# P. Terribilis banned in BC



## Shade71 (May 27, 2008)

Hi.
So our provincial government in British Columbia Canada just yesterday banned Phyllobates terribilis, bicolour and aurotaenia.

site here... Fish and Wildlife - Environment - Province of British Columbia

Any advice on fighting this?
Any useful statistics or studies that can be pointed to?


----------



## Fishman (Jan 16, 2007)

Wow what a bummer for you. While I have no advise from past exsperience fighting this kind of battle, it looks like from the list that they were banning poisonus and large animals. I would try the angle that captive bred terribs are not in the least bit dangerous.

Good Luck


----------



## melas (Oct 24, 2007)

Wow! That really blows! It's typically MUCH easier to overturn PENDING legislation. Once it's on the books it's certainly much more difficult to overturn. Do you know if Canada has any kind of Pet Industry Lobbyists etc? Here are some US organization you might contact for help. I'm not sure that they'll lend you their lawyers but they might be able to give you some info to help! Good luck!

United States Association of Reptile Keepers - USARK

Reptile/Amphibian Committee - Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council

maybe try these folks as well . . . 
Links - World Wide Pet Industry Association


----------



## Enlightened Rogue (Mar 21, 2006)

Welcome to my world!
Here in Connecticut ALL dart frog`s are banned, if that`s not enough, they are shooting for certain kinds of python`s and boa`s also.

JOHN


----------



## hexentanz (Sep 18, 2008)

"The ban was imposed through a regulation under the Wildlife Act.

It prohibits persons from possessing such animals unless they were in B.C. prior to Monday, March 16.

Persons who had such animals before Monday may be allowed to keep them until they die, provided they meet the ministry’s requirements and restrictions on possession, and receive a permit.

They must apply for a permit between Nov. 1 this year and March 31, 2010. All breeding of such animals will be prohibited as of April 1, 2010, unless the owners are accredited zoos, research or educational institutions."

They are always thinking of doing this here with Teribilis and the like, but never do so because people come together to fight it.

If you can get your local zoo's to help fight the issue with you and prove that these animals are not a threat and do so in a calm rational manner only then will courts listen.


----------



## ggazonas (May 11, 2008)

Enlightened Rogue said:


> Welcome to my world!
> Here in Connecticut ALL dart frog`s are banned, if that`s not enough, they are shooting for certain kinds of python`s and boa`s also.
> 
> JOHN


I was thinking of moving to conn. until I found that out.


Anyways what happenes if you already own a species of animal before they bann them?


----------



## Ziggi (Jan 23, 2009)

With issues like this though, who's gonna come knocking on your door checking if you have P.Terribilis or not? Even if you have a pair breeding and keeping them for your own who's gonna know? Or who's gonna know if you aquired them before or after the date noticed....I think it's that kind of thing that wouldn't stop me from owning them if I wanted them.


----------



## frogfreak (Mar 4, 2009)

Hi

Why were they banned???????

Glenn & Laura


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

> they were banning * poisonous* and large animals.


The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.


----------



## pl259 (Feb 27, 2006)

frogfreak said:


> Hi
> 
> Why were they banned???????
> 
> Glenn & Laura


Because I couple ignorant lawmakers watched an Animal Planet special, did a little googling, and don't know the difference between WC and CB tropical frogs, with respect to toxins.


----------



## frogfreak (Mar 4, 2009)

Hi

That figures!
If thats the case why stop at just 3 species. Why not ban all PDF's. Wait I know. They weren't on TV that night!

Glenn & Laura


----------



## Shade71 (May 27, 2008)

Thanks for all the replies, that's great!

I'm trying to get more details from local government rep. 
The website is sorely lacking.

Simple questions like... 

"How can you tell if I had my animal before March 16, when you don't even ask me to get a permit and declare it Nov 01?"

Is it just going to be my word against theirs?
Seems weird.


----------



## Enlightened Rogue (Mar 21, 2006)

ggazonas said:


> I was thinking of moving to conn. until I found that out.
> 
> 
> Anyways what happenes if you already own a species of animal before they bann them?


