livingart Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 good post barrie passion. experience and money don't always go hand in hand not too many years ago a guy in auckland took the time and money and imported some new breeds of pheasant into nz these were then bred and sold off to recoup costs on outlay a couple of the breeds commanded high prices as they were expensive to purchase originally having the money to purchase something does not necessarily mean you have the expertise to keep and breed it properly sadly these breeds are now in very short supply Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 In the real world we live in a capitalistic country where a persons success is largely judged by how much money they have. Have a look at the prices paid for some reptiles in NZ. Many of them can have the sex determined by incubation temperatures and there is often a shortage of one sex which pushes the price up. I would suspect that this is not accidental. Generally in time (and a shorter time with fish than some reptiles) the prices come down to something more sensible. It is all relative---diamonds are only carbon like the soot in your chimney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 To be honest I would not deal with someone if they operated under these conditions out of principle and most decent clubs would blacklist them. That would be the case in dog breeding circles. Is it?? I thought many purebred cats/dogs came with desexing contracts to help rpotect the breeders market. Look at the problems that can arise with purebred dogs due to a lack of genetic diversity, from unscrupulous breeders crossing closely related animals. The NZKC goes to a heap of trouble to prevent this and make sure its breeders aren't selling animals that are going to have hereditary problems, shouldn't us fish keepers be doing the same? Your example is a bit extreme, but if I went to the trouble and expense of importing some rare cichlids I'd probably only sell one sex, and pass on pairs to people who I trusted to breed them well. Isn't it better that everyone be here to help each other and try to breed the best fish possible? When personal agendas creep into it then everyone loses. Who is to say that Tom down the road couldn't do a better job of breeding the fish that someone who holds a monopoly of the known females in the country? As a responsible breeder don't you have an obligation to allow others to try to breed them better than what you can? I'm not really sure what you mean by saying someone is "better" at breeding a fish. The quality of the fry really comes down to the quality of the parents, the person who is breeding them is either doing it or isn't. IMO the signs of someone who is "better" at breeding would be the person who selects his breeders out of a large group of fish, and grows his fry out to a decent size and culls anything slightly inferior. This is why I disagree with the FNZAS breeding scheme, which pretty much just encourages anybody to try to bred as many different fish as possible. There's no points for quality, just get two average fish from the lfs, and once they've done their thing you get the gold star for your chart (just like when you were a kid ). Really its just doing a disservice to those who put a lot of effort into breeding quality fish [or importing fish from good overseas breeders], especially those who rely on it for their livelihood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 There is nothing wrong with very closely bred lines of dogs if they come from good stock to begin with. The problems arise when people don't scrutinize their breeding stock and breed dogs with faults. inbreeding and linebreeding tends to double up the faults. A lot of the problems in purebred dogs comes from the extreme interpretations of the breed standards. This is purely because people select for an unnatural and unhealthy phenotype to meet the interpretations of the standard. Allowing dedicated breeders to also try their hand is the whole key to it. Every Tom, Dick and Harry may not be the best for breeding quality specimens, but to think there are not others who have bred similar species and could do a service to the species is blinkered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 There is nothing wrong with very closely bred lines of dogs if they come from good stock to begin with. !!!! what? im sorry but that is the sort of comment that would make one fail genetics 101. I seriously think you need to read up on the adversities of genetic inbreeding and resulting genetic disorders like extra or few chr's, premature death, a weakened immune and what have you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smidey Posted December 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 p44, have you read about the origin of e yellows? what do you think about the gene pool & what it has produced? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkLB Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 An interesting read indeed..... http://www.cichlid-forum.com/articles/l_caeruleus.