What do you see in the new strain of long fin bristlenoses that makes them desirable?
Jools
Long Fin Ancistrus
-
Jools
- Expert
- Posts: 16141
- Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 15:25
- My articles: 198
- My images: 948
- My catfish: 237
- My cats species list: 87 (i:237, k:1)
- My BLogs: 7 (i:10, p:202)
- My Wishlist: 23
- Spotted: 450
- Location 1: Middle Earth,
- Location 2: Scotland
- Interests: All things aquatic, Sci-Fi, photography and travel. Oh, and beer.
- Contact:
Owner, AquaticRepublic.com, PlanetCatfish.com & ZebraPleco.com. Please consider donating towards this site's running costs.
-
Elspeth
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 01 Mar 2004, 19:47
- My cats species list: 2 (i:0, k:0)
- Location 1: Kansas City, Missouri
Jools, although the question wasn't directed at me, would you be interested in a newbie's answer to it? Simply put, they look very fine. Well, personally, I would prefer someting in between the normal fin length and the pictures I've seen of veiltails; it seems a bit excessive. But I'm sure the dramatic looks are what catches the attention of most people. I would love to see one of these long-fins in motion!
I have some questions for you and the other experienced catfish people here, in return. I gather that veiltails are at best controversial and at worst, in the eyes of many, a very very very bad thing. Why is this? Does the long finnage, or something associated with the mutation I assume produced it, give the fish problems? Is it purely an aesthetic matter, or something deeper?
I have some questions for you and the other experienced catfish people here, in return. I gather that veiltails are at best controversial and at worst, in the eyes of many, a very very very bad thing. Why is this? Does the long finnage, or something associated with the mutation I assume produced it, give the fish problems? Is it purely an aesthetic matter, or something deeper?
-
Jools
- Expert
- Posts: 16141
- Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 15:25
- My articles: 198
- My images: 948
- My catfish: 237
- My cats species list: 87 (i:237, k:1)
- My BLogs: 7 (i:10, p:202)
- My Wishlist: 23
- Spotted: 450
- Location 1: Middle Earth,
- Location 2: Scotland
- Interests: All things aquatic, Sci-Fi, photography and travel. Oh, and beer.
- Contact:
Elspeth,
Thanks for answering, I am genuinely interested as I have become so specialised in the fish I keep that I forget that I once bought an Oscar without really thinking about housing it long term. I am also trying to pull together a FAQ on the subject generally as it certainly is one that raises temperatures all around.
Anyway, to put forward my (and thus planetcatfishes) view on it, breeding for traits is OK, if not to people's taste, as long as it doesn't affect the fishes vitality or produces deformed fish. So, albino corys or bristlenoses, for example don't offend anyone really (they are not to many folks tastes, but some prefer them). Fair enough, bubble eye goldfish and the like aren't cool. I know they have been around for centuries and there is not little skill in their production, but they are not seen as a positive way forward for our hobby.
Veiltail Ancistrus are right in the middle and the current focus of interest, long fins may not hamper them in normal aquarium life. I prefer the natural forms, but I also greatly admire other loricariids that are naturally occuring and have considerably longer fins and look equally ungainly. So, the jury is out on these fish. My personal view is that the fins do hamper the fish but not greatly. Maybe I would agree with you and say that if they were a bit shorter they might be less offensive to my eyes.
Cross breeding, hybridization and indeed the use of genetics in manipulating or producing "new livestock products" for the aquarium trade is (at least in the majorities) most people agree on being just plain too far down the road of exploitation. That said, many of the commonly available farm raised aquarium catfishes may be hybridized to some extent - at least it is fair to say, i think, that they differ noticable from the naturally occuring form.
Anyway, I now have more words for my FAQ...
Jools
Thanks for answering, I am genuinely interested as I have become so specialised in the fish I keep that I forget that I once bought an Oscar without really thinking about housing it long term. I am also trying to pull together a FAQ on the subject generally as it certainly is one that raises temperatures all around.
