Reptile_Boy
Very Well-Known Member
and all of my nieghbours have respect of native wildlife and know they should be left
I don't doubt that you're correct but could you elaborate a little on why it'd do more harm than good , thanks.
It's basically a derelict block of land
Regardless of the legalities, what you're describing will cause a lot more harm than good, and sadly, it would be better to allow the animals to be bulldozed (yes, I know, it's extremely sad, but unfortunately you can't bulldoze a large area without causing a lot of harm).
If you can obtain permits to bring them into captivity, wonderful, if not, I suggest you leave the situation alone.
On the other hand, I expect this advice to fall on deaf ears... have fun
To fully understand the situation you really need to spend a few months studying population ecology. The short version of the story is that nature establishes a balance, the reptiles in a population increase in number until the available system can not support any more (the same applies to most types of animals). If you add more, the system can't support them, the balance is tipped, and problems occur. The type of problems depends upon the nature of the system. There are countless possibilities. Best case scenario would be something like a lack of shelter sites, resulting in the reptiles not being able to hide properly, resulting in migratory birds eating them and flying away, leaving the system as it was previously. A likely outcome is that there would not be enough food to support them all, so none of them are properly nourished and while the population remains high, it is made up of undernourished adults which don't reproduce well - an aging, unproductive population is certainly not a good one! In some cases, this can result in the extinction of a local, isolated population. A likely outcome for some species is that they will fight over territory, leaving some animals dead anyway. A possible outcome (likely to happen, but unlikely to happen to a particularly damaging extent) is that the overabundance of a particular species will result in local predators targetting them, and continuing until there are fewer than they started with. Since the predators will most likely stop targetting them soon after they go back to the normal threshold level, it's most likely to basically nullify the relocation effort (best case scenario), although it could be worse. I could go on and on and on, but you get the idea.
Other than the fact that it is absolutely inevitable that the reptile populations will return to their original level one way or another (assuming they aren't wiped out), so there is nothing to be gained, there are concerns about the spread of disease and inappropriate genetics. Whenever people interfere, there are all sorts of risks involved. I am not saying it is best to leave them to be bulldozed because I am heartless, I am saying it because I care enough to have spent many years studying the issue.
Although the uniformed public typically love them, animal releases almost always cause harm and rarely do any good. The only time animals should be released is when a population has been exterminated or severely reduced, the reason for its extermination/reduction has been permanently removed and the population can be reestablished (the other time is when a species is under extreme thread and a population can be established outside its original range, and it is considered better to create an unnatural population at the expense of the local biological community than let the species of interest go extinct - this is extremely rarely a good idea). Releasing animals into a healthy population of their own species is always inappropriate. Sadly, because public opinion is based on emotion and a lack of understanding, animal releases are popular and often fully endorsed by the government (the government is interested in money and keeping the public happy, it cares nothing for ecology). Most of the most spectacularly problematic animal releases have been done with full government support. Fortunately, the most common outcome is simply the released animals dropping dead when released into an area which can't support them.
Keep in mind that a lengthy forum post is nothing compared to several years of studying population ecology, and the full story is much, much more elaborate.
You'd make a wonderful secretary. Take me a year to type that lot.:shock:
I have driven past that place a million times and never thought there be to many animals in there ....
No they don't.
The RSPCA gets millions of dollars a year from the government and they do not look after native animals. They always refer callers to WIRES. Who, incidentally, only get a few thousand from the government.
The RSPCA will not even euthanaise wildlife in need but instead dump it on WIRES to sort out.
IsK
I know they do handle all relations to wildlife in the film industry.. Even though they may not handle wildlife directly they are the ones that give everything the yay or nay!
Enter your email address to join: