A Discussion of Herping Ethics (warning: long winded)

hellihooks · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 10:05 am

JDM wrote:

I do like the idea of hellihooks, who is much more eloquent in speech than in writing :beer:

, of having a list of ethical guidelines or recommendations for commercial collectors as well as other archetypes. I am personally opposed to commercial collection, as I defined it above, but I see no need for it to be legislated out of existence. I think that people should be respectfully encouraged to not collect commercially, but for those who do it would be good to have a set of ethical guidelines. Most states already protect species that may not be able to withstand collection. I think that collection for purposes of captive breeding should be encouraged, however. I feel strongly that this activity further reduces pressures on wild populations and allows people to work with the animals that they want to. A set of ethics should apply to this activity as well.

Thank you... regarding my 'eloquence...' truthfully, I had feared just the opposite to be true. I'm actually a slow plodding thinker, who must rely upon years of training to 'think critically' which is reflected in my writing, as opposed to most who post here who obviously possess MUCH higher IQ's, which is reflected in how they translate their 'clarity of thought' into succinctly-phrased easy-to-understand sentences... :roll:

As for 'guidelines' for a commercial collector... here's what I tried to keep to, way 'back in the day'
1) Never hit a spot more than once a year.
2) Always seek new spots.
3) Don't collect gravid females
4) Get the herps to the Dealer as fast as possible.
5) Don't collect animals in poor shape.
6) If a lizard drops it's tail... let it go.
7) Provide adequate care for the herps, while in your possession.

That's about it... as a dumb teenager, I had no clue about 'Habitat Preservation' so returned rocks and ac back to 'original condition' only well enough to (hopefully) attract more herps... :roll:

I also ran 'pit traps' out in the desert (when I lived there) hoping to score desert lizards/snakes... but they never worked. I did make a point to check them at least every two days, and filled them all up, before moving away... :roll:

Try not to bash me too hard... this was back in the 70's... it WAS legal, and I was a dumb kid out on my own, unable to resist the $50--$100 a day (which was one HELL of a LOT of money, back then) that 'snake hunting' provided. I generally drank and smoked pot all day, as well... so... think about it... party all day, get to do something that was a ton of fun, and made GREAT money doing it... could NOT resist... :shock:

Perhaps a 'Locality Breeder/collector' will favor us with guidelines for that 'archetype' and Frank will favor us his guidelines for 'observation only'...

jim
edit...BTW Frank the 'Longest time spent with a wild herp?' post is right up your alley... :thumb:

JDM · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 10:25 am

BTW, I have to ask, did Gerry (gbin) get banned from the site?

Bob · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 12:29 pm

Retes wrote:

Hi Jim and Bob, Jim I am not sure what you mean by "myopic"

But if it means I am looking at a small area, yes I am.

You guys are going on and on over the big picture, but that big picture is beyond the scope of our (this)forum. The "ethics" for this forum should be about its users not the world in general. The world has its own ethics to deal with.

How are the members of this forum impacting the subject by their actions, that is the question. The ethics should be how that impact can be lessened or limited, if the users of this forum CHOOSE to go by those ethics.

If we are talking big picture ethics, then bulldozers(more specificically D-8's and D-9's) and chainsaws should be outlawed. If I remember correctly those were the bulldozers designed to be air dropped into inaccessible areas.

But total habitat destruction is not the concern of the members of this forums day to day actions. That is a concern for humanity in general.

So yes, I am concerned with our members "loving" our animals to death. Not as a species, but as individuals. Thats first on my list.

Why is it first on my list, well thats easy, its first because none of you care about the individual snakes your interfering with. Or so it seems!

Its the constant rationalization from you and others, that is the problem.

If you would just look at it rationally. Animals avoid contact with people and predators. So you invading their world is a breach of their normal behavior. Therefore their behavior must change. How does that change and how does that change effect their individual success is the question. Its that simple.

You each protect your actions by rationlizing what your doing is OK. Well maybe not OK, but its not effecting the species. Sir the problem is, its not about you. Its about all of you, and in this case the future all of you.

With the current technogy, its so easy to find and lead others to these animals. Just take Crazins as an example, is just a couple of years, she has been to hundreds of "secret" herp spots. Areas that took years and years to find, she went to in minutes. hahahahahahahahaha no offense but you guys are way to easy.

The real problem may be this forum is not about the animals, but more about using animals to socialize. Which does explain why most here do not care about the impact they are having on the individual animals.

Nice folks like Bob, talk about the benefits to the people of india, which is great, but its not the people of india that are getting picked up, posed, moved, handled, interfered with, etc. Its the subject we see in all the pictures posted on this forum. The animals that are getting interfered with. Just look at the pictures.

