# Costa Rican imports? When did CR start allowing species to be exported?



## stemcellular

hey folks,

Curious, given a recent ad for site specific Costa Rican species, has anyone heard of CR permitting the export of Dendrobatids by those other than CRARC? I've been looking for info but haven't found any. I've linked below to the ad that I'm curious about. The original ad included site data, which if correct, is very interesting since I know that CRARC has been working to produce F2s to send out eventually...

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/fr...hica-black-jeans-typographica-blue-jeans.html

Any input would be appreciated,

Stem


----------



## thedude

They haven't. This is the same as the recent sylvatica from Europe. People can claim whatever but we all know CR isn't open again, and we all know they aren't "research" animals.


----------



## ESweet

Very interesting. Costa Rica has definitely not opened up exports. It's a shame to see smuggled WC animals still being sold.


----------



## cbreon

Furthermore, I thought the idea for the MOD approval of classifieds was to prevent the sale of 'questionable' animals. So, did DB already inquire about these and get 'quality' answers?


----------



## JeremyHuff

cbreon said:


> Furthermore, I thought the idea for the MOD approval of classifieds was to prevent the sale of 'questionable' animals. So, did DB already inquire about these and get 'quality' answers?


I agree 100% Craig. Also, why was the locality info removed? Was it done by a mod?


----------



## cbreon

I noticed they were updated to 'F1 euro imports,' but one thing I dont understand is why are they being sold in pairs for less than froglets would otherwise go for in EU? All of these obligates are pretty highly sought after in EU, just as the Sylvaticus recently available. But instead of being sold in the EU they are sold to a dealer in the US for less $ with the implied risk of shipping? Doesn't make sense to me...


----------



## Brotherly Monkey

cbreon said:


> I noticed they were updated to 'F1 euro imports,' but one thing I dont understand is why are they being sold in pairs for less than froglets would otherwise go for in EU? All of these obligates are pretty highly sought after in EU, just as the Sylvaticus recently available. But instead of being sold in the EU they are sold to a dealer in the US for less $ with the implied risk of shipping? Doesn't make sense to me...


I really don't follow prices in the eu, or much even in the states, so what type of price differences are you talking about here?


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

They likely came in from Europe, perhaps smuggled WC animals. I really wish USFWS would get smart and start doing isotope analysis on these frogs to figure out if they are captive or not. One day USFWS will smarten up...one day. 

Also, in Costa Rica, the country to closed to WC animals, but you can obtain export permits for CB animals, there. One of the reptile zoos there sends out CB snakes from time to time, but they don't bred any frogs currently.


----------



## cbreon

Brotherly Monkey said:


> I really don't follow prices in the eu, or much even in the states, so what type of price differences are you talking about here?


I'm saying that froglets of these species would normally sell for similar prices in euros. So, $1200 pairs would be more like 600 euros/froglet. On another note, how often do you see several breeding pairs of the same high-end obligate for sale from the same source that are not WC?


----------



## stemcellular

I may be mistaken but the CB frogs would have to be F2 to be exported, which is basically what CRARC does for some species.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Perhaps for some species, but I was told (from the gov) that I could have CB frogs from WC parents and they'd grant me export permits. This was in 2006 when I went down there to look at opening a herp farm there. Perhaps there was something lost in translation, or the rules have changed, but I was told F1 animals would be permitted. I never went through with the idea (land became too expensive), so it is not something I have personally done. 

I can say that other species of herps I am familiar with being exported out of CR were F1 animals. 



stemcellular said:


> I may be mistaken but the CB frogs would have to be F2 to be exported, which is basically what CRARC does for some species.


----------



## Julio

stemcellular said:


> I may be mistaken but the CB frogs would have to be F2 to be exported, which is basically what CRARC does for some species.


Costa Rica and Brazil have similar laws, from what i remember they would have to be F3


----------



## stemcellular

thanks, Julio. I think that is correct, I couldn't remember but I do recall it being something substantial.


----------



## Julio

the unfortunate issue is that they are coming in through EU and although we suspect they are smuggled animals, all they see is just the scientific names, just like the mystis coming in as black and white auratus.


----------



## thedude

cbreon said:


> I'm saying that froglets of these species would normally sell for similar prices in euros. So, $1200 pairs would be more like 600 euros/froglet. On another note, how often do you see several breeding pairs of the same high-end obligate for sale from the same source that are not WC?


Ya no kidding. Even the Paru that were farmed specifically for export to the hobby came in to Mark around 4-8 weeks old.

I know an easy way to settle this, Either get in contact with the Coasta Rican government or Brian K.

As for the sylvatica, same thing, Ecuadorian government or WIKIRI.


----------



## stemcellular

Brian is already well aware of what's up.


----------



## gluedl

A dutch vendor that imports peruvian frogs is selling the denim pums at 135€ at the moment. I spoke to him recently in Hamm and he said a friend had bred them. The numbers and average age available make them suspicious to me.

gluedl


----------



## thedude

stemcellular said:


> Brian is already well aware of what's up.


Details? What does he have to say about them?


----------



## frogparty

Blue_Pumilio said:


> They likely came in from Europe, perhaps smuggled WC animals. I really wish USFWS would get smart and start doing isotope analysis on these frogs to figure out if they are captive or not. One day USFWS will smarten up...one day.
> 
> Also, in Costa Rica, the country to closed to WC animals, but you can obtain export permits for CB animals, there. One of the reptile zoos there sends out CB snakes from time to time, but they don't bred any frogs currently.


Isotope analysis is EXPENSIVE, especially considering the # of animals they'd have to be testing. Do yu have any idea what kind of budget cuts the USFW has had to endure?


----------



## cbreon

gluedl said:


> A dutch vendor that imports peruvian frogs is selling the denim pums at 135€ at the moment. I spoke to him recently in Hamm and he said a friend had bred them. The numbers and average age available make them suspicious to me.
> 
> gluedl


Thanks for the info Gluedl, my knowledge of EU prices is limited and primarily based off vendor websites and limited reading on forums. 135€ for froglets, I would think means ~400€ pairs for the blue jeans. Any idea on the palmar norte grannuliferous. I don't recall many of these mentioned on EU sites/forums...


----------



## cbreon

frogparty said:


> Isotope analysis is EXPENSIVE, especially considering the # of animals they'd have to be testing. Do you have any idea what kind of budget cuts the USFW has had to endure?



Yeah, my understanding is they are grossly understaffed and underfunded, like pissing on a forest fire as the saying goes.


----------



## thedude

cbreon said:


> Thanks for the info Gluedl, my knowledge of EU prices is limited and primarily based off vendor websites and limited reading on forums. 135€ for froglets, I would think means ~400€ pairs for the blue jeans. Any idea on the palmar norte grannuliferous. I don't recall many of these mentioned on EU sites/forums...


I've never even heard of that name and I've looked all over the Euro sites. Usually if it isn't on Dendrobase, it's new. Or someone is calling it something new.


----------



## gluedl

> Thanks for the info Gluedl, my knowledge of EU prices is limited and primarily based off vendor websites and limited reading on forums. 135€ for froglets, I would think means ~400€ pairs for the blue jeans. Any idea on the palmar norte grannuliferous. I don't recall many of these mentioned on EU sites/forums...


Nope, not froglets, adults, sexable and laying immediately in some cases I know from. Proven pairs normally go for 400-600€ depending on leg color.

I have never seen granuliferus sold by shops, you sometimes see some offered through the forums, anything from 400€ upwards 

red and blue o. vicentei seem very popular at the moment

and I heard the brasilian Estado Amapà orange tinc is to come to Germany this summer...


----------



## stemcellular

gluedl said:


> Nope, not froglets, adults, sexable and laying immediately in some cases I know from. Proven pairs normally go for 400-600€ depending on leg color.
> 
> I have never seen granuliferus sold by shops, you sometimes see some offered through the forums, anything from 400€ upwards
> 
> red and blue o. vicentei seem very popular at the moment
> 
> and I heard the brasilian Estado Amapà orange tinc is to come to Germany this summer...


Ya'll hear the one about the two Germans buying plane tickets to Brazilia...?

Adam, Brian said (I'm paraphrasing) that he would hope we could have a discussion on the online forums and that folks would realize that they should not support or purchase such frogs.


----------



## gluedl

they are listed as Gulfito (Palmar Norte) at dendrobase.de. See here:

www.DendroBase.de

And to be fair they do look the same as the one offored. So at least nothing new.

gluedl


----------



## thedude

gluedl said:


> they are listed as Gulfito (Palmar Norte) at dendrobase.de. See here:
> 
> www.DendroBase.de
> 
> And to be fair they do look the same as the one offored. So at least nothing new.
> 
> gluedl


Thanks I didn't see that before.




stemcellular said:


> Adam, Brian said (I'm paraphrasing) that he would hope we could have a discussion on the online forums and that folks would realize that they should not support or purchase such frogs.



Thanks for the info. Sounds like you had your answer about them from the start then  That pretty much ends that. I would imagine Brian would know if any had been exported legally. Or at least could find out. 

I'll wait for him to bring them in, then I will gladly pay top dollar for the frogs and CRARC's efforts.


----------



## gluedl

> Ya'll hear the one about the two Germans buying plane tickets to Brazilia...?


Yup, heard that. On the other side, did you hear that one of both got busted in the Netherlands (as far as I can remember) offering white foot sylvatica on a parking lot. There are rumours of sums up to 10.000€ that had to be paid for this infraction. 


The site www.granuliferus.de that offerd anything from auratus to yellow lehmanni is down since a years...

Just saying, do not want to spoil anyone's business

gluedl


----------



## SamsonsFrogs

Why doesn't Taron chime in. Im curious to read what he has to say.


----------



## Woodsman

It is an unrealized dream of mine that Dendroboard would take a stand against smuggled frogs being sold openly on this board. A boy can dream, I guess.

Richard.


----------



## Woodsman

Taron knows exactly what he is doing, taking advantage of the many people here who would buy frogs "no questions asked". He is rolling in the money from people who just don't give a .....

Richard.



SamsonsFrogs said:


> Why doesn't Taron chime in. Im curious to read what he has to say.


----------



## SamsonsFrogs

Thats very unfortunate. Some people are in it just for the money.


----------



## Ed

frogparty said:


> Isotope analysis is EXPENSIVE, especially considering the # of animals they'd have to be testing. Do yu have any idea what kind of budget cuts the USFW has had to endure?


There has been at least one example of USF&W using fecal checks to look for native parasites that require more than one host to complete it's lifecycle. (This was done with Fly River Turtles (Carettochelys insculpta) and the result was that imports were totally shut down since they had more than one parasite that could not be aquired in captivity. 
Isotopic analysis, while probably a more exact result doesn't have to the the entire yardstick. 

Unfortunately this is not the first time that this has occured in the last several years and given how quickly the last batch (which was marketed as "farm raised" and exported from CR to the EU and then to the US), was snapped up, it should have been expected. 

Ed


----------



## Scott

Believe me when I tell you many of "us" feel the same way.

We're somewhat in the middle though.

s


Woodsman said:


> It is an unrealized dream of mine that Dendroboard would take a stand against smuggled frogs being sold openly on this board. A boy can dream, I guess.
> 
> Richard.


----------



## Zoomie

Guys, if you would be so kind as to help the village idiot here (that would be me), I am just trying to understand. Perhaps it will help others too. I intend to be vague intentionally so as not make any accusations.

As I understand this at the basic level, the gist of the situation is that certain species of frogs, which have never been legally imported in to the U.S., have shown up for sale from time to time in the classified section here?

I ask, not to point fingers, but to understand that I bear potential personal exposure, in the event that I purchased something which has shady provinance? Technically, this is a huge stretch as I would never buy anything without researching, and surely something would show up during that process. 

Further, I assumed (once again with great ignornance) that anything for sale here at DB would be above reproach in terms of ownership legality.

I apologize for asking such a ridiculous question. I only do so as I ran into many illegal snakes down in Florida. 

If this is the case, then I need to garner a sound understanding of those species here that shouldn't be in the US, correct?


----------



## XxExoticPsychExX

Woodsman said:


> Taron knows exactly what he is doing, taking advantage of the many people here who would buy frogs "no questions asked". He is rolling in the money from people who just don't give a .....
> 
> Richard.



Or to newbies like me who wouldn't know who to deal with and who not to deal with. I've had to go through a ton of threads just to come across info that would help me determine the good people from the bad. It would be awesome to have info like that somewhere easy to find! Especially since I wouldn't want to unknowingly purchase frogs acquired illegally. :/

If it weren't for this thread, I wouldn't have known there was anything questionable about the ad.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Woodsman said:


> Taron knows exactly what he is doing, taking advantage of the many people here who would buy frogs "no questions asked". He is rolling in the money from people who just don't give a .....
> 
> Richard.


And we as a community should put up with that BS behavior?


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

XxExoticPsychExX said:


> Or to newbies like me who wouldn't know who to deal with and who not to deal with. I've had to go through a ton of threads just to come across info that would help me determine the good people from the bad. It would be awesome to have info like that somewhere easy to find! Especially since I wouldn't want to unknowingly purchase frogs acquired illegally. :/
> 
> If it weren't for this thread, I wouldn't have known there was anything questionable about the ad.


Of course not, there's no negative feedback on him...what you have to do is ask people...they'll tell you the truth that won't appear on an electrionic page.


----------



## Zoomie

Thank you, Rusty. Answered my questions perfectly!


----------



## Woodsman

Hi Rusty,

I have to say that there is little that a hobbyist community can do, other than let the official agenices that deal with smuggled animals know about questionable frogs being sold out in the open. This leaves people open to be called snitches and such, but not doing anything only leads to what we are seeing today.

New locality O. sylvatica and Casta Rican O. pumilio and O. granulifierous did not evolve in the EU. They come from countries that do not allow exports of wc animals. This should be an easy one for Dendroboard to look at and reject adds for. 

"New blood" animals are just that, they leave their blood on our hands if we choose not to intervene on their behalf.

Take care, Richard.



Rusty_Shackleford said:


> And we as a community should put up with that BS behavior?


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Zoomie said:


> Thank you, Rusty. Answered my questions perfectly!


Zoomie, all I can tell you is I can honestly say I've never seen any negative feedback about said person in the feedback section of this forum, however that being said, I've had many a frogger communicate with me personally about who to stay away from since day one of frog keeping.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Woodsman said:


> Hi Rusty,
> 
> I have to say that there is little that a hobbyist community can do, other than let the official agenices that deal with smuggled animals know about questionable frogs being sold out in the open. This leaves people open to be called snitches and such, but not doing anything only leads to what we are seeing today.
> 
> New locality O. sylvatica and Casta Rican O. pumilio and O. granulifierous did not evolve in the EU. They come from countries that do not allow exports of wc animals. This should be an easy one for Dendroboard to look at and reject adds for.
> 
> "New blood" animals are just that, they leave their blood on our hands if we choose not to intervene on their behalf.
> 
> Take care, Richard.


Richard I understand perfectly what you're saying. It's up to all of us as individuals to have morals and decide for ourselves we want nothing to do with questionable frogs or shady characters. I understand online forums are not the "Frog Police" ( I believe that's Jake's job lol) nor should they be, online forums are only a vehicle to spread information. It's up to each individual to make the choice for themselves. Unforturantely it seems like the majority of froggers just see a pretty a frog without all the implications that come with it, that or they just don't give a crap.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

It is not any more, especially with access to a few grad students and a good lab at a university. Hell, these days some people are doing it in garage labs. USFWS could use it to look at HIGHLY suspect animals. I wish they would. 

Also, I am unaware of ANY budget cuts USFWS port inspectors have had to go through. Hell, they just raised all the fees to make sure all costs where covered. 



frogparty said:


> Isotope analysis is EXPENSIVE, especially considering the # of animals they'd have to be testing. Do yu have any idea what kind of budget cuts the USFW has had to endure?


----------



## JasonE

Ok. Maybe someone can explain this to me. This isn't the first instance of EU imports coming into the country. I don't remember anyone saying anything last year when tincs, terribilis, and thumbs came in. Why is that? When it was those frogs, no one seemed to care, but when its obligates, everyone gets all fired up about it? Those terribilis and tincs, and thumbs were just as likely to have been illegal imports into EU. Why the stink now? I'm not saying I'm for the practice of selling or buying of frogs that we know have questionable backgrounds, I'm just saying if you weren't going to raise the issue with past years EU imports, why do it now?


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

I've seen questions raised on several past EU shipments. 



JasonE said:


> Ok. Maybe someone can explain this to me. This isn't the first instance of EU imports coming into the country. I don't remember anyone saying anything last year when tincs, terribilis, and thumbs came in. Why is that? When it was those frogs, no one seemed to care, but when its obligates, everyone gets all fired up about it? Those terribilis and tincs, and thumbs were just as likely to have been illegal imports into EU. Why the stink now? I'm not saying I'm for the practice of selling or buying of frogs that we know have questionable backgrounds, I'm just saying if you weren't going to raise the issue with past years EU imports, why do it now?


----------



## JeremyHuff

JasonE said:


> Ok. Maybe someone can explain this to me. This isn't the first instance of EU imports coming into the country. I don't remember anyone saying anything last year when tincs, terribilis, and thumbs came in. Why is that? When it was those frogs, no one seemed to care, but when its obligates, everyone gets all fired up about it? Those terribilis and tincs, and thumbs were just as likely to have been illegal imports into EU. Why the stink now? I'm not saying I'm for the practice of selling or buying of frogs that we know have questionable backgrounds, I'm just saying if you weren't going to raise the issue with past years EU imports, why do it now?


These are being passed off as captive bred, which they are clearly not. That is the biggest issue here. There is nobody holding back vast numbers of obligates to sell breeding age animals for less than what froglets go for. Doesn't happen! And lets not forget Taron's mark up, so he got these considerably cheaper. Anyone who keeps obligates knows they don't produce nearly as rapidly as the species you mentioned. *IF* the new tinctorius morph from Brazil makes its way to this country, there will be a *HUGE* stink about it because Brazil is closed AND it is from a National Park.


----------



## JeremyHuff

Scott said:


> Believe me when I tell you many of "us" feel the same way.
> 
> We're somewhat in the middle though.
> 
> s


There doesn't need to be a middle Scott. Let Kingsnake.com deal with WC crap. Make the classifieds here captive bred only so we can stop perpetuating the myth of "farm-raised" or "EU raised" *ADULT* frogs, regardless of how they were exported from the original country (ie. Panama only allowing exports of farm-raised pumilio)

This is the third ad in the last week of VERY QUESTIONABLE frogs (and 2 of those ads were tinctorius.)


----------



## Scott

You are pontificating to the wrong person my friend.

s


----------



## JeremyHuff

Scott said:


> You are pontificating to the wrong person my friend.
> 
> s


Oh, I know. Just wishing others will hear....


----------



## Ed

People should also keep in mind that the statue of limitations on these sorts of issues are 5 years, and the typical history is to track the animals through the entire chain from import to the end purchaser before arresting the suspects. 

Ed


----------



## Woodsman

Please check recent adds here for imported D. tinctorius imported from Suriname.

Richard.



JasonE said:


> Ok. Maybe someone can explain this to me. This isn't the first instance of EU imports coming into the country. I don't remember anyone saying anything last year when tincs, terribilis, and thumbs came in. Why is that? When it was those frogs, no one seemed to care, but when its obligates, everyone gets all fired up about it? Those terribilis and tincs, and thumbs were just as likely to have been illegal imports into EU. Why the stink now? I'm not saying I'm for the practice of selling or buying of frogs that we know have questionable backgrounds, I'm just saying if you weren't going to raise the issue with past years EU imports, why do it now?


----------



## JasonE

Woodsman said:


> Please check recent adds here for imported D. tinctorius imported from Suriname.
> 
> Richard.


I've seen that ad. I don't see what that has to do with EU imports. Questionable background yes, but my comment was about EU imports.


----------



## pdfCrazy

Well, after reading through this entire thread....well, I'm disgusted by the highbrow, never do wrong, governments are our friend and protectors of the frogs attitude. The truth is, a large majority of the time these countries close their borders to export, its just a way of manipulating the market, supply and demand. A perfect anology would be the debeers diamond company. They control the flow of wholesale diamonds to such a degree to keep prices stable. USFWS, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, these countries rape and pillage their forests for natural resources by the millions of acres. I know the realities of smuggling animals like these, many die in the process, and that IS a shame. But the fact is, many of these countries won't even have frogs to be smuggled in 20 years. What makes it to hobbyists and captive breeders may be all thats left of many species in the near future. Would I buy some Histo's, lehmanii, Sylvaticus, Mytis, casti's, biolot, and other "unavailables" if I had the cash? You better believe it. Is that what I prefer, or I search for, absolutly not? But I'd rather have a smuggled frog breedign in my viv, than going extinct in the wild with no safety net populations because some high minded beurocrat legislator says so.


----------



## Dev30ils

pdfCrazy said:


> But the fact is, many of these countries won't even have frogs to be smuggled in 20 years. What makes it to hobbyists and captive breeders may be all thats left of many species in the near future. Would I buy some Histo's, lehmanii, Sylvaticus, Mytis, casti's, biolot, and other "unavailables" if I had the cash? You better believe it. Is that what I prefer, or I search for, absolutly not? But I'd rather have a smuggled frog breedign in my viv, than going extinct in the wild with no safety net populations because some high minded beurocrat legislator says so.


I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you here. I'm not sure that I trust the average hobbyist to be the "safety net" for an entire species or even morph of a species. That is best left to an organization like TWIN or WAZA, so that they can maintain a proper studbook for the animals and ensure that the genetic stability of the species is maintained for the future. That is why we should not be supporting illegal imports of CITES species.


----------



## Woodsman

Hi Jason,

I'm trying hard to get your point here. You are saying that any frogs coming from the EU are okay by you? That no frogs should be questioned as to their legal status if they come from the EU? Or are you saying that it is hypocritical to question some imports and not others?

My question to you would be why don't you ask questions about frog imports yourself? Do you never have questions and accept as legal all frogs that are offered for sale? It seems naive to think that smuggling doesn't exist and that people aren't trying to make fast money on frogs smuggled through the EU.

Take care, Richard.



JasonE said:


> I've seen that ad. I don't see what that has to do with EU imports. Questionable background yes, but my comment was about EU imports.


----------



## JeremyHuff

pdfCrazy said:


> Well, after reading through this entire thread....well, I'm disgusted by the highbrow, never do wrong, governments are our friend and protectors of the frogs attitude. The truth is, a large majority of the time these countries close their borders to export, its just a way of manipulating the market, supply and demand. A perfect anology would be the debeers diamond company. They control the flow of wholesale diamonds to such a degree to keep prices stable. USFWS, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, these countries rape and pillage their forests for natural resources by the millions of acres. I know the realities of smuggling animals like these, many die in the process, and that IS a shame. But the fact is, many of these countries won't even have frogs to be smuggled in 20 years. What makes it to hobbyists and captive breeders may be all thats left of many species in the near future. Would I buy some Histo's, lehmanii, Sylvaticus, Mytis, casti's, biolot, and other "unavailables" if I had the cash? You better believe it. Is that what I prefer, or I search for, absolutly not? But I'd rather have a smuggled frog breedign in my viv, than going extinct in the wild with no safety net populations because some high minded beurocrat legislator says so.


Well, at least you have an appropriate username. Seriously though, comparing the diamond trade to this is absolutely ridiculous. And this is nothing about "safety nets" IT IS about greed. Greed by the smuggler, greed by the flipper, and greed by the "hobbyist" who HAS TO HAVE IT! Costa Rica protects huge amounts of forest. They have replanted entire regions like Guanacaste National Park AND they have someone in country breeding frogs for legal export. The greedy can't wait for the legal stuff though, they want their fix now!


----------



## Woodsman

I'd like to introduce you to Taron Langhover. I think he has just the frogs for you!

Smuggler is as smuggler does, bro.

Richard.



pdfCrazy said:


> Well, after reading through this entire thread....well, I'm disgusted by the highbrow, never do wrong, governments are our friend and protectors of the frogs attitude. The truth is, a large majority of the time these countries close their borders to export, its just a way of manipulating the market, supply and demand. A perfect anology would be the debeers diamond company. They control the flow of wholesale diamonds to such a degree to keep prices stable. USFWS, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, these countries rape and pillage their forests for natural resources by the millions of acres. I know the realities of smuggling animals like these, many die in the process, and that IS a shame. But the fact is, many of these countries won't even have frogs to be smuggled in 20 years. What makes it to hobbyists and captive breeders may be all thats left of many species in the near future. Would I buy some Histo's, lehmanii, Sylvaticus, Mytis, casti's, biolot, and other "unavailables" if I had the cash? You better believe it. Is that what I prefer, or I search for, absolutly not? But I'd rather have a smuggled frog breedign in my viv, than going extinct in the wild with no safety net populations because some high minded beurocrat legislator says so.


----------



## jacobi

Newbie here. Simple question, without finger pointing. Just trying to understand. Are frogs such as these illegal under US law to own or sell in the US?


----------



## Dev30ils

Jake,

We would have to check with CITES documents for the extent to which an individual could be liable for purchasing or reselling an illegally imported animal, but as Ed said earlier it is likely that one could have an unfortunate meeting with USFWS up to 5 years after having participated in such an action. 

Bottom line being, it's probably best to stay away from any questionable imports, both for the well-being of the species and yourself.


----------



## pdfCrazy

Please note that I did not include Costa Ricain my government finger pointing. CR has done an outstandiing job in managemeing their forests and fauna, been better than probably every country in the world. They are "the model" other countires shoudl follow


----------



## pdfCrazy

It is called a strict liability crime. It dosnt matter if you "didn't know" or relied on the importer or resellers "good word". Possession is the crime


----------



## pdfCrazy

Hmmmm, I may have to get to know this Taron fellow


----------



## JasonE

Woodsman said:


> Hi Jason,
> 
> I'm trying hard to get your point here. You are saying that any frogs coming from the EU are okay by you? That no frogs should be questioned as to their legal status if they come from the EU? Or are you saying that it is hypocritical to question some imports and not others?


