# 'Tumucumaque' morph photos.



## mordoria

So i was reading this german frog site and came across the D.Tinc morph 'Tumucumaque'. I guess this is known here as a Koi or otherwise. I just wanted to share these pics that I have never seen before. 
I dont have permssion to post the pics (diddent bother asking) so heres the link. 
Morphguide - die einzelnen Varianten

Its at the bottom of the page. Enjoy!


----------



## epiphytes etc.

That morph is also sometimes referred to as "Peacock". As far as I know it is not in captivity, and the locale info has never been shared by it's discoverers. It is a beauty though.


----------



## sports_doc

^ yes, not "koi" that I know of....

anyway, until now, I had only seen the one posted pic ever....but thanks for posting...The pics are crazy cool.

Thanks!

Shawn


----------



## Julio

epiphytes etc. said:


> That morph is also sometimes referred to as "Peacock". As far as I know it is not in captivity, and the locale info has never been shared by it's discoverers. It is a beauty though.


unfortunately this frog has been popping up in some European countries illegally off course.


----------



## mordoria

Thanks for the info. 
Ive seen the "peacock" pic from the Loitters book but I have never seen the other pics showing the different patterning.


----------



## JeremyHuff

I wasn't aware of this site, thanks for posting. Anyone have the book on tinctorius morphs?


----------



## motydesign

same as everyone else, i thought the one photo was the only one that existed.the yellow silver blue is nice looking


----------



## mordoria

JeremyHuff said:


> I wasn't aware of this site, thanks for posting.


Its great to get a pulse on what the germans are illegally smuggling.


----------



## mordoria

What I find the most interesting is that, most Tinc patterns evolve from a yellow, blue black scheme. This patterning comes from a completely different sort of coloring. Its says there were some in a research facility, Museo Emilio Goeldi in Belém Paraense. Im assuming they mean dead. I speak Portuguese, so I can navigate through the museums virtual site but theres no mention of the frogs.


----------



## jbherpin

They are certainly very interesting looking frogs. I foresee a potential exploitation, and illegal wave of US imports in the coming years. If Germans are working with them now, nothing is stopping friends from doing across sea business. Illegal or not. Of course though, with such a low moral code of ethics, they would not advertise the acquisition(s). This is my theory... Not that it is terribly insightful, as most would assume the same, but I thought it worthy of mentioning in an open conversation about a cool new Tinc morph.

JBear


----------



## Frank H

wow! they look like half azureus.


----------



## jbherpin

I was thinking similar thoughts... I wonder if/when genetic testing is mastered, and ALL species are loked at with an ideal of importance, what will come to light? Will the various frogs of a "family" be shown to be natural intergrades? I think we may find that a lot of frogs we call "Locale Specific", are nothing more than 2 populations conjoining and interbreeding, thus creating frogs that have characteristics of many closley related populations.

I ask ALL of you to look at your frogs, and find 1 pic of a definitive morph that says, wow, this is my exact pattern, therefore it must be____! Just some thoughts.

JBear


----------



## thedude

jbherpin said:


> I was thinking similar thoughts... I wonder if/when genetic testing is mastered, and ALL species are loked at with an ideal of importance, what will come to light? Will the various frogs of a "family" be shown to be natural intergrades? I think we may find that a lot of frogs we call "Locale Specific", are nothing more than 2 populations conjoining and interbreeding, thus creating frogs that have characteristics of many closley related populations.
> 
> I ask ALL of you to look at your frogs, and find 1 pic of a definitive morph that says, wow, this is my exact pattern, therefore it must be____! Just some thoughts.
> 
> JBear


A lot of populations are surely interbreeding in the wild. The phenotypes of Dendrobatidae are probably relatively easy/quick to change by evolutionary standards. And given that how much variation some populations have, it could very well be from natural crossing. Actually finding distinct borders that indefinitely separate populations could be very difficult with some species. Obviously not all of them, but quite a few.


----------



## jdooley195

does anyone know what we classify that orange-ish alanis as? I've seen a pair once at pet kingdom in san diego, but everything else ive seen called "alanis" or "inferalanis" looks more like what this site called oranje gebergte


----------



## jbherpin

Would anyone mind commenting on the boldface? Thanks for the interest, again!

