CBW Questions

[tglazie]

Hmm... So, does the ESA listing have nothing to do with the CITES listing? Are animals on the ESA listing ever taken off the ESA listing should the animal's numbers in the wild increase to allow the animal classification under Appendix 2 or 3? Is there a chance that the sulcata could ever fall under this listing, given the sorry state of wild populations?

T.G.

 

[deadheadvet]

Rarely do animals get removed. American Alligator and I believe the Bald Eagle have been removed. Since it can be very arbitrary, unlikely to see spedies taken off the list. As far as the Sulcata goes, and the African Leopard Tortoise, you will not see them removed form CITES Appendix 2. They can carry a species of tick that will affect Cattle. So you will not see them nor should they be removed. Sulcatas and Leopards breed like rabbits and are incredibly plentiful in the US. They can be exported to other countries of the world with proper paperwork but are banned from import from Africa. ESA has nothing to do with CITES. It is only recognized in the US. No country recognizes ESA.

 

[JoesMum]

Responses in the body of your text as courier type face.

@Will changing the font works fine if you're not using the app. A different colour works better for those of us not using a computer, but our phones or tablets instead.

 

[tglazie]

Thanks for all the info. Good things to know. I'll post whenever I think of more unusual questions to ask.

T.G.

 

[tglazie]

It's just interesting to me that importation of sulcatas and leopards has been banned (which I feel is appropriate; I wish this were true for Russians) and USFW determined it unnecessary to require cbw permits for their interstate commerce, but radiated tortoises were somehow of a different status. Arbitrary seems the proper word for describing these rules. I've never been much of one for authority or the law. My father always urged me to go into law school. My response was that I preferred to earn my living honestly.

T.G.

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

To be a signatory nation to CITES (an international treaty) each country had to create a internal or national law to protect native species and/or species that nation impacts. The USA at the time was a huge consumer of animals from all over the world. ESA listing of species not native was to some extent a push by USFWS to those range countries to get on with protecting their own wildlife.

There are other international treaties regarding wildlife, but they are not associated with in-country conservation law enforcement the way CITES is, as far as it has been explained to me.

The law regarding sulcatas, leos, and some hinge-backs, ban for ticks was not created by USFWS, but they are the guys with guns at the border regulating animal importation, so they got stuck with enforcing it. This was not a labeled a conservation law for wildlife, but as an agriculture (cattle) protection act. Much like the Earlier act to prohibit bird importation, again labeled as protecting the poultry industry, but has served as a wildlife conservation law to some extent.

ESA and CITES both came out in 1973, and were made to be collaborative as I mention. I would speculate that there was much overkill on listing non-native species to the US as the CITES had not been ratified (adopted) right away by many countries that later did sign on. It seems some provision for removing non native species from CITES as other nations got on board with it should have been incorporated into CITES. But it was not.

So you have to ask yourself, why would any elected official do anything that other elected officials could be critical of? Elected officials create law, not disassemble it. They just don't. The only way to move the idea forward would be to write another law indicating some test of structure for native range states to pass, for the US to de-list non-native wildlife from our ESA. And why would you do that, so a bunch of whiney pet owners can have more pets. There would need to be a substantive argument that it is a conservation increasing effort.

Who might not support that? Those that currently have a $$ interest to keep things as they are. Hmmm, who might that be?

 

[Tom]

It's just interesting to me that importation of sulcatas and leopards has been banned (which I feel is appropriate; I wish this were true for Russians) and USFW determined it unnecessary to require cbw permits for their interstate commerce, but radiated tortoises were somehow of a different status. Arbitrary seems the proper word for describing these rules.

Arbitrary? Yes. I'd say so. But this is a double edged sword. On one hand it drives me nuts that we have more stupid overreaching government control in our lives regarding radiata and Galops. On the other hand, I'm glad its not a wet government blanket that covers many more species… yet. Better, in my mind, to have a couple of species regulated in some small way, than a blanket "no" on everything. I'll choose a little "arbitrary" over a total ban any day, even though I'd like to see some other more sensible alternative.

I don't agree with a blanket ban on importation of sulcatas, leopards or russians. I see no reason why sustainable numbers cannot be legally purchased, permitted and brought in. They don't even need to be wild caught. How about captive bred Ethiopian leopards out of Asia or Europe? Russian tortoises come in many geographically distinct varieties. I'd like to be able to import small numbers and start colonies representing each separate locality. Assurance colonies, if you will. I think it is wrong for our government to simply say "no" in this way. And more and more "no" is all we hear. New CBW permits being a perfect example.

 

[Yvonne G]

Don't get off track, but the African tortoise import ban was because of the deer tick.

 

[deadheadvet]

Actually the Tick species that can transmit Heartwater in Cattle is Amblyomma variegatum. The North American Deer Tick is Ixodes scapularis. There is a native species of tick related to A. variegatum, which you may be familiar with Amblyomma americanum, the Lone Star Tick

 

[BrianWI]

Write "sulcata" on receipt. Ship tortoise. Solved.

I like import/export bans myself. Too hard to track cb imports from wc imports. Kills off the monetary reward for catching wild animals for the pet trade and endangering them in their native habitats.

 

[deadheadvet]

I actually would like to see Pancake tortoises added to the list of banned exported tortoises from Africa. They have been reproducing very well worldwide in captivity that they should be banned from export out of Africa. As previously stated, no reason to restart export of Sulcatas and leopards out of Africa. I would be willing wager that there are more than 100,000 Leopards and Sulcatas in the US alone.

