just my personal opinion.
If hybrids would be sold as what they are this should be allowed. Selling
hybrids with a scientific name is fraud.
The other ornamentals mentioned like parrot fish and others are on another
sheet of paper. I'm working in some comitees with deal especially with these
fish and have contact with the ministery etc. All of these fish have
strongly deformed bodies. These fish aren't needed in aquarism, and I
created the name "unwanted ornamentals" for them when I published on them in
specialised magazines. Aquarism would not suffer if these fish (as well as
the tattood ones) would no longer be available.
Regards Harro
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Tyrone Genade <12860379 at narga.sun.ac.za>
An: rainbowfish at pcug.org.au <rainbowfish at pcug.org.au>
Datum: Montag, 14. August 2000 08:11
Betreff: [RML] hybrids
Hi all
This hybrid topic is more reallity than nightmare unfortunetly. I have
seen hybrids onsale (even here in S. Afr) of incisus x praecox and
trifasciatia x incisus. While the later is quite attractive (I bought it
out of ignorance) it is still quite sad. The pure bred trifasciata is still
hundreds of times nicer, and unfortunetly is never imported into
S.Afr.
Perhaps we should try to do something to stem the tide of hybrids
before we see the rainbow equivalent of parrot fish on the market.
But then again perhaps we should also do something about the
hideously deformed bubble eye and oranda goldfish and balloon
mollies too.
Just a few philosophical thoughts...
Tyrone
http://www.geocities.com/tyronegenade/intro.html
***********************************************************
"Submit to God and accept the word that he plants in your
hearts, which is able to save you."
James 1:21