# Pumilo Import March



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Seems some Rio Guarmo, Cauchero and Almirante have recently come into the country thru FL.

Anyone know who imported this batch?


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> Seems some Rio Guarmo, Cauchero and Almirante have recently come into the country thru FL.
> 
> Anyone know who imported this batch?


I think SNDF was planning to bring more in. I know the folks selling them frequently purchase from Marcus.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

The website says all are "out of stock", which doesnt really suprise me....


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

neat that you can select individual frogs, not that I'm getting any, just to see the diversity within the population.


----------



## laylow (Apr 6, 2009)

I've talked to Marcus at SNDF and he says if your really interested in knowing its sometimes best to give him a call. Im sure he isn't able to update his site 24/7 ya know? Either way super great guy to work with. . .


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

laylow said:


> I've talked to Marcus at SNDF and he says if your really interested in knowing its sometimes best to give him a call. Im sure he isn't able to update his site 24/7 ya know? Either way super great guy to work with. . .


Thanks but not talking about them specifically. Another vendor selling frogs. Just knew SNDF was bringing in some frogs, in addition to the escudo.


----------



## JCoveney (Dec 5, 2009)

We managed to get a hold of about 140 O. pumilio here at Amazing Pets (Naples, Florida) that arrived about three weeks ago out of Panama and were just released out of our quarantine. We have all but 25 (have another 20 Guarmo Rivers and another 5 Caucheros that need to be photographed) of the frogs pictured on our website. Is this the shipment you were referring to as we got Caucheros, Almirantes and Guarmo Rivers in?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

........got the original importer info and it was who I thought all along.

Thanks for everyone that PM'ed me.


----------



## VivKits (Mar 17, 2010)

I'm curious as to what your QT procedure is. Do you run fecals and treat or other measures?


----------



## edwing206 (Apr 9, 2008)

All these are morphs that are already in the hobby. Why are they still being imported? I'm not bashing anybody. I'm just curious.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

edwing206 said:


> All these are morphs that are already in the hobby. Why are they still being imported? I'm not bashing anybody. I'm just curious.


Because Panama is still "wide open" and a $10-15 imported frog still has the potential to sell for over a hundred dollars US.

also,

Out of 100 imported Pumilio, my guess is that @ 5 make it to the 1 year plus mark and into the care of responsible hobbyists.

The "Rio's" are especially scarce in terms of successful breeding, compared to Eldorados, Bastimentos or even Almirante for example....


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

There's a big profit margin in wild-collected frogs, given that the frogs aren't raised and bred in captivity.

Richard.



edwing206 said:


> All these are morphs that are already in the hobby. Why are they still being imported? I'm not bashing anybody. I'm just curious.


----------



## Arrynia (Dec 27, 2009)

Phil hit the nail on the head. It may seem like there are multitudes coming in, the mortality rate is going to be much higher vs. captive bred specimens.

Richard, unless I'm terribly mistaken, these are farm raised that are being brought in.


----------



## edwing206 (Apr 9, 2008)

That's too bad. IMO we shouldn't support this kind of trade. I know a lot of people like the price but eventually it's going to take a huge toll on wild populations. I buy CB exclusively for this reason. I just think it's pretty irresponsible.

Edit: I just saw Arrynia's post. I didn't realize that they were Farm Raised. I was under the impression that they were Wild Caught.


----------



## dcameron (Jun 9, 2004)

I received a good sized group of these imports about two weeks ago. They came in great health compared to some of the past WC imports. The real problem is going to be getting the rest into good hands

As for being farm raised, lets not kid ourselves. These are purely WC.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Arrynia said:


> these are farm raised that are being brought in.


I do not think they are "farm raised".


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

They are farm raised, I saw this batch almost every one had overalls and little straw hats on, if that's not from the farm I don't know what is....


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

markpulawski said:


> They are farm raised, I saw this batch almost every one had overalls and little straw hats on, if that's not from the farm I don't know what is....


Mark....you "slay" us...

Here's a real frog farm....turning a profit and most likely, helping reduce pressure on native species.

Chinese Forest Frogs Farming And Processing In Northeast China - Pictures - Zimbio


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Does anyone have photos of these so-called farms in Panama? I think farm-raised just means it was from private land (farms).....


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

JeremyHuff said:


> Does anyone have photos of these so-called farms in Panama? I think farm-raised just means it was from private land (farms).....


http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/20396-frog-farms-3.html#post187327


----------



## Arrynia (Dec 27, 2009)

Philsuma said:


> I do not think they are "farm raised".


I do. This has been debated over and over before....


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Arrynia said:


> I do. This has been debated over and over before....


So, in your opinion, all of the "farm raised" pumilio exported from Panama have been reared in either the facility documented above or similar facilites and none of them are wild collected and laundered through that designation (particularly in light of the fact that Panama refused to set a export quota on them?)? 

On a slightly different note, I suggest those interested check out SpringerLink - Journal Article 

Ed


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

The Escudo Island frogs that are being sold are apparantly being stolen from a national preserve. Escudo is considered a national treasure in Panama, due to the many unique and endangered animal and bird species that exist there. There is no private land, so it isn't possible to refer to the frogs them as "farm raised". I would hope that the Dendroboard would take a position on the sale of these frogs.

Richard.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

These aren't froglets coming in. I doubt very much that only adult-raised individuals are being shipped. The photos really just look like holding pens. They would need thousands of tanks to produce the number of pumilios coming out. Not a few 20 gallons with 1 or 2 bromeliads!


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Arrynia said:


> I do. This has been debated over and over before....


Please do a lot more research on this.....


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks for this link, Ed. 

I wonder if it isn't time for the hobby itself to become more active in the discussions regarding wild-collected or "farm-raised" dart frogs. I have heard a number of hobbyists say that they really don't care where their frogs come from, but I would rather not be in a hobby that actively contributes to the decline and extinction of any species of animals or plants in the wild.

Take care, Richard.



Ed said:


> So, in your opinion, all of the "farm raised" pumilio exported from Panama have been reared in either the facility documented above or similar facilites and none of them are wild collected and laundered through that designation (particularly in light of the fact that Panama refused to set a export quota on them?)?
> 
> On a slightly different note, I suggest those interested check out SpringerLink - Journal Article
> 
> Ed


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Hi Richard,

Activity is starting here....with the participation and perusal of this very thread.

The moral compass of the hobby has to 2 main issues to deal with right now....

1. WC Imported , legally and illegally.

2. Morph mixing and "Hybridization"

A lesser issue could be , proper enclosure size but I digress. If you are looking for a blanket policy issue from the site owner or an enmass "shunning", I think you are going to be dissappointed.

but

As advanced hobbyists with time and experience, we are expected to post often and share information, insight, experiences and opinion right?


----------



## sports_doc (Nov 15, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> The Escudo Island frogs that are being sold are apparantly being stolen from a national preserve. Escudo is considered a national treasure in Panama, due to the many unique and endangered animal and bird species that exist there. There is no private land, so it isn't possible to refer to the frogs them as "farm raised". I would hope that the Dendroboard would take a position on the sale of these frogs.
> 
> Richard.


Hi Richard,

I understand your concerns, esp if the information is factual....

Is there a position statement published from a Govt agency or consensus panel about these animals being 'stolen from...'?? I ask because I dont know....

that being said I doubt that an online frog forum should be the one taking a stand? 

Perhaps more needs to be known, perhaps individual hobbiests need to make up their own minds, perhaps even 'we' might not have all the facts....since it is quite common for us to jump to conclusions.

just my first thoughts


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Escudo is part of a national marine preserve, administeered by the Autoridad National Del Ambiente (ANAM). The is where the newly-discovered Dwarf Three-toed Sloth and many other endangered species are facing extinction. The only analogy that can be made is if someone in the U.S. where to take an endangered species from a national park and offer them for sale. 

