# Massive Dart Frog Sell-offs



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

It concerns me to see so many selling off whole collections, 15 - 80+ frogs! I understand there are times when one must evaluate his or her priorities in life (financial, health, family, work, etc.) and make the needed changes, but I think some of this overload is self inflicted. I have thought about a comment made on the board some months back by someone smart, I can not recall who. They were talking about some of the differences between Europe and The US in the hobby. It was pointed out, that a lot in Europe focus on smaller collections, with an emphasis on the whole experience, vivariums included, whereas many in The US have a "Pokemon, collect them all" mentality. Is it that people are collecting too much too fast? Can anyone adjust from 0 frogs to 30, or 50, or 80 in a year or two? I myself waited well over a year to even set-up a tank after I wanted to get into frogs, just to make sure. Then I waited 6-8 months to get frogs, just to make sure. It is only now, after having them for 8 months or so that I feel comfortable to add a few more to the collection, slowly, just to make sure. 

Is there anything we can do to help people avoid PDF overload? I just worry that as the hobby grows this is going to be a bigger and bigger problem and could cause some real headaches down the line. Eventual there may not be enough serious froggers to support these dump offs, and others may buy these large collections without really knowing how to care for them (or why to avoid hybrids). 

I for my part try to apply some well known words on the board. *"Instead of keeping more species, why not do more with the species you keep?" - GrassyPeak*

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## Jayson745 (Dec 13, 2006)

I think this happens with alot of animals(not just darts). To some its a faze where they go nuts, then get bored. But there will always be new people to take thier place. And there will always be the life long hobbiests out there.

In short, I think this is a natural thing that happens with everything from fish to snakes. Not really something to worry to much about.


----------



## evolvstll (Feb 17, 2007)

I agree with the burn out issue. Trying to go out of town is always a concern if you have frogs, especially froglets. Finding and trusting someone to care for your frogs while out of town is a concern. 
How many get into the hobby are see dollar signs and think that it is an 'easy' money maker. Jumping into the hobby and collecting a large frog collection, and thinking that each pair can produce an endless supply of froglets. Only to realize that is not the case. Being a frogger is a livestyle and a passion. To those getting out may realize how time consuming and ultimately life consuming being a frogger is. Imagine the dissapointment of some when they over breed their females and start seeing entire clutches with sls and realize the dollar signs they saw are not a possibility.


----------



## boombotty (Oct 12, 2005)

It's a shame to think people get into darts for the $. I like having a few different kinds to my liking, and if they breed, great, I use the "extra" money and put it right back into them. Grassypeak has it right in his quote.
Scott


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

To be honest, I didn't even think about the money issue, but I guess that could be part of it too, which is sad. GrassyPeak does have it right. I am all for large collections if people really have the passion, time, money, and proper motive for it.


----------



## Abbathx (Aug 15, 2007)

i dont find them that time consuming .. as long as u have a good working system i find it less time consuming. the more efficient your system and evolving the process of your system the less time will be focused to care.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

well believe it or not, the hobby experienced the same thing a few years ago i rember i was just coming on here just to check the classifieds, but there a lot more people getting in the hobby then there are getting out of it, so believe it or not the hobby is still getting bigger and bigger each year.


----------



## housevibe7 (Sep 24, 2006)

I have to agree with the over collection syndrome. I see some of these new people come in, and within a month or two they have 6 different types of frogs. Its kind of sad really. I have been in the hobby for almost a year now (not long) and only have two different types of frogs. I felt that in order for me to go on to the next level of having more, I needed to get feeding down, culturing of different feeders, and get my first frogs to breed succesfully (beyond just clutch after clutch of bad eggs) and show general parental care. This is one of those situations where less is definately more. Also, unfortunately many of the froggers that have been in the hobby for years have huge collections, so the rare frogs go to them because they have the most experience, but because of the sheer enormity of their collections, many times they dont have the time needed to make sure that these frogs are getting all they need. I think thats why we have some of the problems we do with with frogs such as D. histrionicus and D. pumilio 'Blue Jeans.' It has been shown that blue jeans consistently do well with large enclosures, so rather than people paring down their collection to maybe encorporate a larger enclosure, they still try to stuff a pair in a 15 gallon tank. So... its unfortunate that the problem exists, but until people get past the collection mentality, it will never happen and people will still get burned out.


----------



## Abbathx (Aug 15, 2007)

amphibians have been apart of my life since i was 5 years old. i will always be a amphibian hobbyist. i was going to start breeding projects with salamanders around my area that been disapearing and reintroducing large numbers around protected areas where they have suffered in population lost but recent protection in forest has an opening for a good project for me to help the population loss and boom population. my highest goal is the hellbender but i will take alot of time before acually having them to make sure the conditions are more than perfect and i hope to introduce f1's in the hobby aswell as helping local populations. i believe only having amphibians just for the money makes them no better than smugglers in my opinion.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

housevibe7 said:


> It has been shown that blue jeans consistently do well with large enclosures, so rather than people paring down their collection to maybe encorporate a larger enclosure, they still try to stuff a pair in a 15 gallon tank. So... its unfortunate that the problem exists, but until people get past the collection mentality, it will never happen and people will still get burned out.


I fully agree. I like that in Europe people seem to have larger tanks and fewer frogs. Now I know that is not always the case, but you seem to see it more. I myself also collect Orchids, so to me, a larger tank with that can fit a lot of Orchids, Broms, and Ferns is ideal. I would rather have two or three medium to larger tanks fully planted as show pieces, with two or three species, than ten small tanks and ten species. I think some of this will change as vivarium construction advances. People also seem to be getting more into their plants, so this may help with tank size and lean people towards more modest collections.


----------



## skronkykong (Jan 1, 2007)

Charge more for the frogs. That will deter at least some of those that over do it.


----------



## housevibe7 (Sep 24, 2006)

Mywebbedtoes said:


> I would rather have two or three medium to larger tanks fully planted as show pieces, with two or three species, than ten small tanks and ten species.


I second that... I have three tanks right now set up, one with no frogs in it (hopefully soon to come) and none of them are under 40 gallons. I have one 18 cube (25 gallons) that I am setting up for a single adult yellow terrib. Thats the smallest I would use for adults. Many people complain that they dont have enough room for larger tanks... I live in one of the smallest apartments you have ever seen, I just choose to not have as many frogs so they have as much room as possible.


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

I think much of it can be the "over collection syndrome" as it was put, but it can also be that peoples lives change.

For example I have recently considered selling off some of my species as I have been really busy with work, and will be for some time. I do a good job of keeping my frog work to a minimum, but I have so much Id like to get to.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

kyle1745 said:


> it can also be that peoples lives change.
> 
> For example I have recently considered selling off some of my species as I have been really busy with work, and will be for some time.


And this I fully understand. As I said in my original post, that I understand peoples circumstances change and they have to reevaluate their priorities. If frogs are getting in the way of making a living, or more importantly your family, then by all means sell away. My concern isn't with that, it's people that buy a bunch for whatever reason and then just decide they are over it and dump them all.


----------



## redhawk (Sep 28, 2007)

it is nice to see the prices drop. But low prices mean more expendible to some folks


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

ANd high prices can mean that they are a status symbol which means they can be disposable as well.... 


Ed


----------



## skronkykong (Jan 1, 2007)

pet frogs as status symbols? I guess I can see that happening in theory but not in real life!


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

> But low prices mean more expendible to some folks





> ANd high prices can mean that they are a status symbol which means they can be disposable as well....


But the medium price was just right.

And so Goldie Locks bought her first frogs.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

skronkykong said:


> pet frogs as status symbols? I guess I can see that happening in theory but not in real life!