The latter. I'm saying that all frogs coming from EU should be questioned. We all know how the system works. Countries like Germany practical welcome illegally smuggled animals. I'm simply saying we can't look at an import of obligates and get all indignant, but shrug off the imports of more easily bred frogs. 



Woodsman said:


> My question to you would be why don't you ask questions about frog imports yourself? Do you never have questions and accept as legal all frogs that are offered for sale? It seems naive to think that smuggling doesn't exist and that people aren't trying to make fast money on frogs smuggled through the EU.
> 
> Take care, Richard.


That's not what I'm saying at all. I realize that there are a lot of smuggled frogs that come into this country, and a lot more often than most people realize. I ask questions about frog imports when I'm thinking of purchasing said frogs. However, whenever I have inquired about imported frogs, I usually find that the seller is less than reputable, or less than forthcoming with information and never purchase the frogs. I ask questions about any frogs I am looking to purchase, CB or imported.

I don't see why you are coming off so hostile to what was a simple question. Not to mention assuming that I'm ignorant or naive. But have a good day man.


----------



## cschub13

Even though this thread basically came about over nothing, I feel as though myself as well as others could learn a lot about this issue from this thread. Most frog hobbyists, even some of the more experienced ones don't seem to know as much about this topic as they should. (Including myself!!) Conservation and protection of these amphibians in the wild should be just as much a concern to us as taking care of our own "pets" in captivity. I am very eager to read through this thread and look forward to more discussion to further expand my knowledge of what is a very very important topic! Thanks to all contributing, seriously!

Cam


----------



## thedude

JasonE said:


> Ok. Maybe someone can explain this to me. This isn't the first instance of EU imports coming into the country. I don't remember anyone saying anything last year when tincs, terribilis, and thumbs came in. Why is that? When it was those frogs, no one seemed to care, but when its obligates, everyone gets all fired up about it? Those terribilis and tincs, and thumbs were just as likely to have been illegal imports into EU. Why the stink now? I'm not saying I'm for the practice of selling or buying of frogs that we know have questionable backgrounds, I'm just saying if you weren't going to raise the issue with past years EU imports, why do it now?


I've raised a stink about all the Ranitomeya and Ameerega that come in. The big reason these obligates are the ones people freak out about is, quite simply, because they are incredibly difficult to breed so nobody out there has the means to have all these adults that are captive bred. It's easy to point out, "somebody is selling 20 of X frog that doesn't breed easily, those are more than likely smuggled". Not only that, but they have been hit HARD by smuggling over the past 15 years and some populations are disappearing. We SHOULD be making a stink about the other frogs, but at least we are taking a step in the right direction. Know where your frogs come from.




pdfCrazy said:


> Well, after reading through this entire thread....well, I'm disgusted by the highbrow, never do wrong, governments are our friend and protectors of the frogs attitude. The truth is, a large majority of the time these countries close their borders to export, its just a way of manipulating the market, supply and demand. A perfect anology would be the debeers diamond company. They control the flow of wholesale diamonds to such a degree to keep prices stable. USFWS, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, these countries rape and pillage their forests for natural resources by the millions of acres. I know the realities of smuggling animals like these, many die in the process, and that IS a shame. But the fact is, many of these countries won't even have frogs to be smuggled in 20 years. What makes it to hobbyists and captive breeders may be all thats left of many species in the near future. Would I buy some Histo's, lehmanii, Sylvaticus, Mytis, casti's, biolot, and other "unavailables" if I had the cash? You better believe it. Is that what I prefer, or I search for, absolutly not? But I'd rather have a smuggled frog breedign in my viv, than going extinct in the wild with no safety net populations because some high minded beurocrat legislator says so.


The problem with what your saying is supply and demand. If you purchase smuggled frogs, the smuggler or middleman now knows he can make money with them and smuggles again. YOU are the driving force behind that. Some of the best intentions can have dire consequences unfortunately. Also these frogs used to come in all the time...so where are they now? Do you really think YOU can keep lehmanni from going extinct when tons of others couldn't keep theirs alive, let alone breed?

And the last issue, what about the frogs coming in from reserves? lehmanni, and many other species/populations are in national parks and reserves, yet they are still smuggled. So the forest that is protected from the 20 years of deforestation you are talking about, no longer has frogs...because of smuggling. 

Everyone needs to think things through in these cases and know where your frogs come from.


----------



## pdfCrazy

smuggling is usually a drop in the bucket in contributing to a species demise. The oil drilling, the cattle farms, palm plantations, inroad constructio support these activities, the hardwood "underground", these contribute to destroy habitat. Smuggling a few hundred frogs, would not even dent a species population, even frogs with very specific localities. I have read research papers (no I cannt locate them) on this VERY subject. You don't see anyone smuggling auratus or vittatus do you? You know why? Because they are very established in the hobby. Why would a smuggler bother to risk life and limb to smuggle something easily obtainable CB. The majority (no not all) species can and have been bred in captivity, including histo's and lehmanii. Smuggling of these and others will remain a reality UNTIL they become established in the trade. Call it greed if you want, I see no difference than with the guy who HAS to have his H3 Hummer or BMW. It is a want. And as for safety nets, if you don't think there are species that HAVE been saved due to hobbyist/zoos captive breeding, you are sadly mistaken. Do a little research. And while I do not put down TWI or other groups, what makes them the only ones "to be trusted".


----------



## Dev30ils

pdfCrazy said:


> And as for safety nets, if you don't think there are species that HAVE been saved due to hobbyist/zoos captive breeding, you are sadly mistaken. Do a little research. And while I do not put down TWI or other groups, what makes them the only ones "to be trusted".


You cannot continue to lump together zoos and hobbyists into the same category. Zoo's captive breeding programs are managed by the World Association of Zoos & Aquariums or their regional affiliate. They maintain studbooks which contain the genetic information of every animal in their program in order to maintain proper genetic diversity. Animals are moved from one facility to another via "trades" in order to further spread genetics around as much as possible. I'm sure Ed could comment on this further as he worked in this very system for years. 

TWI is "trusted" because they have a similar model in place, that uses members to breed captive dart frogs with the use of a studbook system just like zoos.


----------



## Scott

Thanks for letting me know - you're now marked down as someone (else) I would _*never *_do business with.

s


pdfCrazy said:


> Hmmmm, I may have to get to know this Taron fellow


----------



## pdfCrazy

I can, and do lump them together. I know the intricacies and workings of zoos very well. Managing genetic diversity within populations of reptiles and amphibians is much less problematic than with mamals. For soem reason, inbreeding does not create the gentic mutations that contribute to certain diseases and cancers that are common with mamals. So no, I do not place much relevance on their studbooks and trades. Zoos are nothing more than hobbyists with government backed funding and free passes to collect and own what they want.


----------



## pdfCrazy

Scott said:


> Thanks for letting me know - you're now marked down as someone (else) I would _*never *_do business with.
> 
> s


Sure, no problem. Glad I could help.


----------



## frogparty

pdfCrazy said:


> I can, and do lump them together. I know the intricacies and workings of zoos very well. Managing genetic diversity within populations of reptiles and amphibians is much less problematic than with mamals. For soem reason, inbreeding does not create the gentic mutations that contribute to certain diseases and cancers that are common with mamals. So no, I do not place much relevance on their studbooks and trades. Zoos are nothing more than hobbyists with government backed funding and free passes to collect and own what they want.


Wow, tell that to the extremely dedicated people that work at zoos around the world who have dedicated their lives towards no only displaying and breeding these animals, amphibians mamMals, etc, but who also strive to educate the public about their plight. 
You come off as extremely arrogant, and as someone who has volunteered time working with zoos I feel more than a little insulted


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> smuggling is usually a drop in the bucket in contributing to a species demise. The oil drilling, the cattle farms, palm plantations, inroad constructio support these activities, the hardwood "underground", these contribute to destroy habitat.


This ignores the fact that a wide variety of dendrobatids actually do better in disturbed/secondary growth habitats... This is well summarized in the literature ranging from travel descriptions, to books (Poison Frogs), and research papers (see for example http://www.revistasusp.sibi.usp.br/pdf/philo/v9n1/v9n1a02.pdf)..... It has been well established that smuggling for the pet trade has repeatedly caused extinctions of animals, we can look at the extinction of Goniurosaurus luii at the type locality (local population) (see PLoS Biology: Rarity Value and Species Extinction: The Anthropogenic Allee Effect) to extinction of other taxa.... 



pdfCrazy said:


> Smuggling a few hundred frogs, would not even dent a species population, even frogs with very specific localities. I have read research papers (no I cannt locate them) on this VERY subject.


I would be surprised if you could locate them, the scientific literature is pretty clear in the exact opposite (see the above links for examples).... 




pdfCrazy said:


> You don't see anyone smuggling auratus or vittatus do you? You know why? Because they are very established in the hobby. Why would a smuggler bother to risk life and limb to smuggle something easily obtainable CB.


Really? The literature indicates the exact opposite... Auratus and a number of other species are laundered on a massive scale. See for example http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_nijmanshepherd_poisonarrowfrog_biodivconserv_2.pdf 

I think you are also ignoring the reports of seizures of "common dendrobatids" being smuggled.. these were pulled on just a cursory search (ignoring all of the laudering going on via Lebanon... 

In 2000, 770 D. leucomelas were seized in Frankfort Germany,
in 2004, 580 O. pumilio and 22 D. auratus were seized in Belgium (the frogs were smuggled from Panama through Madrid and then seized in Belgium). 
In 



pdfCrazy said:


> if you don't think there are species that HAVE been saved due to hobbyist/zoos captive breeding, you are sadly mistaken. Do a little research


Ignoring the entire issue that the animals in the hobby are not suitable for any conservation use... See this thread starting here http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/sc...e-bred-conservation-efforts-2.html#post576511.... 

The research doesn't support your position or point of view.... 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> I can, and do lump them together. I know the intricacies and workings of zoos very well. Managing genetic diversity within populations of reptiles and amphibians is much less problematic than with mamals. For soem reason, inbreeding does not create the gentic mutations that contribute to certain diseases and cancers that are common with mamals.


I actually started to laugh when I read this.... Despite the attempt to conflate your authority, it is incrediably clear from this post that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.. For example, you are inferring that managing genetic diversity is more difficult with mammals than herps, yet according to the literature, it is exactly the same.. The main drawback is space to house a suitable number of animals to sustain sufficient genetic diversity for the next 100-500 years. 

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Well, I'm out of this thread. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. My point is not that smuggling is ok. My point is more about my belief that we don't need government telling us what species to keep or not keep, or other people worrying about where a few dozen frogs came from. If you question the source of a species and care where it came from, dont buy it. That simple. A Huge cross section of herps/animals originated from illegally collected animals at some point, but are now "legitimized". Parrots, conures, geckos, pythons, boas, *frogs* fish, even insects like our iso's and springtails.


----------



## pdfCrazy

And yes, i have worked with zoos, and was not impressed. Dedication yes, not much more.


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> Well, I'm out of this thread. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. My point is not that smuggling is ok. My point is more about my belief that we don't need government telling us what species to keep or not keep, or other people worrying about where a few dozen frogs came from. If you question the source of a species and care where it came from, dont buy it. That simple. A Huge cross section of herps/animals originated from illegally collected animals at some point, but are now "legitimized". Parrots, conures, geckos, pythons, boas, *frogs* fish, even insects like our iso's and springtails.


Actually your position is that smuggling is okay. You were very clear on that point. 


pdfCrazy said:


> . Smuggling of these and others will remain a reality UNTIL they become established in the trade. Call it greed if you want, I see no difference than with the guy who HAS to have his H3 Hummer or BMW. It is a want.


In this exerpt, you clearly compare it to having to have a specific model of a car.. and because it is a want.... 

Actually, establishment in captivity does not in any way provide a safety net for any species until the captive bred specimens are cheaper than wild caught animals if all other aspects are the same. This is a well documented problem... (and I linked to one of the papers on it above).... However not all other aspects of it are the same there is a market for wild caught frogs because there is an established perception that wild caught frogs are better because they are larger and in some cases more colorful... which are due to issues in which the frogs are captive bred and reared which places difference emphasis..... 

In addition lets go back to your example of auratus and the claim that it establishment in captivity reduces demand on wild caught frogs... Auratus has been established in captivity in the USA prior to the mid-1980s (and much earlier than that in Europe), yet during the period of 2000-2009 close to 49,000 D. auratus were imported... (see this thread for the years etc... http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ge...ild-caught-auratus-pet-stores.html#post476465 )

Some more comments,

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Yes, they were imported. Legally and *cheaply*. That is why they were brought in, because there is a demand for cheap animals. Show me any statistics on common species be being smuggled. No ones going to go to the effort to smuggle a 30$ dollar frog. They are aplenty.


