# Should the location of newly discovered species be hidden?



## thedude

I'm re-posting this from the other thread so people can actually find it and talk about it.

BBC News - Should the location of newly discovered species be hidden?

Definitely a good read, very eye opening.


----------



## heyduke

At this point I say yes. Scientists can exchange that info privately when needed. As far as publishing locale specifics I see little need for the general public to have access to this information. It kind of seems like a roadmap to extinction to me.


----------



## sjaakdaak

One of the important things in a description of a new taxon is the type locality. Without stating one, the description is practically worthless. I get the point of course, but I don't think it'd be anywhere near practical to rely on personal communication if needed. This kind of information keeps its validity and people are still likely to be scientifically interested in location data a hunderd years or more from now. I don't really think the scientist who published the description in the first place will be able to answer any questions by then...


----------



## markpulawski

I think there should be a data base open to the scientific community where the location should be posted but not available to the general public....I would say of you want to slip me the info, I'ld be cool with it..


----------



## Roadrunner

I brought this up in 95 on the Big Bend Nat Park Spring Survey. The first thing that stood out to me was River Road( a known locale of Grey Banded Kingsnakes). We were collecting data for all species and GPS coordinates w/ them and it was viewable by anyone visiting the park. Your not supposed to take ANYTHING from BBNP but there is a locale of kings in the hobby from there. It's not only new species that are sought.


----------



## JeremyHuff

This is a very sticky subject. As an arachnologist who has done a tremendous amount of fieldwork all over the world, with many of these trips targeting specific species, the locality data from papers and preserved specimens is invaluable. Especially when dealing with rare or difficult to find species. 

However, that said, I recently discovered a new genus and species of an arboreal tarantula that would be sought after in the pet trade. I am seriously considering being vague in the paper as to where they are found. The collection labels would have all the info and GPS coordinates, but your average collector won't have access to this info.

Several years ago my good friend, Rick West, was part of a team to go to India to try to rediscover Poecilotheria metallica. This is arguably the most beautiful tarantula in the world. Rick eventually found the first specimen seen in over 100years. Unfortunately, another member of the team quickly released the info to some German and French collectors and within a couple months they were smuggled out of India. That one species probably made the collectors over $100,000 easy. The other unfortunate thing is that the only way to collect them is to cut the tree down and split it with a machete, so precious habitat is destroyed at the same time.

A similar story happened to Rogerio Bertani at Bhutantan in Brazil. A German tarantula "researcher" visited Rogerio and looked at the live and preserved collections. He then took notes on localities and proceeded to go and collect thousands of tarantulas and "brown boxed" them back to Europe. Many of these shipment were lost or died. Acanthoscurria geniculata was one of the main prizes here. This individual was arrested on two separate occasions for doing this. To make things worse, many of Rogerio's future descriptions of new species were then published by another German arachnologist from these same smuggled animals

I think for 99.9% of the descriptions published, the organisms aren't flashy enough to warrant smuggling, but I wouldn't blame a taxonomist for keeping localities secret from the public of those organisms at serious risk.


----------



## fishman9809

If it took this long to discover the species, it means the species likely has a very small habitat or a very small numbers. Based on this knowledge, I'd definitely say yes, the location should be kept a secret.


----------



## Roadrunner

I've done LOTS of vegetation surveys. Isn't it possible to describe the type locality w/out giving out the locality? Description of habitat won't necessarily give away a location, although sometimes it does.



sjaakdaak said:


> One of the important things in a description of a new taxon is the type locality. Without stating one, the description is practically worthless. I get the point of course, but I don't think it'd be anywhere near practical to rely on personal communication if needed. This kind of information keeps its validity and people are still likely to be scientifically interested in location data a hunderd years or more from now. I don't really think the scientist who published the description in the first place will be able to answer any questions by then...


----------



## MonarchzMan

markpulawski said:


> I think there should be a data base open to the scientific community where the location should be posted but not available to the general public....I would say of you want to slip me the info, I'ld be cool with it..


The problem, however, is that not all in the scientific community are conservation minded, unfortunately.

It is a tough question, and something that we are ultimately responsible for. I have seen so many people here interested in the rare and new. When benedicta came out, everyone was wanting them. So how, as a hobby, do we have minimal impact on the animal? I think the answer is supporting organizations like UE. But not everyone does, and not everyone does with all species.

I've seen the same reactions with pumilio morphs, and they're not sustainably collected and bred like what UE does. Fortunately, pumilio is very resilient to such disturbances, but how many other dart frog species have the same story? I know of a few people who know where speciosus is. Fortunately, they haven't let the word slip because otherwise, we'd see this happen with that species.

I don't know what the ultimate solution is, but obviously, the status quo isn't working...


----------



## frogparty

Nobody is cutting down canopy forest to collect pumilio.
Im all for keeping exact locations secret to prevent over exploitation.
Noone says "I discovered the worlds biggest diamond deposit...right HERE" Go check it out for yourself


----------



## jacobi

Its all about the quick buck... Tragic. I was reading Sustaining life: how human health depends on biodiversity - Eric Chivian, Aaron Bernstein, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, IUCN--The World Conservation and wondering whether getting pharmaceutical companies involved purely for the money and political clout they have would help. If they can be convinced that there is profit to be made by keeping rainforests intact and sustainable harvesting of species... Thoughts?


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> It is a tough question, and something that we are ultimately responsible for. I have seen so many people here interested in the rare and new. When benedicta came out, everyone was wanting them. So how, as a hobby, do we have minimal impact on the animal? I think the answer is supporting organizations like UE. But not everyone does, and not everyone does with all species.


And species that have been illegally distributed into the hobby there is often a mentality of "well they are here now, so they should be legal" which does nothing but drive smuggling since once it is here it is "okay" to have.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

There has been a long history of this including it first getting wide spread attention after the publication of Snakes and Snake Hunting by Karl Kauffeld where the areas Kauffeld described were heavily hunted by amatures and collectors resulting in anecdotal claims of habitat destruction as well declining populations. More recently it regained a lot of notoriety with the extirpation at the type locality of Goniurosaurus luii and several incidents (much like Jeremy related). 
Protection of the habitat doesn't mean that a species or species won't be unsustainably exploited from the site unless there is some other driver to prevent it from occuring (such as sustainable harvest models) since total protectionism is often economically unfeasible unless there are huge bankrolls devoted to protecting the habitat or the animals. There are some good discussions on it in the literature and I recommend the following (both are free access)
PLoS Biology: Rarity Value and Species Extinction: The Anthropogenic Allee Effect 

http://max2.ese.u-psud.fr/epc/conservation/PDFs/AAEModel.pdf

Ed


----------



## thedude

jacobi said:


> Its all about the quick buck... Tragic. I was reading Sustaining life: how human health depends on biodiversity - Eric Chivian, Aaron Bernstein, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, IUCN--The World Conservation and wondering whether getting pharmaceutical companies involved purely for the money and political clout they have would help. If they can be convinced that there is profit to be made by keeping rainforests intact and sustainable harvesting of species... Thoughts?


That is definitely one of the big selling points on rainforest conservation. We don't even know everything that's out there, let alone tested much of it (very minute amount) to understand their chemical properties and what they can be used for. If Brazil saved all of their remaining rainforest and allowed collection and testing (sustainably of course) for pharmaceuticals, they would make WAY more money in the long run than slash and burn agriculture.

It's unfortunate but in order to help the planet you also need to help people and provide profit. Not that it's bad to help people and the economy, but it makes it difficult when conservation and science is already so underfunded.


----------



## frogparty

Agreed Adam. The other unfortunate thing is that 
1. Ethnobotany and the testing of living organisms for pharmaceuticals is way underfunded because people are more focused on purely synthetic drug discovery
2. Ethnobotanical research of indigenous plants in the past has yielded almost NO PROFIT for the country of origin or indigenous peoples..Read the excellent book "The Shamans Apprentice" for more on ethnobotany and drug discovery in the rainforest


----------



## Scott

Given a previous thread in this section - I'll warn now that the topic will be adhered to or infractions will be forthcoming.

