For making money it just depends how much you can sell them for, which is a question I can't you help with..........Personally, I know of very few people who make money from breeding, regardless of species(mammal or otherwise)
Someone who isn't looking to better the breed and just looking to make cash is what we(horse people) call backyard breeders. Do you know the lines of your Chameleon? Health of parents, pureness of your female?.
Otherwise to me they are just a muddled chameleon, unpapered horse or dog. And to me not worth much because it would be hard for me to buy something that the health/lineage sn't a main concern
But this is just my opinion, and nothing more
I disagree. There are dog breeders, for example, that will breed just to breed. Then there are others, like the responsible ones, that will NOT breed a dog that has any sort of genetic problem. My sheltie comes certified that no one in her line has collie eye or any other genetic problems that usually plague the breed. This is bettering the breed.For making money it just depends how much you can sell them for, which is a question I can't you help with..........
but bettering the breed? That implies you can know what is better for the genetic health of the species, which pretty much requires omnipotence, not just knowing the lineage (for evidence of the damage to a species that trying to keep a breed 'pure' can do then look no further than pedigree dogs health problems or the Nazi eugenics programs ). As far as my opinion goes then if the individuals are healthy and you have a market for babies then you might as well aim for a profit. 'Pure', 'certificated', 'pedigree' chams will make more money, but in my humble opinion it's that profit, and not the health of the population which is the main motivation for keeping a breed pure........you can be cynical about the motivations from both angles........
Ah, but I am cynical, everywhere that money is involved.......'cos I don't care too much for money - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8zx68HENIA lol. I don't disagree with your principles at all, just adding a note of caution that in a captive population we actually can't be certain of the long-term consequences of pedigree breeding........Dave, im not cynical at all. In my years of animal husbandry I've seen alot of bad breeding. And just for profit has another name...puppy mills
But again, I am older than most here and come from a different way of thinking, doing your best and breeding for the best. I am like everyone else here, entitled to my opinion. And I don't speak it often here.
But someone that knows little of chameleon husbandry thinking of breeding just to make a buck seems wrong. (Not referring to this op)
Of course, again I understand the principles......you can see though that there would not be the 'genetic problems that usually plague the breed' in the first place if there were not breeders artificially selecting for certain desired traits. Natural selection has done life on Earth proud for billions of years, and even the most responsible breeders don't know what potential side effects their choices will have. Bettering the breed is a lofty aim, but all we can really do with our artificial selection in a captive population is hope not to screw it up too badly.......that's the only point I wanted to make, jmhoI disagree. There are dog breeders, for example, that will breed just to breed. Then there are others, like the responsible ones, that will NOT breed a dog that has any sort of genetic problem. My sheltie comes certified that no one in her line has collie eye or any other genetic problems that usually plague the breed. This is bettering the breed.
That's what's meant with bettering the breed, not saying anything other than being responsible, doing things well, taking care in WHAT you breed, not just how you breed it.
No, no no, not at all - I wouldn't say that subtly if I were going to say it, and I know you better than that anyway.David... after rereading your original post, did you say my opinion was the same as Nazi Eugenics??????
Be careful my friend, that is a line I am asking you to not cross with me.
It might be in the best interest of the forums if the mods cut this thread short. I will pm David with how I feel about his correlation of my opinion to one of, if not the most horrific atrocities mankind has ever placed on itself
Just taking an example to the extreme, no implication meant at all.....really, just over-making my point, sorryI don't disagree with your principles at all, just adding a note of caution that in a captive population we actually can't be certain of the long-term consequences of pedigree breeding........
I'd hate to think I offended anyone like that, especially you ......but I am known for taking my philosophising to logical extremes without taking emotions into account.....so thanks for letting me get away with it.......Thank you babycakes!!
You lowered my bp! With your reply
Exactly, a Chameleon breeder needs to breed Chameleons, and they are the same species ( though you could say a different 'race' ). If the individuals are in good health and not immediately related there is absolutely no reason not to go for it. Racial integration for all species is my hippy ideal, and forget foolish ideas of local purity.trust me im aware of the very little money in the breeding business, hence why i need abit more, lol. And when did i say anything about unhealthy bloodlines, i really dont see how crossbreeding has anything to do with it as they are the SAME SPECIES, they just live in different areas, hundreds of years ago, the falys probably originated from a pure white, a red, and a blue locale, and that came out. all of my chameleons and animals are of good health. I simply want to breed her, because i have no one else to breed her with
This is what caught my eye. Babies take up way more space and cost alot more then a male mitso. You are going to do what you want but just to give you an idea check this thread outi agree, but i dont have the space or enough cash to get a male mitsio