# Can Captive Breeding Reduce Demand for WC?



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

This topic was raised in another thread: E.mysterious legality

To allow the other thread to remain on topic, I've created a new thread here to discuss the question, "Can Captive Breeding Reduce Demand for WC?", which I think is very important to explore. Here is the last post from the other thread:



Ed said:


> > As a counter example, look at Ball Pythons.
> 
> 
> I was wondering if you would mention ball pythons... if cb is really reducing demand, can you explain why 1,914,530 were exported from Africa between 2000 and Jan of 2010.. The numbers actually seem to either be slowly increasing or holding the same over the last 5-10 years (with a jump from prior years) with most of those animals coming out of three or four countries. These are not true cb animals but "ranched" where the eggs or gravid females are collected.. which if it hasn't already will seriously impact recruitment for this species... So given the huge volume of what are effectively wc animals that are being exported on what premise are you basing the argument that cb ball pythons are really reducing demand for wc animals? (-particularly since it is only a matter of time before the populations begin to collapse from insufficient recrutiment).
> ...


I will spend some time reflecting on your points, Ed, and will respond with my thoughts and any data that I'm able to find that supports my position that captive breeding can reduce demand for WC. In the meantime, what does everyone here *think*?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Eliminate - Never

Reduce - Absolutely


On WC Auratus. The US (and other countries apparently) exotic animal hobby needs readily available, CHEAP "representative" animals to stock retail pet shops.

Who do you think buys alll of these imports? Hobbyists make up a small percentage. Retail stores are the big boys. They buy most of the import animals. The stores need: A boa, a gecko, an iguanid, a water frog, a tree frog, a crab and .....a "dart frog". They are going to go with what is the cheapest available in order to make thier profit margin. Also the importer is paying the campesinos small amounts of money to collect the easist frogs they can - Panamanian Auratus - easy to find, exporters are insisting that that US importers take them and no CITES signature from country of origin, meaning send as many as we can.

Panamanian Auratus are being imported for far less money than for a hobbyist to produce them. No hobbyist is going to wholesale froglets for $3.00 each. That's the number we are up against. That's why not many serious hobbyists breed them.

On smuggling them...and I admit, I'm gonna have to do some more research here, but I really believe that they are being boxed up along with all sorts of other herps and birds, mammals and fish and when the WHOLE lot is confiscated for whatever reason - the auratus become "smuggled animal" numbers by default, not demand, in a future CITES report. Does that mean the US are actively trying or asking for auratus to be provided for the pet or hobby trade? I don't think so. I think their reported numbers are showing up in those other ways - otherwise, you would see odd colours and morphs in the hobby and you just don't.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

The problem with getting CB frogs to meet the demand WC frogs meet is at least two fold.

First, nationally there aren't enough mass breeders of amphibians (to my knowlegde we don't have anyone like ORA working with frogs). Tree frogs could be factory produced in large enclosures in a warehouse with minimal effort and I'd even be willing to say that with the right setup larger darts can be mass produced too. 

However, until it becomes more work and money to obtain WC frogs instead of CB ones or the current WC consumer base demands CB frogs at their petstores (like with TR clowns) wholesalers won't care where they get their frogs from. This education piece is where TWI can play a role.

Secondly, on a local level, if hobbyists want to consider themselves 'conservation minded' then they will have to get over the idea of extra froglets being their 'babies' and see them as see them as a commodity just like the rest of the pet trade. It sounds harsh, but I would rather see 100 CB baby auratus die in a pet store than 1 wild one. This especially applies to everyone who doesn't care to recoup costs (not that anyone has to) on their froglets when they dump 20 on the market here on DB. If you don't care how much money you put into them, raise them up for 3-4 months and wholesale them to a pet store or a local reptile wholesaler for next to nothing. Make contacts at the local reptile show with a jobber- inject them into the market where they are really needed and short circuit the need for WC frogs. Will this solve the problem, no, but it is a step in the right direction and it does way more than selling your frogs on DB since you are actually displacing WC frogs in the market.

Until we address these issues, I kind of cringe at the idea of legally exported mysteriosus. Sure, they breed easily, and there is less of a demand for WC mysteriosus than WC aurautus and it is more difficult to smuggle WC mysterious but I just can't bring myself to believe that legal mysteriosus in captivity will be good for the ones in the wild. It would only take 1-2 smuggling attempts, so that some advanced froggers could have fresh bloodlines, to destroy the wild population. It has proven to be practically impossible to differentiate legal and illegal frog.

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


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Let us go back to the ball python example.. the export numbers of Africa are easily found on the CITES.org website... The graph shows that there has been variations in the exports but not a consistent reduction over time as would be expected if the numbers produced in the hobby are actually reducing demand for the snakes.... There are other explinations that are just as valid such as poor hatches, droughts, over harvesting that could also explain the ups and downs in the graph..

A quick graph of the years from 1997 through 2010 (and keep in mind that 2010 isn't over so there is still six months of export time in that period shown in the following graph (which one should keep in mind that the lowest point on the graph is due to incomplete reporting by one of the countries...). It should be noted that the trend for export is again climbing.. again after 20-30 years of consistent captive breeding.. there is no indication that this has reduced the demand for ball pythons removed from the wild....


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Philsuma said:


> take them and no CITES signature from country of origin, meaning send as many as we can.


A clarification here.. setting a quota and a signature are two different things. As auratus are listed as CITES II, they have to be accompanied by paperwork. 



Philsuma said:


> Panamanian Auratus are being imported for far less money than for a hobbyist to produce them. No hobbyist is going to wholesale froglets for $3.00 each. That's the number we are up against. That's why not many serious hobbyists breed them.


Phil, at what level is that being sold for $3? I have significant doubts that pet stores in general are paying $3 for an auratus.. I have doubts that is also the landed price once handling and shipping are worked out on a per animal basis. I can see that being the price before shipping being charged to the big importers..
Based on the average retail prices of $25-35 each I think the average pet stores are probably paying closer to $10-15 a frog (which is not far off what I used to purchase them for back in the late 1980s and early 1990s..)



Philsuma said:


> On smuggling them...and I admit, I'm gonna have to do some more research here, but I really believe that they are being boxed up along with all sorts of other herps and birds, mammals and fish and when the WHOLE lot is confiscated for whatever reason - the auratus become "smuggled animal" numbers by default, not demand, in a future CITES report. Does that mean the US are actively trying or asking for auratus to be provided for the pet or hobby trade? I don't think so. I think their reported numbers are showing up in those other ways - otherwise, you would see odd colours and morphs in the hobby and you just don't.


When one digs through the traffic reports on the seizures, they list everything seized at the time and if often is just the auratus.. The only problem is that the listings also don't list all of the refused shipments which are returned to the exporter...


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

The ball python example leaves me kind of puzzled. Surely with the amount of captive breeding there is enough produced to sustain the hobby. I can't help but think that these imports are based more on trying to find the next big genetic oddity to produce the crazy new designer morph. Does an animal that is bred for designer morphs really portay a good example to oppose a single morph species?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Aurotaenia said:


> First, nationally there aren't enough mass breeders of amphibians (to my knowlegde we don't have anyone like ORA working with frogs). Tree frogs could be factory produced in large enclosures in a warehouse with minimal effort and I'd even be willing to say that with the right setup larger darts can be mass produced too.


And this is part of the problem, for many of the species seen in the pet trade, the demand exceeds the captive bred supply by an enormous amount. The scale of this is easily underestimated when one looks at the classified ads on various forums and sees hundreds of cb animals for sale, and doesn't actually look at the history of commonly bred species listed under CITES to see if it is true or not. 
It is only when there is a low demand for a species that captive breeding on the hobbyist scale is likely to be able to supply enough species to deal with the demand... 



Aurotaenia said:


> Secondly, on a local level, if hobbyists want to consider themselves 'conservation minded' then they will have to get over the idea of extra froglets being their 'babies' and see them as see them as a commodity just like the rest of the pet trade. It sounds harsh, but I would rather see 100 CB baby auratus die in a pet store than 1 wild one. This especially applies to everyone who doesn't care to recoup costs (not that anyone has to) on their froglets when they dump 20 on the market here on DB. If you don't care how much money you put into them, raise them up for 3-4 months and wholesale them to a pet store or a local reptile wholesaler for next to nothing. Make contacts at the local reptile show with a jobber- inject them into the market where they are really needed and short circuit the need for WC frogs. Will this solve the problem, no, but it is a step in the right direction and it does way more than selling your frogs on DB since you are actually displacing WC frogs in the market.


I whole heartedly support this method. Each animal that is not purchased by a pet store is in reality one less that is taken from the wild. 


Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

jubjub47 said:


> The ball python example leaves me kind of puzzled. Surely with the amount of captive breeding there is enough produced to sustain the hobby. I can't help but think that these imports are based more on trying to find the next big genetic oddity to produce the crazy new designer morph. Does an animal that is bred for designer morphs really portay a good example to oppose a single morph species?


Hi Tim,

The producers in Africa are well aware of the value of the different morphs and pull them and hold them aside to sell to the highest bidder.. 

Between Europe, Japan and the USA, there is still that large of a demand for ball pythons. The level of production in captivity isn't even close enough to dent the demand... As I noted just a second ago, this is the problem when one is looking at ads for cb animals, it is easy to get the impression that it is making a difference when in reality it is just a drop in a very very large bucket... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

jubjub47 said:


> Ed, I completely agree with you and understand your point. One thing that I think should be weighed into this example though is that auratus have many different populations/morphs and these imports are many times new to particular populations and such. It's hard to compare a species like this with one like mysteriousis based on that alone. I would suggest standard leucs might be a good example of a pretty sustained species that does a good job with little wc stock entering the hobby.


The numbers of leucomelas out of Guyana pretty haven't changed much since 1998 but the imports have been consistently at the maximal level set for export by Guyana.. if the number produced was decreasing demand wouldn't we have seen a decrease in imports? 

How about we look at other species then.. what about red eyes? or Ball pythons? How about boas? Boas have been continually imported since 1977 (when they were added to CITES)... 

Ed


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

Ed said:


> The numbers of leucomelas out of Guyana pretty haven't changed much since 1998 but the imports have been consistently at the maximal level set for export by Guyana.. if the number produced was decreasing demand wouldn't we have seen a decrease in imports?
> 
> How about we look at other species then.. what about red eyes? or Ball pythons? How about boas? Boas have been continually imported since 1977 (when they were added to CITES)...
> 
> Ed


Other than the banded leucs which have come in over the recent years, I don't think I've see wc standard leucs offered in quite some time. Maybe they're not being exported to the US? 

I agree that your examples are true and valid, but it still can be run down the designer morph debate with the cited species. Red eyes keep appearing with all sorts of different genetic traits and so do the boas. Whether that really has anything to do with the import numbers I don't know, but it can't help. 

I think it really comes down to members of programs like ASN working to keep the lines genetically diverse and spread the word and their offspring to others at decent prices. Until that happens nothing will change.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Of course they can reduce the need for WC. Azureus for example. 
I agree w/ this statement as I`ve said many times, if people go to their local pet shops and take them under wing we could change a lot. Most people don`t see the good in going to their local petshops and teaching them and selling them ff`s. They think it`s too much work or don`t want to give their frogs over to such conditions. 
How many people are breeding auratus at the moment? Not many compareds to the number of thumbs being bred. So yes, cb can actually turn frogs into unwanted if they are always up for sale in certain groups. 
These stores order from the same importer over and over and they get 3 dart frogs, a couple snakes, geckos etc. If people offered 10 lots w/ no shipping charges and supplied ff`s things would change all over the country. Pet shops would stop adding certain darts to their orders, and w/ ff`s being supplied and info, the dart sales would go up. People who are breeding cobalts could then trade w/ people breeding azureus, etc. to up your diversity that you could offer pet shops.



Aurotaenia said:


> The problem with getting CB frogs to meet the demand WC frogs meet is at least two fold.
> 
> First, nationally there aren't enough mass breeders of amphibians (to my knowlegde we don't have anyone like ORA working with frogs). Tree frogs could be factory produced in large enclosures in a warehouse with minimal effort and I'd even be willing to say that with the right setup larger darts can be mass produced too.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> Of course they can reduce the need for WC. Azureus for example. .


How has cb reduced the demand for azureus? For most years, that frog was prohibited from export.. (since 1997 only 1200 have been exported compared to 28,736 D. tinctorius during the same period...). 

Ed


----------



## Boondoggle (Dec 9, 2007)

Ed said:


> How about boas? Boas have been continually imported since 1977 (when they were added to CITES)...


...which is hard to understand. You can hardly even give away standard captive bred boas in my area.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Boondoggle said:


> ...which is hard to understand. You can hardly even give away standard captive bred boas in my area.


Some of that is the continued desire for "new blood"... 

Ed


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

jubjub47 said:


> The ball python example leaves me kind of puzzled. Surely with the amount of captive breeding there is enough produced to sustain the hobby. I can't help but think that these imports are based more on trying to find the next big genetic oddity to produce the crazy new designer morph. Does an animal that is bred for designer morphs really portay a good example to oppose a single morph species?


This is what I heard about the ball python hobby and it's doubly frightening when considering the possiblities with our frogs...

The CB ball pythons are not being released back into the pet trade as a whole.

Why? Because so much line breeding and designer traits are being bred for, that breeders are scared that one of their possible morphs, that appears plain and unremarkable, may turn out to grow to adulthood and be bred by someone else and produce a highly desired or remarkable animal.

In order to not have that happen - competition for designer morphs...the breeders do not release all those ball pythons back into the hobby via pet stores ect, hence the continual need for additional "Ranched" African animals.

