# Warning about wild-collected tinctorius



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

There have been a large number of wild-collected D. tinctorius on offer from quite a few frog re-sellers lately and I want to provide a warning to people that may be purchasing these frogs. It's clear that their large size and cheap price are very tempting (to me as well), but the drawbacks to bringing potentially pathogenic diseases into one's frog collection should not be easily dismissed.

Wild-collected tinctorius can carry a plethora of parasites that can easily be passed to other frogs in your own collection (as well as others collections when these frogs and their progeny are transferred about in the hobby). There's is no doubt that the frogs are undertreated (if they are treated at all) for parasites and potentially devastating fungal diseases. There are likely completely new pathogens that are being imported with these frogs, some of which potentially could be released into the mainland U.S. by careless froggers.

Finally, it has been the experience of many froggers that have purchased these wild-collected frogs over the years (including the recent 2009 Suriname imports), that there is a large percentage of loss of these frogs. They are very big and beautiful because they come from the wild, but are not very adaptable to terrarium life (note the great amount of nose and head rub that these frogs develop when constrainted to small spaces).

Although captive-born D. tinctorius are generally very hardy and bold in the terrarium, I think that these wild-collected frogs should be considered only by very advanced hobbyists who have access to a good frog vet and aren't too concerned about the high mortality rate in these imports.

This is my personal opinion, of course. Richard.


----------



## Reef_Haven (Jan 19, 2011)

They are very tempting.
Some good things to think about. 
But, are you suggesting these frogs should receive shotgun treatments for all pathogens?
IMO, it's possible their fecals won't show any problems yet. Depending on how long they've been held at a collection site and how much stress they have endured. Their immune systems may not have been compromised enough yet, that the pathogens would have built up to very detectable levels.
I'd also be interested if you have some knowledge of NEW pathogens, or if this is just speculation.
How many would a plethora be? dozens???


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

A good number of people that I know who purchased D. tinctorius from the 2009 imports (which came through a much more reputable importer) reported losses over the first year that they had the frogs. Since I don't have any of these frogs in my personal collection, I don't have a strong opinion about how to treat these frogs. I think I would be likely to have fecals performed and treat for as many pathogens that were discovered.

As far as NEW pathogens, you have to keep in mind that Chytrid is a NEW pathogen. I believe that there are likely other pathogens coming-in with wild-collected frogs that we are currently not testing for.

Take care, Richard.



Reef_Haven said:


> They are very tempting.
> Some good things to think about.
> But, are you suggesting these frogs should receive shotgun treatments for all pathogens?
> IMO, it's possible their fecals won't show any problems yet. Depending on how long they've been held at a collection site and how much stress they have endured. Their immune systems may not have been compromised enough yet, that the pathogens would have built up to very detectable levels.
> ...


----------



## Reef_Haven (Jan 19, 2011)

I agree. The risks are probably higher with any WC individuals. I just don't think many symptoms would manifest this early. Unless the frogs are not feeding, you might not see any problems for a while. 
I guess it comes down to how much effort someone wants to put into them.
As long as they are willing to do proper quarantining procedures, follow good husbandry principles, be alert for problems and prepared to act on them. 
These are all things that should be done with any new frogs.
As you say, probably the biggest risk is how they are able to adapt to captivity.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I would add to my first post in saying that D. tinctorius (and all dendrobtid frogs) are listed as CITES II species (vulnerable to extirpations or extinction). The scientific advisory group to CITES has requested that Suriname close its exports of dendrobatids, but the exporting continues without a single field study to determine the impacts of the collections. People who are buying these frogs, against the wishes of CITES, are contributing to the potential decline and extirpation of populations of D. tinctorius in Suriname.

Richard.


----------



## Bcs TX (Sep 13, 2008)

Another thing to add is since these are WC (the ones I am seeing for sale are sexable) their age is unknown.

I totally agree these should go to advanced hobbiests.


----------



## billschwinn (Dec 17, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> I would add to my first post in saying that D. tinctorius (and all dendrobtid frogs) are listed as CITES II species (vulnerable to extirpations or extinction). The scientific advisory group to CITES has requested that Suriname close its exports of dendrobatids, but the exporting continues without a single field study to determine the impacts of the collections. People who are buying these frogs, against the wishes of CITES, are contributing to the potential decline and extirpation of populations of D. tinctorius in Suriname.
> 
> Richard.


Richard, I understand your concern, however they are coming in with CITES permits, valid permits, meaning CITES is currently ok with it. Maybe another branch of the CITES organization is not, but if you try to back up your reasoning with info that is not valid your argument does'nt really work, Bill


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Bill,

Please have a look at the CITES site. Their scientific advisory committee has been asking Suriname to close its exports since the 1990s. Ultimately, it is up to the individual countries to set the exports for themselves (though I understand from US FWS that many nations have signed-on to a letter asking Madagascar to stop exporting many of its endemic species). The dart frog hobby doesn't do any species any good by taking advantage of uncaring or unscrupulous countries' willingness to exploit their native floras or faunas.

Take care, Richard.



billschwinn said:


> Richard, I understand your concern, however they are coming in with CITES permits, valid permits, meaning CITES is currently ok with it. Maybe another branch of the CITES organization is not, but if you try to back up your reasoning with info that is not valid your argument does'nt really work, Bill


----------



## EricIvins (Jan 4, 2010)

Losses? I haven't lost any that have come in this year, and none in 2010.....

These things are bullet proof compared to Hyla or Phyllomedusa, and yes, I'm keeping them long term.......Only one DOA from the shipments I've un-packed to boot.......


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> They are very big and beautiful because they come from the wild, but are not very adaptable to terrarium life (note the great amount of nose and head rub that these frogs develop when constrainted to small spaces).


They might do a little better for you if you keep them in something bigger than a 10 gallon.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Eric,

That is NOT the experience of many members here who purchased imported D. tinctorius in 2009. Why don't you keep a log of the feedback you get from your purchasors over the next year and let us know how it worked out.

Then again, every importer I have ever questioned about their imports have claimed that not a single animal has ever died, EVER! So, I wouldn't expect any difference here.

Richard.



EricIvins said:


> Losses? I haven't lost any that have come in this year, and none in 2010.....
> 
> These things are bullet proof compared to Hyla or Phyllomedusa, and yes, I'm keeping them long term.......Only one DOA from the shipments I've un-packed to boot.......


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

I have also not lost any personally but all mine were treated. I however do listen to feedback and I have only had two reported deaths. These tincs are pretty sturdy compared to last years imports in which I had around 5-6 die. As for the country exporting being the one that controls export that is a lie. Europe clossed its borders to Madagascar and refuses to allow anything other than cb so if cites had issues here in the us they would not allow them to arrive. The reason they are allowed is because these animals are being collected on regions that are set for deforestation and they are allowing alloted permits for those particular areas. Not everything is a negative as you make it seem richard. I for one do not want these amazing animals to ever be extinct however the countries from which they come are expanding and with expansion comes loss of habitat. I would rather see them here then never see them at all.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

It's pretty clear from this post that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. You might want to perpetuate some fantasies about all wild-collected CITES II frogs coming-in from "rescues", but that is a fully-loaded diaper (IMO). 

I recommend doing a bit of actual homework on the subject and not try to spin all the stories that the importers tell each other to justify the destructive practices they (you) are participating in.

Make money if you want to, but please try to stay with actual facts.

Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> I have also not lost any personally but all mine were treated. I however do listen to feedback and I have only had two reported deaths. These tincs are pretty sturdy compared to last years imports in which I had around 5-6 die. As for the country exporting being the one that controls export that is a lie. Europe clossed its borders to Madagascar and refuses to allow anything other than cb so if cites had issues here in the us they would not allow them to arrive. The reason they are allowed is because these animals are being collected on regions that are set for deforestation and they are allowing alloted permits for those particular areas. Not everything is a negative as you make it seem richard. I for one do not want these amazing animals to ever be extinct however the countries from which they come are expanding and with expansion comes loss of habitat. I would rather see them here then never see them at all.
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> Make money if you want to, but please try to stay with actual facts.


Where are your facts? I see a lot of emotion-driven half truths, but your argument is pretty light on actual facts.


----------



## Rain_Frog (Apr 27, 2004)

Honestly, I'm sure many, many people that are interested in pumilio are well aware of the risks-- since they are so readily available wild caught. 

I understand you're warning beginners, but considering that CB tinctorius can often be as cheap as $25 versus large wild caught adults, I'm sure a beginner that has done his / her reading will probably choose the route with least resistance


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

It seems odd to me that you would want to have the "TWI/ASN" next to your name (as if you support frog conservation), but that doesn't seem to be what you are on about today. It's too bad to see that. I will leave it that I have etablished my opinion and leave the apparent pack of dogs to their little feeding frenzy.

Good luck with that, Richard.



Tony said:


> Where are your facts? I see a lot of emotion-driven half truths, but your argument is pretty light on actual facts.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

Woof Woof Woof Woof Woof!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> It seems odd to me that you would want to have the "TWI/ASN" next to your name (as if you support frog conservation), but that doesn't seem to be what you are on about today. It's too bad to see that. I will leave it that I have etablished my opinion and leave the apparent pack of dogs to their little feeding frenzy.
> 
> Good luck with that, Richard.


Again, let's see some facts to support the argument. Show me some evidence that importing a few dozen tincs does any damage to wild populations.


----------



## Rain_Frog (Apr 27, 2004)

> I recommend doing a bit of actual homework on the subject and not try to spin all the stories that the importers tell each other to justify the destructive practices they (you) are participating in.


While I definitely think restrictions are looser than as stated-- trying to convince a 3rd world country like Madagascar with an overthrown governor to not collect wild caught frogs when people are trying to feed their starving families is like trying to tell people to boycott Wal-Mart in favor of "ethical business practices" when so many people are out of work right now.

I'm not saying we're powerless, and I'm not saying that you're not well meaning, but ranting doesn't do much honestly to stop the problem. As we've seen in the past on this forum, we had more people just rant about the ban on interstate transport of possible chytrid infected frogs than people that actually wrote letters to the USFWS.


----------



## billschwinn (Dec 17, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> It seems odd to me that you would want to have the "TWI/ASN" next to your name (as if you support frog conservation), but that doesn't seem to be what you are on about today. It's too bad to see that. I will leave it that I have etablished my opinion and leave the apparent pack of dogs to their little feeding frenzy.
> 
> Good luck with that, Richard.


Richard, personal attacks don't help your case, just agree to disagree


----------



## Reef_Haven (Jan 19, 2011)

Am I the only only one who feels the hobby puts so much importance on being absolutely sure of the locale a frog was collected from, that it may actually increase the demand for WC frogs?


----------



## EricIvins (Jan 4, 2010)

Woodsman said:


> Hi Eric,
> 
> That is NOT the experience of many members here who purchased imported D. tinctorius in 2009. Why don't you keep a log of the feedback you get from your purchasors over the next year and let us know how it worked out.
> 
> ...


I'm openly honest about everything I do......

But thanks for letting your bias and personal opinion get in the way.......That only stifles any kind of dialogue, and is a problem in this wonderful hobby of yours........


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

Reef_Haven said:


> Am I the only only one who feels the hobby puts so much importance on being absolutely sure of the locale a frog was collected from, that it may actually increase the demand for WC frogs?


I feel the exact same way!!!! And since localities are often as small as one small area of one river valley, or one side of one tiny island, the risk of over exploitation becomes very real


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Reef_Haven said:


> Am I the only only one who feels the hobby puts so much importance on being absolutely sure of the locale a frog was collected from, that it may actually increase the demand for WC frogs?


Check out http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...e-bred-conservation-efforts-4.html#post586940 

as there are several factors that come into play with the demand for wild caught... 
Ed


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Not to be that guy, but the number one issue affecting amphibians in Madagascar is not the WC imports but rather habitat destruction.


----------



## billschwinn (Dec 17, 2008)

stemcellular said:


> Not to be that guy, but the number one issue affecting amphibians in Madagascar is not the WC imports but rather habitat destruction.


Watch out, Richard won't like this, even though it is fact.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

"Hobby of _yours_ ... " - so you're not in the hobby then?

Only a business for you?

s


EricIvins said:


> I'm openly honest about everything I do......
> 
> But thanks for letting your bias and personal opinion get in the way.......That only stifles any kind of dialogue, and is a problem in this wonderful hobby of yours........


----------



## EricIvins (Jan 4, 2010)

Scott said:


> "Hobby of _yours_ ... " - so you're not in the hobby then?
> 
> Only a business for you?
> 
> s


Both Business and a Hobby.......However, some people in this "Hobby" have a tendency to stifle anyones opinion that isn't their own......So his "Hobby" is a bit different than mine.......I'm open to anyones opinions/experiences/or information.......It may not pertain to what I do with my Frogs, but anyone can take it for what it is and have the ability to choose between the information, not stifle or shelve it......


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

In regard to countries (especially unstable ones such as Madagascar) just shutting down exports of their amphibians, it's simply not that easy. A little over a year ago I was in Liberia, West Africa and, during my short stay there, some local kids were able to catch a single large toad/frog for me...but the neighbors ate it for dinner before I could get back in time to see it.

