# Someone's New Wild Tincs



## builder74 (Mar 26, 2006)

xxxxxxxx I bring this thread up to see the views on importing already established Tincs from the wild. I am the first to buy or just admire new WC frogs that are not yet established in the us and have a chance to get them in the hobby. There are so many CB blood lines of each of these Tincs in the us and outside the us why we should get more WC ones? I do understand we had to start this hobby with WC in the years past to start the populations we have. Just want to get others views on this. All this being said I hope these go to good homes.

Reference to vendor involved and vendor feedback removed...carry on - Bill


----------



## puckplaya32 (Jan 6, 2008)

I think it is necessary to occasionally import new stock of even an established species or morph. New blood is always required to be bred into existing stock to prevent an inbred gene pool. The key to longevity of our hobby is to maintain diverse bloodlines, or our established stock will eventually perish.


----------



## flyangler18 (Oct 26, 2007)

I think if you really look at how the hobby is defining 'already established', it will be illuminating. 

Auratus still tops the list for imported Dendrobatids, despite being 'established'.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

flyangler18 said:


> I think if you really look at how the hobby is defining 'already established', it will be illuminating.
> 
> Auratus still tops the list for imported Dendrobatids, despite being 'established'.


and I see that _dendrobates leucomelas _is on a importers list for roughly the same price of a CB frog, despite a large amount of these being produced by even new hobbyists.

Just who is buying all those _Auratus_ Jason? Look to our MADS group and try to find more than a couple people seriously trying to breed them.

It has got to be the pet trade...ah the retail "pet" store. You can BET over 80% of the Auratus destined for these stores die on the shelf or days after being sold.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

builder74 said:


> I am the first to buy or just admire new WC frogs that are not yet established in the us and have a chance to get them in the hobby. There are so many CB blood lines of each of these Tincs in the us and outside the us why we should get more WC ones? I do understand we had to start this hobby with WC in the years past to start the populations we have.


 
I think you should have just entitled your thread " WC vs CB....a preference discussion".....or something along those lines and left xxxx out of the equation.

It would be a good discussion thread.

Vendor reference removed - Bill


----------



## ravengritz (Mar 2, 2009)

Philsuma said:


> You can BET over 80% of the Auratus destined for these stores die on the shelf or days after being sold.


Agreed. I was at a shop recently where they were keeping a green and black auratus in an almost empty tank, nothing but a piece of wood and damp coco fiber substrate. They've been feeding the little guy "small" crickets as long as his head.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I have already been given a talking down to over the request I made for some basic information about permits and how quotas are determined for the imported animals. I feel that there are some good relationships that have developed over time and -----------------. My questions, though, refer to how we balance the desire for "new blood" in the hobby and the need to conserve these frogs in the wild.

For folks to say that we have to be against inter-morph hybrids to protect the gene pool of our "wild-type" frogs (with the vague notion that what we are up to has something to do with conservation), then to have little concern for the status of the species in the wild, is anathema to me. I still think there are plenty of hobbyists who would like to say "I have the only specimens of species "X" in the hobby" (some sort of frog bragging rights), and aren't that concerned with the survival of the species in the wild.

I think all the other rationalizations for taking wild frogs should be looked at and evaluated with some discernment. The "we need new blood so that the hobby lines don't become inbred" suggests that we know something about the genetic diversity within the frogs in the hobby right now and that they need this "new blood" to survive. It seems that a lot of hobbyists spend time finding mates for their frogs that represent the same bloodline as the animals they have (keeping the bloodlines "pure"); Yet this is the very opposite point of view than "new blood" from WC animals.

The other rationale that I've heard is "they are tearing down the rainforest anyway, so we are really "rescuing" these frogs". This one gets to me personally. Instead of putting any real effort into helping to save the habitats in which our beloved frogs exist, some are using its destruction as a rationale for being selfish (which I think is probably at the heart of this argument).

Another argument regaurding WC animals "from Europe" is that, even though they may have been smuggled illegally from South America, they can be resold in America once they "clear" the lax European standards. As I said, I think some folks will tell themselves anything to get their hands on the frogs they want.

All that said, I think that if these kinds of importations are going to continue, it would be incredibly valuable to a real conservation effort for the importers to work more closely with conservation-oriented groups like TWI or Amphia-ark (sp?) If it is true that there is good locality data associated with the imported frogs (something lacking for most tinctorius in the hobby now), then the frogs sold could be monitored and bred with the idea of some sort of future conservation effort (although multiple specimens of each morph would have to be collected and tracked, which is a pretty difficult task). If these frogs are coming out of the rainforest, at least we should try to make sure that they can become part of a real conservation effort.

I admit that the idea of having some "wild-collected" frogs is appealing, so I understand the desires that froggers might have for them. It takes some real discipline to deny yourself the thing you want most. I'd like to think we have that discipline.

Richard in Staten Island.


----------



## flyangler18 (Oct 26, 2007)

As a general hypothetical, just what species and locality morphs are truly established with an understanding of total numbers in the hobby? Tinctorius morphs have historically suffered from boom and bust cycles.

A controlled sustainable harvest may be the only way that some species will continue to exist; if collection is so detrimental to genetic diversity, why is it that auratus is considered a species of least concerns and still tops export numbers year after year despite being regularly bred in private hands?


----------



## builder74 (Mar 26, 2006)

Thanks for the replies to bad they took out all the nice things I said about the vender. Looks like I pissed off someone they gave me a red Rep so thanks , I am sorry to bring up a subject that is important to myself and some other people.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

*Re: SNDF New Wild Tincs*



Woodsman said:


> For folks to say that we have to be against inter-morph hybrids to protect the gene pool of our "wild-type" frogs (with the vague notion that what we are up to has something to do with conservation), then to have little concern for the status of the species in the wild, is anathema to me. I still think there are plenty of hobbyists who would like to say "I have the only specimens of species "X" in the hobby" (some sort of frog bragging rights), and aren't that concerned with the survival of the species in the wild.


Hi Rich,

There are a number of us who have been agitating to prevent the idea of hybrids being okay that are under no illusions that it has anything to do with conservation in the wild.. instead we are concerned with conservation of the morphs in captivity. There is no guarantee that a country will open for export or rexport in this day and age or even allow for cetain species to be exported (example Columbia...). 

Countries set thier own export quotas based on criteria that they themselves choose... yes this can mean that species are collected and exported in unsustainable numbers (for example, Egypt when it opened with Testudo kleinmanni or the current exports of Lygodactylus williamsi.. 
A main source of the pumilio over the last few years has been Panama who declined to set a export quota.. 



Woodsman said:


> I think all the other rationalizations for taking wild frogs should be looked at and evaluated with some discernment. The "we need new blood so that the hobby lines don't become inbred" suggests that we know something about the genetic diversity within the frogs in the hobby right now and that they need this "new blood" to survive. It seems that a lot of hobbyists spend time finding mates for their frogs that represent the same bloodline as the animals they have (keeping the bloodlines "pure"); Yet this is the very opposite point of view than "new blood" from WC animals..



To expand on this a little.. given that the hobby for years has identified and segregated frogs based on visual characteristics the addition of "new blood lines" is of little value as there is no indication that the current blood lines are pure. 
Now the reason people concentrate on specific blood lines is because those bloodline often represent different importations of the frogs and hopefully are from one locality which until the identity can be broken down further (as is occuring in the population management plans with TWI) this is probably the best way for the hobby to keep potentially different localities seperate. 


Some comments,

Ed


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

The fact remains that there are relatively few hobbyists who remain in the hobby longer than a few years. Frogs die for many reasons, old age included, and there are only a handful of long term hobbyists trying to sustain even the most common species and morphs for the long haul. If you like to keep frogs in aquariums, which we all do, then wild frogs will continue to be brought in for our pleasure. Luckily there are several importers/vendors who do this in a very responsible way. If you have a problem with this, don't keep frogs in aquariums in your house. If you really have a problem with it, there are many avenues through which you can support true conservation of these animals.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

rmelancon said:


> If you have a problem with this, don't keep frogs in aquariums in your house. If you really have a problem with it, there are many avenues through which you can support true conservation of these animals.


For me, this part of Robb's statement is the bottom line. All the frogs in the hobby are a derivative of some wild animal importation. If you don't like imported frogs, then you should not keep dart frogs period, because importation is a necessity to obtain CB individuals.

It should be noted that Dendrobatids are CITES II listed species, and their import/export is controlled both by the exporting country and the importing country (at least when imported into the US). While I am not arguing either way as to the efficacy of both countries in controlling the export numbers relative to the native populations, there is oversight there.

As Robb indicated, most of the CB animals in the hobby originate from a scant few WC or imported individuals. I personally am very appreciative that some new genes get to be brought into the hobby. In the end, to each his own. However, it is difficult in my mind to reconcile the position against importing frogs while keeping frogs that are the offspring of imports.


