Thanks for your input mate, okay so you have 50 fry in a net, and the LFS wont take them...what do you do?
Emma
Debate
- Thread starter emmsy
- Start date
Thanks for your input mate, okay so you have 50 fry in a net, and the LFS wont take them...what do you do?
Emma
brads
Fish Fanatic
I have no idea what I would do. I don't think I would get my self in such a situation. But if I had so many live bearers in the tank that they bred that much I would save some and hand them out to mates of mine and the rest let nature do the rest. Good debate this....
Brads
I don't think I would get my self in such a situation
you say that because you are educated about NOT getting into that situation.
Yes Wilder, that, I think is the only humane solution. Gonna have a bath now. back soon
Emma
you say that because you are educated about NOT getting into that situation.
Yes Wilder, that, I think is the only humane solution. Gonna have a bath now. back soon
Emma
brads
Fish Fanatic
Sure. When I got into fish keeping the first thing I bought was a book and did a bit of research. I remember My LFS (maiden Head Aqutics) informing me on what fish do what and how much work they can be. Once I got over the fact that I couldn't have a Nemo and Dori in my tank I made my choices and have stuck to them since.
That is exactly what I would do (and as I have guppies what I will do if I have to).
However, I do think fish shops shops should label their fish a bit more clearly, a few paragraphs about them would surfice. Then again as a fishkeeper, I reasearch what fish i'm getting first.
Em, did you have a good night hun?
Miss Wiggle
Practically perfect in every way
funny, but very very true.
ultimatley fish shop employee's are on minimum wage or not much more, you're not gonna get degree educated biologists working for minimum wage in every fish shop, because of the nature of the retail trade you will inevitably have the majority of them being either teenagers or (and i honestly don't mean this derisivley) those with less education or ability. you get the odd fish store run by people who really care and love the hobby or the odd employee in a 'bread and butter' store who really knows their stuff, but it's by far the exception not the rule.
honestly, you can't expect that people working in a retail outlet on minimum wage will be specialists enough to give out decent advise on a wide range of species.
this is why you'll get better advice from a forum like this, you've got contributors to some of the leading fishkeeping magazines, you've got vets and vetinary nurses, you've got a lot of really bright people who would probably all dearly love to work in fish shops but can't earn enough money to support their families doing so.
when you think about it in that context it's any wonder why people expect the shops to be able to give them the best advice, really they aren't the experts at all.
Sorry if anybodys mentioned this as I don't have the patients to read through this whole thread...
This situation to me seems to be a double edged sword, on the one side the fact is that you have successfully bred baby fish and by keeping them alive you give them the chance to thrive, grow and live their lives to the best that you can offer.
On the other side, if you have a larger predatory fish then you are just completing the natural cicrle of life that would occur in the wild. (big fish eats little fish).
Yes, there is the question of morality in this situation, however if the fry are going to slowly end up dying in your tank that is too small to sustain the amount of fish that say guppies can produce, then it is no longer a question of what's right or wrong, it's a question of ethics. Are you going to let the little fish grow up in a bad enviroment? Or are you going to allow them to be eaten quickly with minimal pain?(I refer to them being eaten as minimal pain as the fact of the matter remains that living in an ammonia, nitrite and nitrate filled enviroment would cause a lot more pain over a period of time.)
Myself, I do not find it to be unethical, however I do quest the morality of some whom do this. I'm still on the fence myself, however if I have a large fish that eats small fish to survive in the wild, and as a responsible fish owner I am trying to duplicate it's natural enviroment (weither it be Ph levels, area of the world, landscape set-up or food -in this case) then yes, I will feed live fish.
This brings us back to the question about feeding live goldfish, is it right or is it wrong? There is no right or wrong answer to this question, just opinions.
And for those who say "feeding other fish, live fish is wrong period." well I have this question to ask, is feeding a lizard crickets or other insects wrong? It's their natural food source in the wild (not so much crickets, but other insects) and as a responsible pet owner your responsible for providing an enviroment as close to their natural enviroment as possible. Yes, there are dry foods on the market, but even then they are not a complete balanced diet.
So to answer your question emma, I find nothing wrong with feeding live fish, however if the chance arises to give them a proper home, even if your only given a penny per every 2 fish then who cares? A home is a home and if the lfs sells them to make more money oh well, it's just another circle of life.
This situation to me seems to be a double edged sword, on the one side the fact is that you have successfully bred baby fish and by keeping them alive you give them the chance to thrive, grow and live their lives to the best that you can offer.
On the other side, if you have a larger predatory fish then you are just completing the natural cicrle of life that would occur in the wild. (big fish eats little fish).
Yes, there is the question of morality in this situation, however if the fry are going to slowly end up dying in your tank that is too small to sustain the amount of fish that say guppies can produce, then it is no longer a question of what's right or wrong, it's a question of ethics. Are you going to let the little fish grow up in a bad enviroment? Or are you going to allow them to be eaten quickly with minimal pain?(I refer to them being eaten as minimal pain as the fact of the matter remains that living in an ammonia, nitrite and nitrate filled enviroment would cause a lot more pain over a period of time.)
Myself, I do not find it to be unethical, however I do quest the morality of some whom do this. I'm still on the fence myself, however if I have a large fish that eats small fish to survive in the wild, and as a responsible fish owner I am trying to duplicate it's natural enviroment (weither it be Ph levels, area of the world, landscape set-up or food -in this case) then yes, I will feed live fish.
This brings us back to the question about feeding live goldfish, is it right or is it wrong? There is no right or wrong answer to this question, just opinions.
And for those who say "feeding other fish, live fish is wrong period." well I have this question to ask, is feeding a lizard crickets or other insects wrong? It's their natural food source in the wild (not so much crickets, but other insects) and as a responsible pet owner your responsible for providing an enviroment as close to their natural enviroment as possible. Yes, there are dry foods on the market, but even then they are not a complete balanced diet.
So to answer your question emma, I find nothing wrong with feeding live fish, however if the chance arises to give them a proper home, even if your only given a penny per every 2 fish then who cares? A home is a home and if the lfs sells them to make more money oh well, it's just another circle of life.
5teady_2012
Here to help
I totally totally agree 5teady - amazing!
This is just a topic I'm quiet... well, on the fence about I guess, but I'm passionate in my response. I find it niether right or wrong as I said... lolz and what can I say, arguing is what I do best hahaha 
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
383 -
237
-
228 -
224 -
211 -
171
-
146 -
129 -
117 -
111 -
101 -
99 -
98 -
92 -
F
92