For people just struggling to introduce a bit of protein into their diets each day, the idea of them not earning money off collecting/selling frogs (to feed themselves and their families) is crazy...and the idea that people across the ocean just keep them in little glass boxes is even crazier. The entire time I was there I tried catching some local Agamas, and each morning the women sitting in front of their shacks laughed at me--why would I expend so much energy to catch something that tasted so horribly? My response that I wasn't going to eat one if I caught it confused them even more--why else would I try to catch it?

Also, we in the U.S. and Europe are on the hind-end of being able to see the downfalls of deforestation, etc...but many of these people have not yet gone through the entire process--they are on the front end of it and don't necessarily see or comprehend the subsequent impacts. An interesting excerpt from the book _One River_ by anthropologist Wade Davis:



> On the day before I left Quiwado, Jim and I poled upriver with young Geke and Kento to collect bark cloth, a speciment of yam bean, and a number of other plants I had yet to find... We passed a quiet eddy, and Geke wanted to fish. He reached into his fiber bag and pulled out a stick of dynamite. Jim told him to put it away. They argued. Jim prevailed, and Geke sulked the rest of the morning.
> 
> "They get it from the local officials," Jim explained, "a fuse connected to a blasting cap. Jam it into a stick of dynamite, tie it to a rock, light it, and let her rip. The concusion kills all the fish. The rivers around Tena are all wiped out. If it's not dynamite, it's DDT."
> 
> ...


I'm not coming out on either side of this discussion: my point is to say it's a confusing and multi-faceted issue that warrants a more thorough and honest discussion than often happens on this forum.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Ray,

So, if wild collection of animals for the pet trade came in second to habitat destruction, we should discount its effects? Doesn't this sound to you a bit like an apology for those who want the wild-collected animals and don't really care what the consequences are?

And what about the deplorable conditions that the animals are collected and stored in? What about the vast numbers that suffer and die in the miserable transport from country to country. If you were informed by the Importer that, let's say half of the frogs died horrible deaths so that the last few could reach the American buyer (where another percentage invariably dies), all this would be okay so long as we all had our "fix" of wild-collected animals?

The hundreds of frogs in question here are phenotypically "cobalt" tinctorius. This is a morph that has been in the hobby for years, is easy to breed and available at very reasonable prices to anyone interested in owning them. What could be the ehtical justification for continuing this "treadmill of death" that is the import/export trade when it comes to well-established frogs in the hobby? perhaps one could make an argument for species (such as Atelopus spumarius) that are not established yet in the hobby, but I can't imagine what the argument would be (except for some BS about always needing new "blood" in the hobby) for maintaining a really cruel practice by people that are clearly only in it for the CASH.

I think I know enough good froggers in the hobby well enough to say that, for many of us, money is the LAST thing that is on our minds (given how expensive the hobby can be). So, why continue to support the people who are not breeding the frogs themselves and only using inadequate laws that permit the (scientifically) unregulated taking of frogs from the wild?

How do we move our interests in conservation of these beloved frogs foward?

Take care, Richard.



stemcellular said:


> Not to be that guy, but the number one issue affecting amphibians in Madagascar is not the WC imports but rather habitat destruction.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

stemcellular said:


> Not to be that guy, but the number one issue affecting amphibians in Madagascar is not the WC imports but rather habitat destruction.


While habitat destruction is the biggest threat, we should be aware that the threats are not isolated from one another and the effects can be considered to be cumulative when looking at how much a population is threatened. If the cumulative threat is sufficient the population will reach a tipping point where extinction becomes probable... See for example http://webpages.fc.ul.pt/~mcgomes/a...e density dependence and the Allee effect.pdf

For many population of animals globally, to simply throw out habitat destruction is no longer sufficient.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Ed,

I agree completely with what you have laid out here in your good "thesis". I think it is clear that a group of dedicated captive breeders could produce a large number of reasonably-priced frogs for the hobby and greater "frog-buying" public. My worry continues to be the people that have that "thirst" for the "latest and greatest", the guys and gals that are always on to the next thing (and often ignoring the frogs already in their collections). No matter how many frogs we are albe to breed in captivity, there are always going to be hobbyists who want what is rare, what is endangered. No matter what the price to the frogs in the wild.

My argument for my latter concern is that ethical hobbyists really need to step-up and say that they don't want continued collection of animals from the wild for the pet trade, that we should be focusing on becoming better breeders of these frogs ourselves. Together we should continue the advocacy for protecting dendrobatid frogs and forcing countries that have no concern for their native species to comply with the recommendations of CITES and the IUCN.

We should be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Thanks for the link, Richard.



Ed said:


> Check out http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...e-bred-conservation-efforts-4.html#post586940
> 
> as there are several factors that come into play with the demand for wild caught...
> Ed


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Ed,

Thanks for this. I have always wondered what the affects on local populations would be when most of the males frogs have been removed (as local collectors find frogs by listening to them call). Imports containing a very heavy percentage of adult males (such as the recent Atelopus importation) had me worried that this could cause population collapse in the colonies where the frogs were collected. This seems to be born out by the species modelling.

Thanks again, Richard.



Ed said:


> While habitat destruction is the biggest threat, we should be aware that the threats are not isolated from one another and the effects can be considered to be cumulative when looking at how much a population is threatened. If the cumulative threat is sufficient the population will reach a tipping point where extinction becomes probable... See for example http://webpages.fc.ul.pt/~mcgomes/a...e density dependence and the Allee effect.pdf
> 
> For many population of animals globally, to simply throw out habitat destruction is no longer sufficient.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Nice Ron, I used to work with Wade back in the day...great guy. 



skylsdale said:


> In regard to countries (especially unstable ones such as Madagascar) just shutting down exports of their amphibians, it's simply not that easy. A little over a year ago I was in Liberia, West Africa and, during my short stay there, some local kids were able to catch a single large toad/frog for me...but the neighbors ate it for dinner before I could get back in time to see it.
> 
> For people just struggling to introduce a bit of protein into their diets each day, the idea of them not earning money off collecting/selling frogs (to feed themselves and their families) is crazy...and the idea that people across the ocean just keep them in little glass boxes is even crazier. The entire time I was there I tried catching some local Agamas, and each morning the women sitting in front of their shacks laughed at me--why would I expend so much energy to catch something that tasted so horribly? My response that I wasn't going to eat one if I caught it confused them even more--why else would I try to catch it?
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Richard 
I'm shortening this up a bit 



Woodsman said:


> Hi Ed,
> 
> 
> My argument for my latter concern is that ethical hobbyists really need to step-up and say that they don't want continued collection of animals from the wild for the pet trade, that we should be focusing on becoming better breeders of these frogs ourselves. Together we should continue the advocacy for protecting dendrobatid frogs and forcing countries that have no concern for their native species to comply with the recommendations of CITES and the IUCN.
> ...


