Are we pampering our fish?

[Phantom Thief]

I was expecting the SPCA and RSPCA and UN and NATO and ASEAN and the CIA and the FBI to storm this place, kill everyone, and take our fishes away because we were suggesting being cruel to them.

And another point on this is the difference between surviving and thriving. That is directly affected by how you treat them, whether you pamper them or just chuck em in the tank and not care about them. So what is the fine line between all this?

We can now set a standard, the 'Fish Forum International Fishkeeping Standards;.



P.T.

 

[Discomafia]

A betta doesn't look comfortable in a small cup with brown, dirty water, that's the fine line, or something like that I'd guess. Well for one, don't keep a fish that's so long that it can't turn around in the tank. Like a 9" pleco in a 10 gallon tank. I've seen that before. That can't be nice. But they were surviving. I think thriving isn't the word I'm looking for, that's too good. Replace that with living comfortably.To say your fish would only thrive if you gave them ideal conditions, then once again, we have to define what ideal conditions means.

 

[panboy]

Phantom Theif put it simple. its not really our fault.

of course i have no problem spoiling our pets, as i do it to mine all the time. but it makes sense....

 

[Phantom Thief]

That wasn't really what i meant. To a certain extent, every bunch of offspring will have weak fishes, and the fish you buy from the lfs tend to be very stressed, so them dying isn't so much of your fault. But otherwise it is the person's fault.

P.T.

 

[JustinSane]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, what is in the nature can not be compared to that which is in the aquarium. Even the largest of aquariums are very very restriceted indeed when compared to the smallest creek in the wild. The whole natural cycle is an immense system that has taken millions of years to develop into it's current delicate form. It has it's own balance and means of regulation, these cannot be simulated in an aquarium.
Are fish hardy? They have to be, in the wild that is, nature has it's balance but it goes through various different stages and changes too, the fish (and other animals) have to be able to adapt to these. If they don't, they don't survive and thrive. It's called natural selection. Which is also by the way a mind blowingly complex system that cannot be simulated in an aquarium to any extent. It just doesn't work, there are too many variables to be simulated and most them even cannot be simulated at all.

Do I pamper my fish? H*ll yeah I mean I don't humanize them, they are fish after all and should be treated as such, but when it comes to maintaining, it's only the best for my babies Correct water parameters, varied diet, weekly 50% wc's etc. It doesn't take much and the results can be seen immediately as healthy fish that breed and behave like they should.

 

[Bignose]

As much as we rant and gnash our teeth at the poor LFS stock, the overbred state of some of the most popular common fish, the rampant diseases that decimate our tanks --- I (and many others!) have come to the conclusion that it is really like 85 to 95% of all unnatural (i.e. not simply old age) fish deaths are from poor husbandry. As has been said often above, we have to try our best to replicate nature, not a trivial task! And poor husbandry = stressed fish = more susceptible to disease. So, I'll be the one who says that it is mostly not the fishes fault, it is our fault.

The reason only a few percent of wild fish survive is that they play a significant role in the food chain. Most aquarium fish are just feeders in the chain in their natural eco-system -- if the fish were near the top, they would never be able to be kept in an aquarium. They have to lay 100s to 1000s of eggs, because their whole role is to be eaten by the larger fish, so heck yeah they are not going to survive. But, as aquarium owners, we have not replicated the entire eco-system, so most of our fish should not have to worry about being consumed. There will always be a few sickly or weaker fish, that is the whole idea of genetic diversity, and correspondingly there will always be a few stronger or hardier fish. But, given good conditions a great majority of the fish should be more than fine.

Yes, they can be very hardy creatures -- how many fish did we really acclimate the first time? For that matter, how many fish went through your first cycle?

But, if you want them to live out their long natural life, and at least live life close to how they would in nature, you have to do the water changes matching pH, hardness, temperature, give them a tank of a decent size to some of what they would in nature, give them the rocks or plants to make them feel secure, etc., etc. Otherwise, the fish are not as stress-free as they could be, which will make them less hardy. If you have hardy fish now, and intend to start skipping on your maintenence, I would bet they are significantly less hardy in 6 months. So, why risk it?

