Is Fish Keeping Cruel?

[joshrm115]

Well It is to my understanding that fish have a minimal memory.

thats not quite true, it has been proven that fish do have a long term memory.

not so dim either, though how they find out is beyond me. i have read, in more than one place, that a "tropical fish" (whatever they mean by that) is about as intelligent as your average horse . if this is true, they are more than aware of how they are kept.

Ok this is not true I have horses and horses can be train to do thousands of things where as a fish cant. If you go to Google and type in fish memory you will not find one fish that has a memory of more than a month. I am sry to say this but if you where to leave you fish for a month and give it no human contact you would be back to square one. People believe what they want to, and they want to believe that there fish know who they are when in actuality you are nothing but a lost memory.

 

[Bigpig]

[/quote]

not so dim either, though how they find out is beyond me. i have read, in more than one place, that a "tropical fish" (whatever they mean by that) is about as intelligent as your average horse . if this is true, they are more than aware of how they are kept.
[/quote]
Ok this is not true I have horses and horses can be train to do thousands of things where as a fish cant. If you go to Google and type in fish memory you will not find one fish that has a memory of more than a month. I am sry to say this but if you where to leave you fish for a month and give it no human contact you would be back to square one. People believe what they want to, and they want to believe that there fish know who they are when in actuality you are nothing but a lost memory.
[/quote]

Great white sharks migrate thousands of miles and rember where feeding grounds are and bays which are rich in food ect Id say they have a pretty darn good memory

 

[Truck]

theyve done it on brainiac, they managed to train a goldfish to do a maze, it can be done.

 

[rdd1952]

Let's not get off topic here. Discussing fish intelligence is another deep subject in itself.

 

[OohFeeshy]

But surely you can get enough genetic variation by sourcing fish from somewhere else in captivity, for example if i have one pretty common fish here, surely somewhere in europe, US, asia, there are a hell of a lot of fish that weren't bred from the same strain?

Don't forget that the vast majority of fish are bred on fish farms in Asia- I'm not sure on the exact data but the gene pool is unlikely to be as varied as you think. They're then sent all over the world. Even if you took a 'home' breeder from each of the countries you mentioned, the fish would still originate from inbred parents. If you think about it, when you buy fish they are all the same size and therefore age, meaning they're likely to be siblings.

 

[raptorrex]

Let's not get off topic here. Discussing fish intelligence is another deep subject in itself.

unfortunately, fish intelligence, is directly related to how cruel the hobby may be! perception, on behalf of the detainee, is important in judging how cruel, any, confinement is!

horses learn tricks, so do fish. one of the main reasons horses have more tricks than fish is the direct contact its trainer has. not many of use can get in our tanks in orderer to, try, and teach them anything. you try putting a lounging rope on a Terta, or even a Green Terror! try to whip one, something that is common in lounging, to keep the horse at the right distance. even a fish would give up and follow a direction, if the result of not doing so was the infliction of pain, or the perception that pain will be inflicted( i do undrerstand, most, owners do not whip their horses. it says here). ignoring the fact that, horses are domesticated, effectively bred, by use, to fulfull a role, or roles. it would be surprising if we did not bred in a propensity to do the things, we all try to teach our horses.

 

[Colin_T]

Fish Keeping isn’t cruel as long as you look after the fish. As already mentioned, some fish would be extinct if they weren't in captivity today. And if the fish are cared for and provided with the right conditions, most will live long and happy lives and even reproduce. Reproduction is a good example of a happy healthy fish. If they are happy enough to breed then they are not being stressed out and therefore are living a good life. Therefore this cannot be considered cruel.

The problem I have with fish in captivity is people not looking after them properly, and fish farms keeping diseased breeding stock that pollutes the shop tanks and your tanks.

As for keeping marine fish and thinking that is cruel because they are all wild caught (well the majority are), the same thing happened with freshwater fishes about 60years ago. Every freshwater fish was wild caught originally and it was only because of a few dedicated fish keepers (usually wealthy people) that wild caught fish were no longer needed. They bred the fish and it wasn't long before everyone else was breeding them. Marine fish are going the same way. Every month or so new species are being bred and reared up in captivity and hopefully in a few years the majority of marine fish in the shop will be captive bred.
And for people saying marine fish come from the ocean and that is huge and a fish tank is tiny, therefore the fish is stressed from being in a small tank. Many marine fish that are kept in aquariums naturally have a small territory that they defend from all comers. There are exceptions like angel & butterflyfish, but stuff like damsels and clownfish only have a natural territory consisting of maybe 2 square feet. These fish are happy living in a 4ft aquarium and will often breed there.

Fish have good memories and can even differentiate between people. My rainbowfish would only come to the corner of their tank for food when I walked past their tank. They also knew that when my bedroom door opened I was coming out and they could beg for food. They wouldn't beg for food from anyone else in the house even if that person came out of my room. They also remembered me after I went away for a few weeks. I would come home and they would swim up to the front and beg for food like they always do.
There are also reports of fish (mainly big cichlids) that have gone on hunger strikes when their owners have died or the fish has been given to someone else. We had a large cichlid (I think it was a severum) at the shop. It was old and had been given to us by a lady whose dad was no longer able to look after the fish. The fish went on a hunger strike and refused to eat. After a couple of weeks the daughter brought her dad down to see how his fish was doing and the fish immediately got up and swam to the front of the glass. We got the guy to feed the fish while he was there and we had him come back a few more times after that to feed the fish. Eventually it did start to take food from other people but it took a while.

