A more ethical way to live feed?

[Zmouvek]

"Hello; you get to have an opinion to be sure, but you do not get to set the standards for everyone. The dog was her dog. I will presume she tried to raise it properly but cannot know that. You cannot know her evidence was shaky by the same logic. I do not for a moment think she enjoyed killing her own dog. I imagine, based on personal experience, that it was a hard thing to do.
but i have been thru this with others on this site and in life. I respect her for doing a hard thing. you jump to unsupported conclusions about her ability to train a dog. Here is your chance to drop the topic and get back to sedating feeders."
I was saying that this was how people who had a problem with her actions
I was stating what THEY believed, I personally could care less, because ultimately, the dog is dead and nobody is going to undo that.

 

[esoxlucius]

If you're gonna feed live, and a lot of people do for whatever reason, then feed live. By that I mean don't "tamper" with the prey fish at all. That's how I used to do it back in the day when I had piranhas. Like I said earlier, it's a warts and all type of thing.

Messing with the prey gives the prey absolutely no fighting chance, not that it has much of a fighting chance in an enclosed box anyway, and it can't really be that stimulating for the predator either.

Bringing the subject up on this forum, as you are finding out, isn't going to get you right far, because it's a touchy subject.

There's no laws against it yet, I don't think, and your tanks are in the privacy of your home, so do what the hell you like, just don't film it and stick it on you tube. A lot of morons out there do just that.

 

[RD.]

Its too bad that feeders aren’t more like chickens, if they would swim around in frantic circles after being beheaded, it could satisfy everyone’s needs.

 

[koltsixx]

Hello; I get the point, but these threads take on a life of their own. Another thing is if you throw out such comments as the following and then try to corral the topic i will not comply.

What you did was derail the OP's thread by trying to draw a very weak comparison to the OP's topic by injecting a personal situation you have repeatedly and abundantly made your opinion clear on in another thread. Which is a TOS violation on it's own but then you continue to persist even blatantly exclaim you won't comply and respect the OP's topic or rules of MFK. Your most recent post has been erased and I ask you to not persist with the argumentative derail further.

 

[dmyersWv]

I think to summarize the posts. If you would like to try this experiment, please proceed. Keep 2 predators feeding one standard feeders and another clove oiled feeders. Document any differences in health, growth, water quality. Measure if you feel better about yourself feeding clove oil vs none.

 

[Midwater]

Fighting Chance:

... not that it has much of a fighting chance in an enclosed box anyway, ...

Many times, I have had tilapia or anabas that get away. Well, they don't get out of the box (although crickets do (and frogs)), but they do manage to hide by the driftwood or somewhere.

And more than merely surviving, they thrive and grow. Tilapia can be particularly cannibalistic.

So many times, I have had do dissemble driftwood, climb in the tank and try to net increasingly large and aggressive tilapia. It is a right pain.

Proportionally, anabas are even better at dodging death. But they do not get so big or aggressive. I have still got half a dozen that I have allowed to remain in the tank.

In nature, their are thousands of fry at a time, and most get predated. The strong/clever ones survive. Not too different to live feeding.

 

[Backfromthedead]

Predator satiation is/has always been a widespread survival strategy worldwide since the cambrian. Prey species have evolved to proliferate in abundance knowing that a certain percentage are born feeders. The strongest, fastest, smartest survive.

Its not ethics, its ego. You have no control over the fishes so called suffering. Humanity gives itself far too much credit in the grand scheme of things.

 

[newworld]

if worrying about ethics….just keep a pet rock?

 

[jjohnwm]

Its not ethics, its ego. You have no control over the fishes so called suffering. Humanity gives itself far too much credit in the grand scheme of things.

Of course, it is both. Morals and ethics only exist because of ego, which in turn only exists because of our supposed intelligence. The original question in this dog-and-pony-show of a thread specifically asked about ethics.

I just can't buy this "s**t happens" approach to everything. Most of what transpires in the universe is utterly and completely beyond our hope to control, but some small aspects of our own little limited surroundings are well within our ability to control...like our aquariums.

I can cause "suffering", if that's what you want to call it, in many ways because I do indeed have a lot of control over the environment within my aquariums...and so by the same token I can also prevent "suffering" by exerting the same type of control. The whole point of keeping an aquarium is to maintain control of the environment in a way that allows a fish from the Amazon to live a healthy life in a living room in Arizona or Alaska.

We're not talking about the grand scheme of things; we're talking about a few small animals in a tiny enclosure in your house. There's nothing "grand" about it. If you can't at least control what happens in their world, why would you try to keep them?

Live feeding, in most cases, is absolutely not necessary. In many cases, it's the moral/ethical equivalent of pulling the wings off flies...that, of course, refers to undrugged, fully conscious flies. I'm sure that statement will set some folks off...a result of ego, on both their part and mine...but, hey...s**t happens.

My uncle (who is a bit of a sadist) loved to roast whole hogs.

Jeez...I hope he killed them first. If he adopted the "it doesn't matter in the end" approach, that would have been quite the rodeo.

 

[SilverArowanaBoi]

Oooh...a new hot topic. It reminds me of some older threads. *cough* Heh. Anyways, here are my thoughts:

Basically, like others have said, if you don't want to feed live fish to your stock, then don't keep fish that need that kind of food. Stick with fish that can take frozen or dried food.

Ethical, moral—there can be a lot of words used to describe this issue, but that's just adding complex levels to a topic that doesn't need to be complicated. If we get further into the nitty gritty related to ethics, then why is there a group for keeping fish in glass/acrylic boxes? One can argue that it is unethical to keep any animal—fish, cats, dogs, rabbits, etc. But we still keep them, Why? Because we love animals and we want animal companionship, there is nothing compared to animal companionship. However, they do rely on us, and domesticated animals can't take care of themselves, so we have to provide them with the best food and care we can. If that means live food, then so be it, if it means dried/frozen food, then so be it. Either way, its about the animals rather than our personal feelings related to feeding them.

Long story short, don't try to sedate live prey, either throw them in or not throw them in at all. We are in control of our pets' diet; however, we also have control over what animals we choose to be our pets.