Seeing this really upset me....

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Still don't have any tattoos. Still have no tattooed pets. Still firmly believe that ANY ADULT that has MINOR children with tattoos have ABSOLUTELY no right to type comments bashing fellow fishkeepers that do support.

Tattoed Fish >> Tattoed minors (Children)

Businessmen who tattoo fish for profit >> Parents who ALLOW their children (minors) to get tattoos!

(Lord only knows their reasoning, but there is ABSOLUTELY NO health benefit for the youth getting a tattoo, so from the ADULT STANDPOINT, the motivation is probably something along the lines of "FOR THE HECK OF IT".

How is it WORSE for a business man to tatto fish than it is for either a Parent to allow their MINOR(s) children to get tattoos for nothing more that the heck of it, or for a tattoo artist stricking needles into a child REGARDLESS OF THE IMBICILIC PARENTS PERMISSION.

I have YET to hear ANYONE say that they think that a tattoo artist that INKS UP a child is anything short of a totally A+OK legitimate honest business man! 90+% of the posters are basically saying that a fish tattoer (Not allowed to use the word "art" here) requires a foot broken off in their rump, but not a child tattoo "artist"! WTF?



I do NOT support this practice personally!!!!!!!!!!! With that clearly stated, the most intelligent response that I have gotten to any of my arguments is "sober up"! Nice.

Just want to throw out another point that again, everyone will take personally but have no intelligent response because they know it is true.

I live in the central Maryland area. I have been to dozens of local fish stores in the Baltimore area and have NEVER found a single one that DID NOT sell these digusting tattooed fish. Out of curiosity, is there any fishkeepers in the central Maryland area disagree that the extreme vast majority of the local fish stores here carry these tattooed/ painted fish?

Now for the sticking point! It is generally accepted here on MFK that there is no worse place (cruel treatment) to buy fish that the major chain stores like Petsmart and Petco.

I have only been to two Petcos (as I am not a loyal customer), but I have been in dozens of Petsmarts in the area. I have yet to EVER see either of these horrible places or even walmart for that matter support the practice of fish tattooing.

HAS ANYONE in other areas of the country seen this horsey poop practice from these evil chain pet stores?
 
I'll give the hybrids a pass, as just about every domestic animal has been hybridized ie breed, dogs, cats, rats, cows, horses, goats, chickens, pigeons so on a so forth. The tattoos though, I don't like them and I'll never buy a fish that has ugly blotches in the vauge shape of a heart, or flowers, or just the "blue" parrots that also look all blotchy and sick, and best case will lose the ugly blotches in a few months. I would support stores that felt the same way as me but every shop within an hour of me has tattooed mollies, BPs, and glass fish, and my biggest complaint is that it's poorly done (ugly/ dangerous for the fish/costs the same as the not ugly fish).
I tried to get into animal rights all hardcore in high school, I spent six months trying to free a monkey from a dentists office (because keeping monkeys is wrong), with pamphlets and wised up a bit, as of a few years ago the monkey is alive and well, and still in the dentist office.

And yeah, Wal-Mart sometimes has tattooed mollies.
 
Yeah, this thread seems to have gotten a bit out of hand. I think most serious hobbyists can agree tattooed fish look awful and won't buy them. That's about as good as we can do.
 
I think its cruel and ugly, most of what I have seen looks like it was finger painted by a toddler. But it the past few month's I have been much more forgiving of stores selling them. These are sold mainly to appeal to children (I assume) and therefore that is a huge market. Kids are not like us adults who love the fish for there natural beauty, they want fish that look like pokemon. If shop A sells these fish and shop B doesnt, and little Johnny (who may or may not be sporting an adolescent mom/dad approved tatto of there own, lol) wants a molly with a heart on it, shop A gets the sale, Shop B gets another step towards shutting down. The fact of the matter is "we" are not representing a large enough percent of the consumer buying fish from LFS's to support them not selling what sells. The only real way for this horrible practice to stop is a government ban, that way no one can sell them and shop A and B are on equal grounds.
 
there a LFS that has pink convict cichlid that has tattoo on it.. :cry:
 
GolemGolem;4771526; said:
I'll give the hybrids a pass, as just about every domestic animal has been hybridized ie breed, dogs, cats, rats, cows, horses, goats, chickens, pigeons so on a so forth. The tattoos though, I don't like them and I'll never buy a fish that has ugly blotches in the vauge shape of a heart, or flowers, or just the "blue" parrots that also look all blotchy and sick, and best case will lose the ugly blotches in a few months. I would support stores that felt the same way as me but every shop within an hour of me has tattooed mollies, BPs, and glass fish, and my biggest complaint is that it's poorly done (ugly/ dangerous for the fish/costs the same as the not ugly fish).
I tried to get into animal rights all hardcore in high school, I spent six months trying to free a monkey from a dentists office (because keeping monkeys is wrong), with pamphlets and wised up a bit, as of a few years ago the monkey is alive and well, and still in the dentist office.

And yeah, Wal-Mart sometimes has tattooed mollies.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I will never own an ugly brutalized tattooed fish. Like you I also am not aware of ANY local fish stores within an hour drive of me that DO NOT sell these abominations.

If I were to boycott all LFS's in my area that sold painted and tatterd (Tattooed) fish as well as follow the MFK law to boycott all chain pet stores due to poor conditions and unknowledgable employees, I honestly ask: should those of us like you and myself who do NOT have these LFS's in our area with ultra-moral ownership that refuses to carry this garbage be totally shut off from the hobby, even though we DO NOT support the practice of fish inking?

I do not and will not support this practice by purchasing any of these grotesque creatures, but I will also NOT give up the hobby of fishkeeping simply because I am not fortunate enough to have a LFS in the area that is up to these moral standards.

In short, I have total control over what I do and what I buy. It seems WRONG for me to try to shove my moral beliefs within this hobby onto other fishkeepers.

I'd say a better approach then a total boycott is to state you bojection(s) to the store manager/ owner and then go into the LFS that sells these fish that you disaprove of very regularly and buy only very inexpensive dry goods etc... making sure that they hear you disapproval on every visit. The tell them it is a shame that you can not spend more of your budgeted "fish" money in THEIR store due to their carrying these monsters.:headbang2
 
That's just wrong i went to a LFS that had dyed parrot fish
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom