# Oppinions on WC animals



## Eriathwen (May 24, 2012)

I know this footage is a few years old, an American company, probably seen before etc but i was just wondering what peoples opinions are on transporting WC animals? Im not saying we should bring them over in 1st class seats but surely they deserve better than this right? Is anyone actually aware of how their WC stock was transported or is WC just a label to people that they can try to ignore...

So, propaganda or problem? Discuss!! :whistling2:

Behind the Scenes in the Pet Trade: A PETA Undercover Investigation | PETA.org


----------



## CREAKS Society (Jun 6, 2011)

Anything with PETA on the name of it instantly looses any validation and credit of it being truthful.
I don't doubt for one moment the footage in that video is anything but dishearting and shocking, but that company was closed down for a reason, because it was animal cruelty. Not every importer and not every wholesaler treats there animals like crap. 

You only need to look at some of the owners of well known wholesalers, they are some of the most well respected breeders and herpetologists in the country. Some of them have invested alot of money into improving transit methods aswell. Lets also not forget we have the IATA/LAR code for animal transit, which is a international code that all airplanes must legally use.

To me this is simply just propaganda, you get good and bad in all walks of life.
The RSPCA will show some chav beating the hell out of his staffy, doesn't mean all staffy owns are chavs or treat there dogs bad.


----------



## Tarron (May 30, 2010)

As above,

but also, if you think logically, importers have no incentive to treat thier animals in anything but the best possible manner.

Better conditions = better survival rates = more animals to sell = ££££


----------



## sasca (Sep 29, 2011)

Good friend of mine was in charge of sexing and sorting through a batch of wild caught royals imported over and he said it was awful, hundreds of them all just in a box, some dead or dieing etc. So im inclined to believe the footage. 

Won't touch WC, if it was born in the wild, i won't put it in a tank in my house. I know WHY certain species may need a blood boost from wild stock eg corns, royals etc. But unless its considered extremely common in its habitat of origin, i don't think it should be in the pet trade.


----------



## Spikebrit (Oct 23, 2006)

Completely agree with CREAKs. I've worked a lot with WC reps and imports as well. Whilst there are bad ones out there most are really good. 

There are really strict criteria for bringing in animals and despite what many beleive the regulations are tight. You can't bring in half dead animals without facing massive fines. You also have to think of it this way, importing animals isnt cheap, so its in the importers best interest to bring in healthy animals and keep them healthy. 

I would love to say we are in a position were we no longer need WC, but at the moment that just isnt the case. if more people start breeding then maybe we will soon. 

On a slightly slanted topic, WC animals actually do a lot to protect their natural habitat and reduce habitat destruction. If the local can make renewable money from capturing and selling reps then woodland won't be destroyed for farms and palm oil plantations. If you look at exporters with farms over there they ac tually do a lot to save animals natural habitat from destruction, educate locals etc.

So personally at the moment i see WC as being necessary in the trade for the time being but i also see it as helping protect some of their local habitats. As if we stopped WC, the local couldn't make money and woodland will likly be felled for farm land. Which has happend in lots of places

jay

jay


----------



## Drayvan (Jul 7, 2010)

For once i actually agree with most said, lets hope this continues to be a decent back and forth rather than a slanging match as theres some credible, interesting posts so far!

As for me, yes we have a need to import, if it wasnt for the pet trade i doubt the crested gecko would have done so well for itself, but we also have a responsibility to make sure the animals we do are treated properly before arrival etc. However, yes these guys were shut down, but how many more are out there?, and how can we know? As much as people dislike PETA, if they hadnt investigated, would the reptile community have known? and if so, would they have done anything? Unfortunately some people within the hobby seem preoccupied with keeping the hobbys nose clean in the public eye and would hate to see bad press  surely self regulating would put us in better light? Seems theres a lot of 'you cant say that!!! :gasp::gasp: it might be used against us!' going on, and burying our heads in the sand isnt doing us any favours :lol2: 
So yes, i would most definately keep WC seeing as i mainly stick to phibs and its kind of unavoidable, if it can be CB il try to buy those, if its rare to find a CB one and i have the means to il try to CB the WC i buy. Unfortunately you can never be sure your supplier is being truthful with how they entered the country so unless you import them for yourself i guess you will have to accept they may have been treated badly or stick to CB.


----------



## CREAKS Society (Jun 6, 2011)

sasca said:


> Good friend of mine was in charge of sexing and sorting through a batch of wild caught royals imported over and he said it was awful, hundreds of them all just in a box, some dead or dieing etc. So im inclined to believe the footage.
> 
> Won't touch WC, if it was born in the wild, i won't put it in a tank in my house. I know WHY certain species may need a blood boost from wild stock eg corns, royals etc. But unless its considered extremely common in its habitat of origin, i don't think it should be in the pet trade.


If your friend was indeed placed in charge of sexing hundreds of them then that surely means he must work in the pet trade to some extent, and seems abit odd even if it was the case that he would state this. Generally if things go bad then you tend to keep it quite due to embarrassment, just seems to be the way it is.

I am also surprised to see the high volume of wc royals, epically as last years cites quotas for wc royals was so low world wide. CF royals however is massive.
On the oppiste end of the scale out of all the imported in CF royals we saw this year, only 3 died, and that was nothing into the sheer comparison. I guess you could say importing reptiles is about experience and quality, you need the experience to no where to buy the quality. Buy bad fruit and it will go mouldy quickly, buy animals from crap exporters and expect them to not last long.

