healthy breeding.

[vickson420]

Well I actually think my 2 biggest problem with silks are 1)the actual breeding process.From what I have learned about them the females are quite easily damaged due to this process especially if paired with a "normal" which is really the only way to keep the inbreeding issues at bay and 2) I also question their uv intake abilities and possible damages from the uv itself.I am not sure anyone has extensively studied if the lack of the top scales does in fact expose them to higher uv absorption issues and subsequently the damage that could occur from this exposure.I also wonder if they are susceptable to internal issues as well from their obvious genetic abnormality.

I would also be very curious to know how their life span is indeed affected based on their mutations.This would be hard to determine however because you wont know at the moment if its due to the genetic change or in fact due to the inbreeding.I dont believe the two are the same as if a morph were more naturally bred into existence I am not sure they would suffer the same weaknesses as that of an inbred morph.

I dont really have issues with leatherbacks other then the inbreeding issue.

I will admit that part of my issues with silkbacks are personal as I myself do not view them as a bearded dragon when I look at them.To me they look more like a salamander.Personally speaking I feel the animal loses its charm by losing its "scales" :wink:

 

[kirby]

Well I actually think my 2 biggest problem with silks are 1)the actual breeding process.From what I have learned about them the females are quite easily damaged due to this process especially if paired with a "normal" which is really the only way to keep the inbreeding issues at bay

thats the thing, you DONT need to breed a silk, just two leathers. (be them unrelated, no inbreeding is necessary)

2) I also question their uv intake abilities and possible damages from the uv itself.I am not sure anyone has extensively studied if the lack of the top scales does in fact expose them to higher uv absorption issues and subsequently the damage that could occur from this exposure.I also wonder if they are susceptable to internal issues as well from their obvious genetic abnormality.

well, with a reptisun10.0 giving out 60 uWcm2. i highely doubt even this much Uvb will harm the animal, having no chunky protective tubercles. considering you could choose a bulb which emits 10 times as much Uvb (600+ uWcm2). supplimentary powdered or liquid D3 and calcium will be released from the body via Urates, as it would in a normal dragon, and naturally formed vitimins (those that act as hormones in Calcium absorbtion) within the skin, will be stored naturally aswell. So personally, i dont see the dangers. the Uv tubes we provide are dismal compared to natural sun..

I would also be very curious to know how their life span is indeed affected based on their mutations.

scaleless death adders, hog nose and a variety of other snakes have lived long healthy lives so far as we've seen. i dont see why they would live just as long? does a bald person live shorter then those with a head of hair?

I will admit that part of my issues with silkbacks are personal as I myself do not view them as a bearded dragon when I look at them.To me they look more like a salamander.Personally speaking I feel the animal loses its charm by losing its "scales" :wink:

totally agree, personal opinions. i still dont 100% like silkbacks. im sure if i ever saw one in the flesh, i would fall for it, as i do with ANY other dragon. (this doesnt help my addiction :lol: ) could anyone say the same with a grey dragon over a hypo Chris Allen red etc.


another point i thought of, would you all rather buy a brown wild phase goldfish over a fantail, gold, butterfly tail, googly eye, bubble cheek, or oranda red cap? there have all been inbred an INSANE amount. same with poodles, or ANY breed of dog, cats aswell, what about hairless mice, or BLUE budgerigars (these are an inbred morph)... yet perfectly accepted. my question is, if a leather or silk was produced without inbreeding, would is be just as acceptable?

 

[fresnowitte]

First I just wanted to say great conversation going on here.

my question is, if a leather or silk was produced without inbreeding, would is be just as acceptable?

Personally I think the answer to your question is yes. Yes if it weren't for the inbreeding...which makes a lot of people leery of what there health issues may be. It seems to me that this is a major concern that turns people away from them.....making them not want to accept them. But sense the conversations out there, myths, theories.....have already created mind sets. Then even if you could/did create one without inbreeding would anyone believe it....

I personally don't really see them as beardies more like another unique species.
That's my mind set if it doesn't have rough spiky scales it can't be my scaly puppy.
However if I did own one I would most likely enjoy it and love it just as much as my puppies.
I just wouldn't see as one of my puppies no more than I can look at the cat and call him a dog.

Call me prejudice, but to me the spikier the better. :mrgreen:

 

[Rosebud]

my question is, if a leather or silk was produced without inbreeding, would is be just as acceptable?

Paul, you know I love you, but my answer is still no, and my reasons are still the same ones that I spelled out in earlier silkback threads. You are making a linguistic fallacy, saying that if inbreeding is taken out of the equation, then it is a natural mutation and is healthy. Not a logical conclusion, Darlin'. If you can prove to me that these mutations are occuring in the WILD and are being replicated in the wild and surviving, then we can say it is a natural and healthy mutation.

Also, you can speculate and justify all you want, but you simply cannot make your claims about the long term health of these mutated beardies with any solid conviction because we have not seen those long term results. I can tell you that people are seeing more and more cancers in captive beardies, so weakening, whether it is because of inbreeding or simply selective breeding, is occurring.I will reserve judgment about leathers until 10 years or so from now when we know a little better about how they do. I will never buy the idea that silkbacks are good, because to me, they are no longer beardies, and are always going to be pathetic, naked creatures that did not have a say in their nakedness.

Now, I have a question for you: why the hell do you want to reduce or eliminate the scales on a beardie? WHY? If you want a smooth feeling reptile, get a gecko or a skink! Or, have someone smuggle you in a chuckwalla! :lol: Why do you want this to be okay and want it to be okay to produce silks?

 

[fresnowitte]

why the hell do you want to reduce or eliminate the scales on a beardie? WHY? If you want a smooth feeling reptile, get a gecko or a skink!

That's what I'm talkin' about! :headbang:
Regardless of all of the possible health issues.
A beardie just can't be a beardie without it's spikes and scales.......that's part of what makes a beardie so interesting and stimulating for the eye to look at. Why on earth would anyone want to change that? :dontknow:
The very first thing that I found so irresistible about them is all of their spikes. Then one looked into my eyes an it was over I was hooked. :notworthy:

 

[kirby]

theres no reason other then chance that a leatherback wont be produced in the wild. multigenerational individuals can produce them. why not in the wild? Agreed that silkbacks would not be present in the wild. the scales act as protection and disguise. you wouldn't find a poodle in the forrest hunting dear? why on earth would you want a dog with curly hair?

the Cancer point, i believe is due to Uvc in tubes and compacts. afterall not every dragon in the world has reduced scales.

We're all 'forum-ly' qualified to throw an arguement. why not see whats on the flip side? after looking into it, i dont see them as SO sickly or unhealthy. i too would like to know about there health negetives if any. before i even thought about venturing into the possibilities. i want to know exsactly what the reduction is. to what extent, and what are the real negetives. rather then the speculation.

sorry, im rushing for work. short and blunt post :S lolololololol

 

[vickson420]

Here is what would make me feel better and this is in regards to any animal.I would love to see a fully informed study with proof of viability and quality of life in any morph before introductions to the open market.Wouldnt it be nice to have a new morph introduced with a hard proven statement saying they have no ill effects,issues with quality of life,lifespan,etc.The problem I have is people are so quick to make a buck on a "new" morph that they dont take the time to consider the impact it will have not only to the morph but to their owners.I do understand what you said about the silkbacks in regards to breeding two leathers but isnt the most likely cause of action with any major breeder going to be to bypass that and just breed the actual silkback itself?Thats where I have the problem as I know the damage that can result from such a pairing.I just dont believe a breeder will just be happy with a 1 out 4 odds in breeding in this manner.Its all a little like mad science to me.I just think we would be breeding all that makes a beardie a beardie out of the equation by continuing in this direction.I would rather see less color and more size if we are going to be selective.I admit I love color as you can tell by my beardies but what I like to see even more then that is a big beardie.Get me a 4 foot beardie then we can talk :lol:

 

[lacy_black]

*ducks behind a concrete wall before replying* Personally if they do prove to be as long lived and healthy then I would probably want a silky. I admit I wasn't thrilled with the spikes all that much. Maybe i'm a wimp :lol: I like my animals smooth or silky feeling. My rats, mice, guinea pig, snakes even my dubia roaches, all soft. I don't mind cuddling with them, but dragons, while interesting to watch and stuff, just weren't so much fun to touch and if they got mad you got poked. Also not a thrill to me.
Plus the vibrance in a silky's coloration blows me away, there's nothing "blocking the view" like with the regular old normal spiked dragons.

