When such plants are grown in the captivity, reintroducing them into the wild is very difficult, considering the survival rates in the wild are much smaller than in controlled environments. It isn't an efficient way to conserve the species ; rather, preventing the species from ever getting to that point is much more effective.
Last edited by Dante1709; 07-01-2014 at 12:14 PM.
Sadly, governments only cares about money and could care less about the beautiful species and environments they grow in, so they will waste no time in protecting them.
Who wants to start a protection agency with me and harass climbers at the base of cloud forest mountains?
Last edited by Plant Planter; 07-01-2014 at 12:22 PM.
Come to me flies and crawling bugs. This plant wants to give you great big hugs
Aren't I pretty, don't I smell good? I'd come to you if I could
But I can't so you must come to me, I'm sure we will get along splendidly
Attitudes like yours, whether fueled by a lack of knowledge about the true situation, or by a complete disregard for the truly amazing things on this earth, causes things to be lost forever. Nepenthes have a hard enough time with lose of habitat, we don't need to push the extinction of wild populations by supplying the poachers with the demand that prompts their actions in the first place.
Last edited by Oregoncp; 07-01-2014 at 08:02 PM.
I can see both sides of this argument.
On one hand, if a species is already endangered, I would consider it acceptable for a select number of seeds or plants to go to extremely qualified individuals or institutions (NOT Fleabay sales), for the sole sake of protecting the species from complete extinction - especially in the case (as it seems to be in most of East Asia) where the local gov'ts give not one rat fart if a species goes extinct as long as they can make a buck off it today. And with it being such a densely populated region (human population) there is little to no way to enforce any law they do pass, short of posting armed guards on preserves - which does sometimes happen, for more iconic things like Rhinoceros.
A plant as sensitive as N. aristo may not be viable for relocating to the wild once suitable reserves are in place, but seeds from healthy captive specimens may be easier to plant in suitable locations, and allow to grow naturally.
A thief faced with starvation today for not poaching something he can sell, or imprisonment tomorrow for poaching will always choose poaching. Survival of self is a powerful incentive, and always trumps survival of anything else. This is why it seems that almost every vertebrate in China is endangered.
On the other hand, The poacher only poaches because there is demand for what he is stealing - in this case, Nepenthes seed. The only way we can hope to have any impact on it is to eliminate demand for poached seed. Refusing to buy questionable seed is one way we can help preserve this species in the wild.
By insisting on plants that were responsibly propagated, poaching becomes a much less tempting target, and responsible propagation becomes more profitable.
If you could buy a healthy, vigorous, TC Nepenthes, would you settle for poached seed that may or may not be viable?
It may seem like just a plant, but it's part of a complex ecosystem. Humans are notoriously horrible at estimating the roles different organisms play in ecosystems (and consequently, we have altered many by adding or subtracting vital species.) It is in there interest or preserving these ecosystems that we do not condone poaching, or taking of the plants from the wild.
Genetic bottlenecks can also screw up a species. I mean, look at Cheetahs.
Jen- My Grow List: http://www.terraforums.com/forums/sh...00#post1154900
"Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as valuable to the child as it is to the caterpillar."