Its all about the scale, good and bad everywhere you look


----------



## Khonsu (May 20, 2009)

Eriathwen said:


> I know this footage is a few years old, an American company, probably seen before etc but i was just wondering what peoples opinions are on transporting WC animals? Im not saying we should bring them over in 1st class seats but surely they deserve better than this right? Is anyone actually aware of how their WC stock was transported or is WC just a label to people that they can try to ignore...
> 
> So, propaganda or problem? Discuss!! :whistling2:
> 
> Behind the Scenes in the Pet Trade: A PETA Undercover Investigation | PETA.org


APA member perhaps :whistling2:


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

I visited the facility in the footage some years ago, and although its hard to explain away some of the footage, at the time of my visit the facility was very impressive. It was very comparable to many of the large, medium and small time breeders producing CB animals that we all know and dont question their animal welfare credentials. It was also far ahead, at that time, of many worldwide zoos "behind the scenes" that I have also visited. I cannot comment (but will in the next paragraph!) about the possibility that circumstances had possibly changed with this business, but when I visited things were very good, and I saw none of those practices that shock when I was there. 

I know that certainly when several of the staff, who were long term employees, were under cover PETA agents (who recorded this video over a period of a few months working at the facility) its not difficult to see that they them selves were guilty of letting standards slip as much as anybody else. If standards were high once, I fail to see any other reason other than staff with motives (and lack of reptile knowledge) had a part in the blame. But I would never argue that the owners should have noticed that these "staff" had let things slip, and obviously some of the recorded comments of the owners conversations seemed cold and uncaring - but I guess we will never know how "taken out of context" the recordings are. The owners were "animal people", but also good business people - for two reasons they seemed, to me, to put animal welfare high on the agenda (they loved animals, and they loved making money ie; profit doesnt happen if the animal is dead or poorly).

I had some minor issues with regards the upstairs snake room, for example many snakes did not have adequate feeding records - so it was difficult to see which snakes needed some extra attention, and perhaps some minor hygiene issues. 

I hope this helps, giving a more balanced approach to this video, released showing a very biased PETA side of their argument.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i don't get these animal rights groups...

i mean, reptile keepers an other hobbyists are all for animal rights for the most part...

peta for instance... they cite animal cruelty as the entire reason why people should not keep animals...

that's like saying some restaurants serve bad food... therefore we should not have restaurants...

or that airplanes crash and kill people... therefore air travel should be banned...

something is terribly wrong with these people... something about their minds are screwed up...

people are cruel to dogs... a fact... does that mean dogs should not be kept?

yet these peta people often own dogs... they don't seem to let logic get in their way...


----------



## bladeblaster (Sep 30, 2008)

sasca said:


> Good friend of mine was in charge of sexing and sorting through a batch of wild caught royals imported over and he said it was awful, hundreds of them all just in a box, some dead or dieing etc. So im inclined to believe the footage.


I find this extremely difficult to believe. It makes no sense at all, unless your 'friend' is involved with some very dodgy bordering on ileagal importers. In which case he himself is as much to blame as anyone.

As for the video, there are elements of truth, but of course is very one sided. It's no massive secret that in the 'bad old days' there was a lot of room for improvement, however huge improvements have been made. Why do you think that a tortoise will now set you back over a hundred quid, and 20 years ago they were pretty much given away as fairground prizes?


----------



## sasca (Sep 29, 2011)

I go by what they said, im quite happy to admit i myself don't have first hand experience of it myself, and it was a good few years a go, only going on hearsay. However he is NOT dodgy in any sense so please don't insinuate on a couple of sentences written by myself. Blame me for not giving all details as i don't know them. 

My opinion is that WC is not ideal at all, i don't think endangered or delicate species should be brought into the pet trade ever but understand and accept that new blood is needed in existing breeding projects such as royals and other snakes etc. Hopefully we'll get to the stage there is a big enough gene pool to not need to catch more. I wouldn't choose to keep WC myself


----------



## Drayvan (Jul 7, 2010)

Aimo said:


> APA member perhaps :whistling2:


Pretty sure if they were an APA member they would be posting this on an Animal rights forum, not a reptile keeping one :lol2::lol2: 

Not everyone who questions how the hobby runs is AR, maybe theyre just trying to make the world a better place :whistling2:


----------



## Eriathwen (May 24, 2012)

v-max said:


> I visited the facility in the footage some years ago, and although its hard to explain away some of the footage, at the time of my visit the facility was very impressive. It was very comparable to many of the large, medium and small time breeders producing CB animals that we all know and dont question their animal welfare credentials. It was also far ahead, at that time, of many worldwide zoos "behind the scenes" that I have also visited. I cannot comment (but will in the next paragraph!) about the possibility that circumstances had possibly changed with this business, but when I visited things were very good, and I saw none of those practices that shock when I was there.
> 
> I know that certainly when several of the staff, who were long term employees, were under cover PETA agents (who recorded this video over a period of a few months working at the facility) its not difficult to see that they them selves were guilty of letting standards slip as much as anybody else. If standards were high once, I fail to see any other reason other than staff with motives (and lack of reptile knowledge) had a part in the blame. But I would never argue that the owners should have noticed that these "staff" had let things slip, and obviously some of the recorded comments of the owners conversations seemed cold and uncaring - but I guess we will never know how "taken out of context" the recordings are. The owners were "animal people", but also good business people - for two reasons they seemed, to me, to put animal welfare high on the agenda (they loved animals, and they loved making money ie; profit doesnt happen if the animal is dead or poorly).
> 
> ...


