Wow, Just Wow!

[england]

I dont imagine people there care too much for these fish, they have different prioritys...fishermen there make litterally peanuts, shame but its life i guess...

 

[FWFishLover]

I Wonder If They Cycled? LOL

LMAO... Could you imagine the wait or the ammount of ammonia in order to do a fishless cycle? Bet they would come in barrels, not ml or drops. LOL. This would be one tank, i would not want to fishless cycle... be two years before you event get a hint of nitrite... or maybe its hiding a corner lol.

im sure that they would pour like 250,000 gallons of ammonia and test with a 100,000 gallon tank hahahaha

 

[kaivalagi]

Just one more thing to say on the subject of whale sharks in captivity....and then I'll shut up for good

Arguably the things we do not know about the whale shark would never be understood by keeping them in captivity...the main things I am referring to are breeding and migration. The chances are these fish dive into great depths to reproduce, as both have never been observed in shallow waters or aquariums right?


So in removing the possiblity of diving to these great depths by placing them in "small" aquariums also removes any natural behaviour exhibited by them, the same can be said for other large pelagic fish too. We just don't know enough and will never know enough by keeping them captive.

There are research teams already, slowly capturing valuable information about such creatures, we've all seen the wildlife documentaries on such things (BBC's Oceans series being one good example), and know what valuable information has been collected over the years...information such as migratory paths and population growth/decline being the major bits of info helping us join the dots. I am sure as technology improves and our ability to observe in a manner of ways gets better, we will learn all these secrets we currently don't know about.

I see no excuse to keep these fine animals in very small glass cages...

Now, pet fish are a different story, a lot of these fish live their whole lives in one place and can adapt to the habitat they are in quickly and easily...our aquariums prove this. Georgia Aquarium, as mentioned before in this topic, proves the complete opposite of this for whale sharks.

 

[ian]

Is that a Juwel Tank ?

i hope they cut the filter out!

 

[onebto]

he he!

its definatley not one of the vision models as I dont think you can get bow front glass that big

 

[Mikaila31]

Just one more thing to say on the subject of whale sharks in captivity....and then I'll shut up for good

Arguably the things we do not know about the whale shark would never be understood by keeping them in captivity...the main things I am referring to are breeding and migration. The chances are these fish dive into great depths to reproduce, as both have never been observed in shallow waters or aquariums right?


So in removing the possiblity of diving to these great depths by placing them in "small" aquariums also removes any natural behaviour exhibited by them, the same can be said for other large pelagic fish too. We just don't know enough and will never know enough by keeping them captive.

There are research teams already, slowly capturing valuable information about such creatures, we've all seen the wildlife documentaries on such things (BBC's Oceans series being one good example), and know what valuable information has been collected over the years...information such as migratory paths and population growth/decline being the major bits of info helping us join the dots. I am sure as technology improves and our ability to observe in a manner of ways gets better, we will learn all these secrets we currently don't know about.

I see no excuse to keep these fine animals in very small glass cages...

Now, pet fish are a different story, a lot of these fish live their whole lives in one place and can adapt to the habitat they are in quickly and easily...our aquariums prove this. Georgia Aquarium, as mentioned before in this topic, proves the complete opposite of this for whale sharks.

I greatly disagree. There are many reasons to keep them in captivity. Many things on the cellular level dictate how the animal behaves. These we can not study easily in the field. It is important to know what triggers behavior like migration, feeding, diving abilities on a cellular level. We have collected very little on these animals over the years. They are also commercially fished and face the threat of global warming and pollution. It is important to study their internal functions to understand what and how they will be effected by these threats. This can help us provide better protection for them in the areas where they are protected. I fully agree an aquarium is not a healthy habitat. Keeping them in captivity is determental to the individual, but will most likely help the species as a whole.

The captivation on whales and dolphins is no different. When use to consider orcas and dolphins pest and they would be shot and killed in large numbers for no reason. They were also seen as man eaters. When the first orca was taken captive we did not even know what they ate. Soon however we learned their true behavior in captivity. They became a public favorite. Then the public started promoting anti-captivity. There are about 50 captive orcas and Sea world can not take any more wild orcas and dolphins. We now have captive-bred animals. Wild populations are now protected, this most likely would not of happened as soon if we had not taken any captive and put them on public display. As far as orcas go, no wild orca has ever been reported to attack a human. There have been human deaths from wild caught captive orcas, one fairly recently. This I feel is clear proof that captivity is detrimental to the individual. I still feel the benefits for the species overall are worth it. We have tried to rehabilitate and release them, which was what we did with keiko(free willy). It however was never sucessful. He would not join a pod and remain near humans until his death.

