# So question for everyone...



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

People who have been breeding for a long period of times... and have "seen it all" what is the general attitude about froglets with birth defects?? We have a pretty young trio of Vanzolini that have given us 8 or so froglets.. And just tonight I realized one that came out of the water about 2 weeks ago, does not have front feet what so ever.. Just a couple little nubs.. The little guy is fat as can be and has no problem out running me, climbing the walls of his grow out, and even up plants.. I mentioned to my lady that we may end up having to cull the little thing and it broke her heart.. I know others have successfully raised frogs to adulthood with similar defects.. What is the general consensus on something like this?


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

Cull it. Why keep deformed animals and pass them on into the hobby?


----------



## goof901 (Jan 9, 2012)

Nismo95 said:


> People who have been breeding for a long period of times... and have "seen it all" what is the general attitude about froglets with birth defects?? We have a pretty young trio of Vanzolini that have given us 8 or so froglets.. And just tonight I realized one that came out of the water about 2 weeks ago, does not have front feet what so ever.. Just a couple little nubs.. The little guy is fat as can be and has no problem out running me, climbing the walls of his grow out, and even up plants.. I mentioned to my lady that we may end up having to cull the little thing and it broke her heart.. I know others have successfully raised frogs to adulthood with similar defects.. What is the general consensus on something like this?


Personally, I think that if it can get around fine and can walk and hop relatively normally, I wouldn't cull it... However, if you wanted to sell him, you'd have to make sure that the buyer knows that this frog is defective, and I don't really think that this frog should be bred either...


----------



## grendel88 (Oct 19, 2006)

If you are adverse to culling the frog, you can always donate it to another member. I know someone on here runs a small "zoo" with animals that have special needs. I donated a few one eyed leucs to him. Forgot his username, though. I am sure someone would be willing to take care of the little guy. Hell I might take him.


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

frogparty said:


> Cull it. Why keep deformed animals and pass them on into the hobby?


Understandable, this was my first thought on the subject as well. And while on the subject, is this the type of thing that you think is in the DNA? Or perhaps nutritional during development... If its in the DNA shouldnt we just cull the parents too? If they did it to us once, how long til it happens again? 



goof901 said:


> Personally, I think that if it can get around fine and can walk and hop relatively normally, I wouldn't cull it... However, if you wanted to sell him, you'd have to make sure that the buyer knows that this frog is defective, and I don't really think that this frog should be bred either...


This is the type of of deal I would do with this guy... Either donate him like said to someone, or if someone I know was buying others from me, I would offer this one along for either free or a reduced price if the buyer is in deed interested in it. But I definately wouldnt just hand it over blindly, Do not need to ruin my reputation over one froglet. 



grendel88 said:


> If you are adverse to culling the frog, you can always donate it to another member. I know someone on here runs a small "zoo" with animals that have special needs. I donated a few one eyed leucs to him. Forgot his username, though. I am sure someone would be willing to take care of the little guy. Hell I might take him.


I do like the idea of it. For a little 2 week morphed vanzo, it has zero problems moving about and eating. Still quick as lightning. I would hate to put something down just because it wasnt "normal"


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

frogparty said:


> Cull it. Why keep deformed animals and pass them on into the hobby?


And sorry, on my last reply to this message, I mis read what you said about passing them on. as in breeding them. I just dont know how I feel about culling something because it was born with a "handicap" No, SLS or if it showed signs that it was suffering, by all means.. Put it out of its misery, but for a froglet who is chubbier than the others while missing 2 feet, just seems kinda heartless.. Now, maybe its time I man up and do what I need to do, this would be the first frog I would have to euthanize.


----------



## grendel88 (Oct 19, 2006)

If he has siblings that have no abnormalities, I would argue this deformity is developmental and not genetic. I would be willing to bet that if this little frog bred, he would have normal kiddos. This type of thing happens a lot due to environmental factors. Maybe a gene or two got turned off at an innopportune time and he didn't develop feet. I would suggest keeping an eye on him for a while. If he doesn't seem to have limitations then I would not want to cull him. If his quality of life takes a nosedive, then by all means don't let him suffer. Just my opinion.


----------



## KDuraiswamy (Dec 2, 2012)

I haven't had any experience raising frogs with defects, but the way I see it, there isn't any reason to cull him as long as you never use him for breeding and don't sell him to someone in place of a normal frog. There's no harm done that way, and you avoid having to cull him.


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

grendel88 said:


> If he has siblings that have no abnormalities, I would argue this deformity is developmental and not genetic. I would be willing to bet that if this little frog bred, he would have normal kiddos. This type of thing happens a lot due to environmental factors. Maybe a gene or two got turned off at an innopportune time and he didn't develop feet. I would suggest keeping an eye on him for a while. If he doesn't seem to have limitations then I would not want to cull him. If his quality of life takes a nosedive, then by all means don't let him suffer. Just my opinion.


That is precisely the way I am seeing it as well... I am going to be monitoring him daily, to make see how things pan out for him. So far it is keeping up just fine with its siblings.. There are about 5 others in the bin with him, and they are all devouring springs. Had this one not been on top of a leaf tonight when I misted, I may have not noticed the deformity for a lot longer. This will definately not be sold as a full price frog, and instead offered to someone as a freebie with another purchase. Or kept for our personal collection. My girlfriend has been nagging my ears off all night about just keeping the little trooper if all goes well with it. 



KDuraiswamy said:


> I haven't had any experience raising frogs with defects, but the way I see it, there isn't any reason to cull him as long as you never use him for breeding and don't sell him to someone in place of a normal frog. There's no harm done that way, and you avoid having to cull him.


As far as breeding goes, I am not planning to breed this little one what so ever.. Now if someone else takes it off my hands, that is on them to decide. I am like Grendal and I believe this froglet could breed later on and produce completely viable offspring.. I do believe this was an owners error on my part.. The frog room has been kept a bit hotter than I would of liked the last 1.5 months which in terms has kept the tad incubator a bit too high. So far, no other mishaps on other morph outs, but we'll see, still have 20 or so tads cookin in there.


----------



## TheCoop (Oct 24, 2012)

Just remember your pair is still fairly young.. This can be common with the first few froglets..


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

Nismo95 said:


> That is precisely the way I am seeing it as well... I am going to be monitoring him daily, to make see how things pan out for him. So far it is keeping up just fine with its siblings.. There are about 5 others in the bin with him, and they are all devouring springs. Had this one not been on top of a leaf tonight when I misted, I may have not noticed the deformity for a lot longer. This will definately not be sold as a full price frog, and instead offered to someone as a freebie with another purchase. Or kept for our personal collection. My girlfriend has been nagging my ears off all night about just keeping the little trooper if all goes well with it.
> 
> 
> 
> As far as breeding goes, I am not planning to breed this little one what so ever.. Now if someone else takes it off my hands, that is on them to decide. I am like Grendal and I believe this froglet could breed later on and produce completely viable offspring.. I do believe this was an owners error on my part.. The frog room has been kept a bit hotter than I would of liked the last 1.5 months which in terms has kept the tad incubator a bit too high. So far, no other mishaps on other morph outs, but we'll see, still have 20 or so tads cookin in there.



If you keep it in a group, you wont be able to prevent it from breeding. Your best bet is to either give it its own enclosure, or cull it


----------



## Lifeguard (Jun 30, 2011)

I would say if it is able to survive let it be. What would happen in the wilde? If it can do everything other frogs can do let it live it's life.


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

frogparty said:


> If you keep it in a group, you wont be able to prevent it from breeding. Your best bet is to either give it its own enclosure, or cull it


So, I am only going back and forth with you because I am just honestly curious.. I dont want this to come off as attitude or disrespect in any way.. I know how forums can get lol. But in all honesty, why are you so convinced that if this froglet had the chance to breed that it would be prone to producing deformed offspring of its own? Lot of factors that could of been with this little one.. I see where you're coming from.. but like others have said, what if this was in the wild? and it survived everything out there? would you see it come in an export and expect it to be killed? hope you dont mind me bantering back and forth. and like I said, no disrespect.. I did ask for opinions on the matter.


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

I'm not saying its a genetic defect.

What I am saying is that there's no shortage of healthy NON DEFORMED froglets out there, and you aren't doing the hobby any favors by keeping that froglet. Plain and simple


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

frogparty said:


> I'm not saying its a genetic defect.
> 
> What I am saying is that there's no shortage of healthy NON DEFORMED froglets out there, and you aren't doing the hobby any favors by keeping that froglet. Plain and simple


Well if he can make it to adulthood and live a healthy life... Just because its missing his 2 front feet, does that make him anyless of a good frog? Sure it may not be as appealing to the eye to some, but to others they may see it as a joy.. I just personally dont see harm in letting it live, especially if its not suffering at this point in time.