Anyway, to put forward my (and thus planetcatfishes) view on it, breeding for traits is OK, if not to people's taste, as long as it doesn't affect the fishes vitality or produces deformed fish. So, albino corys or bristlenoses, for example don't offend anyone really (they are not to many folks tastes, but some prefer them). Fair enough, bubble eye goldfish and the like aren't cool. I know they have been around for centuries and there is not little skill in their production, but they are not seen as a positive way forward for our hobby.
Veiltail Ancistrus are right in the middle and the current focus of interest, long fins may not hamper them in normal aquarium life. I prefer the natural forms, but I also greatly admire other loricariids that are naturally occuring and have considerably longer fins and look equally ungainly. So, the jury is out on these fish. My personal view is that the fins do hamper the fish but not greatly. Maybe I would agree with you and say that if they were a bit shorter they might be less offensive to my eyes.
Cross breeding, hybridization and indeed the use of genetics in manipulating or producing "new livestock products" for the aquarium trade is (at least in the majorities) most people agree on being just plain too far down the road of exploitation. That said, many of the commonly available farm raised aquarium catfishes may be hybridized to some extent - at least it is fair to say, i think, that they differ noticable from the naturally occuring form.
Anyway, I now have more words for my FAQ...
Jools
Owner, AquaticRepublic.com, PlanetCatfish.com & ZebraPleco.com. Please consider donating towards this site's running costs.
-
pturley
- Posts: 833
- Joined: 08 Jul 2003, 23:11
- I've donated: $66.00!
- My articles: 2
- My images: 16
- My cats species list: 1 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 8
- Location 1: Cleveland, Ohio USA
This can quickly turn into a discussion for another forum but here goes. (And perhaps likely should.)
The rumor I had heard regarding the Veiltail Ancistrus is that it is an induced mutation that originated in a former Soviet block country (starts with a Cz). The mutation was supposively induced by exposure to high doses raditation. BTW: By what I have heard as was the Albino form as well!
This is not a new trick. Scientists studying genetics have used this for years to create "marker" types of mutations in model organisms. The cost is that vast numbers of culls are used to isolate one such marker. Should the animal model be a fruit fly, nematode worm, or a plant, this is less of a concern. Add to that, those sacrificed are done so in the the interest of science.
In this case, this was done for purely monatary reasons (for an ornamental animal). This is where I have a problem with this. The sheer fact of the matter is, nature has provided a vast array of diverse forms for us to view, study and learn from. Most of these, we have never seen in the Aquarium hobby to date. IMO We don't need additional forms beyond those found in nature. BTW: I have nothing against naturally occuring mutants, they offer allot more to learn than these induced ones.
Goldfishes, guppies and the like may be a different matter. (NOTE: This is why this likely needs to be moved to a different thread)
Dismiss this if you, will but please keep one thought in mind:
Catfishes, more than any other group of fishes we currently house in aquariums allow someone at our level, the hobbiest, to contribute to the body of scientific knowledge. Do you know if a Centromochulus perugea provided maternal parental care or not? I have heard conflicting reports and, if it ever gets settled it will likely be a hobbiest's observations (and hopefully videotape, hint, hint) that will confirm this. Another case in point: One of the references used by Jonathan Armbruster is the proposal of a theory for the evolution of the Rostral tenticules (his term) was a hobbiest article on the reproductive behavior of Ancistrus!
In my tanks at least, all I would be accomplishing by keeping mutant catfishes is muddying the waters from what I am trying to study.
EDIT: Wow, on second read that really sounds like a rant!
The rumor I had heard regarding the Veiltail Ancistrus is that it is an induced mutation that originated in a former Soviet block country (starts with a Cz). The mutation was supposively induced by exposure to high doses raditation. BTW: By what I have heard as was the Albino form as well!
This is not a new trick. Scientists studying genetics have used this for years to create "marker" types of mutations in model organisms. The cost is that vast numbers of culls are used to isolate one such marker. Should the animal model be a fruit fly, nematode worm, or a plant, this is less of a concern. Add to that, those sacrificed are done so in the the interest of science.
