Keep the coquí alive!
Posted on May 15th, 2008 - 10:30 AMAbout the author: Lina Younes has been working for EPA since 2002 and chairs EPA’s Multilingual Communications Task Force. Prior to joining EPA, she was the Washington bureau chief for two Puerto Rican newspapers and she has worked for several government agencies.
Lea la versión en español a continuación de esta entrada en inglés.
Some links exit EPA or have Spanish content.
When my friend Jeff M. came back from Hawaii, he mentioned the Hawaiian-Puerto Rican controversy over the tiny Puerto Rican frog, the coquí-the Eleutherodactylus coquí.
The controversy or “national conflict” depending if you ask a Puerto Rican, made front page headlines several years ago when Puerto Rico got wind of Hawaii’s efforts to eradicate these innocent Puerto Rican frogs. How did they travel thousands of miles across the oceans? Apparently some innocent coquís got on a plant shipment from the tropical paradise in the Caribbean to a similar paradise thousands of miles away in the Pacific. Needless to say, in that tropical setting without any indigenous predators, these Puerto Rican coquis have multiplied abundantly!
These small frogs are known for their melodious nocturnal sounds in Puerto Rico. They have been the inspiration for numerous songs, stories, and poetry. These small amphibians have become an unofficial symbol of Puerto Rico. In fact, I just read a newspaper article in Puerto Rico, that the Sierra Club-PR and the University of Puerto Rico hosted an Earth Day event to promote the defense of the coquí.
Yet, the coquís-named after their musical chirping-cokée, cokée–have not received a warm aloha from our fellow U.S. citizens in Hawaii.
In fact, what is music to the ears of many Puerto Ricans became more than a amphibian cacophony over in the Pacific. In Hawaii, the coquí chants have been compared to the noise pollution caused by lawn mowers! That’s hard for me to conceptualize, given the fond memories of listening to the coquís at nighttime. I remember many a rainy night falling asleep to the symphony of these harmless creatures. They are so small and defenseless! But for the residents of the state of Hawaii, the Puerto Rican coquís are doomed for complete eradication and some of the methods are not benign at all
It’s true that the Puerto Rican coquí has become an invasive species in Hawaii, yet I still don’t see how coquís challenge Hawaiian wildlife. I still cannot understand why their chants are not music to the ears of the inhabitants of this Island State. Sad to say, it all boils down to one man’s friend is another man’s foe.
Nonetheless-please save the Puerto Rican coquí.
(UPDATE 7/15/2008 - see also Post-Hawaii Musings)
¡Qué viva el coquí!
Sobre la autor: Lina M. F. Younes ha trabajado en la EPA desde el 2002 y está a cargo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Comunicaciones Multilingües. Como periodista, dirigió la oficina en Washington de dos periódicos puertorriqueños y ha laborado en varias agencias gubernamentales.
Cuando mi amigo Jeff M. regresó de Hawaí, mencionó la controversia entre Hawaí-Puerto Rico sobre la pequeña ranita puertorriqueña, el coquí-Eleutherodactylus coquí.
Esta controversia o “conflicto nacional” si le pregunta a un puertorriqueño, fue motivo de titulares de primera plana hace varios años atrás cuando Puerto Rico se enteró de los esfuerzos hawaianos por erradicar estos pequeños anfibios. ¿Cómo viajaron miles de millas por los océanos? Aparentemente unos inocentes coquíes estaban en un cargamento de plantas que viajaron del paraíso tropical en el Caribe a otro paraíso semejante miles de millas de distancia en el Pacífico. ¡Demás está decir que en ese entorno tropical sin enemigo autóctono en Hawaí, estos coquíes se multiplicaron abundantemente!
Estos pequeños anfibios se caracterizan por los sonidos nocturnos en Puerto Rico. Han servido de inspiración a numerosas canciones, cuentos, y poesías . Estos pequeños anfibios se han convertido en un símbolo extraoficial de Puerto Rico. De hecho, acabo de leer un artículo de periódico anunciando que el Sierra Club-PR y la Universidad de Puerto Rico auspiciaron un evento del Día del Planeta Tierra para promover la defensa del coquí.
Sin embargo, los coquíes-conocidos por su melodioso cantar-coquí, coquí-no han recibido un caluroso aloha de sus conciudadanos estadounidenses en Hawaí.
De hecho, lo que es música para los oídos de muchos puertorriqueños se convirtió en una cacofonía anfibia allá en el Pacífico. ¡En Hawaí, el cantar del coquí ha sido comparado a la contaminación de ruido ocasionado por las cortadoras de césped! Me es difícil conceptualizarlo dado los gratos recuerdos de escuchar a los coquíes al anochecer. Recuerdo muchas noches lluviosas quedarme dormida con la sinfonía de estas criaturas inofensivas. ¡Son pequeñas e indefensas! Pero para los residentes del estado de Hawaí, los coquíes puertorriqueños están condenados a erradicación completa y algunos de los métodos no son nada de benignos.
Es cierto que el coquí puertorriqueño se ha convertido en una especie invasora en Hawaí, pero todavía no veo cómo los coquíes amenazan la vida silvestre hawaiana. Tampoco entiendo el por qué su cantar no es música para los oídos de los habitantes de este estado isleño. Lamento decir, que la controversia se limita al hecho de que la criatura que es amiga para unos resulta enemiga de otros.
Independientemente de la clasificación-ayuden a salvar al coquí puertorriqueño.
Tags: coqui, puerto rico
| Permalink | TrackBack
Question of the Week
May 15th, 2008 at 10:50 am
I got a mini coqui souvenir from a friend when he returned from a vacation in PR. Very cute! I guess its like birds or crickets….some people love the sounds, and some people hate the noise! Viva el coqui!!!
[Reply]
May 15th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
¡¡¡Viva el coquí!!!! It’s music to my ears and I still can’t see why our fellow citizens in Hawaii don’t enjoy the music. Guess you have to have grown up with it. Thanks for commenting.
[Reply]
May 16th, 2008 at 9:44 am
People sometimes ask me what I think the greatest environmental problem is and I say, without hesitation, ‘invasive species.’ The havoc the accidental and, often, intentional import of non-indigenous species has wreaked on ecosystems is, I think, larger than any other actions caused by man. Just two examples suffice. 100 years ago the most abundant tree in the Eastern United States was the American Chestnut tree. Good luck finding even one of them today. Currently, the most abundant bird in the same area, the English Sparrow, was intentionally introduced in the mid-1800s. But Lina raises a good question, at what point do we accept, and even embrace, an invasive specie?
[Reply]
pt reply on October 20, 2008 4:42 pm:
At what point do we accept the demise of (rare–or even common) native species–and the subsequent loss of biodiversity–because of problems that we (as humans) have created?
