[Killietalk] Re: Re: Sanctioned naming conventions? Proposal

["Kenneth Combs" <KCombs at mergerx_net>]

Tyrone said:
>Roger Langton's new book on collection codes is now out in circulation
is the "gold...
>standard" of killi location names. In essence it is kind of what you
are proposing. 

Yeah, I was looking at the KMI and thinking how easy it would be to port
something like that over to a HTML based "breeders registry", wherein
pull downs select the genus, then species then locations, ect
(queried/filter based pull downs), once done, I see no rocket science in
the 1000 (or even 10K) AKA members entering in their AKA #'s along with
stock origins for even 30+ species fish rooms (surely we've kept track
of where most of our fish came from). Digesting the data into a smaller
character based coded structure is easy after that (a pedigree# if you
will)...Even better if the stock "origin" has a AKA# or even DKG breeder
#. 
Hence, short of a futuristic hand held DNA machine, we got some
documented clue of bloodlines, ect (along with the correctly sanctioned
names for our stock!). Obviously, like anything else, it is an honor
system, but again, at least we got some central documentation to query
from....I'm not suggesting every fish get tagged, but at least the
breeders stock/bloodlines, etc..  Moreover, I'm thinking nomenclature
Snafu's are mitigated at least via electronic collaboration just a
thought, won't stop handwriting errors)

>What happens with fish from the DKG? 
Good question, BTW, how much formal/informal cooperation/collaboration
exist amongst the major international bodies anyway? (Is there some
consensus or a lot of polarity?, I'm just unfamiliar...)

>A bigger problem is that some puritans will then treat these as
distinct populations and >not as fish from the same line. This could
eventually cause either strain to be lost 
>because people can't find suitable mates. also, what happens with a
cross of the two     >lines?

I was thinking that also, but I wonder if happens anyway in the
"background"... I'm still thinking centralized documentation guided by a
"sanctioning body" is a positive step (or at least more "forward" than
the current "honor" system)

>I was circulating a N. foerschi Alegre Aquarium Strain a while back.
>This strain was bred by John Alegre from a mix of males or females he
got from me and    >some males or females he got from Tony. Both were
aquarium strains and the resulting fish >were magnificent. Both lines
were probably seperated by about 10 years (I think the      >person I
got my stock from got them from Tony many moons back). You try and do
the same  >thing with gold and brown australe today (never mind they
come from the same stock       >originally) and you will have several
irrate puritants on your back in no time. And I    >will add that that
crossed out strain was more viable than anything I have red about in
>recent history. 20 to 30 eggs per day was the norm!

Exactly, my point also...we have in this sector a "homogeny" between a
demand & real need to maintain/preserve "nature" produced strains and a
demand for fancier "aquarium" bred strains, obviously the hobby is too
diverse to exclude either. Problem is, similar fish exist in the same
venue and often in the same fish room. Snafu's will happen, and IMO all
the more reason for creating a formalized registry of sorts (at least
for "God" bred strains)..the KMI is sorta-kinda like that, but currently
there are no "tags" if you will when fish are exchanged...(NTM, it lacks
hobby level detail for albinos, color morphs, etc)

>Personally I do not see how we can improve on the current system
without making it more  >complex and more error prone. 

I do, when folks like yourself just take time out to loan us their gray
matter (as you just did). those points you made were valid and well
thought out...there is a issue as I see it, and the identification of
the road blocks just pointed out are needed to arrive at a
solution...here is another point I did not think of:

Dramsey writes:

>Using your AKC dog analogy. Price will destroy the fish. Look at what
price did to German >Shepherd hips, Cocker Spaniel hearts?, on and on.
Puppy mills abound..... 
>Look what commercial naming has done to discus. Every red discus has a
name dreamed up by >the breeder trying to get a higher price.

True, and lord knows pricing needs to stay within tolerances so a
diverse array of hobbyist can buy and maintain fish,....Heck like I
said, either we keep a $10-20 structure or we let documented pedigrees
keep folks  (and their investments) "honest" (again, think if your name,
AKA # is associated with a fish sale, I'm betting you will sell "as
advertised", well to the best of your knowledge anyway)...
My crystal ball tells me: prices for certain Aquabid sellers will DROP
pretty low (just based on their reps), my Crystal ball also sees some of
the more reputable breeders reaping the monetary rewards for their
reputation for integrity....but I see your point...IMO its like a HUGO
selling for less than a Benz, both are cars, but one has a better
reputation for reliability...in this case, authenticity will drive
market prices...those with registerd fish can get more (if that's the
direction to go...I'm all for free fish if maintenece is the
goal...again, that's just me)

>At least most people can tell if it sorta looks like the right kind of
dog, but many     >killie location codes depends on your trust of where
and from whom you got the fish.     >Reputation is everything. And the
biggest difference. With killifish we strive for       >stability. If my
fish today looks like a picture of the same fish from 20 years ago then
>I have accomplished something, and so have the people before me for
that 20 year period. >With the other fish they are after new colors, new
variations, or mass produce to make   >the 3 for $2 sales at the pet
shop.

Well said!, and I am drawn to this aspect of the hobby for those very
aforementioned reasons, but as a ever present observing "outsider", I
have often detected a small hint of sanctimony also: How often have we
seen this phase?: "This such and such a fish will only be sold to
experienced breeders". ARRRGHH...in my mind, those statements throw
"pricing argument" right out the window!...I realize the alleged "well
intentioned" impetus behind this "exclusionary sale" (as it makes
certain the species in question  is maintained in the hobby...However,
said "seller" is mixing a lofty "moral" intent with a monetary goal (a
sale)IMO, give the dang fish away to your "experienced breeder", or sell
to whoever's got the bucks!!! I've tried to reason the "breakeven"
argument before, fine; you are selling said "rare fish" at cost,  but
IMHO mixing a moral goal with a sale is "sorted business" at best...I
say let market forces be market forces, mixing a sale with some other
greater hobby/killie "moral" goal to me is plain malarkey..., a buyers
quals need only be the ability to produce the right amount of
cheese...once again, the weird ad-mixture of hobby, science and
conservation...

I hate to say it again, but IMHO, the mixing of conservation goals,
species preservation, ect into a hobby where sales provides our means is
just plain wacky (and from what I see the actual "cause" for a lot of
woes in this arena). not the least w/o a comprehensive sanctioned
structure...I'm still failing to see the greater damage a registry would
do...OTOH, I'm sure a better idea is floating around in someones head...

Ken (outsider looking in)




To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/