Jump to content


California Bans Non-Native Frogs & Turtles


8 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 June 2010 - 04:56 PM

This is a forward from the Center for North American Herpetology list. This ban has both good and bad features, which I'm sure we could argue about for a long time. But it addresses an issue that we deal with here, the impact of invasive species and how should we deal with invasive species.


CALIFORNIA UPHOLDS BAN ON THE IMPORTATION OF NON-NATIVE FROGS AND TURTLES
Measure will reduce the number of invasive species and infectious diseases harming native wildlife

The California Fish & Game Commission voted 3-2 to uphold their recently instated ban on the importation of non-native frogs & turtles for use as food. The ban, intended to reduce the influx of harmful invasive species into the state, drew significant criticism from the San Francisco Chinese community, one of the largest U.S. consumers of frog legs and turtles. This in turn prompted a re-consideration hearing in a Sacramento room that was filled to capacity with legislators, businessmen, nonprofit representatives and other members of the public eager to speak their view on the matter.

Frog populations worldwide have been declining at unprecedented rates, and nearly one-third of the world's amphibian species are threatened with extinction. Up to 200 amphibian species have completely disappeared in recent years and California is home to 16 threatened amphibian species. The frog leg trade is responsible for the spread of infectious diseases and invasive species that damage the California ecosystem, according to Santa Cruz-based public charity SAVE THE FROGS! (www.savethefrogs.com), who led the campaign to maintain the California Fish & Game Commission's April 8th ban. The group's supporters sent nearly 1,200 letters to the California Department of Fish & Game this week.

SAVE THE FROGS! Founder Kerry Kriger testified at the Commission hearing, highlighting the spread of infectious disease and invasive species that inevitably accompany the frog-leg trade. "Several million Bullfrogs from North America that are farmed overseas are imported into California for food each year. A recent study showed that over 60% of these frogs are infected with a deadly chytrid fungus that has decimated frog populations in the Sierra Nevada range." The fungus, which causes a potentially lethal skin disease called chytridiomycosis, has caused the extinction of up to 100 amphibian species worldwide. Furthermore, says Dr. Kriger "bullfrogs and turtles regularly escape or are purposely set free into the wild. They establish populations and damage local ecosystems by eating native frogs and other wildlife."

San Francisco-based legislators Leland Yee, Fiona Ma and Ted Lieu testified in opposition to the ban, stating that it would damage the economy and that it discriminated against the Chinese community and their 5,000 year old history of eating frogs and turtles. However, the, vast majority of frogs the Chinese-American community is eating are Bullfrogs from North America, which have only a very recent history in Chinese cuisine.

"Cultures necessarily evolve: if they did not, we would have long since eaten the Buffalo and the California Red-Legged Frog to complete extinction, as we did the Passenger Pigeons," said Dr. Kriger. "As Americans, we are fortunate to have many choices of food, and thus it is our responsibility to act wisely and ensure that our culinary decisions are not unduly impacting our natural heritage and the future of our planet."

Americans consume 20% of the world's frog legs, and scientists estimate that over a hundred million frogs are taken out of the wild each year for food. SAVE THE FROGS! last month convinced San Francisco's upscale Restaurant Gary Danko to remove the frog legs from the restaurant's menu. The group, which organizes the annual Save The Frogs Day events, recently held the world's first protests in defense of frog populations – at four east coast restaurants that refuse to stop serving frog legs.

More information on the frog leg trade can and on the ban can be found at:

http://savethefrogs.com/frog-legs
http://bit.ly/ca-frog-legs-ban

Contact:

Kerry Kriger
Save the Frogs!
Executive Director and Ecologist
(831) 621-6215
contact@savethefrogs.com

#2 Guest_Newt_*

Guest_Newt_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 09:48 AM

Interesting. Generally a positive move, i think, but there may be unintended negative consequences. I wonder if they have considered possible increased hunting pressure on wild herp populations? I also wonder if frog or turtle farms are legal in CA, and what effect this will have on them.