ALso if you don't post pictures of animals, you may as well not post. And not just pictures, but artsy fartsy pictures. Thats the game thats being played here. Can you argue against that? By and large, its not about the subject, or information about the subject, its ALL about the pictures.

And in that , its about trends in types of pictures. Its more like a competition of pictures. Am I wrong?

Which is fine as long as the animals are not suffering for that human goal.

Whats funny is, its more like "keeping up with the Jones" Its not like it takes talent to take great pictures, these days, there are lots and lots of great cameras that allow anyone to take great pictures. So now its more about access to the subject. Which is real easy to obtain on this forum. A couple of kind words and wink and a smile will get you anywhere you want to go. And see anything you want to see.

I still question, what does great pictures have to do with a field herp forum? I am most likely wrong, but I somehow was under the impression that field herping was about the animals. And the pictures were to help understand the animals and how they fit in nature. That is, to transmitt knowledge of the animal, you know like Doc does here.

So all you have to do is tell me, its not about the animals. Then I would understand. As of know, I don't understand why there is so little concern for the individual animals. They are treated as if they are YOUR PERSONAL TOYS TO PLAY WITH.

You see, I think these animals belong to the world, not us. But then thats a whole other subject. The common narsisisstic view is, these animals are for OUR USE. Well that does seem a little self centered. but hey, we are human. So what say you Jim and Bob

So yes, I am but one voice, and I choose to stay on this subject. The rest of the ethics I will leave to you fine gentlemen. Cheers

What say I ? :thumb:

I love the fact that you care about individual animals that deeply.

But... I do take with issue with the idea that habitat protections must be a large scale issue. Some of the best examples of habit protection can take place on very small scale, especially with reptiles who's home range is very small for the most part. I sure everyone here has a great story in this area if they think about it. In our family's case we have landscaping in a corner of the yard consisting of flat sandstone rock from the local area that we hoped would attract and hold snakes. It does, plenty of racers, garters occasional hog nose, some bulls and we see a few rattlesnakes using the area each summer (which are moved outside the fence for safety).

At the back of the 4 acre property we have a small coulee and surrounding area we refuse to mow, and low and behold we have two dens that cater to rattlesnakes, bulls and racers. (The fights with the neighbor right to west who's dogs run loose and have been struck is another story.) There are so many ways to enhance or protect habitat on the micro scale.

On a bigger scale, organizations/concerned citizens can have quite a bit of success in at least protecting moderate sized areas and maintaining corridors between protected habitats. The fact is that with our growing population the idea that ALL development can be stopped is simply pie in the sky. We must remain pragmatic. Victory by a thousand cuts!

As for protecting or not even disturbing individual animals I have no problem if you choose that route in your own herping, but going all elitist is a turn off and does no good in the end. If everyone took a hands off approach there would be little point, kindling interest in herps simply would not take place. After all we all started out as kids catching garters and frogs...and things progress from there ( perhaps you have reached a level few others will ?). I catch and keep quite a few individual snakes to teach my kids, grand kids and friends about them (and yes, CERTAINLY for my own enjoyment). I can't say for sure if those snakes after being released are harmed or not but I strongly doubt it. I also take every opportunity to catch and show snakes to people I fish with. For instance, this fall I had a rather phobic client in the boat and we came across three bull snakes crossing the river towards their dens. I caught one and it progressed into a perfect teachable moment which changed her outlook, at least to some extent. I always point out and take time to have a closer look at any snake we see while out on the river. I would love to get to the point where people ask 'are there snakes around here' out of curiosity rather than unfounded fears.

As for your belief that nature is not be 'used', I always counter that by pointing out that humans are indeed PART of nature. Anyone that believes in evolution must agree eh? All species 'use' other species, we just have the gift of advanced reason . When we isolate people from feeling part of nature that is when we start to have real problems.

hellihooks · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 1:50 pm

Bob wrote:

As for your belief that nature is not be 'used', I always counter that by pointing out that humans are indeed PART of nature. Anyone that believes in evolution must agree eh? All species 'use' other species, we just have the gift of advanced reason . When we isolate people from feeling part of nature that is when we start to have real problems.