[Reply]
May 16th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
The coqui frog in Hawaii is now a predator that can and does eat whatever it can. A male can be as large as two inches and they are growing in size, able to go anywhere from the forest floor to the highest branch upsetting the balance of species that have been here for thousands of years. Yes, humans are invasive too, but at 20,000/per acre density possible in the forest’s this is not a cute frog…having one outside your bedroom window at night is like having someone honk a car horn every 3-4 seconds…the Amphibian Ark Project can have them all, and build a herpetarium here…
[Reply]
May 17th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Your article is misdirected and naieve. Hawaii is a multicultural melting pot of ethnicities. But when it comes to this frog and the population densities that it can achieve in Hawaii, your cute frog has become an invasive pest. Do you wish to inpose that on Hawaii because of your ehnicity? I think not.
The frogs can become so numerous and the male’s call can be so loud because of the population densities, that normal conversation cannot be conducted between two people standing 5 feet apart. There are places in Hawaii where the frog’s desity is so high that individual calls can no longer be isolated and all one can hear is an oscillating wave. I do not think that is the “melodious nocturnal sounds” you are thinking about.
Then, if you are a thinking environmentalist, you should wonder what happens when an invasive species like this reaches the levels of biodensity to drown out all other Hawaiian night sounds. Real estate transactions now mandate a coqui frog discalimer. As if it were a environmental noise hazard. How ironic. Meditative, and quiet Hawaiian moonlit nights are becoming something of a memory. The bugs that these frogs are eating can no longer be available to the native birds and animals of our land.
It has become such a problem that Hawaii agriculture product shipments and deliveries suffer if a frog or eggs are found in the shipment. The fact that you seem to encourage the protection of this invasive species in a place that you do not live, and criticize our efforts shows a lack of respect and understanding of the sensitivity of the indigenous species of Hawaii from introduced species (intentional or accidental). Hawaii is already the endangered species poster child for the US. The coqui frog will place additional pressure on the dwindling Hawaiian species with its constant expansion and density of biomass per acre.
Our own agriculture experts mistakenly gave the coqui frog no additional thought when they first knew about it because they also did not thnk it would pose a problem. Now they know differently.
The fact that your write up shows up on an EPA site is even more shameful. You of all people should understand respect for another’s culture. The frog is like audible graffitti that is growing out of control here in Hawaii.
Please keep a copy of your article. 10 years from now, as you see how the frog has affected us here in Hawaii, you may be ashamed of it.
[Reply]
May 19th, 2008 at 10:02 am
My response is directed to both Kookee and Eieio–First–thank you for your constructive responses. I would not characterize my blog as naive, but perhaps one that is based more in idyllic memories of my childhood.
Obviously, you are going to the heart of the discussion of invasive species. Since the PR coqui, in its own habitat, has been kept in check, I erroneously assumed that it would behave accordingly in its Hawaiian setting, but by your response, that is not the case. In lack of any natural predators, it has become a threat to your peaceful ecosystem.
I would like to note that several species of the PR coqui are currently threatened due to climate change, pollution, and uncontrolled growth on the Puerto Rican Islands. A recent article in the PR newspaper el Nuevo Día mentiones that 87% of these amphibians in the Caribbean are endangeres and three species have already disappeared in the Island. I don’t know if you read Spanish. But here’s the article.
http://www.elnuevodia.com/XStatic/endi/template/content.aspx?se=nota&id=403470
Se calienta el canto para el coquí
En el Caribe, 87% de los anfibios está en peligro de extinción y tres especies ya han desaparecido de la Isla.
Por Sara Del Valle Hernández / sdelvalle@elnuevodia.com
¿Qué tienen en común un oso polar y un coquí? ¿No lo adivina? Pues que ambos son especies que están amenazadas por los cambios climáticos que experimenta nuestro planeta.
Agraciadamente, los osos polares aún nos acompañan, pero ese no ha sido el destino de tres especies de coquíes endémicos de Puerto Rico que ya han sido reportados como “desaparecidos” por la comunidad científica: el coquí palmeado, el coquí dorado y el coquí eneida. Y si no se toman acciones correctivas, el coquí caoba, el martillito y el melodioso podrían encarar una suerte similar en los próximos años.
“En 2004 se documentó que la posible extinción de estas tres especies y la declinación de otras especies de anfibios endémicos de Puerto Rico se debe a los efectos combinados de un hongo y el calentamiento global”, explicó el doctor Rafael Joglar, herpetólogo experto en el tema de los coquíes. Este hongo, conocido como Bd (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) y del que aún no se conoce como opera, fue descubierto en 1998, pero se sabe que está presente en la Isla desde la década de 1970.
¿Dónde piensa pasar sus vacaciones de verano?
En Puerto Rico
Fuera del País
El estudioso argumentó que los cambios climáticos que se experimentan en el planeta han afectado de forma más directa a los anfibios, particularmente a los que habitan en la región del Caribe. “Un 87% de las especies de anfibios de esta área confrontan problemas. Una de las causas principales para esto es el cambio climático. Esto es conocido en el mundo científico como la crisis de los anfibios”, dijo.
El también profesor del Departamento de Biología de la UPR informó que al menos 165 especies de anfibios han desaparecido en los últimos 30 años. Tan grave es este problema, que la Asociación de Zoológicos y Acuarios (AZA, por sus siglas en inglés) ha declarado el 2008 como el Año de la Rana, en aras de concienciar a las personas sobre este asunto.
Por su parte, el doctor Ariel Lugo, director del Instituto Internacional de Dasonomía Tropical del Servicio Forestal, coincidió con Joglar en el sentido de que el coquí es una especie amenazada en la Isla. “Hablando del Caribe, el equivalente al oso polar es el coquí”, acotó.
Lugo también trajo a colación que en Puerto Rico y en otras partes del mundo hay un problema con el blanqueamiento de corales debido al aumento de las temperaturas en los océanos. Este proceso, en el cual los corales expulsan unas algas microscópicas que les aportan alimentos y les dan su hermoso color, puede dañar y destruir colonias enteras de arrecifes de coral.
No empece los peligros que acarrean, Lugo matizó que los cambios climáticos no sólo traen extinción, sino también un proceso de evolución. “La naturaleza no es pasiva. Los organismos tienen que moverse buscando su acomodo. No todo va en una sola dirección. Lo interesante es ver cómo la naturaleza se ajusta”, argumentó.
Salvemos los osos
Aunque los osos polares no están reconocidos como especies en peligro de extinción, la comunidad científica ciertamente está preocupada por los efectos que el calentamiento global tiene sobre su hábitat. De hecho, las imágenes de estos mamíferos flotando a la deriva sobre pedazos de hielo ártico los han convertido en el símbolo de los daños que causa este fenómeno atmosférico.
