# Don't keep terribilis with mourning geckos



## minorhero (Apr 24, 2020)

Not my picture, saw it on facebook and thought it was worth posting here for archival reference. Cohabitating is a hot topic with some strong feelings but I think terribilis at least really should be a species only tank as evidenced by this picture.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Yeah. My sympathies to the gecko but I'd be worried about the terribilis. 

Prey item too big
Pathogens
Possible mechanical damage and infection from the struggling prey
I don't personally understand why some people are dead set on keeping Mourning Geckos with dart frogs, but as you say -- hot topic with strong feelings so I'll drop it for now.

And yes, my terribilis have tried to eat _me_ so this comes as no surprise.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

I'm having a hard time with that photo. 

Thanks for posting it -- people need to see it.

A little more info -- MG hatchlings are _tiny. _Any _Dendrobates_ could do exactly this to one of them (and, for all we know, probably do unbeknownst to the keeper).


----------



## FroggerFrog (Jan 11, 2021)

By the way, what is the point of mixing animals? To show off your capabilities? To be like a zoo? To simply want to have 2 animals in the same cage so you can save money? I don’t get why people do this even when every corner of a frog care sheet literally says “DO NOT MIX SPECIES”.


----------



## bssknox (Apr 24, 2017)

You beat me to it Minorhero. I saw the same post and was shocked. This looks like an adult gecko, to juvenile at the youngest. According the the OP on Facebook the gecko did indeed die. But like Fahad said, I'd be worried about the effects on the frog.


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

For me it would be none of the above. It would be to create a more complete ecosystem for example and to fill the whole tank if you have a tall one with terrestrial and arboreal animals. Just like one would a proper aquarium.

That being said, I completely understand that frogs should be kept separate and I would not mix myself. Just trying to explain where such desires may come from without the negative connotations.


----------



## Tijl (Feb 28, 2019)

Anda said:


> For me it would be none of the above. It would be to create a more complete ecosystem for example and to fill the whole tank if you have a tall one with terrestrial and arboreal animals.


People heavily overestimate the size of the enclosure we work with all the time. There realy is no such thing as terrestrial or arboreal when given only a few centimeters..


----------



## FroggerFrog (Jan 11, 2021)

Anda said:


> For me it would be none of the above. It would be to create a more complete ecosystem for example and to fill the whole tank if you have a tall one with terrestrial and arboreal animals. Just like one would a proper aquarium.
> 
> That being said, I completely understand that frogs should be kept separate and I would not mix myself. Just trying to explain where such desires may come from without the negative connotations.


That’s a good point but I should add mourning geckos originated on the other side of the world. Would it really make sense for a gecko from another continent to be put with a frog from the other side of the world? Now you could make points that mourning geckos were introduced to South American and Central American countries but that was brought to the country and didn’t originate their which probably brought a slew of problems to the ecosystem.


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Absolutely not, it would not make sense. I was trying to answer the genereal questions.

That being said, the question about the mourning geckos specifically could just as easily apply to the other absolutely necessary springtail, isopods, plants and leaves etc. Are they habitat specific?


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

This looks to be a Brooke's House Gecko (or Common House Gecko, Hemidactylus brookii), in case anyone was wondering!

The above is incorrect, that is a Lepidodactylus Lugubris (Mourning Gecko). Apologies!


----------



## FroggerFrog (Jan 11, 2021)

Anda said:


> Absolutely not, it would not make sense. I was trying to answer the genereal questions.
> 
> That being said, the question about the mourning geckos specifically could just as easily apply to the other absolutely necessary springtail, isopods, plants and leaves etc. Are they habitat specific?


I think my message came across as a little rude so please, I definitely didn’t mean to come across that way.

True, but once you add an animal which can potentially be hazardous to the environment, then that’s when you start to think about how wrong it is. Plus with plants, isopods, and etc. they aren’t a hazardous obstacle. (You can make a statement about some plants which will devour or kill other plants and the environment.)


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

I think we agree completely. Until a small lizard appears that will clean their »teeth», rub their belly and tuck them in at night - stay away


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Anda said:


> For me it would be none of the above. It would be to create a more complete ecosystem for example and to fill the whole tank if you have a tall one with terrestrial and arboreal animals. Just like one would a proper aquarium.


First problem there is the false equivalency between a vivarium and an aquarium. You can't compare these organisms and the limited dimensions they traverse with a water column full of entirely different organisms.

Hobbyists don't have the resources and space to 'create a more complete ecosystem'. 

My frog room is 30' x 14' and I don't have that kind of space nor the understanding to deal with that kind of complexity reliably, and I've been in and out of this hobby since I was a child and worked in the industry -- and you know what? I don't know **** beyond a basic foundation on how to keep these animals healthy in an artificial environment with strict parameters and limitations.

This one point is _continuously_ misunderstood and overestimated by otherwise well-meaning, smart and interested people, and sometimes capitalized on by people out to make a buck.

What's "tall"? My tallest vivs are 36" tall. In a wild environment that's not "arboreal" that's scrambling over a fallen log. My "terrestrial" P. terribilis climb that high a few times a week when they're on the hunt.



Anda said:


> *That being said, I completely understand that frogs should be kept separate and I would not mix myself.* Just trying to explain where such desires may come from without the negative connotations.


Of course, but other hobbyists often overestimate the extent of their knowledge and the quality of the knowledge that's being sold to them. I know I did, when I was much younger.

The accusation that gets leveled at boards like this (and my view in particular) is that it's dogmatic and elitist.

I get it. You can get away with a lot of things for a while. Sometimes a long while. But if you look at the potential lifespan of a dart frog -- say 20 years or longer -- that's a long timeline for variables in a dynamic biological system to go wrong. 