If true.....what a horrible, sad, sickening state of affairs that the US hobby finds itself in. At least the dart frog hobby hasn't gone that route.....yet.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Phil,

On average of the last 9 years exports of ball pythons.. the breeders would have to have been releasing 212,726 per year to cause the net demand on the wild caught animals to be zero. I have a hard time thinking all of the breeders are sitting on literally hundreds of thousands of offspring (particularly when it can take on average 2 years for a female to reach breeding size/age) while waiting to prove them out. 

Ed


----------



## swampfoxjjr (Nov 13, 2007)

Ed, I was hoping you could help me wrap my mind around something because I find this kind of subject to be infinitely more productive than the "crusader" topics of the past few months.

In your estimation if local hobbyists were to give away their offspring for free (even going so far as to pay for the shipping costs out of pocket) to other hobbyists or perhaps even local pet shops would it have any positive outcome for the export scene?

I ask because I am caught in a bit of a logic whirlpool. In my personal/career life (read outside of dendrobatids) I have found demand and perceived value (ie price) to be fairly inseparable in terms of an economic market. If we assume this to be correct for the exotic pet trade/hobby, which I admit it may not be, I cannot seem to find my way out of the rabbit hole on this equation. I will use leopard geckos for my basic example because I have little to no experience with the snake species you referenced.

When the Blizzard leo's first showed up as a result of heavy line breeding the initial price for the offspring tripled in the first two months. As the price rose, even though conceivably production was also on the rise, the demand continued to rise. This however, is a designer morph equation much like the python example you gave. I think it fueled the export of additional "nominant" WC leos because the search for the next genetic trait was where the money was at. If people had simply given away the offspring of the initial $1200 breeding stock of Blizzards (I know illogical but hear me out) I think perhaps demand for the morph would have certainly been effected by the rapidly falling price given a "free" source on the market.

If we apply the logic to dart frogs however I am having trouble anticipating the end result. If I were to simply give away all the offspring produced by my Costa Rican Auratus (again purely viewed as a commodity I am not encouraging poor husbandry choices) I feel my actions would cause at the very least a minor fluctuation in the pricing of that morph in this community. It follows that if enough of us did this with Costa Rican Auratus we could reduce the worth of Captive bred animals enough to effect the worthiness of the animal from an export perspective (I know Costa Rica does not legally export these animals I am just using an example).

However, I am not in this hobby to make money. As such I am not involved in importing any animals. There are many people who are. My actions would impact them negatively and perhaps, if my actions caught on could force established businesses out. Herein lies the problem I cannot solve. Have I truly helped? I don't own every morph of dart frog that is in this hobby. If I provide an avenue to acquire only the species I work with at no cost does it make the demand and cost of the morphs I don't have rise? In economic theory the answer is yes. So, in my long-winded way you see my problem. Does the good of my suggestion get completely offset by increases in exportation and demand for that which I cannot provide for free?

Tricksy logic circles...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Bear with me as my understanding of economics is from a small and distant past 



swampfoxjjr said:


> In your estimation if local hobbyists were to give away their offspring for free (even going so far as to pay for the shipping costs out of pocket) to other hobbyists or perhaps even local pet shops would it have any positive outcome for the export scene?


Other than a feel good effect.. I think the economics of the scale are out of the reach of the hobby to effect the wc problem. In an approximately ten year period there were close to 50,000 auratus imported into the United States (this does not count the numbers exported to other countries).. and this number does not count the frogs that are transacted within the country during that same period.... 



swampfoxjjr said:


> I ask because I am caught in a bit of a logic whirlpool. In my personal/career life (read outside of dendrobatids) I have found demand and perceived value (ie price) to be fairly inseparable in terms of an economic market. If we assume this to be correct for the exotic pet trade/hobby, which I admit it may not be, I cannot seem to find my way out of the rabbit hole on this equation. I will use leopard geckos for my basic example because I have little to no experience with the snake species you referenced.


And within the hobby we see this in action through the boom and bust cycles that the frogs follow.. there is a saturation level and lower price limit (usually around $15) where the hobbyist has problems selling offspring to other hobbyists (and in some occasions even giving them away) and the perception is that it is too common to command a lot of interest. As a result, other than a few people really interested in the species, people divest from that species and over the next few years the population crashes until it again becomes a popular species (as an example, E. tricolor/anthyoni has gone through this more than once...) 




swampfoxjjr said:


> When the Blizzard leo's first showed up as a result of heavy line breeding the initial price for the offspring tripled in the first two months. As the price rose, even though conceivably production was also on the rise, the demand continued to rise. This however, is a designer morph equation much like the python example you gave. I think it fueled the export of additional "nominant" WC leos because the search for the next genetic trait was where the money was at. If people had simply given away the offspring of the initial $1200 breeding stock of Blizzards (I know illogical but hear me out) I think perhaps demand for the morph would have certainly been effected by the rapidly falling price given a "free" source on the market.
> 
> If we apply the logic to dart frogs however I am having trouble anticipating the end result. If I were to simply give away all the offspring produced by my Costa Rican Auratus (again purely viewed as a commodity I am not encouraging poor husbandry choices) I feel my actions would cause at the very least a minor fluctuation in the pricing of that morph in this community. It follows that if enough of us did this with Costa Rican Auratus we could reduce the worth of Captive bred animals enough to effect the worthiness of the animal from an export perspective (I know Costa Rica does not legally export these animals I am just using an example).


The scale is just too small to have the effect.. if approximately 5000 frogs are coming in and retailing for $20-40 each.. how many do you think you would have to produce and give away to reduce the demand for imports? 



swampfoxjjr said:


> However, I am not in this hobby to make money. As such I am not involved in importing any animals. There are many people who are. My actions would impact them negatively and perhaps, if my actions caught on could force established businesses out. Herein lies the problem I cannot solve. Have I truly helped? I don't own every morph of dart frog that is in this hobby. If I provide an avenue to acquire only the species I work with at no cost does it make the demand and cost of the morphs I don't have rise? In economic theory the answer is yes. So, in my long-winded way you see my problem. Does the good of my suggestion get completely offset by increases in exportation and demand for that which I cannot provide for free?
> 
> Tricksy logic circles...


Tricksy indeed... 

If I can cover my feed bills and maybe upgrade my cages, I think I have a good year. There are people I do give animals to on a routine basis.. If they hatch, I have animals that are designated to go to several school programs.. (and I am getting involved with the local 4-H and will donate some animals to them). I do produce three toed box turtles which I sell at below wholesale rates to a pet store that I know would otherwise carry wc turtles. The demand for box turtles that take actively take pelleted foods in addition to the other foods has resulted in a demand that I can't keep up with.... 

Ed


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

swampfoxjjr said:


> Ed, I was hoping you could help me wrap my mind around something because I find this kind of subject to be infinitely more productive than the "crusader" topics of the past few months.
> 
> In your estimation if local hobbyists were to give away their offspring for free (even going so far as to pay for the shipping costs out of pocket) to other hobbyists or perhaps even local pet shops would it have any positive outcome for the export scene?
> 
> ...





Ed said:


> The scale is just too small to have the effect.. if approximately 5000 frogs are coming in and retailing for $20-40 each.. how many do you think you would have to produce and give away to reduce the demand for imports?
> 
> 
> If I can cover my feed bills and maybe upgrade my cages, I think I have a good year. There are people I do give animals to on a routine basis.. If they hatch, I have animals that are designated to go to several school programs.. (and I am getting involved with the local 4-H and will donate some animals to them). I do produce three toed box turtles which I sell at below wholesale rates to a pet store that I know would otherwise carry wc turtles. The demand for box turtles that take actively take pelleted foods in addition to the other foods has resulted in a demand that I can't keep up with....
> ...


Like Ed was saying the biggest problem is the fact that hobbyists cannot produce the numbers of frogs needed to satiate the 'need' for wild caught frogs.

Also, giving them away to other hobbyists does nothing to help the problem of the high numbers of imports (how many hobbyists buy WC auratus?) and like you and Ed mentioned can hurt the frog's 'status' in the hobby. Instead, you should find a way to get them into pet stores either directly or through wholesalers and jobbers.

Just a note: This doesn't mean you shouldn't give away frogs to other hobbyists, as we all do, but also consider selling cheaply (especially in large quantities) to commercial enterprises. You won't be hurting the frog's status in the hobby as the price will be marked up and you may prevent that wholesaler from buying one batch of WC frogs.


----------



## swampfoxjjr (Nov 13, 2007)

Thank you both! Lost cause of course but worth the mental mastication of exploring the reasons behind the fail rather than just succumbing to it.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

And how many wc have you heard about being smuggled in? or out of surinam?
The problem w/ auratus is that if the country sends them out they are in the middle of the pet market distribution center. No matter how many you breed they will always be wc sold because the people who breed auratus are not in that loop along w/ the rest of the amphibians and reptiles available thru those importers(it`s easy for the pet shops to order from one place). if people would go to their local pet shops and offer cb good sized auratus(and azureus and leucs, etc. thru trading if they aren`t breeding them) at 10-25$ ea all over the country we would have our own distribution network which, w/out shipping costs and a guaranteed live animal to sell, since hobbyists are also providing knowledge and ff`s would trump wc imports. No shipping is good for pet shops in the winter. Then the auratus would sit in the wholesalers warehouse and they wouldn`t accept them anymore because pet shops would already have a source they wouldn`t want to pi$$ off.
Then keep your pairs alive and breeding for 13+ years and we don`t need the wc new blood because we`d only go thru less then 10 generations in 100 years.



Ed said:


> How has cb reduced the demand for azureus? For most years, that frog was prohibited from export.. (since 1997 only 1200 have been exported compared to 28,736 D. tinctorius during the same period...).
> 
> Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

As long as importers are required to buy auratus to get other frogs they will keep coming and there is nothing we can do about it.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Yes there is. When the importers are not getting a good deal buying the auratus w/ the others, because they don`t sell, they`ll stop. A business is in it to make money. if the auratus drive up the price of the other animals because they don`t sell, theyll let it be known that they can`t take them anymore.


Tony said:


> As long as importers are required to buy auratus to get other frogs they will keep coming and there is nothing we can do about it.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> And how many wc have you heard about being smuggled in? or out of surinam? .


Whether or not I have heard of illegally imported azureus (and I have), there is no evidence that captive breeding has changed the demand for wild caught animals as there is nothing with which to compare it. As azureus have been legal in the pet trade for a long time, any wc frogs would be immediately laundered into the hobby without any evidence. 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

OK Ed. Why anyone would want to go thru what Ron Gagliardo described to get a couple $50 frogs is beyond my logic. As long as you keep comparing rare in nature frogs w/ auratus that are ubiquitos and breed like rabbits no one is going to be able to debate you. Each animal has it`s unique situation(prolificity in captivity and nature, color, popularity, laws against smuggling in the country of origin or elsewhere,price,ease of acquisition, etc.).

I can tell you right now though that if they were never bred in captivity, the price would be much much higher as they were one of the highest priced darts, even cb when they were first being offered. Also there would be A LOT more smuggling of azureus going on strictly because of the high price they`d demand.



Ed said:


> Whether or not I have heard of illegally imported azureus (and I have), there is no evidence that captive breeding has changed the demand for wild caught animals as there is nothing with which to compare it. As azureus have been legal in the pet trade for a long time, any wc frogs would be immediately laundered into the hobby without any evidence.
> 
> Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> OK Ed. Why anyone would want to go thru what Ron Gagliardo described to get a couple $50 frogs is beyond my logic. As long as you keep comparing rare in nature frogs w/ auratus that are ubiquitos and breed like rabbits no one is going to be able to debate you. Each animal has it`s unique situation(prolificity in captivity and nature, color, popularity, laws against smuggling in the country of origin or elsewhere,price,ease of acquisition, etc.).
> 
> I can tell you right now though that if they were never bred in captivity, the price would be much much higher as they were one of the highest priced darts, even cb when they were first being offered. Also there would be A LOT more smuggling of azureus going on strictly because of the high price they`d demand.


Because they would want new bloodlines..(and that is what I was told) the frogs released legally into the hobby from NAIB descended from less than ten frogs (if my memory) serves me correctly. That is one of the main reasons, that AZA reimported the azureus and set up as stud book to track thier population to try and manage the genetics of the population.. 

Not breeding in captivity is something that often keeps the price up and isn't really relevent.. Arguing that it is simply hard to get to the frog doesn't mean someone won't do it. If that was the case, many of the newly described species wouldn't make it onto the market so quickly after description.. not all of those are in locations that are easy to collect.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> OK Ed. Why anyone would want to go thru what Ron Gagliardo described to get a couple $50 frogs is beyond my logic. As long as you keep comparing rare in nature frogs w/ auratus that are ubiquitos and breed like rabbits no one is going to be able to debate you. Each animal has it`s unique situation(prolificity in captivity and nature, color, popularity, laws against smuggling in the country of origin or elsewhere,price,ease of acquisition, etc.).
> .


Okay Aaron,

As you don't like the example of auratus and its 30 year history of captive breeding and easy reference to the numbers imported in the USA (and it should be noted for auratus that those are the numbers for the USA alone and do not include Europe or Asia), name one species of dendrobatid that has had a decrease in exports due to the numbers produced in captivity and show the data on which you are basing the information. I've shown hard numbers with the auratus example (and with the ball python example (and I'll be able to show hard data when the reporting for RETFs starts))... lets see you produce a dendrobatid counter example with hard numbers.. 

I noted above that in the same period where 1200 azureus were exported, more than 28,000 D. tinctorius were exported.. that tells me if azureus were up for legal export, they would be coming out in the boat fulls... and that we aren't doing a good job of keeping up with the demand for tincts... 

