MSAquatics
New Member
Those are amazing pictures, I'd hate to know what they cost. lol Do you ever ship any CB F.minor to the states?
Leland
Leland
some nice pictures....
- Thread starter kameleons jvo
- Start date
Kent67
Retired Moderator
If you're going to address the non-believers, we're going to respond.... So those are what; 10th generation captive? 12th? Not sure those pics prove anything more than you can breed them in captivity, which we already knew. Get me a couple pairs of smuggled balteatus and I could have the same pics in a year.
Strange words for a "guy" who post in other tread this tekst....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sun Diego
Posts: 3,331
Kent67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motherlode Chameleon View Post
EWWWWW! Kinyongia carpenteri!?!?!?
My heart just skipped a couple beats. I'd be willing to offer up one each of my paired organs.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sun Diego
Posts: 3,331
Kent67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motherlode Chameleon View Post
EWWWWW! Kinyongia carpenteri!?!?!?
My heart just skipped a couple beats. I'd be willing to offer up one each of my paired organs.
Confusing??
You don't believe the breeding part "whit pictures" but you believe the export part???
Where is the logic??
I know his animals have legal papers so what is wrong then??
If here you don't have legal papers you are in jail....
Its that simple.
Feeling sorry you can moderate this forum......
End of discussion for me.
Kent67
Retired Moderator
The logic is that it hasn't been possible to get legal export permits for Furcifer balteatus from Madagascar in 19 years. Since you don't understand the history of these animals and are only trying to confuse things then it probably is best that it's the end of the discussion for you.
Motherlode Chameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
I never doubted the skill of the European chameleon breeders. They have proven themselves capable time and time again at breeding tough and what were once thought to be species that were not capable of breeding in captivity. Jurgen has proven to be one of these capable breeders. Although if these Furcifer balteatus are from true stock imported from before 1995 that would be truly impressive.
The problem is that the USA has got a different set of rules and strict laws (especially here in California, people become angry, it is a species fighting for existence) when it comes to Endangered species. When showing off these CITES II endangered species to keepers in the USA on these forums, such as Furcifer balteatus, it makes people in the USA question the authority of the CITES organization and decision making capabilities of CITES officials. These species being Endangered species should they even have CITES permits for export to begin with? Especially a species of Madagascar chameleon with a history of being known as being a difficult species to keep in captivity such as Furcifer balteatus.
However, I continue to say that if you want to work and keep these species in captivity no questions asked to contribute to these species habitat conservation in Madagascar. Once Furcifer balteatus is delisted to a less threatened listing then it is appropriate to consider this species for export.
Once I return to the USA I have got a thread for this.
The problem is that the USA has got a different set of rules and strict laws (especially here in California, people become angry, it is a species fighting for existence) when it comes to Endangered species. When showing off these CITES II endangered species to keepers in the USA on these forums, such as Furcifer balteatus, it makes people in the USA question the authority of the CITES organization and decision making capabilities of CITES officials. These species being Endangered species should they even have CITES permits for export to begin with? Especially a species of Madagascar chameleon with a history of being known as being a difficult species to keep in captivity such as Furcifer balteatus.
However, I continue to say that if you want to work and keep these species in captivity no questions asked to contribute to these species habitat conservation in Madagascar. Once Furcifer balteatus is delisted to a less threatened listing then it is appropriate to consider this species for export.
Once I return to the USA I have got a thread for this.
Last edited:
kameleons jvo
Avid Member
You have no idea what you are taking about.
Furcifer balteatus got almost the same life span as C parsonii ,so just 2 in some cases 3 generations where needed to breed them until know!!!
This again proof your knowledge about this specie is ZERO!!
I guess you running out of inspiration.....
kameleons jvo
Avid Member
Motherlode Chameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
Thanks Jeremy for your clear view
I would exercise caution showing off species that are listed as Endangered Species by the IUCN Red List Jurgen. I could not say how you got CITES paperwork for Furcifer balteatus. However there are many people who would be excessively angry that you are keeping and showing off and Endangered Species openly.
leedragon
Chameleon Enthusiast
I was about to say that, I don´t know how old balteatus get, but it it gets about 10 years it would only need for 2 or maybe 3 generations for still be legal.
