# So, you want a reason to not mix species?



## SmackoftheGods

So tonight I was in the living room watching television and I hear a bunch of noise coming from my bedroom (aka: frog room). Figured I'd go check out what's going on. Turns out I now have two verified male leucomelas. They decided to have a shouting match during my Family Guy time. Fortunately they were too concerned with each other to care when I walked in, opened the cage and started taking pictures.

The way I see it, if _the_ beginner frog (let's admit it, anytime someone asks for the best beginner frog at least half the people say "leucs!") that is fairly non-territorial, relatively easy to take care of and keep alive can express aggression toward its fellow brothern, what do you think could happen when introducing more than one species to a small enclosure?

As a side note, the tank has plenty of hiding places (I count eight film canisters mounted in the Great Stuff, my leucs utilize them all, not to mention mini caves and plenty of visual barriers), is well planted, and has plenty of horizontal and vertical space.

Looks like I'm going to be getting a bigger tank


----------



## Dane

Wrestling isn't that uncommon. I sometimes see it among pairs that have been together for years, but something (usually food) just sets them off for a few minutes.


----------



## Shockfrog

In my experience female leucs will even drown eachother. These are certainly not non-territorial frogs!


----------



## Jellyman

That is a very irresponsible post. This information is not based on any facts or experience and is only being posted to further stir the pot on the topic of mixing species. It is post like this that hurt this hobby. Posting inaccurate data based on your belief instead of actual experience with the subject.

You may be of the opinion that mixed tanks are difficult but that is simply not the case(this is based on almost 10 years keeping mixed tanks and assisting others with the setup and maintanence of their mixed tanks). What you have shown is that aggression can happen in a single species tank and happens more then one would think because almost every tank is setup with unsexed juveniles. The wrestling behavior you witnessed is a normal(as stated by the previos two posters) function of how frogs interact to establish a hierachy within a group. It is when this aggression becomes excessive that it needs to be addressed. 

Also, it is not recommended to setup a mixed species tank or keep a group of leuc's in a small enclosure, as you stated.


----------



## flyangler18

> That is the most irresponsible post I have read to date on this forum. You may be of the opinion that mixed tanks are difficult but that is simply not the case.


Wow, Jell, the *most* irresponsible post? A little hyperbole, don't you think?

It's a well recognized fact that you keep a multi-species tank, and I pass no judgment on you because it's clear that you are observant and quick to make adjustments if territorial disputes and aggression become problematic to the health of the frogs. 

However, proselytizing about the merits of mixing is another thing entirely. I consider mixing to be an advanced subject that shouldn't be approached by inexperienced novice keepers because there are many variables that could contribute to potentially devastating failure. 

Your experiences should be shared so that others can read about them, research on their own and come to their own decisions and conclusions.

Respectfully,
Jason


----------



## Jellyman

flyangler18 said:


> Wow, Jell, the *most* irresponsible post? A little hyperbole, don't you think?
> 
> It's a well recognized fact that you keep a multi-species tank, and I pass no judgment on you because it's clear that you are observant and quick to make adjustments if territorial disputes and aggression become problematic to the health of the frogs.
> 
> However, proselytizing about the merits of mixing is another thing entirely. I consider mixing to be an advanced subject that shouldn't be approached by inexperienced novice keepers because there are many variables that could contribute to potentially devastating failure.
> 
> Your experiences should be shared so that others can read about them, research on their own and come to their own decisions and conclusions.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Jason


I agree 100% that it is not something that should be tackled by a beginner and one should aquire knowledge and experience before attempting to do so. But it is irresponsible for members to continue to try and misinform other members with inaccurate information based on their own beliefs and NO experience. That is irresponsible and a detriment to the advancement of this hobby.

Also, I am not proselytizing. I am not trying to change anyone's mind. That is a decision each and everyone should have the opportunity to do so on their terms based on the full set of accurate and avaialable information.


----------



## laylow

I believe that Smack is a great guy and has done a lot to progress the hobby of darts in Utah and surrounding area. If we are learning we should all do it together instead of acting like another person's ideas or opinions are worth no merits or second thoughts. Bottom line lets help eachother not be so quick to pass judgement. . .


----------



## flyangler18

> But it is irresponsible for members to continue to try and misinform other members with inaccurate information based on their own beliefs and NO experience. That is irresponsible and a detriment to the advancement of this hobby.


I fail to see any 'irresponsibility' in the case of the OP; it is a logical progression that any territorial disputes observed in a single species enclosure could well be magnified in a mixed species enclosure, particularly those with similar body shape (that Ed has referenced previously).

If I've misinterpreted the intent of the OP, please correct me.


----------



## Jellyman

flyangler18 said:


> I fail to see any 'irresponsibility' in the case of the OP; it is a logical progression that any territorial disputes observed in a single species enclosure could well be magnified in a mixed species enclosure, particularly those with similar body shape (that Ed has referenced previously).
> 
> If I've misinterpreted the intent of the OP, please correct me.


The OP is making assumptions that just because it happened with his leuc's it will be magnified in a mixed species tank. This is "simlpy" not true. The OP also stated "what do you think could happen when introducing more than one species to a small enclosure?" For starters you should not put a group of leucs in a small enclosure no more then you should put a small group of mixed frogs in a small enclosure. I would bet if you put a small group of Dendroboard members in an elevator that would not go over well either It is irresponsible to offer advice based on speculation with no experience to back up your claims.


----------



## Woodsman

Whether or not there is aggression in mixed species tanks is a competely seperate issue from intra-species aggression. It's sort of like saying, "all of the astronauts that have visited the moon have been white American men, so women and non-white, non-American persons would be unable to survive on the moon". Your observed behaviour does not logically transfer to your suggestion that mixed species tanks would only increase aggression.


----------



## flyangler18

It is obvious that those who advocate mixed morph or mixed species tanks seem to be on the defensive, and are reading Smack's posting far too literally. While a multi-species enclosure does not guarantee territorial aggression, I still think it reasonable to approach it as probable, particularly amongst specimens of a similar body shape as a visual marker for species recognition (I'll also need to find the citation that Ed has previously provided on this topic.)

On the question of 'small enclosure', this has been discussed many times. I submit that _truly_ adequately sized enclosures don't exist in the hobby. I would love to construct an enclosure large enough to sustain a breeding group of species X where the entire life cycle of the frog can be carried out - no pulling of eggs or tads. Rich Frye has written earlier (and I'll have to find the post in question) about a viv the size of a modern shower for a pair of pums, and Brent Brock's blue jeans viv is quite large as well, gargantuan even compared to the 'typical' enclosure in the hobby. 

Ed has written extensively on the topic of available space when designing an enclosure - this is especially important with multispecies enclosures with respect to visual barriers and refugia.


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> I would bet if you put a small group of Dendroboard members in an elevator that would not go over well either


Wrongo...

Mike K, myself and Julio were in a elevator and a small Baltimore hotel room and there was no aggression noted. We even ate together. Julio and I even allowed Mike to eat without bullying him or taking his food.

Mike didn't seem to display any signs of stress and was observed to return to the breakfast buffet for a second helping of eggs!

Now if *Kiera Knightley *were to be suddenly introduced into the hotel room, I'm fairly certain that I would have pushed both Mike and Julio out of the room and /or stood on their heads until they passed out and then dragged them outside.


----------



## Marinarawr

I think that there is absolutely nothing wrong with telling a new hobbyist that they can't mix species. Would you tell a young child that smoking cigarettes/using the stove/using sharp knives/driving a car/drinking alcohol is ok? I mean of course it's ok for an adult, but the child doesn't understand why it's ok for adults and not for them. Which is why so many people use the "zero tolerance" parenting technique in order to avoid misunderstandings with their children. Once the children grow older they can begin to take on some of these activities, such as, using knives and cooking on the stove... New hobbyists (to any hobby) have to take this approach. (Yes I know there are people who jump into anything and everything head first and no harm comes of it, but those are "exceptions to the rule".) In the case of the dart frog hobby I just don't see the harm in drilling the "no mixed species" idea into their head so that one day when they have a room full of mysteriosus, pumilio, histrionicus, quinqs, etc, it can dawn on them that the only thing they haven't tried is a mixed species tank. My personal feeling, is that the patience and responsibility you have to exercise to arrive at that moment, are nearly as rewarding as finally creating a successful multi-species enclosure with animals whose husbandry and behavior you are intimately knowledgeable of.


----------



## Rich Conley

SmackoftheGods said:


> So tonight I was in the living room watching television and I hear a bunch of noise coming from my bedroom (aka: frog room). Figured I'd go check out what's going on. Turns out I now have two verified male leucomelas. They decided to have a shouting match during my Family Guy time. Fortunately they were too concerned with each other to care when I walked in, opened the cage and started taking pictures.
> 
> The way I see it, if _the_ beginner frog (let's admit it, anytime someone asks for the best beginner frog at least half the people say "leucs!") that is fairly non-territorial, relatively easy to take care of and keep alive can express aggression toward its fellow brothern, what do you think could happen when introducing more than one species to a small enclosure?


This has absolutely nothing to do with mixing. If you have two same sex conspecifics, they may fight. This isn't any more an issue with mixing than with same species, as your post proves. 

honestly, your post is a counterpoint to one of the arguments against mixing.


----------



## Rich Conley

flyangler18 said:


> *it is a logical progression* that any territorial disputes observed in a single species enclosure could well be magnified in a mixed species enclosure, particularly those with similar body shape (that Ed has referenced previously).


No, it is not. 


If anything, there should be slightly less aggression between two males of similar species than between two males of the same species. Yes, there will still be aggression, but theres no reason that it would be MORE than two same species same sex animals. 


(unless, of course, rather than 4 leucs in a tank, you're talking 4 leucs and 2 tincs, in which case, increased aggression is more caused by increased population density than any mixing concerns)


----------



## Jellyman

Marinarawr said:


> I think that there is absolutely nothing wrong with telling a new hobbyist that they can't mix species. Would you tell a young child that smoking cigarettes/using the stove/using sharp knives/driving a car/drinking alcohol is ok? I mean of course it's ok for an adult, but the child doesn't understand why it's ok for adults and not for them. Which is why so many people use the "zero tolerance" parenting technique in order to avoid misunderstandings with their children. Once the children grow older they can begin to take on some of these activities, such as, using knives and cooking on the stove... New hobbyists (to any hobby) have to take this approach. (Yes I know there are people who jump into anything and everything head first and no harm comes of it, but those are "exceptions to the rule".) In the case of the dart frog hobby I just don't see the harm in drilling the "no mixed species" idea into their head so that one day when they have a room full of mysteriosus, pumilio, histrionicus, quinqs, etc, it can dawn on them that the only thing they haven't tried is a mixed species tank. My personal feeling, is that the patience and responsibility you have to exercise to arrive at that moment, are nearly as rewarding as finally creating a successful multi-species enclosure with animals whose husbandry and behavior you are intimately knowledgeable of.


All of the examples you mention are due to the lack of mental capabilities or physical limitiations of a child. A new member to the dart frog community typically does not lack either and is capable of gathering and processing the information needed to setup a mixed species tanks. It is the omition of information or the intentional issuance of incorrect information that will cause a poorly formulated decision.


----------



## Jellyman

flyangler18 said:


> It is obvious that those who advocate mixed morph or mixed species tanks seem to be on the defensive, and are reading Smack's posting far too literally. While a multi-species enclosure does not guarantee territorial aggression, I still think it reasonable to approach it as probable, particularly amongst specimens of a similar body shape as a visual marker for species recognition (I'll also need to find the citation that Ed has previously provided on this topic.)
> 
> On the question of 'small enclosure', this has been discussed many times. I submit that _truly_ adequately sized enclosures don't exist in the hobby. I would love to construct an enclosure large enough to sustain a breeding group of species X where the entire life cycle of the frog can be carried out - no pulling of eggs or tads. Rich Frye has written earlier (and I'll have to find the post in question) about a viv the size of a modern shower for a pair of pums, and Brent Brock's blue jeans viv is quite large as well, gargantuan even compared to the 'typical' enclosure in the hobby.
> 
> Ed has written extensively on the topic of available space when designing an enclosure - this is especially important with multispecies enclosures with respect to visual barriers and refugia.



Noone is on the defensive due to the difference of opinion. If the other side did not exist then there would be no boundries and more harm then good would come from the husbandry habits of experimental frog keeping. The defensive ensues when information is purposely omitted, discredited by someone who lacks experience, or more often offers inaccurate information.


----------



## jpg

This arguement is such a waste of bandwith as usual .


----------



## ErickG

Philsuma said:


> Wrongo...
> 
> Mike K, myself and Julio were in a elevator and a small Baltimore hotel room and there was no aggression noted. We even ate together. Julio and I even allowed Mike to eat without bullying him or taking his food.
> 
> Mike didn't seem to display any signs of stress and was observed to return to the breakfast buffet for a second helping of eggs!
> 
> Now if *Kiera Knightley *were to be suddenly introduced into the hotel room, I'm fairly certain that I would have pushed both Mike and Julio out of the room and /or stood on their heads until they passed out and then dragged them outside.


This is hilarious!


----------



## Philsuma

ErickG said:


> This is hilarious!


Thank you for appreciating it.....I giggled while typing it, to be honest.

BTW....Mike K is none other than our own Corpus Callosum, for those of you who don't already know.

back to the topic.....I just caught two of my male Leucs fighting a few minutes ago. "Combating" is a natural breeding issue with many herps and animals in general.

The thing that we need to remember is that more often than not, the people inquiring about mixing are:

1. New to dart frogs
2. Young....like 14-16 yrs old.

These are two types of hobbyists that should not even be thinking about mixed species vivariums.


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> No, it is not.
> 
> 
> If anything, there should be slightly less aggression between two males of similar species than between two males of the same species. Yes, there will still be aggression, but theres no reason that it would be MORE than two same species same sex animals. )


This cannot be used as a broad based rule with species that are strongly territorial as the competition for niches and resources can be just as intense between the species as within a species. A reputable source reported about a male O. pumilio repeatedly attaching a D. tinctorius in an attempt to drive it from the tank... this is an example of different species same behaviors, same shape.. (for a good source of peer reviewed data look at that for plethodontid salamanders, there is even direct competition between plethodontids and amybstomids for resources and if the ambystomid is too small to eat the plethodontid, it will bite at the nares in an attempt to damage them inhibiting not only the plethodontid's ability to not only feed but court and reproduce). 
When discussing this keep in mind, one of the background drives is on whether or not the species will compete for space with offspring.. there is an evolutionary pressure to discourage competition by species with the same niche requirements (one of the driving forces for speciation is niche specialization...) 

This is one of the reasons why in general density within a species enclosure doesn't directly translate to multispecies enclosures..as competition between species with similar body shapes and niche requirements can actually be more intense. 




Rich Conley said:


> (unless, of course, rather than 4 leucs in a tank, you're talking 4 leucs and 2 tincs, in which case, increased aggression is more caused by increased population density than any mixing concerns)


If one uses a species that doesn't have the same shape and/or behaviors then the animal is going to be ignored as it will be "viewed" as being a non-competitor for the same resources. This is why in multispecies enclosures, there isn't a problem with a small hylid for example..... 

Unless you are really have a lot of experience and design ability I do not suggest housing different dendrobatids together... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

*OT Re: So, you want a reason to not mix species?*



ErickG said:


> This is hilarious!



I agree... 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> The thing that we need to remember is that more often than not, the people inquiring about mixing are:
> 
> 1. New to dart frogs
> 2. Young....like 14-16 yrs old.
> 
> These are two types of hobbyists that should not even be thinking about mixed species vivariums.



There is no basis for this reference. There are members of all ages asking about mixing species and out of all the people I have ever helped setup and maintain a tank I can honestly say that none of them were under 20 years of age. This is the kind of misleading comments that is associated with mixing species.


----------



## Ed

flyangler18 said:


> I
> 
> On the question of 'small enclosure', this has been discussed many times. I submit that _truly_ adequately sized enclosures don't exist in the hobby. I would love to construct an enclosure large enough to sustain a breeding group of species X where the entire life cycle of the frog can be carried out - no pulling of eggs or tads .



I think this would be possible with R. ventrimaculatus.. I have seen enclosures where the density was surprisingly high when tadpoles were allowed to remain in the enclosure. One should also keep in mind that this species also has social parasitism behaviors that could only really evolve in high population densities. Based on on those behaviors and the anecdotal observations, a decent sized tank (say a 40 breeder) properly set-up could probably accomplish this task... the main thing would be the food input as this could artificially affect the density.. 

Ed


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> There is no basis for this reference. There are members of all ages asking about mixing species and out of all the people I have ever helped setup and maintain a tank I can honestly say that none of them were under 20 years of age. This is the kind of misleading comments that is associated with mixing species.


Ok, Jel....that was just my personal observation from reading thousands of posts for over three years.

Yeah...you're right


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> Ok, Jel....that was just my personal observation from reading thousands of posts for over three years.
> 
> Yeah...you're right


I am right. You have absolutely no way of knowing how old the poster/member is. You are making this general misinformed reference to suport your belief.

How many mixed tanks have you had?

How many people have you helped setup and maintain a mixed enclosure?

One would think after reading "thousands of posts" from members interested in mixed species tanks that there might actually be people out there interested???


----------



## Corpus Callosum

I too would like to see the elevator battle of Phil, Julio and I when Kiera Knightley is thrown into the mix. I would probably let her know you guys have girlfriends and that I am the most available package of the bunch. But if that didn't work then let the fighting begin.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> I am right. You have absolutely no way of knowing how old the poster/member is. You are making this general misinformed reference to suport your belief.
> 
> How many mixed tanks have you had?
> 
> How many people have you helped setup and maintain a mixed enclosure?
> 
> One would think after reading "thousands of posts" from members interested in mixed species tanks that there might actually be people out there interested???


If the two of you are done poking each other in the eye with a sharp stick..

There is a difference between successful and maintained... 

Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

Philsuma said:


> The thing that we need to remember is that more often than not, the people inquiring about mixing are:
> 
> 1. New to dart frogs
> 2. Young....like 14-16 yrs old.
> 
> These are two types of hobbyists that should not even be thinking about mixed species vivariums.


And that's completely fine, we should just try to keep discussions to actual facts, and relevant details. The original post was almost all spin, and very little substance (with regards to mixing), and that's not helpful, especially not to people who don't already understand both sides of the argument.


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> This cannot be used as a broad based rule with species that are strongly territorial as the competition for niches and resources can be just as intense between the species as within a species. A reputable source reported about a male O. pumilio repeatedly attaching a D. tinctorius in an attempt to drive it from the tank... this is an example of different species same behaviors, same shape.. d


Ed, I'm not saying that a male XXX won't attack a male YYY. I'm saying a male XXX generally wont attack a male YYY any more than he'd attack another male XXX. 

Interspecies aggression most certainly can happen, but so can intraspecies aggression. The case above, from an aggression standpoint, most likely would have had the same resolution if the 2nd frog was another male O.pumilio, as it did with the tinc.

In this specific case, we're talking about two species that wont tolerate other same species pairs, so its not a surprise they won't tolerate off-species (but similar looking) pairs.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> If the two of you are done poking each other in the eye with a sharp stick..
> 
> There is a difference between successful and maintained...
> 
> Ed



A well maintained tank is more likely to be successful then a poorly maintained tank..


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> A well maintained tank is more likely to be successful then a poorly maintained tank..


Okay, it seems like its time to define out some terms here... Since you want to argue this point... 

Please define well maintained...

Please define poorly maintained.... 

Please define Successful.....


----------



## DCreptiles

oh boy oh boy oh boy.. another one of these topics and id like to say im am truely sorry for chimming in as late as i am.. but after reading page after page of nonesence and ppl truely just wanting cold hard facts is just... sad..
Phill was simply making a statement and personal observation is truely a dendroboard fact where 9 out of 10 of the ppl asking about mixing species is normally younger froggers or ppl very new to the trade, hence is why their asking.. and not telling.
with any species of animal aside from frogs there is always going to be agression between species.. and i have been keeping reptiles for most of my life been to many shows done alot of traveling and i have kept different snakes together, large monitor lizards ect.. and with them i have seen no different agression between say a Black throat monitor and a savannah monitor housed together then i have with keeping 2 black throats together. when its feeding time the competition starts.
and honestly every one keeps saying over and over mixing is for the pro's the ppl with expierence this and that.. come on guys.. we all started somewhere and we have all been like "hmm i wonder what would happen if i put my Azureus and my Leuc together" ect.. or just different types of tincs and pums and vents and such.. i hear mixing lamasi and vents is popular..
all im saying is there isnt really a right or wrong way to do it.. for ppl just starting out its trial and error thats truely how the more expierenced guys got their answers. re search trial and error. 

but anyway what is everyones dilema with this topic? who cares? whats the point? you truely think by having debate after debate one side will just lay down and surrender to the other? LMAO the soga continues!
-Derek


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> A well maintained tank is more likely to be successful then a poorly maintained tank..


....My brain hurtz 



Jel....most poster's age is usually revealed on here, after awhile....

for instance, we know Jelly Shrimp is 14.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Okay, it seems like its time to define out some terms here... Since you want to argue this point...
> 
> Please define well maintained...
> 
> Please define poorly maintained....
> 
> Please define Successful.....


I agree. It comes down to the individuals definition.

Here would be mine:
well maintained: adequate size, proper substrate, well planted but not overgrown, well drained, proper humidity

poorly maintained: to small for number/type of frogs, wrong substrate, overgrown, soaked substrate, low humidity

Succesfull: all qualities from well maintained, plump frogs, no excessive aggression


----------



## Jellyman

DCreptiles said:


> oh boy oh boy oh boy.. another one of these topics and id like to say im am truely sorry for chimming in as late as i am.. but after reading page after page of nonesence and ppl truely just wanting cold hard facts is just... sad..
> Phill was simply making a statement and personal observation is truely a dendroboard fact where 9 out of 10 of the ppl asking about mixing species is normally younger froggers or ppl very new to the trade, hence is why their asking.. and not telling.
> with any species of animal aside from frogs there is always going to be agression between species.. and i have been keeping reptiles for most of my life been to many shows done alot of traveling and i have kept different snakes together, large monitor lizards ect.. and with them i have seen no different agression between say a Black throat monitor and a savannah monitor housed together then i have with keeping 2 black throats together. when its feeding time the competition starts.
> and honestly every one keeps saying over and over mixing is for the pro's the ppl with expierence this and that.. come on guys.. we all started somewhere and we have all been like "hmm i wonder what would happen if i put my Azureus and my Leuc together" ect.. or just different types of tincs and pums and vents and such.. i hear mixing lamasi and vents is popular..
> all im saying is there isnt really a right or wrong way to do it.. for ppl just starting out its trial and error thats truely how the more expierenced guys got their answers. re search trial and error.
> 
> but anyway what is everyones dilema with this topic? who cares? whats the point? you truely think by having debate after debate one side will just lay down and surrender to the other? LMAO the soga continues!
> -Derek


I'm simply tired of the same people who have no experience on the subject trying to tell everyone they know what is best and not giving any credit to those that actually have experience(trial and error if the case may be).


----------



## Adven2er

I try not to get involved in these discussions. I have been into this hobby for only a short while and can be considered a noob at this point. I will only speak from my own personal experience.
Well.... Myself and two friends got into this hobby just last year. 
I have a single species enclosure, a group of four Leucs. All seem healthy.
Friend #1 got 2 Azueres 2 G&B auratus 1 Luec and 1 Cobalt. He has lost 3 of his frogs since.
Friend #2 got 1 Azueres and 1 Leuc. She lost her Leuc. (competition for food)
There are many reasons why I've had success and they have not. I know for a fact that I did much more research than they did. I went with a single species enclosure because of the research I did. I know some of the other PDF boards deal with the same mixing questions as here and almost all mixing threads I've read were started by people with almost no experience.


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Ed, I'm not saying that a male XXX won't attack a male YYY. I'm saying a male XXX generally wont attack a male YYY any more than he'd attack another male XXX.


I don't think that this supported in the literature (if you for example use a group in which territoriality has been well studied like caudates) and may be even less supported when you add in kinship effects that are probably also occuring given than many of the kept groups (like several leucomelas in a tank) of dendrobatids are related.. 



Rich Conley said:


> Interspecies aggression most certainly can happen, but so can intraspecies aggression. The case above, from an aggression standpoint, most likely would have had the same resolution if the 2nd frog was another male O.pumilio, as it did with the tinc.


I'm not sure you can say that as one of the confounding issue are submission displays and behaviors which are different between species. Within the species these actions can result in a decrease or stopping of the aggression which would allow the frog to escape to shelter or leave the area. Between species, these are usually different so the frog cannot signal and get the aggression to stop... given these sort of issues, aggression between different species can be greater than that within a species as the methods which can call a halt to the agression are missing between species. (for a review I suggest those interested check out Hödl, W.; Amezquita, A. (2001). Visual signaling in anuran amphibians. In: Anuran communication, (M.J. Ryan, ed.). Smithsonian lust. Press, Washington. Pp. 121-141.)

Ed


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> I agree. It comes down to the individuals definition.


As with anything else that involved animal welfare.. the individual's definition is not necessarily the accepted standard as the welfare of the animal is what needs to be considered optimal. 




Jellyman said:


> well maintained: adequate size, proper substrate, well planted but not overgrown, well drained, proper humidity


Define adequate size and on what standard and proof that the size is adequate? 
Define proper substrate and on what standard and proof that the substrate is "proper". 
Define well planted and define not overgrown. 
Define proper humidity and on what standard and proof. Does the proper humidity apply to all species that could be housed in the enclosure? 



Jellyman said:


> poorly maintained: to small for number/type of frogs, wrong substrate, overgrown, soaked substrate, low humidity


As above, define all of these vague terms. 



Jellyman said:


> Succesfull: all qualities from well maintained, plump frogs, no excessive aggression


Define "plump" most of the frogs in enclosures are obese when compared to the wild counterparts. How do you determine if your plump is obese. Obesity could very be a sign of poor husbandry. 

Define excessive aggression and how you reached that result. 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

Adven2er said:


> I try not to get involved in these discussions. I have been into this hobby for only a short while and can be considered a noob at this point. I will only speak from my own personal experience.
> Well.... Myself and two friends got into this hobby just last year.
> I have a single species enclosure, a group of four Leucs. All seem healthy.
> Friend #1 got 2 Azueres 2 G&B auratus 1 Luec and 1 Cobalt. He has lost 3 of his frogs since.
> Friend #2 got 1 Azueres and 1 Leuc. She lost her Leuc. (competition for food)
> There are many reasons why I've had success and they have not. I know for a fact that I did much more research than they did. I went with a single species enclosure because of the research I did. I know some of the other PDF boards deal with the same mixing questions as here and almost all mixing threads I've read were started by people with almost no experience.


There are alot of questions here. 
What size setups did they have? 
How well were they designed?
Where did the plants come from?(possible contamination or fertilizer?
Were backup tanks ready in case frogs needed to be seperated?
How often and how much was being fed? 
Were did they get the frogs? 
Were the frogs in good health prior to be introduced?
What was the umidity levels? 
Was there proper drainage?


If there was an atmosphere of open communication here all these questions could have been asked and the information could have been obtained. The answers to these questions would have greatly increased the chances of a successful setup.


----------



## salix

Philsuma said:


> Mike didn't seem to display any signs of stress and was observed to return to the breakfast buffet for a second helping of eggs!


I'm still fairly new so I might be wrong, but I would think egg eating is a sign of stress, aggression and territorial issues.



Deb


----------



## Ed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philsuma 
Mike didn't seem to display any signs of stress and was observed to return to the breakfast buffet for a second helping of eggs! 

I'm still fairly new so I might be wrong, but I would think egg eating is a sign of stress, aggression and territorial issues.endquote

This is a surprise to me... 
1) I didn't know that Mike could lay eggs
2) that he was selling them for the commercial food market (wow, that is a lot of eggs to lay, Mike must be one prolific egg layer...) 


Ed


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> There are alot of questions here.
> What size setups did they have?
> How well were they designed?
> Where did the plants come from?(possible contamination or fertilizer?
> Were backup tanks ready in case frogs needed to be seperated?
> How often and how much was being fed?
> Were did they get the frogs?
> Were the frogs in good health prior to be introduced?
> What was the umidity levels?
> Was there proper drainage?


NONE of these questions matter. These were new hobbyists that purchased some of their first frogs from.....somebody.... and ended up with a mixed species tank.

Not all new people have computers or can immediately access DB or PM you for advice on issues that crop up.

My guess is that you are going to say that all this is purely coincidental....


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> As with anything else that involved animal welfare.. the individual's definition is not necessarily the accepted standard as the welfare of the animal is what needs to be considered optimal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define adequate size and on what standard and proof that the size is adequate?
> Define proper substrate and on what standard and proof that the substrate is "proper".
> Define well planted and define not overgrown.
> Define proper humidity and on what standard and proof. Does the proper humidity apply to all species that could be housed in the enclosure?
> 
> 
> 
> As above, define all of these vague terms.
> 
> 
> 
> Define "plump" most of the frogs in enclosures are obese when compared to the wild counterparts. How do you determine if your plump is obese. Obesity could very be a sign of poor husbandry.
> 
> Define excessive aggression and how you reached that result.
> 
> Ed


Ed,
It's not an exact science. Yes you are very capable of quoting a source from a book that will give you some statistics but in reality very little is known that can be proven to be 100% correct when it comes to dart frogs. If needed I'm sure someone(and it is not going to be me) can find a quote in a book or publication that contradicts your quote. The way I would answer all your questions would be based on what has worked for me and the success I have had with my frogs and the other tanks I have helped setup. This does not mean that my way is the only way or the best way just that it does work under the parameters i have been using.

Honestly the true measure of all your questions is observation. We can mimic the environment to temp and humidity and try to landscape them with optimal use of the environment,. but what it really comes down to is whether or not your frogs get along and this is only identified through observation. The more in tune you are with your setup the better chance of success you will have. If you throw 5 frogs in a cube and look at them once a week, probably not so much.


----------



## Philsuma

salix said:


> I'm still fairly new so I might be wrong, but I would think egg eating is a sign of stress, aggression and territorial issues.
> 
> 
> 
> Deb


 
Deb THAT is Hilarious!


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> NONE of these questions matter. These were new hobbyists that purchased some of their first frogs from.....somebody.... and ended up with a mixed species tank.
> 
> Not all new people have computers or can immediately access DB or PM you for advice on issues that crop up.
> 
> My guess is that you are going to say that all this is purely coincidental....


That is ridiculous. If they purchased frogs without doing the research then none of this matters in the first place. Everyone of those questions are relevant to whether or not they would have a successful single or mixed species tank. Not all people have computers, but all have access to the library and the libraries have computers. You honestly should just stop posting because your agenda is clear, you do not believe in mixed tanks but have no experience, proof, or evidence as to why they cannot be successful. All you have is second hand info passed onto you from others without experience.


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> I'm simply tired of the same people who have no experience on the subject trying to tell everyone they know what is best and not giving any credit to those that actually have experience(trial and error if the case may be).


Well, I know that temperatures in the high 90F's are not conducive to the health and good keeping of dart frogs based on what I have read in print and on here.

I do not need a summer power outage or a science experiment to be able to speak intelligently on the issues and concerns of high temperatures.

I also believe that supplements are "good" to use and to not allow them to expire or otherwise go bad. I don't think I need or want to test that senario either.

Other than a "science experiment"....what EXACTLY are you trying to achieve with your mantle of "champion of mixing"?

That it can be done? 
That Mt Everest can be climbed?
That it is as "good or better" than a single species tank?

What is it?


----------



## afterdark

Jellyman - you must have some pretty dang successful mixed tanks to be so confident that it's no problem.

Please share your secrets with the rest of us.

If you are looking for 'evidence':
The fact is there have been many threads posted about a dead, sick or stressed frog and one of the parameters has been a mixed tank.

How many threads can you find with examples of stress-free, happy mixing?


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> Jellyman - you must have some pretty dang successful mixed tanks to be so confident that it's no problem.
> 
> Please share your secrets with the rest of us.
> 
> If you are looking for 'evidence':
> The fact is there have been many threads posted about a dead, sick or stressed frog and one of the parameters has been a mixed tank.
> 
> How many threads can you find with examples of stress-free, happy mixing?


Not many because those that keep mixed tanks either stopped coming to this site or are afraid if they do admit it they will be attacked as I am. I see far more threads of peoples single species tank frog deaths and can site probably 100 but you know how to you the search function so I will let you look it up if you are truely interested. 

As a matter of fact my tanks have been very successful. I have only lost one frog becasue he escaped and it was too late when I found him. I do admit that a bit of luck was involved since there is very little help from the hobby community. I have posted several times in numerous threads of how to be successsful. You have chosen either not to read them or have simply disregarded the information. 

I would love to start a thread with how to setup a mixed tank but those that have no experience know more then I do and it would just be me defending my information.


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> Well, I know that temperatures in the high 90F's are not conducive to the health and good keeping of dart frogs based on what I have read in print and on here.
> 
> I do not need a summer power outage or a science experiment to be able to speak intelligently on the issues and concerns of high temperatures.
> 
> I also believe that supplements are "good" to use and to not allow them to expire or otherwise go bad. I don't think I need or want to test that senario either.
> 
> Other than a "science experiment"....what EXACTLY are you trying to achieve with your mantle of "champion of mixing"?
> 
> That it can be done?
> That Mt Everest can be climbed?
> That it is as "good or better" than a single species tank?
> 
> What is it?


That's it exactly. That it can be done. Because as you said you have read 1000 posts over the past three years of members asking how to do so. With that much interest it is a good reason to find out if and how this can be accomplished so those that simply want to enjoy a colorful vivarium will be enabled to do so. That has been my opinion since day one.


I've answered your questions but you still have not answered mine:
What experience do you have that enables you to give advice on mixed species tanks?


----------



## bobberly1

Ugh. Everyone please just stop.


----------



## Philsuma

Mike,

I understand your pain....you can click "unsubscribe" to this thread.

Me?....I have to say, that Jel and I have a "little more" to discuss.....


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> I've answered your questions but you still have not answered mine:
> What experience do you have that enables you to give advice on mixed species tanks?


Read my above post....I don't need to stick my hand on the stove to know that it's not a good idea.

You are right...I don't own a mixed species viv. 

Here's an idea jel.......why not post your success? Lets have a few pics of your viv and your frogs.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> It's not an exact science. Yes you are very capable of quoting a source from a book that will give you some statistics but in reality very little is known that can be proven to be 100% correct when it comes to dart frogs..


So why does something have to be proven 100% to be used to determine the parameters to be of value in setting the parameters needed for the care of the frogs? 
Not to be offensive, but your answer appears to be a dodge to avoid defining those conditions as a hard knowledge of those conditions is required to be able to house species that are not going to compete together much less those that will directly compete...

The measure of success, that I would suggest using is as follows
1) life span exceeds the median and approaches the reported maximum for those species
2) optimizing the display of natural behaviors occuring in all species housed there including demonstration of normal activity patterns as shown in the literature. 




Jellyman said:


> We can mimic the environment to temp and humidity and try to landscape them with optimal use of the environment,. but what it really comes down to is whether or not your frogs get along and this is only identified through observation. The more in tune you are with your setup the better chance of success you will have. If you throw 5 frogs in a cube and look at them once a week, probably not so much.


The ability to have significant differences in temperment is not something that has been seen in anurans.. that is a mammalian trait that is being misapplied.. anurans are much more hard-wired along those lines which is why the issue is not the same species but behavior and shape. The plasticity in the behavior occurs due to resource allocation and core territories not whether or not one frog is more "tolerant" than another. 


Ed


----------



## Adven2er

Jellyman said:


> There are alot of questions here.
> What size setups did they have?
> How well were they designed?
> Where did the plants come from?(possible contamination or fertilizer?
> Were backup tanks ready in case frogs needed to be seperated?
> How often and how much was being fed?
> Were did they get the frogs?
> Were the frogs in good health prior to be introduced?
> What was the umidity levels?
> Was there proper drainage?
> 
> 
> If there was an atmosphere of open communication here all these questions could have been asked and the information could have been obtained. The answers to these questions would have greatly increased the chances of a successful setup.


I was merely trying to point out that, most people who mix, lack the proper husbandry skills to begin with. You've stated before that only the most advanced froggers should be mixing frogs. Why then would they need your advise. If someone asks the question they are surely not an advanced frogger. The answer should be a resounding no!


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> So why does something have to be proven 100% to be used to determine the parameters to be of value in setting the parameters needed for the care of the frogs?
> 
> "It does not have to be 100%. That is my point. Everyone wants to argue that mixed tanks should not be kept because there is no 100% proven method."
> 
> Not to be offensive, but your answer appears to be a dodge to avoid defining those conditions as a hard knowledge of those conditions is required to be able to house species that are not going to compete together much less those that will directly compete...
> 
> "No offense taken. Valid question. I have put down a good portion of my experience in other threads and have been told they are off topic. I'd would love to post them but feel I would probably be booted from the board for all the ruckas it would cause."
> 
> 
> 
> The measure of success, that I would suggest using is as follows
> 1) life span exceeds the median and approaches the reported maximum for those species
> 2) optimizing the display of natural behaviors occuring in all species housed there including demonstration of normal activity patterns as shown in the literature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ability to have significant differences in temperment is not something that has been seen in anurans.. that is a mammalian trait that is being misapplied.. anurans are much more hard-wired along those lines which is why the issue is not the same species but behavior and shape. The plasticity in the behavior occurs due to resource allocation and core territories not whether or not one frog is more "tolerant" than another.
> 
> "I disagree with you on this point. I feel it is completely relevant in the social structure of the frogs."
> 
> 
> Ed



My responses are quoted within. Was not sure how to best try and answer your questions.


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> Read my above post....I don't need to stick my hand on the stove to know that it's not a good idea.
> 
> You are right...I don't own a mixed species viv.
> 
> Here's an idea jel.......why not post your success? Lets have a few pics of your viv and your frogs.


I've done that and was accused of lying about the age of my viv. Use the search function and you should be able to find them. Good try.

But just to humor this I will take some pics this weekend. I'll be taking it down in the next month once my new tank arrives.

