• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Culling 'side product' hatchlings

Culling hatchlings:

  • is a responsible thing to do when they are deformed/weak and have no chance of a decent life

    Votes: 155 74.5%
  • 1 + when they are 'side products' and end up in pet shops, overflowing the market

    Votes: 5 2.4%
  • 1 + when hybrid hatchlings can be mistaken for pure, threatening the mass market with their genes

    Votes: 9 4.3%
  • 1 + 2 + 3

    Votes: 24 11.5%
  • is ok when..... (see my post)

    Votes: 2 1.0%
  • is never a good thing to do, even a deformed/week hatchling should only die by its defect

    Votes: 13 6.3%

  • Total voters
    208
With that...I'm going to try and leave this conversation as it is. I truly don't feel as though any progress is being made anymore. It has come down to a discussion which is questioning only the intentions of each individual in hypothetical situations...which may be fine for some, but is not why I involved myself in the discussion.

Suffice it to say that, at least for me, I don't hold any ill feelings towards any of the other participants of this discussion, and I hope no one holds any towards me. After all...it just cron sankes...we don't have to agree on everything...
 
Eremita said:
You apparently do not see that the relevant distinction has already been made. You would not be killing to benefit any living thing – you would be killing to prevent a creature from thriving.

Unless you are culling "normal looking" hybrids to prevent future cross-breeding into 100% corn snake blood lines.

Yes, you can control who YOU sell to, but that buyer is only as good as his or her word. And, there is no guarantee that even if YOU chose a seller whose word is good, that the person they sell to will be as ethical.

Case in point... do you all remember the individual who posted about snakes with single eyes? They had I think it was 2-3 snakes in a clutch missing eyes... maybe more, and were wondering whether to "adopt them out" or euthanize. I think the end consensus was that unless they were going to keep all 2-3 themselves, forever, the snakes should be euthanized.

If you were to keep such snakes YOURSELF and could guarantee that they would NEVER be bred to pass on that mutation, then cool! Raise 'em up and let 'em live as long as possible. But to sell them to someone else, even someone you trust, is to risk them ending up with someone who breeds them to make a quick buck and passes on the eye-less gene. And THAT would pollute the gene pool with an incredibly negative trait, something that would be of detriment to corn snakes of future generations.

In order to understand the opposing viewpoint (i.e. that it is, at times, ethical to cull even an apparently "healthy" hatchling) one must look BEYOND the scope of that INDIVIDUAL snake and what is best for it, and consider instead the POPULATION of corn snakes as a whole.

People with dogs have it much easier... if you produce a puppy who is deaf, you can have him or her spayed and neutered to prevent that trait from being passed on, with 100% security. Unfortunately, it is impossible to spay or neuter a snake for eventual sale to a "pet only" home.
 
If you were to keep such snakes YOURSELF and could guarantee that they would NEVER be bred to pass on that mutation, then cool! Raise 'em up and let 'em live as long as possible. But to sell them to someone else, even someone you trust, is to risk them ending up with someone who breeds them to make a quick buck and passes on the eye-less gene. And THAT would pollute the gene pool with an incredibly negative trait, something that would be of detriment to corn snakes of future generations.

Very well put Hypancistrus!

I do have a question for other breeders here. As shown above, there are GOOD reasons to cull hatchlings even if they would have made someone a wonderful pet. We are talking about protecting the species (or breed if you prefer) from harmful genes. So, what do you do with the rest of this clutch that may CARRY a defective gene? We know that corns can pass on other harmful traits that we REALLY do not want floating around in the gene pool. With rats and mice, I will inbreed them to bring out hidden recessive genes and I will cull an entire line if necessary if harmful genes show up. Once this has been accomplished, I can cross my different lines for diversity or linebreed. I pretty much only see defective animals born when I am bringing in new blood from other breeders. So, as a responsible snake breeder, how would you handle this situation if there were several defective babies in a clutch and you had reason to believe that the trait was hereditary? I have seen some breeders sell the normal-looking offspring. Even with a full-disclosure of the possible hereditary defects, is this enough?
 
chausies said:
Very well put Hypancistrus!
So, what do you do with the rest of this clutch that may CARRY a defective gene? We know that corns can pass on other harmful traits that we REALLY do not want floating around in the gene pool.

