03-16-2012, 02:29 PM
Some arguments for how one keeps dart frogs are based around how one defines conservation. To me, conservation of wild animals MUST include their natural habitats. That is why I don't believe we are practicing conservation in any real sense and are instead keeping pets. Were the goal true conservation, we would leave them in their habitats, not put them, as so many say, in glass boxes.
Can you conserve the captive population, conserve diversity in our pets? Sure. Just like conserving heritage breeds of animals that are close to disappearing. However, I believe they're ability and comfort at living in captivity (they are not wild animals, they are captive animals) trumps a diverse group of alleles. That group already exists in the wild, and if it doesn't, we won't be able to save it with captive populations, especially if we are not conserving the natural habitat loss or other base reasons for their disappearance. Again, because they are pets, I believe pets should be best served by helping them live in this new environment. That could mean selecting for traits that help them live better in pet environments. Caging an animal best suited for life in the wild is sad.
Because we are dealing with pets, I also find breeding to taste is not evil. However, it does not release us from doing so in a responsible manner. I like to present those breeding techniques that can allow this to happen without detriment to the population. Yes, this can be argued to the extreme, that any selection is "bad". However, nature selects as well. Is that bad too?
Can you conserve the captive population, conserve diversity in our pets? Sure. Just like conserving heritage breeds of animals that are close to disappearing. However, I believe they're ability and comfort at living in captivity (they are not wild animals, they are captive animals) trumps a diverse group of alleles. That group already exists in the wild, and if it doesn't, we won't be able to save it with captive populations, especially if we are not conserving the natural habitat loss or other base reasons for their disappearance. Again, because they are pets, I believe pets should be best served by helping them live in this new environment. That could mean selecting for traits that help them live better in pet environments. Caging an animal best suited for life in the wild is sad.
Because we are dealing with pets, I also find breeding to taste is not evil. However, it does not release us from doing so in a responsible manner. I like to present those breeding techniques that can allow this to happen without detriment to the population. Yes, this can be argued to the extreme, that any selection is "bad". However, nature selects as well. Is that bad too?