# Can UE and EU Vanzolinii be mixed?



## greenthumbs (Nov 6, 2015)

If I'm not mistaken, the the European line and the Understory line are of the same morph. Is this true? If so, would it be okay to mix them, or should they be kept separately? I've read posts on this forum discussing mixing the lines as though it wouldn't be a problem, and I've read posts saying they shouldn't be mixed. Is there a consensus on this?


----------



## gary1218 (Dec 31, 2005)

No, they should not be mixed. And that comes directly from Mark Pepper.


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

Well.....this will not be a popular opinion, but my answer would be yes. There are not different localities of Vanzolinii. A vanzo is a vanzo. The only difference is that The EU vanzo's were illegally collected, then legally imported to the United states where they have been widely distributed. I think the mixing of the lines is a 100% eventuality. I myself have both lines, and I DO keep them separate. Why keep them seperate? Because of the legality of the lines? I do no not support smuggling, but vanzos, galacs, azureus...they are all the result of illegally sourced animals, and widely available and kept.


----------



## Scott (Feb 17, 2004)

CAN they be, and SHOULD they be, are two different questions.

Can? Possibly.

Should? No, not a chance.

s


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

pdfCrazy said:


> Well.....this will not be a popular opinion, but my answer would be yes. There are not different localities of Vanzolinii. A vanzo is a vanzo. The only difference is that The EU vanzo's were illegally collected, then legally imported to the United states where they have been widely distributed. I think the mixing of the lines is a 100% eventuality. I myself have both lines, and I DO keep them separate. Why keep them seperate? Because of the legality of the lines? I do no not support smuggling, but vanzos, galacs, azureus...they are all the result of illegally sourced animals, and widely available and kept.


I see your point but respectfully disagree...

Many of us have some of those "grey" frogs including myself (red galacs), but if we sign off on mixing EU and UE vanzos, then I think it does nothing to discourage similar illegally sourced frogs being brought in "legally" in the future. At worse it legitimizes or even encourages smuggled frogs continuing to go to the EU then find there way here. Why not keep doing it if everyone just accepts it, and you can mix them without pissing anyone off???

I'm more concerned with what our government says then Brazil, or any other country, so if they signed off on bringing EU vanzos over; then ok well you're *"legal enough"* in my book, and I'm not going to defriend you on facebook or give you a hard time, *but I really think we need to discourage this thing from continuing.*

I think it could also be construed as a slap in the face to Mark Pepper, and other people like Ivan from Tesoros if we start mixing grey frogs with their 100% legit frogs. I think we go down that road and we're going to see less effort towards those things, if the people with the ballz and the drive to do it just end up feeling like all their efforts went to legitimizing a bunch of smuggled frogs.

If there is a specific case where it seems the only way to save a frog in the hobby, and if we can get some kinda community consensus... great: but if not, I think doing so isn't the best thing for the hobby, and may even mean less cool 100% legal frogs coming in the future. 

We all want cool frogs, and some ships have sailed long ago like red galacs, and I'll even say EU vanzos, *but we don't need to keep building and launching more of these black/grey ships from the EU to our USA shores. *

At some point if we really care about these animals origins, and being ethical in our hobby we've got to draw a line and stop just signing off, or giving tacit approval for this kinda thing to keep happening.

2.69 cents


----------



## evolvstll77 (Feb 17, 2007)

I understand on a point for supporting Mark. However having the 'grey' frogs and breeding them such as the Vanzo' while mixing or not still supports the 'grey' frogs and how they were ultimately obtained. So in reading and understanding the issue, should the non Mark line be shunned by the community? If not then mixing the lines would make sense...........


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

evolvstll77 said:


> I understand on a point for supporting Mark. However having the 'grey' frogs and breeding them such as the Vanzo' while mixing or not still supports the 'grey' frogs and how they were ultimately obtained. So in reading and understanding the issue, should the non Mark line be shunned by the community? If not then mixing the lines would make sense...........


I think it is a matter of degrees. Some of the frogs like Red galacs have been around 10+ years, others like EU vanzos only a few years, and if that Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' morph has hit our shores or is about to... then even less. 

I think a frog that came in years ago is a lot more "grey" then say Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' that might have gotten here recently or will soon. That frog is pretty much "black" IMHO. 

Not much we can do about frogs that came in years ago, but I still think signing off on mixing them with truly legal stock just encourages more of the same thing. At least as things are we are policing ourselves to some degree even if the USA gov continues to sign off on more frogs from the EU or else where with smuggled origins. Someone would be hard pressed to get me to believe that signing off on mixing isn't just gonna make things worse.

What needs to happen in my opinion, instead of taking a step backwards and signing off on mixing legit frogs with grey frogs, crapping on the efforts of people like Mark and Ivan: is we need to step up and say "NO MORE, WE DRAW THE LINE "HERE", (where ever "here" is. Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque'???)".

