Go Back   Aquarium Advice - Aquarium Forum Community > Community Forum > Aquaria Off-Topic
Click Here to Login

Join Aquarium Advice Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com
 
Old 10-31-2013, 10:22 AM   #51
Aquarium Advice Freak
 
The Trooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Scotland
Posts: 419
Send a message via MSN to The Trooper
The way i see this is as follows...

Someone is bored of the fish and therefore doesn't want them - fish may end up neglected/flushed alive or any number of horrific ways to go, they could be re homed elsewhere - this person may be a great Aquariast or may not be. That is a gamble.

The OP is taking it upon himself to stop the risk and is trying to rehome as many of these as possible to suitable homes or keep them himself, which is great.

However OP can only have so many fish and as such the whole problem starts again, i would much rather have a fish humanely and quickly killed than tortured (intentionally or not) to death.

I agree with the OP.

What you could do is throw them all into a 10g tank and just let them live like that, if ofcourse you think that's a better alternative?

I do not think so, Quick death Vs slow or painful, there can be only one winner, even when it comes to humans.
__________________

__________________
The Trooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 10:23 AM   #52
come get me tang police!
 
jetajockey's Avatar


 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: In a swamp near you /Pensacola, FL
Posts: 12,047
Its similar in that both are unwanted. You don't have to euthanize a runt to maintain strong genes, you just have to remove it from the breeding gene pool. Yet most breeders will put a runt down if they cant find it a home (assuming they even try).
So what would make one situation acceptable and the other not.
__________________

__________________
Dont Forget to Join my FREE weekly Plant Giveaway.
Click Here!
jetajockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 10:25 AM   #53
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
huma-huma's Avatar

POTM Champion
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: washington Pa
Posts: 5,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Trooper View Post
The way i see this is as follows...

Someone is bored of the fish and therefore doesn't want them - fish may end up neglected/flushed alive or any number of horrific ways to go, they could be re homed elsewhere - this person may be a great Aquariast or may not be. That is a gamble.

The OP is taking it upon himself to stop the risk and is trying to rehome as many of these as possible to suitable homes or keep them himself, which is great.

However OP can only have so many fish and as such the whole problem starts again, i would much rather have a fish humanely and quickly killed than tortured (intentionally or not) to death.


I agree with the OP.

What you could do is throw them all into a 10g tank and just let them live like that, if ofcourse you think that's a better alternative?

I do not think so, Quick death Vs slow or painful, there can be only one winner, even when it comes to humans.
that's exactly the thought process that we as responsible hobbyists should be trying to eliminate. and plus I don't think we should just say "well its prob gonna have a horrid life anyways, mineaswell kill it now."
__________________
my 125g Sw...Round 2!http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums...220171-33.html
ever see someone cut a 125g in half??
http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums...-286438-4.html
huma-huma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 12:56 PM   #54
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Hobgob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by huma-huma View Post
but I still don't feel that killing healthy fish is ok at all
so like I said, is it ok for us to wait for the fish to get stunted and then kill it? Its sick and now healthy now
__________________
Hobgob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:28 PM   #55
AA Team Emeritus
 
Wy Renegade's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 4,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by huma-huma View Post
my view isn't double-sided one bit. culling dog puppies to maintain strong healthy genes is a world apart from simply killing fish because you don't have the space, and as you brought up the situation of the horses, I don't really buy into situations as that, only because theres really no valid proof to support what people claim in those situations but I still don't feel that killing healthy fish is ok at all
I have to respectfully disagree with you here, mainly because I happen to know a good bit about Siberian husky genes. If a breeder is truly interested in maintaining strong healthy genes in dogs, they wouldn't be breeding Siberian huskies in the first place (or most other dog breeds for that matter), as the vast majority of Show Siberian bloodlines can be traced back to just three male dogs. They (and other breeds) have become so inbreed that genetic disorders (thankfully rare in the past) are starting to show up even in Siberians. Further, you are ignoring the fact that many breeders have puppies put down not only because they are runts or because some gentic disorder or deformity shows up, but also because they were a cross between two dogs they didn't want to breed, because they can't find a potential buyer and they don't have the space to keep them, and because they can't find buyers fast enough and the puppies are simply getting too old to sell. All these are fairly common practices in the world of dog or any other purebred animal breeding.

As for the situation with wild horses in this country, you can buy in or not, it doesn't change what is happening. It also isn't occurring just in Wyoming. Wild horses and ponies all over the nation including on the east coast are in the same situation. Scientists have spent millions of government dollars on attempting to develop a nonfertility drug that can be induced by tranquilizer darts and lasts for an extended period. Do a little research online and you'll learn all kinds of things.