I've seen nothing yet that would even hint at this - but I'd like to keep it that way.

s


----------



## thedude

frogparty said:


> Agreed Adam. The other unfortunate thing is that
> 1. Ethnobotany and the testing of living organisms for pharmaceuticals is way underfunded because people are more focused on purely synthetic drug discovery
> 2. Ethnobotanical research of indigenous plants in the past has yielded almost NO PROFIT for the country of origin or indigenous peoples..Read the excellent book "The Shamans Apprentice" for more on ethnobotany and drug discovery in the rainforest


I should add that the companies doing the testing/discovering would also have to not be incredibly greedy  Thanks I will check that out.


----------



## frogparty

You should, I think youll really enjoy it. Its right up the alley of what youre talking about


----------



## MonarchzMan

thedude said:


> That is definitely one of the big selling points on rainforest conservation. We don't even know everything that's out there, let alone tested much of it (very minute amount) to understand their chemical properties and what they can be used for. If Brazil saved all of their remaining rainforest and allowed collection and testing (sustainably of course) for pharmaceuticals, they would make WAY more money in the long run than slash and burn agriculture.
> 
> It's unfortunate but in order to help the planet you also need to help people and provide profit. Not that it's bad to help people and the economy, but it makes it difficult when conservation and science is already so underfunded.


Fortunately, I think that there is a green revolution going on, especially in these developing countries. Many governments are realizing that there is greater value in forests being up rather than cut down. There is more and more research going on that shows the benefits to biodiversity, and the profit for maintaining biodiversity. Countries are quickly seeing that rich tourists want to travel to these "wild" areas to see the plants and animals there. The only problem is that this green revolution is not happening fast enough.


----------



## Ed

thedude said:


> That is definitely one of the big selling points on rainforest conservation. We don't even know everything that's out there, let alone tested much of it (very minute amount) to understand their chemical properties and what they can be used for. If Brazil saved all of their remaining rainforest and allowed collection and testing (sustainably of course) for pharmaceuticals, they would make WAY more money in the long run than slash and burn agriculture.
> 
> It's unfortunate but in order to help the planet you also need to help people and provide profit. Not that it's bad to help people and the economy, but it makes it difficult when conservation and science is already so underfunded.


One example of why countries with rainforests are hesitant to allow bioprospecting is one near to the heart of the dendrobatid community.. it involves a chemical known as epidobatine and the frog from which it was extracted. 
The result of that battle are a number of agreements and treaties that many countries (but not the US) have joined.... this is one of the reasons why countries impose so many hurdles to the research by some of those countrie (like the US). Country Profiles 

Ed


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> Fortunately, I think that there is a green revolution going on, especially in these developing countries. Many governments are realizing that there is greater value in forests being up rather than cut down. There is more and more research going on that shows the benefits to biodiversity, and the profit for maintaining biodiversity. Countries are quickly seeing that rich tourists want to travel to these "wild" areas to see the plants and animals there. The only problem is that this green revolution is not happening fast enough.


 
Some of the modeling used by zoological institutions predicts that global populations should stabilize in the next 100 to 200 years after which ecosystems should begin to recover. 

Ed


----------



## EricM

It wasn't long after captivus was rediscovered that the frogs were offered at show X overseas, and for high dollars, I was offered them twice in a year accompanied by intentions of false CITES papers to get them in the US, much like putting a bow on a pig and exporting it as a horse with a free ride to the clink.

Information is so fluid with technology it doesn't take any digging to find out site data anymore. This is why we have El Dorado pumilio instead of sibubi morph or other location. Once the location is public the cash cow gets slaughtered, and like previously mentioned the dollar drives many intentions.

Even if they keep the locations classified it will just be the really wealthy that can bribe for it. Hard dilemma and the best we can do as a hobby is shun the smuggled stuff, hard to suppress the lust for new frogs we can flaunt for attention.

Lots of worm cans to open in this aisle.
ERic


----------



## thedude

MonarchzMan said:


> Fortunately, I think that there is a green revolution going on, especially in these developing countries. Many governments are realizing that there is greater value in forests being up rather than cut down. There is more and more research going on that shows the benefits to biodiversity, and the profit for maintaining biodiversity. Countries are quickly seeing that rich tourists want to travel to these "wild" areas to see the plants and animals there. The only problem is that this green revolution is not happening fast enough.


I agree on all accounts except there are still plenty of countries that still aren't seeing the benefit. Or they are dismissing that benefit for dams (China, Brasil) and various other things. If only everyone was as quick to catch on as Costa Rica. But again, I agree that it is definitely moving in that direction. Part of the problem like I said before though, is it has to have those three P's. As long as western civilizations are willing to pay for sustainable agriculture and eco-tourism it'll continue. But I wonder what will happen if it slows? I imagine they would go back to short term gain. If you look at history in our country, we don't exactly learn from past environmental mistakes. Or when new members of congress are elected, they don't care till it hurts their wallet.



Ed said:


> One example of why countries with rainforests are hesitant to allow bioprospecting is one near to the heart of the dendrobatid community.. it involves a chemical known as epidobatine and the frog from which it was extracted.
> The result of that battle are a number of agreements and treaties that many countries (but not the US) have joined.... this is one of the reasons why countries impose so many hurdles to the research by some of those countrie (like the US). Country Profiles
> 
> Ed


Yes I am aware of it. Ecuador seems to get screwed a lot with environmental problems. I take it everyone's heard about the lovely oil spills (yes, plural) they have been batteling for decades? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/americas/10chevron.html



EricM said:


> It wasn't long after captivus was rediscovered that the frogs were offered at show X overseas, and for high dollars, I was offered them twice in a year accompanied by intentions of false CITES papers to get them in the US, much like putting a bow on a pig and exporting it as a horse with a free ride to the clink.
> 
> Information is so fluid with technology it doesn't take any digging to find out site data anymore. This is why we have El Dorado pumilio instead of sibubi morph or other location. Once the location is public the cash cow gets slaughtered, and like previously mentioned the dollar drives many intentions.
> 
> Even if they keep the locations classified it will just be the really wealthy that can bribe for it. Hard dilemma and the best we can do as a hobby is shun the smuggled stuff, hard to suppress the lust for new frogs we can flaunt for attention.
> 
> Lots of worm cans to open in this aisle.
> ERic


Very well said Eric. It amazes and baffles me how CITES permits can exist for a species that has never left its country of origin legally. You would think it would be very easy for them to notice something like that...

It's really unfortunate when smuggled origin frogs come in that undercut the great work that is done by companies like UE, INIBICO, WIKIRI, etc. We've seen it plenty over the last few years and the frogs it happens with are even ones where it's obvious it's happening. But of course bringing in some new frogs from Europe brings in quite a bit of money, and people either don't know it's a problem to purchase them, or don't care because they have to have the latest thing.


----------



## heyduke

Ed said:


> And species that have been illegally distributed into the hobby there is often a mentality of "well they are here now, so they should be legal" which does nothing but drive smuggling since once it is here it is "okay" to have....
> 
> Ed


I completely agree with this. There are frogs in the hobby that are now legal in the US that have come as European imports. Yet these were never legally taken from the wild to begin with. I feel that sends a mixed message about what this hobby is / should be about.

Would I love to have Vanzolini? Yes, but I will hold out for a UE line. This might not happen for quite sometime but I feel it's worth the wait.

Please no one take this the wrong way or feel that I'm being pious or judgemental. It's a choice that I have made for myself and am certainly not criticizing those who own legal animals.


----------



## MonarchzMan

thedude said:


> I agree on all accounts except there are still plenty of countries that still aren't seeing the benefit. Or they are dismissing that benefit for dams (China, Brasil) and various other things. If only everyone was as quick to catch on as Costa Rica. But again, I agree that it is definitely moving in that direction. Part of the problem like I said before though, is it has to have those three P's. As long as western civilizations are willing to pay for sustainable agriculture and eco-tourism it'll continue. But I wonder what will happen if it slows? I imagine they would go back to short term gain. If you look at history in our country, we don't exactly learn from past environmental mistakes. Or when new members of congress are elected, they don't care till it hurts their wallet.


