# There Seems to be a lot of Hybrid Central American Cichlids.



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

I havent been in the Central Americans in a while. When I came back there seems to be a lot of crossbreeding that wasnt considered good 5 or 10 years ago. The Flowerhorn popped up. Now people are trying to crossbreed them it seems. With Africans people want to keep the lines clean and pure. Id think that would be true with most all fish and leave the hybrids to the plants. Whats changed in the last decade to promote hybrid CA fish especially it seems? Im not trying to start a flame but Im curious as to why or how it started being more common.


----------



## jgentry (Jul 3, 2008)

Nothing has really changed. The asian market is producing a lot of the hybrids and deformed ballon/short body fish. I have no problem with people that keep flowerhorns to each there own. I on the otherhand do not keep or really care for them. I like the pure lines. As long as the hybrids are sold a such it is not really a problem. Most people that keep CA like there fish to be pure that is why we pay a lot for wild fish. I will never cross fish and if something does breed that I don't want then I just use them as feeders  .

I find it a little funny that you mentioned africans and pure lines. There are more hybrids and crosses in africans then CA fish. A lot of the african lines are so jumbled no body has any idea what they are. The majority of CA are still pretty pure. The exceptions are the cryptoheros group, amphilophus, texas and vieja's all for the same reasons. They cross breed easily with others from there own group and many aquariumist were not responsible with them. Finding pure lines of these can be little hard, but you can still order them online from a large number of sellers.


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

Its true that many of the mbuna crossbreed and Im sure a lot of people that go to walmart or whatnot and buy "asst African Cichlids" get a bit of crossed babies. The people dont generally look at it in a good light. I am not aware of any African breedings like the flowerhorn is to the new world. I knew the mbuna were "unawares" being mutated but not on purpose.


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

Sadly, a lot of the peacocks and haps are being crossed now intentionally for color. I'm with you, I grew up reading how bad it was crossing them, worse than robbing a bank even. And westie keepers have always kept even the same species, differant rivers pure.

I think it started with that test tube frankenfish, and add the increase of prevelance of asian breeders/farms ... and it kind of took off from there. Nor is it likely to change, newcomers to the hobby enter with them already being around, so don't see it as being wrong like we did 20 years ago.


----------



## jgentry (Jul 3, 2008)

Like mentioned above a lot of the peacocks are hybrids. As far as the CA keepers go most of the people strive hard to keep pure lines and most of the people I know don't even really consider flowerhorns CA cichlids. They are man made fish. Most other forums have them seperate because passions flare and people always get into online fights about hybrids in CA forums. This forum is a little more laid back and most people don't mind the flowerhorn talk but you still see plenty of hybrid hatred :lol: .

I personally don't even look at hybrids as CA fish. To me if it's not pure it is a mutt. Doesn't really matter what they were bred from they are all mutts. Some people love the idea of creating new colors and such. That's fine as long as they aren't breaking any laws and are responsible with it. I'll stick to pure fish though.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

I don't mind the hybrid fish obviously I love flowerhorns yea I know there are tons of types of ca cichlids but flowerhorns have always interested me. Now don't get me wrong one thing that ticks me off about hybrids is people trying to pass them off as a pure species. That can and will ruin the hobby if people are buying as something they aren't especially if they are breeding them everyone really needs to read up on a fish and learn how to properly identify them long before they even considering purchasing anything.
And I do agree hybrids do need to be separated from other types of cichlids as they are really a man made fish.


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

Hybrids are ****!


----------



## Nathan43 (Jul 9, 2007)

Here we go...


----------



## Nathan43 (Jul 9, 2007)

Delete :?


----------



## jgentry (Jul 3, 2008)

I have no real problem with hybrids or people that keep them. Some of the ones that look like normal fish are even pretty cool looking. As long as they are sold as such and people are responsible with them it is not really a problem. I'm just not in to them, that's just my preference though. These threads do tend to always go the wrong way pretty quickly though.
What do you expect though when even the ACA mocks hybrids with the name of there convention this year.


----------



## mambee (Apr 13, 2003)

As in most cases, it is a fine line that people draw at different places.

I prefer wild type livebearers (Endlers) and discus while other people prefer fancy guppies and brightly colored discus.

At the end of the day, there isn't much difference between hybrid fish and fish which have been selectively bred for different traits/colors over generations. In each case they bear no resemblance to what is found in the wild. (I do admit that I love koi angels).

To each his own.

Mike


----------



## mlancaster (Jul 24, 2009)

As long as I have been into cichlids, I have seen a presence of hybrids. However, I have only been into cichlids for about 6 years. I personally do not like flowhorns, but not b/c they are hybrids; I just do not like their coloration and body shape. The issue is LFS not being truthful or fully informed about their hybridized fish; however anyone buying fish to bread would be able to easily identify a CA hybrid, with appropriate research.

The African mbuna cross breeding seems to be more of an issue in my opinion. Mbunas are commonly kept together in assorted tanks, expecially in LFS. Typically at a younger age they may look like a pure line, but as they grow and their colors change you will soon realize there is a mix. I have had this problem myself trying to get a quality pure yellow lab tank going, as of now I believe I only have two pure labs of the six in my tank, the rest are barred (does that indicate a cross bread?). But I continue to look for high quality labs, at a good price.

Another note, crossbreeding is present in the wild, although extremely rare. Mbuna species do cross breed in the wild, it is just less likely due to the large amount of space, many compatible mates, and diffrent geographic regions of each species. However, it does happen (based on what I have read, I am in no way an expert, especially on African cichlids, and amonly basing this on internet research). The issue is individuals keep assorted Africans in a small tank (compared to a lake) intermixed, which obviously leads to many cross breads and impure gene pools.

*I also wanted to use this discussion to see what everyone thought about selectively breed short bodied CA cichlids.* I have what I believe is a short bodied Texas, I may be wrong, could be a hybrid, check out a picture of him below, any thoughts?. Anyways, I thought we could extend this discussion to include *thoughts on selectively bred CA cichlids to exhibit certain qualities, such as a short fat body, elongated fins, or face/snout shape.*

Without a flash









Thanks for listing to my rant/thoughts.

-Matt


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

This is a delicate topic which has been covered many times before. Remaining respectful of those who have differing opinions is exceptionally important if this conversation is going to progress.

The motive to create hybrids is to create something new. Then we can analyze a number of motives one may have to want to create something new. Mostly financial or reputation gainsâ€¦

Then there is the perspective that when attempting to breed the perfect *pure species of your choice*, there is much more competition.

I personally do not support the creation of hybrids, because no matter how careful one may be, they cannot control what happens with every create hybrid offspring that they let into the hands of another fish keeper. Even if you sell/give away your hybrid very well labeled as a Blank x Blank hybrid, there is a chance the person who received it will breed it with something and distribute those offspring not labeled properly. In this case one can argue very reasonably that they are not responsible for the actions of anotherâ€¦ but my perspective is I do not want to be in any way involved with this processâ€¦

There are so many very interesting naturally occurring fish, I see absolutely no reason to start crossing them in attempts to make something â€œnewâ€


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

jaybuc said:


> Hybrids are #%$&!


Yea that was really necessary let the grown ups talk please.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

I think the whole problem having a discussion on this topic is that fact that your either for or against and there's no middle ground and people are HIGHLY supportive one way or another and that always leads to a huge argument. Frankly this has been done many times and there is no changing minds either way.

People are gonna do things the way they want to and there is no changing human nature so I for one say let people enjoy the fish they love and if you sell them of give them away please label them correctly and on the same note if your receiving don't breed them and sell them as something else either. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

I think there can be some level of a middle ground... I do not own hybrids... any hybrid that is ever born in my tanks has/will be used as food and will never leave my tanks alive... I would not purchase hybrids thus financially supporting such a breeding program...

Yet I can acknowledge that many of them are attractive fish and I can fully understand why some people keep them. The middle ground is open-mindedness and a lack of judgment...



mslancaster said:


> *I also wanted to use this discussion to see what everyone thought about selectively breed short bodied CA cichlids.* I have what I believe is a short bodied Texas, I may be wrong, could be a hybrid, check out a picture of him below, any thoughts?. Anyways, I thought we could extend this discussion to include *thoughts on selectively bred CA cichlids to exhibit certain qualities, such as a short fat body, elongated fins, or face/snout shape.*


On a purely personal note... I think they are ugly... but beauty is in the eye of the beholder and this holds no weight to the big picture...

My big picture opinion is that it is irresponsible to purposefully breed a fish that suffers from deformities. If it can/has been proved that these fish can live a long healthy life, then I wouldn't oppose it at all... yet I suspect that the short body will cause issues with internal organs that prevent the fish from living a naturally long life... To my knowledge the creation of these fish happened less than 12~15 years ago, so it is impossible to know for sure without doing many costly operations on these fish, which I don't see anyone volunteering to pay for anytime soon...

So hybrid or selective bred... I would not support the creation of "deformed" fish...

Noting hybridization in the wild should be done so with cautionâ€¦ Sure it does happen, but we do not have sufficient documentation of what happens with the result. It is likely the resulted offspring are shunned by both species and therefore never have the option of offering their hybridized genetics to either line of fishâ€¦ Yet I admit openly I have no evidence to support this theoryâ€¦

It is believed / understood that hybridization is one of many contributions to the process of evolution. But we shouldnâ€™t pretend to be causing evolution when unnaturally crossbreeding our fishâ€¦


----------



## jgentry (Jul 3, 2008)

Toby_H said:


> I think there can be some level of a middle ground... I do not own hybrids... any hybrid that is ever born in my tanks has/will be used as food and will never leave my tanks alive... I would not purchase hybrids thus financially supporting such a breeding program...
> 
> Yet I can acknowledge that many of them are attractive fish and I can fully understand why some people keep them. The middle ground is open-mindedness and a lack of judgment...
> 
> ...


Excellent post!!!!!!!!!!!

My opinion on the short bodied/ballon fish is not a good one. I can't really understand the desire to intentionally breed for deformed fish. The fish are often weak and many of them can't even swim well. These are deformities that are not that rare. I have seen a couple of short bodied fish in some of my spawn and they were culled as soon as I noticed. I see no reason to worsen the gene pool and they are just not what I'm striving to do.

On a side note, I'm against hybrids but there is something about a quality red texas that makes me drool. Why couldn't mother nature make that fish so I could buy one :lol:


----------



## mlancaster (Jul 24, 2009)

Well said Toby, I agree with you on hybridization and selective breeding. However, due to my impulse buy of a "dwarf Texas" for a small empty tank about 8 months ago, I have a large sized what I believe to be a short bodied Texas with a lot of personality who I like very much. But I do understand your thoughts on not supporting breeders who do this to make money, especially if it is not healthy for the fish (we will see how long this "Texas" lives for, I hope a long time).