Personally I think Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' or whatever frog someone somewhere is trying to import right now is where we draw the line. For pragmatic reasons let's give everyone a pass up till the EU vanzos and then from here on out say "No More". 

Especially when it is something really new, even when the US gov signs off on it, it is basically one step from buying smuggled frogs. They're just being smuggled to the EU or wherever before them or their offspring are shipped here. *IF we continue to benefit from the rest of the world's smuggling efforts then we're not really any better then them, and I think if you actually care about the animals at some point you gotta know it is wrong to keep doing that over and over: so let's do the right thing from this point on... Please?
*


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Let me just add a bit more detail to the thoughts about "degrees": that even with frogs as recent as UE vanzos, those frogs have been bred and many have changed hands lots of times very openly, arguably a few more steps removed from their illicit origins.

...Frogs like Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' or something else very very new to the USA, are basically just one maybe 2 extra steps away from the actual smuggled animals. They even could be the actual smuggled animals if someone imports adults from EU or other countries. 

The only argument I see for being ok with that, is saying "well hey the US gov signed off on them", and that may be true, and it might be a bit better legally... but ethically? Going forward with new frogs from this point on: is that as high as are standards should be, when we know the true origins?


----------



## ecichlid (Dec 26, 2012)

Dendro Dave said:


> I think it is a matter of degrees. Some of the frogs like Red galacs have been around 10+ years, others like EU vanzos only a few years, and if that Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' morph has hit our shores or is about to... then even less.
> 
> I think a frog that came in years ago is a lot more "grey" then say Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' that might have gotten here recently or will soon. That frog is pretty much "black" IMHO.
> 
> ...



I couldn't agree more with this statement. If we can't say "no" to a frog collected from a national park - Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque', then this hobby deserves another black eye. 

Draw the line. If you can provide proof to USFW that this frog is in the possession of someone, report them and let them know this frog is from a national park. It's not enough for us to just support Tesoros, UE, WIKIRI and the like. We must be separate ourselves from the dark underbelly of the hobby. Let's say we did it in 2015.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

ecichlid said:


> I couldn't agree more with this statement. If we can't say "no" to a frog collected from a national park - Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque', then this hobby deserves another black eye.
> 
> Draw the line. If you can provide proof to USFW that this frog is in the possession of someone, report them and let them know this frog is from a national park. It's not enough for us to just support Tesoros, UE, WIKIRI and the like. We must be separate ourselves from the dark underbelly of the hobby. Let's say we did it in 2015.


I wouldn't agree if we were talking about EU vanzos, or some of the older grey frogs, where the frogs have been here long enough and changed hands so often that unless you were there when they came in and in the know you could have very easily gotten those frogs before you found out the story behind them.

But...
*Dendrobates tinctorius 'Tumucumcaque' *is something so new, and if it is here is still not out in the open, and that basically anyone with the experience/connections to get it should know the story behind this frog, that I think it is a good place to draw the line. 

I don't know If I'd personally report someone I liked/respected that had that frog, but let me put it this way... *I don't wanna know if you have it*, and if that fact comes up in conversation then you'll at least get a "NOT COOL MAN" from me... and you know I think if enough people are willing to go even that far, it will make a big difference.


----------



## ecichlid (Dec 26, 2012)

I couldn't respect anyone who would keep that frog and if I don't respect them, then I can't like them either.


----------



## easternversant (Sep 4, 2012)

Another point that no one has mentioned: If we mix 'gray' frogs like the European imports of Vanzos with legal ('white') frogs, then the people who put the effort in to provide new legal frogs for the hobby might be less willing to do so.

For example, Mark Pepper from UE has been excellent about making new frogs available as they are discovered/relocated. He has also worked with some frogs that are also around in good numbers from smuggled stock (Vanzos [note: I'm not sure when he started with them compared to the origin of smuggled animals] and Varadero fantastica are two examples).

If we as a hobby want new frogs of legal origin, then we must convince the people that are making it happen that it is worth their time. If we can't, then they would be less inclined to put in the time, money, and heart to get us frogs that have either been smuggled or are at a high risk of being smuggled.

A prime example would be mysteriosus. We know this frog is abundant in the EU and has been around for a long time (and likely has been in the US for a while as well...). When this frog is discussed here, one of the main arguments that we won't get legal mysties is because Mark wouldn't want his frogs to A) 'legalize' those of smuggled origin and B) be mixed with those frogs. If we do that with Vanzos, will Mark want to work with mysties? 

I hope we don't mix EU and UE Vanzos. I think there is a better chance than people realize that we will finally get legal mysties (I haven't talked to Mark)--and I don't want people to ruin it.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

ecichlid said:


> I couldn't respect anyone who would keep that frog and if I don't respect them, then I can't like them either.


