Controversial breeding

[Tikibirds]

I didn't read most of the other posts but I guess it depends on what you are looking for. If I were breeding, I think I would only cull those that had would have a poor quality of life if they were to live. I know there are alot of people on here that are willing to take care of imperfect fish if given the chance.

IMO - humans ARE animals. Why is it OK to kill of imperfect dogs, cats, fish yet we let humans who have severe mental limitations and diseases - live?

[Aus]

Why is it OK to kill of imperfect dogs, cats, fish yet we let humans who have severe mental limitations and diseases - live?

If we were not consistently destroying our own environment by pillaging its resources for unnecessary products, and disadvantaging other living beings in order to live in relative luxury, this would not happen. We would not spare the resources.

We can afford to be liberal about caring for our infirm, because we don't have to worry about survival so much.

At the expense of every living thing around us, but that's another conversation. ;)

[VictorP]

Originally Posted by MollyJean

If, for example (consider this rhetorical) I had the goal to breed a line of betta like Tidbit, or experiment with her genetics to see what other breedable deformaties I could produce, the gut reaction is don't do it, but why?

It would produce unwanted fry, and yes, many of them would have to be culled due to the poor quality of life many defects create, but this is the process used for producing double-tail, crown-tail and, outside of the betta species, many varieties of fish. Is it simply the idea that so many fish will need to be culled that leaves most people unwilling to attempt these pairings, or is it something more?

At this point, and I am sure at all points, my goal will be healthy fish, no matter what the spawning pair is. It's safe to say this is true of most breeders. Where is the line drawn though? When is it acceptable to attempt production of a new line of betta? When is it acceptable to breed a deformity?

I believe that breeding more deformed fish into this world is a worthless endeavor. Of course the marketing will be a huge dilemma but the fact that you're bringing life into this world just to "destroy" or "cull" is not a smart decision. Also, Mildly affected betta will get around okay, but in severe cases the fish will have entirely non-functioning life.

Think of it like this. Sti's are passable through genes. Would you like it if you had to pass on something like aids to your child?

[MollyJean]

Hmm.. I have quite a bit to think about, but this is all wonderfuly insightful. There are many points I hadn't found on my own, and are wonderful to hear...

But I need to remind everyone I'm not the bad guy. I'll make this clear.. again.

I have no intention of breeding Tidbit! She is nothing more then an example, and though she be deformed, she has raised my interest in genetics and fish breeding quite a bit, to the point I want to see the insights of others in order to understand what I'm attempting better. On a very personal level, I looked at all of my betta and scrutinize them carefully to decide who I would attempt to breed first. And I will have to brace myself for culling.. if I can even do it. But Tidbit made me wonder what would happen if I bred her. And while I wouldn't, I can see the up side of attempting.. and understand many of the down sides. This is all about insight, please don't attack me for Tidbit, she is being used as nothing more then an example.