Big cats, good news or bad news?

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 22 Apr 2005, 20:28

I would like to find out your opinions.

I would like to hear what you all think about big cats in the hobby. Please say whatever you feel, good or bad.

Thank you

Barry

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 22 Apr 2005, 20:36

What defines a "big cat"?

Jools

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 22 Apr 2005, 21:00

Sorry

2 foot plus

Barry

bunjiweb · Post by **bunjiweb** » 23 Apr 2005, 01:05

bad, unless you have a truly humungous aquarium... for a 2 foot fish you would want something at least 3 foot wide, preferably 4 ft, then you want 8-10 foot length maybe?

Ben

Post by **Birger** » 23 Apr 2005, 16:13

Do some searches in the forums ,there are some "interesting" responses which would give you general opinions.This is a subject people feel strongly about and rightly so.

Birger

pturley · Post by **pturley** » 24 Apr 2005, 03:33

I agree with the "Big Cats Sticky" above.

A fish with the potential to grow greater than two feet plus widely available for very little money... ...Yeah, I object to that.

I don't have a problem with committed keepers being able to obtain these giant cats. What I have a problem with is that every LFS you walk into will have one or more species of fish that will outgrow EVERY effort to house them correctly.

Again, I'll refer you to the Big Cats Sticky. Shane mentions that we know of only ONE aquarist that actually build that 20,000+ gallon aquarium for his giant catfish. ONE! In comparison to the tens of thousands of juvinile Red-tails and shovelnose cats each year being pushed into the hands of aquarists that really have no concept of what they are getting themselves into.

dancingdryad · Post by **dancingdryad** » 24 Apr 2005, 07:17

Shane mentions that we know of only ONE aquarist that actually build that 20,000+ gallon aquarium for his giant catfish. ONE!

My cousin built a tank across the entire wall of his living room to house his fish. It was at least 7000gal/31780L probably bigger. I'd call that a substantial tank, maybe not in the league of public aquaria but his fish had plenty of swimming space.

Also a neighbour built an indoor pond that just about filled his garage, he housed Koi in that though. The same could be done for other fish.

What I really really object to is seeing beautiful fish housed in bare tanks apparently to make maintaining water quality easier... Just an excuse for laziness and cost cutting IMO. If you have an adequate sized filter and are feeding correctly and have built up an establised mini ecosystem in the tank then you shouldn't need to keep fish in bare tanks. Yeah the fish might have enough space to swim back and forth but most of the ones I've seen kept in these conditions just sit on the bottom and I don't blame them, I'd be depressed if I lived in a bland box like that. I can however see the point for keeping fry like this but that shouldn't be for the long term.

I would say that if the fish are exhibiting natural behaviours then they are happy fish. If they are not then something obviously needs to be done to address this. I saw 2 huge Red Tail Cats in a fish shop in a huge tank below the counter. They had enough space to turn around but not enough length to get a good ole swim going. IMO, although they were healthy, they didn't look like they were exhibiting natural behaviour and weren't particularly happy. That said years ago in my LFS the guy that ran it had a whopping Red Tail Cat, who he'd had since it was a tiny kitten, he kept it in a huge heated pond, this fish would glide around in there, would come over to greet anyone who stuck their head over the edge and was a wonderful character obviously very happy with his cushy lot.

Here's another thought, some fish are very intelligent, how many people observe their fish to figure this out and do something to adress the needs of intelligent fish? How many people will entertain their fish rather than expecting it to be the other way around? Take Mbu Puffers as an example, an incredibly intelligent fish, most I've seen just sit on the bottom of the tank looking depressed. But the happy puffers I've seen have been in a position where they can see activity going on, where they get the opportunity to interact with people. I've got a Fire Eel, admittedly not the brightest of fish, but with an insatiable curiousity and he/she? is into everything, very much into exploring and exhibits a lot of hunting behaviour. Maybe this is because I've changed the tank decor around a few times so far this week? gives it's brain something to think about, lots of new nooks and crannies to explore, some of it's fundamental needs being met.