----------



## melissa68 (Feb 16, 2004)

I couldn't agree more with Homer & Robb's statements. 

Many of us in the hobby have been waiting years for Suriname to open up again!!! 

Anyone who thinks it is a travesty shouldn't own exotic animals...all of them came from the wild at one point. 

As a breeder, a wild caught bloodline is a prized frog in my collection. Other breeders feel the same. 

Just my 2 cents!!! 

Melis

btw...nice to see you back on the board Homer!!!



Homer said:


> For me, this part of Robb's statement is the bottom line. All the frogs in the hobby are a derivative of some wild animal importation. If you don't like imported frogs, then you should not keep dart frogs period, because importation is a necessity to obtain CB individuals.
> 
> It should be noted that Dendrobatids are CITES II listed species, and their import/export is controlled both by the exporting country and the importing country (at least when imported into the US). While I am not arguing either way as to the efficacy of both countries in controlling the export numbers relative to the native populations, there is oversight there.
> 
> As Robb indicated, most of the CB animals in the hobby originate from a scant few WC or imported individuals. I personally am very appreciative that some new genes get to be brought into the hobby. In the end, to each his own. However, it is difficult in my mind to reconcile the position against importing frogs while keeping frogs that are the offspring of imports.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Homer said:


> For me, this part of Robb's statement is the bottom line. All the frogs in the hobby are a derivative of some wild animal importation. If you don't like imported frogs, then you should not keep dart frogs period, because importation is a necessity to obtain CB individuals.
> 
> It should be noted that Dendrobatids are CITES II listed species, and their import/export is controlled both by the exporting country and the importing country (at least when imported into the US). While I am not arguing either way as to the efficacy of both countries in controlling the export numbers relative to the native populations, there is oversight there.
> 
> As Robb indicated, most of the CB animals in the hobby originate from a scant few WC or imported individuals. I personally am very appreciative that some new genes get to be brought into the hobby. In the end, to each his own. However, it is difficult in my mind to reconcile the position against importing frogs while keeping frogs that are the offspring of imports.


Hi Homer,

Good to see you back (if you had been posting I had missed it).. 
Typically the oversight from the importing country has been to enforce or honor the quotas set by the exporting country so while there is oversight if a country chooses to set no quota then there is effectively no quota. 

Ed


----------



## jehitch (Jun 8, 2007)

Philsuma said:


> It has got to be the pet trade...ah the retail "pet" store. You can BET over 80% of the Auratus destined for these stores die on the shelf or days after being sold.


The guy next to me at the last Detroit reptile expo had a crapload of WC auratus - both blue and green - in a pair of 9.75" deli containers. I asked him if they were captive-bred, he said, "Yeah, sure." But they were adult size, looking like they were stressed out, and more than a few had nose rubs. I doubt many of them lived even days after being sold.

___
Jim


----------



## JoshK (Jan 5, 2009)

jehitch said:


> The guy next to me at the last Detroit reptile expo had a crapload of WC auratus - both blue and green - in a pair of 9.75" deli containers. I asked him if they were captive-bred, he said, "Yeah, sure." But they were adult size, looking like they were stressed out, and more than a few had nose rubs. I doubt many of them lived even days after being sold.
> 
> ___
> Jim


 
Thats sad to hear Jim. I think we are loose froggers because they buy frogs such as these that die within days, they blame themselves and think they aren't capable of caring for darts. 

I know before I jumped in I was under the impression that darts were "VERY hard to care for". I now know they are pretty easy to care for and even easy to breed when compared to other some other herps/reptiles.


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

Thanks, Ed and Melissa. Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated.  While I occasionally pop in to check up, my time has been more than spoken for the last few years. Any free time goes to making new fly cultures and growing plants.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I think the folks here that continue to say things such as "if you don't like wild collections, get out of the hobby" are insulting anyone who believes that there should be an ethical standard in the hobby.

If I have Surinam Cobalts or Green Sipaliwinis in my collection now, why exactly should I be thrilled that animals continued to be taken from the rainforest? I hear something vague about "new bloodlines" over and over as if these folks really believed that they new of what they were speaking.

I would hope that some others from the conservation community would weigh in on this point, as there has been such bad record-keeping and study in D. tinctorius in the hobby so as to not really know what this concept would even mean. All of my tincs breed well for me and produce viable offspring. I try to obtain animals from breeders that have been in the hobby longer than I have and to breed animals of different bloodlines together to PRODUCE genetic diversity (as opposed to the many who only breed from WITHIN a single blooldine).

