Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
@JasP Can you give me 1 (and only 1) example there overfishing for the aquarium trade has been shown? I know the full story about the Bangai cardinal so you do not need to mention that species. You are allowed to take with freshwater species
Sincerly Lasse
Hi, I beleive the new batch of Flames are a lot bigger. whether we see any in the UK is another question. Although TMC are making a real effort with regards Captive Bred availability.
Cyanide fishing was a huge problem where I live too. Thankfully its been illegal for decades now.I once met a guy who used to keep morish idols. He would buy, one care for it six months, and than it would die. He had wondered why they were dying, seeing he was doing everything right. He did a bit of research and found out that they had cyanide poisoning. This is caused by people using cyanide to catch fish in the ocean, and then it stays in the fish and kills them later on. This is why i’m slightly nervous about buying fish that are from the ocean
The wild vs captive bred argument has some interesting trade-offs. Wild caught fish if caught sustainably and properly provide incentive for people to conserve the reef. However captive bred fish are more ethical for alot of people and have less health issues from strees or disease.
I think wild caught fish are fine as long as good practices are used. However corals are so easy to propagate that I have a hare time believing wild coral specimens are necessary.
These are all great points. However I know little about fish keeping since I only have one fish. I have never even bought medications or set up a qt.Since I like playing devils advocate for a change and whilst i don't necessarily disagree, to get this interesting topic flowing, are captive bred fish more ethical? Just because they haven't come from the wild shouldn't make keeping them any different. Any animal has the same rights if your strictly being ethical and its like saying that a tiger raised in a zoo is fine but one brought in is not. Just because it hasn't been free doesn't mean its any less cruel (and again just playing the devil, I know fish and intelligent mammals are not the same thing and its not really fair to compare them but....)
Do captive bred species have less health problems? I don't think you'd hear anyone argue that they come in with less disease due to the conditions in which they are raised but that doesn't mean they are more resistant. I'd actually argue the opposite. When I was a kid I was allowed to be mucky, so puddles were splashed in, I was covered in mud and investigated everything meaning my immune system was developed from introduction to bacteria and pathogens. When these fish are raised they don't come into contact with diseases so build up no immunity. In my time running a shop we had problems with a couple of batches of tank raised clowns and after lots of investigation we discovered it was because the clowns were raised with antibiotics. That may have been good for the suppliers but not so great when we had to introduce them to other species.
Wilds on the other hand will have lived a life where the are exposed to everything. The chain from sea to tank may have more disease issues but it doesn't make them more of a problem in all cases.
For stress i'm not sure how you would quantify this. I've read research on tangs where cortisol levels, the stress hormone, was monitored and it showed that even in small tanks this level dropped quickly after introduction meanings it fair to assume it wasn't overly stressed. I'm not sure why captive bred specimens would have lower stress compared to their wild counterparts after a short time in a tank. It takes a long time for natural instincts to fade so captive bred fish will behave similarly to the wild. As an example my captive bred dottybacks and clowns used to shoal when they were small which wouldn't happen in the wild as they wouldn't ever meet in such large numbers, but they quickly matured and began to beat all hell out of each other which would cause stress I'm sure. I'd also bet that a group of those captive bred yellow tangs would have similar aggression towards one another than a wild group.
These are all great points. However I know little about fish keeping since I only have one fish. I have never even bought medications or set up a qt.
People regard captive bred as more ethical due to the fact that the animal ever experienced the drop in quality of life associated with being put in captivity. Despite my past point I believe its important to move onto captive bred fish. The oceans are getting less healthy by the day it seems. At least most wild corals are collected by snipping off a piece of a larger colony.
@mort
But there is one very good thing with farmed fish – they are us to eat dead food. I have always loved pipefishes but I have never had the time to cultivate artemia or other pods in order to slowly adapt them to dead food. Therefore – I have not try to get them. 2 weeks ago. I got 2 farmed pipefish – small but they eat and it seems like they will survive in my aquaria.
Sincerely Lasse
I hope we continue the quality if the species we rear. Many freshwater fish habe had some terrible mutations bred into their lineages. Im always worried the same will happen to saltwater.Even with your limited experience of fish your views are just as important as anyone elses and I think you summed up what the majority of people believe perfectly.
Again though do fish have a drop in quality of life? It's hard to answer that question because of anthropomorphism. Does a fish really care it's trapped in a tank? In a tank you get a life without predators, easily found food etc making life easier than on the reef. I do understand your point and it's one I actually share. Ethically captive bred fish sit much better on the conscience.