What they don`t know won`t hurt them.

John


----------



## sNApple (Mar 19, 2007)

Ziggi said:


> With issues like this though, who's gonna come knocking on your door checking if you have P.Terribilis or not? Even if you have a pair breeding and keeping them for your own who's gonna know? Or who's gonna know if you aquired them before or after the date noticed....I think it's that kind of thing that wouldn't stop me from owning them if I wanted them.


people make posts, and post pictures online... 

it wouldn't be too hard to track people down from ip addresses...


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

sNApple said:


> people make posts, and post pictures online...
> 
> it wouldn't be too hard to track people down from ip addresses...


Do you really think ANY Law enforcement or regulatory agency would ever have the manpower to attempt that?

Heck no...never

BUT

When your neighbor's house has a gas leak or fire and they have to come into your basement to check for gas or fire damage ect ect and see a veritable "grow room" of crazy hippy suspicious froggies....and they then call numerous other agencies ect

well...you can see where this can potentially go....


----------



## JoshK (Jan 5, 2009)

Philsuma said:


> Do you really think ANY Law enforcement or regulatory agency would ever have the manpower to attempt that?
> 
> Heck no...never
> 
> ...


I don't want to argue but they tracked down the little kids and tried to ruin their lives for downloading music. . . .


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

joshieluv said:


> I don't want to argue but they tracked down the little kids and tried to ruin their lives for downloading music. . . .


HUGE difference......big record contract $$$ was at stake with powerful record moguls and rich attorneys.

For lowly frogs....there's no money backing up that prosecution at all....no money translates into no real enforcement effort....


----------



## JoshK (Jan 5, 2009)

Good point!


----------



## basshummper (Jan 13, 2008)

good thing no ones getting high off of licking phyllobates or else the DEA would be busting down our "grow rooms"


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Bakers wire racks with lots of tanks filled with plants and flourescent lighting looks a lot like a dopers grow operation....


Hey...look on the bright side....we don't usually get confused with METH labs...


----------



## JoshK (Jan 5, 2009)

Thats funny because my neighbors had said they saw super bright lighting coming from the windows and asked if I was "growing plants". I explained my hobby in the readers digest version, and I think they would rather me grow pot. I try to never refer to them as "poison dart frogs". I prefer to call them "dart frogs". I believe calling them "poison dart frogs" give a lot of people the wrong idea, maybe thats why they are being banned.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Here's the verbaige to use, and I got this from my friend at TSA.....

*Harmless*

*Tropical *

*Frogs*


Sweet eh?

No mention of the word "poison or dart".......beautiful


----------



## CHuempfner (Apr 27, 2008)

I agree with this.. I have noticed it makes a huge difference on how you tell uneducated people about this hobby. It can make a world of difference! I call them "Colorful frogs from the rainforests"

It can go from them reacting like this:  to this 





Philsuma said:


> Here's the verbaige to use, and I got this from my friend at TSA.....
> 
> *Harmless*
> 
> ...


----------



## porkchop (Aug 29, 2005)

I know the USDA watches insect forums on the lookout for illegal bugs being sold/offered, due to agricultural issues.
I cant imagine if they banned phyllo's here, i would be devastated.
Wow... im blown away by the reality of that, totally sucks the hiarchy is so ill informed that this would happen.
maybe 10,000 signatures from the states here would help in your fight.
If we can help in some way, post here and see what we can do.
keep us updated on progress or not.
Sorry to hear it.
Just move to WA. here, they're still legal !


----------



## Omead (Mar 21, 2009)

That's just nuts.. After reading this I realized I never checked to see if they were legal in Tennessee, I'm sure its ok but I should look into it anyways. Most people do look at me like I'm crazy when I say I have PDFs but there have been a few that were just amazed at the exotic creature and ask me all about them like they want to get some of their own until they find out how expensive the hobby is.


