Why the Monsters? Is It Ethical?

[greenearthlawns]

a breeding fish is a happy fish.... keep your fish happy... lol

 

[cchhcc]

I continue to be surprised how people take their position and will not even consider another -- to the point on not even discussing another view in a rhetorical sense. Cichlaguapote and Bderick, you both should at least allow yourself to consider differing points of view. Don't be afraid to "test" them out.


To another point, Bderick is comparing a dog's house (its owner's house that is) to a fish's tank. Now, am I supposed to validate that comparison while at the same time in another of your statements you see no similarity between a fish owner's responsibilities and those of a dog owners?

Certainly (hopefully), and dog is allowed outdoors from time to time. Perhaps he lives on a farm. Perhaps he walks with his owner. No matter. THE SIMPLE TRUTH IS: no one would say: "I have a Rottweiler that is three feet long, so keeping him in a 9'x3' room for the rest of his life is fine since he can still turn around!"

 

[packer43064]

It's just amazing how people justify their desire to keep whatever they want with no concern for their animals.

"Most people would love to have a bigger tank, but just can't afford one." THEN DON'T GET A MONSTER FISH!

What are you going to do with your Aro when it outgrows it's tank (and 20" in an 18" wide tank is inarguably, for reasonable people, not a good fit)?

Did you even read my posts, i SAID I will upgrade. I said I will get a 180 then a bigger tank when needed. So since you probaly don't beleive me that I will get a bigger tank I'm suppose to not get a silver aro then. I can't get a fish that I really want because someone thinks it's unethical? Have you ever seen a live silver, they bend like no tommorow. Ask any silver aro keeper and they would say they spend half of their time swimming straight then bending around.I could probaly keep it in the 125 until it's 22 inches if I wanted to. And guess what, I think it's ETHICAL. Go ban me. Oh and I see you think I'm not a reasonable person, well thanks for clarifying that with me.

I guess that would depend on how many of these excuses become actuality. Many people with big tanks and small fish end up with too many fish, so this could lead to even more of a problem.

Basically we keep fish for our enjoyment not theirs. We all have differing opinions of what is or is not acceptable, so this will be just an endless debate

Couldn't agree more. We all have our own opinions on tank size. Noone is right or wrong. Example is minimum tank size for an Oscar. Some think that a 55 should be the min then others think your committing the worst sin ever if you do this. I will not state my opinion on this because I really don''t feel like being ridiculed any more.

What if we substituted "dog" for "fish" in your statement. Would it make a difference?

"Basically we keep <dogs> for our enjoyment not theirs. We all have differing opinions of what is or is not acceptable..."

Dogs are not even on the scale of a fish. Do you hear people saying "Fish are a man's best friend" anywhere? No you don't because sorry to hear but you can't train(besides maybe hand-feeding) a fish, nor can you walk it, pet it, nor does it show unconditional love as a dog(most monster fish will bite you thinking your food). The most you get out of a fish of any kind is pure enjoyment to keep it, breed it, and best of all to feed these monsters. Sorry to say but that's it. There are literally animal officers for dogs, cats, birds, cattle, sheep, goats and etc. but you don't see people breaking in houses and arresting owners for keeping a oscar in a 55. Sorry but their just not the same. It's like comparing a Granny Smith apple(green apple) to a Gala apple. Yes their the same(apple) but they are unlike as ever(granny smith apples are bitter while gala's are sweet and their used in totally different recipies).

I only keep fish that i can house in my current tanks for life. My largest indoor fish is an 11" pleco, who spends the summer in my pond. He spent the past winter in a 20 gallon long tank. Honestly, i feel the tank was too small, but it was the only tank available. The water was kept clean, and he was fed. The tank is 30"x12"x12". So, about 1 body length by 1 body length by 2.5 body lengths. I considered it small. However, a 3 foot arowana kept in a 9'x3'x3' would be acceptable to nearly anyone on this forum, i would assume.

There are hundreds of factors to consider. There is no clear line between right and wrong. But there are situations where setups just scream unethical. I think we all have come across these. It is up to your discretion.[/quote]
There we go, a very very good way to put it.

FTW, at least someone gets it





Anyone who is a fishkeeper cannot deny they're keeping fish for their own enjoyment. There's simply no other reason to have them unless you're doing genetic testing or are conducting some sort of scientific study. Any pet we keep is for our enjoyment or to serve a purpose to us. And people will have varying opinions of appropriate enviroments for dogs too. Though most if not all will judge a dog by how it looks/acts vs the size house it came out of.

Exactly why keep fish if it's not for our enjoyment.

This is why the first fishkeepers probaly hundred if not thousands of years ago kept fish, for their pure enjoyment. We have came a long way from then but still we keep fish to keep us happy. It's just how it is. Sure we don't want to see fish die, but it will always happen. Were humans all we can do is give out INFORMATION and hope that the fish keepers listens to us. That's it.