Well I'm more a "million shades of grey" guy then "black and white": and bit more middle of the road if it is a case of the US government actually signing off on them when they hit our shores, because I'm more concerned with our laws then some other country's... Basically in something like this I favor the "let's just all stop doing it" approach over the "tar and feather them" one 

I don't know if they have or will for that particular frog: I'd be disappointed if they did, but if our government says "OK", and especially if it is a newer person/less in touch with what's going on, and they get the frog from someone they trust... It's hard for me pull out the pitchfork and torches. But then again it is on each of us to educate ourselves and be ethical in our hobby...not just legal. 

So, if at some point we aren't going to stop signing off on these practices, let us at least be honest with ourselves and each other; and just admit we don't care where our cool new frogs came from, as long as they get here and we don't get a fine...or go to jail. 

I think this is a lead by example situation too. If you (all of you) and I don't draw the line somewhere, then well it doesn't get drawn: then even if we aren't the ones doing the importing or even the buying once they get here... we IMHO still bear some responsibility for it due to our continued silence.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

easternversant said:


> Another point that no one has mentioned: If we mix 'gray' frogs like the European imports of Vanzos with legal ('white') frogs, then the people who put the effort in to provide new legal frogs for the hobby might be less willing to do so...continued...


I Mentioned it 

...but I think it bears repeating 

Also maybe worth mentioning is that 100% new and legal frogs are coming in, and even if that stopped 5 years ago... most of us would probably never run out of frogs we'd like to own. 

How greedy do we really need to be to continue to enjoy the hobby???


----------



## easternversant (Sep 4, 2012)

Dendro Dave said:


> I Mentioned it
> 
> ...but I think it bears repeating


Oops, sorry Dave! I clearly didn't read the thread very closely.


----------



## macuser (Oct 8, 2015)

greenthumbs said:


> If I'm not mistaken, the the European line and the Understory line are of the same morph. Is this true? If so, would it be okay to mix them, or should they be kept separately? I've read posts on this forum discussing mixing the lines as though it wouldn't be a problem, and I've read posts saying they shouldn't be mixed. Is there a consensus on this?


i think they can be mixed because i assume they mix in the wild.

vanzolinis come from "over many thousands of square kilometers in east-central Peru and adjacent Brazil" 
SpottedPoisonFrogs: Descriptions of Three New Dendrobates from Western Amazonia ,and Resurrection of a Lost Species from "Chiriqui" CHARLESW.MYERS'
http://www.dendrobates.org/articles/Myers1982_Spottedfrogs.pdf

vanzolini range map
Global Species : Ranitomeya vanzolinii

i also dont think theres any way to actually tell the difference between the 2. i dont think these 2 lines should be mix for a few reasons, one of them being that the european line is genetically less verifiable and desirable then the understory line. theres no way of know how many generations of inbreeding brought you that frog. the understory frogs are legal f-2s from several breeding groups of 4-6 f-1s. but if vanzolinis become extinct 100 years from now, i dont think mixxing the 2 lines would cause outbreeding depression. 

the consensus as a hobby should be that they should not be mixed, and you wouldnt want to mix them even if you could.

edit: where european vanzos come from
http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/5695-frog-smuggling-reality-check.html#post47626

edit2: this thread should be moved to http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ranitomeya/


----------



## gturmindright (Mar 15, 2006)

The one positive is the more often questions like this come up and the more often these things happen the more likely I am to get my frogs from UE as opposed to fellow froggers.


----------



## Damon Ryan (Nov 13, 2015)

Sorry to interrupt the question but can someone explain to me what UE and EU stand for and how they differ?


----------



## Spaff (Jan 8, 2011)

As is usual, this is not a black and white issue. There are no locality specific vanzolinii phenotypes, so one would be led to believe that they could be mixed together. It is also probably beneficial for the species overall in captivity to mix those bloodlines to keep them as unrelated as possible. 

With that said, there is also the hobby morality issue that has already been brought up and mixing frogs acquired from Mark's hard work with frogs from smuggled backgrounds likely doesn't look very good. 

Traditionally, the hobby has chosen (for better or for worse) to keep things like this separate CV imitators vs. standard/greens, Kelley line Iquitos vs. UE Iquitos, old line reticulata vs. UE reticulata, etc. 

While we're having this discussion, though, I'll pose a question strictly for discussion's sake: Say UE were to bring in a bloodline of Highland sirensis that was totally unrelated to our current captive population (A tiny population fragment was discovered within the historical range, and they began to farm them.) Because these new animals came from a tiny fragment of a population, they were equally as inbred as our current captive animals (so breeding issues that we are currently dealing with exist with these as well). How would those in the know within the hobby advocate them to proceed? Do you mix these two totally unrelated lines and potentially alleviate some of the issues that are present currently, or do you keep them separate for the arguments posed for other, more prolific species?