Anyhow, time to play with my children. Thanks for all the discussion today. Makes work go by faster See you all tomorrow. Same Bat Time, Same Bat Channel.


----------



## SLEDDER23

so, back to the point on page 1...

That's cool that you saw them both calling, and are obviously successful to the point of having calling males. I hope all works out well for you.

Kyle/Mods, theoretical questions:

1) I've spent a lot of good time on Dendroboard, but can I get the last 15 minutes of my life back?

2) Is there a bottom threshold on reputation that a member must reach before banishment or at least infraction?


----------



## DCreptiles

Jellyman said:


> That's it exactly. That it can be done. Because as you said you have read 1000 posts over the past three years of members asking how to do so. With that much interest it is a good reason to find out if and how this can be accomplished so those that simply want to enjoy a colorful vivarium will be enabled to do so. That has been my opinion since day one.
> 
> 
> To mix speicies in the same viv is just considered " bad practice" and it does not mean it cant be done.
> its not a good idea to yell "bomb" on a plane but it doesnt mean you cant physically do it. its just not a very good idea.
> 
> when i first came into the hobby i asked also how come no one has mixed vivs and everyone jumped down my throat and i didnt think it was that serious. after careful re search and reading i find that the PDF's are just very easily stressed animals and to achieve great things with them you would want to keep their stress levels down. im not one for going with the norm on alot of things but i do like to follow good practice and be considered a "good frogger" would i like a mixed speicies tank with different types of frogs and colors sure who wouldnt? but with mixing comes cross breeding and everything else. this debate is truely useless because frogging is all opinion there hasnt been proved to be a right way or a wrong way to do anything in this trade yet. im sure there are ppl out there culturing fruit flys in a old shoe.
> but i dont believe that we need to all get on our high horses and throw big words and fancy terms quote books and throw out correct or incorrect data to enjoy our collections. but as it stands and just how it will always stand.. ( mixing tanks is bad practice ) i have witnessed ppl purchase frogs at shows and such or through private sale of different species of PDF's and the seller say its ok to keep them all together ( and their own statement to justify it ) " keep them together till 8 months of sexual maturity" and i just smile and walk away.. not my business. could i have said something.. sure.. but why? to get into a heated debate which can possibly end in someone missing teeth? not worth my time. but jelly i would like to see your sucess of your mixed tanks you seem like a very educated and straight foward person and i happen to know Phil personally and he happens to be a very great and sucessful frogger which is why the only good out of this debate is that im learning from both ends. no matter if i agree or disagree. but lets please not let it get out of hand by any means. because remeber one thing.. both sides are in this hobby for the love of the animal.
> -Derek


----------



## divingne1

Some people would argue with a fence post if they thought it would argue back.


----------



## frogfreak

The only way to stop these threads is to stop responding period.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................


----------



## SLEDDER23

divingne1 said:


> Some people would argue with a fence post if they thought it would argue back.


No I would not. 

Let's start our own side argument.


----------



## Ed

Ed said:


> So why does something have to be proven 100% to be used to determine the parameters to be of value in setting the parameters needed for the care of the frogs?





Jellyman said:


> "It does not have to be 100%. That is my point. Everyone wants to argue that mixed tanks should not be kept because there is no 100% proven method."


So your position on this argument is that because you say we don't understand the various aspects of the required husbandry to set up a well maintain enclosures (humidity, substrate etc) as they haven't been 100% defined, this supports multispecies enclosures as we don't understand 100% of the parameters needed for those enclosures? If this not your argument, then please define the questions I asked above. 




Ed said:


> The ability to have significant differences in temperment is not something that has been seen in anurans.. that is a mammalian trait that is being misapplied.. anurans are much more hard-wired along those lines which is why the issue is not the same species but behavior and shape. The plasticity in the behavior occurs due to resource allocation and core territories not whether or not one frog is more "tolerant" than another.





Jellyman said:


> I disagree with you on this point. I feel it is completely relevant in the social structure of the frogs."



If the frogs had the ability to be "tolerant" then it would be relevent, however this view point is not supported by the published literature. There is a technical term for "tolerance" in territorial species. This is known as Dear Enemy Phenomena and the studies have shown that this doesn't occur in dendrobatids. 

A second highly possible scenario is that the frogs are showing "tolerance" because the normal behaviors are being suppressed for one reason or another.... 

Can you provide any hard data to back up that the supposed "tolerance" occurs in the frogs? 


Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

afterdark said:


> If you are looking for 'evidence':
> The fact is there have been many threads posted about a dead, sick or stressed frog and one of the parameters has been a mixed tank.


And there have been equally many where it hasn't been a mixed tank, and yet, when it is mixed, people always assume thats the problem. Sometimes its not. Sometimes it is. But people ALWAYS jump to the conclusion that it is, and that doesn't help.


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> And there have been equally many where it hasn't been a mixed tank, and yet, when it is mixed, people always assume thats the problem. Sometimes its not. Sometimes it is. But people ALWAYS jump to the conclusion that it is, and that doesn't help.


Well it would be fair to say that in all cases thier heart stopped beating.... 

Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> Well it would be fair to say that in all cases thier heart stopped beating....
> 
> Ed


Right, but I DESPISE when people turn anecdote into "fact"


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Right, but I DESPISE when people turn anecdote into "fact"


Can we assume that the heart stopped beating in all of those cases as a fact? 

Ed


----------



## MonarchzMan

Quite the thread. Kind of nutty thread, but that's what happens with mixing threads. I'm glad Phil lightened the mood.

To Jelly, I've got a couple questions.

What benefit to each of the species is there for a mixed species tank?

You say that people want to mix to get a colorful display. Why can't this be done by creative planting and/or paludariums with fish? Keep in mind that many of the most colorful frogs are tiny, and without the creative planting, they'd look like specks of color on an otherwise green background.

Have you considered that your experience might be the 1 in a million success with mixing? Since that does seem to be the case given all of the evidence that mixing isn't good, is it really wise to advocate mixing? It would be likened to saying "Buy a lottery ticket because you will win $1,000,000."

Have you run single species tanks with the frogs in your mixed tanks and determined that weights, reproduction, eating, intraspecific competition, call rate, etc. are no different than in the mixed tank?

How big is your mixed tank? What species are in it and how many of each? What is the age of the frogs? What is the sex ratios of the species?

There is a big difference between surviving and thriving. For example, there has been a recent movement in the zoo industry to make habitats more natural. Animals survived in the concrete boxes that animals were kept in, but did not do well. It was found that animals did much better and thrived in more natural enclosures. Same thing with these frogs. Your frogs are surviving, but do you have evidence that they are thriving?

Just a few questions...


----------



## imitator83

This may have been discussed, but after a while, this thread just seemed to blend together like one big whiney nightmare, so if it has been discussed, then I'm sorry. I was always under the impression that the biggest argument against mixed tanks was the likelihood that the two species would breed together and create a hybrid, and that some genius could then take these hybrid offspring and sell them off to newbies in the hobby as "a cool new morph". Many of the hybrids I have seen are kinda cool looking, imo, but the possibilities that this scenerio could happen seems pretty feesible, so I have stayed away from mixing species myself and people who do mix species. Even if you are responsible and would not do this, that would mean you would have to kill the eggs, tads and froglets created by the two species, and since I don't enjoy killing frogs, I stay away from mixing species. Just my thoughts...

...I wish I had a job where I the time to sit around and write essay-length responses to every differing opinion on a 6 page thread. It would be nice.....I didn't get to sit down at work tonight...


----------



## Rich Conley

MonarchzMan said:


> Same thing with these frogs. Your frogs are surviving, but do you have evidence that they are thriving?


You could ask that question to almost any frogger here, and they'd be no more qualified to answer it than he is. 

Again, no different in single species and mixed species tanks.


----------



## Rich Conley

MonarchzMan said:


> What benefit to each of the species is there for a mixed species tank?


What benefit is there to any species being kept in a glass box in your house? What benefit to the animal is there to keeping a pair of Pums in a 20g tank, as opposed to a more natural 300g tank? What benefit to the animal is there to feeding it an incomplete diet that robs it of its natural defense mechanisms? 

The "What benefit?" question really doesn't work, now does it?


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> Can we assume that the heart stopped beating in all of those cases as a fact?
> 
> Ed


Yes Ed, but we can not just assume what caused that fact without taking everything into consideration. 


Every thread I've seen with a mixed tank, and a sick/dead frog, nobody ever asks about supplements. Nobody ever asks about whether fecals were done. Nobody ever asks about overcrowding. Nobody ever asks about temperature. 

It was 105 degrees yesterday, but mixing must have killed the frogs. 



I'm not saying mixing is a good thing, or that people should be doing it, but that a lot of the jumping on mixing keeps the actual issues from being ascertained. This thread is a great example of the obfuscation that goes on: the thread is about a bunch of leucs fighting in a single species environment. What does that have to do with mixing?


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> What benefit is there to any species being kept in a glass box in your house? What benefit to the animal is there to keeping a pair of Pums in a 20g tank, as opposed to a more natural 300g tank? What benefit to the animal is there to feeding it an incomplete diet that robs it of its natural defense mechanisms?
> 
> The "What benefit?" question really doesn't work, now does it?


Well... lets look at the enclosure reference here... why is a 300 gallon more "natural"? 

Rich you stated that you despise anecdote turned to fact but this is exactly what you are doing here.. as this is not stated as opinion. 

It is a known fact (and you can pull it up out of the literature) that one of the main drivers of territoriality as defined by space is resource allocation... if the resource allocation is correct in a 20 gallon then it can be as natural as the 300 gallon and if the allocation is incorrect then the 300 gallon would actually be less natural... 

Personally in my opinion, larger may be better as it can allow for greater microniches but this is totally dependent on how the enclosure is managed. 

If you are referring to the natural defenses with respect to the toxins, this is an incomplete idea as there are a number of peptides that provide natural defenses that are not dietarily related and the idea that the dietarily derived ones are important for captive animals is still speculation without any hard data while the idea that the problem is more related to hypovitaminosis of retinol is gaining support based on other captive anurans. 


Ed


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Yes Ed, but we can not just assume what caused that fact without taking everything into consideration.


I was being tounge in cheek but you seem to have an axe to grind over this issue.. so as a simple fact in and of itself, the final cause of death of the frog(s) was organ failure.. any thing else was what contributed to the final cause of death....




Rich Conley said:


> Every thread I've seen with a mixed tank, and a sick/dead frog, nobody ever asks about supplements. Nobody ever asks about whether fecals were done. Nobody ever asks about overcrowding. Nobody ever asks about temperature.
> 
> It was 105 degrees yesterday, but mixing must have killed the frogs. .


With respect to the supplements... vitamin and mineral requirements are highly conserved with some variations in some species (tolerance etc) and the effects of various stressors (positive and negative) are also highly conserved.. (you can search this in the literature but I would suggest starting with the references in the Nutrition Chapter of Mader's first book by Donoghue etal). Stressors can increase the metabolic need for different vitamins and/or minerals and based on the data seen in other anurans, the requirement for retinol in captive anurans is increased and we are seeing more and more signs of hypovitaminosis of A in captive anurans (everything from some forms of embryo death, SLS, to suppression of the immune system) and if the "mixed enclosure) is set up improperly or managed improperly then mixing will cause the frog to die due to the effects of stress on the animal (for a review of stress in this manner I suggest Health and Welfare of Captive Reptiles (stress and the effects of stress are also highly conserved). So the cause of death is stress as manifested by x,y,z caused by improper management.... 

Now I will agree that many people jump to to stress due to mixing as the causative factor, given the multifocal manifestations of stress in anurans and how it can lead to death, this is also not an unreasonable suggestion. Even a necropsy cannot rule out stress due to improper management as death due to an infection could be a result of immunesuppression due to the stress... 

The same can be said about supplements, etc. The only things that can be ruled out are those that cause mechanical trauma or are documented as major issues such as a rapid thermal spike (but this is also a stress in and of itself). 




Rich Conley said:


> I'm not saying mixing is a good thing, or that people should be doing it, but that a lot of the jumping on mixing keeps the actual issues from being ascertained. This thread is a great example of the obfuscation that goes on: the thread is about a bunch of leucs fighting in a single species environment. What does that have to do with mixing?


Actually its not a great obfuscation as the title of the thread indicates. The original poster was using the observed behaviors within a single species enclosure to make the connection to multispecies. The thread has evolved from that point. 

Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> Actually its not a great obfuscation as the title of the thread indicates. The original poster was using the observed behaviors within a single species enclosure to make the connection to multispecies. The thread has evolved from that point.
> 
> Ed


And I don't think that the behavior within a single species tank points out any dangers of a multispecies tank that aren't already present in a single species tank.


The original poster was using an observation that is relevant to ALL tanks with more than one individual, multispecies or not. 

The title of this thread should be "so, you want a reason to keep an eye on same sex frogs?"


EDIT:

Ed, let me try to be more clear here: Cross Species aggression can most certainly be an issue in mixed tanks. Signals are often not the same, and animals misread aggression cues. All these are potential issues. Generally mixed tanks have higher densities, which also cause issues (IE, one pair of each species in a tank only big enough for one total pair). 

I just do not feel that anything the OP posted is any more relevant to mixed tanks than it is to tanks as a whole, and that the thread title, and his assumptive jump are inappropriate given the specifics. If you don't agree, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Rich Conley said:


> You could ask that question to almost any frogger here, and they'd be no more qualified to answer it than he is.
> 
> Again, no different in single species and mixed species tanks.


Try asking how many people have played around with ratios of sexes, enclosures, environments, and enclosure make up, and I think that you will be very surprised at how many people have toyed around with their frog tanks to help make life better for their frogs. I know froggers that have tried all sorts of methods for their frogs. It's fairly common practice.

And generally, when people do that, they can easily tell whether or not the frogs are doing better: they're out more, calling more, breeding, active, maintaining natural behavior.

The problem that Jelly has is that each species is unique in all of those things. In order to see that they're thriving in a multi-species environment, he needs to observe how they do, in the same conditions, in a single-species environment. If they maintain the same quality of life in a single species environment or a poorer quality of life in a single species environment, he would have a significant argument for mixing. He has not yet done that, at least that he has indicated.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Rich Conley said:


> And I don't think that the behavior within a single species tank points out any dangers of a multispecies tank that aren't already present in a single species tank.
> 
> 
> The original poster was using an observation that is relevant to ALL tanks with more than one individual, multispecies or not.
> 
> The title of this thread should be "so, you want a reason to keep an eye on same sex frogs?"
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Ed, let me try to be more clear here: Cross Species aggression can most certainly be an issue in mixed tanks. Signals are often not the same, and animals misread aggression cues. All these are potential issues. Generally mixed tanks have higher densities, which also cause issues (IE, one pair of each species in a tank only big enough for one total pair).
> 
> I just do not feel that anything the OP posted is any more relevant to mixed tanks than it is to tanks as a whole, and that the thread title, and his assumptive jump are inappropriate given the specifics. If you don't agree, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


One thing that I haven't really seen addressed or acknowledged is that territoriality differs between species. Leucs are considered a relatively non-aggressive species whereas tincs are considered to be more aggressive. I think that the point that the OP was making is that fights can occur and be instigated by non-aggressive species in a mixed tank. I'm sure people would expect aggressive species like Tincs to instigate fights, but would not necessarily expect the non-aggressive species to instigate them. So, while one's eye may be on the tincs for being bullies, one might miss the fights that still happen with the frogs that aren't supposed to be bullies.


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> One thing that I haven't really seen addressed or acknowledged is that territoriality differs between species. Leucs are considered a relatively non-aggressive species whereas tincs are considered to be more aggressive. I think that the point that the OP was making is that fights can occur and be instigated by non-aggressive species in a mixed tank. I'm sure people would expect aggressive species like Tincs to instigate fights, but would not necessarily expect the non-aggressive species to instigate them. So, while one's eye may be on the tincs for being bullies, one might miss the fights that still happen with the frogs that aren't supposed to be bullies.


The aggressiveness of the tinctorius is dependent on a number of things... but again it does fall back onto resource allocations.. one of the reasons you see such aggression in tinctorius is that the females are territorial in defending what may be a limited resource (access to a male and oviposition sites). (for a good reference in dealing with a different Dendrobatid see BioOne Online Journals - Space Use of Amazonian Poison Frogs: Testing the Reproductive Resource Defense Hypothesis) (but tinctorius are closer to JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie) 

In the distant and dark past, I was able to maintain groups of tinctorius in 20 gallon longs without the issues seen today by providing more than one male and multiple egg deposition sites.... 

Ed


----------



## Philsuma

Rich,

You are refuting all our examples and cites....

Ca we get you on record as to exactly why you support mixed species vivariums?

and

Do you own any? How many years experience do you have with them?


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> And I don't think that the behavior within a single species tank points out any dangers of a multispecies tank that aren't already present in a single species tank.
> 
> 
> The original poster was using an observation that is relevant to ALL tanks with more than one individual, multispecies or not.
> 
> The title of this thread should be "so, you want a reason to keep an eye on same sex frogs?"



Hi Rich, 

I'm not sure that the idea behind the observation precludes either the title, the attempted application of the observation or the subsequent evolution of the thread. Misapplication etc of the observation is in part what the discussion is where it should be addressed... 
With that said, I'm don't really see a preponderance of evidence that an observation that could be applied to any multiple animal enclosures invalidates the OP's original premise or title. 

While it may in some aspects be better addressed to single species enclosures, that is in part what the discussion subsequent to the original post can address if the readers choose to do so.. in this case, the weight of the discussion is on the multiple dendrobatid species enclosures. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Philsuma said:


> Rich,
> 
> You are refuting all our examples and cites....
> 
> Ca we get you on record as to exactly why you support mixed species vivariums?
> 
> and
> 
> Do you own any? How many years experience do you have with them?


I don't think Rich is defending Multispecies enclosures per se (or that is how I have read the intent behind his posts) but instead is questioning what is potentially an observation that may or may not have any real value when expanded out to multispecies enclosures. 

Ed


----------



## hendyUNLV24

Wow, this topic has certainly gained some speed and has snowballed into quite a debate about the merits/demerits of mixed-species tanks.

Now, to say that I am an expert on keeping dart frogs would be a stretch. I would consider myself a novice at best. I have two auratus that are almost a year old, and I am happy to say that they are doing great. Over the last year I have had numerous questions that I have needed help answering, and this forum has been a tremendous help to me. Those who post on this forum must understand the great importance of the knowledge they are sharing to individuals like myself. 

That being said, I believe that this forum is a great place for opinions to be shared, and for those opinions to be questioned or challenged is a great thing.

But, as hobbyists in a field that most certainly has scientific roots, I believe it is irresponsible to make statements that are not based on scientific tests, in which hypotheses were actually tested, and pass them off as evidence for unrelated circumstances.

If two male leucs are observed to be showing territorial aggression toward each other, the only logical assumption that can be made is that male leucs are territorial. Now, one could hypothesize that if intra-species aggression is observed, then inter-species aggression may also be an issue in mixed species tanks. But, that would only be an opinion. Certainly there are those on this forum who have tested this hypothesis, with differing results. But the OP seems to have not tested this hypothesis, and therefore, has started a thread about the demerits of mixed-species tanks that is based on assumption and opinion, not personal observation of mixed-species interaction.

Jelly was simply bringing up the point that it was an irresponsible post because it made assumptions without employing the scientific method. Jelly, as responsiblity dictates, stated his experience with mixed-species tanks. Certainly others that have mixed-species experience have both congruent and conflicting results with Jelly. Theses are the only people who should be making statements about the merits/demerits of mixed-species tanks.

As a beginner in this hobby, I, and others like me, need answers to our questions that are based on fact, not opinion. While postulations are certainly valuable for starting conversation and debate, they should not be passed off as anything other than opinion, until they are tested and evidence has been obtained to support or refute them.

I have never tried a mixed-species tank. If I were to ever try one, my decision to do so would be greatly influenced by information I could obtain from this forum. Just like any decision I would make regarding my frogs, I would base my decisions on my level of experience, and my ability to understand the risks I may or may not be taking. I would hope others would employ the same responsibility regarding their frogs.

Thank you for considering my opinion on this matter
Chris


----------



## afterdark

Fantastic post, Chris. I think it perfectly sums up the discussion thus far.


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> Fantastic post, Chris. I think it perfectly sums up the discussion thus far.



I agree and I am leaving it at that.


----------



## Uncaonce

Philsuma said:


> Wrongo...
> 
> Mike K, myself and Julio were in a elevator and a small Baltimore hotel room and there was no aggression noted. We even ate together. Julio and I even allowed Mike to eat without bullying him or taking his food.
> 
> Mike didn't seem to display any signs of stress and was observed to return to the breakfast buffet for a second helping of eggs!
> 
> Now if *Kiera Knightley *were to be suddenly introduced into the hotel room, I'm fairly certain that I would have pushed both Mike and Julio out of the room and /or stood on their heads until they passed out and then dragged them outside.


Dude, that is hilarious! Good job!!!!!!!


----------



## Philsuma

Uncaonce said:


> Dude, that is hilarious! Good job!!!!!!!


Yeah....but....It seem's even I can make a rookie mistake....

It was brought to my attention that Mike may have been under some stress with resource competition all along.....he ate the entire plate of eggs and then proceeded to attempt to eat many more (buffet), possibly to ensure than Julio and I could not get to them.

So you see...resource competition doesn't allways manifest itself with violence. Sometimes it can be..... sneaky.


----------



## viktor

imitator83 said:


> This may have been discussed, but after a while, this thread just seemed to blend together like one big whiney nightmare, so if it has been discussed, then I'm sorry. I was always under the impression that the biggest argument against mixed tanks was the likelihood that the two species would breed together and create a hybrid, and that some genius could then take these hybrid offspring and sell them off to newbies in the hobby as "a cool new morph". Many of the hybrids I have seen are kinda cool looking, imo, but the possibilities that this scenerio could happen seems pretty feesible, so I have stayed away from mixing species myself and people who do mix species. Even if you are responsible and would not do this, that would mean you would have to kill the eggs, tads and froglets created by the two species, and since I don't enjoy killing frogs, I stay away from mixing species. Just my thoughts...
> 
> ...I wish I had a job where I the time to sit around and write essay-length responses to every differing opinion on a 6 page thread. It would be nice.....I didn't get to sit down at work tonight...


Wow, thank you, Scott, for pointing that out. That seems the only valid argument I ever heard against mixed species tanks (assuming the species require the same conditions). All these other arguments seem really to be arguments against overcrowding. But given the same number of frogs, I simply can't fathom how it would be more stressful to the frogs to have the frogs be different species. Perhaps some worry about racial tensions between the species?


----------



## jubjub47

I made this comment in the thread with the pics of jellymans viv and will make it again since it has not been directly brought up. For me and for the success of any species for that matter is the ability to reproduce and keep the genes moving to another generation. If that is not happening I feel its not a success. Jellyman mentioned that he's never had offspring in his viv in the other thread and that alone tells me its unsuccessfull.


----------



## paulrust

I have to agree with Tim, while reading this excellent debate I tried to decide what successful meant. I believe that with no offspring being produced by viable pairs that the experiment has failed. Surviving and thriving are two different things. Phil, you make awesome points even when you mean to be funny, how can I possibly know if one species is misinterpreting signals from another and being subdued? Sneaky or passive aggressive behavior is certainly harmful and I would never know it is going on. I would like to thank everyone on both sides of this, I am learning a lot from this discussion.


----------



## JoshK

Jellyman said:


> I agree and I am leaving it at that.


 
Your not getting off that easy, Phil asked you for evidence supporting your claim that your mixed frogs are thriving, healthy frogs. If you are truly some great mixing master teaching others, you should have something to show everyone your wonderful methods. I looked through a lot of your past posts but to be honest they were pretty much nothing but negative, argumentative comments. I couldn't find any pics. I'm sure we would all enjoy seeing these.

I am not trying to start anything with you, I just think that if your going to support and encourage mixing you should have something to support your claims of how easy and wonderful it is.


----------



## Jellyman

joshieluv said:


> Your not getting off that easy, Phil asked you for evidence supporting your claim that are frogs are thriving, healthy frogs. If you are truly some great mixing master teaching others, you should have something to show everyone your wonderful methods. I looked through a lot of your past posts but to be honest they were pretty much nothing but negative, argumentative comments. I couldn't find any pics. I'm sure we would all enjoy seeing these.
> 
> I am not trying to start anything with you, I just think that if your going to support and encourage mixing you should have something to support your claims of how easy and wonderful it is.


I'll post pics. I said that I would this weekend. I love showing off my frogs. The tank is packed with a few extra plants that I have been aquiring for the new tank I am waiting for but it is essentially the same as the pictures I posted in a previous thread.

I'm simply not going to defend myself any longer from those that have no experience with mixed species tanks and subsequently have nothing substantial to offer other then an arguementative empty opinion.


----------



## Ed

No offense folks but pictures really aren't going to tell you that much... a frog can be fat and immunosuppressed... that is one of the reasons I rarely ask for photographic proof.. 

As a further thought for those who want photographic evidence.. with respect to the photos.. when dealing with personal enclosures there is little if anything to indicate that the photos are recent, or even of those exact enclosures. 

Ed


----------



## MonarchzMan

hendyUNLV24 said:


> Jelly was simply bringing up the point that it was an irresponsible post because it made assumptions without employing the scientific method. Jelly, as responsiblity dictates, stated his experience with mixed-species tanks. Certainly others that have mixed-species experience have both congruent and conflicting results with Jelly. Theses are the only people who should be making statements about the merits/demerits of mixed-species tanks.


I totally agree with your post up until this point. Observation alone is not scientific. Hence the problem Jelly has had with the OP. Now, that may be justified, but him saying that mixing works based on the fact that he has kept a mixed tank is no better. The only conclusion that can be made is that mixing won't necessarily outright kill frogs. It says nothing on whether or not frogs do well, or do no worse than a single species tank. In order to make any conclusions about mixing, he would have to do what I suggested.

Now, that said, I asked a number of questions of Jelly that I'd like to have answered:



> To Jelly, I've got a couple questions.
> 
> What benefit to each of the species is there for a mixed species tank?
> 
> You say that people want to mix to get a colorful display. Why can't this be done by creative planting and/or paludariums with fish? Keep in mind that many of the most colorful frogs are tiny, and without the creative planting, they'd look like specks of color on an otherwise green background.
> 
> Have you considered that your experience might be the 1 in a million success with mixing? Since that does seem to be the case given all of the evidence that mixing isn't good, is it really wise to advocate mixing? It would be likened to saying "Buy a lottery ticket because you will win $1,000,000."
> 
> Have you run single species tanks with the frogs in your mixed tanks and determined that weights, reproduction, eating, intraspecific competition, call rate, etc. are no different than in the mixed tank?
> 
> How big is your mixed tank? What species are in it and how many of each? What is the age of the frogs? What is the sex ratios of the species?
> 
> There is a big difference between surviving and thriving. For example, there has been a recent movement in the zoo industry to make habitats more natural. Animals survived in the concrete boxes that animals were kept in, but did not do well. It was found that animals did much better and thrived in more natural enclosures. Same thing with these frogs. Your frogs are surviving, but do you have evidence that they are thriving?
> 
> Just a few questions...


----------



## paulrust

For myself, after digesting all of this, if all things were equal between the two populations and the only arguement to be made was the hybrid issue, that is where being responsible and a consiencous stewards and protectors of our beloved friends and dare I say, "loved ones", would prohibit mixed species environments all together. There, that's how I feel. Take it or leave it!


----------



## JoshK

I am not offering an opinion, just wanting evidence. Don't bother posting pics for me, someone showed me the thread you are talking about and I found it rather laughable. 





Jellyman said:


> I'll post pics. I said that I would this weekend. I love showing off my frogs. The tank is packed with a few extra plants that I have been aquiring for the new tank I am waiting for but it is essentially the same as the pictures I posted in a previous thread.
> 
> I'm simply not going to defend myself any longer from those that have no experience with mixed species tanks and subsequently have nothing substantial to offer other then an arguementative empty opinion.


----------



## hendyUNLV24

Just before I catch any flack from anyone, I would like to say that I'm not endorsing the OP or Jelly. I believe this topic is much more complex than many people are saying.

Just because OP observed action "A", doesn't mean action "B" is inevitable.

Just because Jelly claims success in multi-species tanks, that doesn't mean others will have the same success.

And of course, the matter of what is a successful frog population is a debate in itself.

Fecundity(the ability of a individual to pass on its genes to a new generation) is a very complex thing to determine. Also, it is not the only measure of the success of a species. Many individuals within a species may not find reproductive success, and instead will make efforts to ensure the success of closely related individuals, thus ensuring some of their genetics are passed on.

Furthermore, many of us have no desire for our frogs to reproduce. So, in my _opinion_, success for one person, is not always success for another.

Many of us spay or neuter our dogs and cats, but they still live long, healthy lives as successful pets, without reproducing. I know this analogy is a bit of a stretch, but I hope people will see my point.

Now, if Jelly were to make the admission that he is trying to have reproducing pairs, but has not acheived this, then I agree that he has not been successful. This could be for any number of reasons. I'm sure there are those of us with only one species in a tank that have had difficulty acheiving reproductive success.


----------



## Philsuma

Good post (above).

Just when you think that you cannot possibly take another mixed species or hybrid thread......you read on and discover a lot of good postings, information and theories.

This was / is ,actually a very good thread, despite how it started.

The OP may have started the thread with a post that wasn't designed or written in the best fashion BUT he is to be commended for his desire to help, share and do the right thing.

Remember....we are all in this together. It is US (and frogs) against the world....if you really want to take it that far. We all have strong opinions and a passion for these animals. I am sure nobody thinks either advocate of this topic is a bad or horrible person who is mistreating their animals.

We all type and say some inflamatory stuff on ocassion and some of us like to debate (argue)...ehem...but there isn't anyone on this forum that I would refuse to have a beer and talk with.

Except Jellyshrimp.

He's only 14.....


----------



## divingne1

Philsuma said:


> but there isn't anyone on this forum that I would refuse to have a beer and talk with.
> 
> Except Jellyshrimp.
> 
> He's only 14.....


He might be up for some kool-aid and a chat.


----------



## Philsuma

divingne1 said:


> He might be up for some kool-aid and a chat.


Or...Mountain Dew if it's not too late at night....Certainly!


----------



## Jellyman

joshieluv said:


> I am not offering an opinion, just wanting evidence. Don't bother posting pics for me, someone showed me the thread you are talking about and I found it rather laughable.


Sorry, I'm not following you? I get bored with the same plants all the time so yes I do keep a few potted plants in my tank. Currently there is one. The majority of my plants are actually attached to cork bark. 

I am curious as to exactly what you found laughable.

I just looked at the pics I previously posted and I'm pretty sure there actually are not any potted plants in those pictures?? But like I said, I do like to use some potted plants so they are easily swapped out for a different look from time to time.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> I totally agree with your post up until this point. Observation alone is not scientific. Hence the problem Jelly has had with the OP. Now, that may be justified, but him saying that mixing works based on the fact that he has kept a mixed tank is no better. The only conclusion that can be made is that mixing won't necessarily outright kill frogs. It says nothing on whether or not frogs do well, or do no worse than a single species tank. In order to make any conclusions about mixing, he would have to do what I suggested.
> 
> Now, that said, I asked a number of questions of Jelly that I'd like to have answered:


Send me a PM if you would like to discuss.


----------



## Jellyman

Here are a bunch of pics as requested. Ed please feel free to ask me to take another pic of something to ease your mind that they may be fakes. Not the best it has looked but I was expecting my new tank at the end of April but it was delayed until the end of may(hopefully) becasue they were waiting for a shipment of starfire glass so I have not trimmed or tidied it up in some time.

Sorry they are not such good shots. I just snapped them off really quick. 




























Below has three new hanging cork bark pieces I just received from SpringValley Farms


----------



## Blackbird

You know, I briefly entertained the thought of writing a very _very_ lengthy (more lengthy than this) reply just why, theoretically, dart frog intraspecific aggression should occur more commonly than interspecific aggression*, but then I thought, _why bother?_ The rabid "mix-haters" aren't gonna take anyone who tries to have a reasonable discussion about this (animal behaviour is an extremely fascinating topic, in my opinion) serious anyway. Jeez, I am against mixing (for several reasons), but I'm still getting annoyed with people whose only statement to this particular problem of mixing seems to be "you suck, don't do it (anymore)". "Don't do it" is _not_ a reason, it is advice that should point one in a certain direction, the reasons are WHY the advice points us in that direction. 
So why might mixing not be a good idea:
- crossed morphs (in case you mix frogs of the same species, but not morph): Not cool. No-one wants to unknowingly buy a frog of "unpure" (lol) blood. Note: This doesn't stop people from buying tinc "Amotopo" and tinc "Agreja" though. Why not, I wonder? Apparently these morphs are the results of crossing morphs. Shouldn't that make them undesirable? Ah well.
- actual hybrid offspring occurring: It is possible that a auratus mate with a leucomelas, and a auratus x leucomelas hybrid offspring may be born of it. However, I am unsure whether these bastard frogs would even be fertile (anyone?).
- mixing small darts with larger ones: dude. Big will flatten little. If you don't need to expend much energy to take out a weaker individual that competes with you for food (etc), and that you can't breed with (same gender, or different species _and_ gene pools too far apart), and there isn't much risk of injury, then why not do it? All the better for you (animal logic! )
- mixing more aggressive darts (a) with "less aggressive" ones (b): dude. A will flatten B. Or he might, at least. 
- mixing bolder darts with shyer ones: _And then they starved..._
(the last three are all theoretical for me, _I haven't tried them!_  And I don't want to.)
In conclusion: I wouldn't mix 'em. 

* Oh yes, if anyone is wondering, in "short": Breeding partners! Since it's every animal's main objectives to a) stay alive (and if possible in good condition) and b) (under favorable conditions) to have as many offspring as possible, it is only logical that, let's say, a male tinc should be more threatened by another tinc than a male of another species, since the animal will recognize the other male as a member of the same species, and that will mean the other male will automatically be seen as a rival for the ladies.  Which, of course, they won't like. Stress. Threatening. Fighting. The more similar a frog is to the first male's species, the more likely it is he will be seen as a rival for females. Similar in shape, seize, color, pattern, sound (their call is _very_ important! Do tinc males get angry when they hear leucs (in a different tank) calling? Do tinc females react to leuc males calling? Not really. But they get pissed (males) when they hear other tincs), smell (though, of course, I don't know how good frogs can smell, at that).
Even for a different species which occupies the same ecological niche as another species, they're only rivals regarding one of the two main objectives: stay alive + in good condition. That means they're competitors for food, water (well, not regarding darts here ), breeding/nesting spots, and possibly territory as well. That doesn't mean they like each other, of course, just because they're not competing for females. It means they won't necessarily want to expend the energy to get rid of the other (if they are about equal opponents), if it is not necessary. 
This is the point where it would be logical that another male leuc means more stress for a male leuc than another male tinc. The second male leuc is a major threat to the first male leucs chances to have offspring (and vice versa, of course). Now both main objectives are threatened. Not cool.

See? Theoretically it makes sense that having same-species animals of the same gender in a tank/cage/small area/whatever together can be just as, if not more critical regarding stress and fighting than a mixed tank. Lol I will probably be getting negative rep points just for stating this, even though I have stated before that I am, in fact, against mixing, but for other reasons.

Practically, studies_ have _been done on other animals (like birds) that show exactly this: that intraspecific aggression is more common than interspecific aggression. (Right now, I'm pretty sure I even have one report sitting around on my hardware somewhere, a report that states intraspecific aggression occurred more than twice as often than interspecific aggression in a certain kind of bird (I forgot, though I am reasonably sure it was some kind of Shrike).

Of course, if you cram too many beings into a tank/cage/area/whatever, some individuals will inevitably end up drawing the _short straw_. Too densely populated area = lack of space/resources = stress = weakened immune system and/or death, aggression (intra- and interspecies), infanticide, etc - all those nasty things. 

In light of this, I don't believe the original poster made a very good argument here. because "my two same-species same-gender frogs are fighting, now look what would happen if you mixed frogs?" yeah, kinda self-explanatory.

And now I'm done. I'm sure all _extreme_ anti-dart-mixers (now that sounds wrong ) will just hate this.



Jellyman said:


> There are alot of questions here.
> What size setups did they have?
> How well were they designed?
> Where did the plants come from?(possible contamination or fertilizer?
> Were backup tanks ready in case frogs needed to be seperated?
> How often and how much was being fed?
> Were did they get the frogs?
> Were the frogs in good health prior to be introduced?
> What was the umidity levels?
> Was there proper drainage?





Philsuma said:


> NONE of these questions matter. These were new hobbyists that purchased some of their first frogs from.....somebody.... and ended up with a mixed species tank.
> 
> Not all new people have computers or can immediately access DB or PM you for advice on issues that crop up.
> 
> My guess is that you are going to say that all this is purely coincidental....


To put it mildly, I am _surprised_ that no other Dendroboard member participating in this discussion has taken some real offense to this statement. So you're saying it doesn't matter whether the frogs introduced into the tank were actually healthy in the first place? They could have been parasite-infested, for example. I guess quarantining and getting the frogs' fecals done isn't all that important after all, so long as you make sure you don't put two different species in the same tank. Too low a humidity will not actually cause frogs in a mixed species tank to die and shrivel up because of dehydration, no it will be because THEY HAVE SUCKED THE WATER OUT OF EACH OTHER, LIKE INSECT-EATING, WATER-SUCKING LITTLE KILLING MACHINES. How they have done this, of course, is another question. 
These frogs could have died of pretty much anything. Without proper information we'll never be able to guess at a probable cause. Saying "Ooh they were mixed THAT'S IT!" is simply _not enough_. And I am saying this even though I am by no means a supporter of mixed species tanks.


----------



## Philsuma

Blackbird,

I really don't think you have any idea as to exactly how hard it was to _try _to read and comprehend your post.......

I mean no disrespect, but is English your second language?

If you are unclear or unsure about one of my posts, please either re-read the posts above mine in order to bring it into context or post again without all the other confusing tangents and replies to two or three different people........makes it really hard to understand.


