Tank Bred thoughts, and philosophical questions

[kathywithbirds]

Originally Posted by reefjitsu

Look at it this way:
These color morphs have a advantage that may allow them to out-survive their wild counterparts. If the coral reefs disappear as predicted, these fish have found a way to survive by being attractive to humans.

Input from a beginner/bleeding heart: culling just sounds cruel!! Would you kill off a child with a birth defect? Or because he didn't have blond hair?
(Oh dear god this sounds like a church debate on abortion...)
I agree with reefjitsu, the "new," and perhaps "deformed" fish might find a happy home with someone like me, who doesn't know that his head is misshapen, but chose him for his lively personality and the fact that I do not have the equipment or experience for an anemone.
And I'm not inferring that Reefjitsu is advocating sloppy breeding en masse.

I have to hope there are enough breeders out there who have Ilham's sensibilities on responsible breeding, though I disagree with the whole culling thing!

We all do the best we can in most situations, and hopefully breeding marine fish and other species is one of them.

[kathywithbirds]

I notice no one has posted since my tirade on adopting the deformed clown.

[Kirblit]

I think that the culling is an important part of the breeders responsibility, that said I certainly don't like to think about it either. I think that in nature these fish that are malformed don't generally make it anyway because they don't have all of the tools to survive in the wild, and they would only exist in our aquariums because we have kept them alive. There was natural selection with humans as well, but we have found a way around that problem, technology. I can see both sides of this debate and believe that they are both somewhat correct, but there has to be a middle ground. Kathywithbirds I know how you feel about the culling, my wife is the same way with here freshwater tanks. She is always on the look out for the "gimpy" fish, and once she see's one she has to have it. So needless to say we have a housefull of "gimpy" fish that all seem to get around fine, but never really appear happy to me. I happen to be one of those people that put myself in their shoes and if I were like that, well, I wouldn't want to be like that.

I think that everyone has their own opinion on the subject of captive breeding. I think that it's a great thing for the hobby, and for the reef in general. I think it's a matter of time before most fish in the hobby are captive bread and that will be great. I also believe that it will get out of control with all kinds of morphs just like the freshwater hobby, and it's up to us to choose whether to buy those fish or not. I just don't think that I would want some artificial breed in one of my tanks, it's not what we are trying to recreate in this hobby.

[kathywithbirds]

One has to define what "natural selection" is. On one hand, you have people who believe that natural selection is what would happen in the wild without man's interference. But I contend that's flawed reasoning. Man has influenced every part of the globe by his very existence (sorry to the women out there, I'm using the collective "man"), so who is to say what the earth would look like had man never existed?
We're trying to regulate fishing (hubby in the Coast Guard can attest to this), save the whales, find "extinct" species, save the rainforests, have created species like Catalina macaws and picasso clownfish, regulate our own propagation...
Where's the line? I'll call it fate, perhaps... lets say we nuke ourselves out of existence from our sheer stupidity (OK, vast simplification but bear with me) and there's more species that survive the apocalypse that were "created" by us or bred for certain characteristics than species that were "naturally" evolving. So who's to say that's not "natural selection"?

Let's call it the "It's a Wonderful Life" theory.

Sometime I'll expound on my dolphin and aliens theories.

BTW, just FYI, I believe that Catalinas are infertile.

And yes, I too have a house full of adopted creatures!

[reefjitsu]

If you consider humans to be just another part of the natural world, as I do, then nothing is really unnatural. Save of course any supernatural things that may or may not exist out there.

[meandean45]

Hello!
I guess that I've got to give you that point! I hope that they can find a way to survive when Aquariums are outlawed because they're "destroying"the worlds' Reefs!
Dean

[lcstorc]

Originally Posted by kathywithbirds

Sometime I'll expound on my dolphin and aliens theories.

BTW, just FYI, I believe that Catalinas are infertile.

And yes, I too have a house full of adopted creatures!

Let me guess. Another fan of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
So long and thanks for all the fish.
You know it is the mice that are really in charge.

[meandean45]

[quote=kathywithbirds;264786]One has to define what "natural selection" is. On one hand, you have people who believe that natural selection is what would happen in the wild without man's interference. But I contend that's flawed reasoning. Man has influenced every part of the globe by his very existence (sorry to the women out there, I'm using the collective "man"), so who is to say what the earth would look like had man never existed?
We're trying to regulate fishing (hubby in the Coast Guard can attest to this), save the whales, find "extinct" species, save the rainforests, have created species like Catalina macaws and picasso clownfish, regulate our own propagation...
Where's the line?
Apparently there isn't one!!! Speaking for myself, "I'd like to see one drawn, and not crossed!" At least in the reef hobby. I need someone to explain to me how a person can "Re-create the natural beauty of a reef habitat" with creatures that do NOT occur in nature!?!!!

True "Natural Selection" ceased in humans long before recorded history began. Simple things like crutches and canes, Spears and Knives, made it possible for our ancestors to survive, when nature would have "culled" them. Has this been "Good" for our species as a whole? We'll never know. Once the line is crossed, there is no way to go back and check to see if it would have been 1) Better, 2) Worse, or 3) the same. Theories will come and go, but none of them can be proved or disproved. The development of anti-biotic medicines in the 20th century kept millions of humans alive (including myself) long past the time that infection/disease would have "culled" them. Is this better or worse for the species? Again, the line has been crossed, and there is no way of telling now. Are humans REALLY better off with a life span that is now 20 or more years longer on the average? Is it better to die from Pneumonia at age 32, or Cancer at age 72? Or a broken leg at 12? Or, Perhaps, Starvation at 12 days? There are no right, or wrong answers.

We as a group, by refusing to buy these specimens, Have a chance to draw, and hold, the line for reef species. I think that we should, obviously, others disagree.

I'l end my tirade now, as it's obvious to me that it's a situation where the thoughts of the many will prevail, and I will just have to get used to seeing "Picasso Clowns" for sale at my LFS.

Thanks to all for their input!

Regards,
Dean

[kathywithbirds]

We shall agree to disagree!!

Lynn, no, not Hitchhiker, more like Xfiles. I'm of the opinion that WE are the aquarium for the aliens. Food? No, don't think so. More like they take out a specimen, poke and prod it a bit, put it back (alien abductions). This would explain lost civilizations -- they decided to re-think the inhabitants.

The dolphins -- another of my theories, I'm a stay at home mom, I have nothing better to do -- were one of the first species to come out of the water (or, well, stay in, whatever) and create early civilization. (One of the species that we can't seem to decide how smart they are.) Their world was probably something spectacular (Atlantis??) with art, music, literature, as well as disease, famine, prejudice, wars... they progressed so far without decimating themselves that decided at some point they were truly happy back in the water in the first place. And if we're smart we'll also get to the point where we realize that "progress" isn't necessarily progress.

[lcstorc]

You really need to read Hitchikers Guide. It is a great series of books and many of your theories are represented in them. Or if you don't like to read see the movie even. It is one of the few movies made from books that keeps the feel of the original. The movie is a bit over the top but then again if you know anything about the author it is very much his style. (He died suddenly when they were making the movie. )

[sasquatch]

Oh MY! I so wanted to say something smart and clever but my killer ape gene is acting up again

[kathywithbirds]

I read hitchhiker's guide, but it was so long ago...
maybe that's where I got some of my theories.