I don't see how you can say that genetic loss can be overestimated. Yes,
thes animals can be line bred and be healthy for generations, but what about
the adaptive advantages that these animals need to survive in the wild? By
captive breeding for wild release, we are essentially playing God. We are
only selecting for things that we think are important, not what may be
important for survival in the wild. We can not know all the selective
pressures that go on in an ecosystem.
><)> Removing any specimens reduces
><)> > genetic diversity in the system that animals are in.
><)> That is exactly what predators do to them. What to
><)> do? Declining their
><)> permit? What makes the difference is that
><)> predators usually only take what
><)> they need.
Yes, they remove genetic diversity from the system, however that is what we
call natural selection. It has a purpose and contributes to the evolution
of the species.
><)> > For arguments sake, if we were to allow
><)> hobbyists to have these species,
><)> > should there be a screening process? What would
><)> the requirements be? I'd
><)> > be interested in hearing anyones comments on
><)> this specifically.
><)> Why not? As in all parts of life - if I want
><)> something I have to do
><)> something. The requirements could be agreed upon
><)> interdisciplinary. We do
><)> this in Germany not only for endangered species.
><)> There are regulations for
><)> maintaining species, for showing qualification in
><)> care and transport. Not
And finally, you are creating more work and bogging down an already taxed
system.
Nick Zarlinga
Aquarium Biologist
Cleveland Metroparks Zoo
216.661.6500 ext 4485
><)> -----Original Message-----
><)> From: owner-nanfa_at_aquaria.net
><)> On Behalf
><)> Of Steffen Hellner
><)> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 12:14 PM
><)> To: nanfa_at_aquaria.net
><)> Subject: Re: NANFA-- Collecting ethics
><)>
><)>
><)> > Steffen, we can go toe to toe on this as you
><)> have effectively done, but the
><)> > fact remains that we need to deal with reality.
><)> In the grand scheme of
><)> > things, hobbyists don't have the knowledge or
><)> the knowhow to deal with
><)> these
><)> > species that we are talking with. Again, some
><)> do, but we need to look at
><)> > things as a whole and deal with it in that
><)> fashion. No, not all biologists
><)> > have the passion, but I believe that it is much
><)> more than you are giving
><)> > credit for. By going into biology as a
><)> discipline, you know that you are
><)> > not going to be making loads of money. You do
><)> it for the passion and the
><)> > interest.
><)> Or for the safe employment status (over here), or
><)> because it is not that
><)> stressing a sassembly lines or big companies. When
><)> young I thought it is as
><)> you say but when I started studying biology I
><)> found most professors, and
><)> students having serious deficits in passion and
><)> motivation. That4s one
><)> reason why I quit it. The "biology business" as I
><)> encountered it was not
><)> where I like to be part of. Individuals excepted,
><)> of course.
><)>
><)> > Again, certain hobbyists may be great at it, but
><)> how do you weed
><)> > out those that really are good from those that
><)> *think* they really are
><)> good?
><)> That4s one of the major problems, I agree. But
><)> applications won4t be that
><)> much I think. Looking at the papers for some
><)> states I found they have nice
><)> hurdles built in to keep spontaneous applicants
><)> off to a certain degree. I
><)> support restrictions in permit as far as one
><)> should state the purpose of his
><)> intensions collecting a species.
><)>
><)> > You make the comment that you "Can4t see the
><)> protection by limiting
><)> > hobbyists and letting the industry go on with
><)> pollution and destruction."
><)> > You are taking it personally and I believe that
><)> you are not looking at the
><)> > best interest of the species as a whole.
><)> Removing any specimens reduces
><)> > genetic diversity in the system that animals are in.
><)> That is exactly what predators do to them. What to
><)> do? Declining their
><)> permit? What makes the difference is that
><)> predators usually only take what
><)> they need.
><)>
><)> Genetic loss: I am convinced that this is
><)> overestimated by far as amphibia
><)> and fish are generally highly stable to inbreeding
><)> and even transbreeding
><)> (the green-frogs e.g. and the cleptones). These
><)> animals can be bred healthy
><)> even in-line for many generations. genetic
><)> isolation and inbreeding (lack of
><)> gene exchange) are found in mostly every
><)> salamander and newts. Scientist can
><)> even tell local populations from each other. And
><)> they like it when
><)> "natiralist" transfer specimen to different
><)> locations to "save" them. They
><)> may crass the entire population by that. So from
><)> my point the taking of a
><)> little of the so highly precious genetic diversity
><)> doesn4t matter at all.
><)> Otherwise most of the amphibians would already be
><)> extinct. To them its
><)> natural.
><)>
><)> > By allowing only a
><)> > certain number of animals out by issuing permits
><)> is a way to reduce that
><)> > genetic loss by taking an educated stance- you
><)> only allow a small number of
><)> > animals out to those who have the best chance to
><)> learn the most for the
><)> > species as a whole. The rest of the equation
><)> should be protecting the
><)> > habitat and all of the *other* stressors in it.
><)> I respect your opinion,
><)> but
><)> > I think that you are not looking at things in
><)> reality. We are talking
><)> > numbers here, plain and simple.
><)> Yes, I am talking of numbers, rather small
><)> numbers. Keep just some of these
><)> idiotic fishermen and offroad driver off and there
><)> would be hundreds of e.g.
><)> hellbenders saced for science and hobbyists. I am
><)> absolutely convinced to
><)> not only look at this from my personal interest
><)> but at reality. Your
><)> argumentation is like cutting some leafes from the
><)> tree rather than going to
><)> the roots. We all have to decide on an at least
><)> national scale to either go
><)> for unlimited industrial development and
><)> consumption of resources (material,
><)> ground, water, air) or to change paradigm to a
><)> substantial limitation of
><)> what is called "growth". This in fact would take
><)> much of each and all of us.
><)> This will not come, world will go on as it is. And
><)> there will always be a
><)> group available to blame for the situation and to
><)> show "we are doinmg
><)> something". Yes, but inconsequently and often at
><)> the wrong end of the
><)> ladder.
><)>
><)> > For arguments sake, if we were to allow
><)> hobbyists to have these species,
><)> > should there be a screening process? What would
><)> the requirements be? I'd
><)> > be interested in hearing anyones comments on
><)> this specifically.
><)> Why not? As in all parts of life - if I want
><)> something I have to do
><)> something. The requirements could be agreed upon
><)> interdisciplinary. We do
><)> this in Germany not only for endangered species.
><)> There are regulations for
><)> maintaining species, for showing qualification in
><)> care and transport. Not
><)> perfect still but its improving and more and more
><)> people take part. This is
><)> accepted within scientists, hobbyist, politicians,
><)> and the bureaucracy. But
><)> we are still far away from perfection. At first
><)> many hobbyists were afraid
><)> of being over-regulated, other interest groups the
><)> other way around. Todays
><)> situation is fine for all parties and for the aim
><)> of protecting all species,
><)> endangered or not.
><)>
><)> Steffen
><)> ---------------------------
><)> /"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this
><)> list do not necessarily
><)> / reflect the beliefs or goals of the North
><)> American Native Fishes
><)> / Association"
><)> / This is the discussion list of the North
><)> American Native Fishes Association
><)> / nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or
><)> get help, send the word
><)> / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not
><)> subject) of an email to
><)> / nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version,
><)> send the command to
><)> / nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
><)> / For more information about NANFA, visit our web
><)> page, http://www.nanfa.org
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org