"Though most if not all will judge a dog by how it looks/acts vs the size house it came out of."

That's the point: what % of posters here can point to pictures of fully mature <pacus, RTCs, pimas, aros, other monster fish> in their care?

What if 90% of the puppies sold ended up dead after the first year after the sale?

I see lot's of "I just bought a pima" threads...but quite a bit fewer "My pima three years later" ones. Must just be that people are too busy doing hourly water changes for the 3' pima in a 125g to post pics.

If they ended up dead then they ended up dead. We can't stop people from buying puppies and mistreating them. All we can do again is give out solid information and hope that they treat them well. But like I already said dogs can't even compare to a fish.

I mean the HR669 bill is trying to take pretty much all of our Monsters away from us and every other fish. I don't think we need people to be complaining about keeping a Oscar in a 55 to be ethical or not. We should be trying to show new fish keepers about the fun and thrill to keep these monster fish. Not scare them away.

 

[The Ippster]

i own a petstore, and honestly, i wont sell fish to people who cant adequitly provide for the fish. i actally usually make more money by selling people bigger tanks, id rather lose 20 dollars in fish and sell a large tank

 

[cchhcc]

Packer, I wasn't directing my comments at you other than to sincerely ask what your plans were. My point was to show everyone what to expect as it was clear you were going to upgrade eventually. Many or most people who keep some of these fish don't ever think they'll need to.

Also, I don't want this conversation to target Aros. My original intent was to point out the folly of keeping arapaima, alligator gars, etc.

Also, no need to describe Aros to me. I got my first Aro nearly 30 years ago.



ULTIMATELY, many of the arguments presented here smack of "CUZ I CAN!"

 

[polish]

What if 90% of the puppies sold ended up dead after the first year after the sale?

Actually...

Millions of dogs are put down a year, not counting the ones that die of starvation, disease, fighting, cars, etc... (Is it 90%, I have no idea but we can't prove 90% of fish die either)

Same with many other pets I'm sure.

This is an endless argument, no ones view will change because of this thread. We all have ours ways, lets move on.

 

[dogofwar]

I'm certainly not arguing that people MUST have the tanks to house max size adult fish at the time they buy a 6" little one... I'm saying that the reason that I don't keep "monster" fish is that I don't and don't anticipate having tanks big enough to house them.

"Did you even read my posts, i SAID I will upgrade. I said I will get a 180 then a bigger tank when needed...."

How is this different than, for example, buying a dog that needs exercise...while you live in a small apartment...work long hours...and never give it exercise? You'll work better hours someday...and maybe even buy a house with a fenced yard. The dog's for your enjoyment, right?

"If they ended up dead then they ended up dead. We can't stop people from buying puppies and mistreating them. All we can do again is give out solid information and hope that they treat them well. But like I already said dogs can't even compare to a fish."

Uh, there are laws about abusing / neglecting animals. For good reason.

"I mean the HR669 bill is trying to take pretty much all of our Monsters away from us and every other fish."
It is? Not that it will pass, but that's not why it was put forth..

"We should be trying to show new fish keepers about the fun and thrill to keep these monster fish. Not scare them away."

Shouldn't we be trying to present a RESPONSIBLE example for new hobbyists to follow: that happy, healthy fish that have enough room to turn around are infinitely more "fun" than jamming fish into tanks that aren't big enough for them...or buying and killing rare fish.

 

[Bderick67]

To another point, Bderick is comparing a dog's house (its owner's house that is) to a fish's tank. Now, am I supposed to validate that comparison while at the same time in another of your statements you see no similarity between a fish owner's responsibilities and those of a dog owners?

WTF are you talking about? I did no such thing. I think comparing dogs to fish in any capacity in this discussion is idiotic. Maybe you should use the quote feature, it may help you to be less confused and reduce misquoting people.

 

[Bderick67]

I continue to be surprised how people take their position and will not even consider another -- to the point on not even discussing another view in a rhetorical sense. Cichlaguapote and Bderick, you both should at least allow yourself to consider differing points of view. Don't be afraid to "test" them out.

What point of view am I not considering? There are aspects to your argument that I do agree with, while others I do not.

IT IS STILL A MATTER OF OPINION ON WHAT IS OR ISN'T "ETHICAL" IN FISH KEEPING

 

[packer43064]

Actually...

Millions of dogs are put down a year, not counting the ones that die of starvation, disease, fighting, cars, etc... (Is it 90%, I have no idea but we can't prove 90% of fish die either)

Same with many other pets I'm sure.

This is an endless argument, no ones view will change because of this thread. We all have ours ways, lets move on.

Absolutely agree. Bye all.

WTF are you talking about? I did no such thing. I think comparing dogs to fish in any capacity in this discussion is idiotic. Maybe you should use the quote feature, it may help you to be less confused and reduce misquoting people.

Thanks Bderick67, you have this thread hope.