Sin embargo, el Departamento del Interior de Estados Unidos aún no toma una decisión de si incluye o no a estos mamíferos en la lista de especies en peligro de extinción.
En aras de que se tome una determinación final, tres grupos conservacionistas, entre ellos el Centro para la Diversidad Biológica, llevaron un recurso ante los tribunales para demandar que el gobierno de Estados Unidos tome una acción al respecto.
En días recientes, la jueza federal Claudia Wilken decidió que el Departamento del Interior tiene que tomar una decisión final de si lo incluye o no en la lista para este jueves, 15 de mayo.
[Reply]
May 19th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Lina, I have been researching this frog issue for over 4 years, and have become very close to the coqui including the extinct ones… collecting/rearing/filming/breeding and yes looking for methods to control them. Also it seems from the one species that came over on a mass of floating debris thousands of years ago you now have all these different types of frogs on your island…chytrid fungus, pollution, human’s …nature’s response to change. Was the eneida the last one to be labelled extinct? I have found coqui’s here seem to be lining out into distinct populations, one looking very much like the eneida. They are showing up larger than before, a 2 1/2 inch male isn’t unusual anymore, with a call
much lower and louder than normal, perhaps Chief Coqui’s spirit has travelled over as well and is meeting with King Kamehameha.
The frog is evolving here, living high in the palms or hala trees where they have a source of food/water and may only need to come down if the chosen mate lays her eggs on the ground… eggs hatch here fine without a male sitting on them…. The frogs travel on cars/boxes/plants but also can survive extended journeys without food/water staying in a torpor state for 3 months…or until they escape..a trait carried over from it’s ancestors. Plain baking soda (not baking powder) controls them and I’m hoping that the State can work with EPA to get an SLN.
There are people like Sydney Singer who actively fight against the control of this species in Hawaii, but I think if he saw one chase down a young anole and eat it his opinion may change…in Hawaii they are moving up the food chain…you know you have a bad infestation when you no longer hear crickets chirping…they’ve eaten them and moved on, nature’s way with the help of human’s playing the part of the floating debris. “No kekahi o kakou ka plikia, malaila pu kakou a pau” (Should one of us get into trouble, we will all go that way). Mark Munekata/ coquifrognews.blogspot.com
[Reply]
May 20th, 2008 at 3:13 am
Please hold on to your idyllic childhood memories, because like you, memories are all I will have of meditative and peaceful Hawaiian moonlit nights. The coqui frogs are taking that away from us here in Hawaii. As a matter of perspective, you are remembering the Geico geco, we are dealing with Godzilla. The problem that I have with your blog is not so much what you say, because you are entitled to an opinion. But it is because you say it with the perceived backing of the EPA. You have EPA credentials on an EPA site.
Environmental Protection Agency. Now that you know that even our real estate sales contracts warn the purchaser of land in Hawaii that there may be coqui frogs in the area, (and although they could affect a person’s ability to sleep and maybe their hearing), will you investigate the severity of this threat? What will your agency do to protect our Hawaiian environment? But instead of protection, your article seem to back the support for stopping eradication of an invasive species and even question why Hawaii people cannot love the sound of the frog (from your cultural perspective.) From my perspective you misuse you position.
Maybe I used the word naïve in haste. You are remembering something pleasant but the reality here in Hawaii is that we have a lot to lose:
-There is a difference in the price of real estate where the property exists in a frog infested area. I wonder what the cumulative cost for devalued property would be.
-What would be the cost to our tourism when the tourists can no longer stand “that bird” continually singing at night. Or worse yet when there are thousands of them screaming in the forests per acre, where it used to be peaceful breezes blowing through the palms(which can no longer be heard).
-What would the cost be to our agriculture sector when our products are condemned because frog eggs are found on a shipping container (not in the product, on the outside of the container.)
-What would the cost be to the native bat (which IS endangered), which uses sound to find its food. The frogs call would produce so much white noise that the bat fails to find food and starves. This is speculation but the military sonar opponents pose this same argument for the porposes and whales here in Hawaii.
-What would the cost be to all of the native endangered birds when the coqui frog penetrates the high forests and impacts their food fupply.
-What price do you place on the peaceful quietness of a forest, and the quality of life it presents.
From the cant of your article and the references you bring up, you appear to support a stop to our eradication efforts because the frog is becoming scarce in your home land. If all of this is based on nostalgic impressions (based on your culture) and we in Hawaii have so much to lose, and you were never here to feel our loss as you write your article based on your perspective, I do not know what other word to use, but naïve is the nicest one I know.
We are in disagreement about a frog. On the surface it is silly.
From your perspective, a nostalgic pleasantry of sound from a non poisonous frog.
From my perspective, an invasive pest that is taking away something precious; economic and qualitative elements of our lives here in Hawaii. Also my view is that you misuse your credentials and resources to boldly resist what you should protect by virtue of the agency you work for and the sensitivity of the credentials you hold (you should know how fragile island ecosystems are).
This is likened to China’s Opium War. The Chinese fought to keep opium out of their country. The foreign powers used politics and military might to force it upon them. In the end the Chinese lost. But now you know better, because we are no longer like that.
If you want to restore the frog in Puerto Rico, then focus on that and retitle the article to suit such an effort. Please do not rhetorically wonder why we in Hawaii would not love something that you do. We also love our Hawaii and what we are losing to this invasive pest.
If you really love your home land wish to restore frog populations there, get in touch with Kokee. He seems to have the “super ” frogs. I would have eradicated them.
[Reply]
May 20th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Dear Eieio,
I’m glad that my blog has created this cyber-debate. How about if we change the title to “Keep the coquí in Puerto Rico alive!”
Estimado Eieio
Me alegra el debate cibernético que mi blog ha creado. ¿Qué pasaría si cambiamos el título a “Mantengan el coquí en Puerto Rico vivo!”
[Reply]
Vanessa Gonzalez Velazquez y Carlos Tort Santiago reply on September 24, 2008 11:11 pm:
Me parece que Eieio, tiene en el cerebro Elio. Las opiniones de las personas no son ingenuas o “Naive” son las impresiones que nos llevamos a primera instancia con algun tema y/o discucion basado en nuestras propias percepciones. Ahora bien, el que parece estar molesto es Eieio. Todas los argumentos son con meras especulaciones de como PUDIERA afectar el mercado de valores o la agricultura eso si que es ser idiota, (perdon fue la palabra que mejor encontre) debe probar o al menos aparentar una razon de peso para tomar la terrible accion.