It really goes beyond simple environmental mistakes, but is quite a bit of politics. I would recommend reading (while we're recommending books) Breakfast of Biodiversity by John Vandemeer. It talks quite a bit about the political ecology that promotes rainforest destruction. He actually takes a very critical view of Costa Rica and largely says how its environmental claim to fame is a bit overrated. I agree with him on some points, but certainly not all. He makes some very good points about how rainforest destruction isn't simply one cause and one thing to fix, and often by trying to fix one thing, you can cause problems that actually promote more rainforest destruction.

Oh, and you'll never eat bananas again


----------



## thedude

heyduke said:


> I completely agree with this. There are frogs in the hobby that are now legal in the US that have come as European imports. Yet these were never legally taken from the wild to begin with. I feel that sends a mixed message about what this hobby is / should be about.
> 
> Would I love to have Vanzolini? Yes, but I will hold out for a UE line. This might not happen for quite sometime but I feel it's worth the wait.
> 
> Please no one take this the wrong way or feel that I'm being pious or judgemental. It's a choice that I have made for myself and am certainly not criticizing those who own legal animals.


Ya I'm going to be getting UE line as well. You know they are available right? They are much less common than the Euro line because by the time they had them available most people that wanted vanzos already had the Euro line. Which is exactly what I was talking about before, it basically pulls the chair out from under them  Kinda sucks when there is a sustainable, site specific, completely legal line of frog, and a frog of questionable origins, and the latter is more common.



MonarchzMan said:


> It really goes beyond simple environmental mistakes, but is quite a bit of politics. I would recommend reading (while we're recommending books) Breakfast of Biodiversity by John Vandemeer. It talks quite a bit about the political ecology that promotes rainforest destruction. He actually takes a very critical view of Costa Rica and largely says how its environmental claim to fame is a bit overrated. I agree with him on some points, but certainly not all. He makes some very good points about how rainforest destruction isn't simply one cause and one thing to fix, and often by trying to fix one thing, you can cause problems that actually promote more rainforest destruction.
> 
> Oh, and you'll never eat bananas again


My book list is forever long  But I'll add it in there. Have you heard of the pathogen that took out the original domestic banana? I believe it was in the 50's or 60's but it's been a while since I read about this. Anyway it was due to very low variation in this line basically, and the same thing is happening with the bananas we eat now, even the same pathogen. Cause we didn't learn  So I may not have a choice anyway! I'll have to find the article later.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Yes, there are a number of fungal pathogens that are attacking banana, which have resulted in a ton of pesticides being used. The problem with bananas is that they're all essentially clones of one another. Every single one. Bananas we typically eat do not produce seeds, so they are reproduced by vegetative divisions. So, you can imagine what happens when a disease comes into a population of clones...

But BoB doesn't actually deal with any of that. It deals with the politics behind banana companies cutting down forest and how it has developed into a big loop to perpetuate the process. Fortunately, BoB is a short book, so something that you could read in a few days.


----------



## sjaakdaak

frogparty said:


> Agreed Adam. The other unfortunate thing is that
> 1. Ethnobotany and the testing of living organisms for pharmaceuticals is way underfunded because people are more focused on purely synthetic drug discovery
> 2. Ethnobotanical research of indigenous plants in the past has yielded almost NO PROFIT for the country of origin or indigenous peoples..Read the excellent book "The Shamans Apprentice" for more on ethnobotany and drug discovery in the rainforest


I'm afraid that you are overestimating the benefits of ethnobotany. I know a few botanists who thought it would be a good idea to take locals with them on an expedition. They had very hight expectations of it, but it turned out that the local specialists were, at best, only able to determine plants to the family level. Needless to say that to people who are naturally sceptic, it would appear that there simply IS no benefit or profit to be yielded.


----------



## MPepper

This thread highlights the complexities that are involved in a situation that has on the surface a simple solution. Some interesting perspectives from Jeremy, Ed and Eric that everyone should really consider.

There were a few frogs left out of the Ranitomeya revision completely (not species, just populations), not even pictures published because of fears had of potential negative impact on wild populations. I really think it is a shame because in the end the result is a wonderful piece of scientific work that is (sadly) not as complete as could have been. The reality is, in this day and age, and as Brown et al. noted in the revision, scientists when describing commercially valuable species need to at least take into consideration the potential impact publication of precise locality info might have on the long term integrity of the population and or the species. 

Though smuggling is not the biggest threat to most amphibians, it is the threat that we as a hobbyist community can most easily mitigate by choosing to buy CB and from frogs with known legal origins.


----------



## thedude

Just to clarify, apparently I read something wrong somewhere because Understory isn't offering vanzolinii yet. My mistake! Just gotta keep on waiting  




MonarchzMan said:


> Yes, there are a number of fungal pathogens that are attacking banana, which have resulted in a ton of pesticides being used. The problem with bananas is that they're all essentially clones of one another. Every single one. Bananas we typically eat do not produce seeds, so they are reproduced by vegetative divisions. So, you can imagine what happens when a disease comes into a population of clones...
> 
> But BoB doesn't actually deal with any of that. It deals with the politics behind banana companies cutting down forest and how it has developed into a big loop to perpetuate the process. Fortunately, BoB is a short book, so something that you could read in a few days.


Ya I figured it wasn't about that, just replying to you saying I wouldn't want to eat one ever again. But it does sound interesting and I'll check it out. Coffee was already ruined for me, might as well add bananas  



sjaakdaak said:


> I'm afraid that you are overestimating the benefits of ethnobotany. I know a few botanists who thought it would be a good idea to take locals with them on an expedition. They had very hight expectations of it, but it turned out that the local specialists were, at best, only able to determine plants to the family level. Needless to say that to people who are naturally sceptic, it would appear that there simply IS no benefit or profit to be yielded.


That's a pretty big assumption based on one event that didn't go well. Not only that, but many of the drugs we have used over the years have come from ethnobotany, and I don't see why that wouldn't continue into the future. The opportunity just needs to be there, as well as the money (which it is since we are talking about huge companies).


----------



## frogparty

sjaakdaak said:


> I'm afraid that you are overestimating the benefits of ethnobotany. I know a few botanists who thought it would be a good idea to take locals with them on an expedition. They had very hight expectations of it, but it turned out that the local specialists were, at best, only able to determine plants to the family level. Needless to say that to people who are naturally sceptic, it would appear that there simply IS no benefit or profit to be yielded.


CURARE has yielded amazing medications used in heart surgery never matched by synthetics
Psilocybin was used as a model for the beta blocker visken and is now in study as the worlds most effective treatment for cluster headaches...otherwise untreatable. 

Two examples of amazing medicines taken from indigenous peoples and discovered through ethnobotany


----------



## sjaakdaak

Point taken. 

Back on-topic: I was pretty surprised by the amount of cases mentioned here which involved smugglers using first-hand information obtained from biologists. One more reason to be very careful with whom you buy your animals from. I'd very much hate the idea of having contributed to the demise of a population simply because I like putting animals in glass cases.


----------



## winstonamc

sjaakdaak said:


> They had very hight expectations of it, but it turned out that the local specialists were, at best, only able to determine plants to the family level.


Not to be rude, but I think this is a specious grounds for supporting your claim. What you might take as fundamental, natural categories (scientific classifications of species etc) are still cultural categories, it's just that we have a strong correspondence to scientific bases for our categories. The term from anthro is folk ontology.

Would you say that local specialists are ignorant / failing the expectations of the illumined men of science because they group a set of plants according to their ability to ease a particular ailment rather than genetic affinities which are not particularly helpful if you are looking to nature for solutions to medical issues or for design solutions?

