Wild caughts vs Captive breeds

[duanes]

In nature, of a spawn of say 1000 fry, maybe 2 or possibly only 1 survive. So in theory the fittest and best adapted fish make it. When aquarists breed, often 100 or more survive, that may be 98 more than should have made it, so those 98 may be of lessor fitness.
If you are going to buy only 1 fish of a species to live alone, captive bred is probably a good idea for the aquarist, and the environment.
Same goes when considering salt water species, think of the techniques used to collect, and this may be the reason survivability is as low as it is.
Captive bred salt water fish are generally much better suited for aquarium life, and better for the environment.

 

[duanes]

In nature, of a spawn of say 1000 fry, maybe 2 or possibly only 1 survive. So in theory the fittest and best adapted fish make it. When aquarists breed, often 100 or more survive, that may be 98 more than should have made it, so those 98 may be of lessor fitness.
If you are going to buy only 1 fish of a species to live alone, captive bred is probably a good idea for the aquarist, and the environment.
Same goes when considering salt water species, think of the techniques used to collect, and this may be the reason survivability is as low as it is.
Captive bred salt water fish are generally much better suited for aquarium life, and better for the environment.

 

[Squirtle919]

Completely infeasible for so many reasons....



Wild caught FW fish aren't as bad as reef fish IMO, the collection methods are usually a lot less harmful and sustainable. In many cases it creates an industry and source of income for the locals, who otherwise might resort to slash-and-burn farming or other more harmful methods of making money. And there are numerous cases where the aquarium hobby is the sole reason a species hasn't become extinct.

^ agree, the numbers taken from freshwater for the trade is very small compared to natural populations, saltwater there is some points but I think freshwater is very well fine with those few exceptions.

I understand breeders buying WC fish etc but people who buy WC just to have a WC fish are more laughing stock.

 

[dogofwar]

Hobbyists can be part of the problem and part of the solution.

In situations, where fish are on the verge of extinction BECAUSE of over-collection for the aquarium trade, hobbyists should absolutely not buy WC fish. Some examples include Pseudotropheus saulosi, Tropheus from Ilangi and Melanochrmis chipokae. There are others.

It really make little sense to collect wild rift lake cichlids. Almost all are readily available, easy to breed and pure in provenance, if purchased from places like Dave's Rare Fish (www.davesfish.com).

The larger threats to aquatic habitats are from deforestation, overpopulation, commercial (food) fishing, climate change, pesticide poisoning, dam building and other non-fish-hobby-related threats.

It would be great if more hobbyists would support efforts to conserve and preserve natural habitats.

Anyone have any charities or causes that they'd like to highlight?

A few that I support:

http://www.internationalrivers.org/ and their efforts in Brazil
http://magazine.nature.org/features/habitats-humanity.xml - Nature Conservancy's Work in Lake Tanganyika
http://www.cichlidpress.com/smgfund/index.html - Stuart Grant Conservation Fund (Anti-netting devices in Lake Malawi)

Matt

Just a random thought this morning while chilling with my patients in the recovery room. Do you think we can help protect our beloved fishes in the wild if we (fish keepers) would buy more CBs to stock our tanks than going for WCs?


Sent from my iPod touch using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

 

[dogofwar]

Many people purchase "wild" fish with the mistaken belief that captive fish are inferior in quality, color, pureness, etc. That some how only wild or F1 fish have good color and are free of deformities. The past sixty or so years of aquarium aquaculture would prove otherwise.

I think many purchase "wild" fish to tell other people that they have "wild" fish. They're a status symbol in some circles.

The solution is simple (and already happening!): Vendors sell captive bred fish to hobbyists as "wild" fish. Hobbyists pay premium prices and have the satisfaction of having "wild" fish with superior color and pureness. Everyone wins

Matt

 

[Zoodiver]

I think quality has to do more with the source and the care prior to showing up in the trade more than actual fact of WC vs CB.

I've seen it go both ways. Breeders who have been carried away to the point where fish are born biologically messed up (missing fins, organs that fail etc...). They produce quantity instead of quality trying to make a quick profit.

I've also seen WC animals that are ten times hardier because they have delt with every parasite and bacteria you can think of and they have an immune system that is able to deal with it.

Flip it around:

I've seen captive fish that are rock solid animals b/c they have been well cared for and are settled in well.
I've seen WC fish that start off stressed from poor collection, go into a low water quality situation during shipping and then are held poorly until they get sold. Those fish don't stand a chance at thriving once they get to your house.

 

[Lunglover]

I buy WC fish because after you start breeding CB fish a lot their genes start to wear down and you can get some really messed up fish. I don't completely buy WC fish but when I have a choice I usually take the WC fish because the genes are usually pretty good. A lot of the genes being messed up is because the people breeding them only care about the money. I'm not talking about the hobbyist breeding i'm talking about the mass breeding farms in Asia. And with all the F1 or F2 stuff it's because it shows that those particular fish aren't way down the line and still have good genes from the WC parents. Usually when a fish is F1 or F2 though they are bred by a hobbyist or someone who cares about the fish and not just the money.

+1
Couldn't of put it better myself.

 

[Bichisaur]

In nature, of a spawn of say 1000 fry, maybe 2 or possibly only 1 survive. So in theory the fittest and best adapted fish make it. When aquarists breed, often 100 or more survive, that may be 98 more than should have made it, so those 98 may be of lessor fitness.
If you are going to buy only 1 fish of a species to live alone, captive bred is probably a good idea for the aquarist, and the environment.
Same goes when considering salt water species, think of the techniques used to collect, and this may be the reason survivability is as low as it is.
Captive bred salt water fish are generally much better suited for aquarium life, and better for the environment.

That's exactly what im thinking. If only 2 or 1 survives from 1000 fry that is spawn in the wild and we collected those survivors to be put in the tank instead of letting them breed again then we are doing alot of damage in the enviroment since they can increase their population in the wild if we leave them alone. I believe most of the extincts animals now used to be able to only have a 1 or 2 offsprings and those who gave birth to hundreds had a very low survival rate.