# Would you snatch a purse?



## alfredjourgen (Apr 9, 2010)

It’s pretty easy to get re-export papers for any animal listed on CITES 2 all you have to do is put the origin as captive bred as no checks are made and there’s really no way to distinguish between a captive bred or wild collected frog unless one sees the animal and even then its near impossible.

For instance over the last 3-4 years large numbers of sylvaticus and histrionicus have been smuggled into the EU by 2 individuals as well as a number of different species including granuliferus, pumilio, vanzolinii and even captivous..

A large number of these frogs have been exported to the USA where froggers seem to be turning a blind eye to the origin of these animals or with their rose tinted spectacles just don’t care any more.

These frogs have been ripped out of the forests in huge numbers stuffed in soda bottles and shipped across the world in terrible conditions… ever wondered why these EU imports come in male heavy is because males are easier to find the collectors don’t care about the sex of the animals they are catching they get the same few cents either way.

If you look at the origin of these morphs you will
see that the country of origin has been closed for many, many years.

Vanzolinii have been laundered through a seized shipment years back so any one in the US or even the EU can say my frogs came from that line with no evidence or proof for that matter.. even though the specimens yoy have may be CB they all came from smuggled animals. 

Blue jeans pumilio have suddenly become available and believe me there’s no on breeding hundreds of these over here and keeping them back they just don’t breed like that nor do many froggers keep froglets back more than 6 months let alone till maturity.

So what I m trying to get at here is take off the rose tinted spectacles and realise you’re helping locales/species disappear from the wild. The more you buy they smuggle the more that die 
People have probably read this article before but it’s worth reading again,

Dendrobates.org - Smuggling


Alfred


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

alfredjourgen said:


> Vanzolinii have been laundered through a seized shipment years back so any one in the US or even the EU can say my frogs came from that line with no evidence or proof for that matter.. even though the specimens yoy have may be CB they all came from smuggled animals.


actually understory enterprises legally produced individuals for the hobby which is where a large part of these come from in the US market.



alfredjourgen said:


> Blue jeans pumilio have suddenly become available and believe me there’s no on breeding hundreds of these over here and keeping them back they just don’t breed like that nor do many froggers keep froglets back more than 6 months let alone till maturity.
> 
> So what I m trying to get at here is take off the rose tinted spectacles and realise you’re helping locales/species disappear from the wild.


in the case of the BJs i seriously doubt that a small group (100-200) smuggled or not would have any significant impact on he wild populations. 

james


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

james67 said:


> actually understory enterprises legally produced individuals for the hobby which is where a large part of these come from in the US market.


I thought Understory has only sold a handful in the US so far. Most of the ones that are here have been imported from Europe through Sean Stewart.


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

i was unaware that he was importing them.

james


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

With the exception of the last group to come in (beginning of April this year or so), I am aware of only one person with vanzolinii from Mark Pepper in the US.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

My answer would probably be yes, but only from an old lady.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

She would have to be rich too, that way it wouldn't hurt her to much.


----------



## Occidentalis (Jul 11, 2009)

Rich and carrying her Sunday purse, the one that's just for show and doesn't have the credit card, ID, etc. Those are hard (and a pain) to replace. I wouldn't want to inconvenience her too much, like Bussardnr.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

james67 said:


> in the case of the BJs i seriously doubt that a small group (100-200) smuggled or not would have any significant impact on he wild populations.


It may or may not, but the correct way to look at it is....

Am I proud of my collection? My little tiny part in this hobby?

Am I giving my money to the right person?

Am I helping a species of frog more than hurting?

Is the person drinking beer next to me, my friend, or someone trying to make money illegally?

That's your frickin' moral compass talking? Do you give a sh*t about it?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

alfredjourgen said:


> It’s pretty easy to get re-export papers for any animal listed on CITES 2 all you have to do is put the origin as captive bred as no checks are made and there’s really no way to distinguish between a captive bred or wild collected frog unless one sees the animal and even then its near impossible.


Hi Alfred,

It depends on how badly the goverment wants to bust the smuggler.. about ten years or so here in the US, there was a confiscation of close to hatchling sized fly river turtles. The proof of the turtles being wild caught was based on the species of parasites and the parasite load found in the turtles. So for example, if several of the frogs were necropsied and found to have parasites that do not have a direct life style and utilized a host that was not found in country, there is precedence to use that as proof of smuggling (at least here in the US). 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

ChrisK said:


> My answer would probably be yes, but only from an old lady.


Is the purse full of candy?


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Ed said:


> Is the purse full of candy?


yep, .....Bottle Caps, Candy Cigarettes, Fun Dip, Neccos, Teaberry, Blackjack, Clove Gum, Wax Lips, Moon Pies, Flying Saucers..


----------



## Dane (Aug 19, 2004)

Nah, if it is indeed an old lady, all you're getting is stale ribbon candy and Werther's.


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

Philsuma said:


> yep, .....Bottle Caps, Candy Cigarettes, Fun Dip, Neccos, Teaberry, Blackjack, Clove Gum, Wax Lips, Moon Pies, Flying Saucers..


hilarious! these candies are pretty old-school, phil. i think the newest candy on there (bottlecaps) was popular like 40 years ago right. i guess candy ciragettes are better than candy crack: http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/candywarehouse_2099_1316674653 

james


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Philsuma said:


> yep, .....Bottle Caps, Candy Cigarettes, Fun Dip, Neccos, Teaberry, Blackjack, Clove Gum, Wax Lips, Moon Pies, Flying Saucers..


You forgot pixie sticks, Mary Janes, candy dots/candy buttons, candy necklaces/candy bracelets, Nik-L-lips wax bottles, Bazooka bubble gum, Barley pops, those orange circus peanuts (which I hated more than ribbon candy), Scooter Pies, Rootbeer barrels, .. and I can't think of the name but they were hard fruit flavored candies that came in a tin can that opened like a paint can... 

Ed


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

First of all:



Philsuma said:


> It may or may not, but the correct way to look at it is....
> 
> Am I proud of my collection? My little tiny part in this hobby?
> 
> ...


^^ here here!

Second... I really have no words... I'm pretty sure in the same thread Ed made not one, but _two_ jokes! :O


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

It is so sad to say, but the person who re-smuggled the sylvaticus into the U.S. told me himself that essentially all of the frogs died.

So, those of you who will say to yourself, "well, I'm a good breeder, so I'll buy the smuggled frogs, and I'll be the one to establish these smuggled species into the hobby", you are deluding yourselves into believeing that you are not the biggest part of the problem. You are. Maybe some even have the fantasy that they will be the "ark" for these species, once they finally do become extinct in the wild.

And maybe some really don't give a sh*t about anything but there own "appetites".

Richard (BTW, I would kill the old lady first, then take the purse, just to see if there were any banana "Now-and-Laters" in it).


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

Woodsman said:


> I would kill the old lady first


If I didn't know you any better....


----------



## alfredjourgen (Apr 9, 2010)

james67 said:


> actually understory enterprises legally produced individuals for the hobby which is where a large part of these come from in the US market.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I believe Sean Stuart imported a large number of vanzolinii from Germany before the UE frogs showed and I know for a fact vanzolinii where smuggled into the USA with in the last 3 years, these frogs have now been laundered.

As for damaging wild populations I was referring more towards the histrionicus and sylvaticus where a entire locales population is collected it’s such a waste of life half die before even getting to the EU and more die when here, I’ve unpacked boxes of smuggled frogs it’s a very sad sight indeed. 

100-200 blue jeans might not effect a population if done once but when this gets repeated over and over again because only say 50 of that 100-200 collected make it into a hobbyists vivarium it will eventually damage wild populations. 
Much like a fat girl has just one chocolate that wont hurt but before she knows it the entire box in gone and she has a belly ache!

The same argument was used with the first 100 koi sylvaticus came in the population was remote and very dangerous so they figured it wouldn’t damage the populace but now 3 years later you can’t find any koi sylvaticus and the population has been wiped out….


----------



## alfredjourgen (Apr 9, 2010)

Philsuma said:


> It may or may not, but the correct way to look at it is....
> 
> Am I proud of my collection? My little tiny part in this hobby?
> 
> ...



Exactly my point! couldn't of said it better.


----------



## alfredjourgen (Apr 9, 2010)

Ed said:


> Hi Alfred,
> 
> It depends on how badly the goverment wants to bust the smuggler.. about ten years or so here in the US, there was a confiscation of close to hatchling sized fly river turtles. The proof of the turtles being wild caught was based on the species of parasites and the parasite load found in the turtles. So for example, if several of the frogs were necropsied and found to have parasites that do not have a direct life style and utilized a host that was not found in country, there is precedence to use that as proof of smuggling (at least here in the US).
> 
> Ed




I agree it’s down to the government wanting to bust the smugglers. The only hurdle smugglers have over in the EU is the initial importation once in the EU the frogs can be sold openly with a simple self produced captive bred certificate moving around EU member countries freely. Necropsies would be a good way of proving WC with parasite load but it actually happening is slim to none as the people smuggling the frogs except losses as part of the deal and the DOA’s get tossed in the trash like they are worthless rubbish.

Like I mentioned in my first post it’s very easy to get re export papers for any dart frog even mysteriosus or captivus … Because in the governments eyes a dart is a dart, and once they arrive in the US since they have genuine EU papers so USFW can’t do much.

What needs to be done is education of DEFRA/USFW as to what frogs come from where and the legal status of each species/locality 


Alfred


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Ridiculous! What's going to happen when cities expand into there habitat? FYI The human population isn't getting smaller! Eventually everything will have to be cb!

I would sit back and snipe every person who tried to hurt the old lady

OVer and Out no purse snatching today Son

PS I condone anyone taking frogs illegally in case someone misconstrues this information. We just need to establish frog camps much like costa rica and other countries in order to preserve populations.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

alfredjourgen said:


> Like I mentioned in my first post it’s very easy to get re export papers for any dart frog even mysteriosus or captivus … Because in the governments eyes a dart is a dart, and once they arrive in the US since they have genuine EU papers so USFW can’t do much.
> 
> What needs to be done is education of DEFRA/USFW as to what frogs come from where and the legal status of each species/locality


There are several species of darts that the US won't knowingly let into the country at this point: castaneoticus, mysteriosus and captivus. But like you said USFW needs to be given a refresher in what is legal and what isn't. That would mean governments would have to spend time and money caring about an actual environmental problem that isn't big and flashy and stop wasting time on useless carbon credits and payouts to third world countries.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

alfredjourgen said:


> I agree it’s down to the government wanting to bust the smugglers. The only hurdle smugglers have over in the EU is the initial importation once in the EU the frogs can be sold openly with a simple self produced captive bred certificate moving around EU member countries freely. Necropsies would be a good way of proving WC with parasite load but it actually happening is slim to none as the people smuggling the frogs except losses as part of the deal and the DOA’s get tossed in the trash like they are worthless rubbish.


In the US, what can happen is that the purchaser (in this case the hobbyist) is the one who gets busted for buying smuggled frogs and then they work backwards until they get to the smuggler. 

Ed


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Hi Taron,

I hope you meant "I do NOT condone taking frogs illegally".

Also, to suggest that conservation efforts are meaningless is a bit insulting to those of use who work on conservation issue every day.

Take care, Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Ridiculous! What's going to happen when cities expand into there habitat? FYI The human population isn't getting smaller! Eventually everything will have to be cb!
> 
> I would sit back and snipe every person who tried to hurt the old lady
> 
> ...


----------



## NDokai (Nov 13, 2009)

A purse, no. A nice loaf of marble rye, yes.


----------



## RMB (Nov 26, 2009)

Funny that we can have two conversations going at the same time about one of the most disturbing threats to wild dart frogs, and robbing an old lady for candy.

A serious question then: I'm going to Frog Day next month, planning on purchasing a group of thumbs. I've never been to a reptile/herp/critter show before. Is there any way I can tell with any certainty where any frogs I purchase come from? Other than only buying from a known supplier like Josh's Frogs or something. Do most dealers provide proof of the CB origin of their frogs? Are most of them trustworthy? I got my first 4 from a DB member, and they're leucs so I wouldn't worry about them. I'm looking mostly for vents, imis, or intermedius, are those commonly smuggled frogs? Purchasing juveniles is safer because most WC frogs are imported as adults right?

As to the granny... I'm going to assume she's a rich widow, so I'd marry her, give her a few months of comfort, then inherit the purse.


----------



## Dane (Aug 19, 2004)

RMB said:


> A serious question then: I'm going to Frog Day next month, planning on purchasing a group of thumbs. I've never been to a reptile/herp/critter show before. Is there any way I can tell with any certainty where any frogs I purchase come from? Other than only buying from a known supplier like Josh's Frogs or something. Do most dealers provide proof of the CB origin of their frogs? Are most of them trustworthy? I got my first 4 from a DB member, and they're leucs so I wouldn't worry about them. I'm looking mostly for vents, imis, or intermedius, are those commonly smuggled frogs? Purchasing juveniles is safer because most WC frogs are imported as adults right?


Pretty sure that Frogday is a CB only show, so nothing you see will be a directly laundered frog. No vendors (that I know of) hand out certificates of origin with their frogs, so the best thing that you can do is to stay aware of the species that are of dubious origin, and you are in the right place for that kind of info. Vents, imitators and intermedius breed pretty regularly, so there is no real demand for smuggling, unless it is a newly discovered, or difficult population.


----------



## Boondoggle (Dec 9, 2007)

RMB said:


> A serious question then: I'm going to Frog Day next month, planning on purchasing a group of thumbs. I've never been to a reptile/herp/critter show before. Is there any way I can tell with any certainty where any frogs I purchase come from? Other than only buying from a known supplier like Josh's Frogs or something. Do most dealers provide proof of the CB origin of their frogs? Are most of them trustworthy? I got my first 4 from a DB member, and they're leucs so I wouldn't worry about them. I'm looking mostly for vents, imis, or intermedius, are those commonly smuggled frogs? Purchasing juveniles is safer because most WC frogs are imported as adults right?


