Wild Collection Issue

This is a hot one I know. But,..not talking about it, won't make it go away. We all know that it goes on. We also know that if you have enough money/power in Florida, you can bulldoze gopher tortoise/indigo habitat, and dispose of the animals as you see fit. We also know, that if someone were to try and collect those animals for private breeding/conservation programs, that person would be subject to jail time possibility. We also know that when one of those poachers is busted, the confiscated animals are given to zoos, and breeding colonies at Universities. And the possibility of that wild DNA ever making it into the captive population, is probably a long shot. It shouldn't be. Either the government should stop the bulldozers, or it should allow collection permits to be issued for qualified private breeders. Personally, I'd like to see them stop the bulldozers, but we both know,...that aint gonna happen. Yes there will be some habitat in places not inhabited by humans for a very long time. But if we don't get a handle on our captive gene pool now, we may be in trouble. Again,...Indigos Forever.
T.

I'll only address the captive gene pool

trends change with herps. The runaway morph , cross , and hybrid is upon us. This leads to untrue gene pools of and by some people/breeders. The concentration of the good old solitary gene pool is only thought of these days because of the wheel of profit and monies. With a well known ( could be anybody and this is a scenario ) breeder that produces 400 to thousands of whatever be it corns, tri-colors, what would they concentrate on ? Imagine with all those numbers as well if they would maybe even know what they have but by only careful breeding. Example > If they had a true bona-fide corn and bred it to anther and knew the locality and kept the original parents and or offsprings, that would be a bona-fide gene pool. Right ? ( my .02 cents )

Sorry,...I'm not clear on what you're saying.
T.

You're not the only one, Tony..

I have been trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to make sense of Mike's post, as it pertains to the question presented.
Unfortunately, the primary reason the "Sunshine State" is not issuing permits to maintain breeding pairs of D. couperi stems from ease of enforcement and cost to oversee such a program. Keep in mind, there are not going to be enough native permit requests for the captive husbandry of D. couperi within the “Sunshine State”, to make such a venture financially feasible, unlike hunting and fishing permits, which amount to a great deal of revenue for the state.
In short, it cost the state far less time and money to simply administer a blanket ban, regarding the captive husbandry of a native protected species, rather than develop and oversee a program regarding the issuance of permits for such an endeavor.

Best regards,

Jeff