----------



## Blackbird

Jellyman said:


>


Okay. *Too many frogs*, Jesus. We should try and do what's best for our frogs. *This isn't it. * I doubt the frogs are even able to get territorial in your tank in the first place. It's like in the fish stores, where there are sooo many territorial fish crammed into one tank that they can't even begin to establish a territory. Just. It's beyond "not cool". It'd piss me off if I saw it at a pet store, even.  

Just - how long have you been keeping the frogs like this? Without one dying? Sort of curious, here.


----------



## Philsuma

....and Jel.....kudos to you for having the guts to post those pics, at least.

as to comments?......I got......nothin'......


----------



## paulrust

A picture is worth a thousand words, dude, you said it all with that catstrophe of a viv.


----------



## Blackbird

Philsuma said:


> Blackbird,
> 
> I really don't think you have any idea as to exactly how hard it was to _try _to read and comprehend your post.......
> 
> I mean no disrespect, but is English your second language?
> 
> If you are unclear or unsure about one of my posts, please either re-read the posts above mine in order to bring it into context or post again without all the other confusing tangents and replies to two or three different people........makes it really hard to understand.


Aw hell... I'm sorry my English seems to be confusing... but yes, in fact, whether you meant to disrespect or not (I'm not too good at catching your kind of sarcasm) English is in fact my second language. Though I've been told I'm not so bad I can't be understood by native speakers. Oh well. No worries though, I'm not insulted. Also, I understood your post. That's pretty much why it annoyed me so. I'm sorry though, I didn't mean too hurt anyone's _sensibilities_.  You know, just in case I did.

"two or three people"? Lol... I only quoted Jellymany so that people would have a better idea what I was talking about regarding your reply to him. I didn't reply to him at all in that post. 

If you are still confused about my post feel free to ask me.  I'd hate to miss out on a potentially good discussion simply because of communication problems. 

P.S.: Any spelling errors, grammar errors, wrongly used phrases and incorrect idioms you can totally keep. For free.


----------



## Philsuma

No disrespect meant here, I assure you. 

Your English is fine, by itself.....it was just the length of the posting and the references to multiple other posts / people, I think.


----------



## frogfreak

Blackbird

I was able to kill a delicious molson canadian tallboy reading your first post 3 times Shorten it up a bit please. What were you getting at? 


Jellyman

There's no way those frogs are living like that! That has to be staged. Never would you see all those frogs out like that in those positions. That's what frogs do when you first put them in a viv. They're searching all over the place. It's obvious


Glenn


----------



## MonarchzMan

Blackbird said:


> * Oh yes, if anyone is wondering, in "short": Breeding partners! Since it's every animal's main objectives to a) stay alive (and if possible in good condition) and b) (under favorable conditions) to have as many offspring as possible,


Careful with painting with so broad a brush  Wolves are an excellent example of not following B 



> This is the point where it would be logical that another male leuc means more stress for a male leuc than another male tinc. The second male leuc is a major threat to the first male leucs chances to have offspring (and vice versa, of course). Now both main objectives are threatened. Not cool.


But you're assuming that a leuc male would be able to recognize a tinc male. I don't think that that would be the case. My guess is that it would not see it as a male, but simply as a potential competitor of resources, and that would be an issue. And in that case, it would be worse for a leuc male because it would see both males and females of the opposite sex in a negative light rather than just males.

Jelly, what is laughable is that you have 16 frogs that are mostly terrestrial (some will climb, but they tend to spend the vast majority of their time on the ground), so you have 16 frogs sharing 8 square feet of space. That's two frogs per square foot. That is ridiculous density. Not only that, but some of the frogs look thin to me, which really doesn't surprise me at that density.

Also I asked the questions so that the answers would be posted on the thread. If I wanted them to be answered in PM, I would have sent you a PM. Answers to those questions would make or break your case. If you find the answers to the questions not to your liking, then perhaps you should rethink your stance on if mixing works.


----------



## Jellyman

Blackbird said:


> Okay. *Too many frogs*, Jesus. We should try and do what's best for our frogs. *This isn't it. * I doubt the frogs are even able to get territorial in your tank in the first place. It's like in the fish stores, where there are sooo many territorial fish crammed into one tank that they can't even begin to establish a territory. Just. It's beyond "not cool". It'd piss me off if I saw it at a pet store, even.
> 
> Just - how long have you been keeping the frogs like this? Without one dying? Sort of curious, here.



Agreed, it is too many. Although, they are feeding in that picture and are in basically 1/6th of the available floor space(and that does not include any of the additional area that they have access to above the ground level or within the ground level). I am waiting for the arrival of my new tank that will be 6' long x 3' wide x 30" tall. Basically doubles the size of the current enclosure.

I have receipts that will date the frogs from being purchased from Saurian Ent. and Vansihing Jewel in July 2002. That would make them almost 7 years old.


----------



## Jellyman

paulrust said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words, dude, you said it all with that catstrophe of a viv.


Yeah, it is definitely not in it's finer moments as far as eye appeal. It has been neglected for the past two months. I was expecting my new tank at the end of April and had been aquiring items for the build(this is all in a different thread) but the place building my tank is waiting on a starphire glass shipment and the tank got pushed back until the end of May. Hopefully my new 6' long x 3' wide x 30" wide will get less of a rude comment from you.


----------



## paulrust

Maybe I'm the only one who missed it, but Glenn made an excellent point. Frogs do not do that, I have to search for mine because they hide so well except at froggy dinner time.


----------



## paulrust

Sorry Jelly, just a bit of a shock. No harm intended.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> I have receipts that will date the frogs from being purchased from Saurian Ent. and Vansihing Jewel in July 2002. That would make them almost 7 years old.


No offense, but that means nothing. Simply means that you bought frogs in 2002. Unless you have them PIT tagged and those numbers are printed on those receipts, you cannot prove that those frogs are in fact the same ones you bought in 2002.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> Careful with painting with so broad a brush  Wolves are an excellent example of not following B
> 
> 
> 
> But you're assuming that a leuc male would be able to recognize a tinc male. I don't think that that would be the case. My guess is that it would not see it as a male, but simply as a potential competitor of resources, and that would be an issue. And in that case, it would be worse for a leuc male because it would see both males and females of the opposite sex in a negative light rather than just males.
> 
> Jelly, what is laughable is that you have 16 frogs that are mostly terrestrial (some will climb, but they tend to spend the vast majority of their time on the ground), so you have 16 frogs sharing 8 square feet of space. That's two frogs per square foot. That is ridiculous density. Not only that, but some of the frogs look thin to me, which really doesn't surprise me at that density.
> 
> Also I asked the questions so that the answers would be posted on the thread. If I wanted them to be answered in PM, I would have sent you a PM. Answers to those questions would make or break your case. If you find the answers to the questions not to your liking, then perhaps you should rethink your stance on if mixing works.


I am refraining from defending myself from the likes of hobbiest that have no experience and hence no ground to stand on when giving advice or arguing that I am wrong. I answered all of your questions in a PM. Why do you have a problem with that? Are you continuing to post only with the intent to argue? I told you in the PM that if my answers did not meet your standards to be more specific and I would do my best to answer them.

I do agree that there are too many frogs in the current setup. I'll be upgrading soon to a tank twice the size. And I actually have 18 frogs 4+4+4+4+2=18 and they are in 6 square feet of living space 2x3=6. And again, I agree with you that there are too many frogs for that amount of space.

And you are really reaching if you think my frogs look thin. 
Peace


----------



## Jellyman

frogfreak said:


> Blackbird
> 
> I was able to kill a delicious molson canadian tallboy reading your first post 3 times Shorten it up a bit please. What were you getting at?
> 
> 
> Jellyman
> 
> There's no way those frogs are living like that! That has to be staged. Never would you see all those frogs out like that in those positions. That's what frogs do when you first put them in a viv. They're searching all over the place. It's obvious
> 
> 
> Glenn


That's what they do when it is feeding time. I can take a picture at anytime for you if you would like. You are welcome to come to the house at anytime. Anyone that is around the Kansas City area is welcome to come by anytime. You can stop by uninvited so there is no chance of me staging a tank. They are only out like that when I feed them because I feed in the front left corner of the tank. The remainder of the time they are all over the place.


----------



## frogfreak

paulrust said:


> Maybe I'm the only one who missed it, but Glenn made an excellent point. Frogs do not do that, I have to search for mine because they hide so well except at froggy dinner time.



Come on jellyman. I don't mean at all to be rude but they just don't behave like that unless they've just been put into a viv

Especially that many

Glenn


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> No offense, but that means nothing. Simply means that you bought frogs in 2002. Unless you have them PIT tagged and those numbers are printed on those receipts, you cannot prove that those frogs are in fact the same ones you bought in 2002.


I knew one of you great die hards would take that stance. No they are not tagged. What is PIT tagged?? Are you talking like a microchip or something?


----------



## Jellyman

paulrust said:


> Sorry Jelly, just a bit of a shock. No harm intended.


That's cool. No harm done. I knew I'd be getting some. The pics where they are in the upper left corner is of them eating fruitflies. I did not dust the flies as to take away from the pictures. Typically they are fairly spreadout through all levels of the tank. If you would like I can take some more full tank shots tomorrow or whenever??

Is there a way that a picture can be dated so I do not have to keep defending when these were taken??


----------



## Jellyman

frogfreak said:


> Come on jellyman. I don't mean at all to be rude but they just don't behave like that unless they've just been put into a viv
> 
> Especially that many
> 
> Glenn


That's everyday at feeding time. Once the flies or crickets are put in the tank it is dinner time!!! Maybe I can figure out how to shoot a video and put it on the computer. Then you would see all the frogs gradually make their way to the front of the tank to eat??


----------



## jubjub47

Blackbird said:


> Okay. *Too many frogs*, Jesus. We should try and do what's best for our frogs. *This isn't it. * I doubt the frogs are even able to get territorial in your tank in the first place. It's like in the fish stores, where there are sooo many territorial fish crammed into one tank that they can't even begin to establish a territory. Just. It's beyond "not cool". It'd piss me off if I saw it at a pet store, even.
> 
> Just - how long have you been keeping the frogs like this? Without one dying? Sort of curious, here.


They're still trying to find a territory that's not already taken

All kidding aside, Jelly, the viv doesn't look bad. I didn't think it looked bad last time you posted it either. I can tell it's in a transition period, but that's ok. The amount of frogs crammed in there is pretty ridiculous and personally that just don't think it looks good. That to me is the perfect turnoff to mixed tanks. Nothing natural about the situation you've put those frogs in at all. I understand that a glass tank isn't natural, but at least do the best you can for them....you are holding them captive after all.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> I am refraining from defending myself from the likes of hobbiest that have no experience and hence no ground to stand on when giving advice or arguing that I am wrong. I answered all of your questions in a PM. Why do you have a problem with that? Are you continuing to post only with the intent to argue? I told you in the PM that if my answers did not meet your standards to be more specific and I would do my best to answer them.


You seem to be stuck on the "if you haven't done it, you have no right to voice an opinion on it" and that is a silly standpoint. I doubt you'd find many people who would argue to jump out of a plane without a parachute, and logic would lead most people to agree even though they have not done it. A number of the people you are arguing with not only have years of experience keeping dart frogs, but have scientific backgrounds in studying anurans and dart frogs. Experience in mixing isn't a prerequisite to knowing that it's not a good idea in all but a few cases.

Like I said, if I wanted them to be answered in a PM, I would have sent you a PM rather than post it on the thread. I'm posting to prove a point. If you are right, I would think that it would be beneficial to post it as such.



> I do agree that there are too many frogs in the current setup. I'll be upgrading soon to a tank twice the size. And I actually have 18 frogs 4+4+4+4+2=18 and they are in 6 square feet of living space 2x3=6. And again, I agree with you that there are too many frogs for that amount of space.


My bad, I got past the second 4 and decided it was too much. So I gave you too much credit, but the actual number is 3 frogs per square foot. And going to 18 square feet and giving them each a square foot is still pretty ridiculously packed. The frogs in the Tinc group are big frogs. I challenge you to find a citation that shows that any frog will have its territory entirely in a square foot.



> And you are really reaching if you think my frogs look thin.
> Peace


Perhaps it is the angle of the camera, but some of the leucs and auratus look on the thin side. Not starving, but not what I'd be real happy with.


----------



## Jellyman

jubjub47 said:


> They're still trying to find a territory that's not already taken
> 
> All kidding aside, Jelly, the viv doesn't look bad. I didn't think it looked bad last time you posted it either. I can tell it's in a transition period, but that's ok. The amount of frogs crammed in there is pretty ridiculous and personally that just don't think it looks good. That to me is the perfect turnoff to mixed tanks. Nothing natural about the situation you've put those frogs in at all. I understand that a glass tank isn't natural, but at least do the best you can for them....you are holding them captive after all.


Thanks, and agreed. They are a bit crowded. I was told my new tank would be delivered by the end of the month so their home will double in size. I have not ruled out thining them down a bit once in the new tank and redoing the current tank for just the azeurus or the tincs.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> You seem to be stuck on the "if you haven't done it, you have no right to voice an opinion on it" and that is a silly standpoint. I doubt you'd find many people who would argue to jump out of a plane without a parachute, and logic would lead most people to agree even though they have not done it. A number of the people you are arguing with not only have years of experience keeping dart frogs, but have scientific backgrounds in studying anurans and dart frogs. Experience in mixing isn't a prerequisite to knowing that it's not a good idea in all but a few cases.
> 
> Like I said, if I wanted them to be answered in a PM, I would have sent you a PM rather than post it on the thread. I'm posting to prove a point. If you are right, I would think that it would be beneficial to post it as such.
> 
> 
> 
> My bad, I got past the second 4 and decided it was too much. So I gave you too much credit, but the actual number is 3 frogs per square foot. And going to 18 square feet and giving them each a square foot is still pretty ridiculously packed. The frogs in the Tinc group are big frogs. I challenge you to find a citation that shows that any frog will have its territory entirely in a square foot.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps it is the angle of the camera, but some of the leucs and auratus look on the thin side. Not starving, but not what I'd be real happy with.



I have already answered all the questions you have asked several times in several threads. Out of courtesy I thought I would take some of my time and answer you personally. If that is unacceptable to you then too bad.

Let's see. People have jumped out of airplanes and had there parachute fail, plus we know without arguement the effects or gravity, so most people can logicall y conclude not to jump out of an airplane.

On the other hand, very little is known about the effects of mixing darts frogs. If you do not have any first hand experience, you typically only have information being fed to you by other people with no experience. And because so little is truely known, the only way to find out is to try, and to discuss what worked and what failed. 

I do agree with you that these frogs are cramped in the current tank. I do not feel that will be the case in the new tank but I will judge that once they are actually in the tank. People will keep 3 Tincs in a 20g breeder tank and everyone thinks that is fine. That is alot less them one square foot per frog?? Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## frogfreak

By the way.

Did anybody notice the beautiful woodworking on that stand???


----------



## paulrust

Absolutely, the enclosure is very pretty.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> I have already answered all the questions you have asked several times in several threads. Out of courtesy I thought I would take some of my time and answer you personally. If that is unacceptable to you then too bad.
> 
> Let's see. People have jumped out of airplanes and had there parachute fail, plus we know without arguement the effects or gravity, so most people can logicall y conclude not to jump out of an airplane.


But with your standpoint, only the people show have jumped out of an airplane without a parachute would be qualified to say whether or not it was a good idea.



> On the other hand, very little is known about the effects of mixing darts frogs. If you do not have any first hand experience, you typically only have information being fed to you by other people with no experience. And because so little is truely known, the only way to find out is to try, and to discuss what worked and what failed.


Very little is known if you discount the number of bad stories that have come out of people attempting to mix AND ignore knowledge of the species themselves. I mean, do you realize that habitats for Leucs, Auratus, and Tincs are different? That there are different temperatures and humidities and that those are different as far as the standard year goes?

Logic says that if you know the requirements of species A and you know the temperament of that species, then you can determine whether or not it is a good idea to mix. Now, in the case of dendrobatids, as pointed out by the OP, "non-aggressive" frogs can be aggressive. Territoriality in dendrobatids is prevalent throughout the family. Logic would state that it probably is not a good idea to mix. There are a couple cases where mixing could be done and could be successful, but the requirements for that are so steep that it isn't really done.

Like I said, a number of people you're arguing with have years of experience working with frogs and studying them. I would think that their opinions should be very valid based on their wealth of experience and knowledge. You keep putting your opinion out there as being valid, but then undermine yourself by making the inexperienced mistake of overcrowding. Apparently for 7 years.



> I do agree with you that these frogs are cramped in the current tank. I do not feel that will be the case in the new tank but I will judge that once they are actually in the tank. People will keep 3 Tincs in a 20g breeder tank and everyone thinks that is fine. That is alot less them one square foot per frog?? Please correct me if I'm wrong.


I didn't say that I condoned putting 3 tincs in a 20g.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> But with your standpoint, only the people show have jumped out of an airplane without a parachute would be qualified to say whether or not it was a good idea.
> 
> 
> 
> Very little is known if you discount the number of bad stories that have come out of people attempting to mix AND ignore knowledge of the species themselves. I mean, do you realize that habitats for Leucs, Auratus, and Tincs are different? That there are different temperatures and humidities and that those are different as far as the standard year goes?
> 
> Logic says that if you know the requirements of species A and you know the temperament of that species, then you can determine whether or not it is a good idea to mix. Now, in the case of dendrobatids, as pointed out by the OP, "non-aggressive" frogs can be aggressive. Territoriality in dendrobatids is prevalent throughout the family. Logic would state that it probably is not a good idea to mix. There are a couple cases where mixing could be done and could be successful, but the requirements for that are so steep that it isn't really done.
> 
> Like I said, a number of people you're arguing with have years of experience working with frogs and studying them. I would think that their opinions should be very valid based on their wealth of experience and knowledge. You keep putting your opinion out there as being valid, but then undermine yourself by making the inexperienced mistake of overcrowding. Apparently for 7 years.
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say that I condoned putting 3 tincs in a 20g.



You are in this for the arguement. I am not. If you have anything further on this and would like to discuss it through PM's I will be more then happy to talk about the experience I have on this subject.


----------



## MonarchzMan

No, I am simply attempting to get you to prove your case. You say "Mixing works because I do it and you don't, and my frogs are still alive." It's a bold claim, but as with anything, simply saying it means nothing. You need to demonstrate the evidence that it works and that the frogs are not negatively impacted. Only then would you have a legitimate case to say that mixing works. Until then, _you've_ got no case regardless of what you've done. It has been demonstrated that mixing has negative effects. If you can demonstrate that it doesn't, then one can logically move on to say that something else was probably wrong. While other things likely contribute to death of mixed frogs, compounded stress effects of mixed tanks very likely contributed to it too. In fact, I would submit that not having any breeding, whether or not you care about it, in 7 years would be evidence that it's not working. If it works, the frogs will breed regardless of whether or not you care about it.

There, however, it plenty of evidence saying mixing does not work.


----------



## frogfreak

The bottom line is we all want to look after our frogs to the best of our ability! 

IMO And I'm stessing this IMO. 

The way I see it, In the wild if frogs of the same species, or of two different species encounter one another the dominant frog wins. The other hops away 10-20-30 metres and gets out of harms way. It's a done deal. I wonder how many frogs die into the wild due to aggression and how many escape? They don't have that option as our pets. They're is a glass box. I was told by a reputable breeder that our viv could hold up to 9 Leucs comfortably so we went with 7 just so they were comfortable. If there's a problem we'll deal with it then and make them as commfy as we can. 

Good Luck

Glenn


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> You are in this for the arguement. I am not. If you have anything further on this and would like to discuss it through PM's I will be more then happy to talk about the experience I have on this subject.


Funny...hearing you complain about arguing, when you are the one that always shows up when any mixing topics hits the boards.

....and please stop asking everyone to PM you. The very purpose and life blood of this forum is to provide information to others. If everyone PM'ed each other,where would others get their information?

You do want all your mixed species info to become public so that it will assist others don't you? It's a little late now, to be concerned with what all the rest of us will think.


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> Funny...hearing you complain about arguing, when you are the one that always shows up when any mixing topics hits the boards.
> 
> ....and please stop asking everyone to PM you. The very purpose and life blood of this forum is to provide information to others. If everyone PM'ed each other,where would others get their information?
> 
> You do want all your mixed species info to become public so that it will assist others don't you? It's a little late now, to be concerned with what all the rest of us will think.


I have stated my experiences in many threads and you and the same handful of individuals continue to ask me to answer the same questions. They have been answered. Either you are incapable of processing the answers already given or you choose not to. Noone is trying to change your mind and until you realize that you will continue to look like a closed minded individual. 

I'll say this for you once again. I am not an expert. I offer my experiences to the hobby in hopes that others will make there own choices based on all the information available not just want you and your 5 buddies decide is relevant. I also hope that others attempt to explore this hobby and not sit in the dark with blinders on because they are being bullied by a handful of members who think they know everything. 

If you are not simply using this issue to argue with me in a public forum you would have no issue discussing this off forum through the PM system. It is very clear who wants to argue and who wants to promote progress.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> I'll say this for you once again. I am not an expert. I offer my experiences to the hobby in hopes that others will make there own choices based on all the information available not just want you decide is relevant. I also hope that others attempt to explore this hobby and not sit in the dark with blinders on because they are being bullied by a handful of members who think they know everything.


Again, you're only saying that you have done it and that they're still alive. If you can show me that the frogs are not worse off in a mixed situation like yours, then I will concede that mixing can be done without negative effects to the frogs, as I imagine most people would. Doing anything less is being irresponsible. I've kept some leucs froglets in 190oz containers for the last 9 months. They're active, eating, and fat. Would I recommend that long term? No. Even given my experience and success with it, it would be irresponsible to suggest that it could be done long term.

That handful of members do know a great deal of husbandry and care of frogs. That handful of members has dedicated years to studying and caring for amphibians. It is _extremely_ arrogant to discount their experience and knowledge because they have not done it. There is likely reason for that.



> If you are not using this issue to argue with me in a public forum you would have no issue discussing this off forum through the PM system. It is very clear who wants to argue and who wants to promote progress.


So in order to promote progress, you talk in private rather than in the open? Discussing in the open is promoting progress. If you think you're right, prove it. Then progress is made. Progress in this hobby isn't done by talking in secret.


----------



## Blackbird

MonarchzMan said:


> Careful with painting with so broad a brush  Wolves are an excellent example of not following B
> 
> 
> 
> But you're assuming that a leuc male would be able to recognize a tinc male. I don't think that that would be the case. My guess is that it would not see it as a male, but simply as a potential competitor of resources, and that would be an issue. And in that case, it would be worse for a leuc male because it would see both males and females of the opposite sex in a negative light rather than just males.


I did not paint with this brush myself... school... some kind of information was bound to stick.  If a species doesn't follow this it will end up having problems sooner or later.  Of course there are the r-strategy and the k-strategy, but the main point is still: as many own offspring as possible.
Off-Topic for a sec:
Regarding the wolves... I don't know much about them, only that there is an alpha-female and an alpha-male, and only those two will mate? Actually that is a very nice plan. It allows only the alpha-female's/alpha-male's genes to be passed down and with the strongest partner... I believe I mentioned this as a desirable effect. Anyway, this is getting off-topic, PM me if you feel you have to clarify wolf mating behaviour. 

Back On Topic:
No, it's actually quite the other way around, I'm assuming the leuc is NOT likely to recognize the tinc male as anything other than competitor for resources/space/breeding spots. It would, however, recognize another leuc male as competitor for resources/space/breeding spots AND as a competitor for the females. And that is why, essentially, it is entirely possible that having another leuc male (this is just an example here) might be even more stressful.
I'm not actually using this to defend mixing, I'm using it to show the possible risks involved with putting several territorial animals into a small tank, compared to the size of their territory in nature. People always seem to be pretty much okay with _that_.

ETA: Okay, as I suspected, I got bad rep points for voicing my opinion. That's okay, you don't need to agree with me. I don't even mind that they didn't leave a username. Hey, it's all easy. Just next time, try and be a little bit less... rude about it. That would be cool.


----------



## Ben E

for the people that are so rabid about not mixing frogs....i think that many of your examples can be applied to captivity in general. If we really cared about the natural history and natural expression of behavior we would never put these frogs in terrariums at all. I dont see mixing species being any more a travesty than keeping a pair of frogs in a 10 gallon aquarium, or not allowing parental care, or not allowing the frogs access to the complexity of a true ecology. This is a hobby that we are wealthy enough to enjoy and if someone wants to enjoy it with multiple species in a glass box i dont see this as being much "worse" than wanting to keep any species in a glass box. Both scenarios are founded on completely selfish desires that are sometimes masked behind an artificial establishment of conservation ideals and what one perceives as "more accurate" to nature. I have heard the same arguments used for keeping fish. Does someone who keeps a "community" aquarium with a bubbling treasure chest have less a right to keep fish than someone who keeps a single pair of a single species of fish? Does the treasure chest person enjoy their fish less? does either scenario impact wild populations more than another? It all comes down to this being a selfish hobby for rich people and arguing over semantics gets old. Enjoy your frogs and make the hobby what YOU want and dont worry so much about the internet hobby police.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> Again, you're only saying that you have done it and that they're still alive. If you can show me that the frogs are not worse off in a mixed situation like yours, then I will concede that mixing can be done without negative effects to the frogs, as I imagine most people would. Doing anything less is being irresponsible. I've kept some leucs froglets in 190oz containers for the last 9 months. They're active, eating, and fat. Would I recommend that long term? No. Even given my experience and success with it, it would be irresponsible to suggest that it could be done long term.
> 
> That handful of members do know a great deal of husbandry and care of frogs. That handful of members has dedicated years to studying and caring for amphibians. It is _extremely_ arrogant to discount their experience and knowledge because they have not done it. There is likely reason for that.
> 
> 
> 
> So in order to promote progress, you talk in private rather than in the open? Discussing in the open is promoting progress. If you think you're right, prove it. Then progress is made. Progress in this hobby isn't done by talking in secret.


You can continue to attack me personally all you want. You obviously are not interested in hearing what I have to say or you would read what I have already posted, you would stop asking the same questions that have already been answered piblically several times, or you would PM me with your individual questions as many others have already done.


----------



## afterdark

Jellyman said:


> You can continue to attack me personally all you want. You obviously are not interested in hearing what I have to say or you would read what I have already posted, you would stop asking the same questions that have already been answered piblically several times, or you would PM me with your individual questions as many others have already done.


Hi Jelly - I've read through your posts, both in this thread and elsewhere and I can't find where you have answered any of the questions that explain how you have been successful with this setup or how you measure that success. If I'm missing something, please help me out.

If you've already posted this info somewhere I don't see why you are asking for everyone to PM you about it. Please re-post since no one can seem to find the answers you keep referring to.


----------



## chuckpowell

Just to clarify this point a male tinct is likely to recognize a male leuc as a competitor. At least pumilio and tincts do. I kept them together about 20 years ago and the pumilio were constantly jumping on the backs of the tincts, and vice versa.

Just thought I'd add some information to all this bickering.

Best,

Chuck



Blackbird said:


> I
> No, it's actually quite the other way around, I'm assuming the leuc is NOT likely to recognize the tinc male as anything other than competitor for resources/space/breeding spots. It would, however, recognize another leuc male as competitor for resources/space/breeding spots AND as a competitor for the females. And that is why, essentially, it is entirely possible that having another leuc male (this is just an example here) might be even more stressful.


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> That handful of members do know a great deal of husbandry and care of frogs. That handful of members has dedicated years to studying and caring for amphibians. It is _extremely_ arrogant to discount their experience and knowledge because they have not done it. There is likely reason for that.


That handful of members has NO experience with mixed tanks, aside from Ed who said he has done it successfully and that it can be done with the information currently available. Therefore, they have no basis to parallel what they know about a single species and apply it to scenario of mixed species. 

That handful of members is a great tool for anyone that wants a single species tank and there experience should be shared when speaking on a single species tank. There experience with the single species will help an individual with a mixed tank if we have a behavioral question based on a single species.

You are putting words into my mouth by saying we should dismiss their experience and knowledge. There lack of experience on mixed tanks has as much merit as mine does on breeding the frogs, none.


----------



## afterdark

chuckpowell said:


> I kept them together about 20 years ago and the pumilio were constantly jumping on the backs of the tincts, and vice versa.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Chuck


Thanks for posting Chuck. Just to clarify - would you say your mixed tank was a success? Did you lose any frogs? What size of tank were you using? 

I think some in this thread will assume that because you kept a mixed tank and the frogs did not immediately drop dead, it was a successful setup.


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> Hi Jelly - I've read through your posts, both in this thread and elsewhere and I can't find where you have answered any of the questions that explain how you have been successful with this setup or how you measure that success. If I'm missing something, please help me out.
> 
> If you've already posted this info somewhere I don't see why you are asking for everyone to PM you about it. Please re-post since no one can seem to find the answers you keep referring to.


Rather then just making a quick post, Sometime over the next few days I'll write up to the best of my ability what my experiences have been and how I measure that success. Please remember that this willl not be "follow my direction" to the promise land care sheet. Until more people feel comfortable sharing their experiences without being attacked we will not truely know what works and what is a fluke.


----------



## chuckpowell

The frogs did not immediately drop dead and I didn't want to take the chance they would in the future so I separated them. My plan was not to prove some point but to keep and breed frogs. To that end i try and keep things as peaceful as possible for what I'm keeping, but not to the point of keeping only a single pair because I'm afraid two of the same sex might stress each other out. They were in a 70 tall and there were about 4 frogs of each species. 

My opinion is that mixed tanks are not good for either of the frog species. That's my opinion based on my experience and nothing more. 

Best,

Chuck



afterdark said:


> Thanks for posting Chuck. Just to clarify - would you say your mixed tank was a success? Did you lose any frogs? What size of tank were you using?
> 
> I think some in this thread will assume that because you kept a mixed tank and the frogs did not immediately drop dead, it was a successful setup.


----------



## MonarchzMan

I'm not attacking you. I'm merely critical of your method. I honestly don't care that you've answered questions elsewhere. You haven't answered them here. I've had this discussion many times before. Most of us have, and yet, here we are. We're not saying "go look elsewhere for the answers." We're answering them even though it's been said many times.

I am giving you the opportunity to defend your method and prove that it's no worse than the preferred method here on the board, and you seem to take that personally. It's not personal. You are a proponent of a highly controversial method, so in order to justify it, you need something better than "I just wanted a colorful display." You need to show that it's not bad for the frogs. If you can't do that, you haven't got much of an argument for your side. I can guarantee that if you do that, the "anti-mixers" would concede that it can sometimes work. We are an open minded group.

For example, there was a member that created some tinc hybrids to better understand the species. He explicitly said that the hybrids wouldn't leave his frog room and that they were for his purposes only. People were accepting of that. Personally, I don't like it, but if he's being responsible with it, then I've got no gripe with him.

I ask the questions of you so that you may answer them and be open with the information. That is, of course, what you are accusing people of not doing: not allowing information to be spread so people can make their own decisions. I'm giving you that opportunity, but you'd prefer, it seems, to discuss it behind close doors. I'm not attacking you. I am simply critical of your method and am asking the questions that will help people determine if your method truly is good for the frogs or not.


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> Thanks for posting Chuck. Just to clarify - would you say your mixed tank was a success? Did you lose any frogs? What size of tank were you using?
> 
> I think some in this thread will assume that because you kept a mixed tank and the frogs did not immediately drop dead, it was a successful setup.


What they should ask are a bunch of questions as you started to:
1. What sixe tank and how many per tank?
2. How long did you have these tanks setup?
3. Where they just breeder tanks, no attempt at natural settings, lack hiding spots, etc?
-no offense but 20 years ago you were basically doing this by trial and error, you probably have alot of situations that ended poorly by no true fault of yours, simply the lack of knowledge avaialble about the frogs


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> I'm not attacking you. I'm merely critical of your method. I honestly don't care that you've answered questions elsewhere. You haven't answered them here. I've had this discussion many times before. Most of us have, and yet, here we are. We're not saying "go look elsewhere for the answers." We're answering them even though it's been said many times.
> 
> I am giving you the opportunity to defend your method and prove that it's no worse than the preferred method here on the board, and you seem to take that personally. It's not personal. You are a proponent of a highly controversial method, so in order to justify it, you need something better than "I just wanted a colorful display." You need to show that it's not bad for the frogs. If you can't do that, you haven't got much of an argument for your side. I can guarantee that if you do that, the "anti-mixers" would concede that it can sometimes work. We are an open minded group.
> 
> For example, there was a member that created some tinc hybrids to better understand the species. He explicitly said that the hybrids wouldn't leave his frog room and that they were for his purposes only. People were accepting of that. Personally, I don't like it, but if he's being responsible with it, then I've got no gripe with him.
> 
> I ask the questions of you so that you may answer them and be open with the information. That is, of course, what you are accusing people of not doing: not allowing information to be spread so people can make their own decisions. I'm giving you that opportunity, but you'd prefer, it seems, to discuss it behind close doors. I'm not attacking you. I am simply critical of your method and am asking the questions that will help people determine if your method truly is good for the frogs or not.


You have the answers in the PM I sent to you. Feel free to copy and past them if you wish. I will also try to make some type of post outlining my experience and what my parameters of success are for a mixed tank. I believe the guy who has the hybrids also has been tagged with a negative reputation status so I'm not sure how your arguement there works. I do not wnat or wish for the opponent to concede. That is not what this is about. It is good to have poeple on bith sides of the fence. It allows those on the fence to get answers from both sides and come to their own conclusion.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> That handful of members has NO experience with mixed tanks, aside from Ed who said he has done it successfully and that it can be done with the information currently available. Therefore, they have no basis to parallel what they know about a single species and apply it to scenario of mixed species.
> 
> That handful of members is a great tool for anyone that wants a single species tank and there experience should be shared when speaking on a single species tank. There experience with the single species will help an individual with a mixed tank if we have a behavioral question based on a single species.
> 
> You are putting words into my mouth by saying we should dismiss their experience and knowledge. There lack of experience on mixed tanks has as much merit as mine does on breeding the frogs, none.


Alright, I try not to brag or boast, but do you know who you're talking to? I do not have a mixed tank, have not had a mixed tank, and will not have a mixed tank. Why? Because I study the frogs. Specifically, I study pumilio. I have done a great deal of observations in the wild on those frogs. I understand a great deal about that species, and the species it is sympatric with (Colostethus talamancae, Minyobates claudae, Dendrobates auratus, Phyllobates lugubris, primarily). I have observed and read about these frogs from a natural setting. You quickly discount my knowledge and experience _actually understanding_ the frogs' behavior, as you do with most of the members here, and say that they don't know anything because they haven't done it. I'm sorry, but you're incorrect in that assessment. Just like with jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, if you understand a little bit about the situation, and in this case, the frogs, you'll come to the same conclusion.


----------



## Estrato

Ben E said:


> for the people that are so rabid about not mixing frogs....i think that many of your examples can be applied to captivity in general. If we really cared about the natural history and natural expression of behavior we would never put these frogs in terrariums at all. I dont see mixing species being any more a travesty than keeping a pair of frogs in a 10 gallon aquarium, or not allowing parental care, or not allowing the frogs access to the complexity of a true ecology. This is a hobby that we are wealthy enough to enjoy and if someone wants to enjoy it with multiple species in a glass box i dont see this as being much "worse" than wanting to keep any species in a glass box. Both scenarios are founded on completely selfish desires that are sometimes masked behind an artificial establishment of conservation ideals and what one perceives as "more accurate" to nature. I have heard the same arguments used for keeping fish. Does someone who keeps a "community" aquarium with a bubbling treasure chest have less a right to keep fish than someone who keeps a single pair of a single species of fish? Does the treasure chest person enjoy their fish less? does either scenario impact wild populations more than another? It all comes down to this being a selfish hobby for rich people and arguing over semantics gets old. Enjoy your frogs and make the hobby what YOU want and dont worry so much about the internet hobby police.


Well for starters fish and darts are much different, but even so there are many species of fish that you should not keep together, and if they are kept together death as a result of stress or fighting will occur. Would you keep piranhas with guppies? Full grown oscars with tetras? How about I toss my pumilio and intermedius into the same tank, just because I can? I mean as long as I "enjoy" it theres no problem, right? Just because its more aesthetically pleasing doesnt mean its good for the animals.

There has been discussion as to whether or not darts are better off in captivity, when taken care of PROPERLY. For example, many froggers have reported chytrid in their collections, but their frogs show no signs of having the disease at all. Why? Perhaps one reason for this is the animals are well fed, well supplemented, and closely monitored. We have access to a wealth of information on the internet from others who have experienced the same problems, and can even take our frogs to the vet if they arent getting better. Id be willing to say the majority of serious froggers take extremely good care of their animals, and because of this there have been reports of darts living for more than 20 years in captivity. I dont consider my frogs living space, or that of most others on here, a "glass box", rather a vivarium designed to mimic their natural environment as closely as possible. Hell, the only made made item in any of my vivariums is the plastic temp/humidity moniter I use. The "internet hobby police" as you called them have probably saved the lives of countless frogs that would have been taken care of improperly had they said nothing. God knows I, and many many others based on the posts Ive read here, would have been mixing frogs from day one had somebody not told us otherwise.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Estrato said:


> God knows I, and many many others based on the posts Ive read here, would have been mixing frogs from day one had somebody not told us otherwise.


And given plenty of very valid reasons to discourage that.


----------



## paulrust

Ben E said:


> for the people that are so rabid about not mixing frogs....i think that many of your examples can be applied to captivity in general. If we really cared about the natural history and natural expression of behavior we would never put these frogs in terrariums at all. I dont see mixing species being any more a travesty than keeping a pair of frogs in a 10 gallon aquarium, or not allowing parental care, or not allowing the frogs access to the complexity of a true ecology. This is a hobby that we are wealthy enough to enjoy and if someone wants to enjoy it with multiple species in a glass box i dont see this as being much "worse" than wanting to keep any species in a glass box. Both scenarios are founded on completely selfish desires that are sometimes masked behind an artificial establishment of conservation ideals and what one perceives as "more accurate" to nature. I have heard the same arguments used for keeping fish. Does someone who keeps a "community" aquarium with a bubbling treasure chest have less a right to keep fish than someone who keeps a single pair of a single species of fish? Does the treasure chest person enjoy their fish less? does either scenario impact wild populations more than another? It all comes down to this being a selfish hobby for rich people and arguing over semantics gets old. Enjoy your frogs and make the hobby what YOU want and dont worry so much about the internet hobby police.


I don't think anyone here is saying that Jelly or any mixed species keeper has an intent to harm the animals. The Fantastic Five, or whatever you want to call them, Ed, Philsuma, AfterDark, and countless others are extremely experienced and have forged my path through this hobby. They should be taken seriously. If you are suggesting that we are all selfish and keep frogs merely to look at then you are gravely mistaken. This is not an animal that breeds by the hundreds and can be caught in any tropical sea. It is a real possibility that the wild populations will be gone someday. It would truly be sad if all we have left are bastard mud blood hybrids that were crteated to make some irresponsible keeper a little money. And oh by the way, I wish I was rich, I would create a preserve for our little friends.


----------



## jackxc925

Okay, so I just read through this whole thread, and it’s a doozy. But first of all, doing something just to prove it can be done is rather pointless. People like monarchzman do experiments to draw conclusions about what they are studying, not just to do them. 

Jellyman, what you have done with those 18 frogs is selfish. Not a single one of them can ever live to their full potential based on what I have seen. You strike me as a person who can never be satisfied, and in the pursuit of your satisfaction you have crammed 18 frogs with different requirements, who would quite frankly never encounter each other in the wild, into a very small and poorly designed enclosure.

You say you are keeping them for enjoyment, and that you don’t wish for them to breed, that may be so, but if the frogs are in a healthy environment, then they will breed. 

Frogs breed on their own if the conditions are correct! Even if your frogs were breeding, I suspect that they would never develop, seeing as they might get stomped on by EIGHTEEN other frogs. Something is seriously wrong with your husbandry if no breeding has taken place in seven years; I doubt they are all male or all female. 

Not only have you stuffed these animals in like sardines, you mixed species that wouldn’t encounter each other in a natural situation. 

Enough with the analogies, cold hard facts are what we need.


----------



## Estrato

paulrust said:


> If you are suggesting that we are all selfish and keep frogs merely to look at then you are gravely mistaken. This is not an animal that breeds by the hundreds and can be caught in any tropical sea. It is a real possibility that the wild populations will be gone someday.


I almost put that exact point in my post, and one Ive used when people I know ask why I decided to get darts as pets.


----------



## paulrust

Estrato said:


> I almost put that exact point in my post, and one Ive used when people I know ask why I decided to get darts as pets.


I would bet that most of the responsible keepers here feel the same way. It's not as if you can go see these little guys in a pet store and decide you want one. You have to make a decision to figure out what they are, where to get them, how to keep them and a million other questions.


----------



## Tuckinrim8

jackxc925 said:


> Jellyman, what you have done with those 18 frogs is selfish. Not a single one of them can ever live to their full potential based on what I have seen. You strike me as a person who can never be satisfied, and in the pursuit of your satisfaction you have crammed 18 frogs with different requirements, who would quite frankly never encounter each other in the wild, into a very small and poorly designed enclosure.
> 
> My thoughts exactly!
> 
> Jellyman, you justify the amount of frogs you have in this enclosure with the point that you have a new tank that is double the size on order... IMO that would still be way too small for 18 adult frogs. How about easing the stress on the frogs by moving some (15 or so .. ) to temp tanks.... Your existing tank lacks leaf litter, plants, suitable hiding places and visual barriers that are a must. You say you have neglected to maintain the tank for the last few months - I say you have neglected the inhabitants for as long as you have had them together. I hope people new to the hobby can look beyond the awwe factor of seeing so many frogs crammed together and realize that this is just plain IRRESPONSIBLE!


----------



## Ed

Whoa whoa slow down with the pitchforks and torches folks. There really isn't any need for castigation in a discussion. 
This is a discussion and it should be handled that way, not as a mob yelling burn the witch....

This is hard to follow from my I-phone so I'll to follow up more later but want to add that a lot of basic science starts/started out as what happens when.


----------



## frogparty

I would definitely count no successful breeding/tad rearing as LACK of success in that enclosure. If they were living life happily there would be breeding. You certainly seem to have enough individuals. I would be interested toknow how much calling is going on in there. 
There is no such thing as the FROG POLICE and honestly, they are your pets and noone can ever stop you from doing what you want with them. Vendors will still sell you frogs no matter what, and noone asks for proof of a good home before they sell them. But if I understand correctly, those frogs are all almost 7 years old, and they've all been in that viv the whole time? The same set up you yourself aknowledge as too cramped for the number of frogs you have in there. Thats just admittedly bad husbandry practice. Now, if the 4, 4, 4, and 2 groups were split up into respective vivs, don't you think you could have produced some viable offspring by now? Something that truly benefits the hobby by reducing the pressure on WC populations by offerring more CB animals for availability. Something far more valuable to the hobby than an argument for mixed species husbandry. 

Id be far more likely to support a mixed species argument with a much lower frog density where the frogs liklihood of encountering each other was low. Even a situation where the frogs in question were competing less for the same foods. I see tincs auratus leucs and azureus(more tincs) all of which are going to be wanting the same sized foods and the same space requirements, with the leucs maybe utilizing mre arboreal space than the others

It looks like a terrestrial attempt at a reef tank,and while it is neat to see so many different frogs all at once I can't help but point out that the successful dynamics between frogs of the same species and the subsequent successes in breeding is considered by many here to be the most enjoyable part of this hobby. Something you are missing out on if you have no breeding in that viv


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> Alright, I try not to brag or boast, but do you know who you're talking to? I do not have a mixed tank, have not had a mixed tank, and will not have a mixed tank. Why? Because I study the frogs. Specifically, I study pumilio. I have done a great deal of observations in the wild on those frogs. I understand a great deal about that species, and the species it is sympatric with (Colostethus talamancae, Minyobates claudae, Dendrobates auratus, Phyllobates lugubris, primarily). I have observed and read about these frogs from a natural setting. You quickly discount my knowledge and experience _actually understanding_ the frogs' behavior, as you do with most of the members here, and say that they don't know anything because they haven't done it. I'm sorry, but you're incorrect in that assessment. Just like with jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, if you understand a little bit about the situation, and in this case, the frogs, you'll come to the same conclusion.


Excellent, if I ever have a question about pumillo I now know who to ask. You still have no experience with mixing species in an enclosed environment and have no basis to continue arguing about it. I also notice you did not take up the offer I extended for you to post my answers to you??

When the dart hobby is explained in a manner that is even 1/100th of the way gravity is explained then we can start comparing that to your ridiculous parachute arguement.


----------



## Jellyman

Estrato said:


> Well for starters fish and darts are much different, but even so there are many species of fish that you should not keep together, and if they are kept together death as a result of stress or fighting will occur. Would you keep piranhas with guppies? Full grown oscars with tetras? How about I toss my pumilio and intermedius into the same tank, just because I can? I mean as long as I "enjoy" it theres no problem, right? Just because its more aesthetically pleasing doesnt mean its good for the animals.
> 
> There has been discussion as to whether or not darts are better off in captivity, when taken care of PROPERLY. For example, many froggers have reported chytrid in their collections, but their frogs show no signs of having the disease at all. Why? Perhaps one reason for this is the animals are well fed, well supplemented, and closely monitored. We have access to a wealth of information on the internet from others who have experienced the same problems, and can even take our frogs to the vet if they arent getting better. Id be willing to say the majority of serious froggers take extremely good care of their animals, and because of this there have been reports of darts living for more than 20 years in captivity. I dont consider my frogs living space, or that of most others on here, a "glass box", rather a vivarium designed to mimic their natural environment as closely as possible. Hell, the only made made item in any of my vivariums is the plastic temp/humidity moniter I use. The "internet hobby police" as you called them have probably saved the lives of countless frogs that would have been taken care of improperly had they said nothing. God knows I, and many many others based on the posts Ive read here, would have been mixing frogs from day one had somebody not told us otherwise.


You can say now that one fish should not be placed with another fish becasue such combinations have been tried under many different conditions by many individuals and the information was shared to the point that it was proven it could not be accomplished successfully. Currently people have started breeding large saltwater angel fish even though for ever it has been said to be impossible. Why is this being accomplisehed now, becasue someone said it is not impossible.

The dart hobby currently bashes people until they quite and leave the hobby or surrender and post on egg shells in fear of retaliation if they post something someone disagrees with. 

I would say a very very very low number of any of our vivariums mimic the natural environment of the frogs. It just is not possible even though we wish it to be so.


----------



## Jellyman

paulrust said:


> I don't think anyone here is saying that Jelly or any mixed species keeper has an intent to harm the animals. The Fantastic Five, or whatever you want to call them, Ed, Philsuma, AfterDark, and countless others are extremely experienced and have forged my path through this hobby. They should be taken seriously. If you are suggesting that we are all selfish and keep frogs merely to look at then you are gravely mistaken. This is not an animal that breeds by the hundreds and can be caught in any tropical sea. It is a real possibility that the wild populations will be gone someday. It would truly be sad if all we have left are bastard mud blood hybrids that were crteated to make some irresponsible keeper a little money. And oh by the way, I wish I was rich, I would create a preserve for our little friends.


I've never said to dismiss any of the information they have that directly involves what they have experience with. So far Ed has been the only one to admit that he has had mixed species tanks and had them be successful. All the others are spitting out information based off of things they have been told. Where are the poeple that have put in the time and tried to do it right. Everyone uses the horror stories of the newbie throwing together a tank of mixed frogs and they die. Well big surprise. Someone should start a thread of all the single species tanks put together by newbies that have had problems, I bet it would be in the hundreds.


----------



## Jellyman

jackxc925 said:


> Okay, so I just read through this whole thread, and it’s a doozy. But first of all, doing something just to prove it can be done is rather pointless. People like monarchzman do experiments to draw conclusions about what they are studying, not just to do them.
> 
> Jellyman, what you have done with those 18 frogs is selfish. Not a single one of them can ever live to their full potential based on what I have seen. You strike me as a person who can never be satisfied, and in the pursuit of your satisfaction you have crammed 18 frogs with different requirements, who would quite frankly never encounter each other in the wild, into a very small and poorly designed enclosure.
> 
> You say you are keeping them for enjoyment, and that you don’t wish for them to breed, that may be so, but if the frogs are in a healthy environment, then they will breed.
> 
> Frogs breed on their own if the conditions are correct! Even if your frogs were breeding, I suspect that they would never develop, seeing as they might get stomped on by EIGHTEEN other frogs. Something is seriously wrong with your husbandry if no breeding has taken place in seven years; I doubt they are all male or all female.
> 
> Not only have you stuffed these animals in like sardines, you mixed species that wouldn’t encounter each other in a natural situation.
> 
> Enough with the analogies, cold hard facts are what we need.


Anyone who owns a frog is selfish in nature. Yes they are now captive bred but if there was no market for them to begin with then they would not have ever originally been removed from the wild.

My intention was never to breed the frogs. I have never even had them sexed. I'm sure that if there are males/females breeding has occured. And like I have said a bunch of times already, the eggs would not have a chnace in that tank. They would have either been eaten or trampled. Either way it is no different then the rightous culling of eggs or tadpoles of perfectly healthy frogs. But since this issue keeps coming up I intend to let them breed in the new tank and see if I can raise the offspring.


----------



## Jellyman

Tuckinrim8 said:


> jackxc925 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jellyman, what you have done with those 18 frogs is selfish. Not a single one of them can ever live to their full potential based on what I have seen. You strike me as a person who can never be satisfied, and in the pursuit of your satisfaction you have crammed 18 frogs with different requirements, who would quite frankly never encounter each other in the wild, into a very small and poorly designed enclosure.
> 
> My thoughts exactly!
> 
> Jellyman, you justify the amount of frogs you have in this enclosure with the point that you have a new tank that is double the size on order... IMO that would still be way too small for 18 adult frogs. How about easing the stress on the frogs by moving some (15 or so .. ) to temp tanks.... Your existing tank lacks leaf litter, plants, suitable hiding places and visual barriers that are a must. You say you have neglected to maintain the tank for the last few months - I say you have neglected the inhabitants for as long as you have had them together. I hope people new to the hobby can look beyond the awwe factor of seeing so many frogs crammed together and realize that this is just plain IRRESPONSIBLE!
> 
> 
> 
> I've never justified the amount of frogs in this tank with the purchase of another tank. I decided I did not want to maintian my 270g reef any longer so I sold it and decided I would get a larger vivarium. One that my wife could also enjoy by placing her orchids within it. I justify this enclosure based on the fact that these frogs are at almost 7 years old, have had no health issues, had no deaths(except for the one Auratus that escaped the first week or so when originally purchased), and they continue to interact with each other.
> 
> I personally hate leaf liter. I have explained this point as well. I prefer a cleaner tank. It makes observation easyier if you can find the frogs. It is hard to tell from the pictures but within the mounds there are numerous caves and crevices that the frogs venture in and out of and there are alot of visual barriers within the tank. They also have access to all the plants hanging on the walls and are commonly all over them.
Click to expand...


----------



## jackxc925

How can you justify that as healthy for the frogs? Even if you say you are moving them to a new tank, they were still overcrowded for "seven years"

How can you say that eggs getting eaten and or trampled is okay?

we may be selfish in that we find these frogs beautiful and fascinating, but we provide them with an environment that refrains from putting them in situations where they share space with 18 other frogs that they would never encounter if they were still wild. 

My take on this situation would be so different if there was even an ounce of good husbandry going on in this tank. But so far I have seen 18 frogs that dont breed because their environment suppresses their instincts. I would liken it to a psych ward


----------



## Jellyman

frogparty said:


> I would definitely count no successful breeding/tad rearing as LACK of success in that enclosure. If they were living life happily there would be breeding. You certainly seem to have enough individuals. I would be interested toknow how much calling is going on in there.
> There is no such thing as the FROG POLICE and honestly, they are your pets and noone can ever stop you from doing what you want with them. Vendors will still sell you frogs no matter what, and noone asks for proof of a good home before they sell them. But if I understand correctly, those frogs are all almost 7 years old, and they've all been in that viv the whole time? The same set up you yourself aknowledge as too cramped for the number of frogs you have in there. Thats just admittedly bad husbandry practice. Now, if the 4, 4, 4, and 2 groups were split up into respective vivs, don't you think you could have produced some viable offspring by now? Something that truly benefits the hobby by reducing the pressure on WC populations by offerring more CB animals for availability. Something far more valuable to the hobby than an argument for mixed species husbandry.
> 
> Id be far more likely to support a mixed species argument with a much lower frog density where the frogs liklihood of encountering each other was low. Even a situation where the frogs in question were competing less for the same foods. I see tincs auratus leucs and azureus(more tincs) all of which are going to be wanting the same sized foods and the same space requirements, with the leucs maybe utilizing mre arboreal space than the others
> 
> It looks like a terrestrial attempt at a reef tank,and while it is neat to see so many different frogs all at once I can't help but point out that the successful dynamics between frogs of the same species and the subsequent successes in breeding is considered by many here to be the most enjoyable part of this hobby. Something you are missing out on if you have no breeding in that viv


Just to clarify I am not in this to breed the frogs or for the "save the rainforest" conservationist twist. I built the enclosure for the abiltiy to view a multi species setup. I would not doubt if they have produced eggs but due to predation and simple trampling the eggs probably would not stand a chance. Once in the new setup I will make it a point to watch for breeding and raise the tads to please all the people that would not cal lit a success due to lack of breeding.


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> From Rich Frye - who's experience and opinion I have a lot of respect for - in regards to mixed tanks:


I have no idea who Rich Frye is but from your quote it appears he actually never had a mixed species tank??


----------



## Jellyman

jackxc925 said:


> How can you justify that as healthy for the frogs? Even if you say you are moving them to a new tank, they were still overcrowded for "seven years"
> 
> How can you say that eggs getting eaten and or trampled is okay?
> 
> we may be selfish in that we find these frogs beautiful and fascinating, but we provide them with an environment that refrains from putting them in situations where they share space with 18 other frogs that they would never encounter if they were still wild.
> 
> My take on this situation would be so different if there was even an ounce of good husbandry going on in this tank. But so far I have seen 18 frogs that dont breed because their environment suppresses their instincts. I would liken it to a psych ward


1. They are only being moved because I decided to take down my reef tank. Otherwise tey would have lived out there lives in the current enclosure.

2. It is just as okay as those that cull eggs or tadpoles. This also happens in single species setups.


----------



## jackxc925

Jellyman said:


> 1. They are only being moved because I decided to take down my reef tank. Otherwise tey would have lived out there lives in the current enclosure.
> 
> 2. It is just as okay as those that cull eggs or tadpoles. This also happens in single species setups.


who in their right mind just randomly decides to cull tadpoles, I do not endorse this practice whatsoever.



Jellyman said:


> I have no idea who Rich Frye is but from your quote it appears he actually never had a mixed species tank??


it appears you didnt read the post. As he has mixed intermedius with terriblis and other thumbs with tincs


----------



## paulrust

Ed said:


> Whoa whoa slow down with the pitchforks and torches folks. There really isn't any need for castigation in a discussion.
> This is a discussion and it should be handled that way, not as a mob yelling burn the witch....
> 
> This is hard to follow from my I-phone so I'll to follow up more later but want to add that a lot of basic science starts/started out as what happens when.


He started it


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

paulrust said:


> He started it


FINALLY, something to smile about in this mind numbing thread.

John


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> Therefore, they have no basis to parallel what they know about a single species and apply it to scenario of mixed species.


Trying to catch up on several pages of posts...

I have to disagree with this here... a sound understanding of the normal behavior of the frogs is required to be able to design and implement a multispecies enclosure with the greatest chance of success. 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

jackxc925 said:


> who in their right mind just randomly decides to cull tadpoles, I do not endorse this practice whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> it appears you didnt read the post. As he has mixed intermedius with terriblis and other thumbs with tincs


There is a thread on here of a zoo that culls tadpoles and frogs of an almost extinct in the wild species of frog rather then get these frogs into the hands of breeders.

There are many posts of how it is better to cull tad poles of hybrids then let them live all over the forum.


I'll reread his thread. I must have missed that he had any mixed species tanks that consisted of two different frog species.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Trying to catch up on several pages of posts...
> 
> I have to disagree with this here... a sound understanding of the normal behavior of the frogs is required to be able to design and implement a multispecies enclosure with the greatest chance of success.
> 
> Ed


I agree that there information on that particular species is very valuable but when they start generalizing across the board when it pewrtains to mixed species it is only speculation.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> Excellent, if I ever have a question about pumillo I now know who to ask. You still have no experience with mixing species in an enclosed environment and have no basis to continue arguing about it. I also notice you did not take up the offer I extended for you to post my answers to you??
> 
> When the dart hobby is explained in a manner that is even 1/100th of the way gravity is explained then we can start comparing that to your ridiculous parachute arguement.


You just do not understand that a great deal can be learned from a species by actually doing the research. I understand more about the behavior on these animals, and what is natural, where as you do not have any such experience. So in determining if frogs are behaving naturally, you have no basis for determining if your frogs are in fact displaying natural behavior. If you want to play it that way, we can play that way. The fact of the matter is that I have observed these frogs, studied them, and read extensively about them. I know what I'm talking about. I do not have to fail at mixing to realize that it only works in very particular situations. What you're condoning is people putting their frogs through a stressful experience before they can determine if that stressful experience was good or not. Not very responsible.

And we know a great deal about keeping anurans, especially darts. We don't know everything there is to know, but we know a great deal. Enough to be able to determine basic stuff like behavioral compatibility.

As for the answers, fine, here they are with my responses (the original questions are in bold):



Jellyman said:


> *What benefit to each of the species is there for a mixed species tank?
> 
> You say that people want to mix to get a colorful display. Why can't this be done by creative planting and/or paludariums with fish? Keep in mind that many of the most colorful frogs are tiny, and without the creative planting, they'd look like specks of color on an otherwise green background.*
> 
> -It can be done with plants but I am talking about different color of frogs. I have no experience with paludariums.


Despite how frogs very commonly hide and are very small. If they want a colorful display, it can be done with creative planting with frogs as a highlight. If you're talking about just frogs, why bother with planting at all?



> *Have you considered that your experience might be the 1 in a million success with mixing? Since that does seem to be the case given all of the evidence that mixing isn't good, is it really wise to advocate mixing? It would be likened to saying "Buy a lottery ticket because you will win $1,000,000."*
> 
> -All of the evidence does not say mixing is not good. There is almost no evidence being provided that is based on experience/fact by anyone other then myself. As a matter of fact, I know of several mixed tanks that are quite successful and even Ed has admitted in threads he has maintained successful mixed tanks.


Your tank is not successful. It's overcrowded, and the frogs have not bred in 7 years. All of the evidence does say that mixing is not good.



> *Have you run single species tanks with the frogs in your mixed tanks and determined that weights, reproduction, eating, intraspecific competition, call rate, etc. are no different than in the mixed tank?*
> 
> -I did have a single species 55g 4 leuc tank prior to starting the mixed tank. I sold it when I moved and was without frogs fo about a year or so before I started the mixed tank.
> -I have never been interested in breeding any of the frogs I have owned and can offer basically no advice on reproduction with the frogs. I have noticed a couple times some jelly looking masses that were probably eggs but I will not say I'm 100% sure
> -I do not handle my frogs to weigh them so their weight is monitored by observation. The Leucs I have now are basically identical to the ones I had in a species only tank.
> -I tend to over feed. I do this with my saltwater tanks as well. I'd rather error on the side of them being full rather then hungry.
> -I have only heard my leucs call and they call all the time. As far as sexing them I never have and would not know how to. Like I said I'm not in it to breed them.
> -my looks eat with the rest of the frogs and do not appear to act any different then the four acted with each other in the single species tank


So basically, it's a no. You don't have any conclusive evidence that all of the species are doing as well or better than they would in a single species tank. You have the leucs which you think were the same, but do not have any real unbiased data to say that that is true, just what you think.



> *How big is your mixed tank? What species are in it and how many of each? What is the age of the frogs? What is the sex ratios of the species?*
> 
> -My tank is a custom acrylic tank. It is 3' wide x 2' deep x 30" tall
> -4 Panamania Auratus, 4 Costa Rican Auratus, 4 Tincs, 4 Azeurus, and 2 Leucs
> -Personally I think they are a little cramped and that is why I am up grading to a 6" x 3' x 30"tall new custom tank.
> - I purchased the P. Auratus from Saurian Ent on 7/8/2002, the Leucs and the C. Auratus from Vanishing Jewel on 7/1/2002, and the Tincs and Azerus from either Glades Herp or Strictly Reptiles within a week or two of the others(can't remember if the frogs or the soft shelled turtles I bought came from which place)
> -I'm only sure of the two leucs being males because I have watched them both call. All the others I have no idea


Not really gonna comment since there was several pages devoted to the ridiculousness of this.



> *There is a big difference between surviving and thriving. For example, there has been a recent movement in the zoo industry to make habitats more natural. Animals survived in the concrete boxes that animals were kept in, but did not do well. It was found that animals did much better and thrived in more natural enclosures. Same thing with these frogs. Your frogs are surviving, but do you have evidence that they are thriving?*
> 
> -I guess that will only be determined by whomever is defining thriving. These frogs are going on 7 years old. I only lost one frog that escaped shortly after I bought them. Could be he was driven out, could be he simply was exploring and got out. I simply do not know. Are they breeding. Probably if male/females exist but with 18 frogs the likely hood that any eggs would survive is not likely(either because they are eaten or are stomped on). I think my frogs are thriving and I bet once in their new enclosure I will see more evidence of breeding just due to the increase in available space.


Ed provided a good definition of thriving. Exceeding median age and displaying natural behavior. Natural behavior includes breeding. So you animals probably are not thriving.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> I agree that there information on that particular species is very valuable but when they start generalizing across the board when it pewrtains to mixed species it is only speculation.


Unless you understand the behavior of a great number of species, including those that might be used in a mixed tank, then it's not so much speculation.


----------



## Ed

Blackbird said:


> - crossed morphs (in case you mix frogs of the same species, but not morph): Not cool. No-one wants to unknowingly buy a frog of "unpure" (lol) blood. Note: This doesn't stop people from buying tinc "Amotopo" and tinc "Agreja" though. Why not, I wonder? Apparently these morphs are the results of crossing morphs. Shouldn't that make them undesirable? Ah well.


And how much of that is a lack of education on the part of the purchasers?.... 



Blackbird said:


> actual hybrid offspring occurring: It is possible that a auratus mate with a leucomelas, and a auratus x leucomelas hybrid offspring may be born of it. However, I am unsure whether these bastard frogs would even be fertile (anyone?).



I have not seen any hard evidence either way however given that there are known hybrid among other anurans that are fertile (such as Rana esculenta), it should not be considered unlikely. 




Blackbird said:


> a male tinc should be more threatened by another tinc than a male of another species, since the animal will recognize the other male as a member of the same species, and that will mean the other male will automatically be seen as a rival for the ladies.  Which, of course, they won't like. Stress. Threatening. Fighting. The more similar a frog is to the first male's species, the more likely it is he will be seen as a rival for females. Similar in shape, seize, color, pattern, sound (their call is _very_ important! Do tinc males get angry when they hear leucs (in a different tank) calling? Do tinc females react to leuc males calling? Not really. But they get pissed (males) when they hear other tincs), smell (though, of course, I don't know how good frogs can smell, at that).


Dendrobatids? Apparently quite well (see Forester, D.C. & A. Wisnieski. 1991. The Significance of Airborne Olfactory Cues to the Recognition of Home Area by the Dart-poison Frog Dendrobates pumilio. J. Herpetol., 25(4): 502-504 and Korbeck, R.G and McRobert, S.P. (2005). Home area recognition via olfactory cues in the tropical poison frog Dendrobates auratus. Russian Journal of Herpetology 12(3): 161-166.




Blackbird said:


> This is the point where it would be logical that another male leuc means more stress for a male leuc than another male tinc. The second male leuc is a major threat to the first male leucs chances to have offspring (and vice versa, of course). Now both main objectives are threatened. Not cool.).


This depends on the species of dendrobates and the allocations of the resources.. in Dendrobates, the males are more likely to defend the calling perch as opposed to other resource allocations (check out some of the earlier references I posted along these lines) as opposed to Oophaga or Ranitomeya... 




Blackbird said:


> Practically, studies_ have _been done on other animals (like birds) that show exactly this: that intraspecific aggression is more common than interspecific aggression. (Right now, I'm pretty sure I even have one report sitting around on my hardware somewhere, a report that states intraspecific aggression occurred more than twice as often than interspecific aggression in a certain kind of bird (I forgot, though I am reasonably sure it was some kind of Shrike).



This depends on the resource involved and the species involved.. many dendrobatids are going to be closer to nectiverous birds in defending resources as the competition is going to be intense and the resource may be transitory (phytotelmata availability and quality for example) and probably occurs more along the lines of the link below, or like that seen by hummingbirds.. 

BioOne Online Journals - RESOURCE AVAILABILITY CONTROLS BIRD-ASSEMBLAGE COMPOSITION THROUGH INTERSPECIFIC AGGRESSION



Some thoughts,


Ed


----------



## Ed

Blackbird said:


> No, it's actually quite the other way around, I'm assuming the leuc is NOT likely to recognize the tinc male as anything other than competitor for resources/space/breeding spots. It would, however, recognize another leuc male as competitor for resources/space/breeding spots AND as a competitor for the females. And that is why, essentially, it is entirely possible that having another leuc male (this is just an example here) might be even more stressful.


The recognition depends on the species involved as different dendrobatids have different degrees of the type of resource defended. In Oophaga pumilio both the male and females will defend resources but if one looks in Lotter's Poison Frogs, there is a photo of a surprisingly dense assembly of O. pumilio which if I remember correctly is attributed to the density of the resources (heaps of coco beans...). 

Ed


----------



## jackxc925

Jellyman said:


> There is a thread on here of a zoo that culls tadpoles and frogs of an almost extinct in the wild species of frog rather then get these frogs into the hands of breeders.
> 
> There are many posts of how it is better to cull tad poles of hybrids then let them live all over the forum.
> 
> 
> I'll reread his thread. I must have missed that he had any mixed species tanks that consisted of two different frog species.


are your tincs almost extinct. I didnt think so. They were culled because the tank mates in that situation were siblings, and they didnt want the future genetics to be muddled.

Personally, I think they should do something in that situation to eliminate culling. I don't like it here, I don't like it there. 

And another thing. You would rather kill eggs and stop life than simply never put frogs in a position to create hybrids?


----------



## Ed

frogparty said:


> I would definitely count no successful breeding/tad rearing as LACK of success in that enclosure. If they were living life happily there would be breeding.


I don't necessarily agree with this one... reproduction is not a yardstick that is a good one to use to determine how well an animal is doing in captivity.... If used in combination with lifespan, and number of natural behaviors observed then it is fine but by itself it is not acceptable. Animals that are stressed have been known to breed provided that the proper reproductive cues are given even though the animal may not survive the stress of reproduction. 


Ed


----------



## Ed

paulrust said:


> I don't think anyone here is saying that Jelly or any mixed species keeper has an intent to harm the animals. The Fantastic Five, or whatever you want to call them, Ed, Philsuma, AfterDark, and countless others are extremely experienced and have forged my path through this hobby .


I have to say that Ben has inspired more than one of the twists and turns on my paths to keeping animals... 
If I have learned from him..... 

Ed


----------



## frogfreak

I like the way this thread is starting to take a turn. It's starting to sound more like a discussion and not mudslinging. You have to hand it to Jellyman. He's taken a lot of abuse in the last few days yet he managed to answer point by point tonight without getting upset or arguementative. Keep it up guys and gals

Glenn


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> I've never said to dismiss any of the information they have that directly involves what they have experience with. So far Ed has been the only one to admit that he has had mixed species tanks and had them be successful. All the others are spitting out information based off of things they have been told. Where are the poeple that have put in the time and tried to do it right. Everyone uses the horror stories of the newbie throwing together a tank of mixed frogs and they die. Well big surprise. Someone should start a thread of all the single species tanks put together by newbies that have had problems, I bet it would be in the hundreds.



Keep in mind that when discussing herps in general I have been keeping/working and learning about them for more than 35 years and I have been working with anurans pretty solidly for more than 15 years... I have to say that I did a lot of research before I was able to get my first successful multispecies enclosure. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

jackxc925 said:


> who in their right mind just randomly decides to cull tadpoles, I do not endorse this practice whatsoever.


I have to make a comment here.. how did you determine the decision was random? This is a discussion and personal attacks don't do any good except maybe to make someone feel good for a moment at the expense of the discussion.... 

Ed


----------



## Philsuma

frogfreak said:


> I like the way this thread is starting to take a turn. It's starting to sound more like a discussion and not mudslinging. You have to hand it to Jellyman. He's taken a lot of abuse in the last few days yet he managed to answer point by point tonight without getting upset or arguementative. Keep it up guys and gals
> 
> Glenn


Yep...he has been "fairly good"...especially in the face of overwelming opposition.

Glenn...I'm only seeing ONE signature??? 

Don't tell me......


----------



## afterdark

Jellyman said:


> I have no idea who Rich Frye is but from your quote it appears he actually never had a mixed species tank??


Hm - try reading this paragraph again. 


Rich Frye said:


> On a more serious note though, the two times I have attempted mixed Dart tanks they both ended in what some may call successful, but what i call far from that. I have mixed "arboreal' with ground dwelling (*terribilis with intermedius*) and they got along just fine. No aggression, no cross infections, no hybridization, no anything, including no breeding. They were in-fact the ONLY tank I had running that was not producing one single egg, not one egg. At the time each and every other tank was "successfully" producing good eggs. My second attempt at a mixed dart tank produced the same exact "successes". No aggression in a big old tank but not breeding either. *Tincs mixed with thumbs.* Nothing good to report other than the fact that they did not kill each other. What did I learn? Mixed species tanks good. Bugs with darts will always work. Mixed dendrobates tanks bad. Mixed Dart tanks will never be as "successful" as single dart species tanks.


Rich Frye is widely regarded as one of the best (and outspoken!) frog keepers in the US. Do a search for some of his posts here - he has lots to say and his advice is sound.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> There is a thread on here of a zoo that culls tadpoles and frogs of an almost extinct in the wild species of frog rather then get these frogs into the hands of breeders.
> .


Point of clarification.. the country that owns all of those toads (Atelopus zeteki) prohibits the transfer to any non-AZA institution. 
Now the hobby doesn't have a good reputation with respect to responsible conserveration of species (as maintaining genetic lineages, smuggling,.. (for example, there are mysteriousus in the USA illegally.. this does not help the case for distributing anything to some institutions and even foriegn goverments...) 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> I agree that there information on that particular species is very valuable but when they start generalizing across the board when it pewrtains to mixed species it is only speculation.


Actually, frogs of the genus Dendrobates are likely to react to other males of the same genus Dendrobates the same way so it does apply to multispecies.. And it has been reported that species that behave similarly do show the aggression to those similarly behaving species (the problem is more that the frogs may not demonstrate the correct submission behaviors..) 

Ed


----------



## frogfreak

We're good I only use the double sig if we're posting together. I painted the walls in our soon to be frog room. Laura's busy doing the baseboards 

I love womans lib!

 Glenn


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Keep in mind that when discussing herps in general I have been keeping/working and learning about them for more than 35 years and I have been working with anurans pretty solidly for more than 15 years... I have to say that I did a lot of research before I was able to get my first successful multispecies enclosure.
> 
> Ed


That's awesome. So you posess the information alot of us have tried to seek out. And in order for mutli species tank to be successful the information you have regarding how your enclosures were successful will help everyone. Please share what you found that worked in a multi species tank and what did not so we can avoid potential mistakes and take steps in the right direction.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> I have to make a comment here.. how did you determine the decision was random? This is a discussion and personal attacks don't do any good except maybe to make someone feel good for a moment at the expense of the discussion....
> 
> Ed


Even if it was not random, the decision was still made to cull the offspring of an endangered frog rather then using them to create more. I know there are genetic reasons but if a frog species is almost extinct I cannot understamd killing a single one.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Actually, frogs of the genus Dendrobates are likely to react to other males of the same genus Dendrobates the same way so it does apply to multispecies.. And it has been reported that species that behave similarly do show the aggression to those similarly behaving species (the problem is more that the frogs may not demonstrate the correct submission behaviors..)
> 
> Ed


So the only way to learn is to introduce them and find out. This may not be the perfect way to go about it, and if there is a better way, then let's try it.


----------



## Jellyman

afterdark said:


> Hm - try reading this paragraph again.
> Rich Frye is widely regarded as one of the best (and outspoken!) frog keepers in the US. Do a search for some of his posts here - he has lots to say and his advice is sound.


Sorry, I misread it after it started into a comedy routine of a mixed species bug/frog tank. Unless I am mistaken he said the tanks were successful and the only factor he contributes to them not being successful is breeding. 

"they got along just fine. No aggression, no cross infections, no hybridization, no anything, including no breeding"

I have stated from the beginning that I was never interested in breeding and have never used this as a measure of success because in the event that they did breed the liklihood off the eggs surviving predation or being trampled on was very very low. My measure of success is that they are healthy and if 18 frogs can live 7 yeasr without a death, can you honestly argue they are not healthy?? 

I am game to try and see if thining down the tank, or limiting it to two species, or once they are in the larger enclosure if breeding is taking place and if the egss are viable.


----------



## Ben E

paulrust said:


> I don't think anyone here is saying that Jelly or any mixed species keeper has an intent to harm the animals. The Fantastic Five, or whatever you want to call them, Ed, Philsuma, AfterDark, and countless others are extremely experienced and have forged my path through this hobby. They should be taken seriously. If you are suggesting that we are all selfish and keep frogs merely to look at then you are gravely mistaken. This is not an animal that breeds by the hundreds and can be caught in any tropical sea. It is a real possibility that the wild populations will be gone someday. It would truly be sad if all we have left are bastard mud blood hybrids that were crteated to make some irresponsible keeper a little money. And oh by the way, I wish I was rich, I would create a preserve for our little friends.


ah! ... there once was a time when i was taken seriously!  I was just trying to point out that the hobby has a way of instilling emotions which tend to make people think that somehow having some dart frogs in a glass box in the living room is "aiding" wild populations. My personal belief is that institutions engaging in this are also somewhat being fooled by the same self importance trap. This just isnt coming from complete left field, i have participated in the maintenance and management of three pretty badass anuran collections, built a handfull of exhibits, traveled to central and south america about a dozen times, and waste countless hours tinkering in this hobby as a hobbyist. Mixing species is demonized to no end on these lists, and the "holier than thou" attitude is one of the main reasons i have some 150 posts in the years i have been a member. I have had some successful multi-species tanks, and i could have never done it without failing, learning, and doing my own work and my own observations. This is a hobby, YOUR hobby. I have learned so much and enjoyed so many aspects, and have had many failures. That is what it is about. There would be no furthering of the art if everyone were to follow these internet enforced "rules". If you want to try mixing species, just keep in mind that you will probably fail a couple times. Read the animals, figure out what you did wrong, fix it, and keep on keeping on. 

mixed species boxes...


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> Even if it was not random, the decision was still made to cull the offspring of an endangered frog rather then using them to create more. I know there are genetic reasons but if a frog species is almost extinct I cannot understamd killing a single one.


Zeteki breed like rabbits in captivity. They must be culled because AZA institutions are running out of room to keep them in. They're an endangered species, but in captivity, there is little threat to them going extinct.



> So the only way to learn is to introduce them and find out. This may not be the perfect way to go about it, and if there is a better way, then let's try it.


Seriously? That's like saying "well, we don't know the lower temperature limit these frogs can survive at, so let's try it!" These frogs easily stress when there are too many individuals of the same species, and you're suggesting do further stress them?


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> That's awesome. So you posess the information alot of us have tried to seek out. And in order for mutli species tank to be successful the information you have regarding how your enclosures were successful will help everyone. Please share what you found that worked in a multi species tank and what did not so we can avoid potential mistakes and take steps in the right direction.


