Ethics in fishkeeping

[beex215]

you will be the savior of this world.

Also, people who keep birds don't believe they should fly. They believe bird wings should properly clipped, and letting bird fly in your house is irresponsible, and could kill bird. People who keep horses so they can ride, not just letting them run in the field. The ones who believe birds should fly or horse should run in the field won't keep them

 

[Greg31]

You may not understand the difference between ethical and justification. Trying, better are used to justify your action. What makes you think that it's better for a fish to live in a tank with substrate and decoration than in a bare tank? In some case, a fish could get hurt or killed by substrate and decoration. What's so ethical about that? It's like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet, gulped as much food as you can, and drink water or diet soda will do your body some good deed

Yeah...it seems people are getting ethical, and what they think best confused. By some people's standards I guess we should put natural predators, and feed only the best feeders to make sure fish feel most at home. I guess we should simulate tree limbs and rocks in the tank as well because it is only natural that a fish may hurt itself on one of them.

I for one dislike bare bottom tanks because I get bored with the tank. If I had more fish I am sure I would want bare bottom but it just isnt a problem for me.

This is just another one of those topics for people to show the MFK world how smart they think they are and blow off steam from the real world.

 

[ecoli73]

i stopped keeping fish in glass cages as it is truly inhumane. i stopped keeping fish altogether due to this very fact. i wont support the hobby where people buy pacus and put them in 55 gallon tanks, just so they can say, its only going to grow as big as the tank.

Why are you here?

 

[jcardona1]

You are right. I should have said you try to keep huge growing fish. The smaller ones tend to die before they even have a chance to put on any size. The one's that you buy large don't seem to fare too well. You are the posterboy for how not to keep fish. I'm sure Wes loves you...you are putting his kids through college with all the fish you buy, kill, then buy more to replace those you have killed. Your tanks are a revolving door.

We are talking about the ethics of fish keeping. What were you going to do with 3 Bumblebee Grouper (Epinephelus lanceolatus)? I guess we'll never know what you had in store for a fish that grows 6' long and weighs several hundred lbs because you killed all 3 before they even hit 6". But you are the better fish keeper because you spend more money than me on fish and post your little "guess what's in the bucket" threads every other day?

The results speak for themselves.

Death row is right:

 

[Greg31]

I tried clicking the like button but it seems to be broken...

 

[ecoli73]

There was a time not too long ago where the recommended tank size for big fish like arowannas/oscars etc is 55 gallons. I do not think fish keepers at that time were any less ethical than today. Technology advances, homes becomes bigger and larger tanks becomes cheaper, thus aros now are being kept in 240 gallons+ tanks.

Also, one must distinguish ethics of fish keeping and animal rights. In my view, animals have no rights; otherwise such rights should be applied evenly. If animals enjoy rights as human defines them, they also must answer to the same standards which will end nowhere...what, are we doing to condemn every fish there is for being cannibalistic?

 

[ecoli73]

Still need to explain your peacock bass story

 

[jcardona1]

Also, one must distinguish ethics of fish keeping and animal rights.

It's not really a matter of animal 'rights'. It's about doing what you think is right and not doing what you think is wrong. Somebody said it earlier; there's two kinds of fish keepers. The two will never agree and we can argue this till the end of time. There are those who view their fish as pets, members of the family and like to treat them as you would a dog or a cat or a bird. Then there are those who view them as material possessions; just another flashy item in their collection of "things" and feel that as long as the minimum basic requirements to sustain life are met, they are doing no wrong.

That's all there is to it. And all there will ever be. One side will never convince the other. We just come on here, talk crap about each other for a bit then go back to our normal lives. It's the way of the internet forum

 

[MonsterMinis]

Also, people who keep birds don't believe they should fly. They believe bird wings should properly clipped, and letting bird fly in your house is irresponsible, and could kill bird. People who keep horses so they can ride, not just letting them run in the field. The ones who believe birds should fly or horse should run in the field won't keep them

i owned a parekeet for 14 yrs.. whom i stopped clipping when i got older and learned more about birds.. but allowing free flight means you keep fans off windows covered, and other precautions so the bird doesn't hit the window and break its neck.. or get tangled into a fan. I own a thoroughbred gelding i bought from a seller the week before he was going to be sent to canada for slaughter, after 14 yrs in my care he only gets stalled threw the worst of wisconsins winters, otherwise he spends his time outside in a herd. Im not justifying or bragging.. im pointing out your absolutely dead wrong. While everyone can appreciate wild animals there are many animals domesticated, and humans as a species are unethical... this thread is starting to gie me the creepy PETA vib.

 

[Shenanigans]

i think you are somewhat misunderstanding what I meant. I understand birds flying freely in the house poses a danger and is irresponsible. But is it ethical to take an animal that naturally wants to fly, clip there wings and keep them grounded all their lives? a horse riding/running=happy good horse. keeping it in the stall all day would be a different story. Yes decor and substrate can harm and animals, but NO animal no matter what species wants to be kept in a bare box. Fish tanks get compared to small bed rooms and closets all the time. A bare concrete box would be a pretty sad existence I think, So yes its an ethical choice, not simply anmal rights. If you see it differently and as a matter of animals rights, then so be it. Another difference in opinion in a divided debate over opinions