Controversial Topic

[SilverArowanaBoi]

Hey y'all! I was talking with a friend a little while back, and he does reptile keeping, but he also takes an interest in fishkeeping. The discussion was about whether or not people in our hobbies looked down on getting animals from the wild (the difference between captive-bred and wild-bred).

He said that it is looked down upon in the reptile hobby to get reptiles from the wild rather than captivity. I said that in a fish-keeping hobby, it isn't really looked down upon as most fish (especially rare oddballs and certain types of catfish, including my prized Striped Raphael Catfish) come from the wild rather than captivity, and that is especially true for saltwater.

Is it actually frowned upon by the fish-keeping community to take fish from the wild? I have a feeling about what people will say, but I'm still curious to know what other people think.

 

[Midwater]

So long as the speices of fish are not endangered.

 

[duanes]

Wild caught fish in the Amazon, are a major source of income for indigenous people there.
But captive breeding is becoming more and more advantageous as certain wild stocks disappear or diminish,.
Even in the salt water hobby advances in breeding techniques are providing fish that are better suited for aquarium success.

Some of the biggest problems are people wanting very large species (such as Arowana, and Arapaima) that are usually only available thru wild caught ways, and compromising and reducing wild stocks, leading to extinction. Luckily there are laws that prevent some importation of endangered species.
But even more ridiculous IMO, are people trying to keep them without large enough and proper facilities.

But this not only goes for these large species, I believe medium species like oscars are probably the most abused species in the hobby.
Kept in tanks that are little more than puddles.
Luckily they are easily captive bred, so that kind of abuse makes little natural deleterious impact.

I admit I catch my own fish in nature.
But if I catch something deemed endangered while in Panama, or even too big for my 300 gal system, it is released.

And if I end up with a spawn, I will return fry to the same river their parents were collected in, when I return.

And if I catch exotic invaders here, such as Oscars or P bass, I give them to locals for their dinner, or eat them myself.
Below left Tilapia dinner, Tilapia are invasive all over Panama



Below cooking Pbass fillets, caught in Lake Gatun

 

[Deadeye]

It depends on the fish imo.
A lot of the captive bred ones in freshwater have either become genetically weaker or impure due to captive breeding practices, good or bad. Because of this, it becomes more advantageous for collectors to get wild ones with better genes to mix back into the gene pool.
For saltwater fish, the wild caught ones pose a few problems. First off is disease, there are a lot of bad things that a wild caught fish can bring in, and if you don’t follow a proper qt procedure it can wipe out your entire tank. Second is endangered fish and depleting wild stock - take too many out and then nobody gets them.
As captive breeding in marine fish advances, however, I can see a similar shift as in freshwater. If everything is captive bred and no new genes are regularly introduced, you can soon see genetically worse fish. You can already see this in clownfish, with many of the morphs sold being far less healthy and barely resembling the wild type.

 

[dogofwar]

It really depends. There are a few main reasons that people want wild fish: 1) Captive fish aren't available, 2) People want "the best" fish (most colorful, etc.) for keeping, or 3) It's economically better to buy wild than captive (e.g. cardinal tetras).

In my perspective, as long as fish aren't threatened or endangered and it's done legally, there's no issue with sourcing wild fish. Especially if they're going to be part of a breeding project such that there won't be a need for additional wild fish.

That said, there is a widespread and erroneous belief that wild fish have more of the aquarist-desired characteristics than captive-bred fish do. That wild fish are more colorful or bigger or whatever than F1 fish...and so on. And conversely that captive bred fish have washed out colors, are inbred and full of deformities. So, if you want the most "pure" and colorful fish, then you must have wild ones. This is, of course, nonsense. But deeply ingrained into the "if it's hard to obtain, then I must have it" ethos

I'd much rather have known-provenance, locally-well-raised captive fish than wild fish. Wild fish often struggle to adapt to captivity. Losses between collection and successful care in a hobbyist's aquarium are staggering. And, especially when flown around the world with the cost of shipping, the cost and greenhouse footprint of wild fish can be high.

In the case of Rift Lake Cichlids, with very few exceptions, there is absolutely no need to extract more wild fish from the lakes. They're readily breed-able, widely available from quality sources and - most importantly - collection for aquariums is a leading threat to many species and variants of them.

 

[neutrino]

It does depend on region, species, etc. and it pays to be informed, but (for example, if you check the IUCN Red list for most freshwater aquarium species) in many, perhaps most, cases, collection of (freshwater) fish for the aquarium hobby is not the problem. Conservation is often different than the average person understands.

Wildlife conservation and the Amazon fish trade | MonsterFishKeepers.com

 

[tlindsey]

Conservation is often different than the average person understands.

That was very educational.
I personally get it but hopefully things remain the same for the people who depend on collecting those beautiful fish for the aquarium trade.

 

[SilverArowanaBoi]

View attachment 1527860


Below cooking Pbass fillets, caught in Lake Gatun
View attachment 1527861

Dang nab it, you're making me hungry! Now I want fresh cooked P-bass...throw in some fries or some hushpuppies and you got yourself a happy eater lol

 

[jjohnwm]

I will always choose wild-caught fish over domestic-bred ones; much better flavour, firmer-textured flesh, and a much better chance that they haven't been exposed to useless cocktails of antibiotics, dyes, steroids, conditioners, etc.

But for keeping in an aquarium, give me captive-bred fish every time. I understand the argument which states that wild-caught fish of many species are ethically superior because of the income generated for local people, which supposedly results in a greater appreciation for their wild resources and a vested interest in maintaining and protecting the wild populations. I simply don't believe that it actually works out that way in most circumstances, because greedy and short-sighted human nature will always prevail.

I always get a laugh out of the constant wailing about inbreeding that is said to cause weaker, genetically-inferior and more-disease-prone fish. The particular example that is oft-heard and especially ludicrous is the Neon Tetra. Back in the day, Neons were considered an extremely difficult fish to spawn in captivity, so vast numbers were wild-caught for the hobby; Neons were a hot item for many years. I'm sure that many hundreds of thousands were imported, if not millions, and this was back in a day when protection of the wild populations was a novel idea that few considered. Eventually, finally, Neons began to be bred domestically, first by hobbyists and shortly afterwards in commercial quantities. Today, we have people wringing their hands and wailing that Neons are terrible fish, very weak and sickly and likely to die very quickly once gotten home...because of inbreeding. Are they? I haven't had Neons for at least 10 years, but have friends who keep them rather than Cardinals because of their preference for somewhat lower temperatures. Their Neons look great, kept with things like Bloodfins or Guppies or many other small fish that are quite happy in the low 70F-range of temperatures.

Others buy Neons, plop them into their 85F tanks with Discus, Apistogrammas and other "hot" fish...and then when the Neons waste away, well, it's because they were weak! It certainly isn't due to the fact that these keepers don't do even the slightest bit of research before buying...is it...? "I don't know what I'm doing, but my fish keep wasting away and it's because they are inferior specimens!" There are certainly inferior specimens in the hobby...but most of them aren't fish...

Too many people are attracted to certain species of fish simply because they're "new" and wild-caught and nobody else has them...which is, IMHO, a sad excuse for a reason to keep living creatures in captivity.

 

[Deadeye]

Just to clarify on my point, my statement of wild vs captive health was more targeted at line bred morphs like fancy guppies, electric blue dempseys, etc.
I can’t say I’ve ever noticed a difference between wild type captive fish and their wild counterparts (I wouldn’t know if they were captive or not for those types).
I do think you need to add genetic diversity from time to time though, whether from different captive lines or added wild.