No se cual es el animal simbolo de Hawai, pero te aseguro que si vamos a matar en Puerto Rico el Elio ese haria una objecion.
[Reply]
May 20th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Coqui frogs are just another entry in a rapidly evolving Hawaiian ecosystem. The hype centered on these frogs is just that, hype. I live in Hilo HI and share my home with many creatures including lots of coqui.
I can understand a yearning for stability. Stability is never going to happen in this island ecosystem again. It never did exist anyway. The only thing that has changed is the rate of change. Today the system is changeing thousands of times faster than it did for it’s first few million years.
When the first humans arrived the rate of change was pushed way up, now it is faster still. It is not going to slow down and efforts to achive stability are doomed to frustration.
The coqui are not going to damage any hearing. I have guests come to my home and comment on the beauytiful jungle sounds in the night. When I tell them what makes the sounds they are enjoying they are confused. The eco-hype that surrounds these frogs leaves little room for rational thought. The reasons for this hype are proably many but if something doesnt seem to make sense I always try to see where the money angle is. It is unlikely that this frog can ever be removed from Hawaii. It calls in the night so it’s spread is easy for anyone to see. What a great way to get grant money. More hysteria = more grant money.
They may be an ecological disaster to some, but for me they are a blessing. Before the coqui the evenings at our home were filled with mosquitoes and it was no fun to be outside at all. Now thanks to these little singers the mosquitoes are very rare. One “invasive” species takes care of another. We need to remember that every living thing here invaded this ecosystem at some time.
There are many legends about Hawaiian ecology, promoted for various reasons. Miconia is a good example. A few years ago it was going to destroy the Island. Nothing effective was done about it and now it is blending in to the forest. I see it along the roadsides every day. When I have a chance I remove it but I am beginning to wonder why.
I invaded Hawaii about 35 years ago. Some of my friends famlies invaded this Island almost two thousand years ago and so it will continue.
I don’t want to say that we should not try to control what we share our home with. I just think that our energy should be put where it will have an effect.
[Reply]
May 20th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Write another article focused on your efforts to restablish the frog in Puerto Rico and leave this article as is.
In Hawaii, we may be fighting a losing battle. Do you know how bad that feels? We do not need someone on the sidelines cheering on the enemy while we have so much to lose.
Instead, memorialize this article. 10 years is not long a time. It only took about 6 years for the coqui frog problem to exponentially explode on our Island. I expect that within those 10 years you will see headlines like, “Hawaiian endangered species threatened by coqui frog.” As if we never saw it comming. Your agency could help us. But will they?
[Reply]
May 20th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Just want to point out that as I contribute to the Agency’s blog–Greenversations–I am sharing my personal thoughts about the environment with individuals like yourself who care deeply about our milieu and in making the world a better place for future generations. I welcome the exchange–we can all benefit from it.
[Reply]
May 21st, 2008 at 1:32 am
To have a “live and let live” opinion on this only works if if doesn’t affect you (or you block it out)…you don’t like mosquitos.. someone may, people smuggle in snakes, pirrahna, ect…when they leave sometimes they let these things go…no issue because they like them. You see where this can go until someone let’s go something you don’t like….It may or maynot endanger anything, an agency may get funding to study it, a private citizen may do it on their own dime…There is hype going on, discussing it over dinner is one thing, being out in the forest/yards all hours of the night till the early morning working on the issue is another, some “expert opinions” may need to be adjusted. People will get involved to their comfort level, some take more convincing, some never change, it’s a choice. Mahalo Lena for the forum and the article that sparked this exchange, there are solutions to Puerto Rico’s problems with the coqui, I know they just put aside 200 acres as a sanctuary for one species and the Central Florida Zoo has opened a coqui exhibit http://www.aza.org/Publications/2007/01/exhibits.pdf
raising the awareness of the worldwide decline of the frog.
[Reply]
June 8th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
When I visited PR in the ’80s, I was told by native guides that the kookee frog could only live on that island. They had tried to transplant the frog to other islands without success. Was I missinformed, or has cimate change caused this to happen. Anyone know?
[Reply]
Vanessa Gonzalez Velazquez y Carlos Tort Santiago reply on September 24, 2008 11:16 pm:
The eonomic situation in Puerto Rico is so extreme that, even the poors Coquies leave the island to have a better future.
Sorry is a joke, I beliefe that to, what a shame.
[Reply]
June 25th, 2008 at 12:22 am
You can push and pull all you want. The Coqui will become part of Hawaii forever. They’re not going anywhere and your kids will grow to love them. Ten years from now all those efforts to eradicate them will be a shameful page in the history of Hawaii. Your grandson will ask you why you were so mean and all your scientific rhetoric will mean nothing to them. The Coqui was design by God to leave on Earth. Point blank. You have no right or jurisdiction over that. There’s always a more feasible solution: why don’t YOU leave the Islands? You are the smart one with the bigger brain. It is not the Coqui’s fault that it ended up in Hawaii. So, relax. It is not a tragedy. Save your guns and energy for something really meaningful, they’re bigger problems to solve in Hawaii than fighting a two inches singing frog!
[Reply]
June 26th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
José,
Looking forward to the responses to your comment. After the fireworks last month, I suppose some one will provide additional data on the negative impacts of this diminutive singing frog.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Sigh….Jose, complacency isn’t the answer, shall we get use to pollution, deforestation ect..religion, politics and the like will cloud the issue, also “save your guns”? So your idea is to leave when the going gets rough or worse yet tell others what to do in there lands.
[Reply]
July 11th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
To: Debi C.
I also lived under the impression that coquis could only live in PR. Guess we were proven wrong. As an invasive species in Hawaii, the coquis have been able to thrive without any opposition. Don’t think it has anything to do with climate change.
For Kookee,
I don’t support a laissez-faire attitude, but wonder what are the real options?
Now I am aware about the noise in Hawaii, a friend just brought me a live recording of these little amphibians. You don’t see them provide any benefit to the Hawaiian scenery–how about eating mosquitos or other insects?
[Reply]
July 14th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I was just on the Big Island a couple of weeks ago, both south and north of Hilo. North, I heard one frog calling, and it was kind of nice. South of Hilo, down near Isaac Hale park? Hoo boy! A wall of sound.
I’ve got one more Hawaii blog post in me, and I’ll post my recording in that.
[Reply]
July 15th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Looking forward to the public comments on your amphibian wall of sound!
[Reply]
July 17th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
The coqui in Puerto Rico and Hawaii…same frog, opposite reaction. What Hawaii has is an attitude problem, not a frog problem.
