Using Fish To Cycle?

[Sean W.]

So you always read threads about people doing " Fishless cycles ".


why doesnt anyone buy like feeder fish to cycle a tank?

 

[Amberleaf]

Because feeder fish are *WEAK*, that's why. XD

People often use platies to cycle tanks.... Idk, they're rather hardy or something. XD Must certainly be, as they are the healthiest fish I've ever had in my tank. (Well, except for Oddball, but he doesn't count in this case as he came from a different store and has been alive for like two years already. )

 

[Aphotic Phoenix]

We advocate fishless cycling because:

a) Cycling with fish is arguably a cruel practice. Ammonia burns gill tissue, Nitrite causes oxygen deprivation, and both can result in permanent damage and death. Just because an animal is "cheap" doesn't give you the right to treat it poorly.

b) Fishless cycling is actually a lot less work. All it involves is daily testing and dropping in some ammonia. Compared to numerous and potentially large water changes with a fish-in cycle it's much easier.

 

[bitteraspects]

are you really suggesting using FEEDER fish to cycle a tank is more cruel than FEEDING them to another fish? bahahahahah. what a load of one sided hypocritical nonsense.
feeder fish are nothing more than a tool for a job. either way their role in the hobby is to be killed. if thats too much for your sensitive nature, maybe fish keeping isnt the hobby for you. big fish eat little fish... its just the way of the world.


i personally do not suggest fishless or fish in cycling as the only option. however the individual keeper choses to do it is their business. quite frankly, i find maturing media in an established tank and moving it to the new filter is both the fastest and most efficiant way to go about it. but in the case its not an option, fish in cycling is just as good a choice as any.

 

[Sean W.]

thats what i prefer to do, get mature media, you can easily cycle a tank in under a week.

i was just wondering if you could cycle a tank with fish...

 

[bitteraspects]

i absolutely would.
and not just feeders. but then again, thats me.

 

[Aphotic Phoenix]

are you really suggesting using FEEDER fish to cycle a tank is more cruel than FEEDING them to another fish? bahahahahah. what a load of one sided hypocritical nonsense.
feeder fish are nothing more than a tool for a job. either way their role in the hobby is to be killed. if thats too much for your sensitive nature, maybe fish keeping isnt the hobby for you. big fish eat little fish... its just the way of the world.

People can pose moral arguments whether they personally believe in them or not. There are many other people on this forum who would make the exact same argument. It is up to the individual to make the choice. I also presented a completely logical argument as well.

Personally, I'd much rather die quickly being eaten by another animal than spend weeks locked in a small container suffocating in my own waste...but that's just a personal opinion. If I had issues with animal death, I wouldn't eat meat, or be able to feed any fish in the first place since the majority of fish food contains...fish! Nor do I have issues with proper feeders being used as food for predatory species that are not easily converted to frozen food...but most "feeders" available in pet shops are NOT proper feeders (goldfish are very poor nutrition), and are kept in conditions that increase the risk of transferring disease to your fish. Why support those practices? I've also done a fish-in cycle before, and know from personal experience that it is a royal pain to do so.

 

[bitteraspects]

doing a fish in cycle takes no more maintenance than a fishless cycle. im not sure how you have convinced yourself otherwise. in fact it takes less.
add water, add fish, done. both your so called "logical arguments", were completely subjective, and quite frankly... wrong. sorry pal.

a fish in cycle, is exactly the same as having an operational tank. no extra water changes are needed. ust your usual weekly WC. yes the fish will live in highly fluctuating water conditions, but as i said before, the fish used for cycling is nothing more than a tool for a job. and if your equipment breaks halfway through the job, replace it, and continue. easy as that.

 

[Aphotic Phoenix]

You are perfectly welcome to your own opinion bitteraspects. Obviously you and I have very different approaches to the hobby.