I believe the tipping point applies to vivariums ... you have a system and keep giving it the same inputs, but at some point you get an unexpected result. Even with perfect, restricted husbandry, I've dealt with infected eyes likely due to mechanical injury, osmotic imbalance possibly caused by the stress of a physical injury (dislocated wrist it looked like) -- non-overt bullying ... and now you want me to throw more variables in like geckos with who-knows-what in their guts and doing weird gecko things in a confined space for years with frogs doing weird frog things ... no thanks.  



Anda said:


> [...]
> 
> That being said, the question about the mourning geckos specifically could just as easily apply to the other absolutely necessary springtail, isopods, plants and leaves etc. Are they habitat specific?


We make compromises all the time because these habitats are artificial, but context and consequences are everything, so going back to false equivalencies, I don't believe the question just as easily applies.

A gecko is not a plant is not an isopod is not a leaf.

People also see mixed species exhibits in zoos but those zoos have a mandate to engage the public and represent something specific, have full-time, highly trained staff and veterinarians, and I imagine that sometimes they expect to lose animals in some of those exhibits in service of that mandate.

I believe it _can_ be done, I just don't believe it _should_ be done, and that belief is based on decades of observation and experience and talking to people much more knowledgeable than I am.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

There is real gold in here and I agree completely.



Fahad said:


> First problem there is the false equivalency between a vivarium and an aquarium. You can't compare these organisms and the limited dimensions they traverse with a water column full of entirely different organisms.
> 
> Hobbyists don't have the resources and space to 'create a more complete ecosystem'.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Again I completely agree with all your comments and good advice, I know nothing about these frogs relative to most of the members on this forum, but perhaps it is a conversation barrier thing between cultures. I am not defending people who want to mix species, I simply tried to answer some specific questions obectively about the desire to have different animals in one enclosure.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Anda said:


> Again I completely agree with all your comments, I know nothing about these frogs relative to most of the members on this forum, but perhaps it is a conversation barrier thing between cultures. I am not defending people who want to mix species, I simply tried to answer some specific questions obectively about the desire to have different animals in one enclosure.


Of course, no worries. I didn't think you were defending, just speculating on motivations. Cheers!


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Fahad said:


> Of course, no worries. I didn't think you were defending, just speculating on motivations. Cheers!


And I missed that nuance as well...will try to do better


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

A properly planted enclosure is boring. We must have more.

We must have a waterfall. We must have a drip wall. We must have a moving stream.

Single species enclosure is boring. We must have multiple colours and species.

Single animal enclosure is boring. We must have crabs and shrimp and geckoes.

All said by the new hobbyist. I wonder if they have this problem in Europe? I bet they don't - not to the 'Merican extent. We have become an entitled society where no one can say no to us or tell us what to do - what is good or bad or logical or correct.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

I'm genuinely surprised to see a dart frog, even a terribilis, try to eat something that large and it certainly highlights why mixing species is a bad idea. 
I know several people in europe who _do_ mix darts with very small gecko species reasonably successfully (both species breed and produce healthy offspring in the enclosure) and they have never reported anything like this but I suspect they will be as surprised by this photo as I am.
I also participate in various planted aquarium communties and I don't completely understand why attitudes to this sort of thing differ so fundamentally between aquarium and vivarium keeping. In fishkeeping it's not remotely controversial to keep a 'community tank' of species from all round the world in which smaller species will produce young that are opportunistically consumed by larger species within the tank. 
People get a little hysterical about this topic sometimes and I don't want to step on that landmine so again, I don't mix species and I don't advocate for mixing species, but in principle why is a baby gecko being eaten by a frog regarded as being so much more offensive than a baby guppy or corydoras being eaten by a larger fish or an aggressive shrimp? 
Do the hobbies attract fundamentally different personalities? or is this a cultural thing where because we consume so much fish and at such detriment to the marine environment that it becomes difficult or impossible to value their lives in the same way? Would someone from a culture where they routinely eat frogs and lizards see any problem here other than that the terribilis has clearly bitten off more than it can chew? Plenty of people breed mourning geckos solely as a feeder for specialist snakes, I'm not attempting to low key rationalise mixing species in a vivarium, I'm just genuinely interested in what underpins these values. I'm sure many of you eat plenty of meat and any sincere investigation will reveal that most of the animals you consume suffer far more than that gecko before they die.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Philsuma said:


> I wonder if they have this problem in Europe? I bet they don't - not to the 'Merican extent.


In my experience this is not the case, in fact mixing species and particularly dart frogs and small geckos is much more common in europe and far less frowned upon. Particularly continental europe where English isn't the native language. If anything I think we probably exported the concept to america.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Louis said:


> In my experience this is not the case, in fact mixing species and particularly dart frogs and small geckos is much more common in europe and far less frowned upon. Particularly continental europe where English isn't the native language. If anything I think we probably exported the concept to america.


I remember in the early 2000's seeing photos of beautifully planted Dutch vivaria that contained a variety of dart frog species, sometimes mixed with small geckos, so it's definitely not just a North American thing.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Fahad said:


> The accusation that gets leveled at boards like this (and my view in particular) is that it's dogmatic and elitist.


I certainly don't mean to highlight yourself Fahad but I've expressed something along those lines on here before in a moment of frustration. It's not so much that I see the well established dogma with regard to keeping dendrobatids as a bad thing but rather the way that people sometimes attempt to intervene in situations where someone is proudly trying to show off their new mixed species waterfall tank with a moss floor.
I'm a pragmatist and I feel that very often people come in all guns blazing when a more softly softly approach might result in a far more productive intervention. It's easy to forget that online you never really know who you're dealing with, I've seen people who I'd bet were young teenagers or even children (or who _clearly_ had learning difficulties) being subject to fairly aggressive and excessivey verbose lectures from passionate people, as keen to show off their expertise as the young person is their less than ideal tank, and I think it can sometimes be very counterproductive. 
If the animals welfare is your primary concern then sometimes a much gentler guiding hand on the tiller is what's called for and can lead to much better outcomes. In my opinion.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Fahad said:


> I remember in the early 2000's seeing photos of beautifully planted Dutch vivaria that contained a variety of dart frog species, sometimes mixed with small geckos, so it's definitely not just a North American thing.