People should not buy any type of fish, small or large, intelligent or not so intelligent, without first doing some research on the fish. If they're not prepared to meet those needs then they shouldn't buy the fish. Fish shops can only do so much to ensure their fish go to responsible homes, maybe a few example specimens of full grown fish might hit home, or maybe some lifesize photos... Perhaps fish with special requirements and tankbusters should only be available to buy if ordered, that would cut down on the impulse buyers. People who bother to order fish perhaps are more likely to have done some research into their chosen fish and are willing and able to give the fish the home it deserves.

catfishcrazy · Post by **catfishcrazy** » 25 Apr 2005, 13:35

Although i am a lover of large fish i feel that any fish that grows over around 24 inches has no place in a home aquarium, the vast majority of homes are far too small to set up the size of tanks needed to house a 3 foot plus open water dwelling fish which IMO need a tank at least 4 times their length long and 1.5 times their length wide, take into account that a full grown TSN or RTC may reach 4 feet and it is highly doubtfull that many people will have a 16x6 foot aquarium.

There are many smaller but still reasonably large species which can be much easier kept in the home aquarium that there should be no need to import and sell monster sized fish.

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 25 Apr 2005, 14:39

The other dimension in this is time. Yeah, sure you can build an indoor pond or whatever, but who's going to run it for 30 years (a short lifespan for one of these big cats).

There's a red tail cat in Amsterdam aquarium that's at least that old if not much more (I forget).

Jools

sidguppy · Post by **sidguppy** » 25 Apr 2005, 16:36

yup, catfish last a long time.....

that's why I'm still committed to keep at least one non-Tanganyikan tank in my hobby; although I'm 100% dedicated to Tang-cats.

I've got a small group of Mochokiella's wich are now well beyond 19, possibly 20-22 years old (they were subadult when bought in summer 1986).....
they don't like Tanganyikan cichlids, Tanganyikan water or Tanganyikan setups.

no WAY I'm going to part with them, hence the riverine tank (wich I don't regret maintenancing; plenty other weirdo's in there

).

multiply this for any bigger catfish!
6 months ago I acquired 4 granny's, 2 of wich have been imported in the late 80's as adults too. they show no signs of aginmg or declining health; my big Tanganyikan tank has to be here for decades I think
(won't feel sorry about that either!

).

The idea of keeping a Megalodoras.....wich I think is the prettiest of the "big uns"....well; let's say I need to ask certain gods for a spare lifetime to stay with it; it would very likely survive me, and I have no kids, let alone "catfish-geeky" ones!

Post by **medaka** » 25 Apr 2005, 21:35

just to put my cap into the ring,, so to say

a good few years ago,

a guy in the North of England set up a rescue centre to house unwanted large fish,
the sad fact, was in one year alone he recieved over a dozen calls asking would he take in large RTC's he had more calls to house all sorts of large fish, nearly all of his callers over the years he ran this rescue centre had bought these fish whilst they were small, and yes there were some LFS that had told customers " Oh! yes these fish only get as big as your tank".or "yes sir if you have any trouble the local Zoo or public Aquarium will gladly take them off your hands", sadly most of us know this isnt the case. There are also cases where people purchased these large fish with the intention of providing large aquaria when the fish out grew the one they were in,, then circumstances changed; and the large fish became less attractive to keep.and that where there the problem lie's
who was it who said "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

I know this may ruffle a few feathers here and there, but the people who have the resorces to have there own "public style" aquaria are few and far between, and because of this I would like to see some sort of license system adopted
where one is vetted to see if suitable housing can be provided.
BTW the guy went on to rescue Burmese Pythons, and the amount of 18ft specimens that had outgrown their owners
was on par with large fish that the owners had got fed up with. This rescue centre is no longer open ..
so what happens now, to all these unwanted large fish..?

bronzefry · Post by **bronzefry** » 25 Apr 2005, 22:06

My first eye-opening experience with "big-cats" came about 2 years ago. (I've only been in this for 3 years) I drove a ways to a store some folks raved about. I watched one of the sales-kiddies do his thing. He talked a man out of buying a Pl*co and into buying a SA Red-Tail. (I had just read about how big they get.) I did a double take to make sure I read the label on the tank correctly. I did. The man looked very pleased with his 4" fish. I asked him what size tank he had. He responded,"A 10 gallon...I think." He proceeded to gesture the approximate size of the tank to me. I asked him if he knew how large this specimen would get. He told me,"It's fully grown! Don't you know anything!" I went to the book section and found one of the atlases. I showed him Phractocephalus hemioliopterus. He said I was a liar and "probably one of those Evolution people and I was going to Hell." I said he was right and walked over to the manager. I showed him the excerpt from the book. He said, "It's what sells, along with the dyed fish over there." I walked out without making a purchase.