Simply studying these animals in the wild is not quick enough considering the dangers they face from us. History has shown the animals that get public support are the ones that get protected, if the public can't go and see the animal in a guaranteed place its going to be tough getting the public to demand protection for it.

 

[kaivalagi]

I greatly disagree...

I appreciate where you are coming from and can see the point you are trying to make, but study of these animals at a cellular level can be done out in the field surely. Most of the timely work would be in a lab...plus samples from the wild will be more representative of actual issues.

Also taking animals into captivity can have a negative on the general population too. It can create a demand for more to be captured, have you seen a documentary about Dolphin capture called "The Cove" (http/www.imdb.com/title/tt1313104/). There is a lucrative business in selling prime specimens to Aquariums for large sums of cash, totally illegal, but government turns a blind eye (atleast in Japan).

So for a moment lets say we do find out how these creatures are affected by global warming and pollution on the cellular level, what is that going to solve? It wont stop global warming and pollution...will we then be medically treating all species to provide artificial/man made protection from their own environment? Please elaborate how this would benefit them, any such examples of other species where this has helped? I would genuinely like to know, I am no scientist though so please use laymans terms

The only way I can see capture as a positive thing is if it would lead to successful breeding, so global populations can be sustained for good regardless of environmental factors. But I can't see that happening in the case of the whale shark. Better to put the cash into protection of the species and research out in the field IMHO.

Also, surely people can watch documentaries on Whale Sharks to know what they're all about etc, which could drive public support up as much as any public aquarium could.

Please try and convince me otherwise though, if I can buy into it I'll be a lot happier about what is going on...

edit: so much for my last post on it.....

 

[Mikaila31]

You seem to not realize that these animals are still hunted, no I have not seen all of the Cove, but I am familiar with what that topic is about. Those animals are not hunted just for aquarium specimens, it is more for food. Even if you stop people from being able to publicly exhibit them, you really think that is going to stop the hunts.... currently around 200 whale sharks are killed every year for food, 1000 dolphins are killed in the hunts, 3000 more are still killed from tuna fishing around the world. you can go on and on... public exhibition is such a small fraction of these numbers. Public exhibition can give these animals public support, which puts pressure to stop these deaths.

I don't see how we are suppose to do indepth studies on a animals as mysterious as whale sharks. Its not like we know where they are going to pop up so we can have all our equipment their waiting. The sharks not going to nicely stay in one spot.

Knowing how they are effected lets us know how we need to regulate our pollution levels. This is done all the time with animals..... pollutants build up in their bodies its important to know how the pollution compounds are building up. This allows us to think of new compounds that will still get the job done, but will not be as harmful to the environment. Learning this allows us to ban certain pollutants. Well the most famous example of this is DDT with the fish getting eaten by the eagles.... we also have wild food fish in both the US and England that are currently become hermaphrodites do to specific pollutants.

Watching a documentary is not going to get public support.... Planet Earth for example was a great show. It does not come close to the effects of seeing a real animal at the zoo, especially for children. My family runs a daycare, the kids watch planet earth and go to the zoo. Trust me they will be telling you about the zoo for a good week, the show for maybe a day.... Its just not equal. I fully agree seeing an animal in the wild is the best experience. That however can be hit or miss, and not everyone can afford trips like that. Zoos are also extremely informative places, where you can see animals from around the world in one spot.

Captivating animals often does lead to captive breeding. This was also the only way we could save the red wolf from extinction. It may not lead to breeding with the whale shark, time will tell this. First you have to learn how to successfully keep an animal in captivity. The issue with field research is just that, these animals can move a lot. Even if you are tracking them they may go off the radar during long dives. Tracking data can only provide where they have been and in what conditions. It does not tell you what they are doing, how they are growing, what is leading them to these areas, ect. Its hard to chase a animal across the open ocean just to understand its yearly growth. This is a little of the important information we have learned from the captive sharks. It may not be the same as the wild sharks, but it is a start. This gives us much more accurate estimates of when they reach maturity, and can suggest population growth rates in the wild.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

They do move naturally...and all the fish in there are real.

Anyways...however breathtaking it is, I really don't feel right with whale sharks in captivity. It just doesn't seem...right. They're just too big.

lol whale shark in 2 million gallons, oscar in 75 gallons... its all relative.

 

[Jonny_russell]

so why dont we keep sperm whales in captivity?

the only plus side to these sharks being in captivity is that they were saved from slaughter.

even so these are wild caught fish

the comparison with oscars isnt relative, oscars and to my knowledge all tropical 'hobby' fish are shallow water fish, the whale shark is an open water fish, not only does it cover vast distances but also dives to extreme depths - something which none of our 'hobby' fish do.

and remember these whale sharks grow two or three times bigger than killer whales......

