Hillstream Loaches And Breeding

[MacZ]

One can argue that we have in fact done the animal a favor even if providing a diminished lifespan and health, Fish in stores are often stressed and the store does not provide a proper long term environment for them.

Fish in stores rarely stay there longer than a few weeks. A Platy or a Mikrogeophagus are usually sold within 2 weeks after delivery to the store. Ask Eddy, he worked in stores for years.

And Unlike a wild environment there are no predators, droughts, and food shortages in an aquarium.

Neglectful owners, just as overzealous tank cleaners and constant overmedication, can also shorten a captive fishes life. Also there are many domestic fish that would not survive in the wild in the first place. E.g. domestic bettas. Man made, man responsibility.

In concluding this argument we can see that fish in aquarium conditions provided their owner is a diligent one get much better lives even if the conditions are sub optimal, the apparent.

Yeah... for every responsible fishkeeper there are just as many people that don't care and just want to own a certain fish, no matter what. Have you ever spent some time at a fish store just listening and observing?

Legally that animal is one's own property.

Does it make this any better? It's not an excuse for neglect and animal cruelty. Which can be reported and punished in the EU, btw. We look at this very differently here. Obviously.

And I would say that this individual animal does not posses moral personhood, as such personhood must be consistient if we deem a simple fish deserving of complete moral consideration then we ought to consider fishing a genocide, natural hunting murder, and the separation of fry from a species that parents it's offspring a kidnapping.

If you go for ultimate consequence, yes.

As seen here it is not immoral to do so as these fishes do not posses true autonomy, they are not moral persons so it is not a question of morality that can be asked here.

It can very much be asked. As the animals we keep are our responsibility. And responsible fishkeeping includes best possible conditions, so any compromise on that caused by keeping specialized species in unspecific conditions is out.

One could even apply this to the dog, again moral consideration would grant it to us to consider the cattle, pig, and lamb industries a genocide, so one must if they belive dogs deserve moral consideration find a criterion that grants it to them but not to the common domestic mammals we consume regularly.

One could, but that's not the point here. This is bordering into whataboutism territory.
Also, I'm vegetarian, leaning heavily towards veganism. And it's not even out of considerations of animal welfare but sustainability and environment protection reasons. Meat production is one of our biggest problems.

 

[Memeboi]

But why keep them in sub-optimal conditions?

Well this is getting rather philosophical, but no fish keeper can deny that fish are capable of feeling stress and discomfort.

Hunting for subsistence is one thing, that is a natural behaviour for humans. Hunting for trophies is wrong in my opinion.

1. If one cannot provide optimal condtions, than it makes sense to do a best, as MacZ pointed out, many people do not care enough about the fish, and i would say this forum is really quite a hotspot of responsible fishkeeping.
Sub-Optimal care is perfered to the complete lack of a s*** some people give their fish.
2. Getting philisophical was honestly something intended, I philosophize in an amateur capacity, and trying to find an ethic of fishkeeping via the socratic method is somthing I view as nessesary.
2.5 Fish are capable of feeling stress and phisical discorfort, In just the same capacity as an ameboea turns into it's cystic form when exposed to stress, it is stress in the phiscal form, and can also express itself in the logical nexus of the individual, However, this does not denot an ability to suffer in this individual.
3. If one was to put humans in a room with absolutley nothing to eat, they after a while would probably find food composed of the flesh of others, they would resort to cannibalism, A crime, especially since it is also murder.
Same applies to animals. Zaroff's actions of hunting humans for sport in ''The Most Dangerous Game'' Would be questionably more moral, and certainly not any less illegal if he was hunting for subsistence.

 

[MacZ]

1. If one cannot provide optimal condtions, than it makes sense to do a best, as MacZ pointed out, many people do not care enough about the fish, and i would say this forum is really quite a hotspot of responsible fishkeeping.
Sub-Optimal care is perfered to the complete lack of a s*** some people give their fish.

You misunderstood. My stance on that is to not keep a certain fish in the first place if you can't provide optimal conditions. And if someone buys a fish and is neither able or willing to change conditions to the fishes improvement asap, returning the fish is the responsible thing to do. That way it gets a second chance for an optimal home.

2. Getting philisophical was honestly something intended, I philosophize in an amateur capacity, and trying to find an ethic of fishkeeping via the socratic method is somthing I view as nessesary.

You might want to read up on the life of Socrates. Especially towards his end.

I'm leaving the discussion. Bye.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

My stance on that is to not keep a certain fish in the first place if you can't provide optimal conditions.

That would be the main one for me. Find fish that thrive in the conditions you can provide. As an example I'm a rainwater user, but our rainwater has some carbonate hardness, so no "black-water" fish for me.

I'm going to keep small volume (40 - 70 litres) <"extremely "weedy" tanks">, so I need small fish that can go about their natural behaviour in that type of tank, with <"limited intervention"> on my part and I'm mainly going to <"feed live food">.

If I wanted to keep Sewellia lineolata, it would be ,<"in a "river-flow" tank"> with flattened cobbles etc.

cheers Darrel

 

[anewbie]

Hi all,

That would be the main one for me. Find fish that thrive in the conditions you can provide. As an example I'm a rainwater user, but our rainwater has some carbonate hardness, so no "black-water" fish for me.

I'm going to keep small volume (40 - 70 litres) <"extremely "weedy" tanks">, so I need small fish that can go about their natural behaviour in that type of tank, with <"limited intervention"> on my part and I'm mainly going to <"feed live food">.

If I wanted to keep Sewellia lineolata, it would be ,<"in a "river-flow" tank"> with flattened cobbles etc.

cheers Darrel

I think 'optimal' is too strong of a word. For example Mike has indicate at times he uses larger substrate which is sub-optimal does that mean he has become a bad fish keeper. Also sometimes the aquarium current is a little stronger or a little weaker than 'optimal' does that make it unacceptable. Of course we are entering a slippery slope because how much sub-optimal is too non-optimal. None the less i suspect that very people truly keep fishes in 'optimal' conditions. And lets face it 'natural' condition are a long ways from optimal in many cases after all in nature many of these fishes have very short life span; so should all fishes in non-optimal condition be removed from their natural non-optimal conditions?

Having said that I do think if you are going to keep fishes some effort should be made to provide fishes a 'good' environment (whatever good means) and while some experimental condition should be accepted there are of course cases where pushing the limit is asking for trouble.

While most of the folks who believe in 'optimal' condition I am one to try mixing apisto with (for example) pygmy cory and kuhli loaches to see how it works out and sometimes we discover that it actually works better than expected (even if it is non-optimal); but then again i am not a very good fish keeper (which i freely admit); but even then combination which i know to be a disaster i try to avoid as i'm not trying to harm or stress the fishes in excess and i do want them to have a good life span (and in case you are wondering i have found both the smaller kuhli (shefordi pangio) and pygmy both want to avoid conflict and avoid regions of the tank where conflict might exist.

 

[Mike Wise]

Memeboi said:

Legally that animal is one's own property.

The difference between my idea of keeping fish and yours is that I don't consider them property. When I bring any living creature into my care I consider them my responsibility - not my property. That means taking care of it to the best of my ability. What is legal and what is ethical are two different things, just my philosophy.