In the end, I believe that everyone makes their own ethical choices and I would not want to demonize anyone for purchasing WC animals. To each his/her own.

Take care, Richard.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I would rather that no dart frogs be allowed to come out of the rainforest, than thousands of wild-stolen animals be allowed to fester and die in this way. It is a shame we are not more outraged by this activity.



jehitch said:


> The guy next to me at the last Detroit reptile expo had a crapload of WC auratus - both blue and green - in a pair of 9.75" deli containers. I asked him if they were captive-bred, he said, "Yeah, sure." But they were adult size, looking like they were stressed out, and more than a few had nose rubs. I doubt many of them lived even days after being sold.
> 
> ___
> Jim


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> I would rather that no dart frogs be allowed to come out of the rainforest, than thousands of wild-stolen animals be allowed to fester and die in this way. It is a shame we are not more outraged by this activity.


Hi Rich,

I'm not sure that I would use the term wild-stolen as those frogs were probably exported legally from Panama.. 

I agree there can be a better method of exporting/importing as this has a direct bearing on the survivial of the frogs long term but with a few exceptions there is little to no regulation in this respect. 

I have heard discussions over the last few years that some of the conservation groups want to get to the point where they can certify import/export processess and collections to help ensure more sustainable collection and transport of the frogs but most of the conservation groups that are interested in doing this are not to the point where they have the leverage (fiscal ability) to do so yet. 

Ed


----------



## Homer (Feb 15, 2004)

Woodsman said:


> I think the folks here that continue to say things such as "if you don't like wild collections, get out of the hobby" are insulting anyone who believes that there should be an ethical standard in the hobby.


I'm sorry if you feel insulted, and I hope you did not find my post insulting. It was not intended to be insulting to you. However, the fact is that if you keep dart frogs, whether CB or WC, the founding stock had to come from the wild. 

Just because someone doesn't agree with your ethical standard does not mean that they do not believe in ethical standards. I believe in having ethical standards, I just don't agree with the one you're espousing, because, if you take it to its logical end, there can be no hobby because you could never import frogs. 



> If I have Surinam Cobalts or Green Sipaliwinis in my collection now, why exactly should I be thrilled that animals continued to be taken from the rainforest? I hear something vague about "new bloodlines" over and over as if these folks really believed that they new of what they were speaking.


There's no question your frogs came from wild stock somewhere down the line. Let me ask you, how many surviving original pairs from the WC importation still exist in the hobby today? Do a Dendroboard search on Regina/Giant Orange to find the 2007 thread tracing the genetic bottleneck that usually occurs with frog importation. If you trace the "bloodlines" back, you'll find that most of the frogs in the hobby are from only one or two, maybe three separate sources, so the gene pool is not very deep. FYI, "these folks that really believed they new [sic] what they were speaking"--are some of the people with founder stock of several morphs, so at least some of them have a pretty good idea of the limited "blood lines" that exist.



> I would hope that some others from the conservation community would weigh in on this point, as there has been such bad record-keeping and study in D. tinctorius in the hobby so as to not really know what this concept would even mean.


Could you please explain? I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.



> All of my tincs breed well for me and produce viable offspring. I try to obtain animals from breeders that have been in the hobby longer than I have and to breed animals of different bloodlines together to PRODUCE genetic diversity (as opposed to the many who only breed from WITHIN a single blooldine).


The problem is, you're assuming that buying different animals of the same morph from multiple sources is ensuring that you have genetic diversity. With many morphs (your Reginas, for example), that is simply not the case. You can buy Reginas from five different people who have been in the hobby longer than you, and still only have one bloodline. So, you're still breeding cousins together [cue the banjo music]. Agreed, the deleterious effects may not show up in the first few generations . . . maybe not even in the first several generations, but line breeding has historically been proven to produce a weaker animal.



> In the end, I believe that everyone makes their own ethical choices and I would not want to demonize anyone for purchasing WC animals. To each his/her own.
> 
> Take care, Richard.


I'm glad you have taken this view, but I think the reason you had previously "been given a talking down to" was because you were openly suggesting the opposite--that the hobby should adopt an ethical standard to preclude buying WC frogs that are already in the hobby--and you were doing so in a way that was disrespectful to the person selling the animals. I agree that we should all be appalled when masses of auratus are set in a tank in an importer's warehouse and never cared for properly. However, I don't think that should be a basis for finding that all imports are bad, that all importers treat animals wrong, or that we don't need new specimens for frogs that are in the hobby. Just for kicks, when was the last time that you remember darts being imported from Surinam?