That's the great thing about shows, you can talk face to face with the other breeders/hobbyists and get a feel for them. At least half my frogs came from local California shows. If I see a guy at a show with a great deal, but his booth looks like he carried his entire stock in his backpack, or he can't talk specificly about where his animals were bred or came from, or he has a lot of wild caught native animals, or if he just seems like he wants to make a sale but isn't stoked to talk frogs...red flags go up and I don't purchase from him. Just listen to your radar. It's not infallable, but it's a lot better than purchasing from a faceless website IMO. 

See ya there.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

RMB said:


> I got my first 4 from a DB member, and they're leucs so I wouldn't worry about them.



Just fyi, all leucs are presumed to be smuggled or descendants of smuggled frogs


----------



## flapjax3000 (Jul 4, 2009)

So what do you do with the current captive bred populations that are descendant from possibly smuggled populations? I see frogs such as Castis and Vanzos up for sell quite often that are CB. Should someone not purchase those because of the possibly origin? 

For example
1. Frogs illegally shipped to Europe.
2. Frogs are then bred in Europe.
3. Captive bred frogs then legally shipped to US to a reputable vendor.
4. Frogs then are bred by the vendor.
5. CB frogs are sold to a happy customer.
6. Happy customer sells offspring to happy customer #2.

Who is wrong in this scenario except for obviously 1 and 2. Possibly 3. Should we rip apart 5 and 6 because of their lack to gain information?

I know some frogs are shipped directly via smuggler, but that is not the situation I am talking about.

BTW, only true way to stop smuggling is if no one had any frogs as pets.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

ChrisK said:


> Just fyi, all leucs are presumed to be smuggled or descendants of smuggled frogs


There have been numerous legal imports of Leucomelas into the U.S.

At best, you may be able to argue a case for a _laundered_ species, but so many have come into the country recently, that even that argument is now weak.


Gross import trade report into US
 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
D. spp. 398 25 0 0 0 6 0 580 0 0
D. amazonicus 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0
D. arboreus 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. auratus 2099 505 3834 4556 6283 8442 8184 7353 8730 0
D. azureus 95 32 46 20 0 0 24 26 0 0
D. duellmani 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0
D. fantasticus 30 0 0 0 0 0 19 75 0 0
D. fulguritus 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 2 0 0
D. galactonotus 244 47 0 40 42 31 0 2 0 0
D. histrionicus 5 87 0 0 0 9 10 14 53 0
D. imitator 63 0 24 5 20 59 34 196 0 0
D. lamasi 48 16 8 0 0 0 44 25 5 0
D. leucomelas 90 30 5 0 0 290 70 28 287 0
D. minutus 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0  0
D. mysteriosus 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. pumilio 3518 1117 28 10 1796 2399 4402 3084 3647 0
D. quinquevittatus 90 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0
D. reticulatus 177 0 0 0 22 10 34 42 2 0
D. tinctorius 1301 1234 817 1191 44 48 28 27 52 0
D. vanzolinii 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 11 5 0
D. variabilis 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 242 0 0
D. ventrimaculat 154 0 24 25 47 86 155 124 16 0
D. vicentei 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
D. viridis 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

flapjax3000 said:


> BTW, only true way to stop smuggling is if no one had any frogs as pets.


There is actually a bit of truth to this and it does sting......I came up with the following choices for everyone's perusal.



* The hobby ethics tree:*
 i. Any frog, from anywhere. No questions asked. Ever
 ii. A species is in the country now, so it is absolutely fair game to acquire WC or EU imports.
 iii. I realize it came here illegally, so I will only acquire CB offspring of that species.
 iv. I will acquire WC frogs, but only from permitted businesses with tax ID numbers ect.
 v. I will only acquire only CB frogs from legally acquired species. 
 vi. I will not keep any frogs whatsoever for a variety of moral reasons.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

Are there any records of legal exports to the hobby from Venezuela? If so I stand corrected right

Edit: I also know for a fact those numbers you posted are inaccurate


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

Several legal imports of frogs from Venezuela came in during the early/mid 1990s. I have F1 and F2 leucs from 95 and 96 imports, and have talked to the person who brought them in, legally.

The more recent imports of leucs seem to be from British Guyana.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

OK so I am corrected, the leucs are good! The import numbers are inaccurate still though


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

ChrisK said:


> OK so I am corrected, the leucs are good! The import numbers are inaccurate still though


Chris....if you find other numbers, please post.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

There is the proof in my living room, in tanks, imported legally, with papers, in 2009, from one of the columns you posted where there is a "0" under 2009


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

I believe that the list just hadn't been updated for 2009 at that point . . .


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

Oh really, what month was it current as of? They actually did come in last quarter 2009


----------



## McBobs (Apr 26, 2007)

Couldnt tell ya, but according to that list, nothing was imported in 2009. I'm willing to bet that the 2009 numbers just hadnt been compiled yet, but had already added the 2009 category to the list. 

-Matt


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

McBobs said:


> Couldnt tell ya, but according to that list, nothing was imported in 2009. I'm willing to bet that the 2009 numbers just hadnt been compiled yet, but had already added the 2009 category to the list.


exactly correct.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

Then it's REALLY inaccurate


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

Woodsman said:


> Hi Taron,
> 
> I hope you meant "I do NOT condone taking frogs illegally".
> 
> ...


I'm thinking the word "condone" was meant to be "condemn."


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

ChrisK said:


> Then it's REALLY inaccurate


Sorry Chris....not trying to F' wit ya, but here's the same list with all the 2009 references excised.

Gross import trade report into US
 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
D. spp. 398 25 0 0 0 6 0 580 0 
D. amazonicus 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 
D. arboreus 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. auratus 2099 505 3834 4556 6283 8442 8184 7353 8730 
D. azureus 95 32 46 20 0 0 24 26 0 
D. duellmani 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 
D. fantasticus 30 0 0 0 0 0 19 75 0 
D. fulguritus 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 2 0 
D. galactonotus 244 47 0 40 42 31 0 2 0 
D. histrionicus 5 87 0 0 0 9 10 14 53 
D. imitator 63 0 24 5 20 59 34 196 0 
D. lamasi 48 16 8 0 0 0 44 25 5 
D. leucomelas 90 30 5 0 0 290 70 28 287 
D. minutus 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 
D. mysteriosus 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 
D. pumilio 3518 1117 28 10 1796 2399 4402 3084 3647 
D. quinquevittatus 90 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 
D. reticulatus 177 0 0 0 22 10 34 42 2 
D. tinctorius 1301 1234 817 1191 44 48 28 27 52 
D. vanzolinii 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 11 5 
D. variabilis 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 242 0 
D. ventrimaculat 154 0 24 25 47 86 155 124 16 
D. vicentei 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 
D. viridis 0 0 20 0 0 0 0


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

No, make it as accurate as you can. I actually would like to see the real 2009 numbers though


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

The 30 Mysteriousis were supposed to be brought in but were never shipped, 10 were for me for frogs I sent to a guy in Germany. Luckily the importer was tipped off he was going to be arrested when he picked them up, I never got the frogs nor payment for the 30 Weygoldt Tincs I sent to P***r N****k.
The 2 Vincetei were ABG animals, unfortunately i beleive only 1 is still alive.


