# Making people care about mixing



## eldalote2

How can we get people to care about not mixing their frogs?

What can we tell them, in a few sentences, that makes them go "That is exactly why I am not going to inbreed my tinctorius, auratus, etc species!" 

How can we reach a brand new hobbyist who may not fully understand or care about preserving the genetics of wild populations?

I think we need to create a thread that we can direct members to when they about inbreeding or mixing. Something that educates them instead of simply telling them not to do it. We need something that educates and alters the thought process.

Education and unfaltering (as hard as it may be) patience is going to be the key when dealing with new dart frog owners.

Please post your thoughts and your best quote you have used when talking to non or new froggers.


----------



## PeanutbuttER

I think this is a great idea. I haven't had frogs that long but this has already come up a couple times and usually I end up at a loss for what else to say. It's tough when they don't care and quite frankly don't care to care either. I'm excited to hear others thoughts and ideas.


----------



## Jellyman

Start by realizing that it is not a matter of educating. Educating implies they are doing something wrong and need to be corrected. In reality they are just doing something that goes against your beliefs. Give good truthful reasons for why you choose not to mix or breed different species or morphs. Be civil in your attempts to pursuade others with opposing viewpoints and realize that not everyone is going to agree and/or change thier mind.


----------



## SmackoftheGods

Jellyman said:


> Start by realizing that it is not a matter of educating. Educating implies they are doing something wrong and need to be corrected. In reality they are just doing something that goes against your beliefs. Give good truthful reasons for why you choose not to mix or breed different species or morphs. Be civil in your attempts to pursuade others with opposing viewpoints and realize that not everyone is going to agree and/or change thier mind.


It is your belief that the "no-mixing" stance most of us take is a belief.

To the OP, the issue is it's very difficult to express all of the reasons to not mix frogs, especially in a few short sentences. I almost feel as if it's a culture thing. Not so much that people need to be indoctrinated, but more that to _truly_ understand what's so great about our frogs as they are you need to experience how great they are as they are.... My best suggestion is that when you come across a new local hobbyist, bring them over, show them your collection, talk to them about your frogs, which is your favorite, why each is in your collection, and let them _experience_ the hobby, rather than just telling them "don't do it, you'll thank me later." I know when I first got into the hobby I had no idea the vast array of both colors and personality traits. I wanted to mix because, well, why the hell not? It's not like any of them are _that_ different. But each species (even each _morph_) has so many unique qualities that it would be a travesty to destroy those qualities by trying to combine them into something new. So, I guess my suggestion is exposure. If you can have a candid discussion about frogs and through your interactions you can help them develop respect for the animals they intend to work with there probably won't be any desire to mix.


----------



## Jellyman

SmackoftheGods said:


> It is your belief that the "no-mixing" stance most of us take is a belief.
> 
> To the OP, the issue is it's very difficult to express all of the reasons to not mix frogs, especially in a few short sentences. I almost feel as if it's a culture thing. Not so much that people need to be indoctrinated, but more that to _truly_ understand what's so great about our frogs as they are you need to experience how great they are as they are.... My best suggestion is that when you come across a new local hobbyist, bring them over, show them your collection, talk to them about your frogs, which is your favorite, why each is in your collection, and let them _experience_ the hobby, rather than just telling them "don't do it, you'll thank me later." I know when I first got into the hobby I had no idea the vast array of both colors and personality traits. I wanted to mix because, well, why the hell not? It's not like any of them are _that_ different. But each species (even each _morph_) has so many unique qualities that it would be a travesty to destroy those qualities by trying to combine them into something new. So, I guess my suggestion is exposure. If you can have a candid discussion about frogs and through your interactions you can help them develop respect for the animals they intend to work with there probably won't be any desire to mix.



It is a belief. There is no right or wrong answer. One will choose based on the information provided as to which belief they will follow.

So how is this any different then me having people over and explaining why they can mix and showing them how to do it properly? What makes your belief any better then mine? 

I'm not saying my belief is any better or worse then yours, just that it is different. 

I do not disrespect someone simply because they have chosen a different path in the hobby.


----------



## SmackoftheGods

Jellyman said:


> I do not disrespect someone simply because they have chosen a different path in the hobby.


You don't disrespect someone if they choose a different path in the hobby than you have because their choice doesn't affect the way you practice your hobby. You mix species. So, verifying purebred morphs/species, or purchasing from people whose husbandry is up to a high par doesn't matter to you.

Mixing species does, however, affect the rest of us who _do_ want to keep species and morphs true. That's the difference. You could purchase frogs from me despite the fact that I keep localities isolated (something you don't do) and it wouldn't be an issue for you. The reverse does not apply.


----------



## SmackoftheGods

Jellyman said:


> So how is this any different then me having people over and explaining why they can mix and showing them how to do it properly?


Oh, and the answer to this question comes in two parts:

1) you're not doing it "properly," (I know you haven't had a fatality in some years, but that's not really the ruler by which this hobby defines success).

2) if you'll go back and read my statement I discussed teaching new hobbyists respect (not just adequate care, but _respect_) for the animals they work with. Showing them a mixed tank and telling them "it doesn't really matter that my different morph tincs come from isolated populations, and the tincs come from Brazil and the leucomelas come from Venezuela and the auratus come from Panama, I felt like throwing them all together in the same tank" is diametrically opposed to providing a sense of respect for those animals....


----------



## konton

SmackoftheGods said:


> Mixing species does, however, affect the rest of us who _do_ want to keep species and morphs true. That's the difference. You could purchase frogs from me despite the fact that I keep localities isolated (something you don't do) and it wouldn't be an issue for you. The reverse does not apply.


By the same logic no one should be allowed to smoke, because we all breath the same air. You want to keep the air clean. I want to smoke. I don't have a problem with you, but you've got a problem with me. And now I have a problem with you, because you're making a problem for me. And the war begins.

Sorry for playing devils advocate (I don't actually smoke). You have the right to want to keep the species and morph true. I want the same thing. But your logic isn't going to sway anyone. 

Actually, I'd love to here what you all have to say. Sway me. I'm new. I came into this hobby this year because of a simple interest in frogs. I don't mix frogs, because I like the genetic differences. In fact it's those very differences from different localities that interests me. I never considered cross-breeding (I wouldn't call it inbreeding, since technically speaking that's what you're doing when breeding a specific locality. How many brothers and sisters have you put together?). So explain to me why I should not do it? 

Okay, I guess I'm not sorry for playing devils advocate.  But I think it's more interesting to try to defend your point-of-view rather than preach to the choir. 

Justin

P.S.: I have 9 different R. imitator morphs so work hard at convincing me! And remember, I grew up watching Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, so making a new species sounds like a fun idea.


----------



## pl259

There are a lot of previous threads about mixing. All members who seek info about it should do the research, like any other aspect of this hobby.

I approach the mixing issue by avoiding the weak analogies and ask a very simple question. 

What are the risks and rewards of mixing? 

From my own experience and from what I've heard and discussed with others, there are no rewards for the frogs, only risks. That leaves the hobbiest/breeder. The only rewards I've ever heard for them are fewer tanks to manage, that it looks cool, and has a high wow factor. The risks are to his collection, the frogs, as already stated, and the loss of acceptance and respect by the community, the large majority of which are against it. 

Hobbiests who do mix, are making a statement about their priorities. Based on these simple risk/reward considerations, those hobbiests do not hold those frogs as their top priority. Despite any words they may say to the contrary, their actions speak louder.


----------



## Woodsman

The argument I usually make is to explain my personal experience, that most of my dart frogs do not perform well in groups, whether a single species/morph or mixed species/morphs. I think the person that's new to the hobby has the idea of a single, absolutely stunning, large vivarium where they can keep all their frogs. After a lot of misfortune and lost frogs, they realize what many of us have known for a long time, which is that dart frogs perform best in 1.1 pairs in their own set-ups. That's why photos of frog collections from long-term hobbyists often show rooms crammed with dozens of smaller tanks (rather than the large display tanks that newcomers are often shooting for).

I agree with the OP that this is ultimately an issue of education and patience. Long-term hobbyists just have to remain involved in the process of educating newcomers to the hobby and not become jaded by the endless repetition that's required by new people continuously entering the hobby. That's why I personally try to spend quite a bit of time in the beginner and general section of the board. If only Dendroboard was around when I entered the hobby 14 years ago!

Take care, Richard.


----------



## dartboard

LOL, this is almost commical, I'll tell you why there will never be an easy one line thing to say to newcomers that teaches them not to mix.... the reason..... look at all the arguing and bickering about what is right and wrong between you veterans,

As long as there is no law against it, and even if there were, there are some that will decide that mixing is what they want to do, and depending on the market it will thrive or end quickly.

The dart frog community has done well trying to minimize any market for mixed breeds, but if ever there is a market, like with ball pythons, then nothing we can say will change it. There will always be a market for pure bred frogs, but regardless of what we say the market will dictate... all those who want it to stay pure can do is be as understanding and kind and patient and helpful in educating new people to the profession

The whole "YOU ARE SATAN AND GOING TO HELL" replies to every new poster that asks a question about it is not helping... you are turning them off and quite literally making it so they dont want to be a part of whatever you are doing.


----------



## eldalote2

Woodsman said:


> The argument I usually make is to explain my personal experience, that most of my dart frogs do not perform well in groups, whether a single species/morph or mixed species/morphs. I think the person that's new to the hobby has the idea of a single, absolutely stunning, large vivarium where they can keep all their frogs. After a lot of misfortune and lost frogs, they realize what many of us have known for a long time, which is that dart frogs perform best in 1.1 pairs in their own set-ups. That's why photos of frog collections from long-term hobbyists often show rooms crammed with dozens of smaller tanks (rather than the large display tanks that newcomers are often shooting for).
> 
> I agree with the OP that this is ultimately an issue of education and patience. Long-term hobbyists just have to remain involved in the process of educating newcomers to the hobby and not become jaded by the endless repetition that's required by new people continuously entering the hobby. That's why I personally try to spend quite a bit of time in the beginner and general section of the board. If only Dendroboard was around when I entered the hobby 14 years ago!
> 
> Take care, Richard.


Thank you Richard, this is what I am looking for. This topic was set up not only for me but for everyone on the board to organize thoughts on what may be most effective to make someone understand why mixing is not going on with the rest of the board members. 

Education does not start when someone does something wrong, education is used to inform or create understanding so a person may pass on what they have learned.

I understand that there is never (usually) a right or wrong, black or white to anything. Usually what is right is what we perceive is right to us in our own opinion or what our culture has taught us to be right.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Let me put this as simply as possible to all you zealots and self proclaimed experts out there.

I keep mixed tanks

I keep many species such as tincs in larger groups than 1.1

I believe there isn't necessarily one ideal way to do anything

And I'm pretty tired of hearing people with minimal experience parroting things they have heard else where rather than learning for themselves and coming to conclusions based on experience

Feel free to make of that what you will. If this makes me a bad keeper in your eyes so be it, but prepared to explain why and show me how your level of success is superior to mine. 


And just for the record you would be shocked to know how many very experienced keepers keep one or more mixed tanks within their collection, but choose not to broadcast it on this board to avoid dealing with narrow minded know it alls.


----------



## eldalote2

Dang... way to trash a potentially nice thread. 

Maybe I need to make this clearer.

How can we educate people so they can see our perspective of why WE PERSONALLY do not mix. 

I'm sorry but this is not a "I Mix and I do what I want!" thread. This is supose to be an educational thread for the board to organize thoughts when it comes time to explain to a new person. 

You are a human being and you can make up your own mind to mix or not I don't care. 

I do NOT want this thread to turn into a fight. If you have a problem with what I am saying then please PM me. I am only trying to help the board.

Angela


----------



## mantisdragon91

eldalote2 said:


> Dang... way to trash a potentially nice thread.
> 
> Maybe I need to make this clearer.
> 
> How can we educate people so they can see our perspective of why WE PERSONALLY do not mix.
> 
> I'm sorry but this is not a "I Mix and I do what I want!" thread. This is supose to be an educational thread for the board to organize thoughts when it comes time to explain to a new person.
> 
> You are a human being and you can make up your own mind to mix or not I don't care.
> 
> I do NOT want this thread to turn into a fight. If you have a problem with what I am saying then please PM me. I am only trying to help the board.
> 
> Angela


Why do you feel the need to educate people on your personal preference? Why not let them hear both sides of the story and draw their own conclusions. My previous post wasn't I Mix and I Do what I want, But I keep mixed species tanks with positive results and am curious why you feel your methods are superior to mine?


----------



## tim13

MantisDragon, would you say you are confident in your level of experience to successfully keep a mixed tank or was this something you decided to do from the git-go upon entering the hobby. 

Would you recommend to someone new to do the same as you and keep a mixed tank, or an unrecommended (by most) number of frogs in 1 tank? Or would you caution someone new to get some experience with their choices of frogs first before attempting something of this nature?


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

pl259 said:


> From my own experience and from what I've heard and discussed with others, there are no rewards for the frogs, only risks. That leaves the hobbiest/breeder. The only rewards I've ever heard for them are fewer tanks to manage, that it looks cool, and has a high wow factor. The risks are to his collection, the frogs, as already stated, and the loss of acceptance and respect by the community, the large majority of which are against it.


hate to stir the pot here, but how does it benefit the frog, for you to keep it, in the first place? Seems like my frogs don't gain much at all from my ownership, and it's solely for my benefit


----------



## DKOOISTRA

> MantisDragon, would you say you are confident in your level of experience to successfully keep a mixed tank or was this something you decided to do from the git-go upon entering the hobby


Its probably something he decided to do to piss off Rich F.
My own personal reasons.... Why would I want to take a chance, Why would I want to do something that could harm the frog. What is there to gain from it? How does it benefit anything? How does the end result benefit me, the hobby or the frog? I have yet to see ANYONE provide an answer to any of these questions outside of "because i want to, and their mine." 
Derek


----------



## DKOOISTRA

Brotherly Monkey said:


> hate to stir the pot here, but how does it benefit the frog, for you to keep it, in the first place? Seems like my frogs don't gain much at all from my ownership, and it's solely for my benefit


Its a matter of providing a certain level of care for the animal in your posetion and the opinion, and experience of many that that base level of care can not be attained in a mixed tank.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

eldalote2 said:


> Dang... way to trash a potentially nice thread.


lol, isn't this a forum dedicated to discussion? If so, you should expect disagreement.


----------



## poison beauties

mantisdragon91 said:


> Let me put this as simply as possible to all you zealots and self proclaimed experts out there.
> 
> I keep mixed tanks
> 
> I keep many species such as tincs in larger groups than 1.1
> 
> I believe there isn't necessarily one ideal way to do anything
> 
> And I'm pretty tired of hearing people with minimal experience parroting things they have heard else where rather than learning for themselves and coming to conclusions based on experience
> 
> Feel free to make of that what you will. If this makes me a bad keeper in your eyes so be it, but prepared to explain why and show me how your level of success is superior to mine.
> 
> 
> And just for the record you would be shocked to know how many very experienced keepers keep one or more mixed tanks within their collection, but choose not to broadcast it on this board to avoid dealing with narrow minded know it alls.



Roman I swear you just like to argue because its fun, First off, I personally don't think mixing makes you a bad keeper or inexperienced but it does create a mood of carelessness or even a ripple in the hobby's need for advancement if we all can't get on the same page.

I find it to be a practice that promotes the unknown and the hybrid crap. But I may be suited to shut up if it were a preached practice to at least test your frogs and plan to cull off anything that were to be produced in a mixed viv. Its not so much the mixed viv as the probable outcome to it that could hurt the hobby. Mixed locale tincs and auratus not to mention the harder to ID Pumilio, hybrids, the spread of chytrid, parasites and then the promoting of it by the people who do it.

You brought up a valid point on the inexperienced in this hobby pushing practices and teaching when they have not learned themselves but why would any seasoned hobbyists promote the idea knowing what it leads to, Im not sure that any of us have ever just posted up NO MIXING, seems we always jump in to just say our piece. It does nothing to say that mixing can be done, or it should be done by the experienced as to me if you can test everything going in the viv, supply a large enough viv, and cull off any eggs, tads or froglets found I'm sure it can be done. But with this subject comes all those ''Oops I think I may have left my spare Imi in the Vanzo breeding viv and look what I found.'' Take credit for what you obviously did purposely as you wouldn't really post it up if you weren't proud of your work. I know anyone who was dedicated to the non hybrid side would have culled that frog off and no one would have ever known. Then you have all those who say ''why cull at all?'' ''Whats wrong with hybrids?'' ''I love my deformed frogs'' Those are the ones who should never be told Mixing is ok.

Michael


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

DKOOISTRA said:


> Its a matter of providing a certain level of care for the animal in your posetion and the opinion, and experience of many that that base level of care can not be attained in a mixed tank.


the remark was about benefits to the frog vs benefits to the owner. I'm pointing out that this entire process represents no benefits to the frog, only our benefit. So if you're going to approach the "no mixing" position from such an altruistic perspective, you should probably get rid of your frogs


----------



## Jellyman

SmackoftheGods said:


> You don't disrespect someone if they choose a different path in the hobby than you have because their choice doesn't affect the way you practice your hobby. You mix species. So, verifying purebred morphs/species, or purchasing from people whose husbandry is up to a high par doesn't matter to you.
> 
> Mixing species does, however, affect the rest of us who _do_ want to keep species and morphs true. That's the difference. You could purchase frogs from me despite the fact that I keep localities isolated (something you don't do) and it wouldn't be an issue for you. The reverse does not apply.


I agree. I could purchase any frog from anyone and it would not matter to me as long as the frog is bred and cared for properly. My point has always been to "educate" those in the hobby to properly label their frogs. The constent attacks by certain members will only continue to have people label their frogs differently to avoid the abuse. I've always been an advocate for getting ALL frogs registered even mixed morphs or hybrids.


----------



## poison beauties

Jellyman said:


> I agree. I could purchase any frog from anyone and it would not matter to me as long as the frog is bred and cared for properly. My point has always been to "educate" those in the hobby to properly label their frogs. The constant attacks by certain members will only continue to have people label their frogs differently to avoid the abuse. I've always been an advocate for getting ALL frogs registered even mixed morphs or hybrids.


Why not set an example as an avid mixer and practice culling everything off that is produced? Why register them? Why even have them? You cant say its because you wanted a new color or pattern as the dart hobby has plenty of choices. 

But yes all unmixed, darts need to be registered and tracked. We may could kill the long running battle with just that. No one would have an excuse then.

Another thing I hear is that people mix as they have room for only one viv. Why not have 2 in place of that one larger viv? 2 20 longs instead of a 40,55, or whatever so your two tinc pairs can live separately. I know as Ive kept and bred many darts its cheaper to just build 2 smaller vivs than one large one.

Michael


----------



## DKOOISTRA

> the remark was about benefits to the frog vs benefits to the owner. I'm pointing out that this entire process represents no benefits to the frog, only our benefit. So if you're going to approach the "no mixing" position from such an altruistic perspective, you should probably get rid of your frogs


I may have missunderstood what you were trying to say. The way I took your statement was this "ultimately, my owning the frog does not benefit the frog, it ony benefits me, therefore, as the frog does not benefit, and I am only in it for me, the level of care i provide does not matter, as long as I am happy." To me, that sums up mixing.
Derek


----------



## mantisdragon91

tim13 said:


> MantisDragon, would you say you are confident in your level of experience to successfully keep a mixed tank or was this something you decided to do from the git-go upon entering the hobby.
> 
> Would you recommend to someone new to do the same as you and keep a mixed tank, or an unrecommended (by most) number of frogs in 1 tank? Or would you caution someone new to get some experience with their choices of frogs first before attempting something of this nature?


It really depends on what kind of background the person going into the hobby has in terms of basic animal keeping. I would consider a mixed species tank more of an intermediate step but it really depends on the prior experience of the person contemplating the project.

anecdotally over the course of my 20 years of working with animals I have experienced much higher losses in single species tanks than in mxed tanks.


----------



## mantisdragon91

DKOOISTRA said:


> Its probably something he decided to do to piss off Rich F.
> My own personal reasons.... Why would I want to take a chance, Why would I want to do something that could harm the frog. What is there to gain from it? How does it benefit anything? How does the end result benefit me, the hobby or the frog? I have yet to see ANYONE provide an answer to any of these questions outside of "because i want to, and their mine."
> Derek


The benefits as I see them are as follows in no particular order:

1) The ability to provide a larger tank then a single species enclosure.
2) Outside stimulation, frogs and other animals are fairly curious and they can suffer from what I would term boredom if kept in small poorly landscaped tanks with minimal sensory stimulation. This leads to aggression, and other problems. I have seen species that are considered very aggressive when kept by themselves become markedly less aggresive when kept in mixed tanks. The same can be seen in the aquarium hobby especially when dealing with many South and Central American Cichlids. 
3) The sound of other species calling in the same or nearby tank can actually help inmprove breeding results.


----------



## Ed

Brotherly Monkey said:


> hate to stir the pot here, but how does it benefit the frog, for you to keep it, in the first place? Seems like my frogs don't gain much at all from my ownership, and it's solely for my benefit


On the point of view of an individual frog, it probably doesn't... from the point of view of the genes, it does if you allow them to reproduce. 

Ed


----------



## mantisdragon91

poison beauties said:


> Roman I swear you just like to argue because its fun, First off, I personally don't think mixing makes you a bad keeper or inexperienced but it does create a mood of carelessness or even a ripple in the hobby's need for advancement if we all can't get on the same page.
> 
> I find it to be a practice that promotes the unknown and the hybrid crap. But I may be suited to shut up if it were a preached practice to at least test your frogs and plan to cull off anything that were to be produced in a mixed viv. Its not so much the mixed viv as the probable outcome to it that could hurt the hobby. Mixed locale tincs and auratus not to mention the harder to ID Pumilio, hybrids, the spread of chytrid, parasites and then the promoting of it by the people who do it.
> 
> You brought up a valid point on the inexperienced in this hobby pushing practices and teaching when they have not learned themselves but why would any seasoned hobbyists promote the idea knowing what it leads to, Im not sure that any of us have ever just posted up NO MIXING, seems we always jump in to just say our piece. It does nothing to say that mixing can be done, or it should be done by the experienced as to me if you can test everything going in the viv, supply a large enough viv, and cull off any eggs, tads or froglets found I'm sure it can be done. But with this subject comes all those ''Oops I think I may have left my spare Imi in the Vanzo breeding viv and look what I found.'' Take credit for what you obviously did purposely as you wouldn't really post it up if you weren't proud of your work. I know anyone who was dedicated to the non hybrid side would have culled that frog off and no one would have ever known. Then you have all those who say ''why cull at all?'' ''Whats wrong with hybrids?'' ''I love my deformed frogs'' Those are the ones who should never be told Mixing is ok.
> 
> Michael


Keep in mind I Don't support or believe in breeding diffrent species or morphs together. When I talk about mixed tanks it would be with species that can't interbreed.


----------



## Jellyman

SmackoftheGods said:


> Oh, and the answer to this question comes in two parts:
> 
> 1) you're not doing it "properly," (I know you haven't had a fatality in some years, but that's not really the ruler by which this hobby defines success).
> 
> 2) if you'll go back and read my statement I discussed teaching new hobbyists respect (not just adequate care, but _respect_) for the animals they work with. Showing them a mixed tank and telling them "it doesn't really matter that my different morph tincs come from isolated populations, and the tincs come from Brazil and the leucomelas come from Venezuela and the auratus come from Panama, I felt like throwing them all together in the same tank" is diametrically opposed to providing a sense of respect for those animals....




It's funny you bring this up yet again. Actually longevity in frogs is a ruler that defines success as it is with all captive animals. Breeding them to an early grave for profit or pleasure certainly is not.

That being said almost a year ago I began pulling eggs from my setup. Over the past year I have raised 33 frogs and currently have 1 froglet, 16 tads, and 15 tads(pulled 3 more last night). So the last arguement has been answered. I have no plans after may to pull any more eggs. I just needed to end this last arguement that the frogs were not breeding.

Who are you quoting here: "it doesn't really matter that my different morph tincs come from isolated populations, and the tincs come from Brazil and the leucomelas come from Venezuela and the auratus come from Panama, I felt like throwing them all together in the same tank." - yet another made up statement beiong used to defend your agenda.

Do you really think making a statement like the one above is realistic. I give them the same advice used for properly aquiring frogs, properly quarantining frogs, properly setting up the enclosures, what signs to watch for, and if they are new I even tell them about the opposing views about mixing and hybrids. I'm not recruiting but I'm also not lying to others that are interested.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> The benefits as I see them are as follows in no particular order:
> 
> 2) Outside stimulation, frogs and other animals are fairly curious and they can suffer from what I would term boredom if kept in small poorly landscaped tanks with minimal sensory stimulation. This leads to aggression, and other problems. I have seen species that are considered very aggressive when kept by themselves become markedly less aggresive when kept in mixed tanks. The same can be seen in the aquarium hobby especially when dealing with many South and Central American Cichlids.


 
Sterotypical behavior has not been documented in any anurans to date... 
so based on the current best understanding, it is an anthropomorphism. 

Ed


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

DKOOISTRA said:


> I may have missunderstood what you were trying to say. The way I took your statement was this "ultimately, my owning the frog does not benefit the frog, it ony benefits me, therefore, as the frog does not benefit, and I am only in it for me, the level of care i provide does not matter, as long as I am happy." To me, that sums up mixing.
> Derek


Someone stated mixing was bad because it doesn't benefit the frog. I replied that keeping the frog doesn't benefit the frog, therefore, the argument is pretty weak on it's face

Not rocket science


----------



## Ed

Brotherly Monkey said:


> the remark was about benefits to the frog vs benefits to the owner. I'm pointing out that this entire process represents no benefits to the frog, only our benefit. So if you're going to approach the "no mixing" position from such an altruistic perspective, you should probably get rid of your frogs


 
Useing you a reference point so I don't have to go back through the thread and dig up the original comment.. 

All of the arguments about no benefit to the frog, implies that if it doesn't benefit the frog, then it is automatically of negative value to the frog, totally ignoring all of the potential neutral impacts to the frogs... 

We have to consider not just those things that are of a positive benefit but those that are neutral and negative as well. 

Ed


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> Sterotypical behavior has not been documented in any anurans to date...
> so based on the current best understanding, it is an anthropomorphism.
> 
> Ed


Then how do you explain that the moment you add a new plant or feature that they are all over it exploring?


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

Ed said:


> On the point of view of an individual frog, it probably doesn't... from the point of view of the genes, it does if you allow them to reproduce.
> 
> Ed


I would say the long term benefits to the genes are pretty questionable, especially in a hobby


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> It's funny you bring this up yet again. Actually longevity in frogs is a ruler that defines success as it is with all captive animals. Breeding them to an early grave for profit or pleasure certainly is not.


Longevity is one of several yardsticks that need to be applied together (not seperately) to determine if the husbandry is a success. 

They are the median longevity approaches the maximal longevity.. Median will never reach maximal longevity but it is within reason to get close to it. We know the maximal life span of Dendrobates tinctorius and auratus can range into the mid 20s.....


----------



## poison beauties

mantisdragon91 said:


> Keep in mind I Don't support or believe in breeding diffrent species or morphs together. When I talk about mixed tanks it would be with species that can't interbreed.


Yes I know you've mentioned this, I may have mislead you somehow to believe I meant you but your actual post was what snagged me to post. As far as being interbred or cant be interbred the practice of finding out is what we don't need. 
I would consider it all of our responsibilities then mixer or not to make sure that the products of mixing are delt with in a more responsible manor. I find it irritating that the ones who do promote it like you Roman do not actively preach about culling off all eggs, tads or froglets found as you understand the issues I'm getting at.

Michael


----------



## Woodsman

This could have been a good thread. We could have spent some quality time this morning educating each other as to our own, personal experiences with the frogs we rear. Instead, it's just another accusational crap-throwing fest where everyone thinks they can tell everyone else what to do.

I provided a post on what my 14 years of experience raising more than a hundred forgs has been. I hope a few will read it and perhaps take some advice based on my experiences.

That is all, Richard.


----------



## Ed

Brotherly Monkey said:


> I would say the long term benefits to the genes are pretty questionable, especially in a hobby


Anything that promotes the passage of a gene onto the next generation is of benefit to the gene.. if we are going to get into arguments about loss of diversity etc.. I suggest looking at the point of view of the genes that have achieved global distribution through being kept in captivity or domestication.. the genes of dogs, domestic cats, corn, wheat, goldfish, guppies, bettas...... Those genes are massively successful....


----------



## mantisdragon91

poison beauties said:


> Yes I know you've mentioned this, I may have mislead you somehow to believe I meant you but your actual post was what snagged me to post. As far as being interbred or cant be interbred the practice of finding out is what we don't need.
> I would consider it all of our responsibilities then mixer or not to make sure that the products of mixing are delt with in a more responsible manor. *I find it irritating that the ones who do promote it like you Roman do not actively preach about culling off all eggs, tads or froglets found as you understand the issues I'm getting at.*Michael


Actually I am a firm believer of the fact that as a hobby we allow too many weak, deformed animals to reproduce that would never have survived in the wild. I think that any specimen that is deformed in any way shoul never be allowed to breed back into the gene pool, this is regardless of whether it was produced in a mixed species or single species tank.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> Then how do you explain that the moment you add a new plant or feature that they are all over it exploring?


 
This in no way indicates that 
1) sterotypy occurs in anurans
2) your position was not an anthropomorphism as 
the additon of a new feature or resource into the enclosure may provide more suitable microniches or reproductive resources. It does not equate to the housing of species together.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> Actually I am a firm believer of the fact that as a hobby we allow too many weak, deformed animals to reproduce that would never have survived in the wild. I think that any specimen that is deformed in any way shoul never be allowed to breed back into the gene pool, this is regardless of whether it was produced in a mixed species or single species tank.


 
This is direct selection for domestication and as such totally changes the genetic variation of the animal in captivity. This is directly one of the reasons, animals housed in the hobby not only cannot be used for reintroduction programs but after a period of time (different for each species) cannot be used as a model for the wild caught species if it goes extinct.


----------



## Jellyman

poison beauties said:


> Roman I swear you just like to argue because its fun, First off, I personally don't think mixing makes you a bad keeper or inexperienced but it does create a mood of carelessness or even a ripple in the hobby's need for advancement if we all can't get on the same page.
> 
> I find it to be a practice that promotes the unknown and the hybrid crap. But I may be suited to shut up if it were a preached practice to at least test your frogs and plan to cull off anything that were to be produced in a mixed viv. Its not so much the mixed viv as the probable outcome to it that could hurt the hobby. Mixed locale tincs and auratus not to mention the harder to ID Pumilio, hybrids, the spread of chytrid, parasites and then the promoting of it by the people who do it.
> 
> You brought up a valid point on the inexperienced in this hobby pushing practices and teaching when they have not learned themselves but why would any seasoned hobbyists promote the idea knowing what it leads to, Im not sure that any of us have ever just posted up NO MIXING, seems we always jump in to just say our piece. It does nothing to say that mixing can be done, or it should be done by the experienced as to me if you can test everything going in the viv, supply a large enough viv, and cull off any eggs, tads or froglets found I'm sure it can be done. But with this subject comes all those ''Oops I think I may have left my spare Imi in the Vanzo breeding viv and look what I found.'' Take credit for what you obviously did purposely as you wouldn't really post it up if you weren't proud of your work. I know anyone who was dedicated to the non hybrid side would have culled that frog off and no one would have ever known. Then you have all those who say ''why cull at all?'' ''Whats wrong with hybrids?'' ''I love my deformed frogs'' Those are the ones who should never be told Mixing is ok.
> 
> Michael


Unfortunately the argument has turned into, "you can't say your tank is successful because your frogs are not breeding in your mixed tank." You cannot say well you are not successful because you do not produce frogs and then turn around and say well your a bad guy because you produce frogs. You cannot have it both ways.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> This in no way indicates that
> 1) sterotypy occurs in anurans
> 2) your position was not an anthropomorphism as
> the additon of a new feature or resource into the enclosure may provide more suitable microniches or reproductive resources. It does not equate to the housing of species together.


Fair point. Let's try this instead behaviors mimmicking curiousity, owner recognition and adverse affects from lack of outside stimulation have been documented in both Reptiles and Fish. Why would it not be safe to assume that same happens in Amphibians who are after all the intermediate family on the evolutionary tree?


----------



## poison beauties

Woodsman said:


> This could have been a good thread. We could have spent some quality time this morning educating each other as to our own, personal experiences with the frogs we rear. Instead, it's just another accusational crap-throwing fest where everyone thinks they can tell everyone else what to do.
> 
> I provided a post on what my 14 years of experience raising more than a hundred forgs has been. I hope a few will read it and perhaps take some advice based on my experiences.
> 
> That is all, Richard.


Richard what's wrong with a counter view or opinion so long as its based on experience? You may have been in this hobby a while, myself I grabbed up my first darts in 1999 but still you should know by now that good quality time talking about mixing is a joke....

I know you've mention having about 50 viv's, how have you only raised a hundred frogs or so? Do they not actively breed in 10's? What about your experience with hybrids and such? I'd love to hear about it. Perhaps the new hobbyists could learn something on the subject.

My point is as a hobby we need to debate, we need to teach, and we need to make sure atleast both sides of the situation are presented as noone will ever get together and set a standard of care. Which if it was me making it a practice to cull off all SLS, Deformed, Hybrids, and Mixed locale darts would be it. And to test everything before its introduced into a viv. Would solve alot of issues.....

Michael


----------



## Jellyman

poison beauties said:


> Why not set an example as an avid mixer and practice culling everything off that is produced? Why register them? Why even have them? You cant say its because you wanted a new color or pattern as the dart hobby has plenty of choices.
> 
> But yes all unmixed, darts need to be registered and tracked. We may could kill the long running battle with just that. No one would have an excuse then.
> 
> 
> Michael


Here is the problem. Sone of your best buddies only argument against me now has been that I never produced frogs. I did let all the eggs be culled. I never pulled eggs and simply let the other frogs and bugs eat the eggs. I was never interested in raising tads. I had no desire spemding the time to do so. Then it became that the health and logevity of all my frogs was not a ruler to measure sucess and that only setups producing frogs were considered successful. So I started producing frogs. I told myself I would pull eggs for a year and see what happens.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> This is direct selection for domestication and as such totally changes the genetic variation of the animal in captivity. This is directly one of the reasons, animals housed in the hobby not only cannot be used for reintroduction programs but after a period of time (different for each species) cannot be used as a model for the wild caught species if it goes extinct.


This is exactly what is being done with certain species of bison, horses and goats, that have been extinct in Europe for hundreds if not thousands of years( Wisent, Tarpans, Aurochs, etc)


----------



## tim13

mantisdragon91 said:


> Fair point. Let's try this instead behaviors mimmicking curiousity, owner recognition and adverse affects from lack of outside stimulation have been documented in both Reptiles and Fish. Why would it not be safe to assume that same happens in Amphibians who are after all the intermediate family on the evolutionary tree?


Good point. I KNOW some of my P. Vittatus recognize me. They will let me watch them close to the tank. If someone else comes close to the tank they will dash for cover. I have spent hours making it a point to be within view of them to achieve this. Whenever I am on this forum, I am sitting in front of them so they can see me. This was in an effort to make them more bold, but it has only made them more bold to ME.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> Fair point. Let's try this instead behaviors mimmicking curiousity, owner recognition and adverse affects from lack of outside stimulation have been documented in both Reptiles and Fish. Why would it not be safe to assume that same happens in Amphibians who are after all the intermediate family on the evolutionary tree?


 
This is a rephrasing of the sterotypical argument. Please cite the references showing that 
1) sterotypical behavior occurs in fish (and in a wide spectrum of fish particularly those kept in captivity such as goldfish) from the lack of outside stimulation
2) please cite references that show sterotypical behavior occurs in reptiles as a result of lack of outside stimulation. 


Ed


----------



## poison beauties

mantisdragon91 said:


> Actually I am a firm believer of the fact that as a hobby we allow too many weak, deformed animals to reproduce that would never have survived in the wild. I think that any specimen that is deformed in any way shoul never be allowed to breed back into the gene pool, this is regardless of whether it was produced in a mixed species or single species tank.


Fair enough, just wanted to make that point clear. We need a better management system of our hobby's breeding stock and to promote better quality control.

Michael


----------



## tim13

Ed said:


> This is a rephrasing of the sterotypical argument. Please cite the references showing that
> 1) sterotypical behavior occurs in fish (and in a wide spectrum of fish particularly those kept in captivity such as goldfish) from the lack of outside stimulation
> 2) please cite references that show sterotypical behavior occurs in reptiles as a result of lack of outside stimulation.
> 
> 
> Ed


Is personal experience not enough for the sake of discussion on a forum made up of people from many walks of life. Of whom the vast majority are not in a field of science or biology, but rather, are simple observers?


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Longevity is one of several yardsticks that need to be applied together (not seperately) to determine if the husbandry is a success.
> 
> They are the median longevity approaches the maximal longevity.. Median will never reach maximal longevity but it is within reason to get close to it. We know the maximal life span of Dendrobates tinctorius and auratus can range into the mid 20s.....


Agreed, what other yardsticks would you use for the hobby for one to say they are successful or not. 

The frogs in my setup are now about 8 1/2 years old.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> This is exactly what is being done with certain species of bison, horses and goats, that have been extinct in Europe for hundreds if not thousands of years( Wisent, Tarpans, Aurochs, etc)


Actually no, they are not the same as the original animal will not be recovered in most of your examples.. for example the tarpan has been extinct since 1909. The program for the tarpan is to attempt to breed a horse that is morphologically similar but not the same as the genetic makeup has been lost, behaviors are lost... in this case a rose is not a rose.. 

The same case applies for the auroch..they are not the same animal... 

Wisent... I think you need to review the wisent breeding program as it is also not analagous.. 

Ed


----------



## poison beauties

poison beauties said:


> Fair enough, just wanted to make that point clear. We need a better management system of our hobby's breeding stock and to promote better quality control.
> 
> Michael





Ed said:


> This is direct selection for domestication and as such totally changes the genetic variation of the animal in captivity. This is directly one of the reasons, animals housed in the hobby not only cannot be used for reintroduction programs but after a period of time (different for each species) cannot be used as a model for the wild caught species if it goes extinct.


Hello Ed, One question on this issue I still do not understand everytime you hit us with this, How is it of any benefit to allow or actively put a clearly weaker/ runt/ deformed/ sls ridden frog in a breeding viv when there are healthier or shall I say a clearly better choice frog without any any of those issues when its from the same gene pool? We have very few blood lines that are actually tracked and managed so how would actively weakening one help?

Michael


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> Is personal experience not enough for the sake of discussion on a forum made up of people from many walks of life. Of whom the vast majority are not in a field of science or biology, but rather, are simple observers?


The problem with simple observations is that they can be grossly misinterpreted.. for example, if you search through the forums over the years, you will see some variation on report after report of frogs "happily exploring" a new enclosure... when in reality the frogs are looking for anything that would indicate how to get back to thier home range and the actual behaviors are a direct result of negative stress and an inability to locate familar landmarks... These behaviors are reduced over time and new territories are established.. but there is no "enjoyment" or "exploration" (which is has a positive connotation) for the frogs. 

With respect to the reports of "recogizing" the keeper, this is a direct result of conditioning behaviors with the animal equating a human interaction with a food response and is often also a sign of genetic adapation to captivity (as one of the best adaptors is a reduced adrenal response to stress or a decreased sensitivity to a adrenal response).


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> This is a rephrasing of the sterotypical argument. Please cite the references showing that
> 1) sterotypical behavior occurs in fish (and in a wide spectrum of fish particularly those kept in captivity such as goldfish) from the lack of outside stimulation
> 2) please cite references that show sterotypical behavior occurs in reptiles as a result of lack of outside stimulation.
> 
> 
> Ed


Here is some just to get you started

Reptilian ethology in captivity: Observations of some problems and an evaluation of their ætiology

SpringerLink - Learning & Behavior, Volume 4, Number 3


----------



## tim13

Ed said:


> The problem with simple observations is that they can be grossly misinterpreted.. for example, if you search through the forums over the years, you will see some variation on report after report of frogs "happily exploring" a new enclosure... when in reality the frogs are looking for anything that would indicate how to get back to thier home range and the actual behaviors are a direct result of negative stress and an inability to locate familar landmarks... These behaviors are reduced over time and new territories are established.. but there is no "enjoyment" or "exploration" (which is has a positive connotation) for the frogs.
> 
> With respect to the reports of "recogizing" the keeper, this is a direct result of conditioning behaviors with the animal equating a human interaction with a food response and is often also a sign of genetic adapation to captivity (as one of the best adaptors is a reduced adrenal response to stress or a decreased sensitivity to a adrenal response).


I don't mean to be argumentative, but wouldn't that adaption to have less adrenal response apply to ANY human they see? My P. Vittatus, as stated earlier recognize me, and so are not afraid. They also recognize that other people are not me. Now, not to be stereotypical, but members of a different species likely all look the "same" to other species. For example, you see a herd of zebras and they all pretty much look the same. Yet those zebras can tell each other apart pretty well. I bet people pretty much all look the same to frogs. Yet, mine can recognize me specifically amongst all those others who like to look in their tank.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> Actually no, they are not the same as the original animal will not be recovered in most of your examples.. for example the tarpan has been extinct since 1909. The program for the tarpan is to attempt to breed a horse that is morphologically similar but not the same as the genetic makeup has been lost, behaviors are lost... in this case a rose is not a rose..
> 
> The same case applies for the auroch..they are not the same animal...
> 
> Wisent... I think you need to review the wisent breeding program as it is also not analagous..
> 
> Ed


My point is they are attempting to use similar animals to fill the same ecological niche that Aurochs and Tarpan used to occupy. The animals appear similar to the originalls but are not geneticly identical. If they can do that with large mammals, why are you so addamant that this can't be done with tiny frogs?


----------



## poison beauties

Jellyman said:


> Here is the problem. Sone of your best buddies only argument against me now has been that I never produced frogs. I did let all the eggs be culled. I never pulled eggs and simply let the other frogs and bugs eat the eggs. I was never interested in raising tads. I had no desire spemding the time to do so. Then it became that the health and logevity of all my frogs was not a ruler to measure sucess and that only setups producing frogs were considered successful. So I started producing frogs. I told myself I would pull eggs for a year and see what happens.


Yeah well I guess my buddies actively care about the hobbies future. Had you just wanted to prove a point why not pull the eggs, prove fertility and then make it known you culled them in the tad stage? This may have stopped a huge war. 
I actively avoided these boards like the plague until a little over a year ago when I began letting my collection go so I cant speak for their past issues but I have read the boards past thread all the way back and I have seen the chaos and hell.

Longevity, Breeding and all other aspects are not all that matters, I find the teaching end of this hobby to be much more important and being that is one of the reasons I let all my frogs go in order to head back to the beginning and work with frogs I can offer to the new hobbyists as well as help teach and do my part. I was very much limited to frogs that I could not actively offer to new hobbyists.

All of these issues are one reason I formally think that a Union/ Organization or whatever are due. This hobby has grown to huge numbers compared to just a couple years ago, look around and you see the seasoned hobbyists now outnumbered 10 to 1. So I ask why can't we get a set example of what is truly best for the hobby? While the new hobbyists will move the hobby forward we have to get them started.

Michael


----------



## Ed

poison beauties said:


> Hello Ed, One question on this issue I still do not understand everytime you hit us with this, How is it of any benefit to allow or actively put a clearly weaker/ runt/ deformed/ sls ridden frog in a breeding viv when there are healthier or shall I say a clearly better choice frog without any any of those issues when its from the same gene pool? We have very few blood lines that are actually tracked and managed so how would actively weakening one help?
> 
> Michael


 
The problem is that pairing should be either randomly or through mate choice. I am not talking about a frog that obviously will not survive on its own.. lets start with SLS.. the majority of sls cases are the result of poor nutrition status of the adults and/or the tadpoles. So if you cull marginal sls affected frogs you are removing genes from the pool and potentially selecting for frogs that have alternate pathways for vitamin A metabolism. 

Again, weaker/runt frogs.. there are multiple potential reasons for this to occur that could be genetic or enviromental but as a case study we will look only at genetic.. The reason the frog may be smaller or weaker is that it is not as geneticly predisposed to survive in captivity (what used to be known as maladaption syndrome) as this is caused by a combination of genes. Deliberately culling that frog is selecting for those frogs that adapt better to captive conditions. 

The general process for selecting mates is not random... so we in general have been selecting the frogs for specific trait even in those groups regardless as people pair frogs in aesthetics which selects for the genes linked to that expressed phenotype.. 

We are not able to look at a frog and decide that all of it's genes are deleterious as some may be of positive benefit in an recessive or unexpressed trait. Any selections that decrease the genetic diversity of the gene pool should ideally be avoided, otherwise you are selecting for type and we know that this can result in the fixing of negative genetic traits (as an example seen in many pure bred dogs).


----------



## mantisdragon91

tim13 said:


> I don't mean to be argumentative, but wouldn't that adaption to have less adrenal response apply to ANY human they see? My P. Vittatus, as stated earlier recognize me, and so are not afraid. They also recognize that other people are not me. Now, not to be stereotypical, but members of a different species likely all look the "same" to other species. For example, you see a herd of zebras and they all pretty much look the same. Yet those zebras can tell each other apart pretty well. I bet people pretty much all look the same to frogs. Yet, mine can recognize me specifically amongst all those others who like to look in their tank.


I have seen similar recognition with a group of Phelsuma Standingii loose in my reptile room. They know my girlfriend is not a threat and will happilly hang out when she is down there by herself. The moment I walk into the basement they scatter to the most inaccessible crevices behind cages.

Amhibians and Reptiles will learn to recongnize individuals and adjust their behavior accordingly. If this is not curiosity and learned behavior than I am not sure what is.


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> Here is some just to get you started
> 
> Reptilian ethology in captivity: Observations of some problems and an evaluation of their ætiology
> 
> SpringerLink - Learning & Behavior, Volume 4, Number 3


 
I suggest that you critically read through them.. neither proves your point... 

Ed


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> I suggest that you critically read through them.. neither proves your point...
> 
> Ed


Than perhaps you can look at this one it clearly illustrates curiosity and learned behavior in monitors and rhino iguanos

Learning in Rhinoceros Iguanas, Monitors and Other Lizards


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> I don't mean to be argumentative, but wouldn't that adaption to have less adrenal response apply to ANY human they see? My P. Vittatus, as stated earlier recognize me, and so are not afraid. They also recognize that other people are not me. Now, not to be stereotypical, but members of a different species likely all look the "same" to other species. For example, you see a herd of zebras and they all pretty much look the same. Yet those zebras can tell each other apart pretty well. I bet people pretty much all look the same to frogs. Yet, mine can recognize me specifically amongst all those others who like to look in their tank.


You are adding conditioning behaviors to a mix.. positive and negative stimulus are not the same as sterotypical behaviors. This is something that people often confuse. 

The zebras cannot be used as an example as a lot of other factors fall into play such as olfactory kin recognition etc. 

If you look into the literature, if you have enough time and energy you can actually teach a hermit crab to ring a bell (better be willing to spend months..) through positive conditioning but this does not demonstrate sterotypical behaviors.. nor the anthropomorphized curiositty. 
For example in the Thamnophis article cited by Roman, there was a difference in behavioral response by sated and hungry snakes.. It was called curiosity but is it really? The more active response by hungry snakes makes sense as it related to foraging but if it was "curiosity" per se then even unsated snakes should have investigated the incident at the same rate as the hungry snakes. 

There is a lot of literature that has been summed up in Health and Welfare of Captive Reptiles, Chapman and Hall, 1995) which contradicts the "benefits" of novel exposure in reptiles. They measures a number of different factors including stress hormones (which directly affects the immune response) on issues ranging from cleaning of the enclosure to the introduction of novel items. Physiologically these were basically all negative impacts on the snake resulting in an increased corticosteroid response (and it can impact reproduction as it decreases testosterone) which resulted in a physiological response for up to two weeks post experiment. 

What we often intepret as "curiosity" often ends up physiologically acting as a major stressor on the animal... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> Than perhaps you can look at this one it clearly illustrates curiosity and learned behavior in monitors and rhino iguanos
> 
> Learning in Rhinoceros Iguanas, Monitors and Other Lizards


 
A blog post (even if by a friend of mine) on a pet store's website does not constitute citable references.. I suggest you get a copy of Health and Captive Welfare of Reptiles...


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> A blog post (even if by a friend of mine) on a pet store's website does not constitute citable references.. I suggest you get a copy of Health and Captive Welfare of Reptiles...


And you personally have no experience similar to the ones he has detailed? Keep in mind that no one here is defending their doctoral thesis, we are all just sharing mutual experiences and coming to personal conlusions based on what we see and hear.

Below can also be found a link to a fairly detailed study of learning in fish, a supposedly lower family on the evolutionary tree:

Neurobiology of comparative cognition - Google Books


----------



## Ed

Some of the captive breeding stuff I started to touch on in this thread http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...e-bred-conservation-efforts-2.html#post576511 

Ed


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> And you personally have no experience similar to the ones he has detailed? Keep in mind that no one here is defending their doctoral thesis, we are all just sharing mutual experiences and coming to personal conlusions based on what we see and hear.


 
See my posts above.. 

I am not the one making claims of sterotypical behaviors nor am I making claims that what I see is the result of curiosity.


----------



## tim13

Ed said:


> You are adding conditioning behaviors to a mix.. positive and negative stimulus are not the same as sterotypical behaviors. This is something that people often confuse.
> 
> The zebras cannot be used as an example as a lot of other factors fall into play such as olfactory kin recognition etc.
> 
> If you look into the literature, if you have enough time and energy you can actually teach a hermit crab to ring a bell (better be willing to spend months..) through positive conditioning but this does not demonstrate sterotypical behaviors.. nor the anthropomorphized curiositty.
> For example in the Thamnophis article cited by Roman, there was a difference in behavioral response by sated and hungry snakes.. It was called curiosity but is it really? The more active response by hungry snakes makes sense as it related to foraging but if it was "curiosity" per se then even unsated snakes should have investigated the incident at the same rate as the hungry snakes.
> 
> There is a lot of literature that has been summed up in Health and Welfare of Captive Reptiles, Chapman and Hall, 1995) which contradicts the "benefits" of novel exposure in reptiles. They measures a number of different factors including stress hormones (which directly affects the immune response) on issues ranging from cleaning of the enclosure to the introduction of novel items. Physiologically these were basically all negative impacts on the snake resulting in an increased corticosteroid response (and it can impact reproduction as it decreases testosterone) which resulted in a physiological response for up to two weeks post experiment.
> 
> What we often intepret as "curiosity" often ends up physiologically acting as a major stressor on the animal...
> 
> Ed


I'm sure teaching a hermit crab to ring a bell relies on months of the same situation being repeated. Same bell, same crab, etc. Yet who else among the animal kingdom routinely (everyday) changes their appearance. We humans wear clothes, something no other animal does. We change the colar, type, size of our cloths often. Sometimes we have long hair, sometimes we cut it. Sometimes we wear hats. All this should make it harder for a frog to recognize a certain individual. Yet it happens.


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> I'm sure teaching a hermit crab to ring a bell relies on months of the same situation being repeated. Same bell, same crab, etc. Yet who else among the animal kingdom routinely (everyday) changes their appearance. We humans wear clothes, something no other animal does. We change the colar, type, size of our cloths often. Sometimes we have long hair, sometimes we cut it. Sometimes we wear hats. All this should make it harder for a frog to recognize a certain individual. Yet it happens.


 
If you have access to it, I suggest reading Kauffield's, The Keeper and the Kept (Amazon.com: Snakes: The Keeper and the Kept (9780894649363): Carl Kauffeld: Books ) as there is an example of exactly what you are claiming with an ending you might be surprised to see..). There was a great talk on it back in (I think the early 1990s) at one of the IHS meetings were a lady got up and gave a lecture on how her herps would only recognize her when she took care of them in her big fuzzy bathrobe.. 

For some odd reasons people only consider "recognition" to be through visual means and ignore the whole host of other cues that may be linked to conditioning of the animals ranging from vibrations (how you walk) to sound, or even how you approach the enclosures.. all of which have been reinforced through the consistent introduction of food to the enclosure....


----------



## tim13

Probably 1 in 20 times I approach my frog enclosure do I offer food. Im a habitual frog watcher and don't walk by their tank without pausing to look for a few minutes. If anything, they should be acustomed to me NOT offering food, and then dashing away when I DO offer food as it being the least likey thing I do. (I feed every other day).


----------



## TheUnseenHand

I'm obviously new here, and as of now don't actually own any frogs. However, this debate reminds me of one that would surface in the bonsai hobby a lot. Not to the heated extent of this, at not having the same potential biological implications, but a debate where there are people on both sides.

Often people new to the bonsai hobby want to keep their trees inside. It's something we hear over and over and over from newbies. A lot of people will say there is no way you should keep your trees indoors. They are meant to be outside and will not survive inside. Inexperienced hobbyists, though, will believe it's fine to keep any tree inside. They often learn the hard way that this is not the case.

Now, as you dig deeper, research more, and become more experienced, you realize that some trees actually can be kept inside. It depends on the species, and it is a lot more work, but it is possible for some trees to thrive indoors. We still won't necessarily recommend this to newcomers, though, because it is a lot of work, requires a lot of study and a good understanding of individual species requirements. It requires a level of understanding and commitment that we just don't know if a newbie has or is ready to give. Frankly, until you try the hobby for a while, you can't know yourself if you are ready for that level of commitment or if you are willing to invest the time and money it will require.

That's kind of what I think this debate is. Newbies probably shouldn't try to mix because it requires a certain level of understanding of individual species that we are just not likely to have; and a level of commitment that we don't yet know if we will have. Now, if you keep different species over a course of a few years or more, realize you love the hobby and have the resources and time to put into the hobby, you may be able to attempt a mixed tank and have it be successful (_*meaning the frogs are thriving and not just surviving*_).

The cross breeding I see as almost another issue.; I don't know how many newcomers are planning on becoming breeders. I don't really see a problem with cross breeding unless you 1. plan to sell frogs or 2. live in an area where the frogs can escape, survive, and then reproduce with wild, pure species. If you dispose of the tadpoles it's all moot; though I have a feeling that opens a whole other can of worms.

In any case, all you can do is explain your side of the coin rationally and maturely and have the person make their own decision. I don't think there is a magic sentence or two you can say that will turn someone one way or the other.


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> Probably 1 in 20 times I approach my frog enclosure do I offer food. Im a habitual frog watcher and don't walk by their tank without pausing to look for a few minutes. If anything, they should be acustomed to me NOT offering food, and then dashing away when I DO offer food as it being the least likey thing I do. (I feed every other day).


 
this ignores the impact of food reinforcement.. In many species, random offering actually results in a more quick fixation of the behavior. All it takes is for an association to be made. 

Ed


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> If you have access to it, I suggest reading Kauffield's, The Keeper and the Kept (Amazon.com: Snakes: The Keeper and the Kept (9780894649363): Carl Kauffeld: Books ) as there is an example of exactly what you are claiming with an ending you might be surprised to see..). There was a great talk on it back in (I think the early 1990s) at one of the IHS meetings were a lady got up and gave a lecture on how her herps would only recognize her when she took care of them in her big fuzzy bathrobe..
> 
> For some odd reasons people only consider "recognition" to be through visual means and ignore the whole host of other cues that may be linked to conditioning of the animals ranging from vibrations (how you walk) to sound, or even how you approach the enclosures.. all of which have been reinforced through the consistent introduction of food to the enclosure....


And what is the diffrence exactly between recognition and learning? Obviuosly the frogs learn to recognize you as a source of food. To quote a friend. "If that ain't learning, I'm a at a loss to describe what is"


----------



## Ed

mantisdragon91 said:


> And what is the diffrence exactly between recognition and learning? Obviuosly the frogs learn to recognize you as a source of food. To quote a friend. "If that ain't learning, I'm a at a loss to describe what is"


 
I think you need to review the real differences between conditioning and learning, they are subtle and are there.. You are looking for a simple semantic way out of your argument as you have been unable to demonstrate your point in any other manner. 

Ed


----------



## poison beauties

Well I'm not sure if its sight, scent or what but I have had a personal experience with this subject regarding an adult 7' male albino Naja kaouthia that had the worst obsession with me Ive seen in a snake. Its got big, well beyond the average 4-5' male and I had probed it male early on but when I pinned and probed this thing as an adult it took on a hatred Ive not seen. Would strike the glass, his, follow me around the room when with its eyes and even spit at me which is rarer for this species. It only did this with me, My wife could come in the room, friends and kids to see it and it did not display this behavior unless I walked in the room. I guess that metal probe gave it nightmares.
I ended up selling him as he would injure his nose and I'm sure I kept him stressed. Herps can recognize individuals.

Michael


----------



## Ed

poison beauties said:


> Well I'm not sure if its sight, scent or what but I have had a personal experience with this subject regarding an adult 7' male albino Naja kaouthia that had the worst obsession with me Ive seen in a snake. Its got big, well beyond the average 4-5' male and I had probed it male early on but when I pinned and probed this thing as an adult it took on a hatred Ive not seen. Would strike the glass, his, follow me around the room when with its eyes and even spit at me which is rarer for this species. It only did this with me, My wife could come in the room, friends and kids to see it and it did not display this behavior unless I walked in the room. I guess that metal probe gave it nightmares.
> I ended up selling him as he would injure his nose and I'm sure I kept him stressed. Herps can recognize individuals.
> 
> Michael


Check out the report in Kauffield's book... and this would technically be a case of negative conditioning.. 


Ed


----------



## poison beauties

Ed said:


> The problem is that pairing should be either randomly or through mate choice. I am not talking about a frog that obviously will not survive on its own.. lets start with SLS.. the majority of sls cases are the result of poor nutrition status of the adults and/or the tadpoles. So if you cull marginal sls affected frogs you are removing genes from the pool and potentially selecting for frogs that have alternate pathways for vitamin A metabolism.
> 
> Again, weaker/runt frogs.. there are multiple potential reasons for this to occur that could be genetic or enviromental but as a case study we will look only at genetic.. The reason the frog may be smaller or weaker is that it is not as geneticly predisposed to survive in captivity (what used to be known as maladaption syndrome) as this is caused by a combination of genes. Deliberately culling that frog is selecting for those frogs that adapt better to captive conditions.
> 
> The general process for selecting mates is not random... so we in general have been selecting the frogs for specific trait even in those groups regardless as people pair frogs in aesthetics which selects for the genes linked to that expressed phenotype..
> 
> We are not able to look at a frog and decide that all of it's genes are deleterious as some may be of positive benefit in an recessive or unexpressed trait. Any selections that decrease the genetic diversity of the gene pool should ideally be avoided, otherwise you are selecting for type and we know that this can result in the fixing of negative genetic traits (as an example seen in many pure bred dogs).


Yes I know SLS is mainly due to husbandry levels in the hobby, and I know about the sneaker male and runt theory's but how in captivity where our gene pool is already weak and limited does it help to keep those frogs in the loop? If you have a stronger, bigger over all healthier appearing frog from lets say the same clutch as the weaker one why is there any cause to use the weaker one when the genetics of both should be the same makeup?

In a few cases some of us would like better management of the frogs in the hobby, With limited lines for some species like st lamasi I see no reason to use a weaker/ smaller frog that in the wild would be least likely to breed anyways.

Michael


----------



## tim13

I would also argue that conditioning is learning. My parents conditioned me to brush my teeth. Now I just do it on my own. Yet it's curiosity that causes me to turn over every rock I find to see what's underneath it. If our frogs have no curiosity to speak of, how do they learn their way around their vivs? Would this not require some exploration? Or, are you of the belief (Ed) that they simply memorize it while hunting for food, cover, past habitats, etc? I have watched my D. Tinctorius "Matechos" hop around their tank all day. They have been in this tank for months, and so should have it memorized. Are they just endlessly looking around for food? If they know I'm going to feed them through conditioning, what prevents them from just staying in one spot till I do?


----------



## poison beauties

Ed said:


> Check out the report in Kauffield's book... and this would technically be a case of negative conditioning..
> 
> 
> Ed


I will when I can get a copy of it now but for short term what do you mean by negative conditioning? As in I stressed it or physically bothered it to cause this? Either way I see it as it showing personality and recognition of a single person.

Michael


----------



## Roadrunner

cross contamination, not only of hook,lungworm, coccidia, chytrid but other virus, bacteria and such we can't test for or know about. Unseen bullying(no one is always around their tanks), different sized food items, cross breeding, being able to place vivs in microclimates suitable for different needs or (humidity, temp or light levels), different feeding amounts for different frogs metabolic needs or shyness, build up of fecal material and nitrogen levels if not adequately made for good bacteria levels to deal w/ the waste, increased stress from unseen intimidation, remember wild animals are built to not show problems outwardly till it may be too late. Any benefits would be strictly for the observer/caretaker. Just outright too much for most, even experienced hobbyists to understand and test for. Anyone who does it and says it's not an experiment and they know what they're doing is lying or trying to sell you something. Even if someone else made that mix work doesn't mean you will.

Can you do it and have it work, sure.

Sorry if this was covered as I haven't read all 8 pages.


----------



## Ed

poison beauties said:


> I will when I can get a copy of it now but for short term what do you mean by negative conditioning? As in I stressed it or physically bothered it to cause this? Either way I see it as it showing personality and recognition of a single person.
> 
> Michael


Hi Michael,

We got into learing as a side bar as people confuse true learning with conditioning.. for example you can have the same response to a stimuli even after one interaction... this doesn't mean that a conscious connection has been made between the two points. I haven't argued that reptiles are incapable of learning (see below about lack of language to seperate the two).. the issue is that people are confusing a response that is the result of a transference from a "unconditioned response" (example salivating when smelling food (which does not involve any conscious connection) to a conditioned response (example whistle) so that the animal responds by salivating when it hears a certain whistle. This can be called learned behavior due to the lack of terminology but it functions without conscious action by the animal involved... 
For example flatworms (which we have to agree are unable to make conscious associations) can learn to avoid exposure to sunfish (see http://www.mnstate.edu/wisenden/reprint pdfs/2001 planaria An Beh 62 761-766.pdf for example) or that mealworms can be "taught" to not burrow.. (see for example JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie).. 

This is why the anecodotal examples cannot be used examples of conscious decisions by the animals as we cannot seperate them from conditioned responses... For example, in your case the snake reacted with aggressive defense to your presence... this could just as easily have been due to the condtioning from exposure to severe negative stimuli from your failure to back away from it's defensive posturing (restraining and probing the snake) resulting in the actions of the snake... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> I would also argue that conditioning is learning. My parents conditioned me to brush my teeth. Now I just do it on my own. Yet it's curiosity that causes me to turn over every rock I find to see what's underneath it. If our frogs have no curiosity to speak of, how do they learn their way around their vivs? Would this not require some exploration? Or, are you of the belief (Ed) that they simply memorize it while hunting for food, cover, past habitats, etc? I have watched my D. Tinctorius "Matechos" hop around their tank all day. They have been in this tank for months, and so should have it memorized. Are they just endlessly looking around for food? If they know I'm going to feed them through conditioning, what prevents them from just staying in one spot till I do?


Given that a mealworm can be conditioned to not burrow doesn't mean it has "learned".. .. The same can be said for the flatworm experiment I cited.. 

If you do not include microfauna in the tank and can positively demonstrate that there are not detrivore mites for them to feed on, then the behavior is just as easily explained that the frogs have not learned that food only comes into the enclosure when you add it.. they have simply been conditioned that food does occur when you add it.. your actual presence in viewing them could be stimulating them to engage in search behaviors.. 



Ed


----------



## Roadrunner

safety from predators. No I didn't ask any of them if they wanted safety. You have to draw the line somewhere about your benefit. Mixing is furthering your benefit by decreasing their benefit/health/safety.


Brotherly Monkey said:


> hate to stir the pot here, but how does it benefit the frog, for you to keep it, in the first place? Seems like my frogs don't gain much at all from my ownership, and it's solely for my benefit


----------



## Ed

poison beauties said:


> Yes I know SLS is mainly due to husbandry levels in the hobby, and I know about the sneaker male and runt theory's but how in captivity where our gene pool is already weak and limited does it help to keep those frogs in the loop? If you have a stronger, bigger over all healthier appearing frog from lets say the same clutch as the weaker one why is there any cause to use the weaker one when the genetics of both should be the same makeup?
> 
> In a few cases some of us would like better management of the frogs in the hobby, With limited lines for some species like st lamasi I see no reason to use a weaker/ smaller frog that in the wild would be least likely to breed anyways.
> 
> Michael


The assumption being made is that 
1) the genes in the "poorer" frog are a negative to the overall genetics of the population in all forms
2) that genetic diversity of the captive population is "poor and weak"
3) that what you are seeing is the actual result of genetics and not due to enviromental or husbandry influences. 

Lets look at number one first.. there is a lot tied up in this assumption that can be shown to be an issue if you practice it in a closed population.. It starts with the assumption that what you are seeing is the result on one gene and not a complex of genes.. for example, it makes the assumption that the genes that associated with that gene are also a negative as you cannot remove just one gene from the population. You remove or change groups of genes (see for example the domestication program with foxes) which can not only reduce the variety of genes in the population but the appearence of the actual animal. 
As you reduce the genetic diversity by selecting away from the traits shown by the "poor" frog (by culling it or refusing to breed it), you are actually changing the frequency of genes in the population (which can directly lead to inbreeding depression). The goal should be to maintain the frequency of all genes at the same relative frequency as that seen in wild populations, otherwise you are engaging in selective breeding for type... this is the same as breeding for fine spot azureus, except you are breeding for the percieved ideal of the type. 

2) Even in populations that are founded on relatively few animals, we do not know that diversity is poor or week as we do not know the diversity present in the founding population, nor how that is present in the current populatons today... This is an assumption based on little information.. for example it doesn't take into account the imports of frogs over time (legal or illegal) that have continued to contribute to the population. 

3) In general we have to idea whether or not that the "poor" frogs that are seen in the hobby are the result of enviromental causes or not.. enviromental impacts on tadpoles can have major impacts on the metamorphs and long afterwards.. 

Ed


----------



## TheUnseenHand

frogfarm said:


> *cross contamination, not only of hook,lungworm, coccidia, chytrid but other virus, bacteria and such we can't test for or know about. * Unseen bullying(no one is always around their tanks), different sized food items, cross breeding, *being able to place vivs in microclimates suitable for different needs or (humidity, temp or light levels)*, different feeding amounts for different frogs metabolic needs or shyness, *build up of fecal material and nitrogen levels if not adequately made for good bacteria levels to deal w/ the waste,* increased stress from unseen intimidation, remember wild animals are built to not show problems outwardly till it may be too late. *Any benefits would be strictly for the observer/caretaker. * Just outright too much for most, even experienced hobbyists to understand and test for. Anyone who does it and says it's not an experiment and they know what they're doing is lying or trying to sell you something. Even if someone else made that mix work doesn't mean you will.
> 
> Can you do it and have it work, sure.
> 
> Sorry if this was covered as I haven't read all 8 pages.


Don't mean to stir the pot as I know this gets really heated. FWIW, I'm not planning on mixing anyway...

Just addressing the bold parts in order: First, wouldn't such diseases likely be passed to the other members of the viv regardless of species? I.E. Say you have a 40 gallon with 4 of the same species and one has a disease mentioned; all other things being equal (which I know they aren't necessarily) wouldn't the other three have the same chance to get the disease as if they were all different species? (not recommending putting 4 different species in the same viv, BTW)

Second, are you saying each species differs so much in it's requirements that it's impossible to provide a single viv that would be able to house any more than one species? If so, and there are that many different species (thus so many different requirements), how do you so precisely tweak each viv for each species? I could understand if their needs were largely different, or even moderately different, but if they are only slightly different, how would you tweak that so finely? Or are there no two species that have only slightly different needs?

Third, would this not be the same as if you had the same number of frogs, but all the same species?

Fourth, I agree. At least from what I have read so far, which is admittedly limited, the only benefit is the wow factor for the observer. It's a big factor for many people, though.


----------



## Wallace Grover

If everybody starts rampantly mixing and breeding, wouldn't we all end up with one color morph consisting of the dominant color genes in the frog(s)?

i.e Mix and make this hobby drab, monocolor, and a bit boring?


----------



## Roadrunner

You should never worry about asking questions.

Disease factors will differ depending on genes and prior exposure? The different morphs would probably have different abilities to resist different pathogens and mixing them would compound the ability of one to have something the other doesn't deal well w/.

no, they don't differ that much but what if you want one type to stop breeding and the other hasn't started you'd then want 2 differing humidities. If some were getting thin you might want them cooler, if the others were getting fat, warmer... Also yes, if you have hi canopy species as opposed to ground dwellers, It's less humid in the canopy than on the ground.

Could act the same if you have the same species or different if the morph sizes are different(dwarf and surinam cobalts).



TheUnseenHand said:


> Don't mean to stir the pot as I know this gets really heated. FWIW, I'm not planning on mixing anyway...
> 
> Just addressing the bold parts in order: First, wouldn't such diseases likely be passed to the other members of the viv regardless of species? I.E. Say you have a 40 gallon with 4 of the same species and one has a disease mentioned; all other things being equal (which I know they aren't necessarily) wouldn't the other three have the same chance to get the disease as if they were all different species? (not recommending putting 4 different species in the same viv, BTW)
> 
> Second, are you saying each species differs so much in it's requirements that it's impossible to provide a single viv that would be able to house any more than one species? If so, and there are that many different species (thus so many different requirements), how do you so precisely tweak each viv for each species? I could understand if their needs were largely different, or even moderately different, but if they are only slightly different, how would you tweak that so finely? Or are there no two species that have only slightly different needs?
> 
> Third, would this not be the same as if you had the same number of frogs, but all the same species?
> 
> Fourth, I agree. At least from what I have read so far, which is admittedly limited, the only benefit is the wow factor for the observer. It's a big factor for many people, though.


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!!!!

John


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

Wallace Grover said:


> If everybody starts rampantly mixing and breeding, wouldn't we all end up with one color morph consisting of the dominant color genes in the frog(s)?
> 
> i.e Mix and make this hobby drab, monocolor, and a bit boring?


I think what the pro arguments have been about is mixing in an enclosure, and not crossing of morph and such


----------



## Wallace Grover

I think it's on both, I saw someone mention how if people mix we can verify the purity of bloodlines...


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

Wallace Grover said:


> I think it's on both, I saw someone mention how if people mix we can verify the purity of bloodlines...


I don't recall anyone promoting hybridizing here, or the crossing of morphs. In fact, the two people that have been arguing the pro-side of mixing have stated they took steps to prevent such. In one instance the someone stated they never pulled the eggs, and allowed them to die in some manner, and the other, they only kept mixed enclosures of frogs that are believed to be unable to breed


----------



## SmackoftheGods

konton said:


> By the same logic no one should be allowed to smoke, because we all breath the same air. You want to keep the air clean. I want to smoke. I don't have a problem with you, but you've got a problem with me. And now I have a problem with you, because you're making a problem for me. And the war begins.
> 
> Sorry for playing devils advocate (I don't actually smoke). You have the right to want to keep the species and morph true. I want the same thing. But your logic isn't going to sway anyone.


Actually, smoking is a disgusting habit that I would prefer to stay entirely away from (both first and second hand). So, had I the option to keep others from smoking... I might just take it (or at leask keep them from doing it anywhere near where it directly affects me)....

The issue is your assumption that my logic (in that particular instance) was intended to sway. It wasn't. It was merely intended to detail the reason behind why Jellyman is okay with those who don't want to mix, but those who don't want to mix aren't okay with those who do. And I accomplished that goal.



Jellyman said:


> It's funny you bring this up yet again. Actually longevity in frogs is a ruler that defines success as it is with all captive animals. Breeding them to an early grave for profit or pleasure certainly is not.
> 
> That being said almost a year ago I began pulling eggs from my setup. Over the past year I have raised 33 frogs and currently have 1 froglet, 16 tads, and 15 tads(pulled 3 more last night). So the last arguement has been answered. I have no plans after may to pull any more eggs. I just needed to end this last arguement that the frogs were not breeding.


Actually, I had a frogger over at my place about a year ago. We had this discussion and I actually like what he told me: "If you are unable to breed your adult stock, and raise the subsequent eggs to full adulthood, you are not having success."

I know you've gotten eggs, you mentioned that before. But because you cull the tadpoles (and I do, actually, appreciate you for culling them) we don't know whether they would've morphed out deformed. And if they didn't morph out deformed we really don't know what's breeding in your tank. To me the ideal mixed tank (and I do believe there are those who are capable of accomplishing a successful mixed tank (that is in response to Roman's statement that there are plenty of experienced froggers who simply don't broadcast that they keep mixed tanks)) is one where the different species can remain isolated from one another. A tank that is so well designed that the different frogs stay in isolated populations and breed without the possibility of having outcrossed frogs. Unfortunately I suspect that because (as I understand it) you have different morphs of the same species in the same tank this goal would be entirely impossible.



Jellyman said:


> Who are you quoting here: "it doesn't really matter that my different morph tincs come from isolated populations, and the tincs come from Brazil and the leucomelas come from Venezuela and the auratus come from Panama, I felt like throwing them all together in the same tank." - yet another made up statement beiong used to defend your agenda.
> 
> Do you really think making a statement like the one above is realistic. I give them the same advice used for properly aquiring frogs, properly quarantining frogs, properly setting up the enclosures, what signs to watch for, and if they are new I even tell them about the opposing views about mixing and hybrids. I'm not recruiting but I'm also not lying to others that are interested.


The quote was not intended to be literal. Obviously is an exaggeration, but it's an exaggeration intended to depict my point (that being that what I meant when I discussed respect of the animals is obviously different than your own).

While I can appreciate that you attempt to provide beginners with a balanced account, rather than indoctrinating them with "mixing is fine," I don't know that it's enough. You and I have agreed in the past that mixing is only for the advanced hobbyist. Telling newbies that it's okay to mix, but you should wait until you have experience just seems like it would lead to some bad consequences.

Now, if you'll all excuse me, this thread is blowing up way too fast and I just can't keep up with everything else I've got going on....


----------



## TheUnseenHand

frogfarm said:


> You should never worry about asking questions.
> 
> Disease factors will differ depending on genes and prior exposure? The different morphs would probably have different abilities to resist different pathogens and mixing them would compound the ability of one to have something the other doesn't deal well w/.
> 
> no, they don't differ that much but what if you want one type to stop breeding and the other hasn't started you'd then want 2 differing humidities. If some were getting thin you might want them cooler, if the others were getting fat, warmer... Also yes, if you have hi canopy species as opposed to ground dwellers, It's less humid in the canopy than on the ground.
> 
> Could act the same if you have the same species or different if the morph sizes are different(dwarf and surinam cobalts).


1. Understood. Makes sense, though I'd imagine this would be the case for nearly every single animal; even cats and dogs.

2. If someone were to mix I would hope their goal would not be to breed, then sell, the frogs. That I am against without a doubt. If they did breed, you could just dispose of all the tadpoles. You'd have to be vigilant, but it could be done I would think.

Again, if one was getting fat while the other thin; could that not happen with the same species? 

I would also think if someone were to mix they wouldn't mix species that had very different requirements (ground dwelling vs. arboreal, for instance) or were very different sizes. If they did that, they obviously have not researched enough and don't have enough experience.

Again, I'm not condoning mixing. I'm not going to do it. I'm just trying to 1. learn and 2. play devils advocate in a mature manner.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

frogfarm said:


> safety from predators. No I didn't ask any of them if they wanted safety. You have to draw the line somewhere about your benefit. Mixing is furthering your benefit by decreasing their benefit/health/safety.


I certainly agree that overtly negative behavior and husbandry is a bad thing. But my point is that simply not directly benefiting the frogs doesn't amount to something overtly negative. Also, it would be interesting to see the number of frogs that survive in captivity (wild collected and captive bred) vs the wild


----------



## Wallace Grover

Brotherly Monkey said:


> I don't recall anyone promoting hybridizing here, or the crossing of morphs. In fact, the two people that have been arguing the pro-side of mixing have stated they took steps to prevent such. In one instance the someone stated they never pulled the eggs, and allowed them to die in some manner, and the other, they only kept mixed enclosures of frogs that are believed to be unable to breed


Typo, the can is supposed to be a cannot...


----------



## Etch83

Wonderful idea! I care about preserving our frogs and helping them thrive. You could also say that if you mix frog breeds and they breed, you will get a gross colored frog.


----------



## Jellyman

Wallace Grover said:


> If everybody starts rampantly mixing and breeding, wouldn't we all end up with one color morph consisting of the dominant color genes in the frog(s)?
> 
> i.e Mix and make this hobby drab, monocolor, and a bit boring?


That is certainly not what has happened in snakes, geckos, fish.... 
The color morphs and patterns are endless


----------



## Wallace Grover

Jellyman said:


> That is certainly not what has happened in snakes, geckos, fish....
> The color morphs and patterns are endless


----------



## poison beauties

Jellyman said:


> That is certainly not what has happened in snakes, geckos, fish....
> The color morphs and patterns are endless


Those are actual genetic morphs, Mostly selectivly bred but still they are from non hybridization...Albino, Hypo, Axanthic, Xanthic, Pied, Leucistic, Ivory and so on are not from crossing locals, species or seperate populations.

Michael


----------



## Wallace Grover

Either way the patterns created in the herp/fish hobby are in general just slight variations of each other and no where near the diversity of patterns in PDF's...


----------



## poison beauties

That is true in the means of there being more variation in the natural patterns and colors of darts but as for man made the python, tokay gecko's, corn snakes, garter snakes have many many crazy patterns and morphs and many are nothing like the normal ones.

Michael


----------



## Jellyman

Wallace Grover said:


> Either way the patterns created in the herp/fish hobby are in general just slight variations of each other and no where near the diversity of patterns in PDF's...


The diversity in pattern and/or color in geckos or betas alone dwarfs what is available as far as dart frogs go. 

The diversity in tinc morphs are mostly slight variations. That is why it is near impossible to label a frog based on it's appearance.


----------



## Jellyman

poison beauties said:


> Those are actual genetic morphs, Mostly selectivly bred but still they are from non hybridization...Albino, Hypo, Axanthic, Xanthic, Pied, Leucistic, Ivory and so on are not from crossing locals, species or seperate populations.
> 
> Michael


They are crosses between seperate locals of geckos. I've never heard of a gecko pertaining to any specific local data information.


----------



## eldalote2

You guys are AWESOME!


----------



## Roadrunner

Ya, but it's moreso w/ frogs since they are kept in a viv walking around in their waste and wrestling, etc.

Id hope that too but I'm not niave.

Yes but it would be more prevelant w/ frogs w/ radically different personality as some would devour all the food before it gets to the shy species.

Do what you will but it's only for selfish reasons that people mix. All these questions don't even account for cross contamination of things we can and can't test for.


TheUnseenHand said:


> 1. Understood. Makes sense, though I'd imagine this would be the case for nearly every single animal; even cats and dogs.
> 
> 2. If someone were to mix I would hope their goal would not be to breed, then sell, the frogs. That I am against without a doubt. If they did breed, you could just dispose of all the tadpoles. You'd have to be vigilant, but it could be done I would think.
> 
> Again, if one was getting fat while the other thin; could that not happen with the same species?
> 
> I would also think if someone were to mix they wouldn't mix species that had very different requirements (ground dwelling vs. arboreal, for instance) or were very different sizes. If they did that, they obviously have not researched enough and don't have enough experience.
> 
> Again, I'm not condoning mixing. I'm not going to do it. I'm just trying to 1. learn and 2. play devils advocate in a mature manner.


----------



## Roadrunner

I agree, but here you are risking the health of the frogs by mixing. That's overtly negative. Ya, wc's don't do as well in captivity as cb. How'd we get on this subject?



Brotherly Monkey said:


> I certainly agree that overtly negative behavior and husbandry is a bad thing. But my point is that simply not directly benefiting the frogs doesn't amount to something overtly negative. Also, it would be interesting to see the number of frogs that survive in captivity (wild collected and captive bred) vs the wild


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

frogfarm said:


> I agree, but here you are risking the health of the frogs by mixing. That's overtly negative.


My original post was in response to someone saying "don't mix because there are no benefits". And I was just pointing out that there aren't benefits to many things, so it's a weak argument




frogfarm said:


> Ya, wc's don't do as well in captivity as cb. How'd we get on this subject?


You brought up freedom from predators as a benefit to captive husbandry. And so my response was that it would be interesting to see survival rates in captivity (both WC and captive bred) vs the wild

Basically, asking if there was an actual benefit to being free from predators, while in captivity


----------



## poison beauties

Jellyman said:


> They are crosses between seperate locals of geckos. I've never heard of a gecko pertaining to any specific local data information.


As far as I know there is only one Tokay population and it extends throughout the range, There are more than 50 naturally occurring patterns, colors of morphs.
And yes I know there are those who actually cross locales but those are not natural patterns and colors. They also cross seperate species and make decent money doing it. I just try and steer clear of that mess

Michael


----------



## Wallace Grover

IMO just do some background work on the seller or ask for information, where they got their breeders from, etc. and don't EVER give your business to someone who cannot provide you with that information...

Eventually when some of these mixers realize this isn't what the vast amount of the PDF community wants they'll stop


----------



## Roadrunner

If you think it's a weak argument fine. It's still overtly negative to mix while not necessarily to keep them in tanks. Even if on the same ladder, they are different levels.

Oh, I imagine so since tarantuals eat tads and frogs, amongst other predators. As I said I didn't ask them though. Feel free to do the research though. 


Brotherly Monkey said:


> My original post was in response to someone saying "don't mix because there are no benefits". And I was just pointing out that there aren't benefits to many things, so it's a weak argument
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You brought up freedom from predators as a benefit to captive husbandry. And so my response was that it would be interesting to see survival rates in captivity (both WC and captive bred) vs the wild
> 
> Basically, asking if there was an actual benefit to being free from predators, while in captivity


----------



## Tony

I think the problem runs much deeper than just the dart frog or herp hobby. Our educational system does a piss-poor job of teaching science in general and evolution in particular. If people do not understand or appreciate the processes and timespans that led to the development of the frogs then why would they place a high value on preserving them?


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

frogfarm said:


> If you think it's a weak argument fine. It's still overtly negative to mix while not necessarily to keep them in tanks. Even if on the same ladder, they are different levels.


He didn't mention it being overtly negative, he said there was no benefit. And I still think it was a weak argument

It's like someone saying "don't paint your car red, because there are no benefits". My answer would be "so?". Now if the person made a similar statement, and mentioned how the color red seems to correlate to higher traffic stops and wrecks, their argument would be much stronger




frogfarm said:


> Oh, I imagine so since tarantuals eat tads and frogs, amongst other predators. As I said I didn't ask them though. Feel free to do the research though.


certainly such won't happen in captivity, but neither will a frog be stuffed into a glass box, with a RH of 20%, in the wild


----------



## Wallace Grover

Tony said:


> I think the problem runs much deeper than just the dart frog or herp hobby. Our educational system does a piss-poor job of teaching science in general and evolution in particular. If people do not understand or appreciate the processes and timespans that led to the development of the frogs then why would they place a high value on preserving them?


IMO you're going a little too deep there... I think the problem is inexperienced hobbyist who just don't care.


----------



## poison beauties

Wallace Grover said:


> IMO you're going a little too deep there... I think the problem is inexperienced hobbyist who just don't care.


You can't technically care about something your never made aware of, Teaching is the root of this hobby's goal and we are one of only a few exotic hobbies that go above and beyond with our own time and money to better it,.

Michael


----------



## Roadrunner

It doesn't even get 20 RH in my house during winter w/ forced air. It has been getting very dry in the tropics w/ it being the second year of drought though. If there are leaves and hide huts the RH wouldn't be 20 even if the tank magically got that lo humidity. We should always try and keep conditions good for the frogs so why possibly compound problems w/ mixing?


Brotherly Monkey said:


> certainly such won't happen in captivity, but neither will a frog be stuffed into a glass box, with a RH of 20%, in the wild


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

frogfarm said:


> It doesn't even get 20 RH in my house during winter w/ forced air. It has been getting very dry in the tropics w/ it being the second year of drought though. If there are leaves and hide huts the RH wouldn't be 20 even if the tank magically got that lo humidity. We should always try and keep conditions good for the frogs so why possibly compound problems w/ mixing?


I wasn't trying to promote mixing. Just pointing out that captivity comes with it's own issues, if you're a frog. So i am unsure that the removal of predators represent some net benefit


----------



## Wallace Grover

poison beauties said:


> You can't technically care about something your never made aware of, Teaching is the root of this hobby's goal and we are one of only a few exotic hobbies that go above and beyond with our own time and money to better it,.
> 
> Michael


The thing is new hobbyist who ARE told this do it anyway...


----------



## Roadrunner

Well, to have a stable population each adult pair can only produce 2 offspring to take their place. If not there would be exponential growth. Seems to me, with their prolificity, there are a lot of frogs and tads dying in the wild.



Brotherly Monkey said:


> I wasn't trying to promote mixing. Just pointing out that captivity comes with it's own issues, if you're a frog. So i am unsure that the removal of predators represent some net benefit


----------



## PeanutbuttER

Wallace Grover said:


> The thing is new hobbyist who ARE told this do it anyway...


Competely agree. Outside the hobby there are people who think hybridizing is cool. You get to more or less play god and create a new never before seen morph. That alone can feel rewarding to some and outweigh advice theyve been getting from others.

Side-note: does anyone want to comment about the op? Surely someone has had experience and knows good ways of presenting the argument to new/prospective owners as to why mixing should be avoided.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

frogfarm said:


> Well, to have a stable population each adult pair can only produce 2 offspring to take their place. If not there would be exponential growth. Seems to me, with their prolificity, there are a lot of frogs and tads dying in the wild.



correct me if I am wrong, but aren't darts seasonal breeders who lay a relatively small number of eggs? 


If it was something like mantillas (sp), I would agree that more die in the wild than survive. But the small size of their clutch seems to suggest that they have a decently high survival rate among their young


----------



## Jellyman

Jellyman said:


> Start by realizing that it is not a matter of educating. Educating implies they are doing something wrong and need to be corrected. In reality they are just doing something that goes against your beliefs. Give good truthful reasons for why you choose not to mix or breed different species or morphs. Be civil in your attempts to pursuade others with opposing viewpoints and realize that not everyone is going to agree and/or change thier mind.


Based on my original post (shown above)answering the OP:

The majority of this forum community believes that mixing is bad for the hobby because it can lead to hybrid or cross morph frogs being produced. The reason we feel this is bad is because these frogs have a long life span and could enter the hobby not labeled properly. If entered in the hobby not labeled properly they can tarnish pure blood lines. Even though it has been shown that mixed tanks are achievable, new comers to the hobby should start out with some single species enclosures to gain some experience before trying to attempt a mixed enclosure. If you do decide to mix first, please take into consideration not creating hybrids and either mix species that cannot breed with one another or be prepared to cull any eggs that are produced and second, research all the necessary information regarding mixed enclosures to make sure you have the best possible setup to be successful for the health and longevity of the frogs.


----------



## Woodsman

People who do not keep dart frogs shouldn't be making arguments about dart frogs. It makes us all look a little bit stupider.

Richard.


----------



## Wallace Grover

lol Jellyman


I could say we're essentially doing the same thing as Hitler and have the argument hold more water than yours are.

Fact is, trying to dispute logic with "logic" doesn't quite work.


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> Well, to have a stable population each adult pair can only produce 2 offspring to take their place. If not there would be exponential growth. Seems to me, with their prolificity, there are a lot of frogs and tads dying in the wild.


This ignores the movment of animals into population sinks... the number of animals that are held in one area is limited by the availability of resources, as the maximal carrying capicity at that time is reached animals are pushed out into population sinks where reproduction and or survivial are limited, this puts a limit on the exponential growth.... 

This wikipedia article is actually a decent one for it.. 
Source 

Ed


----------



## TheUnseenHand

frogfarm said:


> Ya, but it's moreso w/ frogs since they are kept in a viv walking around in their waste and wrestling, etc.
> 
> Id hope that too but I'm not niave.
> 
> Yes but it would be more prevelant w/ frogs w/ radically different personality as some would devour all the food before it gets to the shy species.
> 
> *Do what you will but it's only for selfish reasons that people mix. All these questions don't even account for cross contamination of things we can and can't test for.*


I don't mean to sound confrontational, if that's the way it came across. Just encouraging conversation. I appreciate your answers, I'm learning more and more .


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

Woodsman said:


> People who do not keep dart frogs shouldn't be making arguments about dart frogs. It makes us all look a little bit stupider.
> 
> Richard.


Richard, if you're talking about me, I do own dart frogs. Some of which I purchased from Kyle, with the majority of others coming from various members of this site.

Honestly, I usually wouldn't answer such an inquiry, but it seems like you're the type to hold on to childish grudges until you die. So I figured I would save you some time hyperventilating and trying to engage in pointless harassment


----------



## Roadrunner

They breed when conditions are right. I'm not up on seasonality for the tropics.

A dart frog(phyllos/epis) can produce as many or more than mantellas/year. I've had imitators produce 7 eggs a week. They may be small but they can lay several times in a 2 week period and wc tincs can have over 20 eggs/clutch. You may be thinking of thumbnails laying small clutches, but they can be frequent. Even if they do have few offspring only 2 survive per pair to keep a stable population. If they produce 4 a year then breed 4 years 14 generally die per pair(way small estimate though). I'm sure they have more than 2 tads / lifetime and over 4 would mean 50% die. If it's 20 produced/lifetime than 90% die.





Brotherly Monkey said:


> correct me if I am wrong, but aren't darts seasonal breeders who lay a relatively small number of eggs?
> 
> 
> If it was something like mantillas (sp), I would agree that more die in the wild than survive. But the small size of their clutch seems to suggest that they have a decently high survival rate among their young


----------



## Jellyman

Wallace Grover said:


> lol Jellyman
> 
> 
> I could say we're essentially doing the same thing as Hitler and have the argument hold more water than yours are.
> 
> Fact is, trying to dispute logic with "logic" doesn't quite work.


Sorry, I'm not following you. What arguements of mine are you referring to?


----------



## Roadrunner

I understand that Ed. Either way they are pushed to less than desirable places and die. Mortality or less than desirable life circumstances are hi in the wild. Are you saying there is a very low predation rate on darts in the wild? The Long-billed Kerlews i studied only have one clutch a year about the size or less of some darts and they lost a huge percentage to predation and who knows how many after fledging.



Ed said:


> This ignores the movment of animals into population sinks... the number of animals that are held in one area is limited by the availability of resources, as the maximal carrying capicity at that time is reached animals are pushed out into population sinks where reproduction and or survivial are limited, this puts a limit on the exponential growth....
> 
> This wikipedia article is actually a decent one for it..
> Source
> 
> Ed


----------



## Tony

Wallace Grover said:


> The thing is new hobbyist who ARE told this do it anyway...


That is exactly my point. The anti-intellectual movement in the US has crippled science education. If people aren't educated in science (specifically evolution) then they don't comprehend the foundation of the argument against hybridization and therefore ignore what they are told and do it anyway.


----------



## Wallace Grover

Tony said:


> That is exactly my point. The anti-intellectual movement in the US has crippled science education. If people aren't educated in science (specifically evolution) then they don't comprehend the foundation of the argument against hybridization and therefore ignore what they are told and do it anyway.


Quite frankly I think "anti-intellectual" movement is an extreme hyperbole. Yes, you have a few crazies here and there, but comparing what is taught in schools and more specifically science classes compared to the 20s,50s,80s, etc. shows how much progress we've made. I don't think there truly has been a wide spread anti-intellectual movement in the Western world since the peak of the Catholic Church in the middle ages (barring perhaps Nazi Germany, which was quite a short time period)...


----------



## Tony

Wallace Grover said:


> Quite frankly I think "anti-intellectual" movement is an extreme hyperbole.


The fact that "Intelligent Design" is considered a credible scientific theory among a large portion of the American populous says otherwise.


----------



## Wallace Grover

Tony said:


> The fact that "Intelligent Design" is considered a credible scientific theory among a large portion of the American populous says otherwise.


I'll take that any day rather than house-arrest or being burned for heresy

The fact is sometimes we, as "intellectuals," feel the need to force our reasoning and though process onto others when it is a futile effort. Sometimes you just need to convince others that it's wrong for a reason that they might take seriously as opposed to painting the big scheme of things and just undo your guidance...


----------



## Tony

Wallace Grover said:


> I'll take that any day rather than house-arrest or being burned for heresy


Not being burned alive is a decent goal, but I like to aim a little higher.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Wallace Grover said:


> I'll take that any day rather than house-arrest or being burned for heresy


Give the Tea Party two more elections and I'm sure they will pass a bill along those lines for anyone teaching evolution in school.


----------



## pl259

Brotherly Monkey said:


> hate to stir the pot here, but how does it benefit the frog, for you to keep it, in the first place? Seems like my frogs don't gain much at all from my ownership, and it's solely for my benefit


The frogs beneffit from the glass box I keep them in, the temp and humidity I maintain for them, and the food I feed them. Because they'd die without it. We're all here because we keep them. What does that have to do with mixing? Are you equating keeping a mixed tank with a non-mixed tank, or just saying we shouldn't keep them at all?

Mixing adds risks to the frogs above and beyond the normal care that we as a hobby ALREADY provide. Can some minimze that risk? Sure. Benefits to frogs? None. For the frogs, more risk, no reward. For most keepers that would be enough. 

The mixing choice gets compounded when we ask what are the risks and rewards for the keeper. Risks have already been stated and they're real. 

So what are the rewards for the keeper? 

Do those rewards, outweigh the ADDITIONAL risk to the frogs and the keeper?

Not IMO.


----------



## Wallace Grover

mantisdragon91 said:


> Give the Tea Party two more elections and I'm sure they will pass a bill along those lines for anyone teaching evolution in school.


I'm a political republican and social democrat so... this is a bit of an engima.


----------



## edwardsatc

frogfarm said:


> cross contamination, not only of hook,lungworm, coccidia, chytrid but other virus, bacteria and such we can't test for or know about.


I'm not an advocate for mixing, but let's at least use logical arguments here. I've seen you use this reasoning multiple times. Cross contamination is just as probable in a single species enclosure as it is in a mixed enclosure.


Again, I am not an advocate for mixed species/locales. My point here is that using inaccurate or false information weakens the overall argument.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

pl259 said:


> The frogs beneffit from the glass box I keep them in, the temp and humidity I maintain for them, and the food I feed them. Because they'd die without it.


you're making a circular argument here, because you're citing factors that are a by-product to their captivity, in the first place 



pl259 said:


> We're all here because we keep them. What does that have to do with mixing? Are you equating keeping a mixed tank with a non-mixed tank, or just saying we shouldn't keep them at all?


because I'm pointing out that "it doesn't benefit the frog" is a rather weak argument, because lots of things we do don't benefit the frog




pl259 said:


> Mixing adds risks to the frogs above and beyond the normal care that we as a hobby ALREADY provide. Can some minimze that risk? Sure. Benefits to frogs? None. For the frogs, more risk, no reward. For most keepers that would be enough.


then your position would be better served actually citing those risks


----------



## PeanutbuttER

TheUnseenHand said:


> First, wouldn't such diseases likely be passed to the other members of the viv regardless of species? I.E. Say you have a 40 gallon with 4 of the same species and one has a disease mentioned; all other things being equal (which I know they aren't necessarily) wouldn't the other three have the same chance to get the disease as if they were all different species? (not recommending putting 4 different species in the same viv, BTW)


I don't remember if anyone responded to this or not, so excuse me if it's already been addressed. However, I think you're viewing this from the wrong angle. If you've got 4 frogs of the same species from likely the same source then the diseases they're bringing to the viv to share are going to be the same. For arguments sake, say they each arbitrarily bring 2 diseases with them. The tank still only has 2 diseases since all the diseases they brought are the same.

Bring in 4 different frogs from different sources(including different species, different parents, and possibly different rearing enclosures) and they can each bring different diseases. Say again for argument sake that each frog brings in 2 diseases. Now in the tank with a minimum of two and maximum of 8 unique diseases. That's how I see it. It's a risk not a guarantee of failure, but I personally don't see the point in risking it to begin with.


I was also wondering if anyone had an outside source of the diseases that captive darts or even captive frogs at large carry or a list of health risks associated with mixing darts or amphibians in general. I'm looking around for a journal article or something credible but I can't seem to find anything concrete. Just people saying "hookworm, chytrid, etc" but I'm not finding any source that that's being taken from. I know someone must have something like this, not everybody is just saying what they've read on the board. Thanks guys.


----------



## Percularis

When different Darts mix they can mutate. This means your frog could end up as what scientist call a "Super Frog". Super Frogs are a species all on their own. Each morph has a different special adaptation. Some have ultrasonic croaks that can temporarily paralyze animals, including humans. Other may have the ability to vomit highly acidic toxins that could eat through wood. You never know what you may get. If the morphs interbreed, they can create a higher level Super Frog. Super Frogs are ranked on the Germanotta, created by Stephani Germanotta. Super Frogs with less-effective adaptations are ranked near 1. Super Frogs with more-effective adaptations are ranked up to 5. 

And yes, you may quote that to let the newbies know _exactly_ what can happen when you interbreed different Darts.


----------



## TheUnseenHand

PeanutbuttER said:


> I don't remember if anyone responded to this or not, so excuse me if it's already been addressed. However, I think you're viewing this from the wrong angle. If you've got 4 frogs of the same species from likely the same source then the diseases they're bringing to the viv to share are going to be the same. For arguments sake, say they each arbitrarily bring 2 diseases with them. The tank still only has 2 diseases since all the diseases they brought are the same.
> 
> Bring in 4 different frogs from different sources(including different species, different parents, and possibly different rearing enclosures) and they can each bring different diseases. Say again for argument sake that each frog brings in 2 diseases. Now in the tank with a minimum of two and maximum of 8 unique diseases. That's how I see it. It's a risk not a guarantee of failure, but I personally don't see the point in risking it to begin with.
> 
> 
> I was also wondering if anyone had an outside source of the diseases that captive darts or even captive frogs at large carry or a list of health risks associated with mixing darts or amphibians in general. I'm looking around for a journal article or something credible but I can't seem to find anything concrete. Just people saying "hookworm, chytrid, etc" but I'm not finding any source that that's being taken from. I know someone must have something like this, not everybody is just saying what they've read on the board. Thanks guys.


I said all thing being equal. I understand that things won't always be equal and I imagine you could come up with hundreds of possibilities where a mixed tank could potentially introduce more disease. What I'm wondering about is the likelihood of a mixed tank introducing more disease than a single species tank. It is also theoretically possible that all 4 of the frogs in the single species tank have different diseases, and introduce each one to the other frogs, correct? You can say it's less likely to happen than with a mixed species tank, but is it really? Are there any statistics on this matter? Is it really as big a deal as it is being made out to be? (not the diseases themselves, but the possibility of frogs transmitting them to other frogs; or the possibility of mixed species being more likely to carry different diseases which will be spread to the other frogs).


----------



## Ed

PeanutbuttER said:


> I was also wondering if anyone had an outside source of the diseases that captive darts or even captive frogs at large carry or a list of health risks associated with mixing darts or amphibians in general. I'm looking around for a journal article or something credible but I can't seem to find anything concrete. Just people saying "hookworm, chytrid, etc" but I'm not finding any source that that's being taken from. I know someone must have something like this, not everybody is just saying what they've read on the board. Thanks guys.


Amphibian Medicine and Captive husbandry, 2001, Krieger Press 

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

http://www.jvdi.org/cgi/reprint/11/2/194.pdf

http://ccwhcit5.usask.ca/atlantic_blog/wp-content/uploads/chytridiomycosis-forzan-et-al.pdf

Helminth biodiversity of Costa Rican Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) - Journal of Natural History

Google scholar can be your friend..... these are only a small sample of the mountain of literature available through the search feature...


----------



## Percularis

Scare newbies out of it. For example...

When different Darts mix they can mutate. This means your frog could end up as what scientist call a "Super Frog". Super Frogs are a species all on their own. Each morph has a different special adaptation. Some have ultrasonic croaks that can temporarily paralyze animals, including Ibexes. Other may have the ability to vomit highly acidic toxins that could eat through _lined_ paper. You never know what you may get. Super Frogs are ranked on the Germanotta scale, created by Stephani Germanotta. If the morphs interbreed, they can create a higher level Super Frog. Super Frogs with less-effective adaptations are ranked near -3. Super Frogs with more-effective adaptations can be ranked up to 11.06.

I don't see why breeding different Darts together is a bad thing other than it creates useless morphs that aren't very natural. Could somebody enlighten me so I can expand my PFD knowledge? 
Just so you know, I have no intentions of interbreeding different darts. I like having naturally-occurring animals of one type together. I think most Dart morphs that aren't naturally-occurring are rather ugly.


----------



## Ed

TheUnseenHand said:


> I said all thing being equal. I understand that things won't always be equal and I imagine you could come up with hundreds of possibilities where a mixed tank could potentially introduce more disease. What I'm wondering about is the likelihood of a mixed tank introducing more disease than a single species tank. It is also theoretically possible that all 4 of the frogs in the single species tank have different diseases, and introduce each one to the other frogs, correct? You can say it's less likely to happen than with a mixed species tank, but is it really? Are there any statistics on this matter? Is it really as big a deal as it is being made out to be? (not the diseases themselves, but the possibility of frogs transmitting them to other frogs; or the possibility of mixed species being more likely to carry different diseases which will be spread to the other frogs).


You may want to look up ranavirus and how they can be local and site specific as one example.... or the history of mycoplasma infections in native Gopherus ssp... or even the possible translocations of viral infections into new populations by the release of box turtles...


----------



## Ed

Percularis said:


> Scare newbies out of it. For example...
> 
> When different Darts mix they can mutate. This means your frog could end up as what scientist call a "Super Frog". Super Frogs are a species all on their own. Each morph has a different special adaptation. Some have ultrasonic croaks that can temporarily paralyze animals, including Ibexes. Other may have the ability to vomit highly acidic toxins that could eat through _lined_ paper. You never know what you may get. Super Frogs are ranked on the Germanotta scale, created by Stephani Germanotta. If the morphs interbreed, they can create a higher level Super Frog. Super Frogs with less-effective adaptations are ranked near -3. Super Frogs with more-effective adaptations can be ranked up to 11.06.
> 
> I don't see why breeding different Darts together is a bad thing other than it creates useless morphs that aren't very natural. Could somebody enlighten me so I can expand my PFD knowledge?
> Just so you know, I have no intentions of interbreeding different darts. I like having naturally-occurring animals of one type together. I think most Dart morphs that aren't naturally-occurring are rather ugly.


Repeating it wasn't worth it.. it didn't help the discussion in the first place..


----------



## Percularis

Ed said:


> Repeating it wasn't worth it.. it didn't help the discussion in the first place..


Oh darn... didn't read the entire discussion.


----------



## TheUnseenHand

Ed said:


> You may want to look up ranavirus and how they can be local and site specific as one example.... or the history of mycoplasma infections in native Gopherus ssp... or even the possible translocations of viral infections into new populations by the release of box turtles...


I understand what you're saying. I'm not saying diseases can't be site specific. I assume none of us are planning on releasing frogs, or live in an area where they could thrive if they escape. I guess some may so I should say I'm going under a couple assumptions.

1. As stated above.
2. Someone keeping a mixed tank plans to cull offspring. They do not plan to sell any frogs. They would just keep the viv until the frogs died.

Now, I'm talking purely about statistical probabilities. Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying a disease than 4 of the same species?

Again, I'm not condoning this at all. FWIW I'm not going to attempt a mixed tank and would certainly not recommend one. I like to play devils advocate not to start flame wars, but to have healthy, informative debate. I'm learning from all this, and I enjoy soaking up this information  I'm not trying to annoy anyone, but if it comes across that way, I apologize and will stop.


----------



## PeanutbuttER

Ed said:


> Amphibian Medicine and Captive husbandry, 2001, Krieger Press
> 
> JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
> 
> http://www.jvdi.org/cgi/reprint/11/2/194.pdf
> 
> http://ccwhcit5.usask.ca/atlantic_blog/wp-content/uploads/chytridiomycosis-forzan-et-al.pdf
> 
> Helminth biodiversity of Costa Rican Anurans (Amphibia: Anura) - Journal of Natural History
> 
> Google scholar can be your friend..... these are only a small sample of the mountain of literature available through the search feature...


Thanks. I've already been on google scholar and working through the university database search (which has a lot not available through google scholar) and I'd come up with very little that relates diseases in captive populations and wild populations or that directly implicate mixed-species vivaria as a source of the spread of those diseases. I read the middle two articles about chytrid already but I'll give those other 2 a read through as well. Thanks again.


----------



## PeanutbuttER

TheUnseenHand said:


> I said all thing being equal. I understand that things won't always be equal and I imagine you could come up with hundreds of possibilities where a mixed tank could potentially introduce more disease. What I'm wondering about is the likelihood of a mixed tank introducing more disease than a single species tank. It is also theoretically possible that all 4 of the frogs in the single species tank have different diseases, and introduce each one to the other frogs, correct? You can say it's less likely to happen than with a mixed species tank, but is it really? Are there any statistics on this matter? Is it really as big a deal as it is being made out to be? (not the diseases themselves, but the possibility of frogs transmitting them to other frogs; or the possibility of mixed species being more likely to carry different diseases which will be spread to the other frogs).


I'm not sure what you mean then by "all things equal". I thought my example was pretty fair as far as keeping things equal.


----------



## TheUnseenHand

PeanutbuttER said:


> I'm not sure what you mean then by "all things equal". I thought my example was pretty fair as far as keeping things equal.


I just meant stress level within the viv and the likelihood that a disease would be transmitted from frog to frog in the viv is the same in both cases (mixed and single species). Is it impossible for 4 frogs of the same species from the same local to each bring in a unique disease? 

Basically, my question boils down to this:

Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying one or more unique diseases than 4 of the same species?

Right now I'm basically sleepwalking because I woke up early to work an 11 hour day (though I did get to post here while at work), so I may not be communicating things in a very easy to understand manner at the moment. For that I do apologize. I don't think I can stay up anymore tonight so I'll pick up on this again when I get another chance. I appreciate your response.


----------



## PeanutbuttER

TheUnseenHand said:


> I just meant stress level within the viv and the likelihood that a disease would be transmitted from frog to frog in the viv is the same in both cases (mixed and single species). Is it impossible for 4 frogs of the same species from the same local to each bring in a unique disease?
> 
> Basically, my question boils down to this:
> 
> Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying one or more unique diseases than 4 of the same species?
> 
> Right now I'm basically sleepwalking because I woke up early to work an 11 hour day (though I did get to post here while at work), so I may not be communicating things in a very easy to understand manner at the moment. For that I do apologize. I don't think I can stay up anymore tonight so I'll pick up on this again when I get another chance. I appreciate your response.


I think I get what your saying and I totally get the long work day thing. I used to do 12 hour shifts in a cookie factory and let me tell you it was the most bizarre thing to relieve the guy when I got on shift and to be relieved by the same guy when I was done. I also worked the 4pm to am shift, so it was also weird to be awake in the middle of the night every night.

Okay, if were assuming then that 4 frogs in a tank are healthy except one is carrying something without you the owner knowing, then yeah it wouldn't seem to matter all that much. The other frogs, same species or not, are all at risk. However, if one species is bullying another then I'd assume the bullied would now be at a higher risk due to a weakened immune system brought on by the extra stress burden.

The point that I was making was different. I was saying that 4 frogs from the same source won't really have as much risk in the same tank. But since a mixed tank always means bringing frogs in from different sources (different breeders, parents, or original tanks) then your starting the group out with a higher chance that one of the four has something the other three haven't been exposed to.


----------



## myersboy6

Yeah!!! Beat that dead horse!!!!


----------



## tim13

I have no scientific literature to back this up, but my gut tells me anytime you have frogs from different sources (breeders, locations, walks of life, etc) your risk for disease in general gets higher. This risk is usually mitigated by the fact that most of the time our frogs are kept in separate enclosures. Of course, if you order another frog and add them to the viv after quarantine then you have likely increased the risk of disease in the viv. So, your likelihood of disease is highest in a mixed tank due to all the different sources of the frogs seems somewhat logical to me. I can get behind that just because common sense makes it seem reasonable.


----------



## Roadrunner

Yes, definitely a higher probability(unless your getting all 4 from different sources). If your getting one morph from one breeder, they'll all have the same thing if they were kept together. If you start mixing and matching, you'll also be collecting new parasites along w/ new frogs. If any of them were clean in the first place they won't be after a week in a mixed viv if any of the frogs have anything. Coccidia is the one you definately don't want to get as it's incurable.



TheUnseenHand said:


> I understand what you're saying. I'm not saying diseases can't be site specific. I assume none of us are planning on releasing frogs, or live in an area where they could thrive if they escape. I guess some may so I should say I'm going under a couple assumptions.
> 
> 1. As stated above.
> 2. Someone keeping a mixed tank plans to cull offspring. They do not plan to sell any frogs. They would just keep the viv until the frogs died.
> 
> Now, I'm talking purely about statistical probabilities. Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying a disease than 4 of the same species?
> 
> Again, I'm not condoning this at all. FWIW I'm not going to attempt a mixed tank and would certainly not recommend one. I like to play devils advocate not to start flame wars, but to have healthy, informative debate. I'm learning from all this, and I enjoy soaking up this information  I'm not trying to annoy anyone, but if it comes across that way, I apologize and will stop.


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> Yes, definitely a higher probability(unless your getting all 4 from different sources). If your getting one morph from one breeder, they'll all have the same thing if they were kept together. If you start mixing and matching, you'll also be collecting new parasites along w/ new frogs. If any of them were clean in the first place they won't be after a week in a mixed viv if any of the frogs have anything. Coccidia is the one you definately don't want to get as it's incurable.


Coccidia is also one of the things you can't avoid as there are lots of diffterent strains found globally and can be transmitted to the frogs by insects.. so to avoid coccidia, you would have to start with clean frogs (which means having the gut biopsied to make sure they are clean, as coccidia isn't always shed consistently..it can have long periods without any sign of it), excluding rodents and insects from the rooms, having totally 100% insect proof enclosures, keeping feeder cultures 100% protected from outside insects and rodents, using autoclaved materials (as some coccidias are resistent to everything but live steam or straight ammonia) for decorations and builds.... 
Attempting to prevent coccidia from being in your collection is considered so difficult by institutions that they simply monitor for it, which is done by routine fecal testing. It can be readily controlled with a fairly simple treatment regimen....


----------



## Roadrunner

Funny, I had coccidia in some tricolors that didn't produce for years and had everything tested around that tank and the rest of my collection and never found any signs outside that one group. Why doesn't everyone have it then? Why didn't it spread here? Are you sure there aren't different strains that spread differently? Also couldn't the coccidia in zoos be spreading from fecal material from other animals like geckos or mammals? Zoos are a bit different than a small collection of darts.

I guess if you call fairly simple a drop on the back every day of their life.

Also Tb mycobacteria as there isn't a test for that unless you draw fluid from an infected spot. Kinda like poking in the dark.



Ed said:


> Coccidia is also one of the things you can't avoid as there are lots of diffterent strains found globally and can be transmitted to the frogs by insects.. so to avoid coccidia, you would have to start with clean frogs (which means having the gut biopsied to make sure they are clean, as coccidia isn't always shed consistently..it can have long periods without any sign of it), excluding rodents and insects from the rooms, having totally 100% insect proof enclosures, keeping feeder cultures 100% protected from outside insects and rodents, using autoclaved materials (as some coccidias are resistent to everything but live steam or straight ammonia) for decorations and builds....
> Attempting to prevent coccidia from being in your collection is considered so difficult by institutions that they simply monitor for it, which is done by routine fecal testing. It can be readily controlled with a fairly simple treatment regimen....


----------



## Ed

tim13 said:


> I have no scientific literature to back this up, but my gut tells me anytime you have frogs from different sources (breeders, locations, walks of life, etc) your risk for disease in general gets higher. This risk is usually mitigated by the fact that most of the time our frogs are kept in separate enclosures. Of course, if you order another frog and add them to the viv after quarantine then you have likely increased the risk of disease in the viv. So, your likelihood of disease is highest in a mixed tank due to all the different sources of the frogs seems somewhat logical to me. I can get behind that just because common sense makes it seem reasonable.


 
It actually isn't mitigated that much unless you practice good hygiene between cages.. If you go from cage to another without washing your hands, your frogs may as well be kept together.... You also need to have your cages tight enough to prevent wild insects from being able to enter (if you've had fungus gnats in your tank, it isn't that tight), or insects from being able to escape one cage and enter another.... 

People routinely put materials in thier enclosures that cannot be sterilized (wood) or get live plants that were from cuttings in other people's frog's tanks, or trasfer cuttings between tanks for plantings.. and so forth. 

Compared to all of the other things people do with thier enclosures worrying about parasites from different frogs is only a small tip of the iceberg.....


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> Funny, I had coccidia in some tricolors that didn't produce for years and had everything tested around that tank and the rest of my collection and never found any signs outside that one group. Why doesn't everyone have it then? Why didn't it spread here? Are you sure there aren't different strains that spread differently?
> 
> I guess if you call fairly simple a drop on the back every day of their life.
> 
> Also Tb mycobacteria as there isn't a test for that unless you draw fluid from an infected spot. Kinda like poking in the dark.


Did you have all of the frogs necropsied and histopath done on them? That is the only way to find it in a frog that isn't shedding... It runs about $250 a frog... 

Aaron, I suggest you review the literature on treating coccidia.. it is not a drop on thier back twice a day... 

If you review the literature, the Tb that is most commonly found in frogs (M. marinum group) is found everywhere in soils and moist enviroments. You cannot exclude it from the enclosures....


----------



## edwardsatc

PeanutbuttER said:


> The point that I was making was different. I was saying that 4 frogs from the same source won't really have as much risk in the same tank. But since a mixed tank always means *bringing frogs in from different sources* (different breeders, parents, or original tanks) then your starting the group out with a higher chance that one of the four has something the other three haven't been exposed to.


This is where I was getting at with my post. The issue with disease is the *source*, _not_ the mixing. Several frogs from different sources represent the same probability of disease regardless of species/morph.


----------



## Ed

TheUnseenHand said:


> I just meant stress level within the viv and the likelihood that a disease would be transmitted from frog to frog in the viv is the same in both cases (mixed and single species). Is it impossible for 4 frogs of the same species from the same local to each bring in a unique disease?


People often bring up the stress issue.. we have no indication that the stress of interaction between two different species is any greater than the interaction between two frogs of the same species. There is stress but we can't say it is greater or lesser without proof. 




TheUnseenHand said:


> Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying one or more unique diseases than 4 of the same species?


Unique isn't the correct way to look at it.. many pathogens eventually end up in a balance with the host they normally use.. but if they jump to a novel host, there isn't the same balances. We have seen this with a number of pathogens (although some of the examples with iridoviruses are probably the most clear when looking at anurans) in a variety of taxa. 
In reality, the risk of a pathogen jumping between species doesn't stop simply because the frogs are housed in seperate cages. If this is really a concern for those keeping frogs then frogs from different localities regardless of species should not even be housed near one another in the same room, as this is considered a major risk for cross contamination.....


----------



## Ben Wehr

All's I gots to say is

"He who is convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still"

It is very very hard to change a persons thought process and have an effect on why they've reached the decisions and opinions that they've formed. When you get down deep to why one person will do one thing the the other another thing it gets down to deep core beliefs and foundations which you are unlikely to ever change

Just my $.03


----------



## Ed

TheUnseenHand said:


> I understand what you're saying. I'm not saying diseases can't be site specific. I assume none of us are planning on releasing frogs, or live in an area where they could thrive if they escape. I guess some may so I should say I'm going under a couple assumptions.
> 
> 1. As stated above.
> 2. Someone keeping a mixed tank plans to cull offspring. They do not plan to sell any frogs. They would just keep the viv until the frogs died.
> 
> Now, I'm talking purely about statistical probabilities. Do 4 frogs of different species have a higher probability of one or more carrying a disease than 4 of the same species?


Just as a clarification.. you don't have to release the frogs to introduce parasites.. dumping water or materials from the tanks into the enviroment can pass along pathogens. 

There have been anecodtal estimates that over 90% of the frogs in captive collections have one or more parasites.. 

Given that most of the bacteria that cause issues with frogs are always found in thier enviroments and/or part of thier normal gut flora, we can comfortably move that to approaching 100%....


----------



## Roadrunner

I can't get proof, i can only observe and make decisions. From that I've seen worse problems w/ different species inhabiting the same viv. Usually one stresses the other moreso than the same morphs from my observations.



Ed said:


> People often bring up the stress issue.. we have no indication that the stress of interaction between two different species is any greater than the interaction between two frogs of the same species. There is stress but we can't say it is greater or lesser without proof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unique isn't the correct way to look at it.. many pathogens eventually end up in a balance with the host they normally use.. but if they jump to a novel host, there isn't the same balances. We have seen this with a number of pathogens (although some of the examples with iridoviruses are probably the most clear when looking at anurans) in a variety of taxa.
> In reality, the risk of a pathogen jumping between species doesn't stop simply because the frogs are housed in seperate cages. If this is really a concern for those keeping frogs then frogs from different localities regardless of species should not even be housed near one another in the same room, as this is considered a major risk for cross contamination.....


----------



## EvilLost

Jellyman said:


> Start by realizing that it is not a matter of educating. Educating implies they are doing something wrong and need to be corrected. In reality they are just doing something that goes against your beliefs. Give good truthful reasons for why you choose not to mix or breed different species or morphs. Be civil in your attempts to pursuade others with opposing viewpoints and realize that not everyone is going to agree and/or change thier mind.


I didn't read all the replies in this thread, because Jellymans reply summed up in short what I think on this matter.


----------



## Woodsman

And this was a thread about what? Seems pretty disrespectful to a genuine issue brought-up by the OP.

Perhaps a moderator would consider splicing-off the unrelated stuff into another thread.

Richard.


----------



## jpstod

Here is my take on the Subject

The main reason to not mix species always comes back to the issue that people always assumes that a person who has frogs..will always sale their offspring.

Private collections will never or should never be released into the Wild so purity is not an Issue as Re-Release into the Wild is not avail reason as to not mix. It is based on Sale Values of Animals.

There is not a High Rate of Deformities in Hybrids that I know of so that is not a valid reason not to Mix.

I find it hard to tell someone how to showcase their personal collection based entirely on "economic" reasons. 

Being A Snob about Your Ability to afford Frogs or Equipment does not do the Hobby any Good. Show people you enjoy the Hobby and love your Animals instead of flaunting your Money. Explain why you use a $150 Exo Terra Cage instead of a $20 Converted 10 Gallon Tank.. Explain the Environmental Reasons why you do not Mix a Brazilian Frogs with a Costa Rican Frog, not because You want the price of the Frog to Stay High so you can make Money when you sale frogs..

This Discussion is like any pet trade..It Boils down to Money.Pure Breeds bring in more Money to Breeders. The More Available an Animal is the lower the Value of Offspring..Mutts lower the Need for Breeders and need to be spayed and Neutered or put down entirely because they are abandoned or neglected by Owners. Animal Lovers rescue these animals daily simply because they love animals and not because they can breed them to make money. Would I rescue a Hybrid Frog..YES..Why because it is a beautiful living animal not because I could breed it and Sale it. I never plan to sale and personally breed Animals.

I do not mix because I love my Displays..I have Empty Vivariums simply because I love the Plants and the Ability to bring Exotic Environments to a other wise bland room. It has nothing to do with Flaunting my Income. Someday i will have either Frogs or Geckos in Them.

I got into this Hobby simply because I wanted to bring some sort of Displays to local School Children because we have nothing Locally and we have to travel 150+ miles to a Zoo to see these things. Sadly Animal Displays are not allowed in schools here now.


----------



## Vagabond324

After reading all of this, what do you say to the person who wants a nice Vivarium, with a few different frogs in it, that has lots of room, and they have no intention of breeding their frogs? They look at this like most people would look at a fish tank, a one of these and a one of those to just look at and enjoy? If the tank is large enough and there's no breeding going on, how can one convince them otherwise? IMOHO, It just won't work! I have seen people rant on this site in the short time I have been a member, some of which would curl the ears on a mule about mixing frogs and I think it's a shame that people get to far on either side of the discussion. Knowledge is great, elitism is not, be kind when you talk to people because despite what you might think, none of really knows everything. I read the board to learn, not to be put down and told I should know better and that's just what a few people here do and it's just not right. Thankfully the Moderators do step in and stop it as I noticed this past week on just this issue. We are all here for a reason, not all those reasons are the same, please remember that and hopefully we can all learn together what is best for or frogs and ourselves.


----------



## pl259

Working on a split for the disease discussion...

New thread is here...

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ge...ase-transmission-split-mixing-discussion.html


----------



## Roadrunner

Could we at least sum up that coccidia is a problem w/ mixing? It seems to me coccidia is the herpes of the frog world.

But this thread is about mixing not disease transmission vectors. Chytrid and hookworm and lungworm can all be transmitted the same way(plants soil, soil w/ termites, moss, hands). Considering some are parasitic and cannot be ridded from the animal I'm sure the stress of mixing different frogs could lead to shedding a potential harmful to a different morph or genus from a different area that was never meant to get it. And if you clean between tanks and make them ff proof you can control spread? If the coccidia that are harmful aren't spread by termites and you don't put dirt, plants and soil from one viv to another you could keep it from spreading? Is it airborne?

It seems to me that, if they cause harm and act in different ways and different frogs had different kinds(do we really know what every one of them does or the potential harm they can cause) and you can only suppress them, why would you want to throw a whole bunch of different ones into different frogs in a mix? Especially if you can't get rid of them. I'd say hookworm and lungworm and chytrid wouldn't be as bad as they can be cleared and gotten rid of. It seems to me, if zoos have outbreaks of their strain and I don't have outbreaks or problems w/ my frogs, I'd rather not introduce yours to mine.

Addition: Coccidia is potentially deadly and you can not get rid of it, only suppress it. Other diseases and parasites a frog can live w/ a long time and they can be gotten rid of. I'd choose not to get too many diseases i can't get rid of and don't know the potential problems w/. That's just me though.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Can anyone provide any evidence that frogs are more stressed in a mixed tank than they are in a single species tank, assuming that proper care is provided in selecting a good mix of inhabitants? As mentioned previously I currently have 5 mixed tanks of darts and tree frogs or darts with darts and have yet to see any negative interaction in any of them.


----------



## Roadrunner

Are you around the tanks 247? I have seen auratus bully azureus in juvi tanks when I sit and don't move(like hunting) for 5-10 minutes or more. Azureus weren't doing that to each other. I have seen imitators not come out to eat for over a week when tricolors were on the floor and they were still too stressed.

And how do you know they're successful? Did you ask the frogs if they like it? How long will those frogs live? I have had single species tanks w/ inhabitants living 14 years and still breeding seasonally. Do you have any mixed tanks at that status? Have you checked to see how many different parasites there are in the tank? Have you stressed the frogs to see if they have a lower threshold?


mantisdragon91 said:


> Can anyone provide any evidence that frogs are more stressed in a mixed tank than they are in a single species tank, assuming that proper care is provided in selecting a good mix of inhabitants? As mentioned previously I currently have 5 mixed tanks of darts and tree frogs or darts with darts and have yet to see any negative interaction in any of them.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> Are you around the tanks 247? I have seen auratus bully azureus in juvi tanks when I sit and don't move(like hunting) for 5-10 minutes or more. Azureus weren't doing that to each other. I have seen imitators not come out to eat for over a week when tricolors were on the floor and they were still too stressed.
> 
> And how do you know they're successful? Did you ask the frogs if they like it? How long will those frogs live? I have had single species tanks w/ inhabitants living 14 years and still breeding seasonally. Do you have any mixed tanks at that status? Have you checked to see how many different parasites there are in the tank? Have you stressed the frogs to see if they have a lower threshold?


My definition of success:

Animals are out and about, behaving normally and gaining weight. No animal is hiding or acting abnormally. As for how many parasites may be in the tank, could care less as long as they have no adverse reaction on the inhabitants. As I have stated previously don't think its ideal or natural to strive for a 100% clean tank since all that does is reduce the natural immunity levels of its inhabitants. None of my mixed tanks have been around long enough to check for longetivity records, but I can honestly say that in the 5 mixed dart tanks I currently have I have yet to see a single fatality, nor have I had to remove any frogs that were visibly declining.


----------



## Ed

Aaron,



frogfarm said:


> Could we at least sum up that coccidia is a problem w/ mixing? It seems to me coccidia is the herpes of the frog world.


See my response here.. 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ge...e-transmission-split-mixing-discussion-5.html




frogfarm said:


> Addition: Coccidia is potentially deadly and you can not get rid of it, only suppress it. Other diseases and parasites a frog can live w/ a long time and they can be gotten rid of. I'd choose not to get too many diseases i can't get rid of and don't know the potential problems w/. That's just me though.


There are a lot of pathogens that live with the frogs as long as the frogs are healthy yet we don't treat them differently like we do with coccidia.. For some reason there is a lot of misinformation out there about coccidia. For those interested check out the above linked thread. This will be my last comment on it in this thread as we have a seperate thread for it.


----------



## Roadrunner

And what if you were mixing before we knew about chytrid? You see, we don't know everything about disease. Your animals may not deal w/ stress as well as a tank w/ only one kind of animal. How do you know compounding hook and lung and different coccidias don't lower their ability to handle stress?


mantisdragon91 said:


> My definition of success:
> 
> Animals are out and about, behaving normally and gaining weight. No animal is hiding or acting abnormally. As for how many parasites may be in the tank, could care less as long as they have no adverse reaction on the inhabitants. As I have stated previously don't think its ideal or natural to strive for a 100% clean tank since all that does is reduce the natural immunity levels of its inhabitants. None of my mixed tanks have been around long enough to check for longetivity records, but I can honestly say that in the 5 mixed dart tanks I currently have I have yet to see a single fatality, nor have I had to remove any frogs that were visibly declining.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> And what if you were mixing before we knew about chytrid? You see, we don't know everything about disease. Your animals may not deal w/ stress as well as a tank w/ only one kind of animal. How do you know compounding hook and lung and different coccidias don't lower their ability to handle stress?


I am not foolish enough to rule out the possibility of an adverse reaction, I am just stating my experience that in the five mixed tanks I currently have none have occured. I could also argue that the same level of stress and possible disease introduction can result from mixing frogs of the same species but from diffrent sources in the same tank.


----------



## Roadrunner

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm sure we don't know everything about it and from what I know about chytrid, that there are many forms and only one or a couple strains are harmful, I'd rather not collect them all. 



Ed said:


> Aaron,
> 
> 
> 
> See my response here..
> 
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ge...e-transmission-split-mixing-discussion-5.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are a lot of pathogens that live with the frogs as long as the frogs are healthy yet we don't treat them differently like we do with coccidia.. For some reason there is a lot of misinformation out there about coccidia. For those interested check out the above linked thread. This will be my last comment on it in this thread as we have a seperate thread for it.


----------



## Ed

frogfarm said:


> I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm sure we don't know everything about it and from what I know about chytrid, that there are many forms and only one or a couple strains are harmful, I'd rather not collect them all.


 
I'm copying this to the disease transmission thread, so not to get off topic here. 

Ed


----------



## Bcs TX

Jelly,
Time to call a spade a spade, you say you cull and then admit you are raising hybrids.
Which one is it?
I love the part about them not getting in the hobby, we have all heard that crap before.

Dart Den • Login

-Beth


----------



## Roadrunner

Something I don't do unless they are treated for chytrid and fecaled. And the upside of that is different genetics being introduced, there is no upside to mix different species.



mantisdragon91 said:


> I am not foolish enough to rule out the possibility of an adverse reaction, I am just stating my experience that in the five mixed tanks I currently have none have occured. I could also argue that the same level of stress and possible disease introduction can result from mixing frogs of the same species but from diffrent sources in the same tank.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> Something I don't do unless they are treated for chytrid and fecaled. And the upside of that is different genetics being introduced, there is no upside to mix different species.


There is also no upside to treating frogs with unknown doses of powdered horse wormer, yet you seem to have no trouble still supporting and using this antiquated method. And yes there are benefits to mixed tanks(more room, external stimulation, possibility of greater breeding success) You just chose to ignore those scenarios.


----------



## Woodsman

So, after 19 pages of "discussion" (much of it off-topic), the question remains whether Dendroboard should create a "sticky" that helps explain the majority position on why multi-species tanks generally do not do well and why outcrossing frogs is not in the best long-term interests of the hobby. 

Patient education of newcomers versus bashing everyone until they just leave in disgust.

I vote for education, Richard.


----------



## Jellyman

Bcs TX said:


> Jelly,
> Time to call a spade a spade, you say you cull and then admit you are raising hybrids.
> Which one is it?
> I love the part about them not getting in the hobby, we have all heard that crap before.
> 
> Dart Den • Login
> 
> -Beth


Beth, when you stop selling mislabeled frogs we might take you seriously.

You are a bit late to the dance. Try reading post 30. If you have read this thread you would have noticed I had already posted that I started pulling eggs around June of last year. The relentless effort by the likes of yourself boiled down to the argument that I had never produced a froglet so my frogs must not be in a successful enclosure. Due to this ridiculous bashing I decided to start pulling eggs and raising them. My only involvment in this hobby was to keep frogs in a healty environment for my enjoyment. I had no want and/or need to breed them. I simply had enough of being told that my frogs that have been together for 8 1/2 years with no health issues were not successful. I simply became tired of the same petty lies and felt it was time to end the last argument.


----------



## Roadrunner

Well, I can make a bigger tank w/out mixing. They get pretty stimulated when I walk up to the tank and do you mean vents crossing w/ variabilis as better breeding success?
And yes I used panacure in the past w/ success and I'll use it again if i need to. Well maybe i'll do the drop on the back for some and try panacure w/ others. But that's my choice as i have seen frogs get better after using a powdered horse wormer. Sorry, the body of literature isn't my bible, I still have faith in what i've done w/ success before and what I've seen. Even if I'm wrong about the mixing it's not going to hurt anyone if I don't do it and tell others that I wouldn't, see I don't care what they choose only that I can say what I have experienced. Sorry that's just me and i don't know why anyone even cares what methods I choose and what I do w/ my own frogs. It may be fine to put a whole bunch of animals together that may have different parasites but I'll choose not to do it and give my experiences to anyone who wants to listen. If you don't than that's ok too, I'm not trying to convert anyone.


mantisdragon91 said:


> There is also no upside to treating frogs with unknown doses of powdered horse wormer, yet you seem to have no trouble still supporting and using this antiquated method. And yes there are benefits to mixed tanks(more room, external stimulation, possibility of greater breeding success) You just chose to ignore those scenarios.


----------



## Bcs TX

Jelly all I did was post 1 ad and gave the info from the person I bought them from told me, it was not locale info but info on where the frogs came from AZDR and sold to black jungle which has nothing to do with this thread.
BTW no locale info on fine spot leucs nor did I say there was.

Give it up you are a hybridizer everyone knows it.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> Well, I can make a bigger tank w/out mixing. They get pretty stimulated when I walk up to the tank and do you mean vents crossing w/ variabilis as better breeding success?
> And yes I used panacure in the past w/ success and I'll use it again if i need to. Well maybe i'll do the drop on the back for some and try panacure w/ others. But that's my choice as i have seen frogs get better after using a powdered horse wormer. Sorry, the body of literature isn't my bible, I still have faith in what i've done w/ success before and what I've seen. Even if I'm wrong about the mixing it's not going to hurt anyone if I don't do it and tell others that I wouldn't, see I don't care what they choose only that I can say what I have experienced. Sorry that's just me and i don't know why anyone even cares what methods I choose and what I do w/ my own frogs. It may be fine to put a whole bunch of animals together that may have different parasites but I'll choose not to do it and give my experiences to anyone who wants to listen. If you don't than that's ok too, I'm not trying to convert anyone.


Aaron,

This is my whole point, I don't look down on how you choose to do things and I'd appreciate if you return the favor. Personally I have a wide range of interests in the terrarium hobby and thus work with more species(117 plus at last count) than I probably should based on the space I have available, thus mixing is the only way I can provide bigger tanks for many of my species. 

This board would work much better if we stopped and took the time to understand the motivations and environmental factors that cause each individual to make their own personal decisions as opposed to pointing fingers and shouting you're wrong at the first opportunity. I've said all along that there are multiple paths people in the hobby can take based on their personal interests and there should be room for people to pursue those paths without fear of verbal harrasment.

Regards,
Roman


----------



## pl259

mantisdragon91 said:


> ...And yes there are benefits to mixed tanks(more room, external stimulation, possibility of greater breeding success) You just chose to ignore those scenarios.


How does a mixed tank provide more room? I could see more species per square area, but not more overall room.

External simulation is an interesting thought, but hard to quantify. I would think there could be other ways to stimulate rather than by rolling the dice with mixed species tanks. Not discounting the possible benefit though. Maybe there are species that like having other species around. I don't know of any, nor would I want to experiment to find it out.

Regarding the "possibility" of greater breeding success, so far I've only heard of diminshed breeding with mixed tanks. How would you measure the greater than part? Are you also keeping the same species, the same way, in non-mixed tanks?


----------



## Roadrunner

You just did by insulting me for using panacure. man whatever, you can't get me mad anymore. Why do you want to control the way I think? I'm sorry you have problems w/ my not accepting your position. I hope you find a cure for that.



mantisdragon91 said:


> Aaron,
> 
> This is my whole point, I don't look down on how you choose to do things and I'd appreciate if you return the favor. Personally I have a wide range of interests in the terrarium hobby and thus work with more species(117 plus at last count) than I probably should based on the space I have available, thus mixing is the only way I can provide bigger tanks for many of my species.
> 
> This board would work much better if we stopped and took the time to understand the motivations and environmental factors that cause each individual to make their own personal decisions as opposed to pointing fingers and shouting you're wrong at the first opportunity. I've said all along that there are multiple paths people in the hobby can take based on their personal interests and there should be room for people to pursue those paths without fear of verbal harrasment.
> 
> Regards,
> Roman


----------



## mantisdragon91

pl259 said:


> How does a mixed tank provide more room? I could see more species per square area, but not more overall room.
> 
> External simulation is an interesting thought, but hard to quantify. I would think there could be other ways to stimulate rather than by rolling the dice with mixed species tanks. Not discounting the possible benefit though. Maybe there are species that like having other species around. I don't know of any, nor would I want to experiment to find it out.
> 
> Regarding the "possibility" of greater breeding success, so far I've only heard of diminshed breeding with mixed tanks. How would you measure the greater than part? *Are you also keeping the same species, the same way, in non-mixed tanks?[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Unfortunately not. Most of my single species tanks tend to be smaller thus it is harder to quantify since not all factors are equal. I have noticed less aggression within a species in mixed tanks than in single species tanks, this is also quite often seen in the aquarium hobby and I believe there is a greater body of documentation there, since mixed tanks have been accepted much longer and kept more frequently.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> You just did by insulting me for using panacure. man whatever, you can't get me mad anymore. Why do you want to control the way I think? I'm sorry you have problems w/ my not accepting your position. I hope you find a cure for that.


Go back and reread the threads, you really seem to be projecting your own hostility unto others. I am perfectly fine with you doing things that work for you, as long as you extend me the same courtesy.


----------



## Roadrunner

I get frustrated, if I came across as demeaning I apologize. But maybe your defensive and that's the way your reading it. Either way sorry. i have other things to do rather than read the thread again, again, sorry. but i'm not going to think not testing nd treating and mixing are ok, sorry again.


mantisdragon91 said:


> Go back and reread the threads, you really seem to be projecting your own hostility unto others. I am perfectly fine with you doing things that work for you, as long as you extend me the same courtesy.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> I get frustrated, if I came across as demeaning I apologize. But maybe your defensive and that's the way your reading it. Either way sorry.


No biggie, we all have our bad days. I think the frustration comes from the fact that there are very few clear cut answers when it comes to this hobby and information can change over time, doesn't mean what you are doing doesn't still work for you, just means that if you were starting from scratch it may make sense to do things a little diffrently.


----------



## Roadrunner

That may be, as Ed stated before, there is not enough room to set up territories. Could be the same w/ overcrowded tanks of the same species.


mantisdragon91 said:


> pl259 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does a mixed tank provide more room? I could see more species per square area, but not more overall room.
> 
> External simulation is an interesting thought, but hard to quantify. I would think there could be other ways to stimulate rather than by rolling the dice with mixed species tanks. Not discounting the possible benefit though. Maybe there are species that like having other species around. I don't know of any, nor would I want to experiment to find it out.
> 
> Regarding the "possibility" of greater breeding success, so far I've only heard of diminshed breeding with mixed tanks. How would you measure the greater than part? *Are you also keeping the same species, the same way, in non-mixed tanks?[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Unfortunately not. Most of my single species tanks tend to be smaller thus it is harder to quantify since not all factors are equal. I have noticed less aggression within a species in mixed tanks than in single species tanks, this is also quite often seen in the aquarium hobby and I believe there is a greater body of documentation there, since mixed tanks have been accepted much longer and kept more frequently.
Click to expand...


----------



## Roadrunner

Maybe for you it's not clear cut, from my experience tells me otherwise. To each his own according to their experience I guess.


mantisdragon91 said:


> No biggie, we all have our bad days. I think the frustration comes from the fact that there are very few clear cut answers when it comes to this hobby and information can change over time, doesn't mean what you are doing doesn't still work for you, just means that if you were starting from scratch it may make sense to do things a little diffrently.


----------



## mantisdragon91

frogfarm said:


> That may be, as Ed stated before, there is not enough room to set up territories. Could be the same w/ overcrowded tanks of the same specie /quote]
> 
> Could very well be, but based on the territories these frogs can occupy in the wild anything short of a room sized enclosure may be too small for adequate territory formation. Thus as with Rift and South American Cichlids there may be benefit to adding more species and somewhat overcrowding to keep a single male or female from becoming a tyrant and bullying all others.


----------



## Roadrunner

Not what I've seen, but if you say so. but I only have single pairs/tank anymore because of past experience and my breeding success is better this way.


mantisdragon91 said:


> frogfarm said:
> 
> 
> 
> That may be, as Ed stated before, there is not enough room to set up territories. Could be the same w/ overcrowded tanks of the same specie /quote]
> 
> Could very well be, but based on the territories these frogs can occupy in the wild anything short of a room sized enclosure may be too small for adequate territory formation. Thus as with Rift and South American Cichlids there may be benefit to adding more species and somewhat overcrowding to keep a single male or female from becoming a tyrant and bullying all others.
Click to expand...


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Wow, that was a lot of posts to read to get up to speed...of course I'm now up to speed on about 5-6 different arguments on other subjects too. Given that I read every post I've got a lot to say...

To go back to the original post and this response in particular to it, "First off, I personally don't think mixing makes you a bad keeper or inexperienced but *it does create a mood of carelessness or even a ripple in the hobby's need for advancement if we all can't get on the same page.*

My opinion is that the OP and this response are a greater threat to the dart frog *hobby *than mixing could ever be.

We all imprison our frogs. They didn't get a choice, whether wild or cb. We're at the intellectual apex of living organisms (well, some of us ) and because of this we are able to keep frogs. We do it for various reasons...scientific, financial, enjoyment, etc. 

The reason we have all this debate and the reason you can't get everyone to agree on a strategy for the hobby or verbiage to minimize multi species tanks is that few if any of us have entirely identical goals. If we're not all trying to accomplish the same thing then clearly how to get there isn't going to be the same. 

I've considered mixing and may do it, don't know. But to state as fact that mixing is bad for the hobby or frogs in general is just absurd. It's an opinion...because your goals and my goals for the hobby and frogs aren't identical.

As an argument, if I create and maintain a spectacular multi-species tank and show it off and 100 new hobbyists are amazed and go out and buy frogs and learn about them and then in turn repeat the process and 1000s of individuals learn to appreciate dart frogs....is that bad for the hobby? Is that bad for wild frogs?

You make assumptions when you start stating, they WILL interbreed, they WILL promote disease, they WILL sell them. You can make the statistical argument that these will happen but I don't believe you can prove that the *net effect* of multi species tanks on the hobby or frogs in general will be either positive or negative.

I'm not saying the discussion isn't worthy. I just argue that it's the arrogance and intolerance of individuals who say "my goals for the hobby and frogs are the only ""good"" goals for the hobby", that are dangerous.

I'll now yield the soapbox.


----------



## Ed

pl259 said:


> External simulation is an interesting thought, but hard to quantify. I would think there could be other ways to stimulate rather than by rolling the dice with mixed species tanks. Not discounting the possible benefit though. Maybe there are species that like having other species around. I don't know of any, nor would I want to experiment to find it out.


Correct, it is hard to quantify particularly if the animals in question are not demonstrating abnormal sterotypical behaviors. Abnormal sterotypical behaviors have not been reported in any anurans to date despite a number of programs attempting enrichment for them (there was a discussion on this but it went into the ether as being off topic..). 



pl259 said:


> Regarding the "possibility" of greater breeding success, so far I've only heard of diminshed breeding with mixed tanks. How would you measure the greater than part? Are you also keeping the same species, the same way, in non-mixed tanks?


We have to seperate the impact of competition for resources animals versus non-competing animals.. it is easy to expect a reduction in reproduction if the species compete for breeding sites while species that do not compete for reproductive resources should show no impact on reproduction.. A report of increased reproduction based on housing several species together should rightly be viewed as suspect as this goes against what is known of the animals' physiology (egg production is controlled by nutrition, and resource availability)....