Thanks,
Matt


----------



## mlancaster (Jul 24, 2009)

jgentry said:


> I see no reason to worsen the gene pool and they are just not what I'm striving to do.:


Excellent point about worsening the gene pool, I have never liked hybrids or short bodied fish, but I do now love my Texas. And yes he does have trouble swimming fast. The Bahia Red in his tank is not dominate but easily escapes aggression as he effortlessly swims away, while the Texas uses all his might to catch him, but he is just too short. Although my pure pearl Texas (Herichthys carpintis) that I have kept in the past were not very fast themselves. Side note is Herichthys carpintis a pure fish, or a variant/hybrid of the Herichthys cyanoguttat.

Thanks for the insight and I agree with you points.

-Matt


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

Gliven said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > Hybrids are #%$&!
> ...


And you are saying grown ups like hybrids??.... :zz: I don't like hybrid cichlids...so what's your point?


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

jaybuc said:


> Gliven said:
> 
> 
> > jaybuc said:
> ...


I believe he was suggesting we are attempting to have a mature conversation on a fairly touchy subject and that throwing insulting opinions out there with no logic to base them on only digresses the conversation...


----------



## rjh5791 (Apr 26, 2008)

Not to ruin the thread or anything but how do they make flowerhorns.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

rjh5791 said:


> Not to ruin the thread or anything but how do they make flowerhorns.


Anything anyone tells you about how they are is basing it off pure speculation in all honesty nobody really knows as it is closely guarded by breeders so they can make there own profits.

But they are a mix of several different fish and even other types of flowerhorns are line breed/hybridized with others. Some traits are easy to see like from midas, vejia, and a few other but I guarantee there is much more to it.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

Toby_H said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > Gliven said:
> ...


Exactly there can be no progress made in this thread if all you are throwing out insults and generalizations for no good reason. Please do voice your opinion just do it respectfully.


----------



## rjh5791 (Apr 26, 2008)

Gliven said:


> rjh5791 said:
> 
> 
> > Not to ruin the thread or anything but how do they make flowerhorns.
> ...


So what makes a flowerhorn a flowerhorn? because if there is nothing really that sets them apart anyone can make one.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

rjh5791 said:


> Gliven said:
> 
> 
> > rjh5791 said:
> ...


A selectively bred hybrid of CA cichlids commonly using Amphilophus, Herichthys, and Vieja blood. However, this question of yours is completely dependant on the variant of flowerhorn we are talking, and certain variants must have certain traits to qualify. thats likely the best answer your going to get. Anyone _can_ make there own Flowerhorns, a ton of people within the flowerhorn hobby have made there own variants, and as long as you use the right blood lines it will likely look the same. (Midas, Trimac's, carpintis, and synspilum are desirable/common fish to use)

the Flowerhorn lover that I am... I am indeed neutral on this topic, as Flowerhorns, certain parrots (not so much blood parrots... to many life hinder physical problems), and known selectively bred hybrids (Rose Queen, Super Red Shock, Super Red Synspilum, Super Red Texas, Rainbow King) are the only hybrids I have any desire to own, I personally despise hybrids if they were:

1) Not created with a purpose (like the Yellow Lab x Red Zebra's...)

2) If there is a purpose, do not sell the inbetween stage fry... stabilize the strain you are creating enough that they appear different from any pure strain (which is why low grade flowerhorns should NEVER be marketed... to easy to confuse with trimacs... the flowerhorn community is working on getting rid of the, low quality, trimac lookalike strains, because the flowerhorn keepers for the most part like it no more then you guys over here, as most of them started with pure cichlids and understand the annoyance.

Flowerhorns are different because they were created for a purpose, and that purpose being something that looked completely different then any pure bred. More intense color, better iridophores (shiny spots), bigger nuchal hump (a bit over extreme for me...), buff body, and lastly, aggression.


----------



## jgentry (Jul 3, 2008)

mslancaster said:


> jgentry said:
> 
> 
> > I see no reason to worsen the gene pool and they are just not what I'm striving to do.:
> ...


Carpintis is a pure fish. Although many of the ones you find in stores labled as green texas have some cyano in them. It is the same with cyano's as well. Many store bought ones have been crossed at some point. There are several different regional variaties or carpintis and they look a little different with the size of there spots and colorations.

In general the cyano's have small silver/blue spots depending upon lighting and carpintis have larger green/blue spots.


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

Fair enough! This is a very good read and states my main reasons for not liking hybrids

http://cichlidresearch.com/hybrids.html


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

I personally tend to go along the old school lines of keeping strains puire. To me there is a difference between selective breeding and hybridizing. Some fish in the wild are dwindling in numbers or becoming otherwise hard to obtain F1 in the hobby. For these reasons is a part of why I think that keeping the different fish pure is a good idea. However if they could be seperated and treid perhaps it would be different. However when you typically look at most hybrids or their offspring they arent typical of spectively bred pure breeds. After a few genereations ofselectively breeding those though I suppose that the Red Texas Cichlid and the Flowerhorns are created. The flowerhorns dont look so much unlike some of the other pure cichilds if you didnt know much better. The Red Texas one doesnt look all that bad either. I was just thinking that scientifically, and what not and all, is it responsible?


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

jaybuc said:


> Fair enough! This is a very good read and states my main reasons for not liking hybrids
> 
> http://cichlidresearch.com/hybrids.html


every thing on that read is completely opinion based. No facts whatsoever.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

bntbrl said:


> I personally tend to go along the old school lines of keeping strains puire. To me there is a difference between selective breeding and hybridizing. Some fish in the wild are dwindling in numbers or becoming otherwise hard to obtain F1 in the hobby. For these reasons is a part of why I think that keeping the different fish pure is a good idea. However if they could be seperated and treid perhaps it would be different. However when you typically look at most hybrids or their offspring they arent typical of spectively bred pure breeds. After a few genereations ofselectively breeding those though I suppose that the Red Texas Cichlid and the Flowerhorns are created. The flowerhorns dont look so much unlike some of the other pure cichilds if you didnt know much better. The Red Texas one doesnt look all that bad either. I was just thinking that scientifically, and what not and all, is it responsible?


as long as they are not tossed in the wild and are sold as a hybrid (flowerhorn, RT, etc.) I don't see how it would be irresponsible...


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

gage said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough! This is a very good read and states my main reasons for not liking hybrids
> ...


Gage, I love ya brother... but no need to exaggerate... there are a bunch of facts in that article... as well as some opinions... and the conclusion is the author's opinion...

I understand you disagree with his conclusion... and I don't fault either side of the debate for their individual opinions... but I also don't agree with belittling or exaggerating to support ones opinion (on either side of the debate).


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

I see creating random hybrids and selling them irresponsible because:

A) Just because you label them as hybrids does not mean the buyer isnâ€™t going to resell them mislabeled, or further breed them and sell the offspring mislabeledâ€¦

B) The more acceptable it is to pass hybrids around the hobby the more it will happen, the more it happens the more doing so mislabeled will happen, the more mislabeled hybrids are passed through the hobby the more people will seek out wild caught fish as pets to ensure a pure strainâ€¦ For numerous reasons I disagree with pulling fish out of the wild to be kept as pets.

I do accept that FlowerHorns, Super Red Texas, etc have their place in the hobby. I feel breeders who spend years creating an attractive, desirable hybrid is worthy of being discussed totally separately as random hybridization taking place between two pet fishâ€¦


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

gage said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough! This is a very good read and states my main reasons for not liking hybrids
> ...


Again...like stated before, this article states my main reasons also for not liking hybrids....I wasn't looking for you opinion on the article... :thumb:


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

gage said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough! This is a very good read and states my main reasons for not liking hybrids
> ...


Again...like stated before, this article states my main reasons also for not liking hybrids....I wasn't looking for you opinion on the article... :thumb:


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

Sorry for the double post


----------



## underOATH87 (Apr 14, 2007)

Well, I am the type to want a pure fish over a hybrid. It seems like there are so many hybrids these days it's getting a little out of hand. I feel like eventualy, one day, we're going to be congratulating eachother on how lucky we were to find a pure fish.

I don't believe we should be creating certain types of hybrids for any reason. If they want to do it in the wild, let them. But to keep fish together and breed them just to see what they'll look like for our amusement is just wrong. Even if we're breeding them to make them stronger, or whatever, that shouldn't really be left up to us either.

It's kinda like the "we're trying to play god" thing, it's not right.

I think flowerhorns are very nice looking fish, I wouldn't mind keeping 1, just 1 in a tank alone as a nice fish, but it wouldn't be more than that.

You wouldn't try to breed a human with a cheetah just to see if they could run 60 MPH and have spots on their skin...

LOL, as you can tell, I'm not all about facts, that's just how I see it.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

Toby_H said:


> gage said:
> 
> 
> > jaybuc said:
> ...


I'll restate mtself in a better set of words.

The guy seems much to biased to be writing any articles like this one. You need someone who understands both side to write and article like this.

the thing that caught my attention was "Why are hybrids bad". They are not bad... they are fish... thats that.

and how did a picture of a dyed fish come into the cards with hybridization, I don't know of a flowerhorn keeper that would buy a dyed fish... they have nothing to do with hybrids.

and to say destroy them immediately? seriously... do I need to even mention this for people to know this is just pathetic? a German Shepard breeds with a Siberian Husky... do we kill them? no... so what makes fish any different then that?

and a side note... dogs were not all bred from 1 species... Wolves, Coyotes, Dingos, (any wild dog really) were in there to... you think they got the different colors they did with one species? YA RIGHT!

ps. I will also admit something else, I completely disagree with selling unfaded Red texas (the ones that failed to turn bright orange). you know why? because they look identical to a regular Green Texas, that is the kind of hybrids I dislike.


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

> the more mislabeled hybrids are passed through the hobby the more people will seek out wild caught fish as pets to ensure a pure strain


This is a good point.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

First, Gage, "the guy" is Dr. Ronald Coleman, a highly respected behavioralist who has been doing Cichlid Research studies for a couple of decades. So yes, it is certainly to be expected that he has a bias against hybrids. And no, you don't need someone who understands both sides to write that article, as he is stating his position that hybrids are bad, and backing it up with facts. That is his opinion, and all discussion concerning hybrids in the hobby is going to be just that - opinion. If you want to make an argument as to why hybrids are good for the hobby and post it on your website, that is your prerogative.

Most people involved in the science of studying Cichlids believe the same way, because for science, hybrid fish are a bad thing. *For the HOBBY it is acceptable, but not for the science.* However, for a lot of Cichlid keepers the science is the hobby, and hybrids interfere with the ability to get correctly identified species to study the behavior. This is why you get the strong emotional response to the subject whenever it is brought up.

The connection between dyed/tattooed fish and hybrids is mostly due to the Bloody Parrot, which has been one of the most abused fish in the hobby. Once one crosses the line of modifying an animal in a manner that is detrimental to the animal, it really is a short step from hybrid to line breeding spinal deformities to tattooing them to cutting off parts to make them meet a desired shape. Not everyone will cross that line, but everyone should be made aware of it.

And whether you like it or not, Science considers all domestic dogs to be _Canis lupus familiaris_, not only a single species but a subspecies in their own right. *DNA studies *have found that all dogs really are descended from _Canis lupus_, the Grey Wolf. From the Irish Wolf Hound to the Chihuaha, one species according to DNA. Sorry to disappoint.

That was in defense of Dr. Coleman. I've known him for a long time, even though I don't get to see or talk to him all that often, and consider him a friend and on occasion a mentor. I do not personally have a problem with hobbyists keeping intentional hybrids, but I will continue to see them as not being serious Cichlid hobbyists, as I do those who keep valid species without at least trying to breed them. And THAT is MY opinion, like it or lump it. :wink:


----------



## noobdood (Jul 19, 2008)

Whats so bad about hybrid fish?


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

noobdood said:


> Whats so bad about hybrid fish?


Depends on whom you ask. For me it's a morality issue. For others it's enviormental issue. For others it's a question of responsiblity. Still others it's a religious issue, and you know how touchy those can be.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

not a serious cichlid hobbiest huh? that is too precious... I will go so far as to say 90% of people in the flowerhorn hobby went through years of keeping and breeding a ton of pure cichlids. and almost all breeders of flowerhorns will tell you they moved on to hybrids because after 20 years of owning pure breds they were not interesting enough any more, with flowerhorns, every one owns there own unique individual.

to each there own... but I still disagree with the fact that anyone that keeps hybrids is classified an untrue cichlid hobbiest, as this statement is complete bull... you could be any one of the well known people like Ken Davis (which keeps flowerhorns himself), Jeff Rapps, Spencer Jack etc. and I would not hesitate to say they are full of **** when it comes to that statement.


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

I am currently reading some ACA stuff that has some information about keeping pure cichlids. The ACA like sto keep pure strains it seems. They seem to be more science oriented and not so much experimental as far as breeding goes.

They have a good idea of how they should keep the fish pure, as many are losing habitat and arent available in the wild any longer. As these areas are acleaned or restored only pure specimens should be used to repopulate barren portions of habitat that man has destroyed.

On the other hand I have seen a could SR Texas cichlids that are interesting. I doubt Id ever own one though.


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

*gage* - There is elitism in any hobby/skill/sport, it is human nature. Not a good part of human nature, but it is there. Many cichlid hobbists see hybrid keepers like that one young kid that drops a big block chevy engine into a honda civic and calls it a muscle car, or the guy that buys a moped and joins a harley club.

Or if you aren't a car guy, bowlers like me thinking that canadian 5 pin bowling is blasphemy and won't even go on the same block with a 5 pin alley!! :lol:

You have to remember a lot of older hobbists grew up with the literature of the day denouncing hybrids as the highest of evils by the most established, most experienced of cichlid keeprs. People that have their docturates in biology. It was regarded as worse than communism, and most of the world knows how the US felt about communism ('communist' is still my da's favorate swear word and highest insult). It was, and still is by many, considered one of the signs of the apocolypse.

Now are they really that bad? Of course not. As *dogofwar* has preached both here and other sites, it's more a question of responsiblity more than anything. Where I disagree with him though, is I don't believe responsiblity can be taught to the masses. Humans by nature are irresponsible creatures. I agree with you when you say the serious flowerhorn types aren't the ones creating mixed hybrids and passing them off as pure cichlids. But I do believe the proliferation of flowerhorns has directly increased the average person's appeal of mixing random cichlids. They don't understand that the flowerhorn strains took years to 'fix', just as any line bred cichlid does (marbled convicts for instance).

It's kind of like the news showing a very successfull bank robber, it spawns all sorts of copycat attempts that all fail. It's those failing, undisciplined attempts that are the real problem. And of course people that are only in it for the money. They are always a problem.


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

This is the bottom line from this whole debate...from the article, as stated before

"the more mislabeled hybrids are passed through the hobby the more people will seek out wild caught fish as pets to ensure a pure strain"

This my concern for the future...agree or disagree, this is FACT


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

ook, when it comes to _mislabeled_ hybrids I completely 100% agree with you... I don't agree with destroying them, but I also don't agree with making/marketing them in the first place.

I suppose this is really a whole different debate then the flowerhorn debate.

*dwarfpike*, don't get me wrong, I completely understand a lot of the older members stance, I understand both sides of this argument quite well, I was a pure cichlid only type guy at one point you know. and still am unless it involves a known cross among most fish keepers (like RM, SRS, RBK, FH etc.) by no means would I personally purchase a random hybrid, like those darn carpintis/cyanoguttatus hybrids drive me nuts, as it is those types of hybrids ruining the pure breds, not the known hybrids I stated above.

as I said, between these random hybrids and known hybrids they are completely different arguments, and I have been arguing for the flowerhorn hobbiests, not the ones who have/breed a bunch of random junk to sell.


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

See, I don't believe them to be completely seperate though. The popularity of the known ones is encouraging the creation of the random ones. It is for that reason that I am against them all. If people were more responsible, you could seperate them into two differant arguements. But then if people were more responsible, 90% of the world's problems wouldn't be here either.

Remember, in a perfect world we wouldn't need police becuase people would know it's wrong to steal, kill, ect. But since it isn't, we need those overbearing, give you a ticket for doing 1 km/mile over the speed limit types. Absolutism is never a good idea, but sometimes it is necessary when people can't govern themselves. I do honestly believe in banning all hybrids becuase the vast majority of people can't or won't be responsible enough to handle them properly. As usual, the lack of responsiblity from the masses ruins it for the select few. It is no differant than Brazil limiting exports to try and save their fish becuase too many people had their hands in the pie.

And yes, if I had 3 genie wishes ... I'm pretty sure after the last one there would be no cichlid hybrids left in the world.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

> I do honestly believe in banning all hybrids becuase the vast majority of people can't or won't be responsible enough to handle them properly.


that statement is completely incorrect, I would say the vast majority are fine but the few that make idiotic mistakes overpower the others and that gives all hybrid keepers a bad name.

if any of you were to join a flowerhorn site without biased opinions you would understand that almost every one of them just as if not more responsible then those of us here, and none of them will sell low grade fry for the only reason being they can be confused with a pure bred cichlid, is that irresponsible IYO?

lets face it... flowerhorns have been around a long time... if flowerhorn keepers were irresponsible, they would be flooding lakes and rivers with the fry that were not worth selling (the trimac looking ones)... and as far as I know this has never happened.

out of the millions of flowerhorn keepers out there, the random hundred stupid ones give us all a bad name, does that sound _fair_ to you? I didn't think so.



> The popularity of the known ones is encouraging the creation of the random ones.


not really... the popularity of flowerhorns is encouraging people to attempt at making them better, already using a flowerhorn, and I have not seen anyone cross, for example, a P. managuense with an A. citrinellum because flowerhorns are popular, makes no sense at all, now, they may cross a flowerhorn with a P. managuense to try and make the line better, but never have I seen just random hybrids created because of flowerhorns.

of course, we are 2 strongly opinionated people and neither of us are going to change eachothers views... :lol... so really I suppose this is a pointless argument.



> And yes, if I had 3 genie wishes ... I'm pretty sure after the last one there would be no cichlid hybrids left in the world.


see, I would wish for all irresponsible people in the world to disappear, then these purist would realize 99% of flowerhorn keepers are just as responsible as any other fish keeper

but I'm right and your wrong :lol:


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

You must of missed this part in my previous post *gage*:



dwarfpike said:


> I agree with you when you say the serious flowerhorn types aren't the ones creating mixed hybrids and passing them off as pure cichlids.





gage said:


> out of the millions of flowerhorn keepers out there, the random hundred stupid ones give us all a bad name, does that sound fair to you? I didn't think so.


Yes, I admitted it wasn't fair in the post actually. :thumb:



gage said:


> not really... the popularity of flowerhorns is encouraging people to attempt at making them better, already using a flowerhorn, and I have not seen anyone cross, for example, a P. managuense with an A. citrinellum because flowerhorns are popular, makes no sense at all, now, they may cross a flowerhorn with a P. managuense to try and make the line better, but never have I seen just random hybrids created because of flowerhorns.


Then you haven't visited a certain other site enough, where people believe that since flowerhorns are 'cool' ... then it would be cool to mix and match other cichlids to see if they can't find a new craze, even endangered ones like istalanums.



gage said:


> of course, we are 2 strongly opinionated people and neither of us are going to change eachothers views... :lol... so really I suppose this is a pointless argument.


Yes, I agree with you on this one! :lol: BUT, becuase we don't get snippy with each other (becuase we both stay respectful), we can discuss the points and let others see both sides for themselves. I agree our comments back and forth will never change each other's minds, but if our discourse enlightens some people one way or the other, then it's worth it!


----------



## JerseyGiant88 (Jun 17, 2009)

personally, i support the existence of hybrids and the rights of people to do what they want with their fish so long as they are responsible and truthful about it. i owned 2 of the much abhorred Blood Parrots (they recently died when they jumped out of my tank and got mauled by my dog), but while they were alive they seemed just as happy and healthy as any of my other pure cichlids were. they shared a tank with 2 jack dempseys and they got along fine and were able to compete for food with them. i dont think i would get BP's again because i tend to prefer a tougher fish like the jack dempsey, but i certainly wouldnt classify the blood parrot as a bad fish. as for the abuse that they receive in the industry (tattooing, cutting off tails, etc.), that would fall into the category of irresponsible actions.

also, i feel like banning hybrid cichlids is pretty much an impossibility. those of you who are in favor of this, I am curious to know how you would go about getting a ban put into place and how that ban would be enforced? it seems as if there would be too many ways for people to get around it, and that the costs of enforcing such a ban would be unfeasible.

i am also highly suspicious of any government bans on animals that can and have been kept responsibly. i have 3 Pit Bulls who are sweet and not aggressive at all towards people (though they all have an intense hatred of cats and rodents), but yet Pits are banned in several states and cities. i would trust my dogs around any person, yet certain places have arbitrarily decided that i cannot bring my dogs there simply because of the stigma attached to their breed. though the reasons for banning hybrid cichlids and Pit Bulls are for two completely different reasons, i find both to be wrong because they punish responsible owners for the irresponsible actions of others. i would find it to be quite wrong, not to mention un-american, to take an animal away from a person when they are treating that animal with respect and responsibility.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

gage said:


> not a serious cichlid hobbiest huh? that is too precious... I will go so far as to say 90% of people in the flowerhorn hobby went through years of keeping and breeding a ton of pure cichlids. and almost all breeders of flowerhorns will tell you they moved on to hybrids because after 20 years of owning pure breds they were not interesting enough any more, with flowerhorns, every one owns there own unique individual.
> 
> to each there own... but I still disagree with the fact that anyone that keeps hybrids is classified an untrue cichlid hobbiest, as this statement is complete bull... you could be any one of the well known people like Ken Davis (which keeps flowerhorns himself), Jeff Rapps, Spencer Jack etc. and I would not hesitate to say they are full of #%$& when it comes to that statement.