I also believe that captive bred fish should be an aim but only if the quality of the species is maintained. There is no point being able to mass produce a far inferior specimen as it's not a way of preserving the species in my opinion. I also believe that we need to gain the knowledge of how to keep and breed these fish whilst we can as we may learn new things about how they cope with change and promote new ways of conserving them.
I hope we continue the quality if the species we rear. Many freshwater fish habe had some terrible mutations bred into their lineages. Im always worried the same will happen to saltwater.
I feel like fish breeding in general has gone the way of dog breeding where healthy stock is secondary to certain desirable traits. I feel like sectioning off areas away from tourists would ensure more healthy reefs. They do nothing but distrupt the wildlife and damage corals.Already has. While some people love designer clowns, they are not natural at all, though the patterns are not what I take issue with. They are so inbred, that most clownfish, even the standard pattern ocellaris, that you find in stores are deformed. Head shaped wrong, huge under or over bite..etc etc.
I also agree with OP, I think a balance of captive bred and sustainable fishing would be great. To those that would argue that captive is the only way to go because it's cruel to take a fish off the reef, I wonder, why is a captive bred fish any less "captive" than a wild fish? If you take two lions from the wild, mate them, take the cub and put it in a pen, does it feel any different from a cub you take from the wild and then put it in a pen? I have around 50% captive bred fish, and I would love more, but eliminating wild caught altogether seems a bit drastic. I love my fish, and I definitely am guilty of anthropomorphism saying an fish is "happier" in one place than in another is a huge stretch with absolutely no science behind it.
I also wouldn't discount local issues. Reef conservation is a huge issue, and in places where locals are taught that they must preserve the reef not just for the environment, but also for the livelihood and the prosperity of the county, the reefs are always in better conditions. People are going to want to preserve something that impacts them directly, if you tell them to conserve something just for the hell of it, with no return on their own work, it doesn't work out so well. I've been diving all over the world in South East Asia, French Polynesia, South Pacific, Indian Ocean, America and Australia, and without a doubt, the areas where there was a direct positive economic impact that could be seen from reef preservation to the local population always always always had healthier and more diverse reefs.
Just as an aside, I've also been to all the main Hawaiian islands, and most of the less touristy areas have great snorkeling and good reefs. This has of course declined in the last 15 years, due to increased tourism. Absolutely not due to fishing for ornamental marine trade. Hanauma Bay was touted as one of the best spots around for years, well it's completely dead now and has been for over a decade, all due to tourism. All you can see here now is droves of tangs eating all the algae from dead reef. I wonder what the effect of the ornamental marine trade actually is with regards to activism to save reefs? I'm willing to bet that those that become interested in reef tanks and marine fish, and truly take it as a hobby, are magnitudes more likely to become reef conservationists in some way, shape or form. Perhaps in that respect, the hobby is actually better for the reefs than it is worse. Perhaps not...who knows.
Already has. While some people love designer clowns, they are not natural at all, though the patterns are not what I take issue with. They are so inbred, that most clownfish, even the standard pattern ocellaris, that you find in stores are deformed. Head shaped wrong, huge under or over bite..etc etc.
You mean like this?I feel like fish breeding in general has gone the way of dog breeding where healthy stock is secondary to certain desirable traits. I feel like sectioning off areas away from tourists would ensure more healthy reefs. They do nothing but distrupt the wildlife and damage corals.
Another negative subject that comes up is Lack of Immunity to disease. Once again I believe a very misunderstood topic. First of all comparing fish immune systems to that of mammals is very misleading. Fish have a very particular system of immune defense. The vast majority of this immunity is passed on through genetics. It is passed on by their parents through thousands of years of evolution, not simply by being exposed to infection and disease to test out who is the strongest. This aspect of biology is far toO complicated for a novice like myself to disseminate here. Therefore I have included the following link to an excellent article of which I had come across the abstract to. The paper is by
JAQUELINE D. BILLER-TAKAHASHI and ELISABETH C. URBINAT, Titled Fish Immunology. The modification and manipulation of the innate immune system:
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652014000301484
. I have been working with wild and bred Lake Tanganyika and Lake Malawi chiclids to for many years - i have not seen any differences in aggressions even after 3 or more generations.Captive Bred Fish show less aggression to conspecifics
I cannot stand when people breed deformities into animals. YikesYou mean like this?
I agree.