Thankyou for that, it would be really nice for people who do practice high standards of welfare to have the opportunity to show people rather than sit and get tarred with the same brush as im sure its frustrating for them and its a shame this business went downhill if it was once high standard. Im not sure the PETA staff members would have willingly allowed the animal welfare standards to slip, seeing as a large percentage of animal rights people are quite brainwashed ... even to the extent of valuing animal life over human, so i doubt they would have contributed, more...turned a blind eye for gathering footage sake. But i guess we wont really ever know.


----------



## Tarron (May 30, 2010)

Peta have been accused of causing suffering to get propaganda videos created.

Such as paying someone to skin a dog alive so they could film it.



Eriathwen said:


> Thankyou for that, it would be really nice for people who do practice high standards of welfare to have the opportunity to show people rather than sit and get tarred with the same brush as im sure its frustrating for them and its a shame this business went downhill if it was once high standard. Im not sure the PETA staff members would have willingly allowed the animal welfare standards to slip, seeing as a large percentage of animal rights people are quite brainwashed ... even to the extent of valuing animal life over human, so i doubt they would have contributed, more...turned a blind eye for gathering footage sake. But i guess we wont really ever know.


----------



## Eriathwen (May 24, 2012)

Tarron said:


> Peta have been accused of causing suffering to get propaganda videos created.
> 
> Such as paying someone to skin a dog alive so they could film it.


Hmm guess thats why the AR folks dont have many good words to say for them either... if the accusations are true then i guess that would be why :gasp:

Consider me corrected on that matter then :2thumb::lol2:


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

Eriathwen said:


> Hmm guess thats why the AR folks dont have many good words to say for them either... if the accusations are true then i guess that would be why :gasp:
> 
> Consider me corrected on that matter then :2thumb::lol2:


It may not be a case of PETA staff causing the suffering but they indirectly encourage it. 
PETA buys film footage from private individuals. These individuals are in it for the money not the animals. If PETA is offering thousands of dollers for film footage of animal cruelty the film makers will get that footage. what ever thay have to do to get it. 
PETA have been caught out many times after showing brought in film footage, when investigators have found the people in the film footage and been told they were paid to do what they did and were offered a bonus to make it extra cruel. 
There is also a silent film out there some where of dolphins being killed. When a court demanded the original film with sound still working, the film director could be heard shouting at the natives to hit the dolphins harder and later screaming at them to cut the dolphins deeper to get more blood in the water.

Gordon Glasson
FBH VC


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

Eriathwen said:


> I know this footage is a few years old, an American company, probably seen before etc but i was just wondering what peoples opinions are on transporting WC animals? Im not saying we should bring them over in 1st class seats but surely they deserve better than this right? Is anyone actually aware of how their WC stock was transported or is WC just a label to people that they can try to ignore...
> 
> So, propaganda or problem? Discuss!! :whistling2:
> 
> Behind the Scenes in the Pet Trade: A PETA Undercover Investigation | PETA.org


My favourite PETA related web site is PETA Kills Animals: PETA on Trial for Needlessly Killing Animals

So PETA, a group of respectable animal lovers or a bunch of animal killing nutters? Discuss!! :devil:

Gordon


----------



## Drayvan (Jul 7, 2010)

Natrix said:


> My favourite PETA related web site is PETA Kills Animals: PETA on Trial for Needlessly Killing Animals
> 
> So PETA, a group of respectable animal lovers or a bunch of animal killing nutters? Discuss!! :devil:
> 
> Gordon


Theres already quite a fair bit of debate on that subject if you use the search tool  so isnt really necessary makes a nice change to see people debating a decent subject for once, please dont lower it to the usual swearfest and talking to brickwalls during circling the same point.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

Eriathwen said:


> I know this footage is a few years old, an American company, probably seen before etc but i was just wondering what peoples opinions are on transporting WC animals? Im not saying we should bring them over in 1st class seats but surely they deserve better than this right? Is anyone actually aware of how their WC stock was transported or is WC just a label to people that they can try to ignore...
> 
> So, propaganda or problem? Discuss!! :whistling2:
> 
> Behind the Scenes in the Pet Trade: A PETA Undercover Investigation | PETA.org


This is really sad to watch. I understand that not all companys are like this but now a days there should be no trade in WC reptiles. I really hate that anoles and chameleons and other reptiles are taken from the wild!


----------



## Eriathwen (May 24, 2012)

Mcadam1222 said:


> This is really sad to watch. I understand that not all companys are like this but now a days there should be no trade in WC reptiles. I really hate that anoles and chameleons and other reptiles are taken from the wild!


Indeed, its my understanding that there is infact some very well run ones. The trade is pretty complex in itself, but a lot of species shown are very commonly kept and easily sourced as CB. To enter new blood into a breeding project i guess is reasonable but, to put WC animal into pet home after pet home just seems so unsustainable.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

Eriathwen said:


> Indeed, its my understanding that there is infact some very well run ones. The trade is pretty complex in itself, but a lot of species shown are very commonly kept and easily sourced as CB. To enter new blood into a breeding project i guess is reasonable but, to put WC animal into pet home after pet home just seems so unsustainable.