Ed


----------



## chadbandman (Dec 3, 2007)

Ed & Aaron, 

I really enjoy reading posts from each of you. Once an animals reach a certain level their no longer considered animals and become commodities. Baby balls, Leopard geckos, and some darts fr/wc are commodities animals. Once an animal can be bought in such # that it gets a skew # from one of the chain stores that's the point where it happens. 

There were so many wc balls left over this year that had they not been imported the pet market would have been sustained. I know of one agri/rep biz that had 10,000 from 09 left over. The big breeders are all the same. 

The thing that everyone is really missing talking about wc balls. The animal is $3-4 landed here. Wholesales for $20 and then retails for $69.99. The reptile trade is the only thing I know of where the next person makes more than the first...If I follow this model I can Wholesale tincs for $25 the jobber sells to the pet store for $50 and they retail for $99.99. I think Aaron id on to something w/networking w/others.

I've been swimming in this pool for a long time.When somebody pees in the pool it hurt everyone.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

chadbandman said:


> Ed & Aaron,
> 
> I really enjoy reading posts from each of you. Once an animals reach a certain level their no longer considered animals and become commodities. Baby balls, Leopard geckos, and some darts fr/wc are commodities animals. Once an animal can be bought in such # that it gets a skew # from one of the chain stores that's the point where it happens.
> 
> ...


I would argue that they are commondities regardless of the numbers... 

There are a lot of commodities that are sold/traded etc that function the same way.. there is a chain of sale for most products (unless we are dealing with monopolies or large collectives who can sell directly to the final consumer). It doesn't matter if it is a chicken egg or a piece of iron ore destined to be a car part (or a piece of scrap being recycled), it will follow a chain of sales in which the prices increases as it goes up the chain. 

One of the differences often seen in the pet trade that is not that common elsewhere, is that in the typical pet store sales progression, prices can double or more at each stage. 

There appeared to be a overall reducting in sales of pets and thier products over the last couple of years due to the recession.. that may put a short term damper on the imports but I'm going to be surprised if it changes anything in the long run.. (as exports of ball pythons is on track to be a large export year for 2010 based on the CITES numbers). 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

How can you produce wc in captivity?(if people want wc then you can`t talk them out of it or replace it w/ cb) It`s not my fault that the AZA can`t keep up it`s studbooks. If these animals come into the system, they get sent out. It`s not that we can`t produce enough, it`s that we can`t hit the right market. People sell tincs here under $25ea. if that ain`t enough....
As in Eu, when people think they don`t have enough "bloodlines"(the rumor there is that frogs won`t breed past 2-3 generations, which is husbandry related, not inbreeding related) they will buy WC. Just because they import them doesn`t mean we need them. How many of those auratus dies at the importer and never made it to a sale. The data isn`t out there for me to prove anything(just like you said we can`t get data from them not importing them if they ARE importing them. If they didn`t import them they may not have made it here to get sold). I just know that morphs that used to be smuggled don`t seem to be smuggled in the #`s they used to and I believe it`s because we produce them here.
And for auratus your talking about a frog most people don`t get into anymore because they think you can`t make money at breeding them. The "hobby" runs like a pyramid scam. I know of people who buy breeding pairs and complain when they go down to half price by the time they breed them. The frogs in question are quite prolific and the people can still make money off them but they don`t want to have to take care of more frogs to make the money. I could supply the country w/ enough everything w/ only a couple people from this board helping to produce more frogs that would be sold in the US. The reason we loose species/morphs is because of the competition factor. I wouldn`t have got rid of my tincs and auratus if I could place them all. But I couldn`t. These are marketing problems not prolificity problems. It`s not hard to produce dart frogs it`s hard to find the buyers before they buy WC at their local pet shop.

Not only that but you have to work against hobbyists who don`t want to sell their frogs to pet shops. So they drop the price lower and lower here to try and get rid of them. People see this and they stop buying them and there are still tons of people in the US wanting them but they don`t know about here.

I know bicolor, terribilis and aurotaenia haven`t been imported wc since we started breeding them. I`ve produced thousands(over 12 years) and still sell them all, although wc are coming in from colombia they are NOT terribilis. I don`t have any #`s but there is my counter to your auratus example. More people may want them but they don`t want to pay the current price, but they won`t go to wc because they would`nt be cheaper.
No business breeding darts can hit all the wholesalers, no wholesaler would usually pay for an extra shipment when they get numerous types of animals in one shipment from another country. If I bred leopard geckos, crested, monitors, boas, pythons AND dart frogs, I could offer what could be offered from the wild. The diversity needed to break into the wholesale distribution system. We can`t get people here to buy higher priced anything if it can be made in another country cheaper, even if the quality isn`t there. China has kinda set a precedent for that.

I KNOW there is a way around the imports but there isn`t a paper out there doing the research and proving my point and I don`t have time to research and publish one for you Ed. Sorry.

And I`ve had jobbers tell me"why would I buy the wc auratus, I can get them from you and yours live" so captive breeding DOES make a difference. Although when a new species is described, there isn`t already cb going on so we can`t use that as an example. Although I don`t think people are braving treacherous conditions for frogs already in the hobby, they move on to some other morph, a newer one not in captivity. What we can`t supply is something that`s not already in the hobby thru captive breeding. What ruins us producing enough is the people who always want something new as the morphs already in the hobby aren`t good enough, we can`t fix that human flaw.

So, we can easily breed enough frogs for human consumption, we can`t break the distribution system and be there everytime someone wants a frog.

.


Ed said:


> Okay Aaron,
> 
> As you don't like the example of auratus and its 30 year history of captive breeding and easy reference to the numbers imported in the USA (and it should be noted for auratus that those are the numbers for the USA alone and do not include Europe or Asia), name one species of dendrobatid that has had a decrease in exports due to the numbers produced in captivity and show the data on which you are basing the information. I've shown hard numbers with the auratus example (and with the ball python example (and I'll be able to show hard data when the reporting for RETFs starts))... lets see you produce a dendrobatid counter example with hard numbers..
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> How can you produce wc in captivity?(if people want wc then you can`t talk them out of it or replace it w/ cb) It`s not my fault that the AZA can`t keep up it`s studbooks.



Where did I indicate that it was your fault? The azureus were imported for the Zoo's before there was a big push for a wide variety of studbooks. When they were evaluated, it was shown that because they hadn't been genetically managed (tracked) to determine which were and were not overly inbred, they imported a new group which has since been tracked... (this was also in part at the request of Surinam as azureus was being used as an umbrella species to protect a wide amount of habitat.) There is a lesson here for the hobby that has continued to be ignored by most of the hobby... 



frogfarm said:


> If these animals come into the system, they get sent out. It`s not that we can`t produce enough, it`s that we can`t hit the right market. People sell tincs here under $25ea. if that ain`t enough....


Obviously just selling them for that price isn't enough.. as I've repeatedly noticed, it isn't the price it is the quantity that is produced.. if it was sufficient then there would be doubt that 28,000 tincts would have been exported. 



frogfarm said:


> As in Eu, when people think they don`t have enough "bloodlines"(the rumor there is that frogs won`t breed past 2-3 generations, which is husbandry related, not inbreeding related) they will buy WC. Just because they import them doesn`t mean we need them. How many of those auratus dies at the importer and never made it to a sale. The data isn`t out there for me to prove anything(just like you said we can`t get data from them not importing them if they ARE importing them. If they didn`t import them they may not have made it here to get sold). I just know that morphs that used to be smuggled don`t seem to be smuggled in the #`s they used to and I believe it`s because we produce them here.



If there was sufficient cb animals being produced then there would not be a need to export/import 50,000 auratus regardless of the rate of mortality in the chain of custody to the pet store. 

Or have people switched to other morphs? There is no evidence that the total level of smuggling has declined. Other species may simply be targeted based on fiscal benefits. 




frogfarm said:


> And for auratus your talking about a frog most people don`t get into anymore because they think you can`t make money at breeding them.


Is that the real problem or is it because people don't sell into the pet stores as was noted in another post above... If we are importing thousands of auratus pretty consistently for at least ten years and if memory serves me for at least 25-30 years, then there is a consistent market for them, so there has to be a different idea than they can't make money. The imports demonstrate that there is a consistent demand.... 




frogfarm said:


> The "hobby" runs like a pyramid scam. I know of people who buy breeding pairs and complain when they go down to half price by the time they breed them. The frogs in question are quite prolific and the people can still make money off them but they don`t want to have to take care of more frogs to make the money. I could supply the country w/ enough everything w/ only a couple people from this board helping to produce more frogs that would be sold in the US. The reason we loose species/morphs is because of the competition factor. I wouldn`t have got rid of my tincs and auratus if I could place them all. But I couldn`t. These are marketing problems not prolificity problems. It`s not hard to produce dart frogs it`s hard to find the buyers before they buy WC at their local pet shop.


Given that just between auratus and tinctorius, the numbers required are between 5000 and ten thousand frogs a year I have more than a little skeptism to the claim that just a couple of people could suppy the total market as that also does not include the demand for other species.... (particularly as I have a lot of experience dealing with a large collection of amphibians and reptiles on a daily basis). 





frogfarm said:


> I know bicolor, terribilis and aurotaenia haven`t been imported wc since we started breeding them. I`ve produced thousands(over 12 years) and still sell them all, although wc are coming in from colombia they are NOT terribilis. I don`t have any #`s but there is my counter to your auratus example.


No it isn't the counter to the auratus example as there is no evidence to support the animals you have produced have reduced the demand for wc animals. All this provides is a statement that you have bred a lot of frogs with no support that it reduces the demand for wc. Auratus are imported by the thousands and there has been no sign that it changes the demand when those numbers are added to the ones that are captive bred.. your example does nothing to disprove that it isn't the same as for auratus.. 



frogfarm said:


> No business breeding darts can hit all the wholesalers, no wholesaler would usually pay for an extra shipment when they get numerous types of animals in one shipment from another country. If I bred leopard geckos, crested, monitors, boas, pythons AND dart frogs, I could offer what could be offered from the wild. The diversity needed to break into the wholesale distribution system. We can`t get people here to buy higher priced anything if it can be made in another country cheaper, even if the quality isn`t there. China has kinda set a precedent for that.


Except that various wholesalers routinely advertise for whole clutches of frogs.. they are specifically requesting frogs and not mixed lots.... there are wholesellers and retailers out there who are specifically looking for the frogs. 




frogfarm said:


> I KNOW there is a way around the imports but there isn`t a paper out there doing the research and proving my point and I don`t have time to research and publish one for you Ed. Sorry.


Not surprising, as nothing you have brought up demonstrates that cb reduces demand for wild caught animals. 



frogfarm said:


> And I`ve had jobbers tell me"why would I buy the wc auratus, I can get them from you and yours live" so captive breeding DOES make a difference.


Then why have we been consistently importing auratus for 20 plus years? From the above statements, it sounds like people decide it isn't worth thier time to sell to the various dealers so the need for wc animals is required to make up the difference...


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

See, 10,000 balls left over from 09. Do you think we need anymore this year? But they keep on sending them don`t they... So the #`s are a bit skewed since there was a surplus this year. Also, as I stated before, if they are cheaper than cb, we can`t compete w/ that now can we. Not that we can`t produce enough, we can`t produce enough at the right price. This is what happens when you look ONLY at #`s brought in. That doesn`t mean they were all sold or thet even 50% of them lived.



Ed said:


> I would argue that they are commondities regardless of the numbers...
> 
> There are a lot of commodities that are sold/traded etc that function the same way.. there is a chain of sale for most products (unless we are dealing with monopolies or large collectives who can sell directly to the final consumer). It doesn't matter if it is a chicken egg or a piece of iron ore destined to be a car part (or a piece of scrap being recycled), it will follow a chain of sales in which the prices increases as it goes up the chain.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> See, 10,000 balls left over from 09. Do you think we need anymore this year? But they keep on sending them don`t they... So the #`s are a bit skewed since there was a surplus this year. Also, as I stated before, if they are cheaper than cb, we can`t compete w/ that now can we. Not that we can`t produce enough, we can`t produce enough at the right price. This is what happens when you look ONLY at #`s brought in. That doesn`t mean they were all sold or thet even 50% of them lived.


They don't send them unless they are paid for.. the quotas set so far for this (and not updated) year are 177200 and the ten thousand referenced above are less than 5% of the total export... As I noted this could also be due to factors such as the recession and at this time can not be taken as a indication of cb actually reducing the demand for wc animals (particularly as people are abandoning pets in record numbers at shelters as they can no longer afford to care for them). (and there were 124,700 ball pythons exported last year). 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

As I said, importers have told me they wouldn`t buy wc when I was producing said animal because mine live. If that isn`t proof for you that these jobbers are reducing the need for wc animals, I can`t help you. There are things that happen in the real world that aren`t in research papers and aren`t reflected strictly by import #`s. Your data is insufficient. Neither of us can prove anything.... Your #`s only prove that they are coming in, not that we can`t produce enough.
I can produce about 300 tincs/pair/year. That`s 16-18 pairs needed to produce 5000 a year. Terribilis can produce over 400 offspring a year. I can produce the frogs, I CAN`T stop them from importing them.
And I`m sick of you trying to make me look bad because I can`t produce research papers, you win. You argue just to argue. We`ll never be able to take away captive breeding to see how many more animals would come in so we`re argueing at something neither of us can prove. I know that if there wasn`t cb animals we`d see more imports coming in, call it my religion
Logically, however, if 15000 auratus are needed in the US every year and we produce 5000 then all we need to do is triple our breeding #`s to keep up w/ demand and hit the markets needed. It`s simple supply and demand but then add in business and people take your wholesalers and you need to find new markets, that takes away from the time you could spend producing more animals. It`s not that we can`t produce them, it`s marketing, shipping and competition rather than organization that hinders us. If we took away the competition between us and worked together, I`m sure we can make much more of a positive impact then we already have at reducing the #`s of wc needed or should I say brought in anyway....


