Progress of the Rana pretiosa program
at Woodland Park Zoo

NB: Program has finished

Program Finished:



Population stable in wild


Rana pretiosa

Common Name(s)

Oregon Spotted Frog

Region where program is based

North America

Country where program is based

United States

The authority that recommended this species for an ex situ program

Unknown (TBD), Unknown (TBD)

Has a genetic analysis been performed on wild populations to define the target taxon, i.e., verify that single, viable Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESU's) that are managed as separate populations, are not confounded by cryptic species or polymorphisms?


Name of the institution managing the ex situ population

Woodland Park Zoo

Year the program started


Is at least some portion of the captive population maintained in range country?


Are sufficient resources available to manage the ex situ population?


Are adequate numbers of skilled staff available with the appropriate ex situ amphibian experience?


Is sufficient space available for the required population size?


Additional Support required

Has a Taxon Management Coordinator for the ex situ population been appointed?


Taxon Management Coordinator

Marc Hayes of Washington Fish and Wildlife Service

Has a Taxon Management Group or Recovery Team been established?


Has a Taxon Management Plan, Recovery Plan or Species Action Statement been written?

Web link to Taxon Management Plan

Have Husbandry Guidelines been written?


Web link to Husbandry Management Guidelines

Have any knowledge gaps in the species biology or in their interaction with potential threats been identified that could benefit from research using the ex situ population?

Have founder needs been calculated using the AArk Amphibian Population Management Guidelines ?

Have sufficient potential founders been collected? ( AArk Amphibian Population Management Guidelines recommends a minimum of 20 pairs of found animals).

Is the ex situ population managed by nationals from the range country?


What tools are used to maximize retention of genetic diversity?


Has the population produced viable offspring?


Have the first generation captive-bred animals bred successfully?

Not applicable

Is the ex situ population housed in permanent isolation from other populations occurring outside its range?


Is work being supported to study and mitigate threats to the species in the wild, either by the institution or by a regional wildlife agency?


Have captive-bred or captive-reared animals been released into the wild?


If releases were undertaken, have disease screening protocols or veterinary health checks been conducted prior to releases to the wild?


Is follow-up work being carried out to monitor progress of the released animals?


Is the taxon again secure in the wild, even if it might still require some ongoing in situ management? i.e. has the need for a captive assurance population been obviated such that we can call this a successfully terminated captive rescue program?



This is a head-starting program with participating institutions rearing wild caught embryos to young adult stage for release. Frogs are released at the Fort Lewis Military Reservation. 2011 marked the first year that released frogs had bred in situ. 2015: In order for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to focus on habitat enhancements and monitoring of the reintroduced population, the head-starting program will cease indefinitely with 2015 marking the last frog release for the project. Field sites and the status of the frog in Washington will continue to be monitored by state and federal biologists.
6a7f8b3d 3e3f 4162 8728 07a100e16b91 D1e7f2c1 f461 48f6 9289 8febf0805f74