# Private island / Large greenhouse for rare species



## chilumba (Sep 20, 2008)

Just had the idea that with all the illegal smuggling such as captivus, mysterious, lehmanni etc. Could you just build a large greenhouse or buy a private island and plant them with the plants that the dart frogs prefer, obtain the frogs legally and just let them breed an eventually collect some for the trade?

What do you think? Just an idea not planning to.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

sure, if you wanna raise millions of dollars to buy a private island, you can try, and then you have to raise money year after year to keep the facility running as well as paying property taxes on an island, not cheap. So unless you have Richard Branson money, forget about the idea.


----------



## chilumba (Sep 20, 2008)

Well there are some small cheap islands but it would probably be cheaper to buy a greenhouse.


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

With most of the "rare" frogs the problem isn't breeding them, it is obtaining legal stock. _E. mysteriosus_ is here in the thousands and breeds like rabbits, but you never see them because the founding stock was smuggled. Unless you plan on smuggling frogs your island will be empty...


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> _E. mysteriosus_ is here in the thousands


There are _thousand_s of these in the U.S ?


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> There are _thousand_s of these in the U.S ?


That is what I have been told by a few people I trust. They are apparently VERY prolific breeders.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> That is what I have been told by a few people I trust. They are apparently VERY prolific breeders.


Thousands....seems very high....

Extrapolate that and there would be at 100 or more keepers / owners.

Nahhh.....


----------



## billschwinn (Dec 17, 2008)

Thousands? I have never heard of this, and I have been around a long time. Is it April 1 st ?


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

Thousands actually sounds about right to me. If not here (US) then in North America definitely. He's not exaggerating, they are EXTREMELY prolific frogs.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

fleshfrombone said:


> Thousands actually sounds about right to me. If not here (US) then in North America definitely. He's not exaggerating, they are EXTREMELY prolific frogs.


We can't use 'sounds about right"....

That's right up there with " I heard from my sister friend that her brothers' cousin has"......


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

Phil, your sister's friend's brother's cousin has mystis?!?! 

I would not be shocked if there were hundreds of them around. Thousands would surprise me.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

zBrinks said:


> Phil, your sister's friend's brother's cousin has mystis?!?!


I wish....uh...I mean....*yeah !....*

well

actually....no


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> We can't use 'sounds about right"....
> 
> That's right up there with " I heard from my sister friend that her brothers' cousin has"......


Well Philsuma, if that is your real name (I bet you aren't even really a day gecko), maybe I'm the notorious mysti mass producer.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Do you have them?

Do you know anyone with them?

I've seen three different groups of Histos (3 different U.S collections) 8 total animals.

Never seen a Mysti though....


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

there are mistis in the US unfortunately, there was a large shipment that came in from EU about a year ago as black and white auratus.


----------



## ritersofly (Oct 23, 2010)

Honestly I dont understand why people hide them anymore, I mean can someone get arrested or sued for having mystis? (or other smuggle origin frogs for that matter) I mean there in the states already,obviously quite a couple of froggers have obtained some, the frogs arent gonna disapear, specially if their prolific breeders... if it really is in the thousands! why not turn a negative into a positive and start spreading them around? eventually enough generations will be bread(bread? is that correctly spelled?) and noone will know or care who originally smuggled them.... lol ok Im probably gonna get schooled on why that cant happen why it shouldnt happen etc... lets hear it!!


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> Thousands....seems very high....
> 
> Extrapolate that and there would be at 100 or more keepers / owners.
> 
> Nahhh.....


Not if someone has a very large collection of them. Someone who wants to be able to flood the market, crash the price, and therefore make smuggling them financially unattractive the moment they are legalized.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

ritersofly said:


> Honestly I dont understand why people hide them anymore, I mean can someone get arrested or sued for having mystis? (or other smuggle origin frogs for that matter) I mean there in the states already,obviously quite a couple of froggers have obtained some, the frogs arent gonna disapear, specially if their prolific breeders... if it really is in the thousands! why not turn a negative into a positive and start spreading them around? eventually enough generations will be bread(bread? is that correctly spelled?) and noone will know or care who originally smuggled them.... lol ok Im probably gonna get schooled on why that cant happen why it shouldnt happen etc... lets hear it!!


Instead of schooling you, you could school yourself. Contact USF&W and ask them about it.. and you may want to look up the penalties for violations of the Lacy Act. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Julio said:


> there are mistis in the US unfortunately, there was a large shipment that came in from EU about a year ago as black and white auratus.