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

out of curiosity, why were the threads even split? All the discussion, in relation to disease, were based on the potential dangers of mixing, and seemingly relevant to the OP


----------



## MrBiggs

eldalote2 said:


> I think we need to create a thread that we can direct members to when they about inbreeding or mixing. Something that educates them instead of simply telling them not to do it. We need something that educates and alters the thought process.


It's already been done. I personally created a MASSIVE educational thread about all things multispecies. A ton of information, a lot of Q&A, examples, everything. It took forever and I worked hard on it... and yet it's been sitting in care sheet creation for almost a year. No idea what a guy has to do to get a sticky somewhere.


----------



## MrBiggs

Woodsman said:


> So, after 19 pages of "discussion" (much of it off-topic), the question remains whether Dendroboard should create a "sticky" that helps explain the majority position on why multi-species tanks generally do not do well and why outcrossing frogs is not in the best long-term interests of the hobby.
> 
> Patient education of newcomers versus bashing everyone until they just leave in disgust.
> 
> I vote for education, Richard.


Again, this has already been done and is already in existence. It's sitting in 'Care Sheet Creation' right now and has been since June of '10.


----------



## earthfrog

MrBiggs said:


> Again, this has already been done and is already in existence. It's sitting in 'Care Sheet Creation' right now and has been since June of '10.


Then this frog-wrestling should be designated to the TD IMO. It's getting nasty and it's nothing that the last few posters could/should not settle via PM for their own sakes.


----------



## Jellyman

MrBiggs said:


> Again, this has already been done and is already in existence. It's sitting in 'Care Sheet Creation' right now and has been since June of '10.


Then just copy and paste it into this thread. Problem solved.


----------



## MrBiggs

Jellyman said:


> Then just copy and paste it into this thread. Problem solved.


Actually problem not solved. I spent a ton of time on it and I would like more to happen than simply sticking it on page 20 of a random mixing thread.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

MrBiggs said:


> Actually problem not solved. I spent a ton of time on it and I would like more to happen than simply sticking it on page 20 of a random mixing thread.


then it might help to advertise your position by making it easily accessible to the people reading this thread.

If anything, it has to be more productive than what you are doing now


----------



## MrBiggs

I don't know how I would go about doing that. It's in the 'Care Sheet Creation' sub-forum and I don't have a way to move it from there.

For what it's worth, Philsuma has been nice enough to make it a sticky over at the Dart Den. Feel free to check it out there.


----------



## Woodsman

Hi Travis,

The only "Mixing" thread I saw in the care sheet section is the one authored by Kyle. Is that the one you mean?

Given how often the topic comes up in the beginner and general sections here, I would agree that there should be a "sticky" addressing the issue in each section.

Take care, Richard.



MrBiggs said:


> I don't know how I would go about doing that. It's in the 'Care Sheet Creation' sub-forum and I don't have a way to move it from there.
> 
> For what it's worth, Philsuma has been nice enough to make it a sticky over at the Dart Den. Feel free to check it out there.


----------



## MrBiggs

Nope, that's not it. The one I compiled is in the 'Care Sheet Creation' subforum, not the regular care sheet forum. You have to request access to that section. I don't know why it's never been moved to somewhere everyone can see it. 

__________________
Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk.


----------



## EvilLost

Regardless of what the "majority" may or may not feel, until there is hard evidence pointing in either direction I think we should leave it to nothing but discussion.


----------



## earthfrog

EvilLost said:


> Regardless of what the "majority" may or may not feel, until there is hard evidence pointing in either direction I think we should leave it to nothing but discussion.


Now _that's_ an objective statement...
but I think there has been some evidence. It just needs to be more readily visible.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

My biggest concern about this idea of creating a sticky trying to convince new froggers to not keep mixed tanks is that it seems folks only want THEIR position expressed.

It's kind of like politicians, it's either all repub or all dem depending on who you talk to. The country is roughly half dem and half repub...why can't both positions have some merit? I can not think of a single argument that is entirely right when there are significant numbers supporting a dissenting position. Even the supreme court of the united states presents both viewpoints.

The argument presented by some that new froggers are too ignorant to make their own decision and so you want to tell them what to think is scary as hell.

I would have no problem with a respectful sticky written that provides both opinions.


----------



## Rain_Frog

I think we ALL-- as beginners-- thought about mixing. 

What I find interesting is that most of start out wanting to mix, then we decide not to, and then once we become uber frog keepers, revisit the idea.

As I said in another thread, I know a lot of experienced keepers that do mix successfully, but the catch is that they're experienced.

Basically, if you are asking if you can mix x and y together, you're not familiar enough with the husbandry of x or y to make a decision.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Rain_Frog said:


> I think we ALL-- as beginners-- thought about mixing.
> 
> What I find interesting is that most of start out wanting to mix, then we decide not to, and then once we become uber frog keepers, revisit the idea.
> 
> As I said in another thread, I know a lot of experienced keepers that do mix successfully, but the catch is that they're experienced.
> 
> Basically, if you are asking if you can mix x and y together, *you're not familiar enough with the husbandry of x or y to make a decision.*


Interesting info on the timeline thing. 

As for the bolded comment, is your point that if you're asking you must not have the answer, or that if you're asking you shouldn't do it?


----------



## Averhoeven

That sounds awfully close to the "To get a job you have to have experience, to get experience you have to have a job" conundrum and is very much the working your way up the totem pole concept. In theory, I agree that you should have some experience (and experience does not always have to wholly related to be worthwhile) before trying things that are more advanced, but I completely disagree that you shouldn't be able to ask. 
The point of a forum like this is to pool experience. Just because I haven't done it doesn't mean someone else hasn't. There are clearly going to be species that mix better than others. There are clearly going to be species that, in theory, should mix well, but in practice really don't. Those are things that ONLY the experience of doing that can bring out and are likely the questions more frequently being asked. Just because someone asks doesn't mean they haven't thought long and hard about it; in all likelihood they are trying to get this experiential feedback. 
There are a lot of people with a lot of experience and knowledge under their belt here. People should feel free to utilize that by asking questions. That should NOT be a hostile thing in the least as it deters people from asking and essentially forces them to see for themselves.

For instance: I knew when I posted about putting Tincs in with my RETFs that there would likely be a bunch of moaning and groaning and not a lot of actual info. I didn't care because I was searching for some actual knowledge and have pretty thick skin. That could scare some people off from even asking and then they'd go and do things risking the exact frogs you guys care for. 
Because of the exact mindset above, people assume that because I'm asking I must not know anything about husbandry or researching on my own. I'm a physician and thus, by nature, I tend to do A LOT of researching everything I do and buy (whether its RETFs or a TV). I make decisions based on facts and experience and completely ignore everything else (what is often spewed about as a group-think mentality sets in). I've also had tons of experience managing very detail oriented environments since I was a reefer for years and had many very rare, very difficult to keep fish and corals prior to beginning with frogs. To me, that is experience that is very relevant and very worthwhile, but is wholly discounted under the assumptions of the above bolded quote.

IN SUMMARY (or TL;DR): Yes, my frog experience is limited, but the theory behind husbandry, maintaining an environment and researching and planning are well established in me. The immediate assumption is that asking a question means the above is not true is not only false, but deters the exact kind of discourse that SHOULD happen.


----------



## Woodsman

Hi Travis,

I read through the thread as it is posted on another forum. I thought it was well thought out and did not take an accusatory tone.

I would certainly support the thread being displayed more prominently here on Dendroboard.

Thanks for putting it together, Richard.



MrBiggs said:


> Nope, that's not it. The one I compiled is in the 'Care Sheet Creation' subforum, not the regular care sheet forum. You have to request access to that section. I don't know why it's never been moved to somewhere everyone can see it.
> 
> __________________
> Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk.


----------



## Woodsman

The only other point I would add to this argument is that there is an empirical difference between those of us who have been raising dart frogs for many years (and the experiences, both positive and negative, that that experience conveys), and newer dart frog keepers. So, it is hard to have a discussion about issues that might be revealed over time with members that might not have as much experience.

It also seems that it is those with little experience that are most vocal about what they think they know.

Just my opinion, of course. Richard.


----------



## DartAsylum

Tony said:


> That is exactly my point. The anti-intellectual movement in the US has crippled science education. If people aren't educated in science (specifically evolution) then they don't comprehend the foundation of the argument against hybridization and therefore ignore what they are told and do it anyway.


evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.

adaptations to environment do not = evolution. 
perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


----------



## Averhoeven

DartAsylum said:


> evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.
> 
> adaptations to environment do not = evolution.
> perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


There's a part of your name that describes where you should be and it isn't the part where you're playing a game in a British pub.....


----------



## Woodsman

This is one of those moronic statements that proves that some of the people who post here have absolutely NO clue what they are talking about. I think Kyle should make it a sticky.

Richard.



DartAsylum said:


> evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.
> 
> adaptations to environment do not = evolution.
> perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

DartAsylum said:


> evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.
> 
> adaptations to environment do not = evolution.
> perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


1) do you understand what a theory is in the scientific method?

2) why would no life have value if evolution was true?


----------



## mantisdragon91

DartAsylum said:


> evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.
> 
> adaptations to environment do not = evolution.
> perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


And the other half believe that the planet is 10,000 years old and a magic book tells them everything they need to know about the world.


----------



## DartAsylum

TBH i have no interest in arguing politics, religion, or the THEORY of evolution. i do understand scientific method. i also understand that theory is not fact, its a hypothesis. 

Richard i know calling me a moron, or the font from which all moronic statements flow, made you feel smart, superior somehow. im glad i made you feel better about yourself.

Averhoeven are you saying anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution should be in an asylum? 

Brotherly Monkey why life would or would not have meaning depending on the origin of all things, is a deep philosophical idea, that i wont even begin to try to explain. its the type of statement that requires pondering.

its funny how when you question someones paradigm they get so defensive. if you choose to believe in evolution...whats that to me? nothing. but if your going to spout it out as fact then i have the right to disagree w/o being labeled as moronic.

there are a certain number of people on this board who simply love to argue and insult others. many times i dont post because i know the forum trollers are waiting to flame me. i can take it. call me a moron all day long and i will consider the source and move on.

being a creationist or an evolutionist is moot imo. i also believe you should not mix dart species, i believe this was the topic. if it does not happen in nature it should not happen in a vivarium. thats my opinion. because you can cross breed wolves and foxes does not mean you should. different types of frogs have different needs, environments etc carry pathogens etc.


----------



## Woodsman

Given the devolution of this thread and the rehashing of arguments that have been made before on many threads, perhaps the moderators would consider locking this thread or moving it to the thunderdome before it gets too ugly.

Thanks, Richard.


----------



## Jellyman

Woodsman said:


> Given the devolution of this thread and the rehashing of arguments that have been made before on many threads, perhaps the moderators would consider locking this thread or moving it to the thunderdome before it gets too ugly.
> 
> Thanks, Richard.


Better yet, remove the members that need to fling insults around so the rest of us can have a civil discussion.


----------



## Woodsman

Did not call anyone a moron. Called the statement moronic.

To say that Darwin did not believe in his own theory is a moronic statement.

Richard.



DartAsylum said:


> TBH i have no interest in arguing politics, religion, or the THEORY of evolution. i do understand scientific method. i also understand that theory is not fact, its a hypothesis.
> 
> Richard i know calling me a moron, or the font from which all moronic statements flow, made you feel smart, superior somehow. im glad i made you feel better about yourself.
> 
> Averhoeven are you saying anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution should be in an asylum?
> 
> Brotherly Monkey why life would or would not have meaning depending on the origin of all things, is a deep philosophical idea, that i wont even begin to try to explain. its the type of statement that requires pondering.
> 
> its funny how when you question someones paradigm they get so defensive. if you choose to believe in evolution...whats that to me? nothing. but if your going to spout it out as fact then i have the right to disagree w/o being labeled as moronic.
> 
> there are a certain number of people on this board who simply love to argue and insult others. many times i dont post because i know the forum trollers are waiting to flame me. i can take it. call me a moron all day long and i will consider the source and move on.
> 
> being a creationist or an evolutionist is moot imo. i also believe you should not mix dart species, i believe this was the topic. if it does not happen in nature it should not happen in a vivarium. thats my opinion. because you can cross breed wolves and foxes does not mean you should. different types of frogs have different needs, environments etc carry pathogens etc.


----------



## Woodsman

Dear man made of jelly (sorry, you didn't provide your real name),

Posting anti-scientific statements on a forum that is comprised of many members who work in the biological sciences should be pointed-out for what they are.

The comments were also off-topic. If the poster cares to create a thread about his or her thoughts on evolution, it should be in the thunderdome where we debate these issues often.

Richard.



Jellyman said:


> Better yet, remove the members that need to fling insults around so the rest of us can have a civil discussion.


----------



## edwardsatc

DartAsylum said:


> i do understand scientific method. i also understand that theory is not fact, its a hypothesis.


Evidently you do not understand a theory nor a hypothesis ...


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

DartAsylum said:


> TBH i have no interest in arguing politics, religion, or the THEORY of evolution. i do understand scientific method. i also understand that theory is not fact, its a hypothesis.


1) being that your original remarks concerned evolution, it seems more proper to say "I want to make uncontested declarations of faith"

2) from your remarks here, it doesn't seem like you actually understand what these terms mean, in regards to the scientific method

I suggest reading this: Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions




DartAsylum said:


> Brotherly Monkey why life would or would not have meaning depending on the origin of all things, is a deep philosophical idea, that i wont even begin to try to explain. its the type of statement that requires pondering.


your original comment concerned value. Also, as someone who finds no fault with evolutionary theory, I find my life being quite valuable and full of meaning. So the reasoning behind your declarations still escape me, even after I pondered it on the can


----------



## Tony

DartAsylum said:


> evolution is a theory. even darwin did not believe it so why would anyone else? if the theory of evolution is true then no life has any value. think about that.
> 
> adaptations to environment do not = evolution.
> perhaps 1/2 the problem here is that 1/2 of the people posting are descendants of monkeys or amoebas or mud puppies hahah


I'm not even sure where to start on this one, so I'll just thank you for providing a perfect example of the point I was making.


----------



## Scott

Kindly *STOP* with the evolution conversation please - any/all of you.

I have not read the entire thread - I have no inclination to do that today, I am in a good mood. 

But I do think that this conversation has veered completely off the original topic if the talk is now centered on evolution.

Keep it on topic - take the evolution conversation to Thunderdome please.

*Warning/Infractions wait for those of you who disregard this message.*

s


----------



## Jellyman

Woodsman said:


> Dear man made of jelly (sorry, you didn't provide your real name),
> 
> Posting anti-scientific statements on a forum that is comprised of many members who work in the biological sciences should be pointed-out for what they are.
> 
> The comments were also off-topic. If the poster cares to create a thread about his or her thoughts on evolution, it should be in the thunderdome where we debate these issues often.
> 
> Richard.




Just to let you know my statement was not directed at you in anyway. I simply hate the need for the thunderdome on topics that can be discussed openly and with open minds. I'd rather see the handful of bullies and trouble makers either leave or be told to leave so the rest of us can discuss a topic. And the majority of this thread is off topic.


----------



## Wallace Grover

Can we get a lock on this thread? It's going nowhere...


----------



## choco

Having read only the first few pages of this thread, and seeing it devolve so quickly (as many threads do) I find it rather disparaging in certain lights. Going with that, and that I have not dug through the mountain of dialogue, I'm going to go back to the original intention of this thread.

In a few sentences, I would say that not mixing serves these purposes to a beginner:

1) In general, it is more likely that your frogs will thrive with frogs of like kind and morph as themselves. Even different locality of frogs have different calls, and so breeding may not be as likely to occur among mixed species. 

2) The only way to insure that those beautiful frogs you have are still available in 10, 30, +50 years, is to breed them with others of their own kind, otherwise, that morph may just not exist anymore at all.

3) While you can keep frogs in groups, there is often a higher stress factor for all frogs, the larger the group you keep. As with other species, lions, wolves, and even people, frogs create a hierarchy amongst themselves, and those on the bottom of the totem pole may not make it, or be miserable.

4) Mixed tank species and large groups are generally discouraged for these three primary reasons. It all boils down to the health and prosperity of the frogs, and those of us who love them and care for them in this hobby.

This being said, I have one mixed tank species tank. There is a single leuc, a green and black auratus, and a green and bronze auratus in there. It is a large tank, and I took the precaution of raising them all together. There is also nowhere for them to breed in the tank (raise the tads/deposit eggs to grow). While my leuc enjoys endlessly calling, he will never have a mate.

I made this tank, as I wanted one mixed viv, but I did *not* want them to breed. This is my show viv, and the only one with any regular sized morphs in it. For while I enjoy them for themselves, I have never had an interest in breeding them, only thumbnails.

My other vivs are all set up with like morphs and kind, in small groups. My basti tank is the only viv with more than three in it, however it is also the largest with plenty of hiding spots, cover, and ample breeding grounds (they're doing great!). 

That is all.


----------



## Scott Richardson

Everyone has a different reason for having their frogs. And no one has the right to force their beliefs on anyone else. As long as the offspring are not being sold, and the frogs are healthy and well cared for, what does it hurt? 

We aren't raising our frogs to repopulate the rainforests now are we? And if we were, they wouldn't survive being captive bred.

This discussion gets old every time it comes up. 

Perhaps, helping those that ask the question so that they don't fail and the animals suffer needlessly. 

Two well respected breeders on this forum offer examples of frogs that can be housed together for those that are going to do it. And I respect them for it. 

Am I for or against it? That's my business, and I will not push my beliefs on anyone reading this.


----------



## eldalote2

Now that this thread is potentially under control, thank you Scott, I want to thank the people who have managed to stay on topic and offered good information. 

Beginners will not necessarily know the early signs of stress. Same morph tinctorius are usually recommended to keeping a pair or trio of animals to avoid problems. A beginner with multiple species in an unnamed size tank is bound to run into trouble just because of their lack of experience with the individual animals. 

I think that is a statement most of us can agree on (because not all of us can agree on anything). 

Obviously people have taken my words verbatim, instead, try to take the idea I have presented.


----------



## Scott

It seems to be back on topic - but the first mention of evolution will bring an infraction (oops, besides me right now).

I'll be watching.

s


Wallace Grover said:


> Can we get a lock on this thread? It's going nowhere...


----------



## Scott Richardson

I agree that beginners would not have the experience to avoid problems. But we both know that they will attempt it anyway regardless of what is said. This is why I believe that we need to help them with the information. Because you cannot convince everyone. 

Perhaps, a sticky of "If you must have a mixed tank"

> keeping different morphs of the same species is not recommended
> If your frogs breed, please do not introduce the offspring into the hobby
> A mixed tank should have a large floor space AND a tall vertical height. 
> A list of frogs that could be combined if all conditions required are met. For example, auratus and imis.


----------



## Woodsman

I still contend that the majority of longtime hobbyists would agree that, while mixed species tanks may have asthetic benefits to the owner, they often create complications for both the rearing and the breeding of the species involved. Having a sticky that tries to educate new members of some of these pitfalls seems like a prudent effort.

Richard.


----------



## eldalote2

Scott Richardson said:


> I agree that beginners would not have the experience to avoid problems. But we both know that they will attempt it anyway regardless of what is said. This is why I believe that we need to help them with the information. Because you cannot convince everyone.
> 
> Perhaps, a sticky of "If you must have a mixed tank"
> 
> > keeping different morphs of the same species is not recommended
> > If your frogs breed, please do not introduce the offspring into the hobby
> > A mixed tank should have a large floor space AND a tall vertical height.
> > A list of frogs that could be combined if all conditions required are met. For example, auratus and imis.



People don't know what a large tank means. They do not realize that even though green anoles and southern toads live together in the wild and have different activity periods, that they would almost never come in contact with one another in nature. They need to realize that minimal contact from both species is best. A large tank is a must, but new people don't realize 20 gallons is not a big tank. 

There wouldn't be as much of an uproar if everyone was responsible enough to destroy eggs or simply not allow for a deposit site. 

We don't want to discourage people from joining the hobby, yet we scream at them when they ask about mixing. That's why we try to give them information that will lead to a higher success. Not mixing eliminates a lot of problems and stress that you could encounter as a new person.


----------



## Ed

eldalote2 said:


> People don't know what a large tank means. They do not realize that even though green anoles and southern toads live together in the wild and have different activity periods, that they would almost never come in contact with one another in nature. They need to realize that minimal contact from both species is best.


The total amount of contact is the issue. As an example, wait until the weather warms up and pick a random piece of your yard and lay down in nothing but a pair of shorts.. count how many invertebrate interactions you have in an hour of holding still.. If you've looked at animals insitu you may have seen a cloud of mosquitos or other invertebrates crawling or otherwise contacting the animal in question... Incidental contact by another animal in the enclosure is going to be similar. For contact to be an issue, the animals would have to be climbing over one another on more than an incidental basis. 
The other issue comes from species that are territorial and animals that have the same shape/behaviors are often seen as a territorial threat. This can result in territorial displays or behaviors that since they are cross species may not be interpreted correctly (or at all)...


----------



## Scott Richardson

But it's not nature, and the CB frogs have never been in nature. The were raised in a tank. 

I'm not arguing that the majority agrees, or that it is right or wrong. 

But, to answer the question..........

*how can we make people care about not mixing? you can't!! *

This thread can be 5000 pages long, and it will still be a total waste of time.


----------



## eldalote2

I am just trying to put together a better dialogue for when people ask about mixing is all. They are going to come to their own conclusion, but at least they will be informed on the "no mixing" point of view. 

This would be a much better alternative than what we normally see. "NO!" 

"Ok, so why?" 

People learn a lot better when you give them an explanation instead of a command. 

That's all im asking, I'm not trying to change the world here guys. Or tell you that you can't ever mix or you're doin' it wrong. I am just trying to get people to remember to be patient and informative.


----------



## Scott

I would really have to disagree with this.

All you can do is *try* to explain what best practices are. 

It will _rarely_ make a difference - but it will occasionally make a difference (you posted on the Tincs/Red Eye thread - it appears to have made a different there, correct?).

All we can do is try. 

s


Scott Richardson said:


> But it's not nature, and the CB frogs have never been in nature. The were raised in a tank.
> 
> I'm not arguing that the majority agrees, or that it is right or wrong.
> 
> But, to answer the question..........
> 
> *how can we make people care about not mixing? you can't!! *
> 
> This thread can be 5000 pages long, and it will still be a total waste of time.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Scott said:


> I would really have to disagree with this.
> 
> All you can do is *try* to explain what best practices are.
> 
> It will _rarely_ make a difference - but it will occasionally make a difference (you posted on the Tincs/Red Eye thread - it appears to have made a different there, correct?).
> 
> All we can do is try.
> 
> s


I would really have to disagree with this. You all talk about "best practices" as if you were appointed the caretakers of the hobby. You are at best, experienced hobbyists and mods. That does NOT make you caretakers of the hobby.

What is the difference between this attitude and if I came on here and said I'm a child psychiatrist with 15 years experience and 4 kids and I know the right way to raise a child and you aren't following it? Only my viewpoint should be allowed to be heard and anyone who disagrees will be ostracized.

Sweet jesus people, find a different context and think about what you would say if people told you you weren't educated or experienced enough to attempt something.

You are espousing a "big brother" attitude.


----------



## Scott

I just mean what we, here, on this board - do. That's all.

No big brother crap here - just what we do. If people (especially people new to the hobby ... ) choose not to do what the (vast) majority advise here - than there isn't much to say. You just offer your advice and hope for the best.

I've said elsewhere that what people do in the privacy of their own home is _their_ business - what I am concerned about is what advice is given to new people in the hobby.

If this is "Big Brother" - then I suppose we should just shut down all forums?

Don't try to read more in to what I said than this - thank you.

s


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Scott said:


> I just mean what we, here, on this board - do. That's all.
> 
> No big brother crap here - just what we do.
> 
> Don't try to read more in to it than that - thank you.
> 
> s


Scott, 

I don't know you and I certainly don't want to make an enemy of you. I love this board and read it all the time and would hate to have that privilege removed.

However, as a mod your opinion carries weight. What would your reaction be if you logged onto a child rearing board and they told you raising your child to believe in evolution is wrong and should be avoided? What if they said raising your child as anything other than a christian who believed in intelligent design was wrong and should be avoided?

The purpose of this board, in my opinion, should be to provide information, not to direct behavior. Presenting information in an open manner without bias to a certain behavior is the right way...just my opinion. 

Does this board exist to espouse a particular viewpoint or to provide a source for information. If it is the first, then preach on. If it is the second then recognize that there are many ways to approach this hobby, many different goals and there is now singular RIGHT way to do things. Dear god, trust in the faith of humanity to make their own decisions or recognize that you appoint yourself master of the domain.


----------



## Scott

I believe your example is a bit off base so I am not even going to address it. Talking about children vs. frogs is not a pertinent example I think.

Now, if you want an example of directing behavior, go chat up that Union thing. _That_, is directing behavior (and I couldn't agree with you more about that).

What I am talking about (not "we" in this case, but "I") is what suggestions are given to people with little or not experience in the hobby. Suggestions is pretty much the same as information I think? You give your information and you lend your suggestion based on the information conferred?

And I'll say again (and I've said it more than a few times elsewhere), what you or anyone else does in the privacy of their own home is your own business. What you suggest to someone new in the hobby - probably needs to be a bit more conservative (and I'm rarely conservative about anything) in my opinion. 

And again, they are _suggestions_. As I just said above, they will rarely make a difference - but they will on occasion, and that's a good thing in my opinion.

One other thing you ... Moderators do not represent the Hobby - they represent Dendroboard, and only so much as to try and keep the proceedings clean and civil. It's not like I, or any other Mod, is trying to _dictate_ how the hobby moves forward. Far from it.

Anyhow - hope you understand what I am saying.

s


----------



## marcuswatts

hi from sunny UK, 1st post and all that so I may as well start with a few questions that spring to mind on the topic of mixing.......(I'm new to frog keeping atm so learning the ropes with a juv tinc,)

I have extensively read many posts and can see what people say about preserving bloodlines, wild morphs etc, but when you look at the vast array of wild colour variations & 'named' morphs that are available many of these will be the result of inter-breeding in the wild, or even past captive interbreeding in the countries of origin ?

Now, if a 'new' wild morph that is actually a result of interbreeding is discovered in some remote location, collected, named, bred and supplied to the hobby I would guess many keepers would want one - so how does that fit the equation?

While reading up on tincs (not forum based info but wild species based info) it was suggested that some of the frogs currently classed as the same sp. are probably new and actually different species and may need reclassifying. This surely will result in a rethink on whether people do actually, but unknowingly, have mixed tanks already.

Last thing - by trying to totally preserve the morph by only breeding from the same locations are you not encouraging a weakening of the bloodline by such close interbreeding? - some people will be breeding from the same brood for sure - wouldn't the species be stronger long term if the frogs from totally different locations were paired? When a hobbyist buys a pair (or more) from a breeder how do you know you dont have a brother and sister? 

thanks for any answers - I dont intend mixing sp. but had thought it far better to buy my frogs (one pair) one at a time from totally different sellers so i have un-related frogs.

thanks Marcus


----------



## illinoisfrogs

eldalote2 said:


> I am just trying to put together a better dialogue for when people ask about mixing is all. They are going to come to their own conclusion, but at least they will be informed on the "no mixing" point of view.
> 
> This would be a much better alternative than what we normally see. "NO!"
> 
> "Ok, so why?"
> 
> People learn a lot better when you give them an explanation instead of a command.
> 
> That's all im asking, I'm not trying to change the world here guys. Or tell you that you can't ever mix or you're doin' it wrong. I am just trying to get people to remember to be patient and informative.


I think the reason you see the "No" is because this has been discussed, over and over and over and over and over and over.......people get tired of the same questions, the inability to use the search function, and the defensiveness of inexperienced keepers who have already made up their mind. You'll see what I mean if you check the board daily for several months.....it gets really old! And some people put really good info up, only to be totally ignored by someone who doesn't want to hear good advice, they only want to someone to tell them what they want to do is OK......

When I first got into darts 2 years ago, I always wanted a tank with 2 diff species as well. But after reading up on it, I changed my mind. I wasn't an indignant jerk who refused to rationally ready through the pros and cons.......those people get tiresome.....