 
Unfortunately you are over estimating the impact enforcement can have on a nation that chooses to go a different route. A signatory can simply set a quota far in excess of any potential collection to meet CITES regulations or simply refuse to set a quota at all. The only thing a signatory can do is refuse shipments of that species from that country (which usually means the animals die sitting in boxes either in the country of destination or back in the country of origin), and this does not affect non-signatories or those where custom regulations can be circumvented either through false paperwork or bribes... An alternative is that the nation can issue paperwork implying that the harvesting is sustainable and have it accepted without any supporting evidence (as was initially done with ball pythons) allowing a high quota. All of this has been hashed over previously in this thread http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/55512-can-captive-breeding-reduce-demand-wc.html 

Ed


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

A few different thoughts going on below, but to address:

First point: No. Populations of amphibians that cannot handle sustainable harvesting should not be collected for the pet trade. That said, I'm all ears about how one determines, enforces this. Like so many things, we lack sound data and/or enforcement mechanisms. 

Richard, I think your second point about conditions is beyond the WC/CB distinction. I've seen plenty of CB frogs kept in horrible conditions, shipped horribly, etc. Mortality occurs in either case and we (including importers for their bottom line) should do our best to minimize it during transport, acclimation, etc. I personally don't think a CB frog has more value as a sentient being than a WC frog or vice versa. 

Third point, its supply and demand. While I would chose to purchase a CB animal over a WC one if given the opportunity I cannot speak for others. However, I don't believe this is a sounds basis for restricting the sustainable harvest of WC frogs. 

And yes, as with so many things, it comes down to cash.




Woodsman said:


> Hi Ray,
> 
> So, if wild collection of animals for the pet trade came in second to habitat destruction, we should discount its effects? Doesn't this sound to you a bit like an apology for those who want the wild-collected animals and don't really care what the consequences are?
> 
> ...


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Ed said:


> While habitat destruction is the biggest threat, we should be aware that the threats are not isolated from one another and the effects can be considered to be cumulative when looking at how much a population is threatened. If the cumulative threat is sufficient the population will reach a tipping point where extinction becomes probable... See for example http://webpages.fc.ul.pt/~mcgomes/a...e density dependence and the Allee effect.pdf
> 
> For many population of animals globally, to simply throw out habitat destruction is no longer sufficient.



Agree entirely, Ed. That said, look at the last remaining in tact habitat for M. aurantiaca. While the population may have been affected in someway by the recent import quota, it only took a weekend and a few villagers to eliminate the population entirely.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Worth reading...

http://catskillet.tumblr.com/post/2178238825

"An Obituary

A very special wetland died today, and I was a witness. This is what I saw.

We walked 25 km along abandoned railroad tracks to Torotorofotsy, an internationally-protected RAMSAR wetland. After three days of heavy rain, we were sure to see the Golden Mantella (Mantella aurantiaca), a thumb-sized critically endangered frog found only in a handful of places, one of them being Torotorofotsy. We found one almost immediately and four others after that, ranging from orange to near-red in color. Before we left, we climbed a hill and surveyed Torotorofotsy. Definitely, it is a beautiful place. Besides being home to these cool frogs, it also provides refuge to several endemic birds, an endemic carnivorous plant, endemic orchids, and the rarest lemur in the world. It is by no means pristine – there was a faint bit of farming and some zebu grazing in the wetland, but we decided that overall, it wasn’t bad. After all, the wetland area was predominantly intact, and that’s plenty to ask for in an island where nearly every place else is in ruins. We left that day with a feeling of security and relief due to Torotorofotsy’s protected status – we were sure it would stay there, unchanged, for at least another year or so. We never imagined it would vanish so quickly.

Fast-forward three weeks. Yesterday, we were asked by Alain to assist in fighting a fire in Torotorofotsy, rumored to have started due to an accident with charcoal production. We and two American volunteers left first thing in the morning the next day, though by the time we got to location, we were informed that the fire had died. Instead, we were to spend the day scouting out new localities of Mantella aurantiaca. Fine by us. We hiked from village to village for six hours, trying to locate villagers who knew the location of these sahona mena, red frogs. We had no luck finding a guide to the new locations, but were told repeatedly by different villagers that the sahona mena were all over the place when they were children (~45 years ago), but are only found in one spot now, the place we went to three weeks ago. So we went back there.

No frogs to be found, although this was entirely expected as it had not rained in weeks and we were looking for them during the hottest time of the day. With time to kill, we ventured out into the wetland to take a look at the fires, which were still smoldering in the distance. From afar, nothing looked out of place. When we got closer, though, the situation became painfully clear. Torotorofotsy had been burned intentionally, not accidentally. In the middle of the wetland, five tractors were tilling the land. Almost as far as the eye could see, this once-wetland was gridded into rice patties, with newly dug ditches running between the squares. Only a small patch – maybe 15% of the wetland – was still undisturbed. We couldn’t believe our eyes. Three weeks ago, this was almost all wetland, all native and endemic plants, all under water. Today, there were new dams and ditches, people farming in all directions, and no vegetation to be seen, except for the burnt remains.

We approached the first set of workers driving the tractor, and Alain spoke with them in Malagasy. He found out that they weren’t even local villagers, which was made obvious by the equipment (the villagers can’t afford tractors). They were city workers hired by a rich man name “Maurice” in Antananarivo to plant rice in Torotorofotsy. This made no sense to us. Rice is dirt cheap, the land isn’t even that big, Torotorofotsy is at least a hundred kilometers from the capital, and there’s no way (is there?) you would make a profit off this operation. We couldn’t figure it out, but we were deeply disturbed. All of us felt like crying, all of us felt totally helpless. One of the Americans finally blurted out, “Can’t you tell them to stop?” and Alain laughed half-heartedly at this suggestion. What can you do? We can only inform the authorities – assuming they haven’t been paid off to look the other way, which Alain suggested may be the case, as “this is how Madagascar works” – and wait. Wait and watch the wetland disappear. Wait for the inevitable but accelerating extinction of the very species we are trying to save. Hope that you’re not too late. Hope that the wetland won’t be too badly ruined. Hope that it will bounce back.

Today is December 11, 2010. Today, Torotorofotsy died while I watched."


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

stemcellular said:


> Agree entirely, Ed. That said, look at the last remaining in tact habitat for M. aurantiaca. While the population may have been affected in someway by the recent import quota, it only took a weekend and a few villagers to eliminate the population entirely.


I am aware of it, I was just addressing the fact that in recent years discussions on the potential negative aspects of wild collected animals usually have someone throw out habitat destruction as if that was the end of the story when historically we can look at extremely common species hunted to extinction with habitat destruction (example passenger pigeons, wood bison, eastern elk). The two factors are connected aspects not seperate as they are often portrayed.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I have spent probably the greater portion of my life forcing political change on recalcitrant institutions (I am an old Berkeley radical). Currently, the president of Suriname is trying to make the argument that the preservation of the tropical forests in Suriname is essential to the survival of a world facing climate change. He seems to want to be known as the "saviour" of the forest (if not the world). I think a media campaign targeted to explaining the horrendous way that Suriname exploits its native fauna could force a political reckoning that would make their international position on their tropical forests more consistent.