It needs further research, but I don't believe that ther Panamanian goverment would permit the taking of wildlife from this island.

Panama real estate Noticias :: ISLA ESCUDO DE VERAGUAS ? UNA MARAVILLA NATURAL EN PANAMÁ describes the site's status.

Richard.


----------



## JCoveney (Dec 5, 2009)

VivKits said:


> I'm curious as to what your QT procedure is. Do you run fecals and treat or other measures?


We are in a very difficult position when it comes to quarantine. We do our very best trying to balance what is best for the frog and what people are willing to pay for... We quarantined this batch of frogs in individual but roomy tanks. They are set up with moss and dry large tropical leaves. During a three week period, the frogs are kept dimly lit in a very warm and humid room (they share the room with 100+ aquariums which turns out to be the perfect place for us to acclimatize the frogs. During this time period, they are given Baytril, Panacur, Ivermectin and a couple of antifungal baths. It is incredibly labor intetinsive to care for 200 + individual cages daily during this time!! Imagine having to find each frog and then dropping a droplet of medication right on their back using a needle/syringe for two weeks every day or trying to make sure each frog got soaked by the antifungal bath solution... In the end, we only lost one single frog that had a pre-existing condition with a crushed foot when we got it. The rest of the frogs are looking great and we don't have a single frog that is struggling/getting skinny/doing wierd stuff. These are way better results than what I have seen or dealt with in the past as far as imported frogs.

I understand that this is not the perfect system for treating frogs and it DOES NOT ensure that they are squeaky clean! Nor does it eliminate the need to quarantine our treated frogs when they arrive at their new home! This is no secret. If the frogs were treated fully and went through true Zoo style quarantine, nobody would be able to afford them and everyone would be critical of the price! It is a no win/no win situation for somebody like myself. I have to find a happy medium. All I am saying is that I believe we do more than most for our frogs and that we DO care about our frogs beyond the point where they leave our facility. Our system is far from perfect, but I am hoping that all of this helps to ensure that these frogs will instead thrive in their new homes and that some of the unnecessary losses are minimized or eliminated.

After all,* EVERY FROG COUNTS*! We won't have this kind of availability in tropical amphibians forever. Just think back ten years... I can remember seeing Gold Mantellas at PetSmart for $14.99! LOL!


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Woodsman said:


> Escudo is part of a national marine preserve, administeered by the Autoridad National Del Ambiente (ANAM). The is where the newly-discovered Dwarf Three-toed Sloth and many other endangered species are facing extinction. The only analogy that can be made is if someone in the U.S. where to take an endangered species from a national park and offer them for sale.
> 
> It needs further research, but I don't believe that ther Panamanian goverment would permit the taking of wildlife from this island.


From what I understand about the island and its status, this is all correct.


----------



## JCoveney (Dec 5, 2009)

The subject of wild caught frogs always causes a firestorm of comments and everyone is extremely opinionated in this area. I will try to comment without intentionally stepping on any toes or anyone's beliefs... It is not my intention.

I have commented on this in the past, but since it keeps coming up... I have logged a lot of hours in the jungles of South America and Central America. One thing that always seems to strike a hurtful spot in my heart when I see the destruction of primary or even secondary growth rain forest. It is something that I will never get used to and it hurts just as much each time I see it. It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever. If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction. If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected. If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss?? A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...

All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference. Bashing the Panamanian frog farm is a total waste of time and effort. I promise all of you, they are not the reason or cause of any frog populations going extinct... If you are going to take a stand on some frogs, I hope you are not putting gasoline in your car, I hope that you don't eat the South American beef at McDonald's or that you ever eat another Banana again! LOL


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

markpulawski said:


> They are farm raised, I saw this batch almost every one had overalls and little straw hats on, if that's not from the farm I don't know what is....


Thats why we must be careful about inbreeding


----------



## jon (Mar 12, 2008)

Well said, JCoveney.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

JCoveney said:


> The subject of wild caught frogs always causes a firestorm of comments and everyone is extremely opinionated in this area. I will try to comment without intentionally stepping on any toes or anyone's beliefs... It is not my intention.
> 
> I have commented on this in the past, but since it keeps coming up... I have logged a lot of hours in the jungles of South America and Central America. One thing that always seems to strike a hurtful spot in my heart when I see the destruction of primary or even secondary growth rain forest. It is something that I will never get used to and it hurts just as much each time I see it. It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever. If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction. If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected. If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss?? A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...
> 
> All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference. Bashing the Panamanian frog farm is a total waste of time and effort. I promise all of you, they are not the reason or cause of any frog populations going extinct... If you are going to take a stand on some frogs, I hope you are not putting gasoline in your car, I hope that you don't eat the South American beef at McDonald's or that you ever eat another Banana again! LOL


Very, very, well said.


----------



## Arrynia (Dec 27, 2009)

JCoveney said:


> The subject of wild caught frogs always causes a firestorm of comments and everyone is extremely opinionated in this area. I will try to comment without intentionally stepping on any toes or anyone's beliefs... It is not my intention.
> 
> I have commented on this in the past, but since it keeps coming up... I have logged a lot of hours in the jungles of South America and Central America. One thing that always seems to strike a hurtful spot in my heart when I see the destruction of primary or even secondary growth rain forest. It is something that I will never get used to and it hurts just as much each time I see it. It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever. If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction. If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected. If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss?? A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...
> 
> All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference. Bashing the Panamanian frog farm is a total waste of time and effort. I promise all of you, they are not the reason or cause of any frog populations going extinct... If you are going to take a stand on some frogs, I hope you are not putting gasoline in your car, I hope that you don't eat the South American beef at McDonald's or that you ever eat another Banana again! LOL


*applause*


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

If the people collecting frogs from the wild were rescuing them from land that was being developed already (and had prior agreements with the countries in which they were being collected), your argument might make some sense. Otherwise, it just sounds like one of the many, many, justifications that people use for not doing the right thing.

Stealing frogs from national preserves is WRONG, no matter what stories we can come up with to tell oursleves otherwise.

Richard.



JCoveney said:


> The subject of wild caught frogs always causes a firestorm of comments and everyone is extremely opinionated in this area. I will try to comment without intentionally stepping on any toes or anyone's beliefs... It is not my intention.
> 
> I have commented on this in the past, but since it keeps coming up... I have logged a lot of hours in the jungles of South America and Central America. One thing that always seems to strike a hurtful spot in my heart when I see the destruction of primary or even secondary growth rain forest. It is something that I will never get used to and it hurts just as much each time I see it. It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever. If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction. If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected. If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss?? A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...
> 
> All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference. Bashing the Panamanian frog farm is a total waste of time and effort. I promise all of you, they are not the reason or cause of any frog populations going extinct... If you are going to take a stand on some frogs, I hope you are not putting gasoline in your car, I hope that you don't eat the South American beef at McDonald's or that you ever eat another Banana again! LOL


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

JCoveney said:


> A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on!


This obviously isn't a black/white issue, and we have to be careful not to make it one. However, there are numerous populations of Dendrobatids in the wild that have been nearly (if not completely) extirpated from the wild due to overcollection for the hobby. This includes the highland form of _Ranitomeya lamasi_ and the "red-headed" form of _R. fantastica_. Also, researchers in Colombia are discovering that there are some populations of _Oophaga histrionica_ that are being extirpated as well (as I type this, they might actually be completely gone from the wild)...and these populations are deep in the forest. Because of their inconvenient location, they were traditionally considered "safe" from things like overcollection, but locals are being paid by frog dealers to go deep into these areas of forest and collect frogs...sometimes in the hundreds, sometimes in much higher numbers. They do this "only" once or twice a year, but even this seems to be harmful enough that the populations are not able to bounce back. One has to wonder about all the adult "CB" histrionica that make it into the states.