Personally, I'm really not in favor of putting down perfectly healthy animals either, but if it a choice between that or letting them suffer, I'm all for putting them down in as humane a way as possible.
__________________
the Bog

"Listen to some of these guys talk, and it's like they were born from their momma's belly with a fishkeeping encyclopedia in one hand and an API kit in the other" (unrevealed).
Wy Renegade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:38 PM   #56
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
HUKIT's Avatar

POTM Champion
Tank of the Month Award
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 42.2411°N/88.3161°W
Posts: 6,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wy Renegade View Post
Personally, I'm really in favor of putting down perfectly healthy animals.
Is that a typo or are you really in favor of that?

This thread has gotten so far off the path of the original question, now we are bringing in dogs and horses? I'm sorry but there is a HUGE difference between putting down mammals over fish...
__________________
Those Who Lack The Courage Will Always Find A Philosophy To Justify It.

HUKIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:06 PM   #57
AA Team Emeritus
 
Wy Renegade's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 4,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by HUKIT View Post
Is that a typo or are you really in favor of that?

This thread has gotten so far off the path of the original question, now we are bringing in dogs and horses? I'm sorry but there is a HUGE difference between putting down mammals over fish...
Thanks for catching that LOL - fixed. I guess it depends on your point of view, I personally don't see much difference between the two ~ they are all animals, but I know that lots of people do. I do recognize the need to maintain genetics, populations, etc. doesn't mean I always agree with how that task is accomplished. I think that if you talked to the actual breeders of these animals, you wouldn't find much difference between their attitude and the one that you expressed.
__________________
the Bog

"Listen to some of these guys talk, and it's like they were born from their momma's belly with a fishkeeping encyclopedia in one hand and an API kit in the other" (unrevealed).
Wy Renegade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2013, 07:29 PM   #58
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Cactuspixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 1,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by insecurity View Post
Yeah, its a topic no one really wants to talk about it. Sadly, I'm having a special case of it here. So I have a hobby aquarium business going on. Nothing fancy- I'll setup, install & maintain aquariums for people. What I've been getting recently however, is an influx of people emailing me asking if I can take their fish for them, as they've lost interest in fish-keeping or they're moving, etc. Not wanting to see a fish neglected, I've been saying yes, and petting these fish into my spare tanks. But now I have a problem: I have too many of these fish, and I can't seem to get rid of them. I can't sell them because nobody is interested in buying them. I've been trying to get rid of them by putting them into the tanks I setup and install, but at this rate, I'll be forever trying to get rid of them. And that's where the topic of euthanasia comes into play. Now, granted, there's nothing ethical about euthanizing a perfectly healthy fish, and I agree with that. But what about my bottom line? All told- I don't depend on my hobby business, but at the same time, I do have a couple thousand sunk into it. Is it ethical to euthanize these healthy fish to protect my bottom line?
You yourself said it is unethical to euthanize healthy fish. That eliminates any and all reasons for doing so. This is why you are torn. You need to solve that dilemma for yourself, as the answer lies in your own values.
We all have different values, so you will get conflicting points of view in response to your question.
I am vegan, so my values are likely to be seen as more extreme than the norm.
Euthanizing a healthy fish is something i personally would struggle with, though I think a quick and painless death via Clive oil is infinitely preferable to a miserable existence in cramped and/or toxic conditions, or being torn apart when fed to other fish.

I don't like the idea that people can take the easy way out by dumping their unwanted pets/fish. They are happy for someone else to deal with nasty side of things while they go out and buy more ill-fated pets/fish. I would rather they took responsibility and euthanized their fish themselves. They might even discover that they'd rather keep it than kill it to get a prettier fish.

I guess my values are less extreme than yours lol.
I just don't think that death is the worst thing that happens to living things.

On a practical note:
Are there no fish/pet shops around that these people could take their fish to? Perhaps the place they bought them from?
__________________
Cactuspixie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2013, 08:51 PM   #59
Great white snark
 
DragonFish71's Avatar



Tank of the Month Award
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Posts: 6,563
I'm not sure where the problem is.

euthanasia: quick, painless death
vs
murder: slow, torturous death in a too small tank, being tended by a moron or death in a dumpster

If you can't find a good home for the fish, and can't keep them yourself, what are your options? Are you going to throw it in a dumpster or use clove oil?

Seriously people, get a grip.
__________________
Jamie.... "The fingers of natural selection are hovering over the delete button."
AA community rules: http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums...ork&page=rules

AA ToS
http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums/misc.php?do=sknetwork&page=tos
DragonFish71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2013, 09:07 PM   #60
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
bud29's Avatar

POTM Champion
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In a van, down by the river
Posts: 3,673
Send a message via Yahoo to bud29
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonFish71 View Post
I'm not sure where the problem is.

euthanasia: quick, painless death
vs
murder: slow, torturous death in a too small tank, being tended by a moron or death in a dumpster

If you can't find a good home for the fish, and can't keep them yourself, what are your options? Are you going to throw it in a dumpster or use clove oil?

Seriously people, get a grip.
I agree. Euthanizing fish would by no means be my first choice - however if it comes down to it, euthanasia would be better than the alternative.
__________________

__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
bud29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
euthanasia

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off








» Photo Contest Winners








Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.