I think depending on what the gene is, it may be wise to euthanize the whole line and NEVER breed the parents together, ever again. There have been significant problems in albino boas, I believe, with "one-eyed" genes piggbacking through various albino lines as carriers. You can only prevent such genes from getting established by being a bit... ruthless, shall we say?? in culling the offspring from affected lines.

Breeding animals is not always a pleasant business. :shrugs:
 
Hypancistrus said:
Unless you are culling "normal looking" hybrids to prevent future cross-breeding into 100% corn snake blood lines.

Yes, you can control who YOU sell to, but that buyer is only as good as his or her word. And, there is no guarantee that even if YOU chose a seller whose word is good, that the person they sell to will be as ethical.
Cool! I was hoping there would be some more discussion on this (Chris, I’ve got more for you later, but I have not so much time at the moment). But, I never said anything about who you sell to. I am happy to assume for the sake of argument, along with yourself, that a Disreputable Breeder will breed them and then there will be kingsnake genes in some corn snakes, such that you cannot tell by looking at them. Mind you, I’m not sure how that Dystopian future differs from our present, but whatever. However, the notion that it is by some reckoning ethically better to kill an animal than it is to perhaps be involved in an unfortunate future that will happen anyway, and that you (not personally you but "ethical hybrid breeder" you) are by your practices actively promoting (as in, “Look! You can breed corn snakes and kingnakes and get something interesting!” in a world where you believe other breeders are deceitful and over-opportunistic) seems more like you are trying to alleviate your sense of guilt than to heroically, ethically create a brighter future for our offspring. Which makes me think that it is not those who care to share a different notion of right and wrong than the “kill ‘em” crowd that are bringing thoughts of guilt into the picture.
Hypancistrus said:
Case in point... do you all remember the individual who posted about snakes with single eyes? They had I think it was 2-3 snakes in a clutch missing eyes... maybe more, and were wondering whether to "adopt them out" or euthanize. I think the end consensus was that unless they were going to keep all 2-3 themselves, forever, the snakes should be euthanized.

If you were to keep such snakes YOURSELF and could guarantee that they would NEVER be bred to pass on that mutation, then cool! Raise 'em up and let 'em live as long as possible. But to sell them to someone else, even someone you trust, is to risk them ending up with someone who breeds them to make a quick buck and passes on the eye-less gene. And THAT would pollute the gene pool with an incredibly negative trait, something that would be of detriment to corn snakes of future generations.
Sounds like a health issue to me. I also think that it could be beneficial to have kept at least one to see if there were any other problems that appeared or if it the obvious problem was the only one that manifested. Then we’d know more about the issue. Regardless, corn snake breeding seems to be rife with deformities, and I do not wish to try to define what counts as badly deformed, and I think that can be lumped into the ill-health category if you wish.
Hypancistrus said:
In order to understand the opposing viewpoint (i.e. that it is, at times, ethical to cull even an apparently "healthy" hatchling) one must look BEYOND the scope of that INDIVIDUAL snake and what is best for it, and consider instead the POPULATION of corn snakes as a whole.

People with dogs have it much easier... if you produce a puppy who is deaf, you can have him or her spayed and neutered to prevent that trait from being passed on, with 100% security. Unfortunately, it is impossible to spay or neuter a snake for eventual sale to a "pet only" home.
So, by your system, after a couple of hundred years or so of breeding dogs just the way you say, can you assert that our purebred dogs are healthier than ever? Like, by rigid control over breeding, we now have superdogs with no bad genes? I’m not sure if your system has a historical precedent, even though it seems like there ought to be one by now. How is your control over the situation greater by having killed a snake?

:cheers:
-Sean
 
Last edited:
Eremita, you are taking al the words rigth out of my mouth, thanks for saving me some time :)

I surely do not want to make anyone feel guilty, I am only trying to understand people's thoughts so that I might understand them better. For me that is part of the discussion and trying to get closer, which I would like. Even if that would mean I had to change my opinion, honestly. Thoug I'd like to see the opposite ;) :rolleyes:

If one thinks asking questions and explanation of their reasoning by the other party is to make them feel guilty, could it be that deep down they do feel guilty? I might be stepping toes here but I surely do not feel guilty in anyway about my view though I have been asked to answer questions on multiple hypothetical cases.... what did I (or Eremita for that matter) do or ask what the ones with an opposite opinion did not do?
 