Orchids are used as status symbols. I once witnessed a couple from LA purchase 10 Cymbidiums. I asked the guy at the counter how much they spent, it was more than $500. He said people come in all the time and spend that much and then throw them away when they stop blooming and buy more. They dont care about the plants, just want people to see them. My girlfriend works at a retirement complex in Montecito Ca. (Where Oprah lives, not the complex but Montecito) and there are always Orchids in the trash. I think what Ed means, is that some people like to have stuff so they can say, "That frog was $300", or "That Orchid was $200". So yes, they can very much so be used as status symbols.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

skronkykong said:


> pet frogs as status symbols? I guess I can see that happening in theory but not in real life!


Why not? Dart frogs aren't exactly mainstream pets, so people see them as being something special. I certainly did when I first found out that you can actually have darts as pets. I still consider myself lucky to have them.

I wouldn't really set high prices. Prices are high as is, if you compare it to other pets. A similarly sized fish would go for a dollar or two. Some rarely more than $40. Those are are more, typically, are the saltwater fish. Hell, I can get some parrots for cheaper prices than some darts! Setting high prices reduces impulse buys, but it also makes dart keeping more elitist; which is problematic IMO. Most darts are still too expensive for me to even consider, but I fortunately got some leucs, and I can fairly honestly say that I wouldn't be researching pumilio and campaigning for amphibian conservation on such a personal level had I not had the chance to observe them as pets. I would hate to think what would happen if dart keeping was so elitist as to prevent people such as myself from being able to get into them and potentially do good for them in the nature.

And to be quite honest, these people getting out of their collections of 20+ frogs obviously aren't going to be inhibited by higher prices.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Mywebbedtoes said:


> skronkykong said:
> 
> 
> > pet frogs as status symbols? I guess I can see that happening in theory but not in real life!
> ...


This is a large part of what I am saying.. but it goes beyond that... how many people here want the new morph or new cool species or the hard to get expensive species when they already have one or more species??? 

Its not just the people who aquire a large collection that causes problems with the hobby but the people who get out of the "common" or less "sexy" frogs so they can be cutting edge... this is a bigger impact that the people who get out of the hobby each year..... 

Ed


----------



## srrrio (May 12, 2007)

*collections*

I purchased a collection of 13 jewels a few months ago. I have previously had only lmited sucesess with frogs purchased in Las vegas. About 9 mnths ago I discovered dendroboard and increased my newborn passion and knowlege ever so greatly. The collection and it's owner were amazing.
It was a wonderful thing to meet another frog person in our tranisent little sin city. I am only sorry that the only frogger in LV had to go back to Engand.

Before I bought his colllection, and maybe more importantly, his set ups for very beautiful vivs. He gave me his first egg clutch. I am proud that the 2 good eggs are now 2 vibrant tads. ANd the next clutch are 5 vibrant eggs and this evening there is a new clutch on a philo leaves. 

Sometimes selling out does not mean selling out,

1.1 Canines
1.1 Living Wild in My Backyard Woodhouse Toads
1.2 Auratus
3.3 Hawaiian Auratus
1.0 Tinc
0.2 Man Creek


----------



## wimpy (Dec 14, 2006)

What I think about large collections is, is that in any hobby there are some people with addictive personalities. I've been into Killifish for over 20 years and seen it happen many times. People get their first pair of Killli's, breed em and get excited, get a few more pairs, all of a sudden they have 8, 10, 20 tanks, entering fish in shows, winning awards, working with tougher species, then the excitement high wears off (burnout). Then they go on to find the next high. I also know dedicated LONG term Killikeepers with 150+ aquariums.

I lurked on this forum for almost two years before registering and just picked up my first frogs this past summer. I *plan* on having a large collection of frogs and I realize that I'm also one of those 'gotta have 'em all' type, addictive personalities. I have gotten overwhelmed in the past, not so much with the work, but the RESPONIBILITY of taking care of whatever live things that we aqcuire. Day in and day out we are GOD to them and must continually provide for them. Guilt factor can be a bitch also, missing feedings, cleaning, whatever. 

I also think that costs are kinda out of line too but the market is what determines what we pay. Only a few folks seem to have to run their adds more than once. Better than with Killifish, where you can work with some very difficult species (short lived, badly skewed sex ratios, water chemistry, delicate fry,whatever) and take them to a meeting for auction, or online, and if you're lucky, someome will offer$5-10!

I have GREAT respect for anyone who can keep large collections or even one species going for the duration.


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

When a hobby becomes a job the fun is removed for most. Culturing large qty's of food and maintaining many tanks and then tads becomes a bit overwhelming after a period of time, there will always be some that get in this hobby and go through this cycle...nothing will change that.
Information and availability have never been greater than the time we are in right now (although a Serpents Egg price list would be sweet to see again....oops did I just say that.....I hate smugglers). This is a great time for the dart frog hobby, with the Peruvian projects, Panama farms and the ever rising awarenes of preservation efforts we should continue to see new species and better ways to keep them. The additional number of people in this hobby every year leads to a greater opportunity for more people to get burned out in this process.


----------



## *slddave* (Jun 2, 2006)

skronkykong said:


> pet frogs as status symbols? I guess I can see that happening in theory but not in real life!


It's certainly a status symbol on the board. Look at some of the fancy pumilio comming in and check out the endless responses to the posts. It's just the newest & best syndrome combined with keeping up with the Jones' ******do not take offense- I'm not talking about commited froggers, just impulse buyers*******


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

In the ten years I've been in this hobby, I've always considered overextending/overcollecting that biggest problem and it isn't a new phenomena. But as Ed pointed out, price of the frogs is not a large factor. Several years ago I had a kid contact me because he lived in the same general region as me and was getting into dart frogs. So I helped him as best I could. Then he started adding frogs too quickly and I told him he needed to slow down. He was very gracious and admited that he had done the same thing with leopard geckos - getting too many too fast until he got overwhelmed and they crashed. I thought the problem was solved but the kid just started buying every rare frog he could find. This was back when very few pumilio were coming in and lamasi were just making an appearance, and this kid was shelling out $200-$600 every other week for frogs and I stopped answering his emails. Another frogger in the area stayed in communication and visited the kid once and found the frogs in horrible condition. About 4 months later, the kid said his frogs were dying and asked the other frogger to take them off his hands. The frogger reluctantly agreed but the kid never followed through and all of his frogs died. I would guess that $3,000-$4,000 in frogs died in that kids room and it was disgusting.

I do know that large collections and rare frogs get used as status symbols. But it is a really odd thing to me. I've been very fortunate to be able to hang out with some of the truly top froggers in this country. And what really impresses them is when they see someone stick with the hobby for a couple years yet discipline themselves to a reasonable sized collection and not just chase the rare frogs. And I can tell you that people whose names everyone here know but are never seen on DB know about Grassy Peak's signature line and they like it a lot.

As was already said, the size of the collection is irrelevant, it's how well we take care of the animals we have that matters. Some can do a great job with large collections, I know I can't. We just need to realize our own limititations and be realistic. And I don't think rare frogs are any more cool that common ones. Most people who see my collection are unimpressed by the blue jeans and their froglets, but they really get into the G&B auratus. And I tend to agree with them. I don't have room for a lot of species, but auratus has to be one of them.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

bbrock said:


> I do know that large collections and rare frogs get used as status symbols. But it is a really odd thing to me. I've been very fortunate to be able to hang out with some of the truly top froggers in this country. And what really impresses them is when they see someone stick with the hobby for a couple years yet discipline themselves to a reasonable sized collection and not just chase the rare frogs. And I can tell you that people whose names everyone here know but are never seen on DB know about Grassy Peak's signature line and they like it a lot.
> 
> As was already said, the size of the collection is irrelevant, it's how well we take care of the animals we have that matters. Some can do a great job with large collections, I know I can't. We just need to realize our own limititations and be realistic. And I don't think rare frogs are any more cool that common ones.
> 
> ...