If they think that an orchid they use for tooth aches and a philodendron they use for the same are of the same "family", they're as right for doing so as you are and specialists should change the way they look at they tackle the problem accordingly. 
What would be helpful about finding random medical boons in nature by correcting the native specialists to replace the orchid with a colocasia etc?


----------



## winstonamc

guess I was writing that while you were responding. Sorry


----------



## sjaakdaak

And again, I stand corrected  My way of seeing the world and its inhabitant species as a result of evolutionary processes is, of course, no better than that of a man succesfully trying to find anything that will help him get rid of a toothache. I'd probably succumb to a simple ilness while trying to gain knowledge basically only of interest to me while they, with a very different view on the world they live in, would have no physical trouble at all.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

I am all for two things, 1. Keeping the location of these new species a secret, at least till it can be determined has a large enough population to sustain collecting for the pet trade. Personally I'm not sure we need new wild frogs in the hobby right now. 2. Harsh harsh harsh punishments for smugglers. I know some countries are stricter than others. It seems like any animal related offense in this country, whether it be smuggling or shooting a bald eagle just brings a simple slap on the wrist. Absolutely no deterrent at all.

Really the real issue is money. Smugglers come in and are looking for a certain animal and offer the natives more money than they've ever seen in their life to take them to the location where this animal is located. We've got to remember the natives are for the most part living day to day. You don't fish or hunt today, you don't eat today. So what we must do is educate the natives. Find them a way to make a living so they don't destroy populations of animals, so they don't cut down every tree in the forest for grazing or farming land. They are uneducated, they have no clue what conservation is, why would they? They only take what they need for today. They don't over harvest anything. But the lure of money is too powerful. I remember a Dr. Nibbish Chao, who was a prof at a university in Santarem, Brazil, he came to speak at our cichlid club once. He talked about teaching the native Brazilians to harvest cardinal tetras for the pet trade. What he emphasized was not catching in the same area year after year and wiping out those populations. He taught them the practice of sustainable harvest. Can it be done with frogs??


----------



## jacobi

That's a great idea. Plus, it's a winning situation for the natives since they will be able to harvest and be paid over many years, rather than paid till the smugglers have their fill... 

Jake


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Exactly Jake, don't you think the native tribes would be on board if they could be taught sustainable harvest and they could make money for 20 years instead of just once?


----------



## MonarchzMan

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> I am all for two things, 1. Keeping the location of these new species a secret, at least till it can be determined has a large enough population to sustain collecting for the pet trade. Personally I'm not sure we need new wild frogs in the hobby right now. 2. Harsh harsh harsh punishments for smugglers. I know some countries are stricter than others. It seems like any animal related offense in this country, whether it be smuggling or shooting a bald eagle just brings a simple slap on the wrist. Absolutely no deterrent at all.


The biggest problem is that there are very harsh punishments for smugglers (jail time and thousands in fines, generally), but smugglers are very good at avoiding detection. I mean, look at the Lizard King guy (I can't remember his name) that was arrested this last year. It's been known that he's had a hand in a lot of smuggling, but it has been difficult, for a variety of reasons to actually catch him.



> Really the real issue is money. Smugglers come in and are looking for a certain animal and offer the natives more money than they've ever seen in their life to take them to the location where this animal is located. We've got to remember the natives are for the most part living day to day. You don't fish or hunt today, you don't eat today. So what we must do is educate the natives. Find them a way to make a living so they don't destroy populations of animals, so they don't cut down every tree in the forest for grazing or farming land. They are uneducated, they have no clue what conservation is, why would they? They only take what they need for today. They don't over harvest anything. But the lure of money is too powerful. I remember a Dr. Nibbish Chao, who was a prof at a university in Santarem, Brazil, he came to speak at our cichlid club once. He talked about teaching the native Brazilians to harvest cardinal tetras for the pet trade. What he emphasized was not catching in the same area year after year and wiping out those populations. He taught them the practice of sustainable harvest. Can it be done with frogs??


I agree that education of locals is important, but that is much easier said than done. What will ultimately happen is that smugglers will find people who do not know about conservation should a local village be taught it. I think that there should be equally harsh fines/jail time for anyone with illegal animals, who are the people driving the demand for these animals and giving reason to the smugglers to go find them.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

MonarchzMan said:


> The biggest problem is that there are very harsh punishments for smugglers (jail time and thousands in fines, generally), but smugglers are very good at avoiding detection. I mean, look at the Lizard King guy (I can't remember his name) that was arrested this last year. It's been known that he's had a hand in a lot of smuggling, but it has been difficult, for a variety of reasons to actually catch him.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that education of locals is important, but that is much easier said than done. What will ultimately happen is that smugglers will find people who do not know about conservation should a local village be taught it. I think that there should be equally harsh fines/jail time for anyone with illegal animals, who are the people driving the demand for these animals and giving reason to the smugglers to go find them.


You're right JP. If you can take away the market and therefore the money for smuggled frogs there is no financial incentive to smuggle them and that would effectively end the whole operation. However that means some sort of government interference with who is keeping what species. If it means no more smuggling then I would gladly open the door when USFW or whoever comes knocking. Check it out for yourself, Mr. USFW agent man, I've got nothing to hide. 
I remember reading about the Lizard King guy last year, and hearing various stories about people stopped coming into this country with 100 snakes hidden on them. I always wonder how they do it.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Well, the easiest solution would likely be to target the shows (and really, online sales areas). If people knew that there was a $5,000 fine (or whatever) and possible jail time for owning a casti, for example, then I'd bet castis wouldn't be available in the hobby anymore, especially if it was even moderately enforced. I sure wouldn't take that risk for a frog, even if it was a rare one.

It is important to note that those dealing with black market animals likely do so knowingly, so it wouldn't necessarily completely stop it, but if you can make the risk greater than the reward, it'd likely stem some of the demand.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

I would hope that most moral, ethical froggers wouldn't want castis just knowing that they are illegal. I don't know that anyone is gonna post castis on their website and offer them for sale, it's probably more a word of mouth thing. I've been going to reptile show for twenty years plus, I've never seen any law enforcement at any show. At least not in uniform. I'd like to see it though, just to send a message. Wouldn't have to be at every show, just enough to show up randomly and scare some people.


----------



## jacobi

Motherfu..... I just typed out a freakin essay on my phone and tapatalk crashed! So pardon the spelling and grammar errors now I'm typing quickly.

More government involvement is not a good idea. According to the national geographic article on the subject of illegal wildlife trade Asia's Wildlife Trade — National Geographic Magazine there are about FIVE law enforcement officers devoted to that specific area. Whether that number is completely accurate I dont know, but the ridiculously low number shows the governments attitude toward spending time, money and other resources on training law enforcement officials in this regard... And most policing agencies dont have frogs and birds on a high priority list, when faced with terrorists and drug smugglers, running bombs and weapons into the country. The government is more likely to ban dart frogs outright.

Furthermore, do you really want police officers to be inspecting your newly purchase frogs, when the cant tell the difference between oophaga sp. and ranitomaya sp? They see a small red coloured frog. How many legally purchased frogs will die in a closet somewhere while you file the necessary paperwork proving legal ownership?

Self policing by the purchasers and breeders is necessary, and needs to be further addressed by those witth more knowledge and experience than me.

Jake


----------



## MonarchzMan

Well, it wouldn't necessarily be more government involvement, just stricter penalties and random visits to sites where sales occur. There is a decent amount of literature about risk/rewards and where breaking points are. A bunch of literature exists on looking at filling out surveys, for example, and what sort of encouragement is necessary ($5 vs. $20, for example) to have people fill out surveys. The same sort of concept could be done in reverse. What is the minimum fine that would dissuade people from purchasing illegal animals? What is the minimum number of random searches at shows or wherever that are necessary to dissuade people from taking that risk? I can guarantee that that is how USFWS approaches wildlife smuggling seizures. Just enough to scare people into not risking it.