mummymonkey · Post by **mummymonkey** » 25 Apr 2005, 22:18

People wouldn't dream of keeping a 2 inch fish in a 6 inch tank. May even sign online petitions against such 'cruelty'. Yet the same folks proudly post pictures of their 6 foot tank complete with Arrowana, Rays and large cats.
It's nothing more than a big boy's pissing contest.

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 25 Apr 2005, 23:18

I am planning a 6x3x3 formy Brachyplatystoma Jureunse?

street cypher · Post by **street cypher** » 25 Apr 2005, 23:39

You have to consider peoples goals when fishkeeping.
I can confidently say most people keep fish because they are fascinated by the way they are, and have a genuine interest in them.

BUT, some people aim to recreate the fishes natural environment, which, even with the best efforts, is not nearly as "home" to them as the wild because they are in an aquarium to start out with (this applies to large fish btw).

Others, (myself included), aren't aiming to recreate their natural environment. I keep my fish for my viewing pleasure, its a hobby. I take darn good care of them (weekly water changes, good varied diet, medication if needed), but i'm not going to shoot myself for not making it a "perfect" environment.

I don't keep TSN or RTC, but i do keep asian aros (max size ~26"), and polypterus endlicheris (max size ~3 feet in the wild). They do reside in a 6 X 2 X 2 and are going to for many years to come. But, note that for endlicheris to grow to 3' in an aquarium takes years and years (the most common llarge size is ~20"), as opposed to the very fast growth rate of RTCs and TSNs.

I guess what i'm trying to say is some people aren't as conservative when it comes to keeping fish.

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 26 Apr 2005, 00:46

A point well put.
This is a luxury hobby and therefore every fish purchased is for the enjoyment of the fishkeeper and for no reason other than that.
I have room for 2 tanks this size and if it wasn't for a 2x2 pillar that holds up the building it would be a 14x3x3 (oh well 2 tanks is better than 1). The other will be a community tank with the main feature fish being a group of Wild Tefe Green Discus ( loads of bog wood, sand and vallis).

Can I ask who is doing wrong.
The exporter (who would breed/catch them anyway if not for ornamental reasons then for food)
The importer (who's primary reason is profit)
The LFS (who's primary reason is profit and if they are a good shop, the customer)
The magazines who inspire people to bigger things through coverage of keepers who do keep large predatory sp. ( believe or not their primary object is profit to, things that are interesting sell more copies which then in turn mean higher advertising rates)
Or the customer ( who's primary reason is as a luxury or to give the fish a home wher it will be loved and cared for to the best of there abilities for the duration of there life, but therefore agrees to the breeding/capture and export/import of exotic sp. resulting in only more being produced/exported/imported/sold for caring individuals who do have the option NOT TO BUY THEM).

All you have to live with is your conscience and if you see well looked after healthy looking fish in the home you have provided for them, then well done, I hope you have many more years enjoyment from your pets.

Barry

This was not directed to anyone in particular.

natefrog · Post by **natefrog** » 26 Apr 2005, 05:01

Well, here it is, probably the single most important issue in the home aquaria hobby, and I think I can give a little insight. I own a red snak*head, (also known as Giant Snak*head, Channa micropeltes). Although not a catfish, this fish will reach propotions of upto 1m long. It is currently about 12" long and shows no signs of slowing growth. I will admit that I regret buying this fish. I bought is as a 4" specimen and did it on impulse. The store did say it would grow larger, saying it would reach about a foot long. Well, here I am, trying to divise a way that I can make arrangements for this fish in the future, and I feel remarkably stupid for allowing nievete to get the best of me. I am a biologist, I understand that the aquarium trade is full of fish that should never be purchased by hobbyist and I go and make a mistake like this. I love large fish, I have osc*rs, raphaels, and a Clarius batrachus, and they are all well maintained and happy, but, the commitment of the snakehead is too much, and is the reason I haven't allowed myself to continue with large fish. It is a difficult lesson, mostly because passion and curiousity can become diluted into spectacle and awe. These large fish deserve better and should not be available for the average hobbyist. I would hope that the LFS that import large fish feel enough pressure from there experienced and perennial clientel to stop selling these fish.

