Re: [AlpacaTalk] BEW
Maegan,
I am not advocating one thing over another, each breeder must make those decisions for themselves, hopefully with reasoning based more on fact and less on speculation. My question was over the association between Choanal Atresia and Blue Eyes. I have never heard this association before and wanted to read the paper that showed such an association.
You can't throw associations such as this out there and not expect people to question where it came from. The natural response to your last post where you essentially say you aren't going to talk about it anymore, is an impression that there was no substance to back up your assertion of an association between choanal atresia and blue eyes. I know this probably is not true, but nonetheless, it does not help to further the group's knowledge.
Additionally, while I believe that genetics play a role in some cases of wry face and choanal atresia, there may also be cases where CA is environmentally induced, or just a fluke. If someone has spent thousands on a female, one can understand the hesitancy to cull, and if the issue is blue eyes, where an alpaca can live quite normally and may not even be deaf, culling may be viewed as excessive.
Certainly research, research, research those lines to be sure that genetic issues are not something that could pop out of the womb. Certainly don't introduce issues into your herd, but we must also be sure that we don't assume or claim associations between choanal atresia and blue eyes unless it really exists. On our farm we ask for disclosure on breeding contracts that owners of a dam disclose any knowledge of a heritable defect in the dam's pedigree or progeny. We don't want our male given a bad name due to a heritable defect that may or may not pop out after breeding him to a dam with "issues"
.
We agree that heritable defects should be avoided, but we need to be careful not to lump genetic defects into the same pot as congenital defects that do not have a genetic basis. As you know genetic means that it can be passed either recessively or dominantly from one generation to the next, while congenital defects are present at birth, but are not necessarily genetically caused.
It's an interesting discussion and if you do go back to embryonic development, you can see the potential for problems with the neural tube causing issues all around the headand into the heart, however such problems can be environmental as well as genetic, so we must be careful not to assume that all are genetic in origin.
Thanks,
Laurel
The Shouvlins
Bluebird Hills Farm
Springfield, Ohio
937-206-3936
www.bluebirdhills.
bluebirdhills@
>
>
>
>
>
> OK....
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> It is apparent, as it has been every time the BEW or CA has come up an
> issue, that no one fighting with me on this is going to do their own
> research, believe anything other than what was fed to them by the
> industry itself (What was one of the highest money Industries next to
> the Thoroughbreds, mind you) nor are they going to even take the truth
> into consideration. After all, who wants to be told that after breeding
> animals for however many years, and investing all of the money into the
> business, that it is now rendered useless, the animals aren't worth a
> thing, and said animals and lines have been set in the toilet and are
> patiently waiting to be flushed? Right, Nobody!
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> People say they want proof, I say disprove it. Contact vets, go read
> information online, do your own looking. There is information everywhere
> and believe it or not, many people will tell you what you want to hear,
> and promise you everything and the moon when giving you information,
> especially when it is going to benefit their pocketbook. Vets have openly
> written about Blue eyes and CA. They have openly advised against breeding
> these animals. The BEW, Blue eyes, the issues it causes and how it comes
> about are all over the internet and not hard at all to find. I am not
> going to do the fishing and proving to other people because they don't
> want to do it themselves nor see a truth that is going to send their
> retirement or hard earned money into oblivion.
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> The ARF is not going to tell an industry that the animals in someone's
> back yard is worth no more than the penny sitting on their counter.....
> why bite the hand that feeds you? They had the opportunity in the mid to
> late 90's to find a genetic marker for Choanal Atresia and a Blue eyed
> gene for the cost of $36k, probably costing less now. However, the
> Industry at that time was run by your bigger farms who wouldn't let their
> cover be blown, and it really isn't any different today. There will never
> be a breed standard because that would torch a lot of the animals we have
> in the US (Nor will you ever find a general standard to apply because it
> will be based on something bias), and very rarely will you find the people
> who positively tout BEW or Blue eyes in general, turn around and say,"Oh
> man. This really is a bad thing" and do something about it. Those who do
> get the utmost respect from me because it takes a lot to do something like
> that and try to fix the damage done, especially if you are a smaller farm.
> I know, IÂ have been there and we have lost money on animals who produced
> or were carriers of genetic issues because we did not tolerate having them
> in our breeding program. Those who would much rather continue to breed
> and make money off of animals like this are certainly not going to pull
> the problem from their herds.
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> I will have to say that when talking about blue eyes and why they should
> be taken out of a program, no one has ever come back with, "Well dense
> dark animals are prone to heat stress, so do we remove them?". I will
> not lie, I was actually speechless and somewhat dumbfounded and I think I
> would go as far as saying that it was a very empty argument point. You are
> comparing apples to oranges. We are talking about bad breeding decisions
> when it comes to your blue eyed animals on one hand and then practicing
> the animal husbandry that is supposed to be upheld on the other. You are
> talking something the industry should not be seeing or breeding on one
> hand and something the industry wants to see and is breeding for on the
> other when it comes to color and fleece. Any color can suffer from heat
> stress, and I personally have heard of many lighter animals in comparison
> to the dark ones. Furthermore, when dealing with dense alpacas, especially
> the darks, shear them first. This is all common sense, guys. Don't be
> trying to reach for random comparisons especially when they have nothing
> to do with each other. Removing a dark animal for its dark, dense fleece
> is ridiculous. Removing an animal because it is a genetic risk to a
> breeding program is something completely different.
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> This is important: I would also like to point something out like I have in
> my last post. The reason why I stress this is because people can get
> themselves into a lot of trouble. When you knowingly breed a congenitally
> defective animal and the bloodline, and breed or sell that animal or its
> offspring off as genetically sound or of breeding quality, according to
> ANIMAL LAW, you are practicing animal negligence. Therefore, I
> would recommend those pushing to have someone breed or buy an animal
> which falls under this category to watch themselves. All it takes is a
> farm trying to sue a farm who has done something like this (which can be
> done at any point of time if the contracts and information holds water and
> one finds an animal law attorney to take the case), or even a name being
> dropped by someone who says something like, "Well so and so said I should
> or could do it or advised that I would be ok doing this" and them being
> pulled into it as well. They can be held accountable for what was either
> said or done, and can find yourself in a world of hot water not to
> mention possible jail time and or fines for being "guilty by association"
> or "advising on bad breeding ethics with knowledge".  It would start a
> class action suit in a hurry as soon as the box was busted open and
> everything was thrown on the table. There is so much information one can
> find on blue eyes and such anymore that it would not be hard for an
> Attorney who has been hired up to pull in all the information he needs on
> these subjects and get the job done. There have been multiple farms who
> have been messed over by farms in this avenue of blue eyed and CA
> producing animals, have contacted us regarding these things, and have
> asked if there is anything legally they can do. There are also quite a few
> large farms who have threatened people with lawsuits because new breeders
> have found out about the defective bloodlines. I thought people said it
> wasn't a big deal or was something that "just happens" so why go to the
> extreme of threatening someone?? My mom is studying Animal Law and
> Contracts specifically because of these things being done in our Industry
> today. She has been speaking with an Attorney about this subject of BEW,
> Blue eyed animals in general, and CA and he already said there would not
> be one issue in trying to nab people for doing things like this. I would
> imagine an Attorney who specializes in this subject would know far more
> than quite a few breeders or any other Attorney positions. My opinion: Do
> not ADVISE anyone. Give them the proof or disproof that shows why
> they could or could not breed a certain animal, an opinion if you have
> one, and save yourself from getting into hot water down the road by
> keeping your definitive decisions out of it.
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> While I understand that people saying blue eyed animals are not of
> breeding quality and should not be used upsets people, you can then
> understand how those who take the opposite stand feel as well. If you
> want animals with amazing fiber, then make them. An alpaca that produces
> awesome fiber but shows or is from a line of flaws can still produce
> nice fiber and not be bred! I promise you that there will be other
> animals that have awesome fiber, maintain their fineness and the whole 9
> yards, and are not of blue eyed lines. Why ruin our breeding programs so
> one can breed for fleece that can be found in other animals? Go ahead and
> make animals for fleece, but don't make the bloodlines suffer
> irresponsible breeding decisions because "his or her fleece is way too
> good to pass up by making them a non-breeder". I understand people want
> this to be a fiber industry, but we are going to see that a lot faster
> than we expected if we riddle our bloodlines with defects that will never
> be gotten rid of. I personally would like to stay in the breeding and
> selling of sound animals a bit longer.
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Being that we are going to continue going around in circles and people are
> going to agree or disagree with what they will, I am no longer playing on
> this subject. I have give my opinions, voiced my views and said what has
> been found and proven. Those who want to continue to breed these lines are
> running their lines at their own risk and I wish the best of luck to them.
> I guess we will find out who was the most correct when it all comes down
> to the end result of the Industry or what is found out between then and
> now. I bid good luck to those who breed these animals and the programs
> that include them. For those who are trying to figure out what to do,
> as you can see, there is a bright side and a dark side to this Industry
> just like any other. Just try to keep yourself from paying the price of
> not being correctly informed or doing all the research you can. Do what
> you can to ensure you are making the best choices for your breeding
> programs and the longevity of them as well.
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Maegan Blessing
>
>
>
> Cedar Grove Alpacas, LLC.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
posted by Chaddo at 7:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home