It does work. Look at the number of law enforcement officers there are for the general populace. There are very few people commonly break the law because of the perception that they'll be caught, when the reality is that they likely won't. But there are enough officers out there doing random catches that it'll keep people in line.


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> Well, it wouldn't necessarily be more government involvement, just stricter penalties and random visits to sites where sales occur. .


I don't think the penalities need to be stricter see for example


> Felony criminal sanctions are provided for violations involving imports or exports, or violations of a commercial nature in which the value of the wildlife is in excess of $350. A misdemeanor violation was established, with a fine of up to $10,000 and imprisonment of up to 1 year, or both. Civil penalties up to $10,000 were provided. However, the Criminal Fines Improvement Act of 1987 increased the fines under the Lacey Act for misdemeanors to a maximum of $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for organizations. Maximum fines for felonies were increased to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for organizations. Rewards are authorized for information leading to arrests, criminal convictions, civil penalties, or the forfeitures of property, and for payment of costs of temporary care for fish, wildlife, or plants regarding a civil or criminal proceeding. Strict liability is established for forfeiture of illegal fish, wildlife or plants, and marking requirements for shipments of fish and wildlife must conform to modern commercial practices.


from Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 

Ed


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> Furthermore, do you really want police officers to be inspecting your newly purchase frogs, when the cant tell the difference between oophaga sp. and ranitomaya sp? They see a small red coloured frog. How many legally purchased frogs will die in a closet somewhere while you file the necessary paperwork proving legal ownership?


This isn't a likely scenario anymore as typically they end up at an institution that has experience in caring for those animals... It also assumes that the judge who is hearing the trial, doesn't release them to the institution (since you could recover the value as a result of the trial), however, the Lacey Act has provisions for the institution to recover the costs for the care during their time while legality is proven and this can end up being part of the fees that a person can end being responsible to pay for their animals before they can get them back.. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> Well, the easiest solution would likely be to target the shows (and really, online sales areas). If people knew that there was a $5,000 fine (or whatever) and possible jail time for owning a casti, for example, then I'd bet castis wouldn't be available in the hobby anymore, especially if it was even moderately enforced. I sure wouldn't take that risk for a frog, even if it was a rare one.
> 
> It is important to note that those dealing with black market animals likely do so knowingly, so it wouldn't necessarily completely stop it, but if you can make the risk greater than the reward, it'd likely stem some of the demand.


It hasn't stopped people from owning them when the potential fine could be $100,000 and a year in jail not including legal fees.. This topic gets rehashed every few years and yet they are still around (they are in some people's tag lines).. I even posted the information I got directly from USF&W on castinoticus back in 2005 see http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/wanted/71187-adelphobates-castaneoticus-4.html#post624799 

Ed


----------



## jacobi

Ed said:


> This isn't a likely scenario anymore as typically they end up at an institution that has experience in caring for those animals... It also assumes that the judge who is hearing the trial, doesn't release them to the institution (since you could recover the value as a result of the trial), however, the Lacey Act has provisions for the institution to recover the costs for the care during their time while legality is proven and this can end up being part of the fees that a person can end being responsible to pay for their animals before they can get them back..
> 
> Ed


I explained it a little better first time around before tapatalk ate it. Referring to reptile expos, I doubt USFWS have enough qualified officers able to distinguish between various species to the extent that they would be able to identify the various species being sold as illegal. I imagine several confiscations of legal animals would have people in an uproar, and possibly take the sale of animals underground. 

Jake


----------



## jacobi

I'm sorry. My phone is acting retarded. Posted that before I was finished. I'm going to wait till I have access to a computer to post more. One last comment.

It isn't a likely scenario, the death of wrongly confiscated animals, but it COULD theoretically happen. All kinds of strange things happen when it comes to laws. Look at the execution of people wrongly convicted of crimes who were exonerated after their deaths. Its rare, but it happens. 

I'm not saying we don't need these laws. I'm saying that in any kind of world slightly more ideal than this one, breeders and sellers would band together to educate and prevent... but now that I'm thinking about it, I've seen how people act on this forum merely in conversation so I guess its just a pipe dream. 

Jake


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Jake, It sounds like you're using the modern equivalent of a two tin cans and a string lol. Sorry technology isn't working for you today, but I think I know where you're going with your thoughts. To a certain extant the hobby already is and will continue to self police. However while 95% of the hobby would probably be ok with this we have already observed the fringe element on this board. Sure those people would be shunned, and quite possibly be turned in by ethical froggers. It doesn't seem like that's much of a threat as they would still hang around on the fringes of the hobby. By the time you reach that point the damage would already have been done. Meaning to get that far the frogs would already be smuggled in and likely more than a few sold before getting caught. Apparently the fines and jail time aren't enough of a deterrent to keep people from smuggling animals because people are still smuggling animals. Now if that's not a deterrent you know what is? A higher chance of getting caught. I'm sure there is a shortage of USF&W agents, I'm sure like every other government agency there aren't enough agents to go around so one way to help prevent illegal frogs at shows is to have USF&W show up randomly and unannounced at shows. Think about it, you're driving 10 miles over the speed limit till you see a cop up ahead, what do you do? Just about everyone slows down to the speed limit. It's a deterrent. I understand where you are coming from regarding the frog's care should it be confiscated. Yes a lot of hassle and time and worry to get your legal frogs back. Truth be told, I've never heard of anyone having legal animals getting confiscated. It may happen, I've just never heard of it. Has anyone heard of legal animals being confiscated by mistake? Just curious. 
Now I'm going back to bed, cause it's just too damn early.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ed said:


> It hasn't stopped people from owning them when the potential fine could be $100,000 and a year in jail not including legal fees.. This topic gets rehashed every few years and yet they are still around (they are in some people's tag lines).. I even posted the information I got directly from USF&W on castinoticus back in 2005 see http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/wanted/71187-adelphobates-castaneoticus-4.html#post624799
> 
> Ed


Then it would get to my other point of there needing to be more enforcement. I can't say that I've ever heard of USFWS seizing a collection because it had illegal animals in it. If it does happen, it doesn't happen very frequently, so the risk appears to be worth it.



jacobi said:


> I explained it a little better first time around before tapatalk ate it. Referring to reptile expos, I doubt USFWS have enough qualified officers able to distinguish between various species to the extent that they would be able to identify the various species being sold as illegal. I imagine several confiscations of legal animals would have people in an uproar, and possibly take the sale of animals underground.


As far as I know, USFWS will seize a collection, and if they cannot tell for certain if there are illegal animals in it, they will contract an expert to come in and check. I know the bird professor I've worked with in the past has examined USFWS seizures to see if illegal bird feathers were in the products.


----------



## jacobi

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> Jake, It sounds like you're using the modern equivalent of a two tin cans and a string lol.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm temporarily stuck in a basement with 5% cellphone service, my phone has been dropped so many times it resembles a Klingon's face more than a Samsung, sometimes decides to turn off if I look at it wrong, and the only computer I have access to is running Windows 95... Tin cans would be an improvement but they arent dendroboard compatible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MonarchzMan said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I know, USFWS will seize a collection, and if they cannot tell for certain if there are illegal animals in it, they will contract an expert to come in and check. I know the bird professor I've worked with in the past has examined USFWS seizures to see if illegal bird feathers were in the products.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats exactly my point. We arent talking about the seizure of animals that were discovered by customs, or a collection that was seized with prior knowledge of its seizure based on knowledge of illegal activities. These people also have access to experts and usually have transportation/storage facilities, and/or the phone numbers of experts who will give them advice on how best to deal with the animals. We ar talking about being able to distinguish between species of frog that can look very similar to the untrained or unknowledgable eye, swapping hands for (the most part) cash at a high rate, in a room filled with buyers and sellers all walking arounf with animals. And the vendors would have to arrive hours, or days before hand for officers to check the animals they plan on selling.... How many privately bred animals come with papers that are possible to easily forge? And if someone is selling (cant think of a species offhand) a species that is illegal to take out of its country of origin, then that species is not necessarily illegal to own in the US.
> Now I am playing devils advocate, kind of, because I dont think the extra involvement by government agencies would do more good than harm. As Ed pointed out above, there are already huge fines in place yet they are ignored. Threat of punishment or discovery is not always useful. As I think Rusty pointed out above, people slow down when they see a cop. BUT THEY WERE ALREADY SPEEDING. For the most part, law enforcement has its hands tied legally when it comes to the law. THey can only do something after the fact, they are not a deterrent, as shown by the huge amount of criminal activities we hear about on a daily basis via the media. They can only arrest or prosecute once the act has occurred.
> Perhaps a better idea would be for the reptile expo organisers to do the policing themselves, perhaps in conjunction with USFWS. The organisers arent bound by the same limitatons law enforcement has, and the threat of not being able to vend at an expo would probably bring many sellers to heel. Thoughts?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## heyduke