By the way, the snakehead is going to my parents heated pond, which should keep him happy for longterm.

bronzefry · Post by **bronzefry** » 26 Apr 2005, 21:54

Natefrog, please reconsider placing a Channa Micropeltes in an outdoor pond.

http://fisc.er.usgs.gov/Snakehead_circ_ ... flyer.html

dancingdryad · Post by **dancingdryad** » 27 Apr 2005, 10:21

BUT, some people aim to recreate the fishes natural environment, which, even with the best efforts, is not nearly as "home" to them as the wild because they are in an aquarium to start out with (this applies to large fish btw).

Others, (myself included), aren't aiming to recreate their natural environment. I keep my fish for my viewing pleasure, its a hobby. I take darn good care of them (weekly water changes, good varied diet, medication if needed), but i'm not going to shoot myself for not making it a "perfect" environment.

It is impossible to recreate the fishes natural environment in an aquarium, those that do try to do so are trying to give their fish an environment that fulfils a lot of the fishes fundamental needs to ensure that the fish is happy and healthy. There is more to a fishes health, in fact any animals health, to just having a healthy body that looks good sat on the bare glass of an empty tank with pristine water. If you admire that then why not go into photography and get some impressive pictures of stunning fish in their natural environment?

Some fish like to hide, why not arrange a tank set up where it can do so but also so that you can view the fish easily. Some fish like to bury into the substrate, how much does it cost to provide that small thing that will make all the difference to the mental health of the fish, oh but you might not be able to view it at you convience and would have to wait for the fish to come out... boo hoo. What a selfish, cold, ungenerous, inhumane, repulsive attitude to have. I suppose zoos with whales and dolphins (put on this planet soley to entertain us???), dancing bears, baby orangutans used in the tourist trade, slavery and the death penalty are acceptable too?

Some fish shouldn't be kept in aquaria, for various reasons, space, dietry requirements, even fluctuations in water conditions. I'm not against people keeping large fish at all providing that they at least attempt to provide an environment for the fish that goes some way towards addressing it's other needs. The vast majority of these fish in the wild would probably have been eaten by something long before they got to the size of being a problem to house in aquaria anyway.

Like I said in a previous post, people should do their research before buying the fish and if they can't or are unwilling to provide their guest with a suitable home then they shouldn't buy the fish. Large fish and fish with specific difficult to meet requirements should only be available if ordered by the customer as they are less likely to be impulse buying and would have at least done some basic research into the fish. No doubt that would put the price of these fish up too as the exporters and importers wouldn't be keeping large stocks of these fish in due to a decrease in demand, it would take time to obtain them too, all things that would put off impulse buyers and those not serious about maintaining the fish in the manner they deserve.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 27 Apr 2005, 10:28

fishmadbarry wrote:Can I ask who is doing wrong.
The exporter (who would breed/catch them anyway if not for ornamental reasons then for food)
The importer (who's primary reason is profit)
The LFS (who's primary reason is profit and if they are a good shop, the customer)
The magazines who inspire people to bigger things through coverage of keepers who do keep large predatory sp. ( believe or not their primary object is profit to, things that are interesting sell more copies which then in turn mean higher advertising rates)
Or the customer ( who's primary reason is as a luxury or to give the fish a home wher it will be loved and cared for to the best of there abilities for the duration of there life, but therefore agrees to the breeding/capture and export/import of exotic sp. resulting in only more being produced/exported/imported/sold for caring individuals who do have the option NOT TO BUY THEM).

I don't think you can put the blame on one particular part here. It's a complex system...

If you want to cast blame, it should go on the final customer. If there's no demand for fish like this, then there's no money for the exporter/wholesaler/magazine to make from it.