----------



## Shade71 (May 27, 2008)

Ok, so I found out the provincial governments position is that terribilis is... "the only species of poison dart frogs known to retain their toxicity for extended periods in captivity".

So basically they're worried about wild-caught.
Has anybody ever seen wild-caught terribilis offered for sale?
The IUCN website indicates Colombia banned their export back in the 1980's.


----------



## sports_doc (Nov 15, 2004)

No I have never seen a WC terribilis offered for sale.

A couple years ago Mark Moffett, PhD [google him] licked my male terribilis on national late night TV [Conan OBrien Show]. No ill effects, sadly 

S


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

Colombia has had imports closed for quite a long time. There's been talk that they may reopen imports in the future, but as far as I know, that's speculation.

I would justify owning them by saying that if you had original wild-caughts, they would be well over a decade or two old (which is unlikely to get to that age, 25 or so), and will have lost toxicity over that time. But since it's unlikely that they are wild caughts, they are several generations away from the wild caughts, and didn't even start with being toxic.

I would also include scientific literature that show diet-based toxicity. You might try getting amphibian organizations help with it (Amphibian Ark, TWI, AZA, etc).


----------



## RecycledAgain (Oct 26, 2008)

Why just those 3 Amphibians? 

_Order Primate – [such as monkeys, gorillas and chimpanzees] except humans _

I find the idea of having to add the Human disclaimer so funny,,, and so sad at the same time...

Dan


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

RecycledAgain said:


> Why just those 3 Amphibians?


Those are the three species of dendrobatids considered deadly to humans.


----------



## SLEDDER23 (Mar 17, 2005)

Humans are more deadly to Humans, can we just ban them? I tried to start a petition, but got funny looks.

Sorry to hear about that nonsense, seriously. I heard on NPR on the way home tonight a story about Florida potentially trying to criminalize some reptiles due to invasive species. In that case, it's again a few idiots ruining it for all of us.

With the sad state of the environment, our hobby may be some day the Noah's ark of amphibians, so that is another thing that is sad about this. I wonder what they are really afraid of? It would be nice to have a 5 minute conversation with the bonehead who came up with your bill. I'm guessing he/she knows jack ^%$# about frogs.

I'm with others, keep what you want. I would guess there is over a pound of weed in homes w/i a square mile of yours and my house, and as long as they keep it on the down low, who's to know/care. Good luck.


----------



## Brock (Jun 29, 2007)

This is the reply I got for my inquiry...And for the record, our provincial club was not included in any of the decision making processes. We had no say, and it was a complete 'blind sweep', a lot of people will be losing tens of thousands of dollars they invested into breeding certain morphs of boas and pythons. It originally started out as a ban on herps that can invade British Columbia, such as red ear slider turtles, Italian wall lizards, etc etc...but some hooligans with the SPCA here got in on the decision making somehow..



Hello Brock,



Thank you for your email regarding the controlled alien species (CAS) regulation as it relates to the Genus Phyllobates. All three species of Phyllobates on the CAS list are the only species of poison dart frogs known to retain their toxicity for extended periods in captivity. They may lose their toxicity eventually, but exactly how and when this process takes place is not well characterized. Therefore in the interest of public safety, we need to assume that these frogs are dangerously toxic for at least a certain period. The Ministry of Environment has therefore taken the appropriate precautions by listing these three species as CAS. Most species of Dentrobatid frogs lose their toxicity in captivity relatively quickly which is why not all poison dart frogs are on the CAS list. This means there are potentially hundreds of species of Dendrobatid frogs that can be kept by frog pet owners.



Like you, we are well aware of the global decline in amphibians and the efforts of zoos around the world to maintain populations of many critically endangered frogs. Our regulations do not limit the ability for zoos to continue their important conservation work. These organizations follow strict protocols to maintain genetic diversity and have strict hygiene protocols to prevent the transmission of pests and diseases between frogs from diverse regions of the world. It is important to emphasize that pet frogs should never be released into the wild anywhere in the world. The release of pet frogs or the capture and movement of wild frogs in BC violates the Wildlife Act.