I started a thread that kinda goes with this one but didn't want to hijack

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80587


----------



## asid61

Well, what I have never gotten is how the pet trade affects this at all.
How many people own a tarantula? How many of those people have $10,000 to spend on one?
I guess in the case of poison darts, because of their color, more people would buy one.
But the majority of species is not in danger from pet collection, IMO.


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> Thats exactly my point. We arent talking about the seizure of animals that were discovered by customs, or a collection that was seized with prior knowledge of its seizure based on knowledge of illegal activities. These people also have access to experts and usually have transportation/storage facilities, and/or the phone numbers of experts who will give them advice on how best to deal with the animals.


I've been the expert in some of those cases.... 



jacobi said:


> How many privately bred animals come with papers that are possible to easily forge? And if someone is selling (cant think of a species offhand) a species that is illegal to take out of its country of origin, then that species is not necessarily illegal to own in the US.


I've been at shows where USF&W has been walking around, I've been to shows where the USDA was walking around and I've been to shows where PA Fish and Boat officers were walking around.... Typically they go to the shows with specific species in mind and often one or more vendors in mind.. 



jacobi said:


> THey can only do something after the fact, they are not a deterrent, as shown by the huge amount of criminal activities we hear about on a daily basis via the media. They can only arrest or prosecute once the act has occurred.


Conspiracy to commit an illegal act is in and of itself illegal.. And depending who and what is involved there is the potential for racketeering. 



jacobi said:


> Perhaps a better idea would be for the reptile expo organisers to do the policing themselves, perhaps in conjunction with USFWS. The organisers arent bound by the same limitatons law enforcement has, and the threat of not being able to vend at an expo would probably bring many sellers to heel. Thoughts?


Some do.. for example at IAD, people would try to police the vendors to make sure that there were no illegal animals (castinoticus for example were not allowed) but this did not stop people from violating the rules for the venue and conduct sales in thier rooms or in the parking lot. Wild caught animals were also not allowed for sale but that didn't stop some vendors from trying to sell some passed off as cb. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> Then it would get to my other point of there needing to be more enforcement. I can't say that I've ever heard of USFWS seizing a collection because it had illegal animals in it. If it does happen, it doesn't happen very frequently, so the risk appears to be worth it.


The seizures rarely make the news unless there is something very high profile associated with it, like when a tiger was removed from a apartment in Philadelphia. Those who were busted often want it to stay quiet as many will assume that the authorities would have gotten them to roll over to mitigate thier sentence. 



jacobi said:


> As far as I know, USFWS will seize a collection, and if they cannot tell for certain if there are illegal animals in it, they will contract an expert to come in and check. I know the bird professor I've worked with in the past has examined USFWS seizures to see if illegal bird feathers were in the products.


I've been to seizures where I was one of the experts identifying the animals involved and local regulations can be more of an issue than federal regulations (for example see The 'Real' Snakes Of Rnc Set Free - Philly.com). I had to correct the identification of several of the animals that was made during that seizure. The reason there were heat issues with the animals is because the local police department shut off the AC the guy had before taking the animals to the zoo. The local PD wasn't happen when I told them that virtually everything on the bus was legal. 

Ed


----------



## jacobi

Ed, do they ever go to shows on the lookout for random species or do they usually have specific ones in mind? And do they go with experts or use photos? Just curious...

Jake


----------



## JeremyHuff

I have heard of NY officials going to Hamburg and getting business cards of people living in NY and making sure them don't have illegal species. A few shows back it was actually announced that undercover NY police had entered the show. I assume since it was in PA, the NY guys had to make themselves be known.


----------



## jacobi

JeremyHuff said:


> I have heard of NY officials going to Hamburg and getting business cards of people living in NY and making sure them don't have illegal species. A few shows back it was actually announced that undercover NY police had entered the show. I assume since it was in PA, the NY guys had to make themselves be known.


Thats a little strange.... I wonder how they had jurisdiction. They would have to prove ownership of the animals in NY. Ok. I guess if that's the way they want to play it... shrug.

I've been to expo's with police in attendance as well. I was chatting to one of them, he told me they were there to prevent pickpockets and thieves. All those people brushing up against each other, $1000 snakes sitting out in the open... Anyway. off topic. Sorry.

Jake


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

JeremyHuff said:


> I have heard of NY officials going to Hamburg and getting business cards of people living in NY and making sure them don't have illegal species. A few shows back it was actually announced that undercover NY police had entered the show. I assume since it was in PA, the NY guys had to make themselves be known.


That's really interesting Jeremy. Obviously not a very judicious use of law enforcement. Even if vendors had animals that were illegal in NY as long as they didn't cross the border from PA to NY with them in their possession the NY authorities could do nothing, except note who had animals illegal in NY. Who's to say they didn't buy those animals in PA that day? What's the point of going undercover if you're going to announce you're there? Sounds like a typical law enforcement CF.


----------



## Woodsman

God gave us total dominion over nature. I say do what thou will and let the Bible sort it out. Remember, only the good people will be transported during the rapture. The rest of the world will have to fend for itself.

Richard.


----------



## frogparty

LOL Richard


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Woodsman said:


> God gave us total dominion over nature. I say do what thou will and let the Bible sort it out. Remember, only the good people will be transported during the rapture. The rest of the world will have to fend for itself.
> 
> Richard.


So...that's one vote for yes the location should be revealed?
Is that a serious post?


----------



## jacobi

Woodsman said:


> God gave us total dominion over nature. I say do what thou will and let the Bible sort it out. Remember, only the good people will be transported during the rapture. The rest of the world will have to fend for itself.
> 
> Richard.


Um. What? Why?

Edit: Saw this after I posted. 



Rusty_Shackleford said:


> So...that's one vote for yes the location should be revealed?
> Is that a serious post?


Is there a joke I'm not getting?

Jake


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> Is there a joke I'm not getting?
> 
> Jake


Yes, yes there is.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> That's really interesting Jeremy. Obviously not a very judicious use of law enforcement. Even if vendors had animals that were illegal in NY as long as they didn't cross the border from PA to NY with them in their possession the NY authorities could do nothing, except note who had animals illegal in NY. Who's to say they didn't buy those animals in PA that day? What's the point of going undercover if you're going to announce you're there? Sounds like a typical law enforcement CF.


Rusty, shoot me a pm with your e-mail I'll send you a pdf of the investigation involving Operation Shellshock, how it started and progressed and it did involve people who routinely vended at Hamburg. They could have easily been involved in a joint investigation with PA and/or other states so jurisdiction may be moot.. They could have been there tracking a certain individual and watching to see what they got.... In a seperate one (where a guy purchased illegally collected timber rattlesnakes that had been laundered through Florida), NY, NJ, PA and USF&W were all involved in the tracking including when they went through Hamburg (and ended up at a guys house in New Jersey) and they actually were taking pictures of license plates in the parking lot.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

JeremyHuff said:


> I have heard of NY officials going to Hamburg and getting business cards of people living in NY and making sure them don't have illegal species. A few shows back it was actually announced that undercover NY police had entered the show. I assume since it was in PA, the NY guys had to make themselves be known.


