A Shock

[edub2017]

You guys are fun. Some life to the forums, finally.

 

[Heika]

If Tyler wanted to sell chameleons with three heads ,for those who take things literaly this is an example, dont send me any emails, I am using this as a figure of speach and three headed chams shouldn't be sold or breed.

If I had a three headed chameleon, I would sell it to the highest bidder! Why is selling a three headed chameleon somehow worse than selling a translucent chameleon? Conjoined animals aren't the result of a genetic flaw, just an accident of development. So, breeding them would not cause any of the uproar that this has, because they would produce normal offspring.

Just testing your argument here.. it seems a bit flawed.

If poor results were found, they would stop being bred. They would be kept in safe hands. Eventually they would die out, providing data on their lifespan in comparaision to normals.

Speaking of flawed arguments. I hope that no one is naive enough to believe that these animals will just disappear if poor results are found. As long as there is a demand for them, there will be someone out there ready to fill it. Flawed genetics flourish in human captivity. Take a look at the English Bulldog. It has been bred to the point of near death to meet the breed standard. Why would a chameleon be any different?

Someone pointed out to me a while back that my biggest complaint with these chameleons is that they are ugly. I really find them to be.. well.. hideous. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though, and if someone wants to pay huge amounts of money for the poor things, then so be it. In my opinion, Tyler is serving his customers by filling a demand. There is nothing wrong with that. It is a sound business practice, and I don't find it unethical that he would want to make a profit for his time and investment.

Heika

 

[Hempa]

People can buy whatever they want. But I think it sad that we have to breed morphs out of any reptile we keep in captivity. And I wonder why?

 

[lowendfrequency]

I'm so suprised that people keep bringing genetics up in this discussion. The purpose of preserving strong genetics is to increase or maintain the overall fitness of the offspring (fitness meaning the ability to reproduce in a given environment). If we're talking about a captive population, especially a well established breeder like the veiled, what harm does a little genetic modification/mutation cause? How is it negatively affecting what's really important... the wild populous? The bottom line is that as long as these aren't being re-introduced into the wild, there is NO adverse affect. Everyone seems to have their panties in a bunch simply because this is an ugly/undesireable defect. I'm sure if someone started offering stunning albino veileds at reasonable prices... most of the complainers would be all over them.

What I find offensive is that the original poster claims to be a specialist in the breeding of panther chameleons. Talk about misrepresentation! Hah! A 13 year old who's never actually produced chameleons shouldn't be calling out respected breeders on ethical issues.

 

[ClmbrJ]

I'm so suprised that people keep bringing genetics up in this discussion. The purpose of preserving strong genetics is to increase or maintain the overall fitness of the offspring (fitness meaning the ability to reproduce in a given environment). If we're talking about a captive population, especially a well established breeder like the veiled, what harm does a little genetic modification/mutation cause? How is it negatively affecting what's really important... the wild populous? The bottom line is that as long as these aren't being re-introduced into the wild, there is NO adverse affect. Everyone seems to have their panties in a bunch simply because this is an ugly/undesireable defect. I'm sure if someone started offering stunning albino veileds at reasonable prices... most of the complainers would be all over them.

Ya know, we had a discussion on this not too long ago. Your exactly right, I mean this could lead to chams who don't need as much UVB , or are less at risk to MBD, who knows? But, at least for now Hieka is right, money makes the world go round!

 

[Chris Anderson]

I mean this could lead to chams who don't need as much UVB , or are less at risk to MBD, who knows?

Its more likely to cause chams that need the same amount of UVB but can only handle a more limited range of radience intensity causing an increased occurance of MBD and overexposure issues but hopefully studies will help figure all that out for sure cause at this point, that's only speculation - logical speculation but still speculation.

Chris