Live Foods.

[geo7x]

but in reality, it is nature.

but it really isnt, keeping fish in an aquarium in a country that they shouldnt "naturally" be in isnt natural, breeding fish so that they have desirable characteristics like ling flowing fins or specific colours isnt natural.

Also, in the wild fish that could be classed as food to some fish actually have a chance of getting away, in someone 4x2x2 tank at home there isnt anywhere for them to go and run away.

Personally i think in the majority of cases feeder fish can be unnecessary, and i think most predatory fish can be trained off live feeders if they dont take it at first.

I apologise to use someone as an example but in the profile in the tff index of the frogmouth catfish (or the chaca chaca) cfc says that it was one of the only fish that he couldnt convert to frozen foods. Fair enough, he has had to feed a couple of all the fish hes ever had feeder fish, but imagine how many predatory fish hes had in that time, a few is hardly any at all, especially considering the fish that he keeps are the ones that are considered to "need" feeder fish a few is hardly any and to the average FW fishkeeper i would be suprised if they kept one or two fish that actually needed feeder fish in their whole lifetime.

 

[Arfie]

It's a tough one, I wouldn't like to feed live fish to another fish, therefore I would never keep a predatory fish that would only eat live foods. But I'm a bit of a hypocrite as I have no problem feeding live worms IF I kept a fish that would only eat other live fish then I would obviously do what was needed to keep my pet healthy and happy

The argument of "they eat them in the wild" doesn't stack up for me wild cats and dogs will eat small rodents and birds, are there any cat or dog owners on here that feed live mice or rabbits to their cats or dogs

Arfie

 

[jayjay]

The says something alone the lines of you cannot feed vertebrates to other animals if they will suffer pain. I'd love to see how they judge the pain bit. If it's swallowed whole there is no problem I believe on the law side of things.

I am not against the use of feeder fish, but I'd only use home bred, disease free, well raised fish, that aren't minnows or goldfish.

My fish do quite often get home raised fry that have managed to survive in my tanks. I do not believe in all this nature stuff however, when do you see goldfish in the Amazon? etc. Natural instinct it may be, but it's still not natural, a lot of predatory fish eat dead things in the wild as well, they don't live off just live fish.

Fish that cannot be weaned onto dead food, should of course be given live food. Though things like piranha, Oscars etc. that will nearly aways take dead food/prepared foods, then I think it is pointless to feed live fish to them. Feed them the odd fry culls but no more.

Also they is no need for live food, for quality fish, as manufactured foods have been developed for years to be great for the fishes dietary needs.

If we were doing everything naturally for our fish, shouldn't we have whole ecosystem tanks? Also we'd need to feed our most of the fish we have to other fish, to keep it natural.

 

[OohFeeshy]

If fed correctly, it doesn't bother me. By correctly I mean, for instance, correctly sized (not the stupid 5" goldfish fed to 6" pirahnas you see occasionally), nutritionally balanced (a variety of species fed who have been fed good diets, ideally enriched with nutrients the predators may miss out on, for instance from vegetables), disease free, etc. A lot of the time, the fish in question won't feel 'frightened' or similar- the fish should be small enough to be eaten in one go, and especially with ambush predators, they won't know what's hit them. My delhezi has eaten many a live fish- not that I've intentionally fed, the little git is very predatory (at 5" long he ate a 2.5" pike cichlid....)- and they certainly seemed to increase his growth rate vs. when eating pellets, prawns etc. alone, and he was much more active. The prey in question didn't seem overly bothered their peers were being eaten- so unbothered I didn't even notice some had gone! I caught him eating one once, straight down. What do you think the fish that went into making flakes, pellets and frozen lance etc. went through? You can be, if not processed alive, they probably suffocated to death- certainly not preferable to a quick gulp. Fry certainly are good food for any type of fish- again, nutrition, but also stimulation for the hunter.

EDIT- although Arfie is right about people not feeding cats live mice, you don't exactly get wild caught cats A huge proportion of fish are wild caught, which although it still doesn't support that arguement, does add a bit more credibility to it.

 

[LisaLQ]

I agree with Tokis, completely disagree with the "but it's natural" argument though Dan - it's not natural at all.

I do understand there are some fish who wont eat prepared food, certain wild caught predators - but it should least be attempted. Oscars and the like do not need live fish, usually the only people who deliberately do this are those who like to watch for the "fun" aspect (predominantly teen males lol).

