[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Killietalk] KCC (wasRe: forums vs killietalk)
Hey Lorraine I have "southern" Diaps they like the warm water lol
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lorraine" <overall077 at lycos_com>
To: "'killifish discussion list'" <killietalk at aka_org>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 2:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Killietalk] KCC (wasRe: forums vs killietalk)
> Only Wright's diapterons were mean, mine are not nasty cold water critters
> :).
>
> Lorraine
> In sunny Colorado
> http://lorraines-killies.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: killietalk-bounces at aka_org [mailto:killietalk-bounces at aka_org] On
> Behalf Of David sanchez
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:52 PM
> To: killifish discussion list
> Subject: Re: [Killietalk] KCC (wasRe: forums vs killietalk)
>
> Wright,
> Hey I agree with you 100% That is what the KCC should be, for easy species
> that may be lost to the hobby etc. We did discuss this before you know and
I
> agreed with you then. I still agree with your explanation of what the KCC
> is. It seems practical. However we seem to have widened the functional
> definition of what the KCC is because why else would Diapterons be
included.
>
> Why is there a Diapteron KCC? It does exist, in paper anyway. It is an
> official AKA program or whatever you want to call it. What role does the
> Diapteron KCC play? has this been operationally defined by the BOT?
Perhaps
> that can clear this all up. This is all new to me, Hey I just like
> Diapterons even though they are the meanest Killi's around :)
>
> Dave
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wright Huntley" <whuntley at inkmkr_com>
> To: "killifish discussion list" <killietalk at aka_org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 1:37 AM
> Subject: [Killietalk] KCC (wasRe: forums vs killietalk)
>
>
> David,
>
> In no way do any Diapterons fit the Killifish Conservation Committee
> (KCC) original intent.
>
> During the '60s and '70s, a number of really nice species were lost to
> the hobby through simple neglect. Pretty, easy to breed and maintain
> fish failed to challenge the more reliable breeders, so they usually let
> them go, having "been there, done that."
>
> As folks looked around for the fish, suddenly no one had any and they
> found the original habitat was gone, so there would be no new
> collections. OOOOOPS!
>
> KCC was set up, I believe originally outside the AKA but by mostly AKA
> meembers, to solve this fairly narrow problem.
>
> Criterea for selecting so-called "core species" was that they should be
> good representatives of their group, pretty enough to be popular, easy
> to keep, and likely to be lost from the hobby without some coordinated
> effort. It was assumed that more difficult fish, like Diapterons, whose
> habitat was relatively secure, would be kept going by experts who liked
> the challenge and/or by new collections. They were never a part of the
> KCC effort, AFAIK.
>
> I see no problem with formation of a "Diapteron Study Group" for folks
> interested in those vicious little cold-water fish. ;-) They just don't
> now, and never have really fit the purpose or methods of KCC.
>
> I agree that the communications about KCC have been very sparse and
> confusing, but don't blame the AKA BOT for that. That has not been their
> responsibility.
>
> The BOT has graciously stepped in to provide financial support for the
> increased shipping costs in doing swaps, but, otherwise, KCC is a fairly
> independent program. [That support has, tho, allowed the KCC to be
> active all over the world, and not just in the US. Many KCC breeders are
> not AKA members, for example.]
>
> Most of the KCC breeders are relatively new folks, because the fish are
> not a major challenge to keep. A few experienced coordinators do some
> hand-holding, but for the most part, KCC is available as a nice place to
> contribute to the hobby for breeders with quite modest experience.
>
> A Species Maintenance Committee was set up as a real AKA effort, to
> provide census and the intelligence effort that would make selection of
> core species more accurate and reliable. Unfortunately it has proven
> unworkable, and the last report is 5 or 6 years out of date. A species
> can easily go from "everywhere" to "gone" in a tenth that time without
> deliberate commitment. The name was an unfortunate mistake, I think,
> because there is no way a hobby group like ours can ever do significant
> species maintenance. We have to leave that to governments and big
> museums who can maintain large enough populations in refuges to actually
> be genetically significant.
>
> KCC is just to keep the hobby from losing easy, pretty fish because
> everyone accidentally quits keeping them at the same time. Not
> complicated. Breeders simply agree to keep (and share) a species for a
> known period (usually 2 years). After that they can pass on stock or
> eggs to a new breeder and continue or drop the species as thay choose.
> This method of operating has kept KCC communications 90% internal, which
> may explain why nobody ever knows what they are up to. :-)
>
> HTH
>
> Wright
>
> David sanchez wrote:
> > " for one
> > would like to see better info available about the KCC programs and
> programs
> > associated to conservation. Would also be nice to see better coverage of
> > each volunteer position so that in case of an emergency, their position
> > could be picked up by another volunteer."
> >
> >
> >
> > One big reason I joined the AKA was to be able to do some serious work
> with
> > Diapterons. I feel programs like the KCC represent what the AKA is all
> > about. I feel that if we open communication with these programs and give
> > reports back to the membership,we will not only create more interest in
> them
> > but also bring attention to the importance of these programs.
>
> --
> Wright Huntley - Rt. 001 Box K36, Bishop CA 93514 - whuntley at verizon_net
> 760 937-2276 (mobile) 760 874-2000 (CA) or 941 866-0500 (FL).
>
> "A journey of a thousand miles starts with an airline ticket.
> Unless you're crazy" -- Chad Carter.
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 1/23/2006
>
>
> 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