I am not opposed to people keeping intentional hybrids. I'm also not opposed to people keeping a community tank in their living room because "it looks pretty". I just don't believe anyone who does that is a serious hobbyist because they are not trying to learn anything. If you breed fish as well as keeping a "pretty tank", or a "pet", I'll happily talk with you about the breeding, but I really don't care about the "pretty tanks/fish". And this is the reason I'm willing to tolerate those who are not yet serious, because occasionally someone gets curious enough to want to try the breeding.

Since we're speaking in unprovable near absolutes, I will go so far as to say that 90% of those who breed flowerhorns do it for the money, not to learn anything. Yes, they are looking for new combinations - to sell. that is not a hobbyist, that is a commercial breeder. So are the three people you named, and there is nothing wrong with it as these are the people who make it possible for me to get fish without a trip to SA/CA/West Africa. For them it is a business; for me it's a hobby. I've been breeding Cichlids for 40 years, still haven't bred all of them, and find the argument that someone got "bored" with breeding regular cichlids to be facetious. And I have bred many that I couldn't give away because they were so "ugly", but I learned how they lived and reproduced - and often they were more interesting than the brightly colored species.

the real problem is that most of the people *buying *flowerhorns do not comprehend what they are keeping, because the vast majority are NOT former Cichlid breeders, nor even current Cichlid breeders when they first obtain the fish. How many times have you answered questions here and on other forums asking what species is the flowerhorn - not what species made it, but what species IS it? There is an enormous amount of ignorance among the flowerhorn *keepers *- not necessarily the breeders - that puts real species at risk in the long run, just as dwarfpike has pointed out. But while he considers it irresponsibility, I consider the problem to be one of ignorance, and that is a condition that can be corrected. The internet has also made this ignorance a hazard, as not everyone goes to the forums. If they look at the profiles here, and compare the real Trimac to their lowgrade FH, they may think that's what they've got. Bear in mind, we're not talking experienced hobbyists, we're talking novices.

Another problem I personally have with breeding FH is that it takes viable breeding stock out of real species. I breed domestic swordtails to study the genetics (thereby negating comments about them originating from hybrids), but I always keep a pure line of each of the traits I'm working with. I certainly do crosses, to learn how the various genes and traits interact, but I always maintain a pure line from which to draw breeding stock, and excess can be traded/sold/given away. I don't see any of these FH breeders offering pure stock of the various species they started with, some of which are at risk in the wild as well as the hobby. But again, that goes back to the money: if folks knew what species they have, they'd know what was being used to produce their hybrid stock. Same problem existed for decades in the Discust commercial breeders, genetic data was a guarded business secret. Follow the money.

Also, I hate quoting myself, but you failed to address this statement: "Once one crosses the line of modifying an animal in a manner that is detrimental to the animal, it really is a short step from hybrid to line breeding spinal deformities to tattooing them to cutting off parts to make them meet a desired shape. Not everyone will cross that line, but everyone should be made aware of it." Most of the FH breeders fall into the class of those who recognize that line and choose to cross it anyway. So it's just one step at a time.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

> I will go so far as to say that 90% of those who breed flowerhorns do it for the money


I love it when people that know nothing about flowerhorns or the hobbiests make up statements like this, as it is BS TBH with you, most breeders are in it because they enjoy the fish and enjoy finding new cool traits, sure money is a bonus (as it is with anything...) but that is not the primary reason why most breeders choose to breed, of course there are a few, but you get those few idiots in any "field" you look into.

but ok, bored was the wrong terminology, I should have said they wanted something different, something that no one else on this planet owned, and with flowerhorns, none of them look the same, therefore you own a fish that no one else on this planet has owned.



> How many times have you answered questions here and on other forums asking what species is the flowerhorn - not what species made it, but what species IS it?


that is not what they are talking about... there are different variants of flowerhorns... THAT is what they want to know, and they are using the incorrect term for it. There are Zhen Zhu, Kamalau, Kamfa, Red Monkey, Rainbow King, Super Red Texas, and many more.

here is the one thing about selling the low grades as trimacs/mislabeling them after purchase... The flowerhorn hobbiests/breeders are working on eliminating the low grade trimac like flowerhorns for that purpose, do you really think flowerhorn keepers/breeders _want_ these low grade flowerhorns flooding the market and being sold as something they are not? The answer is no, I have yet to meet a flowerhorn keeper/breeder that likes seeing them labeled as a trimac because they understand the annoyance.

and as far as ignorance, that is far from limited to flowerhorn keepers in the hobby... I am not going into details but I can safely say that there are just as many ignorant purists out there, easily.

and no, every flowerhorn keeper I know 100% disagrees with dying and cutting pieces off of fish... it is 100% NOT the flowerhorn community that causes this to happen, all of these processes are done far after the breeders have sent them out for sale, and every breeder I have searched into in flowerhorns 100% disagrees with this.

see, they do breed with parrots, yes, that is how you get Kamfa, Bonsai, SB's etc. but if the deformity is life threatening in any way the fish is culled, now I cannot speak on behalf of most breeders on this topic, because they never really go into detail with there breeding practices.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

> Then you haven't visited a certain other site enough, where people believe that since flowerhorns are 'cool' ... then it would be cool to mix and match other cichlids to see if they can't find a new craze, even endangered ones like istalanums.


?!??!?!?!??! what site is this???

this is far from most people within the flowerhorn hobby and I 100% agree THIS is a problem, but at the same time what are we going to do? people will do as they please.

we can however hope they do not sell off the fry, at least to any irresponsible people that may do something stupid

but besides this, this is not what I would classify a flowerhorn keeper, and all I'm trying to get across is flowerhorn keepers and breeders are not causing the problems, it is the ones with pure breds and decide they want to cross thems problem. You can blame this on flowerhorns all you want to but I highly doubt that not having flowerhorns would stop this kind of behavior.


----------



## heylady (Oct 14, 2004)

If there is one thing I've learned in this hobby it's to never say never.

Think, "oh _I'll_ never keep one of _those_"....mmmmhhhmmmm keep thinking that because you just might be surprised one day! :wink:

How do I know this? Because I was one of them. Yup, couldn't stand the thought of a blood parrot, didn't like their looks. Then one day hubby was with me at the LFS and remarked on how he liked them, and how he wanted one. Now at that point, he'd put up with all my stuff....raising BBS in the kitchen and infusoria on the windowsills and earthworms on the porch, and the tanks and buckets, etc...and with him being so understanding and all well how could I refuse? Besides, it meant another tank :wink: so he picked one out and home we went. That was over 10 years ago and my much loved Pinky is now gone after being my favorite fish of all time for all those years. ((RIP Pinky)) She was the most interesting and beautiful fish I've ever owned and I still miss her....

And yes, I did love my beautiful marble angels I had that gave me many, many spawns. And the black lace pair. And I loved the rams that I bred, the shellies, the jewels too. And all the other cichlids I kept but didn't try breeding like the discus, cuckatoo dwarfs, texas, julies, labs, kribs, etc...and the ones I have now. Oscars and EBJD and rainbows...

The funny thing is both the purist and the hybridist (is that even a word??) have common ground. Neither group likes the fish that can be passed off as pure when in reality they aren't. Nobody likes the really low grade hybrid. The oh too often tank at the LFS with the "mixed african" sign on it. The poor quality red texas my LFS is selling which could easily be mistaken for green texas. (If they had been from a spawn of mine, those not showing any red would have been culled. That's what oscars are for! :wink: )

I never thought I'd love a hybrid but I did and I do. Now I have a red texas and I have no plans on giving him up.

And just because....

Pinky


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

I find one point DwarfPike made exceptionally interesting and impacting on my overall opinion on this subjectâ€¦

(paraphrased)â€¦ As long as Flowerhorns and other hybrids are praised as being coolâ€¦ younger/newer enthusiasts will be motivated to create random crosses / hybrids hoping to discover a â€œnewâ€


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

JerseyGiant88 said:


> personally, i support the existence of hybrids and the rights of people to do what they want with their fish so long as they are responsible and truthful about it. i owned 2 of the much abhorred Blood Parrots (they recently died when they jumped out of my tank and got mauled by my dog), but while they were alive they seemed just as happy and healthy as any of my other pure cichlids were. they shared a tank with 2 jack dempseys and they got along fine and were able to compete for food with them. i dont think i would get BP's again because i tend to prefer a tougher fish like the jack dempsey, but i certainly wouldnt classify the blood parrot as a bad fish. as for the abuse that they receive in the industry (tattooing, cutting off tails, etc.), that would fall into the category of irresponsible actions.
> 
> also, i feel like banning hybrid cichlids is pretty much an impossibility. those of you who are in favor of this, I am curious to know how you would go about getting a ban put into place and how that ban would be enforced? it seems as if there would be too many ways for people to get around it, and that the costs of enforcing such a ban would be unfeasible.
> 
> i am also highly suspicious of any government bans on animals that can and have been kept responsibly. i have 3 Pit Bulls who are sweet and not aggressive at all towards people (though they all have an intense hatred of cats and rodents), but yet Pits are banned in several states and cities. i would trust my dogs around any person, yet certain places have arbitrarily decided that i cannot bring my dogs there simply because of the stigma attached to their breed. though the reasons for banning hybrid cichlids and Pit Bulls are for two completely different reasons, i find both to be wrong because they punish responsible owners for the irresponsible actions of others. i would find it to be quite wrong, not to mention un-american, to take an animal away from a person when they are treating that animal with respect and responsibility.


Since when are people responsible and truthful?? I don't buy that...I think the complete opposite..people lie and are deceitful :thumb:


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

jaybuc said:


> JerseyGiant88 said:
> 
> 
> > personally, i support the existence of hybrids and the rights of people to do what they want with their fish so long as they are responsible and truthful about it. i owned 2 of the much abhorred Blood Parrots (they recently died when they jumped out of my tank and got mauled by my dog), but while they were alive they seemed just as happy and healthy as any of my other pure cichlids were. they shared a tank with 2 jack dempseys and they got along fine and were able to compete for food with them. i dont think i would get BP's again because i tend to prefer a tougher fish like the jack dempsey, but i certainly wouldnt classify the blood parrot as a bad fish. as for the abuse that they receive in the industry (tattooing, cutting off tails, etc.), that would fall into the category of irresponsible actions.
> ...


you grew up in a very bad end of the neighborhood haven't you... sure there are "not so good people" out there, but to categorize all people as such is wrong and quite disrespectful.


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

gage said:


> jaybuc said:
> 
> 
> > JerseyGiant88 said:
> ...


Did I say ALL people...NO...I just don't trust as you do pet shops/fish stores and hobbyist to not sell hybrid fish. No, I don't think that all hobbyist have the best interest of cichlids in mind....and if you do then you are sorely mistaken.

We are all hearing about hybrids being bad...I want someone to try and defend how Hybrids are good....Let's hear it Gage, how do Hybrids help the cichlid hobbiyst as well as the fish themselves?


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

The more respectful we keep this exchange the more it will be educating people and the less it will be making this whole topic seem annoyingâ€¦

Keeping fish as pets is for personal enjoyment. Personal enjoyment is just as much of a reason to keep hybrids as it is pure strains.

Sure we can claim that in the future captive bred stock might be the only source of a species and captive bred stock may be used to repopulate the wild. But be for realâ€¦ are scientists going to post on CF asking us to donate our fish to a repopulation program? Nope, they are going to turn to Zoos, Universities and other more creditable sources for their fish. Weâ€™re just keeping them cause we like â€˜emâ€¦

But on the flip sideâ€¦ By keeping fish and other exotic pets I have gained appreciation for them and therefore wish to minimize my personal impact on their environment. I attempt to avoid supporting industries that are directly destroying their environments and wish to promote steps that reduce the amount of Wild Caught fish that are brought in from the wild.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

My opinion is that they are nor good or bad, when it comes to flowerhorns. they are not hurting the hobby in any way, nor is it helping the hobby, and IMO flowerhorns are just another part of the hobby.

not once did I state that the random BS hybrids are a good thing, the hybrids that are debatable between pure and hybrids are bad yes, but the known hybrids are not hurting anything.

I apologize if did not intend "People Lie and are deceitful" to mean all people, but generally when someone just says "people", instead of "some people", they are making a generalization about all people. you should watch your grammar next time.

I never once said that all people have the best intentions, but there are just as many irresponsible purists out there as there is hybrid keepers... and I believe using the responsibility aspect is just a reason to "nag" at flowerhorn keepers.


----------



## salukicichlids (Apr 16, 2009)

Well I guess to offer my two sense to the discussion. There is going to be some indifference on how each and everyone views things. Some people think people lie and steal, and some people think to find the good in everyone. I think a lot of people have good intentions for the fish they keep and are distributing. Some probably don't. Personally I think that hybrids are okay and there is no possible way to get rid of them. But they should be marketed as such. But there is no way to control this. How do I know I am not buying a fish that is a hybrid that looks exactly like what I'm trying to get? I guess around here you see a lot of assorted african tanks with a bunch of randoms in it that I have no idea what they are. I know a lot of fish end up in the stores down here from local people with tanks and that's where they end up.

The fish keeping hobby could benefit in many ways just on education on the subject of hybrids and frankly keeping them to yourself. I am a very new fish keeper myself. I received my first tank in January and now I am currently up to four. Had I never strolled across this forum I would be even less educated then I am now. Buying whatever fish catch my fancy at the store. Really as far as locally I think this is where a lot of this stuff comes from. People who buy fish who dont know what they are and have fry and bring them back and they get marketed to the next person.

Obviously this is not true of commercial breeders, but it probably happens a lot more places then here.

So ignorance is shared by many. My first cichlid was purchased as a yellow lab come to find he grows up and no black trim? I have a red zebra...mislabeled tank.


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

> here is the one thing about selling the low grades as trimacs/mislabeling them after purchase... The flowerhorn hobbiests/breeders are working on eliminating the low grade trimac like flowerhorns for that purpose, do you really think flowerhorn keepers/breeders want these low grade flowerhorns flooding the market and being sold as something they are not? The answer is no, I have yet to meet a flowerhorn keeper/breeder that likes seeing them labeled as a trimac because they understand the annoyance.


This makes me wonder, then, where the thousands of lowgrade trimac type flowerhorns in the shops are coming from. Someone is selling them, and probably {GASP!} lying about it. Having dealt with the Far East breeding establishment for several decades, I will repeat: it is about the money and nothing but the money. Creating something new is about the money. And for a commercial breeder, there's nothing wrong with that. It's the dishonesty about it that bugs me.

I have answered the question exactly as originally phrased on a couple of General forums, and I've even seen it on CRC at least once. Not what type, but what is the latin name of the Flowerhorn. And I did not say ignorance is a bad thing, as we all start out ignorant. I said that most flowerhorns are bought because they're pretty, or have "personality", not because people expect to learn anything from them. A lot of normal fish are bought for the same reasons. People have to be educated, regardless of what type of fish they've bought, but they should be given facts, not opinions.

And I will repeat, I am not against people keeping them. I simply find them a waste of my time and effort; but then, I feel the same way about Family Guy and Seinfeld. :roll:

Oh, and a quick English lesson: the word is spelled "hobbyist", there's no such word as "hobbiest". That's just a pet peeve of mine, nothing personal.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

> I said that most flowerhorns are bought because they're pretty, or have "personality"


well, isn't that why _most_ people buy _most_ fish? answer is yes, I bet most of the people who buy fish like Red Devils, Jaguars, Vieja/Paratheraps, etc. are looking at personality and color, not to observe the fishes special behaviors.



> This makes me wonder, then, where the thousands of lowgrade trimac type flowerhorns in the shops are coming from


well, I didn't say there are no irresponsible people, I merely stated that generalizing all hybrid keepers as irresponsible is wrong and untrue, as most are, but the few irresponsible idiots give all hybrid keepers a bad name.

any reputable breeder will not be dishonest, and again, not all breeders are about the money, some yes, no doubt about it, but there are indefinitely breeders out there that produce quality for the hobbYISTS lol.

lol, I hope I am not sounding like an a**hole in all this, not trying to be.

but really, lets face it, this is a useless argument when you get people as stubborn as myself involved :lol:



> Oh, and a quick English lesson: the word is spelled "hobbyist", there's no such word as "hobbiest". That's just a pet peeve of mine, nothing personal.


:lol:... my bad


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

The dog thing and fish are two different things. Your cichlid wont put 76 stitches in my freinds face so that she looks like a package of bacon. It never did that before, and it wont do it again. However that is a completely different subject. It does involve responsibility though, something Im not questioning you about with you or your dog. They are different subjects. I have different feelings about irresposible dog owners and certain dog breeds that I wont get into here.

It is true that certain cichlids that would potentially go into programs for restocking natural depleted sources would come from scientists and zoo, and big aquariums. However at some point we will not have access to certain stocks of fish. When can you draw the moral line for degrading the bloodline of something that you cant get back?

I have thought about what the flowerhorn breeders have done and find it very interesting. I have more than once wondered what one could do with these fish or those fish or what not. I dont think Ill ever have the want to do that though. I thought that flowerhorns were trimacs when I started seeing them in the shops. I had no idea that they were hybrids at first as I didnt pay much attention to them. *** had lots and lots of cichlids. They really looked like trimacs.

In the deepest regions of my mind I think that it is my duty to keep the strains and bloodlines pure. However I have entertained the idea of what hybrids of these and these might look like or whatever. I think that dog breeds shouldnt be mixed like schnoodles, chiweiners, and the like, unless you have a specific use or trait that you are looking for. These all came from the wolf basically so they are strains not seperate species or subspecies. On that same note I somewhat think the same about hybrid fish. Only the dogs werent naturally like that to start with. The fish were here long before man was here, and we gave some of them the old one two.


----------



## heylady (Oct 14, 2004)

> We are all hearing about hybrids being bad...I want someone to try and defend how Hybrids are good....Let's hear it Gage, how do Hybrids help the cichlid hobbiyst as well as the fish themselves?


We could argue that the hobby itself is detrimental to all fish and the environment. (I am also including saltwater fish in this as it is part of the hobby) Some species have been depleted in the wild or their populations brought so low that genetic diversity is a real risk - look what nearly happened to clown loaches and what's happening now to wild stock of bangaii cardinalfish. Some species have been so changed by humans that if released into the wild to "repopulate" the streams or lakes that they wouldn't have much of a chance of survival - fantail guppies and bubble-eyed goldfish come to mind. Some have been exposed to disease for so many generations that it is common for all of them to carry the disease (neon blue gouramis and neon tetras). Some environments have been severly hit by irresponsible people turning non-native fish loose in ponds, lakes, rivers, or off coastlines. Walking catfish, oscars and lionfish, let's not forget the famous snakehead, damaging local populations of native fish. Some habitats have been so severely damaged in the pursuit of collection that they may never recover like reefs where cyanide was used.
Let's consider the individual fish themselves. If fish could reason do you really think they'd prefer to be stuck in a little glass box rather than the lake they came from? Do you really think they'd want to be in the hands of a newby? Or a distributor?  Shipped across the world for our pleasure, our whim?

Now that it's clear that keeping fish is one sided, we need to ask if hybrids have helped *us*, the cichlid hobbyist? Yes I believe they have. One of the aspects of being a cichlid hobbyist is getting "into" cichlids and I do believe that many hobbyists have gotten into our slice of the world because of hybrids. The maligned blood parrot was and is a first introduction even today. From the way I see them flying out of my LFS, I'd say that flowerhorns and their relations (bonsai) are doing the same thing.
Have hybrids helped the hobby itself? Yes I'd say it has. Any fish that sells is a boon to the hobby. The breeder, the manufacturers of the equipment, the LFS, all profit from the sale of fish whether they're pure or not. If people are successful then they will in turn either buy more tanks/fish or bigger tanks, maybe suscribe to magazines, join a club, etc....they're a boon to sites like this too. I keep hybrids and I know many others here who do too. Newcomers to the hobby go searching for sites to find out about their new pets all excited only to find disdain from many and this site one of the few where hybrid keepers are not shunned. 
Even if the newby is not successful they've still bought the equipment, which will end up in a garage sale somewhere or on craigslist where a dedicated hobbyist will snatch it up. :wink:

When you look at a blood parrot, there is no way that a _somewhat_ knowledgable cichlid hobbyist will mistake it for a midas or the real parrot cichlid. Most of the flowerhorns I've seen would not be mistaken for any other CA/SA cichlids either. It's the low grade ones that are the problem. How you go about making people responsible is beyond me. When I bred angels, any fry with a missing or deformed gill plate, bent finnage, odd body shape were culled. It isn't hard to do and that way you expend your energy on the ones that will turn out nice. Common sense tells you that nobody wants to have an angel with a missing gill plate and yet I've seen them in a batch of fish at the LFS. Common sense tells you that nobody wants to buy a red texas that isn't (at least) somewhat red.