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 It is interesting to hear (from someone very anti inbreeding) that the zebras disappeared because of inbreeding... I always thought they disappeared because they were taken off the allowed import list into Nz and they were banned from export from Brazil which pushed up their demand and price worldwide. Apparently alot of the ones in NZ got send/smuggled into Aussie because the Aussies would pay more for them. Alot of info can be found by sticking L046 in the search on this site.. I also suspect alot of it was like most the other species we have lost when they have disappeared off the list, the main reason is they just weren't out there and being bred enough to keep their future in the country secure. If there are any out there breeding these they would have sourced their fish from the survivors in peoples tanks all over the country, the fish were imported regularly from different places at different times so there is every possibility they actually have good unrelated fish with enough genes to keep them going for many years. The inbreeding subject is always brought up on many forums with many experts posting that it has no adverse effects as long as you are selective in what you breed you will just never get anything different or better than what you started with, electric yellows are an example of. I have heard at least half a dozen people say they have or know someone who has L046 breeding and am yet to see one (except for firenz's photo in an earlier thread) or see any for sale so I don't know where they are going. I don't think anyone would sell any males for $2500ea, I saw 2m 2f sell for $10k in Aussie the only reason they would have got that for them is the breeding potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 geographic isolation. I also believe that the e. yellow story is a theory and is not concrete fact. I know inbreeding happens, both in our aquariums and in the wild - but i can assure there is a good genetic reason that our sisters do not pop our kids out (not just the legal side). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 Ryan is correct about the L46. Nothing to do with inbreeding and the remaining fish are from different gene pools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 Phoenix I know someone who operated an internationally renowned kennel producing dogs which were sought after globally and by their own description they were breeding the family line so close they were almost producing clones. All the textbook theories in the world cannot stack up against real world experience. For hundreds of years people thought the world was flat and when people suggested it wasn't they were ridiculed. Every now and then you would want to introduce an outcross to keep things from becoming depressed and the offspring from such an outcross can be exceptional due to hybrid vigour though they typically don't produce well themselves. Culling is an important factor in any breeding programme and with very strict culling practices, there is nothing wrong with inbreeding. There's an article I need to find for you to have a read through on this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simian Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I'm not really sure what you mean by saying someone is "better" at breeding a fish. The quality of the fry really comes down to the quality of the parents, the person who is breeding them is either doing it or isn't. IMO the signs of someone who is "better" at breeding would be the person who selects his breeders out of a large group of fish, and grows his fry out to a decent size and culls anything slightly inferior. This is why I disagree with the FNZAS breeding scheme, which pretty much just encourages anybody to try to bred as many different fish as possible. There's no points for quality, just get two average fish from the lfs, and once they've done their thing you get the gold star for your chart (just like when you were a kid ). Really its just doing a disservice to those who put a lot of effort into breeding quality fish [or importing fish from good overseas breeders], especially those who rely on it for their livelihood. A very relevant point David and something I have been mulling over in the last wee while, I partake actively in the scheme, its a good way to keep techniques current, and a good way to keep track of who's doing what. I have to agree just because you have 50 breeds next to your name doesn't make you a good breeder. But I see nothing wrong with the "gold star" as you put it, if it makes you feel good who cares, we all get our "feel good" stuff in different ways. My thoughts have been moving towards a second tier of the scheme for "serious" breeders. A problem that amateur enthusiast breeders have is moving fish on at a fair price in order to continue to upgrade their set-up and stock quality/variety. My proposal would be a FNZAS master breeder certification/endorsement, which would factor in quality, the set-up and health of the fish. Along with this the use of a simple QA/traceability system and a code of conduct. I may be a bit hopeful but IMO this would add value and desirability to the fish for those who don't want to just "have a play", it would also encourage the showing of fish as stock descended from winning fish (hence the requirement for traceability) would carry more value perceived or otherwise. It seems to work for dogs and cats, cows and sheep etc, why not fish? Marketing 101 says you meed to have a point of difference for your product, most people try for price, research shows only 17% of people shop on price alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 A problem that amateur enthusiast breeders have is moving fish on at a fair price in order to continue to upgrade their set-up and stock quality/variety. If you try to make a living out of your hobby you'll just make your hobby a chore. I've seen it happen many times. I understand someone on an extreme budget might have this dilemma, but I think most of us realise its not likely that we'll make a profit out of the hobby and IMO if that is your motivation for it (unless its on a commercial scale where you're actually relying on it to put food on the table) then perhaps its time to take a step back. The reason they have a problem moving the fish on at a fair price is supply and demand. The easier a fish is to breed, the more people breed them and the