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> Yes, they were imported. Legally and *cheaply*. That is why they were brought in, because there is a demand for cheap animals. Show me any statistics on common species be being smuggled. No ones going to go to the effort to smuggle a 30$ dollar frog. They are aplenty.


Go back a couple of posts.. I provided documentation for common species... Large scale violations and laundering..... 

In any case, you attempting to distract from the point I was addressing with that post.... Your claim that D. auratus is well established which isn't supported by those importation numbers.. A well established species should be meeting a significant portion of the demand for an animal yet we can clearly see that this is not the case by the huge numbers imported into the USA (ignoring the numbers to Europe, Japan or other countries).... 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Well, like I said, I'm not going to be a lightning rod for attacks from people that do not like my opinion. Everyones entitled to their own. I just wanted to put my two cents in.


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> Well, like I said, I'm not going to be a lightning rod for attacks from people that do not like my opinion. Everyones entitled to their own. I just wanted to put my two cents in.


If you don't want to be a lightning rod, then don't participate in threads and make claims that are supposedly supported by hard data, and then try to claim it is just an opinion when the real data comes out indicating that your claim is actually contradicted...... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> And yes, i have worked with zoos, and was not impressed. Dedication yes, not much more.


I missed this one earlier... This statement in no way provides any indication that you actually understand what is actually required in a genetic management program.....which is supported by your incorrect statment where you claim inbreeding causes genetic mutations... Let's clear the air on that one since it is actually part of the fundamentals.. Inbreeding doesn't cause genetic mutations, those are either induced by exposure to a mutagen or are spontaneous due to a miscoding in during meiosis or cell division. In heavily inbred population, it is possible to see expression of genes that are affected by the mutations due to a loss of genetic diversity however the impacts of inbreeding are typically seen long before these start to show-up..... 

As I noted before, the major impediment in successful genetic management programs are from a lack of space to hold enough animals to ensure sufficient genetic diversity to support the population for 100-500 years (although most programs are aimed at 200 years)..... 

Ed 

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

genetic diversity is over rated anyway


----------



## mora

it is fun to point the finger to who ever you want.but did you take your time and ask the guy.

also everyone has the rigth to sell their frogs at whatever price they want.


----------



## Woodsman

Using the "winky" emoticon doesn't make the preceding statement any less moronic, much like arguing with Ed about such topics.

Good luck getting your O. lehmanis from Taron. I have no doubt they are on offer through his EU connection.

Richard.



pdfCrazy said:


> genetic diversity is over rated anyway


----------



## jacobi

Ok... shaking head to clear it from the arrogantly willful ignorance just displayed... Back on track.



Dev30ils said:


> Jake,
> 
> We would have to check with CITES documents for the extent to which an individual could be liable for purchasing or reselling an illegally imported animal, but as Ed said earlier it is likely that one could have an unfortunate meeting with USFWS up to 5 years after having participated in such an action.
> 
> Bottom line being, it's probably best to stay away from any questionable imports, both for the well-being of the species and yourself.


Thus leading to my next question. I may be blundering into a delicate situation about which I know absolutely nothing, but here goes.
I know it has been mentioned earlier in the thread, in regards to researching whom to trust when buying frogs, and again, I'm not pointing fingers, I'm trying to understand the situation as a newbie, but how am I supposed to make a decision in regards to an advertisement in terms of the legality of purchasing an animal if there is no vendor feedback thread?
If an animal or animals are potentially illegal (and I'm sticking with the legal part of the issue right now, as opposed to the moral and ethical side of the issue, as legalities are, generally speaking, more likely to make something happen when financials are involved) I would imagine that Dendroboard has a responsibility to vet advertisements and not allow advertisements of questionable legality, without the necessary paperwork proving otherwise. Or am I living in a fantasy world...?

Fingers crossed that I didn't just step into something and get lots of angry PM's


----------



## eyeviper

Woodsman said:


> I'd like to introduce you to Taron Langhover. I think he has just the frogs for you!
> 
> Smuggler is as smuggler does, bro.
> 
> Richard.


Just wondering...If you know this guys has "open" dealings with such frogs as being discussed why has someone not done something about it? With all these dendroboard connections everyone seems to have maybe doing something about a known someone could be a start...


----------



## mantisdragon91

pdfCrazy said:


> genetic diversity is over rated anyway


Obviously so is education and common sense. To follow your train of thought from an earlier thread, "The government shouldn't be able to tell us what we can and can't keep" if that is the case can you let me know your address so that I can purchase some property next to yours. I have some tigers, lions and grizzlies that I like to keep running free in my back yard, and you seem just like the kind of guy that wouldn't mind if one occassionally hops your back fence


----------



## JeremyHuff

mantisdragon91 said:


> I have some tigers, lions and grizzlies


Oh MY!!!!


----------



## Froggywv

eyeviper said:


> Just wondering...If you know this guys has "open" dealings with such frogs as being discussed why has someone not done something about it? With all these dendroboard connections everyone seems to have maybe doing something about a known someone could be a start...




I sure wish something COULD be done about him. I, as a complete newbie, was suckered into buying a wild caught "pair" from someone who bought them from Taron and couldn't move them because his name was associated with them. He had sold me a pair of CB cobalts, then suckered me into buying this WC pair. And, like an idiot, I bought them, not understanding the implications of buying from this guy. He (the guy that sold them to me) told me people didn't like Taron because he had suckered people out of money a couple years ago, and THAT'S why noone would buy from him. Never anything about him having illegal imports... 
When I tried to sell them, there was interest in them UNTIL I said his name. All interest died out. Gone. Because everyone knows WHO and WHAT he is. Sad to say these frogs were just NOT healthy either. Lots of work, trying to get them healthy. they never did breed for me, even tho I did see minimal courting behavior. NEVER again will I buy anything WC unless I know exactly where they came from, and even then I'm going to question it. The female died about a year ago, and the male would not eat, no matter what I did to get him healthy. I sent him off for an autopsy and they couldn't find anything abnormal. 

How does he continue to sell illegal WC frogs?? By suckering in newbies like I was. And, please note, these were NOT hard to find frogs. These were COBALTS, a well established species, and easy to find. Please don't try to act like the hard to find species are the only ones illegally imported. Here it is, just TWO years ago that these frogs were illegally imported and up for sale.


----------



## JeremyHuff

Were we hear by the Gods??? The ad is gone.....................................


----------



## Scott

Do you still feel this way if the frogs are legally not allowed to be sold in this country?

This conversation isn't about PRICE - it's about whether the frogs are even legal to sell in this country.

s


mora said:


> ... also everyone has the rigth to sell their frogs at whatever price they want.


----------



## JimO

Jake,

This is truly a big problem for newbies and those who knowingly deal in questionable animals take advantage of this. Here are a few things to consider:

1) There are certain species that have either never been legally exported from the Country of origin or have not been in decades. Many of the larger obligates fall into this category. There are some skilled breeders who have successfully kept the older bloodlines going, but it is highly unlikely that you will see those openly advertised for sale on DB. If they are, the seller will most certainly state that they are "old line" and give some info on import dates, importers, or even possible locales, because that makes them more valuable.

2) Find someone knowledgeable who won't berate you for asking a newbie question (which is uncalled for IMO) and send them a PM on a specific ad, seller, or frog being offered. There are many oldtimers that know a lot more than I do, but I'd be happy to tell you what I know about a given issue privately.

3) If it's a hard to come by frog in the hobby that does not breed readily, then those frogs rarely get openly advertised. Most breeders of these types of frogs trade or sell to others who they know personally. This is partly so they know where their frogs have gone and partly to make sure that they'll go to skilled breeders who will have the best shot at getting offspring. For example, I have been trying to pick up some old-line Sylvatica Lorenzos for some time and I cannot even get a response from the folks I know are working with them.

4) Follow the money - There isn't much profit in a $50 frog unless someone is selling a lot of them. So, most people in the U.S. selling questionable animals want to make as much money on as few animals as possible. Heck, it's very risky buying legal imported animals for resale. If you lose 50% during quarantene, then after all the work of treating the frogs, getting them acclimated and sexing them, you'll be lucky to make back the original investment. So, I don't imagine that many people in it solely for the money would risk their investment to make $10 per frog. So, I always scrutinize frogs offered in numbers that cost a lot of money.

5) Profiling is ok - Others likely know more than I do about this, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But, the profile of a smuggled dart frog would likely include the following: a) they are adults (often sexed); b) multiple pairs are available; c) they come from a Country currently closed to exporting; d) they are almost always imported from another Country (other than their Country of origin); they are expensive and hard to find in the U.S.; and no lineage data is available.

Sadly, I know of hobbyists who have condemned smuggling on various threads, but who get real quiet when a frog they really want comes available and all the indicators suggest that the frog is of questionable origin. As long as this continues, there will be a market for even the most blatantly smuggled frogs.

I hope this helps.



jacobi said:


> Thus leading to my next question. I may be blundering into a delicate situation about which I know absolutely nothing, but here goes.
> I know it has been mentioned earlier in the thread, in regards to researching whom to trust when buying frogs, and again, I'm not pointing fingers, I'm trying to understand the situation as a newbie, but how am I supposed to make a decision in regards to an advertisement in terms of the legality of purchasing an animal if there is no vendor feedback thread?
> If an animal or animals are potentially illegal (and I'm sticking with the legal part of the issue right now, as opposed to the moral and ethical side of the issue, as legalities are, generally speaking, more likely to make something happen when financials are involved) I would imagine that Dendroboard has a responsibility to vet advertisements and not allow advertisements of questionable legality, without the necessary paperwork proving otherwise. Or am I living in a fantasy world...?
> 
> Fingers crossed that I didn't just step into something and get lots of angry PM's


----------



## mantisdragon91

mora said:


> it is fun to point the finger to who ever you want.but did you take your time and ask the guy.


You do realize the guy in question is well aware of the existense of this thread. His lack of response should speak volumes about the legality of the frogs in question.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Here's a little gem I learned as a young man, it's part of my own personal mantra.

"Your actions become your reputation."


----------



## frogface

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> Here's a little gem I learned as a young man, it's part of my own personal mantra.
> 
> "Your actions become your reputation."


Here's one of mine:

"Don't listen to what people say, watch what they do"

I've noticed some instances where it seems there are people who publicly decry illegal imports, yet, slip questionables into their own collection if it's something they really want. 

Yep, it's not what they say, it's what they do.


----------



## Ed

JimO said:


> 4) Follow the money - There isn't much profit in a $50 frog unless someone is selling a lot of them. So, most people in the U.S. selling questionable animals want to make as much money on as few animals as possible. Heck, it's very risky buying legal imported animals for resale. If you lose 50% during quarantene, then after all the work of treating the frogs, getting them acclimated and sexing them, you'll be lucky to make back the original investment. So, I don't imagine that many people in it solely for the money would risk their investment to make $10 per frog. So, I always scrutinize frogs offered in numbers that cost a lot of money.


It can be just as profitable to use less expensive frog. Keep in mind that a frog that on this end of the supply chain probably started out as less than a dollar on the other end... If you can launder numbers then you have a much greater chance of better profits since the market for $50 frogs is much greater than that of $300-500 frogs... 

This is why there is currently the huge problem with laundering frogs into SE Asia through Lebanon and Kazakastan See http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_nijmanshepherd_poisonarrowfrog_biodivconserv_2.pdf... 

Ed


----------



## edwardsatc

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> Here's a little gem I learned as a young man, it's part of my own personal mantra.
> 
> "Your actions become your reputation."


Taron's actions became his reputation many years ago, yet folks continue to do business with him ...


----------



## JJuchems

eyeviper said:


> Just wondering...If you know this guys has "open" dealings with such frogs as being discussed why has someone not done something about it? With all these dendroboard connections everyone seems to have maybe doing something about a known someone could be a start...


1. Somethings to keep in mind. These are gray area specimens. They were legally imported into the country from what we know. But you have to add the facts, sexed pairs of imported, rare species at the same price that CB pairs and for that mater unsexed froglets sell for here in the states. So the cost of the animals, importing fees, and "retail mark-up" get the same price as those CB here? That is what gets questioned. 
We have no other facts or tangible evidence to state they are smuggled. 

2. If imported legally they passed USFW inspections. Who else will police them? (See 3)

3. The hobby dictates those who are vendors, this is a hobbyist form. This forum and its members can make a decisions/stance to who sells and who doesn't. Jim has a great response, but keep in mind I have a good friend who holds on to froglets and offers sexed pairs of true CB rare obligates. But use common sense when buying. Add up the facts and make you determination. 

4. While our money/forums/feedback plays a role, the online community is only a fraction of the hobby. I vendor a few shows, are on other forums, ect. There are plenty of people who I have sold to or just talk shop with who want nothing to do with online groups. Again there are the folks who go to shows and buy at impulse for something new to make a buck at breeding. There are also those who are well read and are ready to look for their first frogs and are not part of online communities, they go to a show find a vendor and purchase. There are plenty of shady dealers who are still in business. I know a few who have been doing it for 20+ years.