 

[Discomafia]

^^^
Excellent post. I totally get what you're saying!

 

[Phantom Thief]

Wild angels need a very low pH, so low that you need to use RO water and then change the ph from there.

But the angelfish nowadays can tolerate a wide variety of pH. So this is an example about what i mean. Do we need to redefine what the parameters are? Considering fishes bred in captivity can be tougher except for those which are highly inbred. So how far do we need to go to replicate a natural environment?

P.T.

 

[Discomafia]

For how long can the wild caught ones survive without a low ph value?

 

[Phantom Thief]

I'm not sure how long, because everytime i hear about them, it's a must. No one even mentions what happens if you don't have that ph. I'm guessin they die pretty quick.

P.T.

 

[Dwarfs]

We, humans, rip fish from their native environments to be held in captivity. The least we can do is give the fish good homes and a long healthy life I've skipped dinner for my fish, to make them happy...wait, that was last night

 

[sylvia]

I think it depends.

My opinion:

The fact is that in the wild natural selection would weed out the weak and favour the strong IN THAT ENVIRONMENT. There is no, or limited, natural selection with tank-bred fish, only artificial selection for color, or finnage, or size, or novelty looks. Humans rarely breed an ornamental species (as fish would be considered) based on health or hardiness so the fish can become weaker and more difficult to keep.

On the other hand, fish that have been bred extensively in varying conditions like platies, guppies and zebra or leopard danios, have become adapted to a wide range of human water conditions (rather than those in the wild) and are much hardier.

Obviously, wild-caught fish are fragile because they do not get the chance needed to adapt to a new environment and fish like discus that are CONSIDERED fragile are always bred in ideal conditions so are never forced to adapt to the more 'average' conditions of a household tank (unlke guppies etc.).

Basicly, what I'm saying is that fish are only truly hardy if kept in an environment similar to their own. Whether this be their natural environment or that which we created for them over several generations, makes no difference.

For this reason, it IS important to monitor water conditions though some fish will have different prefferences to others (obviously).

This is another issue - we mix species with *very* different requirements all the time - yet we expect them to all survive in the same water. In their natural (or man-made) environments, they may have been subjected to very different parameters and adjusted to those accordingly (over several generations). I think it is difficult to keep such fish healthy and happy without replicating those conditions or breeding them with the selection of hardy fish in mind for the specific environment.

The fact that fish come from all over the world and are shipped to every corner and every continent makes it even more complicated - not to mention mass production and detrimental in-breeding of some species where the members of a species all come from similar or even identical water conditions and also possess weaker immune systems because of this mass-production. Dwarf gouramies and neon tetras would be a prime example.

 

[panboy]

there is alot of good points that people have posted.... i am now completely confused and dont care.. i ll just keep spoiling my fish, they seem happy so far

 

[Bignose]

Whether the fish is wild-caught or has been bred for generations is the kind of question that requires research. This is why (and everyone say it along with me) you should not buy on impulse. An angelfish bred in the hard, alkaline waters of south Florida will be more than happy in my hard, alkaline Indiana water. But, pluck it out of the wild, and... well, lets not go there.

But, I think this whole thread can come down to just knowing your fish and their history. Research, research, research.

And, panboy and others, it is obviously worse to push the envelope than it is to pamper -- besides by pampering we get to interact and have fun with the fish. By ignoring them, ... b-o-r-i-n-g.

 

[Kittycat]

I think there is no such thing as pampering when we talk of basic living conditions and environment--and that includes water changes. For instance, would you consider it "pampering" yourself if you live in the country to breathe cleaner, fresher air? The standards for responsible pet ownership when it comes to fishes are way below that of dogs and cats, so think it's better to call it providing the best living conditions for your pet rather than pampering.