Suriname president calls for ‘unequivocal incentives’ to preserve rainforests | Caribbean news, Entertainment, Fashion, Politics, Business, Sports….

Richard.



Ed said:


> Hi Richard
> I'm shortening this up a bit
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> I think a media campaign targeted to explaining the horrendous way that Suriname exploits its native fauna could force a political reckoning that would make their international position on their tropical forests more consistent.


Horrendous? How so? Do you have data showing that the populations are being harmed? Do you have documentation of extreme mistreatment of animals during the import/export process? What exactly do you define as "horrendous"? Or is it just the fact that they sell their wildlife? In that case maybe you should focus your efforts on the horrendous exploitation happening right in your own frog room first.  

As a small personal anecdote I have worked with a fair number of frogs from Suriname and every single one arrived at my door in excellent condition, so I'm either unusually lucky or maybe, just maybe, the exports from Suriname aren't so horrendous as you seem to think.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> I have spent probably the greater portion of my life forcing political change on recalcitrant institutions (I am an old Berkeley radical). Currently, the president of Suriname is trying to make the argument that the preservation of the tropical forests in Suriname is essential to the survival of a world facing climate change. He seems to want to be known as the "saviour" of the forest (if not the world). I think a media campaign targeted to explaining the horrendous way that Suriname exploits its native fauna could force a political reckoning that would make their international position on their tropical forests more consistent.
> 
> 
> Richard.


 
I think that any action prior to a determination of how they are going to protect the forests (sustainable versus protectionism) is absolutely premature. Any "pressure" should be towards sustainable protection as this tends to work the best with a minimal expenditure in the long-term....


----------



## Boondoggle (Dec 9, 2007)

Sometimes I agree with Richard, and sometimes I don't. This time I do (at least regarding the original post). New imports are often full of pathogens or are under-medicated. If a beginner were unwary to this fact they could wipe out a collection. Often, imported frogs have a high mortality rate. New blood on occasion is good for the hobby, but given the opportunity, in most individuals cases it's almost always better to buy CB. 

I don't think that's such a revolutionary thought.


----------



## Rain_Frog (Apr 27, 2004)

Let's not forget that mantella cowani's population fell 80% from overcollection for the pet trade. The mountain chicken frog has also been heavily harmed by overcollection for food before chytrid arrived. Conraua goliath is another frog that is endangered because of food usage.

And then we have N. kaiseri which was heavily harmed by overexploitation by the pet trade.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Woodsman said:


> Hi Ed,
> 
> Thanks for this. I have always wondered what the affects on local populations would be when most of the males frogs have been removed (as local collectors find frogs by listening to them call). Imports containing a very heavy percentage of adult males (such as the recent Atelopus importation) had me worried that this could cause population collapse in the colonies where the frogs were collected. This seems to be born out by the species modelling.
> 
> Thanks again, Richard.


Yes of course because tincs have the loudest call and they definitively come in male heavy.....lol....you have no idea and have one heck of a biased opinion. It is obvious you have never herped a day in your life or you would know taking 1,800 tincs from a whole country wouldn't effect a population. By the way 1800 is the quota and I do know what I am talking about and since you supposedly have buddies at cities which you don't. Why not ask them about me because I am in contact with fwp on a regular basis talking about orders and things they should enforce. I am very hands on in what I do and I do not want these to disappear. 

On another note I use to think the same as you richard so I tested the theory. How did I do this you ask easy. I collected every collared lizard on the same hill for over a year till I couldn't find any. (They were used at the university for classwork. Next year I did the same thing and then again the following year. What did my numbers show. Well it showed that I really couldn't effect the numbers by just catching them. My teacher then asked me how I thought I could make the habitat decline and I said habitat destruction. So we lit the hill in fire and removed all of the rocks we could move. The next year the numbers reduced down to a mere 13% roughly. They slowly increased again but this is a perfect example.

first year we found 47
Second year we found 40
Third year we found 53
The burn year we found 6
The year following the burn year was 21

Its all in the numbers and I am very active outdoors and I love my herps. I love your opinion as well and it is a needed opinion because if it wasn't around then the animals would suffer. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

Good thing I'm not a tinc guy or I would be raping mother nature as we speak. For those of you without a sense of humor that was a joke..... she always consents.


----------



## edwardsatc (Feb 17, 2004)

ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Yes of course because tincs have the loudest call and they definitively come in male heavy.....lol....you have no idea and have one heck of a biased opinion. It is obvious you have never herped a day in your life or you would know taking 1,800 tincs from a whole country wouldn't effect a population. By the way 1800 is the quota and I do know what I am talking about and since you supposedly have buddies at cities which you don't. Why not ask them about me because I am in contact with fwp on a regular basis talking about orders and things they should enforce. I am very hands on in what I do and I do not want these to disappear.
> 
> On another note I use to think the same as you richard so I tested the theory. How did I do this you ask easy. I collected every collared lizard on the same hill for over a year till I couldn't find any. (They were used at the university for classwork. Next year I did the same thing and then again the following year. What did my numbers show. Well it showed that I really couldn't effect the numbers by just catching them. My teacher then asked me how I thought I could make the habitat decline and I said habitat destruction. So we lit the hill in fire and removed all of the rocks we could move. The next year the numbers reduced down to a mere 13% roughly. They slowly increased again but this is a perfect example.
> 
> ...


 Nothing like showing folks how ignorant you really are ...

I don't even know where to start with this?

Do you know what the population size is of any of the tinc morphs currently being collected? (of course not because you don't even know what morphs are being collected) If not, how does one know whether 1800 is significant or not?

Let me ask you this - If I collected 1800 wolves from the entire lower 48, do you think that there would be no decline in the species?

What was your control for the lizards? What was the estimated original population size and density? Was there a capture/tag/recapture method in place? What evidence is there that destroyed habitat was the cause for decline and what controls were in place?

So because you captured 176 lizards and found no decline except when you decided to indiscriminately burn their habitat down, your conclusion is that animals cannot be overcollected?

Stick to what you know best - flipping. You appear to know little about conservation or ecology.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Taron,

In some of our private correspondence, you agreed that the hobby should move from wild-collected frogs to captive-bred. This doesn't appear to be the direction you seem to be moving. If you were personally very interested in working with the "new" colormorph (which I personally do not believe needs a new name), a reasonable position might be to acquire a few pairs of the frogs and set-up a breeding colony to make more available to the hobby community. 