They have been in the US for more than a decade from what I've been able to gather. 

Ed


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> Do you have them?
> 
> Do you know anyone with them?
> 
> ...


Like I would admit to any of that on here in open forum with USF&W agents watching.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> Not if someone has a very large collection of them. Someone who wants to be able to flood the market, crash the price, and therefore make smuggling them financially unattractive the moment they are legalized.


Do you seriously believe what you are posting?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

fleshfrombone said:


> Like I would admit to any of that on here in open forum with USF&W agents watching.


I just put my observations out there for the good of the hobby - not seeing any.

Just acknowledge if you've seen some or not....no crime there.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

Tony said:


> Not if someone has a very large collection of them. Someone who wants to be able to flood the market, crash the price, and therefore make smuggling them financially unattractive the moment they are legalized.


i doutb they will ever be legalized


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Not if someone has a very large collection of them. Someone who wants to be able to flood the market, crash the price, and therefore make smuggling them financially unattractive the moment they are legalized.


Keep in mind that they would have to be able to beat the allee effect (PLoS Biology: Rarity Value and Species Extinction: The Anthropogenic Allee Effect) 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

ritersofly said:


> Honestly I dont understand why people hide them anymore, I mean can someone get arrested or sued for having mystis? (or other smuggle origin frogs for that matter) I mean there in the states already,obviously quite a couple of froggers have obtained some, the frogs arent gonna disapear, specially if their prolific breeders... if it really is in the thousands! why not turn a negative into a positive and start spreading them around? eventually enough generations will be bread(bread? is that correctly spelled?) and noone will know or care who originally smuggled them.... lol ok Im probably gonna get schooled on why that cant happen why it shouldnt happen etc... lets hear it!!


If we make it acceptable for people to flaunt frogs like that then it would only increase the number of people willing to support smuggling. It is a pretty clear cut case with that species...not even close to being a grey area. You let that slide you might as well just give up on smuggling laws entirely. Now if the government wants to release confiscated frogs into the hands of hobbyists then fine, but until that happens or they are otherwise brought in legally, at least from the EU with papers they are off limits IMO (and by law).


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> Do you seriously believe what you are posting?


That is what I was told by multiple people who have seen the frogs firsthand. Whether or not the stated goal is feasible I don't know, and I am certainly not going to say who has them or who told me. It is up to you if you want to believe it or not, but I do.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> That is what I was told by multiple people who have seen the frogs firsthand. Whether or not the stated goal is feasible I don't know, and I am certainly not going to say who has them or who told me. It is up to you if you want to believe it or not, but I do.


So....what we really have is second and third hand accounts.

Better to not post that stuff.....it just confuses everyone.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

If I recall correctly Mark and Manuel could have brought them in but chose not to in order to avoid legitimizing the ones already here.


----------



## keith campbell (Aug 11, 2007)

To answer the OP's question...no.
If you bought an island, you are still part of the country that it is in and have to follow the same rules for importing and exporting.

You could do things like:
Force a strict formal attire dress code and allow only pogo balls as means of transportation.




Julio said:


> sure, if you wanna raise millions of dollars to buy a private island, you can try, and then you have to raise money year after year to keep the facility running as well as paying property taxes on an island, not cheap. So unless you have Richard Branson money, forget about the idea.


In this economy! These are in Bocas, but I am more of a caribbean kinda guy!

(IS-230) OWN THIS 2+ ACRE PRIVATE ISLAND (Panama Real Estate - Bocas del Toro Real Estate)

or bigger

Tropical Island for Sale in Bocas del Toro, Panama, Real Estate Central America, Purchase Island Property Caribbean Zone, Panama

Enjoy
Keith


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

stemcellular said:


> If I recall correctly Mark and Manuel could have brought them in but chose not to in order to avoid legitimizing the ones already here.


Can they bring in Lehmanni Ray ?


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> I just put my observations out there for the good of the hobby - not seeing any.
> 
> Just acknowledge if you've seen some or not....no crime there.


Yes I've seen them.


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

MD_Frogger said:


> Can they bring in Lehmanni Ray ?


I know it was a joke but if I'm not mistaken Lehmanni are almost exclusively endemic to Columbia. Mark's connections are in Peru. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

haha, unlikely, nor should they IMO.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

fleshfrombone said:


> I know it as a joke but if I'm not mistaken Lehmanni are almost exclusively endemic to Columbia. Mark's connections are in Peru. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


I believe they are expanding beyond Peru but could be mistaken.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

I'm not sure I understand the rationale of not bringing them in for fear they legitimize the ones already here, especially in this species case. Yes they may legitimize the ones already here, but the ones here are behind closed doors, probably not super easy to trade/sell at least compared to legit frogs and even if they were for now, they will not satisfy the illegal market which means more smuggling and they will never have the market saturation of a legit species because of their nature.