None of these populations are in locations that are being threatened by deforestation for cattle or private development. They have been hit hard and impacted simply due to collection for the hobby.



> All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference.


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## JCoveney (Dec 5, 2009)

Woodsman said:


> If the people collecting frogs from the wild were rescuing them from land that was being developed already (and had prior agreements with the countries in which they were being collected), your argument might make some sense. Otherwise, it just sounds like one of the many, many, justifications that people use for not doing the right thing.
> 
> Stealing frogs from national preserves is WRONG, no matter what stories we can come up with to tell oursleves otherwise.


Please let me clarify something... Richard is ABSOLUTELY correct when it comes to the collection of frogs that come out of a National Preserve. This should NEVER be allowed or tolerated. I meant to comment on that, but it slipped my mind. Thank you for pointing this out Richard.

I do believe in something that is called "responsible and sustainable harvest". Like I said before, I doubt very seriously that the harvest of a couple of hundred frogs out of a certain region once or twice a year will hurt any healthy frog population. More than that are probably eaten by the local critters in that region daily! Believe me, the only way to get the locals to care about the forest is if you show them a way to make a living using it. They all want to make money and better their lives just like we do here. It is a lot easier and profitable to go through with your family collecting frogs and putting them in a pillow case rather than raping and burning your land for the difficult and labor intensive task of raising cows... Look at Costa Rica, they are successfully putting nature first there because the people there have been shown how to make a living off the nature in their own back yards. The locals just need to be shown how to make this happen. 

I am not saying we need to open the flood gates for frogs, just stating my in that shutting down and frowning upon/bashing export fully is not the best answer or solution. That way you will have one more Panamanian man with a family cutting down forest because there is no other way for him to feed his kids. After all, I can't blame him as I would do the same to ensure that my kids had enough to eat. Wouldn't you?

With export must come heavy regulation with certain swift and just punishment for those that do not play by the rules. *It is the combination of export, conservation and strict regulation that is the key.*


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

JCoveney said:


> It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever. If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction.



There are a couple of things to keep in mind, is that at least some dendrobatids appear to reach higher populations in disturbed sites (such as abandoned farmland, coco farms, and trashdumps (see for example the study discussed here (search pumilio http://ns.ots.ac.cr/en/education/pdfs/usap/coursebooks/reunsf05.pdf#page=30)). In addition large amounts of at least Central America were heavily logged and converted to farm lands by prior empires/civilzations yet the forest and the frogs appear to have survived those issues without a problem once the land was allowed to revert.... so 




JCoveney said:


> If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected.


And how does continually purchasing wild caught frogs that may be unsustainably harvested help the wild populations? 




JCoveney said:


> If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss?? A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...



I'm going to address a couple of comments here.. 
1) are you saying that the return of the population is the result of recruitment from reproduction in the wild animals or is the resulting population increase due to frogs migrating out of surrounding marginal habitat back into a more optimal habitat? I have problems believing it is due to recruitment as that would require a very high recruitment level for the population.. and if it is due to animals migrating from marginal areas back into the optimal habitat then the collecting may not show any effects for several seasons until the population collapses due to insufficient recruitment from offspring (for some long lived herps (like blanding's turtles, for one example), removal of a single adult breeder female can render a population non-viable in the long run) which can take a number of years (or decades in the case of the blanding's turtle) to become apparent. 

2) Protection of the habitat has also been shown to be insufficient in protection of species (as Ron noted above with different species), as demand for wild caught animals will result in removal of those species from the habitat until the population collapses. 

3) Likewise protection of animals is insufficient when the habitat is not protected but in the case where mass numbers of animals are being harvested and used for commercial activities in a manner that may be unsustainable on the local population level, the only way to combat that in the short term is to refuse to purchase those animals. In the long terms a combination of habitat protection as well as some form of quota (even if the quota is zero) is the best method for protecting those animals. 

Ed


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

My biggest complaint is calling something farm raised or captive raised to get around CITES issues, making the permits easier to acquire. I think wild stock is essential for genetic diversity and maintaining a healthy captive population. To say that an area will recover when a few hundred frogs are removed I think is naive at best. Especially when we are talking about populations with parental care needed. Not only are you collecting the adult pumilio, but you are killing all the eggs and tads that were being looked after. 200 frogs removed could translate to a couple thousand developing eggs/tads. Also, collectors don't monitor populations. If they see a frog they grab it. They don't decide that a particular population needs to recover first.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

JCoveney said:


> I do believe in something that is called "responsible and sustainable harvest".


Correct, but we have to be on our toes with this one. Just because someone posts a picture of a shack with concrete bins ect, we cannot afford to take that at face value and not go further. Always ask questions. Always inquire further. It's easy to throw up a website, make claims of responsible harvesting ect but until there is transparency and proof, I for one, am not going to just blindly drink the cool aid. I think there is an importer somewhere that offers to take hobbyists with him (or HER) to South America to see first hand the exact level of professional and responsible management. Whoa 



JCoveney said:


> Look at Costa Rica, they are successfully putting nature first there because the people there have been shown how to make a living off the nature in their own back yards. The locals just need to be shown how to make this happen.


Big difference from Panama. CR allows no animal exports for the pet industry. I've been there. There are exquisite blue jeans everywhere you walk in a lot of areas. I would hate to imagine how many you wouldn't see if wholesale exporting was allowed.



JCoveney said:


> I am not saying we need to open the flood gates for frogs, just stating my in that shutting down and frowning upon/bashing export fully is not the best answer or solution.


Nobody is bashing. No one lost an arm over this thread, nor will they. We need discussion, information and opinion. It's the only way the new hobbyists are going to learn how and where the imported frogs come from.



JCoveney said:


> That way you will have one more Panamanian man with a family cutting down forest because there is no other way for him to feed his kids. After all, I can't blame him as I would do the same to ensure that my kids had enough to eat. Wouldn't you?


Nowadays, you have many Panamanian men cutting down trees and broms to harvest frogs to ensure his kids can eat. Is there a difference?


----------



## puddles (Mar 18, 2010)

Hey guys,

many of you recently discussed with me about mixing morphs. I would say in my experience that in general members of this forum show more passion against hybridizing than anything else (I may be wrong).

After a lengthy thread, it really came down to telling me that the reason we don't hybridize is because the best goal of the hobby is to appreciate the natural diversity that has occurred because of evolution.


Here's where I give my two cents:
I think that along with appreciation comes responsibility. Does it sound responsible when someone says they don't _think_ taking a few hundred frogs out of an area will hurt the population? Shouldn't we _know_ that it won't? Now look at who said this and ask yourself if they may be biased for any reason.

I would remember what happened to Bufo periglenes about 20 years ago. I spoke with Jay Savage about when he first discovered this frog in the 60s: the local population was strong and numerous. A short time later (in the context of evolution, a nanosecond later) the population crashed for uncertain reasons (the consensus is a climate-linked epidemic; as in, the chytrid combined with el nino was together more than the animals could handle _Pounds J.A. et al (2006) "Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by
global warming", Nature, 439:161-167._). Two major stresses combined to cause a beautiful and vibrant species to go extinct off the face of the planet.

Do I think that taking WCs alone will cause extinction of histrios or pums or A. moreletii? I don't know, maybe not. Will deforestation alone kill them? I don't know, maybe not. But how many stresses do you want to put on them at once before we find out too late that it was too much?

