It's like you said, hybrids are already accepted. i.e-S discus x S. aequifasciatus
Other than that, I say NO don't accept hybrids.
Other than that, I say NO don't accept hybrids.
Hybrid discussion from Mo's thread....
- Thread starter Mr.Firemouth
- Start date
I honestly think members would leave ACA if it started allowing hybrids without a vote being taken by everyone...
Hybrid owners weren't the only ones biting their tongues (warning: this might get ugly, hope I don't get banned).
Hybrids are in direct contrast to the conservation of cichlid species. If one of the ACA's main goal is conservation, then no of course they should not allow hybrids. Even worse than trimacs are lyonsi, which are the big new trend and species adding to the flowerhorn mix. This is an incredibly rare fish in the hobby and in the wild, with a tiny natural range that is being destroyed. More than any other, this species is in a very real danger from the "f-word."
But what really amazes me is how people don't know or don't realize how wrong hybrids are. Not only is it unethical, it's immoral. Maybe becuase I'm an old school aquarist or just a grumpy old man, but it's the fact people don't understand that it's wrong is what gets people so pissed about this issue. There is no why, your internal moral compass should tell you that it's wrong just like beating a child or kicking a dog. Yes there are a few people that don't see those as wrong either, but they don't decide the laws of the land luckily. Nor should those with bad internal moral compasses determines what happens to this hobby and industry. People with them should, at the very least, have all their fish and other pets taken away and never allowed to have pets again since they obviously have shown they can't be responsible. They should be fined enough that none of their children should be able to go to college. Of course, these are the mildest punishments I would do, but the other ones are really shouldn't be posted, kids do read this stuff.
That is why this becomes such a hotly debated issue each time it comes up, becuase us old guards see it as a moral issue.
Hybrids are in direct contrast to the conservation of cichlid species. If one of the ACA's main goal is conservation, then no of course they should not allow hybrids. Even worse than trimacs are lyonsi, which are the big new trend and species adding to the flowerhorn mix. This is an incredibly rare fish in the hobby and in the wild, with a tiny natural range that is being destroyed. More than any other, this species is in a very real danger from the "f-word."
But what really amazes me is how people don't know or don't realize how wrong hybrids are. Not only is it unethical, it's immoral. Maybe becuase I'm an old school aquarist or just a grumpy old man, but it's the fact people don't understand that it's wrong is what gets people so pissed about this issue. There is no why, your internal moral compass should tell you that it's wrong just like beating a child or kicking a dog. Yes there are a few people that don't see those as wrong either, but they don't decide the laws of the land luckily. Nor should those with bad internal moral compasses determines what happens to this hobby and industry. People with them should, at the very least, have all their fish and other pets taken away and never allowed to have pets again since they obviously have shown they can't be responsible. They should be fined enough that none of their children should be able to go to college. Of course, these are the mildest punishments I would do, but the other ones are really shouldn't be posted, kids do read this stuff.
That is why this becomes such a hotly debated issue each time it comes up, becuase us old guards see it as a moral issue.
big train;2136202; said:
Oh I don't think it matters to the aquarium hobby what the ACA's stance is. Really it makes a big difference for the ACA though. Accepting them or at least having a positive stance on them opens you up to a wider audience.
Bderick67;2136140; said:
MFK also ran an all hybrid ad in TFH.. MFK hardly excludes hybrids or outcasts them. There's a difference between seperation of ca/sa and FH/Hybrids, and just outright being derogatory/outcasting FH's/hybrids.
Hybrids has their own section to cover the myriad of hybrids because it works better that way.. not because anyone is outcasting FH's or staff/admin doesn't want them near CA/SA cichlids.
cichlaguapote;2136691; said:
Really, the membership follows the structure that has been set. You have never seen what happens when a new member unknowingly posts his cichlid hybrid in the cichlid forum? There's even valid threads regarding the safe keeping of a female cichlid from another species male cichlid and people flame and call for the removal of the thread.