----------



## frogparty (Dec 27, 2007)

I'm done arguing with you.


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Nismo95 said:


> So, I am only going back and forth with you because I am just honestly curious.. I dont want this to come off as attitude or disrespect in any way.. I know how forums can get lol. But in all honesty, why are you so convinced that if this froglet had the chance to breed that it would be prone to producing deformed offspring of its own? Lot of factors that could of been with this little one.. I see where you're coming from.. but like others have said, what if this was in the wild? and it survived everything out there? would you see it come in an export and expect it to be killed? hope you dont mind me bantering back and forth. and like I said, no disrespect.. I did ask for opinions on the matter.


I agree with frogparty on this one. It doesn't make sense to assume it could have been environmental as none of the others have expressed it. Unless you raised the tads communally, in which case you could blame cannibalism, the most probable is random genetic mutation. Of course you wouldn't cull the parents, too. They don't possess the genes for 'missing foot'. Their genes are fine as evidenced by their normal offspring. As far as it surviving in the wild. If a genetic mutation is not an advantage, it is a disadvantage. If not, we would see wild type frogs with no front feet. Your responsibility is to keep this animal out of the gene pool. If you can think of another way that makes this guarantee, by all means. Frogparty already made this concession when he suggested giving it its own enclosure.

A second point to consider: how can you be certain it is, in fact, living a 'normal' life? You mention it is as fat, if not fatter than its cagemates. Why would we assume this is a sign it is thriving? Could it not be that it is becomming obese from lack of normal motility? I believe that makes more sense. Humans have become too far removed from our roots as hunter gatherers. We have become soft, our emotions getting in the way. Guarantee its genetic isolation and cull it. 

That being said, I must also express my concern that I may be taken out of context as heartless. I am not. I am simply expressing an abundance of caution, and, you asked for others' opinions.


----------



## Fantastica (May 5, 2013)

This is so interesting! It sounds like a mutation, to me. I don't think you should cull it; if its having no problem moving around, and its fat, it sounds like a innocuous defect. 
I got into this hobby for the science behind frogs, and this is a fascinating case. I say, keep it in a small enclosure and monitor its life compared to its clutchmates. Or, find someone who will (like me!) 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Fantastica said:


> This is so interesting! It sounds like a mutation, to me. I don't think you should cull it; if its having no problem moving around, and its fat, it sounds like a innocuous defect.
> I got into this hobby for the science behind frogs, and this is a fascinating case. I say, keep it in a small enclosure and monitor its life compared to its clutchmates. Or, find someone who will (like me!)
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


I don't necessarily disagree with this proposition. My only concerns would be:
1 Without DNA testing we can not be certain it's not inheritable
2 if there is even the slightest chance it is inheritable it should not be allowed to breed
3 in the frogs entire potential life span is it possible the defect could be overlooked, forgotten, or even worse, not even considered as problematic
4 if #3 were to happen, how would you feel knowing you could have easily, ethically, and humanely, prevented it?

I must admit that I do not envy your position, nismo95. It seems a harsh penalty for an innocent (arguably anthropomorphic) animal. We commonly use the term 'mother nature', a euphemism that invoks an emotional feeling of nurture and kindness. Unfortunately for us mother nature is a very cruel process without conscience, ethics, care, or consideration to how we feel about it. An innocuous mutation you say. In her world, mother nature has no such words.


----------



## Fantastica (May 5, 2013)

Humans develop, on average, 10 unique mutations over their lifetime. This doesn't mean they get passed on to offspring, as the mutation would have to effect the gametes. 
There are plenty of innocuous mutations in nature. In humans, theres colorblindness. If the environment is not selecting against them, they're not deleterious. In fact, the health of the frog so far indicates that it is a benefit, for whatever reason.
That all being said, I don't think the frog should be bred, but isolated on its own. It seems like a travesty to cull such a unique individual.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Fantastica said:


> Humans develop, on average, 10 unique mutations over their lifetime. This doesn't mean they get passed on to offspring, as the mutation would have to effect the gametes.
> There are plenty of innocuous mutations in nature. In humans, theres colorblindness. If the environment is not selecting against them, they're not deleterious. In fact, the health of the frog so far indicates that it is a benefit, for whatever reason.
> That all being said, I don't think the frog should be bred, but isolated on its own. It seems like a travesty to cull such a unique individual.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


We, as humans, have removed ourselves from the processes of natural selection. A color blind individual can survive because we do not need to see, for example, a predator approaching. Takeaway sight of color and the world becomes grey scale, and spatial dimensions are blurred. Anthropic principle states that we can know this because we are not populated with colorblind people.

