To Feeder Or Not To Feeder That Is The Question

[geo7x]

Plus fish sold as feeders are raised and kept in terrible conditions before being plunged into a tank to be eaten alive. Fish for our tables at least have a decent life before they are caught.

 

[dnn3]

i used to use feeders for my senegal bichir but i quit for two reasons,because i was told that some carry disease and because i had one that didn't get eaten and became a pest to my other fish.so that's another potential problem,you may get stuck with a fish you don't want.

 

[rabbut]

If I had an eel or lionfish, which I want someday, I'd have no problem feeding live fish to it/them. Not run of the mill goldies though.

Anyways, I believe I read somewhere that fish don't feel pain(don't know if it's entirely true) and feeders are meant to be that in the wild as well. I'd just chuck it in and let nature take it's course.

wow...a barbaric female doesn't happen to often around here, eh?

Fish do actually feel pain. The theory that they don't was disproved.

Though I personally belive fish feel pain, it is not something that can be proven, so no, the theory was not disproved unless a fish acctually jumped out of the tank and told the studier such The theory that fish do not feel pain still stands, but there is new evidence to surgest that it is not correct, just as there is eidence to surgest that the theory is correct Welcome to the confusing world of science

I don't think this has a closed book answer IMO. I feel that fish should not be fed feeders wherever possible, but some fish won't touch "dead" food. In these cases, I don't have an issue with it In short, with me it depends on the circumstances

All the best
Rabbut

 

[OohFeeshy]

[quote name=''genesis' post='2062775' date='Jul 13 2008, 04:36 PM']If you asked me 'would you rather be mauled by a large predator, say, a lion? or suffocated, which would you choose?'
I would surely say 'suffocated', therefore yes, I do think it is more ethical.[/quote]

It's hardly a valid comprison though, is it? Firstly, if you are using feeders you would select those of a size whereby death would be quick (not, for example, putting an 8" goldfish in a pirahna tank to get ripped to shreds, which is the equivalent of you being eaten by lion). Second, it isn't just suffocation- the fish live quite deep and are brought up very quickly- in divers this would result in serious problems and the same applies for fish (hence why deep living marine fish command a high price as pets; it takes a lot of time to bring them up without causing problems). Even suffication isn't really the right word, since you're removing them from the medium they live in and putting them into an environment they physically cannot breathe in, even though they're attempting to. It takes a long time for them to die; no doubt some are processed alive.

 

[PRW1988]

This is an age old question that sparks a lot of contraversy. Personally I feel absolutly no gulit when feeding smaller fish to larger ones. The reason I feel no guilt is because as a responsible owner of aquarium life forms, you are trying to mimic the natural enviroment of the species of fish as accuratly as possible, so why feel guilt when feeding say guppies to oscars? Yes of course there are alternatives, such as frozen and freeze dried foods, but to me this isn't an accurate mimicry of the fish's natural enviroment.

 

[piranha_tim]

First off I would assume anyone doing feeders ... Home grown would make it the best possible scenario ... as in not putting in huge fish etc.

 

[BecciMac1987]

Maybe feeders shouldn't be used unless necessary, but then maybe fish that will only eat live shouldnt be kept as pets? Its a difficult one, I have no probs watching my puffers rip apart slugs, snails etc, and who said these animals have less of a right to live than fish? Surely all animals should be equal? Mmmmm will have to think deep into this one...

 

[shroob]

So it's more ethical to dredge a fish up from the sea, with thousands of others, leaving no 'decompression' time, haul them on board a ship and leave them to suffocate to death?

Not that I don't disagree but two wrongs don't make a right. I would rather raise my own feeders, kill them humanely (a knock on the head or something).

 

[geo7x]

It's hardly a valid comprison though, is it?

However, in this scenario, what is?

 

[OohFeeshy]

There isn't, so mayhaps people should stop making them...

 

[PRW1988]

So it's more ethical to dredge a fish up from the sea, with thousands of others, leaving no 'decompression' time, haul them on board a ship and leave them to suffocate to death?

Not that I don't disagree but two wrongs don't make a right. I would rather raise my own feeders, kill them humanely (a knock on the head or something).

So a bump on the head is more humane than the fish being swallowed whole? Or it's head bitten off? This is just as quick a method, if you bump it on the head there is no guarunte that the fish will be dead after hitting them in the head.

 

[purpleflower]

I wouldn't feed a fish another live fish just because i would feel bad (haven't ate meat or fish since i was 12) .
but i am glad that when my fish have babies they get ate other wise my tank would be way over stocked!
but some animals need meat so I think it would depend on whether is was more human the way humans kill the animal (to make fish food or whatever) or if it is more humane to be eaten by another fish or animal.

 

[PRW1988]

Feeding live fish mimics the natural enviroment of fish in that they eat smaller fish (all fish do it if given the chance) and some larger predatory fish eat mainly live fish. It's not inhumane and it's not a terrible thing to do, it mimics the natural food chain of the wild. Do you get mad that they feed Lizards crickets? Theres dry foods on the market. But it's not the best thing for the lizard, so if there's no problem feeding live foods to lizards then why is there one with fish?? Same thing for other types of live foods. Blackworms, earth worms, blood worms, musquito larvae all of these things are alive so if we're terrible people for feeding live fish then those of you who feed live worms are just as bad.

 

[jourdy288]

Plus fish sold as feeders are raised and kept in terrible conditions before being plunged into a tank to be eaten alive. Fish for our tables at least have a decent life before they are caught.

Well, if you raise them in good conditions...I have nothing against feeding fish, but I think that feeding fish like, for example, lionhead goldfish, is a bad idea, due to the:

A:Low nutrition content
B:A lionhead, due to how it's shaped, would be torn apart, bit by bit a very painful death indeed
C:Lionhead goldfish do not exist in the wild

Guppies aren't so much a problem, as:

A:Guppies are healthier
B:A guppy wouldn't suffer nearly as much as, say, a weirdly shaped goldfish(no offense goldie lovers)
C:Guppies are eaten by alot of fish in the wild.

Feeding live fish mimics the natural enviroment of fish in that they eat smaller fish (all fish do it if given the chance) and some larger predatory fish eat mainly live fish. It's not inhumane and it's not a terrible thing to do, it mimics the natural food chain of the wild. Do you get mad that they feed Lizards crickets? Theres dry foods on the market. But it's not the best thing for the lizard, so if there's no problem feeding live foods to lizards then why is there one with fish?? Same thing for other types of live foods. Blackworms, earth worms, blood worms, musquito larvae all of these things are alive so if we're terrible people for feeding live fish then those of you who feed live worms are just as bad.

I agree