[Philsuma]

Seems the Wild Caught topic is in the forefront of discussions of late....

[cablemandan]

Being noob I am probably not yet informed enough about the cons of it, however, it seems the wild habitat in which some of these species live is being destroyed. Is there really a problem if some wild caught frogs are taken from that habitat before they are gone? Instead, brought into the gene pool for captive breeding (which may be the only way to see them in 15-20 years). Trying to conserve habitat is great but not going to happen in poor countries where the land is worth more for farming than the frogs are. Thats a reality. Just my .02 on the matter and one of the reasons I am getting into the hobby. Great training tool for my boys also since they really never looked at the world and it's problems in this way (soapbox).

[evolvstll]

I am in the middle. However the hobby/conservation aspects needs a system or something............. in thinking those of us with larger collections with all the time and effort we put into them. What happens when we can no longer care for them? They get sold piece by piece. In the end most of us have jobs and families and take care of our collections with our free time. We surf the boards posting, pm'ing while our collection and knowledge of the hobby grows. The issue is larger than what most of us see in our little world. There is a group of froggers trying to something about this. Hopefully they will come up with a system to manage and stem the tide of imports. The importation of WC is a huge question. As the system is right now the status quo of importation is going to continue.

[Philsuma]

Maybe it's the way I worded it...but....the results are eye-opening, so far.

I think we have more of the older people over here,with well thought out responses, ect. Other-wise the poll would have been "all over the place".

[RanaVenenosa]

I dont see issues w more importations when its done in a responsible and LEGAL manner (ie.. SNDF, Understory etc). The qualification of "certain countries" and "certain species" is key. I saw this option as the best reality for the hobbyist. Lets be honest with ourselves, we have frogs because at one time they had to get imported as Wild Caught specimens (and still do). We all have to live with some selfish hypocrisy to justify keeping a frog in a glass box. Is it the best use of our money?? For me its a discovery of nature and our creator. I also escape from work wout the use of a TV. ok. enough philosophy... Wc or No? Ideal is having a community that can educate people about the pitfalls of WC in the hands of inexperienced froggers. They may be less expensive up front, but long term, captive bred frogs by qualified breeders are a more cost efficient option for most people. With obligates, such as Pumilio, it is becoming apparent in many discussions and lack thereof in classifieds, that several morphs brought in from 2005/2008 are now difficult to find. The common Cristobal and El Dorado of today will in time become scarce. My opinion about WC frogs doesn't mean I think we should import one of every species either. I can enjoy frogs wout having 35 vivs. For those who may feel my opinion implies I am detrimental to frog habitat, realize I am careful with whom I support. I vote with my pocket book. I use wind energy. I drive an economy car out of principle. I go to lots of trouble organize my trash into the recycle bin. I clean my FF cups If i was wearing my "green peace' hat, I would put my money on groups who form land trusts as means to protect the frogs. I just dont see the hobby as a main culprit, but I think as a frogger, we are made AWARE of the situation and are perhaps on some level more accountable (than the avg joe on the street )to our progeny to do something to protect the environment. I see my bright orange Cristobal as a beautiful portal for people to begin to vicariously appreciate the beauty of rain-forests and nurture a consciousness to care enough to want to preserve them.

[Philsuma]

I see my bright orange Cristobal as a beautiful portal for people to begin to vicariously appreciate the beauty of rain-forests and nurture a consciousness to care enough to want to preserve them.

^^ A very underrated ideal IMO

[Philsuma]

Are ALL importers the same ?

Are jobbers and people who handpick frogs different ? Are those frogs healthier ?

Thoughts ?

[Philsuma]

Saw where someone was buying imported vents to "introduce a new bloodline" into the U.S hobby.

If it's any of the three importers that I know of...I don't see how they can guarantee ANY location or site for their imported animals.

[fieldsmith]

Saw where someone was buying imported vents to "introduce a new bloodline" into the U.S hobby.

If it's any of the three importers that I know of...I don't see how they can guarantee ANY location or site for their imported animals.

Yeah, not sure that guy had any idea what he was talking about. Getting no id frogs and trying to start a "new" line is a great way to add to the confusion that already exists in the hobby. I agree with what Scott said...fresh blood that is responsibly harvested, properly cared for, and of an identifiable locale is great...unknown frogs not so beneficial. I truly hope that we keep seeing new blood from responsible importers (like the UE sylvaticus imports?). I just hope that new blood that comes in will go to people who actually care about keeping the species/morphs/localities in the hobby, not people who just want something new or rare.