 

[andywg]

I'm, generally, uncomfortable with wild fish. many fish are now extinct (in the wild), because of our hobby!

Do you actually have a list of species which have truly become extinct in the wild because of collection from our hobby? I am not aware of any from collection, but a few from natural habitat destruction from human encroachment.

i agree with this, i stopped keeping marine fish because most of the fish are wild,

I hate this thought of "I can't keep a marine fish, it was born in the wild". Does no one here realise that the reef is nothing like Finding Nemo? It is a true eat or be eaten habitat where (for the vast majority of species) a very small percentage of the fish that make it out of the planktonic larvae stage even get near to a breeding age. I recall reading that the average life expectancy for a clownfish which reaches breeding age on the reef is 5 years. In captivity it is up to double this. On those figures it would appear that we have the chance of being far from cruel, but in fact being saviours for some marine fish by taking them from the reef.


As hinted at above, there is no black and white in this, but myriad grey shades.

 

[MrWhite]

Fishkeeping is getting greener. The vast majority of aquarium fish are now farmed, rather than wild caught. However, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that catching fish from the wild isn't as bad as some believe, and in many cases it's been shown to help protect the environment.

The marine hobby, which still relies heavily upon wild exports (the opposite of the tropical freshwater hobby), still has work to do to make things better.

However, organisations like the Marine Aquarium Council are doing sterling work here, and things have improved dramatically over the past decade or two - cyanide-caught fish must surely be a rarity nowadays.

Fishkeepers (and importers) want their fish to survive, so they tend not to make repeat purchasers with suppliers who sell cyanide-caught fish.


these are not my words BTW !

 

[Cris_L]

Its an excellent discussion that could go on forever. i guess there is a difference between "cruel" fishkeeping and keeping fish in a healthy environment thats just not as nice as the one they originated from.

surely any animals intelligence has to have some link to the size of its brain (or the types of tissue its brain is made up from). Instinct can count for a lot and this is how many animals survive, hunt, mate etc. Think how birds can find their way thousands of miles during migration.

 

[Aquatic_Az]

I wouldnt consider fish keeping cruel aslong as you provide them a suitable environment etc to live in. Obviously theres exceptions when it is cruel, like keeping a huge fish in a small tank etc etc. But on the whole I think for many fish its a much better safer environment then they couldve ever wanted. There kept in a well maintained clean tank, illness' are treated when they get sick, they have regular food and are safe from predators etc. Also as someone has already mentioned in this thread, if someone is going to say keeping fish cruel, is keeping any animal in a confined area cruel then? I think not

 

[ahodge84]

I will agree with others: proper fish keeping is not cruel.

 

[The-Wolf]

it could be argued that keeping any animal is cruel, as animals were not designed to be restricted by our lifestyle.

on the subject at hand, no I don't think keeping fish is cruel provided that we do our utmost best to ensure they are kept healthy
and well cared for.

 

[Colin_T]

I'm, generally, uncomfortable with wild fish. many fish are now extinct (in the wild), because of our hobby!

Do you actually have a list of species which have truly become extinct in the wild because of collection from our hobby? I am not aware of any from collection, but a few from natural habitat destruction from human encroachment.

I don't know of any fish that have become extinct from collecting for the aquarium trade but there are a few species that are becoming threatened due to their collection. Bangaii cardinalfish, Melanotaenia boesemani & Glossolepis incisus were all taken in huge numbers by collectors and their numbers were significantly reduced. Seahorses were taken for the aquarium trade but most were taken for traditional medicine. However, the problem has been reduced quite considerable due to CITES and various governments protecting them.
The bigger concern (as stated by Andy) is from overfishing and pollution caused by greedy uneducated people. When I say uneducated I don't necessarily mean people that haven't been to school. Those people don't know any better and are simply trying to survive. I refer to people in charge of countries, states and territories that don't learn from past mistakes and are quite happy to delete species simply for a few dollars worth of mineral resources.
In general all wild fishes are endangered due to overfishing and pollution. And if aquarium fish keeping can help keep some species alive when their wild counterparts cease to exist, then I am happy to keep fish in captivity.

 

[raptorrex]

I'm, generally, uncomfortable with wild fish. many fish are now extinct (in the wild), because of our hobby!

Do you actually have a list of species which have truly become extinct in the wild because of collection from our hobby? I am not aware of any from collection, but a few from natural habitat destruction from human encroachment.

i agree with this, i stopped keeping marine fish because most of the fish are wild,

I hate this thought of "I can't keep a marine fish, it was born in the wild". Does no one here realise that the reef is nothing like Finding Nemo? It is a true eat or be eaten habitat where (for the vast majority of species) a very small percentage of the fish that make it out of the planktonic larvae stage even get near to a breeding age. I recall reading that the average life expectancy for a clownfish which reaches breeding age on the reef is 5 years. In captivity it is up to double this. On those figures it would appear that we have the chance of being far from cruel, but in fact being saviours for some marine fish by taking them from the reef.


As hinted at above, there is no black and white in this, but myriad grey shades.

the IUCN red List, gives reasons it thinks are the cause of fish being classified in the list. collection for our hobby is listed, on occasion, as a contributing factor in their classification. the lack of, proper, research and records makes it impossible to ,unequivocally, identify the cause. but for the organisation to even mention the hobbie, must suggest, it is having a significant effect.

my stance on "Marine" is not something i think should be law. i am, simply, uncomfortable with it myself.