----------



## housevibe7 (Sep 24, 2006)

I think that can be said in many cases, although I for one did put D. histrionicus. Not because they are rare, but because I HAVE actually seen one, think they are some of the most gorgeous frogs ever, especially of the larger frogs. Its just sad that more isnt being/cant be done with them.
As far as smuggling goes, unfortunately that is the nature of the beast. Unless these frogs become free, there is no way to insure that people arent going to smuggle them. You think about it, and the money that people pay for some of these frogs, even half that amount would be a good sum to someone that normally makes a few hundred buck a year. Unless we start to only buy from places like Understory, the illegal trade of these guys will continue to happen.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

Sorry, I just realized how scewed up my last post was, and it made it look like bbrock was saying things that I was really saying. Sorry, this is how it should have looked.



bbrock said:


> I do know that large collections and rare frogs get used as status symbols. But it is a really odd thing to me. I've been very fortunate to be able to hang out with some of the truly top froggers in this country. And what really impresses them is when they see someone stick with the hobby for a couple years yet discipline themselves to a reasonable sized collection and not just chase the rare frogs. And I can tell you that people whose names everyone here know but are never seen on DB know about Grassy Peak's signature line and they like it a lot.
> 
> As was already said, the size of the collection is irrelevant, it's how well we take care of the animals we have that matters. Some can do a great job with large collections, I know I can't. We just need to realize our own limititations and be realistic. And I don't think rare frogs are any more cool that common ones.



I agree with this whole statement, and also Ed's earlier comments about status as it relates to rarity. I recently posted a thread called "The Ultimate Small PDF Collection", http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=33475&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30, where I invited people to lists their top four frogs if they had to keep a small collection. On the third page there was this post by Catfur that I really liked:



> 1. Mysteriosus
> 2. Lehmanni
> 3. Vanzolinii
> 4. Histrionicus
> ...


I think this is true, some people want to have frogs that others will say "YOU HAVE THAT?!!" But this doesn't mean they really love the particular frog. Has anyone here read The Orchid Thief or seen Adaptation? When John Leroche is explaining why he vowed never to stick a foot in the ocean again, even after he had spent years hand collecting rare fish and had dozens of tanks, and he is asked why? His response is, "I was done with fish". I think that exists in any hobby. A desire to be admired and revered, and when that is done it is time for something new.


----------



## jschroeder (Mar 19, 2005)

I started to write a response about how I feel a bit pissed to be lumped in a group of irresponsible people because I recently had my collection up for sale but then I realized that I don't care what people think (which is a good thing in this case). 

Those who know me know that I really enjoy and take good care of my frogs. I wouldn't sell the collection if I didn't have to and I think assuming that most people are selling collections because they were not responsible is a bit arrogant. Everyone has their own ideas about how they choose to be in this hobby, and who are we to judge. If someone's idea of enjoyment is getting every new speices out there, cool. If someone else wants to keep one frog, great. I happen to be somewhere in the middle and have opinions about what I think a responsible hobbiest should do. I offer advice when asked. I get as upset as anyone when I see someone who I "think" is getting in over their head and the frogs are going to suffer. Bottom line is, I "think", I don't know so why sould I assume that they are being irresponsible. 

I'm sure that what is being stated here is happening, but also remember that we should try to be a bit less judgemental before we jump to conclusions about people. Things happen in peoples lives that may be more important than this hobby. I still think that an overwhelming majority of people are in it for the love of the frogs and I think if people are getting more frogs than they can care for it's more about the love of the frogs/hobby than anything else. I take my hat off to people that know when to downsize (it shows respect for the health of the animals). I have wittnessed firsthand what happens when people wait too long to make that decision. 

You know, selling a collection off that you worked years on getting just the way you want it is hard. I'm not asking for sympathy, all I'm saying is try to see both sides before you start threads that essentially kick people when they may already be down.

my pair of pennies


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

jschroeder - this is part of my original post.



Mywebbedtoes said:


> It concerns me to see so many selling off whole collections, 15 - 80+ frogs! I understand there are times when one must evaluate his or her priorities in life (financial, health, family, work, etc.) and make the needed changes, but I think some of this overload is self inflicted.
> 
> Is it that people are collecting too much too fast? Can anyone adjust from 0 frogs to 30, or 50, or 80 in a year or two?
> 
> Is there anything we can do to help people avoid PDF overload?


For one, I was more curious why it happens, not trying to state definatively why it does. You will notice that I said I understand that people have life changes that requires them to make smart choices. I stated this again later on in the thread, that people need to set priorities, and if taking care of your family or yourself means selling your frogs then by all means do so. I SHOULD have said that it seems that some of these sell offs are self-inflicted. I think if you read what many on this thread have said it wasn't that people get upset to see people sell collections, it's that people get upset when people do too much too soon, get burnt out, and the frogs suffer. I certainly did not mean to imply that people who sell their collections do not care about their frogs. Obviously people like you do, and so you make the best choices for them. And I didn't mean to imply that most people selling their frogs were irresponsible. I was/am just curious as to why I have been seeing so many full sell-offs. I have since learned that this is common in any number of hobbies. I hope this clarifies my stance.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

jschroeder -

Very well put and I really like what you had to say. There are plenty of people that get in over their head, but there are just as many if not more that have life changing events that make it hard to take care of the collections they have. Instead of doing the wrong thing and trying to make it through when they know they can't and let the frogs suffer, they sell some or all of their stuff off for the better of the frogs. These people should be commended for making the right choice and not letting the frogs suffer due to their lack of time/money/whatever. I am really surprised how many "senior" froggers and respected personalities chimed in here about the negatives and not many (I didn't read the whole thread, so i may have missed one) chose to highlight what you did. I feel very sorry for the people on here that arer forced through circumstance to part with most or all of their collection even though they don't want to and I for one hope I am never put in that position.


----------



## housevibe7 (Sep 24, 2006)

J- I dont think anyone was singling you out... I for one know from the little I've seen and know of you, there would have to be a darn good reason for you to get out or pare down... I dont think that anyone was saying that anyone with a large collection is doomed to fail. In fact I was talking to Todd the other day and said that I think its amazing that people like him and Tor can keep these large collections going for all this time. Its just not for me. I, myself was speaking to the people more like Brent was talking about, the ones that have three different types of frogs before they even know how to culture fruit flies. THOSE are the ones that need to reconsider their priorities.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

Sarah said what I was trying to say. Thank you Sarah.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip " am really surprised how many "senior" froggers and respected personalities chimed in here about the negatives and not many (I didn't read the whole thread, so i may have missed one) chose to highlight what you did. "endsnip

I didn't take it as a person was being singled out as there weren't any links to a specific sale post... especially as over the last few years there have been a number of "clearance sales" on the boards and it seems to me that over the last several months for one reason or another there has been several in a row.

With the piece I snipped above, I am curious, what exactly are the positives to a collection clearance sale? 

Ed


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

jschroeder, I don't think anyone was calling you out. This topic comes up from time to time as it seems at times there are a few people selling off collections at the same time.

Personally I admire someone who admits they need to trim it back or even get out of the hobby. Lives change and it is much better for the animals to be in someone else's care than be neglected by someone who has become too busy.

With that said I have also seen a number of people come back after their lives calm down.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Ed said:


> With the piece I snipped above, I am curious, what exactly are the positives to a collection clearance sale?
> 
> Ed


Well, I addressed how it could be a positive right after the end of you snip, but here Kyle is saying the same thing I said, but in different words...



kyle1745 said:


> Personally I admire someone who admits they need to trim it back or even get out of the hobby. Lives change and it is much better for the animals to be in someone else's care than be neglected by someone who has become too busy.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

sbreland said:


> Ed said:
> 
> 
> > With the piece I snipped above, I am curious, what exactly are the positives to a collection clearance sale?
> ...


Maybe I'm just feeling the negative from having been around the animal trade for such a long time (well over 15 years not counting just my time as a hobbyist (which if we include you can easily double that number)) but transfering the animals to another person while in the short run maybe somewhat a plus for the animals in the long run it may not be... For example given that a Dendrobates ssp (tinctorius, auratus to name two) frog can easily live for more than 10 years and 15 and 20 years are not unheard of, if the change of ownership was a positive thing then there should be a lot more older frogs around.... 

