Yes, I agree that it IS confusing & needs re-written and clarified. Plus, it would save them time on the phone or over the counter...my impression is that they are understaffed.
My interpretation (in my previous post) is the result of living in another state (CA) with better clarity of such rules. There, they did NOT want people to breed (or sell) the native
species, with only 3 exceptions, where they required a paid-for breeding permit (which I had) plus an extensive paper-trail of all offspring. Part of the concern is that native species
produced in captivity will end up being released to the wild, taking with them diseases known only among captive & non-native animals...& they have a good point, IMO...none of
us wants our native wildlife to be harmed or possibly decimated in that way.
To your question, Patrick, I'd assume that any that are old enough to breed would have to be kept in separate enclosures...& best to error on the side of caution.
(some creatures breed way before we expect them to, & often to their detriment)
AJ- Being allowed to keep a few is one thing...but breeding or selling them is quite another. The problem is that no one can tell by looking that the animal you are selling is a
captive-bred specimen (& too young to have the typical 'battle scars' associated with wild-caught animals), or ones that you simply picked up & are trying to make a buck off of.
Poaching is another way our wildlife can disappear, so I still think the answer is "no" but if you get an answer from G & F, please do share it with us...thanks.