i would love your opinion on this post

i was on a tropical fish site today, and i come across this thread and would love to get your opinions on it, so this is it word for word...

"im thinking of getting a large tank to keep in my kitchen, how cool would it be to impress your guests with a beautiful tank full of fish, then serve them for dinner.

what types of tropical fish would be most suitable for this? i think they should be reasonably large, has anyone ever tried an oscar? or maybe a big gourami?

Oscars are indeed a food fish in their native Amazonia, Im unsure of the Giant Gouramis but I dont think I could eat an Oscar and then look at my own one in the same way again .

Jay

Im assuming he got suitable responses telling him where to go. People like this guy won't last long in any hobby if he is only trying to impress people. I wont type what Id call him.
Anyhow,the idea of getting a lobster from a tank in a seafood restaurant is probably what bought the idea to the guy,but Im afraid he clearly doesnt understand much about fish. Not to mention the food we feed our fish would greatly affect the taste of any such fish being served up. Id like to know the responses he got to the post. His guests most certainly wouldn't be impressed.

Gavin

In certain Far East countries this practice maybe would be seen as nothing out of the ordinary.
For Europeans picking a lobster from a tank for a self gratifying meal leaves me uneasy.
Certain South American tribes catch and eat piranha, so we know they are edible, but would you want to pick one from a tank, gut it, cook it all in the comfort of you own kitchen diner just to be different.
I dont think so.
Certainly wouldn't receive many points from me if he/she was a fellow "Come Dine with Me" contestant
Call the #spca.
Regards
C

post the link

I had to re-read that a couple of times to make sure I was reading it right! I don't know about that now. If I went into someones house and they showed me the live fish they were going to feed me I'd probably try and sneak the fish out of the house! It's like serving up the household pet for dinner! "What's for dinner to day mammy?" "I think we'll have Lucky today" Not to mention the fact that he's most likely not going to care for the fish so you're going to end up with a big dead diseased fish on your plate, with a side serving of algae ! God I'd say he got slated in that forum!

surprisingly the guy didnt get slated, i was shocked with the amount of people who didnt find the idea of this disgusting as a hobbyist on a tropical fish keeping forum!! the majority of them were americans who didnt seem to find this odd at all!!

tho i didnt hesitate in slating him and a few others along with him..
i will try an post the link.

Dyco.....are you sure that that is not one of those "a friend of a friend" type queries.
What do you happen to keep? Any big fish?
Just joking.

It takes alsorts to make this mad world go around.....serious loonies and wind-up merchants.

I'm not a fish eater in general unless it is something advertised as kiddies food and has captian birds-eye on the pack. But, the thought of eating freshwater fish just reminds me of the smell of emptied fish-tanks.

dyco619 wrote:

impress your guests with a beautiful tank full of fish, then serve them for dinner.

Sure you didn't mean serve the guests and not the fish???

In all honesty, it's Horses for courses, what differenciates a Telapia from an Oscar etc?
If the Fish/Food is treated humanely prior to it's demise then who has the right to consider it wrong?

Kev.

wolfsberg wrote:

dyco619 wrote:

impress your guests with a beautiful tank full of fish, then serve them for dinner.

Sure you didn't mean serve the guests and not the fish???

Lets hope so matey:) I'd rather a pretentious git like that ate their friends instead

Mark

They say that the taste of fishmeat depends very much on their environment... for example carp can taste like muddy pond... would you like to eat meat that tasted like fish tank and tetramin?!

stretnik wrote:

In all honesty, it's Horses for courses, what differenciates a Telapia from an Oscar etc?
If the Fish/Food is treated humanely prior to it's demise then who has the right to consider it wrong?

Kev.

I doubt this person is a fish keeper, so I doubt the fish would be humanely treated before dying a horrible death, if th stress didnt kill em first.



Mark

It probably boils down to a question of morals, some may deem this act as being fine and others will view it as abhorrent. Most of us on here will probably err on the side of the latter, being aquarists. A fish being drawn out of an aquarium in you living room to be slaughtered for a meal as a proverbial talking point just doesn't sit well with me, in much the same way as cutting a sheep's throat for an ethnic meal.
I like to see my fish meal dead before I eat it. I dont want to watch it's last meaningless glide from one end of its tank to the other or be able to associate with it before its demise.
Regards
C

True enoogh, I hate Fish I really do it is disgusting. Were meat eaters but this is a joke, fish have already been killed for you, why not eat them already caught by the many, if thre is no fish then kill one, circle of life, but as you say, a talking point or to look some way fancy, I dont agree with that.


Mark

I don't have a moral problem with this as I grew up around the food I ate... cattle, lambs, chickens and ducks. I was weaned on rabbit stew from the back field and any pheasants we hit in the car were thrown into the boot and brought home to be left hanging... Mainly due to lack of funds and my folks having to feed a family of 7 on my Dad's seasonal pre-Celtic Tiger wage of the 80's and early 90's, not beacuse it was fashionable to be self-sufficient as it is today!

I eat what I catch on the rod that's tasty... sometimes even some of it raw!
Safe to say I see food as food altough I am an animal lover and respecter.