Someone probably recognized one or more of the officers.. It wasn't that long ago that Operation Shellshock got several of the vendorts from there. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> Ed, do they ever go to shows on the lookout for random species or do they usually have specific ones in mind? And do they go with experts or use photos? Just curious...
> 
> Jake


I am aware of both occuring... For example I am aware that during the tracking of sales of illegally collected herps from New York, one of the PA officers noted that a vendor was selling rough greensnakes at a table (which are a protected species in PA)..... 

One of the times I was at Hamburg, the USDA officers were looking specifically for African Giant Landsnails since a number had been smuggled in and they were tracking them down. 

Ed


----------



## jacobi

Ed said:


> Yes, yes there is....
> 
> Ed



grumpy by jacobi4759, on Flickr


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

I just read the document Ed sent me on Operation Shellshock. I am deeply saddened and troubled by what I read. How can people do this? Why? To see some of them were even operating under the guise of the Long Island Herp Society is..well enough to make me nauseous. I certainly hope no one here is involved in any activity like this. It will make me think twice, three times about everyone I see at a show or swap. I know there aren't many bad eggs out there, but I know some are out there. They better hope law enforcement finds them before I do.


----------



## jacobi

I'm interested in reading it if its available...

Jake


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> I'm interested in reading it if its available...
> 
> Jake


Send me a pm with your e-mail address and I'll send you the pdf. It is a decent sized pdf so make sure your mailbox can accept it. 

Ed


----------



## rahunt2

I often wonder this. I recently found an orchid outside its described range but I am not inclined to tell anyone. I am worried that if it is left alone that the garlic mustard will extirpate it.


----------



## MonarchzMan

I would tell your DNR, and they'd be able to get the information in the right hands. No need to tell the general public, but people doing research or conservation on it should be safe.


----------



## yours

Does EUROPE have any kind of rebuttal or punishment, or ANY kind of policing for all of the illegal smuggling going on over there? 

Blame Canada? No. BLAME EUROPE -- and those goddamn smugglers! Seeing the picture of all of those potentially beautiful - yet dead frogs, from the original link IS sickening!

OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!


----------



## MPepper

Hi Alex,

I can certainly appreciate your passion against smuggling, however I feel your calls for the guillotine might be unfairly directed. Though indeed some of the amphibian smuggling is routed through Europe, you need to consider that the final destination of many of these animals is often in collections in North America or Asia.

I don't think there is a higher percentage of European hobbyists who support smugglers than there are Americans or Canadians or Asians who do. It is a little too convenient for us to point fingers across the Atlantic and expect authorities over there to police it.

There should not need to be stiffer punishments for perpetrators, rather we collectively as hobbyists need to exercise a little more self control when the next undocumented new species/morph shows up on the market. 

Smuggling of pretty frogs for the pet trade is the one factor negatively affecting wild populations that we as hobbyists can most easily mitigate. I think we are slowly moving in the right direction.


----------



## yours

Thanks for the 'reality check', SIR Mark Pepper! But more importantly thanks for YOUR efforts, and Understory Enterprises for helping ALL OF US as a Hobby move collectively forward to a healthy and promising future!

People need to wake up, support more captive bred implementations, and conservation as a whole, not to mention frogs of LEGAL ORIGIN. I think putting your well earned money behind UNDERSTORY ENTERPRISES is the way to go for sure.

People want new and exciting, "pretty" frogs? Wait for Mark Pepper to announce the release of such coveted species. He just released the new morph of R. benedicta, news of Agalychnis spurrelli and Theloderma licin, as well as Hyalinobatrachium valerioi. There's no disputing the fact that if we were to wait, good times always will come! Like Ranitomeya fantastica red and blue morph! Hehe, sorry Mark 

As to the SMUGGLERS all over: OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!!


----------



## Noel Calvert

fishman9809 said:


> If it took this long to discover the species, it means the species likely has a very small habitat or a very small numbers. Based on this knowledge, I'd definitely say yes, the location should be kept a secret.


This is exactly what I was thinking about this subject. As I am also working with plants I am also having the dilemma of whether to give out general or specific collection information to the general public. 

I have decided that my descriptions will have the collection data, but anything I make available to collectors or enthusiasts will have vague details they could not follow to locate the species again. 

This may help to avoid smuggling.


----------



## Noel Calvert

frogfarm said:


> I've done LOTS of vegetation surveys. Isn't it possible to describe the type locality w/out giving out the locality? Description of habitat won't necessarily give away a location, although sometimes it does.


To publish a description of a plant for science you need the distinct locality data as this develops a map of the distribution of species world wide. A description of the site will be useful to horticulturists, and environmentalists, but little use to a taxonomist. Dr. Thomas Croat often asks me how sure I am of locality data I am sharing with him about species I am discovering here & cultivating. He tells me he will not even publish a new plant without that data. I would assume other scientists are basically the same, though keeping that data from the general public is not that tough.


----------



## Noel Calvert

sjaakdaak said:


> I'm afraid that you are overestimating the benefits of ethnobotany. I know a few botanists who thought it would be a good idea to take locals with them on an expedition. They had very hight expectations of it, but it turned out that the local specialists were, at best, only able to determine plants to the family level. Needless to say that to people who are naturally sceptic, it would appear that there simply IS no benefit or profit to be yielded.


He did not suggest bringing field researchers from the country of origin with the foreign ethnobotanists to help searching for the plants/animals with benefits. What he suggested was when there is a discovery , the country of origin generally gets no profitable benefit from it since the ethnobotanist simply takes it with them to manufacture at home. The indigenous peoples get screwed. Obviously a 3rd world farmer has no scientific value for a research team like that... & Trust me that scientist/engineer they found to join them was basically a farmer... I live here in SW Colombia so I see that particular thing all the time.


----------



## Noel Calvert

jacobi said:


> Self policing by the purchasers and breeders is necessary, and needs to be further addressed by those with more knowledge and experience than me.
> 
> Jake


Jake, 
This is where you are incorrect. You, me, and every other hobbyist & frog/plant dealer or collector can affect how this trade works by doing exactly what people have been suggesting all along... Know where your animals/plants come from, & only buy those legally obtained breed, and sold. Even if they are available in the trade & have been for years avoid them if they were not legally collected, breed, & sold...
I for one am working on the legal permits to export my plants, and if I decide to sell the frogs I have I will also do what is required to permit them as well.


----------



## Noel Calvert

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> That's really interesting Jeremy. Obviously not a very judicious use of law enforcement. Even if vendors had animals that were illegal in NY as long as they didn't cross the border from PA to NY with them in their possession the NY authorities could do nothing, except note who had animals illegal in NY. Who's to say they didn't buy those animals in PA that day? What's the point of going undercover if you're going to announce you're there? Sounds like a typical law enforcement CF.


Umm are these animals under federal jurisdiction? Aka federal offense to smuggle them in, & sell them? I would think so. With that in mind, there was mention of the police collecting cards of NY resident dealers with them following a show into PA. If the dealers from NY were selling illegal frogs in PA they had jurisdiction to arrest them as they crossed state lines to commit a federal offense. Best to look up the laws on this part of the discussion...Also, a federal offense committed in front of a law enforcement official is grounds for arrest even if they are not in their jurisdiction. They can also legally make a citizens arrest, and call local enforcement to take custody of the suspects.


----------



## Noel Calvert

I just glanced through the paper Ed posted about a scientist who discovered 3 species & published them... Here is a quote that answers this question without a doubt... In fact someone else earlier mentioned this was not happening or likely to happen, but please do not underestimate human greed. If the item is desirable people will get it when they know where it is.

"In 2010 Brown returned to the area in Peru where he had initially discovered R. benedicta and found that locals had been cutting down canopies in the trees where the frogs were known to live."
BBC News - Should the location of newly discovered species be hidden?


----------



## Pubfiction

There are several problems with hiding location data. 

