Bringing relatively rare species into captive breeding programs does not necessarily promote poaching. Indeed the opposite may be true or even a more likely outcome. There are some great and recent examples within the Morelia genus, one of the best being M. carinata. Although the price was initially very high for this species, after only a few short years of captive breeding there's been a considerable price drop. We've seen the same thing happen with native M. viridis. Due to the fecundity of pythons, their numbers usually increase exponentially in captivity. In other words, pythons usually have relatively large clutches and a high survival rate when in competent hands.
This last point is a critical one for M. oenpelliensis. My understanding is that they're considerably more sensitive than other species within the genus. However, the same was/is often said about M. viridis and sometimes about M. carinata, especially initially. With both of these precedents, the mysteries of their successful captive husbandry and breeding have been revealed in a relatively short period of time in good hands. The best hands so far have been those of Peter Krauss, although there's probably a small number of experienced herpers that would be just as capable. The responsibility of being first custodians of such magnificent species as these, is a great privilege and honour.
A back-up plan for this species survival (and many others) is perhaps the noblest benefit of being given the privilege of being able to keep native wildlife.
Do we want to go down in history as being the generation that sat by and did pretty much nothing as yet another priceless species disappeared into extinction like the Tasmanian Tiger?
