Phase/hybrid-Let´s think a little

[Azhael]

Great point Marshallsmom, i always forget to mention the fish sector, and it´s perhaps the best example of selective breeding gone mental in the hobby.
Since that section of the hobby is ancient and has decades of "experience" over the rest of us, it shows some examples of the consequences of our actions as keepers. Not only there are fishes that have been selectively bred to display severe and very limiting deformities (which are largely accepted and considered cute), but also it shows as how when the species in captivity has been changed to exhaustion, we go back to the wild types which means going back to mass collection. This is a cycle that is becoming apparent in the snake sector too.

Ken, i have a theory as to why there is so much inbreeding and perpetuating of faulty bloodlines. To me the reason is simple when you know that people pay large amounts of money for their mutants. If you have a 400 euros spider BP with severe wobbling and you got it because you thought you had a gold mine in your hands, you are damn well going to breed that snake if it kills you. The combination of a general acceptance of the negative conditions, and the "need" to breed what you have, no matter what, is the reason why there is no control whatsoever over what gets bred and sold.
Behind this is also the cause for the loss of locality purity and even hybridism. We want to breed, fast, and so, many people (in fact, the majority) don´t wait to have two specimens of the same origin or species. They have a cornsnake, and a milksnake, and they desperately want to breed to have something to sell, and so they cross them (for example). This has caused locality purity to have become extremely rare to find in the hobby (you actually have to look very hard to find such animals...which is completely bonkers), and is causing a great deal of intergrades and hybrids, that then get spread, destroying the genetic integrity of more and more bloodlines.

Between "professional" breeders, it´s more of the same. There is so much competition to produce mutants (specially new ones) that they don´t pay any mind to inbreeding or the quality of the animal. They just need to produce faster than the competition.

Also, although the plant side is a different can of worms, it serves as an example of the damage of hybrids, since hybridation is a huge thing in the sector. Oh, and i share your pain about the invasive species...everytime i´m on a car trip i fulminate with my eyes every invasive species i see, and that´s a lot of eye work. You can actually see the advance of some species from one year to another. I swear, one day i´m going to pick an axe and.....

 

[jclee]

This post makes me wonder why there isn't a herp version of the AKC (although that would drive the prices up). Such an organization could register breeders who were known to act by agreed upon ethics of the Herp Breeders Society (or whatever it would be called). Then, serious hobbyists could consider (and locate) HBS accredited breeders, rather than rely on pet stores or online breeders they know nothing about.

 

[pete]

I like the fish and plant analogies, because it asks another question. I had thought briefly thought of a fish analogy instead of a dog analogy for entering into this thread. However, it's a caudate forum and frankly many of our salamanders may have chunks of fish in their stool, so I wasn't sure how broad the analogy would reach. But really, at what point do you set the limit (those of you that may be indignant with breeding animals to meet our whims)?

Even if I accept the postulate that human-driven trait selection is globally a threat to many species (ranging from plants to animals) by polluting gene pools and resulting in a hideous panoply of mutation-ridden freaks. Furthermore, that we need to accept species as they are and not genetically bend them to our will. I would be surprised to hear anyone crying foul over how cruel it is to breed these handicapped wingless fruitflies for our caudates. I can even make an emotional plea, that flies by definition are supposed to fly! Oh, how the animal must suffer, to walk from one rotting apple to the next.... Oh how cruel it must be. Sure I'm sarcastic and it's a fly, but if you dig around in the Tarantula forums you can find discussions on inbreeding and people thinking about isolating morphs. If people are worried about spiders why not flies?

So where does the limit lie? Is it just a concern for us when we're emotionally attached to the animal?

 

[Azhael]

Uh, nice point. I´m going to have great fun thinking this one over. I have some thoughts about it already, but i´ll elaborate tomorrow xD

 

[pete]

This post makes me wonder why there isn't a herp version of the AKC (although that would drive the prices up). Such an organization could register breeders who were known to act by agreed upon ethics of the Herp Breeders Society (or whatever it would be called). Then, serious hobbyists could consider (and locate) HBS accredited breeders, rather than rely on pet stores or online breeders they know nothing about.

This got me curious how the AKC started. Found this on their site. In case you're curious.
American Kennel Club - History of the American Kennel Club

It was interesting. Seems that it grew out of dog show competitions (and personally, I think a dose of healthy snob-ism).