 

[MikeO]

My god, its gorgeous!! Imagine the filter system on that!

Fluval U2 should do the trick

 

[kaivalagi]

@Mikaila31

Thanks for taking the time to explain in great detail your justifications for keeping whale sharks captive.

I do realise that most endangered/threatened animals are like so because they are hunted, Giant Mantas are a prime example of this too as well as Whale Sharks. The cove was about dolphin meat yes, but also about selling live specimens - this being the main money earner keeping fisherman interested - dolphin meat itself it not a great earner for them.

Whale sharks are killed for meat, and if there is a demand for them in aquariums? They'll also be captured for this....a nice cherry on the top for the fishing boat if one can be keep alive - BIG money for them so more interested parties.

The big why for me, is why can't world governments stop the slaughtering of whale sharks, why is it perceived that we need to show case an animal before it can be protected...who do we think we are? How many whale sharks will need to be captured before something positive comes from it...I think the whole notion for capture is ridiculous and just shows how greedy and selfish humanity can be...

Maybe this is the pain we'd have to go through to get whale shark populations steady, but I don't like it one bit!

 

[chrisbassist]

I don't like it either but what she was saying is basically what I meant by there being some good by keeping them captive. I just didn't have the words.

And unfortunately, people do evil things. They will keep killing or hunting animals until they are forced to stop. They will only be forced to stop once everyone wants them to. If you've never seen or heard of the whale shark before, why should you care?
And yes, people should be able to watch a documentary, but having something on screen is not the same as seeing it in front of you. Plus even if you take the cost factors out, why would I go scuba diving to see an animal I don't yet care about?

The world does work in a backwards way, and while I agree with both sides of this argument (or if we call it a debate then there will be less moderation) I can't help but feel there is something we are all missing?

 

[kaivalagi]

I don't like it either but what she was saying is basically what I meant by there being some good by keeping them captive. I just didn't have the words.

And unfortunately, people do evil things. They will keep killing or hunting animals until they are forced to stop. They will only be forced to stop once everyone wants them to. If you've never seen or heard of the whale shark before, why should you care?
And yes, people should be able to watch a documentary, but having something on screen is not the same as seeing it in front of you. Plus even if you take the cost factors out, why would I go scuba diving to see an animal I don't yet care about?

The world does work in a backwards way, and while I agree with both sides of this argument (or if we call it a debate then there will be less moderation) I can't help but feel there is something we are all missing?

Definitely a debate, and one we all care about a great deal If captivity is the only way we can ensure these great animals are sustained then I guess I have to be for it, I'm just not happy to give in to it just yet when I see good research being done around the world that "should" already have an impact on governments world wide for the greater good of these animals. We elect governments to make the big responsible decisions for us so we can get on with everyday life, why is this any different?

I too feel like there is something missing from all of this, I think it may relate to the greed, selfishness and being too far removed from nature these days...

I spent a good deal of time living the simple village life in Fiji for the majority of almost 3 years in the country. When in one of these rural areas I managed to dive everyday for 4 months and saw the environmental impact and the big pelagics migration through these areas (not whale sharks although they have been seen on rare occasion), hence the stance I take. Interestingly when there I found that local people sustained themselves without much impact on the environment at all. For example fishing bans were put in place by the village chief and elders for certain coastal areas for a year or two at a time when fish numbers caught started to drop. There were plenty of other areas to fish, albeit not on the door step as it were. So if people without doctorates or a public aquarium can make the responsible choices why can't the rest of us? Idealistic of me, yes, stupid, well that's your call

Interesting debate, I like the fact we've talked over so many points and anyone reading can make their own choice for their own reasons. I'm glad we can all discuss this without becoming childish and losing sight of the greater good...it has become a tad serious though and I apologise for that. Keep the filter jokes coming

 

[chrisbassist]

idealistic, maybe, stupid? definately not!

yes we SHOULD be able to just appreciate life, and do everything in our power to protect it without having to make any animal suffer. but in our quest for knowledge, other things are sacrificed.

I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere in the world, these sharks are being exposed to toxic chemicals on purpose, then blood tests, and tissue samples being taken to see what happens to the animal. I personally think that would be going too far, but then I also think the knowledge gained would be fantastic, but there must be nicer ways to get the info?

I think you're right, that it may be how far removed from nature we have become thanks to our technology.

btw, a fluval u2 isn't the filter i'd choose, i think i might go for an external, because in a tank that size, having a box in the tank would just ruin it. so i'd go for a fluval 105.