Site-specific frogs: is it possible?

[skylsdale]

This is a continuation from this thread: Pumilio I.D.?

I'm fully aware that outfits such as Understory Explorer offers extremely site-specific frogs and does so using a code system, similar to the killifish hobby...and this is fantastic.

However, in regard to frogs from countries like Panama (primarily Dendrobates auratus and Oophaga pumilio), hordes of them come in with vague (at best) or cryptic information regarding where they were collected, what population they might have been from, etc. and hobbyists are usually forced to group and find breeding animals based purely on phenotypic similarities (which may or may not be the best indicators of same-population frogs). For instance, there are numerous "Blue and Black" auratus populations in Panama, some of them several hundred kilometers apart. To only give the country of origin is not sufficient for responsible captive management...and relying on importations isn't fully reliable as frogs may be collected from different populations and over a wide range, then put in the same box and exported all together.

This has caused much frustration within the hobby, yet has never been improved. Most hobbyists are unaware that the situation will never improve, and more specific locale and collection info will never be taken and/or given, unless pressure is applied by them to the collectors, ex/importers, and distributors.

Exploring exactly how to bring about this change, as well identifying current problems that exist within the system, is the purpose of this thread.

[Philsuma]

Spot on.

The importer that does this and proves locale evidence, as well as sustainable collection and even conservation is the one to support

Everyone is very attuned to imports these days due to the current events out of Texas.

[MonarchzMan]

I think that the easiest way to get that to change is to get someone with the mind to do it to actually do it. Right now, importers are happy just grabbing frogs and not bringing them in with any data, and hobbyists will buy them without any qualms, especially if they're something new and rare (e.g. "El Dorados").

I think that if a person actually brought in frogs in enough numbers with site data like what Understory is doing, and started saturating the market with those frogs, the change in hobbyist mentality would slowly come. I mean, take, for example, the imitators. Many/most of them morphs in the hobby can be traced back to a particular site, and because of that, you see a lot of people advertising lines and actually know where their frogs came from. I would guess that if imitators were brought in like pumilio were brought in, people wouldn't be as willing to buy them because there's no data associated with them.

I think that that is really what needs to happen in Panama. Right now, in regars to pumilio, the only frogs with true site data are those that Rich Frye has, and that is such a small population that you're lucky to get pumilio with true site data. As is evident from the constant "what morph is this" threads, I'm fairly convinced that the frogs that are coming in are simply IDed when imported and don't actually have data associated with them. It might be as simple as "Bastimentos, Chiriqui Grande, and Cayo de Agua" in this shipment, and then guessing what is what.

And even if there are data actually associated with individual frogs, it's incredibly generalized, especially in areas where it is critical to make distinctions. I mean, I know of 5 or so phenotypically distinct populations occurring on Bastimentos island, so having frogs coming in simply labeled as "Bastimentos" is not sufficient.

Personally, I'd love to do an import to start the process, but I don't know that it would be financially possible for me nor do I think I could bring enough in to make a huge difference. And ideally, I'd like to do what Mark is doing and actually distribute captive bred animals from wild caught ones rather than pass out wild frogs.

[jubjub47]

In regards to the site data, how is Rich the only person who has figured out how to get accurate site data? Maybe I'm just out of the loop, but maybe he would be the best place to start in this quest.

[Afemoralis]

I think what needs to happen is easy: No more purchasing frogs without specific locality information.

It's implementing it that will be tough. It means getting folks to do the right thing, and not the easy thing. Or the cheap thing.

Another question I would add to the thread is "what is the function of a site specific ID, in the absence of a conservation program to protect the sites?" I would argue it has none. INBICIO and Understory are actively conserving land and it's associated frogs. Breeding from protected wild stock and then flooding the market to reduce the value of poached frogs and produce revenue to add to preservation efforts. This certainly isn't going on in Panama with the pumilio. You can sub-group Bastimentos (for example) frogs into as many "morphs" or "populations" as you like, but it is only of value in the stamp collecting sense- and has done nothing to stop all the "Red Frog" Condos... Just look at the Escudo de Veraguas frogs.... a mad rush to buy wild caught frogs a few years back, and ZERO conservation attempts for the island.

The reality is that captive-bred hobby frogs will not be suitable for reintroduction efforts, should it come to that. The greatest impact froggers can have on the frogs is by supporting the companies that are trying to turn a profit in conservation based frog farming (Understory), the NGO's that actively work in the field (TWI etc.)...

and here is the hard part....

Not buying wildcaught frogs, frogs from lineages we know were smuggled, or dubious "farms" (that are probably just a cover for massive wild exploitation... gee not looking at all those Escudo or anything...).

If frogs aren't coming in from Conservation projects, then all the locality codes in the world don't matter.

Cheers,

Afemoralis

[frogparty]

Its a fantastic idea, and when I start purchasing frogs where site location is of such importance I will surely ask for and keep track of all the pertinent data.

What then happens to all the "lines" already in the states? What about all the blue and black auratus, "bronze" auratus, leucs, etc. Are these animals simply to be undervalued, only because they aernt site specific? From a true collectors standpoint I guess they are.