Why start with ACA when we have more then enough work to do here?
I personally like it the way it is, no hybrids. How are hybrids going to be judged when there's really no set standards? No two are alike.
People that keeps hybrids also keep pure fishes so if they really want to join the ACA they would of already, no need to add hybrids just to get a few more memberships.
People that keeps hybrids also keep pure fishes so if they really want to join the ACA they would of already, no need to add hybrids just to get a few more memberships.
Yeah, that was a bit excessive, probably should have cooled down more after reading some of the posts in the thread before posting.
So let me try it this way: This will always be a hot and nasty subject becuase it is a moral issue to many older aquarists. Attacking moral stances is akin to attacking religious ones, there will always be heated responses. 20 years ago there was no debate, everyone knew it was wrong. A lot of places refused to sell fake parrots, and people that brought in say convict/sept crosses watched them get fed to pikes/oscars/catfish.
Things have deffinately changed, but us old guard ones won't I am sure. Telling us flowerhorns are okay is like telling us stealing is okay or our religion is wrong.
The thing of it is of course, not everyone has the same morals. What is right for one person isn't always right for the next.
But in regards to the ACA, as I said (and it was probably lost in my hyperbole in the first post) hybrids are at the complete opposite of consveration, so no the ACA should not allow them.
So let me try it this way: This will always be a hot and nasty subject becuase it is a moral issue to many older aquarists. Attacking moral stances is akin to attacking religious ones, there will always be heated responses. 20 years ago there was no debate, everyone knew it was wrong. A lot of places refused to sell fake parrots, and people that brought in say convict/sept crosses watched them get fed to pikes/oscars/catfish.
Things have deffinately changed, but us old guard ones won't I am sure. Telling us flowerhorns are okay is like telling us stealing is okay or our religion is wrong.
The thing of it is of course, not everyone has the same morals. What is right for one person isn't always right for the next.
But in regards to the ACA, as I said (and it was probably lost in my hyperbole in the first post) hybrids are at the complete opposite of consveration, so no the ACA should not allow them.
For some context, the IBC (Internation Betta Congress) focuses on "advancement, friendships, and conservation" of bettas (www.ibcbettas.org).
They seem to be able to balance the advancement of fancy strains of bettas with the conservation of wild-type species...by focusing on...responsible fishkeeping...
An excerpt from the home page of their website:
"Official IBC Code of Ethics:
IBC members welcome everyone who is interested in betta, whether new at owning and/or raising betta or an old pro who has raised thousands.
The IBC feels there is room for all betta enthusiasts, young or old, new or experienced, individuals, families, team or commercial breeder.
The IBC is a club of individuals, families, teams, and commercial breeders who support the keeping, breeding, and or the showing of betta bred by members, the research into the genetics of the betta and support of the preservation of the wild species through the Species Maintenance Program.
It is the policy of the IBC that members who sell trade or give betta to other must represent the description of the betta in a proper manner so as to assure that the buyers, consumers or recipients are not misled. An intentional misrepresentation would be a violation of the IBC policy and Code of Ethics."
They seem to be able to balance the advancement of fancy strains of bettas with the conservation of wild-type species...by focusing on...responsible fishkeeping...
An excerpt from the home page of their website:
"Official IBC Code of Ethics:
IBC members welcome everyone who is interested in betta, whether new at owning and/or raising betta or an old pro who has raised thousands.
The IBC feels there is room for all betta enthusiasts, young or old, new or experienced, individuals, families, team or commercial breeder.
The IBC is a club of individuals, families, teams, and commercial breeders who support the keeping, breeding, and or the showing of betta bred by members, the research into the genetics of the betta and support of the preservation of the wild species through the Species Maintenance Program.
It is the policy of the IBC that members who sell trade or give betta to other must represent the description of the betta in a proper manner so as to assure that the buyers, consumers or recipients are not misled. An intentional misrepresentation would be a violation of the IBC policy and Code of Ethics."