#3 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 09:52 AM

Those are valid questions. They have an interesting web site with an impressive board of directors and list of advisors. I would think that it's possible to farm frogs to meet a demand, and probably turtles too, but that's handwaving on my part.

#4 Guest_gerald_*

Guest_gerald_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 10:22 AM

Are there any turtle farms for food? I thought pretty much ALL of the turtle trade (for food) was wild collected.
NC adopted turtle limits a few years ago, as commercial collecting here for Asian markets was getting huge.

#5 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 11:01 AM

Maybe I missed it... it seems that the ban may not go far enough to acheive its intended results - it is only on non-natives, no? So, the importation of the aforementioned chtyrid-infected bullfrogs would continue?

#6 Guest_mikez_*

Guest_mikez_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 12:11 PM

Bullfrogs are not native to Ca. Prey species did not evolve with a predator of their size and feeding strategy. Many of the most sensitive frogs are obligate to ephemeral pools, small mountain streams and springs and seeps in arid habitat. Small confined spaces where a few giant bullfrogs are like so many hungry bulls in a china shop. My understanding is bullfrogs have wreaked havok, even on snake species. Also, I believe they are wide spread and abundant [from memory, no promises].

I say protect the native frogs and their habitat to the utmost. Ban bulldozers and create responsible water use plans. Provide enhanced protection for wetlands. Don't put trout or bass or bluegill where they don't belong. Tread lightly with pesticides.

Then open up a hefty bull frog harvest. Dead possession only, dressed in field, minimum length limit to protect smaller natives, cheap permit required [with/without proof of citizenship?] containing attached five language questionnaire with prepaid postage to F&W.
I know a few Asian fishermen and believe they'd welcome the chance to get into the field with the family to harvest a traditional meal.
If the state could sell and enforce the dead possession aspect in Chinatown, they could keep the market open.

And if that works, send them out after the redeared sliders.

#7 Guest_Newt_*

Guest_Newt_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 June 2010 - 07:21 PM

Turtle farming for food markets does occur on a fairly large scale in Louisiana. Besides the famous Chinese appetite for turtles, they are also a popular food in the more easterly Muslim areas of south and southeast Asia (I think turtles count as "fish" for certain Islamic dietary restrictions), and the Louisiana farms mainly export to Asia with some side traffic in the western pet industry. Red-eared sliders and common and alligator snappers are the major species involved.

Frog farming is more widespread. Unfortunately, farms are at best a flawed solution. Frog farms in particular seem to be pathogen factories. An especially virulent strain of Ranavirus is known from a Georgia bullfrog farm, and many Bd (chytrid) introductions are blamed on captive stocks of African clawed frogs (once widely bred and distributed as living pregnancy tests).

I'm also a little concerned about bullfrog harvest in-state. It would be fine when the frogging is going on in the essentially already-ruined (for native frogs) waterways, but once you get a bunch of people tramping around in the remaining breeding sites for the imperiled Cali ranids, stomping on tadpoles, mucking up substrate, spearing the wrong species and tossing the carcass back when they realize the mistake...it adds up to a big mess.

Turtling might be less bad, as turtle capture methods are more often non-lethal, so non-target species caught can be released with minimal damage. Still, opening a harvest on these species (especially if they are so foolish as to allow sale of harvested animals) places an incentive on maintaining populations and even establishing new ones.

I'm curious whether the regulations cover only living material. It seems to me frozen frog and turtle meat, from the same sources currently used, would remove most of the issues this law is trying to deal with. I know it is traditional in Chinese cooking to butcher your own meat, but...tough cookies.

#8 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 June 2010 - 11:16 AM

Ah, that makes a lot more sense then. I really wish range maps would indicate more often where a North American native species is introduced to part of its current range. This seems to be a particular issue with range maps that include the west coast (for all types of biota)

Bullfrogs are not native to Ca.



#9 Guest_Newt_*

Guest_Newt_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 June 2010 - 07:21 AM

I think part of the issue there is that the introductions began before anyone was trying to map out ranges, so nobody knows where the boundary between native and introduced populations lies- similar to the issue with many centrarchids and other game fish.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users