There was a company in Amsterdam called simply 'Vivaria' that operated from the no longer active website vivaria.nl
They were a fantastic source of plants in Europe before the hobby became more popular and also built some really amazing zoo displays and huge private custom vivaria all around europe. I'm sure most adults involved in this hobby for ten years or more in Europe will know of them.
They played a major role on popularising 'euro style' glass vivariums and they bred many species of dart frog as well as various geckos and skinks very successfully whilst routinely mixing species. They often kept highly active blue tailed skinks with dart frogs which I'm sure everyone here would agree is even less appropriate than tiny mourning geckos.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Louis said:


> [...]I also participate in various planted aquarium communties and I don't completely understand why attitudes to this sort of thing differ so fundamentally between aquarium and vivarium keeping.[...]


I touched on it in my post further up. A water column has more dimensions for movement, and based on footage I've seen and my own observations bodies of water in the wild, you're more likely to see different species of fish in quite close proximity to each other. 

As I said -- I don't really think the organisms are comparable.



Louis said:


> [...] but in principle why is a baby gecko being eaten by a frog regarded as being so much more offensive than a baby guppy or corydoras being eaten by a larger fish or an aggressive shrimp?


I've kept a lot of predators in my time; small to medium-sized varanids, plenty of snakes ... in principle I have zero issues with an obligate carnivore doing what it was meant to do. 

In practice I won't feed live rodents or reptiles to predators because I don't think it's compassionate, and there's always the small possibility that an expensive specimen is wounded by a prey item that fights back. Pathogens jumping from live or fresh killed lizards to snakes, for example, is also a risk factor.

With fish I draw lines that are probably informed by my own cultural bias to an extent. Would I feed a _small_ fish to a piscivore? Yes, but that also ensures a quick death. But I wouldn't put a large fish in with a small turtle to be torn apart and die slowly, for instance. In nature predation is often very ugly, we don't need to replicate that in captivity.

My issues with geckos being killed by frogs are:

It serves no purpose
It may cause mechanical injury to the frog
It may introduce pathogens to the frog
My current outlook on animal husbandry is to exercise their instincts to a decent extent, while eliminating or at least greatly reducing harmful variables. It's a cautious approach that involves some trade-offs here and there. You can't bubble-wrap the frogs but you don't need to introduce wild cards either, in my opinion.



Louis said:


> Do the hobbies attract fundamentally different personalities?


Although there's overlap, e.g. my fondness for snakes and monitors alongside my love of dart frogs, I think a lot of hobbyists may gravitate towards the frogs as being 'gentler' or less threatening than other reptiles and amphibians, yes.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

I agree with everything you've said below. It can be hard enough to convey tone via text, but giving someone a lecture, however well-intentioned, isn't likely to be productive to anyone.

I try to provide disclaimers and back-ups for what I'm saying when I speak with someone directly; when I was sixteen years old I mixed species like mad because no one had laid out for me why this was a bad idea, they were too busy selling me stuff.

When I'm not talking to anyone in particular about a real tank, I rant with abandon. 



Louis said:


> I certainly don't mean to highlight yourself Fahad but I've expressed something along those lines on here before in a moment of frustration. It's not so much that I see the well established dogma with regard to keeping dendrobatids as a bad thing but rather the way that people sometimes attempt to intervene in situations where someone is proudly trying to show off their new mixed species waterfall tank with a moss floor.
> I'm a pragmatist and I feel that very often people come in all guns blazing when a more softly softly approach might result in a far more productive intervention. It's easy to forget that online you never really know who you're dealing with, I've seen people who I'd bet were young teenagers or even children (or who _clearly_ had learning difficulties) being subject to fairly aggressive and excessivey verbose lectures from passionate people, as keen to show off their expertise as the young person is their less than ideal tank, and I think it can sometimes be very counterproductive.
> If the animals welfare is your primary concern then sometimes a much gentler guiding hand on the tiller is what's called for and can lead to much better outcomes. In my opinion.


----------



## Robru (Jan 1, 2021)

I think the biggest problem is the lack of proper knowledge. You will only discover these things when you visit specialized websites and forums. I've been reading for a long time and suddenly discover things that are not even included in books. The content of books quickly becomes obsolete. If you then visit a specialist forum such as this one, you will see that new insights in the field of, in this case, the keeping of poison dart frogs are occurring at a rapid pace. Many people who take a pet often do not take the time to learn about it. And think they all know how it works.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Louis said:


> There was a company in Amsterdam called simply 'Vivaria' that operated from the no longer active website vivaria.nl
> They were a fantastic source of plants in Europe before the hobby became more popular and also built some really amazing zoo displays and huge private custom vivaria all around europe. I'm sure most adults involved in this hobby for ten years or more in Europe will know of them.
> They played a major role on popularising 'euro style' glass vivariums and they bred many species of dart frog as well as various geckos and skinks very successfully whilst routinely mixing species. They often kept highly active blue tailed skinks with dart frogs which I'm sure everyone here would agree is even less appropriate than tiny mourning geckos.


I remember them well, I used to drool over their set-ups and products and lament there was no equivalent in Canada.

The one thing I remember (and I could be wrong, this was over 20 years ago) is that a lot of the mixed species tanks I saw were really quite large.

I've discussed with other members before the idea of foundational care and reducing variables. Presumably some genius (that rules me out) with decades of experience can successfully navigate the complexities of such husbandry. It's just not something I'd ever recommend and something I choose not to do myself.

I've worked in the trade and to be honest I haven't liked a lot of what I've seen. I do think we've come a long way, on a more positive note, and I hope all aspects of the hobby will continue to improve.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Louis said:


> It's not so much that I see the well established dogma with regard to keeping dendrobatids as a bad thing but rather the way that people sometimes attempt to intervene in situations where someone is proudly trying to show off their new mixed species waterfall tank with a moss floor.