more fry there is for sale. Encouraging more people to breed these fish so they can get a gold star only increases the supply of these fish in our small market and drops their value, which seriously impinges on the sales of the lfs/importer/serious breeder, all who are vital to this hobby. As for the "who cares" thing, is that really the society's attitude? I'm sure that there's plenty of people who will disagree, but making a trivial competition out of breeding fish is pointless and bordering on irresponsible IMO. I've been keeping fish [and not just guppies as most people will know] for over 10 years now, and if I had bothered to register I would only have one "gold star". Does that make me les of a fishkeeper? Someone could walk into Hollywood today and pick up a dozen easy to breed fish and in a few months could have a dozen "gold stars". The challenge of breeding a fish should be all the motivation someone needs, not because they're trying to get more stars than Joe down the street.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrie Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 from the registereing of breedings thing, the reason I took part was simply to make sure that if people were interested in the type of fish I bred, they would have a start point for seeking them out. I have 2 people that I have contacted that have bred a couple of killis that are no longer here... or so I thought. They still had them although one only had peat. I have peat from them now so hopefully these may well become firmly established again in the future. The register is a good thing. Quality being directly related to the parents I would dissagree. Often fry produced from poor parents can be of a higher quality than the parents simply because offeed and conditions. Parents may well have been produced in overcrowded conditions with poor food yet when fry are produced and fed great tucker with plenty of water changes and room, the fry will very often excede the parents in quality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skippy_49nz Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 ok I can't find the article I was after.... GRRRR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I agree Barrie that a register of dedicated breeders listing the fish they breed is a good idea, its the encouraging of people to breed something as a one off just to get another notch in their belt I disagree with. Parents may well have been produced in overcrowded conditions with poor food yet when fry are produced and fed great tucker with plenty of water changes and room, the fry will very often exceed the parents in quality You're right, to a point. If you take two inbred runts with lousy colours you're not going to produce good fry no matter how well you raise them. Thats another reason for my stance, a dedicated breeder looking to establish him/herself as a supplier of quality fish will pick his breeding stock carefully in order to produce good fry, where as the amateur just doing it for the fun/gold star is more likely to pick a couple of randoms from the lfs/trademe and is less likely to cull inferior fry, especially if it means they don't get their star... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 yes the quality of a breeder should not be the amount of fish but the quality of the fish he/she supplies. my original Copadichromis azureus male was far from impressive but his alpha son then his alpha son have produced stunners Unfortunate the gold award clan seem sometimes more interested in the Kudos to be gained within the "society" they're in and the competition to breed first for that Kudos and also to reep the first of any financial gains. BTW- Cuckoo synos juvi's for sale soon.LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 It should definitely be quality based, there is at least one breeder who I know breeds and registers a heap of breedings and most people I know who got fish off him got bent fish or fish missing fins or eyes etc so although he was regarded as a good breeder he produced rubbish.. The hardest thing with quality is how to define it.. I have seen plenty of fish sold as "good quality fish" and shown up to find rubbish for sale usually hybrids or in terrible condition etc so some people have no idea on quality or what they are aiming for. Defining standards for each species would help but again it comes down to peoples interpretation, I have seen plenty of people identify peacocks as zebras and vice versa so some people just have no idea. And then we all have our own types of fish we have our eye in and know what a good example looks like so not everyone can determine what a quality fish is of every breed.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simian Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 As a rebuttal to Davids comment, yes to you it may be trivial but not everyone gets off on the same thing so lets put that "gold star" argument aside it is solely a matter of personal preference and is entirely an aside from the real issue. Encouraging people to breed and the FNZAS breeding scheme is hardly the evil you are claiming David, the number of registered breedings is a fly spot compared with the actual number of accidental breedings that happen each year, most of which are from people who are not a member of a club or even really have a clue about how they achieved it, they are then put on trademe. The breeding scheme while it is very "simplistic" is a form of review, surely some system is better than no system at all. If for instance I get asked to confirm a breeding, I can see the quality of the set-up, and state of the fry etc, this is the time to teach that person a little more about what makes a good fish/breeder/set-up etc. How can this be