At best as long as they are illegal all we can hope for is that the current frogs in country fill the majority of illegal demand rather then more frogs being smuggled out. Make the frog legal and especially with such a prolific and desirable species you will reach a legit market saturation in that larger market probably faster then you would reach saturation in the smaller illegal market. It seems to me with this particular species especially legal imports even at the cost of legitimizing some currently illegal frogs will do more to combat the smuggling of this specific species more then anything else. Unless everyone who knows someone who has them starts reporting those people to the authorities and they actually do something about it.

Maybe it would be different and more reasonable with a very slow producing species that didn't thrive in captivity as this frog seems to but in this case I wonder if the logic is faulty...or at least impractical. If the wild frog is our true concern then it seems we should do what is best for it even if in some cases that means legitimizing some illegal animals so CB can start impacting the smuggling demand. It seems that in this case legal imports will likely have a larger impact on smuggling then a couple guys taking an ethical stand in some form of anti-smuggling protest. 

Would be nice to think that somehow they will inspire the unethical masses to be better people but even if they reach a few I doubt it will have the practical negative impact on smuggling that legal imports and CB would have. Also are these the only guys that could possibly get permission to bring them in? In theory couldn't someone else? And if they do eventually the other guys "protest" will have even less real world impact. May'be they'll sleep better but will they really have done as much to help the frogs as the people who got the legit go ahead to import them and kick start the Captive breeding. Plus these guys do a lot of good work, and the money from this species they make could be applied to continuing and expanding that work. So protest and no legal imports = status quo, Legal imports and the money from them = A hit to smugglers and more money for these guys efforts on behalf of the animals. Where exactly do we loose by letting in and breeding legal frogs? If we do loose, is it so much that it offsets the good we gain? 

I respect and applaud the guys ethics and willingness to take a stand, and the work they do. I'm just not sure if the goal is to combat smuggling of this frog that it is the most practical measure at least for this specific species. We need to evaluate and determine the best course of action for each species/population and perhaps swallow a few bitter pills in some cases in the short term to preserve the species in the longterm. Everything I've heard about this frog leads me to believe this may be one of those times.


----------



## rcteem (Mar 24, 2009)

Here let me safe yall some time and effort and read this post. Might help answer some questions bout the mysterious

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/55443-e-mysterious-legality.html


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

rcteem said:


> Here let me safe yall some time and effort and read this post. Might help answer some questions bout the mysterious
> 
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/55443-e-mysterious-legality.html


Oh ya I remember that thread.... One of the few if not only arguments that held much water for me was Ed's point that auratus are still heavily exported.

I wonder if this would be an issue with mystis though if their government will only grant permission for these to leave via certain programs only. Which is what I would prefer to see happen...not the floodgates open and any Joe blow getting permission to work with these. Also as far as I know there are not a ton of morphs (any mysti morphs?)under this species, nor is it as wide spread as auratus.

Dealing with auratus is almost like dealing with multiple species in multiple countries with all those morphs and different populations. Which helps explain why we still see a major trade in WC auratus. Seems to me because of these extenuating circumstances the mysti trade would be unlikely to work like the auratus trade and once again seems a special case where Legal exports and CB frogs even the illegal ones legitimized by legal exports would lend themselves to dealing a major blow to the illegal trade in these frogs. Sure demand and prices would be high at first..but especially if people are already holding large numbers of CB illegally a price drop and market saturation would occur fairly quickly, and once it did any smuggled animal would be much less valuable, thus much less likely to be smuggled. 

Of course if peru changed their minds about letting these out this is all a mute point. But if that option still exists, while I respect the ethics involved in the decision not to export, I just don't see much evidence of that being the most practical and beneficial practice in this one special case. I wonder if sometimes we don't become so afraid of doing the wrong thing that in some cases we do about the worst thing possible....nothing. At some point you have to decide to act and sometimes that point arrives before you can be 100% that any course of action is the right course.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Ray
Were vanzos, veraderos or benedicta in the hobby illegally before UE released their legal offspring? Seems to me they were. 



stemcellular said:


> If I recall correctly Mark and Manuel could have brought them in but chose not to in order to avoid legitimizing the ones already here.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

To the op...releasing any nonnative animal in an ecosystem where they never occurred is, IMO, very irresponsible. You could be introducing new pathogens to the native fauna or to the frogs you are trying to protect. Not to mention that many islands have rare, endemic wildlife of their own. Also, how is this really any different then just properly managing the wild populations? It would be far more responsible and even possible to protect the remaining habitats, guard them, and even offer additional tadpole drops. You can the selectively harvest froglets or tads.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

JeremyHuff said:


> Ray
> Were vanzos, veraderos or benedicta in the hobby illegally before UE released their legal offspring? Seems to me they were.