Ed


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

But, dealing in that way of thought is theory and conjecture and is purely circumstantial. I will say that your idea has a valid base, but I refuse to believe that moving frogs from a hobbiest that is no longer able to give them the time they need is a bad thing. I will say that in an ideal world the moves would never need to take place but in a real world things happen and it's better for them to be moved to someone who has the time/desire/ability/whatever to take care of them. Do some go to hobbiests that cannot care adequately for them? Sure, I bet, but it's better that the hobbiest that is no longer able to care for their frogs to realize this and make an attempt to do the right thing.


----------



## jschroeder (Mar 19, 2005)

I know that I was not being singled out by anyone, I should have made that more clear in my post. The point that I was trying to make but got a bit off track was that it may seem like there is a trend of massive selloffs but I think if you look a bit deeper into it that it might only be a perception. One thing to consider is how many more people are in the hobby now. I think if you were to look at the average number of people selling off large quantities of frogs compaired to say 3-4 years ago, the numbers might be pretty close (I understand that this is only a guess and that I don't the ability to confirm this idea). 

Mywebbedtoes sent me a nice PM. Thanks. Again, I know that I was not being singled out, so no appolgies are needed.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

It is nice to see the different insight and I am glad to see different opinions and thoughts. I do agree there are many different circumstances with these sell-offs. Those who mass collect frogs for the prestige or the possible payday and then burnout on them are probably in the minority. Sometimes this is even a windfall for the buyer, such as the person who posted that they bought a Vegas collection (that seller was being restationed back to the UK if I remember correctly so it is obvious why he sold).
There is something I am concerned about that relates to this issue that I did not bring up before. I guess I would say that I am uneasy about the relative ease of breeding for PDFs. First let me say, that I am all for those who breed frogs. I know many get into this hobby to experience the whole life cycle of a group of animals. But here is where I think the community as a whole needs to keep doing its part to educate new froggers in terms of care, general ethics, and what it means and doesn't mean to breed their frogs (i.e. you are probably not going to get rich). For example, a well known breeder sells the offspring from a pair of tincs to customers A, B, and C. 
A, B, and C all get frogglets from their pairs (which are siblings) and sell them to three customers each, then three more, and three more, and so on and so on. So an original pair produces hundreds if not thousands of offspring, sometimes with not much or any gene diversity (unless other lines are brought in). Eventually I worry there will be so much supply and so little demand by serious froggers that you will see a lot of "cheap" sell-offs and the frogs will fall into the hands of every little kid who thinks the blue frog looks cool and wants to put 1 or 3 in a little plastic 2.5 gallon box with a water dish and little else.
But maybe that is just a little Doom's Dayish.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

sbreland said:


> But, dealing in that way of thought is theory and conjecture and is purely circumstantial. I will say that your idea has a valid base, but I refuse to believe that moving frogs from a hobbiest that is no longer able to give them the time they need is a bad thing. I will say that in an ideal world the moves would never need to take place but in a real world things happen and it's better for them to be moved to someone who has the time/desire/ability/whatever to take care of them. Do some go to hobbiests that cannot care adequately for them? Sure, I bet, but it's better that the hobbiest that is no longer able to care for their frogs to realize this and make an attempt to do the right thing.



If it was purely circumstancial then where are the (at the very least) several thousand frogs imported, or bred in the mid to late 1990s? Something is causing excessive mortality in frogs that should easily still be alive.... If it was such as positive thing (in the longer term) for the frogs to be transferred then there should still be a lot of these frogs around today. An earlier thread (see http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... ght=oldest ) postulated that it appears that very few of the more experienced people were on the the forum but this still doesn't account for the sparsity of older dendrobatids in collections as the numbers of frogs should still be around and show up when people tranfer frogs (through trade/gift/sales). 
Another "circumstancial" item that this does't explain is how the numbers of different species or morphs cycle in the hobby... how often are some of the morphs or species available compared to 10 years ago? Some of what were common morphs have virtually disappeared... (and are on the upswing because they are hard to get now....) Look at E. tricolor/anthoyni... but the average lifespans should still have significant numbers of these frogs around.... 

All because the frogs were not individually tracked like frogs in Zoos or other institutions does not mean that there was not some form of mortality which had to occur in someone's care.....
I will agree that transferring the frogs to someone who will care and feed them is better than letting them starve to death or dehydrate but the lack of older dendrobatids indicates that there is some major negative to the movement of the frogs in the long term. 

Ed


----------



## bgexotics (Feb 24, 2004)

My personal situation for getting rid of my collection;

I have dissapeared for a while now due to my pregnancy. I got rid of all of my reptiles, including the darts once I found out I was pregnant. I was devoting a large chunk of my free time to the reptile business and also had a more demanding research job and a 5 year old, and I knew something would have to give. I had a very diffcult first pregnancy and knew that there was good chance I could be on bed rest, so in the best interest of the animals, I sold them off. I did not want to risk neglecting any animals or giving them sub-par care. some of my breeders were give to Quality Captives on an indefinate breeding loan since they were the ones who got me into this hobby and have helped me along the way. Others went to a friend in the hobby. 

Luckily the pregnancy was perfect and Aidan was born Sept. 13 healthy and strong. I am still adjusting to life with a baby again and I am in the middle of trying to get research published, so it will probably be a while before I get back into frogs. I almost bought a White's at the last show, but I still don't feel ready. I am a perfectionist and want to be able to give them the best care possible, which is hard when a baby is attached to you constantly. 

I think many people get into the hobby not realizing the time and financial commitment. When you have a family and a job, the hobby can start interfering with your life and you have to decide what is important. I know of people in the reptile hobby who have deprived their families in order to support their hobby, I personally do not want to face the decision of whether to buy crickets or diapers.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

I think this thread has kind of confused a couple of issues. One issue is the fact that people's lives and circumstances change, and so does their ability to keep frogs. There is nothing wrong with that except when changes in circumstances are predictable and you do nothing to prepare for it. For example, if you are a highschool student getting ready to leave home for college, that probably isn't the best time to build up a massive collection of fresh imports. A modest collection that is fairly easily transported and maintained without large time committments is much more sensible in most cases. But there are many responsible people who have been at this for many years and have had to pair down or dispense with their collections for any number of reasons. Usually it is done responsibly and sometimes, unfortunately, the events that cause the change are unexpected, often tragic, and impossible to deal with in any ideal way. In these cases, people do the best that they can with their animals. There is nothing wrong with that.

But I think we are sticking our heads in the sand if we think that the high turnover (and subsequent loss of animals as Ed has mentioned) has not been a problem. I'm sure you could dig through the frognet and db archives and find plenty of data to support this, but the average frogger stays in the hobby for only 2-3 years. Then they, and their frogs, dissapear from the scene. Again, nothing wrong with that at all so long as they provide for the continued health of their frogs by putting them into compitent hands. But when those same froggers jump into the hobby by adding new species far faster than they can accomodate them, and when they are purchasing any fresh import of pumilio and other difficult to breed species they can get their hands on, then it creates a problem. Where are the 17,341 pumilio (mostly blue jeans) that were imported to the US from 1987-2005? Or the 3,548 D. histrionicus imported over the same period? How about the 22,259 tinctorius or the 34,732 auratus that have come in? Over this period, 89,497 dendrobatids have been imported to the US alone. How many of those do you suppose are still alive? If we were supporting the hobby with 100% captive bred animals, I wouldn't be so cranky. But we're not. 

And it isn't that importing is necessarily a bad thing. But if we are going to support importing animals from the wild, then we need to take some responsibility as a hobby for what happens to those animals. I just think we need to recognize that high turnover is a part of this (and any other) hobby, and we need to act as a community to minimize the adverse effects of such turnover. I actually think DB has done a very good job of expanding the "rewards" of the hobby beyond just the status of having lots of animals or particularly rare ones. The threads on plants, vivarium construction, and conservation are all great examples of how people share their enthusiasm for the hobby without focusing on "the collection". And that is not to discount the contributions of those people who have accumulated spectacular collections and have maintained them well over the years. Without them, many of the frogs we have wouldn't be available. But anything we can do to help newcomers see alternative ways to feed their obsession other than just acquiring new frogs, I think, is good for all of us.


