Opinions on breeding fish vs. dogs?

[toad]

In the dog world, it's pretty well accepted that you have no right breeding a dog that hasn't been proven in conformation or working classes. The obvious reason for this is to prevent the breeding of dogs that are poor examples of, and would therefore create poorer examples of, the breed.

I'm just curious to know if the same is true of fish? Does anyone have any business breeding a fish that does not meet the "breed standard" in color, form, etc.?

In breeding a fish that couldn't win a show, aren't we really just muddying the genetic pool of these animals?

[Mo]

I know im Like that... Im very selective about the stock I keep... I only breed fish that meet the standard, and would place well in a show

[Ilikebutterflies]

I just can't see comparing the two. The worst that happens with fish is a breeder is stuck trying to offload his mediocre fish and is either stuck with them or has to destroy them. If he does succeed in selling them it isn't going to matter one bit as he isn't going to be successful in "muddying" the waters. There are far too many purist breeders that do it for the right reasons. Once you know what you are looking for you can easily avoid less than quality fish. I see fish more as livestock than pets. I have my favorites of course but I have to roll my eyes just a bit as some posts that treat fish on equal ground as companion animals.

Not so easy with dogs. There are laws involved and it's far too easy to get papered dogs and just breed them because they are purebred. However, I know of a guy that put himself through college breeding and selling GSD's. He did it solely for the money and did a darn good job. He chose quality healthy parents and sold the pups cheap enough to avoid competition. His breeding stock were well treated pets and his pups were all vetted and vaccinated/dewormed before selling them but had zero interest in showing or improving the breed.

[MoonShadow]

I personally try and keep my breeders as close to the standard as possible, since I would like to show in the future. I also believe that breeding (Of ANY animal) Should be done with the intention of some how improving the breed or creating something new. Nothing aggravates me more then someone who says "Oh look at my 2 pretty pet store fish, I think I'll breed them just because it will be fun and the babies will be so cute!"

IMHO breeding just to breed is not the right thing to do...

[Oldfishlady]

The Betta either meets standards or it doesn't-You won't find a perfect Betta without a fault of some type or another and this is what keeps us breeding.
Faults can vary from minor, major to DQ. (disqualified)

You can either start with known or unknown genetics-but you will still end up with the same thing....A Betta that either meets or doesn't meet standards to some degree with faults.

Starting out with mystery genetic can sometimes take longer to get that near standard for showing if that is something that interest you. Keep good records just as you would do with known genetics.

Even with known genetic lines-you may not be able to sell/re-home them all. Plus, you can still get offspring that don't meet standards and/or have DQ standards.

Personally, I don't see a problem with a hobbyist spawning their pet shop Betta, mixing tail types, colors...etc.... as long as they have a plan. Rarely will a new hobbyist get more than 20-30 fry up to adults anyway-some do get lucky and get 100's on the first attempt and this is where culling comes in and this is what can be hard for some and this is what IMO muddies the water so-to-speak-The really poor quality regardless if they started off with known or unknown genetics that would meet the DQ standard that they continued to use for spawning-especially the deformed, birth defects...etc.....

It depends on your goals-if you want to show-get a pair that fits closest to the IBC standard you can find-that compliment each other-Otherwise get what you like-get creative-experiment-create a unique Betta-how do you think we got what we have today....Brave hobbyist that mixed color, tail types...etc.....The HM wasn't accepted in the beginning and look at it now.....

Get your feet wet-research-experiment-be creative and don't let the extremist dictate what you can and can't do....Have a plan and be responsible....with a plan to spend lots of time in the fish room....

Most of all...have fun and enjoy the hobby....

[Mo]

OFL. this Show season there is an HMPK red male whom does not have any faults. I remember a Judge saying that this was the first fish hes seen (40 years of experience with bettas) Without any faults. So there IS such thing as a Perfect betta

[teeneythebetta]

Originally Posted by Ilikebutterflies

I just can't see comparing the two. The worst that happens with fish is a breeder is stuck trying to offload his mediocre fish and is either stuck with them or has to destroy them. If he does succeed in selling them it isn't going to matter one bit as he isn't going to be successful in "muddying" the waters. There are far too many purist breeders that do it for the right reasons. Once you know what you are looking for you can easily avoid less than quality fish. I see fish more as livestock than pets. I have my favorites of course but I have to roll my eyes just a bit as some posts that treat fish on equal ground as companion animals.

Not so easy with dogs. There are laws involved and it's far too easy to get papered dogs and just breed them because they are purebred. However, I know of a guy that put himself through college breeding and selling GSD's. He did it solely for the money and did a darn good job. He chose quality healthy parents and sold the pups cheap enough to avoid competition. His breeding stock were well treated pets and his pups were all vetted and vaccinated/dewormed before selling them but had zero interest in showing or improving the breed.

Yet another back yard breeder who adds to the population of unwanted dogs for their own benefit.
Vet care isnt the only thing that produces good pups. Genetic health testing and show titled show that the dog is desirable to pass on traits.

[Oldfishlady]

Originally Posted by Mo

OFL. this Show season there is an HMPK red male whom does not have any faults. I remember a Judge saying that this was the first fish hes seen (40 years of experience with bettas) Without any faults. So there IS such thing as a Perfect betta

But it took 40 years......

[Creat]

Originally Posted by Mo

OFL. this Show season there is an HMPK red male whom does not have any faults. I remember a Judge saying that this was the first fish hes seen (40 years of experience with bettas) Without any faults. So there IS such thing as a Perfect betta

I would like to point out the betta was perfect in his eyes dosent mean it was perfect to another judge thats the thing with judging.

I think dogs are a good example to compare to betta fish, I think anyone with a plan can breed. If everyone who bred their dog or fish had a good plan and parents lined up or the offspring I dont see why not. I also like to imput in the search for perfection like the same with dogs it can ruin a line or breed. Just like springer spaniel, pekinese , German shepherds, anything really....

[Mo]

Originally Posted by Oldfishlady

But it took 40 years......

But he hadnt been Judging or showing for 40 years.. The breeder.. I think it took 12-15 years to develop that fish.. WOW