Bottom line, without scientific data on each individual population we should not and cannot speculate on whether taking a hundred frogs once a year will harm the population (that's 140 that we know about, think of the smugglers and the unreporteds that die along the way). I know it's tempting to get the rarest and most expensive species to show off and add to your collection, but I would rather spend $1000 on a trip to see them in the wild for a week than have a few in my house and know that they no longer exist in nature.


Someone once told me that you all don't want to see this hobby go the way of the ball python. I would rather see that than have our hobby go the way of the scarlet macaw. I'll stop ranting now...


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Great post Puddles. Thanks for adding your opinion to the discussion.


----------



## ktewell (Dec 17, 2009)

To SportsDoc:

I assert that there is no one better to take action and control this hobby. To paraphrase "Good Hair" with Chris Rock: "If the black people can't control an industry where the only consumers are black people, what the hell are we doing wrong."

Guys, we are the consumers here. No, we are not everybody who buys these frogs, but we can at least form some sort of coalition against practices that we do not condone. We can demand more accountability and responsibility, like puddles said.


Why won't that farm (thread linked by ChrisK on page 2) let anyone see their operation except the necessary officials to certify them? I don't want to unjustly accuse anyone of anything, but it _could_ be because there aren't nearly enough cages to produce the number of frogs that are being sold (not accusing, just postulating). I say we should demand transparency before we buy from them. I know there is a right to privacy but they do not have the right to have us buy from them. Yes, I know SNDF backs them, but being new to this hobby I'm naturally skeptical at what people who profit off selling frogs will say (again, not trying to accuse, just figure out what's going on).

And to Woodsman- thank you for adding your insight on Escudos. I once coveted them above all other frogs, but now I have an indefinite ban until things become clearer. Not trying to jump to conclusions like SportsDoc said we sometimes do, but let's get to the bottom of this!


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

puddles said:


> I would remember what happened to Bufo periglenes about 20 years ago. I spoke with Jay Savage about when he first discovered this frog in the 60s: the local population was strong and numerous. A short time later (in the context of evolution, a nanosecond later) the population crashed for uncertain reasons (the consensus is a climate-linked epidemic; as in, the chytrid combined with el nino was together more than the animals could handle _Pounds J.A. et al (2006) "Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by
> global warming", Nature, 439:161-167._). Two major stresses combined to cause a beautiful and vibrant species to go extinct off the face of the planet.


According to some of the latest publications, it does not appear that climate change/global warming and/or chytrid did in the golden toad; see Tropical cloud forest climate variability and the demise of the Monteverde golden toad ? PNAS It now appears that a drier than normal year due to the El Nino event was the cause...

Ed


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Ron, J.P......et al

Is this topic distastefull? Embarassing to some? Something else?

I think it's important, especially for the new people - for them to understand how importing works.

All Importers are NOT "the devil ". They are all types of people. Some are trying to make a difference and some are trying to make a living. Some are doing both. Some are good and some are not so...

Read. Learn. Ask questions. Reply to threads. Share experiences and opinions. Visit foreign countries. Become an activist. Donate time, effort and / or money.




Just please don't be silent......and do nothing.


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

I agree it is something that needs to be discussed and talked about, and even though someone will inevitably say "This has all been discussed to death in previous threads" I think it is still worth discussing for two primary reasons: 1) newer hobbyists may only encounter this topic in newer threads like this, and 2) conversation helps ideas and understanding about this issue evolve...including devising new approaches and/or solutions to current problems with the system.

One of the things that makes this such a dicey topic is because there are different people from different parts of the system involved in it: consumers, suppliers, etc. Some people involved in these conversations are selling these frogs to make a living, so if someone starts spouting "Don't buy X frog anymore"...well, that person's going to feel that their livelihood is being threatened and post a defense, at which point the other person defends their POV, and it tends to just spiral downward from there until the discussion trails off or a mod locks the thread.

But at some point I do think some serious discussions need to take place about the proverbial elephant in the hobby, so to speak. Many of the habitats where _O. histrionica_ and _sylvatica_ are found (such as Lita) are extremly dense jungle areas, so these frogs can be somewhat difficult to locate by site, even for collectors. Many rely on hearing males call and then locate them based on that. Therefore, the males are MUCH easier to catch than the females who don't call and remain "off the radar." Given this, as I mentioned earlier, it makes one wonder about to origins of the supposed adult, extremely male-heavy "captive bred" histrionica and sylvatica imports that come into the states (from what I understand in Europe, frogs that might be illegal to export as WC frogs are legal to export if they are CB--or at least declared as CB--progeny of those WC founders). As I also said earlier, some of these populations are being collected at a rate faster than they appear to be able to bounce back from. IMO, this should cause us to step back and evaluate what we're doing in the hobby and why.

I won't go too much into the Escudo situation...but this is a small island (maybe 6 miles long by 1-2 miles wide) inhabited year round by maybe one or two indigenous families, and inhabited at different times throughout the year by seasonal indigenous fishermen and their families (seasonal makeshift camps speckle the perimeter of the island). I have heard firsthand accounts from people who have visited this island over the last 12-18 months, and I haven't heard anything about any sort of farm or facility on the island. So to hear that "farm raised" pumilio are coming from there...well, all sorts of questions start to arise.

Now, I'm not against collection. But I AM against unsustainable collection. The truth is, in the global animal trade (which is a mix of hobby and food purposes), amphibians are a relatively small part of that...and Dendrobatids are an even smaller percentage of that. Therefore, most people aren't going to be able to obtain the funds and resources necessary to do proper population density studies on various species and populations of Dendrobatids in order to determine how much collection a population can take or what the threshold of disturbance might be. So we don't really have definitive concrete numbers, and whether or not something is being collected sustainably is a really nebulous issue for us in this niche of a hobby (and what might be sustainable for one population might be devestating for another). So, in my opinion, we should exercise caution and prudence...perhaps focus on managing the animals we already have in captivity more responsibly before bringing in tons more WC ones that might inevitably slip through the cracks or just disappear within a year or two after importation (read: Melanophryniscus "Bumblebee" toads). But importations will continue because these things all sell like wildfire when they come in. As has already been said: sometimes refraining from purchasing an animal is the strongest vote we can cast because, when it all comes down to it, this hobby is based on and driven by the consumer.

Madagascar is a good current example here: vast swathes of rainforest and habitat are being destroyed even as I type this, impacting wild populations of Mantellids and other amphibians in very serious ways. On top of that they are also being collected in large numbers for the captive hobby. But we don't know how much collection any of those populations can take...what the "point of no return" is. But I think at some point we have to really evaluate the logic behind the statement "I'm obtaining WC frogs for the sake of conservation." Now, as has already been stated, I think it is acceptable to collect a starter colony or population to begin a healthy captive population, but at some point I think we also need to exercise some healthy levels of patience and self-control and not get animals just because we can. To quote Ian Malcom from Jurassic Park: "You spent so much time wondering if you _could_, you never stopped to think whether or not you_ should_."

This is a topic I find myself constantly contemplating and mulling over, and I have found my personal position and opinions to shift and migrate over the time I've spent in this hobby, much of which I owe to conversations like these or at frog shows or in people's kitchens after frog shows after consuming who knows how many beers (that always seems to be when the best ideas are formed).

In conversations like these, I'll add whatever input or commentary I feel to be profitable or useful to the conversation, but in this case, others have already brought up the points I think are prudent to the discussion. In that case, I fade back a bit unless there's something I feel should be considered.