 

[fresnowitte]

*ducks behind a concrete wall before replying*

Are you still ducking behind the wall?
Because I'm throwing tomatoes! :laughing6:

 

[Rosebud]

theres no reason other then chance that a leatherback wont be produced in the wild. multigenerational individuals can produce them. why not in the wild?

But it hasn't happened! For very good and obvious reasons, Nature just doesn't go there. Mutations do not occur by chance, Paul, except in captivity. In nature, every mutation has a specific reason for occurring, and it is usually connected to survivability, unless it is because of toxic waste or something. When leathers turn up in the wild, and turn up multiple times, you let me know, and I will rethink my position. :lol:

Lacy-black, why do you even have beardies then? Your experience with them sounds like nothing but a pain! Did you know that chuckwallas and uros are smooth and also have great personalities? :lol:

 

[vickson420]

In all seriousness there are alot of things that would not necessarily turn up in the wild but I wouldnt be opposed to.The problem is as a race humans just dont know when to say enough is enough.We have this ever lasting needed to meddle.I honestly dont really have an issue with breeding for certain genetic design but I am a purist in the thought that we must stay true to the breed/species.We must maintain health and viability first and foremost and we cannot ignore this just for the sake of seeing if it can be done.If we slow down and let these things occur in a more natural fashion then I dont think I would be as opposed as I am at the moment.

 

[Rosebud]

Vicky, I agree. I am not necessarily opposed to people breeding beardies that produce leatherbacks. I do oppose producing silkbacks.

My biggest problem with this discussion is the attempt to justify keeping and breeding leather backs by reasoning that this mutation is more natural in cases that don't involve inbreeding, or is particularly healthy, though inbreeding obviously weakens a genetic line MORE than selective breeding. Paul, I admire the fact that you are still against inbreeding, but that logic is just plain faulty because the reduction of scales in captive bearded dragons is not an evolutionary thing. It is a genetic flaw that has been fostered, whether intentionally or not, whether because of inbreeding or not. None of your arguments convince me otherwise, and its not just because I have a predisposed attitude. Its because they don't engage KNOWN facts about mutation, evolutionary changes, and genetics. Nothing will convince me otherwise until some long term studies, even unofficial ones, happen. As I said, I will take a wait and see attitude about the leather backs.

Fostering some traits that we want to foster is not necessarily wrong. It is a matter of degree, I guess, and the ethics of it all depends on whether that fostering causes suffering. No, leather backs don't need full spiky scales in captivity THAT WE KNOW OF, but since there is a reasonable chance that silk backs will suffer, why do you want to foster that particular mutation, or even the leather back mutation? I mean, you started out discussing leather backs and you seem to have talked yourself into being okay with silk backs. Why? I am not being funny here. I really want to know what the attraction is to these particular mutant beardie forms.

 

[kirby]

*ducks behind a concrete wall before replying*

Are you still ducking behind the wall?
Because I'm throwing tomatoes! :laughing6:

LOL. that had me laughing SO incredibly hard.

But it hasn't happened!

how do you know? do you know for certain that your collards hybridise as much as your making them? or will your breeding colony of spiny Ig's breed in close groups as your captive 'colony' is making them?

there are hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of beardies in the wild (it goes to show that 100,000 die on road kills doesnt dint there population yearly) far more then produced in captivity, i wouldn't be surprised if there were leathers poppin up occasionally.

Mutations do not occur by chance, Paul, except in captivity.

.
Darwin's theory of evolution.

When leathers turn up in the wild, and turn up multiple times, you let me know, and I will rethink my position.