However, I do have platies and angels in my planted tank, and dont complain when the baby numbers are kept down (I'm assuming by the angels - but it could be any of the other community fish in there too). At least they have a place to hide and get the chance of growing up - and if they were snaffled, it would be quick.

But feeding a goldfish to an oscar isn't natural. It's McDonalds - all bulk and no nutrition, and how many goldfish do you see swimming round the amazon? In the wild there is a chance of escape, it's natural selection - usually the weak getting eaten, the healthy getting away. Nowt natural about sticking a 6" goldie in with an oscar/piranha. If you ask me, it's 99% entertainment for the people who do it - and if that's the case, they should get a robopet and stop playing god with live creatures.

Incidentally, there's been loads of topics with this question before, one recently - and the "dont fall out with me or each other" theory doesn't wash with me - the topic's intended to cause debate - which will in sensitive issues like this lead to bickering and the thread being closed. If you wanted the opinions of the majority - a quick search of the forums would have brought up the same kind of thread in multiple - you could have just read those

 

[Gatorbait]

Fish that cannot be weaned onto dead food, should of course be given live food. Though things like piranha, Oscars etc. that will nearly aways take dead food/prepared foods, then I think it is pointless to feed live fish to them. Feed them the odd fry culls but no more.

Also they is no need for live food, for quality fish, as manufactured foods have been developed for years to be great for the fishes dietary needs.

Piranha's don't always take dead foods, especially S. rhombeus, so that's not exactly true. If he would eat frozen foods right now I'd fed that as it's much easier for me.

I don't like feeding feeder fish and I certainly get no enjoyment from it since I won't watch it.

 

[jayjay]

I should of been more specific referring to piranha; I was talking about nattereri. Though eventually you should get it on dead, even try feeding by the use of a feeding stick or string, to make say a lance fish look alive.

I was personally interested in getting and still am interested in getting a Chaca chaca, though I'm having trouble getting one. They will normally only take live food and I've only heard of a few people getting them to take dead. So if I had to feed live fish, to keep a fish I wanted then yes I would do it.

 

[Dany]

illegal, give us the details of any shop that does that Dany LOL

not being silly Dany, honestly, its illegal mate, bit late in the day to prove it mate, but rest assured its illegal, read a billion threads on this!

its illegal? im screwed.

Anyways

QUOTE
but in reality, it is nature.


but it really isnt, keeping fish in an aquarium in a country that they shouldnt "naturally" be in isnt natural, breeding fish so that they have desirable characteristics like ling flowing fins or specific colours isnt natural.

in my oppinion it is pretty irresponsible as a fishowner to try and feed predatory fishes dead or frozen fishes. These fishes although they may accept dead foods, it is their nature to hunt and be predatorios. (spelling).
i dont believe that it is correct for fish to be gentetically modified interbred or hybridized and no, this is not natural.
A good fish onwer and a responsible one, would be one who would not purchase fish knowing that they are predatory, why bother with natural surroundings trying to mimic natural habitat knowing that their diet will be comprimised? why not go with bright pink gravel with the bubble shark, painted castle and cyramic skull?

if a fish is to be kept in captivity, its surrounding should be naturally mimiced and it diet also, and not comprimised because their irresponsible owner finds the thought distastful. If you find such a thought distastful obgligate piscavors are not for you.

 

[Gatorbait]

I should of been more specific referring to piranha; I was talking about nattereri. Though eventually you should get it on dead, even try feeding by the use of a feeding stick or string, to make say a lance fish look alive.

I was personally interested in getting and still am interested in getting a Chaca chaca, though I'm having trouble getting one. They will normally only take live food and I've only heard of a few people getting them to take dead. So if I had to feed live fish, to keep a fish I wanted then yes I would do it.

Oh ok I misunderstood then. I thought you and Lisa were coming down on me for feeding live foods to my rhom, when I don't have much of a choice for a while.

I agree, the Pygo's are very easy to change over to a non-live food, ime.

 

[LisaLQ]

No Gaitorbait - I appreciate some fish wont take prepared food, it's the average twits giving fish that would be perfectly happy without live food, live food, that to me is wrong.

I do agree with one thing Dan says - and that is, if we cant give them what they need we shouldn't keep them. In theory that means if we cant let them pick and choose their own meal from multiple (and natural ie. relevent feeder species), and they wont take prepared, then maybe it would be more ethical to leave them in the wild.