Which is a point I tried to raise a while back... is man 'part of' or 'separate from' nature? Everyone's basic philosophies regarding the natural world rest upon those foundational cornerstones...
Oh yea(s) of little faith... :roll:

jim

lashinala2 · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 2:32 pm

This is good 'big picture/little picture' stuff, and pretty elucidating. There's always a bigger picture if you want to look...i.e. Do you vote? Then you are part of the bigger picture, like it or not. Here in bama we get the Forever Wild vote next year...in effect a 20 year vote on 'wild' areas. If it doesn't pass, times get tough on habitat. Its a big picture item.
As a side note JDM brought good points on commercial collecting...in the US, but once again a bigger picture is showing here: the rest of the world, which we tend to forget has a whole different set of rules. Commercial collecting is huge in some places.
Our stand needs to take this into consideration.

RobK · **Posted:** November 11th, 2011, 3:36 pm

jonathan wrote:

Retes wrote:

You see, I think these animals belong to the world, not us. But then thats a whole other subject. The common narsisisstic view is, these animals are for OUR USE. Well that does seem a little self centered. but hey, we are human.

For you, does this apply to all animals and resources, or just herps?

I've asked Frank this same question twice now with no response. It's kind of like a vegetarian who holds strong views on not eating meat or supporting the meat industry, yet wears leather shoes.

JDM wrote:

BTW, I have to ask, did Gerry (gbin) get banned from the site?

I noticed the same thing you did.

chad ks · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 12:31 pm **Posts:** 632

Gerry has not been banned, he is just preoccupied with real life. I hope that he'll get some time to come back and contribute.

jonathan · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am **Posts:** 3546

Finally got around to the video. Good job to everyone involved. Too bad there was only time for a few topics to be discussed.

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 16th, 2011, 8:01 am

As per how much commercial collecting occurs, I don't know numbers. However I was at the "captive bred only" show in Tinley this fall and most all of the store-type vendors had tonnes of WC green snakes, assorted desert lizards (didn't even have time to label species) and the like.
To also address collecting for captive breeding; yes this does sound warranted. Albeit when your animals end up in a pet store, they are very unlikely to be captive bred by whomever buys them.

Bob · **Posted:** November 16th, 2011, 9:38 am

joeysgreen wrote:

As per how much commercial collecting occurs, I don't know numbers. However I was at the "captive bred only" show in Tinley this fall and most all of the store-type vendors had tonnes of WC green snakes, assorted desert lizards (didn't even have time to label species) and the like.
To also address collecting for captive breeding; yes this does sound warranted. Albeit when your animals end up in a pet store, they are very unlikely to be captive bred by whomever buys them.

Nor will they be likely to survive a fortnight.

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 16th, 2011, 2:01 pm

Sat and watched HNL, thanks guys for producing this.

I wanted to extend one of the topics about collecting for museums. I think a large factor that has been missed is that these specimens are used for more than visual analyses and taxonomy. You cannot photograph the skeleton, the gut contents, the parasites withen, organs and the unlimited other information hidden withen whole body specimens. Museum collections exist for the study of the animals on many, many levels. Most of these studies havn't even been thought of yet, so we cannot comprehend the cost/benefit relation to the action of collecting that specimen. How many studies have you run into that utilized 50, 100year or older specimens?

When it comes to museum specimens, I think that to put the benefit side of the equation over the top, we need to make sure our documentation is immaculate, preservation is cutting edge, and utilization of existing specimens (and in a sustainable fashion) is promoted.

Ian

Bryan Hamilton · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm **Posts:** 1181

Thanks for posting this joeysgreen,

I wanted to mention something similar during the discussion. These are great points about the utility of museum specimens.

Mike Pingleton · **Posted:** November 16th, 2011, 4:58 pm

good points and well said, Ian.

-Mike

Chris Smith · **Posted:** November 18th, 2011, 12:37 pm

I don't have time to go through every post but I wanted to add a couple more things...

1) There is more commercial harvest than people think... It isn't all for the pet trade! Commercial collectors remove tens of thousands of turtles (for the food market) (see: http://www.mwparc.org/products/turtles/plain/), mudpuppies (lab supply and bait) and tiger salamanders (lab supply and bait) from Minnesota every year.

2) People often argue that $$ trumps morality... Well I tend to agree but people do not valuate herps the way they should (IMO).

As mentioned on the video, I tend to view herps (and other non-managed wildlife) as common-pool resources (or as Common Goods) which is an idea taken from the field of economics (also see "Natural Capital"). The basic gist of the principal is that certain types of resources (e.g., air, water, wildlife, etc…) have a diverse group of beneficiaries and that excluding potential beneficiaries from obtaining said benefits creates complex social and ethical issues.

What gives one individual the right to take something at the expense of another??

We can value herps in multiple ways… The most obvious way is the value set by the markets (e.g., price we buy and sell herps for on the open pet-trade and food markets).