----------



## stemcellular (Jun 26, 2008)

What about the Red vicente and Arboreus adult trios that SS sold this fall?

ah duh, they were 2009 so the numbers don't reflect them.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

markpulawski said:


> The 30 Mysteriousis were supposed to be brought in but were never shipped, 10 were for me for frogs I sent to a guy in Germany. Luckily the importer was tipped off he was going to be arrested when he picked them up, I never got the frogs nor payment for the 30 Weygoldt Tincs I sent to P***r N****k.
> The 2 Vincetei were ABG animals, unfortunately i beleive only 1 is still alive.


 
Thanks for posting, Mark.....this is the kind of info that I really appreciate.


----------



## Taron (Sep 23, 2009)

Technically we are all conservationist considering if they do get wiped out we have them breeding and will be reintroducing them from captive specimens which is why it is so important to keep lineage records. Isn't that why we started catalogging frogs. 

Am I right?


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Technically we are all conservationist considering if they do get wiped out we have them breeding and will be reintroducing them from captive specimens which is why it is so important to keep lineage records. Isn't that why we started catalogging frogs.
> 
> Am I right?


Not at all..........


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

bussardnr said:


> Not at all..........


Instead of being summarily dismissive Nate, why not expound upon your statement and inform him of why he's not completely correct?


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/47152-more-waffling-hybridizing.html
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/science-conservation/47324-conservation-hobby.html

at least I answered his question


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Depends on how you define conservation I guess. I can think of one "conservationist" whose contribution seems to be whining about imports and cross breeding tincs for "science experiments"...


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

bussardnr said:


> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/47152-more-waffling-hybridizing.html
> http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/science-conservation/47324-conservation-hobby.html
> 
> at least I answered his question


Yes you did, with those 2 threads. They are both very good selections for that issue too.

As much as Richard and I have locked horns, I will say that I have no knowledge that he is populating the hobby with crossbred Tincs, so I have no issue with what he does in his own house.

I believe, as he does, that Captive Breeding is a contribution of sorts, to conservation.

He is passionate about imports and is attempting to find out the legality of Escudos and other frogs. Good for him there too....


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

Tony said:


> Depends on how you define conservation I guess. I can think of one "conservationist" whose contribution seems to be whining about imports and cross breeding tincs for "science experiments"...


Thats not really called for, just because hes doing something that doesn't involve darts frogs doesn't make it any less conservation.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Depends on how you define conservation I guess. I can think of one "conservationist" whose contribution seems to be whining about imports and cross breeding tincs for "science experiments"...


Well, I have to say that I do not see the dichotomy... there is science and there is curiosity and while the two often go together, they do not always intersect, one of the main differences is based on the documentation and record keeping.. One should keep in mind that a lot of what we know about pigmentation in amphibians is in part due to a artificial hybrid of an albino tiger salamander and an axolotls (and this was the origin of one of the lines of albino axolotls).


----------



## zBrinks (Jul 16, 2006)

Unless you are captive breeding frogs for the purpose of reintroduction, or managing genetics so the animals can be reintroduced should the need arise, I think captive breeding is contributing to the pet trade - nothing more, nothing less.

conservation - The protection, preservation, management, or restoration of wildlife and of natural resources such as forests, soil, and water.

How is breeding frogs in captivity for the pet trade directly protecting, preserving, managing, or restoring dart frogs in the wild?

One could argue that by captive breeding frogs, you are reducing the demand for wild caught animals, but, by captive breeding, are you actually reducing the numbers of wc frogs entering the United States?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I think the import numbers of auratus gives a strong condemnation that the hobby is doing anything to reduce import numbers... 

It is more probable if one is working with a species that produces hundreds to thousands of offspring at a time. 

Ed


----------



## nathan (Jul 24, 2009)

A lot of people would look at it that way Zach , if they are producing captive bred animals then it reduces the demand for wild caught frogs. Something to think about though, if more healthy cb frogs are available and this hobby continues to grow, so will the demand for frogs. And wc frogs will always be brought in for a cheap alternative to cb. There will always be people out there trying to save money. And Always people trying to make money. Dealers will always look for cheap frogs to turn over fast. pet stores in general want animals cheap. They want quantity not quality. 

I am sure a lot of people here would not want to supply pet stores with the animals they produce. but would rather supply them to experienced frog keepers. Think of how many of the wc frogs that do make it into the US and then into the hands of someone who doesn’t care for them in the right way and they die. Its a waste but that’s where the majority of these frogs wind up. In the hands of people impulse buying the pretty frog in the window.

I don’t know exactly where I was going with this , lost my train of thought. But I am one of the people that would like to think in some way that cb animals reduce the stresses on the wild populations.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

zBrinks said:


> One could argue that by captive breeding frogs, you are reducing the demand for wild caught animals, but, by captive breeding, are you actually reducing the numbers of wc frogs entering the United States?


IMO, yes. The recent BJ are a good example. If we had more of those being CB, I don't think they would have been imported.


----------



## fleshfrombone (Jun 15, 2008)

If there wasnt money to be made the smuggling wouldn't happen. Black markets exist for these reasons supply/demand/prohibition. Now we can wag fingers at each other all day but we create the market at the end of the day. Threads like this are pointless, you may as well say stop being human because it's human nature that drives this in the first place. Mind you I don't condone the actions of said smugglers but I will be the first to admit (since no one else will) I thought about smuggling frogs from Europe to the US for both profit and to expand my own collection. Almost every frog in the country got here in less than ideal or illegal means. Bottom line prohibition doesn't work when the market has a customer base, it becomes even more lucrative.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Ed said:


> I think the import numbers of auratus gives a strong condemnation that the hobby is doing anything to reduce import numbers...


Auratus is often used as "padding" for all sorts of shipments. They are in such high densities and easy to collect for pennies on the dollar.

They are also used as a loss leader for the pet trade in conjunction with the firebelly toad as a means of getting mom and dad to purchase $75.00 worth of related items, tanks, gravel, plants, ect ect


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

zBrinks said:


> How is breeding frogs in captivity for the pet trade directly protecting, preserving, managing, or restoring dart frogs in the wild?