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

skylsdale said:


> Now, I'm not against collection. But I AM against unsustainable collection. The truth is, in the global animal trade (which is a mix of hobby and food purposes), amphibians are a relatively small part of that...and Dendrobatids are an even smaller percentage of that. Therefore, most people aren't going to be able to obtain the funds and resources necessary to do proper population density studies on various species and populations of Dendrobatids in order to determine how much collection a population can take or what the threshold of disturbance might be. So we don't really have definitive concrete numbers, and whether or not something is being collected sustainably is a really nebulous issue for us in this niche of a hobby (and what might be sustainable for one population might be devestating for another). So, in my opinion, we should exercise caution and prudence...perhaps focus on managing the animals we already have in captivity more responsibly before bringing in tons more WC ones that might inevitably slip through the cracks or just disappear within a year or two after importation (read: Melanophryniscus "Bumblebee" toads). But importations will continue because these things all sell like wildfire when they come in. As has already been said: sometimes refraining from purchasing an animal is the strongest vote we can cast because, when it all comes down to it, this hobby is based on and driven by the consumer.
> 
> Madagascar is a good current example here: vast swathes of rainforest and habitat are being destroyed even as I type this, impacting wild populations of Mantellids and other amphibians in very serious ways. On top of that they are also being collected in large numbers for the captive hobby. But we don't know how much collection any of those populations can take...what the "point of no return" is. But I think at some point we have to really evaluate the logic behind the statement "I'm obtaining WC frogs for the sake of conservation." Now, as has already been stated, I think it is acceptable to collect a starter colony or population to begin a healthy captive population, but at some point I think we also need to exercise some healthy levels of patience and self-control and not get animals just because we can. To quote Ian Malcom from Jurassic Park: "You spent so much time wondering if you _could_, you never stopped to think whether or not you_ should_."


This is a good summary of my opinion on the matter. In the end I think it comes down to personal judgement. Always feel free to ask your provider questions. If you have a question you think is important that your seller is not willing to answer you have the right to be a little skeptical of the product they're selling.

I've found a few importers out there that maintain pretty good transparency with me, they're always willing to answer the phone when I've got a question, whether it be a husbandry question or a locality question or questions about collection, etc. They don't always have a perfect answer for me, but enough that I feel I have a really good relationship. Because of these relationships I've created I'm finding it harder and harder to buy from other breeders or importers because while most sellers I run into are friendly it doesn't always seem like I'm getting frogs from people who have the same level of involvement with the importation and distribution of frogs. Even if it's not necessarily the vendor's fault - more often than not I think it may be the importer's fault than the seller's - it's nice to know that my frogs come from places that are on the level.

To summarize, I guess I'm not necessarily opposed to collection, as long as it's done in a reasonable, legal manner. It's the illegal and unsustainable methods that I take issue with. If I have enough information to feel at least fairly confident that my frogs have been collected in an ethical manner, then I'm not averse to buying WC frogs (I have some '08 mancreeks and some '07 rio broncos that are both wild caught, but from reliable sources). But without the information or the willingness for my seller to answer questions about those frogs I'm less willing to purchase frogs, even if it turns out that they _were_ collected legally.

To echo Philsuma: read, learn, ask questions and share information and experiences.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

I wish I came into this earlier, so I apologize for bouncing around.

First, in regards to farms, I highly doubt that there are farms. I have been around to a number of the populations and asked the local people about the frogs. In general, they view Americans and Europeans with some distrust. But they all have the same story, which explains the distrust: Americans or Europeans come in periodically to collect frogs and leave. If there were farms, I would guess that that wouldn't be an issue.

Another couple skepticisms I have about the farm photos is that A. a facility like that could easily be in Florida, but if we assume that it is, in fact, in Panama, then B. why no pictures of tadpoles/froglets? Showing eggs really don't mean that they're being bred. Frogs will lay eggs all the time...



JCoveney said:


> I have commented on this in the past, but since it keeps coming up... I have logged a lot of hours in the jungles of South America and Central America. One thing that always seems to strike a hurtful spot in my heart when I see the destruction of primary or even secondary growth rain forest. It is something that I will never get used to and it hurts just as much each time I see it. It does not matter if it is a brand new Hilton Hotel building on a mountain side or simply a farmer who is forced to cut rain forest for pasture/crops. The destruction is still the same and what is worse is that the impact is forever.


I'd actually argue that the impact is not forever. Forests can be regrown. The forever impact is when a population gets collected out of existence.



> If you really want to "save the planet" or "save the frogs", I suggest turning your attention to habitat destruction. If you are truly interested in "saving the frogs" you will accomplish nothing by scrutinizing a frog and avoiding it if it was wild collected. If this is all that you are doing for your part in conservation, it is like spitting straight into the wind! How many of you that take this stance also belong to conservation groups that focus on habitat loss??


You'll find that a number of conservation groups are not _solely_ interested in habitat loss. Why would anyone support saving a mosquito-ridden swamp? Because a rare, charismatic species lives there. Many conservation groups use a species people can like to conserve habitat. Pumilio, and pretty much all dart frogs, can act as that species.



> A couple of locals running around collecting a couple hundred frogs in a particular spot once or twice a year is NOTHING like the hotel going in on the entire mountain side or like the 140 acres that were cut to raise cows on! Believe me, the spot where there were 200 frogs were collected a year ago is once again teeming with frogs again. I don't think you can say the same for the spot that went from primary rain forest to bright blazing sunny grassland with lots of cow "runoff" everywhere...
> 
> All I am saying is that if you are truly interested in conservation and saving our beloved frogs, then do so in an effective way with your efforts directed in the right direction where it will actually make a difference. Bashing the Panamanian frog farm is a total waste of time and effort. I promise all of you, they are not the reason or cause of any frog populations going extinct... If you are going to take a stand on some frogs, I hope you are not putting gasoline in your car, I hope that you don't eat the South American beef at McDonald's or that you ever eat another Banana again! LOL


Well, the issue, IMO, is that frogs are being called farm raised to ease consciences are allowing importers to go out and collect rare frogs and sell them. All of the habitat protection in the world won't bring extirpated frogs back...



> I do believe in something that is called "responsible and sustainable harvest". Like I said before, I doubt very seriously that the harvest of a couple of hundred frogs out of a certain region once or twice a year will hurt any healthy frog population.


Some populations can handle that. A number cannot. For example, Robalos likely were collected to near extirpation. My adviser went to look for them and found a dozen or so in a couple hours in 2005. I went back last year, and had to visit the same spot twice over the summer, and we found a single pair of frogs the second time.



> More than that are probably eaten by the local critters in that region daily!


Given the high densities of frogs, and the handful of predation events that have been observed over the course of decades, I don't think that this is a very valid assumption. There may be some predation, but hundreds? I doubt it. Someone would have noticed it by now.



> Believe me, the only way to get the locals to care about the forest is if you show them a way to make a living using it. They all want to make money and better their lives just like we do here. It is a lot easier and profitable to go through with your family collecting frogs and putting them in a pillow case rather than raping and burning your land for the difficult and labor intensive task of raising cows...


People need to be taught sustainability. Going out and collecting frogs more often than not, is not sustainable. If locals want to depend on frogs for income, then they need to set of legitimate farms where frogs are bred and offspring are sold. Collecting frogs, putting them in holding tanks, and then saying that they're farm raised won't cut it.



> Look at Costa Rica, they are successfully putting nature first there because the people there have been shown how to make a living off the nature in their own back yards. The locals just need to be shown how to make this happen.


Costa Rica is a good and bad example. Yes, they have more percent of land in reserves than any other country, but, and this is a big but, anything that is not protected has been cut and converted to pasture, plantation, or housing. Unfortunately, Costa Rica is not a contiguous piece of rainforest.