Roy Munson said:
Roll your virtual "eyes" all you want, Barbara. I still believe that humane culling is ok, whether I like it or not. I refuse to judge in situations where I have not yet had to judge...

What burden of breeding? If I'm willing to kill my breeding female for my narrow goals, you should be excused for having somewhat broader goals? You've bred females. Why did you put them at such FATAL risk?

Tthe rolling eyes were just to point out that what you saw as a new part of the discussion, had been what I am discussing all the time...

Nature made most female snakes entirely capable of breeding (a natural purpose), only some die because of the same nature's flaws.... nature never 'wanted' to bring new, flawless life on the planet to be killed for reasons that do not exist in nature (beauty, pureness). So any life that is worth to be lived (no suffering), should be respected and given an opportunity. That would be ethical in my opinion.
 
So any life that is worth to be lived (no suffering) and won't serve a natural purpose, should be respected and given an opportunity.
 
Blutengel--

If you were merely looking to understand a different perspective, it would not be such a chorte. Every question you have asked and every dilemma you have posed has been effectively and responsibly answered...yet the conversation continues. And now, Eremita isn't even disuccing the topic anymore, he is SOLELY trying to find flaws and discrepencies in the way a person thinks or expresses their opinions.

Re-read Eremita last 2 posts, and tell me he is doing ANYTHING other than trying to "fatal flaws" in every aspect of my previous posts, and now the posts by Hypancistrus. And of course...if one doesn't AGREE with me or Hypancistrus, than one will find faults with the logic...It's pointless now, and is completing NO GOOD PURPOSE, other than to make you and eremita feel somehow Righteous in what you're saying.

The topic is dead, and has been for several pages. There is no longer a free exh\change of ideas and comments. That ended a few pages ago. There isn't even any more reasonable acceptance of what someone is trying to say. It has come down to "picking apart" words and semantics of an argument in an effort to somehow discredit the person that wrote it.

I read Eremita's last post, and none of it makes even a bit of sense to me. I can't even decipher what his point is anymore, other than to tear apart Hypancistrus' previous post. And hypancistrus' previous post is well written and easy to understand...so Where is the confusion?

So are you trying to make people feel guilty? Couldn't tell you...I don't have that answer. But what I do know is that this particular topic is no longer "developing". Why would anyone want to continue to "debate" when the whole tactic of your's and eremita's "debating" is to pick apart words and claim inaccuracies(that don't really exist), and claim discrepencies(also...which don't exist).

Pointless...
 
tyflier said:
Blutengel--

If you were merely looking to understand a different perspective, it would not be such a chorte (sic). Every question you have asked and every dilemma you have posed has been effectively and responsibly answered...yet the conversation continues. And now, Eremita isn't even disuccing (sic) the topic anymore, he is SOLELY trying to find flaws and discrepencies (sic) in the way a person thinks or expresses their opinions.

Re-read Eremita last 2 posts, and tell me he is doing ANYTHING other than trying to "fatal flaws" in every aspect of my previous posts, and now the posts by Hypancistrus. And of course...if one doesn't AGREE with me or Hypancistrus, than one will find faults with the logic...It's pointless now, and is completing NO GOOD PURPOSE, other than to make you and eremita feel somehow Righteous in what you're saying.

The topic is dead, and has been for several pages. There is no longer a free exh\change (sic) of ideas and comments. That ended a few pages ago. There isn't even any more reasonable acceptance of what someone is trying to say. It has come down to "picking apart" words and semantics of an argument in an effort to somehow discredit the person that wrote it.

I read Eremita's last post, and none of it makes even a bit of sense to me. I can't even decipher what his point is anymore, other than to tear apart Hypancistrus' previous post. And hypancistrus' previous post is well written and easy to understand...so Where is the confusion?

So are you trying to make people feel guilty? Couldn't tell you...I don't have that answer. But what I do know is that this particular topic is no longer "developing". Why would anyone want to continue to "debate" when the whole tactic of your's and eremita's "debating" is to pick apart words and claim inaccuracies(that don't really exist), and claim discrepancies (sic)(also...which don't exist).

