IHS - FBH - Spider Morph Ban & others

[artgecko]

It’s very easy to ridicule a position by pushing it to the farthest extremes... it’s called the “slippery slope” logical fallacy, Zina.
.

That is true, but we are dealing with zealots in the AR movements and politicians that are willing to back them. We also have some proof of Zina's train of thought happening with the breed-specific bans on dogs. First they started with pit bulls, then rottweilers, GSDs, Dobermans, Several mastiff breeds, etc. The AR movement tends to chip away starting with the weakest point and going forward. Also look at the Lacey act and FWS adding more snake species to it..They stopped at boas, this time, but their next attempt may include them as they work their way down the exotics commonly kept as pets list. I know it is cynical, but there are a lot of AR groups whose agenda is eventually to end all animal ownership and they have a nasty tendency of using lobbyists and politicians to do their dirty work.

I personally don't agree with breeding any animal that has a known genetic issue that could affect quality of life, health, etc. To that end, I have chosen not to work with any of the genes that have neuro issues or kinking, or breed super forms that could have kinking or other issues (duck billing, bug eyes, etc.). It is easy to make this judgement call when we see an animal that obviously can't function (severe kinking, etc.) and has to be euthanized, but it is harder with something like the wobble, where effects are varied per individual and even per situation, with the majority showing very few symptoms.

IMO choosing to work with neuro genes or those that are known to cause issues (kinking) is a tough moral call. For me, I don't want to do anything that would increase my odds of producing an animal that might be born with severe issues and have to be euthanized, for others, the risk may be worth it. IMO though, this is something to be dealt with by individuals who have been educated on the facts and risks involved. The more we eagerly get government involved IMO, the more likely we are to open the door to them banning ownership of all exotics. In this case, it is an individual show organizer (if I'm reading that correctly) that has decided to ban them. This is not a law or legal action. They can still be bred / sold privately, and shown at other reptile expos (as far as I'm aware). So, breeders can vote with their feet and $$ and choose not to vend at that show, which might effect the sponsor's decision. Now what I don't know, is how many other shows there are in the UK for breeders to support.

From what I've seen on some documentaries, etc. The UK is going through a much more intense period of AR or at least AW activism, including the kennel club allowing the humane society to bully them into changing breed standards to appease them..Notably after a documentary came out about how atrocious pure-bred dogs were. I can't remember the name of it, but I did watch it. I read some opinion pieces on the documentary afterwards and some of the people (including vets, breeders, and historians) said that it was heavily lopsided in what it showed, including showing images of dogs that would be considered not-to-standard as what was promoted as ideal, overstating rates of health issues, etc and not covering any of the positives of pure bred dogs (i.e. genetic testing for carried diseases, hip screening, etc.). I think this instance (banning the spiders from being sold at this show) happened after that and while that was still currently ongoing news.

I think I remember seeing this posted...if not here, then on FB, some time last year. I know I heard about it somewhere because every once in a while someone will comment "Yeah, well, spiders are banned in the UK." having mis-read the article or heard incorrectly about it.