How many students at your university know that amphibians are in trouble? How many are actively working to protect the environment? Probably not enough! That’s where you come in! This brand new page lists some ideas on how to get SAVE THE FROGS! activities happening at your university.

“I am a student at Stony Brook University majoring in Environmental Sciences. I live on Cape Cod and my house is near an area loaded with vernal pools. For years now I have been working on getting these pools officially certified by the state as areas of critical environmental concern. I have documented spring peepers, tree frogs, wood frogs, green frogs, bull frogs, and yellow spotted salamanders that call these pools their home in the spring and summer. For years developers have been eyeing these areas as potential lots to build on. With the help of a few people we were able to get these areas protected and stop any development that may have occured there.

I just figured I would tell you what I have done on my part to help in this cause. I have also told many people about savethefrogs.com and the Annual Save The Frogs Day, I’ll continue to do what I can on my part to help protect these great creatures. I wish you the best of luck with everything.”
-Sean Kortis

The New Zealand government has voted to protect the critically endangered Archey’s Frog and the Hochstetter’s Frog, whose last strongholds were faced with the threat of mining as the Government proposed to remove legal protections from the land.

Thanks to the 1,275 SAVE THE FROGS! supporters who wrote letters to the New Zealand government urging them to protect the frogs. If the government’s plans had gone through, the critically endangered Archey’s Frog (Leiopelma archeyi) frogs would have almost certainly gone extinct.

The Archey’s Frog (above), and Hochstetter’s Frog (below): safe from mining — for now.

Press Release from the New Zealand Government
No land to be removed from Schedule 4
Tuesday, 20 July 2010, 10:38 am

Energy and Resources Minister Gerry Brownlee and Conservation Minister Kate Wilkinson announced today that the government has decided not to remove any land from Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act for the purposes of further mineral exploration or extraction. Mr Brownlee said he had always made it clear the government was undertaking a genuine consultation process and had not made up its mind on any of the matters prior to the eight week discussion period which began on March 22. The government received 37,552 submissions on its discussion paper titled Maximising Our Mineral Potential: Stocktake of Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act and beyond.
“The vast majority of submissions were focused on the proposal to remove 0.2 per cent of land from Schedule 4 to allow for wider mineral prospecting on those sites,” Mr Brownlee said. “Most of those submissions said we should not remove any land from Schedule 4. We heard that message loud and clear. “From my perspective this has been a valuable exercise. I suspect few New Zealanders knew the country had such considerable mineral potential before we undertook this process, and I get a sense that New Zealanders are now much more aware of that potential and how it might contribute to economic growth. “Essentially the discussion process identified where the minerals industry can and can’t go. As many people have pointed out, around 85 per cent of the country is not protected by Schedule 4, and a great deal of that land has mineral potential. “New Zealanders have given the minerals sector a clear mandate to go and explore that land, and where appropriate, within the constraints of the resource consent process, utilise its mineral resources for everyone’s benefit,” Mr Brownlee said.

The government has also decided to undertake a significant aeromagnetic survey of non Schedule 4 land in Northland and on the West Coast of the South Island to learn more about which areas have the highest concentrations of valuable minerals. “I am delighted to announce that the aeromagnetic survey in Northland will be conducted as a partnership between central government and the various agencies of local government in Northland.
“It is our expectation that when that data becomes available there will be an escalation of mineral exploration and extraction in those areas, which will be of benefit to the economies of both regions.” The technical exploration process will also make a major contribution to public good science by identifying and de-risking a range of hazards associated with soil and rock instability, which will assist with management of earthquakes and landslides.
Ms Wilkinson said the government had agreed to continue with its proposal to add 14 areas totalling 12,400 hectares of land to Schedule 4. In addition, in the future all areas given classifications equivalent to current Schedule 4 areas, such as national parks and marine reserves, will automatically become part of Schedule 4.
“We wanted to allay the fears of some submitters that the government may consider allowing mining in national parks in the future by taking this possibility off the table. This is an added layer of protection for New Zealand’s most highly valued conservation land,” Ms Wilkinson said. The discussion paper suggested the establishment of a conservation fund where a percentage of the royalties from mineral extraction on Schedule 4 land would be paid to the Crown for conservation purposes. “In the circumstances this is considered redundant and therefore won’t proceed,” Ms Wilkinson said.