Everyone is in this business to make money, by hook, crook or honestly. A honest LFS will neither stock these fish. Many LFS do stock these fish, which tells me that there are people who buy them. There are surely a few people who have both the ability, space, budget and time to look after really big fish. The rest of us, should make sure that we correctly figure what size the fish grows to BEFORE buying it.

Compounding this issue is the myth that fish only grows to the size of the tank, which isn't true if you look after the fish correctly, but if you "poison it" in it's own waste, then I guess there's some truth in that...

--
Mats

natefrog · Post by **natefrog** » 27 Apr 2005, 17:33

Bronzefry wrote: Natefrog, please reconsider placing a Channa Micropeltes in an outdoor pond.

No worries Bronzefry, like I had mentioned before I am a Biologist, infact my major is Conservation Biology, so I have a pretty good handle on the dangers of invasive species. The pond in question is a heated outdoor pond and has no waterways that are in close enough proximity for a successful mad snakehead dash. I am also building a screened top for the pond the prevent a possible escape, and also as a way to protect the fish from the racoons and herons that live in our area.
You are right to be concerned and I appreciate the heads-up. It is all to often that exotics are given the opportunity to colonize new areas by irresponsible owners. Which is a fantastic point for this particular thread. One of the major problems with big cats in the hobby, is their frequent unloading by overwhelmed owners into the wild. Florida and Hawaii are losing a number of endemic species to invasives and it is truly sad.
Thanks again for your concern Bronzefry.

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 28 Apr 2005, 01:08

Is it right, that because everyone is wrong that no one wrong?

I am not going to stock these fish anymore, now it is up to everyone that feels these fish are not for the hobby, to do something about it.

Start with writing letters to the magazines available where you are.
It might make the letters page, if they get enough they may make an article and if they make an article they might make a petition and If they do that, then shops may stop stocking such fish and join the petition ( as this makes for good press). WE can only talk about it if we do not stand up to it.

Barry

street cypher · Post by **street cypher** » 28 Apr 2005, 01:31

dancingdryad wrote:
BUT, some people aim to recreate the fishes natural environment, which, even with the best efforts, is not nearly as "home" to them as the wild because they are in an aquarium to start out with (this applies to large fish btw).

Others, (myself included), aren't aiming to recreate their natural environment. I keep my fish for my viewing pleasure, its a hobby. I take darn good care of them (weekly water changes, good varied diet, medication if needed), but i'm not going to shoot myself for not making it a "perfect" environment.
It is impossible to recreate the fishes natural environment in an aquarium, those that do try to do so are trying to give their fish an environment that fulfils a lot of the fishes fundamental needs to ensure that the fish is happy and healthy. There is more to a fishes health, in fact any animals health, to just having a healthy body that looks good sat on the bare glass of an empty tank with pristine water. If you admire that then why not go into photography and get some impressive pictures of stunning fish in their natural environment?

Some fish like to hide, why not arrange a tank set up where it can do so but also so that you can view the fish easily. Some fish like to bury into the substrate, how much does it cost to provide that small thing that will make all the difference to the mental health of the fish, oh but you might not be able to view it at you convience and would have to wait for the fish to come out... boo hoo. What a selfish, cold, ungenerous, inhumane, repulsive attitude to have. I suppose zoos with whales and dolphins (put on this planet soley to entertain us???), dancing bears, baby orangutans used in the tourist trade, slavery and the death penalty are acceptable too?

Some fish shouldn't be kept in aquaria, for various reasons, space, dietry requirements, even fluctuations in water conditions. I'm not against people keeping large fish at all providing that they at least attempt to provide an environment for the fish that goes some way towards addressing it's other needs. The vast majority of these fish in the wild would probably have been eaten by something long before they got to the size of being a problem to house in aquaria anyway.

Like I said in a previous post, people should do their research before buying the fish and if they can't or are unwilling to provide their guest with a suitable home then they shouldn't buy the fish. Large fish and fish with specific difficult to meet requirements should only be available if ordered by the customer as they are less likely to be impulse buying and would have at least done some basic research into the fish. No doubt that would put the price of these fish up too as the exporters and importers wouldn't be keeping large stocks of these fish in due to a decrease in demand, it would take time to obtain them too, all things that would put off impulse buyers and those not serious about maintaining the fish in the manner they deserve.