----------



## Dancing frogs (Feb 20, 2004)

One thing I have to add:
It seems usually when there is a collection sell-off, it is all or nothing, in other words, you have to buy the whole thing.

I fully understand the reasoning behind doing it that way, but at the same time, how many people are capable of taking on an entire collection all at once?
Because of that reason, I find the whole collection sell off as kind of irresponsible.


----------



## trinacliff (Aug 9, 2004)

As one who has made the difficult decision to sell *most* of my collection, I feel the need to weigh in here. I cannot speak for others, but in my situation, not that it is anyone's business but my own, circumstances in my life changed to the extent that it does not allow me to devote *as much time to my frogs as is necessary*. I decided to offer my group together first, to give someone the opportunity to get some very nice, harder to obtain species at a discounted price for buying the entire group. I suspected it would be the case, but there were not many people wanting/needing those frogs that had the money to put out that kind of chunk at once. If some newbie contacted me and wanted them, I would have graciously declined their offer. My selling the frogs doesn't mean they are disposable and does not mean I don't care where they go. Actually, it means the exact opposite...I realized that someone else could give them better care than I could at this time. I didn't have time to redo a few tanks that nasty roaches got into...at least not to the extent that I would feel they frogs would thrive in (i.e. not simply pothos and sphagnum). I didn't have the time to search every tank for froglets that needed pulling...didn't have time to pull eggs, care for tads, etc. etc. you get my point. Thankfully, I was not the person that just bought all they could because you could "make more money"...I only bought what I loved, which made it all the more difficult to part with a large majority of my collection. 

At any rate, I think it is important here for everyone not in this situation to remember that there could come a time where you would have to make the same decision, and you probably would not want others making assumptions about your ethics, morals, decisions, integrity, responsibility, etc. Rememer, it takes a bigger person to make the decision based on what they SHOULD do as opposed to what they WANT to do. 

Take care,

Kristen


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

bbrock said:


> Where are the 17,341 pumilio (mostly blue jeans) that were imported to the US from 1987-2005? Or the 3,548 D. histrionicus imported over the same period? How about the 22,259 tinctorius or the 34,732 auratus that have come in? Over this period, 89,497 dendrobatids have been imported to the US alone. How many of those do you suppose are still alive? If we were supporting the hobby with 100% captive bred animals, I wouldn't be so cranky. But we're not.


I couldn't believe it when I read this! Makes me not want to buy any imports at all (except maybe those bred for conservation, the Peru frogs). I think bbrocks latest post best sums up what I worry about, people maybe not planning ahead. I see people on here that you can tell are kids (I am all of 24), but they have this intense desire to be a Kyle, or Shawn, or whoever it is. That is not a bad thing per-se, but they do not see the big picture, that those guys have spent years and thousand of dollars and hours on their collection. I also did not know the average PDF keeper only lasts 2-3 years. I will say that as a whole the board does a good job of providing practical long term advise if people heed it, so I hope that continues.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Mywebbedtoes said:


> bbrock said:
> 
> 
> > Where are the 17,341 pumilio (mostly blue jeans) that were imported to the US from 1987-2005? Or the 3,548 D. histrionicus imported over the same period? How about the 22,259 tinctorius or the 34,732 auratus that have come in? Over this period, 89,497 dendrobatids have been imported to the US alone. How many of those do you suppose are still alive? If we were supporting the hobby with 100% captive bred animals, I wouldn't be so cranky. But we're not.
> ...


And I do want to stress that I don't want to suggest that "kids" should not get into dart frogs. Quite the contrary. And I also want to restate that there should be no guilt in selling/trading off a collection due to changing conditions in life. Most times, that is the most responsible thing to do under the situation. One of the things we are trying to promote in ASN is a support network whereby people going through temporary life crisis may be able to put animals out on loan to other stewards but not have to give them up entirely. 

But I do think there is a lot to be said for someone specializing and getting really, really, good at keeping one or two species rather than being pretty good at keeping a lot of species. I do think that one of the reasons (perhaps the main reason) that we've had a general failure in building sustainable cb populations of egg feeders is that the people in the best positions to procure these animals typically have a lot of experience and somewhat sizeable collections. While the experience is good, space in these people's frog rooms is often at a premium which makes it impractical for them to set animals up in spacious enclosures with carefully tailored environments. And the time demands of maintaining a sizeable collection may make it difficult to provide the concentrated attention needed to work out new husbandry methods for a species that doesn't quite fit the general mold of dart frog requirements. Whereas someone with a small collection who has put in enough time in the hobby to know it is the hobby for them, may be able to put their whole heart and soul into figuring out the species' needs. Like many things, it would probably be good for the hobby to diversify in its approach. We do need those large and diverse collections, but at the same time, I think we need to be a bit more critical at evaluating how we judge "success" with a species. I think there have been few true examples of success with egg feeders, for example, despite the fact that a number of people have produced them in captivity - at least compared with the high reproductive rates of these species in the wild. And the same can be said for some of the montane species of Epipidobates too.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

I should say that I do not think young people shuldn't get into PDFs either, it can actually be a good thing for them.

Brent - So would you be more in favor of say a breeder who was an expert with Tinctorius and didnt keep much else, or a breeder who mostly worked with Pumilio? I could see that lending to better results in the long run and in terms of better understanding a particular group of frogs. Isn't that more of the case in the fish trade, where people tend to work with a species or two, or not really?


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Mywebbedtoes said:


> I should say that I do not think young people shuldn't get into PDFs either, it can actually be a good thing for them.
> 
> Brent - So would you be more in favor of say a breeder who was an expert with Tinctorius and didnt keep much else, or a breeder who mostly worked with Pumilio? I could see that lending to better results in the long run and in terms of better understanding a particular group of frogs. Isn't that more of the case in the fish trade, where people tend to work with a species or two, or not really?


I don't think my opinion is particulary important and there are too many variables to say that this is better than that. Mostly, I just like to see people progress incrementally according to what is realistic for them. At least in the early stages, take a breather between each acquisition to give yourself time to evaluate your time committment. Having extra time for frogs on our hands is a great catalyst for focusing on fine details of a frog's world and scheming on new ideas to improve what we do. They may just find there are plenty of satisfying ways to fill their time with the frogs they already have. But I do think that before people jump into less successful species, that they have an honest talk with themselves to make sure they are prepared to make any necessary sacrifices. Large vivs and focused efforts may require reducing the total number of species and frogs one keeps. But it won't necessarily reduce the enjoyment of, or contribution to, the hobby. Let's face it, some people have a real knack for efficiently building and caring for large collections. And some have a knack for obsessing over, and unravelling the mysteries of just a few animals. We need both types and nobody should feel like "success" in the hobby is measured only by the total number of frogs kept or produced.


----------



## Jeff R (Jul 1, 2005)

My chime in...
I stalk the board (and frognet) most of the time and there are a few people I am always on the look out for (not to say I'm not appreciative of every ones input). I just wanted to say how much I respect Brent's thoughtful and level headed views and experiences.
Thank you Brent. 
Jeff


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

bbrock said:


> Mostly, I just like to see people progress incrementally according to what is realistic for them. At least in the early stages, take a breather between each acquisition to give yourself time to evaluate your time committment.
> ...and nobody should feel like "success" in the hobby is measured only by the total number of frogs kept or produced.


I think if we could take one thing from this thread it would be this point. Patience and reasonableness. And I do agree that we should not judge others sell-offs as we may be in the same situation one day and do not know their circumstances. They very well could be sacraficing a great deal for the sake of reasonableness, and that is commendable.


