What Have I Let Myself In For!

k17sty

New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Went to a LFS thats nots so local. Seen a sengal birchir and in our stupidity bought him. We were planning on getting one anyways for our new tank but not so soon. So in he went to my bfs pathetic tank as i call it so in the last 4 days he has munched 7 neons :lol: He has now turned his affections to the algae eater and male swordtail. My female betta who thinks she is rocky is still trying to have a go and steal his food. Think she is going to learn the hard way.

On the plus side it means i can now go get non pathetic fish for the new bad ass tank. Oww the choices. They also had a group of 6 baby snakeheads . . . . ach well one day.
 
Not quite sure that buying a fish and then having it eat its tankmates is all that funny. Sad and cruel are adjectives that spring to my mind more readily.

FWIW, Senegal bichirs are pretty mild fish, and will be hammered by anything of comparable size but significantly more aggression. They aren't in the least "bad ass".

Cheers,

Neale
 
Yes because i solely put him in that tank to eat my fish. It was a bad decision which i have pointed out. But i thought if he was well fed he would be ok for a few days.

At the end of the day thats life. Would you say that giving all live food was sad and cruel? If thats the case then should i stop buying bloodworm? What about people who feed goldfish?

And compaired to a couple of swordtails and female bettas he is pretty bad ass. It was mild humor sorry if you didnt get that concept.

Time and time again people post on this forum and get flamed before they even start. Get off your high horse.
 
I hope this is a VERY BIG tank that you have, snakeheads get very big and are more often than not quite aggressive.

About the smaller fish getting eaten, I think he was saying, it's not funny to sacrifce other fish for personal pleasure basicaly.

Edit - Didn't read what you said probably, I usualy just skim read, add the following to the start of my first sentance ' If you decide to get the snakeheads '
 
We are not getting the snakeheads. . . the store had a group of 6.
 
Hello k17sty,

I'm not on a high horse. But if you make a statement on a public forum, expect to hear people's opinions.

There's a fine line between giving fish a natural life and simply being cruel. Would you feed a cat live mice? Or a dog live rabbits? Those would be natural food options, but most people would reject such a thing as cruel.

Are you asking the question, is feeding live worms cruel? Or live crickets? That's a valid argument to make. Scientists are coming to the opinion that fish feel pain, and they are certainly known to respond to stress. If you are working in a research lab, experiments on fish (and octopuses, funnily enough) are governed by the same sorts of rules as experiments on mice or rats. Most invertebrates (except octopuses) are not treated this way because they do not seem to be stressed or intelligent enough to feel anything like pain in the way we feel it. Or so the theory goes.

What happens "in the wild" is immaterial. By saying, "that's life", would be like me letting a leopard loose in your house and then locking the doors and windows. Leopards were the natural predators of humans when we evolved in Africa, just as a bigger fish would eat a smaller fish. But by trapping the small fish in a tank with no chance of escape, it isn't experiencing "life in the wild", it's being executed.

Of course I get humour, and I understood the "bad ass" comment as being that. But my warning was that if you assume that this bichir a rough-and-tumble guy who will work out with mean cichlids and such, that would be dangerous. Since you'd already erred with the neons, I figured a small warning about the bichir was in order.

In the big picture, fishkeepers should maintain high ethical standards because it makes the hobby look good. Fishkeepers do a great deal that's positive, from breeding endangered species through to encouraging conservation of aquatic habitats. But on the downside, wanton cruelty to things like feeder guppies and goldfish are exactly the kind of issues that draw negative press. Animal welfare laws are constantly being strengthened, and I wouldn't want to see large or predatory fish banned because a small group of fishkeepers couldn't be bothered to wean their fish onto dead foods or invertebrate prey like mealworms. It's bad enough we have to deal with idiot retailers selling baby oscars and 10-gallon aquaria without having to deal with the whole feeder fish issue as well.

Sincerely,

Neale
 
snakeheadds are badass though lol, what type were they ? i have one of the common snakeheads Channa Striatus.
i have 2 snegal bichirs ( albino form ) they are very sociable and not in the least agressive but when he had to stay an afternoon in a smaller tank ( literaly about 3 hours ) he ate a large male betta , and he was only about 5".
keep him with south american cichlids mayb ? mayb a bichir species aquarium ? my brother has a bichir tank with 2 senegal albino bichirs, one armored bichir and a telliogramma brichardi.
good luck.
 
So a few neons got eaten that is indeed life, and to nmonks bring on the leopard because I think that when you make a comment like that, it's what you would really like to do isn't it?

Of course not. The point is that an artificial situation in an aquarium in no way resembles the wild. If you think that, you're deluding yourself.

As for the cruelty of little glass boxes, you're absolutely right. In a perfect world, we'd keep fish in tanks the size of ponds or lakes or tide pools or whatever. But we don't. We can make rational judgements about levels of wrong though. If you keep fish and they breed, then you're basically giving them what they want. That's the benchmark used by professional aquarists and zookeepers.

