I agree that CB over WC is generally better when purchasing a Tarantula. one of the things you have to consider though is that a pet store first and foremost is a business. Most of the petstores go for WC spiders because they are much cheaper. if they are no longer available and its easier to make their money on another animal they will very likely stop selling spiders all together to pursue another animal with a better profit margin. as much as everyone bashes petstores on here they do have their place. Think of how stifled the hobby would be if petstores stopped selling tarantulas. Like it or not the spider in a pet store is often times someones introduction into the hobby.
Rose hairs? The more or less one tarantula everyone has owned (except me... yet)? What justification would they have for banning it? It's not endangered.
I really hope you are kidding. If they aren't endangered...I would be surprised. Slow growing, extremely harsh environment, tons being taken out of the wild..those aren't good odds.
Let's put it this way. It breeds readily, does it not? Even if it were endangered, it isn't like they're dying out anytime soon. If anything they'd make a comeback. And no, they are not endangered. Not on IUCN Red List. Taking big quantities from the wild doesn't mean endangered always.
You know, the rumor mill makes crazy things. As it stands, that's all this is right now.
That's like saying if we take tortoises out of the wild, they stop growing and having tortoise sex. Just because they're slow growing doesn't mean they don't have the capabilities to survive and escape capture or predation. As a matter of fact, there are numerous animals that have been saved by domestication or captive breeding programs, so this is actually saving them if anything. Spiders can have hundreds of babies per sack. Times that by the amount of people breeding these things, and all you'd need is a giant metaphorical Fedex box to their native habitats, and boom, repopulation.
Hey. Just because we're beating the conservationist societies to the punch, doesn't mean the punch isn't happening. If I hit a deer with my car, and it has a broken leg, will it die in the wild? Most likely. Now, if I take this deer and care for it, and THEN release it, possibly into an area with multiple female deer, is it not helping deer in general?
By this logic, the species is doomed if you leave it to its own devices and it's our fault. So. Give us a chance to fix it. Let the breeders give it their all, and see if humans can't make some kind of positive impact. Better to try and fail, than to say "Uh oh, it's gonna die, better leave it to die cause it's just going to happen regardless".
It's perfectly logical. I wasn't advocating taking anymore from the wild. You admit that the species is threatened, even if not formally recognized as such, by human activity. Erego, we are the threat.
So the rumor is true after all?