----------



## Scott Richardson

"Best practise" is a term we have used in manufacturing for years. It is basically " We have tried several different methods, and this method is the way to avoid failure, so it is the best practise"

Are there more ways to do something, Yes. Have those ways been tried? probably. Auratus have been in this country since the 1980's. Naturalistic vivs for dart frogs came about in the early 1990's. With this setup, breeding and longevity success increased. Which is great, because that $40 Cobalt Tinc you have today is offspring of a $350 Cobalt Tinc from back then. Supply and Demand is a benefit to breeding success. 

20 years ago, I never saw a viv that was less than a 40 gallon breeder tank. The larger tanks were sometimes mixed tanks, sometimes colony tanks. 

Somewhere along the line, someone realized you could but several 10 gallons in the same space and keep more types of frogs. A pair in each tank usually provides enough space if oriented correctly for the species. 

However, herein lies the problem. It's ok to keep everything in a small enclosure, right? 

*NO....*

I personally think each frog should be given 10 gallons of usable space. so a pair of tincs would need a tank 24 wide x 18 deep x 18 inches tall. 
A trio of imis would need a tank 18 wide x 18 deep x 24 inches tall. 

So, if I was going to keep a mixed tank I would build one 42 tall x 24 wide x 18 inches deep. 

Such small enclosure size is the biggest factor here in my opinion. 

You have a comfort zone around you when it comes to personal space. Your frogs do too.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Scott,

Yes, I see your point.

I'm not saying children and frogs are the same. I'm just trying to convey the implications of supposing your way about the subject is the right way...even if it is in public. Corporal punishment is a contentious issue and I don't want to get into if it is or is not proper. I just want to ask if you feel one way about it and someone approached you in public and told you you should not voice your opinion on it because your view was not the correct view, how would you feel?

Your point on the difference between suggesting and dictating is taken and is a valid one. However, the line between the two is easily and often crossed, perhaps sometimes unintentionally...and other times deliberately. It will not take very long to surf through the board and find numerous examples of folks dictating or being uncivil about mixing...and it's nearly always directed at mixers or those who openly support mixing vs the other direction.

I also understand and agree with your point about mods. I'm not saying the intent or purpose of the mods is to dictate...it was more about the influence you have given your position...and just by the way I wasn't casting a stone over that...it's not your fault people have that impression. I guess I was really just making sure you were aware of it.




Scott said:


> I believe your example is a bit off base so I am not even going to address it. Talking about children vs. frogs is not a pertinent example I think.
> 
> Now, if you want an example of directing behavior, go chat up that Union thing. _That_, is directing behavior (and I couldn't agree with you more about that).
> 
> What I am talking about (not "we" in this case, but "I") is what suggestions are given to people with little or not experience in the hobby. Suggestions is pretty much the same as information I think? You give your information and you lend your suggestion based on the information conferred?
> 
> And I'll say again (and I've said it more than a few times elsewhere), what you or anyone else does in the privacy of their own home is your own business. What you suggest to someone new in the hobby - probably needs to be a bit more conservative (and I'm rarely conservative about anything) in my opinion.
> 
> And again, they are _suggestions_. As I just said above, they will rarely make a difference - but they will on occasion, and that's a good thing in my opinion.
> 
> One other thing you ... Moderators do not represent the Hobby - they represent Dendroboard, and only so much as to try and keep the proceedings clean and civil. It's not like I, or any other Mod, is trying to _dictate_ how the hobby moves forward. Far from it.
> 
> Anyhow - hope you understand what I am saying.
> 
> s


----------



## Scott Richardson

My point is........

A mixed tank will usually not do well if set up in commercially available aquariums used by most hobbyists today. These aquariums are too small to meet the spacial and husbandry requirements of the frogs to be housed inside. 

And in my example of mixing tincs and imis, imis like a temperature around 10 degrees cooler than tincs. Your tank would have to ATLEAST be tall enough to provide the 2 different temperature zones inside the enclosure. 

If you ventilate the enclosure is will be cooler at the top. 

Oh dang it, with the vents at the top, my humidity is only 65%, Oh, I will just cover part of the screen. Shit, now my temp is too high for the imis. Oh, I'll raise my lights and cool it down. Yes, that worked!! Wait, the Tincs like it warmer than what it is now.


----------



## Ed

marcuswatts said:


> I have extensively read many posts and can see what people say about preserving bloodlines, wild morphs etc, but when you look at the vast array of wild colour variations & 'named' morphs that are available many of these will be the result of inter-breeding in the wild, or even past captive interbreeding in the countries of origin ?


Using tinctorius as the example we can see that in the literature the last time intergradation occured was a long time ago see for example http://bnoonan.org/Papers/Noonan_Gaucher_06.pdf 



marcuswatts said:


> Now, if a 'new' wild morph that is actually a result of interbreeding is discovered in some remote location, collected, named, bred and supplied to the hobby I would guess many keepers would want one - so how does that fit the equation?


The scenario you are positing is that it would then be misrepresented as a stable morph. The distribution pattern of tinctorius doesn't support this scenario as they are patchily distributed usually with significant distances between population. 




marcuswatts said:


> While reading up on tincs (not forum based info but wild species based info) it was suggested that some of the frogs currently classed as the same sp. are probably new and actually different species and may need reclassifying. This surely will result in a rethink on whether people do actually, but unknowingly, have mixed tanks already.


Do you have a reference for this? That actually contradicts what has been published in the last ten years. See for example http://bnoonan.org/Papers/Wollenberg_et_al_06.pdf



marcuswatts said:


> Last thing - by trying to totally preserve the morph by only breeding from the same locations are you not encouraging a weakening of the bloodline by such close interbreeding? - some people will be breeding from the same brood for sure - wouldn't the species be stronger long term if the frogs from totally different locations were paired? When a hobbyist buys a pair (or more) from a breeder how do you know you dont have a brother and sister?


If you are interested in it, do a search for outbreeding here. There are a number of papers and citations that have been referenced in those discussions. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Scott Richardson said:


> 20 years ago, I never saw a viv that was less than a 40 gallon breeder tank. The larger tanks were sometimes mixed tanks, sometimes colony tanks.
> 
> Somewhere along the line, someone realized you could but several 10 gallons in the same space and keep more types of frogs. A pair in each tank usually provides enough space if oriented correctly for the species.
> 
> However, herein lies the problem. It's ok to keep everything in a small enclosure, right?
> 
> *NO.... *


A lot of the problems that people got around by trying large enclosures changed because people learned how to better supply the niche requirements of the frogs. As a result we saw a contraction of enclosure size (and 19 years ago I was working with tinctorius groups in 20 gallons and auratus in ten gallons with success, 15 years ago I was breeding E. tricolor in ten gallon tanks) and now we see an expansion of that as people try different things. The whole argument on how to house frogs using a volume requirement is flawed in multiple ways.... it does not indicate how much appropriate space is set up for the frog. A well set up ten gallon tank is going to be better for the frog than a 30 by 30 foot room that is poorly set up as one example. It also ignores the fact that as resource density increases we see increases in population density even in very territorial species like O. pumilio indicating that this is a somewhat plastic behavior. If you have a copy of Lotters etal handy look at the density of pumilio in some of the pictures.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> A lot of the problems that people got around by trying large enclosures changed because people learned how to better supply the niche requirements of the frogs. As a result we saw a contraction of enclosure size (and 19 years ago I was working with tinctorius groups in 20 gallons and auratus in ten gallons with success, 15 years ago I was breeding E. tricolor in ten gallon tanks) and now we see an expansion of that as people try different things. The whole argument on how to house frogs using a volume requirement is flawed in multiple ways.... it does not indicate how much appropriate space is set up for the frog. A well set up ten gallon tank is going to be better for the frog than a 30 by 30 foot room that is poorly set up as one example. It also ignores the fact that as resource density increases we see increases in population density even in very territorial species like O. pumilio indicating that this is a somewhat plastic behavior. If you have a copy of Lotters etal handy look at the density of pumilio in some of the pictures.


Great points Ed,

To add on to that some of your time lines are also severely flawed. Darts have been kept in captivity with breeding success since at least the 70's in Europe as can be documented in Zimmerman's book "Tropical Frogs" which was pubished in 1979. While many tanks in Europe are huge and museum quality in design, just as many would be shockingly small by our standards. The European community has always been at least 20 years ahead of us when it comes to to creating naturalistic terraria and have figured out early the need for separate feeding stations, micro-niches and micro fauna. Many of the problems that we have had in the past that were attributted to overcrowding or mixing are more the result of providing improperly designed envronments. Because we have often failed to recognize the real reasons for failure we have attributed it to the most easily seen issues mixing/overcrowding. This is how some of these myths have started and have been perpetated ever since by people who have not tried for themselves but have merely parroted other(often dubious) sources.


----------



## Ed

Roman,

Are you referring to my time lines or to Scott's in the post I quoted? 

Ed


----------



## mantisdragon91

Ed said:


> Roman,
> 
> Are you referring to my time lines or to Scott's in the post I quoted?
> 
> Ed


Scott's. Your time lines are dead on with what I have personally seen and experienced. My issue was with the implication in Scott's post that naturalistic set ups for darts have only been around since the 90's and none of those have been smaller than 40 gallons.


----------



## Scott Richardson

He is not referring to either of our comments. Because I totally agree with his statements about dart frogs in captivity in the 1970's. 

However, when I said this country; I was not referring to Europe. I am an American. The European community has been involved in keeping dart frogs alot longer than Americans.


----------



## Scott Richardson

In 1991, European vivarium photos were incredible. However, the rule of thumb in America was a gravel base, covered by moss, with some planted pots.


----------



## Scott Richardson

And as for parroting, I am parroting myself.

Hi, my names Scott, and I have mixed tanks. And have since the early 1990's. As a matter of fact, The Zimmerman's and Charles Powell have had numerous mixed tanks as well.


----------



## mantisdragon91

Scott Richardson said:


> He is not referring to either of our comments. Because I totally agree with his statements about dart frogs in captivity in the 1970's.
> 
> However, when I said this country; I was not referring to Europe. I am an American. The European community has been involved in keeping dart frogs alot longer than Americans.


But the whole point I am trying to make is that in this country we discourage mixing, while in Europe the majority of the tanks are mixed. They mix not only dart species, but often add anoles, day geckos, tree frogs, brookesia, and others to their tanks. 

If we are willing to admit that they are 10 years ahead of us when it comes to terrarium design, than why are we so quick to discourage people experimenting with creating vibrant mixed vivaria, which is something that they have been doing for generations as well?


----------



## Scott Richardson

MountaineerLegion said:


> My biggest concern about this idea of creating a sticky trying to convince new froggers to not keep mixed tanks is that it seems folks only want THEIR position expressed.
> 
> It's kind of like politicians, it's either all repub or all dem depending on who you talk to. The country is roughly half dem and half repub...why can't both positions have some merit? I can not think of a single argument that is entirely right when there are significant numbers supporting a dissenting position. Even the supreme court of the united states presents both viewpoints.
> 
> The argument presented by some that new froggers are too ignorant to make their own decision and so you want to tell them what to think is scary as hell.
> 
> I would have no problem with a respectful sticky written that provides both opinions.


You'll never change that. There are a handful of people on here who think they are smarter than everyone else, and have to impose their beliefs on others.


----------



## Scott Richardson

mantisdragon91 said:


> But the whole point I am trying to make is that in this country we discourage mixing, while in Europe the majority of the tanks are mixed. They mix not only dart species, but often add anoles, day geckos, tree frogs, brookesia, and others to their tanks.
> 
> If we are willing to admit that they are 10 years ahead of us when it comes to terrarium design, than why are we so quick to discourage people experimenting with creating vibrant mixed vivaria, which is something that they have been doing for generations as well?


Exactly!!!!!!! However, Until someone steals the idea, and puts it across as their own idea; then all the cronnies say "Yeah, that's the way to do it" It will never be.


----------



## Ed

Scott Richardson said:


> In 1991, European vivarium photos were incredible. However, the rule of thumb in America was a gravel base, covered by moss, with some planted pots.


 
If one looks objectively at many of the "naturalistic" enclosures created historically and today both here and overseas.. they are in reality no more "naturalistic" than the sphagnum over gravel enclosures.... The densities, types and distributions of the plants, the manipulation of the conditions in the enclosure to maximize activity beyond that seen by wild populations, conditions to stimulate reproduction year round are all examples of why the supposed naturalistic enclosures are no more naturalistic than the gravel over sphagnum enclosures you are referring to as insufficient.... 
so I'm not sure that this is anymore of a valid argument than the 5,10, 50 gallon/frog argument. The fact that the frogs do well at both of these extremes is more a testement to thier adaptability than advances in naturalistic set-ups. 

Ed


----------



## Scott Richardson

*That right there proves my point!!!!*


----------



## Ed

Scott, 
I'm not sure how you got to the point of accusing me of theft of ideas when I was discussing your critical statements on enclosures and how they may not be as different as you are alleging... 

So what new "idea" have I purportedly stolen from you in that discussion?


----------



## Scott Richardson

Ed, I have not accused you of stealing anyone's view. I believe you mistook that. 
My point is on the general consense's view on something and the unwillingness to except anything new until it is tried and proven without them knowing about it. 

I will say, I don't appreciate your putting words in my mouth. At no time did I say that the gravel and moss setups were inferior. The gravel and moss setups worked. And, they were a step in the progression of the hobby. Which, follows the trend of the europeans. Hell, they still have frogs we don't have yet. 

My whole point has been all along that you will not convince people not to mix, and you will never get people to help them to not fail. 

When I first joined in 2007 or 2008, this topic was being beaten into the ground then. I left for some time, and upon return it is still being beaten into the ground. 

Hence the comment....That proves my point.


----------



## Ed

Scott Richardson said:


> Ed, I have not accused you of stealing anyone's view. I believe you mistook that.
> My point is on the general consense's view on something and the unwillingness to except anything new until it is tried and proven without them knowing about it.
> 
> I will say, I don't appreciate your putting words in my mouth. At no time did I say that the gravel and moss setups were inferior. The gravel and moss setups worked. And, they were a step in the progression of the hobby. Which, follows the trend of the europeans. Hell, they still have frogs we don't have yet.
> 
> My whole point has been all along that you will not convince people not to mix, and you will never get people to help them to not fail.
> 
> When I first joined in 2007 or 2008, this topic was being beaten into the ground then. I left for some time, and upon return it is still being beaten into the ground.
> 
> Hence the comment....That proves my point.


Hi Scott,

If you follow your posts.. the post immediately preceeding my post on the "naturalistic design" was preceeded by your post on theft of ideas.. and then you proceeded without any clarification to post that it proved your point. The timeline and context were clear that you were accusing me of theft of idea, if that was not your intent then you should have made that clear. 

With respect to the naturalistic enclosure comment.. let us again look at the context of what you wrote and this makes the meaning clear. 



Scott Richardson said:


> "Best practise" is a term we have used in manufacturing for years. It is basically " We have tried several different methods, and this method is the way to avoid failure, so it is the best practise"
> 
> Are there more ways to do something, Yes. Have those ways been tried? probably. Auratus have been in this country since the 1980's. Naturalistic vivs for dart frogs came about in the early 1990's. With this setup, breeding and longevity success increased. Which is great, because that $40 Cobalt Tinc you have today is offspring of a $350 Cobalt Tinc from back then. Supply and Demand is a benefit to breeding success.


and then in post #260 



Scott Richardson said:


> In 1991, European vivarium photos were incredible. However, the rule of thumb in America was a gravel base, covered by moss, with some planted pots.


In these posts you have directly compared "naturalistic enclosures" with sphagnum over gravel and have given the direct meaning that "naturalistic" are better (best practices..) and that they are more "aesthetic" (which is another direct comparision). So I didn't put words in your mouth, you put those words out there as you made the same blanket type statements that you are putting down coming from other people... 


Ed


----------



## Scott Richardson

This is childish banter, and I am not going to take part in it.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

Scott Richardson said:


> You'll never change that. There are a handful of people on here who think they are smarter than everyone else, and have to impose their beliefs on others.


Do you guys get the irony that you are coming off as these type of people?

And if I loved everything Europe did, I'd move there!


----------



## mantisdragon91

lincolnrailers said:


> Do you guys get the irony that you are coming off as these type of people?
> 
> And if I loved everything Europe did, I'd move there!


Last time I checked none of us are trying to impose our opinions on others. And if you don't like what comes out of Europe then you better make sure that you have no galacs, terribs, bicolors or many other darts in your collection.


----------



## fleshfrombone

mantisdragon91 said:


> Last time I checked none of us are trying to impose our opinions on others. And if you don't like what comes out of Europe then you better make sure that you have no galacs, terribs, bicolors or many other darts in your collection.


Since when did Europe start manufacturing dart frogs? You're comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## mantisdragon91

fleshfrombone said:


> Since when did Europe start manufacturing dart frogs? You're comparing apples and oranges.


Ryan,

Last time I checked most of the terribs, galacs, and bicolors in the hobby came from Europe. Since your boy above doesn't like things from Europe I hope he never plans on getting any of those frogs, or buying ExoTerras, Zoomeds, or any of the dozens of other products that have been inspired by European husbandry methods. While you are at it perhaps he should go back to keeping dart frogs in tanks with paper towels and plastic plants, since most of the naturalistic terrarium setups came from there as well


----------



## fleshfrombone

lol Roman I like your style. Maybe he/she should stop driving import cars, eating western food, and stop wearing designer clothes as well? Come on man, that's painting with too broad of strokes. If those frogs hadn't been smuggled through Europe's comparatively lax customs agencies they would be here anyway. And I don't think using them is very good for your argument since they are little better than frog launderers (not that I mind since I make a distinction between legality and morality). Although I don't know why I'm arguing with you since we agree on this subject. Minus the frog mixing heresy.

Addendum:ALL of the frogs in the hobby come from South America, they just made their way into our hands....


----------



## mantisdragon91

fleshfrombone said:


> lol Roman I like your style. Maybe he/she should stop driving import cars, eating western food, and stop wearing designer clothes as well? Come on man, that's painting with too broad of strokes. If those frogs hadn't been smuggled through Europe's comparatively lax customs agencies they would be here anyway. And I don't think using them is very good for your argument since they are little better than frog launderers (not that I mind since I make a distinction between legality and morality). Although I don't know why I'm arguing with you since we agree on this subject. *Minus the frog mixing heresy*.


Call me a Heretic then My issue with the poster is before you dismiss an entire Continent's entire knowledge base as some how inferior to your own, make sure you understand everything that we on this side of the pond have copied from them and where we would be if we didn't have their combined knowledge to draw on. 

Its hilarious how people choose to ooh and ahh over the setups in Dutch and German websites, but conveniently fail to notice that almost all those setups contain multiple dart species.


----------



## fleshfrombone

mantisdragon91 said:


> Call me a Heretic then My issue with the poster is before you dismiss an entire Continent's entire knowledge base as some how inferior to your own, make sure you understand everything that we on this side of the pond have copied from them and where we would be if we didn't have their combined knowledge to draw on.
> 
> Its hilarious how people choose to ooh and ahh over the setups in Dutch and German websites, but conveniently fail to notice that almost all those setups contain multiple dart species.


Very true. I've often wondered what it is exactly that makes their setups so much better than our own, for the most part. Did they actually invent the naturalistic vivarium or did they innovate it until it looks nothing like our counterparts? There's a good chance I'll be moving to Germany in the near future so I'll be sure to get to the bottom of it and report back.


----------



## mantisdragon91

fleshfrombone said:


> Very true. I've often wondered what it is exactly that makes their setups so much better than our own, for the most part. Did they actually invent the naturalistic vivarium or did they innovate it until it looks nothing like our counterparts? There's a good chance I'll be moving to Germany in the near future so I'll be sure to get to the bottom of it and report back.


I actually think their lifestyle gives them more time to devote to their hobbies and thus they can plan and excute better than we can. Must be nice to have 6-8 weeks of vacation a year. I also think because the hobbyist population is more densely populated than in the US there is more sharing of best practices going on as well as a more mature network of suppliers of tanks, lights and other materials needed for the kind of tanks you see them creating.


----------



## fleshfrombone

Yeah that always blew my mind. When my wife told me about their vacation time and the hours they work everyday I thought how does anything get done!? I think you're right. That and Germans tend to have a need to perfect all things they are passionate about.


----------



## Ed

It would help if people bothered to find out the history of terrariums, and aquariums and thier offshoots.. Terrariums, aquariums and wardian cases became very popular during the Victorian era. See for example On the growth of plants in closely ... - Google Books .. 

For a long time, these enclosures were considered a mark of pride and displayed proudly in the home, along with a more consistent following. By comparision, in the US particularly in more modern times, these enclosures were not seen as decorations for the home and instead tended to be followed by a small group of hobbyists and suffered from up and down swings of popularity (I think the last big upswing was in the 1950s and early 60s). 

Ed


----------



## David12

Education implies they do something wrong and be corrected. In reality they are just doing something that goes against your beliefs. Gives good truthful reasons why you choose not to mix race or different species or morphs.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

lincolnrailers said:


> Do you guys get the irony that you are coming off as these type of people?
> 
> And if I loved everything Europe did, I'd move there!


This argument keeps coming up and it's just silly. I'm not sure if I could find a post that says if you don't mix it is bad for the hobby, or bad for the frogs, etc. 

I'd venture that almost all of the condemnation comes from one side of the mixing debate. Arguing against that condemnation doesn't mean you are arguing for mixing or arguing that the board should limit the info to newbies to pro mixing info.


----------



## earthfrog

MountaineerLegion said:


> This argument keeps coming up and it's just silly. I'm not sure if I could find a post that says if you don't mix it is bad for the hobby, or bad for the frogs, etc.
> 
> I'd venture that almost all of the condemnation comes from one side of the mixing debate. Arguing against that condemnation doesn't mean you are arguing for mixing or arguing that the board should limit the info to newbies to pro mixing info.


Let's just look at it from a conservation-of-the-frogs standpoint. 

The main problem with mixing that will always remain are issues with hybridization and the species being kept unable to reproduce itself. I think the focus on whether or not they seem to 'get along' without dying is a small point compared to the former.

If there becomes a trend towards more and more mixing, the frogs will suffer and decline, and we will have less and less available for everyone, as well as have to deal with an influx of interbred frogs.

These could and are likely resold or traded as legitimate species from some with mixed tanks b/c it can be difficult to tell the difference when IDing them, and if they are bred even once to another legitmate frog...well, you can imagine the rest. For myself personally, I would not buy offspring from anyone who mixes species just b/c of this uncertainty.

I don't think some of the mixers understand how, in some cases, the frogs' survival as unique species stands on the edge of a knife, with everlasting consequences from one irresponsible decision.

If one who mixes does not protect their frogs from interbreeding with another specie and does not allow them to breed themselves, they unwittingly participate in their stagnation as a species. Or, on the other hand, they look pretty with all the colors...

Barring the harmful impact on the frogs as stated above, I don't see any other major problems with mixing.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

MountaineerLegion said:


> This argument keeps coming up and it's just silly. I'm not sure if I could find a post that says if you don't mix it is bad for the hobby, or bad for the frogs, etc.
> 
> I'd venture that almost all of the condemnation comes from one side of the mixing debate. Arguing against that condemnation doesn't mean you are arguing for mixing or arguing that the board should limit the info to newbies to pro mixing info.


I could totally agree with you on this......I'd love it if people just present pros and cons, I was simply pointing out that you guys were condemning people for condemning people for mixing.......

And even though several posts were devoted to my comment about Europe, I didn't say I that I don't like their husbandry practices or frogs, but I think we have some darned good terrariums here too, and the US hobby has caught up quickly......I wouldn't say we are 20 years behind anymore, unless you are talking about all the illegal frogs they have there do to lax customs, and hobbyists who don't mind keeping something they know is illegal.

And for the record, I have leucs and auratus, and there are plenty of really cool animals being legally brought in by guys like Mark Pepper. I'd rather support someone like him than a German smuggler......


----------



## MountaineerLegion

To both earthfrog and lincolnrailers...I'm not going to go back to the argument about whether it's a good idea or not to mix. 

Both sides can make arguments supporting their position. I'll guess almost all of those arguments have been made and no one has achieved consensus. Do you think maybe there is a chance it's because this issue can't be summed up as one side is right and one is wrong? 

My point is that arguing that only a single viewpoint on this subject can have merit is silly. This subject has so many dissenting opinions I doubt anyone has it entirely correct. To push the argument to: we should only provide one viewpoint on this, we should make people accept our viewpoint, let's shut down the mixers, let's form a union and impose our will...etc. etc. is just scary beyond belief.

edit: railers I meant to cover your point. We live in a society that values freedom of speech. I don't fault anti mixers for expressing their view. I fault them for trying to impose their view on others or censor dissenting opinions. As a society we don't tend to value those actions.


----------



## earthfrog

MountaineerLegion said:


> To both earthfrog and lincolnrailers...I'm not going to go back to the argument about whether it's a good idea or not to mix.
> 
> Both sides can make arguments supporting their position. I'll guess almost all of those arguments have been made and no one has achieved consensus. *Do you think maybe there is a chance it's because this issue can't be summed up as one side is right and one is wrong?*


I think that misassumption is the very reason for the argument many are making ---the idea that one side can be proven wrong. Mixing darts has some very harmful and dangerous implications for darts, but it is not an theory or algorithm that can be proven or disproven. Maybe the approach has confused some.

This issue is so complex that it cannot be solved by mere argumentation, only by presenting evidence and allowing others to make decisions by that advice. Arguments can be useful, but when they get into personal issues and insulting other members they lose credibility. 



> My point is that arguing that only a single viewpoint on this subject can have merit is silly. This subject has so many dissenting opinions I doubt anyone has it entirely correct. To push the argument to: we should only provide one viewpoint on this, we should make people accept our viewpoint, let's shut down the mixers, let's form a union and impose our will...etc. etc. is just scary beyond belief.
> 
> edit: railers I meant to cover your point. We live in a society that values freedom of speech. I don't fault anti mixers for expressing their view. I fault them for trying to impose their view on others or censor dissenting opinions. As a society we don't tend to value those actions.


I think that running a group or society under the guise of the betterment of frogdom, as a tightly-controlled situation, lends itself to bullying and tyranny and a lack of cohesiveness, a propensity towards personal attacks. It also seems to encourage a trend towards a stunted and warped approach to learning led only by either an aggressive majority or a few elite instead of the rich resource provided by an entire diverse community. 

Perhaps I mistake you, MountaineerLegion, but I think you are using this argument as a sounding board for acheiving a more balanced perspective and to promote free speech, right?

We could all just get along if all were willing and we were provided the right environment... but of course that is impossible since not all are willing to get along and 'work things out'. One has to realize that no matter how wrong or evil one thinks someone else's viewpoint is, one cannot control or berate that person into changing their mind. People have a free will to choose given the evidence provided. It is when they make a purely emotionally-driven choice that they risk hurting the frogs or each other.

The choice to keep grudges over trifles and perceived injury or insult is also another decision that promotes bitterness and hurts and divides the culture on these forums by encouraging foolish and stupid arguments that only produce fights.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

MountaineerLegion said:


> Both sides can make arguments supporting their position. I'll guess almost all of those arguments have been made and no one has achieved consensus. Do you think maybe there is a chance it's because this issue can't be summed up as one side is right and one is wrong?
> 
> My point is that arguing that only a single viewpoint on this subject can have merit is silly. This subject has so many dissenting opinions I doubt anyone has it entirely correct. To push the argument to: we should only provide one viewpoint on this, we should make people accept our viewpoint, let's shut down the mixers, let's form a union and impose our will...etc. etc. is just scary beyond belief.
> 
> edit: railers I meant to cover your point. We live in a society that values freedom of speech. I don't fault anti mixers for expressing their view. I fault them for trying to impose their view on others or censor dissenting opinions. As a society we don't tend to value those actions.


I can totally agree with you on this. I don't want people to control the hobby and force their views on others. And I'm not completely opposed to mixing, if done properly in a gigantic enclosure with species that can't possibly interbreed. But if someone is keeping different morphs of tincs or intermedius, etc, together, it wouldn't take much time for mixed morphs to make their way into the hobby. And, it has been well demonstrated in the classifieds over the last couple months, that some people (who sell lots of frogs all over the country) are more concerned with profit, and less concerned with truth. Some of these people have proven to be intentionally deceptive about what they are selling, what morph they are, when and where they were acquired, etc, just to make a buck.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

In fact, to anyone new to the hobby, I would say researching who you get your frogs from is at least as important as researching the care your frogs need. It needs to be someone you completely trust. Such research takes a few months, but if you consult the multiple dart frog forums, fauna classifieds, and just read old threads on here, you can figure out who's trustworthy, and who's not.