The coqui situation in Hawaii is a good example of environmentalism gone mad! I am the co-author of the book, Panic in Paradise: Invasive Species Hysteria and the Hawaiian Coqui Frog War (ISCD Press, 2005). We also have a website, http://www.HawaiianCoqui.org, and we own and operate the Hawaiian Coqui Frog Sanctuary and Nature Preserve, on the Puna coast of the Big Island.
This frog war has been insane, cruel, ineffective, and wasteful. It has promoted intolerance for the sounds of nature, and has taught people that burning frogs by spraying acid into the environment, and even bulldozing if necessary, is sound environmentalism. Never mind the other animals and plants burned. Anything to stop the chirps!
The fact is, the coqui has a positive affect on the environment. Several macadamia nut farms, for example, were saved by coquis, which eat the invasive tree borer that attacks their trees. Coquis have also been found eating fire ants, which are now a major invasive pest in Hawaii. And researchers have shown that coquis increase the nitrogen in the soil, fertilizing the garden as they eat the insect pests. This makes coquis a sustainable, “green” alternative to using chemical pesticides and fertilizers.
The real issue in Hawaii is the coquis’ sound, and the fact that it is a new sound for most residents. Change is difficult for people. However, from our website’s survey, most people in Hawaii enjoy the coqui, even in large choruses. Personally, I find it enchanting and a special part of the Hawaiian nights.
Love them or not, they are here to stay.
[Reply]
July 18th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Sydney,
Very interesting perspective. Hope you can continue to bring some sanity into this discussion. Thanks for the website link.
[Reply]
July 18th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
The Coqui loved in Puerto Rico is but the small cousin guy to the new improved coqui in Hawai’i.
The Hawaiian coqui is becoming nearly double the size as it was in Puerto Rico.
Behaviorial changes are also taking place.
The coqui of Puerto Rico is nearly nocturnal which the Hawaiian version was originally.
Now it’s daylight chorus is nearly as loud as it’s nighttime lullaby.
One thing, not a value judgement but…people in Hawaii tend to speak softer than those from Puerto Rico and the raising of your voice to overcome the coqui is not appreciated as it might be in Puerto Rico.
Even if it is true what the above poster contends…that people visiting his site like the coqui… I personally (I’ve lived in Hawaii 20 years) have not meet one person who feels that way and the overwhelming majority that I know, in fact, are doing everything they can to eradicate the coqui save using heavy chemicals.
I thank God I don’t have them…yet, but wouldn’t cry if they were gone tomorrow
[Reply]
July 19th, 2008 at 12:52 am
This blog has the distinct appearance of a conflict of interest between a government employee and any objectivity within this governmental agency. By taking an activist stance on the coqui issue, it seems that this employee has used a government website and was perhaps even being paid ‘on the clock’ to make assertions that are entirely unsupported by any science whatsoever, and without any review or oversight by proper authority. In other words, it would appear that the EPA is endorsing the existence of coqui frogs in Hawaii despite the fact that the EPA is also responsible for reviewing and regulating pesticide applications for the control of coqui frogs in Hawaii. Is the official position of the EPA, we “don’t see how coquís challenge Hawaiian wildlife?” Does anyone else see the problem with using our tax dollars to promote an activist stance on the coqui issue?
[Reply]
July 19th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Since this blog also provides a convenient forum for other coqui activists to express their views, the factuality of these claims needs to corrected. Mr. Singer seems to be able to find the bright side of any disaster. As he correctly points out, coquis do indeed increase nitrogen in the soil and have a fertilizing effect. Volcanic soils of Hawaii, however, contrary to popular belief, are naturally low in nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. The native vegetation of Hawaii is closely evolved to these nutrient poor conditions. The study that Mr. Singer mentioned, found that coquis promote the growth of invasive strawberry guava, which has severely degraded the natural environment in Hawaii. Several other invasive species also have a competitive advantage over native plants in Hawaii when nutrient conditions are enhanced. Mr. Singer claims that invasive species biology is a hoax, so none of this matter to him. The consequences however, are that the native birds of Hawaii, which are highly dependent on the native vegetation of Hawaii, are losing their habitat, and coquis are accelerating this process.
[Reply]
July 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
It took a friend to get you a recording of the “wall of sound” for you to believe or understand what we face in Hawaii. (Maybe even now you do not wish to change your position on the matter because of your sentiments. I can actually understand that.)
So prior to this, you had no idea of what we face and what you defend. If you are no longer naive, then as a representative of the EPA you now misuse your position and sentiments to promote our Hawaiian coqui frog disaster. Even if this blog is only a format for your opinion, it seems lopsided and detrimental to our efforts.
Telling people to leave Hawaii because we do not like the frog goes does not help the discussion. There are people over here in Hawaii that say the very same thing about the people who do like the frog. And they are a little more forceful about their language because they are actively losing a qualitative aspect of our Hawaiian lifestyle. The frog is very foreign.
[Reply]
July 22nd, 2008 at 2:41 am
steve said “This blog has the distinct appearance of a conflict of interest between a government employee and any objectivity within this governmental agency.”
it is not a conflict of interest for anyone (government employee or not) to state an opinion, in fact it is better to have that opinion in the open rather than hidden behind a government decision or interpretation of field data in a way that supports a given opinion. and do not try and say that government employees should be impartial and not have opinions because that is impossible, all human beings have opinions, i have yet to meet the sterile, robotic, unbiased human being.
two last thoughts: everything at one point in time is “alien” and the only thing that is constant is change. no matter how hard we try everything changes. we as human beings should try not to be the catalyst behind the change but we must realize that with or without us change does occur. and finally the coqui experience in hawaii should be a wake up call to everyone that the time to act on invasive species is the second something alien is found, not to wait to see if it becomes invasive before moving to eradicate it.
[Reply]
July 22nd, 2008 at 11:13 am
Thanks to everyone for your continued discussion of this issue.
Please remember that, as Lina said in one of her comments, our bloggers all speak for themselves, not EPA in general, as explained on our page “About this Blog” at http://blog.epa.gov/blog/about/
[Reply]
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Lina, This frog is moving up the food chain as the comments from others say they are eating insects that harm and help what’s here, but “sanity” hmmm, not sure about that. The frogs themselves are evolving here and at some point the opinions on this blog may also change as time goes on. Noise is an issue, they may give nutrients, they eat alot of insects to the point of none left, like locust because of sheer numbers in a given area. People enjoy loud music, others don’t, laws are made to control the situation when it goes on all night into the early morning hours, just like a barking dog next door that goes on all night….
Racing on public streets, driving intoxicated, legalize this or that because…..since this is a creature we should let it go unchecked..
humans are also creatures…shall we let them go unchecked?