Hello,
sorry but you are absolutely wrong. Please look here:
http://www.dihu.ch/tiere/wf/exp_furcifer.htm
The balteatus-picture Jurgen showed here are mine, i will give you some information: first copulation of the parents 12/24/2006, egg laying 06/15/2007, first baby hatched 09/11/2008 (26 eggs laid, 25 juvenils, the last hatched 09/22/2008). Last year i had F2-juvenils, but all died in the first 2 weeks. Now i have another clutch, i' m expecting their hatch in spring next year.
So you can see it can takes more than 7 years for the second.
I hope some people will stop now with statements without any knowledge.
Best Regards,
Timo
kameleons jvo
Avid Member
Thanks for your statement Timo!
I hope people finally start thinking before judging people.
Some people really work on a legal way with these animals and having breeding results with these.
Together with the smaller getting populations in the wild these captive populations could be very important in the future.
I think we both have given enough proof about these balteatus breeding
italian chameleon
New Member
so it's fine to show off WC endangered montane species from africa but not CB furcifer balteatus?? mmh ok
P.s:
P.s:
leedragon
Chameleon Enthusiast
you know instead of trowing accusation to people you should encorage CB of ALL species that way you will reduce the danger of extision at least to the half.
and man at least this ones are in really capable hands man, you are not going to see premature dead or mistreatment due handling the animla as they where cat or dogs
and man at least this ones are in really capable hands man, you are not going to see premature dead or mistreatment due handling the animla as they where cat or dogs
Chris Anderson
Dr. House of Chameleons
As with many threads that turn to such discussion, the recent theme of this thread has been riddled with partial information and a lack of actual evidence that can lead to a somewhat distorted perspective, leaving many feeling personally attacked. This topic is an important one as a community, but the facts surrounding it need to be given fair and accurate representation. This is particularly true since without a complete, fair and accurate representation of these facts, individuals of this community are often vilified in these threads, intentionally or not, and often unfairly so.
Given the personal conflicts that are beginning to show up in this thread, I am temporarily locking this thread. This will hopefully allow individuals on either side to relax, or at least not add coal to the fire. I will reopen the thread later today or tomorrow with a more complete background on the trade in these species that will hopefully lead to productive discussion of the topic rather than resorting to vilifying other members based on partial truths and no proof.
Regards,
Chris
Given the personal conflicts that are beginning to show up in this thread, I am temporarily locking this thread. This will hopefully allow individuals on either side to relax, or at least not add coal to the fire. I will reopen the thread later today or tomorrow with a more complete background on the trade in these species that will hopefully lead to productive discussion of the topic rather than resorting to vilifying other members based on partial truths and no proof.
Regards,
Chris
Chris Anderson
Dr. House of Chameleons
I've written this post in an attempt to provide a thorough background on the current debate in this thread as I believe education on the topic is of vital importance as a community and for many of these species. I’ve limited my post specifically to the trade and captive status of Malagasy chameleon species subject to the 1994/5 trade suspension in an effort to make the post as thorough as possible. I’ve also specifically tried to remain relatively neutral, although I have intentionally attempted to provide background of both points of view, and finally tried to make recommendations on how to proceed with this and future threads.
As I mentioned previously, the status of the trade in many Malagasy chameleon species is a very sensitive subject for many in the chameleon community. Very simply, it has become such because most of these species have not been legally exported from Madagascar since 1995, because the captive maintenance and propagation of these species at the time was generally unsuccessful or inconsistent at best, because the illegal trade has been rampant ever since, and because many of these illegally acquired animals are frequently laundered and falsely represented as legal captive bred individuals in an effort to get around trade limitations. As a result, the legality of any individual of these species in captivity, whether they are ultimately legal in origin or not, is now suspect to many. This is unfortunately true even when the owners of said individuals in all likelihood have done nothing illegal themselves or in some cases may actually have bonafide legal animals. The issue, however, is that supporting the trade in these laundered specimens inherently supports the smuggling of these animals, and given the limited likelihood of specimens in captivity being of completely legal origin, many have strong feelings about people purchasing and working with these species.
In November of 1994, following a Review of Significant Trade by CITES in which the Malagasy Management Authority failed to satisfactorily respond to five recommendations from the Animals Committee of CITES, the CITES Standing Committee issued a recommendation to the Parties that all imports of Chamaeleo (now Calumma and Furcifer) species from Madagascar, with the exception of F. lateralis, F. oustaleti, F. pardalis, and F. verrucosus, be suspended. Such a recommendation means that all CITES Parties (signatory nations to CITES) are no longer supposed to recognize CITES documents for those species from that country after that time. Similarly, as re-export permits require that animals be traced to legally imported animals, re-export permits can only be issued for animals that can be traced back to CITES documents that predate this suspension. This effectively limited the legal captive market to those individuals of these species that were already in captivity at the time of the ban and any bonafide offspring of those individuals.