----------



## MrBiggs

MountaineerLegion said:


> My biggest concern about this idea of creating a sticky trying to convince new froggers to not keep mixed tanks is that it seems folks only want THEIR position expressed.
> 
> It's kind of like politicians, it's either all repub or all dem depending on who you talk to. The country is roughly half dem and half repub...why can't both positions have some merit? I can not think of a single argument that is entirely right when there are significant numbers supporting a dissenting position. Even the supreme court of the united states presents both viewpoints.
> 
> The argument presented by some that new froggers are too ignorant to make their own decision and so you want to tell them what to think is scary as hell.
> 
> I would have no problem with a respectful sticky written that provides both opinions.


Again, pretty sure that's already done. My reference page is about as unbiased as possible in my opinion. Feel free to read it over at Dart Den if you're interested. I'm corresponding with Kyle in an attempt to get it stickied somewhere here but so far no success.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

I doubt you could find someone to argue in favor of dishonesty. If the argument were to condemn folks that maliciously lie about their frogs, for financial gain or not, I would probably join the chorus. That's not how I see this argument being prosecuted though.

I see people trying to dictate that their opinion alone is represented by the board as a "sticky" and that other opinions are ostracized. I see people who want to limit the info given to newbies. I see people who want to "unionize" in an effort to impose their view of what the hobby should be.

Your statement I "bolded" doesn't really bother me. I note things like, "completely opposed", "done properly" (I think the argument of what is proper and not proper is as open ended as the current one of right or not right), "gigantic enclosure", and "can't possibly interbreed", but it's your opinion.

If your view is that unless those conditions are met you can state as fact that it is wrong, and/or that unless those are met you should be able to prohibit dissenting views on the board or should be able to coerce newbies into not mixing then I feel compelled to argue against your position.

Just for thought, I'll also throw out the statement "...are more concerned with profit, and less concerned with truth...", implies you know what their motives are and that you, more than they, know what "truth" is. I don't know how you can make those claims.



lincolnrailers said:


> I can totally agree with you on this. I don't want people to control the hobby and force their views on others. *And I'm not completely opposed to mixing, if done properly in a gigantic enclosure with species that can't possibly interbreed.* But if someone is keeping different morphs of tincs or intermedius, etc, together, it wouldn't take much time for mixed morphs to make their way into the hobby. And, it has been well demonstrated in the classifieds over the last couple months, that some people (who sell lots of frogs all over the country) *are more concerned with profit, and less concerned with truth. Some of these people have proven to be intentionally deceptive about what they are selling, what morph they are, when and where they were acquired, etc, just to make a buck*.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

MrBiggs said:


> Again, pretty sure that's already done. My reference page is about as unbiased as possible in my opinion. Feel free to read it over at Dart Den if you're interested. I'm corresponding with Kyle in an attempt to get it stickied somewhere here but so far no success.


My thoughts on this are generally directed at the anti mixers as a whole but that is really only because it's impossible to address all of them individually. Each takes their argument to different levels and my response would also vary. 

I will head over to Dart Den and see if I can find it, i'm interested in reading it.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Susan,

I'm not sure but I think we've butted heads on this subject too. Perhaps I stated my position poorly before, perhaps you misunderstood it. Perhaps, we've never butted heads before...

but in this post, you do not mistake me. We are in complete agreement.





earthfrog said:


> I think that misassumption is the very reason for the argument many are making ---the idea that one side can be proven wrong. Mixing darts has some very harmful and dangerous implications for darts, but it is not an theory or algorithm that can be proven or disproven. Maybe the approach has confused some.
> 
> This issue is so complex that it cannot be solved by mere argumentation, only by presenting evidence and allowing others to make decisions by that advice. Arguments can be useful, but when they get into personal issues and insulting other members they lose credibility.
> 
> 
> 
> I think that running a group or society under the guise of the betterment of frogdom, as a tightly-controlled situation, lends itself to bullying and tyranny and a lack of cohesiveness, a propensity towards personal attacks. It also seems to encourage a trend towards a stunted and warped approach to learning led only by either an aggressive majority or a few elite instead of the rich resource provided by an entire diverse community.
> 
> *Perhaps I mistake you*, MountaineerLegion, but I think you are using this argument as a sounding board for acheiving a more balanced perspective and to promote free speech, right?
> 
> We could all just get along if all were willing and we were provided the right environment... but of course that is impossible since not all are willing to get along and 'work things out'. One has to realize that no matter how wrong or evil one thinks someone else's viewpoint is, one cannot control or berate that person into changing their mind. People have a free will to choose given the evidence provided. It is when they make a purely emotionally-driven choice that they risk hurting the frogs or each other.
> 
> The choice to keep grudges over trifles and perceived injury or insult is also another decision that promotes bitterness and hurts and divides the culture on these forums by encouraging foolish and stupid arguments that only produce fights.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

MountaineerLegion said:


> I doubt you could find someone to argue in favor of dishonesty. If the argument were to condemn folks that maliciously lie about their frogs, for financial gain or not, I would probably join the chorus. That's not how I see this argument being prosecuted though.
> 
> I see people trying to dictate that their opinion alone is represented by the board as a "sticky" and that other opinions are ostracized. I see people who want to limit the info given to newbies. I see people who want to "unionize" in an effort to impose their view of what the hobby should be.
> 
> Your statement I "bolded" doesn't really bother me. I note things like, "completely opposed", "done properly" (I think the argument of what is proper and not proper is as open ended as the current one of right or not right), "gigantic enclosure", and "can't possibly interbreed", but it's your opinion.
> 
> If your view is that unless those conditions are met you can state as fact that it is wrong, and/or that unless those are met you should be able to prohibit dissenting views on the board or should be able to coerce newbies into not mixing then I feel compelled to argue against your position.
> 
> Just for thought, I'll also throw out the statement "...are more concerned with profit, and less concerned with truth...", implies you know what their motives are and that you, more than they, know what "truth" is. I don't know how you can make those claims.


So what exactly is your view on mixing? Are you OK with people putting 2 tinc morphs together, letting them breed, and selling the offspring? I am ok with this, if they are properly labeled as hybrids. However, some people will intentionally mislabel something if they know hybrids won't sell well. If you think they won't, you're being naive.

I think you haven't followed a few of the specific discussions of the people to which I am referring, but there are people out there who intentionally mislead to make money.......


----------



## illinoisfrogs

MountaineerLegion said:


> My thoughts on this are generally directed at the anti mixers as a whole but that is really only because it's impossible to address all of them individually. Each takes their argument to different levels and my response would also vary.
> 
> I will head over to Dart Den and see if I can find it, i'm interested in reading it.


So you are in favor of mixing, even if not done properly? What would you advise someone, then, who wants to put 3 species of frogs in a 40 gallon tank? I'm just trying to figure out your position.


----------



## mantisdragon91

lincolnrailers said:


> So you are in favor of mixing, even if not done properly? What would you advise someone, then, who wants to put 3 species of frogs in a 40 gallon tank? I'm just trying to figure out your position.


I can't speak for anyone else, but I am personally against keeping animals improperly regardless if they are mixed or not. The first question you always want to ask is what are you trying to mix and what type of space(size/planting/other features) you are trying to accomplish this in. Than I would tailor my response accordingly.

The issue is more with the people that seem to have a Pavlovian response the moment mixing is mentioned rather than bothering to understand the scenario in question.


----------



## Scott

I have a Pavlovian response to the issue, but only in regards to advice given to people who are obviously new to the hobby.

My thought is - IF you are going to mix - you really need to have lots of experience first. As you get more experienced and learn WHY it might not be a good idea - the odds go down that you'll want to mix anyhow.

Woof/slobber.

s


----------



## illinoisfrogs

mantisdragon91 said:


> I can't speak for anyone else, but I am personally against keeping animals improperly regardless if they are mixed or not. The first question you always want to ask is what are you trying to mix and what type of space(size/planting/other features) you are trying to accomplish this in. Than I would tailor my response accordingly.
> 
> The issue is more with the people that seem to have a Pavlovian response the moment mixing is mentioned rather than bothering to understand the scenario in question.


This is good!


----------



## MountaineerLegion

lincolnrailers said:


> So what exactly is your view on mixing?


If you've considered what I'm stating my position doesn't matter. 

However, to answer your question, I've thought about a leuc tank with azureus. Haven't done it, don't know if I ever will. What I DO know, is that my decision will not be made because someone told me how to conduct my hobby. 



lincolnrailers said:


> Are you OK with people putting 2 tinc morphs together, letting them breed, and selling the offspring? I am ok with this, if they are properly labeled as hybrids.


I'd agree with you here. Misrepresenting your frogs and selling them for something they aren't, isn't a hobby.



lincolnrailers said:


> However, some people will intentionally mislabel something if they know hybrids won't sell well. If you think they won't, you're being naive.


I'm not naive...well at least on the subject of what people will do to make a buck.



lincolnrailers said:


> I think you haven't followed a few of the specific discussions of the people to which I am referring, but there are people out there who intentionally mislead to make money.......


I've stated before, PM me the time and location of the stoning for folks that are dishonest businessmen. However, infringing on my hobby because of what someone else does or deciding you are only going to present one opinion to new hobbyists because they aren't smart enough to make a decision is scary.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Just a thought, but what if your first response was, "What are your goals?", or "Why do you think you might want to do that?".



mantisdragon91 said:


> I can't speak for anyone else, but I am personally against keeping animals improperly regardless if they are mixed or not. *The first question you always want to ask is what are you trying to mix and what type of space(size/planting/other features) you are trying to accomplish this in*. Than I would tailor my response accordingly.
> 
> The issue is more with the people that seem to have a Pavlovian response the moment mixing is mentioned rather than bothering to understand the scenario in question.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

Scott said:


> I have a Pavlovian response to the issue, but only in regards to advice given to people who are obviously new to the hobby.
> 
> My thought is - IF you are going to mix - you really need to have lots of experience first. As you get more experienced and learn WHY it might not be a good idea - the odds go down that you'll want to mix anyhow.
> 
> Woof/slobber.
> 
> s


Scott,

I think the "Pavlovian response" point is fantastic. Are you purposefully suggesting it's a conditioned response?

As far as your statement about, ..."people who are obviously new to the hobby.", What do you think about, "What are your goals?"? If they answer, "I wan't to create a tank as realistic as possible.", then point out those frogs don't live together in one locale.


----------



## illinoisfrogs

MountaineerLegion said:


> However, infringing on my hobby because of what someone else does or deciding you are only going to present one opinion to new hobbyists because they aren't smart enough to make a decision is scary.


I'm sure many of the "new" hobbyists are smart enough to read both sides and make an informed decision. After all, we were all new once. But there's an alarming number of new people every month that don't do any research, and won't, and to me, THAT's SCARY. You're assuming that everyone is a rational thinker or will take the time to research. Sadly, this is not the case.

I used to be irritated when people would say "use the search function" to newbies.....then you see how, even after directed to the search function, some continue to ask very basic questions, and you wonder how intelligent some of these people are......

It's an unfortunate aspect of our society, and one I believe is getting worse with the younger generations, that people want to be spoonfed. If you want to be spoonfed, then the simplest, safest answer is "don't mix". If you are intelligent enough to do the research, then you will get a more complex answer.


----------



## MountaineerLegion

lincolnrailers said:


> I'm sure many of the "new" hobbyists are smart enough to read both sides and make an informed decision. After all, we were all new once. But there's an alarming number of new people every month that don't do any research, and won't, and to me, THAT's SCARY. You're assuming that everyone is a rational thinker or will take the time to research. Sadly, this is not the case.
> 
> I used to be irritated when people would say "use the search function" to newbies.....then you see how, even after directed to the search function, some continue to ask very basic questions, and you wonder how intelligent some of these people are......
> 
> It's an unfortunate aspect of our society, and one I believe is getting worse with the younger generations, that people want to be spoonfed. If you want to be spoonfed, then the simplest, safest answer is "don't mix". If you are intelligent enough to do the research, then you will get a more complex answer.


I see your point and agree with much of it. 

However, when I'm approached with a question, I can either decide I want to try to educate or decide I don't. I recognize going in they may or may not listen to anything I have to say. 

Some people decide to educate about the availability of the search function. If that's their approach, that's fine. I think the newbie, as you stated, will see that as too much work and ignore that info. Taking that approach and then complaining that there are a bunch of ignorant froggers around seems silly...especially if you know going in they are not going to use it. 

If you don't want to spoon feed them don't. If you don't want to be disappointed that your knowledge was ignored, don't share it. 

My issue is when folks say we shouldn't educate, we should dictate.

Just by the way, I don't think it would bother me nearly as much if people said, "If you want to be spoonfed, then the simplest, safest answer is "don't mix"." To me that is much better than "don't mix".


----------



## Scott

You'll note that I said "advice given" - any prudent part of giving advice involves a give and take with the advisee, so you're likely right.

s

[edit: it was also an attempt to inject a little levity into a topic that seems so _deathly_ serious]

[second edit: deleted response based on my misconception]



MountaineerLegion said:


> Scott,
> 
> I think the "Pavlovian response" point is fantastic. Are you purposefully suggesting it's a conditioned response?
> 
> As far as your statement about, ..."people who are obviously new to the hobby.", What do you think about, "What are your goals?"? If they answer, "I wan't to create a tank as realistic as possible.", then point out those frogs don't live together in one locale.


----------



## Scott Richardson

Everyone keeps frogs for different reasons. Wanting to breed them is a natural progression for some but not all. The conversation keeps going to inter breeding between morphs and selling them into the public. (in breeding also occurs in Hartsburg and Emden0

Mixed tanks don't always have different morphs of the same species. 

If a person has kept say auratus for a few years and knows there mannerisms, and has kept a thumbnail such as one of the common imis in the same fashion. 

Then that person sets up an enclosure that has a well planted floor with plenty of hiding spaces, so territories can be established; and in addition has a well planted canopy ( by canopy I am talking about a fully covered back wall as well as planted branches coming out to utilize the wasted space above the floor) so territories can be established.

The auratus and imis could happily coexist under the watchful eye of that person. 

Not everyone is in this hobby to breed frogs or make money. Some people just love the frogs. And there are plenty of people breeding both of these two species, so the frog isn't going to disappear from the hobby. 

So, mixing may not be a good idea for a beginner, and it may go against the beliefs that breeders have; however, it is possible to create a successful mixed tank ( I hate the word tank BTW) 

Everyone has to admit that this is not a balanced topic with both sides represented. The subject should be discussed pros and cons. However, every mixing thread I have read is a continous bashing of the thought of mixing and only one side is represented. 


If someone asks about mixing and you are opposed to mixing, maybe just don't answer the post. ignore it. If you have valuable info to contribute, do so. 

I have not read the sticky on Dart Den, and I don't know why it is not on here, but that is up to the admin. 

FOX NEWS baby!! Fair and Balanced.


----------



## Boondoggle

Scott Richardson said:


> If someone asks about mixing and you are opposed to mixing, maybe just don't answer the post. ignore it. If you have valuable info to contribute, do so.


Not to be flippant, but then wouldn't the opposite be true? The OP didn't ask about mixing. If memory serves, he asked about how to dissuade mixing. Wouldn't your advice apply to the pro-mixers in this case?

I do like the idea of "pro vs. cons" of mixing/not mixing, though. Regarding mixing, I can think of some "cons"...what are the "pros"?


----------



## mantisdragon91

Boondoggle said:


> Not to be flippant, but then wouldn't the opposite be true? The OP didn't ask about mixing. If memory serves, he asked about how to dissuade mixing. Wouldn't your advice apply to the pro-mixers in this case?
> 
> I do like the idea of "pro vs. cons" of mixing/not mixing, though. Regarding mixing, I can think of some "cons"...*what are the "pros*"?


Well for starters you can observe more behaviors in a mixed tank then in a single species tank. Contrary to people's beliefs frogs do not live in a bubble in the wild but rather frequently encounter species other than their own


----------



## Woodsman

This isn't Star Wars, the folks who have been around for a while aren't the "storm troopers" trying to take your frogs away from you. None of you need to play the role of indignant rebels for me. 

If you ask for advice, I'll offer you mine from years of experience. If you decide to take that advice, great. If you decide not to take it, great.

No skin off my nose. Damn rebels!

Richard.


----------



## Scott Richardson

Richard,
No one is trying to be rebellious. 

The original topic was how to convince people to believe a certain way. This is a free thinking society, and there are many free thinking people with many years of experience that DO keep mixed tanks, so why do we all have to believe the same beliefs on this subject? 

We are all allowed different beliefs on every other subject there is, are we not? 

I disagree with people who keep and breed frogs merely to make a buck, and just flush any that die without a thought.

However, I have never started the Topic....How do we convince people not to sell their froglets, and just give them away?

Why is disagreement with the masses automatically wrong? 

Columbus disagreed with the masses, Did he not? 

And the world was round. He may not of reached the orient, but something even better came about from his journey. America


----------



## fleshfrombone

Hard to believe but again I agree with Richard. I'm hearing alot of alarmist ideas here and I'm also hearing well I'm dong it and you can't stop me so there. 

*Responsible* hobbyists wouldn't mix morphs of the same species or species that can interbreed then peddle their offspring. In my opinion responsible hobbyists don't mix at all unless they are well versed in the macrofauna subjects and aspects of vivarium design that I won't go into now regardless. However as I've stated before I know of at least two members on this board who have tried to sell their crosses/mixes as something they weren't (save the pm's I won't name names). The last thing we need as a community is a bunch of profiteers getting in bed with the community and devolving it into every other herp hobby out there today. I know it's a slippery slope but it's a demonstrable one.

And yes the frogs don't live in a bubble in the wild. They also don't live in a vivarium measured in gallons either. By that rationale why don't we start keeping our frogs with tarantulas, centipedes, birds, ad nauseum? In the wild frogs and other animals have avenues of escape, visual barriers etc. If a wild frog is being stressed it can escape into feet of leaf litter, up a tree, across a stream.... In even a large viv we are talking square feet not acreage. 

Censorship is one thing, providing bad advice to newcomers is quite another.


----------



## earthfrog

Woodsman said:


> This isn't Star Wars, the folks who have been around for a while aren't the "storm troopers" trying to take your frogs away from you. None of you need to play the role of indignant rebels for me.
> 
> If you ask for advice, I'll offer you mine from years of experience. If you decide to take that advice, great. If you decide not to take it, great.
> 
> No skin off my nose. Dam rebels!
> 
> Richard.


Star Wars Subway Car | Improv Everywhere

I bet the Improv Everywhere team would have something to say in advocating the mixing of species anywhere. In the case above, they mix above-average humans with average ones.


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

lol @ "galactic rebellion for Dummies"


----------



## mantisdragon91

fleshfrombone said:


> Hard to believe but again I agree with Richard. I'm hearing alot of alarmist ideas here and I'm also hearing well I'm dong it and you can't stop me so there.
> 
> *Responsible* hobbyists wouldn't mix morphs of the same species or species that can interbreed then peddle their offspring. In my opinion responsible hobbyists don't mix at all unless they are well versed in the macrofauna subjects and aspects of vivarium design that I won't go into now regardless. However as I've stated before I know of at least two members on this board who have tried to sell their crosses/mixes as something they weren't (save the pm's I won't name names). The last thing we need as a community is a bunch of profiteers getting in bed with the community and devolving it into every other herp hobby out there today. I know it's a slippery slope but it's a demonstrable one.
> 
> And yes the frogs don't live in a bubble in the wild. They also don't live in a vivarium measured in gallons either. By that rationale why don't we start keeping our frogs with tarantulas, centipedes, birds, ad nauseum?
> 
> Censorship is one thing, providing bad advice to newcomers is quite another.


Well for starters let me agree with you on the crossing aspect. I do keep one tank that could potentialy cross breed(variabilis and Iquitos vents) but make sure to monitor and to date neither species has shown any interest in the other. I will strongly disagree with anyone who attempts to crossbreed morphs for financial gain or deceptively release these mutts into the general hobby.

On the other hand don't be so quick to judge every other Herp hobby out there today. There are Phelsuma, Uroplatus and other reptile breeders than can teach this hobby quite a bit about blood line management and preserving species in captivity.

Frogs in the wild can live in shockingly dense populations if conditions are right, and I can tell you that the average vivarium provides a much better micro habitat( high humidity, unlimited food, plentiful breeding spots, no predators, etc) than almost any habitat in the wild.

There is a place in our hobby for well planned multi species tanks just like there is in the fish hobby. Or would you tell an aquarist not to keep mixed tanks either?

It may not be your cup of tea but as long as people don't release hybrids and other mutts into the hobby how does other people deciding to keep mixed tanks and asking people who have done it for advice affect you negatively?


----------



## Greecko

If I may, give how I see as a newbie to the hobby, so new I am yet to own the frogs however researching and reading alot

Yes I can say that when coming into a hobby where there is so much split in certain beliefs and idea's (and as stated by previous posters) it is so off putting to even ask some questions without feeling stupid, when a simple explanation helps. I have had experiences from keeping just one leopard gecko how many different views and the amount of criticisms etc on how each do it (certain sites I even ignore, nothing but rows and egomaniacs)

As someone new I like the fact I can read and understand why mixing species on the whole, is frowned upon, sure you can do it but doesn't make it right

I must have seen 2 or 3 different reasonings from this topic alone never mind the main site that have firmly put me in the mind not to mix species, however I never would have, only though by reading

Your always going to get people who will start something new with their own idea and ignore all advice, unavoidable, but for those who will no doubt read and research then at least give us something solid to go on rather than "I dont think"

Rant over  long story short, its not what you know its how you use it, just please have somewhere to explain without bias why mixing is bad for dart frogs as from reading these forums for hours a day there are some what I see as experts 

Thanks Chris


----------



## Scott Richardson

mantisdragon91 said:


> Well for starters let me agree with you on the crossing aspect. I do keep one tank that could potentialy cross breed(variabilis and Iquitos vents) but make sure to monitor and to date neither species has shown any interest in the other. I will strongly disagree with anyone who attempts to crossbreed morphs for financial gain or deceptively release these mutts into the general hobby.
> 
> On the other hand don't be so quick to judge every other Herp hobby out there today. There are Phelsuma, Uroplatus and other reptile breeders than can teach this hobby quite a bit about blood line management and preserving species in captivity.
> 
> Frogs in the wild can live in shockingly dense populations if conditions are right, and I can tell you that the average vivarium provides a much better micro habitat( high humidity, unlimited food, plentiful breeding spots, no predators, etc) than almost any habitat in the wild.
> 
> There is a place in our hobby for well planned multi species tanks just like there is in the fish hobby. Or would you tell an aquarist not to keep mixed tanks either?
> 
> It may not be your cup of tea but as long as people don't release hybrids and other mutts into the hobby how does other people deciding to keep mixed tanks and asking people who have done it for advice affect you negatively?


It doesn't effect them negatively at all. And, if giving sound advise to those that are going to set up a mixed enclosure anyway helps them avoid some common pitfalls and helps to keep those frogs healthy, What does it hurt?


----------



## frogface

You guys spend all this time arguing and yet *this* is going on right under your noses!

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/lounge/66734-my-first-mixed-terrarium.html#post583617


----------



## Ed

frogface said:


> You guys spend all this time arguing and yet *this* is going on right under your noses!
> 
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/lounge/66734-my-first-mixed-terrarium.html#post583617


 
Way for some people to drop the ball..


----------



## eldalote2

frogface said:


> You guys spend all this time arguing and yet *this* is going on right under your noses!
> 
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/lounge/66734-my-first-mixed-terrarium.html#post583617




Oh my goodness the horror!

She should send them a copy of this "successful" thread to educate them!


----------



## Jellyman

lincolnrailers said:


> So what exactly is your view on mixing? Are you OK with people putting 2 tinc morphs together, letting them breed, and selling the offspring? I am ok with this, if they are properly labeled as hybrids. However, some people will intentionally mislabel something if they know hybrids won't sell well. If you think they won't, you're being naive.
> 
> I think you haven't followed a few of the specific discussions of the people to which I am referring, but there are people out there who intentionally mislead to make money.......


There are breeders that will label a non hybrid as line X because it will sell faster and for more. This is not a hybrid argument as it is an ethical argument.


----------



## fleshfrombone

mantisdragon91 said:


> On the other hand don't be so quick to judge every other Herp hobby out there today. There are Phelsuma, Uroplatus and other reptile breeders than can teach this hobby quite a bit about blood line management and preserving species in captivity.


Yes, but there are others like the ball python/bearded dragon/leopard gecko/what have you crowd that mix and mash bloodlines until you get something little better than the neoregelia hybrids whose lineage is so corrupted who knows where it came from?



mantisdragon91 said:


> Frogs in the wild can live in shockingly dense populations if conditions are right, and I can tell you that the average vivarium provides a much better micro habitat( high humidity, unlimited food, plentiful breeding spots, no predators, etc) than almost any habitat in the wild.


True but again stressed animals have a much more dynamic environment to escape into if the need arises. 



mantisdragon91 said:


> There is a place in our hobby for well planned multi species tanks just like there is in the fish hobby. Or would you tell an aquarist not to keep mixed tanks either?


I tell aquarium enthusiasts their fish are boring, they should try dart frogs  Then again the aquarium hobby is pretty damned corrupted as well. 



mantisdragon91 said:


> It may not be your cup of tea but as long as people don't release hybrids and other mutts into the hobby how does other people deciding to keep mixed tanks and asking people who have done it for advice affect you negatively?


It affects the hobby, which I have been a part of for a long time, negatively because kids being encouraged to mix couldn't care less about the work their forerunners put in when they create hybrids because they look cool. The potential for abuse is too great in my opinion.


----------



## mantisdragon91

fleshfrombone said:


> Yes, but there are others like the ball python/bearded dragon/leopard gecko/what have you crowd that mix and mash bloodlines until you get something little better than the neoregelia hybrids whose lineage is so corrupted who knows where it came from?
> 
> 
> 
> True but again stressed animals have a much more dynamic environment to escape into if the need arises.
> 
> 
> 
> I tell aquarium enthusiasts their fish are boring, they should try dart frogs  Then again the aquarium hobby is pretty damned corrupted as well.
> 
> 
> 
> It affects the hobby, which I have been a part of for a long time, negatively because kids being encouraged to mix couldn't care less about the work their forerunners put in when they create hybrids because they look cool. The potential for abuse is too great in my opinion.


But again we are not advocating tanks with species that can hybridize. It sounds like your issue isn't with mixed tanks as much as mixing morphs and locales and muddying the blood lines. Correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## fleshfrombone

mantisdragon91 said:


> But again we are not advocating tanks with species that can hybridize. It sounds like your issue isn't with mixed tanks as much as mixing morphs and locales and muddying the blood lines. Correct me if I am wrong.


Do you remember that argument I had with pitcom? That is my biggest concern yes. I've also seen tincs stressed by aggressive thumbnails. It just seems like playing with fire to me. Could you do me a favor and take a picture of your mixed tanks so I can see what kind of vegetation and landscaping you've done?


----------



## Ed

Some of the discussion revolves around concepts that are not well defined in the hobby.. for those who are really interested I suggest obtaining copies of the following 

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/27957/1/0000388.pdf

Bimodal signal requisite for agonistic behavior in a dart-poison frog, Epipedobatesfemoralis

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~mbee/PDF_files/Bee (2003, BES).pdf

http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a0502...territorial behavior in dendrobatid frogs.pdf

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie 

An understanding of the underpinnings of the determinents that can effect territoriality would also help see for example... 



CROWDING WITHOUT STRESS* - McBride - 2008 - Australian Veterinary Journal - Wiley Online Library

http://cbn.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2001/PhysiolBehavvLoo/2001PhysiolBehavvLoo.pdf

http://people.auc.ca/imre/Food abundance and territory size.pdf


----------



## MrBiggs

Alright, here it is: http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/66762-multispecies-reference-page.html

Go forth and read.


----------



## Scott Richardson

I for one want to say thank you to Ed and Travis for putting that together. This has always been a long and drawn out battle. But atleast we finally have a winner in this debate..

And the winner is............................The frogs that will be kept in the enclosures!!!!!!!!!

Regardless of what advise is given, people are going to do what they want to do, And if they go about it with no information, failure is imminent. 

My days of debating this subject are over. 

Again, Thank you both. I'm sure alot of frogs will thank you too.


----------



## Scott

Since we have a Happy Ending here - I do believe it's time to lock this sucker up.

All of the celebratory (and way off topic) posts have been removed and the thread is locked.

s


----------