Your point of reference maynot be the majority but when should it be regulated by a law? Bottom line the frog is changing things in Hawaii fast….to fast and for anyone to say they have a definite handle on it, yes maybe yesterday but what about now…Go look for the Amphibian Ark Project and see what’s happening to the frogs worldwide…Hawaii’s ecosystem can only do so much…but the Kona side of the Big Island can house a herpetariium to raise these truly endangered creatures and send them back to their country of origin…
[Reply]
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:42 am
Nice biased writing… it’s true that the frogs were innocently put onto the island, but what about the innocent Hawaii residents that have to deal with 73 decibels of sound from sunset to sunrise? Or the people fighting hard for the protection of the environment who are faced with a mob of people in love with a cute face? If you haven’t experienced Hawaii’s growing invasive problem, and Hawaii’s coqui problem, you really shouldn’t have such a strong opinion about saving them in Hawaii.
[Reply]
July 23rd, 2008 at 11:15 am
To my fellow citizens from the 50th state and mainlanders alike, I must confess this has been a learning experience. Thanks for your input. As has been stated, my blogging represents strictly my views. This discussion has enabled me to see a new perspective. I hope the dialogue continues.
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I too have fond childhood memories of nocturnal sounds. Train track passed within 500 feet of my home and it didn’t bother me. It was merely a low rumble. Coquis are different.
The coqui population in windward Hawaii, especially in areas which we hope to keep pristine is so high that not only do they hunt and eat other animals, especially baby geckos (but not mosquitoes), that they are at the top of the food chain for animals of their size. They are NOT benign opportunistic feeders. They are omnivores, and they hunt prey. As they evolve into larger animals, their mating call evolves as well. It has become louder and much more shrill, to the point that a coqui presence must be listed as a detriment on a mortgage declaration. In some areas the noise exceeds EPA safety standards.
There are no longer a few hundred or a few thousand. There are, conservatively, BILLIONS. And, because to fill all of the niches, specialties are observable. Some are now diurnal. Some have a mottled pattern and all of them can change color. Not just light to dark anymore, but they can blend to their background. If you are chasing one of those, you may not be able to visualize it even if you see exactly where it lands.
Sidney Ross Singer is right about one thing. They are here to stay. I’m sure he will be just thrilled when a couple of brown tree snakes get loose and have an unlimited supply of food. Guam will look like Gilligan’s island in comparison. I don’t see a reference to his hog haven where innocent feral pigs can be taken and cared for instead of being murdered by cruel hunters with dogs, but maybe he is a frog kinda guy. In fifty years these things will be as big as Bufos. At least then they will have some market value as food items.
Ducks are moderately successful frog predators if you get aggressive feeders like Fawn Runners and show them a couple of frogs. They learn fast and hunt actively. In the past they could eat hundreds but now they can only eat a few at a time because the frogs are getting too large for them to swallow. And frogs reproduce at a prodigious rate. But the skin of amphibians is very different that reptiles. A cup of…..oh, I dunno…Oxy Clean for instance, in fifteen gallons of water won’t kill anything but frogs which sometimes get sprayed accidentally when I am washing the mold from my banana plants.
My goal used to be to kill ten frogs a day. Then a hundred. Then a thousand. Then ten thousand. You can tell when you get one with microfine droplets of spray mist; it thinks the rain has started and it starts chirping. Then it realizes it’s melting. But eventually I realized I was merely creating a pristine habitat for new hatchlings which then claim the free territory without having to compete for it; so my future efforts will be biological rather than chemical unless I can find something less expensive than homeade napalm. The effects of acid rain won’t be a factor. The frogs can evolve faster than any effect it might have on them, but it is sure taking a toll on the vegetables.
My associate poster Kookee is very knowledgeable on this subject to the point of biological expertise. He will list his pedigree if he wishes, but I assure you that he knows that of which he speaks.
[Reply]
July 24th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Paragraph 3 corrected text:
“There are no longer a few hundred or a few thousand. There are, conservatively, BILLIONS. And, because nature fills all of the available niches, specialization within the family is already observable. Some frogs eschew climbing entirely, libing and reproducing at or below ground level. Some are now diurnal. Some have a mottled pattern and all of them can change color. Not just light to dark anymore, but they can blend to their background. If you are chasing one of those, you may not be able to visualize it even if you see exactly where it lands. “
[Reply]
July 25th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
So you would confirm that there have been mutations. The Hawaiian coquis are no longer like their Puerto Rican ancestors?
[Reply]
July 26th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Lina, They are moving away from what you remember, males are larger than females and very aggressive hunters. Sounds like a B movie plot doesn’t it…
[Reply]
July 26th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
There is supposed to be an EPA team who will come the Hawaii Island to do air quality studies for the volcanic emissions. Maybe they can also look into this frog problem.
[Reply]
July 30th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Kookee can you provide some images to show these large coqui’s? i have lived in puerto rico and now live in hawaii and have not seen these evolved coquis. The coqui’s around my house are the same size and vocal intensity as those i grew up with. Now there are more of them at my home here in hawaii than there were in puerto rico BUT there are not more of them than we would hear in the rain forest in puerto rico. Where we lived was a much drier region of puerto rico which is why we had fewer frogs.
Here is a recording of the coqui’s in the rain forest in puerto rico : http://www.kongaloid.org/coquicd/coqui.mp3 … note the same overlapping of calls as are heard in hawaii and which some people claim are not “natural.”
and Tom Burnett can you provide some video showing the coqui changing color? i would love to see that and of it’s true that would mean the coqui has undergone major evolution beyond juts an increase in size in less than 20 years which in itself should warrant study.
[Reply]
August 4th, 2008 at 3:20 am
I first came to Hawaii in 1992, I moved to the Big Island last February. Without a doubt, the single biggest difference is the coqui. Silence at night, one of the great blessings of Hawaii, is now actually becoming a thing of the past. Stunning. Currently I have a house guest who would like to be recording music here and that is quite impossible.
I feel fortunate that I live at the very north end of the island at an elevation of about 900 feet. The frogs seem to be temperature sensitive and in the winter at least they aren’t like they are now! And I personally have seen this invasion almost step by step–they weren’t in my yard last year, and they are now. I’ve watched / heard them move down from the nearby ridge and now I’m surrounded. My cat will now bring in four or five a night on average. (I flush them into my septic tank)
I honor the fact that amphibians are disappearing the world over and that this environment is suitable for them, and that’s a positive in general. But too much of ANYTHING isn’t good, that seems obvious, so I admit I’m a bit in shock that the “official blog of the EPA” (which I found by total accident) doesn’t seem to quite groc that the coqui has ZERO predators here and that THAT just might be an exponential problem sooner or later . . . and the cute chirp produced by the creature doesn’t really affect the math in the slightest way. I’m a total outsider, but isn’t science actually supposed to come into the conversation? How hard is it to see a looming disaster given those circumstances? The coqui is so special it should just proliferate unbounded, anywhere and everywhere? That sounds right? Somehow labeling this all as “Hawaiians resistance to change” and lumping this in with other Hawaiian issues seems very shallow and unwise, whatever your preferences.