If outits like UE were the only importers of these animals then there wouldnt be an issue. But "grab and go" importation is going to continue until naive people quit buyng cheapr animals offerd by these outfits.
Kingsnake is a PERFECT example of this, not only with darts, but everything. Lots of different sects of the herp hobby value site specifi morphs, colors, etc. I see numeros queries on arachnoboards, and in regards to grey banded kingsnakes about the TRUE location information. Yet the site is overloaded with "blue jean" pumilio for $60 a piece, not to mention all kinds of our native herps dubiously offered by people.I know in WA you can't legally sell wildlife thats native to the state, but I see native salamanders for sale on there all the time, with no notice about not allowing sales w/in state
So, whats to be done? Discourage "grab and go" importation every chance you get. Support quality outfits that provide the info you want.
Get a reccomendation about a supplier before purchasing from them.

And I guess just be happy with no location display animals, or just pair up frogs based on looks and sell them as yellow w/ white leg pumilio or whatever and not try to deduce locality info based solely on phenotype.

[skylsdale]

Originally Posted by Afemoralis

Another question I would add to the thread is "what is the function of a site specific ID, in the absence of a conservation program to protect the sites?"

Just to include another dynamic to the discussion, I think it's important to realize that not every decision has to be made on the basis of conservation (and this is coming from someone who is a strong advocate of conservation). For many people this will never be anything more than simply enjoying some tropical frogs in a tank in their living rooms, and that's okay. For these same people, simply having and enjoying an auratus that originated from somewhere in Costa Rica is enough, so we have to realize that there is still value to the non-site-specific animals already in the hobby.

However, as a hobbyist, I am personally extremely interested in the specificity of a frog's origin. To me, one of the fascinating things about these amphibians is how they've evolved and adapted so specifically and uniquely to (and along with) their unique environments...so part of the interest and fun for me is knowing their locales. Knowing that the pumilio from the Salt Creek area of Isla Bastimentos are different from the Red Frog Beach area from the cemetary, etc. is part of what continues to draw me into this hobby and personal research and fuels my fascination.

Some thoughts...

[stemcellular]

Originally Posted by frogparty

Its a fantastic idea, and when I start purchasing frogs where site location is of such importance I will surely ask for and keep track of all the pertinent data.

What then happens to all the "lines" already in the states? What about all the blue and black auratus, "bronze" auratus, leucs, etc. Are these animals simply to be undervalued, only because they aernt site specific? From a true collectors standpoint I guess they are.

If outits like UE were the only importers of these animals then there wouldnt be an issue. But "grab and go" importation is going to continue until naive people quit buyng cheapr animals offerd by these outfits.
Kingsnake is a PERFECT example of this, not only with darts, but everything. Lots of different sects of the herp hobby value site specifi morphs, colors, etc. I see numeros queries on arachnoboards, and in regards to grey banded kingsnakes about the TRUE location information. Yet the site is overloaded with "blue jean" pumilio for $60 a piece, not to mention all kinds of our native herps dubiously offered by people.I know in WA you can't legally sell wildlife thats native to the state, but I see native salamanders for sale on there all the time, with no notice about not allowing sales w/in state
So, whats to be done? Discourage "grab and go" importation every chance you get. Support quality outfits that provide the info you want.
Get a reccomendation about a supplier before purchasing from them.

And I guess just be happy with no location display animals, or just pair up frogs based on looks and sell them as yellow w/ white leg pumilio or whatever and not try to deduce locality info based solely on phenotype.

Well said. While I am clearly in support of obtaining site specific frogs we also have to consider that most frogs that are imported (and many that we produce for sale to others) ultimately end up in the general pet trade. Some of the folks that acquire these frogs get interested and do more research, acquire more frogs, etc. and in the process develop an appreciation for locality data and an appreciation of the conservation aspects of the hobby (supporting TWI and UE). However, sad as it may be, that will likely always be a very small subset of those who maintain poison frogs, even among those that participate on DB and other forums.

Now what does that mean? Personally, I have frogs that are both site specific (UE/INIBICO/SNDF) and frogs that are known only by import date and/or import line, as well as some that have no locality at all. Clearly, we should work to preserve what currently exists in the hobby by whatever means we can (import date, phenotype, etc) and just manage those frogs by the data that we have available (much like how those of us working with Mantella sp. currently manage the captive populations since site data is non-existent) while at the same time doing our best to acquire future species with site data. In my opinion, having both old line frogs and new line frogs with site data isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[MonarchzMan]

Originally Posted by frogparty

What then happens to all the "lines" already in the states? What about all the blue and black auratus, "bronze" auratus, leucs, etc. Are these animals simply to be undervalued, only because they aernt site specific? From a true collectors standpoint I guess they are.

These frogs still have function in that they can serve as "trial and error" animals in keeping them in captivity. Non-site-specific frogs can help elucidate needs of site specific frogs when they come in.

[jubjub47]

Originally Posted by skylsdale

Just to include another dynamic to the discussion, I think it's important to realize that not every decision has to be made on the basis of conservation (and this is coming from someone who is a strong advocate of conservation). For many people this will never be anything more than simply enjoying some tropical frogs in a tank in their living rooms, and that's okay. For these same people, simply having and enjoying an auratus that originated from somewhere in Costa Rica is enough, so we have to realize that there is still value to the non-site-specific animals already in the hobby.

Some thoughts...

Having non site-specific frogs in the hobby in ways helps to conserve some of the wild populations. Take your average keeper who just wants the pretty frog in a vivarium. He's not going to care which locality his animal is from as long as it's pretty. Keeping a steady supply of these animals in the hobby through captive breeding helps to ease the losses by beginners working with wild caught animals and allows the more dedicated hobbyist to work with the site-specific animals. In many ways this could also lessen the demand for wild frogs being imported over time. It would really be a shame to see people perceive "green and black" auratus as a devalued animal and lose it in the hobby because of a lack of site data.