----------



## Arklier (Mar 1, 2004)

bbrock said:


> Where are the 17,341 pumilio (mostly blue jeans) that were imported to the US from 1987-2005? Or the 3,548 D. histrionicus imported over the same period? How about the 22,259 tinctorius or the 34,732 auratus that have come in? Over this period, 89,497 dendrobatids have been imported to the US alone. How many of those do you suppose are still alive?


Personally, I think that this is a bit misleading, at least the way it was stated. It's true that probably very few of these frogs are still living, but how much information was generally available when most of these now rare frogs were being imported? Not a lot. There were only a few general books on frogs available (none at all specifically on darts), and while the internet did exist, it wasn't exactly the expansive reservoir of information that it is now and not many people had access to it at all before around 10 years ago. 

Not only that, we're talking about wild caught frogs probably not kept under the best of conditions while being shipped and sold. Plus pumilio and histrionicus (especially) are known for being touchy even now that information is generally available and their needs are better understood.

Having been in the hobby since around 2002, I can tell you there weren't vast numbers of pumilio and histrionicus coming in when I started. In fact, these frogs supposedly stopped being imported in any numbers in the early to mid 90s, at least according to the talk Patrick Nabors did on the history of the hobby at NWFF a few years ago.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Arklier said:


> bbrock said:
> 
> 
> > Where are the 17,341 pumilio (mostly blue jeans) that were imported to the US from 1987-2005? Or the 3,548 D. histrionicus imported over the same period? How about the 22,259 tinctorius or the 34,732 auratus that have come in? Over this period, 89,497 dendrobatids have been imported to the US alone. How many of those do you suppose are still alive?
> ...


Okay, how about this then? From 2002-2005, there have been 3,606 pumilio, 17,165 auratus, and 22,978 total dendrobatids imported to the US. Where are those frogs now? And this doesn't count 2006-2007 imports which no doubt would contribute another couple thousand pumilio to the numbers.



> Not only that, we're talking about wild caught frogs probably not kept under the best of conditions while being shipped and sold. Plus pumilio and histrionicus (especially) are known for being touchy even now that information is generally available and their needs are better understood.


This is exactly my point. While we've established quasi-stable captive populations of many species, we've had very little progress on egg feeders and many other "difficult" species. I can tell you that as early as 2000, NAIB was already realizing that pumilio bred better in taller and larger vivaria. In general, I've seen very little progress made regarding the husbandry of difficult species over the last 10 years and yet we are in the midst of a new wave of mass importations. This strongly suggests to me that anything we can do to discourage spurious purchasing of new imports by people not likely to stay in the hobby or provide the level of care needed to sustainably propagate them would be a good thing.



> Having been in the hobby since around 2002, I can tell you there weren't vast numbers of pumilio and histrionicus coming in when I started. In fact, these frogs supposedly stopped being imported in any numbers in the early to mid 90s, at least according to the talk Patrick Nabors did on the history of the hobby at NWFF a few years ago.


That is not correct. From 1996 - 2001, the US imported 9,304 pumilio. In none of those years were less then 500 pumilio imported. More than half (4,603) were imported over a 3 year period from 1999-2001. In 2002-2003, the numbers dropped dramatically to 10 and 8 animals respectively, and then the jumped back up to 1,196 in 2004 and 2,392 in 2005. As I said, I have no data beyond 2005.

What is particularly disturbing to me are the similarities with the last large wave of pumilio imports. Following the imports a decent number of people were having success producing offspring. But the success was false because the numbers were not enough to offset mortality rates so the captive population declined. Now there are only a handful of reproducing blue jeans pairs in the country. The first real success in this country I'm aware of was when Patrick set up a series of large enclosures to breed bri bri pumilio and started producing them in decent quantities to supply the hobby (btw, where are those bri bri now? They use to be all over the place). This success was soon replicated with bastimentos which seem fairly solid in captivity now. But it really remains to be seen whether many of these other new morphs will be able to hold on. So far it looks like the blue jeans fiasco all over again to me.

The bottom line is that it will be nearly impossible to convince me that fresh imports going into the hands of people without the skills or resources to successfully propagate, and who are not likely to even stay n the hobby for long, is not a problem. If we really want to be sure we have escudos in the hobby 20 years from now, we might want to think about how, as a hobby, we can work together to make that succeed.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

My knowledge is a lot more narrow than Brents, a lot, but I take a few things from his above post. I think maybe we need to change some of our husbandry practices. As has been stated in this thread more than one, some people prefer a small collection that gives each group of frogs a little more room. Could it be that racks of 10 gallon verts are not the best way to produce good results for some of these frogs, like Pumilio? Personally I would like to see imports mostly stop, aside from farm raised. I don't know if that is possible. I don't know, I was going to write more, but I don't know what the solution is. We can't harvest from the wild forever. This thread is off-topic, but I like the conversation, and I started the thread so who cares, ha. 
So is that part of it? Do we need to look at better husbandry? Quality over quantity? Would two larger Pumilio tanks be better than 5 small ones? Maybe this would greatly help people maintain in the hobby longer too, if they maintained less. If every frogger wants a large collection, that is just going to increase the pressure for new imports, is it not?


----------



## Arklier (Mar 1, 2004)

bbrock said:


> Okay, how about this then? From 2002-2005, there have been 3,606 pumilio, 17,165 auratus, and 22,978 total dendrobatids imported to the US. Where are those frogs now? And this doesn't count 2006-2007 imports which no doubt would contribute another couple thousand pumilio to the numbers.


It's probably easier to look at the pumilio because the auratus could be anywhere, really. It's not like there's not a relatively huge number of auratus already in the hobby, and they just mix into the already captive bred population. Since pumilio are rarer in the hobby, they're easier to notice. 



bbrock said:


> This is exactly my point. While we've established quasi-stable captive populations of many species, we've had very little progress on egg feeders and many other "difficult" species. I can tell you that as early as 2000, NAIB was already realizing that pumilio bred better in taller and larger vivaria. In general, I've seen very little progress made regarding the husbandry of difficult species over the last 10 years and yet we are in the midst of a new wave of mass importations. This strongly suggests to me that anything we can do to discourage spurious purchasing of new imports by people not likely to stay in the hobby or provide the level of care needed to sustainably propagate them would be a good thing.


Again, how available was this information? Before this board was created, you know what the resources were for the average keeper? A few books like Jewels of the Rainforest, some personal web pages, Frognet, and the dart forum on Kingsnake. Need I mention that a lot of the information (on breeding especially) was conflicting? I absolutely agree about the larger tanks, though. 



bbrock said:


> That is not correct. From 1996 - 2001, the US imported 9,304 pumilio. In none of those years were less then 500 pumilio imported. More than half (4,603) were imported over a 3 year period from 1999-2001. In 2002-2003, the numbers dropped dramatically to 10 and 8 animals respectively, and then the jumped back up to 1,196 in 2004 and 2,392 in 2005. As I said, I have no data beyond 2005.


My question is, if there was all this importation going on, then where were these frogs being sold? Because before the farm raised pumilio started coming in around last year, we weren't exactly seeing ads everywhere. It's not like you could just pop over to your local pet store or onto Kingsnake and buy a bunch. While I've never been to Frog Day or IAD, I don't remember seeing any pumilio at NWFF during the first two or three years. 



bbrock said:


> What is particularly disturbing to me are the similarities with the last large wave of pumilio imports. Following the imports a decent number of people were having success producing offspring. But the success was false because the numbers were not enough to offset mortality rates so the captive population declined. Now there are only a handful of reproducing blue jeans pairs in the country. The first real success in this country I'm aware of was when Patrick set up a series of large enclosures to breed bri bri pumilio and started producing them in decent quantities to supply the hobby (btw, where are those bri bri now? They use to be all over the place). This success was soon replicated with bastimentos which seem fairly solid in captivity now. But it really remains to be seen whether many of these other new morphs will be able to hold on. So far it looks like the blue jeans fiasco all over again to me.