Try a search using the advanced options using my name and multispecies or the links under the multispecies sticky. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> Even if it was not random, the decision was still made to cull the offspring of an endangered frog rather then using them to create more. I know there are genetic reasons but if a frog species is almost extinct I cannot understamd killing a single one.


The quote I was addressing wasn't from you but I wil repeat myself.. If kept properly the frogs would rapidly outproduce the available holding space in the zoos causing the population to collapse as the newer generations would not have any place to be sent. If prevented from depositing the eggs, the females are known to form adhesions which prevent oviposition and kill the female when she attempts to deposit them or the female may prolapse the eggs and die... 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Point of clarification.. the country that owns all of those toads (Atelopus zeteki) prohibits the transfer to any non-AZA institution.
> Now the hobby doesn't have a good reputation with respect to responsible conserveration of species (as maintaining genetic lineages, smuggling,.. (for example, there are mysteriousus in the USA illegally.. this does not help the case for distributing anything to some institutions and even foriegn goverments...)
> 
> Ed


The quote below is from the original thread on the culling of this endangered toad. I cannot validate it's validity but I'm sure Ed can find it quoted somewhere
It just jerks my chain that every AZA Zoo does not have these guys breeding. I cannot believe that they(and this is not pointed at the people who work with the frogs because it probably tears their insides apart having to kill them) can dance around killing an endangered species because they are afraid it will enter the pet trade.


Quote: "Its my understanding that the ownership of these animals belongs to the CITES permit holder (in this case to The Maryland Zoo in Baltimore) and not to the Republic of Panama. There is however a Memorandum of Understanding that the imported animals and their offspring are only placed on loan to other AZA institutions. 

"This restriction is intended to prevent the protected species from entering the pet trade via captive zoo breeding, potentially creating a situation in which wild-caught illegal specimens could be “laundered” under the guise of coming from legal “zoo stock,” as has happened with other species of amphibians. Once this situation begins, it is impossible to stop and the remaining wild populations become even more at risk of being collected and traded illegally." "


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> So the only way to learn is to introduce them and find out. This may not be the perfect way to go about it, and if there is a better way, then let's try it.


There is no need for random if one has a firm grasp and understanding of the behavior and biology of the frogs in question. 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

frogfreak said:


> I like the way this thread is starting to take a turn. It's starting to sound more like a discussion and not mudslinging. You have to hand it to Jellyman. He's taken a lot of abuse in the last few days yet he managed to answer point by point tonight without getting upset or arguementative. Keep it up guys and gals
> 
> Glenn


Thank You. Kind words are greatly appreciated.
Bryan


----------



## Ed

Ben E said:


> ah! ... there once was a time when i was taken seriously!
> 
> Ben I always take you seriously (at least until I figure out when your kidding...)
> 
> Edd


----------



## paulrust

Ben E said:


> ah! ... there once was a time when i was taken seriously!  I was just trying to point out that the hobby has a way of instilling emotions which tend to make people think that somehow having some dart frogs in a glass box in the living room is "aiding" wild populations. My personal belief is that institutions engaging in this are also somewhat being fooled by the same self importance trap. This just isnt coming from complete left field, i have participated in the maintenance and management of three pretty badass anuran collections, built a handfull of exhibits, traveled to central and south america about a dozen times, and waste countless hours tinkering in this hobby as a hobbyist. Mixing species is demonized to no end on these lists, and the "holier than thou" attitude is one of the main reasons i have some 150 posts in the years i have been a member. I have had some successful multi-species tanks, and i could have never done it without failing, learning, and doing my own work and my own observations. This is a hobby, YOUR hobby. I have learned so much and enjoyed so many aspects, and have had many failures. That is what it is about. There would be no furthering of the art if everyone were to follow these internet enforced "rules". If you want to try mixing species, just keep in mind that you will probably fail a couple times. Read the animals, figure out what you did wrong, fix it, and keep on keeping on.
> 
> mixed species boxes...


I will only comment on the "holier than thou" attack. I am no better than anyone else, but I have re-introduced hundreds of chorus frogs back into an area that was full of them years ago and then over time disappeared. I purchased 6 acres in the area, made wide pools in the creek for breeding and bred and still do breed them to be released. But I guess i don't know what I'm talking about either. I guess this answers any question whether having a living room full of frogs can help the species.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> The quote I was addressing wasn't from you but I wil repeat myself.. If kept properly the frogs would rapidly outproduce the available holding space in the zoos causing the population to collapse as the newer generations would not have any place to be sent. If prevented from depositing the eggs, the females are known to form adhesions which prevent oviposition and kill the female when she attempts to deposit them or the female may prolapse the eggs and die...
> 
> Ed


Why are these frogs not candidates for release?


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Try a search using the advanced options using my name and multispecies or the links under the multispecies sticky.
> 
> Ed


Can you please post what helped you maintain these multi species tanks successfully. Not everyone wants to sift through 100's of threads to find a handful of posts. At least that is what I have been told.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> It just jerks my chain that every AZA Zoo does not have these guys breeding. I cannot believe that they(and this is not pointed at the people who work with the frogs because it probably tears their insides apart having to kill them) can dance around killing an endangered species because they are afraid it will enter the pet trade.


First off, every AZA Zoo with this species isn't breeding them because there isn't room to do it in those Zoos. This is to prevent the population from expanding beyond the capacity of the Zoos to hold it. 

Second, the pet trade in general has a really bad track record with maintaining species.. and there are several somewhat notorious times when the private sector has gotten involved in projects that ended up with animals being laundered into the pet trade.. for example Dyscophus antongilii. 




Jellyman said:


> Quote: "Its my understanding that the ownership of these animals belongs to the CITES permit holder (in this case to The Maryland Zoo in Baltimore) and not to the Republic of Panama. There is however a Memorandum of Understanding that the imported animals and their offspring are only placed on loan to other AZA institutions.
> 
> "This restriction is intended to prevent the protected species from entering the pet trade via captive zoo breeding, potentially creating a situation in which wild-caught illegal specimens could be “laundered” under the guise of coming from legal “zoo stock,” as has happened with other species of amphibians. Once this situation begins, it is impossible to stop and the remaining wild populations become even more at risk of being collected and traded illegally." "



It is my understanding that the import permit for scientific research and captive propegation along with the memorandum of agreement prohibit the transfer of any of these toads to any institution other than an AZA instution. The language was included on the permit (Wisniewski, 2001, personal communication) so USF&W would be able to prosecute anyone other than an AZA institution who ended up with them. There was a seizure of Atelopus varius shortly after thier import if I remember correctly. 

The "A. varius" that were also collected and imported at the same time are under a seperate agreement. 

I have some issues that a failure to understand population management and that it being an endangered species appearing to be used as a cover for avarice in wanting the species released to the pet trade.... 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

MonarchzMan said:


> Zeteki breed like rabbits in captivity. They must be culled because AZA institutions are running out of room to keep them in. They're an endangered species, but in captivity, there is little threat to them going extinct.
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously? That's like saying "well, we don't know the lower temperature limit these frogs can survive at, so let's try it!" These frogs easily stress when there are too many individuals of the same species, and you're suggesting do further stress them?



If they are running out of room then we should be looking to find a way to introduce them back into the wild not culling them.

We can find exact facts as to such things as temperature, humidity, rainfall in an area, etc.... without knowing anything about how the frogs will interact with each other. Frogs do not need to be introduced to find out that type of information.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> Can you please post what helped you maintain these multi species tanks successfully. Not everyone wants to sift through 100's of threads to find a handful of posts. At least that is what I have been told.


I covered a large majority of those issues and have better things to do with my time than retype multiple pages of posts. If you want to pay me for my time, then we will have a basis to talk as I can justify that to my wife when I spend too much time on the computer. 

Ed


----------



## Ben E

paulrust said:


> I will only comment on the "holier than thou" attack. I am no better than anyone else, but I have re-introduced hundreds of chorus frogs back into an area that was full of them years ago and then over time disappeared. I purchased 6 acres in the area, made wide pools in the creek for breeding and bred and still do breed them to be released. But I guess i don't know what I'm talking about either. I guess this answers any question whether having a living room full of frogs can help the species.


that is great and pretty freaking awesome! i dont think i have that commitment or space for such endeavors, let alone the nagging feeling of introducing pathogens or altering a natural extinction event. There are however aspects and virtues of this hobby that do not directly deal with conservation that do deserve merit. one of which is the "art of display", that sometimes can be enhanced through the inclusion of multiple anuran species.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> If they are running out of room then we should be looking to find a way to introduce them back into the wild not culling them.


We cannot reintroduce them at this time as chytrid is rampent in thier habitat at this time. When chytrid can be dealt with in the wild, they will be returned. 




Jellyman said:


> We can find exact facts as to such things as temperature, humidity, rainfall in an area, etc.... without knowing anything about how the frogs will interact with each other. Frogs do not need to be introduced to find out that type of information.


Go to Google, use the pull down menu and click on scholar. 
Wait until the page comes up. 
When the page is done loading, type anuran territoriality and hit enter.. copy down the references and head to the local library or dig out the credit card and purchase online access.... 

Ed


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> I covered a large majority of those issues and have better things to do with my time than retype multiple pages of posts. If you want to pay me for my time, then we will have a basis to talk as I can justify that to my wife when I spend too much time on the computer.
> 
> Ed


Cut and Paste


----------



## paulrust

Ben E said:


> that is great and pretty freaking awesome! i dont think i have that commitment or space for such endeavors, let alone the nagging feeling of introducing pathogens or altering a natural extinction event. There are however aspects and virtues of this hobby that do not directly deal with conservation that do deserve merit. one of which is the "art of display", that sometimes can be enhanced through the inclusion of multiple anuran species.


I completely agree.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> We cannot reintroduce them at this time as chytrid is rampent in thier habitat at this time. When chytrid can be dealt with in the wild, they will be returned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go to Google, use the pull down menu and click on scholar.
> Wait until the page comes up.
> When the page is done loading, type anuran territoriality and hit enter.. copy down the references and head to the local library or dig out the credit card and purchase online access....
> 
> Ed


Excellent point on reintroduction. I was not aware of that fact. Sounds like someone needs to step in and uphold the endangered species protection act.

I'm not sure what your second comment is in reference to?? What exactly are you directing me to find?


----------



## frogfreak

paulrust said:


> I will only comment on the "holier than thou" attack. I am no better than anyone else, but I have re-introduced hundreds of chorus frogs back into an area that was full of them years ago and then over time disappeared. I purchased 6 acres in the area, made wide pools in the creek for breeding and bred and still do breed them to be released. But I guess i don't know what I'm talking about either. I guess this answers any question whether having a living room full of frogs can help the species.



Good for you and the species. I'm new to frogs but I'm involved in cleaning up our Grand river and trying to establish native fish populations. I think a lot of people need to realize that most people involved with frogs intend them no harm. Seems to me most people are genuine nature lovers from what I've been reading. Maybe that's what makes us so passionate about this post and others. I don't think this is a black and white issue. As Ed has stated before he has kept multispecies tanks and I and others would like to hear about you're successes and failures. We can only learn from this experience. I'm NOT promoting mixing species but would just like more info on the topic.

Glenn


----------



## Jellyman

frogfreak said:


> Good for you and the species. I'm new to frogs but I'm involved in cleaning up our Grand river and trying to establish native fish populations. I think a lot of people need to realize that most people involved with frogs intend them no harm. Seems to me most people are genuine nature lovers from what I've been reading. Maybe that's what makes us so passionate about this post and others. I don't think this is a black and white issue. As Ed has stated before he has kept multispecies tanks and I and others would like to hear about you're successes and failures. We can only learn from this experience. I'm NOT promoting mixing species but would just like more info on the topic.
> 
> Glenn


Ed,
I'm not the only one that would like you to post what helped you be successful when setting up a multi species tank. Please humor us.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> Cut and Paste


Search and read.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> Excellent point on reintroduction. I was not aware of that fact. Sounds like someone needs to step in and uphold the endangered species protection act.


How do you uphold a regulation that applies only to the USA to a another country (other than invade it and make it a US territory)? 



Jellyman said:


> I'm not sure what your second comment is in reference to?? What exactly are you directing me to find?


Territoriality, resource defense etc... a lot of the information you claim that is not available is there you just need to look for it. 

Ed


----------



## paulrust

frogfreak said:


> Good for you and the species. I'm new to frogs but I'm involved in cleaning up our Grand river and trying to establish native fish populations. I think a lot of people need to realize that most people involved with frogs intend them no harm. Seems to me most people are genuine nature lovers from what I've been reading. Maybe that's what makes us so passionate about this post and others. I don't think this is a black and white issue. As Ed has stated before he has kept multispecies tanks and I and others would like to hear about you're successes and failures. We can only learn from this experience. I'm NOT promoting mixing species but would just like more info on the topic.
> 
> Glenn


I think you are right and after thinking about what Ben said, perhaps I need to back away from the conservation side of it and look at it from the hobby perspective. I am new to darts and absolutely don't mean to discredit anyone. I am sorry if that is what it sounded like. I am here to learn as much as possible about good practices.


----------



## Philsuma

Ben E said:


> mixed species boxes...


Please....don't use Zoo's as an "example" for the mixing debate.

Zoo's and hobbyists have as much in common as.....well.....not much.

Bad reaching analogy....


----------



## frogfreak

paulrust said:


> I think you are right and after thinking about what Ben said, perhaps I need to back away from the conservation side of it and look at it from the hobby perspective. I am new to darts and absolutely don't mean to discredit anyone. I am sorry if that is what it sounded like. I am here to learn as much as possible about good practices.


I disagree. You should be proud of what you've done. I know I am. Even if that means picking up other peoples garbadge


----------



## Philsuma

I love watching Ed do the heavy lifting....lol


Yeah Ed, please regurgitate a few years of your postings....

Too bad you couldn't make the NJ meeting today....we could have discussed "the lizard king" and others......


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

I wonder what the record is for one person`s responses to a single thread is?
The Jel Man is at 60 so far.
Another exciting Sat. night for me.

John


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> How do you uphold a regulation that applies only to the USA to a another country (other than invade it and make it a US territory)?
> 
> 
> 
> Territoriality, resource defense etc... a lot of the information you claim that is not available is there you just need to look for it.
> 
> Ed



We have the frogs in the USA. They are in our posession. We have the opportunity to uphold the regulation on the frogs currently within our boarders.

Yes, I can find information on a specific species but not as to how different species will behave when confined within the same enclosure. It has been argued that the reason this board is here is so that the questions you are telling me to go "look up" can be asked and answered in a more timely mannor. You for example seem to be one of the best resources as to having claim to successful mised enclosures. Please share this information.


----------



## frogfreak

Philsuma said:


> I love watching Ed do the heavy lifting....lol
> 
> 
> Yeah Ed, please regurgitate a few years of your postings....
> 
> Too bad you couldn't make the NJ meeting today....we could have discussed "the lizard king" and others......



Good point. I will do some searching when I'm able.


Glenn


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

Enlightened Rogue said:


> I wonder what the record is for one person`s responses to a single thread is?
> The Jel Man is at 60 so far.
> Another exciting Sat. night for me.
> 
> John


Make that 61


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> I love watching Ed do the heavy lifting....lol
> 
> 
> Yeah Ed, please regurgitate a few years of your postings....
> 
> Too bad you couldn't make the NJ meeting today....we could have discussed "the lizard king" and others......


Actually we are just asking for the information pertaining to his successful mixed enclosures. Monarchzman has been hounding me to retype every question I have already answered even though I answered him in a PM already. It is his decision not to and I respect that so I've already asked and will not ask him again.


----------



## Estrato

Jellyman said:


> You can say now that one fish should not be placed with another fish becasue such combinations have been tried under many different conditions by many individuals and the information was shared to the point that it was proven it could not be accomplished successfully. Currently people have started breeding large saltwater angel fish even though for ever it has been said to be impossible. Why is this being accomplisehed now, becasue someone said it is not impossible.
> 
> The dart hobby currently bashes people until they quite and leave the hobby or surrender and post on egg shells in fear of retaliation if they post something someone disagrees with.
> 
> I would say a very very very low number of any of our vivariums mimic the natural environment of the frogs. It just is not possible even though we wish it to be so.





Enlightened Rogue said:


> Make that 61


the over/under on the final number has been set at 97.5


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

Estrato said:


> the over/under on the final number has been set at 97.5


I`ll take a piece of that action!

John


----------



## MonarchzMan

Jellyman said:


> Actually we are just asking for the information pertaining to his successful mixed enclosures. Monarchzman has been hounding me to retype every question I have already answered even though I answered him in a PM already. It is his decision not to and I respect that so I've already asked and will not ask him again.


You've answered them, but have not demonstrated that mixing does not have negative effects on the frogs. That is what I keep on getting back to. You don't seem to realize that, if you can't demonstrate that the frogs have no negative effects in a mixed environment, then you have no case to say that mixing works.


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> Actually *we* are just asking for the information pertaining to his successful mixed enclosures.


Actually just *you *are asking him to retype everything that you refuse to look up....don't bring up your constant PM requests with M.M.


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> We have the frogs in the USA. They are in our posession. We have the opportunity to uphold the regulation on the frogs currently within our boarders..


So what is being done with the toads that violates the ESA? I would suggest being very specific as to what is being violated... 




Jellyman said:


> Yes, I can find information on a specific species but not as to how different species will behave when confined within the same enclosure. It has been argued that the reason this board is here is so that the questions you are telling me to go "look up" can be asked and answered in a more timely mannor. You for example seem to be one of the best resources as to having claim to successful mised enclosures. Please share this information.


This to me indicates that you need aquire at least a basic understanding of Animal behavior and then you can apply that to amphibian behavior. If you understand how a frog behaves within a species then you can extrapolate how that frog is going to behave towards a different species that triggers the territorial response. These tend to be hard wired and the data is out there.. 

For example, a lek breeding anuran like Agalychnis annae is not going to show territorial behaviors to one another outside of specific conditions... which points how they are going to react to another hylid...

Ed


----------



## MonarchzMan

First things in the ESA:



> (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds
> and declares that—
> (1) various species of fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct as a consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate
> concern and conservation;
> (2) other species of fish, wildlife, and plants have been so depleted in numbers that they are in danger of or threatened with extinction;
> (3) these species of fish, wildlife, and plants are of esthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and scientific value to the Nation and its people;
> (4) the United States has pledged itself as a sovereign state in the international community to conserve to the extent practicable the various species of fish or wildlife and plants facing extinction, pursuant to—
> (A) migratory bird treaties with Canada and Mexico;
> (B) the Migratory and Endangered Bird Treaty with Japan;
> (C) the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere;
> (D) the International Convention for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries;
> (E) the International Convention for the High Seas Fisheries of the North Pacific Ocean;
> (F) the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; and
> (G) other international agreements; and
> (5) encouraging the States and other interested parties, through Federal financial assistance and a system of incentives, to develop and maintain conservation programs which meet national and international standards is a key to meeting the Nation’s international commitments and to better safeguarding, for the benefit of all citizens, the Nation’s heritage in fish, wildlife, and plants.


Looks to me like the ESA is pretty specific about applying only to species within the US's borders, unless they happen to be migratory or shared internationally.


----------



## Ben E

Philsuma said:


> Please....don't use Zoo's as an "example" for the mixing debate.
> 
> Zoo's and hobbyists have as much in common as.....well.....not much.
> 
> Bad reaching analogy....


these are exhibits that i helped build with experience and knowledge that i gained as a hobbyist.....reaching? who do you think works in zoos??


----------



## Ben E

MonarchzMan said:


> You've answered them, but have not demonstrated that mixing does not have negative effects on the frogs. That is what I keep on getting back to. You don't seem to realize that, if you can't demonstrate that the frogs have no negative effects in a mixed environment, then you have no case to say that mixing works.


is removing all negative effects on the frog natural? what is your "goal" in keeping the frogs? to remove as many stresses as possible and reproduce as many as possible? that is fine, but not the only reason to keep these animals. i think that this attitude can be very limiting.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ben E said:


> these are exhibits that i helped build with experience and knowledge that i gained as a hobbyist.....reaching? who do you think works in zoos??


Zoo exhibits often require mixing simply for space issues. It's easier to have 3 species in one tank than 3 species in 3 tanks. In addition to that, zoo mixed exhibits tend to be very big (I can't think of seeing one that I've seen that has been less than a couple hundred gallons). And the mixed are often all the same sex, and are constantly monitored for the health and well-being of the animals.


----------



## jackxc925

Okay, so I have come to a revalation. I am done with this thread because I have realized the reason I dislike mixing in this case is because the husbandry is terrible. 

If I saw a mixed tank that featured two species that actually lived in sympatry, in the same niche, whose requirements could be transferred into a vivarium, and that vivarium succesfully fufils the requirements of all the frogs, I would be much more inclined to say, hey, that might be okay. 

But I see a situation like this in which care is terrible and it really just turns me off to the idea. So I am done with this thread.


----------



## Ben E

MonarchzMan said:


> Zoo exhibits often require mixing simply for space issues. It's easier to have 3 species in one tank than 3 species in 3 tanks. In addition to that, zoo mixed exhibits tend to be very big (I can't think of seeing one that I've seen that has been less than a couple hundred gallons). And the mixed are often all the same sex, and are constantly monitored for the health and well-being of the animals.


i dont think that mixed species exhibits have as much to do with space limitation as exhibit impact for short attention spans and quick visitor turnover.....it has more to do with zoos being admission driven institutions.....what is stopping a hobbyist from doing the same thing?


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ben E said:


> is removing all negative effects on the frog natural? what is your "goal" in keeping the frogs? to remove as many stresses as possible and reproduce as many as possible? that is fine, but not the only reason to keep these animals. i think that this attitude can be very limiting.


There are plenty of stresses that cannot be removed. Intraspecific competition, small territories, etc as this changes from time to time in nature. But those tend to be more plastic than territoriality. As Ed has said, it's pretty well hardwired into anurans. Forcing frogs of different species to interact in such a small area isn't natural. I've found dendrobatids next to each other in the wild, but that tends to be quite temporary.

Would you advocate keeping humidity low so that it would not fog up the glass on a tank? Would that be an adequate stress to put on the frogs so that you could see them?


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ben E said:


> i dont think that mixed species exhibits have as much to do with space limitation as exhibit impact for short attention spans and quick visitor turnover.....it has more to do with zoos being admission driven institutions.....what is stopping a hobbyist from doing the same thing?


Next zoo you go through that has even a decent number of species of anurans, count the number of species, and then extrapolate the number of tanks they'd need to house all of those individually. Keep in mind that, because people tend to have short attention spans, small tanks aren't great or impressive as opposed to the larger tanks. It's totally about space issues.

Hobbyists aren't zoos. Hobbyists, generally, do not have the size of tanks that zoos have that makes mixing doable. Hobbyists, generally, do not have the knowledge, expertise, and constant monitoring that zoos do. Hobbyists, generally, don't have the in depth knowledge of the species they work with that zoo curators do. Hobbyists, generally, are not as attuned to amphibian biology and behavior as curators are. It's those reasons that should stop hobbyists from mixing.

Don't get me wrong, mixing can be done and done right, it's just that very few hobbyists have the capabilities to do it and get it to work. Size of enclosures and knowledge of species are often lacking in the hobbyist side of things.


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ben E said:


> these are exhibits that i helped build with experience and knowledge that i gained as a hobbyist.....reaching? who do you think works in zoos??


But did you determine what species would go into them, how many of them would go in, and what sexes would go in there, or did you simply help in the design and planting of it? The people who I know who have designed exhibits for zoos tend to not have a say in what goes in it as far as animal species, just how the lay out will be.


----------



## Ben E

MonarchzMan said:


> There are plenty of stresses that cannot be removed. Intraspecific competition, small territories, etc as this changes from time to time in nature. But those tend to be more plastic than territoriality. As Ed has said, it's pretty well hardwired into anurans. Forcing frogs of different species to interact in such a small area isn't natural. I've found dendrobatids next to each other in the wild, but that tends to be quite temporary.
> 
> Would you advocate keeping humidity low so that it would not fog up the glass on a tank? Would that be an adequate stress to put on the frogs so that you could see them?


i think that periods of lower humidity are quite acceptable (and dare i say beneficial for some species) but not for de-fogging glass....fogged glass is an issue with temperature differentials between the sides of the glass much more than inside humidity levels.....drying the tank tends to make the frogs retreat into the vegetation and not aid in visual impact...mixing species in terrarium is about finding creative design elements so that this "forcing" of interaction does not occur, or does not place enough stress to negatively impact health to a significant degree


----------



## Ben E

MonarchzMan said:


> But did you determine what species would go into them, how many of them would go in, and what sexes would go in there, or did you simply help in the design and planting of it? The people who I know who have designed exhibits for zoos tend to not have a say in what goes in it as far as animal species, just how the lay out will be.


the exhibit designing and building i have been involved in allowed input and knowledge of species lists and numbers .....this is an integral component to exhibit design in my opinion....


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ben E said:


> the exhibit designing and building i have been involved in allowed input and knowledge of species lists and numbers .....this is an integral component to exhibit design in my opinion....


Right, and I agree. That's one of the things that people do not realize with mixing. But I guess my point was that the zoo guys made the determination of what would go in there, and it very likely was not on a whim like 99% of hobbyists would do.

Like I said, mixing can be done and be successful, but there is so much to it that it is not recommended for anyone but the most advanced hobbyists should attempt.


----------



## Ed

Ben E said:


> i think that periods of lower humidity are quite acceptable (and dare i say beneficial for some species) but not for de-fogging glass....fogged glass is an issue with temperature differentials between the sides of the glass much more than inside humidity levels.....drying the tank tends to make the frogs retreat into the vegetation and not aid in visual impact...mixing species in terrarium is about finding creative design elements so that this "forcing" of interaction does not occur, or does not place enough stress to negatively impact health to a significant degree


I'm going to be late for work but this is an aspect that should be expanded upon.. one of my main concerns is that the hobby maximizes the humidity not only for maiximal visibility but for maximal reproduction. At work, I don't have to do this, my enclosures are screen topped so I can fluctuate the humidity via glass or plexi panels if I choose or via humidifiers or an old misting system. 

If you look in the literature, one can see that there are periods of activity that are driven by the humidity and the season.. This is natural for the frogs and contributes to thier natural behaviors, but if you don't understand this then it cannot be replicated. In addition, reduces or stopping breeding on a season basis allows for the resequestering of nutrients. 

I've been working with enclosures that are not sealed and anurans for a long long time now...and I don't seal an enclosure unless I am trying in certain species to get reproduction.. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Ben E said:


> i dont think that mixed species exhibits have as much to do with space limitation as exhibit impact for short attention spans and quick visitor turnover.....it has more to do with zoos being admission driven institutions.....what is stopping a hobbyist from doing the same thing?


The average visitor spends less than 25 seconds viewing an exhibit. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> There are plenty of stresses that cannot be removed. Intraspecific competition, small territories, etc as this changes from time to time in nature. But those tend to be more plastic than territoriality. As Ed has said, it's pretty well hardwired into anurans. Forcing frogs of different species to interact in such a small area isn't natural. I've found dendrobatids next to each other in the wild, but that tends to be quite temporary.
> 
> Would you advocate keeping humidity low so that it would not fog up the glass on a tank? Would that be an adequate stress to put on the frogs so that you could see them?


When you are saying frogs of different species are you referring to dendrobatids or all anurans?? This is an important distinction that is often lost in these discussions. 
A small sympatric hylid for example does not cause a response in a dendrobatid like a dendrobatid causes to a dendrobatid.. The shape and behavior don't match..... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Jellyman said:


> We have the frogs in the USA. They are in our posession. We have the opportunity to uphold the regulation on the frogs currently within our boarders.


And according to the ESA what isn't being done? Are these toads even listed on the ESA?...




Jellyman said:


> Yes, I can find information on a specific species but not as to how different species will behave when confined within the same enclosure. It has been argued that the reason this board is here is so that the questions you are telling me to go "look up" can be asked and answered in a more timely mannor. You for example seem to be one of the best resources as to having claim to successful mised enclosures. Please share this information.


The issue you are having is one of percieved entitlement.. yes the boards are here to help people but that does not mean that I am required to spoon feed you at the cost of time, effort, and other resources (such as my relationship with my wife or my job or my other outside commitments) or my health (sleep, carpal tunned, eye strain etc), information that is in the public domain. I have given you explicit directions towards a large body of this information to get you started on the path that I used to aquire the information. 

If you wish through one reason or another, to remain ignorant of the information, then that will be your problem. In the time, you used to make your claim, you could have easily found a number of those sources. 


Ed


----------



## zBrinks

Quoted from Ed:

" I believe I will take Mr. Yeager up on his invite to continue this discussion.

When referring to mixed enclosuresi the use of the word mixed is an inapt description as this indicates that the animals are together in a homogenized fashion. Because this is not what typically happens multispecies is a better description of the properly set-up enclosure.
Multispecies enclosures are becoming more and more common with the larger and better Zoos (including some of those at the forefront of dendrobatid breeding such as NAIB) and Aquaria. Many of the multispecies enclosures at these institutions have been present for years (some for more than a decade) with little to no problems and in some occasions house multiplegenerations of the animals on exhibit.

There are a lot of issues that are thrown when ever multispecies enclosures are brought up on various forums (not just this one) these include (and I am sure I missed a few),

1) the spatial requirements of the animals are violated
2) pathogens
3) stress

Spatial needs of the animals, this is a issue where some hard and fast numbers have become set in stone in the hobby. Usually, people speak about 5 gallons per frog. To make this simple, I am using the assumption that the 5.5 gallon tank is the standard for the 5 gallons that is the commonly used reference.
Within the 5.5 gallons of space, the space used by the frog (I am going to use a tinct as a standard for the larger dart frogs) is typically very different than the space "alloted". In a typically planted set-up the frog will only use the bottom of the tank most of the time so the actual used total space can be calculated by the surface area of the bottom of the tank (8 inches by 12 inches) and say 3 inches of head room for the frogs to hop. A 5.5 gallon tank contains 960 cubic inches so the frogs only really use 30% (288/960 = 0.3) of the available space or about 1.65 gallons.
What this means is that people have to pay attention to how the tank is portioned out for the frogs. With the set-up described above (5.5 gallon tank) there may be between 4 to 5 inches (substracting for bottom of the tank) of height in the tank that is not used by the dart frog. This would indicate that another species could inhabit that niche if the owner of the enclosure was so inclined. In a manner similar to aquariums, people can look at the enclosure as having an upper portions, a middle portion and a lower portion. In most of the smaller enclosures, this will only be two levels. The other space designates a niche that can potentially be used for a different species. This is where multispecies enclosure planning begins. The person needs to be aware of how much space is really being utilized in the enclosure by the animals. This will give you the first step on the path to the next choice if you wish to keep multispecies enclosures.

After comments (if any), next topic pathogens (last will be criteria to help make the correct choice).

-----

Okay here is the next installment. (the top and part of the middle is just covering the minimal amount of space available in more complex enclosures).

To repeat this again I am looking at (conservatively) minimal spatial
availability not the maximum the frogs can/will use (this is an important
distinction). (I used a 20 H and a 55 as these are right outside my office and as such are easily measureable)
So even looking at the minimal space available to the frogs in a more
complex set-up such as those that include drip walls and plants, the ratio of habitable space still decreases as the volume of the tank increases as more and more of the volume of the tank is represented by glass and air volume (but it is this change that creates the changes in the moisture levels, humidity, air flow patterns and light patterns that create different microhabitats allowing the multispecies options).
If we assume that we lose 2 inches of height due to a false bottom set
up and include a tree fern fiber drip wall (as this is thicker than a cocos panel) which is about 1 inch deep. As plantings in tanks tend to be an admixture of tall and short plants as well as open spaces to permit viewing, an assumption that the frogs can use 100% of the first 6 inches in height will give a base line estimate of usable space (instead of estimating usable space in a varied planting). The drip wall is kept to a depth of three inches out from the surface of the drip wall and is assumed to be 100% usable by the frogs.
So for a 20 high tank 24 long x 16.5 high x 12 deep. Deducting for the
substrate and drip wall changes the numbers to the following
14.5 inches high x 11 deep x 24 inches long. So we do not calculate out
the same overlapping volume twice, the three inches from the drip wall are excluded from the bottom area calculations. So then the minimal usable area ends up being (6 inches (height) x 8 deep x 24 long) + (14.4 height x 3 inches deep x 24 inches long)= (1152 ) + (1036.8) = 2188.8 as the conservative minimal estimate for usable space. Yet this is still significantly less than the total volume of the tank (4752 cubic inches so when the total minimal usable estimate is applied you get only 46% of the tank (or 9.2 gallons or 2.3 gallons per frog) as estimated usable space. In a 55 you get (6 inches height x 8 deep x 48 long) + ( 18 height x 3
inches deep x 48 inches long) = (2304) + (2592) = 4896 cubic inches or 42.3% of the volume of the tank (or 23 gallons total or 2.1 gallon/frog) the general trend of the increasing volume decreasing minimal usable space. So once again the idea that each frog gets a minimum of 5 gallons of space breaks down as the enclosures get larger (This is counter intuitive but true unless the enclosure's floor area increases as the height increases (some breeder tanks are an example of this). (However for territorial/aggressive species it is still a place to start planning.) .

There are significant differences between the minimal amount of
available space in a simple enclosure as opposed to a complex enclosure (which is why I needed to demonstrate out the differences via the cubic inches). When considering larger tanks, the 5 gallon rule may be a place to start (although in my personal experience, it is easily possible to keep and breed some darts and many hylids in higher densities for long periods (years to a decade or so )).
The reason the density works in the larger enclosures is not because each frog necessarily has more space but has the illusion of more space. (And this is where I was going the entire time with the previous discussion). This is where having an idea of the minimal usable/available space comes into play with a species that is territorial and/or aggressive as it gives you an idea as to how many visual barriers, hide areas or other refugia may be necessary to accommodate the individuals in that cage. In simple cages, multiple hide areas (often one per animal) as well as visual barriers are needed, in complex enclosures fewer visual barriers are needed as the multiple available height levels available as well as the leaf and stem structure of the plants perform this function while hide areas may also be totally supplied by the plants.

Visual barriers consist of anything that blocks the sight path from one
animal to another. This prevents excess aggression as well as allowing an animal to flee from an interaction (as well as potentially increasing the density the at which the animals can be kept). Visual barriers are not important to nonterritorial/nonaggressive species such as some hylids (except by providing more surface area for perching). When considering multispecies enclosures (and I am actually not talking about more than one dart frog species per enclosure), the complexity of the enclosure provides multiple niches for other species to inhabit. Species that would not do well together in a simple enclosure may do very well together in complex enclosures due to the advantages of the multiple niches provided. The additions of some thin branches to the upper areas of the tank can create an entirely new habitation zone for a different species. In general for most multispecies enclosures there needs to be some gradient in the enclosure to be able to support more than one species. This is more easily and visibly accomplished in the very large enclosures but there are also options available in smaller enclosures that are complexly set up.

Now on to the real heresy. The space taken up by the dart frogs is not
used to determine the spatial needs of the other potential inhabitants (as long as they are not dart frogs or a species that looks/acts like a dart frog). The needs of the other specie(s) such as visual barriers and
hide spots for territorial species all applies and consideration must be given to be prevent these requirements from making a habitat that is detrimental to the dart frogs. (such as overperching, basking lights increasing the temperatures too high, etc). The reason that the space occupied by the dart frogs is not counted against the spatial needs of the other animal is that unless the species chosen to live in the same enclosure behaves/looks like a dart frog it will be ignored by the dart frogs (there are some other guide rules which I will bring up later). For example, if one of the sympatric Gonatodes or Sphaerodactyline geckos are chosen as the second target species, the dart frogs will ignore the lizards. However as these are territorial to each other in their
own right, the limits required by spatial needs of these lizards will curtail
the number of lizards in the enclosures. Now this does not mean that there is an unending number of animals that can be placed in the enclosure. There is a finite number but the number is not directly determined by the amount of space available but by the availability and amount of suitable habitat(s) that the volume can contain. (Obviously the smaller the tank, the fewer the habitats).
The number of niches then determines the number of species (while the territorial needs of the animal will determine the density or number of animals per enclosure predicated on some comments to follow). In addition it is also partially dependent on the target species chosen, the size and complexity of the enclosure, the ease of cleaning of the enclosure and the ease of feeding the animals. In general the smaller the cage, the fewer the species, depending on the species in question. Multiple species are still possible in a small enclosure and are often set-up unintentionally as many people do not count the various invertebrate populations that are established in the enclosures (most of which are not native to the frogs areas to begin with) for janitorial and/or frog food purposes. I tend to use one species to a niche as a basic rule of thumb which has been very workable for me.

So to sum it up just to begin to consider if multiple species enclosure is an option the following must be determined (this is before we get to parasites/disease and stress)
1) Is there more than one niche available?
2) will the conditions available to the animals (both frogs and others) be suitable for those animals?
3) If the animal(s) are territorial, do I have enough visual barriers and hiding spots?
4) Can I easily feed, clean and maintain the enclosure in the chosen configuation? If not, will any changes made to make the enclosure easier to maintain change the animal(s) requirements? and if so can I then meet those requirements?
5) Will the shape or behavior of one animal affect the territoriality of another animal in the enclosure?

So in other words, a lot of issues need to be considered for the set-up before placing multiple species together. It is possible but it takes a lot of planning and thought to do it properly and this still does not take into account the other two items.