It isn't, and using the handful of frogs that we do have to make hybrids only increases pressure on wild populations. How many of us are going to buy a captive-bred frog that may or may not be a hybrid over a wild caught animal? Ideally we would buy known frogs from reputable breeders, preferably within ASN, but that obviously does not happen. We should keep working toward the goal of managed populations, but in the meantime I also think we should all refuse to produce hybrids or condone/overlook irresponsible breeding practices. Every little bit helps.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

fleshfrombone said:


> If there wasnt money to be made the smuggling wouldn't happen. Black markets exist for these reasons supply/demand/prohibition. Now we can wag fingers at each other all day but we create the market at the end of the day. Threads like this are pointless, you may as well say stop being human because it's human nature that drives this in the first place. Mind you I don't condone the actions of said smugglers but I will be the first to admit (since no one else will) I thought about smuggling frogs from Europe to the US for both profit and to expand my own collection. Almost every frog in the country got here in less than ideal or illegal means. Bottom line prohibition doesn't work when the market has a customer base, it becomes even more lucrative.


Correct.

But

Here's how you combat it.

Use the last IAD as an example. Were there frogs that had no documentation? Yep. Were there frogs that HAD proper documentation? yep.

The frogs with proper paperwork stayed and the frogs without - did not.

Do people show up at your meetings and some reptile shows without proper documentation for the animals they bring?

What are YOU going to do? Let them stay at your show/residence/meeting ?

It's up to you. One show/meeting/gathering at a time.

Craigslist had open prostitution not very many years ago. Still think you can deal in that trade? I would not want to roll those dice.

Are we just "pushing the dirt" around the floor, from one room to another? Maybe.

But the dirt will NOT be in my room.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I think if you add up the numbers in the CITES reports in other threads, there have been approximately 50,000 auratus imported into the US alone over the last ten years or so. While this number pales in comparision to the fire belly toad numbers it still gives a strong indication that the hobby isn't even close to providing enough auratus to meet demand. 

On a retail level, it makes sense to have a $5 species (or 2 for $5) as the lead loser (as wholesale they go for much less..), it doesn't make as much sense to use a species that on a retail level (depending on how many resellers it has to pass through) costs between $20-$40.. and will suffer significant mortality... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> It isn't, and using the handful of frogs that we do have to make hybrids only increases pressure on wild populations. How many of us are going to buy a captive-bred frog that may or may not be a hybrid over a wild caught animal? Ideally we would buy known frogs from reputable breeders, preferably within ASN, but that obviously does not happen. We should keep working toward the goal of managed populations, but in the meantime I also think we should all refuse to produce hybrids or condone/overlook irresponsible breeding practices. Every little bit helps.


That would only be the case if the person producing the hybrids was selling them into the hobby.. and it would only be the case if the person purchasing the frogs decided that they weren't what the person told them they were and that person posted a picture on a forum and asked for visual identifications...


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> That would only be the case if the person producing the hybrids was selling them into the hobby.. and it would only be the case if the person purchasing the frogs decided that they weren't what the person told them they were and that person posted a picture on a forum and asked for visual identifications...


Maybe I'm more paranoid than most, but even the chance of that happening is a major deterrent for me. I would not purchase any frog from someone I know to produce hybrids, no matter how "pure" the frog may look.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

NO, hobby frogs as they exist today would not be appropriate for any efforts at reintroductions. Reference can be made to TWI and the Taxon management Plans to understand why.

Richard.



ReptilesEtcetera said:


> Technically we are all conservationist considering if they do get wiped out we have them breeding and will be reintroducing them from captive specimens which is why it is so important to keep lineage records. Isn't that why we started catalogging frogs.
> 
> Am I right?


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

I have contacted US F&W about the Blue Jean and Escudo Island Pumilios and the Sylvaticus that I believe were brought into the country illegally and will let members know what I find out. If there are other species that members are concerned about, please pm me with the details.

Thanks, Richard.


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

are we supposed to include the people who buy the frogs from a pet store, and due to many factors loose them, with the hobbyists like most on here who are at least somewhat committed to the animals? 

that's pretty ludicrous. how about trying to make a distinction between frogs brought in to supply retailers and those distributed throughout the hobby. i very rarely see anyone on here, admittedly, purchasing pumilio from the crappy wholesalers bent on gaining cash (we all know these people, who bring in hundreds of random pums, autratus, etc., and use them purely to make profit with no care for the animals or those purchasing them)

those people are separate from the hobby IMO. so how do we tell who is responsible here, because i feel that if PDFs were distributed only through these types of channels we would see far less of this view of total un-sustainability.

james


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Maybe I'm more paranoid than most, but even the chance of that happening is a major deterrent for me. I would not purchase any frog from someone I know to produce hybrids, no matter how "pure" the frog may look.


Then you should exclude getting frogs from anyone who has had a frog and assigned it to a morph based on visual characteristics (particularly if it was ever posted on a forum for a consensus) or from anyone who has ever gotten a frog from anyone who has gotten a frog from someone who has done so...and so on down the road... unless the frog comes in with actual collection data for that frog, wild caught frogs are going to be subject to the same risk as exporters segregate them on appearance, importers segregate them on appearance and so on... 

Given that it only takes one time for this to contaminate a entire morph.... 


Ed


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> Maybe I'm more paranoid than most, but even the chance of that happening is a major deterrent for me. I would not purchase any frog from someone I know to produce hybrids, no matter how "pure" the frog may look.


That is a _very_ understandable opinion.


----------



## Woodsman (Jan 3, 2008)

Good one, Tony. You have no clue what I do in my real life. I'm guessing your age at, what, 7? Am I right?

Richard.



Tony said:


> Depends on how you define conservation I guess. I can think of one "conservationist" whose contribution seems to be whining about imports and cross breeding tincs for "science experiments"...


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

james67 said:


> are we supposed to include the people who buy the frogs from a pet store, and due to many factors loose them, with the hobbyists like most on here who are at least somewhat committed to the animals?
> 
> that's pretty ludicrous. how about trying to make a distinction between frogs brought in to supply retailers and those distributed throughout the hobby. i very rarely see anyone on here, admittedly, purchasing pumilio from the crappy wholesalers bent on gaining cash (we all know these people, who bring in hundreds of random pums, autratus, etc., and use them purely to make profit with no care for the animals or those purchasing them)
> 
> ...


If the argument is that captive breeding reduces demand on the wild populations then yes.. 
How about all of the people on here who went crazy for those pumilio imports over the last 5-6 years? Are they no longer part of the group who purchase those frogs from the importers? I don't see how any there is any legitimate seperation...


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

james67 said:


> i very rarely see anyone on here, admittedly, purchasing pumilio from the crappy wholesalers bent on gaining cash (we all know these people, who bring in hundreds of random pums, autratus, etc., and use them purely to make profit with no care for the animals or those purchasing them)


I did it a couple years ago and I keep referencing it in posts on here every so often.

I felt I had to, to be able to say I know what I'm talking about on the subject.

I would not recommend it to anyone. I lost 10 of 12 pumilio (over $500.00) and I consider myself an above average experience hobbyist.

Like it or not, we must consider all importers, wholesalers, distributors and jobbers as involved in our hobby and treat and deal with them accordingly. Some are very good and others are horrible and should be put out of business or criminaly prosecuted (see Global Exotics - Texas).


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Woodsman said:


> I'm guessing your age at, what, 7? Am I right?


That's amazing, how did you know?