This is the heart of the matter, right here. I will willingly admit that sometimes we (I will put myself in this category) can be a bit heavy-handed in our response to this sort of situation. For one thing, there are dogmatic aspects of frog keeping that are necessary to emphasize for the welfare of the animals we keep. Just as I am sure that there are things that just set you off when you see how folks keep geckos, there are some things that just shouldn't be done if the welfare of the frogs is the most important consideration. I think that this board is somewhat unusual in its adherence to the idea that the frogs come first, not what looks cool. Mixing species and water features (and the obligatory moss lawns that accompany them) are two things that I think fall into that category. There may be some disagreement about the specifics, but I think you will mostly find agreement on these subjects among the experienced keepers on this board. 

The big problem that I have seen recently is that there are lots folks on social media that are showing how to build super cool-looking (no sarcasm here, I really think they are cool-looking) enclosures that aren't appropriate for the needs of dart frogs. These also are not commonly designed with longevity in mind, but that is a different topic. So, folks see these people that must know what they are doing because they are on YouTube (ok, some sarcasm there ;-) making these tanks and they duplicate them. Then, they come here and show them off. When they meet resistance, they will commonly dig in and try to defend their designs. Now, we have a difficult situation because there are two different camps - one being the original poster of the moss tank build thread and other usually relatively inexperienced folks that have seen the same YouTube videos and defend the design. The other group are those of us who have been keeping dart frogs for a while and think that this type of tank will not be good for the frogs in the long term. 

The way I see it is that these two groups of posters represent a handful of people compared with the number of folks that will eventually read this thread over time. It's those folks that I am writing to when I am trying to make suggestions about how dart frogs might be better taken care of. A complete novice may be incapable of discerning which of the two posting groups is right. So, in order to leave a track record that has the information in it that is best for the frogs, some of us may get a bit more passionate in our defense of our position. Could we do a better job in how we present our information sometimes? Could we be a little less heavy-handed in our approach? Unequivocally yes, we could do a better job sometimes. The only thing I can say in my defense is that these situations come up so often, it sometimes feels as if I am just continuing one long argument across multiple threads. That isn't fair to any particular thread creator, but it happens. I am always careful to write as gently as I can, but I am sure that it still comes across as mean. 

On the topic of fish vs. frogs, this has been discussed before but I think it is worth discussing some more. I think there are differences in the attitudes between the hobbies and there are some interesting reasons for that. 

Good job bringing this stuff up, Louis. I think it's worth talking about these kinds of topics as a gut check to see if we are doing the greatest good with this platform. At the end of the day, we have a responsibility, in my opinion, to do the best we can by our pets. As you have pointed out, though, you can be absolutely right but deliver information in a way that your rightness will never be adopted by anyone. We need to have a community here that is able to both deliver and hear right information without losing sight of the fact that opinions vary and that all of the people on this board are important.

Mark


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Encyclia said:


> These situations come up so often, it sometimes feels as if I am just continuing one long argument across multiple threads. That isn't fair to any particular thread creator, but it happens.


I'm not in any way implying that I've noticed you communicating anything in particular that didn't seem productive mark but I think you have absolutely hit the bullseye here and I can relate to what you're describing. I don't know what the solution might be but this, it seems to me, is the core of the issue. Exacerbated by the fact that occasionally there is just a genuinely willfully ignorant moron that couldn't care less about animals they regard as animated ornaments. I'm sure we've all encountered them and they can sometimes haunt us as ghosts in conversations where perhaps someone has made major and sometimes even costly to rectify mistakes, but with the very best intentions.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Yeah, I think you have the right of it, Louis. It's really hard to shake off the "willfully ignorant" (very well-said) responses and come at the next similar thread with a blank canvas attitude. What I have noticed more recently, though, is that each thread is engaged rather than the blanket "use the search bar" response that previously would have been the only response on this board  There is a time for that, but it's best if every (especially new) person can feel heard. All food for thought and I thank you again for bringing it up as a reminder. I can't tell you how much it means to me that people are willing to discuss this kind of thing in good faith. 

Mark


----------



## Androgynoid (Sep 3, 2020)

On that note Mark, as a longtime lurker but still new board member I think that overall the site seems less.. confrontational than it used to be. It does certainly help that the conversation is more nuanced now, and it's become more common to actually _link_ a thread with relevant info instead of having n00bs like me pore (pour? I'm never quite sure which is which) through years of sometimes conflicting information. The site redesign has certainly helped with the headache of searching the archives. I've stumbled across several helpful threads that weren't showing up in the searches before.

That being said, it's understandable why it could be frustrating to answer the same questions over and over. Unfortunately, us new folk dont always know where to look or which of the conflicting pieces of info are actually _right s_o it can be pretty helpful to have these conversations.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

I cant help but want to gently extricate that large item out of that frogs throat.

An unfortunate event doesnt happen, until it Happens.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Glad that is the way you see it, Androgynoid. I am always happy when others see the positive change that I think I do  You are right about the improvements to the search bar (my goodness it was trash before) and the fact that best practices change over time and that can make it appear that information conflicts more than it actually does (if you pay attention to the dates that things were written).

While it can be frustrating to answer the same questions repeatedly, it is also really rewarding to be able to help people out before painful and costly mistakes are made. It is just another reminder of how important that complete reset is before engaging in a new thread!

Mark


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

I just thought of another situation where the tone can be set inappropriately. I have found myself wading into threads about paludaria and waterfalls ready to do the standard spiel when, after a quick re-read, it turns out that the OP never said anything about having dart frogs in that tank! I am actually really happy that this board has become a place where people come to talk vivarium building without any intention of having dart frogs (I can't conceive of it, myself, but it's apparently true). So, I have to pay close attention to what people write instead of just basing my response on the pictures (or the 10 other threads I have commented on that day)!