Yes I agree. I mean at the start it had to be done but people are still taking reptiles such as ball pythons from the wild and there is no need for that as there are plenty of ball pythons that are CB. Another one you see which is bad is anoles, I have never seen a CB anole in all of the reptile places and shops I have been in and I think it is shocking!. I am thinking in the future of getting a couple of green or brown anole colonys going and give the choice of people to buy CB anoles not WC ones.


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

Human kind is greedy and destructive, but is also needy of feeding their families and surviving on a day to day basis.

If the very small trade in WC "pet" reptiles and amphibians was stopped (this industry is now miniscule, especially in comparison to other destructive forces affecting animals in the wild), the poor people in the countries of origin that collect these animals would have no income - and if they dont find another option they (and their families) will starve. What happens at this point is that the poor people find another way of making money from the land. Slash and burn farming is a good example in the rainforests. Hey presto, the animals that were once valued have no value and no where to live. End result - species disappearing. Its easy to right off WC "farming" as not necessary, but it can be a fundamental tool in conservation - hence why CITES was set up (it stands for Control in Trade of Endangered Species). It is universally recognised that a controlled trade in WC animals is beneficial to their survival. And obviously this doesnt touch on the greed and destruction element of humans - vast areas of habitat are no longer - look at Madagascar for example - most sources suggest over 80% of the rainforest is now gone. I am embarraced for my race to suggest that without getting animals into captivity we have a serious risk of more and more species being wiped out - do gooders might think this is over reaction, its not. So, much of the argument against WC in captivity is seriously flawed.

One last thing. OK, I'm an old timer and have been in the hobby a long time and perhaps have a different insight - but please dont forget that without WC in the first place all the Leopard geckos, Corns, Ball pythons etc etc etc wouldnt now form the basis of our lives. We all love keeping these reptiles, it wouldnt have been possible without those taken from the wild. If, from example, myself (and the countless others at the same time and before me) didnt keep WC animals all those years ago, figure out how to breed them (and then of course create a market place for the resulting CB!) we wouldnt have people taking the moral high ground. 

I'm afraid as a herpetologist I cannot resist the temptation of understanding the biology of a species I have not kept before - and ultimately dictate what the future reptile keeper should and shouldnt keep. There are countless other keepers with the same views - especially on the continent where this element of the hobby is as strong (or perhaps stronger) than the production of colour morphs in the UK. Many keepers in the UK would be seriously surprised how many people are into this side of the hobby and raise to the challenge of keeping and breeding a species that isnt commonly kept or bred in captivity. 

There are some serious rumblings within the workings of the FBH, IHS and other organisations of the job that we did some years ago. As an industry we thought we steered ourselves down a good, correct route promoting several species including Leopard geckos, Corns and the like as CB "pet" species. In other words we brain washed everybody in the industry from the top to the bottom to believe this was the way forward. We did too good a job, and many, including myself now reflect on this and wonder what damage we have done - not only for our industry but also for the good of survival of the animals in the wild.


----------



## Spikebrit (Oct 23, 2006)

Mcadam1222 said:


> Yes I agree. I mean at the start it had to be done but people are still taking reptiles such as ball pythons from the wild and there is no need for that as there are plenty of ball pythons that are CB. Another one you see which is bad is anoles, I have never seen a CB anole in all of the reptile places and shops I have been in and I think it is shocking!. I am thinking in the future of getting a couple of green or brown anole colonys going and give the choice of people to buy CB anoles not WC ones.



Just to pick your coment apart the quote for WC roayls is tiny, there are very few WC royals ever imported. There are CF royals which are completly different. 

With regards to anoles they are seen pritty much as a pest in the US, so they are shipped over. 

If people were willing to pay more for the animal, anoles in particularly instead of wanting the cheapest then maybe more people would breed them. I breed anoles regularly but they make a massive loss as it costs more to heat, raise, incubate and keep and anole then it does to sell. Especially when they are seen as a pest in the US and can be purchased so cheaply. 

Jay


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

Spikebrit said:


> If people were willing to pay more for the animal, anoles in particularly instead of wanting the cheapest then maybe more people would breed them. I breed anoles regularly but they make a massive loss as it costs more to heat, raise, incubate and keep and anole then it does to sell. Especially when they are seen as a pest in the US and can be purchased so cheaply.
> 
> Jay


If wild caught Anoles were stopped from being imported then the price of captive ones would probably trebble.


----------



## Eriathwen (May 24, 2012)

Just to clarify the CITES is The Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora...not 'control' as said above :2thumb: 
All good points raised so far especially v-max however aside from the 'is it ok to keep shipping over WC species, common or not' direction this is taking it would be nice for the point of regardless of what species is shipped over, should their welfare be taken more into consideration and given a higher standard of care? Thats not to say most suppliers starve their stock to death as per the linked video, but i guess what i am thinking is that people should have the opportunity to view good practice from people shipping the animals more easily than there is now. This would make the choice of whom to import your stock from easier and people voting with their feet would either make the bad buck up their ideas of be closed down.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

colinm said:


> If wild caught Anoles were stopped from being imported then the price of captive ones would probably trebble.