You're also right about dead bloodworms having been alive sometime. No arguments from me. But from the point of view of science, a bloodworm is capable of less feeling of stress or pain than a neon tetra.

If you enjoy seeing one feeling animal harm or eat another feeling animal, then that's your pleasure. I prefer to minimise the harm my fishkeeping does. I research my fish before buying them, I optimise water conditions based on their natural ecology not what happens to come out of the mains water supply, and I don't feed live feeder fish.

There are very good practical reasons not to feed live feeder fish. Neon tetras, for example, carry neon tetra disease and false neon tetra disease, both of which affect a wider variety of fish than just neons, including something as un-neon-like angelfish and goldfish. The prime mode of transmission is when an infected neon is eaten by another fish, either whole or in part. Since neon tetra disease is incurable, and appears to be endemic to cheap, mass-farmed neons, allowing a predator fish to eat live neons is a very good way to infect that fish with an untreatable disease.

As a point of science, huge number of fish are not carnivores. Many cichlids (the largest family of fish) feed partly or entirely on algae and aufwuchs, for example. All the herrings and anchovies eat plankton, and the tangs and damsels all eat marine algae. Most of the small freshwater fish eat insects. Dedicated piscivores are relatively rare, for the same reasons than carnivorous mammals only make up a small proportion of the total mammalian diversity.

Cheers,

Neale
 
Be carefull what you say CFC is about :)

Nmonks, although cruel I believe it is right to feed fish feeder fish, but not just for the sake of the keepers pleasure (as seen in that video of the catfish and goldfish on the internet). People feed their fish live shrimp, worms and various other creatures, so I do believe that you do not have to draw the line at fish, it isn't wrong to not remove a guppy after birth so that it eats its fry is it?

Just my two pennies :)
 
Lets not open up the whole live feeders debate again, its been done and some people like it and most people (including me) dont.

There is no reason to feed a predator live fish in 99% of cases (trust me i have enough of them) and fish will usually be healthier when kept on a varied diet of frozen and prepared foods.
 
Yes because i solely put him in that tank to eat my fish. It was a bad decision which i have pointed out. But i thought if he was well fed he would be ok for a few days.

At the end of the day thats life. Would you say that giving all live food was sad and cruel? If thats the case then should i stop buying bloodworm? What about people who feed goldfish?

And compaired to a couple of swordtails and female bettas he is pretty bad ass. It was mild humor sorry if you didnt get that concept.

Time and time again people post on this forum and get flamed before they even start. Get off your high horse.


Hi kirsty,

I can't see any evidence of you being "flamed". Neale was not unreasonable or unfair when he offered his opinion on your post (which was why you posted it right? for opinion.), so please don't think it that way, a difference of opinion does not mean you are being "flamed".

You made a mistake with your fish choice, that's obvious to see. Buying one fish to eat another fish is unethical and is the sort of thing that gives the hobby a bad name. I would very dislike to have to cut short keeping fish because new laws are introduced restricting fish ownership because of live fish being fed to others, or the kind of carelessness you have demonstrated. While I understand it may be unlikely such laws were put in place, but now more than ever pressure groups exist to try and put a lid on things such as keeping fish as pets.

Also, I don't know what would be wrong with goldfish owners? I successfully kept my goldfish without ever having needed to feed them live food, and I knew few who did.

I don't want to add any "drama" to this thread (I don't find it constructive or enjoy reading forum users giving each other a hard time), but, I do find it concerning that in the buy and sell forum you're currently asking for a small red tailed catfish. I hope you plan to research such a fish more than your current choice.

Please don't be offended by anything I have written, as I have not belittled you or patronised you.

Craig
 
Well said. I'm honestly not trying to restart the debate. I think, very largely, it's been done do death (if you'll pardon the pun) and for the most part the hobby has come down against live feeder fish.

I guess I've never gotten over visiting the West London Aquaria Centre (long since closed down) as a teenager, and seeing in a tank with an oscar, the head of a goldfish. Alive. Gills ventilating. Mouth opening. Eyes moving. But no body.

Now, 20+ years on, and having worked in science, education, and with politicians, I'm aware how a visual like that can give our hobby a really bad image. I love fishkeeping, and I think that compared with the average cat or dog owner, we have the potential to give our pets a much more natural lives. There are people keeping fishes hardly known to science except as Latin names -- livebearers, catfish, and cichlids in particular -- and these aquarists provide useful information on behaviour and breeding. I've met a lot of aquarists and a few professional fish scientists, and let me tell you, the aquarists know a lot more about what fish are all about. I'm passionate about the good our hobby can do.

So, if I seem a bit hot about this topic, that's why.

Cheers,

Neale

Lets not open up the whole live feeders debate again, its been done and some people like it and most people (including me) dont.
 
Sorry about contributing to the debate wasnt aware of the previous large debates which have occoured, well I know now :)
 

Most reactions

Back
Top