[Philsuma]

Wild Caught pumilio...are they being devastated by over harvesting, over collecting certain populations and 'morphs' ?

Let's discuss...

[RichFrye]

As of now, there are zero universally accepted studies (as oposed to researchers such as Dr. Summers and his published work on Pumilio) on sustainable harvest, on Panama pums. Sustainable harvest should be the operative term and most important variable next to the actual way the frogs are shipped and housed after shipping.
There are many populations (more than not) that would be difficult if not almost impossible to "over harvest", think 'over harvesting field mice...(where do we think the term "rat frog" came from) but there are also some populations in trouble, such as Robalos.
It's a case by case situation.
Lehmanni are in big trouble, Highland Lamasi also, Robalo as mentioned, but more populations of Panama pums are totally sustainable than not. It's just that Panama does not give two shits about quotas, so if Sergio finds the Robalo population it could bode very bad for it.
The key term be they thumbs, tincs, grannies or auratus , legal or not , is sustainable harvest. Then getting them to people who can manage them. All of our frogs came from the wild originally. Many via not-so-ethical or legal ways.

[turningdoc]

I dare question the strongly-opinioned one. Evidence for " Are in big trouble?"

[RichFrye]

... Evidence for " Are in big trouble?"

I have no idea who you are, but I'll gladly let you know why I say they are in big trouble.
I talk to multiple dart frog in-situ researchers through the year, through the years, such as JP Lawrence, and Dr. Urquhart and others who actually live in situ. Zoo owners and collectors. And their reports such as 'four researchers looked for five days and only found one juvenile offspring' (highland lamasi) and 'it took half a dozen students to find a half dozen robalo in a couples days, then the next year there were even less, then the year after almost none...' leads me to say "big trouble". Information about the troubles with lehmanni has been known and discussed for years now.
I also read papers by Jason Brown and Evan Twomey. I also have talked to Mark Pepper who assures me that there will not be any imports out of Peru of highland lamasi due to extremely small numbers.
Do you have evidence to the contrary? Because that would be very good news, surprising , but very good.

[cbreon]

I have seen studies indicating something like 15-20k pumilio were reportedly exported from Panama last year, 'rat-frog' or not, that seems unsustainable if repeated for a couple years...Not to mention, I'm sure they are not reporting all the animals exported.

[Philsuma]

The Animals Committee should be encouraged to:
• take note of the trade in Dendrobates spp. from Panama, with a view to considering whether this
population might merit inclusion in the Significant Trade Review Process in future.

Table 2.
Gross CITES-reported exports of D. pumilio from range States, all sources (1995-2004).
Country Term 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Costa Rican live O. pumilio - 1995=80, 1996= 98,1997= 60, 1998= 54, year 2000 and on= 0, 0, 4, 0, 0,0

Nicaraguan live O. pumilio 1995=2704, 7587, 2181, 619, 4890, 3550, 1113, 0, 0 ,0

Panamanian live O. pumilio 1995=0,8 ,0 ,4, 12, 60, 0, 0, 0, Year 2004= 2990 !! - the start of the 'big importation'

Source: CITES annual report data compiled by UNEP-WCMC.
References
Solís, F., Ibáñez, R., Jaramillo, C., Chaves, G., Savage, J., Köhler, G., Jungfer, K.-H. and Bolívar, W.
(2004). Dendrobates auratus. In: IUCN. (2006). 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
http://www.iucnredlist.org. Viewed 05 December 2006.

[RichFrye]

I have seen studies indicating something like 15-20k pumilio were reportedly exported from Panama last year, 'rat-frog' or not, that seems unsustainable if repeated for a couple years...Not to mention, I'm sure they are not reporting all the animals exported.

I've spent too much time today on the forums, but I'm sure the guys who look up CITES reports can whip out the numbers. I seem to remember numbers along the line of about 4-6K each year for awhile. Absolutely not 20K each year.
As everyone knows, I am not a fan of the way Panama is exporting their pums, on many levels. I just don't see any factual sustainable harvest reports either.

[cbreon]

The Animals Committee should be encouraged to:
• take note of the trade in Dendrobates spp. from Panama, with a view to considering whether this
population might merit inclusion in the Significant Trade Review Process in future.