After a relaxation of its export legislation in 1986, chameleon exports from Madagascar had grown steadily and large quantities of many of the now suspended chameleon species had been exported legally to the global market prior to their suspension. As with most chameleons during this time period, success with these species in captivity was limited, with large numbers failing to thrive for long periods and limited success in captive breeding. Breeding success that did occur was generally inconsistent, and as with the dynamics of most species still, captive populations of most species were highly dependent on imports, and captive populations plummeted when importation ceased. A few keepers and breeders maintained small groups of various species, some for quite a long time after the suspension, but in general captive populations of these species steadily declined with the isolated clutch and breeding infusing addition specimens on occasion.
As availability of legal captive specimens declined, however, demand naturally exceeded availability more and more, and smuggling these species out of Madagascar became more and more lucrative. While the availability of most of these species in the US has really not been strongly indicative of any large scale smuggling operations of these species into the US, availability of these species in Europe and Asia has remained fairly regular, with clearly newly imported specimens appearing on the market long after the trade suspensions relatively frequently. Countries in Asia and Eastern Europe, in particular, have become hot beds for smuggling operations with large quantities of these and other restricted species being brought into the countries in large quantities due to limited enforcement of these international trade laws.
It quickly became known, however, that as long as someone was able to obtain documentation of having once upon a time legally acquired these species, that there was no way for enforcement agencies to prove that the animals currently in their possession were not direct descendants of those legally acquired animals. As a result, anyone who had ever imported these species or could get signed documents saying they had purchased some of the animals from previous legitimate CITES paperwork, were then able to claim that any specimens in their possession were offspring of those animals, and thus claim them as legal and request legal documents to export the “offspring”. This was particularly effective if they were able to show photographs of females laying a clutch or eggs hatching. In effect, they could then launder smuggled animals by claiming they were descendants of legal documented animals, and then get legal documents for those smuggled animals.
This has resulted in many species that had previously been rarely, if ever bred in captivity, and not imported in as much as a decade, suddenly becoming readily available in Europe (and the US in the case of Calumma parsonii). These are often juvenile specimens, but also frequently even adult animals that appear very obviously to be recent imports. Unfortunately with no proof otherwise unless they are caught in the act of smuggling, authorities have been able to do little to curb this issue.
<Post exceeds word limit. Continued in next post>
As I mentioned previously, the status of the trade in many Malagasy chameleon species is a very sensitive subject for many in the chameleon community. Very simply, it has become such because most of these species have not been legally exported from Madagascar since 1995, because the captive maintenance and propagation of these species at the time was generally unsuccessful or inconsistent at best, because the illegal trade has been rampant ever since, and because many of these illegally acquired animals are frequently laundered and falsely represented as legal captive bred individuals in an effort to get around trade limitations. As a result, the legality of any individual of these species in captivity, whether they are ultimately legal in origin or not, is now suspect to many. This is unfortunately true even when the owners of said individuals in all likelihood have done nothing illegal themselves or in some cases may actually have bonafide legal animals. The issue, however, is that supporting the trade in these laundered specimens inherently supports the smuggling of these animals, and given the limited likelihood of specimens in captivity being of completely legal origin, many have strong feelings about people purchasing and working with these species.
In November of 1994, following a Review of Significant Trade by CITES in which the Malagasy Management Authority failed to satisfactorily respond to five recommendations from the Animals Committee of CITES, the CITES Standing Committee issued a recommendation to the Parties that all imports of Chamaeleo (now Calumma and Furcifer) species from Madagascar, with the exception of F. lateralis, F. oustaleti, F. pardalis, and F. verrucosus, be suspended. Such a recommendation means that all CITES Parties (signatory nations to CITES) are no longer supposed to recognize CITES documents for those species from that country after that time. Similarly, as re-export permits require that animals be traced to legally imported animals, re-export permits can only be issued for animals that can be traced back to CITES documents that predate this suspension. This effectively limited the legal captive market to those individuals of these species that were already in captivity at the time of the ban and any bonafide offspring of those individuals.
