feel the need to explain myself.

jscoggs27 · Post by **jscoggs27** » 22 Feb 2010, 18:54

Not entirely sure why i'm writing this but here goes.
I feel the need to explain myself, Ive been keeping (what was considered exotic) catfish since I was 17. I'm way old now. Most of the stuff thats available now was considered very rare in the 80's and early 90's (and vice versa). The people who acquired them were considered odd. Rtc's and shovelnose cats got front page treatment on fishkeeping magazines, wont find that too often now.
I'm really apologizing for being a bad fishkeeper, I never had much success with any of the cats I kept, (I can remember that much). Everything Ive learnt, and thats not much, has been the hard way, losing fish, having to give them away etc. Hard for me, much worse for the cats.
We are all very lucky now, cos we can look at pics of any fish we want and even video clips of the rarer varieties. (Here comes the excuse) That wasn't possible when I started, we only had BBC Micros, and ZX Spectrums, No Internet, little or no literature that was affordable or available. Have a look in the library under catfish. Yeah, that is a very poor excuse.
I guess its easy to make moral judgements on those who persist in keeping fish beyond there capabilities, but what are we in this hobby for? Are we not all a bit guilty of that? For who's benefit do we keep them?
So, I wont be keeping any more clariids or SA Predators, Or anything remotely difficult. I simply cant look after them as they should be looked after.
Just keep posting pics of your catfish, Ill be happy with that.

2wheelsx2 · Post by **2wheelsx2** » 22 Feb 2010, 19:03

I don't think you need to explain yourself. Everyone does what they can to the best of their capabilities/resources. I'd love to make a river in my house for my plecos, but it's just not realistic. And before the internet, the information flow was not so fast/easy. I mean I had a book on Oscars when I started keeping fish that said 2 full grown O's were ok in a 75 gallon. Now you'll get flamed for trying something like that. These forums are for us to exchange information and learn things from one another, so I don't it's necessary to feel bad or explain your actions if the intentions were good to begin with. I am sure, if you post that you have 5 RTC's and 5 Shovelnoses in a 33 gallon, and people tell you that it's going to be trouble and you ignore, then what's the point of posting right? But if you then turn around and use that advice to rehome the fish and keep something more suitable for the tank, then the forum has served it's purpose. Just my 2c.

Back · Post by **Back** » 22 Feb 2010, 21:08

I actually feel worse about the current situation. I'm thinking of the whole aquarium industry and whatever effect it might have on wild populations.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it a lot more fishkeepers today and a lot more money involved in getting rare and exotic species, subspecies or local variations than 20 years ago?
An Oscar, RTC or similar fish in the 80's might have been treated incorrect due to lack of information or misinformation. We can feel stupid about such things now but what mistakes are we making today?

I'm not interested in the common bristlenose. I want something more exotic - something a bit more like a jewel and something I can't see everywhere - something that has that little extra that keeps me glued to the tank half an hour more in the evenings.
That makes me feel stupid because I know that a Bristlenose is just as fantastic as anything else. Furthermore the Bristlenose is most likely bred and owning one will therefore not affect a wild population and it hasn't been transported around the globe just to come to my tank where I can't keep it in a 100% natural habitat.

I know those things and still I want a more exotic fish than a bristlenose.

Maybe there is already a thread about this issue but my question is still raised here anyway.
- Are there threats, if so - are they big, do we support an ecological multitude/variety collapse by getting what we want?
I guess that the nerds wanting to pay extra for an exotic fish in reality aren't that many even through out the world.
But some local fish populations might not be big either. Some fish are protected but we know how such protections function in reality when money gets involved.
And I also know that at lot of fishkeepers with exotic species try hard to make them multiply as an important part of their hobby.

I desperately hope that fishkeeping today can be a part of understanding the environment and adding data and information about ecological issues. I'm seeing some (or even a lot) of that here at PlanetCatfish.
And I desperately hope that the Sorubims waiting for me at the local LFS won't be crucial for an ecological collapse in the waters they really should live in (or maybe Sorubims are being bred as well nowdays?).

Edit: spelling and a missing word in the now underlined question. (I was a bit tired when posting this one)

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 22 Feb 2010, 21:38

Right, as this has side-tracked a bit from the original confession/explanation....

To a very large extent, it is better for the fish to be captured for the fish trade, than the alternatives. By this, I don't mean that the fish have a better life in the tank than in their natural habitat, but because it gives a value to the contents of the river - which is otherwise valued as "lunch" (or some such), and many of our hobby fishes are actually not particularly great food-fish, so the value of those are not particularly low...

For NEARLY all fish, the number of fish in the wild is able to withstand the pressure from the ornamental trade - there are exceptions, but very few.

The reason many of the "unusual" fish are expensive is the cost of importing them and shipping them around to the shops, etc. Big fish are more expensive, because they are harder to ship - you get fewer fish in a bag or box, so the shop/wholesaler importing the fish has to recover more cost from the few fish.

--
Mats

2wheelsx2 · Post by **2wheelsx2** » 22 Feb 2010, 21:42

Mats hit the nail on the head there. The most profitable fish to ship are Cardinal tetras. It's like 2 cents a fish and 1000 in a box, while say you can get 4 12" L190's in a box. So the Royals are worth $400 retail while the Cardinals are worth $2000 retail. When you're picking up a large wc fish, you're basically chipping in for the shipping in a huge way.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 22 Feb 2010, 22:06

I don't really want to give the exact prices of the fish, but if you go buy Cardinal tetra (Small) from a exporter in Colombia, you get about 1200 fish in a bag - and two bags fit in a large box. If we spend the same exact number of dollars buying XXL P. nigrolineatus, we get 18 of them. Each bag of fish will have 1-2 fish in it, so say we get 1.5 fish on average in the bags, we need 12 boxes.