In this case, this was done for purely monatary reasons (for an ornamental animal). This is where I have a problem with this. The sheer fact of the matter is, nature has provided a vast array of diverse forms for us to view, study and learn from. Most of these, we have never seen in the Aquarium hobby to date. IMO We don't need additional forms beyond those found in nature. BTW: I have nothing against naturally occuring mutants, they offer allot more to learn than these induced ones.
Goldfishes, guppies and the like may be a different matter. (NOTE: This is why this likely needs to be moved to a different thread)
Dismiss this if you, will but please keep one thought in mind:
Catfishes, more than any other group of fishes we currently house in aquariums allow someone at our level, the hobbiest, to contribute to the body of scientific knowledge. Do you know if a Centromochulus perugea provided maternal parental care or not? I have heard conflicting reports and, if it ever gets settled it will likely be a hobbiest's observations (and hopefully videotape, hint, hint) that will confirm this. Another case in point: One of the references used by Jonathan Armbruster is the proposal of a theory for the evolution of the Rostral tenticules (his term) was a hobbiest article on the reproductive behavior of Ancistrus!
In my tanks at least, all I would be accomplishing by keeping mutant catfishes is muddying the waters from what I am trying to study.
EDIT: Wow, on second read that really sounds like a rant!
Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley
Paul E. Turley
-
Barbie
- Expert
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: 03 Jan 2003, 23:48
- I've donated: $360.00!
- My articles: 1
- My images: 15
- My catfish: 2
- My cats species list: 58 (i:2, k:0)
- Spotted: 8
- Location 1: Spokane, WA
- Location 2: USA
I split this topic off into the lori forum so more people could see and participate in the discussion. Here is a link to the last time the topic came up. Beware, 6 pages, hehe.
Barbie
Barbie
-
Chrysichthys
- Posts: 1331
- Joined: 09 Jan 2003, 17:22
- My images: 1
- My cats species list: 43 (i:0, k:0)
- Spotted: 1
- Location 1: Oxford U.K.
- Interests: catfish!
For what it's worth, I think every case of "man-made fish" (regardless of how they were produced) has to be dealt with individually by three criteria, which I will list in order of priority:
1) Is there a risk of the fish causing harm if released into the wild?
2) Does it experience suffering simply for being a living thing we created?
3) Is the customer being deceived or misled in buying it?
A good starting example is the Parrot cichlid, which arguably violates all three of my criteria.
1) Is there a risk of the fish causing harm if released into the wild?
2) Does it experience suffering simply for being a living thing we created?
3) Is the customer being deceived or misled in buying it?
A good starting example is the Parrot cichlid, which arguably violates all three of my criteria.
STOP AND SEARCH TO BE REPLACED WITH GOOD, OLD-FASHIONED VIOLENCE
(Daily Mash headline)
(Daily Mash headline)
-
Caol_ila
- Posts: 1281
- Joined: 02 Jan 2003, 12:09
- My images: 52
- Spotted: 23
- Location 1: Mainz, Germany
Hi!
I kinda like the three points but who decides if the fish is suffering? For some people putting fish in an aquarium would be suffering...
I think the classic catfish enthusiast isnt the typical longfin fish consumer. Ive always had the impression that we all kinda share the love for "archaic" looking fish. Like Hypancistrus zebra has become more of a fashion than a simple fish this might be the same. For most people a catfish has to eat algea or work as a cleanup crew.
I kinda like the three points but who decides if the fish is suffering? For some people putting fish in an aquarium would be suffering...
I think the classic catfish enthusiast isnt the typical longfin fish consumer. Ive always had the impression that we all kinda share the love for "archaic" looking fish. Like Hypancistrus zebra has become more of a fashion than a simple fish this might be the same. For most people a catfish has to eat algea or work as a cleanup crew.
cheers
Christian
Christian
-
Elspeth
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 01 Mar 2004, 19:47
- My cats species list: 2 (i:0, k:0)
- Location 1: Kansas City, Missouri
Well, I must say I'm glad I asked! The responses have been interesting and educational.