Finally, the discussion paper proposed that application of access arrangements for Crown land for mineral development be considered by both the land holding Minister and the Minister of Energy and Resources, as opposed to the present practice of being considered by the land holding Minister only. The government has decided to amend the protocol so that both land holding Ministers and the Minister of Energy and Resources will now need to sign off on applications for access arrangements to Crown land for mineral developments

Questions and answers
1. What decisions has the government agreed to?
After carefully considering the feedback received on the Maximising Our Mineral Potential: Stocktake of Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act and Beyond discussion paper, the Government has agreed that:
i. No areas will be removed from Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act.
ii. All of the 14 areas proposed for addition to Schedule 4 will be added to the schedule.
iii. A technical investigation will be undertaken of Northland (in strategic alliance with Northland Regional Council, the Far North District Council, and Enterprise Northland), the West Coast of the South Island and various other highly prospective areas in the South Island – excluding any Schedule 4 areas. This will identify mineral deposits and assist with hazard identification (for example, faults and slips), road maintenance and conservation planning.
iv. Areas given classifications equivalent to current Schedule 4 areas (for example, national parks and marine reserves) will in the future be automatically added to Schedule 4. Such classifications will be agreed by Cabinet.
v. Significant applications to mine on public conservation land will be publicly notified.
vi. The process for approval of mineral-related access arrangements over Crown land will be amended so that approvals are jointly decided by the land-holding minister and the Minister of Energy and Resources, and take into account criteria related to the economic, mineral and national significance of the proposal.
vii. The proposed conservation fund based on mineral royalties will not proceed.
The automatic inclusion of some types of public conservation land in Schedule 4, the process for classification of those classes of land, and public notification of mining applications on public conservation land were not proposed in the discussion paper but are decisions that have been adopted in response to the feedback received in submissions.
2. What response did the government receive on the discussion paper?
In total 37,552 submissions were received:
• 32,318 submissions were made by individuals using standard submission form templates provided by organisations such as Greenpeace and Forest & Bird.
• 5,234 unique submissions were made by individuals and organisations.

Changes to Schedule 4
3. The government has agreed to no land removals from Schedule 4; why and what protections will there be for high value conservation areas in the future?
New Zealanders have been clear that conservation areas and national parks in particular, are of abiding and deep importance to New Zealanders and should be protected – with the vast majority of submitters opposing the removal of all the areas identified in the discussion paper.
The government has heard this and has agreed that in future all national parks and other types of high value conservation value areas listed in Schedule 4 will be automatically added to the schedule and given protection from mining. This was not proposed in the discussion paper but decided based on feedback received.

4. What areas will be added to Schedule 4 and when?
All of the 14 areas proposed for addition in the discussion paper, totalling 12,400 hectares, will be added to the schedule. Almost all submissions supported this proposal. The areas to be added to Schedule 4 by October 2010 are:
Name Size (ha) Location
Marine Reserves
Horoirangi Marine Reserve 903 Nelson
Parininihi Marine Reserve 1,844 North Taranaki
Tapuae Marine Reserve 1,404 New Plymouth
Taputeranga Marine Reserve 855 Wellington
Te Paepae o Aotea (Volkner Rocks) Marine Reserve 1,267 White Island
Whangarei Harbour Marine Reserve 237 Whangarei
Coromandel/Hauraki Gulf Islands
Kaikoura Island Scenic Reserve 564 Great Barrier
Rakitu Island Scenic Reserve 253 Great Barrier
Land Areas
Abel Tasman National Park additions 914 Nelson
Burwood Bush Scientific Reserve 3,114 Southland
Egmont National Park additions 358 Taranaki
Ianthe Scientific Reserve 211 West Coast
Orokonui Nature Reserve 236 Dunedin
Paparoa National Park (northwest addition) 240 West Coast

The mineral investigation programme
5. What is the further technical investigation programme?

The discussion paper proposed further investigation of New Zealand’s geology to improve knowledge of mineral potential. Submitters recognised the value in this proposal. The investigation will also assist with hazard identification (for example, faults and slips), road maintenance and conservation planning.
Further work on the proposal has been completed, and the programme agreed by the government involves the following:
• an aeromagnetic survey over the Northland region in strategic alliance with local bodies
• an aeromagnetic survey over the West Coast of the South Island
• a desktop review, technical studies of existing samples, and selected hand sampling of the Longwood Complex in Southland and similar rocks in the inland Kaikoura Range
• desktop reviews, technical studies of existing samples, and selected hand sampling of the Riwaka Complex in northwest Nelson, seafloor rocks in both east Nelson and South Westland, and rocks north of Haast River that have the potential to host rare earth elements.
6. Will Schedule 4 areas be included in the programme?
No Schedule 4 areas will be included the programme.
7. What is the cost of the programme?

The estimated cost to the government is up to $4.5 million, subject to the tenders received for undertaking the work.
The aeromagnetic survey over the Northland region will be conducted in a strategic alliance with the Far North District Council and Northland Regional Council, who will contribute to the cost of the survey work, and Enterprise Northland.
8. What is an aeromagnetic survey?