And yet I see where some of the blame could be placed that isn't placed. On the LFS themselves. I realise it's a buisness but at the same time it isn't appropriate to sell certain kinds of fish or to sell them under false pretenses. Pacus shouldn't be sold to anyone because of their sheer size. Selling "mixed" africans is something the LFS should explain to the buyer beforehand- that these are hybrid species that will never show the colors of the pure species.

I don't think you could word a law about this kind of thing either without it shutting down the hobby entirely. 
There is one law that I would love to see though, and that's that absolutely *no* LFS should ever sell any fish that is tattooed, dyed or maimed!!


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

gage said:


> My opinion is that they are nor good or bad, when it comes to flowerhorns. they are not hurting the hobby in any way, nor is it helping the hobby, and IMO flowerhorns are just another part of the hobby.
> 
> not once did I state that the random BS hybrids are a good thing, the hybrids that are debatable between pure and hybrids are bad yes, but the known hybrids are not hurting anything.
> 
> ...


No worries....We just agree to disagree :thumb: It's all for the love of the :fish:


----------



## jaybuc (Dec 15, 2005)

heylady said:


> > We are all hearing about hybrids being bad...I want someone to try and defend how Hybrids are good....Let's hear it Gage, how do Hybrids help the cichlid hobbiyst as well as the fish themselves?
> 
> 
> We could argue that the hobby itself is detrimental to all fish and the environment. (I am also including saltwater fish in this as it is part of the hobby) Some species have been depleted in the wild or their populations brought so low that genetic diversity is a real risk - look what nearly happened to clown loaches and what's happening now to wild stock of bangaii cardinalfish. Some species have been so changed by humans that if released into the wild to "repopulate" the streams or lakes that they wouldn't have much of a chance of survival - fantail guppies and bubble-eyed goldfish come to mind. Some have been exposed to disease for so many generations that it is common for all of them to carry the disease (neon blue gouramis and neon tetras). Some environments have been severly hit by irresponsible people turning non-native fish loose in ponds, lakes, rivers, or off coastlines. Walking catfish, oscars and lionfish, let's not forget the famous snakehead, damaging local populations of native fish. Some habitats have been so severely damaged in the pursuit of collection that they may never recover like reefs where cyanide was used.
> ...


Heylady...very thought provoking post! one of the best so far on this subject. I agree the LFS have to step up and refuse to sell certain kinds of fish. I think most LFS see the $$ involved and could care less about what they sell. I have one saltwater LFS near me that doesn't put the prices or the names of the fish on the tanks. He hangs a printed list on the wall with the scientific name with the price next to it. He believes that if you want to keep the fish correctly you would at least do some research and find out its name. I have seen him several times turn down selling fish to people that just come in and say they want a Nemo fish! Now that is how it should be.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

Great post heylady, very informative! My only regret is I didn't post it first!



> He believes that if you want to keep the fish correctly you would at least do some research and find out its name.


now THAT is a good idea, I mean chances are if you don't even find out it's name you cannot keep it properly... 


> I have seen him several times turn down selling fish to people that just come in and say they want a Nemo fish!


I'd kick them out to...


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

I agree, in a perfect world people would research before buying their first tank. It took several years for me to realize that I was "unusual" in that I bought a book six months before getting a tank.

And Gage, I have taken no insult (other than my little pet peeve, thanks :lol: ). I understand several of your points, but the fish started out as good luck charms in SE Asia, and were bred to bring major cash. I can accept that there are now breeders other than the Eastern commercial concerns, and that they are doing it to see what they can get. I would wish that they would use controlled scientific methodology, but heck, even the fancy livebearer breeders don't bother with that. But I stopped keeping Malawians back in 1977 when I saw what they were producing in the Florida fish farms (hybrids to stock every store in the country). So I probably do have a bug up my posterior over the origin of Flowerhorns, but I can assure you, no one will ever convince me to intentionally keep one.

I should probably mention that I've also kept a lot of killifish in my 40 years, got into those very early on. A lot of my attitudes toward fishkeeping were formed by my friendships in the AKA. If you even suggested keeping hybrid killifish intentionally, they'd probably put out a hit on you. The killie people were keeping fish by location names decades before anyone else, and were using MtDNA when it was still a new experiment. The science is the hobby for most killifish hobbyists, but there have been bad eggs that tried to make money at it in less than savory ways. However, being more of a generalist, I've learned to accept the less enlightened, such as yourself! :wink: 

This has been interesting, but I think it's run it's course. I think the OP got the gist of the "discussion". :roll:


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

*Chromedome52* - Us westie keepers took a note from the killie keepers as well, which is why we won't even mix the same species from differant locations!! Growing in the hobby as a westie keeper probably has my attitude set in stone about it too.


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

I would also like to mention that I would never intentionally buy a hybrid if it weren't a flowerhorn or the like (SRT, RBK, RQ, etc) as far as hybrid Africans, hybrid killifish, any hybrid except flowerhorns I would have nothing to do with them.

I was once a pure only kind of person as well, I have warmed up to and now keep flowerhorns, just took some mind training :lol:, and I still attempt at setting up there tank as a natural biotope of CA because it bothers me because there biotope is nothing more then a clear bottom tank.

as I mentioned before, if parrots/flowerhorns weren't here already I would disagree 100% with making them, I still do disagree with making them, sounds odd, but I don't agree with the making of one of my favorite fish, which is where the mixed feelings come into play for me, so my opinions tend to contradict each other a bit... makes things confusing for me and others :lol:

suppose that is part of being 16 :lol:


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

Something really got to me a few minutes ago and I'm really starting to believe all the talk about breeders and other irresponsible flowerhorn keepers I'm starting to think I should have kept to pure species after this reply I saw on another forum which I will no longer ever visit.
[quote name='kooman' date='Aug 3 2009, 04:26 PM' post='387849']
Some people said that the black mark on the top fin is bad luck. It the mark of the dead.
their is the way you can clean them off. I'm not saying it, but their are other.
















































[/quote]
FOR BAD LUCK!?!?! How could someone do this to a poor fish just because of there stupid superstitions. Granted I will keep my 1 and only flowerhorn but I will no longer support that particular hobby ever again. /rant


----------



## heylady (Oct 14, 2004)

People do horrible things to non-hybrid fish too....I've seen mollies that have been tatooed with hearts on their sides, dyed fish of all kinds from oscars to platies and neon dyes injected in fish like glassfish, to god forbid I saw some albino frogs that had been dyed the other day (first time I'd seen that). I even saw on the net somewhere where a guy had pierced his oscars. That's right - *pierced* them through their lower jaw.

Idiots are everywhere.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

heylady said:


> People do horrible things to non-hybrid fish too....I've seen mollies that have been tatooed with hearts on their sides, dyed fish of all kinds from oscars to platies and neon dyes injected in fish like glassfish, to god forbid I saw some albino frogs that had been dyed the other day (first time I'd seen that). I even saw on the net somewhere where a guy had pierced his oscars. That's right - *pierced* them through their lower jaw.
> 
> Idiots are everywhere.


I know this I guess I over-reacted. But, I absolutely hate when people abuse animals especially when they can't even defend themselves. It's a real shame that anyone would do this to any kind of fish. Guess what irked me the most is the fact that one of the admins on that site was impressed by what this person did.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

That is a horrible post... the "spot of death" (at least in Trimacs) is a sign of being female...

I agree horrible things are done to non-hybrids as well as hybrids...

But I also understand that it is the Asian breeders that created the myth about the hybrid they creatred being good luck that are doing most of the commercial abuse of fish...


----------



## gage (Feb 7, 2007)

Gliven said:


> Something really got to me a few minutes ago and I'm really starting to believe all the talk about breeders and other irresponsible flowerhorn keepers I'm starting to think I should have kept to pure species after this reply I saw on another forum which I will no longer ever visit.
> [quote name='kooman' date='Aug 3 2009, 04:26 PM' post='387849']
> Some people said that the black mark on the top fin is bad luck. It the mark of the dead.
> their is the way you can clean them off. I'm not saying it, but their are other.


FOR BAD LUCK!?!?! How could someone do this to a poor fish just because of there stupid superstitions. Granted I will keep my 1 and only flowerhorn but I will no longer support that particular hobby ever again. /rant[/quote]

looks like the fish didn't make it through shipping not that he killed it... do you have evidence to support him killing it.

I think he meant bad luck/mark of dead because it was *unlucky* that it *died*


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

No he removed the mark from the fish because it's the mark of the dead. The fish is still alive he was talking about treating it with salt for 2 weeks and it looked fine afterwords.(according to him)


----------



## heylady (Oct 14, 2004)

It seems to me that you have two choices Gliven. Either never go to that site again, or let them know in a constructive adult manner how you feel about their cruelty. (In other words, don't just cuss them out!) You could become their conscience there. Educate them. You might be surprised too that others there will not speak up against it unless someone else goes first...


----------



## lil mama (Nov 24, 2007)

Very well put Barb!


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

Gliven said:


> I think the whole problem having a discussion on this topic is that fact that your either for or against and there's no middle ground and people are HIGHLY supportive one way or another and that always leads to a huge argument. Frankly this has been done many times and there is no changing minds either way.
> 
> People are gonna do things the way they want to and there is no changing human nature so I for one say let people enjoy the fish they love and if you sell them of give them away please label them correctly and on the same note if your receiving don't breed them and sell them as something else either. Just my 2 cents.


I'm in the middle 

I don't mind hybridization for the sake of enjoyment in the hobby - so long as the fish is being sold and labeled a hybrid, who really cares?

If someone creates a hybrid with the intention of profit under a new species craze...well that's wrong.

The entire debate is a matter of ethics and integrity - two traits that are sorely lacking in the retail end of this hobby. People are against hybridization because inevitably it leads to misinformation and shady dealings in fish stores.

I'm not a hybrid fan myself - the thai silk flowerhorns showing up in the scene are very nice, though - but I'm not against anyone who is well informed of the fishes origins keeping them for their own enjoyment.

EDIT: When it comes down to the argument of the "ethical treatment of the fish" - it seems silly to me that someone willing to take a fish and throw it in a box, then feed it artificial food for the duration of it's life - and breed it for future generations - would argue that hybrids are unethical. The hobby period is unethical in terms of animal cruelty, hybrids are not the only fish that get the asian market tattoo treatments ect. for alteration.