Yes they were, they were being sold all over EU


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Julio said:


> Yes they were, they were being sold all over EU


So, to me, the excuse of not wanting to legitimize illegal mysteriousus is moot...


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

JeremyHuff said:


> So, to me, the excuse of not wanting to legitimize illegal mysteriousus is moot...


ok, go tell that to the Peruvian government and see what they say?


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Julio said:


> ok, go tell that to the Peruvian government and see what they say?


Julio, from what Ray said, it sounded like they had the ability and authority from the Peruvian government to work with mysteriosus but CHOSE not to for ethical reasons. I'm just saying that why wasn't it ethically wrong to do that for vanzos, veradero, etc....Just wondering is all


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

Actually they don't, the only reason why they even have them in their facility in Peru is because someone got caught trying to smuggle 80 of them out fo the country and out of the 80 only 4 of them were able to suvive by the time they got to Mark and Manuel. The only good thing is that they breed really well in captivity so that has taken some pressure off the wild caught population. With that said, they do not have any permits to really work with them mainly because the Peruvian Government refuses to grant them the ability to do so, the only reason why they are allowed to keep the animals in their possesion is because they confiscated animals.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

I THINK the reason for the mystis not being worked w/ is that they were stolen from a site they were being studied at which was the only known population and they took like half the breeding pairs on site or something and there were only 60-100 adults or something along those lines.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Julio said:


> Actually they don't, the only reason why they even have them in their facility in Peru is because someone got caught trying to smuggle 80 of them out fo the country and out of the 80 only 4 of them were able to suvive by the time they got to Mark and Manuel. The only good thing is that they breed really well in captivity so that has taken some pressure off the wild caught population. With that said, they do not have any permits to really work with them mainly because the Peruvian Government refuses to grant them the ability to do so, the only reason why they are allowed to keep the animals in their possesion is because they confiscated animals.


See the problems you cause Ray... Thanks for clearing it up Julio


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

hahahha, yeah Blame Ray for all of it. 
No Problem


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

Understory is now working with Ecuador, evident by the new pac man frogs he brought in, also some tree frogs i believe. I am sure darts will come in the future but who knows when.
Let's see easily bred smuggled frogs....Terribilis, seems there is little or no demand for WC smuggling of this species, or am i wrong? Prolific breeding has taken care of most that want to work with the 3 colors out there, it's interesting how Mysti's take on a different perspective.
I have never seen one in a US collection though I know they are out there, hearing they were brought in as Auratus is not surprising. And if 100 were brought in certainly more than 1000 could easily be out there now if they breed the way people say.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

JeremyHuff said:


> See the problems you cause Ray... Thanks for clearing it up Julio


My impression (and I could be wrong) from talking with Mark/Manuel was that bringing them in could have been a possibility but that they chose not to even pursue it to avoid legitimizing illegal stock.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

JeremyHuff said:


> Ray
> Were vanzos, veraderos or benedicta in the hobby illegally before UE released their legal offspring? Seems to me they were.


Yes, but mystis are a much more high profile frog.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

And veradaro are imitaors to cites and benedicta is still fantasticus which are 2 species for which there have been numerous cites permits issued for.


stemcellular said:


> Yes, but mystis are a much more high profile frog.


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

stemcellular said:


> Yes, but mystis are a much more high profile frog.


What exactly makes a frog high profile?


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

I would think that a frog is considered 'high profile' if it is easily and widely recognizable, such as Atelopus zeteki.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

MD_Frogger said:


> What exactly makes a frog high profile?


the rare factor, most people just want what they can't get


----------



## frogfreak (Mar 4, 2009)

Julio said:


> the rare factor, most people just want what they can't get


Bingo...and unfortunate


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Hi Profile could also mean that the SPECIES has never been allowed by cites to be exported. AS I said varadero are imitators which have been issued lots of cites permits as they don't count imitators by morph, only species. Benadicta are classified as fantasticus by cites and are under the same umbrella as lowland fants, nominat fants, etc.etc. Mystis were brought in as auratus that's an outright lie to f+w and mystis as a species have never been allowed to be exported or imported anywhere by Peru. Even the brazil nuts were originally brought in on research permits. All of those SPECIES have legally benn allowed out of the country by research or legal exports even if all the morphs available weren't legally exported. Does that make sense?


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Seems to me we need to at least nail down whether they actually had a chance to work with these, or if peru was like don't even ask we aren't going there, and they were like thats cool we didn't plan to. Seems we are getting conflicting reports.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> Seems to me we need to at least nail down whether they actually had a chance to work with these, or if peru was like don't even ask we aren't going there, and they were like thats cool we didn't plan to. Seems we are getting conflicting reports.


The 2-3 people in the hobby (North America) that could help with info and could answer many of there questions don't post here......


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Dendro Dave said:


> Seems to me we need to at least nail down whether they actually had a chance to work with these, or if peru was like don't even ask we aren't going there, and they were like thats cool we didn't plan to. Seems we are getting conflicting reports.


Why? What does it matter? Fact remains, they aren't going to be brought in legally.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

I emailed the guy who runs INIBICO and he is planning on starting up again and sending mysteriosus and captivus. Not sure if it will happen.

My point was that IF UE were allowed to work with mysteriosus BUTchose not to for ethical reasons, then why was working with vanzolini considered OK??? I understand veradero and benedicta came in (or could have) on proper permits as something else so let's forget about them. To my knowledge vanzolini doesn't resemble anything else in the hobby.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

JeremyHuff said:


> I emailed the guy who runs INIBICO and he is planning on starting up again and sending mysteriosus and captivus. Not sure if it will happen.
> 
> My point was that IF UE were allowed to work with mysteriosus BUTchose not to for ethical reasons, then why was working with vanzolini considered OK??? I understand veradero and benedicta came in (or could have) on proper permits as something else so let's forget about them. To my knowledge vanzolini doesn't resemble anything else in the hobby.


Vanzo's are one of _THE_ poster childs of a "washed frog".


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

JeremyHuff said:


> I emailed the guy who runs INIBICO and he is planning on starting up again and sending mysteriosus and captivus. Not sure if it will happen.
> 
> My point was that IF UE were allowed to work with mysteriosus BUTchose not to for ethical reasons, then why was working with vanzolini considered OK??? I understand veradero and benedicta came in (or could have) on proper permits as something else so let's forget about them. To my knowledge vanzolini doesn't resemble anything else in the hobby.


Jeremy,
the guy who ran INIBICO was Schulzte and he imported a fw frogs that were not really under the permits he had obtained, such as the black basseleri. Further more, i really doubt that he will be bringing in Captivus anytime soon, at least not legally

further more, although UE is working with Vanzos they have only sold 3 to the US


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

JeremyHuff said:


> I emailed the guy who runs INIBICO and he is planning on starting up again and sending mysteriosus and captivus. Not sure if it will happen.
> 
> My point was that IF UE were allowed to work with mysteriosus BUTchose not to for ethical reasons, then why was working with vanzolini considered OK??? I understand veradero and benedicta came in (or could have) on proper permits as something else so let's forget about them. To my knowledge vanzolini doesn't resemble anything else in the hobby.


I wouldn't hold your breath.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Julio said:


> Jeremy,
> the guy who ran INIBICO was Schulzte and he imported a fw frogs that were not really under the permits he had obtained, such as the black basseleri. Further more, i really doubt that he will be bringing in Captivus anytime soon, at least not legally


Here is the entire email:

Hi, Jeremy,
we are currently recovering the frog move- our place was closed 3.5 years because IIRSA NORTE built a road through our 3800 Ha Fauna Management Concession at the Cainarachi frog valley. The road from Tarapoto to Yurimaguas is ready now, asphalted and fast, but we must reorganize the producers (Campesinos) and start the move again. We are also preparing the intensive production and export of juvenile E. mysteriosus from our Condor site and possibly breed and export also E. captivus. This species was making some problems in captivity similar R. reticulatus. They need very small food. INIBICO is also ready to export in vitro orchids.
Ok, any more questions please mail.

Rainer Schulte
INIBICO


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

Julio said:


> Jeremy,
> the guy who ran INIBICO was Schulzte and he imported a fw frogs that were not really under the permits he had obtained, such as the black basseleri.


yeah, I was shocked when I heard this, apparently, they arrived here under not entirely legal means.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

I also just want to add that I appreciate that we can have a good conversation about this topic without a flame war. Carry on, good folk!


