Feeder Fish

[oddball_lover]

So can you buy feeder fish in the UK? I'm still a bit confused. I know here (US), you can buy 10 feeder goldfish or guppies for $1, or the super-deluxe-best-deal-ever 50 for $3! XD

Not as far as I know.

I've never been into a fish shop and seen fish specifically advertised as feeders...I am assuming because it's not really the 'done' thing over here. Also I guess because the legality of it is so hazy...

So, from what I understand, over here if you have a predatory fish that will not eat, and you *have* to try it with feeder fish (i.e. you have no choice, it will die otherwise), you gotta pay the 'normal' price for them. E.g. £1 for a small goldfish, £1.50 for a guppy etc.

 

[CFC]

I have never seen feeder fish for sale and have even had shops refuse to sell me fish as they suspected (rightly so) that i was using them for feeders, i guess not many people ask for 20 tetras, a bag of river shrimp and 500 grams of bloodworm every week

 

[nmonks]

Feeder fish were certainly on sale when I was younger and started keeping fish (mid 80s). Usually guppies. I bought a few simply as cheap community fish, and remember one blonde guppy that grew rather large and lived for ages. But as CFC says, you don't see it any more. It's a legally grey area, and few shops want to risk prosecution.

The whole idea of "cheap feeder fish" is fundamentally stupid, and this is my main problem with it. Cheap feeder fish are cheap because they're crammed into a tiny space, fed poor quality food, and have little labour wasted on them to fix things like water quality or removal of sick/dead fish. So buying a cheap feeder fish is Russian roulette for your predatory fish. Sooner or later, you're going to introduce something nasty.

If you are going to need feeder fish, then the only sensible approach is to breed your own, feed them with algae-rich and vitamin-enriched foods for a week or two beforehand, and gut load them with veggies before they're used. This is all non-negotiable if you are serious, and absolutely standard in the reptile-keeping hobby where live foods (not necessarily fish) are widely used. Dumping a cheap goldfish into an oscar's tank is basically saying "I don't care about your health, I just want to see you kill another fish".

Cheers, NEale

 

[jamie2010]

wow my topic has really sterted a debate rather healthy i must say

 

[chibi]

I agree, nmonks. In my LFS, I went in the back and saw the feeders. The conditions weren't nice to say the least. I feed my angelfish my guppies' babies. I feel okay with it because I've raised them, know what they've eaten and are confident enough with it to feed them to my larger fish.

 

[nmonks]

What you're doing with the baby guppies is fine, and probably good for the angelfish as a treat. After all, wild angelfish may eat mostly mosquito larvae but they also eat small fish when they can catch them. Culling excess livebearer fry is part of proper fish breeding, as there's no advantage to dumping poor quality stock on the market. As you say, baby livebearers will have eaten a nice mixed diet, and will be full of good nutrition for your angelfish. So yes, that's the way to use live fish as food. Goldfish from a "vat" at the back of the shop is definitely not the way to do it.

Cheers, Neale

I agree, nmonks. In my LFS, I went in the back and saw the feeders. The conditions weren't nice to say the least. I feed my angelfish my guppies' babies. I feel okay with it because I've raised them, know what they've eaten and are confident enough with it to feed them to my larger fish.

 

[MHunt]

Basically as i understand it, fish such as guppies or goldfish are bred as food for larger predatory fish such as pirahnas, or Oscars. They are just bred in vast quantity's for cheapness with no attention paid to quality, colour or breeding, Purely for food.

How sad.......!!!!

But true!

 

[Fate2006]

wow how odd... (the first page) "Feeding fish to anything is illegal even other fish" WHAT THE?! Don't fish naturally do that? How can you put a law on something that is natural and cruicial to the species survival... It's like making a law that we can't breathe air because theres a hole in the ozone layer... BREATHING IS OUR MAIN FUNCTION! IT'S NEEDED TO SURVIVE DURRR!!! so why is it that predatory fish such as Oscars and Piranahs (which aren't illegal as far as I know BTW I live in canada so not illegal here ^^) not allowed to do what comes naturally to them? And so what if they get a "helping hand"? It's not like nobodys ever broken the law before... wow sorry man but the UK's got 1 hell of an odd legal system no offense!

 

[t.ropical_m.istx3]

I feed my angelfish my guppies' babies. I feel okay with it because I've raised them, know what they've eaten and are confident enough with it to feed them to my larger fish.

answers my question

 

[Dorkhedeos]

hrmm, how do you actually raise the guppy fry without the parents eating the fry themselves?