Chrysichthys, I agree your points two and three. Suffering could be considered differently by different people, but surely we'd all agree on, say, painted fish. As a goldfish fancier, I would also point out that one of the things fishkeepers need to consider -- and too often do not -- is what specific environment and care is needed for fish bred for the aquarium and not the wild. Using goldies as an example, this runs the gamut from the dead simple (separate more and less agile types) to a good deal further than your average impluse fish-buyer is willing to go (I don't think anyone should get an oranda or lionhead unless they are prepared to trim the headgrowth eventually).
Why not one? First, selective breeding for domestication does not tend to yeild characteristics that are advantages in the wild. Even with "natural" fishes -- lines that breed often and easily in tanks, or in fish farms, could well be adapting to tank conditions and not breed as easily in the wild as their wild-bred counterparts. Second, causing harm if released into the wild is a major issue with fish in general (and indeed with other imported animals). Let's face it, we all know fish are released often when they outgrow their tanks or simply aren't wanted anymore -- but we all know that this is generally a very bad thing. A perfectly natural and unaltered species that happens to be well adapted for an environment far from home into which it is released can do a lot of damage.
I especially like your third point. Paul points out that fish like the veiltail ancistrus don't offer the chance to observe and report on the natural behavior and form of a species. I understand the appeal, and I think this is a very valid approach to fishkeeping. I also understand the appeal of pretty, or interesting-looking (and/or interesting-behaving!) fish kept not for study but purely for ornament and entertainment.
But it is important to understand what you have, and how it fits into your fishkeeping goals. If you study your fish and thought you had a natural long-tailed variety, you would be misled. Okay, Paul is probably too sharp for that, but there are plenty of folks who aren't. If you study your fish, you want to know if you are dealing with an undescribed or underdescribed species, and hybrids not identified as such are also misleading.
So I think this point is perhaps the most important of all. Knowing whether you have a wild type (whether wild-caught or tank-bred) or an aquarium type, whether you have a hybrid or a naturally occuring species, AND knowing how the hybrid and aquarium types got that way -- that's absolutely necessary for the hobbyist to make his or her own decisions about whether the fishes origins or type are humane, and whether or not this is the type of fish s/he wants to keep.
And I do agree that most who love catfishes, probably like their archaic looks. I certainly do. But I also like color and refinement in the other type of fishes I keep. It's a bit strange to realise that these aren't mutually exclusive tastes.
Chrysichthys, I agree your points two and three. Suffering could be considered differently by different people, but surely we'd all agree on, say, painted fish. As a goldfish fancier, I would also point out that one of the things fishkeepers need to consider -- and too often do not -- is what specific environment and care is needed for fish bred for the aquarium and not the wild. Using goldies as an example, this runs the gamut from the dead simple (separate more and less agile types) to a good deal further than your average impluse fish-buyer is willing to go (I don't think anyone should get an oranda or lionhead unless they are prepared to trim the headgrowth eventually).
Why not one? First, selective breeding for domestication does not tend to yeild characteristics that are advantages in the wild. Even with "natural" fishes -- lines that breed often and easily in tanks, or in fish farms, could well be adapting to tank conditions and not breed as easily in the wild as their wild-bred counterparts. Second, causing harm if released into the wild is a major issue with fish in general (and indeed with other imported animals). Let's face it, we all know fish are released often when they outgrow their tanks or simply aren't wanted anymore -- but we all know that this is generally a very bad thing. A perfectly natural and unaltered species that happens to be well adapted for an environment far from home into which it is released can do a lot of damage.
I especially like your third point. Paul points out that fish like the veiltail ancistrus don't offer the chance to observe and report on the natural behavior and form of a species. I understand the appeal, and I think this is a very valid approach to fishkeeping. I also understand the appeal of pretty, or interesting-looking (and/or interesting-behaving!) fish kept not for study but purely for ornament and entertainment.
