CULLING IN GENERAL

[robin]

i am not talking about any one person. so do not think that i am talking to you or about her, him, or it.

if you are in any type of animal hobby, business, breeding whatever you want to call it and are unable to cull a deformed animals. you have no business keeping, breeding etc. them, it orwhatever. unfortunately, culling is necessary sometimes especially when there are quality of life issues.

 

[goReptiles]

I agree... if the quality of life is a concern, culling is necessary. If its just because or due to a simple deformity, it's crazy to cull.

As long as there's no harm to the quality of life, pet only animal. No need to cull.

 

[robin]

what is someone gets bored with the pet only animals and sells or gives it to csomeone else? what if that person breeds it? who knows if it is genetic or not.

 

[fuzzylogix]

i am not talking about any one person. so do not think that i am talking to you or about her, him, or it.

if you are in any type of animal hobby, business, breeding whatever you want to call it and are unable to cull a deformed animals. you have no business keeping, breeding etc. them, it orwhatever. unfortunately, culling is necessary sometimes especially when there are quality of life issues.

+1000

 

[robin]

maybe this is calling me a hypocrite but i do have a gecko with a kinked tail. he will remain a pet here at my house til he dies. this is something i know for a fact.

 

[fuzzylogix]

not a hypocrite, the difference is that you know for a fact that that leo will not be bred, and a kinked tail isn't a detriment to its quality of life. i have a leo with one smaller eye that i got from another member here. she will never be rehomed to anyone else, but what if someone else got this leo and decided to breed? she is an adult but in retrospect if she was my hatchling i would have culled her.

 

[M_surinamensis]

I agree... if the quality of life is a concern, culling is necessary. If its just because or due to a simple deformity, it's crazy to cull.

As long as there's no harm to the quality of life, pet only animal. No need to cull.

So... how exactly are you determining the quality of life experienced by a species of animal that cannot directly communicate with you, which is not self aware and which has a physiology and behavioral pattern that is entirely alien to our own, making empathy am impossibility?

Sure, there are egregious examples of obvious pain and difficulty.

But what about more subtle issues? A reptile will sit on a surface so hot that its tissue cauterizes and burns, killing it. Just how do you determine if an animal like that is in constant pain or not? How do you determine if it is having a good life?

Robin has taken the lead on the risk of transmission and the unpredictability of continued control... so I'll leave her to it unless she wants to tag me in, but I would love to know just how you're able to make a determination about the quality of life experienced by an animal that cannot communicate with you and does not display obvious pain responses except in the most extreme cases of acute pain. 'cause I sure can't do it and I am pretty decent with the behavioral stuff.

 

[robin]

Robin has taken the lead on the risk of transmission and the unpredictability of continued control... so I'll leave her to it unless she wants to tag me in, but I would love to know just how you're able to make a determination about the quality of life experienced by an animal that cannot communicate with you and does not display obvious pain responses except in the most extreme cases of acute pain. 'cause I sure can't do it and I am pretty decent with the behavioral stuff.

very true. we can not know for sure what they feel vs what we deem as quality of life issues. if animals i produced were born with deformed eyes, missing limbs,tail kinks etc. i would personally put them down. unfortunately i can not control what others think or do.

 

[Northstar Herp]

Ahem... can I say something here? While I think most things aren't as cut and dry as we would like them to be, and this no exception, one thing has been bugging me for many months.

I've seen so many threads where folks act like we have no right to kill a herp if there is something wrong with it, or that since we bred them, we have a duty to them and if they're special needs then we should do anything we have to do.

Listen, they're not kids, for cryin' out loud... there's a reason they're in the tank and we're outside watching The Office.

But I digress, to my main point of frustration:

Most people come across as being so concerned about the gecko, when in reality, I think they are probably well-intentioned, but misguided. Any time a defective gecko is sold or given away, the general population has the potential to be weakened. If we have a real love for these animals, we must take the long view and cull the defective animal, or at least as Robin is doing, keep them ourselves.

I just think a lot of posters here concntrate on the individual leo and forget that what we breed and sell today will shape the industry of tomorrow.

Think about that next time this discussion pops up in another thread.

 

[prettyinpink]

Intersting I didn't know that tail kinks would be under the order of putting them down. Is this because everything is genetic, and you don't want to breed that out?

So for example...what would you put down? Because you just said you would but down a kink tail but you didn't put down yours. I'm confused

Thanks for all the info, it helps!

I'm not a big fan of the culling...but I agree it's what you have to do. I personally am going to breed. But am not ready yet so I won't.

 

[Northstar Herp]

Oh, and I'd be simultaneously scared and relieved if Robin could control what people did...

 

[BrilliantEraser]

A benevolent dictatorship? Works in theory.

In my personal opinion, I would put down an animal that had missing/deformed eyes or limbs. Severe Enigma syndromes would be cause for concern as well. Basically, I believe that if an animal cannot even feed itself, it probably should be put down. Even if you currently have no issue with force-feeding your animal slurry every day, what would happen if you sold the animal (even with a full disclosure of its issues)? Can you guarantee that the new owner would not eventually grow tired of caring for the animal and let it languish and starve to death?

It's something to consider.

 

[Northstar Herp]

Absoluter power corrupts absolutely. It'd be like that scene in LOTR where Kate Blanchett goes all over-exposed and talks like Andre the Giant, ya know?

I was talking mainly about culling genetic problems in my rant above, otherwise I just don't make any sense at all.

 

[prettyinpink]

A benevolent dictatorship? Works in theory.

In my personal opinion, I would put down an animal that had missing/deformed eyes or limbs. Severe Enigma syndromes would be cause for concern as well. Basically, I believe that if an animal cannot even feed itself, it probably should be put down. Even if you currently have no issue with force-feeding your animal slurry every day, what would happen if you sold the animal (even with a full disclosure of its issues)? Can you guarantee that the new owner would not eventually grow tired of caring for the animal and let it languish and starve to death?

It's something to consider.

Ok, that's something i agree with... if it's not able to feed itself like REALLY not able to feed itself or born without eyes. It's such a harsh thing for me to even say, at least I feel that way. :main_no:

Ok I have a couple questions.
If you had a baby born with a missing toe, Just ONE toe... I don't agree to put that down.
I think I'm a little less strict then most of you are.

Basically if it won't survive in the wild...I think that's the time. But I don't think a little knick on the tail matters that much. I could be wrong though? :main_huh:

 

[BrilliantEraser]

I think a single missing toe is about equivalent to a kinked tail. Nothing that will affect the gecko's quality of life, but still nothing that should be bred from.

If I have an animal like that, I can guarantee that it will never be sold or bred from. There's a contingency plan in place where, should something happen to me, my 'special needs' animals will be euthanized. That way I can guarantee that they will never be part of the gene pool, and they will always have a good life while they are with me. Not sure if anyone else has considered something like this. If they have, I'm glad I'm not the only morbid/realistic one here. :yes:

 

[prettyinpink]

That makes sense.

But what I was trying to say is I don't think that one missing toe or a kinked tail really affects them too much, if at all? I agree with not breeding them...and I don't think any sane breeder would breed that, but I would be considered a bad breeder if I adopted him/her out?

I don't think I complelty understand.

 

[prettyinpink]

Ok. I just read over the posts again and I see what you are saying. You don't want the geckos to go defomed. You want only the strong ones to be around so they're produce nice strong babies. I agree with that. But, hear me out.

Everyone has their opinion and this is mine...

If I have a baby with a missing toe... then I hand her off to someone else and made sure they did not breed them. Say they didn't listen to me and bred her anyways... and that baby had a missing toe. Honeslty it would take forever for the gene pool to get messed up.nI DON'T agree with breeding them, I'm NOT saying that so please don't say I am.

All I'm saying is...it isn't going to mess up the species. I honestly think it isn't fair to kill those who are innocent. Now you're going to jump on me because I said that... BUT as much as it hurts me to say... those who are 'almost' perfect should be at least looked at twice before you jump the gun. I don't think it's fair, when you do that it looks like you're treating them like supplies. If they are suffering that's completly different... but if you're missing a toe or have a kinked tail you're fully functional.

I'm NOT saying to treat them like your kids, all I'm saying is it really isn't far.

Now... Hopefully I won't get jumped on

 

[Kristi23]

What if a gecko hatches fine, but somehow gets a tail kink later on from something? I've had 2 that it's happened to. I didn't put them down. I don't see it being genetic, but I'm not sure how it happened. What would you do to them?

Luckily I haven't hatched out any this season with eye or jaw problems. If I do, they'll be culled right away. It's never an easy thing to do, but it's the right thing.

 

[Keith N]

Culling would be the same thing that would happen in nature. You ever see a blind racoon in the wild? Of course not because they wouldnt last 2 days in the wild. I don't have a problem at all culling an animal.

 

[T-ReXx]

I'm pro culling. It's part of being a responsible breeder. If you don't "have the heart" to remove an animal from the population that has the potential to endanger the population, then you are not an ethical breeder. Simple.

That being said, tail kinks etc that come from KNOWN injuries and are not born with do not fall under that catagory IMO.