But there are other ways to value herps as well... One other way is the value we place on the chance to observe and photograph herps in nature. I suspect that most of us value wild encounters with herpetofauna much higher than captive encounters… this becomes obvious if you tally up the expenses we incur to travel around the world in hopes of encountering targeted species in their natural habitat. Thus, herps left in the wild may be monetarily more valuable than herps collected for pet trade, etc...

Just something to think about...

-Chris

jonathan · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am **Posts:** 3546

Chris Smith wrote:

I1) There is more commercial harvest than people think... It isn't all for the pet trade! Commercial collectors remove tens of thousands of turtles (for the food market) (see: http://www.mwparc.org/products/turtles/plain/), mudpuppies (lab supply and bait) and tiger salamanders (lab supply and bait) from Minnesota every year.

Lab supplies is a good point. When I was a science teacher I perused catalogs that offered herps for dissection in large quantities - most obviously leopard frogs and bullfrogs (and perhaps green frogs), but also turtles, garter snakes, large salamanders, etc.

Bryan Hamilton · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 8:49 pm **Posts:** 1181

Several states still allow commercial collection of reptiles.

Pretty much all the Phrynosoma in the pet trade are collected from Nevada, as well as several hundred Sauromalus annually, to satisfy demand from the Asian medicine trade.

Chris Smith · **Posted:** November 18th, 2011, 2:41 pm

The bait-trade has the added bonus of spreading diseases like Chytrid and Ranavirus... :crazyeyes:

A bit out-dated map of Chrytrid occurrences...

Taken from, http://amphibiaweb.org/declines/diseases.html

-Chris

Scott Waters · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 3:08 am **Posts:** 676

JDM wrote:

BTW, I have to ask, did Gerry (gbin) get banned from the site?

No

scott

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 18th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Good point Chris. Animals have monetary value as left in the field. Selfishly it would suck to have to pay a fee to herp, but perhaps that is what may eventually have to happen to assure both the herps and the habitat are protected.
On this note, do National Parks (those that you have to pay to enter) make enough money to cover expenses or are they a money sink for the government? Anyone know?

Ian

jonathan · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am **Posts:** 3546

As far as state parks go, it depends on the park (most are money sinks, a limited few are profitable). I'd guess that's true for national parks too, but I'm not sure.

One thing to remember is that we tend to only calculate immediate costs. Ways in which a park might benefit the health of the people around it, nearby wildlife populations, air quality, water quality downstream, etc. don't get calculated in, but they certainly do matter. That's a big issue with our current business models - corporations know what costs they have to pay and what costs they don't have to pay, and the costs they don't have to pay themselves (much of the environmental damage, long-term health damage to consumers, negative effects on the communities that the resources are pulled out of, etc.) might as well not exist to them.

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 18th, 2011, 10:22 pm

haha, I can see a water table levy having to be paid for building a parking lot. I was just thinking that since it all might come down to the dollar, does anyone forsee such things as "herp parks"; kind of like ATV parks? Someone previously called this a "pay to play" scenerio, and it might be more of an evolution of the park system and/or incentive for parks to expand and multiply. Of course there's not enough herpers to push things in that direction, but birders, bug freaks, flower nuts etc etc.

Ian

ps, I"m not necessarily saying I want things to go in this direction; but when things always seem to come down to money.

jonathan · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am **Posts:** 3546

joeysgreen wrote:

haha, I can see a water table levy having to be paid for building a parking lot.

Yeah - that and a number of similar levies might be a really good idea.

joeysgreen wrote:

I was just thinking that since it all might come down to the dollar, does anyone forsee such things as "herp parks"; kind of like ATV parks? Someone previously called this a "pay to play" scenerio, and it might be more of an evolution of the park system and/or incentive for parks to expand and multiply. Of course there's not enough herpers to push things in that direction, but birders, bug freaks, flower nuts etc etc.

I believe it was pre-crash, but once on this forum someone suggested that very idea and enough herpers were on board with it that it actually looked like it could happen at least once or twice. They were speaking of something completely private, though, rather than within the public system.

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 19th, 2011, 7:55 am

I just hope it doesnt turn "game farm" and people start releasing a bunch of stuff to find.
"Come to Edmonton and herp Corn Snake Forest before winter comes!

Jimi · **Joined:** December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm **Posts:** 1783

Quote:

common-pool resources (or as Common Goods) which is an idea taken from the field of economics (also see "Natural Capital"). The basic gist of the principal is that certain types of resources (e.g., air, water, wildlife, etc…) have a diverse group of beneficiaries and that excluding potential beneficiaries from obtaining said benefits creates complex social and ethical issues.

Another place the idea is taken from is what's now called the Public Trust Doctrine (PTD). PTD comes to American case law from English common law, which I believe is derived from Roman law. Written evidence for the idea first surfaced around the 6th Century AD and was pretty well-formulated by the time of the Magna Carta in 1215. So, for a very long time modern humans have recognized that some things, like the very air and water we all need for survival, and "the fishe of the sea and the fowle of the air" cannot be made private property, but instead belong to everyone.

The "business" way to think about it is these public-trust resources constitute, well, a trust. Congratulations, all you trust fund babies! Ha ha...

Anyway, as in any trust situation there are the beneficiaries (those who benefit, or "get paid"), there are the managers (who make sure those who are supposed to get paid, do actually get paid) and there are the trustees, who set up the game rules for the managers, and who (are supposed to) represent the trustees' best interests.

Trustees get elected or appointed, managers get hired, and beneficiaries (hopefully) get paid.

Permits (e.g., to withdraw and consume water; to pollute the air or block the sun; to harvest fish or wildlife) are basically the way "individual" beneficiaries can legally take something that belongs to everyone and make it their own. Usually it costs money, which (IMO...) ought to go back to replenish or better-manage the trust. The trustees set up the system, and managers execute it. If you don't like the system - if for example you think the trust is being decimated, or you think you're not getting adequate payment for the privatization of YOUR STUFF, or if you're being denied access to YOUR STUFF (e.g., you don't have clean air to breathe) - tell it to the trustees.

Quote:

That's a big issue with our current business models - corporations know what costs they have to pay and what costs they don't have to pay, and the costs they don't have to pay themselves (much of the environmental damage, long-term health damage to consumers, negative effects on the communities that the resources are pulled out of, etc.) might as well not exist to them.

If you don't like the system, tell it to the trustees. Corporations are people? Give me a break. Some people just pay to get more than one vote...

One dirty way the system is rigged is via what Garrett Hardin calls the double-P, double-C game. That's privatized profits, commonized costs (which are sometimes referred to as "externalities"). As in, I manufacture a product and pollute the air and water. I pocket the sales proceeds, and you all pick up the clean-up tab! Or perhaps you just die a little earlier than actuarially-expected - you and your family pick up the don't-clean-up tab. Neat game, huh? Yep, the EPA is evil and must be eliminated! Gotta free business from all those "job-killing" regulations. You want to talk about killing? Actual killing? About dead people? Of course they'd fry your ass if you killed the guys who killed your kid with dirty air or water. 'Cause that's "tough on crime".

If you don't like the system, tell it to the trustees. Sorry for the political rant, but since we're talking about ethics...today was disgusting.

Cheers,
Jimi

Brian Hubbs · **Posted:** November 29th, 2011, 3:06 pm

Well Jimi, ya know...we really do have too many people...maybe pollution is nature's way of dealing with part of the problem, since we've cured most of the diseases that once kept us in check... :shock:

Perhaps we could talk the state of UT into localized toxic waste dumps (what a boon for the communities, aye?). Or, relax the regs for steel mills, like Geneva used to be in the happy 70s, and open about 50 more of those...I mean, it would be a start...and maybe a little nuclear bomb testing in populated areas could help too... :roll:

hellihooks · **Posted:** November 29th, 2011, 3:17 pm

Oxygen is a waste product... and killed 95% of life on Earth... as a toxic, corrosive, explosive pollutant. Mind you... I ain't saying what humankind is doing is ecologically safe, or sound... we WILL probably kill ourselves off, or if we're very lucky, reduce our numbers back down to the point where we can no longer significantly impact the world. :roll:

jim

Daryl Eby · **Posted:** November 29th, 2011, 5:31 pm

hellihooks wrote:

we WILL probably kill ourselves off, or if we're very lucky, reduce our numbers back down to the point where we can no longer significantly impact the world. :roll:

jim

This could work: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2066624/Anthrax-isnt-scary-compared-Man-flu-virus-potential-wipe-millions-created-warns-frightened-scientist.html :shock:

joeysgreen · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 7:36 am

That is a neat article. It looks like it's only highly contagious, but still just a flu virus. Only the weak would die.
It's not an immediate cure, but a seriously realistic approach is to just stop having babies. If every pair (2 people), only had 1 child, our population would decrease with every generation. The major hard part about this is to pass on the message that it is actually better for our children to have less of them. Most people still arn't convinced that there is a population problem, or that "god" doesn't know what he's doing when he brings them another child (science class anyone?).

Ian

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

Can you please send me the reference for the drugs you are on... I can so use them.

hellihooks wrote:

Oxygen is a waste product... and killed 95% of life on Earth... as a toxic, corrosive, explosive pollutant. Mind you... I ain't saying what humankind is doing is ecologically safe, or sound... we WILL probably kill ourselves off, or if we're very lucky, reduce our numbers back down to the point where we can no longer significantly impact the world. :roll:

jim

Daryl Eby · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 7:58 am

-EJ wrote:

Can you please send me the reference for the drugs you are on... I can so use them.

hellihooks wrote:

Oxygen is a waste product... and killed 95% of life on Earth...

I think he was talking about the Great Oxygenation Event.

Quote:

The rising oxygen levels may have wiped out a huge portion of the Earth's anaerobic inhabitants at the time. cyanobacteria, by producing oxygen, were essentially responsible for what was likely the largest extinction event in Earth's history.[citation needed] Additionally the free oxygen combined with atmospheric methane, triggering the Huronian glaciation, possibly the longest snowball Earth episode ever.

hellihooks · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 8:02 am

Education is the drug, EJ. Every time you learn something new, a new associative pathway is created in your neural mass, with a corresponding release of endorphins (typically dopamine) which produces pleasurable effects. It takes a refined pallet to appreciate, but in fact, for a 'sober' mind, can become quite addicting.
This proclivity, combined with an addictive predisposition, is what I believe turns some children into 'bookworms'... which I certainly was. I had it so bad, as a kid, I would break into school during summer... to read next year's books... :roll:

jim

Edit... which may also be why I've spent the last 12 of 15 years in school, and hope to return soon. I've substituted the pleasures of learning for the pleasures of other mind-altering drugs... :shock:

So yeah... STILL an addict.

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

Interesting. Thanks for the input.

hellihooks wrote:

Education is the drug, EJ. Every time you learn something new, an new associative pathway is created in your neural mass, with a corresponding release of endorphins (typically dopamine) which produces pleasurable effects. It takes a refined pallet to appreciate, but in fact, for a 'sober' mind, can become quite addicting.
This proclivity, combined with an addictive predisposition, is what I believe turns some children into 'bookworms'... which I certainly was. I had it so bad, as a kid, I would break into school during summer... to read next year's books... :roll:

jim

Edit... which may also be why I've spent the last 12 of 15 years in school, and hope to return soon. I've substituted the pleasures of learning for the pleasures of other mind-altering drugs... :shock:

So yeah... STILL an addict.

Daryl Eby · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 8:25 am

joeysgreen wrote:

If every pair (2 people), only had 1 child, our population would decrease with every generation.

Impossible to regulate, short of draconian governmental oppression. But, if some future global government wants to try it, a better approach is explored in the classic SciFi trilogy Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson. The basic idea is to grant each individual a birthright to have 3/4ths of a child. That way, any couple could have one child and have a 1/2 birthright to spare. They could then buy another 1/2 birthright from another couple or sell it to another couple and use the proceeds to provide for their one child. The net effects are a reduction in reproduction, the absolute right of any couple to have at least one child, the ability for couples to earn significant income buy selling their unused birthright (likely for a very substantial sum), and the assurance that only financially stable couples have multiple children.

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

What has this post digressed to? Whateveer... it is entertaining.

Daryl Eby wrote:

joeysgreen wrote:

If every pair (2 people), only had 1 child, our population would decrease with every generation.

Impossible to regulate, short of draconian governmental oppression. But, if some future global government wants to try it, a better approach is explored in the classic SciFi trilogy Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson. The basic idea is to grant each individual a birthright to have 3/4ths of a child. That way, any couple could have one child and have a 1/2 birthright to spare. They could then buy another 1/2 birthright from another couple or sell it to another couple and use the proceeds to provide for their one child. The net effects are a reduction in reproduction, the absolute right of any couple to have at least one child, the ability for couples to earn significant income buy selling their unused birthright (likely for a very substantial sum), and the assurance that only financially stable couples have multiple children.

Daryl Eby · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 8:49 am

-EJ wrote:

What has this post digressed to? Whateveer... it is entertaining.

Just a little diversion. Glad you at least found it entertaining. Please tip your waitress. :beer:

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

Always do... especially when the service is exceptional.

Daryl Eby wrote:

-EJ wrote:

What has this post digressed to? Whateveer... it is entertaining.

Just a little diversion. Glad you at least found it entertaining. Please tip your waitress. :beer:

jonathan · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am **Posts:** 3546

I'm not in support of a system that involves something as personal as the right to have children being transferred from the financially privileged to the less privileged just for temporary financial help.