----------



## Ed

jacobi said:


> If an animal or animals are potentially illegal (and I'm sticking with the legal part of the issue right now, as opposed to the moral and ethical side of the issue, as legalities are, generally speaking, more likely to make something happen when financials are involved) I would imagine that Dendroboard has a responsibility to vet advertisements and not allow advertisements of questionable legality, without the necessary paperwork proving otherwise. Or am I living in a fantasy world...?


Part of the problem is that there are actually very few frogs that have a clearly illegal origin and a lot of frogs that have a grey history. For example several thumbnails were originally imported as Dendrobates quinquevittatus before it was realized that there were actually multiple species covered by that name or were exported as Dendrobates ssp. in the records. This can make it difficult to prove whether some species are legal or not. The main way, that can help people identify a legal animal is to look at whether a country is open to export of these animals. Other than CRACC in Costa Rica, there are no legal exports of those animals.... This has happened several times now.... 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Hmmm, I find it odd the Mods have not intervened on this thread, adn actually participated, being as it clearly crosses lines into vendor feedback, etc. Hypocrisy!


----------



## Ed

JJuchems said:


> 2. If imported legally they passed USFW inspections. Who else will police them? (See 3)


People often use this as a justification but people are ignoring an issue with this designation. If at some point, it turns out that there was an issue with the import, the frogs (and thier offspring) are retroactively illegal and owners if USF&W chooses subject to the penalties under the Lacey Act.. (You can substitute frog for where it refers to any plant product here Lacey Act  Resources, Complying with the Lacey Act:  A Real-World Guide) 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## fieldnstream

pdfCrazy said:


> Hmmm, I find it odd the Mods have not intervened on this thread, adn actually participated, being as it clearly crosses lines into vendor feedback, etc. Hypocrisy!


Weren't you done throwing turds onto this thread that many can learn from?


----------



## stemcellular

JeremyHuff said:


> Were we hear by the Gods??? The ad is gone.....................................


Yup, pending further clarification on the source of the frogs... good work, DB!


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

I find it funny people use USFWS inspections to show their animals are legal. This dealer selling these animals gave me that exact justification. Smuggled is smuggled regardless if USFWS was fooled. As a community, we know better and should always discourage the trade in smuggled frogs. Especially when people are working hard to do things the right way with breeding these species in the origin country. A carefully constructed legal breeding program benefits the country, the species, and the hobbyist. Don't think for a second that these classifieds and boards aren't being watched. Actions like importing HIGHLY suspicious frogs and selling them (there are MANY dealers doing this) will come back to haunt the dealer and the hobby. 




Ed said:


> People often use this as a justification but people are ignoring an issue with this designation. If at some point, it turns out that there was an issue with the import, the frogs (and thier offspring) are retroactively illegal and owners if USF&W chooses subject to the penalties under the Lacey Act.. (You can substitute frog for where it refers to any plant product here Lacey Act* Resources, Complying with the Lacey Act:* A Real-World Guide)
> 
> Some comments,
> 
> Ed


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

If someone hasn't done so, I'd let USFWS know of this thread.


----------



## JJuchems

Ed said:


> People often use this as a justification but people are ignoring an issue with this designation. If at some point, it turns out that there was an issue with the import, the frogs (and thier offspring) are retroactively illegal and owners if USF&W chooses subject to the penalties under the Lacey Act.. (You can substitute frog for where it refers to any plant product here Lacey Act* Resources, Complying with the Lacey Act:* A Real-World Guide)
> 
> Some comments,
> 
> Ed


Ed you are 100% correct, but can you point to a prosecution of an individual due to a retroactive action of this nature from USFW? I don't know of any. And cooperation in any action I am sure would speak volumes over prosecution. 



JJuchems said:


> 2. If imported legally they passed USFW inspections. Who else will police them? (See 3)


All I am saying, is from what we know these entered the country legally. Policing ourselves goes a long ways.


----------



## pdfCrazy

I'm curius on this, and someone please let me know. Everyone is referring to "smuggled" animals. Smuggled usually means not going through any appropriate channels whatsoever. Hidden in suitcases, whatever. Then there are other ways, such as mislabeling, misidentifying species to get them in through customs/USFWS. And further yet, is animals being carried across borders...lets say Costa Rica to Panama, and then shipped "legally" from thereas their originating country whose borders may be open for export. What method is supposedly going on? Or does anyone even know, just guessing?


----------



## Ed

JJuchems said:


> Ed you are 100% correct, but can you point to a prosecution of an individual due to a retroactive action of this nature from USFW? I don't know of any. And cooperation in any action I am sure would speak volumes over prosecution.


Yes, there were prosecutions under Operation Shellshock that were retroactive of animals that were "legally" imported. 




JJuchems said:


> All I am saying, is from what we know these entered the country legally. Policing ourselves goes a long ways .


This is where the disconnect originates... If they are laundered in any way shape or form, they have not legally entered the country even if they have successfully passed through inspection. For example as was noted earlier in the thread, if imports of mysteriosus have occured as "black and white auratus" which have successfully passed through inspection. This does not mean that they are legal in any way shape or form. Relabling smuggled frogs as farm raised/captive bred etc, to get them through inspection does not mean in any way shape or form that they are legal. They and all of thier offspring are considered tainted. 

One of the reasons we are seeing a decrease in enforcement at the federal level is that a lot of thier funding and resources have been redirected for biosecurity... Dendrobatids are a low biosecurity risk. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> I'm curius on this, and someone please let me know. Everyone is referring to "smuggled" animals. Smuggled usually means not going through any appropriate channels whatsoever. Hidden in suitcases, whatever. Then there are other ways, such as mislabeling, misidentifying species to get them in through customs/USFWS. And further yet, is animals being carried across borders...lets say Costa Rica to Panama, and then shipped "legally" from thereas their originating country whose borders may be open for export. What method is supposedly going on? Or does anyone even know, just guessing?




Well I guess the risk of being a lightening rod isn't really a concern... 

From this post I'm guessing that you have not bothered to read any of the citations I provided since one of those papers indicates exactly a species supposedly "legally" exported becomes tainted.... 
Again, see for example http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_nijmanshepherd_poisonarrowfrog_biodivconserv_2.pdf

This also indicates that your scenario of being laundered through a second country is illegal and on the radar for various agencies.... see http://www.invasivespecies.gov/glob...T_ Invasive_Species_ Ecommerce_whitepaper.pdf 


Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Theres a big difference between having a discussion where people are naturally going to disagree, regardless of who's right or wrong, and people attacking others because they post what their thoughts are. I will particiapte and speak my mind so long as people can avoid avoid attitudes


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

I just got a message from an member here saying I should not be encouraging people to contact USFWS and "tell" on someone for illicit activity. That it only encourages gov in our hobby and even more hilarious, it might piss USFWS off by saying they didn't do their job correctly. The gov is in our hobby! In order to keep it out as much as possible, we should make sure to follow the existing rules so they don't see a need to add new ones!

Personally, if I imported these frogs, I'd be the one contacting USFWS and asking them to look into everything further to clear my name and more importantly, to clear my frogs (truth be said, on questionable animals, I do this BEFORE I import them). Even then, it does not guarantee the frogs were not originally acquired through non-legitimate means, but it does add some credibility to that side of the debate.


----------



## pdfCrazy

And yes, I read both of those papers. I was not referring in the general sense. obviously, this thread has been about ONE individual and his frogs for sale. I was asking if anyone knows specifically how these frogs are getting here and how they are being "cleaned up" and sold as legal


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Obviously people don't know the exact details, but when your see quantities of adult frogs being exported out of Europe, frogs that are not legally being exported from their native countries, it correctly raises a few eyebrows, and rightly so. You'd have to be a fool not to see that something "off" is going on.



pdfCrazy said:


> I'm curius on this, and someone please let me know. Everyone is referring to "smuggled" animals. Smuggled usually means not going through any appropriate channels whatsoever. Hidden in suitcases, whatever. Then there are other ways, such as mislabeling, misidentifying species to get them in through customs/USFWS. And further yet, is animals being carried across borders...lets say Costa Rica to Panama, and then shipped "legally" from thereas their originating country whose borders may be open for export. What method is supposedly going on? Or does anyone even know, just guessing?


----------



## jacobi

You know, I used to get irrationally aggravated at intentional and willful ignorance. Now I see it as entertainment. Plus I get lots of interesting papers, articles and threads I've missed to read, so its a win/win.


----------



## JimO

People can rationalize all they want, but it's pretty simple; smuggled animals of any kind, including frogs, are animals removed from their country of origin illegally. Transferring them to other countries through "legal" channels is nothing more than laundering. 

Let's stop pretending to be naive here. Imagine someone capturing a Bengal tiger and smuggling it out of India and then claiming it was part of a captive group at some zoo in, say, Indonesia. Then let's say a zoo bought the animal from Indonesia with the appropriate paperwork thinking it was a legitimate captive animal. Well, the paperwork might all be in order, but creating the paperwork involves fraud because I guarantee nobody told the authorities that the tiger was captured from the wild a month ago.

It's no different with dart frogs; they're just a lot smaller and less noticeable. If frogs are smuggled from Brazil into the EU and then imported to the U.S. with proper CITES permits, those permits were obtained through fraud, making them invalid.

So, somebody has to lie somewhere along the line to get a smuggled frog into the U.S. Also, people who import potentially smuggled frogs from the EU are either incredibly naive or they rationalize the import to soothe their own consciences.

After this post I'll probably be blacklisted by some people, but I am content in knowing that the frogs I own are legal and that I am on Understory's waiting ist for Paru Sylvatica.

The thing that stinks the most is that legitimate importers like Mark Pepper are eventually going to be squeezed out of the market by smugglers and those who support them, because it's expensive and time consuming to legally export a new species or morph or to open up exports from a closed country. The unintended consequence might be that the only new frogs that come into the U.S. might someday be smuggled frogs.

However, this isn't surprising at a time when so many people think "it's not wrong unless you get caught".



pdfCrazy said:


> I'm curius on this, and someone please let me know. Everyone is referring to "smuggled" animals. Smuggled usually means not going through any appropriate channels whatsoever. Hidden in suitcases, whatever. Then there are other ways, such as mislabeling, misidentifying species to get them in through customs/USFWS. And further yet, is animals being carried across borders...lets say Costa Rica to Panama, and then shipped "legally" from thereas their originating country whose borders may be open for export. What method is supposedly going on? Or does anyone even know, just guessing?


----------



## Ed

Just to add a little more clarification, let us look at the exact language in the act that defines the legalities... from http://www.fws.gov/le/pdffiles/Lacey.pdf


> *
> (a)​*​​​​Offenses other than marking offenses
> It is unlawful for any person—​
> *(1)​*​​​​to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken,
> possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in
> violation of any Indian tribal law;​
> *(2)​*​​​​to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce—​
> *(A)​*​​​​any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of
> any State or in violation of any foreign law, or​
> *(B)​*​​​​any plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State;​
> *(3)​*​​​​within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in section 7 of
> title 18)—​
> *(A)​*​​​​to possess any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or
> regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law or Indian tribal law, or​
> *(B)​*​​​​to possess any plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of
> any State;​
> *(4) *to attempt to commit any act described in paragraphs (1) through (4).


 

So if the aquisition of the animals violates any regulations in the country of origin (say collected in Costa Rica and exported from Panama), then regardless of any subsequent laundering the animals and all of thier offspring are tainted and not legal. 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## JJuchems

Ed said:


> Yes, there were prosecutions under Operation Shellshock that were retroactive of animals that were "legally" imported.
> 
> Ed


After some quick research, it seems that only the dealers and those involved in the laundering were charged, not the private purchasers/collectors who purchased. It was also a native pouching case. Do you have another example?

http://www.fws.gov/international/DMA_DSA/CITES/pdf/Thomas.pdf


----------



## pdfCrazy

Yes, but again, all I hear is speculation. I understand that the animals being sold could not possibly be legal because their country or origin (CR) has been closed. And no, laundering them through other countries does not make them legal. It seems to me people are just speculating about the methods, even if they are likely correct. Is there any possibility these are legally coming from EU, and have been held for a time....from say when CR was exporting? No, I know thats not likely, just asking. Does anyone know the supposed source (exporter)? or is that beign kept secret? Would USFWS paperwork be covered under open records acts requests? Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?


----------



## Ed

JJuchems said:


> After some quick research, it seems that only the dealers and those involved in the laundering were charged, not the private purchasers/collectors who purchased. It was also a native pouching case. Do you have another example?
> 
> http://www.fws.gov/international/DMA_DSA/CITES/pdf/Thomas.pdf


That does not go into the depth of the actual prosecutions and arrests. A friend of mine got greedy and purchased baby timbers during the investigation and as a private individual was arrested, and was turned..... I've read the actual warrent and that slide show just highlighted the major players and not all of the ramifications. 

Ed


----------



## JJuchems

Thanks that helps out, I read the NY Times article and others, it only appeared the dealers were charged. In fact I could not find an article detailing the prosecution outside of those who plead guilty.


----------



## amplexed

edwardsatc said:


> Taron's actions became his reputation many years ago, yet folks continue to do business with him ...
> 
> There's even a certain mod who has recently has given Taron great feedback. Probably because he's receiving the "rare" frogs he seeks ...


