Feeder Fish

Most fish are predators. There are a few fish that feed primarily on algae or soft-leaved plants — plecs, mollies, and mbuna, for example — but the vast majority eat other animals. Because aquarists keep relatively small fish, the preferred prey tends to be rather small as well, with small crustaceans and insects topping the list. Live or frozen bloodworms, mosquito larvae, brine shrimps, and Daphnia are enthusiastically eaten by virtually all of the popular community fish.


However, there is no escaping the fact that many fish are piscivores; that is, their natural diet isn’t insects and crustaceans, but fish. Caring for these fish raises an ethical dilemma that has divided the hobby for decades: should aquarists feed predatory fish with live “feeder fish” such as goldfish, guppies, and minnows.

also would it be better to breed your own or buy them:and if you feel the fish you keep are not piscivores why do you feel this way.

Plenty of point to view hear.

Its a forum of differant views (hopefully) please express your own view and debate others

Regards

think this topic was covered before

mossy wrote:

think this topic was covered before

Unfortunatly i think most topics are and this will always be a problem with forum post

Does not mean it can not be covered again i now it was covered on an alternate forum recently gathered a bit of interest and i am sure there are people that use this forum and not the other so just maybe it might gather interest hear also.

just to clarify i did search for the topic on this forum and found nothing

live fish are to me a no no, if you keep predators there are alternatives like mussels, lancefish etc which are frozen foods and to me an acceptable alternative, thawing these and using a light bit of fishing line threaded through it and place it in the flow of a power filter will stimulate event the pickiest predator to attack... but live fish a definate no as it is a cruel practice as the target/feeder fish cannot escape as it could in captivity

im going to have to agree with sheag here , i will admit being called a hypocrite can be dished around here if we're to forget that mosquito larvae and lance fish etc are infact live at one stage and certainly feel pain but i feel frozen ones are the way to go id rather be killed in some industrial humane ( possibly humane not sure how they do it ) manner than to be plopped into a tank with an arowana and digested , thats just me however.
i know plenty of people that feed guppys and minnows to predators and i cant say i approve because its rarely required and i kno a few people that wouldnt admit it but get a kick out of it which is both sad and sadistic, however who am i to differentiate between the value of life given to a live e.g water bug vs. a guppy? also being a reptile and amphibian enthusiast there are frozen rodents but there are also live crickets so again comes the judgeing the value of life ; in this case of a rodent vs. an insect.
In the end it appears we must strive to keep our animals fed in the most humane way possible and not to forget the many trophic levels that the earths bio sphere is based upon and recognise certain species niche is merely to be a source of energy so we dont get caught up in morals that could lead to the death of a fish from poor diet.

My own two cents on the topic

Yes i would use feeder fish not for the pleasure of watching a predatory fish hunt or for fun there is no enjoyment in this.
However most fish are predators and i think do require on occasions to be treated as such.

If you keep live bearing fish for instance and leave it to survival of the fittest is this not the same as using feeder fish.
If you Keep egg laying fish and you want the parent fish to maintain them for several attempts the eggs or wigglers will be eaten again is this not the same .

in relation to buy feeder fish this i would not do as you would have to treat the same as buying any tropical fish and put them in QT tank to make sure there is no diseases bought into the tank i would sooner raise my own

paul wrote:

My own two cents on the topic

Yes i would use feeder fish not for the pleasure of watching a predatory fish hunt or for fun there is no enjoyment in this.
However most fish are predators and i think do require on occasions to be treated as such.

If you keep live bearing fish for instance and leave it to survival of the fittest is this not the same as using feeder fish.
If you Keep egg laying fish and you want the parent fish to maintain them for several attempts the eggs or wigglers will be eaten again is this not the same .

in relation to buy feeder fish this i would not do as you would have to treat the same as buying any tropical fish and put them in QT tank to make sure there is no diseases bought into the tank i would sooner raise my own

So, given this logic, it would be ok for Dublin Zoo to put live Deer or Sheep, Cattle or Goats into a Lion enclosure to satiate two needs?

1. To give live food
2. To give pleasure to the person feeding the live food to the Fish.

You can beat this to death with a Yard Brush but the general consensus is that live Food above a certain level of Cognisance, rightly in my opinion, feel it shouldn't be practised.

I would hope that on a spiritual level we manage to rise above the practise.

Kev.

sigh; there is no right or wrong here im afraid. if it wld make my fish healthy and immaculate looking i would not rule out feeding live fish. only good thing is that these are not available and might be disease prone.

the hypocrisy is that using frozen foods is ok? the shrimps/fish are still gonna be killed then frozen and we still use it no? hands up those that only feed pellets to their fishes.

the cruelty part i can understand; some like to see their oscars or arowanas chase the live fishes as a nice sight. but where to draw the line here bearing in mind that all fishes in the wild gets eaten ALL the time anyways...