But it is important to understand what you have, and how it fits into your fishkeeping goals. If you study your fish and thought you had a natural long-tailed variety, you would be misled. Okay, Paul is probably too sharp for that, but there are plenty of folks who aren't. If you study your fish, you want to know if you are dealing with an undescribed or underdescribed species, and hybrids not identified as such are also misleading.
So I think this point is perhaps the most important of all. Knowing whether you have a wild type (whether wild-caught or tank-bred) or an aquarium type, whether you have a hybrid or a naturally occuring species, AND knowing how the hybrid and aquarium types got that way -- that's absolutely necessary for the hobbyist to make his or her own decisions about whether the fishes origins or type are humane, and whether or not this is the type of fish s/he wants to keep.
And I do agree that most who love catfishes, probably like their archaic looks. I certainly do. But I also like color and refinement in the other type of fishes I keep. It's a bit strange to realise that these aren't mutually exclusive tastes.
-
DeepFriedIctalurus
- Posts: 236
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 04:32
- My cats species list: 11 (i:0, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 1 (i:0)
- Location 2: Saginaw River basin, US
- Interests: anything powered by an internal combustion engine, non-feathered/furred pets, anti-ignorance activism
Money Jools.......money to help fund the breeding of many underappreciated species of course!
That's just an oversimplified answer though, I figured we could use one since 1 lowly fish can cause so much debate (I figured I'd read those 6 pages). I myself am completely fascinated by the diversity of evolution and there's no better animal to show this to you on a broader scale than fish, especially catfish. So I'm sure it's no surprise that I'd favor the natural forms, but on the other hand I do share a bit of the average person's amusement in anomalies.
I don't put forth any real effort or cash outlay for artificial varieties, whether selectivly bred pure species or not. On the other hand I do have a unusual taste for man and nature's accidents, whether they be genetic like short bodies, baby eyes & bent spines...or suffered injuries before I got them like my Rhamdia quelen which survived some severe piranha wounds and my Hypostomus & Botia which are missing an eye. To me, these fish lose their attraction when it's a bred-for trait...it detracts from their uniqueness and it's not like I'm providing a home for an otherwise unwanted fish anymore.
Hybrids come to me in about the same way, if they happen they happen...it's not gonna stop anytime soon. Personally I don't value them monetarily AT ALL, to me a hybrid is and always will be just a pet...not breeding stock or a participant in a show. That being said, I have a few African cich lid hybrids picked from accidental breedings that I happened to like. Did I kill the rest? No. Did I give them away as worthless filler for a cheap "mixed african" tank? Sure did. Will anyone think they're real species and try to breed & sell them? My bets are on No.
Thing is, the average fish buyer never wants to spend much but still wants a feeling of exclusivity with what they bought. This is easy with man-made varieties of fish obviously, because more often than not this means we can fill that preconceived notion of aquariums burned into our minds by a coral reef's gaudy colors and highly unusual shapes as we grew up. The other side of this is man's slightly juvenile and now primitive attraction to things just because we modified it, but this is an issue for society as a whole to deal with....far beyond the scope of any web forum I'd say.
No, I'm not, nor will I ever be a fan of fish bred for fickle "beauty" like fancy livebearers, goldfish, angels, discus or longfinned catfish...Sure, I don't really like the fancy goldfish the lady keeps but I've forgiven her for it..hehe But even she has reasonable disgust for the really handicapped breeds like bubbleeyes & headgrowth types (sorry, but we can't see the age of these breeds as validation for what they've become). Though many others can lead reasonably fulfilling lives in aquariums. In the end it takes all kinds and humans are a very vision-oriented creature, it's not like you do anything with the actual pet fish itself but look at it....I hope!
Anyway I do try to find the value in -humanely- modified fish novelties to some extent in catching the short attention spans out there, since they're here to stay and accessible to the masses. At the devestating loss of tankspace devoted to nature's versions, but it's something I'll have to live with. I just think a part of our fishkeeping should always be an appreciation for what's natural and a reasonable amount of apprehention for what isn't, with an extra helping of education from the experienced. There has to be a happy medium out there somewhere because the line between Joe Fishbuyer and a serious aquarists gets finer every day. Folks just have to know from early on that not every fish has to look like Nemo or a fancy {insert popular fish here} to be interesting.