Pointless...
Hey, wait a minit (sic)…

I don’t know what kind of page length you have set, but a big chunk of the writing so far has been yours. Anyway, I think if the person who started the thread said that I was on-topic, then if you disagree, maybe you got into the wrong thread by mistake, no?

And by the way, you are starting to sound like there is some ill will after all (which I certainly have never felt), and I request that you not posit such uncharitable views of my purposes or writing style.

Now I know how Dale feels sometimes…

-Sean
 
tyflier said:
Blutengel--

If you were merely looking to understand a different perspective, it would not be such a chorte. Every question you have asked and every dilemma you have posed has been effectively and responsibly answered...yet the conversation continues. And now, Eremita isn't even disuccing the topic anymore, he is SOLELY trying to find flaws and discrepencies in the way a person thinks or expresses their opinions.

Re-read Eremita last 2 posts, and tell me he is doing ANYTHING other than trying to "fatal flaws" in every aspect of my previous posts, and now the posts by Hypancistrus. And of course...if one doesn't AGREE with me or Hypancistrus, than one will find faults with the logic...It's pointless now, and is completing NO GOOD PURPOSE, other than to make you and eremita feel somehow Righteous in what you're saying.

The topic is dead, and has been for several pages. There is no longer a free exh\change of ideas and comments. That ended a few pages ago. There isn't even any more reasonable acceptance of what someone is trying to say. It has come down to "picking apart" words and semantics of an argument in an effort to somehow discredit the person that wrote it.

I read Eremita's last post, and none of it makes even a bit of sense to me. I can't even decipher what his point is anymore, other than to tear apart Hypancistrus' previous post. And hypancistrus' previous post is well written and easy to understand...so Where is the confusion?

So are you trying to make people feel guilty? Couldn't tell you...I don't have that answer. But what I do know is that this particular topic is no longer "developing". Why would anyone want to continue to "debate" when the whole tactic of your's and eremita's "debating" is to pick apart words and claim inaccuracies(that don't really exist), and claim discrepencies(also...which don't exist).

Pointless...

Then we have different opinions on what discussing and debating is too :rolleyes: . I might be a bit of a semantic nitpicker though, that's true :cool:

I do see however that nobody seems to get closer to each other indeed, so I'll stop replying (unless something new is brought in) what I already did mostly since Eremita 'took over' :grin01: . I would have been slightly milder in how to say things but being a little more harsh/direct might have helped to make things clear earlier.

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:
 
Eremita said:
I am happy to assume for the sake of argument, along with yourself, that a Disreputable Breeder will breed them and then there will be kingsnake genes in some corn snakes, such that you cannot tell by looking at them. Mind you, I’m not sure how that Dystopian future differs from our present, but whatever. However, the notion that it is by some reckoning ethically better to kill an animal than it is to perhaps be involved in an unfortunate future that will happen anyway, and that you (not personally you but "ethical intergrade breeder" you) are by your practices actively promoting (as in, “Look! You can breed corn snakes and kingnakes and get something interesting!” in a world where you believe other breeders are deceitful and over-opportunistic) seems more like you are trying to alleviate your sense of guilt than to heroically, ethically create a brighter future for our offspring. Which makes me think that it is not those who care to share a different notion of right and wrong than the “kill ‘em” crowd that are bringing thoughts of guilt into the picture.

Hmm... so by YOUR reasoning, I should also not bother to recycle, since regardless of what I do, the rising human population is going to kill the planet anyway? No, in this case, I feel that I DO have an ethical reason to maintain pure blood lines, regardless of what "everyone else" does. And I don't feel guilty about it... mainly because I am not even a breeder (yet). But when I am, you can be sure that if I have to cull a hatchling for any reason, I will do it. Will I feel bad about it? Yes. But being a responsible breeder means making decisions that are at times quite difficult. I am not sure guilt is the word for it though.

Eremita said:
So, by your system, after a couple of hundred years or so of breeding dogs just the way you say, can you assert that our purebred dogs are healthier than ever? Like, by rigid control over breeding, we now have superdogs with no bad genes? I’m not sure if your system has a historical precedent, even though it seems like there ought to be one by now. How is your control over the situation greater by having killed a snake?