An aeromagnetic survey is conducted from a high-flying aeroplane and involves measuring characteristics naturally occurring in the earth. It includes both magnetic and radiometric surveying. A magnetic survey involves measuring the magnetic characteristics of the ground below using a magnetometer, while radiometric surveying involves measuring naturally occurring radiation in the soils and rocks below. Interpretation of this data can be used for a wide variety of applications. In terms of Northland and the West Coast, the enhanced knowledge of prospective areas is anticipated to increase exploration interest and consequently, investment, in the areas. Both surveys will also make a significant contribution to public good science.

9. What will be the public science benefit of the aeromagnetic surveys?
Magnetic surveying will map rock-type variations and show rock structure, such as faults, that will assist with hazard science and engineering, identification of slip hazards, and road maintenance and realignment, as well as improving knowledge of the mineralisation of areas.
Radiometric surveying will assist with the detection of geothermal systems (and energy), as well as improving knowledge of the mineralisation of areas. For Northland in particular, this will be helpful in determining the extent that geothermal systems extend under conservation land. Radiometrics also have strong soil mapping applications, which may assist the Department of Conservation in better understanding and managing flora distribution and biodiversity.

Automatic inclusion to Schedule 4 and reclassification of conservation areas

10. What has been agreed re automatic inclusion to Schedule 4?
Many submitters thought that those conservation areas listed by class in Schedule 4, such as national parks, should automatically be included in Schedule 4, providing those areas with explicit protection from most mineral-related activity immediately on their classification.
The government agrees, and will be amending the Crown Minerals Act 1991 accordingly. To ensure that all considerations, including renewable energy uses, tourism and the mineral potential of the area are considered up front, conservation classification proposals will be signed off by Cabinet in the future (currently the Minister of Conservation makes those decisions alone).

Public notification of mining applications on public conservation land
11. What has the government agreed to, and why?

The government has agreed in principle that significant applications to mine on public land should be publicly notified – currently no notification is required. This proposal was not raised in the discussion paper as an issue for discussion, but the government has noted public feedback on this matter and is responding accordingly.
The proposal will ensure that mining-related applications are treated in the same way as other applications for access to conservation land. The change will provide an opportunity for affected people and businesses to have their views taken into account when decisions are made about mining applications of significance.

Changes to arrangements for access to Crown land
12. What has the government agreed to, and why?
Decisions regarding access to land for mineral-related activity are to be made jointly by the landholding minister and the Minister of Energy and Resources. While many submitters considered a change in decision making on access arrangements would increase the likelihood that access to Crown land for mineral development would be granted, Cabinet has concluded that the current provisions are insufficient to ensure that economic and mineral objectives are properly considered. In addition to considering the purpose for which the land is held and the management plans relating to it, ministers will also be required to take into account criteria relating to the economic, mineral and national significance of the proposal.

In terms of the conservation fund proposal
13. Why is the Government not proceeding with the conservation fund?

The fund was proposed as a means of ensuring that the conservation sector benefited from mining activities that might have occurred in future on Schedule 4 lands. However, no land will be removed from the schedule.

In addition, 88 per cent of responses did not support the proposal to establish a fund. Most of these stated that it was not appropriate to fund the preservation of conservation land from the revenue derived from mining.

Timing of decisions
14. When will decisions come into effect?
It will be several months before changes can be enacted.

This weekend, myself and other SAVE THE FROGS! supporters descended upon Uncle Julio’s Rio Grande restaurants in Arlington, VA and Bethesda, MD and educated well over a thousand people about frog extinctions and the multi-million dollar restaurant chain’s deplorable environmental policies. To date, the company has refused to acknowledge the 800+ letters we have sent them regarding their participation in the ecologically-destructive frog legs trade. The company’s environmental policy has been “ignore the problem and it will go away”, but I have no doubt that the company is quickly realizing that they are soon going to have to confront the issue…or face losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenues. Here’s my recap of the weekend events:

Friday, July 2 — Arlington, VA
I arrived at 5:30pm with two fellow protesters. Yes…only three of us, but who says a small group of dedicated people can’t make a huge impact? We came bearing flourescent yellow signs and were immediately greeted by the restaurant manager, the property manager and a private security guard the restaurant had hired. I introduced myself, informed them that I was a long-time customer and had received no response from their CEO regarding my concerns and thus we were here to celebrate the 4th of July weekend by exercising our right to free speech, and that if they wanted us to leave, they could simply remove the frog legs from their menus. The property manager then lied to me and told me that her company owned the sidewalk surrounding the restaurant. I let her know that the police department had assured me that it was indeed public property and therefore if she had an issue, she could call the police, which she did.