After a relaxation of its export legislation in 1986, chameleon exports from Madagascar had grown steadily and large quantities of many of the now suspended chameleon species had been exported legally to the global market prior to their suspension. As with most chameleons during this time period, success with these species in captivity was limited, with large numbers failing to thrive for long periods and limited success in captive breeding. Breeding success that did occur was generally inconsistent, and as with the dynamics of most species still, captive populations of most species were highly dependent on imports, and captive populations plummeted when importation ceased. A few keepers and breeders maintained small groups of various species, some for quite a long time after the suspension, but in general captive populations of these species steadily declined with the isolated clutch and breeding infusing addition specimens on occasion.
As availability of legal captive specimens declined, however, demand naturally exceeded availability more and more, and smuggling these species out of Madagascar became more and more lucrative. While the availability of most of these species in the US has really not been strongly indicative of any large scale smuggling operations of these species into the US, availability of these species in Europe and Asia has remained fairly regular, with clearly newly imported specimens appearing on the market long after the trade suspensions relatively frequently. Countries in Asia and Eastern Europe, in particular, have become hot beds for smuggling operations with large quantities of these and other restricted species being brought into the countries in large quantities due to limited enforcement of these international trade laws.
It quickly became known, however, that as long as someone was able to obtain documentation of having once upon a time legally acquired these species, that there was no way for enforcement agencies to prove that the animals currently in their possession were not direct descendants of those legally acquired animals. As a result, anyone who had ever imported these species or could get signed documents saying they had purchased some of the animals from previous legitimate CITES paperwork, were then able to claim that any specimens in their possession were offspring of those animals, and thus claim them as legal and request legal documents to export the “offspring”. This was particularly effective if they were able to show photographs of females laying a clutch or eggs hatching. In effect, they could then launder smuggled animals by claiming they were descendants of legal documented animals, and then get legal documents for those smuggled animals.
This has resulted in many species that had previously been rarely, if ever bred in captivity, and not imported in as much as a decade, suddenly becoming readily available in Europe (and the US in the case of Calumma parsonii). These are often juvenile specimens, but also frequently even adult animals that appear very obviously to be recent imports. Unfortunately with no proof otherwise unless they are caught in the act of smuggling, authorities have been able to do little to curb this issue.
<Post exceeds word limit. Continued in next post>
Chris Anderson
Dr. House of Chameleons
<cont. from previous post>
Given how seldom most of these species had been successfully bred in captivity (if ever in many cases), how long it had been since any were legitimately legally imported, and how few of those remaining legal animals or their legitimate offspring remained in the captive market, many in the community are extremely suspicious of the true legality of any specimens of these species in captivity, and rightly so. The truth is while there may be legitimate completely legal bloodlines in some of these species floating around, the vast majority of most of these suspended Malagasy species that are available are likely from an illegal origin of one sort or another. They may themselves have been captive bred, but in all likelihood, their parents were probably smuggled and laundered. At this point it’s impossible to definitively tell the difference between legitimate legal bloodlines and those that at one point or another have been tainted by laundered specimens. As a result, most people who are suspicious of specimens of these species in captivity simply go by the odds, which aren’t in favor of completely legal origins. It does not help convincing people otherwise when individuals are working with large numbers of multiple of these species, posting photos of newly acquired adults, including newly acquired animals that sometimes appear gravid and some of which may even appear to show signs of being recently imported themselves. I don’t think this has anything to do with jealousy, but rather simply looking at the available information and how it looks given the history of these species and the odds. Further, as explained before, while permits may enable legal sale and shipment of these animals, they do not mean the animals are not themselves of illegal origins and subsequently laundered.
That said, many of the individuals who are currently working with these species may themselves have had nothing directly to do with any of these illegal activities and are themselves just trying to do their part in doing what is best for the animals in question, as well as trying to keep the bloodlines going in captivity in the hope of helping to reduce the demand on additional smuggled animals. Even some of those who are most vocally against the smuggling and perpetuation of these laundering activities are themselves in this boat. There are also those individuals who may actually still have legitimately legal blood for some of these species.
The truth of the matter is, while we can say that the chances are extremely good that many, and probably most, of the individuals of many of these species in captivity are likely of illegal origins somewhere along their bloodline, there is no way that any of us can say with complete certainty that any one individual specimen is absolutely not legal, or that the individual working with that specimen was themselves directly involved in any illegal activity. If there were, the authorities would be able to reject giving permits and could confiscate them.
