Balloon-fish, Glo-fish, short bodies - where does it end?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
While the notion that catching wild fish for the hobby may hold true in situations for very localized rare species, such as certain pupfish from one tiny spring.
In most cases, catching for the hobby barely makes a dent, compared to predation by birds, and other animals (like the humans that also eat fish) hobby fishing is negligible.
View attachment 1451986

View attachment 1451987

I agree completely, but as far as hybridization is concerned, the issue isn't the vast majority of fish that are left behind in nature. They have problems of their own to contend with: habitat loss, pollution, competition from invasives, etc.

It's that small percentage of wild-caught fish that make it to the market...or, more accurately, it's what is done with them and to them by the tinkerers, designers and wannabe-mad-scientists that is concerning. Add to that the irresponsible introduction of many of these creatures to waterways far from their natural homes, where some survive, reproduce and become invasive.

There is a thread somewhere on here that discusses how the world-record fish of one of the Vieja species was recently caught by an angler...in a hot spring in, I believe, Colorado! Many years ago in Alberta I visited a national park containing hot-spring fed ponds and marshes, inhabited by a thriving population of Guppies and Mollies. The waters of Florida are a veritable fish stew of introduced species. All of this results from...yep, here I go again...irresponsible behaviour by aquarists. And yet we whine and moan about legislation that restricts the ownership of species that would be "so cool" to have in our tanks. If we don't police ourselves...and we don't...then Big Brother will do it for us, and has begun. How long before the gov't just says "Okay, enough is enough!" and bans all importation of foreign species...or even prohibits keeping them regardless of the source?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Magnus_Bane
The comment that makes me most uncomfortable in this was that purist are ruining the hobby, by buying up pure bred specimens and not putting them back... That ignores the fact that we provide jobs in what can be a sustainable fishery, in areas that don't have a lot of other green industries. This prevents logging and other destructive industries. Look at the work of Project Piabahttps://www.bing.com/search?q=project+piaba&cvid=fca43af39de8465ba3e3d1d3e07d0632&FORM=ANAB01&PC=U531. The other thing that this thinking ignores is collection for the hobby is rarely the threat to these fish. It is usually habitat destruction.
Agree and I was preparing a similar response if it hadn't be said already. It's natural for someone who is conservation conscious to worry about the effect collection for the aquarium hobby has on wild populations, but in most cases this isn't the problem and it's either benign or the opposite is true. Years ago I first began to find this out by checking the IUCN Red List on certain species and finding the real threats are habitat damage and destruction, food fish overfishing, climate change, and in cases like Lake Victoria in Africa, introduction of invasive species for commercial reasons, while impact from pet trade collection is often minimal. (Not to say that's always true in every case.)

Natives (and a few hobbyists) collecting for the pet trade is typically sustainable and in some cases much better than the alternatives. To quote Oliver Lucanus (Video Link) regarding cardinal tetras: "If you have an aquarium you will have had this fish at one point and it's not only popular but an important fish for the industry and a source of income for hundreds of people in the Amazon... The people that catch these fish make their living with aquarium fish. It is a sustainable resource because the nets and methods they use are not so efficient, but also because they don't travel far from their homes to catch the fish."

Continuing, and get this: "I would always encourage people not to buy tank raised cardinals, because people live in the Amazon and they need to have an income, and there are few alternatives, such as gold mining and logging. So by buying wild fish you are actually helping to protect natural habitat and the livelihoods of the people living close to them."

Obviously, being there can change your perspective. Of course this is true in varying degrees, depending on the region and species. What's true of a widely distributed species with a very large natural population doesn't translate fully and equally to species with a limited population endemic to a small range or a single stream or stretch of river. For example, if all the Geophagus sveni now in the hobby were taken from the wild, I suspect the wild population would be in trouble.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jjohnwm
I understand everyone having different opinions here, but here are my two cents. Everyone can have different desires in the hobby, some of the breeding takes tremendous effort. If you breed goldfish you can be part of a project that has been running for over 1,000 years and still isn't finished. Some see it as similar to the multigenerational projects like building a cathedral or monument. Some of the line breeding is interesting some of it I am not a fan of, but breeders doing these things is part of the experience.

What is hated in some species is perfectly accepted in others. It seems to me if people saw it when they came into the hobby they seem to accept it. Very few people have seen wild platies or mollies in their store, far fewer ever buy them if they see them. Most of our livebearers are crossed every possible way, and no one bats an eye. Announce you are considering the same thing with corydoras and the mobs will come after you. I do like hybrids to be labeled properly.

Aberrant wild fish go for huge prices, but as soon as someone breeds it and makes it available to the masses it is an abomination. I remember when the lightning maroon clownfish popped up everyone wanted it. It was so beautiful there was discussion of auctioning it off. Then it went to a farm was made available and it is no longer respected. The same thing happens with gold and white gar.