Just look at what's been working. In societies where women are free to be educated, have access to good health care, and have the authority to make decisions for themselves, standard of living goes up and birthrates drop. Or we can go with the authoritarian China model or some other semi-authoritarian solution. I'm anti-totalitarian, so I'm happy with the freedom/education model.

Daryl Eby · **Posted:** November 30th, 2011, 10:16 am

jonathan wrote:

I'm not in support of a system ...

I wasn't supporting it either. Just throwing it out for thought. For the foreseeable future, I strongly agree that freedom and education are the best route to population control. However, reality sometimes has to trump ideals. Society may someday have to face some very painful and objectionable decisions. In the book I referenced, drastic population control was necessary due to life expectancy jumping from 90 years to several hundred and resource shortages caused by catastrophic sea level rise due volcanic activity in the Antarctic.

joeysgreen · **Posted:** December 3rd, 2011, 1:51 pm

I don't think it's possible to regulate it either, though ideas for such are entertaining. However look at the birthrates in the First World countries drop. Big families of 6plus used to be the norm, then 3 kids, now 1, 2, or many people prefer just not to have kids. I think all that needs to be done is to encourage this trend; heck, just encouraging some sort of family planning other than, "well, god gave us another", or "gotta have 10 kids to support me when I'm retired". Heck, if you save the money you'd spend on the additional nine you'd be able to retire on your own.

And sorry Ed, this is a diversion beyond what FieldHerpForum needs for herping ethics, but still relates for those that think human overpopulation might just threaten the herps we love to go out and find.

Ian

1. Return rocks when flipped.
2. Don't eat snakes.
3. Use a pill or condom.
j/k, just had to

muskiemagnet · **Posted:** June 21st, 2012, 8:19 pm

OMG(i'm enunciating this like a preppy high school girl)

i said i'd be back, but there is no way i am reading through eleven pages.

i skipped around and got the idea.

this topic is extremely important. mentality shifts will occur over time. evolution is always working. this is a good thing. sure, sides will grow apart, but most will gather in the middle. what the middle is, no one knows exactly.

the common good. this is what should be focused on. we all differ in opinions, but collectively, we are strong. herps come first. we need them to survive. lists of ethical practices for newbies? good idea. commercial collecting? i'll punch you in the nose. i know it's legal in many instances, but what makes you think you have the right to take my animals for your own profit? my tax dollars go to support habitat and animals. i want to enjoy them where they are. i can't do that with "you" around. personal collecting? i will discourage it, but if done legally, go for it. i used to as a kid, but i grew out of it. i think in the end, most end up this way anyhow. as far as "too much information" being posted. maybe, but this information can be used by people to gain a greater appreciation for herps. respect for these animals is necessary. once this respect takes hold, conservation will follow.

i understand that protection of herps is a top priority for most. i tend to disagree with this being top priority. i believe(and it was mentioned in this thread) that development and habitat loss are the key elements in herp population decreases. i couldn't agree more. many of us can look at habitat and tell you what is likely found there. here in wisconsin we have many soil types due to glaciation. these soil types dictate the habitat. soil also plays a huge role in species range whether it's habitat or preferred by said species for varying reasons. THE LAND. EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. what's the saying? "if you build it, they will come". protect the land and the herps will follow. many areas i herp are either state natural areas or owned by the nature conservancy. these properties are maintained and/or remanipulated back to near original conditions. trust me, the herps love it. state natural areas are a fairly recent thing here in wisconsin. i can't wait to see how herp populations benefit from them. i'm willing to bet herping will be better in twenty years.

too many herpers? get used to it. we are the tools(tools in a good way) used to mold the newcomers and the old-timers alike. without us, who knows where the hobby would end up. we need to keep helping each other become better woodsmen/women. keep people respectful of the land and all that it contains. if we do this, the herps will be fine.

i'm rambling now.

-ben

chad ks · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 12:31 pm **Posts:** 632

bump.

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

I had a good giggle when I read who bumped this...

chad ks wrote:

bump.

chad ks · **Joined:** June 7th, 2010, 12:31 pm **Posts:** 632

-EJ wrote:

I had a good giggle when I read who bumped this...

chad ks wrote:

bump.

…glad it wasn't the bad kind.

-EJ · **Joined:** June 10th, 2010, 11:17 am **Posts:** 1078

I saw it as ironic... but warranted. It's a good topic that really has no ending.

chad ks wrote:

-EJ wrote:

I had a good giggle when I read who bumped this...

chad ks wrote:

bump.

…glad it wasn't the bad kind.