I feel it is a huge assumption you are making that the animal is surviving, much less thriving with this condition. We have removed the animal from natural selection as well. We simply can not answer this question. I do have a question for you, Fantastica. Couldn't I just as easily argue that it's cruel to isolate an animal with the ingrained instinct to find a mate?

EDIT: I say once again. In nature, if it's not helping, it's hurting. There is no middle ground.


----------



## Fantastica (May 5, 2013)

All species alive today are the result of innocuous mutations that became favorable when environmental conditions changed. We would not have been able to differentiate from our last common ancestor unless this was the case.
I think the beauty of this is the fact that these frogs have been removed from natural selection factors, because we're able to observe what would be very difficult to do in the wild.
You bring up a good point about isolation! I would then change my opinion to keep the frog with a frog of the opposite sex, and simply cull the eggs. 
I do, however, think the possibility of eggs being fertile is low, just because of his lack of toe pads to position himself on the female.

Also, would just like to add that colorblindness in humans only effects specific pigments, like red and green appearing gray. Dogs only see gray, and they have survived for a very long time in the wild.


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Fantastica said:


> All species alive today are the result of innocuous mutations that became favorable when environmental conditions changed. We would not have been able to differentiate from our last common ancestor unless this was the case.
> I think the beauty of this is the fact that these frogs have been removed from natural selection factors, because we're able to observe what would be very difficult to do in the wild.
> You bring up a good point about isolation! I would then change my opinion to keep the frog with a frog of the opposite sex, and simply cull the eggs.
> I do, however, think the possibility of eggs being fertile is low, just because of his lack of toe pads to position himself on the female.


What you are describing is Lamarckian, at best. Darwin, however, would suggest you have things backwards. Animals with the best characteristics to survive their current environment, pass on their genes. When the environment becomes distinct enough, the animals that lacked those characteristics die off. Adaption, in other words, occurs with environmental change. It does not precede it, as you suggest.

Playing Devil's advocate if I may, from a natural standpoint what is so beautiful about removing an animal from the environment that created it? Furthermore, what we observe in captivity does not mimic what occurs in the wild. We still can not observe what would be difficult to see in nature. By definition, it's not nature. 

Finally, you have begun a slippery slope. It's ok to cull eggs, but not mutated animals?

EDIT: dogs as we know them are domesticated, as are we. Are wolves colorblind as well? I do not know that answer

EDIT #2: http://www.timberwolfps.org/wolf-facts.html "They are color blind but their eyes sight is much better than ours particularly their night vision and in detecting movement at great distances"


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Great discussion Fantastica, and all. It's bedtime for me but I will be back tomorrow!


----------



## Fantastica (May 5, 2013)

aspidites73 said:


> What you are describing is Lamarckian, at best. Darwin, however, would suggest you have things backwards. Animals with the best characteristics to survive their current environment, pass on their genes. When the environment becomes distinct enough, the animals that lacked those characteristics die off. Adaption, in other words, occurs with environmental change. It does not precede it, as you suggest.
> 
> Playing Devil's advocate if I may, from a natural standpoint what is so beautiful about removing an animal from the environment that created it? Furthermore, what we observe in captivity does not mimic what occurs in the wild. We still can not observe what would be difficult to see in nature. By definition, it's not nature.
> 
> ...


I may have misexplained what I mean; if there are mutations existing in a population that are innocuous, and the environment changes to favor those with the mutation, it becomes more prevalent in the gene pool and eventually uniform throughout the population. This is Darwin's idea of evolution.
Lamarck would have explained that this frog lost his foot partway through life because it was favorable, and was then able to add that to his genes and pass it on.

To address your question, I'd like to point out that all of our frogs have been removed from nature, that's the hobby. I think it's beautiful because I'm a scientist; you can still study how nature effects a frog when it's not in nature. In this case, it would be how the environment of a vivarium effects mutations, or how Founder's effect/inbreeding depression can cause an increase in mutations. While humans cannot be nature, we can sure mimic some of the effects. 