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

And ball pythons ARE NOT frogs. They sit in a box for months at a time w/out needing to be fed, they are apples and oranges. And just because ONE wholesaler had 10,000 left over doesn`t count all the jobbers and pet stores still sitting on extras. Wholesalers will buy up balls at a low price and sit on them forever, not so w/ frogs. I know of people who lost hundreds and hundreds of auratus during shipment or after arrival, so those should be taken out of the #`s coming in as "needed" by the hobby.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> As I said, importers have told me they wouldn`t buy wc when I was producing said animal because mine live. If that isn`t proof for you that these jobbers are reducing the need for wc animals, I can`t help you. .... There are things that happen in the real world that aren`t in research papers and aren`t reflected strictly by import #`s. Your data is insufficient. Neither of us can prove anything.... ....


Then why have import numbers remained consistent for years? I can demonstrate that demand for wc frogs has not decreased. You cannot demonstrate that it has not decreased. That is pretty evident from the numbers. 




frogfarm said:


> Your #`s only prove that they are coming in, not that we can`t produce enough.
> I can produce about 300 tincs/pair/year. That`s 16-18 pairs needed to produce 5000 a year. Terribilis can produce over 400 offspring a year. I can produce the frogs, I CAN`T stop them from importing them.
> And I`m sick of you trying to make me look bad because I can`t produce research papers, you win. You argue just to argue. We`ll never be able to take away captive breeding to see how many more animals would come in so we`re argueing at something neither of us can prove. I know that if there wasn`t cb animals we`d see more imports coming in, call it my religion
> Logically, however, if 15000 auratus are needed in the US every year and we produce 5000 then all we need to do is triple our breeding #`s to keep up w/ demand and hit the markets needed. It`s simple supply and demand but then add in business and people take your wholesalers and you need to find new markets, that takes away from the time you could spend producing more animals. It`s not that we can`t produce them, it`s marketing, shipping and competition rather than organization that hinders us. If we took away the competition between us and worked together, I`m sure we can make much more of a positive impact then we already have at reducing the #`s of wc needed or should I say brought in anyway....


If the hobby was producing the numbers needed to satisfy the demand, then there would be a decrease in the numbers imported (accepting on face value your statement that the dealers would prefer cb frogs (which is not required as a proof for my point). There has been no decrease... the imports have remained static and shows that there is a consistent demand for the wc frogs.... 

You are correct it is a simple supply and demand equation and it is very obvious that the supply does not meet the demand hence the large requirement for the wild caught frogs. In theory a breeder collective if large enough consistently produce enough frogs that it might under optimal conditions produce enough frogs to put a dent in it, but I again, I have doubts that it requires as few people as you aver. 


And as a clarification point, I am not referring to documented data sources (like CITES import and export quotas) to make you look bad, but to demonstrate that my point is based on hard facts which is not subject to the problems from anecdotal evidence over time. 

On CAl Zoo's website, they have had a standing ad for captive bred offspring of all species... While there aren't any ads today, if we give it some time, there will be ads on kingsnake looking for whole clutches.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> And ball pythons ARE NOT frogs. They sit in a box for months at a time w/out needing to be fed, they are apples and oranges. And just because ONE wholesaler had 10,000 left over doesn`t count all the jobbers and pet stores still sitting on extras. Wholesalers will buy up balls at a low price and sit on them forever, not so w/ frogs. I know of people who lost hundreds and hundreds of auratus during shipment or after arrival, so those should be taken out of the #`s coming in as "needed" by the hobby.


No they should not be removed from the number as those auratus are required to meet the demand. As an example it should be an example of why cb is even more important.. 

And I didn't bring up the ball pythons, it was tossed out there as an example of how cb had reduced the demand for imports... as with the frogs, there is no evidence to support that claim. 

If you sit bush baby ball pythons for months in a box, you will have a box of dead and dying ball pythons.. Unlike adults which are known to go off food in the wild or when stressed and have the body reserves to handle this fast, this does not work for hatchings. They need a feeding schedule... 

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Ok. Last shot. This actually happened to me but I could write it up into a paper if you like
A person comes to my table looking for auratus. They would buy cb or wc but opt to buy cb if available. They buy there cb frog from me, in turn REDUCING the # of wc needed to supply our demand for frogs. Whether or not the demand for wc is going up because of #`s of people getting interested in darts or wholesalers are "padding the need" or "subsidizing the bringing in of wc matters little, cb animals still REDUCE the need for wc. If animals are made available from a different country they will be sold until cb outweighs them such that education tells people (wholesalers) that they aren`t needed anymore. The #`s coming in only reflect what importers think they can sell. They KNOW that animals are going to die. Until they loose enough money to stop importing auratus the lag time between what we are actually producing, what`s needed and what comes in changes, it`ll look like we need more than we actually do. And then they may still send them in for free to wholesalers to get rid of other things they have and clear out what they have from the system that`s already in place. Change takes time. It`ll happen eventually that cb will drive out the need for large imports as pets. The #`s of tincts coming into the US from Surinam looks to be small #`s compared to ksnake and frognet 10+ years ago. Eu is buying them up like crazy but we can`t really do anything about that.
We don`t NEED 90% of what comes in. When no auratus were being imported the price was up and we supplied what was needed at a higher price until they started coming in from Panama again, then the costa rican and hawaiian were lost for the more ubiquitos panamanian and people reduced breeding auratus. When tehre is another source that`s more into the distribution system(maybe 10% of the people who buy dart frogs are on DB) they`ll sell because they are more organized into the distribution system and people give up trying to compete. We need education and distribution to win out over wc animals as pets.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

Ed said:


> Is that the real problem or is it because people don't sell into the pet stores as was noted in another post above... If we are importing thousands of auratus pretty consistently for at least ten years and if memory serves me for at least 25-30 years, then there is a consistent market for them, so there has to be a different idea than they can't make money. The imports demonstrate that there is a consistent demand....





Ed said:


> Except that various wholesalers routinely advertise for whole clutches of frogs.. they are specifically requesting frogs and not mixed lots.... there are wholesellers and retailers out there who are specifically looking for the frogs.





Ed said:


> Then why have we been consistently importing auratus for 20 plus years? From the above statements, it sounds like people decide it isn't worth thier time to sell to the various dealers so the need for wc animals is required to make up the difference...


The reasons that people don't sell to wholesalers run from a lack of understanding to arrogance. I don't know how to even begin convincing people to unload their extra offspring on the wholesale market. 

I don't think that every frog needs to be sold wholesale but anything that is common and having a hard time being moved in the hobby should be moved out of this segment of the hobby and made available to the general public rather than slashing the prices internally and driving people away from the frogs. The hobby can act like a refugium especially if people register their frogs with TWI's ASN.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> A person comes to my table looking for auratus. They would buy cb or wc but opt to buy cb if available. They buy there cb frog from me, in turn REDUCING the # of wc needed to supply our demand for frogs. Whether or not the demand for wc is going up because of #`s of people getting interested in darts or wholesalers are "padding the need" or "subsidizing the bringing in of wc matters little, cb animals still REDUCE the need for wc.


I haven't argued that there may not be any reduction (read through my posts)... 




frogfarm said:


> And then they may still send them in for free to wholesalers to get rid of other things they have and clear out what they have from the system that`s already in place.


Things are not sent in for free from out of country. If they show up in a shipment and are not accounted for, the entire shipment is refused/confiscated etc. Typically they are used as filler to get the order together.. but the numbers coming in indicate that there is a substantial demand in the pet trade for auratus. 




frogfarm said:


> Change takes time. It`ll happen eventually that cb will drive out the need for large imports as pets.


With respect to a number of morphs and species it has been more than 20 years and we have yet to see a reduction in exports/imports... 





frogfarm said:


> The #`s of tincts coming into the US from Surinam looks to be small #`s compared to ksnake and frognet 10+ years ago. Eu is buying them up like crazy but we can`t really do anything about that. .


This still supports the argument that the supply of captive bred animals is insufficient to meet demand. 




frogfarm said:


> We don`t NEED 90% of what comes in. When no auratus were being imported the price was up and we supplied what was needed at a higher price until they started coming in from Panama again, then the costa rican and hawaiian were lost for the more ubiquitos panamanian and people reduced breeding auratus. When tehre is another source that`s more into the distribution system(maybe 10% of the people who buy dart frogs are on DB) they`ll sell because they are more organized into the distribution system and people give up trying to compete. We need education and distribution to win out over wc animals as pets.


When auratus imports were limited, price went up which is an indication that supply is not meeting demand in a market driven system... There were also large numbers being collected and shipped out of Hawaii (until people got caught relocating animals to exand ranges and make collecting easier and it was shut down)... none of this supports the argument that the captive bred supply was actually meeting demand for the frogs. It is good indicator of a market driven system where limited supply increases demand which is reflected by higher prices.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Aurotaenia said:


> I don't think that every frog needs to be sold wholesale but anything that is common and having a hard time being moved in the hobby should be moved out of this segment of the hobby and made available to the general public rather than slashing the prices internally and driving people away from the frogs. The hobby can act like a refugium especially if people register their frogs with TWI's ASN.


Agreed.. 

Ed


----------



## srrrio (May 12, 2007)

I have not had the time to keep up with this thread as much as I would like but this post of
Aarons is the one I have been thinking about this morning : 


frogfarm;481093
The problem w/ auratus is that if the country sends them out they are in the middle of the pet market distribution center. No matter how many you breed they will always be wc sold because the people who breed auratus are not in that loop along w/ the rest of the amphibians and reptiles available thru those importers(it`s easy for the pet shops to order from one place). if people would go to their local pet shops and offer cb good sized auratus(and azureus and leucs said:


> So why could we not have a website that is basically a directory dedicated to the sale of CB auratus and potentially other CB pdfs ? Advertise directly to pet shops. Have listings of people that breed pdfs in their area as well as listings for people willing to provide ff cultures. Establish competitive prices include information on why CB is better for customer, and better for pet store. There could also be care sheets available to print. These could include supplies like supplements commonly found in stores so the pet store has a financial reason to give customer a copy of the care sheet.
> 
> Breeders that register on the website can update what they have available and edit their own contact information, pricing, etc. Perhaps they also pay an annual administration fee to the site owner /administrator. It appears to me that a lot of members have their own websites, and many are not for sales but information on keeping pdfs, So surely if legal issues can be kept to a minimum, it would not be hard to do a site like this. Or perhaps it could be an offshoot of DB, a vendor or even TWI .
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

srrrio said:


> So why could we not have a website that is basically a directory dedicated to the sale of CB auratus and potentially other CB pdfs ? Advertise directly to pet shops. Have listings of people that breed pdfs in their area as well as listings for people willing to provide ff cultures. Establish competitive prices include information on why CB is better for customer, and better for pet store. There could also be care sheets available to print. These could include supplies like supplements commonly found in stores so the pet store has a financial reason to give customer a copy of the care sheet.
> 
> Breeders that register on the website can update what they have available and edit their own contact information, pricing, etc. Perhaps they also pay an annual administration fee to the site owner /administrator. It appears to me that a lot of members have their own websites, and many are not for sales but information on keeping pdfs, So surely if legal issues can be kept to a minimum, it would not be hard to do a site like this. Or perhaps it could be an offshoot of DB, a vendor or even TWI .
> 
> ...


I don't see why we couldn't put together some sort of consortium/brokerage/clearing house for wholesale frogs from the hobby. Though there are a lot of hurdles - just look at all the trouble TWI has had getting participants in the Bd study to turn in kits. Plus there would be the issue of getting the frogs to the dealers - they aren't going to want to deal with a lot of shipping as they generally handle only bulk lots.

I think the key would be to focus on creating relationships with a wholesaler or two to start with just to keep it simple with fewer points of contact. It will come down to us pushing our frogs to them rather than them coming to us.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

One of the main ways to support Captive Breeding is to attend one or both of these fantastic events - on opposite coasts.

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/northeast/53604-iad-mars-year.html

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/science-conservation/45308-microcosm-2010-a.html

no WC frogs.... ..110% CB goodness.

and if that wasn't enough.....all the conservation venues too.


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Aurotaenia said:


> I think the key would be to focus on creating relationships with a wholesaler or two to start with just to keep it simple with fewer points of contact. It will come down to us pushing our frogs to them rather than them coming to us.


I agree. People should work with their local/regional networks.


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Here are the numbers I get for Wild Caught vs. Ranched Ball Pythons imported into the U.S. between 1975 and 2009:


















Looks to me like ranching / captive breeding is causing something to happen, at least with Ball Pythons. The thing that individuals here, who say that captive breeding has had no effect on the number of imported wild caught animals, keep ignoring is that demand for exotic animals is increasing along with the increasing number of captive bred offspring, which might explain why captive breeding seems to have no effect as some are saying.


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> These are not true cb animals but "ranched" where the eggs or gravid females are collected.. which if it hasn't already will seriously impact recruitment for this species...


I seriously doubt that what you're saying is true:



> ...the ranching of 3,500 female royal pythons would only affect a couple of percentage points of the reproductive capacity of the royal python populations that are not in natural habitat.
> 
> Given the overall tendency in West Africa for forest to be converted to farmland, one can
> predict that the royal python populations are rising at a much faster rate than the current level of extraction of snakes.
> ...