Table 2.
Gross CITES-reported exports of D. pumilio from range States, all sources (1995-2004).
Country Term 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Costa Rican live O. pumilio - 1995=80, 1996= 98,1997= 60, 1998= 54, year 2000 and on= 0, 0, 4, 0, 0,0

Nicaraguan live O. pumilio 1995=2704, 7587, 2181, 619, 4890, 3550, 1113, 0, 0 ,0

Panamanian live O. pumilio 1995=0,8 ,0 ,4, 12, 60, 0, 0, 0, Year 2004= 2990 !! - the start of the 'big importation'

Source: CITES annual report data compiled by UNEP-WCMC.
References
Solís, F., Ibáñez, R., Jaramillo, C., Chaves, G., Savage, J., Köhler, G., Jungfer, K.-H. and Bolívar, W.
(2004). Dendrobates auratus. In: IUCN. (2006). 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
http://www.iucnredlist.org. Viewed 05 December 2006.

Yeah, here is another article, citing 15K exported from '04-'08...this article, compliments of Ed, is probably worthy of its own thread...

http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_ ... serv_2.pdf

[cbreon]

I have seen studies indicating something like 15-20k pumilio were reportedly exported from Panama last year, 'rat-frog' or not, that seems unsustainable if repeated for a couple years...Not to mention, I'm sure they are not reporting all the animals exported.

I've spent too much time today on the forums, but I'm sure the guys who look up CITES reports can whip out the numbers. I seem to remember numbers along the line of about 4-6K each year for awhile. Absolutely not 20K each year.
As everyone knows, I am not a fan of the way Panama is exporting their pums, on many levels. I just don't see any factual sustainable harvest reports either.

I'd be interested to see some numbers from 'those guys' too. Although, it does seem that the populations being exported are some of the more robust, plentiful locales, I am always nervous when there doesn't seem to be any credible scientific oversight...

[RichFrye]

The Animals Committee should be encouraged to:
• take note of the trade in Dendrobates spp. from Panama, with a view to considering whether this
population might merit inclusion in the Significant Trade Review Process in future.

Table 2.
Gross CITES-reported exports of D. pumilio from range States, all sources (1995-2004).
Country Term 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Costa Rican live O. pumilio - 1995=80, 1996= 98,1997= 60, 1998= 54, year 2000 and on= 0, 0, 4, 0, 0,0

Nicaraguan live O. pumilio 1995=2704, 7587, 2181, 619, 4890, 3550, 1113, 0, 0 ,0

Panamanian live O. pumilio 1995=0,8 ,0 ,4, 12, 60, 0, 0, 0, Year 2004= 2990 !! - the start of the 'big importation'

Source: CITES annual report data compiled by UNEP-WCMC.
References
Solís, F., Ibáñez, R., Jaramillo, C., Chaves, G., Savage, J., Köhler, G., Jungfer, K.-H. and Bolívar, W.
(2004). Dendrobates auratus. In: IUCN. (2006). 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
http://www.iucnredlist.org. Viewed 05 December 2006.

Yeah, here is another article, citing 15K exported from '04-'08...this article, compliments of Ed, is probably worthy of its own thread...

http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_ ... serv_2.pdf

Five years ('04-'08) divided by 15k = 3k per year. Sounds about right to me.

[RichFrye]

I have seen studies indicating something like 15-20k pumilio were reportedly exported from Panama last year, 'rat-frog' or not, that seems unsustainable if repeated for a couple years...Not to mention, I'm sure they are not reporting all the animals exported.

I've spent too much time today on the forums, but I'm sure the guys who look up CITES reports can whip out the numbers. I seem to remember numbers along the line of about 4-6K each year for awhile. Absolutely not 20K each year.
As everyone knows, I am not a fan of the way Panama is exporting their pums, on many levels. I just don't see any factual sustainable harvest reports either.

I'd be interested to see some numbers from 'those guys' too. Although, it does seem that the populations being exported are some of the more robust, plentiful locales, I am always nervous when there doesn't seem to be any credible scientific oversight...

I'm honestly not sure what 3k per year would do divided amongst many of the populations. Especially when we don't know exactly how many are coming in from where. But most pums in the wild can be incredibly robust.
The most damaging issues occur not so much from over collecting as deforesting for cow pastures and such. Pums will live right up next to humans. Not so much in a cow field.
Pretty much zero oversight is correct.