> I am not saying we need to open the flood gates for frogs, just stating my in that shutting down and frowning upon/bashing export fully is not the best answer or solution. That way you will have one more Panamanian man with a family cutting down forest because there is no other way for him to feed his kids. After all, I can't blame him as I would do the same to ensure that my kids had enough to eat. Wouldn't you?


Unless that Panamanian man can realize the benefit of forest intact. Many people are highly interested in intact forest and will pay to see it. And when you have something awesome like pumilio on the land, and you're in an already tourist-y area, making money off of the frogs living on the land is not that unreasonable...

I just don't see how export of wild caught frogs can be good for the population...



> With export must come heavy regulation with certain swift and just punishment for those that do not play by the rules. It is the combination of export, conservation and strict regulation that is the key.


The US has enough issue with maintenance of it's own animals being wild collected, conserved, and regulated; how do you expect that a country like Panama will be able to do better than the US with a ton more species to deal with?

Only so much can be expected from the legislation side of things. Consumers are the ones driving the market, and as such, will have the largest impact on what's coming in.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Great posts....thanks everyone.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I hope we can get to the bottom of the issue on the Escudo Island Pumilios. If they were wild-collected from a marine preserve and offered as farm-raised, I think the board should take some action here.

Richard.


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

ive hesitated in commenting but this kind of speculation and public attack of <redacted, Catfur> is just flat out wrong and should be stopped. ive witnessed a number of posts that attack two of the importers repeatedly. why? wouldnt it be best to call these folks and ask questions rather than make assumptions?

i know <redacted, Catfur> does everything in his power to offer animals that were collected and farmed according to the permits that he is issued. your talking about a man who is taking tree climbing classes instead of following the smugglers lead and cutting down trees. the fact is that this is nothing more than a few members personal issue with WC/FR animals. i mean he even posted pictures of the facility in an attempt to peacefully calm what has seemed like an angry mob. 

im all for asking questions but when someone asks questions not in search of a valid answer (which could have been done by phone or PM) and asks them in an underhanded attempt to prod at a respected member of the community <redacted, Catfur> there is nothing to be gained.

you all want real answers? then ask people politely and do research. 

james


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

james67 said:


> ive hesitated in commenting but this kind of speculation and public attack of <redacted, Catfur> is just flat out wrong and should be stopped. ive witnessed a number of posts that attack two of the importers repeatedly. why? wouldnt it be best to call these folks and ask questions rather than make assumptions?
> 
> i know <redacted, Catfur> does everything in his power to offer animals that were collected and farmed according to the permits that he is issued. your talking about a man who is taking tree climbing classes instead of following the smugglers lead and cutting down trees. the fact is that this is nothing more than a few members personal issue with WC/FR animals. i mean he even posted pictures of the facility in an attempt to peacefully calm what has seemed like an angry mob.
> 
> ...


Unless I missed it, you are the first to mention any names.

It has been mentioned that Escudo de Veraguas is a protected area now in Panama and scientific permits can allow for collection in protected areas, but I highly doubt that there is such an allowance for commercial permits (what would be the point to a protected area then?). Locals are able to use, to my knowledge, the island to some degree (for example, there is a temporary fishing village on the island where the locals will seasonally fish the reefs around the island). I'm also told that a lot of mangrove destruction is happening "legally." It is possible that frogs are being collected "legally" by locals and distributed to importers (this is just speculation for how frogs could be coming out of a protected area commercially).

Another issue that can be exploited by importers is that permits do NOT list populations. So an importer could put 1000 pumilio which could come from any population, and given that it is unlikely that officials checking frogs know what morphs come from protected areas, importers could collect frogs from protected areas without raising flags to the government.

But the farmed idea really is, at best, temporary holding tanks, not a facility that is captively breeding frogs. I'll eat my words if I see it in person, but until that happens, my experiences traveling and talking to people show to the contrary.


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

i mention names because we ALL know who were talking about. if someone wants to attack another person, then they shouldnt hide behind the "i didnt say any names" junk.

what i am saying is that this is, as you said, speculation and all that these comments are going to generate is more speculation. no one here has shown proof that there has been any wrongdoing, but there has been a lot of that being implied. lets stop hiding behind careful word play and stop unjustly attacking others thats all im suggesting, regardless of what x person thinks could be happening with x importer.

james

im not directing this at any one person im just noticing that there has been a recent surge in threads where the sole purpose seems to be suggesting (without ANY evidence) that there has been some foul play with these importers. its all "they COULD" or what if, thats bs, get off the high horse.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

Alternatively, there has been no proof that there HASN'T been wrongdoing, ethically, at least (e.g. it would be legal, as far as I know, to get locals with permission to go to Escudo to collect frogs for importers, but is it ethical? No). For example to the "farm" pictures posted. How do I know that that is not a facility in south Florida? And if it is in Panama, why are no tadpoles/froglet pictures posted (as I said, it's easy to get frogs to lay eggs; that does not mean that they're being farmed)?

Let's face it, the veil of secrecy in regards to the farms does not help matters. If importers want to show that these are being farm raised, then let folks know where the farms are and invite people to visit. There are certainly enough people on DB alone that go to Bocas. I'd love to see a farm, but right now, you can't convince me that "farm raised" animals coming in as adults with bumps and scratches are farmed individuals. Those are characteristics of wild caught animals.


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

james67 said:


> i mention names because we ALL know who were talking about. if someone wants to attack another person, then they shouldnt hide behind the "i didnt say any names" junk.


No. No. No. No. No.

No Names
No Way
No How

Mentioning names exposes Dendroboard to legal risk and will not be allowed. 

"People are stealing frogs from a national reserve" is just a throwaway statement. "Vendor X is stealing frogs from a national reserve" is a potentially defamatory statement, admits the possibility of legal action against Dendroboard, and will not be tolerated.


----------



## Catfur (Oct 5, 2004)

MonarchzMan said:


> Alternatively, there has been no proof that there HASN'T been wrongdoing, ethically, at least (e.g. it would be legal, as far as I know, to get locals with permission to go to Escudo to collect frogs for importers, but is it ethical? No). For example to the "farm" pictures posted. How do I know that that is not a facility in south Florida? And if it is in Panama, why are no tadpoles/froglet pictures posted (as I said, it's easy to get frogs to lay eggs; that does not mean that they're being farmed)?


Imputing wrongdoing without evidence is defamation. If you want to ask pointed questions, go ahead (as long as you do it in the right place and manner), they probably could use answering. Making statements of fact is something altogether different. Please try to keep the conversation one of inquiry and not accusation, especially when it comes to commercial activities.

I'm unlocking this thread again (I locked it because people were responding faster than I could keep up with), but keep on the right side of the rules, all.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

I thought I was keeping it to a tone of inquiry simply asking the the pointed questions needed to be asked to get to the truth of matters. I did not intend for anything to be accusatory.


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

james67 said:


> i mention names because we ALL know who were talking about. if someone wants to attack another person, then they shouldnt hide behind the "i didnt say any names" junk.


I know I haven't been a huge part of this conversation, but I can speak for myself when I say I didn't mention any names because specific names didn't come to mind. In fact, there are very few specific people I could say anything negative about, and even then those negative things aren't exactly _all that negative_, closest adjective I can think if would be my personal "dubiousness." Not a poignantly negative term, IMO.

Alternatively I could tell you specifically the people I trust without reservation, (I won't in at least a public setting because even apart from the legal ramifications I think it's pretty impolite to put others on the spot).

Just seems to me that most of the posts weren't directed and specific importers and more simply suggesting that if someone is on the level they won't be afraid to answer questions. While this suggestion may spawn from some people's personal experiences, it seems like this is a good general rule of thumb and has been suggested as such, rather than a flagrant attack against a few specific individuals.