Ok I've wasted enough of everyone's time, but I can only hope that my excessive observations & opinions have added to the subject in any way at all..
Tyler
That's just an oversimplified answer though, I figured we could use one since 1 lowly fish can cause so much debate (I figured I'd read those 6 pages). I myself am completely fascinated by the diversity of evolution and there's no better animal to show this to you on a broader scale than fish, especially catfish. So I'm sure it's no surprise that I'd favor the natural forms, but on the other hand I do share a bit of the average person's amusement in anomalies.
I don't put forth any real effort or cash outlay for artificial varieties, whether selectivly bred pure species or not. On the other hand I do have a unusual taste for man and nature's accidents, whether they be genetic like short bodies, baby eyes & bent spines...or suffered injuries before I got them like my Rhamdia quelen which survived some severe piranha wounds and my Hypostomus & Botia which are missing an eye. To me, these fish lose their attraction when it's a bred-for trait...it detracts from their uniqueness and it's not like I'm providing a home for an otherwise unwanted fish anymore.
Hybrids come to me in about the same way, if they happen they happen...it's not gonna stop anytime soon. Personally I don't value them monetarily AT ALL, to me a hybrid is and always will be just a pet...not breeding stock or a participant in a show. That being said, I have a few African cich lid hybrids picked from accidental breedings that I happened to like. Did I kill the rest? No. Did I give them away as worthless filler for a cheap "mixed african" tank? Sure did. Will anyone think they're real species and try to breed & sell them? My bets are on No.
Thing is, the average fish buyer never wants to spend much but still wants a feeling of exclusivity with what they bought. This is easy with man-made varieties of fish obviously, because more often than not this means we can fill that preconceived notion of aquariums burned into our minds by a coral reef's gaudy colors and highly unusual shapes as we grew up. The other side of this is man's slightly juvenile and now primitive attraction to things just because we modified it, but this is an issue for society as a whole to deal with....far beyond the scope of any web forum I'd say.
No, I'm not, nor will I ever be a fan of fish bred for fickle "beauty" like fancy livebearers, goldfish, angels, discus or longfinned catfish...Sure, I don't really like the fancy goldfish the lady keeps but I've forgiven her for it..hehe But even she has reasonable disgust for the really handicapped breeds like bubbleeyes & headgrowth types (sorry, but we can't see the age of these breeds as validation for what they've become). Though many others can lead reasonably fulfilling lives in aquariums. In the end it takes all kinds and humans are a very vision-oriented creature, it's not like you do anything with the actual pet fish itself but look at it....I hope!
Anyway I do try to find the value in -humanely- modified fish novelties to some extent in catching the short attention spans out there, since they're here to stay and accessible to the masses. At the devestating loss of tankspace devoted to nature's versions, but it's something I'll have to live with. I just think a part of our fishkeeping should always be an appreciation for what's natural and a reasonable amount of apprehention for what isn't, with an extra helping of education from the experienced. There has to be a happy medium out there somewhere because the line between Joe Fishbuyer and a serious aquarists gets finer every day. Folks just have to know from early on that not every fish has to look like Nemo or a fancy {insert popular fish here} to be interesting.
Ok I've wasted enough of everyone's time, but I can only hope that my excessive observations & opinions have added to the subject in any way at all..
Tyler
-
Elspeth
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 01 Mar 2004, 19:47
- My cats species list: 2 (i:0, k:0)
- Location 1: Kansas City, Missouri
Er... Gee Tyler, I hope you won't have to forgive me all over again, but there are folks who enjoy interacting with pet fish in more than simply visual ways. A trait shared by the admittedly "unnatural" orandas and chagoi (the most "natural" type of koi) is that both have the reputation for being unusually tame for their species. It's not a matter of swimming impariment; koi are strong, agile swimmers and in any case you don't hand-tame a goldfish by chasing it down and grabbing it any more than you teach Raphaels to come out during the day by removing all hiding spaces and putting a floodlight in there.DeepFriedIctalurus wrote: In the end it takes all kinds and humans are a very vision-oriented creature, it's not like you do anything with the actual pet fish itself but look at it....I hope!