----------



## srrrio (May 12, 2007)

Aurotaenia said:


> I don't see why we couldn't put together some sort of consortium/brokerage/clearing house for wholesale frogs from the hobby. Though there are a lot of hurdles - just look at all the trouble TWI has had getting participants in the Bd study to turn in kits. Plus there would be the issue of getting the frogs to the dealers - they aren't going to want to deal with a lot of shipping as they generally handle only bulk lots.
> 
> I think the key would be to focus on creating relationships with a wholesaler or two to start with just to keep it simple with fewer points of contact. It will come down to us pushing our frogs to them rather than them coming to us.





skylsdale said:


> I agree. People should work with their local/regional networks.


^^^How do local/regional networks tie into wholesalers? I am sure that my local pet stores do not work with local wholesalers for the majority of their stock. 

Chris, I guess I was thinking more of a situation where the wholesaler is basically cut out, and the relationship between local breeder/hobbyist and pet shop owner is focused on and made user friendly through the web site. 

I know what you mean by the TWI Bd deal. I’ve have read posts about starting registries and on another forum, forming a breeders group with very high standards - and at the same time watch TWI struggle to get enough samples for a study that benefits the members, PDF keepers, and the frogs themselves . It leaves me with the concerns that we all talk a big game, but action is always a bit harder. 

This is one of the reasons why I was thinking only a web based “collective or consortium” rather than a physical one. Aaron’s and your points about shipping also makes me feel that just a website that would point exotic pet shops to breeders/hobbyists in their area would be an easier first step. Simply listing sellers by geographical location with cb dart frogs available at wholesale prices, and the sellers contact info. You would need to restrict the buyers to those with resale licenses or you would get people just buying frogs for themselves and perhaps hurting local and online vendors . ..
Well anyway I have run out of steam for this evening and maybe going offtrack of OPs intent. 

Sally


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> Here are the numbers I get for Wild Caught vs. Ranched Ball Pythons imported into the U.S. between 1975 and 2009:
> 
> 
> Looks to me like ranching / captive breeding is causing something to happen, at least with Ball Pythons. The thing that individuals here, who say that captive breeding has had no effect on the number of imported wild caught animals, keep ignoring is that demand for exotic animals is increasing along with the increasing number of captive bred offspring, which might explain why captive breeding seems to have no effect as some are saying.


I noticed that you restricted the listing to the USA... please refer to the quotas I cited from the CITES website above and graphed out in a line graph... 

I strongly suggest you obtain a copy of Beissinger, S. R. in Conservation of Exploited Species (ed. J. D. Reynolds, G. M.M., Kent H. Redford, John G. Robinson) (Cambridge University Press, 2001). 

There are a lot of interesting references in there that document that cb does not mean that the pressure is reduced off the wild population, in fact the opposite is usually true and cb actually increases demand of the species. Increased demand means that a larger number of animals is required to meet the demand which in turn requires a further collection. If the captive breeding is not reducing the demand (because demand is rising) then cb is not reducing the demand for wc and instead is fueling the demand.

Also ranching (in the article you referenced in the next post) shows that they are collecting the females and then releasing them which is not a true cb situation.. it is wc animals... see my comments below.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> I seriously doubt that what you're saying is true:


I have read that report and there is no evidence in there that contradicts the potential problem with recruitment given the following from that report

1) ball pythons have a low rate of recruitment from hatchlings
2) the trappers are successful in locating snakes at least 90% of the time for collection 
3) the report does not report the rate of hatching from the collected animals so a greater number of animals are being removed than are being exported (export quota for Ghana alone as of Jan 2010 is 67,000, Welcome to CITES which if the egg clutch size has not changed means a minimum (assuming a 100% hatch rate (which is highly unlikely)) of 8400 females were removed from the wild along with an unknown number of males)
4) there is no follow up to determine the rate of survival of collected females both during captivity and post release
5) they are a long lived species (see comments below)

In wild ball pythons females only lay eggs every two to three years, so the continued removal of 67,000 plus animals from the wild population is going to significantly impact recruitment. Your reference assumes (with a much lower number of animals involved) that the effect on recruitment is not a problem which in other long lived species with low recruitments is being shown to not be true as some multi-decade studies demonstrate (see below). 

In long lived species with low recruitment rates, the loss of eggs at rate that exceeds what would normally occur (those nests are lost to the wild population) along with an associated mortality of the reproductive females (which according to that article already occur in a skewed sex ratio as the less common sex), is in the long term a problem for a population. There has been information coming out in the last 5-10 years that supports this view point (see Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies for one such study). 

The report you reference is also predicated that the parks remain as recruitment sources for the animals yet there are problems with this assumption as the parks do not serve as refuges. ... see http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/268/1484/2473.full.pdf


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

srrrio said:


> This is one of the reasons why I was thinking only a web based “collective or consortium” rather than a physical one. Aaron’s and your points about shipping also makes me feel that just a website that would point exotic pet shops to breeders/hobbyists in their area would be an easier first step. Simply listing sellers by geographical location with cb dart frogs available at wholesale prices, and the sellers contact info. You would need to restrict the buyers to those with resale licenses or you would get people just buying frogs for themselves and perhaps hurting local and online vendors . ..
> Well anyway I have run out of steam for this evening and maybe going offtrack of OPs intent.
> 
> Sally


It doesn't have to be web based but instead can simply be a local group supplying local stores. If a group just communicates between themselves as to when a store is interested in a new batch and then supplies it, it would effectively prevent the ordering of wild caught animals. 

Ed


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> I noticed that you restricted the listing to the USA...


Yes, of course I did, as anyone can see. This produces the most accurate picture of what is happening in the U.S. where most captive breeding of Ball Pythons takes place.



Ed said:


> please refer to the quotas I cited from the CITES website above and graphed out in a line graph...


No need to do that. You provided no basis for the numbers you graphed and, therefore, they should be disregarded until such time as you care to document them. 



Ed said:


> Also ranching (in the article you referenced in the next post) shows that they are collecting the females and then releasing them which is not a true cb situation.. it is wc animals... see my comments below.


It is my position that "ranching" and captive breeding produce results that are very similar, i.e. captive born offspring and minimal conservation harm, in contrast to capturing a far greater number of wild animals and exporting them out of their native environment.


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> I have read that report and there is no evidence in there that contradicts the potential problem with recruitment given the following from that report
> 
> 1) ball pythons have a low rate of recruitment from hatchlings
> 2) the trappers are successful in locating snakes at least 90% of the time for collection
> ...


Vague reports that make no mention of Ball Pythons hardly refute the research paper I referenced, which specifically investigated said animals and their conservation management.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> Yes, of course I did, as anyone can see. This produces the most accurate picture of what is happening in the U.S. where most captive breeding of Ball Pythons takes place. .


This is an unsupported opinion. 





Web Wheeler said:


> No need to do that. You provided no basis for the numbers you graphed and, therefore, they should be disregarded until such time as you care to document them. .



Actually I did reference the numbers... I don't think you bothered to read the post... as I stated above the export numbers of Africa are easily found on the CITES.org website...




Web Wheeler said:


> It is my position that "ranching" and captive breeding produce results that are very similar, i.e. captive born offspring and minimal conservation harm, in contrast to capturing a far greater number of wild animals and exporting them out of their native environment.


The problem with this statement is that ranching in this case is effectively the same as capturing and removing large numbers of wild caught animals.. when you are capturing and removing egg clutches and/or gravid females from the wild to get their egg clutches, you are removing animals from the wild population. These gravid females and eggs are not collected from enclosed areas in which the population of reproductive adults are maintained, they are wild collected... 

You have not provided any indication that this is not wild collecting.. it is simply wild collecting repackaged. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> Vague reports that make no mention of Ball Pythons hardly refute the research paper I referenced, which specifically investigated said animals and their conservation management.


I have not supplied a vague reference and your reference has flaws in its report. On a scientific basis to support a conservation program it is no better a paper than the one prepared by USGS (and was prepared by the same sort of govermental agencies..) on the possible range of burmese pythons that had them colonizing as far North as DC... 

I have pointed out the major flaws in its preperation and failure of follow-up. Denying data on other long lived species with low recruitment applies to this situation and species is poor research. Please provide proof 
1) the flaws in the paper that I pointed out are incorrect 
2) that the references that I cited do not apply to ball pythons. The paper you supplied does not provide proof as it does not address them with any supporting data or study. Simply saying that because it doesn't mention ball pythons they do not apply is not supplying any evidence to the contrary. 



Ed


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> Actually I did reference the numbers... I don't think you bothered to read the post... as I stated above the export numbers of Africa are easily found on the CITES.org website..


I'm not going to go through all the selection permutations available on the CITES website to discover the choices you made. Do you, or do you not want the readers here to know what selection choices you used to come up with the numbers on your graph?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> I'm not going to go through all the selection permutations available on the CITES website to discover the choices you made. Do you, or do you not want the readers here to know what selection choices you used to come up with the numbers on your graph?


It is on thier website and I referenced what it was.. 

Please respond to the following 

I have not supplied a vague reference and your reference has flaws in its report. On a scientific basis to support a conservation program it is no better a paper than the one prepared by USGS (and was prepared by the same sort of govermental agencies..) on the possible range of burmese pythons that had them colonizing as far North as DC... 

I have pointed out the major flaws in its preperation and failure of follow-up. Denying that data on other long lived species with low recruitment applies to this situation and species is poor research. Please provide proof 
1) the flaws in the paper that I pointed out are incorrect 
2) that the references that I cited do not apply to ball pythons. The paper you supplied does not provide proof as it does not address them with any supporting data or studies. 

Simply saying that because it doesn't mention ball pythons the references do not apply is not supplying any evidence to the contrary. 

Also please respond to the data that cb may also be increasing demand which in turn is causing a greater number of animals to be wild collected. (as referenced in f Beissinger, S. R. in Conservation of Exploited Species (ed. J. D. Reynolds, G. M.M., Kent H. Redford, John G. Robinson) (Cambridge University Press, 2001). ). The econmics of it actually support the problem as the demand increases with insufficient captive bred offspring to supply the demand, more wild caught animals are removed to meet demand..

At the moment, you seem to be dodging responding to these points by focusing on the information provided by CITES.. on the CITES.org site and correctly titled as listed on the CITES site..

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

So the upshot this long discussion.. is that 

1) there is no proof that for at least ball pythons, red eye treefrogs and auratus that captive breeding programs actually reduces demand for wild caught animals

2) there is the possibility that captive breeding actually increases demand for wild caught animals ( Beissinger, S. R. in Conservation of Exploited Species (ed. J. D. Reynolds, G. M.M., Kent H. Redford, John G. Robinson) (Cambridge University Press, 2001).)


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> So the upshot this long discussion.. is that
> 
> 1) there is no proof that for at least ball pythons, red eye treefrogs and auratus that captive breeding programs actually reduces demand for wild caught animals
> 
> 2) there is the possibility that captive breeding actually increases demand for wild caught animals ( Beissinger, S. R. in Conservation of Exploited Species (ed. J. D. Reynolds, G. M.M., Kent H. Redford, John G. Robinson) (Cambridge University Press, 2001).)


I disagree with your assessment, and I have no problem letting my position stand upon the merit of the evidence I provided.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> I disagree with your assessment, and I have no problem letting my position stand upon the merit of the evidence I provided.


Then you are declining to address the faults I pointed out in your reference and arguement? You are aware that the science behind your reference is actual less than that provided in Giant Constrictors: Biological and Management Profiles and an Establishment Risk Assessment for Nine Large Species of Pythons, Anacondas, and the Boa Constrictor
By Robert N. Reed and Gordon H. Rodda ?

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1202/pdf/OF09-1202.pdf


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Ed, as long as you define demand as $3 adult frogs, then no the wc will always be cheaper. What you don`t take into account is that most of these auratus are being sold as cb animals. If they are farmed(cb) then they aren`t wc. If your saying cb in the country of origin being cheaper than being produced here then ya, the demand for the cheaper frog, being they are both on the level of cb and being advertised as no different than american cb, will always be higher. If, however they are wc and people are being lied to then, no the demand for wc is being skewed. Since I know a lot of retailers and jobbers, all selling these latest years imports from Panama as cb then your probably looking at scam #`s and not actual #`s in demand for wc animals. To actually see if demand was being reduced, you`d have to have frogs coming in as wc(and all sold as wc) and look at the #`s of wc sold compared to the # of cb being sold and see how big the hobby has grown since the last time imports were allowed from that country and then look at the #`s in the hobby now. Since the hobby would`ve probably kept growing if there were only wc coming in, you`d then have to see if the % of people buying wc was less in comparison to the net growth of the hobby.
Your also not taking into consideration that there are tons of deaths because of the lack of care because of an unreasonable price on a commodity. Draw it out to the conclusion and people would buy thousands at .01$ea. and let 500-700 die if they could get $1 a piece for the ones that live, that`s not demand, that`s recklessness and abuse. Your trying to reduce a complex situation w/ variables to #`s of imports. If that`s how you define demand, then nothing can compete w/ that. But then again if all wc are sold as cb then yes, cb eliminated the need for wc.
Unless of course your saying that captive breeding is the only reason the hobby is growing and fueling demand and not the Nat geo specials, and the fact that amphibians are disappearing and the articles in reptiles mag, etc.etc.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> Ed, as long as you define demand as $3 adult frogs, then no the wc will always be cheaper.