----------



## nathan (Jul 24, 2009)

I wonder if the so called farms dont give away thier location and invite people to visit because they are afraid they will get vandalized , or broken into by smugglers? Or possibly they are just holding tanks for wild caught frogs, and they dont want people to know. Fact is we wont know for sure untill someone sees some of these facilaties first hand.

Another thing to think about is our own personal viewpoint on purchasing these pumio in question. There are a number of ways to look at it. You might find yourself wanting some of these harder to get localities and figure well they are allready in the U.S. They might as well be in my care and get the best possible life. And possibly produce offspring, which may help with the demand in the future. plus you may feel better knowing they are going to people that can care for them properly. Vs people impluse buying them or them getting sold wholesale to dealers who really have no clue what they are doing.

Or you might just want to avoid purchasing them all together. If we dont buy there will be less demand for these particular frogs. But then again what about the ones allready comming in? What happens to them? What happens a year down the road when everyone starts offering F1's for sale? Will you sleep better at night knowing the particular animals you purchased are c.b.? Kepping the parent frogs that sparked this thread out of site and out of mind?

If this makes sense to anyone , great. If not , I'm sorry, I don't even know if it makes sense to me. Its 4:30 am . . .


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

nathan said:


> I wonder if the so called farms dont give away thier location and invite people to visit because they are afraid they will get vandalized , or broken into by smugglers? Or possibly they are just holding tanks for wild caught frogs, and they dont want people to know. Fact is we wont know for sure untill someone sees some of these facilaties first hand.


This is a bit of an issue for me. I _do_ think it's a valid point, but.... Well, I seem to recall a few posts (maybe one or two even in this thread, it's difficult for me to remember as it's late here as well, can't really sleep...) with people saying "yeah, I've seen the frog farms" or at the very least "I know they exist." It seems like many of the people who make this point don't mean "we won't know for sure until someone sees them" and actually mean "I won't believe/know until _I_ see them, or at least someone I know closely and trust completely sees them."

Based on the nature of frog farms and the controversy it's caused (obviously, look at this history of this thread alone) it seems unrealistic that anyone who isn't very close personal friends with the owner of the frog farms would be allowed to see them. This would mean that while some people may have information about frog farms the number would be very few. If the frog farm exists _someone_ has seen them, maybe a _few_ someones have seen them, but it just doesn't seem like _enough_ people have seen them to provide the general populace within the hobby the peace of mind that frog farms _do_ in fact exist.


----------



## ktewell (Dec 17, 2009)

I did some googling:

Here is a personal blog that mentions a visit to a frog farm (ctrl+f for "farm"):
The House of Nash: Costa Rica / Panama Travel Journal (Warning: pic heavy).
However, it sounds more like a butterfly garden to me than a commercial farm. It may also be the same thing seen in several other places including here: Dendrobates in wild - Caudata.org Newt and Salamander Forum These aren't the droids we're looking for.

Here are some random pics that don't seem to mention exact locale:
Farming in Central America
Does this look like anything of note?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

It depends on what you consider a farm. This is part of the problem, there isn't a real definition of farm in this case and this lack of a hard definition allows for the designation of farmed even if they are not produced in captivity or in a sustainable manner (and this comment comes from the lack of studies documenting the effects on harvesting on the populations). 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

nathan said:


> I wonder if the so called farms dont give away thier location and invite people to visit because they are afraid they will get vandalized , or broken into by smugglers? Or possibly they are just holding tanks for wild caught frogs, and they dont want people to know. Fact is we wont know for sure untill someone sees some of these facilaties first hand.


I suspect that this would be a good way to get killed... and I have significant doubts about the concern on being vandelized, etc. There are a number of dendrobatid researchers in those regions and with only a couple of exceptions, there are no reports of "farms"... 



nathan said:


> Or you might just want to avoid purchasing them all together. If we dont buy there will be less demand for these particular frogs. But then again what about the ones allready comming in? What happens to them? What happens a year down the road when everyone starts offering F1's for sale? Will you sleep better at night knowing the particular animals you purchased are c.b.? Kepping the parent frogs that sparked this thread out of site and out of mind?
> 
> If this makes sense to anyone , great. If not , I'm sorry, I don't even know if it makes sense to me. Its 4:30 am . . .


I strongly suspect that the release of F1 pumilio isn't going to have much of an impact on the demand (and thus the imports) as unlike several other species (like E. tricolor/anthyoni or P. terriblis) clutch size is small and production is relatively low (less than a dozen or so offspring/year in some morphs of pumilio)... Consider the fact that auratus has been imported pretty consistently for the last 20 plus years..... 

Most of the wild imports are probably not being sold to the main hobby but instead are being sold to the pet trade at large and for the most part are lost to the hobby... 

Ed


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

I find it interesting in the most recent CITES report regarding the classification of _Agalychnis spp_. under Status II that many (i.e. thousands) of frogs from that genus have been imported, and many were claimed to have come from "farms" or "ranches" (the CITES report even uses quotation marks when referring to these facilities). Of course, the vast majority were supposedly also collected within the borders of Nicaragua as well.

Given the mass numbers of frogs that supposedly come in from these facilities (nearly all of which, strangely, are adults)...one would think you would actually see or hear more regarding their existence and operation.

But, as has been said: we keep thinking of "farms" as enclosed, fairly artificial facilities. I believe animals can be collected from the wild, but if they are collected with permission on private property, can still be designated and exported as "farmed" or "ranched."


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

skylsdale said:


> I find it interesting in the most recent CITES report regarding the classification of _Agalychnis spp_. under Status II that many (i.e. thousands) of frogs from that genus have been imported, and many were claimed to have come from "farms" or "ranches" (the CITES report even uses quotation marks when referring to these facilities). Of course, the vast majority were supposedly also collected within the borders of Nicaragua as well.
> 
> Given the mass numbers of frogs that supposedly come in from these facilities (nearly all of which, strangely, are adults)...one would think you would actually see or hear more regarding their existence and operation.
> 
> But, as has been said: we keep thinking of "farms" as enclosed, fairly artificial facilities. I believe animals can be collected from the wild, but if they are collected with permission on private property, can still be designated and exported as "farmed" or "ranched."


You hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately, the likelihood is either that the "farm" is someone's forest that they collect from (and it doesn't necessarily even mean that it's a tract of land specifically set aside for pumilio) or that it's just a temporary housing facility.

Personally, I'm waiting for genetic methods to get advanced enough that analyses can be done quickly and cheaply. I would _love_ to get toe clips or swabs of these "farmed" frogs to see relationships between them. If they truly are farmed, then one would expect closer relation to farmed individuals than to randomly sampled wild individuals.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

This is the point that I have been trying to get at with the Escudo Island frogs. I have assumed that the rest of the FR frogs were really WC from private lands. If frogs are being wild-collected from PUBLIC lands, this is where someone should draw the ethical line in the sand. 

Alternatively, hobbyists should declare that they don't care where their frogs come from and what the impacts are to wild populations (this might be closer to the truth with many of our number). It would at least be a more honest assertion.

Richard.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

"Farm raised from private land" is still pretty much a cloaking statement. It still amounts to unsustained and unmanaged harvesting.

Steps to provide proof must include tadpole rasing and juvenile frogs and so far all the imports are male heavy large adults with skin imperfections and some scaring - not indicative of a farming operation.


----------



## nathan (Jul 24, 2009)

Another thing to consider is how the natives view these frogs and other wildlife. If they can make a buck to survive they will in most cases. Unless they are educated in good collecting practices and how to be able to do it long term with less impact on the frogs. All of wich needs to be figured out. Like for instance only collect cetian locals one year then alternate the next to give the population time to increase again. 