Once again it's up to the individual to decide their personal stance on the issue. Personally I have no issue with living creatures being properly raised for the use of providing substance for another living thing. That is natural. Inflicting un-necessary harm to a creature for no better reason than "personal convenience" is a questionable practice for me personally. I'm in the hobby to care for life, not to waste it.

 

[bitteraspects]

so allowing the fish to be digested live is not inflicting unnecessary harm for personal convenience?
funny because it seems to me that modern dry foods provide everything needed for your fish.
hahahahah.
also, you realize the entire hobby of aquatic husbandry is based off of "personal convenience" right? or do you imagine it was "convenient" for these creatures to be dragged out of their homes in lakes/rivers/streams, and put into tiny glass cages?

youre right. we obviously have different approaches. while mine is rational and logical, yours is based off of whatever you can come up with on a whim.
but you did get one thing right, the route taken is solely decided by the person keeping the fish.

 

[indigoj]

Personally I don't see how anyone can justify harming a living creature - ANY living creature - just to 'speed things up' or avoid having to use ammonia or find a way to either get or mature media. Just because a fish is cheap doesn't make it any less likely to feel pain, suffer and be exposed to serious, life long affects than an expensive one.

These days you can fishless cycle pretty easily so why the need to inflict pain and shorten the life of any fish?

Oh I feel feeding live food is totally different - done properly and for need not amusement it is at least a 'natural' process. Exposing fish to high ammonia levels deliberately is not.

 

[JustKia]

1. Can you cycle with fish?
Yes, but it's not the best way. There is a link in my siggie regarding a fish-in cycle. I, myself, did a fish in cycle - but hubby and I were prepared to put in the hard work to make it happen. That means lots and lots of water changes - LOTS sometimes 2-3 per day.

2. Is using feeder fish to cycle more cruel than using them as feeder fish?
Yes, a slow death is always more cruel than a much quicker death - that's not taking any moral veiw point into consideration, just common sense.

 

[bitteraspects]

for what need? dry foods provide more in the way of nutrition, and is readily available and accepted. what is the "need" for live food?
and how is deliberately introducing a feeder fish to a captive environment for the sole purpose of being eaten not "shortening its life"? how is that not "harming a living creature"? how is that not making the fish "suffer"? how is that not exposing it to "serious life long effects"?
by using a feeder in a tank (which usually are not even the same species your fish would "naturally" capture in the wild) you are making a decision to end that fishes life for no other reason than your personal convenience.
if the fish were in the wild, and hunted and captured its meal, that is a completely different and natural process, however, ANYTHING you do in a fish tank is unnatural.

you can attempt to justify this nonsensical argument all you like, in the end it is the exact same thing.

 

[bitteraspects]

1. Can you cycle with fish?
Yes, but it's not the best way. There is a link in my siggie regarding a fish-in cycle. I, myself, did a fish in cycle - but hubby and I were prepared to put in the hard work to make it happen. That means lots and lots of water changes - LOTS sometimes 2-3 per day.

again, it does not require any more water changes. the water changes are only to attempt to "harm the fish" less. you can do a fish in cycle with the usual weekly WC you would do on the tank after the cycle. i have personally done a fish in cycle and done only 2 WC the entire time.

but, as stated above, it IS NOT the best way. using mature media is by far the best option.

2. Is using feeder fish to cycle more cruel than using them as feeder fish?
Yes, a slow death is always more cruel than a much quicker death - that's not taking any moral veiw point into consideration, just common sense.

sorry, but no.
depending on the size of your fish (the one eating the feeder), a lot of the time, the feeder is swallowed whole, and slowly digested by stomach acid. its not like the feeder is quickly and humanely euthanized before it is eaten. sure, being digested over the course of a few hours is quicker than the cycle process, however some would argue being eaten alive/ digested alive is much more cruel then living in less than perfect water conditions.

 

[Truck]

wow! theres some sweeping statements on this thread!

an example: "fish in cycling is cruel"

if you can keep up with the water changes you wont be harming the fish. believe it or not ammonia and nitrite are always present in a tank whether you like it or not.