Is the end consumer paying $3 for the frog? If the end consumer is not paying $3 for the frog then the demand is not for a $3 frog. I have yet to see an advertisement for a consumer for a $3 auratus. So I am not defining demand based on a $3 auratus or even a $3 red-eye treefrog. Adult wc red eyes on kingsnake are running somewhere around $25-30 dollars with the wc auratus being in the same area. In local pet stores, the price of both of those can be as much as twice that amount.. There is no end customer paying $3 for an auratus so you cannot define demand on that price. 




frogfarm said:


> What you don`t take into account is that most of these auratus are being sold as cb animals. If they are farmed(cb) then they aren`t wc. If your saying cb in the country of origin being cheaper than being produced here then ya, the demand for the cheaper frog, being they are both on the level of cb and being advertised as no different than american cb, will always be higher. If, however they are wc and people are being lied to then, no the demand for wc is being skewed. Since I know a lot of retailers and jobbers, all selling these latest years imports from Panama as cb then your probably looking at scam #`s and not actual #`s in demand for wc animals. To actually see if demand was being reduced, you`d have to have frogs coming in as wc(and all sold as wc) and look at the #`s of wc sold compared to the # of cb being sold and see how big the hobby has grown since the last time imports were allowed from that country and then look at the #`s in the hobby now. Since the hobby would`ve probably kept growing if there were only wc coming in, you`d then have to see if the % of people buying wc was less in comparison to the net growth of the hobby.


The premise of the whole argument is that cb animals reduce demand for wild caught animals and regardless of how the wc frogs are labeled, if they are being used to meet the demand then cb animals are not reducing the end demand. See my comments at the bottom.. 




frogfarm said:


> Your also not taking into consideration that there are tons of deaths because of the lack of care because of an unreasonable price on a commodity. Draw it out to the conclusion and people would buy thousands at .01$ea. and let 500-700 die if they could get $1 a piece for the ones that live, that`s not demand, that`s recklessness and abuse. Your trying to reduce a complex situation w/ variables to #`s of imports. If that`s how you define demand, then nothing can compete w/ that. But then again if all wc are sold as cb then yes, cb eliminated the need for wc.
> Unless of course your saying that captive breeding is the only reason the hobby is growing and fueling demand and not the Nat geo specials, and the fact that amphibians are disappearing and the articles in reptiles mag, etc.etc.


Actually Aaron, losses along the way are included in my arguments. They are part of the total being used to try and meet demand. If it takes ten frogs to get one to live to reach market, then ten wc frogs are being collected to attempt to meet demand. All of my arguements have included it. 

We simply cannot say that captive breeding is reducing demand at this time and as you pointed out with the magazine articles etc, you are actually supporting the argument that captive breeding may actually be increasing demand which is being met via wild caught animals (which reinforces the argument in ( Beissinger, S. R. in Conservation of Exploited Species (ed. J. D. Reynolds, G. M.M., Kent H. Redford, John G. Robinson) (Cambridge University Press, 2001).). 

It really isn't that complicated as it is simply supply and demand economics. 

What it boils down to is at this time we cannot say that captive breeding is reducing demand.. it is a good goal to work towards and people who sell thier animals with an eye towards reducing wc demand are to be commended but with some very notable exceptions, it simply hasn't occured yet and we can't claim it for the vast majority of the animals in the herp hobby. (One of a handful exceptions is the notorius red-eared slider....). 


One of the aspects cb is never going to address is the often incorrect assumption that new blood is required to keep a species stable in captivity every few years. If the populations are managed with an eye towards the long-term sustainability then they can easily be around for 100-500 years depending on the degree of participation and the number of founders *without the addition of new blood* 

The final aspect that cb is not going to address is the discovery of novel stable locality variations in the wild... those are going to create a whole new supply and demand problem.

Ed


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Ed said:


> Is the end consumer paying $3 for the frog? If the end consumer is not paying $3 for the frog then the demand is not for a $3 frog. I have yet to see an advertisement for a consumer for a $3 auratus. So I am not defining demand based on a $3 auratus or even a $3 red-eye treefrog. Adult wc red eyes on kingsnake are running somewhere around $25-30 dollars with the wc auratus being in the same area. In local pet stores, the price of both of those can be as much as twice that amount.. There is no end customer paying $3 for an auratus so you cannot define demand on that price.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Allright Ed, it says CAN cb reduce demand, not is it reducing demand. So you can`t say at this point either way considering you have none of the data of cb sales, % growth of the hobby or what factors are expanding it. Captive breeding can not be used as the sole driver for the expansion of the hobby. If frogs are being farm raised or cb for these imports then cb is reducing demand for wc, just cb in another country. Your data is skewed and missing an explanation of variables. If the people buying these imports are buying them solely for pets then captive breeding has nothing to do w/ the increase in imports, cb or wc. Your also changing the term wc w/ imported.

$3 to the shop putting them up for sale for $20-$25, which means you need to sell 2/10 to make a profit. There probably closer to $5-10, but either way the result is still not that you half to sell 1/2 to make your money back.

As new species/morphs come in the overall demand for each species/morph drops, draw that line out over time and you`ll get a very different picture. Exponential growth doesn`t go on forever.

I have bred 7 gens w/ no outward deleterious effects(I understand the whole inbreeding thing but we`re talking demand for pets) and have bred animals at 13 years old, that`s 100 years of pets from one original pair. When we then go back for new blood we only need 100 or so for one year to go another 100+. Example:I have a pair of bicolors that are 13-14 years old from a pair of wc bicolor that came in over 26 years ago. They are still breeding and I`m growing up juvis to replace them but will hold the last they produce for a replacement group. I should be able to do that for 7 genereations as I did w/ Dwarf tincs w/ no outward deleterious affects, they would serve very well as pets. So we should only have to go back to the wild every 100 years or so.

You also don`t take into account how many people would be buying those auratus if cb leucs weren`t around or azureus weren`t at equal prices. Those sales, I`m sure, are reducing the number of wc/farmed auratus needed as it would be even higher if cb leucs and azureus weren`t around at comparable prices.

So, I have already said, yes the wild can produce more for cheaper at this point, and since americans always want the cheapest, demand for wc(imports or whatever is cheaper from another country)(mostly sold as cb, which if they were labeled accordingly would probably be less in demand) will always be more as long as it`s cheaper. Again, you can`t attribute that to cb though in saying it`s creating a bigger demand and increasing the need for wc. Overall #`s of cb frogs sold as opposed to what comes in, whether the country is open or not(as we`re never going to have all countries open to exports at once and they won`t all stay opened forever), I bet is reducing what would`ve actually came in. If you took all the cb sales of all darts as opposed to what is coming in or would`ve come in in wc frogs I bet cb sales(tru cb sales) are higher than imports. For me the glass is half full Ed, not half empty. In your world where you skew the question and leave out data I can see how you would attribute captive breeding to an increase in need for wc frogs. In my world though it`s the actual import practices that drive up the need for wc frogs, not captive breeding. It takes them more to supply what we could w/ half the numbers.
Sorry if there were other things to address, I have other pressing things for the weekend. Any comments or I`ll try and reread your statement Monday.


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

Very simple, can CB reduce demand for WC....ABSOLUTELY!!
If 100 people want an Auratus and 50 are able to get a cb Auratus from a hobbyist then only 50 will get a WC, preferences aside it reduces demand.
Now if the export country has a 100 animal quota and no matter what the demand they collect and export 100 there is little to do to stop that. This board is filled with cb frogs for sale, what if tomorrow there were NONE, most would then be seeking out WC frogs to fulfill their hobbyist needs and the demand for WC would increase.
So in theory absolutely it reduces demand, if export country's set quota's for export and they fill them 100% there is little or nothing we can do to stop it.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Aaron,



frogfarm said:


> Allright Ed, it says CAN cb reduce demand, not is it reducing demand. So you can`t say at this point either way considering you have none of the data of cb sales, % growth of the hobby or what factors are expanding it. Captive breeding can not be used as the sole driver for the expansion of the hobby.



The statistic I can point at is the continued demand for wc frogs which has not decreased at all... more frogs are being imported every year. If cb was reducing the demand then there would be a reduction in imports not an increase in overall imports. The increase and continued high number imports is the yard stick... 




frogfarm said:


> If frogs are being farm raised or cb for these imports then cb is reducing demand for wc, just cb in another country. Your data is skewed and missing an explanation of variables. If the people buying these imports are buying them solely for pets then captive breeding has nothing to do w/ the increase in imports, cb or wc. Your also changing the term wc w/ imported.


Show proof that the frogs are truley farm raised and not simply being labeled farm raised as a marketing ploy. Farm raising is a sustainable practice and not simply harvesting the frogs off a property until they can no longer find them. There is no evidence that these frogs are farm raised just as there is no evidence that the Red eyes being exported from Guatamala are farm raised (they aren't and that was one of the drivers for the CITES II listing for Agalychnis). Simply calling it farm raised does not mean it was captive bred.... 





frogfarm said:


> $3 to the shop putting them up for sale for $20-$25, which means you need to sell 2/10 to make a profit. There probably closer to $5-10, but either way the result is still not that you half to sell 1/2 to make your money back.


It is more like $3 to the jobber not including price landed at the airport. Markup to the distributer (and to account for other costs like mortality) is closer to the $10 mark. The distributer to cover fees and make a profit sells them for somewhere between $12 and $15 dollars. I have direct experience with this process as I ran the reptile section for what was at that time the largest pet store in the country and I purchased whole sale lots directly from the importers (Bronx Reptiles, Cal-Zoo, Strictly Reptiles) at a rate of $400-$2000 a week and that was the typical pricing structure.. since I was buying direct I was able to sell in the lower end with a larger profit margin.... 



frogfarm said:


> As new species/morphs come in the overall demand for each species/morph drops, draw that line out over time and you`ll get a very different picture. Exponential growth doesn`t go on forever.


And that is the point I made when I said it is simply supply and demand economics. 



frogfarm said:


> I have bred 7 gens w/ no outward deleterious effects(I understand the whole inbreeding thing but we`re talking demand for pets) and have bred animals at 13 years old, that`s 100 years of pets from one original pair. When we then go back for new blood we only need 100 or so for one year to go another 100+. Example:I have a pair of bicolors that are 13-14 years old from a pair of wc bicolor that came in over 26 years ago. They are still breeding and I`m growing up juvis to replace them but will hold the last they produce for a replacement group. I should be able to do that for 7 genereations as I did w/ Dwarf tincs w/ no outward deleterious affects, they would serve very well as pets. So we should only have to go back to the wild every 100 years or so.


And how does a person know how related his frogs are, where they are in the level of reproduction (in 13 years a frog could be anywhere from a F0 to a F12 (and since auratus have been cb in the hobby for over 30 years, the frogs could in theory be F25 or more)) There is nothing to indicate how inbred a frog is or isn't.. and there won't be until people start tracking thier frogs.. until such a time, there is no incentive for the average person to not want to aquire new blood as thier frog could be a very inbred frog.... 



frogfarm said:


> You also don`t take into account how many people would be buying those auratus if cb leucs weren`t around or azureus weren`t at equal prices. Those sales, I`m sure, are reducing the number of wc/farmed auratus needed as it would be even higher if cb leucs and azureus weren`t around at comparable prices.


I don't have to as they are not currently part of the demand for auratus. I do recognize that the demand could be much greater if there were fewer frog varieties available. 



frogfarm said:


> So, I have already said, yes the wild can produce more for cheaper at this point, and since americans always want the cheapest, demand for wc(imports or whatever is cheaper from another country)(mostly sold as cb, which if they were labeled accordingly would probably be less in demand) will always be more as long as it`s cheaper. Again, you can`t attribute that to cb though in saying it`s creating a bigger demand and increasing the need for wc. Overall #`s of cb frogs sold as opposed to what comes in, whether the country is open or not(as we`re never going to have all countries open to exports at once and they won`t all stay opened forever), I bet is reducing what would`ve actually came in. If you took all the cb sales of all darts as opposed to what is coming in or would`ve come in in wc frogs I bet cb sales(tru cb sales) are higher than imports. For me the glass is half full Ed, not half empty. In your world where you skew the question and leave out data I can see how you would attribute captive breeding to an increase in need for wc frogs. In my world though it`s the actual import practices that drive up the need for wc frogs, not captive breeding. It takes them more to supply what we could w/ half the numbers.
> Sorry if there were other things to address, I have other pressing things for the weekend. Any comments or I`ll try and reread your statement Monday.


Aaron,

I have not skewed the data. I actually have supplied citations to demostrate I am not skewing the data. I don't have to skew the data.. if the demand was being met by captive breeding then imports of wild caught animals should be declining over time. This has not been the case for the entire history of auratus or red eye treefrogs or ball pythons or virtually any reptile or amphibian... even boas which are literally bred by the thousands have been consistently imported for decades. 

If you think the sales of cb auratus are higher than the imported wild caught auratus that are being mislabled as farmed.. I would like to see the proof. 


Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

markpulawski said:


> Very simple, can CB reduce demand for WC....ABSOLUTELY!!
> If 100 people want an Auratus and 50 are able to get a cb Auratus from a hobbyist then only 50 will get a WC, preferences aside it reduces demand.
> Now if the export country has a 100 animal quota and no matter what the demand they collect and export 100 there is little to do to stop that. This board is filled with cb frogs for sale, what if tomorrow there were NONE, most would then be seeking out WC frogs to fulfill their hobbyist needs and the demand for WC would increase.
> So in theory absolutely it reduces demand, if export country's set quota's for export and they fill them 100% there is little or nothing we can do to stop it.


Correct, but until the quotas are not filled 100% on a consistent basis we can't actually say that we are reducing demand as the demand has not been reduced as shown by the total filling of the quota (which also indicates that the demand is not being totally filled as the quota is 100% filled). 