Edit:


YoDamon said:


> Sorry to interrupt the question but can someone explain to me what UE and EU stand for and how they differ?


UE stands for Understory Enterprises who farms frogs through legitimate practices and brings new species and locales into the US while also conserving species/land in various countries. EU refers to European imports that, depending on species, may or may not have entered Europe through legitimate channels.


----------



## greenthumbs (Nov 6, 2015)

Spaff said:


> While we're having this discussion, though, I'll pose a question strictly for discussion's sake: Say UE were to bring in a bloodline of Highland sirensis that was totally unrelated to our current captive population (A tiny population fragment was discovered within the historical range, and they began to farm them.) Because these new animals came from a tiny fragment of a population, they were equally as inbred as our current captive animals (so breeding issues that we are currently dealing with exist with these as well). How would those in the know within the hobby advocate them to proceed? Do you mix these two totally unrelated lines and potentially alleviate some of the issues that are present currently, or do you keep them separate for the arguments posed for other, more prolific species?


I would think it would be different for less prolific species as endangered as highland sirensis. If both lines were doomed to inbreeding problems, then might mixing them as a means to save the species be the only way out? If I understand correctly, hybridizing the two lines of vanzos is frowned upon because it discourages legitimate lines of the species from entering the market because illegitimate lines are just as easily, if not more easily, available. But an extremely rare and desirable species like highland sirensis may be even more desirable if new genetics were brought into the hobby. If, then, legitimately imported and bred frogs were offered, they would probably still be in high demand, regardless of the availability of 'grey' frogs, would they not?


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

I'm a pragmatist so I could go either way, though I lean towards mixing as a last resort because of the ethical and respect issues. Both options have their up/down sides and both frogs have been in the hobby and sold openly for years, so I don't think it would be quite as bad as if something brand new from UE hit our shores at around the same time as it's smuggled counterpart came in from the EU.

Once we go down that road though I think it is harder to escape the implication that we care more about getting to keep a cool frog, then where it ultimately came from. Also once it's done, it can't be undone.

If we justify it by claiming we need the genetic diversity and go down that road for a frog, it could cost us more efforts from Mark, Ivan, Wikiri, and mean less similar programs ever get off the ground.

So ultimately we may end up trading away a lot of new 100% legal frogs, and some genuine conservation to get that quick fix from mixing our vanzo or highland sirensis lines together, unless we can get people like Mark and Ivan onboard with the idea for the sake of genetic diversity and keeping the frog from going extinct in captivity. Possible in some cases they may be more flexible then in others, but overall I think it is unlikely the idea would get much support from them, for understandable reasons.

Whatever gets done: I hope happens through a constructive dialog like this one (so far), and through community consensus, rather then mistakes or rogue elements.


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

There are at least 3 separate issues:

1) The morality/legality angle-

The basic argument here is: the origin of EU frogs is at best shady, and so therefore they shouldn't be mixed. This is a nonsensical argument. The only ethically consistent position is that the EU frogs shouldn't be sold AT ALL. Mixing this line with "legit" frogs does nothing to address the fact that their continued propagation undercuts the wonderful efforts of organizations like Understory Enterprises. If your position is that frogs with questionable origins should be discouraged in the hobby, (a perfectly legit position although one that may rapidly get you in a tricky "shades of gray" situation) I cannot see how mixing of the lines is really relevant. The position is: never buy, and discourage the sale, of EU vanzolini. 

2) The genetics angle

Here, the concern is: Are these frogs organisms from a single population with more or less continuous gene flow? The answer as best I can tell seems likely to be "yes." Although we're not really sure so I think reasonable people can disagree here. I tend to worry more about line-breeding than I do about (what seems to be) the small chance that these are in fact separate populations.

3) The "repatriation" angle -

Piggy-backing on the above, much of the fanaticism about keeping populations separate seems to stem from a (largely delusional, if you'll forgive my cynicism) belief that private, small-scale hobbyists represent a captive population from which threatened or endangered species may someday be repatriated into the wild. Let me be clear - this is a totally cool and noble goal, and for some advanced hobbyists and many more professional institutions (CRAC, for example), is a totally legit belief/activity. But for the overwhelming majority of private, small hobbyists, it's just not going to happen. So my position on the issue, approached from this angle, has softened a bit in the many years I've been in the hobby. Now, the desire to preserve cool, wild phenotypes (and the related anti-mixing ethos as regards clearly distinct organisms like azureus and auratus, or whatever) is great, and I'm 100% behind it. That's what makes the hobby so fun and wonderful - getting to enjoy these beautiful, wild organisms AS THEY ARE, not as we can create them to be (an attitude which has kinda ruined a lot of the snake hobby, for example).

So anyway, I just think we need to be clear about WHY we're doing what we're doing. And I'm not reading any arguments here that I find convincing in this particular case.


----------