The police were not in a hurry to arrive so, we stood outside the restaurant’s busy patio area showing the patrons and passersby our signs, and distributing literature about the frog legs trade, and the company’s deplorable environmental policies:

Eventually a policewoman arrives and I explain that we are standing on public property abiding by the law, and she confirms our right to be there. The property manager then lied to the policewoman claiming that her company owned the sidewalk, but the policewoman didn’t budge. The property manager was clearly unhappy at this verdict:

After the policewoman’s partner informed me that he liked what we were doing, we spent the next three hours talking to passersby and deterring potential patrons from entering the restaurant. The restaurant manager (who walked away every time I tried to talk to her) was clearly disturbed by the night’s events, and spent most of the time on her phone:

It didn’t take long to realize that three protesters could easily make ourselves and our cause known to every restaurantgoer and every person walking down the street. Several people informed us that they were about to eat at the restaurant but would instead go elsewhere, and i have no doubt that many of the patron’s will think twice before returning to an Uncle Julio’s Rio Grande restaurant. All in all an enjoyable, productive evening!

Friday, July 3 — Bethesda, MD
This evening there were lots of people out and about: a perfect night to protest in defense of the frogs. The restaurant manager — who had already experienced a Save The Frogs Day protest at his restaurant — approached me before I even got within a block of his restaurant. Apparently, they must have received photos and a warning about me, a good compliment! The manager wasn’t alone; his large counterpart introduced himself as Montgomery County Police (though he was not in uniform!). He showed me a letter from the property manager, and a Google Map with a highlighter on it, which in his mind “proved” that the entire 4 blocks surrounding the restaurant was private property, including all the sidewalks. I told him that anybody can print a Google Map and color it in, and that until he showed me an official document, I’d be walking the street with my bright yellow sign, unless of course he agreed to remove the frog legs from his menus. “Oh by the way, where’s your uniform?” After mis-representing himself as an on-duty police officer, it became apparent that this “policeman” was really just working his night job: private security for Uncle Julio.

They called the police. The policewoman informed me she really liked frogs and what we were doing, and that indeed we were allowed to be here protesting — so long as we remain in motion. In Bethesda apparently, the 1st amendment is only in effect while you walk. No problem; myself and three other SAVE THE FROGS! supporters spent the next few hours walking the crowded sidewalks of Bethesda Row, talking to hundreds of supportive people about frogs and Rio Grande. The restaurant manager took lots of photos of us each time we walked by his establishment. It was quite clear he was having a bad night, and I’m quite certain that he was coming to the full realization that we would indeed be back indefinitely until his company removed frog legs from their menus. And indeed we will be.

Who says protesting can’t be fun?

The mathematics of protests
Uncle Julio’s Rio Grande does not care about the environment, they care only about their profits…so all we have to do is make them lose money until they are forced to remove the frog legs from their menu. If we had only three protesters out front of all 16 Uncle Julio’s restaurants 2 nights per week, 52 weeks a year, and each restaurant lost only $100 each time we were there…the company would lose $166,400 in revenues in a year!!! That’s plenty enough to make them address the issue, so we just have to keep the pressure on!

Please attend or help promote a protest by filling out this form!

Conor Finnegan of ABC News recently interviewed SAVE THE FROGS! Founder Dr. Kerry Kriger. A transcript of that interview follows.

-Do you have any idea how many restaurants sell frogs’ legs?
I do not know this number, but one of our volunteers compiled a list of 75 LA-area restaurants that sell frog legs. As frog legs are likely more common in the southeast US than in LA, I’m sure there are thousands of restaurants in the USA that sell frog legs. I have confirmed that Wegman’s and Food Lion supermarkets sell frog legs as well; Food Lion has 1,200 locations.

-How common is the dish?
It has been estimated that globally 100 million frogs are taken out of the wild for use as food each year. The number of farm-raised frogs is thought to be even higher, and the majority of these farm raised frogs are American Bullfrogs being raised outside their native range…they spread chytrid fungus and they escape their farms and eat native wildlife.

-Is its popularity on the rise?
The Eating Frogs To Extinction paper predicts that America will soon overtake France and Belgium to become the #1 frog consumer on the planet.

-What can be done to combat it? Anything else to add?
Education is the number one defense. We need to make sure people know that frogs are rapidly going extinct, that the frog legs trade contributes to the problem, and that there are more ecologically-friendly food alternatives. Once eating frogs is taboo (like eating cats, dogs or horses), it will not be a problem.

-Anything else to add?
Our campaign has begun with Uncle Julio’s Rio Grande restaurants because they are a multi-million dollar Tex-Mex chain, that would not suffer if they were to remove frog legs from their menu. As their CEO has refused to respond to any of our 800+ letters, we are taking the pro-active stance and visibly protesting in front of their restaurants, with the goal of decreasing their revenues to the point where they will be forced to deal with the issue. We have no doubt this will work. This will not be the last restaurant chain we will be contacting, but I certainly hope that others will be more concerned with their corporation’s effect on the environment, and be more willing to assist worldwide frog conservation efforts by removing the frog legs from their menus.