*HA!!!!!!!!​*


----------



## Scott

Nope - haven't seen much Vendor Feedback here. 

Vendor Feedback is talking about specific transactions.

Furthermore - we ARE allowed to have an opinion, but we do not (ok, hopefully do not) cross the line on the Board Rules. But we are allowed to have an opinion.

So please do not try to shut me down. Thank you.

s


pdfCrazy said:


> Hmmm, I find it odd the Mods have not intervened on this thread, adn actually participated, being as it clearly crosses lines into vendor feedback, etc. Hypocrisy!


----------



## Ed

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I just got a message from an member here saying I should not be encouraging people to contact USFWS and "tell" on someone for illicit activity. That it only encourages gov in our hobby and even more hilarious, it might piss USFWS off by saying they didn't do their job correctly. The gov is in our hobby! In order to keep it out as much as possible, we should make sure to follow the existing rules so they don't see a need to add new ones!


A brief discussion on this point, there are several paths that this can take 

1) the goverment comes in and investigates all potentially shady frogs resulting in potentially confiscations, and assorted prosecutions ( from say for those who don't declare the tranactions, tax evasion, to assorted Lacey act violations), putting the hobby under the microscope for a number of years in addition to bad press that can be used by Animal RIghts Groups,

2) consistent self policing reduces the number of suspect violations that then reduce govermental scrutiny..... 

3) some combination of one and two...... 

Ed


----------



## Zoomie

JimO said:


> After this post I'll probably be blacklisted by some people..........


I blacklisted you Jim, but not because of your commentary on this thread.

It's due to frog envy.  

I'm with you on everything else.


----------



## JJuchems

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I just got a message from an member here saying I should not be encouraging people to contact USFWS and "tell" on someone for illicit activity. That it only encourages gov in our hobby and even more hilarious, it might piss USFWS off by saying they didn't do their job correctly. The gov is in our hobby! In order to keep it out as much as possible, we should make sure to follow the existing rules so they don't see a need to add new ones!
> 
> Personally, if I imported these frogs, I'd be the one contacting USFWS and asking them to look into everything further to clear my name and more importantly, to clear my frogs (truth be said, on questionable animals, I do this BEFORE I import them). Even then, it does not guarantee the frogs were not originally acquired through non-legitimate means, but it does add some credibility to that side of the debate.


USFW is already after the hobby wanting amphibian transportation ban (Lacey Act) to stop combat chytrid.


----------



## pdfCrazy

Ed, you mentioned Operation shellshock, an I am aware of a seizure and prosecution in Colorado over an illegal hoard of venemous snakes the owner did not have permits for. But what investigations over "shady frog deals" are you referring? Are there specific instances?


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

I'm one of those people who want to discourage illegal activity. To do that, if a few people RIGHTFULLY get frogs confiscated or taken away to service the greater cause, I'm all for it. We should keep our hobby clean and they we'll have ammo to prevent animal rights groups or USFWS from making further restrictions. I for one would like to see everyone start testing and treating for chytrid, before it becomes mandatory. 




Ed said:


> A brief discussion on this point, there are several paths that this can take
> 
> 1) the goverment comes in and investigates all potentially shady frogs resulting in potentially confiscations, and assorted prosecutions ( from say for those who don't declare the tranactions, tax evasion, to assorted Lacey act violations), putting the hobby under the microscope for a number of years in addition to bad press that can be used by Animal RIghts Groups,
> 
> 2) consistent self policing reduces the number of suspect violations that then reduce govermental scrutiny.....
> 
> 3) some combination of one and two......
> 
> Ed


----------



## frogface

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I'm one of those people who want to discourage illegal activity. To do that, if a few people RIGHTFULLY get frogs confiscated or taken away to service the greater cause, I'm all for it. We should keep our hobby clean and they we'll have ammo to prevent animal rights groups or USFWS from making further restrictions. I for one would like to see everyone start testing and treating for chytrid, before it becomes mandatory.


Yea, but, would they confiscate the frogs and then sort out whether or not they are being kept legally? That's been my biggest fear. "ok you're good. However, your frogs are all dead, now."


----------



## Dev30ils

Kris,

From my knowledge (which is based mostly on large carnivore operations) USFWS tends to do an enormous amount of due diligence before they seize any animals. They generally try to line up a rescue organization or sanctuary to care for any animals seized during operations also.

Again, dealing with small herps is probably different for them but I think their approach would likely be the same.


----------



## JJuchems

Dev30ils said:


> Kris,
> 
> From my knowledge (which is based mostly on large carnivore operations) USFWS tends to do an enormous amount of due diligence before they seize any animals. They generally try to line up a rescue organization or sanctuary to care for any animals seized during operations also.
> 
> Again, dealing with small herps is probably different for them but I think their approach would likely be the same.


I would question this with herps, I know that in state confiscations (IL) they have ended up in private residences.


----------



## thedude

pdfCrazy said:


> smuggling is usually a drop in the bucket in contributing to a species demise. The oil drilling, the cattle farms, palm plantations, inroad constructio support these activities, the hardwood "underground", these contribute to destroy habitat. Smuggling a few hundred frogs, would not even dent a species population, even frogs with very specific localities. I have read research papers (no I cannt locate them) on this VERY subject. You don't see anyone smuggling auratus or vittatus do you? You know why? Because they are very established in the hobby. Why would a smuggler bother to risk life and limb to smuggle something easily obtainable CB. The majority (no not all) species can and have been bred in captivity, including histo's and lehmanii. Smuggling of these and others will remain a reality UNTIL they become established in the trade. Call it greed if you want, I see no difference than with the guy who HAS to have his H3 Hummer or BMW. It is a want. And as for safety nets, if you don't think there are species that HAVE been saved due to hobbyist/zoos captive breeding, you are sadly mistaken. Do a little research. And while I do not put down TWI or other groups, what makes them the only ones "to be trusted".



Smuggling isn't a problem because other things are worse? And maybe YOU should do some research. I already told you that some species and some populations have already been smuggled to the point of critical endangerment. When did I say that species hadn't been saved by captive breeding? I said that obligates, like sylvatica and granulifera, don't breed easily in captivity, at all. Hence why I also said that there is no way anybody in EU or here has the means to be breeding and keeping this many captive specimens. This topic has been re-hashed many times over the last few years. I suggest you use the search function and read some of it, instead of doing whatever you call this.




pdfCrazy said:


> My point is more about my belief that we don't need government telling us what species to keep or not keep, or other people worrying about where a few dozen frogs came from.


Without the government making rules against these animals being smuggled and kept they could go extinct, plain and simple. Sorry about your "freedoms" to destroy nature.

Also, for every frog that makes it here alive, there are probably 6-10 that died in the process. So it's more than a few dozen. 




pdfCrazy said:


> I'm curius on this, and someone please let me know. Everyone is referring to "smuggled" animals. Smuggled usually means not going through any appropriate channels whatsoever. Hidden in suitcases, whatever. Then there are other ways, such as mislabeling, misidentifying species to get them in through customs/USFWS. And further yet, is animals being carried across borders...lets say Costa Rica to Panama, and then shipped "legally" from thereas their originating country whose borders may be open for export. What method is supposedly going on? Or does anyone even know, just guessing?




Typically they would smuggle the frogs out of their country of origin to Europe, then forge CITES permits or manage to obtain them legally, then import them here as "legal".

As far as the country of origin is concerned they are still illegal though, and that's what counts.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

In addition I don't really see this thread as only being about these specific frogs, but suspected frogs in general. What is being said here has implications beyond this shipment. It can be applied to a wide variety of animals, and is more of a continuing thread that people bring up as animals like this are offered for sale. A good exampl is th various threads on the "farm raised" O. pumilio from Panama. 




Scott said:


> Nope - haven't seen much Vendor Feedback here.
> 
> Vendor Feedback is talking about specific transactions.
> 
> Furthermore - we ARE allowed to have an opinion, but we do not (ok, hopefully do not) cross the line on the Board Rules. But we are allowed to have an opinion.
> 
> So please do not try to shut me down. Thank you.
> 
> s


----------



## ChrisK

Blue_Pumilio said:


> In addition I don't really see this thread as only being about these specific frogs, but suspected frogs in general. What is being said here has implications beyond this shipment. It can be applied to a wide variety of animals, and is more of a continuing thread that people bring up as animals like this are offered for sale. A good exampl is th various threads on the "farm raised" O. pumilio from Panama.


Well according to the data and numbers, auratus should be the main concern in regards to smuggled frogs or frogs that come from illegal lineage right? If "investigations" and "confiscations" were going to go on and auratus wasn't the main focus, what does that say?


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Practically all the D. auratus coming into to the USA are "farm raised" Panama imports with valid CITES paperwork according to the Panama government. Just what do you propose they do? 




ChrisK said:


> Well according to the data and numbers, auratus should be the main concern in regards to smuggled frogs or frogs that come from illegal lineage right? If "investigations" and "confiscations" were going to go on and auratus wasn't the main focus, what does that say?


----------



## ChrisK

> Practically all the D. auratus coming into to the USA are "farm raised" Panama imports with valid CITES paperwork according to the Panama government. Just what do you propose they do? <br />
> <br />
> <br />
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by ChrisK<br />
> Well according to the data and numbers, auratus should be the main concern in regards to smuggled frogs or frogs that come from illegal lineage right? If "investigations" and "confiscations" were going to go on and auratus wasn't the main focus, what does that say?
Click to expand...

Farm raised.
Then where have the frogs Ed cited gone?


----------



## Boondoggle

pdfCrazy said:


> Yes, but again, all I hear is speculation. I understand that the animals being sold could not possibly be legal because their country or origin (CR) has been closed. And no, laundering them through other countries does not make them legal. It seems to me people are just speculating about the methods, even if they are likely correct. Is there any possibility these are legally coming from EU, and have been held for a time....from say when CR was exporting? No, I know thats not likely, just asking.


Based on the facts presented here, could I prove it one way or the other in a court of law? No...but frogs like these are offered VERY rarely, and almost always without explanation. If there was a legal, legitimate trail then the seller would almost definitely list it in the ad, as that would greatly increase the potential asking price. There was no explanation, which raises a red flag.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, "Black and White Auratus" were listed in the ad. If that was "code" for Histo then that raises another HUGE red flag. Why would a legitimate seller with legal animals sell an animal under an alias?

Also, as has been stated, some people already come with a red flag based on previous transactions. 

I've learned from experience to avoid a transaction that came with one red flag, let alone three.


----------



## Woodsman

I for one applaud Dendroboard for pulling ads for review that seem to offer questionable frogs. This one change in policy could help discourage smugglers from selling these frogs from unwitting Dendroboard members.

Now, if only we could convince Kingsnake, Fauna Classifieds, Iherp and others to follow suit! This would be a better world.

Thanks again, Richard.


----------



## JJuchems

Woodsman said:


> I for one applaud Dendroboard for pulling ads for review that seem to offer questionable frogs. This one change in policy could help discourage smugglers from selling these frogs from unwitting Dendroboard members.
> 
> Now, if only we could convince Kingsnake, Fauna Classifieds, Iherp and others to follow suit! This would be a better world.
> 
> Thanks again, Richard.


Kingsnake is highly trafficked by federal and state authorities. So, I would disagree. This gives them an avenue to catch those selling or dealing illegal species.


----------



## Ed

pdfCrazy said:


> Ed, you mentioned Operation shellshock, an I am aware of a seizure and prosecution in Colorado over an illegal hoard of venemous snakes the owner did not have permits for. But what investigations over "shady frog deals" are you referring? Are there specific instances?


With respect to Operation Shellshock, it started with a red salamander being advertised for sale on kingsnake and ended up including some very notable names in the hobby (for one example Don Hamper (see news release here Donald B. Hamper, Ohio Reptile Dealer Pleads Guilty in Federal Court - sSNAKESs : Reptile Forum and included dealers who were smuggling animals into and out of the USA... Hamper also ended up having to surrender all of his Gilas and Beaded Lizards for further violations. As of a couple of years ago, fallout was still happening as people who were involved in it, turned and helped set up further stings.. (the most recent I"ve heard of involved Florida indigos in PA)..... 

I had a copy of the warrent application that was obtained through a FOIA request so I was able to read all of the details on how it started and how it ended up... Since I personally know some of those who ended up getting caught (by them being greedy) I was able to get some more details..... 

Ed 
NEWS RELEASE
Lawrence, Kansas
2 March 2005

Herpetoculturist Convicted; Will Serve Time (from U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service)
Contacts: Special Agent Paul Beiriger 317-346-7014 or Scott Flaherty
612-713-5309

Donald B. Hamper, Ohio Reptile Dealer Pleads Guilty in Federal Court to Illegal Commercialization of Protected Reptiles

Donald B. Hamper, a reptile dealer from Columbus, Ohio, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio to a three-count Information charging him with the illegal purchase, sale and interstate transportation of Blanding's Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) and other wildlife protected by federal and state laws. By pleading guilty to the Information, Hamper waived his right to indictment and trial and agreed to serve one year and one day confinement, to pay a $3,000 fine and $7,000 restitution to the State of Michigan Fish and Game Protection Fund, and pay a $300 special assessment to the court.