----------



## zBrinks

------

The subject of cross infection by parasites and diseases is often given as
reasons to avoid multiple species enclosures but the details of the reason(s)
are frequently lacking. When examined in a somewhat global manner, the reasons
are more clear cut. As our knowledge of exotic pathogens becomes more extensive
more and more examples of cross infection and mortality from exotic sources
becomes apparent. Some examples of this are chytridmycosis in many species of
amphibians (possibly the result of the world wide transport of African clawed
frogs (Xenopus)), mycoplasma infections in tortoises of the genus Gopherus
(possibly from exposure to infected South American tortoises) (which has now
also been isolated from box turtles (Terrepene), monkey pox in Prairie Dogs
exposed to giant pouched rats (and humans exposed to the infected prairie dogs)
and Herpes B infections in humans from infected primates (mainly Macaques if I
remember correctly). Because of this, animals should only be mixed with animals
that are from the same regions to minimize the risk of cross infection with
novel pathogens and parasites. There is a risk of infection regardless of the
closeness of the origins of the animals (there are some examples of ranavirus
infections between nearby vernal pools that were the result of researchers
failing to clean boots and collecting gear but nothing on the huge scale of the
examples listed above) but the risk of a novel pathogen getting loose in a
collection are minimized when zoogeographically correct animals are kept
together. This is because there is a good chance that the disease is not novel
to animals from the same regions possibly permitting the infected animals to
resist an infection and/or clear it.
Simply observing the condition of the animal may not give any warning if the
animal is a carrier of the disease/parasite as the animal can be asymptomatic
(such as Xenopus and chytrid), some rodent carriers of hemorrhagic fevers, and
Old World Primates infected with Herpes B. The mixing of carriers and novel
hosts allows the disease the chance to jump to a new host potentially resulting
in significant mortality of the new host species.

So the points from this topic are as follows (rephrased to cover all of the
possible issues I can think of )
1) the multispecies enclosure should be as close to zoogeographically correct as
possible with respect to at least the vertebral inhabitants (given the
restrictions on importation of soil and invertebrates into the USA, this is may
not be possible with many invertebrate species native to the animal's habitat).
2) If possible the animals should be sympatric
3) Ideally species that do not naturally have overlapping distribution ranges
should not be mixed ( for example even though green anoles (Anolis carolinensis)
are found on Guam does not mean they should be kept with Oceanic geckos (Gehyra
ssp).)
4) points 1, 2 and 3 should be followed as closely as possible regardless of the
person's belief in the suitability of the inhabitants. For example, even
through squirrel tree frogs (Hyla squirrella) will quite happily live in a
terraria set up for dendrobates, this is not a suitable animal as it is not
zoogeographically correct. If the person wishes to keep a small hylid with
Dendrobates, then they should consider Hyla leucophyllata or Hyla ebraccata as
possible options.
5) Aquatic and semiaquatic chelonians are not suitable to be kept with any
animal that is at risk to ameobiasis. 

-----

Prey items in anurans.....
1) In most anurans, the prey item needs to fit a certain size and shape profile. There are species where this is not the case such as Bombina (but Bombina do just fine with larger sympatric species of Cynops such as C. cyanureus without injury to either party) and Certophrys (which probably should not be kept with anything else)for example. (In addition, many of the freshly imported C. orientalis suffer limb loss within a month or two of importation due to bacterial infections and damage during importation. Many of the sightings of lost limbs in pet stores or after purchase are due to this and not damage from the toads). Both Bombina and Ceratophrys are generalists, that will attempt to consume prey items as large as they are or larger. In addition, Bombina can enter into a "feeding frenzy" during which they will grab and attempt to consume anything. Dendrobates and the Hylids referenced above will not. In addition, with the Bombina reference provided by Derek, there is a significant difference in the mass of the two animals (at least 5 to 1) unlike the Hylids I suggested.
2) Some anurans exposed to the higher prey ratio in captivity can become "trained" to attempt to capture items that touch them as a feeding reaction. This is not common or usual. I have seen it in two species to date that were both blind, Leptodactylus pentadactylus and Osteopilus septentrionalis. However even if that was the case with the two species I suggested, neither species would be able to injure even a small Dendrobatid frog. The jaw strength just is not there. I believe that this is what Derek observed with the P. sauvagi.
3) While in captivity there may not be a "set" time for feeding, there are preferential times for feedings. These follow the frogs normal activity schedule. It is only the addition of food items at specific intervels that causes the disruption in the normal behavior of the frogs.

Toxicity:
This is another subject that gets tossed around a lot. One of the points to remember that with some notable exceptions (such as Rana palustris) the amphibians are not running around leaking skin toxins. This only occurs when the amphibian is under severe stress. Synthesizing (in those that make their own), storing, excreting skin toxins are all energetically expensive and to leak these all of the time is counter productive to the animal as a general rule. If you see an amphibian reacting in a manner that shows the production of skin toxins, there is some major crisis occuring in the terraria (and the release of the toxins is usually only a symptom and not the primary event).

-----

The third and hopefully last installment.

Stress is the third item often used as a reason to justify why multispecies
enclosures do not work. For this to be discussed appropriately, the definition of stress needs to be outlined before any meaningful discussion can take place. Stress is best defined as anything that disrupts the homeostasis of the animal. However not all of the items that cause stress (called stressors) has a negative impact on the animal involved. Thus there are both negative and positive stressors (I am only going to consider negative stressors for this article as these are the only ones that have a negative impact on the animal). Some examples of negative stressors include improper temperatures, lack of hide areas, and lack of nutrition. One of the points to remember with stressors is that unless they are extreme enough to cause rapid death and do not vary in intensity then the animals will become adapted to the stressor (with the exception of nutritional stressors) and should return to "normal" behaviors after an acclimation period. However if the stressor is not constant then the resultant stress may be sufficient to cause the death of the animal (some times referred to maladaption syndrome or failure to thrive). This adaptive process only works as long as the stressor is constant, as soon as it begins to vary in intensity, the adaption is lost.

One of the most common types of stress seen in anurans (and in fact many herps) is the animal displaying constant escape behaviors, often to the point of self mutilation (nose rubs). This is best avoided by having sufficient hiding areas (see the discussion on complex and simple enclosures from above) available to the frogs to allow them to feel secure in the enclosure thus eliminating the problem (If there are sufficient hide areas and this sort of escape behavior continues then one should immediately suspect heat stress and/or exposure to a chemical agent such as toxic fumes (paints or other solvents for example). While this sort of escape behavior can be the result of territorial displacement in many species this is typically only seen when more than one species of
dendrobatid is kept in the enclosure as the frogs do not recognize frogs that do not behave or look like other dendrobatid frogs. (While it is possible to mix multiple dendrobatid species together, this is not recommended due to the issues mentioned above as well as others such as potential hybridization). As mentioned previously, if the inhabitants are properly chosen (in other words not other dendrobates), the dendrobatids will not be stressed by the other species as the dendrobates will not respond to the other species in a territorial response. This is why other occupants are often treated as so much cage furniture (I used to have a picture of an auratus perched on the head of an eyelash viper feeding on fruitflies).

Another comment regarding stress that is often tossed around is that animals kept in multispecies enclosures will not breed due to the stress of the multispecies enclosures. This is typically due to improperly set up enclosures which lack suitable habitat for reproduction. If the parameters are correct the animals will breed regardless of the number of species in the enclosure (however see the previous discussion on spatial requirements on limits for the number of possible species in an enclosure).

Stress of an animal in the multispecies enclosure will be the same as that in a single species enclosure as long as the animals are chosen under the guidelines provide previously and suitable micoclimates, and refuges are present


From : http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/beginner-discussion/3449-mixing-multispecies-exhibits.html


----------



## frogfreak

Ed said:


> I'm going to be late for work but this is an aspect that should be expanded upon.. one of my main concerns is that the hobby maximizes the humidity not only for maiximal visibility but for maximal reproduction. At work, I don't have to do this, my enclosures are screen topped so I can fluctuate the humidity via glass or plexi panels if I choose or via humidifiers or an old misting system.
> 
> If you look in the literature, one can see that there are periods of activity that are driven by the humidity and the season.. This is natural for the frogs and contributes to thier natural behaviors, but if you don't understand this then it cannot be replicated. In addition, reduces or stopping breeding on a season basis allows for the resequestering of nutrients.
> 
> I've been working with enclosures that are not sealed and anurans for a long long time now...and I don't seal an enclosure unless I am trying in certain species to get reproduction..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Ed
> 
> Where can this information be found? We've been looking for quite some time now regarding the natuaral cycle of breeding. We started a thread as well but didn't really get any facts. We want to keep our frogs as healthy as possible and having them breed constanly will stress the frogs. Is there a thread, book or other any other info out there? Can you point us in the right direction? We want to try and replicate their natural habitat as closely as we can.
> 
> Thanks


----------



## Philsuma

Ben E said:


> these are exhibits that i helped build with experience and knowledge that i gained as a hobbyist.....reaching? who do you think works in zoos??


Please do not work a zoo display in the current argument for hobbyist mixed species...

We are primarily dealing with young hobbyists - not institution staff with biology degrees and other training and a budget (no jokes here).


----------



## MonarchzMan

Ed said:


> When you are saying frogs of different species are you referring to dendrobatids or all anurans?? This is an important distinction that is often lost in these discussions.
> A small sympatric hylid for example does not cause a response in a dendrobatid like a dendrobatid causes to a dendrobatid.. The shape and behavior don't match.....
> 
> Ed


Apologies, I meant dendrobatid species.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> And according to the ESA what isn't being done? Are these toads even listed on the ESA?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The issue you are having is one of percieved entitlement.. yes the boards are here to help people but that does not mean that I am required to spoon feed you at the cost of time, effort, and other resources (such as my relationship with my wife or my job or my other outside commitments) or my health (sleep, carpal tunned, eye strain etc), information that is in the public domain. I have given you explicit directions towards a large body of this information to get you started on the path that I used to aquire the information.
> 
> If you wish through one reason or another, to remain ignorant of the information, then that will be your problem. In the time, you used to make your claim, you could have easily found a number of those sources.
> 
> 
> Ed


In the amount of time you took away from your wife and other interest to write this post you could have cut and pasted the information as ZBrinks kindly did for us. You choose not to becasue you know that the fact of the matter is that you can help us create successful mixed enclosures that will thrive. This goes against what has been the unwritten rule and you fear as the rest of the mixing community that you will be cast out of the "click". It is sad that this influence of this forum is suppressing your 35 years of experience. It is easy for them to stand on your shoulders and shout down at everyone trying to find answers on a topic that has not been properly studied or explored. It is comendable for those actually trying something new in hopes of learning and advancing what is a wonderful "hobby" even when being faced with such negativity and rude comments and attitudes.


----------



## Jellyman

Philsuma said:


> Please do not work a zoo display in the current argument for hobbyist mixed species...
> 
> We are primarily dealing with young hobbyists - not institution staff with biology degrees and other training and a budget (no jokes here).


I agree that a zoo display should not be used as an example of what takes place in the home hobbiest display for the reasons listed above. But, the information that these people have can be shared to help us make better decisions while setting up home displays and in the long run we could see setups in the home that rival or surpass those in zoos.


----------



## Philsuma

Jellyman said:


> This goes against what has been the unwritten rule and you fear as the rest of the mixing community that you will be cast out of the "click". It is sad that this influence of this forum is suppressing your 35 years of experience.


Jel....I say this with the most sincere reasons...

Please get some help with various issues.

If you think Ed is afraid to post his opinions or his "mind"....then you are in serious denial or have not bothered to read or comprehend Ed's body of work on this forum.

I really think you are in denial about a lot of issues here and in need of some help with that.

Again, I say that with the best of intentions and wishes.


----------



## MonarchzMan

We need to be careful about letting this get personal...

Yes, Ed has posted a great deal of very informative posts, and with his tendency to post extensive posts, I don't think that it was unreasonable to ask to use the search function. Zach didn't take long in finding the relevant posts, there's no reason someone else couldn't do that too.


----------



## Dragonfly

I have no desire for a mixed tank - I do want a frog room..... Enough is enough. Until I saw the tank, I had other questions. Seems like the tank is evidence enough. No harm meant. Simple overcrowding and some "jelly masses which may have been eggs".... 

I had expected to see a vastly larger tank, with multiple feeding areas perhaps....

I think there has been some excellent scholarly and scientific information made available thanks to a couple of posters, Ed being one. 

And there are 2 ways of learning I will talk about about .... one from those who have gone before (learning from history) and learning from experience - which if there is no history is one thing otherwise those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Another saying is that insanity is repeating the same actions expecting different results. 

I am sure that we can all learn from one another. And I hope that there has been learning from this thread for all who read and do not post.


----------



## chuckpowell

I'm afraid you have no idea what was going on 20 years ago. Do you really think you're doing so many things different. Your not. Most tanks I see today are just like the ones we made years ago. There were fancy tanks with running water, lots of plants, all those years ago. The trend I see today is towards smaller tanks with more frogs. My opinion, no offense, we were doing it a bit better back then than many people are today. 

And all the new frogs that are coming in - most were available back in the day, but under a different name. 

Best,

Chuck



Jellyman said:


> -no offense but 20 years ago you were basically doing this by trial and error, you probably have alot of situations that ended poorly by no true fault of yours, simply the lack of knowledge avaialble about the frogs


----------



## -Jex-

Jake I think you were just going for the record on longest thread with this one lol! I can't believe this is still going.


----------



## Ed

frogfreak said:


> Hi Ed
> 
> Where can this information be found? We've been looking for quite some time now regarding the natuaral cycle of breeding. We started a thread as well but didn't really get any facts. We want to keep our frogs as healthy as possible and having them breed constanly will stress the frogs. Is there a thread, book or other any other info out there? Can you point us in the right direction? We want to try and replicate their natural habitat as closely as we can.
> 
> Thanks


For example for light intensity in Costa Rica 

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie 

Costa Rican rainfall and weather map Costa Rica Rainfall and weather map (note that there is often a smaller dry/wet period followed by a longer wet/dry period so there are in effect two of each during the course of the year. 

Some more can be found here.. ORNL DAAC Data Set Documentation 

or even here (included humidity..) (note in that case the average humidity averages around 80-83%...) 

Google and Google scholar are amazing tools if one doesn't mind refining thier search strings. 
Try using daily rainfall total and then the name of the country. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

MonarchzMan said:


> Apologies, I meant dendrobatid species.


Got it, just making sure for the sake of clarity. 

Ed


----------



## Ed

*Re: So, you want a reason to not mix species? OT rant*



Jellyman said:


> In the amount of time you took away from your wife and other interest to write this post you could have cut and pasted the information as ZBrinks kindly did for us. You choose not to becasue you know that the fact of the matter is that you can help us create successful mixed enclosures that will thrive. This goes against what has been the unwritten rule and you fear as the rest of the mixing community that you will be cast out of the "click". It is sad that this influence of this forum is suppressing your 35 years of experience. It is easy for them to stand on your shoulders and shout down at everyone trying to find answers on a topic that has not been properly studied or explored. It is comendable for those actually trying something new in hopes of learning and advancing what is a wonderful "hobby" even when being faced with such negativity and rude comments and attitudes.


Okay, I'm going to say a couple of things and I hope you take it personally. You have no clue as to what I am able to do and am not able to do. I do take offense as your assumption that my typing and the ability to search for something and cut and paste each individual item is the same. I can type a whole lot faster.

I also take offense at your assumption and demand for the entitlement of spoon feeding you information that you are for some reason unable or too lazy to locate on your own despite a clear roadmap. I also take offense at your attitude that pandering to your demand when it is available on the forums is an important use of my time. 

If you think I am afraid to share an opinion or information regardless of the "clique" (if your going to use a word at least try to use the right one and not a sound alike... ) then you are spouting at best out of ignorance and at worst due to a failure to comprehend. You couldn't have wanted the information contained in those posts since you were so unwilling to even try and locate it despite being given a direct roadmap... 

Those posts were the first posts I ever made on this board and if you really wanted the information contained in there you would have pulled up the thread and read it and seen the whole argument. 

Based on the post cited above, you do not intend to make any efforts (even such a minor one as using the search function) to "earn" knowledge and in my opinion will not appreciate any such help in having the knowldedge provided to you... 

How about finishing defining the terms we started to discuss earlier in this thread? 

Why do you think the ESA covers Atelopus zeteki? Can you provide any citation to support you allegation that simply because A. zeteki are in captivity in the US zoos that the way they are being maintained is a violation of the ESA? 

Some serious comments,

Ed


----------



## frogfreak

Thanks for all the info Ed! Laura send a kiss


----------



## buddha

Im far from experinced. I read allot. and when the search does not seem to have what i need i ask questions. I have 40 Frogs.. Not including current trunc eggs and tadpoles. And have read the small book that makes up this thread. All mine are are in a ten gallon tank. HAHAHA! kidding. But if i didn't have enough space or enough money or time to Adequately house/Feed/care for my frogs, i wouldn't. And any New hobbiests, reading this and past posts about this topic, will make a smart and well researched educated decission on caring for their frogs. -Buddha

PS. Pouring out some FF for my fallen Hommies (Rich ). HAHA!
EDIT: I love you Ed. There. I said it. Haha


----------



## Ed

buddha said:


> Im
> I love you Ed.


Its cool as long as I can rub your belly for luck. 

Ed


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

If I may be so bold as to ask what the conclusion was for-

27 pages
261 replies
5,284 views

Thanks!

John
EDIT- or maybe it`s not over yet?


----------



## pl259

I didn't need that many pages and posts to conclude that the choice to Mix or not to Mix, is really just a Risk/Reward trade off. The increased risks are well understood and have been stated many times. There are few, if any, tricks or techniques that can reduce these risks.

The rewards are zero for the frogs and few, if any, for the hobbiest(e.g. "because it looks cool!") The rewards for zoos with mixed tanks are different.

The vast majority of froggers will not assume the added risk for the little or no gain in reward, for their animals. Some others froggers are willing to do this. Both positions provide insight into their respective and differing priorities, hence the volatility of the issue.


----------



## Philsuma

....but the large volume of postings DID allow you to decide if certain _personalities_ on this forum have experience and are worthy of paying attention to.....hopefully.


----------



## Rich Conley

Philsuma said:


> Rich,
> 
> You are refuting all our examples and cites....
> 
> Ca we get you on record as to exactly why you support mixed species vivariums?


Where did I say I support them?


Answer: I didn't. I don't have an opinion either way. I'm just a fan of honest, open, intellectual discussion, and the first post doesn't provide any of that.


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> I don't think Rich is defending Multispecies enclosures per se (or that is how I have read the intent behind his posts) but instead is questioning what is potentially an observation that may or may not have any real value when expanded out to multispecies enclosures.
> 
> Ed


Bingo. Thanks Ed, for saying it better than I could.


----------



## Rich Conley

Jellyman said:


> There is a thread on here of a zoo that culls tadpoles and frogs of an almost extinct in the wild species of frog rather then get these frogs into the hands of breeders.


Just a note here:


Culling of animals is EXTREMELY common in zoos and aquariums. The AZA's rules prohibit the transfer of animals from an AZA facility to a non AZA facility, so the Zoos/Aquariums have no choice but to cull animals rather than give/sell them to the hobby.

This makes sense in the context of large animals (lions, tigers, bears..oh my?), but is extremely counterproductive in the case of small (especially endangered) animals, such as frogs, corals, etc.


----------



## Enlightened Rogue

Philsuma said:


> ....but the large volume of postings DID allow you to decide if certain _personalities_ on this forum have experience and are worthy of paying attention to.....hopefully.


As usual I learned something.

Thanks.

John


----------



## Jellyman

Hi Ed,
I've spent the last 8 or so hours reading through threads by using the search function criteria you had suggested. I have quite a few posts noted that would be very beneficial and also valuable if elaborated upon. I will cut and paste them with your permisiion. I do not want anyone to feel that I am singling you out. It is just that your opinion is well respected and you seem to have taken a stake in this discussion.
Thanks
Bryan


----------



## paulrust

Ben E said:


> that is great and pretty freaking awesome! i dont think i have that commitment or space for such endeavors, let alone the nagging feeling of introducing pathogens or altering a natural extinction event. There are however aspects and virtues of this hobby that do not directly deal with conservation that do deserve merit. one of which is the "art of display", that sometimes can be enhanced through the inclusion of multiple anuran species.


I am glad you approve. I don't do it for any other reason than it makes me happy to help. Introducing pathogens is a small risk in an area that is losing frogs because of people buying property and levelling it, destroying the habitat. I just want to take a chainsaw to their new home sometimes, just kidding, or am I? Anyway I try to be careful and since I don't breed them for a paycheck I treat them very well in a huge enclosure that is well planted with a large filtered pond water feature. Thay are in good hands.


----------



## Jellyman

*Re: So, you want a reason to not mix species? OT rant*



Ed said:


> Okay, I'm going to say a couple of things and I hope you take it personally. You have no clue as to what I am able to do and am not able to do. I do take offense as your assumption that my typing and the ability to search for something and cut and paste each individual item is the same. I can type a whole lot faster.
> 
> I also take offense at your assumption and demand for the entitlement of spoon feeding you information that you are for some reason unable or too lazy to locate on your own despite a clear roadmap. I also take offense at your attitude that pandering to your demand when it is available on the forums is an important use of my time.
> 
> If you think I am afraid to share an opinion or information regardless of the "clique" (if your going to use a word at least try to use the right one and not a sound alike... ) then you are spouting at best out of ignorance and at worst due to a failure to comprehend. You couldn't have wanted the information contained in those posts since you were so unwilling to even try and locate it despite being given a direct roadmap...
> 
> Those posts were the first posts I ever made on this board and if you really wanted the information contained in there you would have pulled up the thread and read it and seen the whole argument.
> 
> Based on the post cited above, you do not intend to make any efforts (even such a minor one as using the search function) to "earn" knowledge and in my opinion will not appreciate any such help in having the knowldedge provided to you...
> 
> How about finishing defining the terms we started to discuss earlier in this thread?
> 
> Why do you think the ESA covers Atelopus zeteki? Can you provide any citation to support you allegation that simply because A. zeteki are in captivity in the US zoos that the way they are being maintained is a violation of the ESA?
> 
> Some serious comments,
> 
> Ed


I wanted to apolgize to you Ed. I spent about 8 hours reading through alot of your posts. Some went way back. You are on record many times saying and defending(not necessarily endorsing) that mixed species tanks are capable of being successful. I applaud your honesty and that you feel the "simple" no it cannot be done answer is not accurate. i was out of line in that assumption and the egg is on my face for it. You are a stand up guy when it comes to this issue.

I have one question, you speak of visual barriers alot. I understand the concept but sometimes you reference it as simple and other times as being difficult. Can you elaborate a little on that particular aspect? When I think of a visual barrier I am think of such things as:
-The voids within a staghorn fern
-A mound that seperated the enclosure into different sections 
-A log or rock feature

Things of that nature are what come to mind.

Again Ed, I am sorry for getting you upset. I do not want this to be on a personal level. I do not take such things in life personal so no hard feeling here. I hope you can accept my aplogy,
Bryan


----------



## buddha

Ed said:


> Its cool as long as I can rub your belly for luck.
> 
> Ed


HAHA! As long as i can have the secret tour of the Frog area.. You Know.. Sub level 7b.. Where the frogs are planning on taking over the World!! Ladies also welcomed to rub the Buddha Belly! -Buddha


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Just a note here:
> 
> 
> Culling of animals is EXTREMELY common in zoos and aquariums. The AZA's rules prohibit the transfer of animals from an AZA facility to a non AZA facility, so the Zoos/Aquariums have no choice but to cull animals rather than give/sell them to the hobby..


This isn't technically true.. AZA doesn't totally prohibit the transfer...it depends on the various laws and regulations of where the person lives (Federal, State and Local) and whether or not the person is willing to jump through all of the required hoops which does vary a little from Zoo to Zoo. AZA makes it a real pain to transfer animals.... for example, in the most strict interpretation of the transfer policy, you have to agree to not sell the animal or any of its offspring... as well as have a vet who is willing to state that they do routine work and check on your animals as well as have any required permits.. etc. 
Its enough of a pain, that I won't even bother... 



Rich Conley said:


> This makes sense in the context of large animals (lions, tigers, bears..oh my?), but is extremely counterproductive in the case of small (especially endangered) animals, such as frogs, corals, etc.


Large animals are not culled, they are put on birth control, or implanted, or housed singly or in single sex groups to control populations. 


Ed


----------



## Ed

buddha said:


> HAHA! As long as i can have the secret tour of the Frog area.. You Know.. Sub level 7b.. Where the frogs are planning on taking over the World!! Ladies also welcomed to rub the Buddha Belly! -Buddha


Its not much of a tour.. right now you can see a bunch of tanks of Pipa parva off exhibit... but if some people want to come down, as long as we aren't short handed or doing some venomous work or the vets are doing anything major I should be able to do a behind the scene in the reptile house. 

Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> Large animals are not culled, they are put on birth control, or implanted, or housed singly or in single sex groups to control populations.


Right, I may have been unclear on that. I was trying to say that the transfer policies make sense because its extremely difficult for a layperson to house/care for a large animal, so it wouldn't do to have the zoo giving people seals/lions/elephants, whereas with smaller animals (such as frogs, fish, corals, etc), they are perfectly suited to being kept in hobby terms, and the policy doesn't make sense. 

The aquariums I've dealt with throw out tons of corals simply because there's no room for them, and they can't transfer them outside of the AZA. Nobody in the AZA needs more Discosoma mushrooms, but they're pulling a ton of them out of the ocean everyday for the hobby. Nobody in the AZA needs more montipora digitada, but while they chuck frags in a trashcan (and so do some reefers), large amounts are being collected.

In the case of small easily bred animals, the policy seems entirely counterproductive. The policy is essentially: "the animal is better off dead than outside the AZA"


----------



## flyangler18

> The aquariums I've dealt with throw out tons of corals simply because there's no room for them, and they can't transfer them outside of the AZA. Nobody in the AZA needs more Discosoma mushrooms, but they're pulling a ton of them out of the ocean everyday for the hobby. Nobody in the AZA needs more montipora digitada, but while they chuck frags in a trashcan (and so do some reefers), large amounts are being collected.
> 
> In the case of small easily bred animals, the policy seems entirely counterproductive. The policy is essentially: "the animal is better off dead than outside the AZA"


While I agree, the hobby (speaking of herpetoculture here) doesn't exactly have a track record of effectively managing captive populations of just about any commonly kept and bred reptile and amphibian species. The trade is entirely too influenced by the boom and bust cycles of 'fad' morphs and mutations, hybrids and other such mutts. Wild type genetics are ignored (i.e ball pythons, kingsnakes, leopard geckos come immediately to mind). 

ASN is a start, but to date, we haven't yet been afforded an opportunity to work with the Zoos to prove ourselves as being capable of managing and spearheading a breeding program. I hope we can soon say otherwise.


----------



## Rich Conley

flyangler18 said:


> While I agree, the hobby (speaking of herpetoculture here) doesn't exactly have a track record of effectively managing captive populations of just about any commonly kept and bred reptile and amphibian species. The trade is entirely too influenced by the boom and bust cycles of 'fad' morphs and mutations, hybrids and other such mutts. Wild type genetics are ignored (i.e ball pythons, kingsnakes, leopard geckos come immediately to mind).


Right, but in the long run, is that sort of mismanagement really worse than culling the animals? At the least it prevents some wild collection.


----------



## flyangler18

Rich Conley said:


> Right, but in the long run, is that sort of mismanagement really worse than culling the animals? At the least it prevents some wild collection.


I suppose it really depends entirely on the species. Ed can speak about the AZA's history with _Atelopus zeteki_, for example, though that situation is unique because the country of origin has been vocal about transfers out of AZA institutions. Namely, it can't happen.


----------



## Toby_H

Rich Conley said:


> Right, but in the long run, is that sort of mismanagement really worse than culling the animals? At the least it prevents some wild collection.


I can understand the zoos view that it is better to cull the animal than allow it to be mistreated or released into non-native environments...

But when we consider the fact that the demand will be supplied, if not by the zoos, by captive breeding and/or wild collecting... Then it could be viewed as senseless killing...

From the zoo's perspective they can rest assured they did not produce or distribute animals that are contributing to the problem (mistreatment & introduction to non-native environments)... yet they are inadvertently supporting another problem (over collecting in the wild) by destroying animals that could have otherwise help satisfy the demand...

Damned if you do and damned if you don't...


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Right, I may have been unclear on that. I was trying to say that the transfer policies make sense because its extremely difficult for a layperson to house/care for a large animal, so it wouldn't do to have the zoo giving people seals/lions/elephants, whereas with smaller animals (such as frogs, fish, corals, etc), they are perfectly suited to being kept in hobby terms, and the policy doesn't make sense.
> 
> The aquariums I've dealt with throw out tons of corals simply because there's no room for them, and they can't transfer them outside of the AZA. Nobody in the AZA needs more Discosoma mushrooms, but they're pulling a ton of them out of the ocean everyday for the hobby. Nobody in the AZA needs more montipora digitada, but while they chuck frags in a trashcan (and so do some reefers), large amounts are being collected.
> 
> In the case of small easily bred animals, the policy seems entirely counterproductive. The policy is essentially: "the animal is better off dead than outside the AZA"



I think you are putting way more into this than it really requires.. 

Okay some background on some general AZA policies seems to be required...... 

Zoos took a lot of bad press hits from the media spearheaded by Animal Rights Groups starting somewhere between the late 1970s and early 1980s and continuing well into the 1990s with it becoming really bad in 1991. The groups would lobby the media with examples of how the Zoos were violating thier trust by breeding animals not for conservation but for profit as shown by selling them into the pet trade (maybe some of you younger folk remember the Friends' episodes with the monkey...). This negative press put a lot of pressure on AZA and was shown to be affecting attendance and attendance revenues resulting in policies that do not discriminate between a goldfish and a gorilla (for a example of the negative press see Biodiversity and conservation - Google Book Search) as the average member of the public and the media does not discriminate... 


This has resulted as part of the AZA certification process a laborious paper trail requirement to transfer animals to non-AZA institutions or private personnel with a requirement that they are not allowed to sell the animals or thier offspring. With animals like corals this presents special challenges as AZA policies label fragments or offshoots as offpspring and required to meet these criteria. Under the strictest interpretation of the requirements, animals cannot be transfered to another person or facility unless the enclosure they are moving to will be larger and better furnished then thier current enclosure (how many home aquarists are going to beat the size of a huge institutional display aquarium....) but even without the strict interpretations the cost in personnel time to conduct the transfer is huge at best as it requires a vet exam/check, the time to fill out all of the required forms, check with the person's vet, possibly a site visit, follow-up for the reuquired time frame (usually two years) to make sure the person has not sold the animals etc....
Many Zoos recieve funds (possibly significant amounts) for complying with and maintaining AZA certification (in PA, AZA zoos split the proceeds from the sale of license plates...) so there is a further downside to the whole issue. 

So there is the primer on the fiscal reasons why it's a problem... 

Historically the transfer of animals to private individuals has often gone poorly for Zoos with a number of cases of it being used to either steal from the Zoo (Dyscophus..) or launder smuggled animals into the pet trade.... so there is also that negative aspect as well. 

There is a lot of animosity on the part of the private individual on why Zoos don't give/sell/trade animals more frequently with them, but it has to be noted that there isn't a lot of positives for the Zoos to do so.. if they charge you for them, then they are no better than a pet store.. if they give them to you, then they are providing animals to the pet trade.... so yes, damned if they do, damned if they don't...... 


Ed


----------



## Ed

flyangler18 said:


> While I agree, the hobby (speaking of herpetoculture here) doesn't exactly have a track record of effectively managing captive populations of just about any commonly kept and bred reptile and amphibian species. The trade is entirely too influenced by the boom and bust cycles of 'fad' morphs and mutations, hybrids and other such mutts. Wild type genetics are ignored (i.e ball pythons, kingsnakes, leopard geckos come immediately to mind).
> 
> ASN is a start, but to date, we haven't yet been afforded an opportunity to work with the Zoos to prove ourselves as being capable of managing and spearheading a breeding program. I hope we can soon say otherwise.



These are minor when compared to the other items I listed above.. 

It will take something like ASN and the amphibian crisis to undo a lot of the damage from the the last 30 years or so. 


Ed


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> I think you are putting way more into this than it really requires..
> 
> Okay some background on some general AZA policies seems to be required......
> 
> Zoos took a lot of bad press hits from the media spearheaded by Animal Rights Groups starting somewhere between the late 1970s and early 1980s and continuing well into the 1990s with it becoming really bad in 1991. The groups would lobby the media with examples of how the Zoos were violating thier trust by breeding animals not for conservation but for profit as shown by selling them into the pet trade (maybe some of you younger folk remember the Friends' episodes with the monkey...). This negative press put a lot of pressure on AZA and was shown to be affecting attendance and attendance revenues resulting in policies that do not discriminate between a goldfish and a gorilla (for a example of the negative press see Biodiversity and conservation - Google Book Search) as the average member of the public and the media does not discriminate...
> 
> 
> This has resulted as part of the AZA certification process a laborious paper trail requirement to transfer animals to non-AZA institutions or private personnel with a requirement that they are not allowed to sell the animals or thier offspring. With animals like corals this presents special challenges as AZA policies label fragments or offshoots as offpspring and required to meet these criteria. Under the strictest interpretation of the requirements, animals cannot be transfered to another person or facility unless the enclosure they are moving to will be larger and better furnished then thier current enclosure (how many home aquarists are going to beat the size of a huge institutional display aquarium....) but even without the strict interpretations the cost in personnel time to conduct the transfer is huge at best as it requires a vet exam/check, the time to fill out all of the required forms, check with the person's vet, possibly a site visit, follow-up for the reuquired time frame (usually two years) to make sure the person has not sold the animals etc....
> Many Zoos recieve funds (possibly significant amounts) for complying with and maintaining AZA certification (in PA, AZA zoos split the proceeds from the sale of license plates...) so there is a further downside to the whole issue.
> 
> So there is the primer on the fiscal reasons why it's a problem...
> 
> Historically the transfer of animals to private individuals has often gone poorly for Zoos with a number of cases of it being used to either steal from the Zoo (Dyscophus..) or launder smuggled animals into the pet trade.... so there is also that negative aspect as well.
> 
> There is a lot of animosity on the part of the private individual on why Zoos don't give/sell/trade animals more frequently with them, but it has to be noted that there isn't a lot of positives for the Zoos to do so.. if they charge you for them, then they are no better than a pet store.. if they give them to you, then they are providing animals to the pet trade.... so yes, damned if they do, damned if they don't......
> 
> 
> Ed




Ed, thats exactly why I have such a problem with it: Its not based on any sort of husbandry or animal care issues. Its a PR issue. 


Maybe OT, but I'm of the opinion that a lot of the so called 'animal rights groups' do more harm than good.


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> Ed, thats exactly why I have such a problem with it: Its not based on any sort of husbandry or animal care issues. Its a PR issue.
> 
> 
> Maybe OT, but I'm of the opinion that a lot of the so called 'animal rights groups' do more harm than good.


Hi Rich,

Its not just a PR thing.. as noted above.. as I noted in the beginning, that is how the policies got into place. Its also a fiscal cost.. its expensive to the institution to process and follow up on the animals. 

It may actually be a violation of the charter of the institution in question as it may have to show a net positive for the conservation portion of the charter. To turn this around a little can you name one animal that release of cb animals actually reduced demand from the pet trade or resulted in fewer animals being collected? (I'm playing devil's advocate here..) 

Ed


----------



## davecalk

Ed said:


> Hi Rich,
> 
> Its not just a PR thing.. as noted above.. as I noted in the beginning, that is how the policies got into place. Its also a fiscal cost.. its expensive to the institution to process and follow up on the animals.
> 
> It may actually be a violation of the charter of the institution in question as it may have to show a net positive for the conservation portion of the charter. To turn this around a little can you name one animal that release of cb animals actually reduced demand from the pet trade or resulted in fewer animals being collected? (I'm playing devil's advocate here..)
> 
> Ed


Ed, isn't this part of what TWI has been trying to accomplish? I was talking with Brent at NWFF about some of the issues around this topic. I suggested that there had be some way of doing this, possibly through a vetting process which an individual would go through in order to make sure that only organizations or individuals who would have the husbandry skills needed, who would be willing to keep the required records, who could show a track record of caring for similar animals over a period of time, and who who would agree not to port any of the animals or their offspring into the hobby for money or favors, etc. Only such individuals could be accepted into the program. 

I think that having a way to vet individuals who wanted to be a part of the program might go a long way to helping get it established. Having an outside organization like TWI which could help with or even do all of the vetting might make it so that Zoos would not have to spend nearly as much time dealing with the documenting, verifying, processing. etc., which would eliminate, not only some of the PR issues that they have faced, but might help to eliminate much of the expense issues which the institutions have had to face as well. 

Brent mentioned that part of the problem of developing a program like this was the lack of having an enforcement tool which would help keep individuals honest, a way of keeping unscrupulous individuals from just doing with the animals as they pleased once they were in possession of them. He mentioned that it might be possible to establish a legal fund that would be used to keep someone "honest", which could be brought to bare upon an individual who sold or gave away frogs or offspring which were deeded to their care. Having the ability to hammer someone who was in some way intentionally negligent of their agreed upon duties would be an important policy piece for zoo's and governments to be willing to consider changing the present program policies of deep-sixing an over crowded endangered / rare species. (The last phrase of overcrowded and endangered seems like such a contradiction, but from a zoo's perspective it is accurate and understandable)

Dave


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> To turn this around a little can you name one animal that release of cb animals actually reduced demand from the pet trade or resulted in fewer animals being collected? (I'm playing devil's advocate here..)
> 
> Ed


Ed, I can't name one animal that has been released openly to the pet trade, so no. 

I know that release of coral frags to the pet trade would reduce imports. I'm sure that animals regularly being culled in aquariums (like Bangai Cardinals) would reduce imports, as captive breeding (by the hobby) has certainly reduced import. CB clownfish have almost completely replaced wildcaught at this point, but again, thats the hobby doing it. 

The zoos wont release stuff, so theres no way to get the result you're asking about.