Well its not about the price. I know I would pay £30 for a CB anole than £10 for a WC one.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

Spikebrit said:


> Just to pick your coment apart the quote for WC roayls is tiny, there are very few WC royals ever imported. There are CF royals which are completly different.
> 
> With regards to anoles they are seen pritty much as a pest in the US, so they are shipped over.
> 
> ...


I understand what you mean but I have seen a number of WC ball pythons.


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

Eriathwen said:


> Just to clarify the CITES is The Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora...not 'control' as said above :2thumb:
> All good points raised so far especially v-max however aside from the 'is it ok to keep shipping over WC species, common or not' direction this is taking it would be nice for the point of regardless of what species is shipped over, should their welfare be taken more into consideration and given a higher standard of care? Thats not to say most suppliers starve their stock to death as per the linked video, but i guess what i am thinking is that people should have the opportunity to view good practice from people shipping the animals more easily than there is now. This would make the choice of whom to import your stock from easier and people voting with their feet would either make the bad buck up their ideas of be closed down.


Once over, some years ago, shipments were sometimes very poor indeed. In the '80s I would help unpack shipments at the various importers active at that time. Sometimes, for example, I would untie a small linen bag marked as having 100 House geckos to find only one or two still alive. It moved me enough to say that I would never be part of that industry. History of course shows that I had a re-think (!), but I would like to think I was at the forefront of the "new age" of reptile dealers who had very different standards to some of those before us (including none other Mr Clifford Warwick!!). Once I became a "dealer" I know that I had to be more aware of animal welfare - for two reasons; firstly I love animals and secondly without more care the business would not be viable (profit wise). When I speak to others around at that time its a sentiment often repeated. What I am saying is that standards, on the whole, are now excellent with not only self policing within the industry but now much more stringent rules and regulations. Of course, with all walks of life there are good and bad - and I would not say that mistakes dont happen. But on the whole, we can as an industry hold our head high. 

Dont forget that the same standards of care apply for the (often) shipments of CB from the top breeders in the States as to any other shipments including WC. So be me using the term "dealer" I'm including the large well know captive breeders too. It concerns me about the elitist attitude in the UK within the hobby about CB, dont forget using the same rule as above - there are good and bad, I have seen some breeders with much worse facilities than "WC dealers". So when talking about shipping and the animals welfare its a much bigger picture than just WC. Indeed many of the animals at the dealers premises in the video are CB, supplied from many of the top breeders in the USA - just like here its quite an incestuous industry!

Over the last decade the UK industry has put in place various organisations that have worked hard to improve our industry in all its forms to a standard that we can all be very proud of. We compare very favourably with other forms of animal industry and in many cases are head and shoulders above - for example a huge concern to me is some of the various "rescue centres" and "animal welfare organisations" out there. FBH, IHS and REPTA are held in wide regard worldwide and in many ways lead the way forward for the rest of the world. For example a new inituative has been spear headed by these groups for regular meetings of major USA and European dealers, breeders, shippers etc to discuss further improving the industry worldwide.

Keep this in mind when, on these forums when we single out one aspect of this industry - it is all tied together (breeders and all) and fighting for the best in standards of animal welfare. In Germany WC is commonly kept and a much better understood proposition - for the various benefits to conservation and also our hobby in general. In my humble opinion, there is no better time to embrace all aspects of the hobby - for the sake of its future.


----------



## KWIBEZEE (Mar 15, 2010)

IF, 1 individual of species 'G*' costs £10 to capture abroad then 100 = £1000. Overheads = £500 pcm. ( heat/light/ food etc) Shipping & paperwork etc = £1000 to Uk for 100 individulas. 

In the UK each individual sells for £70. Potential import stock therfore worth £7,000. Cost to entrepeneur so far is £1000 for 100 + £1000 SHIPPING +£500 overheads = £2500.

If, ALL the others sell in 1st month then profit made is £4,500.

However, *25 % die due to stress/ parasites/ injury during transport/ dehydration *{ Loss of 25% 'stock' = £250 ( ACTUAL cost) ( potential worth = £1750)}. Still with one quarter imported animals lost then £2800 is profit. ( £2300 if it takes 2 months).

With 50% loss the profit is still £1050. ( £550 profit if it takes 2 months to sell).


Care & husbandry aside for the time being, there is still a profit to be made despite how good/reputable the entrepeneur is. Of course only the surviving number of individuals make testament to the importers DISPLAY showroom/ shop etc and for the crowds to simply gawp in amazement etc !!! Indeed if only 10% died then the guy makes more profit and is seen as some god-send. A win +win situation if as they say in business - *YOU* are prepared to except 50 % loss. Hang on though - that's 50% loss of stock/ imported animal and not actual £ pounds cash sterling or whatever other currency etc.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

KWIBEZEE said:


> IF, 1 individual of species 'G*' costs £10 to capture abroad then 100 = £1000. Overheads = £500 pcm. ( heat/light/ food etc) Shipping & paperwork etc = £1000 to Uk for 100 individulas.
> 
> In the UK each individual sells for £70. Potential import stock therfore worth £7,000. Cost to entrepeneur so far is £1000 for 100 + £1000 SHIPPING +£500 overheads = £2500.
> 
> ...


Thanks for that. 25% will die because people come and take them out of there home when they were sitting there bothering nobody, Terrible!


