Leopard Gecko Registry; Unneeded Bureaucracy?

Originally Posted by The NY Gecko

as for undercutting its free enterprise and who ever has the lowest prices will seel first. supply and demand. i tell you one thign though. if i had some of mike wilbanks leuscistics (BP's) i wouldnt be the person to sel lthem for 200,000. id sell them for 100 or maybe 50g. why? because mine would sell first and id be lowereing the market prices eventually to where someone like me right now could own one jsut as a pet. i realize that may seem coldhearted. and it is to a degree. but 200K is alot for any animal. i would never expect anyone to pay me that for one.

its late and im off. nite everyone

Tom, even if you were selling Lucy's for 5k, I would still give Mike a call.
I'm done with this thread. It has taken a turn away from what was a pretty good discussion. It is now heading some place I would rather not.

I do believe that I will stick to my initial stance. I for one will not be participating in the LGR.

I didn't read this whole thread, but i want to put in my vote.

I am expecting 200+ hatchlings this season, and I just got my first couple of eggs today. There is NO WAY I am going to have time to register each gecko I own. I work a full time job, a second full time job (the geckos) and a part time job on top of that. Any free time I do muster together is spent with the leos or you guys helping the new ones with questions or giving Jeremy and them a good pat on the back.

I personally won't be partaking in the LGR. Do I think it's a terrible idea? Not at all! I think we are just trying to set standards in the "middle" of the breeding time that leo's have been bred. It wouldn't have been any easier a couple years ago, and won't be easier in the future. It will take years and years to get people on the same schedule, and not everyone will participate (just like the AKC). But you take it with a grain of salt. Stef, good luck with this..I am sorry I can not participate.

im smalltime kelli. and next to tremper i always will be.

Yeah, next to Tremper I always will be too!

as for undercutting its free enterprise and who ever has the lowest prices will seel first.

It is free enterprise, but you are wrong about whoever has the lowest price will sell first. That's true sometimes, but not always.

Tom, I have tried to be nice to you, but you have made it impossible. I don't want forgiveness because i haven't done anything wrong. The thing that seams to be insulting to you is me stating my opinion which is contrary to yours. You on the other hand have been rude and insulting at every turn. So in an attempt to keep this from becoming a problem I ask this from you. Do not respond to any of my threads or posts, and I will do the same for you. I don't want to be acquainted with you in any way including sales to or from you.

agreed then brian. take that as you wish.

Originally Posted by The NY Gecko

no thats not true, my point is id like to see people go throught the "trouble" even though its not that bad and get rid of false advertising

For every one of the ads you can find like that, you can also find one for cornsnakes, and one for dogs. The AKC has been around forever and there are plenty of people selling labradoodles, and people selling "purebred rockwilders" (that are not AKC dogs) and all kinds of other stuff. A registry is powerless to affect any of that, and will not stop or even slow down that kind of thing. The people involved in selling and buying those animals don't care about the AKC, the ACR, or the LGR, and I don't believe that any registry will change that.

Also, please note that the AKC does not really set standards. It is my understanding that they do not write them, they get them from others who write them, and the AKC simply publishes them. They are also not really enforced by the AKC. That is, there's nobody sitting in an AKC office looking at a photograph and using that to decide whether an individual dog is or isn't up to a breed standard. The only "enforcement" of any standards is carried out with shows (by peer review) where judges (who are breeders or former breeders) determine which individuals best live up to the standards of the judge, or the judges interpretation at that point in time.

Also it is important to take into account that dog breeds are very much "set to type" so that they breed true. It is unreasonable to compare dog breeds to any selectively bred morphs, unless they are extremely locale-specific from some isolated wild population, which excludes any of the morphs that have been created by breeders.

Anyway, the important difference is this:
· When you breed two collies together, all of the offspring are collies.
· When you breed a collie to another breed, none of the offspring are collies.
The same does not hold true for selectively bred herps at this point:
· You can breed two animals of selectively bred morph A together and get animals that are not morph A.
· You can also breed two animals that are not selectively bred morph A together, and get some offspring that are selectively bred morph A.

Anyway, the practical upshot of all that is that I personally don't believe it is reasonable to think that standards can be set (or at least anything that would be taken seriously) without holding actual competitions where individual specimens are judged, in the flesh, on their own merits. But at this point, the only thing competitions will do is affirm the quality of an individual, which doesn't necessarily hold true for any of its relatives since they haven't been bred for generations upon generations to set type.

trempers on his 27th generation. i know thats not long when you compare it to dogs, not by a long shot, but you have to think that the cycle of reptiles goes by at a much faster rate than dogs or cats. anyways, its something that i hope is going to help or work. even if it doesnt eliminate it id love to see it to make a dent. im behind the LGR full scale. im srry that some find it unfeasible. maybe a select morph taht you have that youd like to publish, idk. the biggest problem seems to be with tangs.