Some fish will willingly swim around and about your hands in the tank (weather loaches, Misgurnus anguillicaudatus, are said to do this naturally), some will eat out of your hand, and, well, really hand-tame carp will tolerate being touched and even lifted. If you keep in mind that you can't lure a goldfish into a piece of PVC pipe, you can see that the options for moving them involve nets (tend to cause thrashing, loss of slime coat, and unnecessary stress), fish bags and sample containers (nice if you can do it, I can't), or thoroughly wet hands. The latter is less damaging to the fish than a net, and less stressful if the fish is accustomed to human hands. So, um, yeah, at least some of my pet fish get petted.
Catfish, now... well if they do become willingly active around my hands when I'm doing tank maintenance, I might be tempted. Since they are a good deal sharper than the goldies (and the Raphaels capable of voicing their disagreement, as they proved when the fish store caught them), I will know for sure one way or the other whether they prefer not to be handled.
Just when you thought I was a decent if misguided person, I reveal myself to be a Fish Toucher. Can you ever forgive me?
To get back to catfishes, and hopefully evade a moderator slapping me, I note that if I ever do become interested in longfin bristlenoses I would really like to know more about their origins (did the long fins just crop up, or did they kill a bunch of fish with mutagens to get them?) and their genetics, which seem just a little suspicious.
-
DeepFriedIctalurus
- Posts: 236
- Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 04:32
- My cats species list: 11 (i:0, k:0)
- My aquaria list: 1 (i:0)
- Location 2: Saginaw River basin, US
- Interests: anything powered by an internal combustion engine, non-feathered/furred pets, anti-ignorance activism
Eh, I just knew I'd open a can of worms with the mere mention of carp...so I won't again.
Anyway that was just a lousy attempt at a joke, I do understand there is interaction to be had with some fish (hand-feeding, pingpong ball play w/ large cich lids).
And to be more specific..I find personally find the idea of modified fish (or most any other animal not bred for a useful purpose) fairly disgusting as a whole, especially when it comes to catfish. Especially when a catfish's major point of appeal comes from their unique appearance and behaviour, just seems silly to me when people try to make them into angelfish...heh
Aside from any possible inhumane origins (yes, I'm a bit skeptical of their genetics too), longfin Ancistrus really don't bother me much in the grand scheme of things. They're a mere drop in the bucket of canted perspectives. That's why I mentioned the need for an early education about fishkeeping, even before someone gets a tank.....but we all know how this really pans out!
But I don't know, it all just seems to downplay the idea of enjoying something for what it is. People are fickle and many of us grow up with a fairly twisted preconceived notion of what "beauty" is, not like any one of us can do anything about it. Since longfin Ancistrus aren't going anywhere but in more tanks, may as well not fight over it but rather try to spark interest in all suitable aquarium fish.
Ah well since it seems everyone beat this this dead horse into nothin but a spot on the ground, consider me done with it too......Enjoy your fish!
Anyway that was just a lousy attempt at a joke, I do understand there is interaction to be had with some fish (hand-feeding, pingpong ball play w/ large cich lids).
And to be more specific..I find personally find the idea of modified fish (or most any other animal not bred for a useful purpose) fairly disgusting as a whole, especially when it comes to catfish. Especially when a catfish's major point of appeal comes from their unique appearance and behaviour, just seems silly to me when people try to make them into angelfish...heh
Aside from any possible inhumane origins (yes, I'm a bit skeptical of their genetics too), longfin Ancistrus really don't bother me much in the grand scheme of things. They're a mere drop in the bucket of canted perspectives. That's why I mentioned the need for an early education about fishkeeping, even before someone gets a tank.....but we all know how this really pans out!