Ed


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

I would suggest that export quota's do not reflect the true demand, however it would be impossible for me to defend 100% of export being sold. This also would be a VERY LONG process involving overproduction of CB animals to supply wholesalers at very low prices. Once distribution demand were to be filled by low priced cb animals exporters would likely find it difficult to sell all of the animals they had quota's for. The above scenario is so highly unlikely however that i doubt it would ever occur.


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> I don't have to as they are not currently part of the demand for auratus. I do recognize that the demand could be much greater if there were fewer frog varieties available.


Is it really possible to calculate the true demand for WC auratus? How many come in because people truly want WC auratus, and how many come in because people want WC pumilio and the importers have to bring in WC auratus to get the WC pumilio? The import numbers for auratus may be deceptively high if it isn't taken into account that they are often "padding" for orders containing more desirable frogs.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

markpulawski said:


> Very simple, can CB reduce demand for WC....ABSOLUTELY!!
> If 100 people want an Auratus and 50 are able to get a cb Auratus from a hobbyist then only 50 will get a WC, preferences aside it reduces demand.
> Now if the export country has a 100 animal quota and no matter what the demand they collect and export 100 there is little to do to stop that. This board is filled with cb frogs for sale, what if tomorrow there were NONE, most would then be seeking out WC frogs to fulfill their hobbyist needs and the demand for WC would increase.
> So in theory absolutely it reduces demand, if export country's set quota's for export and they fill them 100% there is little or nothing we can do to stop it.


*This ^^^^*

No need to cite papers, national geographic magazines, data crunching, pie charts, CITES screen shots, peer reviewed papers....articles.......

If Mark's simple statement doesn't make sense - then I don't know what will. No need for more debate here.......


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

The dendrobatid hobby appears, in all regards, to be growing at a very swift pace. If CB production of frogs is not keeping up with the demand for dendrobatids, then the demand for frogs will continue to be filled with WCs. Plain and simple. I believe that it is possible for CB animals to make a dent in the demand for dendrobatids, but that they are not being produced in captivity in sufficient numbers to really have any significant impact on that demand. 
The answer as I see it : cheaper cb animals via hobbyist networks, large warehouse-like breeding, education (cb is a better deal in the long run, and why), and more restrictions on wc animals.

Here's the going rates wholesale for many WC adult dendrobatids that I've seen offered in the past year (I'm recalling these from memory, so they may not be exact):

Auratus : $10-12
Tinctorius : $50-75
Leucomelas: $15
Trivittatus: $30
Pumilio: $35-40


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

markpulawski said:


> I would suggest that export quota's do not reflect the true demand, however it would be impossible for me to defend 100% of export being sold. This also would be a VERY LONG process involving overproduction of CB animals to supply wholesalers at very low prices. Once distribution demand were to be filled by low priced cb animals exporters would likely find it difficult to sell all of the animals they had quota's for. The above scenario is so highly unlikely however that i doubt it would ever occur.


Hi Mark,

They may not reflect the true or total demand but it gives a good indication of where the demand is running.. If the export quotas are consistently high and are being filled (which is what is happening) then one can expect that there is high demand.. and keep in mind that in this case we have had captive breeding occuring for a very long time in conjuction with large imports... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Is it really possible to calculate the true demand for WC auratus? How many come in because people truly want WC auratus, and how many come in because people want WC pumilio and the importers have to bring in WC auratus to get the WC pumilio? The import numbers for auratus may be deceptively high if it isn't taken into account that they are often "padding" for orders containing more desirable frogs.


I've actually dealt directly with overseas imports and this form of padding.. The exporter wants to sell x number of animals and has some easily collected species that are used to beef up the profit on the sale. (from Africa, those used to be C. chameleo, if you wanted the ball pythons, nile monitor babies and savannah monitor babies you had to buy some chameleons). This only works while the demand for certain animals is really high and the exporter has to control the trade out of the region. If there are competitors, then they may start selling without the requirment to get the extra species, or undercut in other ways. If demand goes down, then the customer isn't going to take the padding as they can't sell enough of them and the original animals to cover the costs. I have some strong doubts that this is still occuring given that the price of the wc pumilio has significantly dropped from the early days and high demand (first kid on the block syndrome) down to retail on kingsnake for $60-65 each.. However there hasn't been any change in the import numbers for auratus.. In the last 5 years the average ratio of auratus to pumilio has run about 2.6:1... That isn't a lot of "padding" to get the pumilio particularly when the price of the pumilio has dropped pretty quickly. (which is a good indication that demand for pumilio has dropped.. (The imports of pumilio peaked in 2004 and then dropped while the demand for auratus has remained high (8000 or more)... 
For those who wish to play on the CITES reports for imports they can go here and follow the novice route. CITES trade database

On a different note; all CITES parties involved with ranching are supposed to submit reports, those countries that have submitted them can be seen here Reporting under the Convention


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

zBrinks said:


> The dendrobatid hobby appears, in all regards, to be growing at a very swift pace. If CB production of frogs is not keeping up with the demand for dendrobatids, then the demand for frogs will continue to be filled with WCs. Plain and simple. I believe that it is possible for CB animals to make a dent in the demand for dendrobatids, but that they are not being produced in captivity in sufficient numbers to really have any significant impact on that demand.
> The answer as I see it : cheaper cb animals via hobbyist networks, large warehouse-like breeding, education (cb is a better deal in the long run, and why), and more restrictions on wc animals.
> 
> Here's the going rates wholesale for many WC adult dendrobatids that I've seen offered in the past year (I'm recalling these from memory, so they may not be exact):
> ...


I agree with this and I want to note that the whole sale cost of auratus is pretty close to what I was seeing back in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The bullseye histrionicus that I got to sell ran between somewhere around $12-15 each (I may have the exact number a little off but it was in the ballpark) with a bigger price drop if I got more than 6 at a time. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I just want to make it clear that I think at some point, cb can make a difference. However I have to say that at this time, it looks like the data is pointing towards cb may not be supply enough and may actually be driving demand which is in part being met with wc animals. 

For those with a further interest in some aspects on demand.. I suggest 

PLoS Biology: Rarity Value and Species Extinction: The Anthropogenic Allee Effect (actual pdf)

PLoS Biology: A Human Taste for Rarity Spells Disaster for Endangered Species (html)

http://www.ese.u-psud.fr/epc/conservation/PDFs/AAEModel.pdf (actual pdf). 

interesting abstract CJO - Abstract - The dynamics of avicultural markets



Ed


----------



## Afemoralis (Mar 17, 2005)

Just out of curiosity, did the recent Reptiles magazine issue address the WC/CB problem at all? 

I ask because If hobby growth and new hobbyists are part of the issue, we need to be proactive that CB information is the in the first three ideas someone gets about dartfrogs;

1) Ooohhh, pretty!
2) They don't eat crickets/mealworms?
3) There is a nation full of deranged frog enthusiasts looking at me to make the right choice when it comes to my animal purchases.....


-Afemoralis


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I can't say as I've stopped getting Reptiles.. 

Ed


----------



## Afemoralis (Mar 17, 2005)

Ed said:


> I can't say as I've stopped getting Reptiles..
> 
> Ed


 It's got a picture of reticulatus on the cover... surely someone in this thread reads this stuff...

Afemoralis


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Ed, why don`t you just say that there are no #`s for cb sales of auratus in the US instead of asking for proof of something you know there are no #`s for? I`d argue that you should add a couple to the # of cb imports that are coming in No you can`t get an actual # of demand for auratus because a lot of them die from imports and we don`t have #`s of cb sales.
Just like any other business, there is a market and the product comes in cheaper and most everyone stops breeding auratus because they can`t compete w/ the price and size of the auratus coming in. Simple economics, but once they shut off panama we`ll start supplying 100% of the auratus again. Or if they start a slogan to buy american made instead of imports. As I`ve said, if people don`t open up to selling to pet shops we`ll continue to be driven out by imports. We CAN NOT compete w/ a delivery system already in place that`s been in business for over x years and offers diversity that we can`t (Chams, leo gex, ball pythons etc.) unless people move into selling to pet shops so that they don`t need them the next time they come in. Which may change if they come in cheaper than tru cb animals, again there`ll be a larger market and they`ll import more auratus, maybe. It`s not that we can`t do it, it`s that we`re not organized.
And I`ll not get back to that last post. We`re talking about the same thing and understand each other, your just looking strait at the #`s and you don`t recognize the variables, so my argument is futile. I will say that there would be a lot more auratus coming in if we weren`t breeding them. If that isn`t reducing what the demand WOULD be I don`t know what is. Although, I know Ed, we can`t prove that.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

frogfarm said:


> mand for auratus because a lot of them die from imports and we don`t have #`s of cb sales.Just like any other business, there is a market and the product comes in cheaper and most everyone stops breeding auratus because they can`t compete w/ the price and size of the auratus coming in. Simple economics, but once they shut off panama we`ll start supplying 100% of the auratus again.


If you go to the CITES.ORG site and look under the trade reports you can see that auratus have been imported consistently into the United States every year since 1992 with a total of over 71,000 (into the USA only) from Central America. This figure does not of course include any collection and movement of auratus out of Hawaii..or any imports from Europe. 




frogfarm said:


> Or if they start a slogan to buy american made instead of imports. As I`ve said, if people don`t open up to selling to pet shops we`ll continue to be driven out by imports.


I don't agree with the driven out by imports comment but I agree that people need to be selling to the pet stores regardless of the outcome on the frogs. I've held that opinion for years. 



frogfarm said:


> And I`ll not get back to that last post. We`re talking about the same thing and understand each other, your just looking strait at the #`s and you don`t recognize the variables, so my argument is futile. I will say that there would be a lot more auratus coming in if we weren`t breeding them. If that isn`t reducing what the demand WOULD be I don`t know what is. Although, I know Ed, we can`t prove that.


Which is why at this time we can't truly claim we are reducing demand. There is evidence out there that actually shows that part of the trend is that cb actually increases demand which can only be filled by wc and the circumstancial evidence points more in that direction than it does of cb actually reducing demand. 


Ed


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

Ed said:


> If you go to the CITES.ORG site and look under the trade reports you can see that auratus have been imported consistently into the United States every year since 1992 with a total of over 71,000 (into the USA only) from Central America. This figure does not of course include any collection and movement of auratus out of Hawaii..or any imports from Europe.


The one thing that the CITES reports don't show is which populations are being imported. It's doubtful that with all of the morphs of auratus in Panama that these are all the same morph. This is what I feel skews the numbers some in that much of the imported auratus for a year could be a new population that has never been imported hence why it's being imported. I highly doubt that these numbers being imported are all the standard Panama auratus.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

jubjub47 said:


> The one thing that the CITES reports don't show is which populations are being imported. It's doubtful that with all of the morphs of auratus in Panama that these are all the same morph. This is what I feel skews the numbers some in that much of the imported auratus for a year could be a new population that has never been imported hence why it's being imported. I highly doubt that these numbers being imported are all the standard Panama auratus.


So does a new morph of auratus being imported reduce or increase demand for wc auratus?


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

Ed said:


> So does a new morph of auratus being imported reduce or increase demand for wc auratus?


No, it increases it drastically I would assume which is why I brought it up.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Tim,

Opposite of which? Demand for wc auratus up or demand for wc auratus down?


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

Ed said:


> Hi Tim,
> 
> Opposite of which? Demand for wc auratus up or demand for wc auratus down?


I didn't read your original post right and corrected my wording Ed. Sorry


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Thanks Tim,

I was just trying to keep the arguments clear. 

Just to reiterate, I do think there is a tipping point where captive breeding can reduce the demand for wild caught frogs. I just don't think we are there yet as there is data and models out there that show that captive breeding can also increase demand.. one has to get the level of captive breeding past the level where it is increasing demand to begin to make a difference. The hobby appears to be growing rapidly which is supported on a circumstancial basis by the large numbers of imports of some species.. however the levels of imports are also being supported by the boom and bust cycles of popularity in the hobby as captive bred supplies decrease due to a lack of popularity. 

We also have to accept that with very few exceptions, many of the supposed ranching programs have not been shown to be true ranching programs and with those few exceptions we have to look at any claims of farming or ranching with a very skeptical eye.... 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ok I'm going to Import my part of the conversation me and Ed have recently been having in the really fun and popular  WC Lehmanni thread, as I think its is relevant here. So please bare with me...

My initial take on wc reducing demand...




Dendro Dave said:


> I've heard this argument a lot...and while in the short term I don't really disagree with it, it seems to me that in the long term having an established captive bred population would eventually do more to help wild populations and limit smuggling. The potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. (Possibly at least)
> 
> Initially smugglers/distributors may hide behind the legal frogs but most people in the hobby will choose a truely legal frog over an illegal one. I'd like to think the same applies in other countries as well (more ethical people vs unethical) And many of us and I assume its similar in other countries are plugged into the hobby enough to be able to get a fairly good idea who would have the truely legal frogs vs the ones pawning off smuggled ones as legal CB. I bet most people here can rattle off the names of at least a couple of people legal versions of this frog would likely come through (Mark pepper, Marcus at SNDF, Sean Stewart etc..etc..). And they should only be allowed in through monitored channels. Joe blow shouldn't be able to go get a permit and import these just because he has a few bucks in his pocket. If Joe Blow uses the legal ones to try and cover his 100 smuggled frogs, I bet most of us are gonna be like "Ok no way this guy could get 100 of these legal when only 2 people in the country are allowed to import them and they just came in last week for the first time" I have enough faith in us that its likely Joe Blow won't find many customers here...and because of the changing circumstance he'll find fewer and fewer over time. As most are aware there is a lot of talking that goes on behind the scenes of DB and other forums. Who has what, what this and that person are up to..etc..etc...
> 
> ...