The comment that makes me most uncomfortable in this was that purist are ruining the hobby, by buying up pure bred specimens and not putting them back. The issues I have with this are one hobbyist releasing fish back into the wild may not be the best idea. That should be done with strict biosecurity protocols in place. The second issue I have is that we take from the wild without giving back. That ignores the fact that we provide jobs in what can be a sustainable fishery, in areas that don't have a lot of other green industries. This prevents logging and other destructive industries. Look at the work of Project Piabahttps://www.bing.com/search?q=project+piaba&cvid=fca43af39de8465ba3e3d1d3e07d0632&FORM=ANAB01&PC=U531. The other thing that this thinking ignores is collection for the hobby is rarely the threat to these fish. It is usually habitat destruction. Look at the cherry barb less than 5% of its habitat is lost, but hundreds of thousands are sold in the US every year. Sure some are albino some are veil tailed, but without this source cherry barbs could leave this planet forever. I do think it is best if hobbyist breed fish in their home countries. Not to destroy wild collection, but to ensure that there is a diversity of fish in your home country when importation eventually gets shut down by those that disapprove of any animal trading. It also provides a backup of fish if a habitat gets destroyed.

The comment about people line breeding and hybridizing for cash seems short sighted to me. I read these comments about people being in this space for the money often on here. Almost every adult does their job for cash, and they try to do a good job so they can get more cash later. You might love your job, but unless you have your needs met elsewhere you are going to find another job as soon as the paychecks stop. Fish farmers worldwide work tirelessly to provide the fish we enjoy (or revile). They provide the volume that makes it possible for a group as specialized as MFK to exist. Without all the fish MFKers don't keep it would be very hard to get shippers to ship a fish, it would be hard to get permits to move them across borders, there wouldn't be affordable tanks because it wouldn't make sense to build a factory, you wouldn't be able to buy a filter off the shelf, and you wouldn't have access to affordable feeds. Most importantly most of us would have never entered this hobby if we didn't stumble by a tank somewhere. I have always said public aquariums are important, but there is no more public aquarium than the one in your LFS, Petsmart, Petco, Meijer, etc.
I see your point and I will apologize for my one sided argument and the statement about purists ruining the hobby. I shouldn't have used that word honestly and should've used damaging instead. Purists do damage the natural ecosystem by purchasing these wild caught fish from their habitats but I can't really say they are the only ones damaging the ecosystem either. Deforesting, over fishing, pollution both natural (live stock) and mechanical (man made chemicals), and ya also can't forget the ppl who think it's a good idea to just release their pet out into a random body of water just because they can't keep it anymore. Florida, Utah and the lake of the ozarks are good examples of what happens when fish get released into an entirely new habitat that's just ripe for the taking.

Also while hybrid breeders may be damaging the hobby, ya can't really say they are ruining the hobby either. If your looking for a pure specimen to keep just go to a reputable breeder that knows what they are doing/selling, don't go to your average Joe and expect it to be a pure fish even if it's being sold as such. If your so desperate to keep a pure blooded fish don't go to your lfs and buy one just because it's cheap and already there, spend the extra time and cash going out to find someone that knows what they are doing and selling and ya won't have any problems with hybrids.

Personally I love hybrids,not every one but most atleast. I think it's pretty neat to see that even if a species starts to die out it has a chance of being able to bounce back thru hybridization whether it's a natural hybrid or not. And yes hybridization happens all the time in the wild and does eventually create new species for us to enjoy as well. I personally have a handful of wild caught hybrid sunfish and they are lovely in the right lighting. I actually have plans on line breeding them and selling off the higher quality fry eventually once I can get then to start breeding. I found it kind of funny that for years I never once caught a hybrid sunfish in that pond but for some reason this year that's almost all I caught. It seems like just by them hybridizing that they became much stronger fish that will even out grow their original counter parts at a faster rate. I'll try to take some pics of em when I get back home later. They are green sunfish x pumpkinseed sunfish hybrids btw.
 
While hybridization occurs sometimes in nature it is not the norm, and it does sometimes end up providing new species.
With time, if a hybrid is successful it often edges out the real species
But hybrids are "not" species, they are mutts, until DNA sets them apart from the originals .
I'm sure hybrids are not ruining the commercial part of the hobby.
But for aquarists that want real species, be they cichlids or whatever, the authentic species are becoming harder and harder to find (especially as amateurs flood the LFSs with mutts) with scrambled up genes. (for me making them useless)
In nature to become an established species a fish must pass the gauntlet of predators, adapt over time to habitat, and become immune to its habitats bacteria, and pathogens over millennia, become a robust enough individual to conquer its habitat .
In aquarium breeding, a hybrid requires none of that, all the the fish needs to do is look appealing to its market share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjohnwm
While hybridization occurs sometimes in nature it is not the norm, and it does sometimes end up providing new species.
With time, if a hybrid is successful it often edges out the real species
But hybrids are "not" species, they are mutts, until DNA sets them apart from the originals .
I'm sure hybrids are not ruining the commercial part of the hobby.
But for aquarists that want real species, be they cichlids or whatever, the authentic species are becoming harder and harder to find (especially as amateurs flood the LFSs with mutts) with scrambled up genes. (for me making them useless)
In nature to become an established species a fish must pass the gauntlet of predators, adapt over time to habitat, and become immune to its habitats bacteria, and pathogens over millennia, become a robust enough individual to conquer its habitat .
In aquarium breeding, a hybrid requires none of that, all the the fish needs to do is look appealing to its market share.
True true but I would imagine it's just as hard to make a new species thru random mutations. I would imagine the hybrids and mutants would have an equally good chance of becoming their own species over time and given the right circumstances. Now as for hybrids such as the Sturdle fish (American Paddlefish x Russian Sturgeon) it makes no sense how these fish are even able to be made in the first place. Geographically isolated from each other for over 200 million years and they are still able to hybridize, just an absolutely insane hybrid that should never even existed in the first place.
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com