irresponsible? if the person is a member of my club and is dumping poor quality fish onto the market in , I will be having a quiet sit down and try and put them straight. Without some kind of regulation any idiot with some randy fish can cause the issues in regard to over supply poor quality etc. I still maintain that an official way of recognising a breeder who is producing quality fish and acting ethically can only do good for the hobby. I personally am aiming to breed as many different fish as I can in part to be able to say I have but also to learn from the experience, do I dump the fish on the market? no I sell to LFS and club members only. I sell some of the fish I breed, why? so I can regain some of the cash I pour into the hobby and into the club, I will never get back what I put in but at least if I dont have to tap into my family's savings to secure some rare fish with a view to breeding it, thats great and it keeps the wife off my back. The true measure of how good a breeder is, is via a show which we hold infrequently at best. Kapi Mana was planning to hold a National show next year, but are considering pulling out because of the perception that they wont get enough entries now Paul Billany is winding down his operation. I'd llike to see them proven wrong. If you are serious about the quality of fish then support the shows and the local clubs, make them successful and then people can really see what a "proper" specimen of a species looks like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 simian no matter what the hobby or pasttime in life you will get some who do it for prestige, some for cash and some just for the sheer enjoyment of doing it genetically speaking 2 runty fish can produce beautiful fish as it is a random mix of chromosones from both parents that make the new fish transversely the uppusite can happen. 2 beauties can equal some uglies one cannot visually identify the genetic make up of a fish and say it will breed true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firenzenz Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Buyer beware? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smidey Posted December 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 simian no matter what the hobby or pasttime in life you will get some who do it for prestige, some for cash and some just for the sheer enjoyment of doing it genetically speaking 2 runty fish can produce beautiful fish as it is a random mix of chromosones from both parents that make the new fish transversely the uppusite can happen. 2 beauties can equal some uglies one cannot visually identify the genetic make up of a fish and say it will breed true there is also a exception to everything ...... the "it breeds true" theory makes dragon bloods ok..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Encouraging people to breed and the FNZAS breeding scheme is hardly the evil you are claiming David, the number of registered breedings is a fly spot compared with the actual number of accidental breedings that happen each year, most of which are from people who are not a member of a club or even really have a clue about how they achieved it, they are then put on trademe. I know its not the root of all evil, but if you take the person you mention in the second half of that paragraph, whats going to happen if/when he finds out about the society and the breeding scheme? The bad practice he's picked up by accident will be encouraged. *rant edited* I would have thought a "breeding scheme" run by an organisation like FNZAS should aim to preserve the cream of the crop, rather than encouraging mass production of mediocrity? When I started keeping fish zebra pecos were readily available in the shops (despite not being on the list) as were Altolamprologous, and I'm sure there are other examples, I would have thought preserving these rarities would be far more important to the society (and its members) rather than having another successful spawn of kribensis.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 can the cactus company not export some plants to the states, maybe make enough from export so they can concentrate on the rarities a percentage can then be let go to the new zealand market where you have humans you will always have the situation you have described bar banning people from breeding and selling you can't stop it from happening, it just has a bigger effect in a depressed market Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simian Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 I would have thought a "breeding scheme" run by an organisation like FNZAS should aim to preserve the cream of the crop, rather than encouraging mass production of mediocrity? When I started keeping fish zebra pecos were readily available in the shops (despite not being on the list) as were Altolamprologous, and I'm sure there are other examples, I would have thought preserving these rarities would be far more important to the society (and its members) rather than having another successful spawn of kribensis.... We are coming from the same place here David, I am doing my best to preserve the rarer fish in NZ & would like to get yours and others input on how you would modify the breeding scheme to achieve the goals stated in this thread. As stated my idea is to add a second tier to the scheme which would offer some kind of reward or recognition or endorsement to those breeders who meet a set standard. The scheme as it stands IMO should not be scrapped, the data it gathers is valuable and at least is a good starting point. If I can get some good feedback and commitment from the interested parties, I will create an official proposal and present it at the next exec meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.