The coolest part for me is that this mutation is to us, a death sentence, but the frog is surviving well beyond our expectations.

In my opinion, it's much more humane to cull something with a partially-developed nervous system as opposed to culling a fully developed organism with a functioning brain.

You got me with the dogs! I was unsure as well. However, there's sharks:
Sharks Are Color-Blind : Discovery News


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Fantastica said:


> I may have misexplained what I mean; if there are mutations existing in a population that are innocuous, and the environment changes to favor those with the mutation, it becomes more prevalent in the gene pool and eventually uniform throughout the population. This is Darwin's idea of evolution.
> Lamarck would have explained that this frog lost his foot partway through life because it was favorable, and was then able to add that to his genes and pass it on.
> 
> To address your question, I'd like to point out that all of our frogs have been removed from nature, that's the hobby. I think it's beautiful because I'm a scientist; you can still study how nature effects a frog when it's not in nature. In this case, it would be how the environment of a vivarium effects mutations, or how Founder's effect/inbreeding depression can cause an increase in mutations. While humans cannot be nature, we can sure mimic some of the effects.
> ...


I see I have both misunderstood your point, and misrepresented Lamarckian Theory. I should have refreshed my memory as it has been a lifetime ago that I studied Biology. Shame on me! I do understand we have removed all of our keeps from nature. That was my point. We have protected our charges from the evil and discriminating hand of Mother Nature. Going back over my posts, I did not disagree with the controlled keeping of the animal in question. I simply wanted to express my concerns. I still feel they are valid points.

Admittedly there may be 'more correct' answers to our question: What should be done with the front footless frog? In a Utopian world, and/or under scientific discipline, this animal does have things to show us, as you pointed out. But, this is not a lab, and most here are not scientists. This is a hobby that has vilified any phenotype that doesn't conform to the animals' wild type. Had we chose to discuss a "Lavender Sunrise Albino" that was born under the same circumstances this thread would be a 100 page long witchhunt. I am happy it is not, and I am enjoying this discussion.

As for your opinion on culling eggs over fully developed animals, I agree. However, and still playing Devil's Advocate, there are people who would argue the fertilized egg is no less a life to protect. Especially considering the potential for those eggs to be completely normal, and viable young. Again, this is not the 'Lab'. This is a hobby that has decided it's social norms, and vigorously defends them. I can't say i blame them, but I can respectfully disagree.

While great for discussion, your color blindness, dog, and shark example have no bearing on this thread's question as posited in the OP. Aside from the shark being an apex predator, without fear of what's lurking in the depths, I would add that one born with slightly less a sense of smell (far more valuable of a sense than sight to an ocean dweller) would quickly be selected against. You're telling me my apples taste like oranges, when in fact they are the latter.

So, back to our deformed frog. Please see my post, #19 in this thread, located HERE

As a hobbiest, do you disagree with my concerns? Yes, we can both argue our cause, but do our opinions reflect concern for a "poor innocent frog", or are they for what's best for our hobby?


----------



## Kas (Oct 6, 2013)

So.....not to be morbid but how do you cull a frog? Is there a humane/painless way?


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Kas said:


> So.....not to be morbid but how do you cull a frog? Is there a humane/painless way?


There most certainly is a fast, humane, painless, and ethical way. Regular, over the counter, Oragel. The benzocaine, anesthetizes, then kills. Once anesthetized you can place in alcohol to be certain.


----------



## Fantastica (May 5, 2013)

I'm sorry if I presented my argument as if it's the only option, I tend to do that. I hope everyone posts their opinion to help the OP decide what to do with it.

I believe that an animal doesn't need to be in a lab in order to be studied, observed, and appreciated. I think the distinction I make, in favor of keeping the frog alive, is that the frog doesn't need to create more offspring. If it does, the froglets don't need to be into the general population. I think that's where the fear is with the hobby, that someone will unknowingly get a frog that has those defects in it's genes. 

At the same time, we have to consider that this mutation could be in the OPs parent frogs, and perhaps in the generation before them. If the eggs could be viable, they could be equally nonviable for the same reason.

When you take a few frogs from a population to start a new population, there is bound to be an increase in mutations throughout the generations. I think it's a good idea to not let these mutations spread. Many hobbyists have lonely frogs or same sex groups, and hobbyists still appreciate them. I think your post assumes that all frogs need to be bred, and in my opinion I don't think that's the case.