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

JeremyHuff said:


> Here is the entire email:
> 
> Hi, Jeremy,
> we are currently recovering the frog move- our place was closed 3.5 years because IIRSA NORTE built a road through our 3800 Ha Fauna Management Concession at the Cainarachi frog valley. The road from Tarapoto to Yurimaguas is ready now, asphalted and fast, but we must reorganize the producers (Campesinos) and start the move again. We are also preparing the intensive production and export of juvenile E. mysteriosus from our Condor site and possibly breed and export also E. captivus. This species was making some problems in captivity similar R. reticulatus. They need very small food. INIBICO is also ready to export in vitro orchids.
> ...


interesting, i wonder who is funding the project, because my understanding was that the reason it got shut down in the first place was because of lack of funding from investors that pulled out on the last project.


----------



## MPepper (Feb 29, 2004)

on the topic of mysteriousus, to clear up any misunderstandings and misinterpretations....

ZEF recieved a few mysteriousus back in 2005 from INRENA released into the custody of ZEF since we were at the time one of the few outfits capable of receiving and caring for/treating as many frogs as they had confiscated..
That was nearly 6 years ago. If we wanted to we probably could have pushed for them at that time to be released for work within our active management plan (and thus, have the potential to export offspring)

However at that time, Manuel and I decided that we had more important things on the burner, like pending approval for fantastica, imitator, bassleri etc. that we did not want to stir the pot and push for something we knew would be a delicate topic.

As time went by we grew less and less enthusiastic about breaching the subject with INRENA, and became more and more concerned about the potential impact releasing the frog legally might have, IE washing all illegal ones, and potentially damaging the wild populations if, since a legal precedent had been set, we feared increased pressure might have been placed on wild pops. since wild frogs could potentially be washed and traded with permits. We did not want to run the risk of that.

Now, almost 6 years has passed and neither Manuel nor I even consider at this time pursuing mysterious any further. It simply put is not a frog we desire to put our energy towards at this time. Obviously some of you don't agree and take issue with this, and that is fine, I hope you can respect our sentiments none the less. The precipitous slopes around Santa Rosa is one of the most humbling and awe-inspiring places I have seen in Peru, worth a visit for anyone who wants to see and gain a better appreciation of this frog. 

About INIBICO, yes as the emailed Jeremy posted testifies, if looks like Rainer is trying to get the machine going again and work up in the Condor. I don't know any more about this than what was in the email previously posted. For anyone seriously interested in this frog, looks like INIBICO might be your best hope.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

Mark thanks for posting!!


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

MPepper said:


> on the topic of mysteriousus, to clear up any misunderstandings and misinterpretations....
> 
> ZEF recieved a few mysteriousus back in 2005 from INRENA released into the custody of ZEF since we were at the time one of the few outfits capable of receiving and caring for/treating as many frogs as they had confiscated..
> That was nearly 6 years ago. If we wanted to we probably could have pushed for them at that time to be released for work within our active management plan (and thus, have the potential to export offspring)
> ...


Thanks for the info Mark...reading between the lines there it seems the Mysti issue and politics involved may be more complicated then many of us may have imagined. Obviously you and others involved are privy to much more information then most of us in the hobby, and thus better qualified to evaluate where efforts are best directed. I personally don't care much one way or the other if mysti's become legal..I like em, may pick up a few if that ever happens but there are a lot of frogs much higher on my must have list. 

My concern is the practical implications and consequences of legalization vs things remaining as they are. Obviously it sucks that legal exports would in effect wash dirty frogs, and those people who had them would likely be let off the hook. I just wonder if legalization of exports and even the washed frogs would remove more pressure on the wild populations then they would add in some cases. If it looks like legalization is in the best interest of the frog longterm even if in the short term it has some ill effect then to me that seems the way to go. I'd rather see a few unethical people get away with their BS in the short term then see the frog disappear from the wild if exports and washed frogs would relieve pressure on wild populations but as you eluded to in your post the issue probably isn't quite that simple. Mystis looked to me based on the info I had that they may be one of those special cases, but you would know better then I.

Pushing for mystis may mean you are less effective in your goals later on and/or with other frogs, which we definitely don't want that. You are in a much better position to evaluate those issues then most of us, so you've got my trust and best wishes...Love the work you are doing. Hope everything goes as well as possible with your efforts. Happy thanks giving!


----------



## MD_Frogger (Sep 9, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> Vanzo's are one of _THE_ poster childs of a "washed frog".