----------



## Catfur

davecalk said:


> Ed, isn't this part of what TWI has been trying to accomplish? I was talking with Brent at NWFF about some of the issues around this topic. I suggested that there had be some way of doing this, possibly through a vetting process which an individual would go through in order to make sure that only organizations or individuals who would have the husbandry skills needed, who would be willing to keep the required records, who could show a track record of caring for similar animals over a period of time, and who who would agree not to port any of the animals or their offspring into the hobby for money or favors, etc. Only such individuals could be accepted into the program.
> 
> I think that having a way to vet individuals who wanted to be a part of the program might go a long way to helping get it established. Having an outside organization like TWI which could help with or even do all of the vetting might make it so that Zoos would not have to spend nearly as much time dealing with the documenting, verifying, processing. etc., which would eliminate, not only some of the PR issues that they have faced, but might help to eliminate much of the expense issues which the institutions have had to face as well.
> 
> Brent mentioned that part of the problem of developing a program like this was the lack of having an enforcement tool which would help keep individuals honest, a way of keeping unscrupulous individuals from just doing with the animals as they pleased once they were in possession of them. He mentioned that it might be possible to establish a legal fund that would be used to keep someone "honest", which could be brought to bare upon an individual who sold or gave away frogs or offspring which were deeded to their care. Having the ability to hammer someone who was in some way intentionally negligent of their agreed upon duties would be an important policy piece for zoo's and governments to be willing to consider changing the present program policies of deep-sixing an over crowded endangered / rare species. (The last phrase of overcrowded and endangered seems like such a contradiction, but from a zoo's perspective it is accurate and understandable)
> 
> Dave


This is just a way of expanding the problem/kicking it down the road. Instead of zoos culling overcrowded species now (whenever "now" is) you just have zoos _and_ private hobbyists culling overcrowded species two years (or however long it takes to saturate the exceeding limited pool of private individuals set up) from now. It also does nothing to alleviate demand in the private sector (except for those extremely few individuals willing and able to join the program).

The real problem is the idea that these animals are better off as rotting corpses than as pets in some private individuals hands, which is the Animal Rights crowd's opinion. Zoos have already conceded this idea to the Animal Rights wackos, putting them one step closer to their ultimate goal of complete destruction of all zoos and complete bans on keeping of any animals in captivity.


----------



## Catfur

Rich Conley said:


> Ed, I can't name one animal that has been released openly to the pet trade, so no.
> 
> I know that release of coral frags to the pet trade would reduce imports. I'm sure that animals regularly being culled in aquariums (like Bangai Cardinals) would reduce imports, as captive breeding (by the hobby) has certainly reduced import. CB clownfish have almost completely replaced wildcaught at this point, but again, thats the hobby doing it.
> 
> The zoos wont release stuff, so theres no way to get the result you're asking about.


Not to mention that the only real way to measure demand is price, and price is sensitive to many inputs, making it impossible to isolate "satiation of demand" as a measurable. Ed has asked for impossible to provide information.


----------



## Ed

Catfur said:


> Not to mention that the only real way to measure demand is price, and price is sensitive to many inputs, making it impossible to isolate "satiation of demand" as a measurable. Ed has asked for impossible to provide information.


Actually I haven't asked the impossible question. Auratus for example were released to the private sector and we are still importing them.


----------



## Toby_H

Ed said:


> Actually I haven't asked the impossible question. Auratus for example were released to the private sector and we are still importing them.


A few things have to be considered here…

If the average hobbyist could go to the zoo and purchase an Auratus cheaper than I could buy a wild caught one… I’d buy all my Auratus at the zoo! Also if the zoo were allowed to distribute Auratus to pet stores, then even more hobbyists would get their Auratus through the zoos efforts.

Having said that I will also remind myself and others that there has been ample conversation thus far discussing why this is not happening…

Another thought to remember, breeders will always want to import wild animals to continue to add genetic diversity to their bloodlines. This demand will never be served by captive breeding by zoos, the hobby or any other measure.

Hobbyists, myself included, will continue to put a higher value on frogs of recent generations out of the wild, such as F1 or F2. This is because of the negative results of poor breeding habits by many individuals.


----------



## Catfur

Ed said:


> Actually I haven't asked the impossible question. Auratus for example were released to the private sector and we are still importing them.


Yes, you have. You asked about proof of reduced demand. Not proof that releasing animals to the private sector would eliminate imports. Since import/export controls on amphibians aren't meaningful, short term way to demand signals (price) in the US, but primarily tied to what the producer projects for output from the farm (whether or not you believe in the farm), it's essentially impossible to measure this, as well. You are using the no true Scotsman fallacy here.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> Actually I haven't asked the impossible question. Auratus for example were released to the private sector and we are still importing them.


I would have to think that we are not importing as many and would be importing even less if zoos and other organizations were not culling them and selling them for a profit.

I breed Bangaii cardinals and supply most of the LFS(Local Fish Stores) with captive breed fish. If they cannot get them from me they spend a little extra to get captive bred from ORA. We basically have eliminated any demand for wild caught specimens, at least in our area. Another guy is breeding clownfish and does the same thing.

It will never stop importing but it can drastically (or at least partially) reduce it.


----------



## Ed

Catfur said:


> Yes, you have. You asked about proof of reduced demand. Not proof that releasing animals to the private sector would eliminate imports. Since import/export controls on amphibians aren't meaningful, short term way to demand signals (price) in the US, but primarily tied to what the producer projects for output from the farm (whether or not you believe in the farm), it's essentially impossible to measure this, as well. You are using the no true Scotsman fallacy here.


I'm working off my phone so I can't be as eloquent as I normally would be.
The argument is that releasing animals from zoos would lower demand... you referenced price as a yardstick to measure demand, yet the price of auratus which we know to have been released multiple times over multiple years to have remained fairly stable, imports have continued and it's one of the most commonly confiscated smuggled dendrobatid.

If we are considering the bigger picture demand is only reduced if you can supply the item less expensively, more consistently, and in sufficient numbers otherwise you can create a larger market with greater demand. No zoo is set up in a manner that allows commercial production as labor costs etc would price them out of the market unless they operated at a loss.

So why is it okay for a breeder/pet store owner to sell someone something but is bad when zoos do the same thing?

What if the breeder has repeated bad experiences with a certain market? What if a breeder got a lot of bad press for dealing with a certain market? What is the real difference?

Ed


----------



## Ed

So why is it okay for a breeder/pet store owner to Not sell someone something but is bad when zoos do the same thing?

Note the addition of the word not to the above sentence.


----------



## Jellyman

Ed said:


> So why is it okay for a breeder/pet store owner to Not sell someone something but is bad when zoos do the same thing?
> 
> Note the addition of the word not to the above sentence.


Would it be because the zoo is killing/culling the animal that could be sold and the pet store owner is not? 

I do not think anyone is placing the blame directly on the zoo, or especially on the zoo staff but more on the policies they have had to adopt to combat the bad press, PR issues, and the added cost it would involve making sure every single animal was placed with someone who could care for it properly.


----------



## Toby_H

How much more time/energy/investment would it take for a zoo to give/sell the offspring, which were already collected to be culled, to a local pet store?… with the exception of dealing with politics… 

Doing so would potentially lower the amount of wild caught frogs that store may otherwise bring in… or else it would lower the amount of captive bred frogs that store would have brought in, leaving those captive bred frogs on the market to serve the demand for frogs elsewhere… thus lowering the overall ‘need’ for bringing in wild caught frogs…

I believe the above to be true, even if it did not lower the going rate for said frog…

Naturally there would still be a market for wild caught frogs to breeders, which I do not feel will ever be satisfied with captive breeding of any sort… There will also be a desire for wild caught frogs by hobbyists who just think it’s cool to have a wild caught specimen (which I just do not understand)… but it could offset the number of wild caught frogs by the number of wild caught frogs it puts in the hands of those who sell to hobbyists…

The only offset to the above being true that I see is the number of people who entered the hobby through an interest to in the zoo bred frogs… yet isn’t an interest in wildlife a part of the zoos mission? And isn’t keeping an exotic pet often a part of becoming more interested in wildlife?

While on one hand I believe it is “bad” to cull healthy animals… I also understand that zoos have rules and regulations to follow and the benefits of culling may be outweighed the disadvantages of not culling. Therefore I cannot conclude that the overall decision is “bad”…

Instead I would conclude that it’s a shame that bureaucracy and politics so often block simple solutions to real problems… But that’s a whole can of worms I hope this thread doesn’t have to tread through…


----------



## Ben E

my experience with culling amphibs in a zoo setting involved washing eggs down a drain. There would be considerably more effort involved in raising up those hundreds of tads to "salable" size animals. zoos cannot afford to do this nor find space to house all of these animals.


----------



## Jellyman

Ben E said:


> my experience with culling amphibs in a zoo setting involved washing eggs down a drain. There would be considerably more effort involved in raising up those hundreds of tads to "salable" size animals. zoos cannot afford to do this nor find space to house all of these animals.


But they could sell the tads to someone with the facility to do so. I breed bangaii cardinal fish and can only hold about 150 at full capacity to grow out to selling size. After that, I sell them to a few different friends and thhe raise them to selling size.


----------



## flyangler18

Ed,

You should share your experience with _Atelopus zeteki_ specifically to give some perspective to the bureaucracies involved here.

Jason


----------



## skylsdale

Toby_H said:


> How much more time/energy/investment would it take for a zoo to give/sell the offspring, which were already collected to be culled, to a local pet store?… with the exception of dealing with politics…


Think about it logistically...how many communities actually have a zoo that could be used as a resource to the private hobby? When you think about this, the number off animals any given zoo can provide probably wouldn't be much more than the equivalent of a couple extra private hobbyists (per species, lets say). To deal with the demands of raising/rearing these animals, then getting them into the hands of hobbyists, shipping them out and/or delivering them to local pet stores, I would imagine each zoo would be forced to hire at least one more person on to deal with this (best case scenario)...and if you talk to anyone who spends a decent amount of time in the inner workings of a zoo, most will probably tell you that the vast majority of institutions are already strapped for funding and, if money is going to be funneled somewhere within the zoo, it's most likely not going to be toward a "liason" for the private amphibian hobby.

Zoos would need to be able to produce numbers that could competitively compete with wild-caught animals coming into the market...and what we're creating here is a bit of a straw man argument by blaming them for culling animals, blazing up torches and raising our pitchforks high at the big bad zoos. 

If there is any species that is most commonly mentioned on DB as being "established in the hobby" it's _Dendrobates auratus_. Yet this frog, despite being supposedly "established," is still being imported by the thousands each year. It's not because zoos are culling all their captive auratus. Although the answer is complicated and multi-faceted, I would say a large reason is because there is a large market ready and waiting to buy them on the other end. Unless how we choose to interact with that system changes, zoos culling or not culling, we can expect things to continue moving forward in the same ways they always have.


----------



## Toby_H

Skydale… the number of (for example) frogs zoos collectively made available (in my hypothetical world) would not need to equal the amount of imported WC frogs to “help” the situation… every little bit helps…

If Displays could be set up at the zoos to allow the frogs themselves to raise their young to a sellable size, it may be more realistic, but I completely agree/understand it would make it unreasonable if this work had to be done by humans or in non display areas.

Naturally there will also be some animals that this would be more realistic for and some animals it will be less realistic for.

As for shipping / delivery… most mom & pop type stores could easily find an employee eager to go to the zoo and pick up animals. Heck I’d volunteer to do it just to get a free back door tour of the zoo once a month. Chain stores typically don’t supply much in the form of live exotics, so they wouldn’t be your targeted vendors to work with. 

All of that being said, I can still accept that due to past experiences policies are in place that simply make it more realistic to cull as opposed to distribute, and make distribution very difficult at best. Also I haven’t read any posts that suggest torches & pitchforks… just some caring folks asking questions hoping to help find solutions…


----------



## Jellyman

Toby_H said:


> All of that being said, I can still accept that due to past experiences policies are in place that simply make it more realistic to cull as opposed to distribute, and make distribution very difficult at best. Also I haven’t read any posts that suggest torches & pitchforks… just some caring folks asking questions hoping to help find solutions…


Noone is blaming the zoo for covering their butt. It has to suck emotionally for the zoo staff to knowingly cull any animal they care for. I sometimes have bangaii that are born with their front fins growing backwards. They are perfectly fine except thir swimming is labored and they cannot compete for food. I either have to find someone who can keep them or they have to be culled. It really sucks.


----------



## Ed

Catfur said:


> The real problem is the idea that these animals are better off as rotting corpses than as pets in some private individuals hands.


With one main exception (which is Atelopus zeteki when a Zoo is attempting to breed them for the first time), amphibians are disposed of as eggs so this really doesn't apply. 



Catfur said:


> which is the Animal Rights crowd's opinion. Zoos have already conceded this idea to the Animal Rights wackos, putting them one step closer to their ultimate goal of complete destruction of all zoos and complete bans on keeping of any animals in captivity.


Actually if you look at the Animal Right's Agenda, its the extinction of all captive animals so they wouldn't be there for the hobbyist either. 


Ed


----------



## Ed

Hi Dave,




davecalk said:


> Ed, isn't this part of what TWI has been trying to accomplish?


Yes however, people have to realize that regardless of the success or failure of TWI some animals like A. zeteki will never be accessiable due to the permits and other requirements put in place by the exporting country. 




davecalk said:


> Brent mentioned that part of the problem of developing a program like this was the lack of having an enforcement tool which would help keep individuals honest, a way of keeping unscrupulous individuals from just doing with the animals as they pleased once they were in possession of them.


This is one of the problems Zoos face.. and it is a major cost as it requires paying the salary of a person to maintain the paperwork and follow up with the recieving person and often paying for at least one site visit to verify the reported conditions both prior and post transfer of the animal(s). 
There have been multiple cases of where the individual has either attempted to lie on the application or has lied about the animal post transfer or in the case of loans, conducted outright theft of the animals or offspring (one notorious cast in the Zoo field is what happened with Dyscophus antongili (in 1988, the Zoos collaborated with a researcher who shall remain nameless to breed antongili through artificial means and from the project, not only were offspring stolen and sold in the pet trade in large numbers but several pairs of "proven" breeders were also stolen and sold with the losses being reported to the Zoos as deaths. This went on until the whole scheme came to light..) 

The multiple cases of this are a large hurdle for the hobby to overcome.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

Toby_H said:


> Another thought to remember, breeders will always want to import wild animals to continue to add genetic diversity to their bloodlines. This demand will never be served by captive breeding by zoos, the hobby or any other measure.
> 
> Hobbyists, myself included, will continue to put a higher value on frogs of recent generations out of the wild, such as F1 or F2. This is because of the negative results of poor breeding habits by many individuals.


With respect to purchasing from the Zoo.. assuming everything else was equal (no paperwork, etc), that would require that the Zoo to change thier charters and probably violate thier non-profit status...... 


A item to keep in mind is that as long as people continually want animals closer to the wild lines then the demand for newly imported animals will never decreaese. 

I use you, not to single you out Toby but to direct it at the reader. 

The problem with this is that you are devaluing available animals on what grounds? For example, on what basis are you devaluing the ones in the hobby which have not been maintained to maximize allelles? What steps are you taking to perpetuate the whole problem? It doesn't matter if all you purchase is F2 from wild or F400 if the population is not managed. If one isn't engaged in properly managing the population then one is devaluing the current population and placing a greater value on wild caught or near wild caught animals which encourages imports as well as smuggling of animals. 


Ed


----------



## Ed

Toby_H said:


> How much more time/energy/investment would it take for a zoo to give/sell the offspring, which were already collected to be culled, to a local pet store?… with the exception of dealing with politic.


A lot. So lets skip the politics.. it would have to be reviewed and conducted in a manner which did not violate the charter or the non-profit status of the Zoo. To maintain the population in a sustainable manner (required by the charter of an average Zoo), the population needs to be tracked and maintained to maximize diversity. So, you have a keeper, the keeper is responsible for not only the off exhibit animals but the exhibit animals.. so the keeper has to divert time and energy from the exhibit to maintain and raise the eggs and tadpoles... keep track of the groups and not mix them unless breeding them so that the alleles can be maximized overtime. 
The registrar has to enter the data, track it and accession or deaccession the animals. There need to be routine fecal and physical checks on the animals. 
(At least in PA, and possibly all other Zoos as well) Since the Zoo is an institution, any transport or shipments of animals requires an individual vet assessment of each animal which is at a seperate cost.. medical treatments, culture or purchase of the foods... If the project requires enough time a second person has to be hired at a cost to the institution for wages, health care etc... (if you don't then you have problems due to continual and rapid staff turn over..) 
Maintenance has to be involved in making sure the facilities are stable and then there is the costs of power and supplies... 

The Zoos cannot compete with the importation of wc animals or even the hobby that has all of those other costs. 



Toby_H said:


> Doing so would potentially lower the amount of wild caught frogs that store may otherwise bring in… or else it would lower the amount of captive bred frogs that store would have brought in, leaving those captive bred frogs on the market to serve the demand for frogs elsewhere… thus lowering the overall ‘need’ for bringing in wild caught frogs……


See my comments elsewhere on "breeders" desiring frogs closer to wc... 




Toby_H said:


> Naturally there would still be a market for wild caught frogs to breeders, which I do not feel will ever be satisfied with captive breeding of any sort… There will also be a desire for wild caught frogs by hobbyists who just think it’s cool to have a wild caught specimen (which I just do not understand)… but it could offset the number of wild caught frogs by the number of wild caught frogs it puts in the hands of those who sell to hobbyists……


This is assuming that the Zoo can produce the animals at a cost to make it worthwhile to sell to the pet trade, which they can't... If they can only produce them at above market cost who would buy them? 

If the hobby was that concerned about it then we wouldn't have seen the multiple boom and bust cycles in the hobby when it became uneconomical to breed certain species or morphs.... resulting in increased demand and a desire for wc imports... 




Toby_H said:


> The only offset to the above being true that I see is the number of people who entered the hobby through an interest to in the zoo bred frogs… yet isn’t an interest in wildlife a part of the zoos mission? And isn’t keeping an exotic pet often a part of becoming more interested in wildlife.



To break down most charters to three simple words.. 

Education.. sale of captive bred frogs does not educate the average person particuarly if it is through a non-affiliated vendor. 

Research.... sale of a cb frog does not conduct research (it may in theory be used to fund it, but the charters are specific that it has to be performed and that bit of sophistry doesn't fly in most charters) 

Conservation..... unless it can be shown that selling cb frogs directly helps with the conservation of that specfic frog then it doesn't meet the requirements the charters. 

Actually keeping an exotic pet is frequently a negative impact on conservation through 
1) introduction of a invasive species (gold fish, oscars...) 
2) introduction of a novel pathogen (mycoplasma in native US tortoises and box turtles)
3) unsustainable harvesting for the pet trade (a number of parrots are good off the cuff examples)
4) habitat destruction to collect said animal (such as was done with parrots) 





Toby_H said:


> While on one hand I believe it is “bad” to cull healthy animals… I also understand that zoos have rules and regulations to follow and the benefits of culling may be outweighed the disadvantages of not culling. Therefore I cannot conclude that the overall decision is “bad”…
> 
> Instead I would conclude that it’s a shame that bureaucracy and politics so often block simple solutions to real problems… But that’s a whole can of worms I hope this thread doesn’t have to tread through…


I have two further things to say here.. 

1) Panama would have never allowed the US Zoos to get involved in conserving A. zeteki if they were selling animals into the pet trade. As this is toad is considered a national treasure, it was highly possible that it would have been allowed to go extinct as opposed to enter into the US pet trade at no benefit to Panama. It is not only the hobbyists that have put the US, Europe etc in a bad light, it is also some unscrupulous researchers who collect animals and then either do not share the information with the country of origin or any of the benefit (for example, see the whole issue over epidobatin). The USA has never ratified the biopiracy treaty and there a number of countries that have significant concerns that resources and profits that they should be able to get under the treaty would not get to them due to those issues. 

2) People only want the animals that have a demand or that are not availble in the pet trade like zeteki. How much demand do you think would be there for say green frogs (clamitans..).... 


Ed


----------



## Ed

Toby_H said:


> Skydale… the number of (for example) frogs zoos collectively made available (in my hypothetical world) would not need to equal the amount of imported WC frogs to “help” the situation… every little bit help......



Why don't we see the hobby giving auratus away or selling them for $5-10 each? As you ascertain, every little bit helps and a frog sold that cheaply would prevent a lot of people from buying wc frogs.... 



Toby_H said:


> If Displays could be set up at the zoos to allow the frogs themselves to raise their young to a sellable size, it may be more realistic, but I completely agree/understand it would make it unreasonable if this work had to be done by humans or in non display areas.


This may reduce the amount of hands on work but the exhibits have to be kept suitable for public viewing, in addition, if the adults are devoting metabolic resources for caring for the young then they are going to produce less offspring.... which drives up cost as it reduces supply..


Naturally there will also be some animals that this would be more realistic for and some animals it will be less realistic for.



Toby_H said:


> As for shipping / delivery… most mom & pop type stores could easily find an employee eager to go to the zoo and pick up animals. Heck I’d volunteer to do it just to get a free back door tour of the zoo once a month. Chain stores typically don’t supply much in the form of live exotics, so they wouldn’t be your targeted vendors to work with.


See my previous post describing the amount of effort placed by Zoos in tracking animals and if they were to target these to be kept sustainably... 




Toby_H said:


> All of that being said, I can still accept that due to past experiences policies are in place that simply make it more realistic to cull as opposed to distribute, and make distribution very difficult at best. Also I haven’t read any posts that suggest torches & pitchforks… just some caring folks asking questions hoping to help find solutions…


Its not just politics.. its cost.. its the fact that these topics only come up when its a species or morph that is greatly desired by the respective hobby (and third parties who read these posts often see them as being driven by greed and not out of any real desire to aid in conservation of a species.. otherwise, ASN for example would have a lot more members....), its the ability to be able to work with animals from other countries that want nothing to do with the pet trade, its the non-profit status, its the laws regarding transfer of the animals, its the ability to get the public to percieve the zoo as something other than a grandiose pet store..... 

Ed


----------



## Ed

flyangler18 said:


> Ed,
> 
> You should share your experience with _Atelopus zeteki_ specifically to give some perspective to the bureaucracies involved here.
> 
> Jason



I'm guessing that you are not referring to the several bribery hints by a couple members of the hobby???? 
I think I covered it in several other posts... 

Ed


----------



## flyangler18

Ed said:


> I'm guessing that you are not referring to the several bribery hints by a couple members of the hobby????
> I think I covered it in several other posts...
> 
> Ed


No you've definitely covered it with your usual candor in the above posts. I'm sure that most people don't fully understand why A. zeteki offspring are culled when it's so obviously a species under threat.


----------



## Ed

flyangler18 said:


> No you've definitely covered it with your usual candor in the above posts. I'm sure that most people don't fully understand why A. zeteki offspring are culled when it's so obviously a species under threat.


I didn't "get" it either when I first worked at a zoo.. 

Ed


----------



## Beijasmom

Wow folks. Why not we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya? LOL. Actually, the above idea of experience being the one that does the shaping of decisions is true. and this is how we end up with different opinions. I for one am the typical deviant. As a beginner in the poultry industry, moons ago, i decided the hell with everyone else, i would make it work. So now 15 yrs later, i have peacocks, chickens, ducks, pheasants etc all living together in one pen and under one roof. Oh and did i mention my peacock is in love with a white silkie chicken named Dolly? LMAO. for some, certains things may not work at all and for others it does. I for one have had amphibians for about 13 yrs (began with african claweds, which i still have, of course lol, and firebellieds) and now just recently sold the last part of my soul to two azureus, two leuc's, one auratus (all froglets) and two auratus tads. And I am intent on housing them all together. If it doesn't work, that gives me an excuse to make more viv's and thus ive learned it won't work for me and if it does, then great! So what if i have a peacock with identity issues...they all get along! he doesn't even know hes confused so it doesn't count! lol Bottom line: physiologic facts are fact, and the other facts are just exceptions that may choose to occur or not happen at all. Anyway, I have learned so much from reading this board! And i thank you all for the brilliant information!!! I am seeking tads by the way! cobalts in particular but am interested in others as well. drop a line if you have details/photos. thanks! -Lauren


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> With respect to purchasing from the Zoo.. assuming everything else was equal (no paperwork, etc), that would require that the Zoo to change thier charters and probably violate thier non-profit status......


Charters, most likely, but you can certainly sell something and still be a non-profit. They'd most likely either have to lower ticket prices (assuming they were making profit off selling animals), or find some other way to assign money.


----------



## Rich Conley

Ed said:


> Why don't we see the hobby giving auratus away or selling them for $5-10 each? As you ascertain, every little bit helps and a frog sold that cheaply would prevent a lot of people from buying wc frogs....


Because there seems to be this inane idea that selling frogs for cheap is bad for the hobby. Its not. Its bad for the people who want to make a living off the hobby.


----------



## Toby_H

Rich Conley said:


> Because there seems to be this inane idea that selling frogs for cheap is bad for the hobby. Its not. Its bad for the people who want to make a living off the hobby.


But, if hobbyists are buying (sibling) groups, forming pairs, producing offspring, distributing (sibling) groups to later form pairs, etc... and selling these frogs for less... then uneducated hobbyists are motivated to buy overly inbred animals at a reduced cost as opposed to supporting those putting respectable efforts into a quality breeding program. 

I am not experienced enough with breeding frogs to know at what point this becomes detrimental... but inbreeding depression is well documented and will take it's toll when excessive inbreeding takes place. I have seen the results of excessive inbreeding in fish, despite the common belief that inbreeding fish “isn’t a big deal”.

So a higher price tag on our frogs finances stronger breeding programs… with stronger frogs being passed in the hobby we have less of a reason to reach into wild environments and remove wild frogs to strengthen bloodlines…

I STRONGLY support the idea of high quality breeding programs that include some means of using only the strongest frogs as breeders… that avoids inbreeding… that provides ideal care to the potential breeders (and the frogs to be sold) from birth… etc, etc…

I STRONGLY encourage everyone to pay the extra dollar to such breeders so that we can have stronger frogs and so that we have less of a reason to remove frogs from the wild.

By the way… I’d love to know which breeders are taking such steps so I can support them


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> But, if hobbyists are buying (sibling) groups, forming pairs, producing offspring, distributing (sibling) groups to later form pairs, etc... and selling these frogs for less... then uneducated hobbyists are motivated to buy overly inbred animals at a reduced cost as opposed to supporting those putting respectable efforts into a quality breeding program.


You're making the assumption that cheaper frogs means more inbreeding. I see no reason for this to be the case. There are plenty of hobbyists who are willing to swap out frogs for unrelated same sex frogs in order to bolster breeding programs.




> So a higher price tag on our frogs finances stronger breeding programs… with stronger frogs being passed in the hobby we have less of a reason to reach into wild environments and remove wild frogs to strengthen bloodlines…


You're using a poorly supported assumption here to say that higher prices leads to less inbred frogs. Again, this is not necessarily correct.


----------



## Toby_H

Rich, I disagree with you… politely and in a friendly way of course…

If more people could get a group of siblings for $40 and form a pair or two out of them… Then more people would do so… Therefore there would be more sibling pairs out there… therefore there would be more inbred offspring being produced…

Also, if dedicated hobbyists/breeders could not recover some of their expenses by selling frogs, they would have less to invest into their breeding programs, meaning less frogs would be produced by quality breeding programs…

I completely agree/understand there are “some” hobbyists who establish quality breeding programs purely for the love of the frogs… and a couple are even willing to distribute those frogs at a big loss…

But when we look at the end of the day numbers… and the benefits of quality breeding programs… I for one am happy to support them. Whether it’s a commercial breeder, or an individual hobbyist… It takes more to produce higher quality frogs… and higher quality frogs are worth more… and higher quality frogs benefit the whole hobby, and nature as well…

Also note, I believe there is a lot more to a “quality breeding program” than just out crossing bloodlines. 

I was actually discouraged when I asked about good sources for frogs and the responses I got were for inexpensive sources for frogs. I’m not going to naively go with the most expensive, but I would love to know what breeders put the most effort into achieving higher quality breeding pairs… and put the most effort into raising stronger sellable frogs…


----------



## Philsuma

Toby_H said:


> By the way… I’d love to know which breeders are taking such steps so I can support them


Easy Toby....just keep reading and researching on this forum and others..

AND..more importantly - Go to all the local and drivable Frogger meets and conferences. Meet the breeder in person...up close and ask all the questions you care to. It won't be long until you form your own opinions and either like or dislike some of us.


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> If more people could get a group of siblings for $40 and form a pair or two out of them… Then more people would do so… Therefore there would be more sibling pairs out there… therefore there would be more inbred offspring being produced…


If more people could get a group of non-siblings for $40 and form a pair or two out of them... then more people would do so... therefore there would be more non-sibling pairs out there... therefore there would be more clean offspring being produced.


You're making the assumption that a $40 frog is inbred, and that a $100 frog isn't. Paying more for a frog does not insure that it has a diverse background. Its not really any more expensive to put together non-related frogs, so it shouldn't drive up prices any.





> Also, if dedicated hobbyists/breeders could not recover some of their expenses by selling frogs, they would have less to invest into their breeding programs, meaning less frogs would be produced by quality breeding programs…


Again, cost neither indicates nor insures quality. You're just as likely to get an inbred animal at $100 as at $40. You're just less likely to question it. Rare animals are much more expensive, and are much more likely to be inbred because of scarcity. Scarcity, in all cases, reduces genetic variety. 

As to "recovering expenses", after the initial input costs for the Viv, and the cost of the frogs themselves, there are very few expenses. A dollar or two of electricity a month per Viv? A dollar or two a month per viv for fruit fly media?


----------



## Toby_H

Rich Conley said:


> If more people could get a group of non-siblings for $40 and form a pair or two out of them... then more people would do so... therefore there would be more non-sibling pairs out there... therefore there would be more clean offspring being produced.


You are correct, and that doesn't discredit my point in any way. 

Yet, bare in mind, that to produce a group of non-sibling pairs would cost a heck of a lot more for the breeder to produce... so my theory is likely, yours is not...



Rich Conley said:


> You're making the assumption that a $40 frog is inbred, and that a $100 frog isn't. Paying more for a frog does not insure that it has a diverse background. Its not really any more expensive to put together non-related frogs, so it shouldn't drive up prices any.


No I have not made that assumption nor is anything I've suggested dependant on that assumption.

A quality breeding project does cost more to run…

It takes time (and time is money) to do the background research on where your frogs came from and to keep track of your own breeding program which is necessary to avoid excessive inbreeding...

It takes grow out tanks to grow out groups to select the strongest frogs to use as breeders…

You will find that some pairs produce stronger offspring than others thus making some pairs unworthy of being 'producers' for you… therefore making all time/resources invested into that pair a loss…

Ideal care to young from birth I’m sure takes time and attention…

Culling sub par animals as opposed to selling them creates another loss... 

There are likely many other details that a quality breeder could/would/does provide that I am personally unaware of…



Rich Conley said:


> Again, cost neither indicates nor insures quality. You're just as likely to get an inbred animal at $100 as at $40. You're just less likely to question it. Rare animals are much more expensive, and are much more likely to be inbred because of scarcity. Scarcity, in all cases, reduces genetic variety.


Again, while I do not disagree with the above comment... it in no way discredits what I had to say... 



Rich Conley said:


> As to "recovering expenses", after the initial input costs for the Viv, and the cost of the frogs themselves, there are very few expenses. A dollar or two of electricity a month per Viv? A dollar or two a month per viv for fruit fly media?


You are correct in the idea that the breeder must make all of their investments into a pair prior to getting anything back… but I feel that investment is worth rewarding… 

I would also expect that breeder to invest at least a protion of the money they make from selling froglets into producing more pairs or acquiring/creating pairs of other species. That’s how a business grows…


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> You are correct, and that doesn't discredit my point in any way.
> 
> Yet, bare in mind, that to produce a group of non-sibling pairs would cost a heck of a lot more for the breeder to produce... so my theory is likely, yours is not...


How so? How is it any more expensive to produce non-sibling pairs? Additional shipping costs? 




> A quality breeding project does cost more to run…
> 
> It takes time (and time is money) to do the background research on where your frogs came from and to keep track of your own breeding program which is necessary to avoid excessive inbreeding...


Time is money in the case of a business. Time is not money in the case of the hobby. For a hobby breeder, an extra hour a week doesn't 'cost' anything.




> It takes grow out tanks to grow out groups to select the strongest frogs to use as breeders…


You could grow out frogs in 10g tanks, or 20g Rubbermaids. Under $15 each. 



> You will find that some pairs produce stronger offspring than others thus making some pairs unworthy of being 'producers' for you… therefore making all time/resources invested into that pair a loss…


Do you really think that breeders are culling animals that aren't growing as quickly? You see all these threads about SLS, breeding issues, etc? People don't stop using those frogs as breeders, they make changes to raise the froglets, and sell them, whether or not they should be used in breeding programs. They may select breeders based on vigor, but pairs live a long time, so most of them are still using the original frogs they bought as breeding stock. 




> Ideal care to young from birth I’m sure takes time and attention…


It does, but again, you're assuming that only the 'expensive' breeders take care of their frogs, which is frankly, absurd.



> Culling sub par animals as opposed to selling them creates another loss...


At $100 a pop, no one is culling a frog unless its got SLS and can't walk. At $10 a piece, people might actually cull less vigorous frogs.


----------



## Toby_H

Rich… your arguments are that a breeding project can be done cheaply…

My arguments are that a well organized dynamic breeding project is not so cheap…

By cutting corners to save a buck, you are going to loose quality in your product…

I wish to support the guy who does not cut corners and has a better quality product (frog)

I do not assume more expensive = better… instead I am here asking what supplier(s) have the most respectable breeding operations so I can support their efforts and get a better quality frog...

I began this debate/conversation by suggesting that when people buy a couple of random quality sibling frogs to form a pair and inexpensively distribute these inbred offspring… It makes it harder for the guy who puts extra effort into his dynamic breeding project to make his money back…

I’m real new to frogs but I’ve been keeping/breeding fish for a long time and know the pains of a well organized dynamic breeding operation. I also know the pain of being undersold by someone who buys two random quality siblings to form a pair and undersells me…



Rich Conley said:


> At $100 a pop, no one is culling a frog unless its got SLS and can't walk. At $10 a piece, people might actually cull less vigorous frogs.


Based on comments like this, I know you do not hear what I mean when I describe the quality breeding projects that I wish to support. A quality breeder would not send out a sub par quality specimen…

Additionally... if the frogs were only $10 a pop, the breeder would have to sell more to get the same amount of money... and you think this means he will cull more frogs? I would think at the higher price he could afford to cull more and at a higher price it would be more important to him to only send out top quality specimen...


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> Rich… your arguments are that a breeding project can be done cheaply…
> 
> My arguments are that a well organized dynamic breeding project is not so cheap…


And I strongly disagree that a well organized project need be expensive. Frogs can produce dozens of quality offspring yearly. Even at cheap prices, its still a money maker.



> By cutting corners to save a buck, you are going to loose quality in your product…
> 
> I wish to support the guy who does not cut corners and has a better quality product (frog)


Again, this assumption that cheap means cutting corners. Breeding tincs/leucs/etc, is not rocket science. Its not even difficult. Seriously. Breeding something like Clownfish is much more difficult, and they can move them for <$10 each.



> I do not assume more expensive = better… instead I am here asking what supplier(s) have the most respectable breeding operations so I can support their efforts and get a better quality frog...


yes, you're assuming that properly tracked and managed frogs need be expensive. That is assuming that expensive is better. You can breed and sell frogs cheaply, and still do it correctly. 



> I began this debate/conversation by suggesting that when people buy a couple of random quality sibling frogs to form a pair and inexpensively distribute these inbred offspring… It makes it harder for the guy who puts extra effort into his dynamic breeding project to make his money back…


And thats not relevant to the point I was making, that frogs need not be expensive to be high quality. We're talking the cost of a pair for investment. The first clutch will more than pay for the initial investment cost. 



> I’m real new to frogs but I’ve been keeping/breeding fish for a long time and know the pains of a well organized dynamic breeding operation. I also know the pain of being undersold by someone who buys two random quality siblings to form a pair and undersells me…


I know people who are selling bangai cardinals for $5 a piece, and from two wildcaught unrelated parents. Theres much more work involved than breeding darts, and they can still support their breeding program.




> Based on comments like this, I know you do not hear what I mean when I describe the quality breeding projects that I wish to support. A quality breeder would not send out a sub par quality specimen…


No, I hear what you're saying. I just think its ridiculous that you think that it takes $100 a froglet to pay for it. These frogs in captivity can give dozens of sub adult froglets a year. You don't need to make $7500 in froglets a year to pay to maintain and keep records on a $250 pair.



> Additionally... if the frogs were only $10 a pop, the breeder would have to sell more to get the same amount of money... and you think this means he will cull more frogs? I would think at the higher price he could afford to cull more and at a higher price it would be more important to him to only send out top quality specimen...


If the breeder is worried about making his money back, or a certain cash total, hes not culling animals without obvious flaws.


----------



## Toby_H

It’s impossible to have a conversation when you put words in my mouth, make assumptions on my behalf and overlook points I keep making…

So I’ll leave it alone…


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> It’s impossible to have a conversation when you put words in my mouth, make assumptions on my behalf and overlook points I keep making…
> 
> So I’ll leave it alone…


Where did I put words in your mouth? 


I haven't overlooked any points you keep making. You've said "its expensive." I disagree. Its as simple as that.


I see absolutely no reason that keeping a good breeding program necessitates expensive frogs.


----------



## Toby_H

If species X costs $50 per frog…

To just slap a pair together without concerns of quality…

Purchase 4 frogs from one breeder and set up one tank. Chances are a year later you have a breeding pair… 4 frogs @ $50 each = $200 + shipping x1 + tank x 1

To create a breeding pair using some of my proposed methods to increase quality…

Purchase 6~8 frogs from two breeders and raise them in separate tanks. It would also be wise to have an overflow tank to move frogs into that do not get along with their group, maybe even two tanks for this… 14 frogs @ $50 each = $700 + shipping x2 + tank x 3~4

Maybe “survival of the fittest” doesn’t apply to dart frogs and they are somehow immune to “inbreeding depression” and my ideas are just out in left field though…


----------



## Rich Conley

Toby_H said:


> If species X costs $50 per frog…
> 
> To just slap a pair together without concerns of quality…
> 
> Purchase 4 frogs from one breeder and set up one tank. Chances are a year later you have a breeding pair… 4 frogs @ $50 each = $200 + shipping x1 + tank x 1
> 
> To create a breeding pair using some of my proposed methods to increase quality…
> 
> Purchase 6~8 frogs from two breeders and raise them in separate tanks. It would also be wise to have an overflow tank to move frogs into that do not get along with their group, maybe even two tanks for this… 14 frogs @ $50 each = $700 + shipping x2 + tank x 3~4
> 
> Maybe “survival of the fittest” doesn’t apply to dart frogs and they are somehow immune to “inbreeding depression” and my ideas are just out in left field though…


Buy 4 frogs from separate breeders. Problem solved.