While I don't keep any pumilio, I personally don't like the 'get as many of X species/morph/whatever as possible and keep them in 10 gallons' mentality. It's the same kind of thinking that leads people to keep 100 snakes in 12 quart Rubbermaids in a closet all their lives. As for what happened to the Bri Bri from Patrick, you tell me. I'm not psychic.



bbrock said:


> The bottom line is that it will be nearly impossible to convince me that fresh imports going into the hands of people without the skills or resources to successfully propagate, and who are not likely to even stay n the hobby for long, is not a problem. If we really want to be sure we have escudos in the hobby 20 years from now, we might want to think about how, as a hobby, we can work together to make that succeed.


Do some of them go to people unable, unwilling, or unqualified to care for them? Yes. Do some of them die? Again, yes. I agree that it is a problem, but I disagree that that's where all of these fresh imports are going. Not everyone comes to this board, and many of the more experienced froggers I know of who have been in the hobby longer than I have don't post here except to sell frogs that they don't already have waiting lists for. The reasons I've heard are many, and until recently I wasn't posting here much anymore myself. The main one is that they either don't have time or are tired of people who keep frogs for six months and want to tell them they're doing it wrong.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Arklier said:


> bbrock said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, how about this then? From 2002-2005, there have been 3,606 pumilio, 17,165 auratus, and 22,978 total dendrobatids imported to the US. Where are those frogs now? And this doesn't count 2006-2007 imports which no doubt would contribute another couple thousand pumilio to the numbers.
> ...


There is no way that 17,000 auratus are coming into the dedicated hobby and blending into existing collections. Nor are 3,000 pumilio doing this. A huge number are going to pet stores and being sold to people ill-prepared to care for them. I have no way to know, but would guess that most of those 17,000 auratus are dead. And this is a species we really have no reason to be importing from the wild other than an exporter mandated that if you want their pumilio, you have to take their auratus also. 

Let's just guess that DB represents 20% of the US hobby. There are 3139 registered DB users and let's assume they are all in the US, which they are not, and nobody has more than one account on DB, and all users are actual hobbyists and not just vicariously enjoying frogs. So that would mean somewhere around 15,000 actual PDF hobbyists in the US as a very liberal estimate. Every hobbyist would have to purchase, on average, more than one of these imported auratus to account for all of them.



> Again, how available was this information? Before this board was created, you know what the resources were for the average keeper? A few books like Jewels of the Rainforest, some personal web pages, Frognet, and the dart forum on Kingsnake. Need I mention that a lot of the information (on breeding especially) was conflicting? I absolutely agree about the larger tanks, though.


Frognet has been around since 1996 and DB was actually an offshoot of frognet. I would say that a good 90% of the husbandry info found on DB was published on frognet many years ago. The first 5 years of frognet were extremely productive which established good husbandry methods for perhaps 75% or more of the pdf kept. But if you look back through the archives, the species that were difficult to keep and breed back then are still considered difficult to keep and breed today. I actually can't think of a single species that was considered difficult prior to 2000 that is now considered easy. I'm sure there must be some, but I just can't think of them. Egg feeders are still hard. E. silverstonii are still hard, P. terribilis are still hard. Oh wait, galactanotus. The first shipment of those was a disaster but that was more of an importation problem than a husbandry issue. Now there are a lot of species that were really rare back then that are fairly common now, but that is because the husbandry was worked out many years ago and the captive populations grew. The point being that good husbandry information was just as readily available back then as it is now. And although a lot of great knowledge has been gained over the years, I don't see that this knowledge has translated into working out the husbandry needs of most "difficult" species. Progress has been made for sure, but relatively slow progress from my point of view. And to be perfectly honest with you, I've always found the forum format much more difficult to extract information from than a mailing list. So for old farts like me, the argument could be made that information was more readily accessible then compared with now.



> My question is, if there was all this importation going on, then where were these frogs being sold? Because before the farm raised pumilio started coming in around last year, we weren't exactly seeing ads everywhere. It's not like you could just pop over to your local pet store or onto Kingsnake and buy a bunch. While I've never been to Frog Day or IAD, I don't remember seeing any pumilio at NWFF during the first two or three years.


That's my question too, where are they going? Certainly the majority are not going into the hands of people likely to contribute to building a sustainable captive population. Remember though, that you said you started in 2002, and 2002 and 2003 were two years of almost no pumilio imports. So your perception is correct that you didn't see ads everywhere for them. But had you started one year earlier, you would have. But what I'm saying is that the pumilio situation now does not seem too much different than it was in 1998-2001 and very, very, few of those old pumilio are still around.



> While I don't keep any pumilio, I personally don't like the 'get as many of X species/morph/whatever as possible and keep them in 10 gallons' mentality. It's the same kind of thinking that leads people to keep 100 snakes in 12 quart Rubbermaids in a closet all their lives. As for what happened to the Bri Bri from Patrick, you tell me. I'm not psychic.


This is one place the hobby should be commended though I think. It seems to me that the 10 gal. setup has actually become somewhat rare. And it isn't that the 10 gal. tanks are necessarily bad, it's just that they didn't fit the requirements of some species but we've spent way too much time try to force these "difficult" species to be successful in 10 gal tanks because of a mentality that says because a system works will for "some" pdf, it must work well for "all" pdf. 

But this really drifts from my original point which was that in many cases, a large collection limits the time, money, and space a person has available to experiment and expand out knowledge of husbandry needs. And that type of experimentation is needed to master some of these species that don't fit our standard mold. Hence, a smaller collection could free some people to do more innovation and find enjoyment in the hobby in diverse ways.

As for the Bri Bri, it was an honest question. I suspect they just became too "common" as people gravitated to the new imports. Victims of "flavor of the month" syndrome I suppose.



> Do some of them go to people unable, unwilling, or unqualified to care for them? Yes. Do some of them die? Again, yes. I agree that it is a problem, but I disagree that that's where all of these fresh imports are going. Not everyone comes to this board, and many of the more experienced froggers I know of who have been in the hobby longer than I have don't post here except to sell frogs that they don't already have waiting lists for. The reasons I've heard are many, and until recently I wasn't posting here much anymore myself. The main one is that they either don't have time or are tired of people who keep frogs for six months and want to tell them they're doing it wrong.


Sure, frognet and DB are just a part of the US hobby. But even considering that, it is hard to believe that "the hobby", has absorbed 23,000 pdf in the last few years and these animals are still alive. And don't get me wrong, I'm not against imports. I actually think imports can be a net gain for conservation of wild frogs if smartly done. And the numbers I've posted may even be sustainable for wild populations. But sustainable does not mean responsible or ethical (and there are plenty of people who want to stop the pet trade who are quick to point out the ethical issues). I just think we need to think hard about what is happening. First, what is the total mortality rate of these animals coming in? I doubt more than a 2-3 thousand of those auratus have survived, which is appalling. Second, do we even have enough serious hobbyists to sustain captive populations of the frogs already in the hobby? If not, why are we importing more by the truckload? If there are enough hobbyists to sustain what is here (which there are not - the evidence on that seems clear), are there enough to absorb the new species and morphs and also sustain them? And finally, how do we define "sustainable"? Is it just a matter of numbers of animals, or do we want to maintain the wild genetics of these captives so 30 years from now our frogs still look and act like their wild ancestors. If we want to maintain wild genetics, then hobbyists must coordinate to manage genetics. Otherwise they will quickly diverge into domesticated shadows of wild frogs. Right now the only program I know that is dedicated to doing this is the Amphibian Steward Network. Of the 3,139 registered users on DB, exactly nine of them are registered in the ASN. We can do better.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

bbrock said:


> This is one place the hobby should be commended though I think. It seems to me that the 10 gal. setup has actually become somewhat rare. And it isn't that the 10 gal. tanks are necessarily bad, it's just that they didn't fit the requirements of some species but we've spent way too much time try to force these "difficult" species to be successful in 10 gal tanks because of a mentality that says because a system works will for "some" pdf, it must work well for "all" pdf.