 

[michael]

This post makes me wonder why there isn't a herp version of the AKC (although that would drive the prices up). Such an organization could register breeders who were known to act by agreed upon ethics of the Herp Breeders Society (or whatever it would be called). Then, serious hobbyists could consider (and locate) HBS accredited breeders, rather than rely on pet stores or online breeders they know nothing about.

Treewalkers international does something like this. You can register amphibians by local, type, or line and keep track of where offspring goes. They have a program for being sure lines are kept pure. I'm a member of Treewalkers but have not participated in the program. I'm not sure if their site is working. My computer warned me not to go on it when I tried today.

 

[Azhael]

Ok, i´m trying to merge my opinions on captive breeding of "pets" and animal raising for food. Not easy xD
My take on culturing and selectively breeding animals that are intended as food either for us or other captive animals has always been that there is a kind of pact between us and the species. They are cultured or raised so that a) we have easy access to them, and b) pressure is taken away from wild populations. The species in return benefits from both being extremely abundant, and from not being poached from the wild. Problem: does this mean it´s legit to modify them? To me...this is very tricky...i would set the line in: yes, but as long as quality of life is not hindered.
In the case of Drosophila, one could certainly argue that they are intended to fly, but is it absolutely necessary? Experience says no. Does it affect the quality of life of the individual? Hard to stablish...

Another case, mice and rats. They have been hugely domesticated in recent history, and today the animals available in the market are all modified versions of the original. There are some horror stories about what is done to them in laboratories but that to me is a completely different matter (research is another universe and is strictly regulated). Do the animals available in petshops suffer from a reduced quality of life (health wise)? I´d say no, broadly.

The biggest problem with such "fodder" animals is that we tend not to care even a fraction as much about them. My opinion is that they have a purpose...and as long as their quality of life is respected, i have no problem. As a general thought, i´d say such animals, hobby wise, are not suffering as much selection as "pets", their health is not being compromised (another thing entirely is the housing conditions they might suffer). In those cases where it might be being jeopardized, i stand in the same way that with any other species, it´s definitely wrong. My true, deep opinions are substantially more strict than this, but given the situation of the hobby, i have no choice but to accept certain things...
In my ideal universe no animal would suffer selective breeding, but that is nothing but a whishful concept.

I also think there are basic and pretty much unavoidable differences between "fodder" animals and "pets" that make comparing them a very tricky situation. Definitely a complicated issue, with very thin and wobbly lines.

 

[michael]

Ok, i´m trying to merge my opinions on captive breeding of "pets" and animal raising for food. Not easy xD

The biggest problem with such "fodder" animals is that we tend not to care even a fraction as much about them. My opinion is that they have a purpose...and as long as their quality of life is respected, i have no problem.
I also think there are basic and pretty much unavoidable differences between "fodder" animals and "pets" that make comparing them a very tricky situation. Definitely a complicated issue, with very thin and wobbly lines.

I ran into an interesting situation at an all pet expo this year. Many types or pets were represented their. They had animal judging, shows for competition, shows for entertainment, and animals for sale. The rodent keeper club was in one corner of the building and the snake breeders were in another section. The show mice and rat people were not to appreciative of the animals being sold for food.

 

[Azhael]

I can certainly understand that. Because of the insistence of a friend i tried breeding rats once to feed our ball pythons....after i adopted one of the babies and realized just how amazing rats are, i quickly decided that i couldn´t breed them for food myself.
I can buy them for food (just as we all buy chicken) since after all they are absolutely necessary, and i can kill one if necessary....but i admit i dislike it very much. I never enjoyed the death of any animal (although i can enjoy the predatory behaviour of the other animal in the equation).

 

[jclee]

I ran into an interesting situation at an all pet expo this year. Many types or pets were represented their. They had animal judging, shows for competition, shows for entertainment, and animals for sale. The rodent keeper club was in one corner of the building and the snake breeders were in another section. The show mice and rat people were not to appreciative of the animals being sold for food.