Everyone has their own taste, people are entitled to like what they like even if you really can’t carry on a conversation in some places due to the “melody” of the frogs all around. But I would invite anyone from the EPA to come and spend the night–and not over in the dry resorts in Kona but over here on the Hamakua Coast, down in Puna especially–and then claim that coqui noise is either charming or isn’t an issue at all.
My wife, who had never been to Hawaii before we moved here, does in fact now associate the coqui song to Hawaii. And it makes her feel good. And even she finds many of the places on this island totally untenable at night.
As a currently prospective house buyer here, you can be absolutely assured that coquis DO affect my search area and I take all warnings in that regard very seriously indeed. And that IS a direct economic impact from an environmental factor. So people can feel how they want to about the issue, but just like a house near the expressway or the train tracks, if you have to “get used to it” then I personally won’t be getting near it for a purchase, and I am quite certain I do not feel alone in this regard.
Whatever side you’re on, and whether or not these coquis are twice normal size, can change color six times in three seconds, or for that matter can teleport directly to the Hana Coast of Maui, the issue itself is very real. I urge anyone with an opinion on the subject to come and see / hear for themselves. (It’s a trip to Hawaii, how bad could it be?)
[Reply]
August 4th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
mr. gaynes,
the coqui in hawaii points out 2 issues: 1st where were the agencies who are responsible for keeping invasive species off the island back when the coqui were first detected; 2nd, and the harder one, how do we remove or control them without destroying the environment at the same time?
we had no coqui’s until our neighbor across the stream from us sprayed their property to kill them driving them across the stream and into our yard.
our nights now sound like we are in the middle of the puerto rican rain forest … which some folks cannot stand and others love
what needs to be found and i have yet to see is how to reduce their numbers in a safe and effective way. maybe people can post ideas here on how that can be accomplished. spraying citric acid every few weeks for the next 20 years is not the answer
[Reply]
August 5th, 2008 at 1:05 am
I couldn’t agree more. And as I said, I’m a recent arrival and no biological expert, just a Hawaii lover (and I don’t spray). My only point is that the coqui invasion is an issue very worthy of attention and that instead of lamenting the local efforts to get a handle on the problem from 4000 miles away, the people in the EPA might actually contact some of their expert friends to look at the issue in search of a solution . . . but then those people would have to see it as a problem first, wouldn’t they?
As an affected bystander, it’s all I can hope for.
[Reply]
August 7th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
the solution will more likely come from people that live in hawaii than biological “experts” … the wisdom of crowds has shown time and time again that groups of people, not a few hand picked “experts” always come up with the best solution to any problem … the issue in this case is that there is no place for this “crowd” to share their knowledge since government agencies are still tied to the old notion that only experts can solve problems and they are not seeking input from the “crowd” …
[Reply]
August 26th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
The wisdom of crowds. Spraying acid. Spreading lime. Not environmentally friendly, or island style. Or like the Iolani Palace take-over, the Copan ruins take-over, or the Superdome take-over. Mob rule. That’s great. Or is it the wisdom of real estate agents, panicking over the saleability of their $MM estate listings, because of coquis keeping deep pockets up at night. Maybe there should be a requirement that an agent show a home to the prospective buyer, before closing the sale, 30 minutes after sunset. They’re so quick to run TV commercials during this real estate crisis, telling you that “if you’re on the wall about making a purchase”, to leap to your death now, and close the deal, because their boat payments and country club membership renewals are coming due, and they need their commissions, so listen to your real estate agent. They’re likely driving the coqui hysteria. Why aren’t the locals up in arms over the invasive take-over of the islands by the mynah, which is not native, but also an import? A few mynahs can make more noise than coquis any day, and the islands are full of them, also. Just wait until they realize that they can mimic human speak. Oh, wait - the mynahs eat mice, and yes, coquis, toos. Never mind. If you can’t sleep because of the coquis, heed the Madison Avenue TV commercial (Sanofi Aventis AmbienCR) and silence your rooster. Tanks, eh.
[Reply]
August 29th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
people are spraying acid and spreading lime because that is what the “experts” told them to do. in fact the government (up until this year) was giving out grant money for community organizations to purchase the supplies to spray … no one has been telling them how to reduce the foliage from against their homes or make other changes that remove coqui habitat from under their windows … and for the record our realtor did recommend that we visit the house we bought at dusk to see not only if we heard lots of coqui but also what sound the other critters in the neighborhood might be making
[Reply]
August 31st, 2008 at 8:41 pm
As a matter of fact, spraying acid and spreading lime is quite environmentally friendly. These are not synthesized organic chemicals that persist in the environment for eons. They are not polychlorinated biphenyls, for crying out loud. Simple acids are everywhere on Earth, like in oranges. Hydrated lime has a multitude of agricultural uses that include growing the food you eat. The world is made of chemicals and most of them are either acidic or basic. There are a lot worse things we do to the environment everyday just by driving a car. The daily human consumption of caffeine in the US would probably be enough to kill every frog in Hawai`i. Put it in perspective.
And what is island style? Being so stoned that you don’t notice every weed and pest known the planet invade the `aina and drive native plants and animals to extinction?
[Reply]
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:43 pm
estoy buscando una informacion que es por que el coqui lo llevaron a hawii?
[Reply]
September 5th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Estimado anónimo:
Según la información obtenida básicamente de recortes de periódico, los coquís fueron transportados accidentalmente en un cargamento de plantas que fueron de Puerto Rico a Hawaí y allí se multiplicaron. Como no tienen ningún enemigo natural en esas islas, parece que se han acaparado de las áreas silvestres y lo más que le molesta a los residentes es el canto ensordecedor. He aquí algunos enlaces:
http://blog.coquipr.com/index.php/category/sistemastropicales/
http://lib.colostate.edu/research/agnic/invspecies/coqui.html
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Jan/29/ln/FP601290348.html
http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/coqui/hotwater.asp
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/82117/the_puerto_rican_coqui_in_hawaii.html?cat=16
http://www.voanews.com/specialenglish/archive/2002-05/a-2002-05-30-2-1.cfm
http://www.hear.org/species/eleutherodactylus_coqui/
Dear anonymous:
According to the information found in news clippings is that the coquis were accidentally transported in a plant shipment from Puerto Rico to Hawaii and that’s where they multiplied exponentially. Without any natural enemy in those Islands, it seems that they have overtaken the green areas and what is most bothersome for the residents is the deafening coquí chanting. Links included above.