In his plea agreement, Hamper admitted that between June 2001 and June 28, 2003, he knowingly participated in illegal interstate purchases and sales involving
53 Blanding's Turtles and other wildlife including Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata), Wood Turtles (Glyptemys insculpta), and several species of snakes.
Hamper's commercial trade in the rare turtles, valued between $30,000 and $70,000, is prohibited by various wildlife laws in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. The interstate trade in wildlife obtained in violation of state laws is a violation of the Lacey Act, the nation's oldest federal wildlife protection law. Maximum penalties for felony violations of the Act include imprisonment of up to five years, and fines of up to $250,000 for each offense.

In addition, Hamper agreed to donate $2,500 to the Wildlife Education Fund operated by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and publish a statement in Reptile Magazine acknowledging his criminal conduct and describing his penalties. He also agreed to be placed on supervised probation following his release from prison during which time he is prohibited from possessing or handling any reptiles or amphibians. All of the agreed to will be evaluated by U.S.
District Court Judge Algenon L. Marbley in Columbus, Ohio, prior to sentencing.
No sentencing date has been set.

Hamper's guilty plea and penalties resulted from a negotiated, global agreement between the U. S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Ohio, the Department of Justice, and the Franklin County, Ohio, Prosecutor's Office.
Hamper also faced prosecution in Franklin County, on violations of Ohio Revised Code and Columbus city codes involving record keeping, tagging and harboring numerous venomous Gila Monsters (Heloderma suspectum) and Beaded Lizards (Heloderma horridum). As part of a separate plea agreement with Franklin County Prosecutor's Office, Hamper agreed to relinquish ownership of all wildlife seized from him during the course of the investigation including the venomous Gila Monsters and Beaded Lizards.

Hamper's plea agreement is the result of Operation E & T, a joint investigation into the illegal reptile and turtle trade conducted by special agents of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and investigators of the Ohio Division of Wildlife, and Michigan and Indiana Department of Natural Resources. Hamper, a co-organizer of the All Ohio Reptile Show held monthly in Columbus, bought and sold turtles and reptiles during the All Ohio Reptile Show and similar venues in Michigan and Indiana. He also sold reptiles over the Internet.

The Blanding's Turtle is a medium sized freshwater turtle with an average shell length of approximately 7 to 10 inches. Blanding's Turtles are easily identified by their bright yellow chin and throat and numerous yellow speckles on their domed upper shell. The turtle is found primarily in the Great Lakes region and extends from southern Ontario west including Michigan, Wisconsin, northern Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, southern Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. It is protected from commercialization in most of its range.

The Blanding's Turtle is rare throughout its range and is state-listed as endangered in Indiana and Missouri, and threatened in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. The Blanding's Turtle is a species of special concern in Michigan and Ohio. It is highly prized by herpetoculturists, a group engaged primarily in the reptile and turtle trade. 








NEWS RELEASE
Lawrence, Kansas
2 March 2005

Herpetoculturist Convicted; Will Serve Time (from U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service)
Contacts: Special Agent Paul Beiriger 317-346-7014 or Scott Flaherty
612-713-5309

Donald B. Hamper, Ohio Reptile Dealer Pleads Guilty in Federal Court to Illegal Commercialization of Protected Reptiles

Donald B. Hamper, a reptile dealer from Columbus, Ohio, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio to a three-count Information charging him with the illegal purchase, sale and interstate transportation of Blanding's Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) and other wildlife protected by federal and state laws. By pleading guilty to the Information, Hamper waived his right to indictment and trial and agreed to serve one year and one day confinement, to pay a $3,000 fine and $7,000 restitution to the State of Michigan Fish and Game Protection Fund, and pay a $300 special assessment to the court.

In his plea agreement, Hamper admitted that between June 2001 and June 28, 2003, he knowingly participated in illegal interstate purchases and sales involving
53 Blanding's Turtles and other wildlife including Spotted Turtles (Clemmys guttata), Wood Turtles (Glyptemys insculpta), and several species of snakes.
Hamper's commercial trade in the rare turtles, valued between $30,000 and $70,000, is prohibited by various wildlife laws in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. The interstate trade in wildlife obtained in violation of state laws is a violation of the Lacey Act, the nation's oldest federal wildlife protection law. Maximum penalties for felony violations of the Act include imprisonment of up to five years, and fines of up to $250,000 for each offense.

In addition, Hamper agreed to donate $2,500 to the Wildlife Education Fund operated by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and publish a statement in Reptile Magazine acknowledging his criminal conduct and describing his penalties. He also agreed to be placed on supervised probation following his release from prison during which time he is prohibited from possessing or handling any reptiles or amphibians. All of the agreed to will be evaluated by U.S.
District Court Judge Algenon L. Marbley in Columbus, Ohio, prior to sentencing.
No sentencing date has been set.

Hamper's guilty plea and penalties resulted from a negotiated, global agreement between the U. S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Ohio, the Department of Justice, and the Franklin County, Ohio, Prosecutor's Office.
Hamper also faced prosecution in Franklin County, on violations of Ohio Revised Code and Columbus city codes involving record keeping, tagging and harboring numerous venomous Gila Monsters (Heloderma suspectum) and Beaded Lizards (Heloderma horridum). As part of a separate plea agreement with Franklin County Prosecutor's Office, Hamper agreed to relinquish ownership of all wildlife seized from him during the course of the investigation including the venomous Gila Monsters and Beaded Lizards.

Hamper's plea agreement is the result of Operation E & T, a joint investigation into the illegal reptile and turtle trade conducted by special agents of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and investigators of the Ohio Division of Wildlife, and Michigan and Indiana Department of Natural Resources. Hamper, a co-organizer of the All Ohio Reptile Show held monthly in Columbus, bought and sold turtles and reptiles during the All Ohio Reptile Show and similar venues in Michigan and Indiana. He also sold reptiles over the Internet.

The Blanding's Turtle is a medium sized freshwater turtle with an average shell length of approximately 7 to 10 inches. Blanding's Turtles are easily identified by their bright yellow chin and throat and numerous yellow speckles on their domed upper shell. The turtle is found primarily in the Great Lakes region and extends from southern Ontario west including Michigan, Wisconsin, northern Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, southern Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. It is protected from commercialization in most of its range.

The Blanding's Turtle is rare throughout its range and is state-listed as endangered in Indiana and Missouri, and threatened in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. The Blanding's Turtle is a species of special concern in Michigan and Ohio. It is highly prized by herpetoculturists, a group engaged primarily in the reptile and turtle trade.


----------



## Ed

ChrisK said:


> Farm raised.
> Then where have the frogs Ed cited gone?


One of the problems with Panama, is that they have refused to set a CITES quota so they are technically in violation of the treaty. This is part of the issue in the citation I provided that included laundering the frogs through Lebanon (which is a non-signatory) and then into Kazakhstan... 

Ed


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

I'm curious Ed, do you know if Hamper actually served much if any of that sentance? I would imagine he was out in a few months given the way our prison system is today. As bad as his crimes are, I doubt the prison system has much time or space for a criminal herpetoculturist mastermind! Hopefully he got to be someone's "girlfriend" for the duration of his visit.


----------



## Ed

ZookeeperDoug said:


> I'm curious Ed, do you know if Hamper actually served much if any of that sentance? I would imagine he was out in a few months given the way our prison system is today. As bad as his crimes are, I doubt the prison system has much time or space for a criminal herpetoculturist mastermind! Hopefully he got to be someone's "girlfriend" for the duration of his visit.


He did serve it as well as the subsequent probationary period where he was not allowed to traffic in reptiles (he ceded that to his son while he sold t-shirts and hats). I don't know if he ended up in the general population or not. 

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Yes, I think I remember when this happend, Hamper posted an Ad in Reptiles Magazine, acknowledgeing his guilt, the terms of the plea agreement, etc. I think it was per the negotiated global disposition plea agreement.


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

Ed said:


> He did serve it as well as the subsequent probationary period where he was not allowed to traffic in reptiles (he ceded that to his son while he sold t-shirts and hats). I don't know if he ended up in the general population or not.
> 
> Ed


I'm suprised. Not saying he didn't deserve to serve his sentance, but rather that the prison system didn't parole him out, put him on house arrest, or something of that nature. You don't often see any criminal serve the full term of their sentance, especially first time offenders.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Except CITES has addressed this and they don't need to set a quota for "farm raised" animals according to CITES. So as long as they are "farm raised, no quota is needed. Even then, many countries, including Uganda, don't set a yearly quota. If I remember correctly, I quota is strong encouraged, but is not necessary. 



Ed said:


> One of the problems with Panama, is that they have refused to set a CITES quota so they are technically in violation of the treaty. This is part of the issue in the citation I provided that included laundering the frogs through Lebanon (which is a non-signatory) and then into Kazakhstan...
> 
> Ed


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

If you knew Don Hamper, he was a good guy who made some bad choices. People, like everything, are grey, not black and white. He contributed far more good to the hobby then bad. So please, don't make him out to be something that he is not. He did something wrong and got punished for it, rightfully so. 



ZookeeperDoug said:


> I'm curious Ed, do you know if Hamper actually served much if any of that sentance? I would imagine he was out in a few months given the way our prison system is today. As bad as his crimes are, I doubt the prison system has much time or space for a criminal herpetoculturist mastermind! Hopefully he got to be someone's "girlfriend" for the duration of his visit.


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

Blue_Pumilio said:


> If you knew Don Hamper, he was a good guy who made some bad choices. People, like everything, are grey, not black and white. He contributed far more good to the hobby then bad. So please, don't make him out to be something that he is not. He did something wrong and got punished for it, rightfully so.


You're right, I don't know him. Was just trying to be a little silly and sarcastic about it. I figured the idea of a criminal herpetoculturist mastermind! was obsurdly hillarious enough to undue any semblance of being serious..... but I'm always hilarious in my own mind. Sorry


----------



## JJuchems

pdfCrazy said:


> Yes, I think I remember when this happend, Hamper posted an Ad in Reptiles Magazine, acknowledgeing his guilt, the terms of the plea agreement, etc. I think it was per the negotiated global disposition plea agreement.


April 2006 issue, page 73.


----------



## Ed

Blue_Pumilio said:


> Except CITES has addressed this and they don't need to set a quota for "farm raised" animals according to CITES. So as long as they are "farm raised, no quota is needed. Even then, many countries, including Uganda, don't set a yearly quota. If I remember correctly, I quota is strong encouraged, but is not necessary.


Membership in CITES automatically requires that wildlife trafficking to not be harmful to the status of the wildlife in country. CITES can enforce this by enforcing boycotts. CITES member for CITES II animals export/import must meet the following criteria


> *Appendix II* - species can be traded internationally for commercial purposes, but within strict regulations, requiring determinations of sustainability and legality


. Panama has not submitted any indication that the current trade is sustainable or in the case of the laundering detected here http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_nijmanshepherd_poisonarrowfrog_biodivconserv_2.pdf legal. CITES could enact a ban on internation trade in the frogs which the US as a signatory would enforce by refusing to grant permits for all future imports or exports. (This is effectively what happened to Typhlonectes natans. It came to the attention of USF&W that this aquatic caecilian was being exported in violation of the countries of origins regulation and mis-labeled on the imports to the US. USF&W began to seize shipments but rapidly ran out of holding space (usually at institutions (where Philadelphia got some of thier original animals), and instead began to refuse entry of the entire fish shipment.). 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## Ed

As can be seen here, a similar action resulted in the shutdown of exports of frogs from Nicaragua... http://www.cites.org/common/com/SC/57/E57-29-02A2.pdf 


Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Has anyone else read these? Amazon.com: Stolen World: A Tale of Reptiles, Smugglers, and Skulduggery (9780307381477): Jennie Erin Smith: Books 






Both VERY informative and paint the bigger picture. Was supposed to have a movie or special done about it. Havnt heard though lately


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

It looks like CITES may be looking into O. pumilio from Panama soon enough. 

http://www.cites.org/eng/com/SC/62/E62-26.pdf


----------



## pdfCrazy

Or, (I havn't read these) Amazon.com: Forbidden Creatures: Inside the World of Animal Smuggling and Exotic Pets: Peter Laufer: Books

Amazon.com: Illegal entry: endangered animal smuggling is big business at U.S. ports.: An article from: E: Denise Sewell: Books

Amazon.com: Animal Underworld: Inside America's Black Market for Rare and Exotic Species (9781586483746): Alan Green: Books


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Yep, I am very familiar with the happenings in both books. We better watch out before there is one called "Poison Jewels". 



pdfCrazy said:


> Has anyone else read these? Amazon.com: Stolen World: A Tale of Reptiles, Smugglers, and Skulduggery (9780307381477): Jennie Erin Smith: Books
> 
> The Lizard King: The True Crimes and Passions of the World's Greatest Reptile Smugglers: Bryan Christy: Amazon.com: Kindle Store
> 
> Both VERY informative and paint the bigger picture. Was supposed to have a movie or special done about it. Havnt heard though lately


----------



## Ed

I've met more than one character in the Lizard King, more than once and interacted with Strictly Reptiles when I worked in a pet store running a reptile department. 