You're making too many assumptions. I extensively research ALL fish before i buy them. I know damn well what i'm getting into. Its not people like me you should worry about, its people who buy their first fish tank AND the fish on the same day.

I DO provide substrate, I DO have MANY chunks of driftwood and rocks that provide NUMEROUS "chill" spots and cover for ALL the fish. That said, i would not hesitate to take all the decor out.

In no way am i selfish, but I don't create a "Love" bond with my fish, i do not anthropomorphize my fish, and i'm not some zealous fish activist. With an attitude like yours, you must shit your pants when you think of famine, war, disease and genocide.

natefrog · Post by **natefrog** » 28 Apr 2005, 07:51

Well "Street Cypher," its nice to here that you extensively research each and every fish you buy, for that you should be congratulated. Research doesn't change the fact that despite your efforts you will never see anything approximizing natural behavior in your undersized tank. A 6x2x2 tank for fish that grow larger than the width means the tank is far too small, it does not matter what your motives are. Anthropomorphizing means attributing human characteristics to non-human beings, and as I understand it, naming a fish doesn't mean you'll treat it with respect, just the same as treating a fish as a cold-blooded machine doesn't mean you are being scientific. If your "veiwing pleasure" is to see an animal with scars on its nose and tail from bumping repeatedly into the glass then, you are headed on the right path. I apologize if I have offended you in an effort to convince you to find appropriate housing for creatures you chose to take responsibility for, but, please don't be shocked when people question "why?," it doesn't make sense to some of us.

dancingdryad · Post by **dancingdryad** » 28 Apr 2005, 09:25

You're making too many assumptions. I extensively research ALL fish before i buy them. I know damn well what i'm getting into. Its not people like me you should worry about, its people who buy their first fish tank AND the fish on the same day.

I DO provide substrate, I DO have MANY chunks of driftwood and rocks that provide NUMEROUS "chill" spots and cover for ALL the fish. That said, i would not hesitate to take all the decor out.

In no way am i selfish, but I don't create a "Love" bond with my fish, i do not anthropomorphize my fish, and i'm not some zealous fish activist. With an attitude like yours, you must shit your pants when you think of famine, war, disease and genocide.

OOoops obviously hit a nerve there! That is a very defensive and bordering on aggressive attitude... so much so that you totally misunderstood what I was saying and missed the point completely. Please read my previous posts with a cool head and point out where I said anthropomorphising fish was a good thing. I was basically saying that different species of fish have different requirements which should be researched before buying the fish, if people can't or won't even attempt to meet at least some of those requirements then they should not be purchasing the fish, there is more to keeping any size of fish than just space. I was trying to raise some points that often get overlooked, after all isn't a good debate about raising issues that expand and inform the debate rather than just gainsaying.

I do not anthropomorphise any animal but do have a deep respect for the animal and will do my utmost to make sure that it is healthy and happy and has most of what it needs to exhibit it's natural behaviour (a huge bonus and compliment from the fish IMO). Maybe if more people had some level of compasion and empathy and had a bit of thought for the fish they keep then perhaps there will be less incidences of huge fish being dumped in public aquaria or local waterways (and in fact there would probably be less conflicts in the world too). Yet another case of blindly believing others without question... shopkeeper: oh yes you can keep the neons with the oscars, he said to a customer who had just bought a bag of tiny neons. Customer: I'll have two! When I pointed out that the neons would be an expensive snack for the baby oscars which would very soon be bursting out the tank I was told to leave the shop).

FYI I do keep large fish, like I said in my first post I have a Fire Eel which can grow up to 3'. I also have a RTC who is healthy and happy, currently just a baby at approx. 6" and having observed him for hours on end that IMO even at his current size he requires at least a 5' tank just for the swimming length as he hunts for food, rather like a hound sniffing a scent trail at speed. When he hits an adult size 5' will not even cover the width of tank he'll require and yes I can and am more than willing to provide him with the space he needs. Most of the time he lays under his bogwood lair contentedly digesting his meal but he does need a huge amount of space to be able to hunt in a 'natural' manner. He does take food from my hand and also tries to take my fingers too but to say that because he will handfeed means that he doesn't require a huge amount of swimming space is unfair and ridiculous. If for some reason in the future, cos who knows what will happen, I can't give him the home he needs I will try to find someone who can and if not I will make the difficult decision to euthanaise him. Also the shop where I purchased him were a mine of information about the fish and couldn't stress enough how big he would get and what his requirements are and will be, they wouldn't sell him until they were satisfied that I knew what I was letting myself in for and was willing to meet the fishes requirements. It's a shame more fish shops aren't like that.