Again, you're assuming cheap=inbreeding. Thats false.


----------



## Toby_H

Rich Conley said:


> Buy 4 frogs from separate breeders. Problem solved.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you're assuming cheap=inbreeding. Thats false.


buying 1 frogs from 4 breeders creates 4 shipping charges which increases cost... 

Selecting the strongest frog out of a larger group will give you a stronger frog as opposed to using a random frog and hoping it is a strong specimen... buying 1 frog from 4 breeders denies your breeding program this benefit...

Please stop putting words into my mouth pretending that I am making assumptions that I am not making...

This debate is going no where...


----------



## swirlygig

Are any of you by any chance drama majors?

Sorry, but omg the drama! 

I vote who cares...


----------



## frogfreak

This is just an argument. MOD please.

Glenn


----------



## Ed

Rich Conley said:


> And I strongly disagree that a well organized project need be expensive. Frogs can produce dozens of quality offspring yearly. Even at cheap prices, its still a money maker...


I don't have a lot of time to really get into it here, but this argument on the expense of frog rearing is really ignoring a number of the largest costs...

1) time.. What is tha value per hour placed on the worker's time (in this case the person is now a worker). If this argument is really over costs.. then to factor out the cost, then you should at least consider minimum wage as the starting point (and many people value thier time a lot higher) (Personally I value mine at the same cost I make per hour at work.... )
2) electricity (whether just for lights or lights + heat or lights plus heat plus pumps etc) 
3) heating (if you are in a climate that requires heating) 
4) cooling (as with 3 above but its unlikely that a person raising frogs is going to be in a place where neither is required) 
5) water (most people have to pay for water usage) 
6) sewage 
7) fuel costs (purchasing supplies, taking frogs to be shipped/sold, etc) 
8) shipping costs (for frogs recieved and sent, supplies recieved and sent) 
9) Internet access and other forms of advertisement


Now on just this basis to earn a real profit on breeding frogs you either live on a real cheap salary or the frogs are not a real source of income but are a side line or hobby that is not really expected to make a real profit. 





Rich Conley said:


> Again, this assumption that cheap means cutting corners. Breeding tincs/leucs/etc, is not rocket science. Its not even difficult. Seriously. Breeding something like Clownfish is much more difficult, and they can move them for <$10 each..


How many people outside of a couple major companies (like OSA) are doing this as thier full time job? In other words, not as a hobby? Hobbies can be subsidized and many costs are hidden which is why using the profits obtained by those hobbies in this argument is comparing apples and oranges. 
This is because the hobbyist isn't directly attributing the costs I listed above to the actual end price and typically is selling at a loss. 




Rich Conley said:


> And thats not relevant to the point I was making, that frogs need not be expensive to be high quality. We're talking the cost of a pair for investment. The first clutch will more than pay for the initial investment cost. ..


This is a high risk assumption.. for example, it could take two years for some Dendrobates sp to begin producing eggs.. so you now have two years of labor invested into the frogs along with the other costs like electricity, water, etc (see above list) before you get the first clutch. Then you have to hope there isn't anything wrong with that clutch (say no SLS) and they all morph out properly. Then you have the invested cost to rear them up to a more accetable size to sell them which is a cost in terms of labor etc... 
(note we didn't even get into the costs of taking up space while waiting to sell...) 

In reality, it will take many clutches of eggs to even get close to breaking even if you figure in the real costs.... 





Rich Conley said:


> I know people who are selling bangai cardinals for $5 a piece, and from two wildcaught unrelated parents. Theres much more work involved than breeding darts, and they can still support their breeding program.


When you say support... you mean that the cost of the offspring helps defray the costs of the hobby not that it totally pays for all of the associated costs of the fish.. I think if you did a real cost analysis you would find that $5 a fish does not even come close to covering all of the hidden costs and that there are other income(s) subsidizing the real costs. 





Rich Conley said:


> No, I hear what you're saying. I just think its ridiculous that you think that it takes $100 a froglet to pay for it. These frogs in captivity can give dozens of sub adult froglets a year. You don't need to make $7500 in froglets a year to pay to maintain and keep records on a $250 pair.
> .



Actually if you worked out all of the hidden costs, you actually might have to make $100 a froglet and assuming that all of the eggs are going to hatch much less metamorph successfully and survive until sale is a incorrectly optomistic model... 


Ed


----------



## frogfreak

I understand what both Rich and Toby are trying to say. 

This is business. If there is a demand for something the price will be set accordingly. If there is no demand the price will be lower. The current housing & automobile market will prove that point.

When we purchase a frog we go to a reputable breeder. We will pay more that frog but that's ok. We know that the frog was well looked after, has good genes and has a better chance of survival. There's another reason that we are willing to pay more. We want to support their business. People need to support their local businesses. Especially right now. We could have built our own misting system. We have tons of fitting and tube at work. We didn't. We bought it from a DB sponsor. Why? To support the business. Where would we be if all the sponsors went bankrupt. We wouldn't have Viv supplies, Frogs, medical supplies, etc. etc.

Buy a frog from Joe blow $30.00

Buy a frog from a breeder $50.00

Over there lifetime. The initial cost is peanuts and you will feel better about your purchase.

Glenn- my 2 cents


----------



## Ed

I understoodd it as well but a hobbyist who is not having to pay all of the bills from the frogs and only the frogs (and maybe frog related supplies) can technically sell the frog (or any other animal) at a loss without realizing it as the hobby doesn't have to fully support itself. 

Ed


----------



## frogfreak

Ed said:


> I understoodd it as well but a hobbyist who is not having to pay all of the bills from the frogs and only the frogs (and maybe frog related supplies) can technically sell the frog (or any other animal) at a loss without realizing it as the hobby doesn't have to fully support itself.
> 
> Ed



Exactly Ed

I don't think the average hobbyist knows what a business has to go through. How would the hobbyist know their TRUE costs. They wouln't unless they hired an accountant. With a business there is a lot going on people don't even think about. Wages, Liability insuranse, Health and safety, Ministry of Labour, Fire regulations, Taxes, Accounting fees, Audits, Workers compensation, Unemployment fees, Electrical, water,etc.

I could go on and on!

Glenn- When you support a business. You are also supporting the people who work there. Like your neighbour, maybe


----------



## somecanadianguy

wow , when people ask me why i dont bother to bred intentionaly or sell much any more think ll just link to ths thread ,this kinda thought pattern has stoped many a breeder in thier tracks
craig


----------



## jpstod

I have a few thoughts.

Is there a Difference in cost Breeding a $50.00 Dollar Frog that is very Common and a $500 Dollar Rare in the Hobby frog.. If they both have the same Requirements when it comes to the husbandry issues..(Temp, Food, Tank Size)?

Is there a Difference in the Food Cost if they also require the Same diet?

Do Breeders use completely new equipment for New species?

Do Utilites go up just because you get an Expensive New Frog?


----------



## Philsuma

jpstod said:


> I have a few thoughts.
> 
> Is there a Difference in cost Breeding a $50.00 Dollar Frog that is very Common and a $500 Dollar Rare in the Hobby frog.. If they both have the same Requirements when it comes to the husbandry issues..(Temp, Food, Tank Size)?
> 
> Is there a Difference in the Food Cost if they also require the Same diet?
> 
> Do Breeders use completely new equipment for New species?
> 
> Do Utilites go up just because you get an Expensive New Frog?


Nope....nope and....nope.

It's all about supply and demand......


----------



## Ed

Which is why when I used to breed snakes as a hobby, I used to hope to may be cover the food bill for the year... 

Ed


----------



## frogfreak

jpstod said:


> I have a few thoughts.
> 
> Is there a Difference in cost Breeding a $50.00 Dollar Frog that is very Common and a $500 Dollar Rare in the Hobby frog.. If they both have the same Requirements when it comes to the husbandry issues..(Temp, Food, Tank Size)?
> 
> Is there a Difference in the Food Cost if they also require the Same diet?
> 
> Do Breeders use completely new equipment for New species?
> 
> Do Utilites go up just because you get an Expensive New Frog?


A breeder will only breed $500.00 frogs if they're going to sell fast. A business can't sit on inventory for long because it costs money. A breeder is only going to breed frogs that are in demand unless someone is willing to wait for a specific breed. 80% of all small business's fail within the first year.

Glenn


----------



## Jellyman

frogfreak said:


> A breeder will only breed $500.00 frogs if they're going to sell fast. A business can't sit on inventory for long because it costs money. A breeder is only going to breed frogs that are in demand unless someone is willing to wait for a specific breed. 80% of all small business's fail within the first year.
> 
> Glenn


Of the estimated 4% of businesses that do fail, 85% of the 4% do so in the first five years. 


Small Business Administration's web site:
The SBA also states that the number of small businesses in the United States has increased 49% since 1982 and that only one in seven businesses who shut their doors, actually fails - that is, leaves unpaid obligations. 

If you add-up the bankruptcies, failures, and terminations and divide them by the sum of existing and new businesses in 1994, you get a 4% failure rate.

At the end of 1993, the IRS reported there was approximately 21.5 million Nonfarm Business Tax Returns, of which over 15 million were sole proprietorships. In 1994, the number of Nonfarm Busines Tax Returns was 22.1 million.

The number of businesses that failed in 1994, as reported by the U.S. Courts, Dun & Bradstreet, and the U.S. Department of Labor 

Bankruptcies 52,256 (15.4% decrease from 1993) 
Failures 71,520 (17.0% decrease from 1993) 
Terminations 803,127 (0.3% increase from 1993) 


A second source that can verify this is a former Senior Analysis from Dun & Bradstreet, Fugi Saito, who worked on the above report. His analysis showed that of those businesses that do fail, 85% do so in the first five years. But this does not mean that 85% of all small businesses fail!

Knight-Ridder Newspaper in San Jose, CA in an article from Mar, 1995 reported that an analysis by Dun & Bradstreet of 800,000 small businesses show that 70% were still in business after 8.5 years.


----------



## skylsdale

frogfreak said:


> A breeder will only breed $500.00 frogs if they're going to sell fast. A business can't sit on inventory for long because it costs money. A breeder is only going to breed frogs that are in demand unless someone is willing to wait for a specific breed. 80% of all small business's fail within the first year.


Glenn, I think jpstod was referring to hobbyists in this case, not professional businesses. I believe his point was that the cost of raising a $50 frog is the same as raising a $500 frog. If this is the case, then why such the discrepancy in price...unless the latter species is being fed with hundreds of fruit flies that cost 50 cents each, given regular full body massages, etc.


----------



## Jellyman

skylsdale said:


> Glenn, I think jpstod was referring to hobbyists in this case, not professional businesses. I believe his point was that the cost of raising a $50 frog is the same as raising a $500 frog. If this is the case, then why such the discrepancy in price...unless the latter species is being fed with hundreds of fruit flies that cost 50 cents each, given regular full body massages, etc.


First he would have to purchase the $500 frogs to breed or he could purchase 10 pairs of less expensive frogs(say $50 each) to breed for the same price??? The hobbiest could probably make more with the less expensive frogs because they would have more offspring and more potential buyers.


----------



## flyangler18

> Glenn, I think jpstod was referring to hobbyists in this case, not professional businesses.


And to further Ron's point, can you name a single professional PDF breeder whose sole source of income is the sale of offspring from breeding pairs?


----------



## Philsuma

flyangler18 said:


> And to further Ron's point, can you name a single professional PDF breeder whose sole source of income is the sale of offspring from breeding pairs?


I can't think of even ONE....


----------



## frogfreak

skylsdale said:


> Glenn, I think jpstod was referring to hobbyists in this case, not professional businesses. I believe his point was that the cost of raising a $50 frog is the same as raising a $500 frog. If this is the case, then why such the discrepancy in price...unless the latter species is being fed with hundreds of fruit flies that cost 50 cents each, given regular full body massages, etc.


You're probably right about what jpstod was reffering to. We all no that the only difference between a $50.00 frog and a $500.00 frog is the avaliability of the frog. If they're plentifull you will be paying a lesser price. If they're rare you will be paying a higher price. We're back to supply and demand. People standing in line for hours to get the latest play station, and paying throught the nose for it.

Glenn


----------



## frogfreak

flyangler18 said:


> And to further Ron's point, can you name a single professional PDF breeder whose sole source of income is the sale of offspring from breeding pairs?


Yes. A large breeder in canada selling almost nothing but frogs and is doing well from what I understand.

Jellyman

I was reffering to canadian businesse's not American. I have no knowledge of those statistics.

Glenn


----------



## skylsdale

frogfreak said:


> You're probably right about what jpstod was reffering to. We all no that the only difference between a $50.00 frog and a $500.00 frog is the avaliability of the frog. If they're plentifull you will be paying a lesser price. If they're rare you will be paying a higher price. We're back to supply and demand. People standing in line for hours to get the latest play station, and paying throught the nose for it.


I have to disagree with you that availability plays such a strong role on price (yes, it does play a role...but not necessarily the primary one). I would venture to guess that E. tricolor "Moraspungo" are as plentiful/available as R. vanzolini currently are...but I can't recall ever seeing Moraspungos go for over $100. Or what about D. auratus from Nicaragua? You hardly see them around anymore, and I'll bet I could probably have better luck currently obtaining some vanzolini than a Nicaraguan auratus...yet which do you think is going to cost twice as much as the other? Auratus have the stigma of being dubbed a less valuable frog compared to most in the hobby, and I think the person who would pay more for specimens of that species are few and far between compared to those who wouldn't think twice to pay the same amount for a few vanzolini.


----------



## flyangler18

> A large breeder in canada selling almost nothing but frogs and is doing well from what I understand.


I'm assuming you mean Mark Pepper/UE?


----------



## frogfreak

skylsdale said:


> I have to disagree with you that availability plays such a strong role on price (yes, it does play a role...but not necessarily the primary one). I would venture to guess that E. tricolor "Moraspungo" are as plentiful/available as R. vanzolini currently are...but I can't recall ever seeing Moraspungos go for over $100. Or what about D. auratus from Nicaragua? You hardly see them around anymore, and I'll bet I could probably have better luck currently obtaining some vanzolini than a Nicaraguan auratus...yet which do you think is going to cost twice as much as the other? Auratus have the stigma of being dubbed a less valuable frog compared to most in the hobby, and I think the person who would pay more for specimens of that species are few and far between compared to those who wouldn't think twice to pay the same amount for a few vanzolini.



That's a good point. So where do we go from here. We like mantellas and We can pick up most for $35.00, yet they are difficult to breed for most people. Is it the supply and demand + what's "IN"

Glenn


----------



## Otis

frogfreak said:


> That's a good point. So where do we go from here. We like mantellas and We can pick up most for $35.00, yet they are difficult to breed for most people. Is it the supply and demand + what's "IN"
> 
> Glenn


I have not followed this thread at all, so if my post is out of place I apoligize....

I think one of the main reasons mantellas have been dubbed a "hard to breed" species is because so many of the breeder frogs are wc. In comparing the same species, cb nigricans are more heat tolerant than wc counterparts, and they are not nearly as picky about food items. Once they are acclimated sucessfully they are still not as prolific as a cb frog of the same species. (ask doug peel (rainfrog) if you have any more questions about this). 

Also, while they may have traditionally been dubbed difficult to breed, it really depends on the species, to clump an entire genera together in this case is misleading. You have to keep in mind that mantellas lay enormous clutches compared to most dart frogs. In Mark Stanzewaski's (spelling?) book "Mantellas," he records M. auriantiaca laying clutches of over 120 eggs. Granted, not all species have clutches this large, but they have significantly larger clutch sizes overall as a genus compared to dendro's. I think, if their clutch sizes were smaller, you would see a rise in price. 

This isn't the only thing determining the price of mantellas, while cb mantellas are still somewhat rare (becomming less so), wc mantellas can be obtained seasonally for a very low cost. If mantella breeders in the states/canada were to charge even double what wc mantellas cost, I think many "customers" would opt for the wc animals. So the prices you see are somewhat a reflection of the low cost of imports.


----------



## skylsdale

frogfreak said:


> Is it the supply and demand + what's "IN"


I think that's it exactly. Simple popularity and perceived value is huge. Mantella are a classic victim of this in the hobby. Most people consider them second-rate PDFs...however, when there was a scare that Madagascar was no longer going to export any Mantella species, all of a sudden prices on them in the hobby shot up and everyone was scrambling to get them. Then exports continued once again...as did prices and interest.

When Hyloxalus azureiventris were about to be imported, everyone was talking about them and wanting to get some. The first batch of imports came in and it was discovered they breed like rabbits. Prices fell and interest dropped. 

I think perceived prestige and popularity, and the possibility of something new and challenging that no one else has is a huge driver of price and supply in the hobby: a new frog hits the hobby, one of the first obtainers of said species posts pictures of it and everyone drools over it. Then the first person who breeds it posts pictures and an account of it and everyone drools over it. Then more people begin to obtain the frog and breed it...and everyone generally gets bored and starts looking for a new import or species or morph to drool over. The hobby and its fickle nature is its own worst enemy.



frogfreak said:


> So where do we go from here.


I don't really have the answer to that question, but I think it's a conversation that needs to take place. As many of the old-timers know, this hobby has been its best when it actually managed to function like a community. I have both seen and been the recipient of incredibly generosity by people in this hobby. I have built real and lasting relationships with some of them. It's great to see local and regional societies that get together regularly and function cohesively. But as it has gotten bigger and become more accessible, some of this has been lost. So much of the hobby takes place online...via nebulous e-mail exchanges and shipping containers. The knowledge and experience doesn't get passed along in the same way when this happens...something of the spirit of the hobby dissolves. And I have to wonder if this also makes it easier for us to view these frogs primarily as commodities. I don't think it's wrong to charge for frogs or buy frogs, etc...but when it becomes primarily about these things I think the PDF hobby will officially move into the same league as most reptile hobbies: who can create what new/crazy/cool morph or cross and be the sole/major proprietor of that form. That's when egos and attitudes really start to solidify and the actual sense of community that has, at least thus far, characterized this hobby goes out the window.

At NAAC last year in Massachusetts there was a guy attending with his girlfriend. I don't believe he had ever attended a PDF show or event. They both came out on the herp field trip that Friday and the various dinners, speaking engagements, show, BBQ, etc. that took place that weekend. I remember something he mentioned to a few of us at the end of that weekend: he said that he had been involved in a lot of herp hobbies in the past and attended a lot of shows...but that this one was different. He said there actually be a sense of community among people at the show, which he said he had never experienced in any of the other hobbies.

Although there is obviously a somewhat selfish aspect to the hobby in that we choose to keep these animals in captivity for our interest and enjoyment, I also think that the character of our hobby has the potential to affect these animals for better or worse. I think it will affect how we manage (or don't bother to manage) the animals in our care. I think it will affect how we will work together (or don't work together) toward conservation of amphibian species in the wild. The hobby could become an increasingly fickle and narcissistic market (and I'm sure aspects of it will), or it could be comprised of some folks who decided to be serious about the plight many of these species face and commit to doing something about it. Sometimes that may mean NOT keeping 20 different species and having to sell your entire collection 18 months down the road. Maybe it means keeping two different species and keeping them really well, being a solid source and steward for those speices in the hobby and captive cultivation. Maybe it consists of actually managing your animals (like in the *cough*ASN network*cough*) so they are actively being tracked so we know what's going where, what's in trouble and needs attention and what's not, etc. Maybe it means sometimes selling your frogs at a premium price because that's what you feel they're worth and it helps recoup some of the effort/time you put into raising them...and maybe sometimes it means giving a few away free and putting them into the hands of someone who is truly capable of doing well with that species.

None of this is the complete answer to your question, but it's a part of the conversation. My thoughts and $o.o2, whatever they're worth.


----------



## JoshK

skylsdale said:


> I think that's it exactly. Simple popularity and perceived value is huge. Mantella are a classic victim of this in the hobby. Most people consider them second-rate PDFs...however, when there was a scare that Madagascar was no longer going to export any Mantella species, all of a sudden prices on them in the hobby shot up and everyone was scrambling to get them. Then exports continued once again...as did prices and interest.
> 
> When Hyloxalus azureiventris were about to be imported, everyone was talking about them and wanting to get some. The first batch of imports came in and it was discovered they breed like rabbits. Prices fell and interest dropped.
> 
> I think perceived prestige and popularity, and the possibility of something new and challenging that no one else has is a huge driver of price and supply in the hobby: a new frog hits the hobby, one of the first obtainers of said species posts pictures of it and everyone drools over it. Then the first person who breeds it posts pictures and an account of it and everyone drools over it. Then more people begin to obtain the frog and breed it...and everyone generally gets bored and starts looking for a new import or species or morph to drool over. The hobby and its fickle nature is its own worst enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't really have the answer to that question, but I think it's a conversation that needs to take place. As many of the old-timers know, this hobby has been its best when it actually managed to function like a community. I have both seen and been the recipient of incredibly generosity by people in this hobby. I have built real and lasting relationships with some of them. It's great to see local and regional societies that get together regularly and function cohesively. But as it has gotten bigger and become more accessible, some of this has been lost. So much of the hobby takes place online...via nebulous e-mail exchanges and shipping containers. The knowledge and experience doesn't get passed along in the same way when this happens...something of the spirit of the hobby dissolves. And I have to wonder if this also makes it easier for us to view these frogs primarily as commodities. I don't think it's wrong to charge for frogs or buy frogs, etc...but when it becomes primarily about these things I think the PDF hobby will officially move into the same league as most reptile hobbies: who can create what new/crazy/cool morph or cross and be the sole/major proprietor of that form. That's when egos and attitudes really start to solidify and the actual sense of community that has, at least thus far, characterized this hobby goes out the window.
> 
> At NAAC last year in Massachusetts there was a guy attending with his girlfriend. I don't believe he had ever attended a PDF show or event. They both came out on the herp field trip that Friday and the various dinners, speaking engagements, show, BBQ, etc. that took place that weekend. I remember something he mentioned to a few of us at the end of that weekend: he said that he had been involved in a lot of herp hobbies in the past and attended a lot of shows...but that this one was different. He said there actually be a sense of community among people at the show, which he said he had never experienced in any of the other hobbies.
> 
> Although there is obviously a somewhat selfish aspect to the hobby in that we choose to keep these animals in captivity for our interest and enjoyment, I also think that the character of our hobby has the potential to affect these animals for better or worse. I think it will affect how we manage (or don't bother to manage) the animals in our care. I think it will affect how we will work together (or don't work together) toward conservation of amphibian species in the wild. The hobby could become an increasingly fickle and narcissistic market (and I'm sure aspects of it will), or it could be comprised of some folks who decided to be serious about the plight many of these species face and commit to doing something about it. Sometimes that may mean NOT keeping 20 different species and having to sell your entire collection 18 months down the road. Maybe it means keeping two different species and keeping them really well, being a solid source and steward for those speices in the hobby and captive cultivation. Maybe it consists of actually managing your animals (like in the *cough*ASN network*cough*) so they are actively being tracked so we know what's going where, what's in trouble and needs attention and what's not, etc. Maybe it means sometimes selling your frogs at a premium price because that's what you feel they're worth and it helps recoup some of the effort/time you put into raising them...and maybe sometimes it means giving a few away free and putting them into the hands of someone who is truly capable of doing well with that species.
> 
> None of this is the complete answer to your question, but it's a part of the conversation. My thoughts and $o.o2, whatever they're worth.


 
I love you Ron!


----------



## somecanadianguy

frogfreak said:


> Yes. A large breeder in canada selling almost nothing but frogs and is doing well from what I understand.
> 
> Jellyman
> 
> I was reffering to canadian businesse's not American. I have no knowledge of those statistics.
> 
> Glenn


if u read jasons wording he said sole source , mark {understoryenterprises} sells frogs yes but also sells feeders cages and was doing butterflys and even tours at one point, while i cant speak for mark id geuss that the other extra sales really help keep things going too.
craig


----------



## frogfreak

somecanadianguy said:


> if u read jasons wording he said sole source , mark {understoryenterprises} sells frogs yes but also sells feeders cages and was doing butterflys and even tours at one point, while i cant speak for mark id geuss that the other extra sales really help keep things going too.
> craig


*This is what I said*

_"Yes a large breeder in Canada sells nothing but frogs and is doing well from what I understand"_

What I consider large may be concidered small in the US.

I did not mention a business name nor would I.

*From what I understand*- I don't look at their books.

Please don't assume it's UE. I know that's the name that is familiar Canada and the US but let's not throw names out there. I know nothing about their business!


*Lets be realistic here*

Does a landscaping company sell plants only? No They sell dirt,etc

Does a pet shop only sell animals? No they sell food and housing,etc.

Does a fly company sell just flys? No they sell containers,medium,etc

This breeder does sell mostly frogs but are they going to sell food for those frogs-YES

Just wanted to clarify my statement


----------



## Gh0stw4lk3r

this is what u get when u mix a auratus with a leucomelas.

these are *not* my frogs, a guy posted this on a forum, he never had the intention of crossbreeding, also will never sell these frogs. 
eventough the frogs look kinda cool, i would never have species in my tank that could crossbreed.

this is a nice piece of evidence that it can happen if u have a mixed species tank....


----------



## Roadrunner

I don`t know what is considered doing well. 
When you breed frogs and try and sell ff cultures and crickets you can loose more money from people not buying them and you making too many. 
All these extra sales and time detracts from paying attention to the frogs which cuts quality.
Also buying supplies to resell takes space and packing, etcetera.
To hire employees cuts down on quality control, which would be what you need to do to sell all these extra items.
To really know what cuts quality and what is doable in a business you have to try it and find out how hard it actually is.
And landscaping companies don`t sell plants and dirt, they care for the plants and buy dirt, mulch etc from some place else that specializes in that aspect of landscaping




frogfreak said:


> *This is what I said*
> 
> _"Yes a large breeder in Canada sells nothing but frogs and is doing well from what I understand"_
> 
> What I consider large may be concidered small in the US.
> 
> I did not mention a business name nor would I.
> 
> *From what I understand*- I don't look at their books.
> 
> Please don't assume it's UE. I know that's the name that is familiar Canada and the US but let's not throw names out there. I know nothing about their business!
> 
> 
> *Lets be realistic here*
> 
> Does a landscaping company sell plants only? No They sell dirt,etc
> 
> Does a pet shop only sell animals? No they sell food and housing,etc.
> 
> Does a fly company sell just flys? No they sell containers,medium,etc
> 
> This breeder does sell mostly frogs but are they going to sell food for those frogs-YES
> 
> Just wanted to clarify my statement


----------



## georgiekittie

Adven2er said:


> I was merely trying to point out that, most people who mix, lack the proper husbandry skills to begin with. You've stated before that only the most advanced froggers should be mixing frogs. Why then would they need your advise. If someone asks the question they are surely not an advanced frogger. The answer should be a resounding no!


Because even though they are an expert at keeping frogs, they have no experience with mixed species tanks. Therefore, they would want advice on how to best keep a mixed a species tank.


----------



## yumpster

Even an expert needs to make sure they have their facts straight or else it could be a froggy massacre!


----------



## Ed

Even poorly set-up mixed enclosures rarely end up with a massacre unless one has included a major predator (such as Ceratophrys) or a species or species that uses some form of significant weaponry in territorial defense (such as varanids or even possibly Hyla boans). It is much more likely that over a period of weeks or months animals disappear due to quietly dying in some corner of the enclosure. 

Ed


----------



## yumpster

...a figurative massacre


----------



## earthfrog

Ed said:


> Even poorly set-up mixed enclosures rarely end up with a massacre unless one has included a major predator (such as Ceratophrys) or a species or species that uses some form of significant weaponry in territorial defense (such as varanids or even possibly Hyla boans). It is much more likely that over a period of weeks or months animals disappear due to quietly dying in some corner of the enclosure.
> 
> Ed


I think the main issue with mixing vs. not mixing is rooted in the primary values of the frogger. 
I have talked privately with some amateur mixers, and the primary value is a nice-looking frog tank, but there is little interest in conservation.

It reminds me of the commonly-available Glofish that are injected with neon-colors---they sell well and they may live awhile, but is it fair that they have to exist with that genetic manipulation---freaks of nature?
Also, take for instance the public playground at a typical elementary school. There are many different sizes and personalities, enclosed in one area. Some are bullies and gang up on the little people, dominate the play areas and no one corrects them. The teachers supervise, but they have their own concerns. In this case, I was the frog who went into the corner. I thought most people were rude, so I stayed by myself and played alone. 
Thankfully, I'm human, so someone eventually felt sorry for me and became my friend. 

But these frogs have no recourse. I would say that there is a place for mixed tanks, but it is only in the hands of an experienced keeper at either a zoo or someone involved in conservation/study efforts---someone of great experience and knowledge. I think that many of the mixed tanks are just for jollies, and I do not condone that. It is in some cases cruel, notwithstanding the fact that these frogs will not be able to have a mate and live on. 

I will not let my frogs be the ones that die in the corner of their 'playground'.


----------



## Ed

earthfrog said:


> It reminds me of the commonly-available Glofish that are injected with neon-colors---they sell well and they may live awhile, but is it fair that they have to exist with that genetic manipulation---freaks of nature?.


Hi Susan,

It depends on the variety of glo-fish. If you are referring to the modified zebra danios, these are not injected but have been genetically modified with jellyfish genes and these genes are often passed down through multiple generations (it can vary depending on how many copies they incorporated initially) and do not have negative effects on thier reproduction. The injected fish are another story as they typically lose the color over the next couple of months. 




earthfrog said:


> But these frogs have no recourse. I would say that there is a place for mixed tanks, but it is only in the hands of an experienced keeper at either a zoo or someone involved in conservation/study efforts---someone of great experience and knowledge. I think that many of the mixed tanks are just for jollies, and I do not condone that. It is in some cases cruel, notwithstanding the fact that these frogs will not be able to have a mate and live on.
> 
> I will not let my frogs be the ones that die in the corner of their 'playground'.



As noted above in several different posts, the problems are due to inappropriate choices for cage mates and/or inproper set-up of the enclosure. If the enclosure is set up properly then the frogs should breed and behave without any issues. If it is not appropriately set up.. well that is a different story. 

Ed


----------



## earthfrog

Ed said:


> Hi Susan,
> 
> It depends on the variety of glo-fish. If you are referring to the modified zebra danios, these are not injected but have been genetically modified with jellyfish genes and these genes are often passed down through multiple generations (it can vary depending on how many copies they incorporated initially) and do not have negative effects on thier reproduction. The injected fish are another story as they typically lose the color over the next couple of months.
> 
> 
> As noted above in several different posts, the problems are due to inappropriate choices for cage mates and/or inproper set-up of the enclosure. If the enclosure is set up properly then the frogs should breed and behave without any issues. If it is not appropriately set up.. well that is a different story.
> 
> Ed


Thanks, Ed. The summary at the bottom of your quote is what I was getting at in my last post.


----------



## sports_doc

Anyone from NYC see the current mixed dart frog exhibit at the Planetarium/Museum of Natural History?

One of the nicest [and I'd say only nice one] I've seen.

Huge exhibit...large enough to have pums hopping in broms 4 ft up, tricolor midway calling away and all sorts of terrestrials below. Well segregated by the size and massive root in the center [360 degree exhibit].

I cant imagine any of us could replicate 'nature' to this degree....without a room dedicated to the space....but it literally was the only time I've seen a set up that might convince me that it is at least possible to do it 'right'.

S


----------



## earthfrog

skylsdale said:


> I think perceived prestige and popularity, and the possibility of something new and challenging that no one else has is a huge driver of price and supply in the hobby: a new frog hits the hobby, one of the first obtainers of said species posts pictures of it and everyone drools over it. Then the first person who breeds it posts pictures and an account of it and everyone drools over it. Then more people begin to obtain the frog and breed it...and everyone generally gets bored and starts looking for a new import or species or morph to drool over. The hobby and its fickle nature is its own worst enemy...
> 
> Although there is obviously a somewhat selfish aspect to the hobby in that we choose to keep these animals in captivity for our interest and enjoyment, I also think that the character of our hobby has the potential to affect these animals for better or worse. I think it will affect how we manage (or don't bother to manage) the animals in our care. I think it will affect how we will work together (or don't work together) toward conservation of amphibian species in the wild. The hobby could become an increasingly fickle and narcissistic market (and I'm sure aspects of it will), or it could be comprised of some folks who decided to be serious about the plight many of these species face and commit to doing something about it. Sometimes that may mean NOT keeping 20 different species and having to sell your entire collection 18 months down the road. Maybe it means keeping two different species and keeping them really well, being a solid source and steward for those speices in the hobby and captive cultivation. Maybe it consists of actually managing your animals (like in the *cough*ASN network*cough*) so they are actively being tracked so we know what's going where, what's in trouble and needs attention and what's not, etc. Maybe it means sometimes selling your frogs at a premium price because that's what you feel they're worth and it helps recoup some of the effort/time you put into raising them...and maybe sometimes it means giving a few away free and putting them into the hands of someone who is truly capable of doing well with that species.


I def. think this is at the root of the issue w/mixing and not mixing---conservation.
I remember reading about how when orchids were first imported, they were expensive and many died due to lack of care---and now many years later, we have lost so many species b/c of the craze of consumerism. I would like to be at least one person who works against that tide by breeding my frogs.


----------



## skylsdale

earthfrog said:


> I would like to be at least one person who works against that tide by breeding my frogs.


Breeding doesn't necessarily equal conservation or maintaining a species in the hobby--it's the purposeful management and tracking of animals within the hobby that will help preserve a captive species. You can breed all you want of species X and even know the exact history of where it came from...but if no one knows where it's going after that, how well it's doing once it's in someone else's hands, etc. then we're somewhat deluding ourselves by thinking we've "saved" or "established" this species. We could be breeding it, but those offspring are just heading out into some sort of vacuum.


----------



## earthfrog

skylsdale said:


> Breeding doesn't necessarily equal conservation or maintaining a species in the hobby--it's the purposeful management and tracking of animals within the hobby that will help preserve a captive species. You can breed all you want of species X and even know the exact history of where it came from...but if no one knows where it's going after that, how well it's doing once it's in someone else's hands, etc. then we're somewhat deluding ourselves by thinking we've "saved" or "established" this species. We could be breeding it, but those offspring are just heading out into some sort of vacuum.


Very true. I think screening buyers and distributing offspring to others who will properly care for them is essential to conservation. Furthermore, I think the ones most likely to properly care for them are those who make themselves accountable to parent conservation organizations. This is not to say that those who are not part of those organizations will not care for them well, but without accountability (should something happen to the caretakers), there is no fallback for the frogs and many species may disappear in the hands of some who will not work to protect them.


----------



## james67

Ed said:


> It depends on the variety of glo-fish. If you are referring to the modified zebra danios, these are not injected but have been genetically modified with jellyfish genes and these genes are often passed down through multiple generations (it can vary depending on how many copies they incorporated initially) and do not have negative effects on thier reproduction. The injected fish are another story as they typically lose the color over the next couple of months. Ed


i notice you say that the "glowing" genes in the Glofish (i better be careful using that since it's a copyrighted name haha) have been successfully passed to multiple generations of offspring. was this done by those holding patents during initial research or for breeding stock? i was under the impression that the US allows them to be sold (FDA since i believe they control genetically modified animals in the US) but only as sterile specimens (to quell the outrage that was sure to follow the release of these fish on to the market)

is this not the case?

james


----------



## skylsdale

> Very true. I think screening buyers and distributing offspring to others who will properly care for them is essential to conservation. Furthermore, I think the ones most likely to properly care for them are those who make themselves accountable to parent conservation organizations. This is not to say that those who are not part of those organizations will not care for them well, but without accountability (should something happen to the caretakers), there is no fallback for the frogs and many species may disappear in the hands of some who will not work to protect them.


Even in light of all that, if we don't know _where_ they're going we can't know _how_ they're actually doing. Frogs could be going into the hands of great hobbyists and herpetoculturists...but even they can neglect to hold back an assurance colony of offspring, experience a hickup in life, etc. that can eliminate a major source of species X in captivity. If that happens, and we don't know where they've gone and no way to track/manage what's gone out into the expanse of the hobby...we could lose the entire species or morph in captivity. It's happened before, and some have never made it back into the hobby (the "Giron Valley" form of _E. tricolor_ comes to mind). There are forms of species that have disappeared, even in the hands of skilled hobbyists. 

Registering animals in things like the ASN can help us track trends and respond to rapid drops in popularity, captive numbers, etc. If we don't know what's out there, or what numbers its existing in...we simply can't do anything about it. I agree with what you've said...but even in screening buyers, having high husbandry practices, etc...if we aren't actually registering and tracking them, we don't have any more potential in stopping the loss of a morph/species in the hobby than we have ever had in its history.


----------



## earthfrog

I totally agree---and for my part, I am not into fads in other regards, so the current hot new frog isn't going to cause me to abandon/sell my current ones in favor of the next new, rare thing. 

I concede that registering and tracking animals so that ASN knows who has what and how many are out there helps us not to take what we have for granted---who knows what a frog's fate is without a reliable fallback like that?



skylsdale said:


> Even in light of all that, if we don't know _where_ they're going we can't know _how_ they're actually doing. Frogs could be going into the hands of great hobbyists and herpetoculturists...but even they can neglect to hold back an assurance colony of offspring, experience a hickup in life, etc. that can eliminate a major source of species X in captivity. If that happens, and we don't know where they've gone and no way to track/manage what's gone out into the expanse of the hobby...we could lose the entire species or morph in captivity. It's happened before, and some have never made it back into the hobby (the "Giron Valley" form of _E. tricolor_ comes to mind). There are forms of species that have disappeared, even in the hands of skilled hobbyists.
> 
> Registering animals in things like the ASN can help us track trends and respond to rapid drops in popularity, captive numbers, etc. If we don't know what's out there, or what numbers its existing in...we simply can't do anything about it. I agree with what you've said...but even in screening buyers, having high husbandry practices, etc...if we aren't actually registering and tracking them, we don't have any more potential in stopping the loss of a morph/species in the hobby than we have ever had in its history.


----------

