>>Quote:

>>

>>>> He feels they are separate, breeds his separately, plans to keep them that way

>>> I don't think that's exactly what he said.

>>Quoting: “In the meantime, I will attempt to keep my bloodlines pure waiting on the very real possibility that some time in the future the gaigei subspecies will be recognized again…”



Right -- BUT -- if I'm not terribly mistaken (which I could be), Jeff is referring to keeping the PERUVIANS pure. Now, I AGREE with keeping Peruvians pure, and not selling mixes as Peruvians.



>>> These animals are already mixed

>>This is an assumption on your part.



Not really. As Jeff has mentioned several times, Peruvians and Brazilians are crossed in the market.



>>For all you know, any mixing, if it has occurred at all, may well be a tiny fraction of the market.



You're absolutely right about this part. I have no idea how much crossing has gone on -- and I dare say you don't know either.



>>Yet this is justification to proceed at will with more, while knowing full well -- as several commenters have advanced and you did not counter -- that full disclosure would not exist to document this?



I don't understand your question here.



>>Furthermore, your logic is inconsistent: you are taking license on the Brazilian side because you “know” diluting has occurred, but you can’t prove for certain that it has never occurred on the Peruvian side. Yet that ssp. is protected?



It's not actually inconsistent. Evidently -- from what I've seen Jeff write -- you can tell with a reasonable degree of certainty, through scale counts, which animals are pure Peruvian. But you can't tell the Peruvian/Brazilian mixes apart from pure Brazilians in any dependable way, that I know of. If Jeff does know of some way to do this, please let us know!



Also, Peruvians have a very limited range -- while Brazilians have a very broad range. This means that the Peruvian "type" may be in more danger -- from habitat destruction, overcollection, whatever you can think of -- than the Brazilian "type" is. And if it's in more danger, IMHO it's more important to treat it more carefully.



>>> It's not a "rationale" -- it's a reality check.

>>Your logic is not “reality.” It’s conjecture.



Yup, some of it certainly is. So is yours.

[ Show Entire Thread ]