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

There are a lot of "ifs" there.The few reptile importers that I have net over the last thirty odd years are certainly not driving around in Lambourghinis.

Of the "25%" that die these would not have necessarily lived in the wild.The wild is a dangerous place remember.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

colinm said:


> There are a lot of "ifs" there.The few reptile importers that I have net over the last thirty odd years are certainly not driving around in Lambourghinis.
> 
> Of the "25%" that die these would not have necessarily lived in the wild.The wild is a dangerous place remember.


I do understand that some reptiles are safer in captivity but they should have just been left alone and if they are eaten by a predator then that is whats going to happen its nature but they should still be left alone in the first place!


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

If you are to bring in 100 animals at £10 each then spend £1500 on getting them into the UK and having them ready for sale that means each animal has cost you £25 each. If you lose 25 of those animals you have lost £625 - at cost. 

Further more, if an animal has cost an importer £25 they will sell it into the trade (the shops) at around £40 plus VAT - not £70. I would say, from personal experience that around 90% of shipments are sold into the trade at these margins - making the shipment worth (after the hypothetical losses) around £2680 - a £180 profit. If the importer does sell some at retail he/she will sell them at around £75-80. There is instantly a loss of 20% to the VAT man - and thats before the overheads of them being cared for. So if the remaining sell at those margins he/she will make a further £512 making a grand total - in the extreme of around £690. 

Using the £500 per month figure already used per month for care it easy to see that profit eaten up if they are not sold quickly. So, if a dealer was to allow such a high 25% "failure rate" they would not be "coining it in", and would likely be out of business. 

If a dealer wants to make "loadsa money" WC isnt the way forward. Try that exact same calculation with the CB colour morph industry with the margins and high $ prices that this part of the industry commands. And they have the exact same obligation to animal welfare transportation as WC shippers do.


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

A good reply Kevin.

I agree if you want to make big money you will have a better chance in morphs,but you have to be at the very start of each morph and invest £££s.Then you have all the problems with live animals.

So it always looks good on paper like the importing but life doesnt run that smoothly does it?


----------



## FLINTUS (Feb 12, 2012)

I get really sick of online pet shops saying we'll say whether they're wild caught or not and then say we promote CB animals and don't like WC stock, and then admit they've got a WC animal. Oh yes, great post V-Max.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

morally, wc, if done responsibly, isn't any different than hunting or fishing...


----------



## KWIBEZEE (Mar 15, 2010)

colinm said:


> There are a lot of "ifs" there.The few reptile importers that I have net over the last thirty odd years are certainly not driving around in Lambourghinis.
> 
> Of the "25%" that die these would not have necessarily lived in the wild.The wild is a dangerous place remember.


What makes you so sure that the 25% would die anyway? There's no real proof without an Ecological study to evaluate some solid equation etc. There are other Ecological studies though that do indicate that with the removal of top predators there certainly is a significant disturbance amongst many populations of species. An example here would be the taking of say 25 individuals from a given population in a capture area - but - 20 of them are pregnant females. ( This may be 80% ratio of the total amount of that seasons gravid females etc. Or the number of alpha males may have been captured etc or even the possibility of some relevant genetic information.). Okay - here admittedly there is a bias for the sake of the professed statement's following but anyone can surely see the clear logic. Yes there are many assumptions but still the probability is there and it stands a good chance of proving correct with any other null hypothesis. 

I'm sure some species may not even have essential native data on record for one reason or the other. Another impact may possibly result from a future event - pollution, a particular disease, environment islandisation - were habitat becomes too fragmented by natural or anthropomorphic ( man) activity. etc The result may see that insufficient capable breeding ratios of either or both sexes therefore there are fewer 'next generation' offspring. Again, assumption - but ones that should not be overlooked. Every environmentalist would surely wag the long finger at such ignorance!!!
( Shelley's exclamations - all mine )

See what you say HABU - I'm not into hunting or fishing - not without a legitimate purpose and not something to class as "sport".

One other consideration : of the number of individuals caught at a capture area by the natives ( as is the case in most cases ) there is no telling how many are rejected or again suffer unnecessarily before being chosen ( some ticket to freedom after so long in the wild). This isn't an assumption - have seen many world class and BBC documentaries highlighting such things and countless other campaigns.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

all i meant was that taking animals from the wild can be sustainable... and good for the population in many cases...


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

HABU said:


> morally, wc, if done responsibly, isn't any different than hunting or fishing...


I really dont agree in hunting or fishing unless your using it for something e.g food. So the animal is dead but when taking animals out of the wild, they are not dead and they have to be stuck in a cage for the rest of there life! So it not the same as hunting or fishing in my opinion.


----------



## MCEE (Aug 8, 2011)

v-max said:


> If you are to bring in 100 animals at £10 each then spend £1500 on getting them into the UK and having them ready for sale that means each animal has cost you £25 each. If you lose 25 of those animals you have lost £625 - at cost.
> 
> Further more, if an animal has cost an importer £25 they will sell it into the trade (the shops) at around £40 plus VAT - not £70. I would say, from personal experience that around 90% of shipments are sold into the trade at these margins - making the shipment worth (after the hypothetical losses) around £2680 - a £180 profit. If the importer does sell some at retail he/she will sell them at around £75-80. There is instantly a loss of 20% to the VAT man - and thats before the overheads of them being cared for. So if the remaining sell at those margins he/she will make a further £512 making a grand total - in the extreme of around £690.
> 
> ...