And look at how alot of americans view thier own wildlife. Are we any better? Growing up hardly anyone cared about our local frogs. Im not that old but Ive still heard of alot of people going out and shooting bullfrogs and leopard frogs with bb guns. . . Or seen people speed up to hit an animal trying to cross a road.


----------



## ktewell (Dec 17, 2009)

nathan said:


> And look at how alot of americans view thier own wildlife. Are we any better? Growing up hardly anyone cared about our local frogs. Im not that old but Ive still heard of alot of people going out and shooting bullfrogs and leopard frogs with bb guns. . . Or seen people speed up to hit an animal trying to cross a road.


Not to detract from your point, but the example you chose is interesting. The state of Washington enforces no hunting season on bullfrogs and there are no restrictions on size or number of frogs that you can kill. They actually go in depth on state gov't websites on the best methods of killing them- even what kind of buckshot to use in a shotgun. I just refreshed my memory of this last night because I went out and caught one adult and one two year old tadpole and was checking the legality of my actions. It turns out you can kill them almost no matter what, but you can never keep or transport them. The species is invasive in Western states and has detrimental effects on native amphibian populations, so by killing bullfrogs you are actually helping the environment (probably).


So, to address your point more directly: yes, it's true that Americans can have similar disregard for wildlife. But the differences in socioeconomic conditions prevent a helpful comparison between the two regions, IMO.

However, this disregard can be influenced through education and financial encouragement: take the example of the Community Baboon Sanctuary in Belize. Where once the farmers would kill howler monkeys to eat or keep them from eating their crops, the farmers now help the monkey population because of the tourism dollars that the animals attract. The population of _Alouatta pigra_ has swelled in the 30 or so years since the CBS' inception. My point here is that we, the consumers, have power in our dollars. We can choose to ignore improper harvesting techniques or we can encourage actions that will allow sustainable harvest by buying from reputable sources who have demonstrated responsible practices.


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

ktewell said:


> Not to detract from your point, but the example you chose is interesting. The state of Washington enforces no hunting season on bullfrogs and there are no restrictions on size or number of frogs that you can kill. They actually go in depth on state gov't websites on the best methods of killing them- even what kind of buckshot to use in a shotgun. I just refreshed my memory of this last night because I went out and caught one adult and one two year old tadpole and was checking the legality of my actions. It turns out you can kill them almost no matter what, but you can never keep or transport them. The species is invasive in Western states and has detrimental effects on native amphibian populations, so by killing bullfrogs you are actually helping the environment (probably).


its not a probably. they are horrible to our eco systems and destroying them is the only way to help the wildlife. ive been killing them constantly at a pond by me for 2-3 years now. when i first got there, there was a huge population of bullfrogs, with next to no northwestern salamanders. now, there are no adults left in the pond (big pond by the way), with only 1.5-2 year old tadpoles left. also, the northwestern salamanders population has atleast tripled, while red legged frogs have also returned to the pond. there is also 3 smaller seasonal ponds only about 20 yards away, which never had any amphibians in it because the bull frogs would travel there and eat everything. now there are pacific chorus frogs and long toed salamanders breeding in them. so go back to the pond you got them from, and start killing them. dont look at it as killing frogs, but saving frogs and salamanders, and essentially, the entire eco system.

sorry for the hijack.

i too find it interesting that there are no pics of froglets, and that we always get adult imports. kind of suspicious. also, there is an importer (cant say who obviously) that always says there frogs are captive BORN. that is considered different than captive bred. they could be collecting eggs and hatching them in captivity to sell, instead of breeding them. at any rate, its too bad we cant breed these frogs to the point where they arent brought in anymore.


----------



## kingnicky101 (Feb 20, 2009)

Just my two cents about all this ranting: I believe what Philsuma said about the abundance of BJ's in Costa Rica earlier in the thread. Some recent importations of mantellas are just wrong, I am shocked and disgusted that aurantiaca are being imported. The reason why they sell is because of their rarity and the fact that they are in high demand. I do NOT think it is okay to import frogs by hundreds to help keep the genes pure or whatever "x" reason. When there actually is a reason it doesn't mean you should import as much as you can get either. Especially because of the mortality rate of the wild collected frogs, if the frogs do need to be imported don't import them in such large amounts. Only a few a here and there and some better work so the mortality rate isn't so great as it would be when they are importing larger quantities of frogs. People not even saying that I won't but you have to admit if there was a list for a critically endangered frog nobody else has you have an urge to buy it that takes over you. This is why I always try to buy captive bred animals. Even in other hobbies people think it's okay to collect animals from the wild. It is beyond cruel to take an animal tha has lived in the wild free roaming its whole life and stick it in a glass box for your entertainment. I always see a major difference in captive bred animals behavior compared to wild caught ones. I am talking about chameleons,frogs, turtles, etc. as a whole. I know we do have to import every now and again so they don't end up the guppies and angelfish after breeing CB's over and over again, but collectors should NOT take advantage of importations due to lack of knowledge in the Panamanian government with conservation of native species. Just my two cents.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

kingnicky101 said:


> J but collectors should NOT take advantage of importations due to lack of knowledge in the Panamanian government with conservation of native species.


 
Trust me when I say, the Panamanian government knows full well about every single export. We are not taking advantage of their government.

.....I could say more but for once, I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I'll say it.. 
The Panamanian goverment refused to set export quotas on the frogs. If they had set export quotas that would mean they intended to regulate the trade. Instead with no export quotas, it shows that they intentionally chose to not regulate it. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

kingnicky101 said:


> The reason why they sell is because of their rarity and the fact that they are in high demand


They aren't in that high of a demand or those people who were captive breeding them wouldn't leave reptile shows after having sold none of the golden mantellas they brought with them.. I watched that happen at a couple of IADs. They haven't been that rare in the pet trade.. 




kingnicky101 said:


> Especially because of the mortality rate of the wild collected frogs, if the frogs do need to be imported don't import them in such large amounts.


The mortality rate is directly related to how the frogs are handled before, during and after importation. Zoos and researchers have repeatedly been able to show that proper handling during the process pretty much eliminates the mortality rates seen in frogs imported for the pet trade or smuggled. 




kingnicky101 said:


> Only a few a here and there and some better work so the mortality rate isn't so great as it would be when they are importing larger quantities of frogs.


At this time in the pet trade there really isn't a difference in mortality between 20 frogs and 2000 frogs as the number imported doesn't change how they were treated during the whole process. 



kingnicky101 said:


> I know we do have to import every now and again so they don't end up the guppies and angelfish after breeing CB's over and over again.


Actually this is only true if enough of the gene frequency isn't being managed to support the population for the long term. If a person is really interested in preserving the captive bred frogs, they should get involved with ASN. 

Ed


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

kingnicky101 said:


> People not even saying that I won't but you have to admit if there was a list for a critically endangered frog nobody else has you have an urge to buy it that takes over you.


the terribs you have are critically endangered in the wild. while im certain you have CB animals, it just goes to show that it isn't all about how endangered an animal is. i doubt most people choose terribilis for this reason, but rather because they like the way it looks etc. 

there are plenty of lists of endangered animals available to anyone online. those who seek out these animals don't go through the "regular " channels to get their stock. and i certainly haven't seen arboreus and speciosis being snuck in with any panama shipments from the "regular" importers. these guys (IMO) tend to stick to what is legal, if there is an issue it lies with those in the Panamanian govt. who set quotas and give permits, and like ed said if they wanted to regulate it they would.

james


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Woodsman said:


> I hope we can get to the bottom of the issue on the Escudo Island Pumilios. If they were wild-collected from a marine preserve and offered as farm-raised, I think the board should take some action here.
> 
> Richard.


Did you find out anything?


----------