Thank you again for your email and I hope that we have addressed your concerns. If you have any further enquiries, please do not hesitate to contact us or visit the CAS website at Fish and Wildlife - Environment - Province of British Columbia.



Best regards,



Controlled Alien Species Team

Fish and Wildlife Branch

BC Ministry of Environment

[email protected]

Ph. 250-387-9771

Fax. 250-387-9568


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

At this point, I would ask them where they're getting their information on how long Phyllobates can retain their toxicity.


----------



## Jason (Oct 14, 2004)

May we use your letter to sent a reply back to CAS? I think a group effort is important on this one. They are sadly mistaken in a lot of what they say. Maybe I am wrong, but wouldn't a F1 generation frog not maintain any toxicity? I could see wild caught maintaining some toxicity, but F1's? There are many responsible "pet" breeders that do a much better job than some zoos I have seen. That was a big diss to TWI and many breeders and keepers.


----------



## J-man12 (Mar 24, 2009)

To bad lawmakers are so ignorant. I feel they have no idea what they are even doing. They just try to do more and more to take away peoples rights. Its not like they are even wc and are ganna harm anybody. It just ticks me off that people think they know what the best is for everyone.


----------



## ETwomey (Jul 22, 2004)

MonarchzMan said:


> At this point, I would ask them where they're getting their information on how long Phyllobates can retain their toxicity.


John Daly published a paper in Science in 1980 that showed wild-caught terribilis can maintain significant levels of toxicity for several years after being captured.

However, F1s had no detectable levels of batrachotoxin.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

Ric Sanchez said:


> However, F1s had no detectable levels of batrachotoxin.


Has that been published? It would seem to me that that would hold considerable weight given that we can probably safely assume that there aren't any WC around anymore, and all that we're seeing now is F1 and beyond.


----------



## ETwomey (Jul 22, 2004)

MonarchzMan said:


> Has that been published? It would seem to me that that would hold considerable weight given that we can probably safely assume that there aren't any WC around anymore, and all that we're seeing now is F1 and beyond.


Yes, like I said, John Daly published that paper in 1980 in Science.

Now the task becomes demonstrating that there are no wild caught terribilis around these days.


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

but how are they to distinguish between imported wc and captive bred individuals? Even though there seems to be very limited importation of these animals, the possibility still exists. If only cb animals were available I think it would be easier to convince them that they are safe.


----------



## ggazonas (May 11, 2008)

it would be quite difficult to prove to authorities that the phyllobates you may own are WC/ or CB. How would one go about this, and what kind of documentation would be needed. Maybe if there was away to prove they are CB then they would be allowed under certain circumstances.


----------



## frogsanddogs (Jun 21, 2008)

What a shame. These sorts of laws really are ridiculous and tend to hurt the people most who are honest about things and trying to do the right thing even though lawmakers who make these laws often don't begin to actually learn about what they are proposing laws to regulate.
However, out of curiosity, why would something like ASN or Frogtracks not provide the necessary paperwork to show that given frogs were not wild-caught? If these sorts of channels do not currently provide the necessary paperwork to prove such a thing (as dog breeding papers would)... would it not be possible create such a channel to allow for this? I know it is still restrictive and don't know people with existing frogs before this law could prove theirs were not wild caught if they did not have any registrations, but since they eventually lose their toxicity even if they were originally WC, wouldn't the government feel some kind of saftey in the fact that if people owned their animals before the legislation that by the time paperwork/ registration is completed that even if they could have possibly have been WC that they would no longer be toxic. I do know that laws like this don't rely on common sense, but is there something I don't know about these avenues that they could not provide what is needed. I really do feel for all of you in CA and hope they soon see the error of their ways and correct this sort of legislation to reflect the actual situation.


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

Yeah, seems sillly to me. Ban phyllobates, but snakeheads are still legal in BC... HMMMMMM


----------



## batrachiophyle (May 7, 2009)

"...out of my cold, dead hands."


----------