Having said that I would like to qualify it all by saying this...

First after reading this thread, especially given Ed's arguements I am less convinced that CB can reduce the demand for WC now. I will however note that many of the examples being raised such as leo's and and snakes involve a strong trade in designer animals which we so far have avoided or at least limited fairly well, and this has important implication for our side of things.

Assuming that doesn't change I think it puts us in a unique position to use CB efforts to more effectively limit WC imports for many animals. We simply don't need and/or want the new blood in most cases(Or we shouldn't at least). With the exceptions of new natural morphs being introduced and of course new species. 

I believe our smaller size in relation to the snake hobby and leo hobby is an advantage here also along with our general concern with the integrity of the species relating to natural morphs and species vs designer animal focused hobbies.

Regarding my above statements I would also like to clarify that I am talking about highly controlled/monitored importations that come through special channels like inbinco or similar programs. I think the way imports are done for most animals is to unregulated and we need more specialized programs of import/export for darts and other animals. 

As I said above Joe Blow with a few bucks should not be able to import 100's of frogs. More care needs to be taken in who is allowed to do these import/exports. Especially in the cases of highly endangered and/or new species morphs. Some of the "Farms" need to be called on their BS, and shut down also, and current laws better enforced. Of course eduction needs to continue/increase also.

Maybe its to late for some of the other animal hobbies but I think given the special nature of our little "boutique" hobby and the unique sensibilities of its members with better enforced and more well thought out laws in concert with CB programs we can make a significant Impact on smuggling and possibly legal WC demand in at least some cases.

We have a lot of questions we need to be asking ourselves about the potential risks vs rewards of such programs both in the long and short term. To date, our thinking has been to limited in my opinion and a course of correct action is better found by taking the longest view possible with the most complete accounting for all the risks/variables as possible. This means limiting knee jerk reactions, and looking beyond potential short term damages to see long term rewards.

It also means finding the merits of other ideas or associated facts/research that may come from other animal hobbies or even beyond such hobbies all together. A multidisciplinary approach if you will. Ed has brought up many examples not directly related to frogs that could have strong implications to our hobby and the animals all the same. Aaron has made many strong arguments also as have many other people, and we've already invoked economic principles, land management ideas etc..etc... this needs to continue.

But perhaps most importantly if the animals, their habitat and the people that live with them are our most important concerns we need to be vigilant that we don't let our emotions, personal conflicts, selfish desires or preconceived notions cloud our reason and prevent us from truly effective actions even if they initially go against some of our sensibilities. We need to look deep, and perhaps be ready to crack a few eggs if we wanna make this omlet 

But basically I'm saying this could be a tool that used wisely could benefit us and the frogs long term...but like any tool it could cause damage accidentally/purposely. Its how and when we use it that will make the difference.

I just hope we still have a chance for studies to be done, other steps taken that would make the best use of this potential action so that it benefits the animals as much as possible while limiting damage/risks as much as possible. I hope that in most cases we aren't at a point where we will just have to wing it based on our best guesses and hope for the best...I'm afraid we are though, and that in some cases running this experiment now or soon may be the only hope unless things change drastically soon. Waiting has risk too ;(
__________________


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Dendro Dave said:


> We have a lot of questions we need to be asking ourselves about the potential risks vs rewards of such programs both in the long and short term. To date, our thinking has been to limited in my opinion and a course of correct action is better found by taking the longest view possible with the most complete accounting for all the risks/variables as possible. This means limiting knee jerk reactions, and looking beyond potential short term damages to see long term rewards.
> 
> ...
> 
> But perhaps most importantly if the animals, their habitat and the people that live with them are our most important concerns we need to be vigilant that we don't let our emotions, personal conflicts, selfish desires or preconceived notions cloud our reason and prevent us from truly effective actions even if they initially go against some of our sensibilities. We need to look deep, and perhaps be ready to crack a few eggs if we wanna make this omlet


Great thoughts and post, Dave.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

Perhaps someone can help me with something here... is it as common in the fish hobby or the snake hobby (just pulled those out of thin air so they are random) to want to save the world and save habitat, wild stock, and reduce wild collection? I don't know because I don't follow those hobbies (or any other animal related ones for that matter) so I don't know if people in those hobbies are as rabid about conservation as we are here in frogs. Just a curiousity of mine and hopefully someone who dwells on both sides can give some perspective.


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

We need to remember that Dendroboard is a very small sample of the dendrobatid hobby. The majority of the frog owners I know are not concerned with conservation, where their frogs came from, etc. Like the aquarium hobby, the majority of those who own frogs simply want something nice and colorful to look at, impress visitors, etc. 

Overall, the dendroboard community closely reminds me of the killiefish community, in that there is a faction of keepers that work to preserve species integrity, habitat, etc. There is also the shift within parts of the saltwater hobby towards captive breeding and sustainable harvesting.


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

I agree with Zack: small pockets of the fish and other hobbies are concerned with conservation (as well as pockets of Begonia keepers, etc.). Serious killifish keepers are probably the best comparison to serious Dendrobatid keepers...and I think we could still learn quite a bit from the killifish folks in regard to locale/collection info and tracking, captive management and tracking, etc. UE uses, from what I can tall, a very similar system to the killifish hobby. There are also other small niches in other hobbies (such as Begonia keepers) that are concerned about the organisms' status in the wild and their conservation. 

This interest and how to exercise it (i.e. how can captive cultivation/propagation play a role in conservation) is a major theme of Microcosm, and what different hobbies can learn and share with one another is why we are combining all of these similar interests together under one roof.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

skylsdale said:


> I agree with Zack: small pockets of the fish and other hobbies are concerned with conservation (as well as pockets of Begonia keepers, etc.). Serious killifish keepers are probably the best comparison to serious Dendrobatid keepers...and I think we could still learn quite a bit from the killifish folks in regard to locale/collection info and tracking, captive management and tracking, etc. UE uses, from what I can tall, a very similar system to the killifish hobby.


Amen Ron, or should I say 

+1

Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

sbreland said:


> Perhaps someone can help me with something here... is it as common in the fish hobby or the snake hobby (just pulled those out of thin air so they are random) to want to save the world and save habitat, wild stock, and reduce wild collection?


The killifish hobby has been mentioned as an example, and on the snake side there are small but dedicated communities of locality-specific Boa constrictor, Gray Banded Kingsnake, and Rosy Boa enthusiasts. There may be others too, but those are the three I can think of off the top of my head.


----------



## sbreland (May 4, 2006)

zBrinks said:


> We need to remember that Dendroboard is a very small sample of the dendrobatid hobby. The majority of the frog owners I know are not concerned with conservation, where their frogs came from, etc. Like the aquarium hobby, the majority of those who own frogs simply want something nice and colorful to look at, impress visitors, etc.
> 
> Overall, the dendroboard community closely reminds me of the killiefish community, in that there is a faction of keepers that work to preserve species integrity, habitat, etc. There is also the shift within parts of the saltwater hobby towards captive breeding and sustainable harvesting.


OK, this is along the lines of what I expected... small portions like this but overall and for the majority of keepers all these "issues" are not really "issues". So with that said how do we ever expect to make a dent in any of these conservation arguements (smuggling, captive breedings, etc) if it is a minority that is worried about it and the majority could care less? With the heat that came from the lehmanni and histo threads I'd like to believe that something would come out of it but I was always resigned to the fact that it was just that... talk. Perhaps I'm off base (noo... could it possibly be  ) but I just don't see the minority leading the majority to do anything, especially when the majority is not even aware of the minorities points and many of the ones that are aware simply don't care. Now that screams "education" but most of the majority is in the majority because they really DON'T care... they just want something cool to look at. Not sure if you get the point I'm making (and it's not to simply give up) but more to have realistic expectations... and those that say "stop smuggling" or "CB can reduce demand for WC" are simply just not having realistic expectations... not enough people actually care to make a significant shift in either (or any) of these issues... thoughts?


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 9, 2010)

Of the people I've met, turtle enthusiasts are the most conservation minded.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

sbreland said:


> (noo... could it possibly be  ) but I just don't see the minority leading the majority to do anything, especially when the majority is not even aware of the minorities points and many of the ones that are aware simply don't care. Now that screams "education" but most of the majority is in the majority because they really DON'T care... they just want something cool to look at. Not sure if you get the point I'm making (and it's not to simply give up) but more to have realistic expectations... and those that say "stop smuggling" or "CB can reduce demand for WC" are simply just not having realistic expectations... not enough people actually care to make a significant shift in either (or any) of these issues... thoughts?


The simplest solution is to supply the market with enough of a captive bred supply at a price that significantly undercuts the value of wild caught and/or smuggled species.. however this runs into the reality of being able to supply enough animals that you can undercut the cost which for many species is not a reality as demand is typically much greater than the potential supply which unfortunately cause a pulse effect on the market causing it to run in cycles (as modeled here http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=74421 for birds.. same mechanics oddly enough apply to the hobby as seen in the boom and bust cycles for terriblis, tricolors, bassleri..to name a few (and even other species like D. ebracattus) and so forth). This however runs into the problem of not only being able to supply the market with enough animals (which was throughly argued in my normal long winded manner) but having the supplier being willing to cut into his/her profits by selling at a lower price (which could even result in a loss). The problem is further exacerbated by the continual demand for locality specific, new blood or new morphs that further decrease the value of the breeders (along with the fact that very few groups are being managed for the long term in captivity). 

Unfortunately the simple solution really isn't simple.. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Web Wheeler said:


> Of the people I've met, turtle enthusiasts are the most conservation minded.


And I've met a number of them that would happily take every bog turtle out of field because they thought it would do better in their basement. 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> And I've met a number of them that would happily take every bog turtle out of field because they thought it would do better in their basement.
> 
> Ed


I thought that was you!!! ...I also thought we agreed to keep that on the down low man? Now what the hell am I gonna do with these 500 bog turtles running free range in my basement? Guess I'll haul em up to the Wal-Mart in my truck and stick red bows on them. Maybe I can trick kids into buying them for the folks. Or tell people the proceeds will go to stop cancer or maybe Lehmanni smuggling  

(Kidding, I'm trailer trash...no basement, no truck (suv) and not THAT unethical


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> I thought that was you!!! ...I also thought we agreed to keep that on the down low man? Now what the hell am I gonna do with these 500 bog turtles running free range in my basement? Guess I'll haul em up to the Wal-Mart in my truck and stick red bows on them. Maybe I can trick kids into buying them for the folks. Or tell people the proceeds will go to stop cancer or maybe Lehmanni smuggling
> 
> (Kidding, I'm trailer trash...no basement, no truck (suv) and not THAT unethical


And I am so not a turtle person.... many years at work scrubbing up nasty turtle enclosures... has so cured me of really wanting to keep turtles (particularly aquatic or large species or large aquatic species). I have my rescued token three-toed box turtles and that is more than enough for me.... 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

I wish there was a turtle that was viv suitable, like under 2 inches in diameter


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

So, basically, cb can only reduce the demand for smuggled species as there is an added cost to smuggling to compete w/. If any country opens up to export we simply can not compete w/ wc frogs prices. I don`t know anyone who could produce adult auratus for $3-5ea. I guess, possibly, hard to collect species that breed well in captivity we could be competitive w/.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Dendro Dave said:


> I wish there was a turtle that was viv suitable, like under 2 inches in diameter


The bog turtles you were talking about just about meets those 2 criteria....


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Some of the mud and musk turtles come very close to that as well.. 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Hmm, I'll have to look into them again. I checked into it awhile back but don't remember finding anything I really got excited about. Maybe I was trying to find something really colorful also...like a dart turtle  Thanks.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> Hmm, I'll have to look into them again. I checked into it awhile back but don't remember finding anything I really got excited about. Maybe I was trying to find something really colorful also...like a dart turtle  Thanks.


If your state lets you own them, then I would suggest a turtle that was just slightly larger (about 3.5-4 inches adult length) and does well in captivity and is readily available cb.. Check out spotted turtles as you can hibernate them for the winter to get a break from their care. 

If you have a lot of money you can look at Testudo kleinmanni.. as they are one of the smallest tortoises and usually don't much above 4 inches shell length... 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> If your state lets you own them, then I would suggest a turtle that was just slightly larger (about 3.5-4 inches adult length) and does well in captivity and is readily available cb.. Check out spotted turtles as you can hibernate them for the winter to get a break from their care.
> 
> If you have a lot of money you can look at Testudo kleinmanni.. as they are one of the smallest tortoises and usually don't much above 4 inches shell length...
> 
> Ed


Thanks, I was looking at America's Largest Selection of Captive Bred Turtle & Tortoise Species and found a couple I liked. Rhinoclemmys pulcherrima was probably one of my favorites. I'm a little afraid though in a natural setup it would try to eat the plants. Anyways a turtle purchase and setup is a long ways off if ever. Just some fun research for now


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> Thanks, I was looking at America's Largest Selection of Captive Bred Turtle & Tortoise Species and found a couple I liked. Rhinoclemmys pulcherrima was probably one of my favorites. I'm a little afraid though in a natural setup it would try to eat the plants. Anyways a turtle purchase and setup is a long ways off if ever. Just some fun research for now


Were you looking at the colorful subspecies (R. p. manni or R. p. pulcerrima). The latter doesn't stay colorful as adults. 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> Were you looking at the colorful subspecies (R. p. manni or R. p. pulcerrima). The latter doesn't stay colorful as adults.
> 
> Ed


It didnt say ;(


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Web Wheeler said:


> Of the people I've met, turtle enthusiasts are the most conservation minded.


A couple years old, but relevant to the discussion: POV - The Chances of the World Changing | PBS


----------