As a community, it’s important for us all to be educated about the realities of the trade in these Malagasy species and to do our part to avoid perpetuating the continued smuggling and laundering of these species. We may not be able to do anything about removing the individuals in captivity that were previously imported illegally and have since been issued legal documents, but there are steps that can help curb continued smuggling and laundering. While the best way of doing so is simply resisting temptation to buy these species outright, obviously many won’t do that. In those cases, not purchasing specimens of these species that show signs of possibly being of questionable origin (adult individuals in any quantity that include gravid individuals and appear to be in rough or otherwise possibly wild condition) and requiring the breeder to show dated photographs of important events associated with legitimate captive breeding (copulation when possible, oviposition, eggs, hatching, neonates, etc.), and even multiple generations of so, can definitely help.
A separate thread specifically about these issues is likely the ideal place to discuss them and how we as a community should treat such instances in the future. I’m happy to start said thread, even if it is simply a repost of this message, if people are interested. That said, we also have rules on this site about attacking other members and treating them with respect. We have to remember that in the absence of evidence to the contrary (which as discussed above, we are generally limited), members should be treated with respect and assumed to not have been directly involved in any illegal activity. I think inquiring about the history of individuals of these species they post about and respectfully educating them about the issues surrounding them is fine, but accusations and vilifying should not be tolerated.
Chris
Given how seldom most of these species had been successfully bred in captivity (if ever in many cases), how long it had been since any were legitimately legally imported, and how few of those remaining legal animals or their legitimate offspring remained in the captive market, many in the community are extremely suspicious of the true legality of any specimens of these species in captivity, and rightly so. The truth is while there may be legitimate completely legal bloodlines in some of these species floating around, the vast majority of most of these suspended Malagasy species that are available are likely from an illegal origin of one sort or another. They may themselves have been captive bred, but in all likelihood, their parents were probably smuggled and laundered. At this point it’s impossible to definitively tell the difference between legitimate legal bloodlines and those that at one point or another have been tainted by laundered specimens. As a result, most people who are suspicious of specimens of these species in captivity simply go by the odds, which aren’t in favor of completely legal origins. It does not help convincing people otherwise when individuals are working with large numbers of multiple of these species, posting photos of newly acquired adults, including newly acquired animals that sometimes appear gravid and some of which may even appear to show signs of being recently imported themselves. I don’t think this has anything to do with jealousy, but rather simply looking at the available information and how it looks given the history of these species and the odds. Further, as explained before, while permits may enable legal sale and shipment of these animals, they do not mean the animals are not themselves of illegal origins and subsequently laundered.
That said, many of the individuals who are currently working with these species may themselves have had nothing directly to do with any of these illegal activities and are themselves just trying to do their part in doing what is best for the animals in question, as well as trying to keep the bloodlines going in captivity in the hope of helping to reduce the demand on additional smuggled animals. Even some of those who are most vocally against the smuggling and perpetuation of these laundering activities are themselves in this boat. There are also those individuals who may actually still have legitimately legal blood for some of these species.
The truth of the matter is, while we can say that the chances are extremely good that many, and probably most, of the individuals of many of these species in captivity are likely of illegal origins somewhere along their bloodline, there is no way that any of us can say with complete certainty that any one individual specimen is absolutely not legal, or that the individual working with that specimen was themselves directly involved in any illegal activity. If there were, the authorities would be able to reject giving permits and could confiscate them.
As a community, it’s important for us all to be educated about the realities of the trade in these Malagasy species and to do our part to avoid perpetuating the continued smuggling and laundering of these species. We may not be able to do anything about removing the individuals in captivity that were previously imported illegally and have since been issued legal documents, but there are steps that can help curb continued smuggling and laundering. While the best way of doing so is simply resisting temptation to buy these species outright, obviously many won’t do that. In those cases, not purchasing specimens of these species that show signs of possibly being of questionable origin (adult individuals in any quantity that include gravid individuals and appear to be in rough or otherwise possibly wild condition) and requiring the breeder to show dated photographs of important events associated with legitimate captive breeding (copulation when possible, oviposition, eggs, hatching, neonates, etc.), and even multiple generations of so, can definitely help.
A separate thread specifically about these issues is likely the ideal place to discuss them and how we as a community should treat such instances in the future. I’m happy to start said thread, even if it is simply a repost of this message, if people are interested. That said, we also have rules on this site about attacking other members and treating them with respect. We have to remember that in the absence of evidence to the contrary (which as discussed above, we are generally limited), members should be treated with respect and assumed to not have been directly involved in any illegal activity. I think inquiring about the history of individuals of these species they post about and respectfully educating them about the issues surrounding them is fine, but accusations and vilifying should not be tolerated.
Chris