Mark


----------



## Kribensis (Jan 14, 2021)

I would never house anything that small with terribs. They’re incredibly voracious and aggressive feeders, and routinely try to eat my fingers. I considered trying it before I had my frogs, but after feeding them for the first time, I quickly changed my mind.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Anda said:


> For me it would be none of the above. It would be to create a more complete ecosystem for example and to fill the whole tank if you have a tall one with terrestrial and arboreal animals. Just like one would a proper aquarium.


You've apparently never been in a real fish room, kept by a fishkeeper who is passionate about *fish*. Each species has its own tank (because that is how they do best), and they are not kept because they are bold or cute or match the carpeting. To think that a 'display tank' is a proper aquarium misses the real connection between fishkeepers and froggers (very different than 'aquarium keepers' and 'vivarium keepers').

I've worked in the retail fish business for a short time, and been an aquarist (yes, the bad kind) for 30 years, and that is not the hobby to emulate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.




Chris S said:


> This looks to be a Brooke's House Gecko (or Common House Gecko, Hemidactylus brookii), in case anyone was wondering!


I respectfully disagree. The chevrons on the back are distinctly different than the pixellated blotches of a house gecko.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Socratic Monologue said:


> I respectfully disagree. The chevrons on the back are distinctly different than the pixellated blotches of a house gecko.


Upon a second look, you are most correct, I will update my post.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Socratic Monologue said:


> You've apparently never been in a real fish room, kept by a fishkeeper who is passionate about *fish*. Each species has its own tank (because that is how they do best), [...]


Ah...that's something I'd equate with higher end or specialty species. I'm not sure where biotope aquaria with their mix of bottom feeders and free swimmers etc. fall in ... maybe somewhere in between? I haven't kept fish since I was a teenager.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Socratic Monologue said:


> You've apparently never been in a real fish room, kept by a fishkeeper who is passionate about *fish*. Each species has its own tank (because that is how they do best), and they are not kept because they are bold or cute or match the carpeting. To think that a 'display tank' is a proper aquarium misses the real connection between fishkeepers and froggers (very different than 'aquarium keepers' and 'vivarium keepers').
> 
> I've worked in the retail fish business for a short time, and been an aquarist (yes, the bad kind) for 30 years, and that is not the hobby to emulate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.


Similar to you, I have worked on the retail and wholesale side of the fish business. It isn't overly pretty. I was always a die-hard hobbyist (freshwater and then marine). I would say, though, there are also situations where a 100-150G+ community tank is actually healthier, more active and still safe for all occupants when species are mixed. Is it the norm? No, not by a long shot, but it is possible and replicated by experienced hobbyists.

The reality is there are always two types of hobbyists: those that are interested in the actual biological animals and those that are interested in how they look or make them look. The latter are more common, and if I am to be honest, they make the hobby affordable for everyone else. They are also the people who usually name all their animals weird and funny names (my dogs has a name, but none of my frogs have names, nor will they ever). Do animals die in the care of these people? Yes, all the time. Through ignorance, mistakes, lack of experience or downright neglect. Will that ever change? No, not likely. These are also the people who will build inadequate enclosures because they look cool. The problem is by confronting them aggressively, you just drive them to seek absolution of their ideas elsewhere. Eventually someone will pat them on the back and justify their decisions. 

It's best to be welcoming and informative - and don't think threads like this aren't helpful. People actively search and read. The people interested in the animals and their biology. There will always be the second group, but its the first group of people that defines path for the hobby. I'd truly hate to see this hobby turn into the inbred, linebred oddity seeking unnatural morph collecting that many, many other areas have become!


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Fahad said:


> .that's something I'd equate with higher end or specialty species.


Often, but non necessarily. Some serious keepers just keep cichlids, some just Rift Lake or South American cichlids, some just discus, some just catfish. There is a keeper nearish to me who keeps a range of South American fish in a handful of families. These sorts of keepers are much more like froggers who keep frogs for the love of frogs -- rather than someone who keeps a vivarium, that incidentally is a dart frog vivarium -- which is one reason I think the analogy is with them, rather than with someone who , for example, keeps a mixed reef tank as a display. 

Another reason is that the livestock losses in the display aquarium hobby -- considering the whole chain of custody -- are mind-numbingly high.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Often, but non necessarily. Some serious keepers just keep cichlids, some just Rift Lake or South American cichlids, some just discus, some just catfish. [...]


I always thought keeping African Cichlids by locality was just the norm as opposed to the 'community tanks' of many tropical aquarists. They were the last fish I kept, way back when. Admittedly, I'm almost totally out of touch with that hobby now.



Chris S said:


> [...] are also the people who usually name all their animals weird and funny names [...]


Full disclosure, I do name the frogs in my breeding groups, but it's just easier to identify them in my spreadsheets than by using a serial number or whatever. 

(And I think it's funny.)

But I don't anthropomorphize them or try to put little bows on their heads.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Fahad said:


> Full disclosure, I do name the frogs in my breeding groups, but it's just easier to identify them in my spreadsheets than by using a serial number or whatever.
> 
> (And I think it's funny.)
> 
> But I don't anthropomorphize them or try to put little bows on their heads.


I name mine too. For instance, I had two little ones morph out today and I named them "R.imitator 'Chazuta' 02.03.21 UE LINE1 F4" and "R.summersi 'Sauce' 02.03.21 UE LINE2 F3"

All kidding aside, I apologize, it was intended only as a generality and not as an insult directed to anyone in particular.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Another reason is that the livestock losses in the display aquarium hobby -- considering the whole chain of custody -- are mind-numbingly high.


This is undeniably true for the marine hobby, and one of the reasons I no longer participate in it on any level. As much as I tried to justify my interest and (former) expertise, the negatives of the hobby outweighed the positives in my eyes. CB animals still are not the norm.

The churn of animals is just staggering, especially from areas like Sri Lanka and the Philippines.


