[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Killietalk] Conservation
Ken I received the eggs yesterday.
Thanks man I am very excited about the KOR. The
striatum eggs do not look viable however. I looked at
them this morn and all looked like they will be
turning white.
I will be shipping this sat sorry buddy but I had the
worst weekend totaled car cold snap hurricane and I
needed to finish my fishroom. I will have time sat and
ill have your stuff out then.
I like your comments on Killie talk
Psssss. To those interested, for clues go to the AKA
> Site and see who even
> list fish, and who does not...then just track the
> progress of the "rare"
> fish around the hobby...heck I'd hide mine also ;-)
I hate that why hide fish that seems silly. I would
even write people about Diapterons and get no response
because I was new to Killies and not ready for them
yet. Yea ive been breeding fish for over 20 years
doesn?t matter. Anyway so whats new in your fishroom?
I just got 5 prs of Apistogramma elizabethae red! Im
pretty pumped. I have breeding tanks ready to go lol.
I also have some N.gue giving me lots of eggs as well
as my AUS so I will be busy all winter.
Dave
--- Ken <ken_combs at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "Doing a census involves asking every single
> breeder to reveal his stock.
> For a large number of reasons (one or two even
> valid) it just ain't gonna
> happen -- ever"
>
> What I've always found VERY peculiar is this
> "privacy" is not nearly as
> amplified in the other segments of the aquarium
> hobby (I've been in them).
> And there are many examples of "Non-commercially"
> bred fish in those ranks
> also, NTM the Lake Victoria situation makes this
> issue equally urgent
> amongst the cichlidophiles...
>
> No, no & well well well, methinks the cause & effect
> is not as benign as it
> appears (or as oft explained)...yet another topic we
> cannot approach with
> honesty thanks to the sensitivity and complexity of
> self serving agendas
> involved here...
>
> Psssss. To those interested, for clues go to the AKA
> site and see who even
> list fish, and who does not...then just track the
> progress of the "rare"
> fish around the hobby...heck I'd hide mine also ;-)
>
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: killietalk-bounces at aka_org
> [mailto:killietalk-bounces at aka_org] On
> Behalf Of Wright Huntley
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 9:03 AM
> To: killifish discussion list
> Subject: Re: [Killietalk] Conservation
>
> Keith,
>
> This is a function that was supposed to be performed
> by that
> most-unfortunately-named "Species Maintenance
> Committee." The objective was
> periodic census to keep track of what was still
> non-extinct in the hobby,
> and to ultimately provide guidance for core-species
> selection for KCC
> maintenance for those most likely to be lost.
>
> The last _Species Maintenance Committee Report 2000_
> was in that year, and I
> believe that was so expensive and divisive that it
> has been dropped for now.
> It was compiled by Tom Grady, among what I heard was
> considerable BOT
> dissention.
>
> The KCC is still very active, under the leadership
> of Charley Nunziata, and
> has a number of group or genus coordinators working
> with a larger number of
> species coordinators, who try to herd the work of a
> very large number of
> core species breeders. It takes skill to herd cats,
> and that's about what
> the species coordinator often faces. :-)
>
> Doing a census involves asking every single breeder
> to reveal his stock.
> For a large number of reasons (one or two even
> valid) it just ain't gonna
> happen -- ever. Ask Tom just how much fun it is.
>
> If strong feelings have died down a bit, I would
> hope this function could be
> revisited by the BOT, for, as an experienced group
> and species coordinator
> for KCC, I felt our selection process for "core
> species" was flawed at best
> and even totally absurd in some cases.
>
> Our goal has been to select species (individual
> collections, usually) for
> special care that were a)colorful and pretty, b)easy
> to breed, and
> c) likely to be ignored by the serious breeders as
> not needing special care.
>
> A few such species did get lost in the '70s and
> '80s. As habitats are often
> lost, the need became severe. We added "destroyed
> original habitat" as a
> selection criterion. That is, new wild collections
> were unlikely.
>
> The use of volunteer tanks and time is most
> precious, but without our CIA
> (SMC) we are quite likely to wage war on "weapons of
> mass destruction"
> without knowing if there are any, or where they are.
> Surely the bright folks
> on the BOT can do something to improve this
> situation.
>
> Please????
>
> Wright
>
>
>
> Keith Cook wrote:
> > Is there a need to keep tabs on which fish are
> present in the hobby?
> > If so, to what extent? Can anyone name a fish
> that has gone extict in the
> hobby?
> > I'm aware of the KCC, though I'm not sure it is
> still active. Is this
> > program, as well thought out as it is, enough? I
> guess I'm just
> > trying to guage the level of concern or even if
> there is a need to be.
> >
> >
> > Keith
> >
> > AKA #9058
>
> --
> Wright Huntley - Rt. 001 Box K36, Bishop CA 93514 -
> whuntley at verizon_net
> - 760 872-3995 still works. Also 760 873-2000 (CA)
> or 941 866-0500 (FL).
>
> http://www.self-gov.org/wspq.html
> Join the AKA at
> http://aka.org/modules/tinycontent0/index.php?id=9
> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
> Modify your subscription at
>
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk
>
> Join the AKA at
> http://aka.org/modules/tinycontent0/index.php?id=9
> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
> Modify your subscription at
>
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk
>
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Join the AKA at http://aka.org/modules/tinycontent0/index.php?id=9
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
Modify your subscription at http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk