Stan Perkins
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Zarlinga" <njz_at_clevelandmetroparks.com>
To: <nanfa_at_aquaria.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:03 AM
Subject: RE: NANFA--genetics again and predators- Collecting ethics
> ><)> 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.
>
> 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 /----------------------------------------------------------------------------- /"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