Using hybrids as an argument to stop asian markets is a moot point - they will always be around doing new things - pure species or not.

The argument around hybrids leading to wild caught specimens being pulled out of their habitat more and more by hobbyists in search of pure strains is probably a valid one - but no concrete research has ever been done around that thought. A lot of things said and read on the internet go somewhat overboard - and unfortunately a lot of people are gullible enough to believe them.

Working in a pet shop I can assure most of you that this type of hobbyist is a VERY niche area of interest - you aren't going to see pet stores cross country going after nothing but F0 because they can make a couple extra bucks on it. In most cases we prefer tank raised/captive bred fish because of how hearty they are, and maybe 10% of our user base is concerned with their origins.

I really doubt that the hobby itself is going to cause any particular species of fish to go endangered due to advanced hobbyists wanting F0 fish. Once again - to me - it really comes down to an argument of ethics, and I think extremists from both sides of the argument need to take a step back and look at some of the stuff they put into their opinions towards an argument before posting it. To anyone who is actually neutral on the subject, a lot of it can be very silly - and most of it has an underlying agenda.


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

I do see alot of bland cichlid specimens in many fish stores that the consumers dont know are bland or hybrid (the africans esp) as they have nothing to compare them to.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

> I don't mind hybridization for the sake of enjoyment in the hobby - so long as the fish is being sold and labeled a hybrid, who really cares?
> 
> If someone creates a hybrid with the intention of profit under a new species craze...well that's wrong.


Iâ€™m not sure I see the difference in these two that you are makingâ€¦

At some point someone â€˜createdâ€™ the FlowerHorn (new species craze) and went as far as to make up some nonsense â€œgood luck fishâ€


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

*Iâ€™m not sure I see the difference in these two that you are makingâ€¦
*

I thought it was pretty clear cut - if someone is selling a fish as a hybrid - and people want to buy the fish as a hybrid with the knowledge of that fact, then great. More power to them.

*At some point someone â€˜createdâ€™ the FlowerHorn (new species craze) and went as far as to make up some nonsense â€œgood luck fishâ€*


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

I guess I should make mention of this as reading through my last post it comes off the wrong way - which is another problem with the internet and being able to illustrate yourself properly in a debate.

I'm well aware that there are people out there who try to swindle folks out of their money - that fact is obvious in all aspects of sales, period.

Saying that eliminating hybridization is a step towards getting rid of unsavory business practices in terms of being lied to about fish is wrong - it will never stop.

People need to accept the fact that there are a lot of dishonest people in the world who will say whatever it takes to make a buck, and not just attribute this characteristic with flowerhorns. Once again it's using an underlying agenda to prove a point towards your own opinion, but the fact of the matter is that crooks have, and will always be around - flowerhorns didn't suddenly spring up this well of dishonest salesmen in the world. Dishonest salesmen were always there, and just used flowerhorns to their own ends.

EDIT: I do remember, when flowerhorns first came out - that they were being bred with the intentions of having markings on the side of their body that coincided with some type of Cantonese marking for good luck.

Whether that's true or not I really don't know - but A LOT of work went into creating a flowerhorn fish. Back when they were first being produced, Lyonsi were barely ever even heard of. Whoever did breed this hybrid knew very well what they were doing - and was not a misinformed hobbyist who got bored and wanted to make a buck.

I doubt the guys who originally created the flowerhorn did so with intentions of dolling it out as a brand new species of fish - that is to say as a newly discovered wild species of fish. In my own *opinion* I think it was done with the intentions of creating something new and unique.

Not everyone thinks a line bred trait in a pure bred fish is something spectacular, and I can see where the appeal of flowerhorns could come into play for breeders due to the possibilities out there by comparison to line bred traits.


----------



## Gliven (May 5, 2007)

heylady said:


> It seems to me that you have two choices Gliven. Either never go to that site again, or let them know in a constructive adult manner how you feel about their cruelty. (In other words, don't just cuss them out!) You could become their conscience there. Educate them. You might be surprised too that others there will not speak up against it unless someone else goes first...


I tried to explain my postion and I belive what he did was unacceptable and he basically said I was attacking him and he was trying to give us all "knowledge" which I thought was utter bs.

There are a few others that are on my side but with an admin apparently supporting the actions I believe I'll never return there this is a huge moral issue to me and anyone that thinks it okay to abuse an animal in anyway has some sort of deep issue.

The more I think about this topic the more upsetting this hybrid issue is to me. Granted yes other types of fish are tattooed, dyed, and mutilated but it is by far more prevalent in the flowerhorn hobby then anywhere else and I do believe breeders and other merchant are in it for the money or none of these would even be issues to begin with.

I don't see why someone would want to buy a fish with a missing fin or dyed some neon green color. What the whole problem is, is that people buy this fish in the first place if they have nobody to purchase them then obviously none would be made so quite frankly you can't blame merchants or breeders for trying to make money. People need to be educated on this matter and not purchase the fish and boycott or inform LFS what selling is immoral if they aren't even aware of how they are produced.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

To safe space Iâ€™ll omit quotesâ€¦

But I now better see the differences in the two statements I previously quotedâ€¦

Essentially, provided the hybrid breeder labels his fish a hybrid, as opposed to a new species, you do not see it as a problemâ€¦

Yet two posts up you stated that (approx) 10% of the customers at a pet store are educated hobbyistsâ€¦ so that means 90% of the people who read the tag â€œFlowerHornâ€


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

*** seen firemouths and jack dempseys available in pet store and in other aquarists tanks that were very bland and colorless. It is possible that the color is related to conditions, however as the wide array of people and tanks it is more than likely poor genetics that they are unassuming. As a youngster I had FM and JD that were very colorful that I had obtained from someone that bred tham as a hobby from F0 stock originally.

I once say a fish that looked like a firemouth body shape but had no coloring. I asked about it and the shop owner told me that it was a hybrid that someon had brought in and that they couldnt get rid of it because it was ugly. It was full grown but looked like a solid grey with light barring.

I beleive that above all we should be responsible and have the interest of the fish and hobby in mind.


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

*Essentially, provided the hybrid breeder labels his fish a hybrid, as opposed to a new species, you do not see it as a problemâ€¦

Yet two posts up you stated that (approx) 10% of the customers at a pet store are educated hobbyistsâ€¦ so that means 90% of the people who read the tag â€œFlowerHornâ€*


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

A reminder to myself, yourself as well as others... we are having a friendly conversation...

I'm sorry if I misread your 10% reference...

Having spent a considerable amount of time around pet shops and having several friends who work at them... I would say 10% or less of the people who buy fish from pet shops are experienced hobbyists... This may be true to my neck of the woods and not yours though...

In my experience FAR less than 10% of fish keepers are interested in keeping Wild Caught stock... I doubt if 1% do...

I don't see my perspective stated above as "closed minded" at all and feel you have no bearings to suggest it was... I see it as I've open mindedly looked at the potential result of hybrids on the hobby and made a choice because of it...

I have far more years of experience in Cichlids than I do the internet... so continually falling to the opposite as an excuse is irrational in my case. Please stop diluting yourself on this misconception and keep your comments about my posts in reference to my posts 

I still feel that... If/When the hobby as a whole accepts hybrids... this encourages people to make random hybrids...

Respectable breeders will properly label them... but the random hobbyist and less respectable breeders may not... Thus potentially "polluting" otherwise pure strains...

If the hobby as a whole rejected hybrids, random hobbyists would be discouraged from making them. These are the people that are the link which allows the vast majority of mislabeled hybrids hit the market...

But as long as there are Flowerhorns or Super Red Texas' being sold for $500+... there are going to be those who do not understand what it really takes to make such a hybrid breeding this fish with that fish and expecting it to make high dollar offspring... and when it doesn't they all too often flood their local market with them...


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

Toby_H said:


> I still feel that... If/When the hobby as a whole accepts hybrids... this encourages people to make random hybrids...
> 
> Respectable breeders will properly label them... but the random hobbyist and less respectable breeders may not... Thus potentially "polluting" otherwise pure strains...
> 
> ...


Well said. =D>


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

I really, really had hoped that this thread was dead when it went quiet for a day or two. I hesitate to post further, but I think a history lesson is in order for you kids.... opcorn:

Gliven's post proves something I said earlier in this thread about crossing lines one step at a time. The thing that one must remember is that Eastern culture operates under a different ethic toward animals than our Western culture does. They stage fights with Bettas and Halfbeaks the way they stage Cockfights, which are perfectly legal over there. Fish are not lives deserving of respect simply because they are alive - no animal is (note: there are exceptions in certain parts of the culture). This is not right or wrong, it is their culture and they have the right to live it as they wish. But when East meets West.....

Theirs is the culture that developed all the bizarre shapes of Goldfish over hundreds of years for aesthetic reasons. These are the people who gave us hybrid Gouramis, the bright Red-Orange Dwarf strains, and from that developed the theory that selling only males keeps the competition down. Then they painted Glassfish, followed by painting albino Redfin Sharks, and then started dying these and other fish, including the leucistic form of the Black Widow Tetra. From there they moved on to breeding the Bloody Parrot, about which they repeatedly made up stories as to how it was developed; which was then dyed, tattooed, and finally had the tail cut off so that the fish would have the shape of a heart.

And they have given us Flowerhorns, which first gained attention in this country 10-15 years ago when the first commercial breeders over there decided to send thousands of their excess/cull Flowerhorn young over here because there was no other way to make a profit on them. Most of them did not have very much color, and they looked like juvenile Trimacs.

So please, do not sit there and tell me that "respectable" flowerhorn breeders are not going to sell their cull fish. They've already done so, and given the way they view this *business*, they will continue. The words for the day - as always - must be "Buyer Beware". If you are observant, or just very lucky, you may get a nice fish. Good Luck.


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

*So please, do not sit there and tell me that "respectable" flowerhorn breeders are not going to sell their cull fish. They've already done so, and given the way they view this business, they will continue. The words for the day - as always - must be "Buyer Beware". If you are observant, or just very lucky, you may get a nice fish. Good Luck.*

In all of my dealings with importing flowerhorns out of Signapore for the shop - we have been repeatedly TURNED DOWN business due to there being a shortage of "suitable candidates" for shipment. I.e., they had stock that they did not want to sell because they felt it was not up to par for what we were paying.

At the end of the day you do get what you pay for - don't expect to come out with a super nice flowerhorn if you're giving a breeder $5 a fish. Quality fish - that command a high price in Signapore - will command a high price in America.

You're right about their cultural differences as well - a study on Eastern Religions is a good way to brush up and gain an understanding of the differences between how we view life and how they do. That is not to say it would be the end all solution, as there are plenty of Buddhists, Taoists, ect. in the U.S. Just as there are many Christians in Eastern countries, but it's a start.

