# Mysteriosis - US legal status



## Santosrica (Sep 2, 2007)

sbreland said:


> Derailz said:
> 
> 
> > D. Mysteriosis - Please tell me that someone was able to get these legally exported by now...
> ...


 Yes i am trying to convince some breeder up in the UK to shipping out to Mexico where i have family there. But he wont ship to the U.S.A. If i get of hold these Mysteriosis i can bringing across the border with no problem. Will see i keep you posted.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

with all the legal documentation too right? Otherwise thats smuggling.


----------



## Santosrica (Sep 2, 2007)

Dendro Dave said:


> with all the legal documentation too right? Otherwise thats smuggling.


 I understand the smuggling part but what is smuggling? This is not a drug. I think most people around this board would want to conserve and protect these frogs for future generations to come. I am not going to sell these frogs to just anyone either. If i do get hold of these frogs i would sell them to somenoe that can breed them good with lost of experience. The other docmentation part well you know every frog that came into this hobby became legal at one point or another and i bet you if not already someone out there already had these frogs here in the U.S.A but are waiting or selling them to people they know. Point of the fact people will stay buy them just like anything else.


----------



## elmoisfive (Dec 31, 2004)

I have split this debate from this thread 

http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=31777

the Wanted section of the board.

Bill


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

*Re: Mysteriosis coming soon to a dealer near you*



Santosrica said:


> Dendro Dave said:
> 
> 
> > with all the legal documentation too right? Otherwise thats smuggling.
> ...


Anything that is transported illegally is smuggled, people, drugs, guns and animals are all examples of items that are smuggled. 
The problem with smuggled frogs is that they create a greater demand for the frogs and encourage laundering of the frogs. This is done by smuggling the frogs into the country and claiming they are from the frogs produced by X... 
The demand in the pet trade cannot be underestimated as there are more and more examples of localities being stripped of all accessiable animals to supply them to the pet trade (for example after the description of the Chinese Cave gecko was published the location from where it was first found was stripped of all of the animals. Further attempts to study the animal at the original site were impossible). 

Simply keeping an animal in captivity is not "conserving" and protecting it as there is no effort being made to keep the animal as it needs to be kept. You could make the same claim about goldfish and guppies..... The method you describe is actually the exact opposite of conserving as you are creating a demand for an illegal item... and by encouraging smuggling you are harming the people in Peru that are working to make these frogs legal by farming them. 

Ed


----------



## HappyHippos1 (May 7, 2007)

Any info about this frog ? Why is it illegal more so than the other PDFs?


----------



## Shockfrog (Apr 14, 2004)

Illegal because there never where any export permits from Peru. All mysti's in the hobby are illegal.


----------



## Derailz (Apr 3, 2006)

Thats what I was thinking because if they were legal they would be huge! But that is why I had that under hoping! Thanks for the responses.


----------



## Derailz (Apr 3, 2006)

This may sound cruel, but if there are not that many left in the wild, why not export some to a fewreputable breeders who bid and pay top dollar for them, then use the money that is made to try and set up a sanctuary for them in the wild. This way, IF something happens to them in the wild, there will still be some legal specimens in the world to continue the species survival. Do I have an odd way of thinking about this or do other people agree?


----------



## melissa68 (Feb 16, 2004)

yawn!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## MJ (Jun 16, 2005)

We keeping you up Melissa?


----------



## jmcc000 (Apr 7, 2005)

Maybe next time Melissa you could just skip replying instead of being rude. There is really no need for it.


----------



## jmcc000 (Apr 7, 2005)

Derailz, here are a few threads if you have not read them already. 
http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... ysteriosis
http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... ysteriosis
http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... ysteriosis


----------



## melissa68 (Feb 16, 2004)

jmcc000 said:


> Maybe next time Melissa you could just skip replying instead of being rude. There is really no need for it.


Jason - You will know it if I was being rude. The comment was made because this topic and topics such as this have been discussed sooooo many times it is amazing. Wasn't there just a thread the other day on Lamhani (spelling is off - please excuse me)? Thank you for taking the time to post the other threads, I appreciate it since I was too lazy to do it!

Paul - you know the answer to your question, :wink: 

The topic goes on and on without any solution except arguments about saving frogs, destroying habitat, increased demand, etc.. I think Ed hit on pretty much all of the reasons in his post - and he was kinder than I in his response.

So, no one doubts they are illegal. Are they here in the US already, probably...just like so many other "illegal" frogs. Does that make it right, no.

So, if you really want to do something about getting them in here don't talk about smuggling them in to the US on this board & how you plan to do it. Take your conversation off the board!

Finally glad I woke up 

Melis


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Derailz said:


> This may sound cruel, but if there are not that many left in the wild, why not export some to a fewreputable breeders who bid and pay top dollar for them, then use the money that is made to try and set up a sanctuary for them in the wild. This way, IF something happens to them in the wild, there will still be some legal specimens in the world to continue the species survival. Do I have an odd way of thinking about this or do other people agree?


Because the imports do not tend to be managed for the long term and as animals are lost due to changes in popularity more animals have to be imported (or smuggled) to make up for the genetic losses 
Also at least in other herps, when the first imports are brought in there is a big incentive to smuggle the frogs as they can then be laundered and there is a lot of incentive. 

If they are brought in then they need to be registered and managed like TWI is recommending to maintain the viability of the population in captivity and if they are registered it will help prevent laundering of smuggled animals... 