All my thanks!

JBear




jbherpin said:


> I was thinking similar thoughts... I wonder if/when genetic testing is mastered, and ALL species are loked at with an ideal of importance, what will come to light? Will the various frogs of a "family" be shown to be natural intergrades? I think we may find that a lot of frogs we call "Locale Specific", are nothing more than 2 populations conjoining and interbreeding, thus creating frogs that have characteristics of many closley related populations.
> 
> *I ask ALL of you to look at your frogs, and find 1 pic of a definitive morph that says, wow, this is my exact pattern, therefore it must be____! *Just some thoughts.
> 
> JBear





thedude said:


> A lot of populations are surely interbreeding in the wild. The phenotypes of Dendrobatidae are probably relatively easy/quick to change by evolutionary standards. And given that how much variation some populations have, it could very well be from natural crossing. Actually finding distinct borders that indefinitely separate populations could be very difficult with some species. Obviously not all of them, but quite a few.


----------



## tclipse

really awesome morph... thanks for sharing. 


j, i have no idea what youre asking, could you rephrase?


----------



## thedude

tclipse said:


> j, i have no idea what youre asking, could you rephrase?


I think he's asking us to try and figure out what type of frogs we have based solely on phenotype. Which for most things is impossible. That's the point though right jbear?

Maybe I'm wrong though! Finals week, brain is fried.


----------



## Shockfrog

Hmm.. nobody wonders what this (unknown) Dendrobates sp. actually is/looks like which is mentioned in the paper? Besides that I'm also surprised they found A. hahneli on 4 of the 5 expeditions. I always thought A. hahneli being found in French Guyana was a mistake, just like A. beebei is not found in FG and A. brunneus is not found in Surinam, but I guess they found some 'real' ones in neighbouring Brazil.


----------



## ETwomey

Shockfrog said:


> Hmm.. nobody wonders what this (unknown) Dendrobates sp. actually is/looks like which is mentioned in the paper? Besides that I'm also surprised they found A. hahneli on 4 of the 5 expeditions. I always thought A. hahneli being found in French Guyana was a mistake, just like A. beebei is not found in FG and A. brunneus is not found in Surinam, but I guess they found some 'real' ones in neighbouring Brazil.


As for the Ameerega, this could maybe be A. pulchripectus, as that species was described from the Amapa. There isn't a lot of info floating around on this species so I could see how a non-specialist would miss this ID. 

As for the Dendrobates: Depending on how current they are with the taxonomy this could just be Ranitomeya amazonica (following Amphibiaweb from 2009-2011 this would have been a Dendrobates). Aside from tinctorius the only other Dendrobates in the region is nubeculosus which is lost and also occurs near the coast. So probably not that.


----------



## Shockfrog

A. pulchripectus is indeed the only one I could think of in that area, but it's a really recognisable species in my opinion. I guess you could be right about missing the ID when you're not really into darts. 

K.H. Jungfer once told me he had been breeding pulchripectus in captivity for many years (hence the pictures in 'Poison Frogs, biology, species & captive husbandry'). It's a shame they disappeared from the hobby completely many years ago, just like many other species.


----------



## Shockfrog

I think it was Weygoldt who brought those from the Amapa to Europe. It's actually his pics which are in the book, not Jungfer's as I remembered. Anyway, Jungfer told me he couldn't even give the offspring away...


----------



## Ed

jbherpin said:


> I was thinking similar thoughts... I wonder if/when genetic testing is mastered, and ALL species are loked at with an ideal of importance, what will come to light? Will the various frogs of a "family" be shown to be natural intergrades? I think we may find that a lot of frogs we call "Locale Specific", are nothing more than 2 populations conjoining and interbreeding, thus creating frogs that have characteristics of many closley related populations.
> 
> I ask ALL of you to look at your frogs, and find 1 pic of a definitive morph that says, wow, this is my exact pattern, therefore it must be____! Just some thoughts.
> 
> JBear


Typically the patterns in a zone of integradation range from one parent animal to the other with various graduations inbetween them. What tend to see with many of the dendrobatid populations is that within a specific geographic region tend to be more stable than diverse. This is because there are pressures such as mate selection and/or pressures by predation that result in the pattern stabilization. See for example http://www.bio-nica.info/Biblioteca/rudh2007dendrobates .pdf where it indicates that there is less contact than is being supposed... 

