Tattooed Fish/glo Fish

[DiscusKeeper403]

Who knows if either of these methods cause pain? I think that is really up in the air and until we know for sure I am undecided on either of these methods of artificially coloring a fish.

 

[hihi100202]

Oh and I also added something about Betta can't be in a cup and must have atleast 1/2 gallon of water.

that is going to be hard... It will cost to mutch money to get 1/2 gallon cups for all them... and with freakin economy and all.

 

[dthoffsett]

Oh and I also added something about Betta can't be in a cup and must have atleast 1/2 gallon of water.

that is going to be hard... It will cost to mutch money to get 1/2 gallon cups for all them... and with freakin economy and all.

For the best impact I think you should stick with one subject at a time. You could write to them again about the bettas.

DiscusLova - while there is no proof that it hurts them, there is also no proof that it doesn't and until studies are done we won't know. Wouldn't it be best to stop the practice until then? We already know that it hurts when humans get tattoos, and while human/fish anatomy differ greatly, it isn't unreasonable to think that it hurts them as well.

 

[Inchyally]

Tattooing, definitely yes. From what I have heard, 80% of fish that are tattooed/dyed don't even make it to stores.... horrible.

Glofish? No fish are harmed in their making, so I don't see the problem, really.

 

[unknowntbeast]

For the best impact I think you should stick with one subject at a time. You could write to them again about the bettas.

Yeah, your probably right.

 

[DiscusKeeper403]

I am pretty sure laser tattoo is different then the regular old methods of tattoo?

 

[unknowntbeast]

I am pretty sure laser tattoo is different then the regular old methods of tattoo?

Yeah, from what I've read they use a low power laser to somehow tattoo them....not quite sure of all the details.

 

[DiscusKeeper403]

I am pretty sure laser tattoo is different then the regular old methods of tattoo?

Yeah, from what I've read they use a low power laser to somehow tattoo them....not quite sure of all the details.

That's what I read too. Don't see why people are against it if the fish aren't in any pain? Those statistics wouldn't come into play on this method either I am assuming.

 

[unknowntbeast]

Don't see why people are against it if the fish aren't in any pain?

Well that's what the company say. But as always they will put themselves in the best light. And is it even ethically right to have a Redskins helment tattooed on the fish? Even if it was done with a low power, no pain laser?

 

[dthoffsett]

PFK has an interesting article on both dyeing and tattoos.
[URL="http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=850"]http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/...em.php?news=850[/URL]

The thing is that no one knows if it hurts the fish or not, the "manufacturers" doing the actual tattooing says it doesn't hurt but why would they admit that it does and possibly damage sales.

 

[DiscusKeeper403]

PFK has an interesting article on both dyeing and tattoos.
<a href="http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=850" target="_blank">http/www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/...em.php?news=850</a>

The thing is that no one knows if it hurts the fish or not, the "manufacturers" doing the actual tattooing says it doesn't hurt but why would they admit that it does and possibly damage sales.

True. I didn't see your above response to my question until now. I guess you have a point. Better safe then sorry.

 

[Truck]

all glofish should be euthanised imo
tattooed fish should be allowed to live
and neutering a fish is not going to be an economical move, imagine the costs for neutering a glofish when they can be culled.

 

[unknowntbeast]

Wow truck, that's a complete oppisite view from what I expected. Euthanise GloFish, but not tattooed? GloFish are "engineered" while in the egg, so there is no pain. They were, and still can be, used to detect polletants. Tattooed fish on the other hand go through significant ammounts of pain. Tattooed fish may also have toxins in the dye which are non-eco friendly. So why euthanise the GloFish?

 

[Truck]

Wow truck, that's a complete oppisite view from what I expected. Euthanise GloFish, but not tattooed? GloFish are "engineered" while in the egg, so there is no pain. They were, and still can be, used to detect polletants. Tattooed fish on the other hand go through significant ammounts of pain. Tattooed fish may also have toxins in the dye which are non-eco friendly. So why euthanise the GloFish?

its not the pain thats bothering me...its the fact that theyve been introduced into the wild and will continue to breed with natural stock thus passing on the jellyfish gene.
there nothing worse than some forms of genetic engineering IMO...yes it can have its uses but things like IVF are getting out of hand...people are able to have designer babies these days and thats imply playing with nature.

 

[shahrezsyed]

ban all o them especially tattooed but only use the glo fish for detecting water pollutants dont lets them interbreed in the wild!(as in set some free in the wild) that could cause the entire ecosystem to collapse!!
shahrez