Attitudes that fish or other animals are bought solely to provide entertainment and a wow factor at the cost of the animals welfare should be discouraged. The fish never asked to be put in a tank and I think that as fishkeepers we should at the very least make sure that we provide for their mental as well as physical health and have some respect for other living creatures who have just as much right to a good life as we do.

LeopardFrog · Post by **LeopardFrog** » 28 Apr 2005, 09:51

street cypher, firstly I have to say to you, that you have surprised me; I have finally encountered a Canadian that inspired loathing in me- are you by any chance a US immigrant? That's a serious question.

I think others here have neatly tucked your misuse of 'anthropomorphism' into bed for the night and sung it a lullabye.

The thing that strikes me most is your a veritible pride in your lack of compassion (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=compassion). You seem to imply that concern for suffering and a conscientious effort to avoid suffering is plainly ridiculous. Given that that would ring alarm bells with any psychologist, I would be deeply concerned for anything with a central nervous system that was in your 'care' and would hope you could instead consider collecting coprolites (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=coprolites) as a hobby?

I personally DO feel sick at the thought of famine, genocide and war; I suggest that you spend five minutes in the company of anyone who has been faced with any of those before being so glib.

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 28 Apr 2005, 13:48

LeopardFrog wrote:I have finally encountered a Canadian that inspired loathing in me- are you by any chance a US immigrant? That's a serious question.

I've been watching this one for a while, can you guys veer off the mudslinging please. I've taken the above as an example but there's a bit of cooling down all round needed.

Just to add my 2c or 2p, invasive species is a tricky one not least because what might be dodgy for a Florida based LFS to sell is not threat at all in the the UK for example.

Jools

PlecoCrazy · Post by **PlecoCrazy** » 29 Apr 2005, 04:15

Just to get my say in it. I agree with most of you that large cats are a problem for 99% of the people who buy them and I understand everyone getting excited about trying to stop it but the big picture is that Walmart is the largest seller of fish in the USA. Many other super stores are up there as well, ex. Meijer. Most of these places sell irredescent sharks, blue channel cats, albino channel cats, tinfoil barbs, pacu's, oscars, etc... and have basically no one of knowledge working the pet department. If they do, it is only during the day shift when they sell the least. They actually sell fish that grow to a larger adult size than the largest tank that they even sell in the store. If they cared at all about what they sold that should say something. You can't even shove a half grown Pacu into a 55 gallon.

The problems are not the LFS, they are a very small part of the equation, plus most LFS are more knowledeable anyways. Its the Walmart and such that are the biggest part of the problem. That is where all of the fish are coming from. There is so much money behind them, what politician or goverment official is going to listen to a complaint about the fish they sell? None I know of.

Want to complain, protest any new Walmarts going up in your area. The problem grows with every new store they open.

Good topic, hopefully someone reads it and thinks twice about their purchases.

bronzefry · Post by **bronzefry** » 29 Apr 2005, 15:34

I don't think a lot of people realize it, but in certain rural US areas, Walmart might be the only store around for a 2-3 hour drive. This would be the only pet store, the only grocery store, the only pharmacy, etc. There is no other place to shop. Their low prices put all other stores out of business. It's very contraversial and probably a subject best left to another web site.

But, Walmart is just one contributor. There are many other contributors, all mentioned here. Every region in every country of the world has its own contributors. This is an exceedingly multi-layered issue. There isn't once cure-all, either. In the end, all involved must accept some level of responsibility.

fishmadbarry · Post by **fishmadbarry** » 13 Jun 2005, 22:20

Come on keep going. I need more.

Big cats, good news or bad news?

Big cats good idea or bad idea?

Big cats, good news or bad news?