The point needs to be stressed, the fish that wild Fish feed on have recourse to escape, Fish being subjected to prolonged terror before being consumed alive in an enclosed Tank is utterly wrong and contemptible no matter what the purpose is in doing so and labelling such Fish as feeder Fish seems to try to exonerate them from a tag of cruelty .
Micro Worms, Brine Shrimp, Mosquito larvae, white Worms, Grindal Worms, etc are at a level of consciousness that would be deemed to be acceptable by most, I personally, would not keep a Fish if it required any live Fish in it's diet and I hate to say that I genuinely believe there is something deeper in anyone that can watch a higher life form being stressed to provide entertainment.

You only need to view the disgusting Posts on Youtube depicting idiots revelling in beautiful and very expensive animals being placed in a Tank to resemble a Gladiatorial arena and hearing eggers on revelling in the event, the comments posted reflect how a section of Society have become unconsciously de-sensitised, it really saddens me.

Kev.

stretnik wrote:

You only need to view the disgusting Posts on Youtube depicting idiots revelling in beautiful and very expensive animals being placed in a Tank to resemble a Gladiatorial arena and hearing eggers on revelling in the event, the comments posted reflect how a section of Society have become unconsciously de-sensitised, it makes me reallly sad.

Kev.

Try to remove such idiots from the questions what goes on in these videos is wrong.

if you want to use other animals to make your point thats fair enough

I eat meat and i am aware how it gets on my table and these animals have no chance of escape they are bred for one reason.

We try to justify this sometimes by calling it free range product end result no chance of escape.

So Paul, asking for opinions etc is a waste of time because the debate will be cyclical and will come to no conclusion other than the conclusion that there is no conclusion so I conclude.

Kev.

No Kevin asking for opinions is not a waste of time

I have given mine and how i view things and by no means should anyone have to feel the same or agree with me

Me not wanting to bring those videos on you tube into the questions is because that is a whole differant ball game they have no morals and only feed live fish for sheer entertainment value it is not done for the Preditor fish.those videos are disgusting

I think it would be fairer to all Forum members if the Extract posted was viewed in full.
Just a suggestion for Admin, could it be made as one of the rules that any Text copied and pasted on a Thread could have the origin of the Text posted along side? It would exonorate the poster from personal responsibility for the information contained and give respect to the Author and the Website it was taken from.



www.wetwebmedia.com/fwsubwebindex/fdgfdrartneale.htm


Kev.

NB.
This is the rule on this Forum anyway - as I think you'll find it is (or definitely should be) the Rule on every forum. Other people's articles (and pictures) are their own intellectual property and should be respected as such!
In this particular case (the link provided) is by far the best way - far better than posting the whole article - as anyone interested enough will open that page and read the article in the context it was posted.
John

I could of just posted Fedder fish what are views.
Is it wright
Is it wrong

in context its the same thing

and another thread goes down the toilet

I don't think the Thread has gone down the Toilet at all, I could have plagiarised the whole web page by copying and pasting the pros and cons contained within the Page in response to your request for opinions but both of would have known what I had done and that just wouldn't rest comfortably with me and I would feel like I was cheating, I like the honesty of the Forum members on ITFS, I always cite where I have gotten Text if it isn't my own, I love a level Playing Field.

There was no malice in my bringing this Web link to the attention to the other Forum members, it was just to let them read the whole article which I feel is very interesting as long as it is accepted it is like the question, how long is a piece of string? It is subject to interpretation and conscience.

Where opinions are concerned, there are no rights or wrongs, just opinions.

Kev.

There is a difference between a predator and a carnivore (incl fish eater) and an apex predator.

I think that what is being attempted to be debated here is "carnivorous predators" (or just carnivores) as opposed to predators such as Pacus (a predator of seeds) or plecos (another predator).

If we talk about predators, then we have to talk about prey. When both of those are brought into the equation then we are talking about predation..... but predation is not just consuming another orgranism, it is about a specialised relationship between the two organisms.

In captivity, often that relationship is lost and thus a carnivore eating another animal is not necessarily 'natural'.

Now, there is always the other debate on the level on consciousness of the prey...eg invert vs vertebrate. But this is really a different debate that needs its own airing.

There are some rare occasions when a specimen animal will not eat a dead vertebrate animal (this is true in the reptile and fish world).
However, for most cases, a predator or a carnivore will eat substitute dead food (very few fish are apex predators, but even apex predators don't need to kill a living vertebrate animal).

Even some of the most primitive predatory fish, eg the lungfish or Polypterus, will accept and do very well on substitute food.

Now, what about insects? eg flies, locusts, or other inverts? should they come into the bigger debate.