Ed


----------



## pdfCrazy

Likewise. ex-pro exotics employee


----------



## pdfCrazy

Kamuran Tepedelan at Bushmaster was my more local go to supplier though


----------



## mantisdragon91

pdfCrazy said:


> Kamuran Tepedelan at Bushmaster was my more local go to supplier though


Is he still around? I haven't heard that name since I bought Black Roughneck and Blue Tongue monitors from him in the mid 90s.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

He is still going strong and one of the best in the business. 




mantisdragon91 said:


> Is he still around? I haven't heard that name since I bought Black Roughneck and Blue Tongue monitors from him in the mid 90s.


----------



## pa.walt

Julio said:


> the unfortunate issue is that they are coming in through EU and although we suspect they are smuggled animals, all they see is just the scientific names, just like the mystis coming in as black and white auratus.


julio when did these come in. just wondering. to my knowledge never saw anything posted ad wise.


----------



## Julio

I have no idea, i did not import them


----------



## JeremyHuff

pa.walt said:


> julio when did these come in. just wondering. to my knowledge never saw anything posted ad wise.


Walt
The ad was removed shortly after it posted. It posted just before Ray started this thread.

J


----------



## Scott

Jeremy - he may also be referring to the "black and white" auratas mentioned here at some point. They're not mentioned in the "recent" ad that was removed.

s


----------



## Julio

Ah that, 
i know that is how they have been sneaked in the past, i personally have never kept Mystis nor do i do so now, nor know anyone who does, but i did hear that 5 ppl were caught with them last year in the midwest, not sure if its true or who.


----------



## Woodsman

I have a few extra Atelopus zetekis, free to a good home!

Richard.


----------



## JJuchems

Woodsman said:


> I have a few extra Atelopus zetekis, free to a good home!
> 
> Richard.


You need to start a whole new thread if you want to start this one...They are already in private US collection from what I understand...

There is a brief section on captive care in:
Zappler, G., & Zappler, L. (1973). Amphibians as pets. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

No way! I haven't heard that one before. Strange....as for captive care, much better sources. I got several pdf's. 



JJuchems said:


> You need to start a whole new thread if you want to start this one...They are already in private US collection from what I understand...
> 
> There is a brief section on captive care in:
> Zappler, G., & Zappler, L. (1973). Amphibians as pets. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.


----------



## JJuchems

Blue_Pumilio said:


> No way! I haven't heard that one before. Strange....as for captive care, much better sources. I got several pdf's.


There are a ton of PDF's, I have them. Finding old pet trade books is a bit more difficult.


----------



## Ed

JJuchems said:


> You need to start a whole new thread if you want to start this one...They are already in private US collection from what I understand...


Unlike many other frogs there is no question as to whether they are legal or not and USF&W as well as Panama would take great interest in ensuring that prosecution those that have them goes through.... There have been historic imports of varius (and several smuggled imports that were confiscated) in the pet trade but no zeteki and the language allowing zeteki to be collected and imported to AZA instutions requires prosecution if they are held outside of a AZA accredited instution. 

Ed


----------



## pa.walt

Julio said:


> Ah that,
> i know that is how they have been sneaked in the past, i personally have never kept Mystis nor do i do so now, nor know anyone who does, but i did hear that 5 ppl were caught with them last year in the midwest, not sure if its true or who.


no i was just curious. like that new group of frogs that came in and more or less started this thread. i often wonder how people get some of these rare frogs in the us.
also how they were presented to the public for sale. i would like to have some but i know that they are illegel. i also like the vincenti. ok now you can send the frog police to watch my house since i mentioned these two types of frogs.


----------



## JJuchems

Ed said:


> Unlike many other frogs there is no question as to whether they are legal or not and USF&W as well as Panama would take great interest in ensuring that prosecution those that have them goes through.... There have been historic imports of varius (and several smuggled imports that were confiscated) in the pet trade but no zeteki and the language allowing zeteki to be collected and imported to AZA instutions requires prosecution if they are held outside of a AZA accredited instution.
> 
> Ed


Yep, and that is were they came from... We had this discussion after a herp society meeting, over the very same facts/ information. However this would not be the first time a "secure" species is let out.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Sounds like a keeper took some eggs/tadpoles.



JJuchems said:


> Yep, and that is were they came from... We had this discussion after a herp society meeting, over the very same facts/ information. However this would not be the first time a "secure" species is let out.


----------



## Ed

JJuchems said:


> Yep, and that is were they came from... We had this discussion after a herp society meeting, over the very same facts/ information. However this would not be the first time a "secure" species is let out.


The main difference is that the prior "secure" species did not have exacting language around who can and cannot possess them (including accredation by AZA), there is absolutely no question about what will happen if they surface... 

Ed


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

I thought I read somewhere (one of the AZA articles) that some of A. zeteki them were outright owned by the zoo and did not have the restrictions the previous collections had. I'll have to look up the article, but I'm pretty sure of it. Either way, zoos will not want these in private hands. 



Ed said:


> The main difference is that the prior "secure" species did not have exacting language around who can and cannot possess them (including accredation by AZA), there is absolutely no question about what will happen if they surface...
> 
> Ed


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Ahh, I guess is was USFWS that limited the frogs to AZA facilities, only. http://www.ranadorada.org/PDF/HusbandryManual.pdf


----------



## Ed

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I thought I read somewhere (one of the AZA articles) that some of A. zeteki them were outright owned by the zoo and did not have the restrictions the previous collections had. I'll have to look up the article, but I'm pretty sure of it. Either way, zoos will not want these in private hands.


No, all of the zeteki are owned outright by Panama. Initially they had intended to release varius to the pet trade to satisfy some of the demand, however, there is some political issues that have arisen and Panama has refused to allow them to be released...

Ed.


----------



## Ed

Blue_Pumilio said:


> Ahh, I guess is was USFWS that limited the frogs to AZA facilities, only. http://www.ranadorada.org/PDF/HusbandryManual.pdf


Panama insisted. They did not want a repeat of the castinoticus or D. antongilli incident particularly with a species that is considered a national treasure. As a result the CITES permits, as well as an agreement with Panama prohibit their release to any non-accredited AZA institution ( A, Wisnieski. personal communication). 

Ed


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

You sure, there are SEVERAL articles that specifically say that some animals are NOT owned by the Panama gov. Including the Atelopus husbandry manual put out by the AZA. 



Ed said:


> No, all of the zeteki are owned outright by Panama. Initially they had intended to release varius to the pet trade to satisfy some of the demand, however, there is some political issues that have arisen and Panama has refused to allow them to be released...
> 
> Ed.


----------



## JJuchems

Blue_Pumilio said:


> You sure, there are SEVERAL articles that specifically say that some animals are NOT owned by the Panama gov. Including the Atelopus husbandry manual put out by the AZA.


 I believe you are referring to specimen imported for zoological purposes before the agreement.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

No, this was AFTER the agreement. USFWS is the one who put the restrictions on the specimens when they issued the CITES I import permit. Panama did not issue restrictions and they do not own the specimens, at least according to the AZA Husbandry guideline book on Atelopus. 



JJuchems said:


> I believe you are referring to specimen imported for zoological purposes before the agreement.


----------



## JJuchems

I was going by conversation with a friend who is the lead keeper at an AZA facility and a fellow herp society member. But you are correct, the owner is the permit holder, the Maryland Zoo in Baltimore.


----------



## Julio

People just want what they can't have!


----------



## stemcellular

"you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes..."


----------



## mantisdragon91

stemcellular said:


> "you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes..."


You may get a visit from USFWS


----------



## Scott

I've been listening to a lot of that time period lately. 



stemcellular said:


> "you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes..."


----------



## TURQ64

Heck, I'm still gigging in 'that time period'!!...Charter member, Church of the Holy Stratocaster........


----------



## Zoomie

I'm stuck in seventies land. Played bass forever.

Two of my babies. The bottom is still my fav. Fender Jazz USA in brilliant lavender sparkle, or Statatory Grape if you prefer.

If anyone has any frogs in this color, please put me on the list for a baker's dozen. 

Smells like funk!










Do I get bonus points for the awesome derail?


----------



## Scott

Yeah - we should probably stay on topic. Apologies all.

s


----------



## TURQ64

My appologies also....


----------



## Zoomie

Self-imposed time out.

Scott feel free to delete.


----------



## skylsdale

We usually look at this issue from the perspective of the hobby (obviously)...but if zeteki were to be released into private collections, what would the penalties/consequences be for the keeper and/or institution responsible for their distribution?


----------



## Ed

Blue_Pumilio said:


> You sure, there are SEVERAL articles that specifically say that some animals are NOT owned by the Panama gov. Including the Atelopus husbandry manual put out by the AZA.


Thanks for the corrections.. 
Ed


----------



## Ed

skylsdale said:


> We usually look at this issue from the perspective of the hobby (obviously)...but if zeteki were to be released into private collections, what would the penalties/consequences be for the keeper and/or institution responsible for their distribution?


If they were stolen from the zoo, then the person in possession of them will prosecutable under the Lacey Act as well as the Endangered Species Act (see Species Profile for Panamanian Golden frog (Atelopus varius zeteki)) For penalties see Endangered Species Program | Laws & Policies | Endangered Species Act | Section 11 Penalties and enforcement... 

They should consider themselves lucky that the spray toad was also not listed.... 

If the people who have them in possession engaged in any commerce with them, then you can be sure it will be that much worse. 

If the institution knowingly released them, then the above provisions would be violated and in addition, they would probably lose accredidation which affects everything from the animals the institution can possess as well as grants and funding. The people who approved the release could also be subject to prosecution of the above acts (if there was some benefit to it for themselves) and most certainly would lose thier jobs and probably thier careers since it would be highly unlikely that they would be hired to work at another institution. 

Some comments,

Ed


----------



## Woodsman

Hi Ed,

So you are saying that my planned night-time raid on the reptile house at the Staten Island Zoo is ill-advised? The siren call of their A. zetekis echoes in my head to the loss of all reason.

Maybe I could plead temporary insanity? lol

Take care, Richard.



Ed said:


> If they were stolen from the zoo, then the person in possession of them will prosecutable under the Lacey Act as well as the Endangered Species Act (see Species Profile for Panamanian Golden frog (Atelopus varius zeteki)) For penalties see Endangered Species Program | Laws & Policies | Endangered Species Act | Section 11 Penalties and enforcement...
> 
> They should consider themselves lucky that the spray toad was also not listed....
> 
> If the people who have them in possession engaged in any commerce with them, then you can be sure it will be that much worse.
> 
> If the institution knowingly released them, then the above provisions would be violated and in addition, they would probably lose accredidation which affects everything from the animals the institution can possess as well as grants and funding. The people who approved the release could also be subject to prosecution of the above acts (if there was some benefit to it for themselves) and most certainly would lose thier jobs and probably thier careers since it would be highly unlikely that they would be hired to work at another institution.
> 
> Some comments,
> 
> Ed


----------



## Ed

Woodsman said:


> Hi Ed,
> 
> So you are saying that my planned night-time raid on the reptile house at the Staten Island Zoo is ill-advised? The siren call of their A. zetekis echoes in my head to the loss of all reason.
> 
> Maybe I could plead temporary insanity? lol
> 
> Take care, Richard.


I think it would be more than temporary insanity.... I don't know about you, but walking around a dark zoo by yourself can be pretty spooky particularly when you can hear the big cats calling.... 

Ed


----------



## Woodsman

On second thought, I am happy to make the special trip up to see them when I want to get my A. zeteki fix. 

I'm mature enough to WANT to obey the laws regarding endangered species and to support the zoological institutions that are performing the ACTUAL work of conservation on their behalf..

Richard.


----------



## Ed

Back to the whole illegal frog possession thing... I have always found it problematic since you couldn't then invite people over since if word leaks you would be guaranteed a visit from people you really don't want to have come to see you. 

I come from a generation of herp keepers where you didn't advertise if you had rare or high value animals, since there was a concern of theft (and more than one person I know back in the day had animals stolen) and the potential issues with your neighbors. However, I can't understand how you could want something so bad that would prevent you from ever having your friends from work (if you were a zookeeper) or other hobbyists over or would reck your career so badly you would be unemployable in that field. 

Ed


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

Ed said:


> I think it would be more than temporary insanity.... I don't know about you, but walking around a dark zoo by yourself can be pretty spooky particularly when you can hear the big cats calling....
> 
> Ed


Nothing quite like it! I've had to come in many a night to check a sick animal, do a treatment, stay late with a baby etc. At night, in a dark Zoo, no one can hear you call, CODE RED!

I swear our South American pavilion is HAUNTED. The security will not go near the carousel at night. They swear a little girl calls for you to play with her and it lights up and runs on its own! /shiver

On the topic of A. zeteki, oh man how I wish we could have ended up with those in our collection, instead we have Puerto Rican Crested Toads.......


----------