 

[xscape]

my LFS sells 'feeder barbs'. 10 for $3... they're kept in a tank out back - dont even get to see the fish before you buy them

 

[LisaLQ]

wow how odd... (the first page) "Feeding fish to anything is illegal even other fish" WHAT THE?! Don't fish naturally do that? How can you put a law on something that is natural and cruicial to the species survival... It's like making a law that we can't breathe air because theres a hole in the ozone layer... BREATHING IS OUR MAIN FUNCTION! IT'S NEEDED TO SURVIVE DURRR!!! so why is it that predatory fish such as Oscars and Piranahs (which aren't illegal as far as I know BTW I live in canada so not illegal here ^^) not allowed to do what comes naturally to them? And so what if they get a "helping hand"? It's not like nobodys ever broken the law before... wow sorry man but the UK's got 1 hell of an odd legal system no offense!

I dont have a problem with feeding fish to fish that would not readily take anything else - ie wild caught predators, I couldn't do it personally, but if it were the only way to keep them alive, then I guess that would be a different situation. Although I would wonder why they chose to keep that fish if that were the case. But to feed them to an oscar is pointless when they will eat anything, and there's plenty of much better prepared food available for them. As far as ethics are concerned, if a piranha or carnivore will readily take prepared food (and by that I could mean fish that had been killed humanely prior to feeding in the case of the piranha or other piscivore), why else would someone put a live fish in?

As someone else said earlier, if someone's feeding live fish to their oscar/piranha, they're not doing it for the fish's health - they're doing it for the novelty. Then you get those inbreed idiots who film their fish doing it - and you know it's not for the piranha's sake - it's for their own entertainment. In which case I'd suggest they stick to electronic interactive pets rather than real ones. After all, a cat's made to eat small animals, but we dont see folks breeding mice to drop into their food bowls - because it's cruel. And not nutritionally balanced either And that's pretty sad. Much sadder than our legal system.

 

[oddball_lover]

wow how odd... (the first page) "Feeding fish to anything is illegal even other fish" WHAT THE?! Don't fish naturally do that? How can you put a law on something that is natural and cruicial to the species survival... It's like making a law that we can't breathe air because theres a hole in the ozone layer... BREATHING IS OUR MAIN FUNCTION! IT'S NEEDED TO SURVIVE DURRR!!! so why is it that predatory fish such as Oscars and Piranahs (which aren't illegal as far as I know BTW I live in canada so not illegal here ^^) not allowed to do what comes naturally to them? And so what if they get a "helping hand"? It's not like nobodys ever broken the law before... wow sorry man but the UK's got 1 hell of an odd legal system no offense!

Feeding a live fish to another fish isn't crucial to it's survival. It is legal if it's as a last resort, but if it will eat defrosted food then there is absolutely no reason why live fish should be given, except for the fascination of the human doing the feeding.

You could argue that dogs would 'naturally' pack together to kill and eat other animals. However, surely you can see that it would be wrong to set your dog on a live chicken when it would happily eat tinned meat?

It's exactly the same with reptiles...it wouldn't be legal to feed a python a live rat if it would happily feed on defrost. There's absolutely no need, and just creating suffering for the prey animal.

Your analogy of breathing isn't relevant...breathing doesn't cause pain and suffering to another animal.

The legal system is here to protect animals that cannot defend themselves from the sad losers who think it's funny to watch another animal kill another for fun

But is flexible enough that it is permitted as a last resort, if you believe that the predatory animal in question would otherwise likely die.

 

[Kevin_D]

Ive just been reading this thread, and was wondering, would feeding live, small fish that someone either bred themselves, or quarentened first, to an aquatic snake species that will only accept live fish be illegal in the UK? I see theres exemptions where feeding fish to another fish that will only accept live fish is concerned, but im unclear about feeding fish to Reptiles, feeding live shrimp and other invertebrates would be unsuitable in this case, I dont keep aquatic snakes, but was thinking about keeping Enhydris chinensis, if the law is clear that feeding fish is illegal I wont look further into their keeping requirements.

I keep other snake species, and feed them pre-frozen rodents, I wouldnt feed them live prey, as it isnt needed, though with Enhydris chinensis they will only accept live fish, and from what Ive read, predominantly minnows.

 

[andywg]

The law is far from clear on feeding anything. It only refers to unnecessary suffering. The verb "to feed" and any of its conjugations does not occur in the statute. I would suggest that provided the animals being bred as food were kept in good conditions there is little problem.

Provided there was no undue suffering with the actual feeding then you should be fine. the only problem I can see would be if the fish live for some time, in fear of the snake. Any feeding should ideally be as swift as possible to minimise the contact time between the feeder and the snake before consumption.

I would say that so long as you try and move the snake over to dead (while many animals are difficult, most will eventually take dead) at the same time as feeding there would be very little cause for any prosecuting authority to get involved.

Obviously, as the statute is very new and there is no case law to help with definitions and what is and isn't meant by the more ambiguous phrases (just when does suffering become "unnecessary"?) then everything is very up in the air at this time.