# Fish Ethics?



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

Is there anything published along the lines of what is ethically proper with regards to keeping fish (or any pets)?

Example, is "body piercing" acceptable or considered inhumane? People do it and people do it to livestock. People have gps implants in dogs and cats. So what's wrong with a ring in the lip of a fish?

I realize that this is a topic that people are going to align both with and against. Has any of the "forums" established their own "Ethics Standard"? I'm sure I've read as much in some of the threads.

So as fish lovers, I'm sure no one here falls into the camp of "anything goes", but what is acceptable? This thread is spawn from a thread I have going regarding "training" fish to do tricks. Is that cruel?


----------



## Deni (Jul 6, 2005)

As far as training goes, it depends on how you do the training. Training with reward isn't cruel. Training with punishment is -- and is much less effective.

I've never heard of gps implants in dogs and cats. I have heard of identifying chips, which I understand are painless to insert and do not interfere at all with the animal.

I guess that would be my criteria. You don't cause pain and you don't do things that shorten the life of the animal. That's my sense of ethics.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

Deni said:


> I've never heard of gps implants in dogs and cats. I have heard of identifying chips, which I understand are painless to insert and do not interfere at all with the animal.


Well the chip implants was what I was referring to. I thought they had some sort of tracking implant that reported the location like a gps device....probably was reading too much science fiction.


----------



## Jareardy (Feb 14, 2008)

pretty much anything that puts undue stress/pain on the fish I'm against (i.e painting fish, or tattooing).


----------



## Deni (Jul 6, 2005)

> I thought they had some sort of tracking implant that reported the location like a gps device....


They're just something that can be read with a device when the animal is found by the humane society or a vet. It has a number on it that is associated with the owner's name and phone number.


----------



## ed seeley (Dec 1, 2006)

They use the ID chips on large carp in fisheries over here to ID them if they were ever to be stolen and have also used them on koi for the same reason. In fact I believe to get insurance on some fish it is a prerequisite of the policy.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Jan 31, 2008)

Nope I've never seen an ethical code in regards to fishkeeping on any forum. Ethical codes are the hallmark for a "profession"- and most ppl keep fish as a hobby.


----------



## tkos (Oct 30, 2006)

Unless the SPCA or some other similar group sees fish as an important thing then ethics are going to be in the eye of the beholder. Dog abuse gets you a fine or jail time. Fish abuse gets nothing.

They tag large ocean fish all the time for science. They also tag tiny birds. Our old dog had a registration tatoo which was common practice and didn't hurt her. I have seen tatooted fish in Asia that I thought was horrible. It served no purpose, but I can't say whether or not it affected the long term survival of the fish.

I am sure there is animal ethics classes taught in philosophy courses somewhere. I could be really interesting to see what level of animal gets considered.


----------



## Adragontattoo (Jun 3, 2007)

usually if the animal is a "pet" and is "cute" then treatment levels are different.

club a fish to death and you will get a scolding
club a dog to death and you will be strung up and picketed.

tattoo hearts and asstd crap on a fish, people look at you funny.
tattoo hearts and asstd crap on a cat, people will drag you in to court.

etc...

Unless the animal is endangered or in some way peculiar, the same abuse that gets you fines and jail time for a panda, horse, dog,cat etc gets you nothing or mild scorn for a fish, salamander, newt, frog or most snakes.


----------



## Six (May 29, 2006)

IMO fish are not thought of as "important enough" to create an ethical standard. In many regards this isn't a bad thing considering the ambiguity of fish keeping practices. Whose to say one methodology is better than another? 

If you want to really dive into ethics of fishkeeping, the marine hobby has much more relevant issues than the freshwater hobby. 
IE: Is it appropriate to capture fish with cyanide when no other means will do?
Is it appropriate to capture difficult to keep fish and have most all of them die in captivity? 
Is it OK to import Pacific fish to the east coast and have the possibility of letting them go in the incorrect ocean accidently? 
Is it OK to bring in fish simply to sell them and not care if they live (Moorish Idols and the movie Finding Nemo).

As for coral collection, that's a whole other world. There are instances where importations of slow growing and thus restricted corals being imported in mass via gluing them to one rock and calling it one coral. Customs and other entities don't realize this. If you've been to a LFS, you've seen these Blastomussa wellsi rocks. Acanthastea also is imported as such at times sometimes with possible restricted species glued along with it (Mussids- I've seen 1, but that's at one store, who knows how many more are out there). Why glue corals that sting each other to one rock to sell it? 

Anywho, those are just a few things I've seen and thought about.

Anyone think of an ethical issue with specific wild caught freshwater fish?


----------



## lauraleellbp (Jan 31, 2008)

Importing endangered species, importing invasive species... I suppose there are some laws, some based on ethics but mostly economics and environmental concerns.


----------



## ed seeley (Dec 1, 2006)

There were the issues of overfishing Galaxy rasboras and also Hypancistrus zebra too Six.


----------



## isu712 (Feb 8, 2008)

I go to another website to check out species profiles. They have a pretty extensive list so it's real nice. On their front page, they have a "responsible fishkeeper's manisfesto." The URL is www.aquahobby.com, check it out if you want, but I like the statements made. I think they're pretty good ethics to follow.


----------



## Beasts (Apr 14, 2006)

How about a basic knowledge test for anyone interested in keeping any pet, including fish. It would be an excellent way to prevent a lot of needless deaths. Seems like a step in an ethically correct direction to me.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

isu712 said:


> I go to another website to check out species profiles. They have a pretty extensive list so it's real nice. On their front page, they have a "responsible fishkeeper's manisfesto." The URL is www.aquahobby.com, check it out if you want, but I like the statements made. I think they're pretty good ethics to follow.


Yeah, that's it. That's a good point. Is our hobby causing the depletion of certain species of fish in their natural environment, pushing them into endangered status? Or are fish being breed for the market by large breeding farms. Should a portion of our purchase price be allocated to benefit the protection and enhancement of their environment?

It's kind of like the black market for ivory or some other parts of animals that is resulting in the extinction of certain species. I personally have no idea where the fish at the lfs come from. I mean, I am pretty sure Mollies, Guppies, etc are probably not coming from the wild rivers around the world but what about the others?


----------



## Six (May 29, 2006)

ed seeley said:


> There were the issues of overfishing Galaxy rasboras and also Hypancistrus zebra too Six.


Yes, but the zebra pleco might help keep them from damming the Xingu River. Otherwise, I totally agree.


----------



## ed seeley (Dec 1, 2006)

Six said:


> Yes, but the zebra pleco might help keep them from damming the Xingu River. Otherwise, I totally agree.


Maybe... About their best hope I think! Hopefully both situations can be sorted with a bit of long term planning. And most freshwaters have the advantage of being within one country so they don't need co-operation between countries like the seas around Europe where Cod will soon be a threatened species!


----------



## Pitt420dude (Mar 21, 2008)

I like the "pain and shortened life" standard. 

You ought not to do anything that causes pain to a fish or shortens it's life. 

Strange how fish are sort of exempt from most peoples standards isn't it???

Remember the Nirvana song: "It's okay to eat fish, because they don't have any feeeeelings..."


----------



## Six (May 29, 2006)

well, we shorten fishes lives by keeping them in aquariums at times and at other times we lengthen it past normality. shouldnt we strive for normality?


----------



## Deni (Jul 6, 2005)

If I knew that keeping a certain species of fish would likely shorten its life, I would probably opt for a different species. I wouldn't have much compunction about increasing the normal lifespan of a fish unless there was some indication that living longer was somehow causing pain or something to the fish.


----------