The problem with the internet - especially when typing on a bulletin board, is that you can never fit in every little detail as you discuss it, so the arguments continue back and forth and go off topic.

This has mainly become an argument over flowerhorns and blood parrots, as well as ethical treatment of painted glass fish ect. when it started as an argument over hybrid fish in general.

I'm going to leave it at that - everyone has their own opinion. You get what you pay for, reputable breeders do not release sub par stock at a price you would pay for high quality stock.


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

Toby_H said:


> A reminder to myself, yourself as well as others... we are having a friendly conversation...
> 
> I'm sorry if I misread your 10% reference...
> 
> ...


My internet comments are generally meant for everyone, period. The internet - for the most part - has really polluted and ruined the industry in general. While there's a great wealth of accurate knowledge, there are also a lot of new hobbyists who spew stuff verbatim that they've read without having any experience in the matter. Sorry if you took that the wrong way.

I do think it's closed minded to tell people they should not keep hybrids, period. To tell some one they can't spend their money on things they want - with obvious exceptions - is a completely different issue philosophically. In the end it's just my opinion, and I didn't mean for it to be an offensive one.

Obviously our opinions on the matter differ, so I'll leave it at that - this is pointless.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

I think a conversation with this topic has great value, provided we keep it friendly... Since it is a text based conversation on the internet it is very easy to apply the wrong tone to a statement which can then put a very unintended twist to someoneâ€™s comments... I think each of us here would much rather engage in a friendly conversation than an aggressive debate...

I completely agree with what MOoN said that the internet has allowed many naive perspectives to become common beliefs. It has also allowed logical experiences to be much more widely shared. As a whole, I think it has helped the hobby more than it has hurt it, but that is an opinion without any statistical backgroundâ€¦ so who knowsâ€¦

Since the hybrid debate is a theoretical or philosophical debateâ€¦ none of us are â€œrightâ€


----------



## dogofwar (Apr 5, 2004)

I was away for a few days at the ACA in Cinci... so I missed this thread. I have to say that the level of discourse has been quite good.

I'm really impressed with the differentiation between intentional hybrids (e.g. flowerhorns and OB peacocks) and unintentional ones (e.g. "mixed africans", hobby convicts).

Some thoughts:

Flowerhorns pose much less of a threat to "pure" lines of cichlids than do mislabled wild-type fish. The chances of unintentionally including a flowerhorn or an OB peacock in a captive breeding project aimed at maintaining an "authentic" population of fish is very small.... while the chances of including a mis-labeled female peacock...or a wild-type fish from a different collection location is commonplace. I ONLY include fish of known provenance in captive breeding projects.

"Being against" flowerhorns, OB peacocks, and other intentional hybrids in the hobby is futile. They're popular, commonly available aquarium fish. And their color, personality, and other attributes will ensure that stores stock them and people buy them. Same with line bred fish. Fancy aquarium fish are good for the hobby because they keep LFS open... and grow the size of the hobby. A lack of new participants is the greatest threat to the hobby!

I don't question the "seriousness" of flowerhorn hobbyists - keeping, breeding, developing new strains of flowerhorns requires lots of skill and patience. Kind of like breeding fancy discus requires lots of skill and patience.

I also don't accept that it is possible to establish an ethical "bright line" between line bred fish and flowerhorns and other intentional hybrids. Taxonomic reorganizations, variability within a geographic population of fish, proclivity toward lumping or splitting by those doing classification and other factors lead to difficulty in having a consistent definition of "species"... let alone a way to determine if a fish has been line bred to the point where it is different enough from a given population to be not the originating species any more. For example, a single generation of captive breeding of some Victorians can result in changes to the pharyngeal plate of the offspring that make them indistinguishable from other species.

So what do we do?
I've recommended that the ACA and other cichlid hobby organizations "accept" cichlidiots that happen to like flowerhorns because we have a lot more in common than in difference. Sharing our experiences and ideas for attracting more participants into the hobby...and encouraging hobbysists and vendors to act in responsible ways... will go a lot further than polarizing the hobby and "being against" one type of cichlidiot or another...

One program that I've recommended is for the ACA to work with hobbysists and vendors to develop a set of "responsible practices" for labeling, mixing fish, maintaining "pure" lines, etc... and maybe even a program by which fish vendors that want to differentiate from their competitors agree to abide by those guidelines.

Matt - The brown fish keeper


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

dogofwar said:


> "Being against" flowerhorns, OB peacocks, and other intentional hybrids in the hobby is futile. They're popular, commonly available aquarium fish.


You are right, it probably is futile but depending on your reasons for being against it ... doesn't mean you still shouldn't be. Theft is extremely common, and popularized through media such as movices. If you find it wrong though, you are still going to be against it wiether or not it's popular or even became legal.

But debating the morality of hybrids will lead the discussion into a place where it will become nasty fast, hence why I don't get into that part of the discussion. But don't discount morality as part of the equation for many people.


----------



## bntbrl (Apr 23, 2009)

> One program that I've recommended is for the ACA to work with hobbysists and vendors to develop a set of "responsible practices" for labeling, mixing fish, maintaining "pure" lines, etc... and maybe even a program by which fish vendors that want to differentiate from their competitors agree to abide by those guidelines.


This sounds like a good idea.

How was the convention?


----------



## dogofwar (Apr 5, 2004)

For me, the base question is "is it immoral / wrong to create hybrid fish for the aquarium hobby?"

For a variety of reasons, I struggle with differentiating the morality of "fancy" hybrid cichlids and other "fancy" fish in the hobby.

Fish that are - intentionally - different than what's found in nature build the foundation of the aquarium hobby... some of which (e.g. koi) have been around since 200 AD.

If you go back and read the first issues of the ACA's Buntbarche Bulletin, you'll find lots of discussion about developing hybrid (tilapia) for their brilliant yellow color, breeding strains of jewel fish and mbuna to enhance color, etc.

To me there's a place in the hobby for "fancy" fish and one for "wild-type" ones. Aquaria are man-made creations and stocking them with man-made fish appeals to many.

Almost all people can agree that fraud (i.e. intentionally selling something that isn't what you say), cruelty (i.e. tattooing a fish, scratching off a dorsal spot, etc.), and destruction of natural resources (i.e. letting non-native fish loose into the wild) are immoral and unethical. We should focus on those activities vs. trying split hairs around the morality of hybrids like flowerhorns or OB peacocks vs. line bred fancy fish (super red longfin oscars and Albino Eureka Reds).

Matt

PS. West africans aren't immune to hybridization: until recently people routinely crossed one "krib" with another to enhance their color, size, pattern, etc. Better description of the genus has led to multiple species but for years they were all "kribs"... Nor are tanganyikans: they were all "brichardi" before they were a bunch of species and geographic variants


----------



## Chromedome52 (Jul 25, 2009)

> In all of my dealings with importing flowerhorns out of Signapore for the shop - we have been repeatedly TURNED DOWN business due to there being a shortage of "suitable candidates" for shipment. I.e., they had stock that they did not want to sell because they felt it was not up to par for what we were paying.


Well, you don't sell chainstore Bettas to an IBC member, either. You have greater knowledge of the subject, they are going to sell you better fish. If they sold you junk, how long would it take for you to tell all their other customers via the Internet?

However, there was another post on here today that mentioned seeing Flowerhorns in Petco. How much would you like to bet that those are not quality fish? Or the ones at Petsmart, or Pet Supplies Plus? Those places aren't going to go back to the community and bad mouth them for selling junk, now are they? In fact, they are far more likely to blame the chain stores than the breeder who sold thousands of fish to the chains in the first place. Chain stores don't buy from local breeders, guys. Think about it.

This whole thing reminds me of an old Cheech and Chong bit, where two Eskimoes find a pile of dog doo in the snow. "Good thing we not step in it." :dancing:


----------



## M0oN (Dec 8, 2003)

Chromedome52 said:


> > In all of my dealings with importing flowerhorns out of Signapore for the shop - we have been repeatedly TURNED DOWN business due to there being a shortage of "suitable candidates" for shipment. I.e., they had stock that they did not want to sell because they felt it was not up to par for what we were paying.
> 
> 
> Well, you don't sell chainstore Bettas to an IBC member, either. You have greater knowledge of the subject, they are going to sell you better fish. If they sold you junk, how long would it take for you to tell all their other customers via the Internet?
> ...


This goes back to the argument of whether fish education is the responsibility of the breeder, importer, wholesaler, vendor, or client - and in actuality it's everyone's responsibility to be educated on these matters.

If PETCO chooses not to dig a little bit further into their stocks origins it's nobody's fault but theirs - and I'm sure breeders who sell to them are more than happy to make whoever they do business with aware of higher quality, more expensive stock.

Fortunately, with the way the economy has been going - both PETCO and Petsmart are starting to cut back on keeping any livestock period, and going back to hosting adoptions on a monthly basis and selling dry goods.

I just get really frustrated when people lump exporters up as crooks because they choose to sell sub par fish. It's only a logical train of thought - and a very feasible possibility - that all of these people are showing off their high quality stock as well when buyers come over to arrange large deals.

A lot of people are crooks - oversea's, in the states, anywhere you go there are dishonest people who are trying to turn over stock at the fastest rate possible in order to make money. But there are also a wide majority of top notch breeders, exporters, sellers ect. who consider their name to be something important - and lumping flowerhorn breeders into this huge conglomerate of shady businessmen is just unfair.


----------



## dogofwar (Apr 5, 2004)

Just as I wouldn't expect PETCO to stock IBC quality bettas, I wouldn't expect them to stock high grade flowerhorns. They know their customers...and their customers won't pay for them.

The main thing, though, is that they label the flowerhorns that they sell as flowerhorns (and not trimacs or red devils or whatever). PETCO wouldn't stock these fish if they didn't sell.

To me "being against" flowerhorns or OB peacocks is misdirected. These are simply ornamental aquarium strains of fish that are no more or less "different" from wild than many of the "fancy" fish that have been in the hobby forever. You might not like 'em...but a lot of other people do. If people get turned on to cichlids by flowerhorns or OB peacocks...that's a good thing!

Irresponsibility and fraud are the problem. And there are irresponsible people and thieves in all areas of the hobby...

Some people are willing to admit that people who maintain thousands of gallons of fish tanks to maintain managuensis, red devils, and other big aggressive cichlids have a heck of a lot in common with those who maintain thousands of gallons of fish tanks to maintain flowerhorns, red texas, EBJDs and other fancy cichlids. Others aren't. Of course some people who keep thousands of gallons of Malawi cichlids don't think that they have anything in common with people who keep thousands of gallons of Tanganyikan ones...but that's another story.

Matt


----------

