably being the creation of fake rocks to be used in their known areas.

.... And yes, when the "clean up Australia" people started their wholesale campaign of removing busted cars and the like from the bush I cried.
All the best


----------



## GBWhite (Apr 19, 2015)

Hi Ray,

My friend I am familiar with the above mentioned paper having read it many years ago. Hops are and have been my thing for a very long time and I have to admit that you make some very valid points (especially regarding the motivation for the study in the first place and the correlation of subsequent papers published later on). Likewise there are a number of points brought forward that I disagree with.

I actually authored an unpublished species profile on them for the NSW NPWS in 1993. In fact it was me who was called upon by Rick and John to assist John with his original paper on the subject and through personal communication at the time and prior to the original study, Rick admitted to me he had only ever collected one specimen and John had never had anything to do with them at all let alone collect any. 

Personally I was very disappointed in the end result of Webb and Shine's original publication as I knew for a fact that a lot of the data was not actually verified during the study period. I also questioned on going publications ie; Substitute rock replacement and population predation by Lyre Birds. I can tell you know that the substitute rock replacement was a dismal failure and a total waist of time and considering the nature of the prefered exfoliates I doubt very much that Lyre Birds had/have a significant affect on populations, like wise I question their assumption regarding inbreeding and the alleged low fedundancy rate of wild populations.

I know for a fact that you can walk onto a ridge and walk past 90% of assumed micro habitat and go to a particular rock or rocks to find your hops, simply because of the location, shape, size, thickness and nature of the exfoliate against the parent rock. So even though there maybe an abundance of assumed micro habitat, it is actually limited due to preference for one type over another. Due to the vulnerability of their habitat to summer fires, other than finding refuge in hollows of large gums (which are limited a top sandstone ridges) I don't see what advantage they would have finding refuge in shrubs and accompanying coastal heath and believe they are a lot less arboreal than first believed. They are built for climbing rocks and through personal observation believe they prefer to find refuge in crevices on the face of the sandstone escarpment during the daytime periods over the hotter months and scour the tops of the outcrops in search of prey at night. This activity makes them all the less likely to be discovered by collectors during this time of the year. I have a theory why they emerge from these crevices during winter and spring but I won't go into that here.

As with several species of reptiles that inhabit the Sydney Sandstone Region, there colouring and patterns make them ideal for utilising sandstone crevices as a means of concealment and I'll add that I've found plenty in these situations during the winter and spring periods.

It is obvious to anyone who has anything to do with them that individual specimens do utilise the same rocks as shelter sites, over and over again, on different occasions over periods that extend to years (personal obs & communication with a well know hop man of the 60's, 70's and 80's, Mr Mick Van der Straten)...who incidentally was very successful breeding them during this same period) I also have a theory for this but again I won't go into it here.

Most certainly habitat destruction is a contributing factor that affects population densities however if you care to delve further you'll discover that there are plenty being held in collections illegally at the moment. The populations are no doubt sustainable and secure in isolated and inaccessible habitat, but those that are currently being held illegally have been removed from wild populations in restricted areas. I'll add they they still are valued by collectors and you only have to visit some of the reptile facebook pages to see how many people are out there actively searching for them still. There might only be a limited number of people removing them in numbers, but they are a marketable commodity. I believe another major reasons that people are taking them from the wild is due to the restrictions and conditions placed on having them and the current price. On top of that I hear they are also prized by international collectors and fetching sums in the tens of thousands of dollars. Surely, these points alone are incentive enough for some to get out and get there hands on them.

I think I've said enough for now and besides I have to go off and prepare for this week's work commitments. 

Again, all the best to you

George.


----------



## C.Bayo (Apr 20, 2015)

dont forget the authers who have been catching and getting people to catch reptiles for them so they can get a good pic this has been going on for years ,


----------



## Pythoninfinite (Apr 20, 2015)

snake-man said:


> George and Jamie, I knew it was only a matter of time before the Hoppo bogey got raised.
> The data does not support any claim at all that private keepers have threatened populations, save for those immediately abutting major urban areas.
> A significant paper on the matter was published in 2005, which later had it's key recommendations adopted by the NSW Government, most notably being the creation of fake rocks to be used in their known areas.
> 
> ...



Just to make it clear - I'm a relative newcomer to NSW reptile collecting history & politics, having only been here since 2005. My comment about Hops was more about suggesting that desirable species with specialised microhabitat requirements, such as exfoliated sandstone or loose bark on trees, are more easily found and collected when targeted by collectors who know where to look, with the prospect of both localised habitat destruction and reduction in local populations of that species. This has certainly happened in WA where wholesale LEGAL collecting (still permitted btw) has seen significant granite habitat damage and localised population reduction in the so-called "Wheatbelt Stimson's Python". This is arguably one of the most attractive Stimmies, and therefore there is a good market for animals taken by legal collectors. As George suggests, the Hops have a niche market and are very desirable overseas, so it makes them a worthwhile target. My guess is that H. bungaroides is in a better place than the Wheatbelt Stimson's however, because the Stimmies live in widely separated but isolated communities in granites on farmland, whereas the Broadies live in extensive and often rough bushland.

Jamie

I doubt that they would be collected to the point of extinction, but on the outcrops that have been stripped of animals and the exfoliated granites damaged irreparably, we may never see these animals in those places again because suitable habitat probably takes hundreds of thousands of years to develop.


----------