Wouldn't azureus fit the bill a little better since they have been around so much longer and are a "washed frog"?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

MD_Frogger said:


> Wouldn't azureus fit the bill a little better since they have been around so much longer and are a "washed frog"?


They go back so far, that I for one, am not sure of their exact history with regards to our hobby....

Now Vanzo's....since they are so recent and during the time that I've been in the hobby and had a chance to see the hobby change with them....I'm just more familar with thier situation.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Philsuma said:


> They go back so far, that I for one, am not sure of their exact history with regards to our hobby....
> 
> Now Vanzo's....since they are so recent and during the time that I've been in the hobby and had a chance to see the hobby change with them....I'm just more familar with thier situation.


At least some vanzos came here from the EU with papers though didn't they? I mean we can't get legal papers at all for mysti even from the EU can we? I know papers or not some will think those are just as illegal, but for me it a grey area. The USA has given tacit permission to own them as far as I'm concerned by issuing papers. You can argue ethics if not legality there...but mysti as I understand it is just straight up illegal...period.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> At least some vanzos came here from the EU with papers though didn't they?


Yes.

Without re-hashing the Vanzo senario (can be found via th search function)....It appears that CB Mysti's are being overtly transfered in Europe and the U.K so I wonder why CITES paperwork cannot be applied for by any given "Joe Citizen" with a couple hundred bucks.

I just can't think that the _only_ reason is cash - the several hundred dollars followed by a few thousand $$ - Should be able to get a dozen sexed animals sent over for around 10-15K.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Philsuma said:


> Yes.
> 
> Without re-hashing the Vanzo senario (can be found via th search function)....It appears that CB Mysti's are being overtly transfered in Europe and the U.K so I wonder why CITES paperwork cannot be applied for by any given "Joe Citizen" with a couple hundred bucks.
> 
> I just can't think that the _only_ reason is cash - the several hundred dollars followed by a few thousand $$ - Should be able to get a dozen sexed animals sent over for around 10-15K.


Ya I guess that is my question too, since it seems mysti are basically as legal to own as other frogs in some countries that did give papers for frogs. Right? Lets just ask directly.... What is stopping someone here from getting papers and bringing over mysti from the EU? The US gov, or the EU gov...or both? or the money, time/effort? Not saying someone should do that if it is possible, I'm just curious about the details of why it hasn't happened.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> At least some vanzos came here from the EU with papers though didn't they? I mean we can't get legal papers at all for mysti even from the EU can we? I know papers or not some will think those are just as illegal, but for me it a grey area. The USA has given tacit permission to own them as far as I'm concerned by issuing papers. You can argue ethics if not legality there...but mysti as I understand it is just straight up illegal...period.


I could be wrong here, but I think I remember seeing this somewhere in one of those older mysti threads: The Peruvian government never allowed exports for the pet trade- they were either smuggled in or came in for something different, like a research permit. The Peruvian government considers them stolen, but some individual countries' governments decide whether or not cb offspring are legal to posses or not. So while some countries in Europe may allow them, in America, the USF&W made them illegal.
Bryan


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Baltimore Bryan said:


> I could be wrong here, but I think I remember seeing this somewhere in one of those older mysti threads: The Peruvian government never allowed exports for the pet trade- they were either smuggled in or came in for something different, like a research permit. The Peruvian government considers them stolen, but some individual countries' governments decide whether or not cb offspring are legal to posses or not. So while some countries in Europe may allow them, in America, the USF&W made them illegal.
> Bryan


Yep that is basically what I heard up till the point "the USF&W made them illegal" part....That part I've been unclear on. Is that really the case, and if so didn't the same thing happen with other frogs but they were allowed in to the US? So why are mysti not allowed but others were? Weren't other frogs smuggled out of host country to EU...then granted papers to come here from the EU/US? ...or am I mistaken about that?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> Yep that is basically what I heard up till the point "the USF&W made them illegal" part....That part I've been unclear on. Is that really the case, and if so didn't the same thing happen with other frogs but they were allowed in to the US? So why are mysti not allowed but others were? Weren't other frogs smuggled out of host country to EU...then granted papers to come here from the EU/US? ...or am I mistaken about that?


USF&W did not make them illlegal.. this species has never been legally released to the pet trade which is why it is also illlegal in a number of countries in the EU. Different countries overseas have different standards for what can be legally traded and what cannot be legally traded within that country. Whether or not another country accepts that as sufficient proof depends on the internal standards of that country. Our standards require enforcement of the laws of Peru and as I understood it; Peru has stated that species has not been legally exported for the pet trade and those that were exported on a scientific permit were released in violation of the permit. 