----------



## james67 (Jun 28, 2008)

phil: or DFG or whatever they have changed their name to now.

ed: im simply stating that i think if we looked at the frogs bought by hobbyists vs those that are simply sold to whomever has some cash and thinks something poisonous would be a cool pet, the hobby might look a little less sinister. not that there is a definite distinction. but when it comes to saying look at these statistics and how poorly we manage the animals, we are also including those who dont go to hobbyists at all, and never stood a chance. im not saying that this can be changed, but i also dont think that its fair to group these two distinctly different sectors of buyers together when only one carries the burden.

james


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> Given that it only takes one time for this to contaminate a entire morph....
> 
> 
> Ed


Valid points, and I do understand that we must accept hobby frogs as being flawed representations of wild populations because they have not all come in with site data and have not been subject to planned management over the years. However, that does not legitimize hybridization in my eyes. I would much rather do the best we can with what we have, and use our knowledge to manage future imports properly than just give up and start making designer frogs.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

james67 said:


> phil: or DFG or whatever they have changed their name to now.
> 
> ed: im simply stating that i think if we looked at the frogs bought by hobbyists vs those that are simply sold to whomever has some cash and thinks something poisonous would be a cool pet, the hobby might look a little less sinister. not that there is a definite distinction. but when it comes to saying look at these statistics and how poorly we manage the animals, we are also including those who dont go to hobbyists at all, and never stood a chance. im not saying that this can be changed, but i also dont think that its fair to group these two distinctly different sectors of buyers together when only one carries the burden.
> 
> james


Hi James, 

I see what you are saying but you can't seperate the two unless the hobby does not ever purchase mass imported wild caught frogs then you can't seperate them... I referenced the pumilio imports on purpose.. there were a lot of threads on here about what morph was imported.. man creek, almirante.. etc and who was getting them. Look at all of the people who aquired the bumblebee toads.. we are not seperate..we are part of the problem... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Valid points, and I do understand that we must accept hobby frogs as being flawed representations of wild populations because they have not all come in with site data and have not been subject to planned management over the years. However, that does not legitimize hybridization in my eyes. I would much rather do the best we can with what we have, and use our knowledge to manage future imports properly than just give up and start making designer frogs.


And where has the hobby given up? It is hard to draw that picture based on what the person you referenced is actually doing. see my comment above on the understanding of amphibian pigmentation.. 

Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> And where has the hobby given up? It is hard to draw that picture based on what the person you referenced is actually doing. see my comment above on the understanding of amphibian pigmentation..
> 
> Ed


What understanding do we gain from some guy cross breeding tincs in his basement? My understanding from what has been posted is that it was just to satisfy personal curiosity. Where is the scientific merit in "I wonder what frog X crossed with frog Y will look like?"


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

why are you guys even talking about cross breeding? We dont need to have this conversation every month or two.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

So the only valid science of information comes out of a lab or institutional setting? How about a little homework assignment? 

Look up the research done by members of the American Killfish Association on hybridization between species and morphs about 30-50 years ago.. and tell what value the results of the experiments provided... 

Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

bussardnr said:


> why are you guys even talking about cross breeding? We dont need to have this conversation every month or two.


Because hypocrisy irritates me. I get tired of reading sanctimonious garbage from a guy who is making a direct negative contribution to the issue he spends so much time complaining about. Hybrid producers are in no position to complain about the demand for wild caught animals, they are a part of that problem.


----------



## nathan (Jul 24, 2009)

bussardnr said:


> why are you guys even talking about cross breeding? We dont need to have this conversation every month or two.


I am scratching my head too over this. How this thread has turned to hybrids . . .


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> So the only valid science of information comes out of a lab or institutional setting? How about a little homework assignment?
> 
> Look up the research done by members of the American Killfish Association on hybridization between species and morphs about 30-50 years ago.. and tell what value the results of the experiments provided...
> 
> Ed


Any particular source? I don't know enough about killifish to even know where to start or what I'm looking for.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

nathan said:


> I am scratching my head too over this. How this thread has turned to hybrids . . .


Post number 54 where and subsequently where a link was attempted to be drawn between one person crossbreeding and effects of crossbreeding and how this requires further imports of wc frogs. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> Any particular source? I don't know enough about killifish to even know where to start or what I'm looking for.


No, If I told you where to find it then it wouldn't be research. If you look at the literature along the way in trying to find it, you may learn more about the entire process. 

Ed


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> No, If I told you where to find it then it wouldn't be research. If you look at the literature along the way in trying to find it, you may learn more about the entire process.
> 
> Ed


What is "it?" I am genuinely interested, but I have no idea what I'm looking for.


----------



## UmbraSprite (Mar 2, 2007)

:: Munches Popcorn::


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> What is "it?" I am genuinely interested, but I have no idea what I'm looking for.


Back in that time, there were a lot of different morphs of annual killifish floating around.. not only was there a lot of question about which were actually species and which were not, there was a lot of question on inheritance of coloration in those fish. As a result, a number of breeders engaged in a systematic crossbreeding and hybridization to clarify the relationship between those fish (keep in mind that some of these fish were only found in one mud puddle miles from other related fish). These were documented and published in several journals including the Journal of the American Killifish Association. This provided the information needed to elucidate some of the relationships between different forms. DNA analysis will provide data that shows relatedness but it won't provide information on how pigmentation or even the effect of outcrossing on the animals involved. That kind of data can only be determined through actually going through the crosses.. (and as a side note the AKA also has (and had at that time) a goal for the members to preserve as many as possible the pure morphs species in captivity (and did have more than a few go extinct due to lack of interest, inbreeding etc). 
These sort of processes are still going on and are valid projects for one example see JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie 
Whether or not outcrossing/hybrids should be permitted really depends on the methodology and training of the person doing the crosses.. as it can actually provide valuable insight into the animals involved.. (but it does depend on how it is occuring..)


----------



## SmackoftheGods (Jan 28, 2009)

I think you just did his homework _for_ him.... That was always taboo in my classes....


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> Back in that time, there were a lot of different morphs of annual killifish floating around.. not only was there a lot of question about which were actually species and which were not, there was a lot of question on inheritance of coloration in those fish. As a result, a number of breeders engaged in a systematic crossbreeding and hybridization to clarify the relationship between those fish (keep in mind that some of these fish were only found in one mud puddle miles from other related fish). These were documented and published in several journals including the Journal of the American Killifish Association. This provided the information needed to elucidate some of the relationships between different forms. DNA analysis will provide data that shows relatedness but it won't provide information on how pigmentation or even the effect of outcrossing on the animals involved. That kind of data can only be determined through actually going through the crosses.. (and as a side note the AKA also has (and had at that time) a goal for the members to preserve as many as possible the pure morphs species in captivity (and did have more than a few go extinct due to lack of interest, inbreeding etc).
> These sort of processes are still going on and are valid projects for one example see JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
> Whether or not outcrossing/hybrids should be permitted really depends on the methodology and training of the person doing the crosses.. as it can actually provide valuable insight into the animals involved.. (but it does depend on how it is occuring..)