That may be all well and good but what if these animals were not "common" £10 animals but £100 or rarer, lot more expensive animals. Keeping the same percentages you quote the markup would be a lot greater and, thus, the incentives being that rarer animals would be more lucrative and losses would be better written off.


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

MCEE said:


> That may be all well and good but what if these animals were not "common" £10 animals but £100 or rarer, lot more expensive animals. Keeping the same percentages you quote the markup would be a lot greater and, thus, the incentives being that rarer animals would be more lucrative and losses would be better written off.


Not really Im afraid. Rarer animals require extra CITES paperwork at both ends (export and import) that soon eat up into the margin - and thats not taking into account that a £100 (plus costs) loss is a much harder loss than a £10 (plus costs). If you were to lose £10 of your wages or £100 I'm guessing you would chose the former.

And of course thats still not taking into account that if you were to import, for example high end CB Corns or Leopard geckos, that require no extra paperwork, that you would be much better off. 

I'm afraid that no matter which way you look at the finance sides of both WC or CB imports there is a greater chance of making lots of money with CB. The idea of importers becoming stinking rich from WC animals is, frankly, non-sensicle. 

I sincerely inderstand the "ideal" of those that argue that the animals would be better off left in the wild - but human kind being the way it is the "ideal" is highly unlikely. If these poor people that live with the animals cant make money from the animals they will not protect the land. Habitat destruction has been proved to be increased once quotas have been limited or stopped. So that ideal of leaving them where they are, well I'm afraid that without a place to live they will ultimately die. A sustainable "farming" thus protects the habitat and (hopefully) allows for generations of animals to have some where to live. I say hopefully as of course much larger industries than the pet trade have their greedy eyes on much of the same terrain - oil for example.

Being very frank, what I dont understand is keepers saying that animals should not be in cages, when they have animals of their own in cages. Some would argue that all animals should not be in cages no matter what their origins - they are called APA or PETA. I'm sorry if this is offensive, and I dont mean to be, but I cannot be hypocritical to say that its OK for my animal to be in a cage when its only there because its grandad and grandma where taken from the wild. 

I'm proud to be a herpetologist. I'm proud to have been one of the pioneers of breeding reptiles from WC stock. I am proud to still be taking on new challenges breeding "new" species not available as CB. I am proud to have had a part in making the hobby what it is today. I am proud to be part of an industry that holds and maintains several species in captivity that, without working with WC stock, would now be extinct in the wild due to habitat loss. I am also proud of helping create the hobby, interests and to many their entire lives of tens of thousands of reptile keepers in the UK. This lifestyle that we all hold dear has its heart and soul in keeping animals in place where some would argue they shouldnt be. I hope these ramblings make some sense!


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

KWIBEZEE said:


> What makes you so sure that the 25% would die anyway? There's no real proof without an Ecological study to evaluate some solid equation etc. There are other Ecological studies though that do indicate that with the removal of top predators there certainly is a significant disturbance amongst many populations of species. An example here would be the taking of say 25 individuals from a given population in a capture area - but - 20 of them are pregnant females. ( This may be 80% ratio of the total amount of that seasons gravid females etc. Or the number of alpha males may have been captured etc or even the possibility of some relevant genetic information.). Okay - here admittedly there is a bias for the sake of the professed statement's following but anyone can surely see the clear logic. Yes there are many assumptions but still the probability is there and it stands a good chance of proving correct with any other null hypothesis.
> 
> ( Shelley's exclamations - all mine )
> 
> .


I was merely quoting your figures and I assume that you have a good knowledge of the trade to quote this percentages and figures?

This thread seems to be a thread intended to deliberately antagonise people.Kevin has put forward a very logigal and balanced answer to the accusations that have been levelled at the importers.


----------



## becky89 (Nov 24, 2009)

Mcadam1222 said:


> I really dont agree in hunting or fishing unless your using it for something e.g food. So the animal is dead but when taking animals out of the wild, they are not dead and they have to be stuck in a cage for the rest of there life! So it not the same as hunting or fishing in my opinion.


Well it is really because at the end of the day animals have been taken from the wild permanently. 

Really annoys me when people say they're against WC animals because where the hell do they think their CB ones came from?? If you're against WC that we take now then you shouldn't be keeping reptiles at all IMO as it's completely hypocritical. There's no point trying to make yourself feel superior about the whole thing just because you strive to buy CB, you've already supported the capture and breeding of WC animals somewhere along the line. We have a couple of WC animals, and tbh they don't act any differently to the CB ones. Reptiles aren't domestic animals, so a baby CB acts no differently to a baby WC.


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

becky89 said:


> Well it is really because at the end of the day animals have been taken from the wild permanently.
> 
> Really annoys me when people say they're against WC animals because where the hell do they think their CB ones came from?? If you're against WC that we take now then you shouldn't be keeping reptiles at all IMO as it's completely hypocritical. There's no point trying to make yourself feel superior about the whole thing just because you strive to buy CB, you've already supported the capture and breeding of WC animals somewhere along the line. We have a couple of WC animals, and tbh they don't act any differently to the CB ones. Reptiles aren't domestic animals, so a baby CB acts no differently to a baby WC.