Nope, not at all what I was saying. What I was trying to point out is that in the dog world, they have a third option- which is remove the chances of the "defective" animal from breeding and passing on its genes (by spaying/ neutering), and then sell it to a home where it will be a wonderful pet. Unfortunately, we snake hobbyists do not (yet) have that option- if we did, I'd be the first to suggest THAT as opposed to culling an animal that could lead a relatively healthy life.

As for a historical precedent, yes, there used to be one, even in dog breeding. Dog breeders would not allow dogs to be bred that carried undesirable traits. For instance, a gun dog who was blind or deaf was of no use to people in the field, as it could not hear commands called to it, nor naviagate its way through unfamiliar territory. Such dogs would have been "culled" or euthanized as soon as the defect was discovered. The reason why this system WORKED in historical times is because much more depended on having good working bloodlines, and animals free of defect- whether your family ate this week would depend on your working dog. Whether your sheep made it to market would depend on your working dog. When your life depends on an animal, you want to be certain that that animal is "the best," and as perfect as possible.

In modern times, we have become "softer." We try to avoid bloodshed when possible, and when we cannot, we feel bad about it. I don't mean to say this as a bad thing, but we also tend to distance ourselves from the idea that eliminating animals of poor breeding from the gene pool is an inherent task in breeding- if you CHOOSE to breed, then you must accept the fact that along with wonderful new traits, you will also find bad traits, and it is your responsibility as an ethical breeder to ensure that those traits are not propagated, regardless of what traits they are. It is wonderful that we can now remove traits from the gene pool of dogs, cats and other larger animals without loss of life, but the reality of breeding smaller creatures- be they snakes or fish- is that the only way to ensure that those traits are not passed on is to euthanize the animal.

Yes, there will be people who choose not to do so, for many reasons. Some people may be uncomfortable with having an animals death on their hands. Other people simply don't care, and want to get the most $$$ for their animals as possible, regardless of breeding goals and the species as a whole. If and when I begin breeding, I will do so with the understanding that eventually I will be forced to take the life of a hatchling snake who won't feed willingly, because producing non-feeders is not something that will be a part of my business plan. I do not plan on getting into the hybrid market, so thankfully, that is not something I will have to pursue. However, I do understand and appreciate the need for culling in that case. I wish that hybrids were not popular and such a need did not exist... but it does, and those breeders must accept the consequences for their choices as well.

But rest assured... as a responsible breeder, I will strive to produce only the highest quality hatchlings for my customers, and to me, that means animals of good health and ravenous appetite. If they fail to meet either of those two prerequisities, then I would most definitely not feel comfortable passing them on the my customers (who are most likely going to be local beginners). It's just good business... selling most people a struggling hatchling does not a repeat customer make. :shrugs:

By the way, did any of you catch the thread on that corn hybrid who was sold to the buyer as a pure corn snake, an amber? I've linked it below. The animal has already been bred several times, and the resulting offspring will now be hybrids. This is an animal that has been passed along probably several times, and who knows if the original owner intended that... but this case illustrates exactly why I would chose not to dabble in hybrids, and certainly if I did, I would make sure than any "normal looking" types did not leave my care, or were culled.

What is this [snake]?
 
Last edited:
Eremita said:
Hey, wait a minit (sic)…

I don’t know what kind of page length you have set, but a big chunk of the writing so far has been yours. Anyway, I think if the person who started the thread said that I was on-topic, then if you disagree, maybe you got into the wrong thread by mistake, no?

And by the way, you are starting to sound like there is some ill will after all (which I certainly have never felt), and I request that you not posit such uncharitable views of my purposes or writing style.

Now I know how Dale feels sometimes…

-Sean
See...this is a good example. NOWHERE in any of my posts, did I refer to the length of the postings, nor the amount of words being used, or whom has had the most replies. So what's the point in that?

There is no ill-will towards you...only towards the turn this topic has taken. I do not see you making any points in your last two posts. I only see nitpicking, and to me, it appears as though your whole argument boils down to "You'r thinking is flawed because it is different than mine"...that seems to be the substance behind your last two posts, and yes...I DO take issue with that, as it is certainly NOT an appropriate manner in which to debate an issue of opinion.