That does bring up a few interesting points about the ethics of animal-keeping. I think that, as Azhael indicated, on some level the difference in our breeding ethics lies in our intention for the animals. I've had pet mice, in which cases I wanted healthy specimens, and had great luck with stores that differentiated mice that were bred, specifically to be pets. Unfortunately, many stores do not do this; they keep one tank full of mice that are sold both as pets and as feeders. In the Hudson Valley (where I was living at the time of my mouse-pet-ownership), most of the pet store mice are (or are descended from) retired lab mice. Every Hudson Valley mouse that I ever bought came to a horrible, unhealthy (and unpleasant to watch) early end.

I have also bought mice as feeders at different points in my life, in which case I was only concerned with their health to my mouse-eating animal. Their longevity was not an issue because I did not need/want the animal to live long. I would have no problem with tumors in a feeder mouse, as this would not be contagious to the snake that eats it.

To some extent, our abilities to accept/reject unwanted effects of careless breeding stem from our intentions for the animal in question.

 

[pete]

Ok, i´m trying to merge my opinions on captive breeding of "pets" and animal raising for food. Not easy xD....

I had some concern that you might argue even wingless fruitflies are a genetic monstrosity. They could be? I couldn't argue against your belief, but only admire your consistency. Although my purpose was to poke holes in a global argument against selective breeding on all accounts. Admittedly, it is a difficult position to defend considering the number of species that exist and how useful many of them are to us.

I agree with the sentiment of your post. It is interesting that when the animals are considered for a different purpose our rationale can flex and these animals are submitted to a different set of standards. It's good too, or we might be stuck eating wild animals and acorns.

Back to the point though.... I agree. I don't have a problem to genetically bend fruitflies to our caudates needs. In general, I'm content to eat black anguses and drink from holsteins instead of trying to tame a wild (and extinct) auroch. I'll accept to breed huge colonies of inbred rats that will die early from cancer, with the goal that one day we may understand the disease. And I'd probably readily accept a number of other selected traits that have benefited humanity

However, I would be most likely be against any selective breeding of animals slated for a reintroduction program for many of the reasons that Azhael states in the opening thread and several other times.

So where do pets lie on this spectrum and why is that?

 

[Azhael]

I would apply stricter rules to pets if only for the simple reason that they are not necessary, they are a "luxury".
Rats, mice, Drosophila...we use them for research (which as i have said i personally separate completely), we do need them, but "pets" or any animal kept for personal enjoyement are a different matter.
I sometimes think it´s bad enough that we keep animal in captivity for our enjoyement (i have weird days xD), the notion of altering them to suit our whimsical desires just sounds entirely wrong to me, specially for commercial purposes. I have a peculiar point of view about animals and money, too. I love that some of the caudate enthusiasts i know from this forum share my view that it´s not at all about the money, it´s about enjoying the animals. This is the reason why i´ve never sold any of my captive bred animals, they have all been given away, and almost half of my "collection" has been given to me as a present. I can only dream of a hobby that worked like this, where money and elitism have NO importance at all.

I think the problem of "purpose vs ethics" is a delicate one. Just because an animal is necessary as food, it doesn´t mean anything goes. I accept that different rules apply to such animals, the same way as we apply different rules to cattle or chickens, but i also regret that in many cases we have gone way too far.
Guaranteeing a quality of life is in my opinion an absolute must, no matter the species.

I too have encountered pet-shops that had feeder mice and pet mice (or rats). Any animal that displayed a health issue, was automatically transfered to the feeder category. I see a problem with this, and it´s basically the why behind the issue. Using a tumor ridden mouse for fodder is no problem to me, the problem is why that animal has developed tumors. I think it´s unnaceptable to have blood lines of mice that are prone to such conditions in the market. For scientific research? Sure, with the proper methodology. For the market, even if they are going to be food....i think there is no excuse. Same way i think having horribly deformed chickens in tiny cages is unnaceptable.

 

[Mac Myers]

Treewalkers international does something like this. You can register amphibians by local, type, or line and keep track of where offspring goes. They have a program for being sure lines are kept pure. I'm a member of Treewalkers but have not participated in the program. I'm not sure if their site is working. My computer warned me not to go on it when I tried today.

Treewalkers has been hijacked by some Russian sites and the Russian sites are intermediaries for hackers installing Malware of a few different kinds. Treewalkers may not even know it. There site isn't doing it... it's the Russian sites. Their facebook page is ok. I didn't look to see if it seemed that they were aware of it.