----------



## FroggerFrog (Jan 11, 2021)

I name my frogs because I have relatives who will think I’m weird by having an animal, not naming it, and breed it till it dies. (some people) Also it helps me track down which one is which by their patterns. You could say my first reason is absolutely goofy but it’s the truth.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Chris S said:


> I name mine too. For instance, I had two little ones morph out today and I named them "R.imitator 'Chazuta' 02.03.21 UE LINE1 F4" and "R.summersi 'Sauce' 02.03.21 UE LINE2 F3"
> 
> All kidding aside, I apologize, it was intended only as a generality and not as an insult directed to anyone in particular.


No worries, I have a much thicker skin than that.  

I know it's goofy, but I own it. 
*
Clutch no. P-12 = 12th Blackfoot clutch, dam: Pepper*

I only have the one male in the tank so I don't have a column for sire at this time.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Fahad said:


> No worries, I have a much thicker skin than that.
> 
> I know it's goofy, but I own it.
> 
> ...


Hmm...I have never thought to track the number of clutches. I guess I could go back and look at the dates though!


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Socratic Monologue said:


> You've apparently never been in a real fish room, kept by a fishkeeper who is passionate about *fish*. Each species has its own tank (because that is how they do best), and they are not kept because they are bold or cute or match the carpeting. To think that a 'display tank' is a proper aquarium misses the real connection between fishkeepers and froggers (very different than 'aquarium keepers' and 'vivarium keepers').
> 
> I've worked in the retail fish business for a short time, and been an aquarist (yes, the bad kind) for 30 years, and that is not the hobby to emulate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.


Apparantly not, but you don‘t know your audience if you cannot recognize where the passion to keep mixed species come from, right or wrong. That is what I was trying to illustrate.

And I would be even more honest with myself, if I really cared for and was really passionate about fish or frogs, then I woud not keep them at all. I would work with habitat protection, environmental protection and local breeding projects only. There is absolutely no good reason for me, however well I care for it, to place that poor frog in a plastic box and display it in my living room other than pure egotistical desire to have it close and look at it. Further, I should not impose these antiquated desires on to my kids, rather I should tell them never to cage exotic pets, because they do not benefit from it at all. Am I a hypocrite, absolutely, but not because I am evil and that is what I was trying to answer in response to »why» earlier. And that is why sometimes lizards end up in an frog’s mouth.


----------



## Kribensis (Jan 14, 2021)

My English teacher named one of my frogs a while ago. I showed her my juvenile terribs over Zoom, and she immediately named one of them Rocco. I just went with it, and now I guess I have a baby frog named Rocco. So that's fun.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Socratic Monologue said:


> You've apparently never been in a real fish room, kept by a fishkeeper who is passionate about *fish*. Each species has its own tank (because that is how they do best), and they are not kept because they are bold or cute or match the carpeting. To think that a 'display tank' is a proper aquarium misses the real connection between fishkeepers and froggers (very different than 'aquarium keepers' and 'vivarium keepers').


I breed Boraras maculatus in a species only blackwater biotope with very minimal flow and it is really remarkable how different their appearance and behaviour is in these conditions compared to a non blackwater, community tank, or one with relatively turbulent flow. The Boraras genus of fish is actually a perfect example of many things dart frog keepers are seeking to avoid - although IUCN currently categorises them as least concern their natural habitat is threatened and they are extremely hybridised in captivity due to people mixing different species from the genus in community tanks or due to incorrect identification by shop owners. 
I've never seen B. brigittae, B. merah, B. maculatus, or B. uropthalmoides identified as anything other than 'chilli rasboras' in the shops here.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Anda said:


> And I would be even more honest with myself, if I really cared for and was really passionate about fish or frogs, then I woud not keep them at all. I would work with habitat protection, environmental protection and local breeding projects only. There is absolutely no good reason for me, however well I care for it, to place that poor frog in a plastic box and display it in my living room other than pure egotistical desire to have it close and look at it.


I have wrestled with this myself and ultimately I do both. I donate a lot of time, labour and money to local and gobal conservation efforts and have planted more than enough trees that can reasonably be expected to grow to maturity to offset my carbon footprint for my entire life. But I also keep and breed certain animals that I genuinely believe are at risk of being wiped out or becoming critically endangered in the wild within in my lifetime and go to great lengths to ensure proper genetic diversity and avoid inbreeding. I do not do so for profit and am extremely discriminating about who I will give offspring to.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Louis said:


> I have wrestled with this myself and ultimately I do both. I donate a lot of time, labour and money to local and gobal conservation efforts and have planted more than enough trees that can reasonably be expected to grow to maturity to offset my carbon footprint for my entire life. But I also keep and breed certain animals that I genuinely believe are at risk of being wiped out or becoming critically endangered in the wild within in my lifetime and go to great lengths to ensure proper genetic diversity and avoid inbreeding. I do not do so for profit and am extremely discriminating about who I will give offspring to.


In addition to this, if you can source animals in a sustainable manner, the educational benefits are not to be disregarded. Understanding the animals, and in turn their natural environments leads to conservation and awareness. My son now has a spark of interest in areas of the world like Peru now, whereas otherwise this would not likely exist. If we don't understand, and can't relate to, the animals, there is no chance we will save them from deforestation, overcollection or any other possible avenues of extinction. Education is important!


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Anda said:


> And I would be even more honest with myself, if I really cared for and was really passionate about fish or frogs, then I woud not keep them at all.


I agree. There are many ways in which these hobbies are very detrimental both to individual animals and to species. And while what @Chris S said about educational benefits is absolutely true, it isn't clear that this balances out the harms. At best, I think that the "keeping animals and gaining understanding from them" process is the least worst way that all this can take place -- it is bad, but every other way I can think of aiming at conservation without public first-hand intimate exposure to animals is worse. I don't have any data on this, of course. It is a mindset that comes more from reading more Aldo Leopold and Wendell Berry than conservation journals.