Whether or not the o.p. feels that you are "on topic" is entirely beside the point. As I said...if I agreed with you, I would understand your argument. As it is, I agree with Hypancistrus, and I see every validity in HIS argument...which you claim isn't there. Seeing the reasoning and validity in someone's post, at this point, comes down to perspective. Whomever you agree with looks to be making the better points, and that, in itself, makes this "debate" fairly pointless.

And absolutely, if I don';t agree with your posting style, why should I NOT make that opinion known? If I feel the manner is wehich you are posting is unfair to the person you are replying to and unfair to the topic at hand, do I not have a right to say as much? I certainly think that I do. Your comparing yourself to dale. Except that Dale takes the words a person uses and makes the irony of the statements clear for all to see. I don't see you doing that. I see you saying quite simply, "Your wrong because you differ from my opinion"...that's not clever, it's not irony, and it certainly isn't stylish...


Blutengel--

I would have been slightly milder in how to say things but being a little more harsh/direct might have helped to make things clear earlier.

"Being Harsh", and "making people understand" is not how an opinion topic should be debated. EVERY post in this topic has been a matter of opinion. Being harsh or rude or nitpicking is not going to change people's opinions. When a debate of this nature turns away from the free exchange of ideas and respectable and respectful exchange of opinions, and turns TOWARDS a matter of "changing their minds", the topic loses it's own validid\ty. It was made clear early on that nobody was going to change anybody else's opinion. That is as it should be. The topic quickly turned from an exchange of opinion to a challenge of ideals, and that is not appropriate in a "frendily debate"...
 
tyflier said:
And of course...if one doesn't AGREE with me or Hypancistrus, than one will find faults with the logic...It's pointless now, and is completing NO GOOD PURPOSE, other than to make you and eremita feel somehow Righteous in what you're saying.

The topic is dead, and has been for several pages.

Yes, Ty, I think you are right! I just realized that, looking back at my last post! :grin01: So I too will back out. I have said my piece, and I think everyone has something new to think about, and so the post has served a point.

I guess the moral of the debate is that in any situation, what one person considers ethical will differ from many other peoples ideas of ethical. There is no fixed "definition" for what consititutes ethical. :)

It was a good discussion though.
 
Hypancistrus said:
By the way, did any of you catch the thread on that corn hybrid who was sold to the buyer as a pure corn snake, an amber? I've linked it below. The animal has already been bred several times, and the resulting offspring will now be hybrids. This is an animal that has been passed along probably several times, and who knows if the original owner intended that... but this case illustrates exactly why I would chose not to dabble in hybrids, and certainly if I did, to make sure than any "normal looking" types did not leave my care, or were culled.

What is this [snake]?

Would you be so kind as to try to make me understand why the odd looking hybrids you sell are no treath to the market? Neither of the people with the same opinion on culling pure looking hybrids, seems to want to or is able to do so. And that is not about semantics, but about logic I think... since nobody can be sure these odd looking ones won't produce pure looking ones which end up in less responsible breeder's hands.... this seems to me like threatening the pure lines with less snakes is responsible cause it is really 'necessary' to breed hybrids too, but threatening pure lines with some more hybrids, hence not killing healthy pure looking ones is not responsible :shrugs:

I do want to make the remark that 'protecting pure breeds' does not have to do with benefiting the snake population itself, cause hybrids do not suffer from being a hybrid and wild 'pure breed' populations change by evolution, species come and go so pure breeds as a holy grale is just something that exists in people's minds IMO. Nature does not care about the purity of species at all. It cares about survival, so if environment changes, species change and hybrids might survive where pures won't.
 
Blutengel--

I answered that question for you many pages ago.

It is nearly impossible to mistake a true hybrid for a pure snake. Period. If you cull all pure-looking offspring, the rest *SHOULD* be identifiable, through visual inspection, as hybrids, which in itself protects the market.

Neither of the people with the same opinion on culling pure looking hybrids, seems to want to or is able to do so. And that is not about semantics, but about logic I think...

You're right...it isn't about semantics...it's about you ONLY seeing and reading what you WANT to see and read, and that statemwnt, infact, your entire last post, is extremely rude and offensive to anyone that disagreed with you, and went FAR out of our ways to debate EVERY SINGLE ISSUE you presented us with.