 

[pete]

I would apply stricter rules to pets if only for the simple reason that they are not necessary, they are a "luxury"....

I think you hit a lot of important points and on many points I concur. I think the question about pets is not a simple one at all. Especially for herps, because there are such diverse reasons for keeping them including: the hobbyist hoping to fully capture and recapitulate a natural environment in a box, to the kid seeking to satisfy their curiosities about the natural world, to people looking for a little quiet friend that is always willing to listen, to the meathead hoping to impress the ladies with his 20 ft python, to the breeder waiting to see what the next clutch holds, and anything else I'm forgetting.

I would argue, and I think that you've eluded to this common point in raising the animal's health, which is that for pets we should work towards minimizing their suffering. Other animals, too, but pets especially because of the way we use them, mainly for personal satisfaction. I'd propose that it is only a balanced relationship if we reciprocate what they give to us.

Perhaps, this is an argument against the wreckless breeding of traits. On a large scale it leads to the mass production of suffering animals for largely selfish gains.

Treewalkers has been hijacked by some Russian sites and the Russian sites are intermediaries for hackers installing Malware of a few different kinds. Treewalkers may not even know it. There site isn't doing it... it's the Russian sites. Their facebook page is ok. I didn't look to see if it seemed that they were aware of it.

Russians again?

 

[Azhael]

I'd propose that it is only a balanced relationship if we reciprocate what they give to us.

I like that phrase, Pete, nicely put.
We benefit from keeping them, it´s only fair that they do too. I think they do (under the care of a decent keeper) by having a constant and reliable supply of food (not to be confused with over-feeding), being free of competitors and predators (and in principle, of disease), and basically living an "easy" and long life. Suffering the consequences of reckless breeding, whimsical human desires or negligent care is not exactly benefitial for them...
When the balance is lost, it´s ALWAYS the animals that pay the consequences.

 

[pete]

to the meathead hoping to impress the ladies with his 20 ft python

Just to add that I meant no disrespect to 20 ft pythons. I'm sure some of them hang around with very respectable people.

 

[pete]

When the balance is lost, it´s ALWAYS the animals that pay the consequences.

I just wanted to add this tiny detail....

Humans also pay from the imbalance in a human - pet relationship. People can suffer (to varying degrees and in different ways) when they happen to obtain one these animals. Hearing the stories about people dealing with these mutant mice and have my own experiences. A friend kept a feeder mouse as a pet and she was very disturbed to have to watch it die slowly as an enormous tumor grew on its neck.

One example that I recall on this forum was this "short toes" thread.
http://www.caudata.org/forum/f46-be...bloated-he-going-die-see-pic-please-help.html

I think it's important to realize that both parties ultimately suffer from an imbalance.

 

[Azhael]

I see your point. However, in such circumstances the imbalance is not caused by the keeper (and if it were, he/she would have little right to complain). It´s another example of the consequences we pay as keepers, for the mistakes made in the past. Such things can happen with healthy animals, where there is no imbalance, too. I recently suffered the loss of what had been a very healthy and nice newt, and it did cause me pain. Nothing compared to the loss the animal suffered, though. Let me rephrase my words by saying it´s always the animals that pay the highest price. We pay with the psychological impact of seeing an animal suffer, they pay with the suffering and their lifes.


PS: I would like to say that i´m enjoying this discussion inmensely It´s a great pleassure for me to be able to discuss a controversial topic in a civilized way, to have different opinions and yet being able to confront them and analyze them without tainting the discussion with personal stuff or hot-headed reactions as i´ve seen dozens of times before. I honestly think this might be the first time i see this topic being discussed without it going horribly wrong (fingers crossed it continues to be this way hehe). A special thank you to Pete for challenging my opinions with interesting questions. I have great fun discussing stuff, but i also enjoy thinking about it over and over and finding dead-ends and holes in my own opinions. It´s fun xD

 

[pete]

Yes, I've enjoyed the discussion, but we seem to have found some middle ground. I'm content with where it has led so far.

My only complaint would be that no one has yet took up a very strong position of "They're just animals we can do anything we want...." I'd just be curious to see how they would argue their case.

 

[Azhael]

My experience with such things is that there is no argument, there´s just statements....¬¬ It´s terribly frustrating.