I think the thought that you elaborated there, @Anda, actually gives us more reason to do better for our captive animals, rather than taking hints from a hobby that doesn't do so well at all. That's why I (many of us, as far as I can see) get bent out of shape by the 'what might probably work' approach ('how many frogs can I keep in here at the most', 'well, a water feature probably won't kill them', etc), and try to redirect to some sort of 'frog first' thinking.

This is a valuable discussion, and I'm glad we're having it. @minorhero , apologies if all this looks like a hijack.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

This is a complex and difficult topic we've veered into.

I think there are a lot of misconceptions about this hobby's connection to the frogs' wild ancestors.

Personal ethics come into play. I do eat meat, in spite of leaning into a more plant-based diet for health and environmental reasons. I do still wear leather. And I keep neo-tropical frogs in glass boxes for entertainment.

There's a lot of nuance to be found in those statements above, meaning there are better or worse ways to do these things and each one could be the basis for a small book.

The current outlook on habitat destruction is bleak, but that's no reason to give up, and I'm of the opinion that money talks. Both how we spend it day to day and by extension what we implicitly support, and where we explicitly direct funds for conservation and habitat preservation.

I take the position that ecologically speaking, our captive frogs are dead. It's not like any of these will ever be used to replenish decimated wild populations. You can "raise awareness" all day long with them but money gets things done, the rest is all talk and impotent without financial support.

At a bare minimum, choose a program you feel an affinity for and support them. Then maybe take a look at both how you live your life, and how you maintain these animals, in an ongoing and mindful way. 

But as others have pointed out, if the general public remains totally disconnected from intimate contact with nature or representatives of the natural world, all may be lost because out of sight is out of mind.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

'Keeping animals in glass boxes is selfish and has zero to do with conservation'

Completely wrong. Our glass box hobby is directly responsible for huge amounts of donations of time and money to various agencies and countries, which in turn help the animals. The above statement is defacto 'green on green crime'. I'm not saying to move the 'hobby needle' all the way to conservation, but it should move very far from 'doing nothing and selfish'.

But we are getting away from the point of this thread - the keeping of Dart Frogs and Geckoes together, especially by new hobbyists.

Older hobbyist (I'm an exception) don't really post here or anywhere else for that matter. The constant tedium leaves us jaded.

Hobbyists with fails, like the Gecko in mouth pic are VERY rarely reported. No one likes to advertise their failures, but rest assured, they happen at a most alarming rate.

New hobbyists are always clambering for acceptance of whatever husbandry method they like. They are in search of validation - someone...anyone...to agree with them.

Facebook is a horrible venue to impart good and advanced husbandry information. It just is.

The heavy lifting is up the forums, where we hope to catch and educate at least 20% (arbitrary figure) of these newer hobbyists.

Some thoughts, as Ed would say.


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Guess the frogs are here to stay regardless of what any of us might think or do so I agree with the «let‘s make the best of it» approach.

If you want to increase the percentage from 20, one way is to stay at it without appearing «tired of», being dismissive, condescending (NOT aimed at anyone in particular), it does not work. Neither does the «I am so old and have been doing this for so long, I know best, period.» - lecture. These are domination techniques and will not help for exactly the reason mentioned above. Everyone needs validations, even the most seasoned frog keeper.

I was very hesitant to post this reply in fear of offending anyone and ending up in another position where I have to defend myself, but here it goes. 

By the way, looking up «dart frog concervation» there is a wide choice of foundations. Any advice on a good one, where most of the money go towards actual conservation?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Dismissive and condescending is very much in the eye of the beholder these days - always was, but lately one can't say even a sideways word with offending several people. I have always taken the 'let the chips fall' method. I have knowledge and experience to impart and I don't really have several different methods of delivery. 

Yes, validation is important but it seems like we get a ton of validation efforts from new hobbyists or even those who have never 'gone there' - hundred of 'use dry ice to kill pests' posts from people who clearly have never done so. Very problematic for the blind to lead the blind.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

Anda, well it doesnt seem like you were very hesitant expressing how old ppl lecture and have unpleasant personalities. 

Im sure i have had my moments fitting that description so, you could aim your comment openly at me and promise I wont be offended!🤓 

I am sure that most of time any 2 ppl whether young or old, veteran or new were face to face talking about frogs, would find more reasons to feel warmly about the other than any typed commentary of contention.


----------



## klc21473 (Jan 13, 2021)

I'm new - the frogs and vivarium given to me with the dart frogs came with 2 mourning geckos. So far, I've left them in there. I'm very new to dart frogs, but I've seen many videos from reputable places encouraging putting mourning geckos in with the frogs. Other than the poor things getting swallowed up, are there any reasons why it's not good for them to live together?


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

klc21473 said:


> I'm new - the frogs and vivarium given to me with the dart frogs came with 2 mourning geckos. So far, I've left them in there. I'm very new to dart frogs, but I've seen many videos from reputable places encouraging putting mourning geckos in with the frogs. Other than the poor things getting swallowed up, are there any reasons why it's not good for them to live together?


Heya ... so a couple things to talk about. First, how do places get a 'good reputation'? Sometimes it's because they're popular and/or good at marketing, not necessarily because all their information is solid.

A few reasons not to put Mourning Geckos in your dart frog enclosure:

They're not from the same biotope
Darts wouldn't live in close proximity in confined areas with lizards of any type in the wild
Chance of pathogens being exchanged between the 2 species
Chance of one species or the other being stressed by the other
Adds another variable you can't control over the long term
Chance of them injuring each other
I'd take them out and either re-home them or set up their own tank if you like them.

Cheers!


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

There is 'Pop Keeping' and then there is subject oriented keeping.

Pop gets the most attention because it appeals to known triggers of human appeal. Its also lucrative.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

We keep frogs in smaller sized glass boxes. They should have more room than we currently given them. A lot of the large size commercially available enclosures are 'decent' sized for the frogs but not when you add on other animals.