In keeping a small colony of the frogs yourself, you could have given much better care to the medical needs of the frogs and, by breeding them and selling the "clean" cb offspring, would not be selling frogs to unsuspecting hobbyists who don't realize how many parasites wild-collected frogs can carry (which can not be cured by a single dose of any medicines).

I would have respect for someone that works to breed their own animals and not rely on making money from flipping wild-collected animals. I would be willing to create a group of hobbyists to work with the new colormorph and make sure we retain as much genetic diversity from the importation as possible over time. By continuing to buy up all the frogs that are available out there, you're only creating more demand for additional importation of wild-collected frogs. And none of us know how many "Yellowheaded Sipaliwinis" there were to start. If it was a very localized frog, all of them could have easily been taken at one time.

I know that you want to make this business work for you over the longterm, but I don't think you will achieve this goal in the dart frog hobby if you don't dedicate yourself to breeding your own frogs. I know there are some who will disagree with me, but I am sure that the vast majority of longterm breeders would agree with this statement.

Good luck, Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Yes of course because tincs have the loudest call and they definitively come in male heavy.....lol....you have no idea and have one heck of a biased opinion. It is obvious you have never herped a day in your life or you would know taking 1,800 tincs from a whole country wouldn't effect a population. By the way 1800 is the quota and I do know what I am talking about and since you supposedly have buddies at cities which you don't. Why not ask them about me because I am in contact with fwp on a regular basis talking about orders and things they should enforce. I am very hands on in what I do and I do not want these to disappear.
> 
> On another note I use to think the same as you richard so I tested the theory. How did I do this you ask easy. I collected every collared lizard on the same hill for over a year till I couldn't find any. (They were used at the university for classwork. Next year I did the same thing and then again the following year. What did my numbers show. Well it showed that I really couldn't effect the numbers by just catching them. My teacher then asked me how I thought I could make the habitat decline and I said habitat destruction. So we lit the hill in fire and removed all of the rocks we could move. The next year the numbers reduced down to a mere 13% roughly. They slowly increased again but this is a perfect example.
> 
> ...


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

I one hundred percent agree with you richard and as for the other guy who wants controls and stuff email ne and I will sens you a copy of BAL the research done. Do you honestly think MY professor is stupid and wouldn't think about that stuff. I am on my phone or I would have written the whole report or scanned and pasted. The particular wolves your talking about are gone due to there habitat being gone. The habitat in new mexico where the habitat is still suitable however has been showing great promise. Now back to richard bud I agree a hundred percent with what your saying and I have held back 20 select pairs to breed. I needed to look at every tinc first hand and the only way to do that was to buy all of them. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

edwardsatc said:


> Nothing like showing folks how ignorant you really are ...
> 
> I don't even know where to start with this?
> 
> Do you know what the population size is of any of the tinc morphs currently being collected? (of course not because you don't even know what morphs are being collected) If not, how does one know whether 1800 is significant or not?


 
Actually Donn, my first thought on the comparision of collard lizards to tinctorius is So? The comparision is really an apples and oranges comparision...


----------



## Dendrobatid (May 6, 2010)

I'm still waiting for the DNA analysis for this "new" morph of Tinctorius. 

I don't understand how anyone can believe without doubt where a animal was collected from, unless it was their own hand reaching down on the forest floor and raping that animal from it's ancestral homeland.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Exactly my thought 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

Not to pick on you, but I've heard this fear about bring in wc caught frogs and how they will wipe out a collection for a long time. Does anyone know of someone this has happened to? I've heard these rumors for years and never first hand - just someone said. I've imported frogs and gotten a fair number of wc frogs over the years I've been in the hobby and I've found them overall to adapt well to captivity and for the most part live a long life. The longest living frogs I've had was a trio of wild caught adult D. auratus that lived a month short of 18 years with me and breed for 15 of those years. I've never know anyone to loose more than a few wc frogs IF they are handled properly. The only high mortality I've ever seen in wc frogs was from improper shipping - left on the tarmac in the hot sun for hours waiting for inspection (it happened to me), a number of frogs shipped together in a plastic or burlap bag (again, both happened to me), a dozen frogs shipped together in an empty milk carton (yeah me again). Yes these things have happened but overall importation of wc frogs has vastly improved over the past couple decade. And just to let people know I never treated my frogs - I gave them a good home and plenty of food and the vast majority of them did very well. Just another point of view. 

Best,

Chuck

Best,

Chuck




Boondoggle said:


> Sometimes I agree with Richard, and sometimes I don't. This time I do (at least regarding the original post). New imports are often full of pathogens or are under-medicated. If a beginner were unwary to this fact they could wipe out a collection. Often, imported frogs have a high mortality rate. New blood on occasion is good for the hobby, but given the opportunity, in most individuals cases it's almost always better to buy CB.
> 
> I don't think that's such a revolutionary thought.


----------



## billschwinn (Dec 17, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> Hi Taron,
> 
> In some of our private correspondence, you agreed that the hobby should move from wild-collected frogs to captive-bred. This doesn't appear to be the direction you seem to be moving. If you were personally very interested in working with the "new" colormorph (which I personally do not believe needs a new name), a reasonable position might be to acquire a few pairs of the frogs and set-up a breeding colony to make more available to the hobby community.
> 
> ...


I have to make a brief observation and opinion. I don't understand why this same type of thread pops up with more and more frequency with different names, usually the same players and opinions and nothing ever changes as far as the outcome. Here is a novel idea, lets try to be resposible for our own activities and purchases with our frog hobby or business, police our own actions. By doing this we will have made a difference, one frogger at a time. No one can make anyone do something they don't want to. Lead by example, not by arguments and anger and other forms of animosity. I do also have to say to Richard, I have seen you offer help and encouragement to so many people on DB, then to see you turn around and do something as you did in this post I qouted from you, Using a persons Private and personal conversation to as I see it prove a point against said person to bolster your argument, you kind of dissappointed me for one, I would like to think you were better than that, Bill


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> I would add to my first post in saying that D. tinctorius (and all dendrobtid frogs) are listed as CITES II species (vulnerable to extirpations or extinction). The scientific advisory group to CITES has requested that Suriname close its exports of dendrobatids, but the exporting continues without a single field study to determine the impacts of the collections. People who are buying these frogs, against the wishes of CITES, are contributing to the potential decline and extirpation of populations of D. tinctorius in Suriname.
> 
> Richard.


IUCN lists D. tinctorius (as a whole) as "least concern". their assessment was done in 2008 (so its fairly recent as these things go)

they say, "Listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a more threatened category." 

james


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi James,

As you WELL know, all dendrobatids are listing as CITES II vulnerable specifically because they are exploited commercially for the pet trade. You are also aware that the CITES scientific advisory committee every year has recomended that Suriname close its exports of dendrobatids.

Given what you already know, I have to assume that you are making a specious argument geared to convince people that collecting D. tinctorius is approved of by the IUCN/CITES, which IT IS NOT. Argue with me if you want to, but it would be best to stick to the facts of the argument.

Take care, Richard.



james67 said:


> IUCN lists D. tinctorius (as a whole) as "least concern". their assessment was done in 2008 (so its fairly recent as these things go)
> 
> they say, "Listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a more threatened category."
> 
> james


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Bill,

I'm not really sure what you are getting at here. I did not see in the user agreement that people should not refer to other conversations that they have had with other members. I think I laid-out in this post specifically what my hopes were for Taron moving forward, but I have been made aware by some other's experiences (which I won't reference here) that I don't think much has really changed here. If someone is running a business and not a hobbyists per se, I think these comments fit perfectly well into the conversation.

As to why I started the thread in the first place, it is because I wanted to alert newer members (who might be thrilled to be able to buy some very beautiful frogs at rock bottom prices), that there are definite issues related to the health of the frogs and the difficulty in establishing these frogs in the hobby.

To my way of thinking, I believe I am doing the thing that I like to do on Dendroboard, provide advice to people that might not be aware of some of the pitfalls in the hobby.

Take care, Richard.



billschwinn said:


> I have to make a brief observation and opinion. I don't understand why this same type of thread pops up with more and more frequency with different names, usually the same players and opinions and nothing ever changes as far as the outcome. Here is a novel idea, lets try to be resposible for our own activities and purchases with our frog hobby or business, police our own actions. By doing this we will have made a difference, one frogger at a time. No one can make anyone do something they don't want to. Lead by example, not by arguments and anger and other forms of animosity. I do also have to say to Richard, I have seen you offer help and encouragement to so many people on DB, then to see you turn around and do something as you did in this post I qouted from you, Using a persons Private and personal conversation to as I see it prove a point against said person to bolster your argument, you kind of dissappointed me for one, I would like to think you were better than that, Bill


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

So what your saying is that I don't breed frogs and I am not a hobbyist? So me flying to frog day (which I wont be vending) is just a waste of time for me. Your ridiculous and you have no idea how many frogs I breed. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## jeffr (May 15, 2009)

Where are these "rock bottom" prices that everyone is seeing? I see these Tincs going from $180-$250 a pair 

Outside of the Strawberry Pumilios for $60 a piece I never see W/C dart frogs at Rock Bottom prices anymore


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Taron,

I can only go by the frogs you have listed for sale here, which have all been wild-collected. I'd love to see photos of your frog room and breeding facilities when you have the time.

Take care, Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> So what your saying is that I don't breed frogs and I am not a hobbyist? So me flying to frog day (which I wont be vending) is just a waste of time for me. Your ridiculous and you have no idea how many frogs I breed.
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Shoot me a pm richard and what is your email. Also if I give you pics is the whole world going to see my stuff?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Why wouldn't you want to show-off your frogs to everyone? There is a section here for member frogs and vivs. I'm sure your breeding projects would be well received there.

Take care, Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Shoot me a pm richard and what is your email. Also if I give you pics is the whole world going to see my stuff?
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Blocker Institute (Apr 19, 2010)

Everybody here realizes that you can walk outside and within a few miles (few feet for some of us) and you can find a very, very needy homosapien....Right????

Can clearly see where someone came in with a great thought and ideas, but wow, did that take an odd turn. 

I value the opinion of most on here and enjoy the rhetoric. 

Perspective folks.....perspective.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

chuckpowell said:


> Not to pick on you, but I've heard this fear about bring in wc caught frogs and how they will wipe out a collection for a long time. Does anyone know of someone this has happened to? I've heard these rumors for years and never first hand - just someone said. I've imported frogs and gotten a fair number of wc frogs over the years I've been in the hobby and I've found them overall to adapt well to captivity and for the most part live a long life. The longest living frogs I've had was a trio of wild caught adult D. auratus that lived a month short of 18 years with me and breed for 15 of those years. I've never know anyone to loose more than a few wc frogs IF they are handled properly. The only high mortality I've ever seen in wc frogs was from improper shipping - left on the tarmac in the hot sun for hours waiting for inspection (it happened to me), a number of frogs shipped together in a plastic or burlap bag (again, both happened to me), a dozen frogs shipped together in an empty milk carton (yeah me again). Yes these things have happened but overall importation of wc frogs has vastly improved over the past couple decade. And just to let people know I never treated my frogs - I gave them a good home and plenty of food and the vast majority of them did very well. Just another point of view.


Hi Chuck, 

there are examples of mass mortalities in captive collections. I have doubts that we would really hear about it from many people on the boards as today's hobbyists tend to place a stigma on losses. As for the risk to the collection a lot of this depends on how and who does thier qurantine methods. As an example I have a hierarchy of how I manage my animals, snakes and lizards are cared for first, amphibians second and turtles last. In that order animals that were cleared through quarantine are cared for first, then depending on the status quarantined animals second... 

But as examples in institutional or agricultural collections I can cite several published examples where mass mortalities occured that could have been the result of introductions or contaminations by wild frogs 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640851/pdf/10756157.pdf

Emerging Pathogen in Wild Amphibians and Frogs (Rana catesbeiana) Farmed for International Trade

Frog Virus 3 Infection, Cultured American Bullfrogs

I'll stop citing the literature at this point.... but it should also be noted that mass mortality events have been seen in other captive collections such as massive paramyxovirus infections in snakes, ranavirus and herpes live virus in boxturtles and so forth... 

I personally lost about 3/4 of the caudates I had in quarantine at one point after aquiring some newly imported Paramesotrition species. I lost Cynops pyrrogaster, and Pachytriton ssp that were in quarantine near to the newly aquired Paramesotriton. A eventually got a couple of alcohol preserves specimens necropsied and the results were consistent with viral infections. 


Ed


----------



## Reef_Haven (Jan 19, 2011)

Setting aside ethics and conservation, since that is not what the initial post was about; what is the general consensus about shotgun treatments for these particular WC tincs?
Since the OP speculates they have a plethora of parasites and likely new unknown pathogens, it would indicate treatment, even without symptoms; would be the only safe way to go.
That seems a stretch to me, but I'm fairly new, so maybe other more experienced keepers can chime in.
I'm well aware of this thread. http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-health-disease-treatment/9555-regular-treatment-parasites.html
But I think WC may require special needs.
So, would quarantine, direct observation for any health problems, and several clean fecals be enough?


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

My comment about the treatment of the frogs refers to importers who do not treat or undertreat their imports. I would personally not buy frogs for which fecal specimens were not run and appropriate treatment given before they were released to the public.

That's my position. I just want to be clear that the discovery of pathogenic organisms in the frogs should be the work of the importer, not the frog-buying public.

Thanks, Richard.