I dont hink so, I am just saying what I think here!. This is the year 2012 not 1950. There should be no trade in WC animals.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mcadam1222 said:


> I really dont agree in hunting or fishing unless your using it for something e.g food. So the animal is dead but when taking animals out of the wild, they are not dead and they have to be stuck in a cage for the rest of there life! So it not the same as hunting or fishing in my opinion.


i was referring to harvesting animals and it's impact on the population...

and stuck in a cage?... captive bred animals are stuck in a cage and there are no hawks or raccoons to eat them for lunch...

people don't do well in cages... but people don't do well living under logs either... unlike snakes and such...


nature always produces a surplus and the surplus animals die in nearly all cases...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mcadam1222 said:


> I dont hink so, I am just saying what I think here!. This is the year 2012 not 1950. There should be no trade in WC animals.


what's changed?


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

HABU said:


> i was referring to harvesting animals and it's impact on the population...
> 
> and stuck in a cage?... captive bred animals are stuck in a cage and there are no hawks or raccoons to eat them for lunch...
> 
> ...


Im just saying my opinion here. Whatever is going to happen to them in the wild is going to happen! Its nature.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Mcadam1222 said:


> Im just saying my opinion here. Whatever is going to happen to them in the wild is going to happen! Its nature.


you must be a vegetarian...:lol2:


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

HABU said:


> you must be a vegetarian...:lol2:


 Ahaa, Im not !


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

Mcadam1222 said:


> Im just saying my opinion here. Whatever is going to happen to them in the wild is going to happen! Its nature.


The people who live alongside the animals are also part of nature. They have spent many, many generations living alongside each other. Surely if all that is "nature" you can live with the fact there us a direct relationship to each other. If these people eat an animal, or collect an animal to sell to feed themselves the end result is the same. I only say this because I have had the fortune to spend time in these places, with these people so perhaps understand the role it plays a little better than the average person. Sorry to single you out :blush:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

v-max said:


> The people who live alongside the animals are also part of nature. They have spent many, many generations living alongside each other. Surely if all that is "nature" you can live with the fact there us a direct relationship to each other. If these people eat an animal, or collect an animal to sell to feed themselves the end result is the same. I only say this because I have had the fortune to spend time in these places, with these people so perhaps understand the role it plays a little better than the average person. Sorry to single you out :blush:


i'm biased about the wilderness and wild things...

i live here after all...




















a sea of green...


folks in england likely don't have open wilderness like here...

my woods wouldn't miss a few snakes or lizards....


----------



## Horny Toad (Sep 9, 2006)

HABU said:


> i'm biased about the wilderness and wild things...
> 
> i live here after all...
> 
> ...


Wow! Beautiful! Being an importer of CB and WC animals I'll send the boys round now to rape and pillage the whole area :Na_Na_Na_Na:

Seriously though, many keepers do not actually see where there animals come from CB or WC. They have little idea of the relationships between animals and the land when they live together. It's not as straight forward as it's often made out.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

v-max said:


> Wow! Beautiful! Being an importer of CB and WC animals I'll send the boys round now to rape and pillage the whole area :Na_Na_Na_Na:
> 
> Seriously though, many keepers do not actually see where there animals come from CB or WC. They have little idea of the relationships between animals and the land when they live together. It's not as straight forward as it's often made out.


overdoing anything is counter productive...

sustainability...

most of my herps were wild caught...











my black king(*****) is wild caught... four years now i've had him... thriving...

took this pic last summer...


----------



## Mcadam1222 (May 17, 2012)

v-max said:


> The people who live alongside the animals are also part of nature. They have spent many, many generations living alongside each other. Surely if all that is "nature" you can live with the fact there us a direct relationship to each other. If these people eat an animal, or collect an animal to sell to feed themselves the end result is the same. I only say this because I have had the fortune to spend time in these places, with these people so perhaps understand the role it plays a little better than the average person. Sorry to single you out :blush:


I understand where your coming from but again this is my opinion and I think it is terrible that this is going on and dont really care what people will reply to this.


----------



## Tarron (May 30, 2010)

I hate you habu!

It's so unfair, I want to live there!

*jealous stop*


----------



## becky89 (Nov 24, 2009)

Mcadam1222 said:


> I dont hink so, I am just saying what I think here!. This is the year 2012 not 1950. There should be no trade in WC animals.


Well just because it happened before you may have got involved in the hobby doesn't make it any different. It doesn't hurt to get fresh bloodlines in, plus if you take into consideration what others have said about the wild habitats, they're buggered either way. So you know, can offer jobs for WC collectors and preserve the habitat, or let the loggers/farmer's etc take over and destroy the habitat and animals in an unnatural way :whistling2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Tarron said:


> I hate you habu!
> 
> It's so unfair, I want to live there!
> 
> *jealous stop*



it's too hot here... you'd burst into flames just by going outside...



:lol2:


----------



## Spikebrit (Oct 23, 2006)

Mcadam1222 said:


> I understand what you mean but I have seen a number of WC ball pythons.



Knowing the quotas for WC ball's again I would be surprised. CF yes there are large bumbers of CF royals out there but WC are slim. 

I think Kevin has put forward some excellent points and has far more experience with imports then me. 

there are too many points i would like to comment on but i think we have all found out we will have to agree with disagree, Wc at the moment is a necessary part of our hobby. 

Jay


----------