Ed


----------



## rcteem (Mar 24, 2009)

To the OP...I think you have some great creativity going there and dont let all the negative talk on here slow you down...It may be a bit unrealistic but I like to see someone who is trying to figure out ways to save the endangered darts...keep it up and thank you again for brainstorming.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

To the OP.... If you were going to do this I think it would be most ethical to find an island that was not the sole home to a species, contained no endangered species and had a minimum of vertebrate life forms on it. Basically as few other frogs, lizards, snakes and mammals as possible, even birds...occasional sea birds might not be a big deal. But adding darts to a non native environment has a lot of implications for the native life if they are going to be free range. Also unless they are in enclosures I'd say stick to a mix of species that can't possibly interbreed with each other. 

I personally wouldn't mind seeing a small island or 2 that didn't have a lot of native and/or endangered species on it be used as a dart sanctuary it is just if the animals can roam freely they will impact that ecosystem in all kinds of ways...many which may be unpredictable. It wouldn't be particularly ethical to try saving darts by screwing over a bunch of other plants and animals. BTW darts could indirectly effect plants because they would alter the food chain by feeding on insects that may eat the plants, or help the plants in some way.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> To the OP.... If you were going to do this I think it would be most ethical to find an island that was not the sole home to a species, contained no endangered species and had a minimum of vertebrate life forms on it. Basically as few other frogs, lizards, snakes and mammals as possible, even birds...occasional sea birds might not be a big deal. But adding darts to a non native environment has a lot of implications for the native life if they are going to be free range. Also unless they are in enclosures I'd say stick to a mix of species that can't possibly interbreed with each other.
> 
> I personally wouldn't mind seeing a small island or 2 that didn't have a lot of native and/or endangered species on it be used as a dart sanctuary it is just if the animals can roam freely they will impact that ecosystem in all kinds of ways...many which may be unpredictable. It wouldn't be particularly ethical to try saving darts by screwing over a bunch of other plants and animals. BTW darts could indirectly effect plants because they would alter the food chain by feeding on insects that may eat the plants, or help the plants in some way.


Dave,
you may be interested in http://www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/pubs/ja_iitf_2002_beard001.pdf 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> Dave,
> you may be interested in http://www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/pubs/ja_iitf_2002_beard001.pdf
> 
> Ed


Thanks...scanned through it some already. Pretty interesting stuff...glad to see they are doing such studies.


----------



## chilumba (Sep 20, 2008)

rcteem said:


> To the OP...I think you have some great creativity going there and dont let all the negative talk on here slow you down...It may be a bit unrealistic but I like to see someone who is trying to figure out ways to save the endangered darts...keep it up and thank you again for brainstorming.


Thanks Rcteem! It would be cool to do this, luckly I am only 16 and have lots of time to plan this but lets hope some species don't go extinct by then and maybe that some will get rediscovered!



Dendro Dave said:


> To the OP.... If you were going to do this I think it would be most ethical to find an island that was not the sole home to a species, contained no endangered species and had a minimum of vertebrate life forms on it. Basically as few other frogs, lizards, snakes and mammals as possible, even birds...occasional sea birds might not be a big deal. But adding darts to a non native environment has a lot of implications for the native life if they are going to be free range. Also unless they are in enclosures I'd say stick to a mix of species that can't possibly interbreed with each other.
> 
> I personally wouldn't mind seeing a small island or 2 that didn't have a lot of native and/or endangered species on it be used as a dart sanctuary it is just if the animals can roam freely they will impact that ecosystem in all kinds of ways...many which may be unpredictable. It wouldn't be particularly ethical to try saving darts by screwing over a bunch of other plants and animals. BTW darts could indirectly effect plants because they would alter the food chain by feeding on insects that may eat the plants, or help the plants in some way.


I definitely don't want to kill some other endangered/rare flora and fauna. Also never thought about the impact on insects and what they do, thanks for that. 

There is always the option of having a large greenhouse for every species. Which would probably be way cheaper, safer for the frogs just incase a tsunami pops out of nowhere and be able to control diseases and pests.


----------



## bobzarry (Mar 2, 2005)

Personnaly I don't see the atraction with mysteriousus. There are many frogs already available and legal that are way more atractive. All Pics I have seen of mysteriousus are a brownish frog with white spots. Other then it being illegal and hard to come by I just don't get what all the hub bub is about.


----------