Almost all gecko/dart frog tanks are too small and poorly designed. Heck it's hard enough to scape and design for the frogs let alone add ledges and hides and barrier and feeding platforms ect for the geckos. It just gives new people 3-4 more huge headaches.

Other than stress and possible predation, what are the drawbacks of adding geckos? Let that line sink in, lol.

Finally, a large company decided that geckoes would make a great 'add-on' or extra sale, so they added a page and advertising to help promote this. This add-on type of sales reaches 90% new people who should concentrate on simplicity first.

That's also the problem with complex water features, waterfalls, dripwalls ect too. If you are reading this, and have to ask....then you are not ready.


----------



## Tijl (Feb 28, 2019)

10/10 on everything for @Philsuma . I could not agree more with everything said.


----------



## Anda (Jan 18, 2020)

Philsuma said:


> Finally, a large company decided that geckoes would make a great 'add-on' or extra sale, so they added a page and advertising to help promote this. This add-on type of sales reaches 90% new people who should concentrate on simplicity first.


This!

When I first contacted the European seller about dart frogs, they basically asked "would you like some geckos with those Sir?"

Consequently I built an enclosure for both. Then corona happened and I currently have only plants.
The enclosure is plenty big enough for both in theory, but by adding height (geckos like height I guess) the light requirements for the plants increase exponentially. Even with led lights, if the frogs ever ventured close to the top they would dry out like raisins. The bottom has 20-23 degrees and 90% humidity, while the top around 30 degrees and 60% humidity.

Just trying to add to the post above, if you think size-increase is the solution, then you end up with a whole other set of problems.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

In case it wasn't stated, this picture is from Facebook, where people frequently post about mixing species. Many of the super experienced froggers who have left DB also post about mixing, and newcomers to the hobby naturally try to emulate them.


----------



## jgragg (Nov 23, 2009)

> Do the hobbies attract fundamentally different personalities? or is this a cultural thing where because we consume so much fish and at such detriment to the marine environment that it becomes difficult or impossible to value their lives in the same way? Would someone from a culture where they routinely eat frogs and lizards see any problem here other than that the terribilis has clearly bitten off more than it can chew? Plenty of people breed mourning geckos solely as a feeder for specialist snakes, I'm not attempting to low key rationalise mixing species in a vivarium, I'm just genuinely interested in what underpins these values.


Literally, books have been written on this subject. E.g., The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge

The Wiki alone is pretty "chewy" - the book itself is a real slog (you can download a full-text pdf). Something about the humanities (science envy?) really motivates them to come up with a whole lot of silly jargon to replace normal English. But - that said - the basic subject is really, really fascinating. To me anyway. These times, with "alternative facts", wide adoption of conspiracy theories, etc sure get one to thinking. (Thinking "_How did we get in this mess, and can we get out?_") Here are some Wiki snips:



> *Institutionalization*
> Institutionalization of social processes grows out of the habitualization and customs, gained through mutual observation with subsequent mutual agreement on the “way of doing things”. This reduces uncertainty and danger and allows our limited attention span to focus on more things at the same time, while institutionalized routines can be expected to continue “as previously agreed”:





> *Social objective worlds*
> Social (or institutional) objective worlds are one consequence of institutionalization, and are created when institutions are passed on to a new generation. This creates a reality that is vulnerable to the ideas of a minority which will then form the basis of social expectations in the future. The underlying reasoning is fully transparent to the creators of an institution, as they can reconstruct the circumstances under which they made agreements; while the second generation inherits it as something “given”, “unalterable” and “self-evident” and they might not understand the underlying logic.
> 
> 
> ...





> *Conversation*
> Conversation or verbal communication aims at reality-maintenance of the subjective reality. What seems to be a useless and unnecessary communication of redundant banalities is actually a constant mutual reconfirmation of each other's internal thoughts, in that it maintains subjective reality.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

Really interesting stuff.

There are observable phenomenon and demographic realities borne of herp hobby, its a study in itself. Some i have encouraged, some i have not.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

I kind of liked it when only weirdos liked reptiles and amphibians.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Kmc said:


> I kind of liked it when only weirdos liked reptiles and amphibians.


Wait, when did that change? I would have thought I would at least have gotten a memo.

Mark


----------



## Herpin Man (Apr 11, 2018)

Kmc said:


> I kind of liked it when only weirdos liked reptiles and amphibians.


I agree. Although at that time, I wished that the hobby would go more mainstream. Now that it has, I see that there are some downsides, as well. For starters, newcomers to the hobby who think they know more than (and talk down to) the old timers, just because they read a lot of facebook. Misinformation and bad advice being repeated ad nauseum. The tremendous amount of scammers and con artists. New laws and ordinances that threaten our ability to keep herps legally. Tanks versus tubs arguments. And, let's not forget, terms like "snek", "noodle", "scale baby", etc.
When I first began dating my wife, 25 or so years ago, I brought her to a herpetological symposium. One of my friends there explained to her how the herp hobby attracted primarily intelligent people, because unintelligent people tended not to have much success with the animals.
With that in mind, I kind of liked it when mostly smart people liked reptiles and amphibians.


----------



## Kmc (Jul 26, 2019)

I dislike the cringy nicknames for snakes, too much. I dont get it and i love my snakes.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Herpin Man said:


> I agree. Although at that time, I wished that the hobby would go more mainstream. Now that it has, I see that there are some downsides, as well. [...]


The Internet increases population density, noise-to-signal ratio, and sparks (often poor) trends.

I think the ignorant and the immature etc. were always present in this hobby, like anywhere else. It's just that now there's _more_ of everyone, good and bad.

When I worked in the industry 32 years ago there were some absolute nutjobs. Again when I was heavily involved about 20 years ago. From what I can see now it's just more of the same, with higher visibility.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Herpin Man said:


> [...]
> Misinformation and bad advice being repeated ad nauseum. [...]


Actually this is a new thing. People don't fact-check so bad information gets massively reproduced thanks to Google.


----------