I dont see how putting a fish in a glass tank, throwing in a goldfish now and again and watching it eat it is anywhere near giving them a natural environment. But then again I'm not so hypocritical as to say that my fish do get a natural environment either. I just think the argument is pointless as it's not natural, why argue that it is?

Had someone been saying they gave their oscars insects to mimic their diet in the wild rather than 5" goldfish, that might have been different...

 

[Dany]

i think we need a poll.

But feeding a goldfish to an oscar isn't natural. It's McDonalds - all bulk and no nutrition, and how many goldfish do you see swimming round the amazon? In the wild there is a chance of escape, it's natural selection

i appoligize, i do not agree with the fact that some people feed Large goldfish to phiranha sinario as we have all seen, My view point is that if a fish is to be kept in captivity its natural surroundings, diet etc should be mimiced to the most accurate degree possible. i am compleatly against the idea of people feeding dozens of feeder fishes for the pleasure, but i think for fish such as snakeheads, some predatory catfish etc, some live food should be included in its diet.
Dan

I dont see how putting a fish in a glass tank, throwing in a goldfish now and again and watching it eat it is anywhere near giving them a natural environment. But then again I'm not so hypocritical as to say that my fish do get a natural environment either. I just think the argument is pointless as it's not natural, why argue that it is?

Had someone been saying they gave their oscars insects to mimic their diet in the wild rather than 5" goldfish, that might have been different...

i never said that, and i, have the same viewpoint on the topic as yourself.

 

[Gatorbait]

I'm sorry, Lisa. I totally misunderstood you guys. Maybe it's the guilty conscience thing of having to right now when I don't particularly want to.

I'm the biggest wimp piranha owner there is, most likely. I love piranha's because of the way they move so slowly around the tank. Like a shark almost. That relaxes me as fast moving fish tend to stress me out when watching. But I hate having to see them eat other fish, especially when he goes without for a day or two and I add new ones. He just goes off and kills some just for the sake of killing because he doesn't eat all of what he bites. So I try to keep them in there and add new ones before the old ones are gone but then it's harder to get him to eat raw shrimp etc so it's a delicate balancing act I must do. I try so hard to get my fish away from live foods that I felt badly that someone may think I enjoy this. I enjoy the fish but not that part of it.

S. rhombeus has only been bred in captivity once as far as I know, so all these rhoms are wild-caught, which makes it a bit difficult at times to ween them.

Thank you for explaining it for me so I better understood you, though.

 

[jayjay]

I would seriously consider myself strongly irresponsible then. That my fish have a safe, disease free food source, that has been catered to my fishes needs, in the form of prepared foods. Instead of feeding my Senegal bichir for example, live African dwarf frogs.

Ah Gatorbait, I do have no problem with the use of live food, if your at least trying to wean them off at some point. So I do find it fine for you to use live foods.

 

[t1tanrush]

No Gaitorbait - I appreciate some fish wont take prepared food, it's the average twits giving fish that would be perfectly happy without live food, live food, that to me is wrong.
Yea, because I feed my ACF minnows I'm a twit. By putting in large quanaties of minnows I can rest assured knowing she can eat what she wants, then leave the rest for when she is hungry again. With pellets who knows how many she wants to eat, and the ones she doesn't, if they will sink and rot. Feeding live food is more practical in some cases.
I do agree with one thing Dan says - and that is, if we cant give them what they need we shouldn't keep them. In theory that means if we cant let them pick and choose their own meal from multiple (and natural ie. relevent feeder species), and they wont take prepared, then maybe it would be more ethical to leave them in the wild.
Then we really shouldn't be keeping NEAR as many fish as we do in this hobby?
I dont see how putting a fish in a glass tank, throwing in a goldfish now and again and watching it eat it is anywhere near giving them a natural environment. But then again I'm not so hypocritical as to say that my fish do get a natural environment either. I just think the argument is pointless as it's not natural, why argue that it is?

Had someone been saying they gave their oscars insects to mimic their diet in the wild rather than 5" goldfish, that might have been different...
Does an oscar occasionally eat a fish in the wild? Yes. Its not like the person is throwing in 2 dozen fish a week for the oscar. One fish now and then mimics what it might naturally come across. Yea, it can't escape, but neither can the injured fish it eats. Both ways it ends up eating a single fish. The fish in the tank, just got unlucky.

 

[Gatorbait]

i think we need a poll.

If you have a poll, I would choose I'm for live feeding if others choose but not for me after I ween them. As long as the fish that is being fed isn't too large where he suffers. To each their own if it helps their fish survive.