I can't access the full article, but from what I can read it seems like a different situation. We already know that the three _Dendrobates_ species common in the hobby can interbreed, and common sense tells us that the various tinc populations will be able to freely interbreed. What is the conservation value of further crosses? The only thing that immediately comes to mind is genetic rescue of a population with it's closest relative like what was done with Florida panthers, but are we at or near the point where that would be necessary with any tinc populations or other dendrobatids? Or am I completely missing the point you were trying to make?


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

SmackoftheGods said:


> I think you just did his homework _for_ him.... That was always taboo in my classes....


It's a bit difficult to do homework when you're not sure what the question is and don't have access to the relevant literature.


----------



## jubjub47 (Sep 9, 2008)

Tony said:


> It's a bit difficult to do homework when you're not sure what the question is and don't have access to the relevant literature.


That's better than telling them the dog ate it


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> I can't access the full article, but from what I can read it seems like a different situation. We already know that the three _Dendrobates_ species common in the hobby can interbreed, and common sense tells us that the various tinc populations will be able to freely interbreed. What is the conservation value of further crosses? The only thing that immediately comes to mind is genetic rescue of a population with it's closest relative like what was done with Florida panthers, but are we at or near the point where that would be necessary with any tinc populations or other dendrobatids? Or am I completely missing the point you were trying to make?


Based on your response, I get the impression you didn't understand the implications.. 

1) there isn't any conservation value (and I think I have been clear on this). The value comes the determination of how the interbreeding occurs and the inheritance of of the morphometric characteristics (for example, outcrossing impacts can help determine relatedness between populations which will help eludicate relationships between populations (see http://www.montana.edu/~wwwbi/staff/creel/bio480/edmands 2007.pdf for a good explination of outcrossing). Currently we have no understanding of this in any dendrobatids. 
If nothing else comes out of it, a photo journal of hybrids would also help with preventing the laundering of hybrids into the pet trade.. 

2) People currently believe that the hybrids within the genus Dendrobates are infertile. This is not known and a study as shown in the article linked above JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie will demonstrate whether that is true or not.. The inclusion of necropsies (unlikely in this case) on select animals can also determine whether the infertility is a problem with the eggs or the sperm (in many cases where infertility results in herps, it is a problem with the males and not the females for example as seen in green tree x carpet pythons). 


3) there is also NO automatic negative impact on conservation unless people are so paranoid they have purchase new imported animals in an attempt to replace the lines currently in the hobby. 

There is a big black hole in pattern genetics in our knowledge of color inheritance in these frogs, particularly given the extereme polymorphism seen within a species. We have no idea as to whether there is a dominance/recessive control on any aspect of this.. the only way to elucidate this is to work with outcrosses and intergrades... 

I am not in favor of hybrids in general but with some rigerous work, needed information can result from properly run crosses. 

Ed


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Just to throw a few ideas into the mix for those who might be interested in funneling their energy/passion for such things into perhaps more constructive ventures:

1) TWI has formed the Commercial Amphibian Conservation Group (CACG), which is a forum for discussing issues related to more sustainable commercial amphibian endeavors. There is currently in the works a document recommending "best practices" for the entire collection, import, and export trail. It is currently a document in the works...and open to members who may be interested in helping compile it.

2) Microcosm 2010 is coming up in September, and one of the primary goals of the show is creating a forum and venue in which we can further discuss and explore the ways in which the skills and energies of private hobbyists can contribute to conservation efforts. We think this is a pretty exciting opportunity to expand involvement of private hobbyists in conservation efforts, and by bringing together people from various other hobbies (amphibians, fish, invertebrates, orchids, etc.) we can learn from one another and build upon previous successes and failures.

I personally think these conversations are important to have (even if they are every month or so) because there are invariably folks who read them who perhaps haven't considered these things before. However, I also think that it's easy to pat ourselves on the back for just talking about them and delude ourselves into thinking that just the act of discussing it is actuall solving something. The above suggestions are just a couple ways folks can turn their talk into action.


----------



## Tony (Oct 13, 2008)

Ed said:


> Based on your response, I get the impression you didn't understand the implications..


Not being able to read past the first page makes it hard to see the implications you were trying to point out.




> 1) there isn't any conservation value (and I think I have been clear on this). The value comes the determination of how the interbreeding occurs and the inheritance of of the morphometric characteristics (for example, outcrossing impacts can help determine relatedness between populations which will help eludicate relationships between populations (see http://www.montana.edu/~wwwbi/staff/creel/bio480/edmands 2007.pdf for a good explination of outcrossing). Currently we have no understanding of this in any dendrobatids.
> If nothing else comes out of it, a photo journal of hybrids would also help with preventing the laundering of hybrids into the pet trade..


The paper on outbreeding depression was a good read, thank you. On relatedness between populations, wouldn't that simply be a function of geography? Since these frogs are too tiny and delicate to migrate long distances they are pretty much stuck wherever natural events place them, and it would make sense that relatedness decreases with distance.



> 2) People currently believe that the hybrids within the genus Dendrobates are infertile. This is not known and a study as shown in the article linked above JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie will demonstrate whether that is true or not.. The inclusion of necropsies (unlikely in this case) on select animals can also determine whether the infertility is a problem with the eggs or the sperm (in many cases where infertility results in herps, it is a problem with the males and not the females for example as seen in green tree x carpet pythons).


Again I can't access the killifish study, so I'm probably missing your point, but my question is why do we care? I mean that sincerely, I'm not trying to be flippant. What value is there in knowing if interspecific hybrids are fertile and why or why not?



> 3) there is also NO automatic negative impact on conservation unless people are so paranoid they have purchase new imported animals in an attempt to replace the lines currently in the hobby.


Fair enough.



> There is a big black hole in pattern genetics in our knowledge of color inheritance in these frogs, particularly given the extereme polymorphism seen within a species. We have no idea as to whether there is a dominance/recessive control on any aspect of this.. the only way to elucidate this is to work with outcrosses and intergrades...


Haven't all of the hybrids so far shown polygenic inheritance?



> I am not in favor of hybrids in general but with some rigerous work, needed information can result from properly run crosses.


I guess I'm just a bit skeptical of the average hobbyist's ability to do that rigorous work considering our past history as a hobby. Call me paranoid, but I worry that unscrupulous breeders would use the info to cross inexpensive morph A with inexpensive morph B to create a passable replica of expensive morph C. In any case I do appreciate you taking the time to discuss this, your input is always valuable.


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

Tony said:


> I guess I'm just a bit skeptical of the average hobbyist's ability to do that rigorous work considering our past history as a hobby. Call me paranoid, but I worry that unscrupulous breeders would use the info to cross inexpensive morph A with inexpensive morph B to create a passable replica of expensive morph C.


I have yet to hear about any "genetic / scientific" hobbyist with record keeping.

You are in good stead to be very sceptical about breeders who have expressed interest in mixing morphs. I am too. I would not accept a single animal from them or other people who have received animals from them.


----------



## Marc (Feb 3, 2008)

Interesting read.