For each box, we have to pay for the actual box, and pay shipping to get it wherever it's going. Shipping lots of boxes to the same destination at the same time is of course cheaper than one box, but I'm sure that shipping 12 boxes will cost a bunch of money.

--
Mats

2wheelsx2 · Post by **2wheelsx2** » 22 Feb 2010, 22:37

Yes, Mats, I hear ya. I have a friend who imports, and he explained the whole situation to me a while back, and it makes perfect sense.

And to get back to the original topic, it's only in rare instances where the habitat is restricted or there is some other extenuating circumstances, where a valued fish would be endangered by hobbyists, since no matter how crazy it gets, there are only so may crazy hobbyists in the world. The two examples off the top of my head are the galaxy rasboras (no longer a problem) and the L046,

jscoggs27 · Post by **jscoggs27** » 23 Feb 2010, 08:36

Right, as this has side-tracked a bit from the original confession/explanation....

Actually I think Back understood my post as I intended it. However, I never mentioned cost.

bamboosticks · Post by **bamboosticks** » 23 Feb 2010, 09:14

2wheelsx2 wrote:you have 5 RTC's and 5 Shovelnoses in a 33 gallon

lol

Back · Post by **Back** » 23 Feb 2010, 11:16

jscoggs27 wrote:
Right, as this has side-tracked a bit from the original confession/explanation....
Actually I think Back understood my post as I intended it. However, I never mentioned cost.

I don't know. I felt like hijacking the thread never the less but I wanted to know if we make new mistakes today.

The answers I got makes me feel much better. Thanks!
I've been having those questions in the back of my head but never really checked the situation out.
I am a person who's by nature rather concerned about ecology and environmental questions - also ethical issues in these matters.
There are plants - really rare ones like certain cycads for example - that some private collectors are prepared to pay huge sums of money to get their hands on. Such plants risks "poaching".
Or as we in scandinavia have lost raptor birds' eggs (like the endangered Peregrine Falcon) to egg collectors.
I just hope that the same thing won't happen to certain fish populations and that this hobby won't reach those proportions.

But when it comes to this threads original post:
No. There's no use in feeling bad for old mistakes - other than that such feelings hopefully helps us avoid doing the same mistakes all over.

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 23 Feb 2010, 11:37

Interesting topic. I've felt bad for past stupid mistakes but I keep trying and with more success and learning, comes more respect for nature. I think that's one of the best things about this hobby. How many fishkeepers would flip out if someone suggested pouring x into their local stream? Many fishkeepers are not likely to say, "It's just a fish, it's not like it's a cat or a dog!" and this translates to not using pesticides, leaving trees in place as nurse trees or snags for other insects and critters and raptor look-outs. The closer we all get to what's out there, the more we respect it and all those tiny individual changes add up to a lot.

Don't give up on rare species if you come across one, the more people who experience these fish, the more we learn about them and can provide better care.
However if you want to go off happily in the other direction..I'd like to see your thoughts on your first local 'fishing' trip or the details of fishy habitats you visit in Traveler's Notebook Forum. Maybe you don't have catfish all over the place like some areas of the world but a tank of local water critters always makes for a good learning experience for all of us.
Check it out to see what's happening with certain habitats:http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=26

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 23 Feb 2010, 13:35

Based on Back's location, he's about 800 km north of Stockholm (and the other side of the Baltic sea), so the chance of finding wild catfish is exactly zero. In the very south of Sweden, there is Silurus glanis, but they are not in the Stockholm area, and further north is less likely yet. They only live in "warm" rivers in Sweden. Not sure if there is ANY in Finland, as Finland doesn't stretch as far south.

--
Mats

L number Banana · Post by **L number Banana** » 23 Feb 2010, 14:00

Hi MatsP,

When I said,

Maybe you don't have catfish all over the place like some areas of the world but a tank of local water critters always makes for a good learning experience for all of us.

, I was referring to jscoggs27's location of UK. The waters may not be erupting with catfish per se but as seen in the travellers notebook, we like to see just about any aquatic critters. That would include any goodies found in the waters near Back's location too. There must be lots of life there even if it's for seals

It would be new to the rest of us and therefor worth writing about.

Just don't want someone to give up on fish keeping in any way shape or form so local collecting would be an option for people who are unsure about the status of rare fish collecting. If we all look at our own backyard and introduce it to others, more people care and more is protected. Then of course there's local laws that have to be checked wrt local collecting of anything.

Am I being just a bit optimistic and maybe dreaming a bit? Yup.

Back · Post by **Back** » 23 Feb 2010, 16:15

Oh we have the most lovely fishes in our waters. No Catfish though. Those are - as MatsP wrote - not to be found in Finland. The nearest one is Silurus glanis in Sweden (also mentioned by MatsP). There is a theory that the local Loch Ness monster in the lake Storsjön near Östersund (Quite far north in Sweden) might be a Silurus. Never been confirmed.

I've been fishing for food since I was small. Nowdays I don't due to lack of time but I'd say that I'm pretty well acquainted with the local fishes.

I've had lampreys Lampetra fluviatilis and the European perch Perca fluviatilis briefly in tanks at home. The lampreys just a few days for my children to see.

But I feel this thread is moving in yet another direction at the moment

EDIT: Nice coincidence that both shares the same name - fluviatilis.

feel the need to explain myself.

feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.

Re: feel the need to explain myself.