People often forget that populations tend to be localized and discontinous with population sinks between locations. This restricts gene flow between the populations and allows for pattern stabilization. There can be surprisingly long periods of time between contacts between the populations See for example this discussion on D. tinctorious..http://bnoonan.org/Papers/Noonan_Gaucher_06.pdf

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## bobrez

Wow idk but too me looks like an experiment gone bad. Frankenstein might be a good name as looks very unnatural.


----------



## stu&shaz

thanks for this David,i've wondered about this tinc for years now nice to have some more info after all this time
Stu


----------



## goku

From Europe I heard some rumors about some legal imports for next year..what do you people think about it? just not possible or there could be some truth on it?

greetings!


----------



## JeremyHuff

goku said:


> From Europe I heard some rumors about some legal imports for next year..what do you people think about it? just not possible or there could be some truth on it?
> 
> greetings!


They would never be legal. Not only is Brazil closed to export, but they are from a protected park as well.


----------



## RedEyeTroyFrog

The very last frog on this page D. Tinc. Britsch Guyana looks like what ppl have been posting here as Koeari...Confuses me a bit because I've seen the " koetari " morph on German sites before. I also find the morph right above it interesting as well.

My mistake... Reading thru a bit further in, I see kutari amongst the German words


----------



## thedude

RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> The very last frog on this page D. Tinc. Britsch Guyana looks like what ppl have been posting here as Koeari...Confuses me a bit because I've seen the " koetari " morph on German sites before. I also find the morph right above it interesting as well.
> 
> My mistake... Reading thru a bit further in, I see kutari amongst the German words


This is something Corey W. said a while ago in a conversation we had.

"The Koetari/Kutari River is a pretty long river serving as the border along three countries (British Guyana, Suriname, and Brazil - note that the spelling is different depending on the country you're standing in since each of the three countries involved were colonized by different countries thus having di...fferent main languages, and the hobby grabbed a spelling depending on the map they looked at - pronounced basically the same way tho), and the Sipaliwini River feeds into it. The area between the two rivers in Suriname is presumably where most of the blue/green/yellow sips were found as well as True Sips, Azureus, and Kutari/Koetari."

So they have been called many things, and have quite a bit of variation which could be from them being gathered from several places on the river. Or chances are, it's from a very small gene pool in captivity.


----------



## RedEyeTroyFrog

I see, that makes sense. So, does Azureus have more than one locality? Or does the Gebroeders Mountains ( Island Forest patches) fall in that same range where all the other frogs u mentioned are?

Sorry if there is information on this somewhere and I sounds dumbs... , but Ive never really researched or found information on locality data on many Tinctorius. 

I read the story on the discovery of the Azurues(Hoogmoed) which was pretty cool, and very detailed, Other than that, all Ive really ever seen is the Morph guide maps on Tropical experience.

also in the previous post i mentioned the frog pictured above...( turns out its thought to be a leucomelas x tinctorius ) so thats resolved too


----------



## Affordable Exotics

wow....those are awesome. Where might one attain some of these?


----------



## Ed

RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> I see, that makes sense. So, does Azureus have more than one locality? Or does the Gebroeders Mountains ( Island Forest patches) fall in that same range where all the other frogs u mentioned are?


On a macroscale..no they do not have multiple locations.. on a microscale they do since they inhabit small "tree islands" in the Sipalawinii Savannah...



RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> Sorry if there is information on thi somewhere and I sounds dumbs... , but Ive never really researched or found information on locality data on many Tinctorius.


There was information provided on this via links to the citations only a few posts above this... check out the second link in post #22......




RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> also in the previous post i mentioned the frog pictured above...( turns out its thought to be a leucomelas x tinctorius ) so thats resolved too


If you are referring to the Tumucumaque morph, it is not a hybrid. 

Ed


----------



## skylsdale

Affordable Exotics said:


> wow....those are awesome. Where might one attain some of these?


Have you read any of the conversation in this thread? It was mentioned at least a few times in the first couple of pages.


----------



## kgb

They refer to Dendroboard in the German Document


----------



## frogfreak

skylsdale said:


> Have you read any of the conversation in this thread? It was mentioned at least a few times in the first couple of pages.


I'd be guessing no, Ron.

He's trying to get the 25 posts required to sell and did. Now, the "time thing" kicks in. DOH!

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/search.php?searchid=2150058


----------



## RedEyeTroyFrog

Thanks Ed I actually read the links u posted about 10 minutes after I posted my comment...Thank you that was very interesting, At times a bit hard for me to understand, but interesting none the less 

I was not refferring to the Timucumaque morph. On the German site, where the Timucumaque is pictured. All the way down at the bottom there was a picture Koetari/Kutari. I was referring to the frog Directly able the Koetari....i translated the page shortly after and it was Lecu x Tinc

So Ed, I have a question for you? Are there any other Tinctorius that inhibit the small Tree Islands other than Azureus? I know the true sip, and other sips are fairly close by.


----------



## Ed

RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> So Ed, I have a question for you? Are there any other Tinctorius that inhibit the small Tree Islands other than Azureus? I know the true sip, and other sips are fairly close by.


Not where the azureus are.. all of the tinctorius morphs on the Sipaliwani savannah do not link up (the last time they had contact was at least 10,000 years ago). 

Ed


----------



## RedEyeTroyFrog

Thanks Ed ....fascinating


----------



## dartguy

They look like a cross between "Azureus" and "Matecho".


----------



## RedEyeTroyFrog

dartguy said:


> They look like a cross between "Azureus" and "Matecho".


not a cross...


----------



## fieldnstream

thedude said:


> Or chances are, it's from a very small gene pool in captivity.


Hey Adam, I've been told there were only 12 adults imported...pretty small for sure.


----------



## thedude

fieldnstream said:


> Hey Adam, I've been told there were only 12 adults imported...pretty small for sure.


Thanks Field, I couldn't remember the exact number.


----------



## dartguy

RedEyeTroyFrog said:


> not a cross...


I know it is not a morph cross. I'm just saying it looks like an amalgamation of Azureus/Matecho. Not that it actually is one.


----------



## cosyis77

thanks for posting!


----------



## bobrez

I thought that cross morph could happen in the wild also. Isn't just as bad?


----------



## thedude

If you are referring to the leuc X tinc cross I don't believe it occurs in the wild but if it did then no it's not bad.


----------



## jacobi

For those of you who don't know this, Google chrome will translate the page for you... You can obviously put the whole page into google translate, but if you open it in the chrome browser it will offer to translate it for you, with no copying pasting of any kind.


----------



## ghostpilot

I'm not one to wake up a dead thread, but is there anymore information about the 'Tumucumaque'? I've been waiting to see something new for over a year and I keep finding myself scouring over the web trying to find something.


----------



## danicc

Hi all,
does anybody know exactly where does 12 animals came from? I have been looking at the CITES trade database, and definitely Brazil has not imported any tinctorius since the sub species was discovered in 2004.
I have seen them on the trade in EU, and I was wondering where are they coming from.
Cheers
Dan


----------



## pdfCrazy

smuggling.....plain and simple


----------



## TatianaB0527

Hey there
what 12 are you reffereing to?


danicc said:


> Hi all,
> does anybody know exactly where does 12 animals came from? I have been looking at the CITES trade database, and definitely Brazil has not imported any tinctorius since the sub species was discovered in 2004.
> I have seen them on the trade in EU, and I was wondering where are they coming from.
> Cheers
> Dan


----------



## rigel10

TatianaB0527 said:


> Hey there
> what 12 are you reffereing to?


Tinctorius "Tumucumaque".


----------



## TatianaB0527

rigel10 said:


> Tinctorius "Tumucumaque".


No I know that, but What 12 peacocks came in and from wherr?


----------



## Raul Gomez

if these were to end up in the states can it ever be proven that they were imported illegally?


----------



## Spaff

They're a pretty distinct locale, and it has been proven that they have never been imported legally. I'm not sure what stance USFWS would take on them, but it'd be pretty obvious that they were smuggled.


----------



## zerelli

Here is a great example of what great stewards of wildlife they are in Brazil

AP test: Rio Olympic water badly polluted, even far offshore


----------



## srrrio

If for example, Japan had a craze for hellbenders, and was able to smuggle some out of the USA, it is okay because we have polluted their natural habitat?


----------



## zerelli

Personally, I say yes. But lets be honest, there is no dart frog "craze". If they smuggled out a few dozen hellbenders to place them with people whom were negaged in breeding them.



srrrio said:


> If for example, Japan had a craze for hellbenders, and was able to smuggle some out of the USA, it is okay because we have polluted their natural habitat?


----------



## Ed

I have to admit that every time I see this sort of BS argument it irritates me even more. 



zerelli said:


> Personally, I say yes. But lets be honest, there is no dart frog "craze".


Do you even know what your talking about? 
Nijman, Vincent, and Chris R. Shepherd. "The role of Asia in the global trade in CITES II-listed poison arrow frogs: hopping from Kazakhstan to Lebanon to Thailand and beyond." Biodiversity and conservation 19.7 (2010): 1963-1970. 

There is an abundant and clear "craze" for dendrobatids that is more than likely unsustainable. 




zerelli said:


> If they smuggled out a few dozen hellbenders to place them with people whom were negaged in breeding them.


And the removal of that many hellbenders could easily render those population(s) non-viable so your willing to cause an extinction just to get your hands on a pet? That is one thing people keep ignoring with these comments, they are willing to allow an animal to smuggled into extinction just to get it and yes there are examples of where the pet trade has extirpated populations. An example of this is G. luii which is extirpated at the type locality by the pet trade ... 
see Courchamp, F., Angulo, E., Rivalan, P., Hall, R. J., Signoret, L., Bull, L., & Meinard, Y. (2006). Rarity value and species extinction: the anthropogenic Allee effect..

This also ignores the high mortality that commonly accompanies smuggled animals so more than likely it wouldn't just be a few dozen animals but many times that number to make up that surviving population. 

Anytime someone makes the claim that they should be in the pet trade because something is in a disturbed/altered habitat it is nothing more than a shallow justification for greed. Virtually all of the demands are for charismatic species, virtually no one is making that argument for a plain species. 

In addition if your making the habitat destruction argument for Dendrobates sp. (and most dendrobatids) it indicates a lack of knowledge about the biology and behaviors of the taxa. Many dendrobatids actually do much better in disturbed habitat as opposed to normal habitat. That is why the populations can really explode in things like trash piles ...

If your going to make the argument that captive breeding is conservation then I suggest reading http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...ive-bred-conservation-efforts.html#post576511 

This is also before we consider that smuggling animals versus pushing for a sustainable harvest model provides pretty close to zero incentive to preserve the ecosystem much less the animals. Smugglers pay very little for the animals and the profit is once they land in the EU, Asia, or North America from the collectors. A sustainable harvest model instead places a value on the products from that ecosystem and helps to keep relatively intact. 

So anytime someone makes the claim it should be in the pet trade because of habitat destruction we can view it as the fake gold glitter BS attempt to disguise greed as a noble endeavor it really is .... 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## srrrio

zerelli said:


> Personally, I say yes. But lets be honest, there is no dart frog "craze". If they smuggled out a few dozen hellbenders to place them with people whom were negaged in breeding them.


I am sort of shocked by your reply. Luckily Ed gave you more meaningful information then what I would have come up with.


----------



## rmp

zerelli said:


> Personally, I say yes. But lets be honest, there is no dart frog "craze". If they smuggled out a few dozen hellbenders to place them with people whom were negaged in breeding them.


Are you saying that enthusiasm to breed a species gives people the moral right to extract that species from its habitat regardless of the effect that may have?


----------



## Raul Gomez

Disturbed isn't the same as destroyed. Should people go out and throw garbage in the jungle to have more frogs? These guys are from a very specific place and if that land is gone then they will be gone. I agree with conservation but lets face it people tend to mess things up.

My question is if they already have passed thru Germany and were sold at Hamm to someone from Spain then where are the ethics of owning the CB babies?

I have been doing a little research and it looks like Europe has zoological institutions that sell animals from countries with export bans to the public. The best example is Australia. We have here in the US dozens of species of Monitors, Lizards, snakes ect from Australia that were produced in zoos then sold to private breeders who in turn sent them over. What if that is whats happening here?

Not trying to argue by the way, Just trying to get some perspective. 

i


Ed said:


> I have to admit that every time I see this sort of BS argument it irritates me even more.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you even know what your talking about?
> Nijman, Vincent, and Chris R. Shepherd. "The role of Asia in the global trade in CITES II-listed poison arrow frogs: hopping from Kazakhstan to Lebanon to Thailand and beyond." Biodiversity and conservation 19.7 (2010): 1963-1970.
> 
> There is an abundant and clear "craze" for dendrobatids that is more than likely unsustainable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the removal of that many hellbenders could easily render those population(s) non-viable so your willing to cause an extinction just to get your hands on a pet? That is one thing people keep ignoring with these comments, they are willing to allow an animal to smuggled into extinction just to get it and yes there are examples of where the pet trade has extirpated populations. An example of this is G. luii which is extirpated at the type locality by the pet trade ...
> see Courchamp, F., Angulo, E., Rivalan, P., Hall, R. J., Signoret, L., Bull, L., & Meinard, Y. (2006). Rarity value and species extinction: the anthropogenic Allee effect..
> 
> This also ignores the high mortality that commonly accompanies smuggled animals so more than likely it wouldn't just be a few dozen animals but many times that number to make up that surviving population.
> 
> Anytime someone makes the claim that they should be in the pet trade because something is in a disturbed/altered habitat it is nothing more than a shallow justification for greed. Virtually all of the demands are for charismatic species, virtually no one is making that argument for a plain species.
> 
> In addition if your making the habitat destruction argument for Dendrobates sp. (and most dendrobatids) it indicates a lack of knowledge about the biology and behaviors of the taxa. Many dendrobatids actually do much better in disturbed habitat as opposed to normal habitat. That is why the populations can really explode in things like trash piles ...
> 
> If your going to make the argument that captive breeding is conservation then I suggest reading http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...ive-bred-conservation-efforts.html#post576511
> 
> This is also before we consider that smuggling animals versus pushing for a sustainable harvest model provides pretty close to zero incentive to preserve the ecosystem much less the animals. Smugglers pay very little for the animals and the profit is once they land in the EU, Asia, or North America from the collectors. A sustainable harvest model instead places a value on the products from that ecosystem and helps to keep relatively intact.
> 
> So anytime someone makes the claim it should be in the pet trade because of habitat destruction we can view it as the fake gold glitter BS attempt to disguise greed as a noble endeavor it really is ....
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


----------



## zerelli

I am not intending to support commercial harvest of any species. But, the arguments you make could easily be used to argue against allowing ANY animals to be kept at all. The keeping of animals in captivity just encourages the taking of more from the wild. It will always be so as long as the animals are sold for money. This logic of saying that harvesting animals from the wild is only detrimental to the species means that all of us who keep animals in glass boxes are in the wrong. So, yes, as someone who does keep animals alive in glass boxes I approve of collecting animals. It needs to be regulated as opposed to banned. All banning it does is increase the rewards for those who get them anyway. I think your ideas are noble, I just feel that they are creating the problem that you are arguing against.


----------



## Ed

Raul Gomez said:


> Disturbed isn't the same as destroyed. Should people go out and throw garbage in the jungle to have more frogs? These guys are from a very specific place and if that land is gone then they will be gone. I agree with conservation but lets face it people tend to mess things up.


Actually people do go out and add what is effectively trash to bolster dendrobatid populations as part of a sustainable harvest technique. 

Your attempting to link the fact that Brazil's deforesting is threatening these frogs as a justification of your position. Do you have proof of that? Are you aware that this frog is from a designated national park? It covers more than 15,000 square miles. 

So the fact that people mess things up is justification that its okay for people to go and mess things up further? So according to your argument because people mess things up it is ethical to support the black market smuggling chains. I think there is a real problem with that as your encouraging the support of that problem. If your purchasing offspring from animals that were smuggled then the person who knowingly paid for the smuggled animals is going to receive money so your subsidizing the whole process. 



Raul Gomez said:


> My question is if they already have passed thru Germany and were sold at Hamm to someone from Spain then where are the ethics of owning the CB babies?


As I noted above, if you think subsidizing the smuggling efforts to be an ethical decision even when all of the negatives are known then your not supporting conservation at all, in fact your doing the exact opposite. 



Raul Gomez said:


> I have been doing a little research and it looks like Europe has zoological institutions that sell animals from countries with export bans to the public. The best example is Australia. We have here in the US dozens of species of Monitors, Lizards, snakes ect from Australia that were produced in zoos then sold to private breeders who in turn sent them over. What if that is whats happening here


Not all of those animals are considered legal in all of the EU or even in the US as some of them are the result of offspring of confiscated animals being released to the hobbies. Brazil has made it very clear on many fronts that any animals smuggled from their country are illegal. 

This is also before we consider the effect that subsidizing the smuggling ring entails. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Ed

zerelli said:


> I am not intending to support commercial harvest of any species. But, the arguments you make could easily be used to argue against allowing ANY animals to be kept at all.


Then you haven't read all that I've written on the topic. No where I have argued that people shouldn't have pets nor have I argued that animals should never be collected I simply pointed out that your attempting to make smuggling not only an acceptable way to get animals but its actually a "good thing". 



zerelli said:


> The keeping of animals in captivity just encourages the taking of more from the wild. It will always be so as long as the animals are sold for money. This logic of saying that harvesting animals from the wild is only detrimental to the species means that all of us who keep animals in glass boxes are in the wrong. So, yes, as someone who does keep animals alive in glass boxes I approve of collecting animals. It needs to be regulated as opposed to banned. All banning it does is increase the rewards for those who get them anyway. I think your ideas are noble, I just feel that they are creating the problem that you are arguing against.


Your attempting to hide the fact that you were arguing that smuggling is okay. I'm simply pointing out that you attempted to make smuggling acceptable. 

If your advocating regulated harvest then you cannot condone smuggling. So which is it? Earlier you argued it was okay and now your trying to say it isn't. Seem that your backpedaling for some reason. 

And if you bothered to read the captive breeding conservation link above you would have seen that I'm not advocating banning all collection at all. Your simply trying to deflect from your pro-smuggling argument. 

If anyone was wondering, Yes these sorts of posts irritate me. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave

Raul Gomez said:


> Disturbed isn't the same as destroyed. Should people go out and throw garbage in the jungle to have more frogs? These guys are from a very specific place and if that land is gone then they will be gone. I agree with conservation but lets face it people tend to mess things up.
> 
> My question is if they already have passed thru Germany and were sold at Hamm to someone from Spain then where are the ethics of owning the CB babies?
> 
> I have been doing a little research and it looks like Europe has zoological institutions that sell animals from countries with export bans to the public. The best example is Australia. We have here in the US dozens of species of Monitors, Lizards, snakes ect from Australia that were produced in zoos then sold to private breeders who in turn sent them over. What if that is whats happening here?
> 
> Not trying to argue by the way, Just trying to get some perspective.
> 
> i


Actually in a way people do put garbage in the forest to get more frogs. They set up pop bottles and other things to increase the number of suitable tadpole sites for the frogs to drop their young off in.

As far as the ethics of CB babies; well it potentially legitimizes other smuggled frogs, plus if there is no stigma attached to owning these frogs or their offspring then that leaves a larger market for smugglers to take advantage of, and their potential customers may be more likely to buy those frogs if they know they'll have no trouble getting rid of them.

I don't wanna see frogs go to waste anymore then the next guy, and if they are truly going to be wiped off the face of the planet then I'd rather see them in captivity, but it is a slippery slope and others are bound to use that justification in less dire cases... and probably get away with it. I think a few ships have already sailed long long ago like the Red galac example I mentioned, but I also think we need to demand better of ourselves now and in the future, then what we've done in the past.


DD


----------



## zerelli

Not my intent to irritate, I am just considering the subject based on other examples I have seen personally. I do not know where I fall on the issue and was seeking to talk about it in a discussion forum. If it irritates you then don't read it, maybe? I just thought that in a general discussion forum that ideas could be freely discussed. Perhaps you are correct and this is not the place where someone who might be newly considering a topic should speak, if so my apologies for assuming discussion was welcomed here. Just because I talk about something does not mean that I espouse that belief and think all others should. I see your points, and do not disagree. I find the topic very interesting, and I really appreciate that this community seems to be much better at self-policing than others I have seen. I also was discussing it with everyone and not personally rebutting you.