I have been into killifish for about 10 years now. I am a member of the American Killifish Association (AKA) and Northwest Killies. I have read some of the studies of crossing killifish for research. 

I have been interested in dart frogs for years and have kept them for about three years. My interest in keeping stock pure comes from my killifish keeping. We keep killifish labeled as followed. 

For example. I have Aphyosemion. bochtleri GWW 86/11. 

This is a very rare fish in the hobby. Myself and maybe two others in the US have this fish. The code denotes collected in 1986 by one or two people (GWW are their initials) It was collected in the pond or stream at mile post 11. This information means it has been bred only to it's own kind for 24 years. If I so choose, I can trace it origin back to the collectors and country as this is recorded in our records. 

We still have stock of killifish collected in the 1970's. We also have killifish stock that is extinct in the wild. 

If the code is lost by the keeper or not passed on, the killifish becomes "aquarium strain" and is not considered desirable. This makes passing this information on as vital and most killifish keepers do pass the info on. (In the killifish hobby a killifish even from another mud puddle 2 feet away is kept separate with it's own code)

We do have unique problems in the dart frog hobby though. With killifish, it is hard to completely fish out a stream or pond. So this info is freely passed on to all killifish hobbiest. (Exactly where it was collected) For dart frogs if the info is known, (from what I have read) that area becomes targeted and every frog eventually gets collected and that morph from that area is no more. 

I am not sure of the solution to this. I do know Mark Pepper has site specific data on some of his frogs. He is the only one that I know who has done this. He does own/manage some of the rain forest in Peru I believe.

Marc


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

Marc said:


> For example. I have Aphyosemion. bochtleri GWW 86/11. This is a very rare fish in the hobby. Myself and maybe two others in the US have this fish. The code denotes collected in 1986 by one or two people (GWW are their initials) It was collected in the pond or stream at mile post 11. This information means it has been bred only to it's own kind for 24 years. If I so choose, I can trace it origin back to the collectors and country as this is recorded in our records.


Hi Marc, this is very much what some have wanted to see in the Dendrobatid hobby for quite a while now (I think there is much we can learn from the killifish hobby). Unfortunately, with the exception of Pepper and his UE operation, there isn't enough foresight in frog collection to take note of such specific data. Obivously, if you dont' start with that info, it's difficult to ever institute it.



> (In the killifish hobby a killifish even from another mud puddle 2 feet away is kept separate with it's own code)


How does this play out in regards to longterm captive management and breeding, genetic bottlenecking, etc? For instance, do you treat fish collected from each seperate puddle/pool as a seperate population and therefore bred seperately (i.e. not with others from another puddle 2 m away)? Or, assuming that those puddles may very well reconnect at various times throughout the year, interbreed all the fish collected from different puddles within a specific area as the fish represented are most likely from a single contiguous population?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Tony said:


> The paper on outbreeding depression was a good read, thank you. On relatedness between populations, wouldn't that simply be a function of geography? Since these frogs are too tiny and delicate to migrate long distances they are pretty much stuck wherever natural events place them, and it would make sense that relatedness decreases with distance.


Actually this isn't supported in other anurans that have been studied. I just spent about 45 minutes trying to find the papers on this (I have them laying around somewhere but I can't remember where off hand).. The reason behind this is that you can't assume that the closer populations are more closely related as it depends so much on dispersal patterns and population sinks. The closer populations may be due to different colonization events that occured at two seperate times from different parent localites or the patterns could be more random. This is fairly easily determined by crossing events. . 



Tony said:


> Again I can't access the killifish study, so I'm probably missing your point, but my question is why do we care? I mean that sincerely, I'm not trying to be flippant. What value is there in knowing if interspecific hybrids are fertile and why or why not?


If your not interested in knowing it then there isn't any point in disussing it. Personally, the more I can learn about a species the better I can understand it. I would be interested in knowing if fertility issues arise at F2, or F3 etc. It has implications in conservation as it could potentially indicate where closely related genetic blood lines can occur.. it may also demonstrate the manner in which the areas were colonized... 



Tony said:


> Haven't all of the hybrids so far shown polygenic inheritance?


Based on what I know, virtually no documention is available to be polygenic (other than some initial studies in pumilio) and there has been virtually no documentation of morphometrics, pretty much only anecdotal observations on one generation of animals. Keep in mind that skin color is the result of up to three layers interacting with light either together or solo and we do not have any clue as to the heretiability of these patterns. (for example, I have observed auratus x azureus that resulted in a very large auratus patterned frog with suppression of all of the blue pigmentation... if reproducable that would indicate a dominance/recessive trend between green (which would be yellow pigments (pterins and cartotenoids) acting with blue light reflected from the skin to produce the green as opposed to the othere pigmentation colors... 




Tony said:


> I guess I'm just a bit skeptical of the average hobbyist's ability to do that rigorous work considering our past history as a hobby. Call me paranoid, but I worry that unscrupulous breeders would use the info to cross inexpensive morph A with inexpensive morph B to create a passable replica of expensive morph C. In any case I do appreciate you taking the time to discuss this, your input is always valuable.


I can be as well but if the person has the training and background to document it and carry it out properly, then you can't judge it until the data comes out... keep in mind that the world expert on common blue butterflies was a person who lacked any real entomalogical training (trained himself) and was famous for being a Pulitzer Prize winning poet (Vladimir Nabokov)..... and as I hear it, one of the world's experts on dragon flies is a farmer in the midwest US.... 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

skylsdale said:


> Hi Marc, this is very much what some have wanted to see in the Dendrobatid hobby for quite a while now (I think there is much we can learn from the killifish hobby). Unfortunately, with the exception of Pepper and his UE operation, there isn't enough foresight in frog collection to take note of such specific data. Obivously, if you dont' start with that info, it's difficult to ever institute it.


Some of the ideas for TWI's ASN were based on the AKA's policies and that they were working for the AKA.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

Philsuma said:


> I have yet to hear about any "genetic / scientific" hobbyist with record keeping.


What`s that supposed to mean? Is that even a full sentence? I can pull out all my old notebooks on egg clutches and hatch rates from 10 years ago. I can tell you temps and lay and hatch dates for all my leo and rhac geckos from back then, notes on what f# generations I bred to in dwarf tincs and matching egg production and hatch rates, etc., how long tads took to morph at what times of the year and tank and water temps, etc.


----------



## ChrisK (Oct 28, 2008)

frogfarm said:


> What`s that supposed to mean? Is that even a full sentence? I can pull out all my old notebooks on egg clutches and hatch rates from 10 years ago. I can tell you temps and lay and hatch dates for all my leo and rhac geckos from back then, notes on what f# generations I bred to in dwarf tincs and matching egg production and hatch rates, etc., how long tads took to morph at what times of the year and tank and water temps, etc.


I think he was talking about hybridizers


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

ChrisK said:


> I think he was talking about hybridizers


Ahh, never did that


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

ChrisK said:


> I think he was talking about hybridizers


I was indeed....


----------



## Philsuma (Jul 18, 2006)

More candy found in the purse:


----------