EXTREMELY disrespectful...

At this point it is becoming impossible to even reply to ANYTHING in this topic without getting extremely aggravated. You are no longer debating, you are accusing. So get off of it, and let it go...

Trust me when I tell you that EVERY SINGLE SITUATION that you posed throughout this entire topic was reasonably and respectfully answered. If you missed it or don't remember, go back and re-read the topic, and stop being so darn condescending and rude.
 
tyflier said:
Blutengel--

I answered that question for you many pages ago.

It is nearly impossible to mistake a true hybrid for a pure snake. Period. If you cull all pure-looking offspring, the rest *SHOULD* be identifiable, through visual inspection, as hybrids, which in itself protects the market.

You're right...it isn't about semantics...it's about you ONLY seeing and reading what you WANT to see and read, and that statemwnt, infact, your entire last post, is extremely rude and offensive to anyone that disagreed with you, and went FAR out of our ways to debate EVERY SINGLE ISSUE you presented us with.

EXTREMELY disrespectful...

At this point it is becoming impossible to even reply to ANYTHING in this topic without getting extremely aggravated. You are no longer debating, you are accusing. So get off of it, and let it go...

Trust me when I tell you that EVERY SINGLE SITUATION that you posed throughout this entire topic was reasonably and respectfully answered. If you missed it or don't remember, go back and re-read the topic, and stop being so darn condescending and rude.

But these odd looking hybrids you put on the market, CAN produce pure looking ones, ending up in less responsible breeders hands... so these odd looking ones are a threat to the market indirectly. Is that NOT logic? I still did not see an explanation why F2 is not a treath... Pointing that out is not rude I think...

I do not see any accusation... I never said that anyone with other ethical standards is bad, I am only trying to get their logic cause I do not see it.
 
Blutengel said:
But these odd looking hybrids you put on the market, CAN produce pure looking ones, ending up in less responsible breeders hands... so these odd looking ones are a threat to the market indirectly. Is that NOT logic? I still did not see an explanation why F2 is not a treath... Pointing that out is not rude I think...

I do not see any accusation... I never said that anyone with other ethical standards is bad, I am only trying to get their logic cause I do not see it.
Yes...that's reasonably logical. However, regardless of the snake I sell, I cannot control what happens in the F2 of a different breeder. I can ONLY control my offspring. I can rest assured that the hybrid I sell cannot EVER be mistakenly sold or bred as a pure snake. THAT is the point. I don't expect to be able to follow every customer I ever have and scrutinize THEIR breeding programs for possibly unscrupulous behavior.

I can't control their F2 breedings from my hybrid anymore than I can control their F2 breedings from a PURE corn I sell them.

And your "accusation" was the implication that "we" COULDN'T answer the question...THAT statement was rude. Period.

Ultimately, by your logic, ALL snakes are a threat to the general population,. because NOBODY can reasonably be expected to control what their customers do with snakes they purchase. So by that reasoning, we should all just stop breeding them NOW, and only allow w/c specimens to be traded, to avoid the "tinkering" of man...I don't like that option even more than I don't like culling healthy offspring...
 
tyflier said:
Yes...that's reasonably logical. However, regardless of the snake I sell, I cannot control what happens in the F2 of a different breeder. I can ONLY control my offspring. I can rest assured that the hybrid I sell cannot EVER be mistakenly sold or bred as a pure snake. THAT is the point. I don't expect to be able to follow every customer I ever have and scrutinize THEIR breeding programs for possibly unscrupulous behavior.

I can't control their F2 breedings from my hybrid anymore than I can control their F2 breedings from a PURE corn I sell them.

And your "accusation" was the implication that "we" COULDN'T answer the question...THAT statement was rude. Period.

So if want to protect the pure market in all sincerity you should not breed any hybrids I think, that for me is called being consequent. But I do see culling your own pure looking ones, is a way of finding a balance in doing what you like and living up to your ethics (protecting the market). I would never bring live to the world and then kill it to execute that balance.

I was a bit fed up with the Q about F2 not being answered so I might have gone a bit too far in suggesting you could not, I apologize for that.
 
Back
Top