 

[Tom]

I actually would like to see Pancake tortoises added to the list of banned exported tortoises from Africa. They have been reproducing very well worldwide in captivity that they should be banned from export out of Africa. As previously stated, no reason to restart export of Sulcatas and leopards out of Africa. I would be willing wager that there are more than 100,000 Leopards and Sulcatas in the US alone.

Except for a few of us producing "pure" South Africans, and one man I know of with three other localities, most of the leopards in this country are mutts. I'd like to see a limited number allowed in from known localities so they can be kept separate and captive reproduction can then sustain the numbers.

This ban prevents us from being able to get in the Ethiopian giants that so many of us would like to work with.

 

[tglazie]

Very good point, Tom. A quota system would be far superior to an outright ban. I hadn't thought of it that way, but yes, definitely the better idea.

And Will, your point is also well taken. Perhaps these laws aren't as arbitrary as I would have initially argued, given their differing natures, one being a livestock protection, the other being a conservation measure. It's still a drag though, given that this whiney pet owner wants to see more of these pets more widely available.

T.G.

 

[Lincoln Michal]

I have seen a lot of nice south african leopard tortoise from Italy on the Internet. It would be nice if their offspring could be legally brought into the country. Have you seen the videos of Tartaruga Beach shows held in Italy- lots of great tortoises.

 

[tglazie]

I've seen those videos. It would be awesome to get some of those beasts on this side of the pond.

T.G.

 

[Lincoln Michal]

Have you seen the Video called 'Stigomochelys pardalis pardalis male', Its shows an enormous SA leopard tortoise running around a yard in Italy. Its a must see if you like SA leos.

 

[BrianWI]

In the pet trade, mutt vs "pure" local variant is irrelevant. Best to leave them where they are if the numbers are so low as to require protection. Not worth risking the wild population to have one more variant in captivity. The only people who generally care are those that see $$$ and they are the ones that the torts need to be protected from in the first place.

 

[Tom]

In the pet trade, mutt vs "pure" local variant is irrelevant.

Might be irrelevant to you, but its not irrelevant to the people doing it. See @HermanniChris for verification of what I say.

Best to leave them where they are if the numbers are so low as to require protection.

That's a good recipe for extinction. If the conditions that exist in the wild in the country of origin are leading to extinction, then how is leaving the remaining population there to expire too, a good strategy? Best, in my opinion, to establish assurance colonies.

The only people who generally care are those that see $$$ and they are the ones that the torts need to be protected from in the first place.

This is a very broad generalization, and in most cases it is wrong. I don't care about the money. Many of us here don't care about the money. I care about producing something "special" and doing a service for the species and other people that are interested in the same species that I'm interested in. I care about doing a good job and maintaining the lines we have in captivity. Nothing wrong with mutts. I have some of my own and love them, but that doesn't mean maintaining pure lines is "irrelevant" or profit driven. In most of the cases I've seen it is "passion" driven by people who love tortoises, love the tortoise hobby, and enjoy doing something different and admirable. There will be no profit in breeding my Sudan Sulcatas in the next few years, but its super cool because they are super cool tortoises. I can assure you that wild Sudan Sulcatas don't need to be protected from Tom the Dog Trainer.

Easy example: Platynota is extinct in the wild as far as we know. It still exists because of captive breeding populations that were established because a couple hundred captive bred individuals were imported in the late 90s'. These people that you think only care about the money and who you think the tortoises need to be protected from, are the only thing keeping this species alive on the earth.

 

[deadheadvet]

Tom makes some very valid points. We all wish to obtain very rare species of tortoises that only exist outside of their native range through poaching and smuggling. i have some personal issues with quota systems for protected species, it is a flawed system and those who gain the system will take advantage at the expense of these noble species. There appears to be some success in madagascar in teaching the locals how important it is to protect their endangered species. So rare yet so beautiful.

 

[BrianWI]

Might be irrelevant to you, but its not irrelevant to the people doing it. See @HermanniChris for verification of what I say.



That's a good recipe for extinction. If the conditions that exist in the wild in the country of origin are leading to extinction, then how is leaving the remaining population there to expire too, a good strategy? Best, in my opinion, to establish assurance colonies.



This is a very broad generalization, and in most cases it is wrong. I don't care about the money. Many of us here don't care about the money. I care about producing something "special" and doing a service for the species and other people that are interested in the same species that I'm interested in. I care about doing a good job and maintaining the lines we have in captivity. Nothing wrong with mutts. I have some of my own and love them, but that doesn't mean maintaining pure lines is "irrelevant" or profit driven. In most of the cases I've seen it is "passion" driven by people who love tortoises, love the tortoise hobby, and enjoy doing something different and admirable. There will be no profit in breeding my Sudan Sulcatas in the next few years, but its super cool because they are super cool tortoises. I can assure you that wild Sudan Sulcatas don't need to be protected from Tom the Dog Trainer.

Easy example: Platynota is extinct in the wild as far as we know. It still exists because of captive breeding populations that were established because a couple hundred captive bred individuals were imported in the late 90s'. These people that you think only care about the money and who you think the tortoises need to be protected from, are the only thing keeping this species alive on the earth.

Tom,

Show me the permits for every rare tortoise you bred that have been returned to the wild to restore a population. All else is really just self-aggrandizement and fantasy. You keep pet tortoises. Try to stay grounded in reality. No insult, no attack. Just the real honest truth.