Ed


----------



## ETwomey (Jul 22, 2004)

melissa68 said:


> The comment was made because this topic and topics such as this have been discussed sooooo many times it is amazing. Wasn't there just a thread the other day on Lamhani (spelling is off - please excuse me)?
> 
> The topic goes on and on without any solution except arguments about saving frogs, destroying habitat, increased demand, etc.. I think Ed hit on pretty much all of the reasons in his post - and he was kinder than I in his response.


So since it has discussed before, should we just drop it? This topic has been discussed several times, but look, still someone shows up on the board talking about getting mysteriosus in the states. I can't think of many topics more important that we should be discussing, and when someone posts saying they are getting illegal frogs, the fact that it has been discussed before does not mean it should not be discussed again.

About mysteriosus, I think one of the main reasons they are illegal in the states is not just because there are no legal exportations, that would have to do with violating CITES regulations. But with mysteriosus, USFW has placed a ban on owning them period, from my understanding they did this because of the extremely precarious wild population status. So theoretically if you could get CITES papers to get them into the states, they would still be illegal here under the USFW ban.

-Evan


----------



## Derailz (Apr 3, 2006)

Thank you all for the posts, I really do appreciate it. Those links were very good as well. From the way Ed put it though it kind of seems like they don't take the time to enforce the rules after a year or so or keep up with the proper paperwork. I'm curious if that is a lack of funding or if after a while noone cares anymore or is it too troublesome to do?


----------



## Greenstar (Feb 28, 2004)

In bringing those frogs into the country you are violating the Lacey and other wildlife acts as well as international trade laws, I doubt you are going to declare the mysterious before you bring them over here. By having these animals you are looking at federal crimes. You will go to jail if you are caught for a minimum of 5 years, you will loose your house, your car, your life not to mention all of the fines you are going to be charged with and be labeled as a felon. You also were smart enough to start a paper trail on a public forum. If you are going to break the law, than do it stealthy.


Danny


----------



## Derailz (Apr 3, 2006)

Well, I was never planning on getting them illegally,just wondering if they had been legally brought in yet.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

No, I think Danny meant that towards the guy who said he was going to have em shipped to Mexico and "carry" *cough,cough...smuggle* them across the border.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Derailz said:


> Thank you all for the posts, I really do appreciate it. Those links were very good as well. From the way Ed put it though it kind of seems like they don't take the time to enforce the rules after a year or so or keep up with the proper paperwork. I'm curious if that is a lack of funding or if after a while noone cares anymore or is it too troublesome to do?


They have taken as long as 10-15 years to bust someone. Often the current idea is to get as much of the supply chain as possible. 

Even if you had legal CITES paperwork to bring them into Mexico, you would need anotehr set of legal CITES paperwork as well as import permits to bring them across the border into the USA. Failing to obtain the necessary paperwork would result in the frogs still being illegal and subject to all of the problems. 

Ed


----------



## Greenstar (Feb 28, 2004)

Moving reptiles and amphibians out of mexico is illegal. I know of people who have smuggled for a long time and not been caught. Though over the years a few have gotten their fair share of justice, namely anson wong and corey sawyer. I know of other who have been busted on thier first attempt. And for the record mystis are already here.

Danny


----------



## Don1 (May 27, 2007)

Are they illeagle in the uk also because there are a few people keeping and breeding These????
Thanks Brendan.


----------



## Peter Keane (Jun 11, 2005)

They are at this time Illegal because *I SAID SO*... end of story.. it's late nite-nite.. Peter


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Ric Sanchez said:


> About mysteriosus, I think one of the main reasons they are illegal in the states is not just because there are no legal exportations, that would have to do with violating CITES regulations. But with mysteriosus, USFW has placed a ban on owning them period, from my understanding they did this because of the extremely precarious wild population status. So theoretically if you could get CITES papers to get them into the states, they would still be illegal here under the USFW ban.
> 
> -Evan


Finally a new twist on a very old subject. But I remain skeptical. Under what law could the USFWS "ban" a species from ownership? To my knowledge there are only 3 laws/treaties that apply here to frogs. The Lacey Act, The Endangered Species Act, and CITES. Okay, there are a few other laws that gives USDA control over frog ownership to control disease transmission etc. But I doubt those apply here and USFWS isn't under the Dept. of Ag anyway. USFWS has the authority over issuing US import/export permits as well as CITES. So it would seem they have authority over whether any exotic species of frog is legal or not to keep in the country without having to issue any sort of ban. But I don't think they have the legal authority to just "ban" any species unless it is within the authority granted to them by these other laws and treaties. Everything they do has to be through authority granted to them by Congress (or by the President who is granted authority by Congress or the Constitution).

Perhaps I've missed something but from my understanding of current laws, USFWS does not need to declare a ban to make D. mysteriosis illegal to keep. And I doubt they have the legal authority to declare such a ban outside what is granted under CITES and the ESA.


----------



## Greenstar (Feb 28, 2004)

I don't think it says anywhere that D mysterious are banned. More along the lines of, they have never been allowed out of peru legally therefore all frogs outside of peru are illegal or of illegal origin.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Greenstar said:


> I don't think it says anywhere that D mysterious are banned. More along the lines of, they have never been allowed out of peru legally therefore all frogs outside of peru are illegal or of illegal origin.


From Evan's post, "But with mysteriosus, USFW has placed a ban on owning them period, from my understanding they did this because of the extremely precarious wild population status."

Given that Evan is one of the most reliable information sources on DB IMO, I'd just like to hear more about this.


----------

