Page 2 of 2
Posted: 17 Sep 2003, 19:18
by Dinyar
coelacanth wrote:Keeping ornamental fish is largely a luxury activity, whereas eating isn't
coelacanth wrote:We have a conscious choice whether or not to inflict more more stress on other organisms than is absolutely necessary, and the routine use of live fish as food for other fish falls on the wrong side of the line as far as I'm concerned.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, Pete, and am certainly not trying to start a flame war, but this seems to be a slippery slope you're sliding down. Eating may be a necessity, but eating meat, which arguably inflicts "more stress on other organisms than is absolutely necessary", isn't. That was my original tongue-in-cheek point about the fish 'n chips.
What about habitat loss, pollution, etc., as a result of human activity which leads to accelerating species extinction? How much of this stress is absolutely necessary?
I'm not saying we shouldn't act humanely to other species. What I
am saying is that we are conducting genocide (in the literal sense) on an unprecedented scale, and that fact deserves our attention as much or more than the lives of individual feeder fish.
OK, off my soapbox.
Dinyar
Posted: 18 Sep 2003, 17:15
by T
Dinyar wrote:
I'm not saying we shouldn't act humanely to other species. What I am saying is that we are conducting genocide (in the literal sense) on an unprecedented scale, and that fact deserves our attention as much or more than the lives of individual feeder fish.
Theres not a whole lot WE as fishkeepers can do about genocide etc, but using dead fish to feed our predators means a goldfish could survive to become someones loved pet or pond inhabitant.After all wild dogs predate on rabbits but you wouldnt exactly go into a pet shop to buy yours some feeder rabbits(well I'm sure some people do).
I'm glad the UK frowns upon the use of feeders.
Posted: 18 Sep 2003, 17:17
by T
coelacanth wrote:T wrote:Well I was under the impression that this is a somewhat large pool
.I think you would be better off sticking to the smaller species then, roach(also maybe the golden form), dace, sticklebacks, gudgeon, goldfish maybe.Nothing too predatory anyway(no perch or chub).
What about the little fat head/rosy minnows or would that pose to much of an escape risk?
Even 60-70,000 gallons is still a small body of water by natural standards (although it's a lot of 12 gallons tanks!). Wth this in mind I feel it is better to look at smaller native species, then it can be more than just a 'fish pond'.
The Rosy Red Minnnows (apparently a hybrid of Fathead and another unidentified Pimephales sp, or so I am told) are non-native, and if there is any proximity to a natural water course should probably not be considered.
Yeah I suppose so, but I was seeing people posting about goldfish and they are not native either.
Posted: 19 Sep 2003, 03:42
by JohnnyOscar
Thanks guys and gals for all the suggestions (and apologies for my rather inane post halfway through page 2. It was my drunken flatmate, honest! He clearly has a different view on feeder fish as he has fed at least half of my red juwel cichlid fry to my oscars and Leiarius longibarbis...).
I had a word with the powers that be and they want all native flora and fauna. They want it to be more of a wildlife pond than a place to go and watch the kois. So, strictly native fish.
There are a couple of pairs of mallard that nest in/near the pond. They have been there for years. I know you aren't really supposed to mix ducks with fish (something to do with phosphates) but it seems to work. Do you think it would be OK to add another pair of ducks (or maybe two pairs -- something to look at as the fish won't be terribly visible). There is a wildfowl park down the road that sells all kinds of ducks and I'm sure our budget could stretch to a pair of goldeneye, pintails, shovellers or whatever.
Also, what are your thoughts on crayfish? Do they need flowing water or will they live in a pond?
Posted: 19 Sep 2003, 17:16
by clothahump
The ducks will need to have their wings pinioned to get them to stay put, problem with this is they are unable to fly away from predators (two legged and four).
Native Crayfish are fast becoming a rarity as the introduced American ones brought disease with them, they survive the disease ours do not.
Forgot to add that it is now illegal to introduce non native species into a body of water that has a direct outflow to a natural water course, this includes plants, fish and crustaceans.
Posted: 21 Sep 2003, 22:48
by T
Yo man I was fishing the other day and caught loads of little baby roach, they were so easy to catch.They were swimming in a big shoal at an inlet, they would be perfect for your pond.