But I don't know, it all just seems to downplay the idea of enjoying something for what it is. People are fickle and many of us grow up with a fairly twisted preconceived notion of what "beauty" is, not like any one of us can do anything about it. Since longfin Ancistrus aren't going anywhere but in more tanks, may as well not fight over it but rather try to spark interest in all suitable aquarium fish.
Ah well since it seems everyone beat this this dead horse into nothin but a spot on the ground, consider me done with it too......Enjoy your fish!
-
Elspeth
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 01 Mar 2004, 19:47
- My cats species list: 2 (i:0, k:0)
- Location 1: Kansas City, Missouri
DeepFriedIctalurus wrote:Anyway that was just a lousy attempt at a joke, I do understand there is interaction to be had with some fish (hand-feeding, pingpong ball play w/ large cich lids).
Ah, I'm truly sorry. I thought you were quite serious!
I agree that this discussion has run its course, but I'm very glad we've had it. I have learned more and gotten more to think over from this than from the 6-pager referenced earlier.
Meanwhile, I've discovered something other than visual OR interactive enjoyment of fish. I seldom see my new Raphaels, and then only fleeting glimpses as they go about their business in the dark, yet I am still absolutely thrilled to have them there. And though I've had them for a very short time, the thought of trying to produce brightly-colored or fancy-finned Raphaels is already quite appalling to me. In their secretive, nocturnal way they have definitely helped me understand where you're coming from.
-
Caol_ila
- Posts: 1281
- Joined: 02 Jan 2003, 12:09
- My images: 52
- Spotted: 23
- Location 1: Mainz, Germany
Hi!
I fully understand your point of view as my girlfriend is an absolute fish newbie (and i think will always be on her own will/interest) but when i go to the lfs with her she has a totally different nice/ugly/interesting definition of fishes. Hence my theory about non specialized fishkeepers that open the market for fish like these.
But your last post brings up why we are all enthusiastic about cats.
1. a fish that you see every day doing the same stuff gets boring
2. a fish that you see once in a while surprises you from time to time with special behaviour
3. most cats are specialized somehow and bring somethign no other fish can offer
4. theres a huge selection of species of which many havent been cracked to reproduce in captivity
5. catfish people are cool ;)
just my 2 cents
I fully understand your point of view as my girlfriend is an absolute fish newbie (and i think will always be on her own will/interest) but when i go to the lfs with her she has a totally different nice/ugly/interesting definition of fishes. Hence my theory about non specialized fishkeepers that open the market for fish like these.
But your last post brings up why we are all enthusiastic about cats.
1. a fish that you see every day doing the same stuff gets boring
2. a fish that you see once in a while surprises you from time to time with special behaviour
3. most cats are specialized somehow and bring somethign no other fish can offer
4. theres a huge selection of species of which many havent been cracked to reproduce in captivity
5. catfish people are cool ;)
just my 2 cents
cheers
Christian
Christian
Great points on the catfishes. They are unique and not for everyone. While I love catfish, the rest of my family puts up with them 
However, the Raphael analogy was great. Every few weeks or so, our Rafael comes out late in the evening before lights out and stays for a short bit. While he is out, he has the whole families non stop intention. No TV, no phones, everyone stops everything to see Raphael!
However, the Raphael analogy was great. Every few weeks or so, our Rafael comes out late in the evening before lights out and stays for a short bit. While he is out, he has the whole families non stop intention. No TV, no phones, everyone stops everything to see Raphael!Brian
-
Fiskars the Whiskers
- Posts: 319
- Joined: 31 Oct 2003, 19:52
- Location 1: Ketchikan, Alaska
- Interests: Catfish, coffee, math, reading, the internet, frolicing, going for drives, anthropology, Terry Pratchett books
- Contact:
That's how it is with my three USD cats. I still haven't seen the adult one get out and roam, but whenever the two younger ones do it, everyone watches. The other day one swam right through the school of tiger barbs and I think it scared them because they immediately all shot to either side of the tank! Every once in awhile I see a USD cat poke around through the plants, but most of the time I see them hiding underneath the driftwood.
And, yes, catfish people ARE cool!
And, yes, catfish people ARE cool!
Line up!