Where I draw the line though is eating an animal that I know would taste the way fish from an aquarium would taste.

That said, if somebody told me that I'd have to eat dog, would I?... No, I'd rather die of hunger a million times over!

Strange the way the mind works!

wolfsberg wrote:

That said, if somebody told me that I'd have to eat dog, would I?... No, I'd rather die of hunger a million times over!

Strange the way the mind works!

Believe it or not, if starvation is occuring at a slow tortuous pace, people can eat their own children, the mind turns to mush eventually from such a type of slow starvation.


Mark

Can we consider the practises of other cultures unacceptable because we find them unpalatable?

People in the west have a virtual smorgesbord of food and other nations make do with what they can, it's like the west telling the countries of Amazonia etc not to fell Trees because of what affect it may have on us while we and the continental USA have , in the past stripped vast amounts of land of all of it's native Timber. A major case of nimby.

Kev.

stretnik wrote:

Can we consider the practises of other cultures unacceptable because we find them unpalatable, people in the west have a virtual smorgesbord of food and other nations make do with what they can, it's like the west telling the countries of Amazonia etc not to fell Trees because of what affect it may have on us while we and the continental USA have , in the past stripped vast amounts of land of all of it's native Timber. A major case of nimby.

Kev.

Yet it is the west that creates the demand for all that tropical hardwood! It doesn't bother me what other cultures eat really Kev... If we were all the same it would be a very boring planet!

Culture would be the spice IN life, who want to go away and be surrounded by Irish all of the time:)

Hit the nail on the head Kev, but the same excuse, the economy, so much of the Amazon does not need to be cut down, just saw two weeks ago, not only did they fell an entire area, tey drained a lake first. This is beyong feeding yourself.


mark

Mark. wrote:

Hit the nail on the head Kev, but the same excuse, the economy, so much of the Amazon does not need to be cut down, just saw two weeks ago, not only did they fell an entire area, tey drained a lake first. This is beyong feeding yourself.


mark

While it is pretty easy for us to point fingers and judge these countries for what they do with THEIR natural resources it would be wise to remember that this type of development can result in a positive outcome for the native wildlife. A lot of the forest that is cleared is done so to make room for gigantic ranches that produce huge quantities of beef that is then exported abroad. Huge plantations that grow exportable crops also factor in here. This is good for the economy of the country in question but a balance needs to be struck. Work like this creates jobs, legit jobs that result in people working and not illegally felling trees or poaching ect. As natives find themselves with a sustainable, dependable income, their children can then be educated to respect what they have, conserve native species and question their goverments when they step out of line, and the need to make a quick buck that may result in a harsh punishment is all but taken away. All of this takes time of course, and old habits die hard but all of what I have seen on this subject eventually boils down to what the local people are willing to let happen to the environment they live in. If they are educated enough to know that illegal clearing, poaching and overfishing will eventually leave them broke and destitute then there is always hope that these incredible places are still around for generations to come. Whilst its true that some of the more unscrupulus companies will abuse their powers, under the eye of corrupt officials, if enough people take notice and stand up for what they believe to be right then things will change. Hopefully for the better.

Jay

Viperbot wrote:

Mark. wrote:

Hit the nail on the head Kev, but the same excuse, the economy, so much of the Amazon does not need to be cut down, just saw two weeks ago, not only did they fell an entire area, tey drained a lake first. This is beyong feeding yourself.


mark

While it is pretty easy for us to point fingers and judge these countries for what they do with THEIR natural resources it would be wise to remember that this type of development can result in a positive outcome for the native wildlife. A lot of the forest that is cleared is done so to make room for gigantic ranches that produce huge quantities of beef that is then exported abroad. Huge plantations that grow exportable crops also factor in here. This is good for the economy of the country in question but a balance needs to be struck. Work like this creates jobs, legit jobs that result in people working and not illegally felling trees or poaching ect. As natives find themselves with a sustainable, dependable income, their children can then be educated to respect what they have, conserve native species and question their goverments when they step out of line, and the need to make a quick buck that may result in a harsh punishment is all but taken away. All of this takes time of course, and old habits die hard but all of what I have seen on this subject eventually boils down to what the local people are willing to let happen to the environment they live in. If they are educated enough to know that illegal clearing, poaching and overfishing will eventually leave them broke and destitute then there is always hope that these incredible places are still around for generations to come. Whilst its true that some of the more unscrupulus companies will abuse their powers, under the eye of corrupt officials, if enough people take notice and stand up for what they believe to be right then things will change. Hopefully for the better.

Jay

I have to point out that it does not have to be done on such a scale, feeding yourself from theland is a right any person should have, not destroy it. All they are doing long term is letting the soil get washed away so it is a very short term solution, thats one problem, secondly it is mostly business, which the locals get practically nothing of, these logging companies get everything and the locals, they arent local to the place they are ripping up btw, get barely enough to live on compaired to a 100th of the land they destroy they could live off. I don't blame people trying to survive, actually I don't blame anyone as I am not going to pretend I know exactly how it is, I am just saying the destruction is excessive and indiscriminate, 65000 sq k so far? or is it 650000? cant rem

Devolopment needs to occur in places like this before any kind of long term, sustainable consrvation efforts can work. We would all like to see this happen without without a single tree coming down or a monkey being skinned but thats not reality. Reality is, like you have said, big business. Big business has a part to play here too, and a balance needs to struck with it, the environment and the people, native indians or not, who live there. At the end of the day it is in nobodys interest to completely destroy the Amazon or similar ecosystems and I dont think that is what is going to happen. If it does, then we deserve to suffer the consequences, whatever they will be. I still have faith that people wont allow that to happen.

