Brookesia vadoni/decaryi

Neither Brookesia vadoni nor Brookesia decaryi can legally be exported from Madagascar. Some Brookesia decaryi are exported mislabeled as Brookesia brygooi, but technically neither can not be imported legally.

Chris
 
Thank you for replying. Can you provide any insight into why species like parsonii are currently legal (for now), but they've maintained the restrictions ( I assume they are restricted under species and not due to where they are from, in Madagascar) on these species, Furcifer balteatus, and B.perarmata? I'm just curious as the if they have done more population studies and know that the species still illegal to export are indeed more threatened than parsonii or there is some other reason.
 
Last edited:
For Malagasy species, it has to primarily do with range within Madagascar and IUCN Red List status. If they are only found within protected areas, they can not be legally collected, and thus have a zero quota (example: Calumma ambreense). If they are assessed on the IUCN Red List as either Endangered or Critically Endangered, they are given a zero quota (example: Furcifer balteatus and Brookesia decaryi). So Calumma parsonii is assessed as Near Threatened and has a large range that includes both protected and unprotected areas, so it has a quota. Brookesia perarmata, on the other hand, is classified as Endangered, but also listed on CITES Appendix I, so no commercial trade is permitted in the species anyway.

Those criteria cover most Malagasy species, although a few additional species do not currently have quotas either because there is concern about differentiating them from other protected species, or other reasons. I believe the concern with B. vadoni is that they are found in the areas that are most prone to illegal rosewood harvesting, and they are trying to prevent any collection in these areas to combat that.

Chris
 
Back
Top Bottom