I have to say that I respectfully disagree with your concerns. I don't see a reason why you can't keep a poor innocent frog as well as do what's best for the hobby.



aspidites73 said:


> Admittedly there may be 'more correct' answers to our question: What should be done with the front footless frog? In a Utopian world, and/or under scientific discipline, this animal does have things to show us, as you pointed out. But, this is not a lab, and most here are not scientists. This is a hobby that has vilified any phenotype that doesn't conform to the animals' wild type. Had we chose to discuss a "Lavender Sunrise Albino" that was born under the same circumstances this thread would be a 100 page long witchhunt. I am happy it is not, and I am enjoying this discussion.
> 
> As for your opinion on culling eggs over fully developed animals, I agree. However, and still playing Devil's Advocate, there are people who would argue the fertilized egg is no less a life to protect. Especially considering the potential for those eggs to be completely normal, and viable young. Again, this is not the 'Lab'. This is a hobby that has decided it's social norms, and vigorously defends them. I can't say i blame them, but I can respectfully disagree.
> 
> ...


----------



## aspidites73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Fantastica said:


> I'm sorry if I presented my argument as if it's the only option, I tend to do that. I hope everyone posts their opinion to help the OP decide what to do with it.
> 
> I believe that an animal doesn't need to be in a lab in order to be studied, observed, and appreciated. I think the distinction I make, in favor of keeping the frog alive, is that the frog doesn't need to create more offspring. If it does, the froglets don't need to be into the general population. I think that's where the fear is with the hobby, that someone will unknowingly get a frog that has those defects in it's genes.
> 
> At the same time, we have to consider that this mutation could be in the OPs parent frogs, and perhaps in the generation before them. If the eggs could be viable, they could be equally nonviable for the same reason.


Yes, that is the fear. It is a logical one that you try to disprove with an appeal to probability. That is faulty logic.

One last question from me. Would you trust a random person from this forum to be as cautious as you?


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

frogparty said:


> If you keep it in a group, you wont be able to prevent it from breeding. Your best bet is to either give it its own enclosure, or cull it


Going back to the OP's question, frogparty mentioned the two responsible things to do. If the animal is healthy, then there is no need to "put it out of it's misery", since it's not miserable.

Keeping that in mind however, it would be very unresponsible as a breeder to have a frog with defects in your breeding group. For example, you wouldn't want to buy a dog or cattle from a breeder that keeps animals with defects in it's breeding stock, would you? I would imagine that you would not get a good reputation in the hobby if you did so.

As a further option, if you don't want to cull it or give it its own enclosure, you could offer it up to someone who could care for the frog and provide it with an appropriate habitat where it can't breed.


----------



## smoyer (Jul 9, 2007)

Very interesting thread, and i like the arguments on both sides. I keep several different species of day geckos and have twice now had this same dilemma.

Both animals are isolated in their own tanks, one has a deformed limb, the other is blind in one eye. Both are healthy. 

I for the most part am on frogparty's side of this argument. just read about a few of the issues that the pure breed dog hobby has due to a handful of irresponsible breeders...

Because the condition is congenital I don't think it would be ethical to risk passing on suspect genes. For many species in this and other hobbies the gene pools are not large enough to take care of themselves (there's a lot of inbreeding that has a greater potential to magnify gene mutations). We are the 'keepers,' I feel it's part of our responsibility to mitigate the risks we know as much as possible. 

That being said I could not bring my self to cull my animals; but i will not sell them, or breed them either. They are my responsibility until they pass. 

and honestly, i still enjoy keeping them!


----------



## Nismo95 (Jul 30, 2011)

Coming back to this thread, I am glad to see the discussion continued. I loved reading the comments I havnt seen the last few days. I have not culled this frog, and it still is doing well on its own given its condition. And yes, I do NOT plan on breeding this frog.. It is only 3 weeks OOW at this point anyways. So who knows, in a month it may be needing to be culled due to struggling and just suffering. I also, do not plan to sell this frog, or any others that could show up this way in our collection. I do not have much of a rep so far with the hobby as a breeder, and I know how little it really takes to tarnish your name. This frog will either remain with me, or donated to someone I can trust to not breed and still provide it a nice healthy life.


----------