Jay

Now, here's where the difficulty lies, most of the Amazon lies over very thin and very nutrient defficient Soils, so poor in fact that cleared Forest can just give one or two harvests before they become wasteland, it is the high humidity and temperatures that cause year round leaf fall which are broken down in a single season to give back to the soil what it has already taken from it, the imbalance left is irrevocable and irreconcilable.
It is a very delicate balance that has taken many millions of years to perfect.

The problem on Earth now isn't global warming it is global overpopulation, the Education of third world in better farming methods will only cause more population growth, where does this end, continents with no biodiversification, no wild genetic material to combat pest and diseases of Plants. Let us take a look at the mini microcosm that is your Fish setups, one drop of detergent, a hand with Aftershave or a fly spray for the ever buzzing Bluebottle and things go down hill so fast you can see it happening. You wouldn't dream of doing anything like that but if it's thousands of miles away it's someone elses' problem. The example can be given of the Fish tank, you can keep feeding your fish and they'll keep growing and breeding but there will come a time when you will either get rid of some of them or get more or bigger tanks, isn't the Planet like that too?

Can you imagine wall to Wall farms churning out the same cereals etc, all we'd need is a major disease to wipe out such mono culture and watch Mankind tumble . I don't know the answer but it's a scenario I envisage and fear.
There are the pollyannas out there that like to say , look on the positive but if the negatives aren't taken care of there will be no positives.

Kev.

PS. Sincere apologies to dyco619 for Blatent hijacking of Thread.

You make some very good points there Kev but I have no doubt that no matter what, the planet will bounce back. It has for eons. Calamity after calamity and just look around at whats here...a beatiful blue planet teeming with life so diverse it boggles the mind. Long story short, Earth, and the life on it, has survived some pretty hairy events. Im certain it will survive us. Hopefully, if we change our habits enough, we will be around long enough to see it. Just dawned on me that this thread started about someone wanting to eat an Oscar...I love these boards.

Jay

You make some good points Jay, but hard cash would fix it, and hard cash they aint got, not wealth but investment in their infrastructure and agriculture which would drastically increase efficiency and reduce the need to use so much land, have seen those farms, they take way more land than required before someone else grabs it, its a land grab now and not about just making a living pure greed is causing as much damage as civilization, lets see if Alec Baldwin wants to donate a few million seein as he was there tutting at the whole situation.


Mark

Viperbot wrote:

it would be wise to remember that this type of development can result in a positive outcome for the native wildlife.

Tell that to the likes of the Hyacinth Macaw, Spix's Macaw (extinct in wild) and the extinct Carolina Parrot to name but 3 equally amazing birds just off the top of my head.

There is going to be damage done, no matter what. Its naive to think that all of this is going to happen without irreperable damage being done and without doubt, certain species will suffer, and some tragically wont survive at all due to habitat destruction and other variables. All Im saying is, its easy for devoloped countries to turn around and tell poorer nations what they should do, how they should govern themselves and how to use their resources. We, after all did exactly the same thing to get to where we are today with comfortable lives, big roads and no nasties crawling through you window to bite us. Like I said earlier, I believe that educating the population of these countries and letting them do what they think is best for themselves is going to be a major part in them finally getting their act together and taking care of themselves using proper resource management and conservation efforts. This cannot and will not happen without ifrastructure and developement.

Jay

Viperbot wrote:

You make some very good points there Kev but I have no doubt that no matter what, the planet will bounce back. It has for eons. Calamity after calamity and just look around at whats here...a beatiful blue planet teeming with life so diverse it boggles the mind. Long story short, Earth, and the life on it, has survived some pretty hairy events. Im certain it will survive us. Hopefully, if we change our habits enough, we will be around long enough to see it. Just dawned on me that this thread started about someone wanting to eat an Oscar...I love these boards.

Jay

We need to change our habits and change them quick. I watched a documentary about unregulated fishing and its effects this evening and it was depressing viewing. If the current trend of over fishing by huge industrial fishing ships continues there will be no large edible fish left in the oceans by 2048.
Fishing limits imposed by governments are twice the level advised by scientists and all limits are being ignored by fishermen.

The limit for catches of Bluefin tuna to sustain the species is 10.5 thousand tonnes per annum. The limit set by the EU is 29 thousand tonnes and what's actually being caught is 61 thousand tonnes. This is one third of the entire population of bluefin tuna. At this rate they will be extinct in three years. Next is the big eyed tuna then the skipjack etc

So my point is maybe once the oceans are barren and we've exhausted the rivers we'll all turn to our fish tanks as they'll be the only fish left to go with our chips.