Aquamojo;2050300; said:
I think the ACA needs to do more to explain some of the nuances that differentiate hybrid vs. line bred, Discus and Angelfish, and more importantly the "why" on the long standing stance on Hybrids. Maybe it doesn't change anything. But the conversation has to happen.
I couldn't agree more.
I also think that there needs to be differentiation between INTENTIONAL hybrids and random ones.
Much like fancy livebearers and fancy bettas, fancy cichlids (flowerhorns, red texas, parrots) have been selectively bred to have the extreme, un-natural characteristics that they have. The market wants them, so the breeders produce them. While bad flowerhorns might be sold as "trimacs" or vice versa, it's hard to mistake a flowerhorn or parrot for anything else purebred.
Random - often unitentional - hybrids are another issue altogether, both in terms of posing a risk to being passed off as pure and in terms of having few redeeming characteristics. An LFS by me is selling some "sajica" that to the casual observer might seem like the real thing...but I'd bet that they're not pure. Whatever a-hole traded them in as "sajica" is doing his fellow hobbyists a dis-service. This is a whole different kind of problem than someone selling an AAA Super Red Flowerhorn for $300.
It would be great to have a moderated panel discussion on the pros and cons of hybrids at an upcoming ACA where SERIOUS flowerhorn folks (many, like discus folks are asian) are invited to participate. I'd bet that the two groups could learn a lot from each other, gain and understanding...and would find more similarities than differences.
By the way, I don't keep any hybrids - intentional or unintentional, although I can understand the appeal of some of the flowerhorns.
.
.