Ed said:


> Then you haven't read all that I've written on the topic. No where I have argued that people shouldn't have pets nor have I argued that animals should never be collected I simply pointed out that your attempting to make smuggling not only an acceptable way to get animals but its actually a "good thing".
> 
> 
> 
> Your attempting to hide the fact that you were arguing that smuggling is okay. I'm simply pointing out that you attempted to make smuggling acceptable.
> 
> If your advocating regulated harvest then you cannot condone smuggling. So which is it? Earlier you argued it was okay and now your trying to say it isn't. Seem that your backpedaling for some reason.
> 
> And if you bothered to read the captive breeding conservation link above you would have seen that I'm not advocating banning all collection at all. Your simply trying to deflect from your pro-smuggling argument.
> 
> If anyone was wondering, Yes these sorts of posts irritate me.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


----------



## Ed

zerelli said:


> Not my intent to irritate, I am just considering the subject based on other examples I have seen personally. I do not know where I fall on the issue and was seeking to talk about it in a discussion forum. If it irritates you then don't read it, maybe? I just thought that in a general discussion forum that ideas could be freely discussed. Perhaps you are correct and this is not the place where someone who might be newly considering a topic should speak, if so my apologies for assuming discussion was welcomed here. Just because I talk about something does not mean that I espouse that belief and think all others should. I see your points, and do not disagree. I find the topic very interesting, and I really appreciate that this community seems to be much better at self-policing than others I have seen. I also was discussing it with everyone and not personally rebutting you.


No the whole idea that irritates me is the BS excuse that because there is habitat destruction going on somewhere, people should be entitled to remove the animals even if it is by illegal methods particularly when its made from ignorance of risk to the animal. Your hellbender comment is a classic example of this and could actually do more harm than good as many populations are low enough that removal of that many animals could easily reduce the population below the viability threshhold (and that is before the consideration that they have not been successfully bred outside of institutions) so that population is functionally extince (or actually extinct). You made the insinuation that as long as they were then captive bred it should be fine and that you didn't have a problem with it. So you were advocating the potential extinction of a species in an entire watershed for nothing more than greed. 

In addition, the whole support of smuggling to get new color variations is completely opposite any conservation efforts so you really can't in one post make the claim to be for conservation and then turn around and support smuggling. 

I should also note the attempt to claim you wanted to simply have a discussion is BS as well given your statements. You were attempting to justify smuggling as an acceptable source and got called out on it ..... 

All of this is before we consider that this frog is from a national park so the entire "but their destroying the rainforest so it's okay" justification. 

* Saying that purchasing smuggled frogs or the offspring of clearly smuggled frogs is okay is nothing more than being greedy all other arguments are nothing more than a smoke screen to justify it. *

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Sherman

zerelli said:


> Not my intent to irritate, I am just considering the subject based on other examples I have seen personally. I do not know where I fall on the issue and was seeking to talk about it in a discussion forum. If it irritates you then don't read it, maybe?


Please understand that ED is a valuable asset to this community and has covered this issue thoughtfully and repeatedly in the past. One of his most important roles is effectively having these conversations. It would be a loss to the community for him to not read and respond to these posts.



zerelli said:


> I just thought that in a general discussion forum that ideas could be freely discussed. Perhaps you are correct and this is not the place where someone who might be newly considering a topic should speak, if so my apologies for assuming discussion was welcomed here.


Although he comes across as irritated, he does a good job of addressing your points and questions, likely more thoroughly than others could or would. That is discussion. 



zerelli said:


> Just because I talk about something does not mean that I espouse that belief and think all others should. I see your points, and do not disagree. I find the topic very interesting, and I really appreciate that this community seems to be much better at self-policing than others I have seen. I also was discussing it with everyone and not personally rebutting you.


If you agree with Ed's points and find these topics to be interesting, you will find a wealth of threads on topics of this nature. I would guess that Ed could point us to many good ones.
As time goes on you may notice that the hobby in fact does not police itself very well and the arguments that you posed earlier are all too common.


----------

