Shortbody albino channa straita

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
tokyogasmask;4079327; said:
Well, It's a shortbody.
So it has it's uniqueness.
I don't mind shortbody fish, Not really my personal cup of tea though.

That said this poor dudes tank doesn't make life any easier for it!

I heard a lot of comments on the tank,whats wrong with it bro?
 
Brucki;4077055; said:
HI,

surely not natural. albinos occur in mass breedings, and mutations like shirt body or double fins (like some goldfish) come from too much incest.
its a very ugly and poor snakhead.
Natural Channa striata are so nice fish, why does anybody want a pale red eyed fish that looks disabled ?

that's one OPINION, not to be confused with a fact.

probably for the same reasons people keep poodles, bulldogs, pugs, chihuahuas, dachshunds or any other breed of dog in their home instead of a wolf.
variety is the spice of life, and love it or hate it, it's animals like this that bring more attention to the hobby in general and spark additional interest in that particular fish.

i think it's an interesting fish, thanks for posting it!
 
looks funky haha lol i like it :thumbsup:
 
whats bad bout the tank ?
no hiding places at all. Fish is always "on display". It gets stressed by this.That whats wrog about it. And I am sure its much too small .

Aquaritic doesnt need the attention of peple that like man-made monstercreatures, who keep them not for the interest in the fish but just for the curiosity and in wanting something "special"

NOBODY needs shortbody bichirs,channa or color dyed or tattooed fish. This is perversion of what serious people call aquaristic
 
Brucki;4080000; said:
Aquaritic doesnt need the attention of peple that like man-made monstercreatures, who keep them not for the interest in the fish but just for the curiosity and in wanting something "special"

i keep natural fish "for the curiosity and in wanting something "special"", does that still make it bad?

what's wrong with people liking "man-made monstercreatures"?

if that fish was designed by nature, instead of man, would it be more, less or equally appealing to you?

Brucki;4080000; said:
NOBODY needs shortbody bichirs,channa or color dyed or tattooed fish. This is perversion of what serious people call aquaristic

nobody NEEDS any fish for that matter. there are very serious people that are into fish morphs as well.

you simply prefer natural fish, there is nothing objectively evil about man-made morphs.
 
was wondering what that fish was. there's one in the LFS, part of the LFS owner's private collection. pretty cool. i'm keeping a couple freaks of nature and quite content with the perversion.

by definition, all life that exists are of "nature" for those that believe nature's rules apply to all living things. Man is of nature, and thus, inclusive of man's evolution to modern civilization, which include many creations, one of which ie; fish keeping

At best, one could argue that this fish was not born in the wild. But neither are most "natural" monsters in the trade. i believe albinos are found to occur in the wild as well. the irony in this is under the implied definition of "natural" vs "man made"... i see nothing natural about keeping fishes in glass boxes... falls well into what could be labelled as a man made perversion.

ultimately what this discussion breaks down to, would be something to the effect: purists vs nuevo aquaritic culture, no different than say, opposing views on politics, religion or the like.
 
Hi,its a matter of opinion,there are people who like these man made creatures and then there people that prefer natural fish.
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com