Joeeggy30 · **Joined:** December 8th, 2015, 11:23 pm **Posts:** 3

This topic kinda reminds me of a topic that has been touched in the entomological side of my interests. You have people that are legit entomologists, and you have your amateur entomologists. This regards collecting, especially butterflies. There are a couple of groups that are all about photographing butterflies in their habitats, which is fine and dandy, but they are very much against ANYONE who dares collect them. I have worked 8 years in entomology at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, and have collected a lot in Southern California and Arizona. I collected mostly moths and beetles, but did collect some butterflies from time to time. While on a research trip in SE Arizona, we were collecting some of the late summer, fall migrant butterflies that came in from Mexico. Me and my boss were stopped by a group of photographers, who got very vocal because we were collecting these butterflies, and tried to confiscate our nets, and even threw drinks and spat at us. That is no way to do things if you disagree with something. lol In the end, these people called the cops, and when they arrived, they saw one of the ladies throw a bottle of water at us. in the end, they told these people to leave us alone as 1. We had permits to collect there. 2. We were collecting for an institution, and we weren't collecting every single thing that was flying as one of the ladies claimed, and 3. We didn't instigate anything, well they tried to say we did. Collecting insects won't be the end on insect species, as of right now the warming phenomenon and habitat destruction along with the wide usage of pesticides is what is bringing a lot of bug species down. I feel the same goes with herps as well, habitats are important, and when habitat gets destroyed to become a strip mall, that eventually would go out of business, and be abandoned, that is a problem.

Kelly Mc · **Posted:** March 25th, 2016, 6:22 pm

If a species has sensitive range realities, because of destruction of its habitat, recreational/hobby collecting seems oxymoronic.

cj65 · **Joined:** July 31st, 2011, 3:52 pm **Posts:** 3

I don't log in here much, but feel I have a pertinent experience to tell. I was a crappy uneducated herper as a kid. In my adult life, I met a colleague who once we bacme friends, put a huge slope on my learning curve. This guy is an accomplished herper. He takes a select few species out of habitat, but is very responsible.

I took a couple out of their habitat, but returned them back to the wild. Wife thought I was crazy, because it was a 200 mile round trip to release them back where I took them. Since then, I vowed to never take a specimen out of the wild. My paradigm is that every person took one, the populations may be threatened, so this is where I dwell. I dismiss data or facts as not applicable, so maybe I can be accused of anthropomorphisizing reptiles, believing they don't want to be in a captive environment. I already know that this is feelings based, not fact based.

Point of my story, I told my friend, and really only herp enthusiast friend that I had, I was going road cruising one night. He asked me to bag a certain species if I found one cause he can't make it. Purposes were for a breeding colony of a friend of his. I said ok, brought a pillow case, which is not standard equipment for me on a herp excursion. I don't feel that I owe my friend anything, but tried to overcome my personal beliefs, and wondered if if I would find this species that night. I don't even think that this species is threatened in this habitat. Conditions were great, knew I would see something. Well, I did find 4 snakes that night, one being the species requested. I did bag it, but then in the silent dark moment, watching the snake moving inside the pillow case, I had to let it go. If there is anyone that was deserving of this it was my friend. I really wanted to give it to him. It took Maybe 3 minutes to make my decision. I shared with my friend the story, (I am probably too honest for my own good.) and long story short, he is no longer my friend. Trust issues is what he argued, that I am not a friend if I agreed to do something then failed to follow through. My petty emotionalism was too much for him in his own words. I am not crying about it. Everyone has the right to be a friend or not be a friend. Nor do I regret my actions, but still it hurts when I encounter a snake, or lizard, and can't share with my no longer friend. It makes any herp experience bitter sweet now. What really is strange is that I have seen 3 snakes recently when not even herping. Almost salt into wounds kind of deal. :lol:

Kelly Mc · **Posted:** June 10th, 2017, 8:30 pm

I am sorry the person who wanted the snake reacted the way he did. And that it has left a tarnish.

Between your words and shining humbly it is fair and clear that any herper would be fortunate to have a friend like you.

craigb · **Posted:** June 12th, 2017, 8:25 am

I too, think you did the right thing.
If it doesn't feel right in your gut, then you are correct.
I am disappointed in your friend's behavior.

He/She can always go and get their own, and make it personal.
I have received many snakes through the years from folks that picked them up and kept them a year or two then "adopted" them to me.
It means more if they get it themselves. They are likely to take better care of it.

You will find more "like minded" herpers in the coming years....

Craig

cj65 · **Joined:** July 31st, 2011, 3:52 pm **Posts:** 3

Thank you Kelly and Craig. I appreciate your comments, and hope one day my ex friend will want to re establish our friendship. I know he is going through a rough season in life, and may just need some time.

A Discussion of Herping Ethics (warning: long winded)

Who is online