1 scientist do not all have good intentions. Anyone who has worked in the scientific field knows that with something's, some scientists are very open and collaborative with other scientists and others are definitely not. 

Lets say we both study frogs and know each others work very well, you discover a new species and its location. I want to study that too. So I call you, you and ask for the location. Well you start making up all kinds of excuses about why you cant tell me. 

You know I wont smuggle but you want to limit my access so you can get more papers out before anyone else has access. 

Was that best for the species, or people as a whole? 

The second issue is some scientists do smuggle. Regardless of which side you stand on many of us know well of a high profile person in this hobby whom received frogs others did not have access to thanks to a scientist. Some say the scientist only imported the frogs to hand them right off to the breeder, but officially they both claim it was for research. A database of locations only accessible to scientists will not stop smuggling. It will just grant monopolies or more exclusive access to certain smugglers who find the access. 

Next what about the good guys? If the good guys have no idea where the frog is located they cannot do anything either. How much missing information do we have in this hobby. Remember scientists are often very limited in resources. Many times hobbyist who put their own resources into information and projects have known things that scientist only published 10 years late. Hobbyist could just as easily do lots of good if they know the locations that could out weight the inevitable smuggling. They could donate to causes to save the animals, they could try to get in educational material to locals. Or they might just be a person who wants to start a local captive breeding farm like Tesoros. And if they don't have any information they probably cant help much at all. 

My personal belief is that more information is better than less information. there are always ups and downs to both sides. But in the end it is usually better. It is just awfully hard to see that from the start sometimes.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Pubfiction said:


> The second issue is some scientists do smuggle. Regardless of which side you stand on many of us know well of a high profile person in this hobby whom received frogs others did not have access to thanks to a scientist. Some say the scientist only imported the frogs to hand them right off to the breeder, but officially they both claim it was for research. A database of locations only accessible to scientists will not stop smuggling. It will just grant monopolies or more exclusive access to certain smugglers who find the access.\


As someone who has direct, first hand knowledge of this situation, I can tell you unequivocally that you have it wrong, and are maligning a good scientist based on hearsay. Unless you have direct knowledge, don't comment on it.

Yes, some scientists do smuggle, but the one you elude to does not.


----------



## Pubfiction

I understand the issue is controversial so lets just leave it at SOME people would definitely consider this to be in the grey area of the law. And if a person of power was watching over every aspect of that case do you really think it would have played out in the same way?

Besides that even if the case is completely fine it doesn't change the point that scientist can be just as at fault as anyone else and make similar mistakes. Giving them sole reign can easily backfire like any case where only privileged are allowed access to power.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Then the people who have issue with the law should go to USFWS. In fact, they did, and USFWS didn't have any issue with it. The _only_ reason it is controversial is because the breeder in question is controversial. If it were someone else, I guarantee that this wouldn't linger as long as it has, if at all.

Like I said, I agree that scientists can smuggle as well. There plenty of stories out there of scientists doing so. The person you reference is not one of those people, however.


----------



## chuckpowell

I don't understand all this discussion. I know in my field if the author thinks release of the locality data will result in looting then detailed locality data is not given. A museum locality number is presented with a note in the paper that if your a qualified researcher then you can get the locality information from the museum. If it isn't being used in other fields it should be. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## chuckpowell

I should also have said its on the author - he knows what's going on better then anymore else and if he thinks releasing the locality information will cause problems then he shouldn't release it. Its not on anyone else. Science has to be openly distributed to be useful, telling someone they have to contact such and such museum for locality information isn't a problem for qualified scientists. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## Noel Calvert

frogparty said:


> Nobody is cutting down canopy forest to collect pumilio.
> Im all for keeping exact locations secret to prevent over exploitation.
> Noone says "I discovered the worlds biggest diamond deposit...right HERE" Go check it out for yourself


Though not Pumilio, I thought you might be interested in seeing this.

"In 2006 he (Jason Lee Brown) published the picture of a new species of poison frog, Ranitomeya benedicta on the internet. Almost immediately it appeared in trade shows in Europe and North America."
"In 2010 Brown returned to the area in Peru where he had initially discovered R. benedicta and found that locals had been cutting down canopies in the trees where the frogs were known to live." (BBC News. 2012)
BBC News - Should the location of newly discovered species be hidden?

Please do not ever underestimate the horror people will produce for a little profit. South America is well known for its slash & burn approach to everything including agriculture. Frog treatment is even worse. I have seen locals here in Tumaco take a toad out of their well, put it on the road in a halved bleach bottle, and wait for a vehicle to come run it over. I asked the local why, and the reply I got was, "It is so ugly!" Explaining that they perform important & helpful pest control work means nothing to them. They have pesticides... 

Though the scientific work of classifying species is important, my opinion is the location information should be kept privately to the scientific community with strict legal implications to the divulging perpetrator. The decimation of "cool" species simply for a few dollars or pesos is not even a new practice.


----------



## Noel Calvert

Pubfiction said:


> There are several problems with hiding location data.
> 
> 1 scientist do not all have good intentions. Anyone who has worked in the scientific field knows that with something's, some scientists are very open and collaborative with other scientists and others are definitely not.
> 
> Lets say we both study frogs and know each others work very well, you discover a new species and its location. I want to study that too. So I call you, you and ask for the location. Well you start making up all kinds of excuses about why you cant tell me.
> 
> You know I wont smuggle but you want to limit my access so you can get more papers out before anyone else has access.
> 
> Was that best for the species, or people as a whole?
> 
> The second issue is some scientists do smuggle. Regardless of which side you stand on many of us know well of a high profile person in this hobby whom received frogs others did not have access to thanks to a scientist. Some say the scientist only imported the frogs to hand them right off to the breeder, but officially they both claim it was for research. A database of locations only accessible to scientists will not stop smuggling. It will just grant monopolies or more exclusive access to certain smugglers who find the access.
> 
> Next what about the good guys? If the good guys have no idea where the frog is located they cannot do anything either. How much missing information do we have in this hobby. Remember scientists are often very limited in resources. Many times hobbyist who put their own resources into information and projects have known things that scientist only published 10 years late. Hobbyist could just as easily do lots of good if they know the locations that could out weight the inevitable smuggling. They could donate to causes to save the animals, they could try to get in educational material to locals. Or they might just be a person who wants to start a local captive breeding farm like Tesoros. And if they don't have any information they probably cant help much at all.
> 
> My personal belief is that more information is better than less information. there are always ups and downs to both sides. But in the end it is usually better. It is just awfully hard to see that from the start sometimes.


First off, I know this thread is old, but I came back to Dendroboard recently, & thought I might have something to add to this discussion.

Educating locals is like a double-edged sword. Most locals are uneducated poor people who will most likely take your education as a way to exploit their environment as I posted earlier in this thread about the locals cutting canopy to get at frogs. 

They also have no compunctions about destroying whole species as I have constantly in my time here in South West Colombia pleaded with people to stop hunting turtles, foxes, or frogs to no avail. Even if they understand which is very unlikely, they just do not care...

I have discovered a couple of new morphs in a part of Colombia that I will not disclose for the reasons mentioned above, & the probability they will be poached within minutes of posting the location data with photos...You think that is an exaggeration, but I would wager on it.

My plans are to start a farm to produce these frogs safely & protected away from their actual local to preserve. The local information will not be released...
I have finally gotten to the point with my nursery that I can announce here that I am opening the website doors for sales...


----------



## Ed

Noel Calvert said:


> Educating locals is like a double-edged sword. Most locals are uneducated poor people who will most likely take your education as a way to exploit their environment as I posted earlier in this thread about the locals cutting canopy to get at frogs.


This is not exactly correct ... the education requires the transmission on how to make a sustainable income on the ecosystem as otherwise, why not get what you can while you can much like we see in other countries (including the US). This model has worked for other taxa and is slowly being expanded see for example Home Aquarium Fish Sub-Group (HAFSG) - IUCN Freshwater Fish Specialist Group

some comments 

Ed


----------