Reef_Haven said:


> Setting aside ethics and conservation, since that is not what the initial post was about; what is the general consensus about shotgun treatments for these particular WC tincs?
> Since the OP speculates they have a plethora of parasites and likely new unknown pathogens, it would indicate treatment, even without symptoms; would be the only safe way to go.
> That seems a stretch to me, but I'm fairly new, so maybe other more experienced keepers can chime in.
> I'm well aware of this thread. http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-health-disease-treatment/9555-regular-treatment-parasites.html
> ...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

It depends what you are considering as shotgun treatments... For treating imports for chytrid is probably a good idea as mortality from this pathogen can occur before you get a positive test run and treatment is fairly easy and safe (depending on the drug used ten minutes a day for ten minutes is the maximal treatment time). 

If a frog has a real heavy parasite load just treating it could cause a significant enough die off to take the frog with it... or depending on the drug used, it may be easy enough to missdose the frog and not remove the parasites (dusting fruit flies is a good example of this) or maladaption syndrome can cause the frog to due from the treatment.... 

I've seen newly imported frogs die during treatments due to issues with the parasites (confirmed on necropsy)... in addition one drug doesn't get all parasites... so you would need to treat a newly imported animals multiple times a week to properly treat for all potential parasites. 

Parasite treatments should be done in conjunction with fecal tests and a vet...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> My comment about the treatment of the frogs refers to importers who do not treat or undertreat their imports. I would personally not buy frogs for which fecal specimens were not run and appropriate treatment given before they were released to the public.
> 
> That's my position. I just want to be clear that the discovery of pathogenic organisms in the frogs should be the work of the importer, not the frog-buying public.
> 
> Thanks, Richard.


 
A negative fecal test does not mean the frog is clean of parasites..


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

It's not recommended, then?



Ed said:


> A negative fecal test does not mean the frog is clean of parasites..


----------



## edwardsatc (Feb 17, 2004)

ReptilesEtcetera said:


> I one hundred percent agree with you richard and as for the other guy who wants controls and stuff email ne and I will sens you a copy of BAL the research done. Do you honestly think MY professor is stupid and wouldn't think about that stuff. I am on my phone or I would have written the whole report or scanned and pasted. The particular wolves your talking about are gone due to there habitat being gone. The habitat in new mexico where the habitat is still suitable however has been showing great promise. Now back to richard bud I agree a hundred percent with what your saying and I have held back 20 select pairs to breed. I needed to look at every tinc first hand and the only way to do that was to buy all of them.
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


Obviously, you completely failed to get my point ... population size and density vs. number of animals collected ... sinks, sources ...

As Ed has stated, the lizard data is really an apples and oranges argument. But since you feel so strongly that it supports your position, why not just post it here so we can all see it? Has it been published?

Off topic but warrants some comments:


ReptilesEtcetera said:


> The particular wolves your talking about are gone due to there habitat being gone.


Really? So, predator control (hunting and poisoning by ranchers) had nothing to do with it? Perhaps you should refresh your knowledge of historical wolf declines.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> The habitat in new mexico where the habitat is still suitable however has been showing great promise.


Again, you seem to be way off the mark. Despite reintroduction efforts (99 between 1998 and 2007), Mexican wolf populations have been declining for the past several years. Last year the count was 42, of which only 15 were residing in New Mexico.The number of breeding pairs is currently estimated at less than four. This is what you would call "great promise"?

I'll quit hijacking this thread now. Your ignorance and motives are clear to me.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> It's not recommended, then?


 
Richard you are reading ino it... a negative fecal test does not mean a frog is free of parasite(s). All it means is that none were present in that fecal. So a person could get a wild caught frog (or any other animal) and on quarantine discover that it is still infected. If people do not understand that, the importers etc will then get flak from the buyer about sick animals or lying about the fecal. 

I am not defending any sellers, breeders, resellers, importers, or exporters. I am simply clarifying an implicit message about who is responsible for fecals. In reality both parties should be responsible. 

Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> Why wouldn't you want to show-off your frogs to everyone?


Maybe because some people like to call in false reports to government agencies when they don't like someone else?


----------



## Reef_Haven (Jan 19, 2011)

O.K. Ed,
You would treat for chytrid even without any symptoms present. What other possible problems would you treat for even without symptoms?


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Ed,

It is my very strong preference not to buy frogs that are infected with parasites or bacterial or fungal infections. I do feel everyone that sells frogs should do all that they can do determine what pathogens they might be sending to other folk's collections. It's for the reason that wc animals can carry an array of pathogens that I personally don't feel it's worth the risk.

I am stating this as a preference, not an edict. Everyone makes up their own minds on these matters.

Take care, Richard.



Ed said:


> Richard you are reading ino it... a negative fecal test does not mean a frog is free of parasite(s). All it means is that none were present in that fecal. So a person could get a wild caught frog (or any other animal) and on quarantine discover that it is still infected. If people do not understand that, the importers etc will then get flak from the buyer about sick animals or lying about the fecal.
> 
> I am not defending any sellers, breeders, resellers, importers, or exporters. I am simply clarifying an implicit message about who is responsible for fecals. In reality both parties should be responsible.
> 
> Ed


----------



## Enlightened Rogue (Mar 21, 2006)

Pissing Contests « crackunit.com

John


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi John,

Awesome artwork an certainly a propo. Point taken.

Richard.



Enlightened Rogue said:


> Pissing Contests « crackunit.com
> 
> John


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Reef_Haven said:


> O.K. Ed,
> You would treat for chytrid even without any symptoms present. What other possible problems would you treat for even without symptoms?


 
Actually chytrid is the only thing and the reason is that by the time you see symptoms you are probably going to lose the frog. However if you keep the frog above 75 F, then it won't die from chytrid and if you can reliably do this then you should test before you treat. 

I would suggest fecals for any other pathogens before treating... and there are reasons for it.. for example, I suggest reviewing the literature on pinworms/oxyurids in species that ingest high fiber foods (and chitin is a high fiber food). Shotgun treatments have the potential to reduce the absorbtion and uptake of nutrients... 

Along the line of "parasite free" frogs, there are some other factors you may want to talk to your vet about or review some of the changes in idealogy.. one is that anurans infected with low or moderate levels of a parasite can experience little or no detrimental impact in captive conditions while there is a good body of anecdotal literature indicating that repeated treatment can be a significant negative stressor. 

see for example 
American Society of Parasitologists - Moderate Echinostoma trivolvis Infection Has No Effects on Physiology and Fitness-Related Traits of Larval Pickerel Frogs (Rana palustris) or little or no negative impact in captivity http://ufwildlife.ifas.ufl.edu/pdfs/Marr et al 2010 Coqui biocontrol.pdf

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

This is an area in which information and idealogy in the veterinary field are undergoing rapid change so I strongly suggest a monitoring program, and a discussion of the pros and cons with your vet. 

Ed


----------