[Reply]
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:53 pm
I’m enclosing a Puerto Rico newspaper article on the latest efforts by the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture to irradicate the invading coquí frog. According to the article HDOA is proposing to have its officials enter any property where the coqui’s chants are heard to spray an acid to kill these small amphibians. The article quotes one of the contributors of our blog, biologist Sydney Ross Singer, author of “Panic in Paradise”. I’m sharing the article in Spanish published in El Vocero. The PR article invites people to write to HDOA defending the coqui at hdoa.info@hawaii.gov and to info@hawaiiancoqui.org .
Nueva ofensiva contra el coquí en Hawaii
Por Maggie Bobb, El Vocero
23 de septiembre de 2008 05:00 am
El Departamento de Agricultura de Hawaii quiere llevar su guerra contra el coquí a los patios y hogares de los ciudadanos, declarando esta ranita que es un símbolo de Puerto Rico como “una plaga de las plantas”, en contravención a toda la información científica sobre la especie.
De aprobar dicha medida, el Departamento de Agricultura de Hawaii (HDOA, por sus siglas en inglés ) podría entrar en la propiedad de cualquier ciudadano, sin permiso de un juez ni del dueño, para regar ácido sobre los coquíes.
Como la ranita denota su presencia por su canto de “coquí, coquí”, cualquier persona que tiene este sonido entre sus plantas está a riesgo de una invasión del gobierno con sus rociadores armados con ácido cítrico, que cuando no mata al animalito lo quema en forma dolorosa.
Según el defensor de los coquíes, el biólogo conservacionista Sydney Ross Singer, el ácido también podría matar plantas y otras especies de animales o insectos.
Singer es autor del libro ‘Panic in Paradise’ (Pánico en el paraíso) sobre el miedo “irracional” que ha causado el coquí en Hawaii, por ser una “especie invasiva” cuyo sonido molesta a alguna gente.
En una entrevista telefónica, ayer, Singer dijo que el HDOA estaba pagando hasta $5,000 a personas o municipios por regar ácido a las ranitas, o sea, un programa de exterminación similar a lo que están haciendo con los lobos en los estados norteños de EEUU.
“El coquí no come plantas ni puede ser plaga de ellas, sino come insectos dañinos, tales como mosquitos, hormigas bravas, y comején”, explicó Singer, por lo que es beneficioso tanto a ellas como a los seres humanos.
Hasta ahora, lo que se define como plagas (“pests”) a las plantas en Hawaii son cosas como insectos y hongos, no animales vertebrados como el coquí.
Se está dando hasta el próximo 2 de octubre (jueves de la semana que viene) para comentarios sobre la aprobación de la medida. Singer es presidente de una organización defensora del coquí en Hawaii, conocida como CHIRP por sus siglas en inglés.
Se pueden dirigir comunicaciones a favor o en contra del coquí, a la siguiente dirección: hdoa.info@hawaii.gov. Se pide que se envíe una copia a la organización defensora a: “info@hawaiiancoqui.org”.
En su página electrónica se puede obtener mas información sobre el coquí y la campaña para salvarlo en Hawaii.
[Reply]
September 24th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
!Que barbaridad!. Si no quieren a los Coquis, pues avisen para pagarles el pasaje entre todos los buenos puertorriquenos a nuestros amigos cantores para que regresen a su tierra. Ellos se lo pierden.
[Reply]
September 25th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Life is really interesting! What is horrible noise to some is a beautiful music to others. I am a puertorrican who lives in Michigan. I made sure to buy a CD that features coquis singing for the times when I miss Puerto Rico. The sound of the coqui is soothing to my soul and brings me back to many childhood nights. I guess attitude and biases make all the difference in the appreciation of this frog’s song.
[Reply]
September 26th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Karen,
That’s what I was hoping to capture when I first wrote the blog back in May. I do confess that with many of the responses, I have become more sensitized to the concerns of our fellow citizens in Hawaii. Yes, the coquis are an invasive species, but when you think of the history of the world, almost everything, particularly in coastal areas, was an invasive species at some point in time.
If you go to the Web site where the latest article was published in Puerto Rico [http://www.vocero.com/noticia-2431-nueva_ofensiva_contra_el_coqu_en_hawaii.html] you will also see some heated comments on what is being done to the coquí en Hawaii–some pro and con– As you say, life is very interesting.
[Reply]
pt reply on October 20, 2008 4:58 pm:
RE: “almost everything…was an invasive species at some point in time.”
Simply not true, in the sense that “invasive species” (see the Presidential Executive Order [http://tinyurl.com/PeoReInvasiveSpecies] that officially defines this term for official purposes in the U.S.) is limited to only those species which arrived in an ecosystem AS A RESULT OF HUMAN ACTIVITY.
Regardless of how we define terms, we MUST (operationally) define them so we’re using a given term to mean the same thing within a given context.
[Reply]
September 27th, 2008 at 3:50 am
“Yes, the coquis are an invasive species, but when you think of the history of the world, almost everything, particularly in coastal areas, was an invasive species at some point in time.”
Just what is the point of this comment? Tra-la-la oh well that’s life? Because you have some affection for this species that has no predators here, no check on its population–NONE–your comment is some excuse for doing nothing?
Are you proposing that nature on Hawaii island will EVOLVE to deal with the problem? In the 21st century? Are you serious?
Or are you simply saying that surrender is a terrific option because invasive species always win out in the end, so why make a big deal out of it? Well, thank you!
YOU work for the Environmental PROTECTION Agency? Forgive us cold-hearted, unloving, nature-slaying Hawaiian residents for wondering just what it is you think you are protecting since it sure doesn’t sound like you mean OUR environment. But we’re happy to know that based on your happy childhood that you think that a massive unwanted change in our condition is completely cool, or even desirable, but certainly not a problem.
How could people possibly be losing faith in government helping them solve problems, it’s a mystery. Obviously the real problem isn’t the coqui, it’s just our bad attitude! (Uh, wow)
[Reply]
October 20th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Yes, please save the Puerto Rican coqui–in Puerto Rico.
While you’re at it, please save Hawaiian insects and natural ecosystem processes.
“I still don’t see how coquís challenge Hawaiian wildlife.” “Still?” Read the literature. In fact, PLEASE read the literature–especially before you make such comments as a representative of the EPA.
[Reply]
pt reply on October 20, 2008 5:01 pm:
…and–regardless of your disclaimers later in the thread–your “about the author” blurb should EXPLICITLY include a disclaimer of your statements being representative in any way of the EPA’s position (and the EPA [webmaster or other authority] should ENSURE that this is the case).
[Reply]