Multi-generations of unrelated breedings isnt enough? considering the amnesty began in 1992. i would be suprised if these dragons great grandparents were wild. or not far off.

because the reduction of scales in captive bearded dragons is not an evolutionary thing. It is a genetic flaw that has been fostered

Again, Darwins theory of evolution, whales didnt always have a nostril through the top of there head. One day a freak baby was born with a hole in his head, he could come up to the surface, breath easier, and bred profusely because of this advantage. hence, why all whales have holes in there head now. its evolution. a freak genetic default. i TOTALLY agree that the lack of tubercles isnt a positive (nor a negative in a captive environment) it is still a form of evolution in a sense. being happening without inbreeding.

the reason i am apposing the arguement is because i CAN see the other side. its a debate of opinions PURELY opinions. and ive come to find a satisfying and comfortable position on both sides of the wall. im a person of extreme opinions, i rarely sit on the fence, its one way or the other. and ive come to sit comfortably in both. i LOVE a debate, absolutely gets my heart going, and im excited to post. this thread is friggin awsome IMO. its getting in deep quick, and were al still managing to be friends although were debating each other. (well at least i hope were still friends)

thank you to everyone posting, it may be pulling your strings to snap that im debating against popular, and somewhat my opinions, but i find it a learnign process. rather then question and assume problems, why not find them out, discuss, diagnose, and understand why, what, who, where, when and how.

 

[Rosebud]

Paul, scientists who study evolutionary processes, mutations, and natural changes in organisms do not believe in freak occurrences or phenomena. They say that phenomenal events or occurrences are only phenomenal until we figure out why and how they happened. They would call your arguments here VERY naive. I know this because I know several scientists, even dated one or two, and have had long conversations about these very things, though not necessarily with beardies as the subject. But take your own whale example. You stated yourself that whales NEEDED a better way to breath FIRST, and then developed blow holes. That proves to me that blow holes were not a random mutation, but a necessary one. Your "naturally occurring mutation" theory just doesn't fly, at least not yet. If someone discovers leather back beardies running around in the wild over there, do let us know.

So quit it! :lol: Accept that even without inbreeding, this is a captive induced mutation as far as we know at this time. Find a more logical and HONEST reason for accepting it! And BTW, Darlin', you are NOT sitting on the fence. You have clearly planted your feet firmly on the other side, or you would not be trying to make a ridiculous argument that a reduction in the very armor that protects them from predators in the wild is evolution! Sorry. You know me. I call it as I see it, but I still love ya, Baby! :lol: :wink:

As for my collareds, there are documented hybrids that hybridized in the wild, PROVEN through DNA studies of wild populations in that area. Proven through hard science. As for the collareds that I might breed, I will not delude myself into thinking that they will be prime specimens of collareds comparable to those in the wild, or that any mutation that occurs because of the pairings that I have chosen are natural! For one thing, they will lose just a bit of their wild instincts, which is a good thing because wild caught collareds have a hard time adjusting. But the very act of me picking their mates for them has the potential to weaken the offspring. I have to be honest with myself about this. I would never assume that any babies produced in captivity would do okay if I threw them back in the wild. Breed and release programs do exist in cases of endangered species, but a great deal of science goes into the process to ensure the survival of the species. But rest assured that if a deformed or strange baby turns up because of my pairings and I am not absolutely sure that the oddity won't cause suffering in the short or long term, I WILL NOT allow that pair to breed again. I don't think you can be sure about silks, or even leather backs at this time.

So, here are my arguments for possibly breeding collareds, and I say possibly because it has not happened yet. I want to provide captive bred collareds for people to adopt as pets and do my part in reducing the collecting of wild populations. With habitat destruction on the rise and collecting, collareds could become threatened at some point. Also, as I said earlier, I have seen first hand how hard it is for wc collareds to adjust to captive environments. Some don't and they die. Do I pair them based on traits? Well, I do have one group that has been selected based on unusual markings, but if their pairing produces any more drastic mutations than color, they will not be allowed to breed again. The rest are paired by breed, or common locale.

So, what are your REAL and HONEST motives for supporting the breeding of leather backs and now, surprisingly, silk backs? You have not given me an honest answer yet. :wink:

 

[lacy_black]

So I get ketchup from being behind my wall? sweet who wants to throw french fries at me next?
I really do think kirby has a point Rosebud *ducks* We don't KNOW that they're not being produced in the wilds, they just might be smarter then the scaled ones and know to stay out of sight.

It's really a moot point tho, regardless of what some people think about the ethics, breeders are and will continue to breed them for those who are into the exotic mutations.If someone can do it without inbreeding then really who has a right to say no. It's done daily with thousands of types of animals. Humans are known for screwing with nature it's one of our biggest faults.