I am always curious about the word 'humanely'.....it's a bit fuzzy and too much anthropocentric for my liking.
What we may consider to be 'humane' may not actually be 'humane' at all. Humane seems to be applied to the effect of something on the observer (=man), and doesn't really care too much about the object.
It's a bit like the death penalty having the 'lethal injection' as being 'humane' whereas dropping a 30 tonne piece on concrete on the condemned might be considered an inhumane death-penalty (it's a bit messy for the observer!)


ian

I totally agree, it ends up with how sensitive a person might be to an action taken, my feelings are that de-sensitising leads to disregard to others feelings, our own species and others, I don't envision a bloodworm sitting on the Tank Floor, worrying if it's demise will be quick and painless but the fact a guppy will swim as fast as it can to avoid capture indicates to me that on some level it is aware of the threat and doesn't favour the outcome.

A comment was made re an Animal in a slaughter house not being free to escape but it is quick, it hasn't got a raging lunatic running after it with a Machete, chopping lumps out of it while it bounced off the Walls.

Kev.

from my own experience of looking after polypterus, arowanas , oscars, red bellies, pike cichlid etc etc that these types of fish feed perfectly fine on e.g. bloodworm.the only time theyve been unresponsive to frozen is when theyve been fed live before they got to my care , ive never looked after a fish that required live food from the get go honest.there are plenty of perfectly fine alternatives to live and i commend anyone who strives towards it , if its the case where its impossible the frozen is non responsive fair enough feed your predator a cricket or locust or frozen prawn etc, feeding guppies etc just because of the 'chase' is a depiction of a pathetic person in my opinion, i think kev hit the nail on the head on this one and i do agree with ian a debate on the topic of insects life value as a foil to what we're discussing here is a whole other world and certainly would be an interesting one!

also to answer your simplified question paul ; it is wrong , too many alternatives to dismiss and as stated the bloodworm sits oblivious to the fish , a guppy fights hopelessy for his life fully aware whats going on and survival instinct in full effect.

so; to summarise a arowana fishkeeper that feeds live fish as opposed to one that only feed frozen livestock is not a fishkeeper that we aspire to follow the footsteps of?

I believe referring to the bloodworm is an assumption saying it oblivious to the situation

just because it cant move quick and has to wait for its demise as apposed to doing a runner

lets say i breed my feeder fish but before i feed them to my predator i put the in a bowl of water place it in a freezer until its metabolic system stops then feed that to my predator fish.

so now ive killed the fish first is that acceptable in theory its possible the fish has had a painless death.

If feeding live Fish to other Fish in the Hobby were the norm I don't think we would be having this conversation, what anyone does legally in the confines of their own Homes remains private and the business of the House holder, however , put these activities into the public domain and you run the risk of rebuke and before anyone asks, "what is the norm"? It is an activity that is practised by the majority, if most people fed live food, there would be comments like how could you? Frozen food is unnatural etc.

Kev.

its sadistic is what it is , for once i like the 'norm' ( that being frozen and pellets ! )

Where is this all going?

These topics always end up going round and round in circles, as there are no rights or wrongs there can be no end to it, it could, in theory fill the web many times over, I'm right you are wrong, you are right you are wrong.

It's all down to opinions and we all know we all have plenty of those, me more than others.

As you stated in the beginning, it will ruffle Feathers or words to that effect.
These contentious topics always start off asking opinions, these given, tend to incite disgruntlement and topics descending into extremely fuzzy Logic.

Kev.

So using live fish is horrible and by majority its wrong

Putting a fish through a potential painless death is sadistic

just to clarify the biggest mouth fish i own is an Angel fish there would not to many feeder fish fitting there

And your right Kevin there is no wrong or wright answere just differant opinions and it could go forever

As you said

As you stated in the beginning, it will ruffle Feathers or words to that effect.
These contentious topics always start off asking opinions, these given, tend to incite disgruntlement and topics descending into extremely fuzzy Logic

My Bad on this occasion

Yes to point no.1
To point no.2, elucidate "potentially painless", it either is or isn't.

Kev.

Kevin

I have no idea weather it would be painless for the fish or not i am not a Vet and i have no idea of how a fish feels

No bad, no good, if there were no posters there'd be no Threads and ergo, no Forum
Banter is delicious but like a Dog, we need sometimes to let go of the Bone lol.

Kev.

stretnik wrote:

No bad, no good, if there were no posters there'd be no Threads and ergo, no Forum
Banter is delicious but like a Dog, we need sometimes to let go of the Bone lol.

Kev.

No icon for a hand shake we will meet again but next time ill do even more homework

Thank you and to all that have posted so fare please feel free to continue commenting

You need only watch a Fish with White spot or other irritant to realise they are responsive to external stimuli, if not, they wouldn't spend every hour rubbing and scraping off rocks to remove the causative agent of the irritant, I think it's safe to say they, without any doubt, do feel pain.

Kev.