I don't know if I agrere with this. While these small enclousres may have greatly decressed with the more serious or even professional keepers, I don't know they have with new comers. How many times do you see "My first vivarium", and it is a 10 gallon vert with a waterfall and pond with some auratus or whatever. I think it is new comers to be concerned most about. This is where the board is good and bad. A brand new keeper can come on here, read some threads for a few weeks, see a bunch of others with these small verts, and then think that is the prefered way to keep these animals. Little do they know that they are reading the opinions of other new comers. If some one builds a collection of 5 - 10 tanks in a year or two, keeps a few kinds of pumilio, and they all die, do you think they readily post that information? Probably not. So those frogs die and are repurchased and it could start all over. 



> But this really drifts from my original point which was that in many cases, a large collection limits the time, money, and space a person has available to experiment and expand out knowledge of husbandry needs. And that type of experimentation is needed to master some of these species that don't fit our standard mold. Hence, a smaller collection could free some people to do more innovation and find enjoyment in the hobby in diverse ways.


Agreed. This gives people a chance to really know how much of a load they can handle.



> Second, do we even have enough serious hobbyists to sustain captive populations of the frogs already in the hobby? If not, why are we importing more by the truckload? If there are enough hobbyists to sustain what is here (which there are not - the evidence on that seems clear), are there enough to absorb the new species and morphs and also sustain them?


Exactly the point. With large numbers coming in, with the fact that the hobby is growing, with the fact that most of us can breed something if we so choose, will the hobby be able to support more and more mass sell-offs? The market will increasingly be flooded with frogs, they will get cheaper, they will become more disposable (to some people). Do we think they will not show up at Petco one day? And this says nothing for the increased difficulty of maintain pure blood lines. While I think everyone agrees there are times when one must part with a collection (and we should not judge them), I think Ed spoke well when he said it wasn't really ever a good thing.


----------



## chuckpowell (May 12, 2004)

This isn't something new. Its been going on for over 20 years, although I have to admit its easier now with the glut of frogs in the hobby. It really doesn't have to do with frog, or any animal group for that matter. It come from the person who want to collect. We (Americans) tend to want at least one of everything. The more variety the better. I'm not sure where this 'obsession' comes from but it seems to be particular to Americans. 

Best,

Chuck


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Mywebbedtoes said:


> I don't know if I agrere with this. While these small enclousres may have greatly decressed with the more serious or even professional keepers, I don't know they have with new comers. How many times do you see "My first vivarium", and it is a 10 gallon vert with a waterfall and pond with some auratus or whatever. I think it is new comers to be concerned most about. This is where the board is good and bad. A brand new keeper can come on here, read some threads for a few weeks, see a bunch of others with these small verts, and then think that is the prefered way to keep these animals. Little do they know that they are reading the opinions of other new comers. If some one builds a collection of 5 - 10 tanks in a year or two, keeps a few kinds of pumilio, and they all die, do you think they readily post that information? Probably not. So those frogs die and are repurchased and it could start all over.


I guess I don't see much harm in having a 10 gal. as your first viv so long as you don't stock it with species that won't do well in that size viv, or that the hobby needs more cb animals from and they would reproduce better in a larger viv. But many species are fine in a 10 gal. tank, including auratus. It isn't my idea of a great choice because I think you get much more natural behavior, and more personally enjoyment, by putting fewer frogs in larger tanks. But a 10 gal. doesn't seem like a bad way for someone to get a start in the hobby for a reasonable cost. Interestingly though, I tend to see more 10 gal. tanks in serious collections where space becomes a limited. The first time I visited the Jewel Room at NAIB, there were racks of 10 gal. tanks housing the bulk of the collection. The last time I visited, there was more of a mix of sizes but still a lot of 10's, which seemed to suit their purposes. Again, it's not my thing but I don't get worked up over it within reason.



> Exactly the point. With large numbers coming in, with the fact that the hobby is growing, with the fact that most of us can breed something if we so choose, will the hobby be able to support more and more mass sell-offs? The market will increasingly be flooded with frogs, they will get cheaper, they will become more disposable (to some people). Do we think they will not show up at Petco one day? And this says nothing for the increased difficulty of maintain pure blood lines. While I think everyone agrees there are times when one must part with a collection (and we should not judge them), I think Ed spoke well when he said it wasn't really ever a good thing.


Obviously with a growing hobby, it does mean our capacity to handle more species should also be growing. But I don't think the hobby was sustainably keeping all the species and populations in the hobby before the new spate of imports arrived. So the hobby needed to grow just to keep up with what we already had. But I doubt it has grown enough to handle all of the new stuff. My guess is that some old populations are being left out of collections to make room for new stuff. It gets complicated though because some of these new imports are geared to establish captive populations to remove incentives for smuggling. And that is a good thing too. I just think having a large percentage of private collections in a central database would help us be much more efficient by recognizing populations that are under represented in collections so the word can go out before they become rare and there are populations bottlenecks. Let's face it, too many captive populations depend on the continued stewardship of only one or two hobbyists to keep them around.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

bbrock said:


> I guess I don't see much harm in having a 10 gal. as your first viv so long as you don't stock it with species that won't do well in that size viv, or that the hobby needs more cb animals from and they would reproduce better in a larger viv. But many species are fine in a 10 gal. tank, including auratus. It isn't my idea of a great choice because I think you get much more natural behavior, and more personally enjoyment, by putting fewer frogs in larger tanks.
> 
> Again, it's not my thing but I don't get worked up over it within reason.


True, and I dont view 10 as off limits, they have their place. However, I think the benefits of larger tanks should continue to be emphasized. My concern is that emphasis on small tanks lend to the mass collection mentality, and possibly over collection. I have all larger dendros at this time, and because I am keeping a little larger tanks, I will be forced to keep a smaller collection. If I ever do have to "get out" of the hobby, I will have 6 - 10 frogs to sell or donate. 

There was some interesting thoughts in the very first post of this thread as it relates to tank size. http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=24280 (Husbandry Improvements - Tank Size & layout).
I think in some ways, when we see a tank that is ten gallons vertical, with half the floor space being a water feature, we may not be promoting the best husbandry if we do not chime in. I try to suggest other possibilities to people when I see that, maybe removing the water feature, or changing the frogs the plan to keep. I think many on the board are good about that which is great.



> Let's face it, too many captive populations depend on the continued stewardship of only one or two hobbyists to keep them around.


I like that you use the word steward, it has a very nice connotation. I agree, I wish we had a few more full time breeders in the hobby, some that would focus on the hard to sustain. Brent, I appreciate your insight on the board very much. There are maybe 10-15 people on here I pay special attention to, and you are one of them. Threads like this teach me a lot and have greatly improved my thoughts and approach to frogging.


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

Recently I have been trying to keep multiple tanks of some of the species I keep in hopes to not let them become at risk within the hobby. It has been tough with my free time lately but I hope to get back to building more tanks to do just this.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

kyle1745 said:


> Recently I have been trying to keep multiple tanks of some of the species I keep in hopes to not let them become at risk within the hobby. It has been tough with my free time lately but I hope to get back to building more tanks to do just this.


Yep, one of the more established froggers has been drilling me for years of the need to keep multiple tanks and hold backs. I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that it's the best way to build assurance. It goes against my training as a conservation ecologist though because the rule is that you never manage an entire species at just one location. But the reality I've learned is that it is much harder to establish successful groups in someone else's collection than it is in your own.


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

What is interesting as well is how one person can keep them and have great success and someone else can keep them the exact same way and lose them. With that said I wonder if the "keep what you like" statement should be amended to "keep what you like and have success with".


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

kyle1745 said:


> What is interesting as well is how one person can keep them and have great success and someone else can keep them the exact same way and lose them. With that said I wonder if the "keep what you like" statement should be amended to "keep what you like and have success with".


That's exactly right. Some of the animals I've unsuccessfully sent out have gone to people who are a heckuva lot better froggers than I am. WAY more experience and just plain better at it than me. But for one reason or another, it just didn't work.


----------

