fieldsmith wrote:Hey Mike,
The list is meant to encompass all species/morphs/locales that are in collections in the U.S., not just the easily obtainable ones...that would have been much less work There are already general dart lists (I believe Phil made one of those), so I was just focusing on frogs that are here. I thought about putting a notation next to some that are almost impossible to get (to avoid people getting their hopes up) but since rarity is not a stable condition (i.e. the new sylvaticus) I decided it wasn't necessary and would have to be revised often. The two Ranitomeya that you mentioned were imported in the mid 90's so I included them, though I don't know if they are still around. I have been given strong evidence (privately) that E. captivus is in the country...I tried to keep my personal ethical views out of making the list, just report what I am told (many of the frogs on the list may be of questionable legality). Hopefully one day I can make a list of frogs available in foreign markets (Especially the EU and Asia).
Yes, there are still offspring from frogs from the 90s around. I don't like the term ethical for this. 20 years ago, it was hard to say what was smuggled and what was legit. And harder to prove it. The histos were cheaper than "Blue Arrow Frogs" which are $30 today. There was ADG and Chuck Powell, ISSD, Sean McKeown and Helmut Zimmerman to write letters asking for advice, but there was no internet. Frognet came about a few years later. You really didn't know who had what outside of any circles you were in. The frogs were all assumed legal. Now, it is known that some frogs were never legally exported. So it is a technicality. I don't believe the frogs should be destroyed. People with certain species just keep a low profile not because of ethics, because they wish to keep a certain frog that is in a gray area. They aren't breeding them for profit. They obtained them in what was at the time legal channels. It is for the love of that species. period.