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Homer,

I appreciate all your good comments. There really does seem to be a lack of good record-keeping in the hobby, so perhaps our main goal should be to conduct the work I have spoken to TWI/ASN folks about. A TMP for D. tinctorius would allow us to go backward and see just how many breeders attribute their frogs to "X" importation or to "Y" importation. This would give us a better notion of the diversity that does or doesn't exist in the hobby.

I would be happy to take part of this work on as part of developing an "ethic" for the continued importation of these awesome frogs.

Richard 

(BTW, I saw a photo of a truck stuffed with Red-footed Tortoises just now on Kingsnake.com, and it reminds me that "legally" imported does not mean not-abused and mistreated. How many Tortoises have to be collected, to die in transit of disease and starvation, just so a small number will make it to the great reptile "houses"? I really hope we can work to avoid this scenario in PDFs).


----------



## froglady (Feb 21, 2004)

I for one am very excited about the imports. I feel that they can be responsibly imported and sold and I believe that if you do get them you should be ready to treat them pro-actively so that they do survive.

I was talking to another breeder the other day about imports and collection in the wild. It's amazing what they have learned about collecting, transporting, and treating that has greatly increased the survival rate of the frogs that are being imported.

And I echo what others have said on here. If you don't like importing WC frogs then maybe you should rethink being in the hobby. ALL of our frogs came from WC at one time or another. I am against the illegal smuggling of any animal but when it is done legally, with proper permits, regulations followed and done in a responsible manner I think it could be a good thing.

And then there's the other point. Once we have these we need to be responsible enough to track the bloodlines so that we know what we do have in the hobby. That's harder to do because it relies on people being honest. You can't tell and F1 frog from an F5 frog just by looking at it. That's why buying from reputable people is important.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Sarah,

That is just a really mean-spirited thing to say, that if someone doesn't believe in WC animals, they should rethink being in the hobby. It is a bogus argument to say that all frogs originated as WC, as if that makes your argument for continued wild-collecting.

Unlike the ravenous "anti-hybridizing" wing of the hobby, I have made clear numerous times that I don't judge anyone for their opinions and actions with regaurd to WC animals. So I would never say, "if you buy WC animals, you should rethink being in the hobby". I'm not judging you, so please doin't judge me.

Richard.




froglady said:


> I for one am very excited about the imports. I feel that they can be responsibly imported and sold and I believe that if you do get them you should be ready to treat them pro-actively so that they do survive.
> 
> I was talking to another breeder the other day about imports and collection in the wild. It's amazing what they have learned about collecting, transporting, and treating that has greatly increased the survival rate of the frogs that are being imported.
> 
> ...


----------



## froglady (Feb 21, 2004)

Richard,

If I read your statement correctly


> It is a bogus argument to say that all frogs originated as WC...


 you believe that some frogs have been magically captive bred all along. Hate to tell you but your thinking is the one that is bogus. At one point in the lineage of the frogs there comes a wild caught individual. Period. End of story.

I was not judging you at all and don't understand why you felt the need to attack me. Especially when others on this thread have made the exact same point that I made. Then again perhaps your just having a bad day and felt the need to lash out. Since I don't make my way to DB very often it's hard for me to say. 



Woodsman said:


> Sarah,
> 
> That is just a really mean-spirited thing to say, that if someone doesn't believe in WC animals, they should rethink being in the hobby. It is a bogus argument to say that all frogs originated as WC, as if that makes your argument for continued wild-collecting.
> 
> ...


----------



## thedude (Nov 28, 2007)

i think importing new "bloodlines" is fine as long as it is done sustainably. as in, importing HEALTHY animals and importing them from a healthy population in sustainable numbers. and that we keep good records on those new imports.


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

Surinam has been closed for several years, in the case where the proper habitat has remained it is easy to assume wild populations have recovered from previous collecting. Harvesting a managable number of these animals adds value to them and they land they occur on, giving at least a small incentive to keep these areas intact.
Current importers have elevated the care of collecting by the exporters so that the % of viable animals reaching our tanks is the majority, unlike the early 90's when imports were nearly always at deaths door by the time they showed up in the hobbyists hands. I believe new blood is vital in sustaining the viability of these frogs but as Richard said WC pair management will be critical in optimizing genetic diversity moving forward.
mark


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

The main downside to new imports is that there is often a loss of interest in the same morph currently held in captivity with people rushing to get the new blood or offspring from the new bloodlines with a loss to the currently held frogs. 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

froglady said:


> Richard,
> 
> If I read your statement correctly you believe that some frogs have been magically captive bred all along. Hate to tell you but your thinking is the one that is bogus. At one point in the lineage of the frogs there comes a wild caught individual. Period. End of story.
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## MPepper (Feb 29, 2004)

In Peru, the zoocriadero (ZEF) is issued quotas for the collection and reproduction of certain numbers of approved species. These remain in Peru, and only offspring exported. Once collected the animals remain in custody of ZEF until they die. For several reasons, no animals are re-released back to the wild. Not meaning to hijack the thread just wanted to clear that up.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Aaron,

I'm still not getting this argument that you (and many others) have made. Suggesting that my view is hypocritical because all PDFs once came from the wild at one point in time just isn't a clear point of view. I have stated that it is my CHOICE not to buy animals that are WILD-COLLECTED. Period. End of story.

As far as I know, none of the imported tinctorius from Suriname represent new morphs to the hobby. My understanding from speaking with Patrick Nabors and others is that a large number of tincs came out of Suriname ahead of the closing to export around 2000.

So, if there are a number of different bloodlines of Cobalts and Powderblues already in the hobby, there seems to be no good reason to continue to import WC animals. The "new blood" argument some have made could only be assessed with some baseline genetical data (which we don't have).

I think it is clear that just the IDEA of having WC animals is attractive to many (larger sizes in wild frogs and being the truly "wild-type" animal). Ironically, in the rest of the herpetological community, WC animals are considered extremely suspect and often sell for much less than captive bread animals. 

It is my PERSONAL belief that these frogs should be left in the rainforest where they were born. I'll state again that I do not judge anyone else for having a different opinion. I would just hope that we would value our own captive born animals more highly.

Finally, I think the point should be made that captive breeding of PDF does take pressure off of wild populations and over-collecting for the pet trade. I have personally produced several hundreds of leucomelas and azureus (probably the two most popular frogs for beginners in the hobby), and I like to believe that continued access to these "starter" species will help guide new-comers to the hobby away from purchasing WC auratus and/or pumilio. It is probably difficult to quantify the positive impact that captive breeding has on reducing demand for WC animals, but I'm sure it is a positive one.

Take care, Richard.



frogfarm said:


> froglady said:
> 
> 
> > Richard,
> ...


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Sorry for my confusion Mark.

Richard, you mistook my point. It is getting better w/ certain ventures as In Marks Project there are no wc taken from the country of origin, only cb.

The # of bloodlines of these surinam morphs is much lower than you might expect. Some are probably limited to one and most are probably f5-f10 inbred or crossed at some point. Hopefully we`ll not always need wc animals or we`ll need very few individuals every few years for some morphs but we can`t control the country of origin from sending out they`re frogs as long as there is a market for these animals. The importers can`t control the #`s of frogs sent out either, they can only care for the animals sent till they find good homes. Some better than others(such as those who acclimate, test and treat). We can only hope that they won`t send out open ended quotas.
I`m not condemning you for only wanting cb and I wish more people thought that way. It`s not the action of owning wc but the action of smuggling or sending out too many for the population size. 




Woodsman said:


> Hi Aaron,
> 
> I'm still not getting this argument that you (and many others) have made. Suggesting that my view is hypocritical because all PDFs once came from the wild at one point in time just isn't a clear point of view. I have stated that it is my CHOICE not to buy animals that are WILD-COLLECTED. Period. End of story.
> 
> ...


----------



## builder74 (Mar 26, 2006)

What percent off these WC pairs will breed in captivity? You would have to assume that some of them will never ,and then they will be crossed with the old line to try to get those not breeding to breed. Will this cause any problems? Thanks for your answers!


----------



## Jellyman (Mar 6, 2006)

I think this may be along the lines of the American captive Asian elephant situation. Currently the captive population is getting old and the captive bloodlines is starting to bottleneck. It is being discussed whether or not new wild animals need to be collected and brought in to diversify the current gene pool. I was speeking to a keeper in Topeka and it sounds likely that this will happen in the very near future. I would think this is the same situation that would happen with most captive populations of any animal/species. It is not that they want to take more wild animals but it is necessary to keep the current captive population viable.


----------

