phatoscarlover Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 josh, you shouldnt have removed your comments, there were some very good points in there If people want to buy fish at 1cm there isnt alot we can do about it but its not in the best intrests of the hobby, so i would consider them to be the greedy ones. how can you pick a deformed lip or a NQR gill plate on a fish which is 1cm? IMO it only leads to lower quality fish being pushed into the market. If you dont have the space to raise the next batch of fry then dont, the only thing you will miss out on is a few $, but you do our hobby no favours by selling them on @ 1cm. Definitely they are more than 1 month old after the mother spit them out. The mother of these fry has produced another 38 fry 3 days ago. Therefore I need to let go to make room for their younger sibling which is currently in the fry saver. Also I want to make these awesome fish more affordable. Like thropheus, as you all know, the more you have them in the tank, the better. Not all people can afford $200 for 10 demasoni. If you can spend just $50 for 12 fish, why not? Why do you need to raise the next 38 instead of raising this batch to a proper size? Your not actually giving hobbiests a good deal at all, your offering them "weak" fish because of there size, you cant guarantee quality because you cant tell @ 1.2cm and if you really want to get them out there cheap, then grow them to 3cm and sell them cheap, they cost you no more to raise than an EY which gets you about a $1 per cm so if you think the price they go for is wrong then do something about it, the right way! Cheers Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gav Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 If you dont have the space to raise the next batch of fry then dont, the only thing you will miss out on is a few $, but you do our hobby no favours by selling them on @ 1cm. i really agree with the above andy. i would just expand it to say that if you dont have space to raise fry then dont. you should at least have a tank for them, not just a floatie that you grow them in then sell them off asap. take the time to get a tank for raising fry so you can get them to a good size. then you can find deformities and get rid of the stuff that isnt up to scratch. having all your tanks filled with breeders and no room for fry seems to be getting far too popular of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CThompson Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Guys, To be honest, my demasoni fry are of good quality. I bought the parents from Roland Tarr. Most of the fry ( 95% I would say) have straight bars. Simon ← There is noting wrong with demasoni with bent, half, forked or any other way nature intended the bars to be other than straight. This is NOT a sign of quality. Well coloured, healthy strong fish are a sign of quality, as is the absence of deformed young from a batch. I love the fish with these differences, not only because this is the way nature intended, but because I can tell otherwise indistinguishable fish apart . In addition, I know of people who have spawned new fish into the country, and sold young straight from the mouth. I understand indeed that eggs are at times bought. Provided the purchaser and seller know what’s going on, and the price reflects their sale value (sale value = size + rarity + want), sell them at any size you want. If you can't keep fish alive, at what ever size, don't buy them. would have been 45-60 @1cm and i reckon ive still got 30 kicking (now 2 weeks later) so im pretty happy! Even if you are giving the fish away, it is not acceptable to loose half the group during transit, and you should not be "happy" about only losing this much ! They are terrible losses of life – bugger the money (or lack of it), how about some respect for a fish's right to a decent chance at survival . BTW - Five years in the hobby = less of a newbie Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatoscarlover Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Hey craig, i agree it was a terrible loss This was an experiment as much as anything and was between mates, not as a "sale". We have both been surprised at the hardiness of the fish travelling at that size. What we didn't count on was the fish knocking each other off so easily at such a size in the new small confines. Mistakes are made, and i said first time round.... Nearly all the ones which died were already skinned and eye less by the time i got them out of the bags, so maybe there not the right fish to be sending at 1cm in a small bag but i think between freinds (and serious hobbiests) its "doable" with the right species but probably not the best idea. Just to let you know there was also a bag of F1 peacocks aswell who are all alive and doing well. BTW - Five years in the hobby = less of a newbie Thanks for your input Cheers Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducksta Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 would have been 45-60 @1cm and i reckon ive still got 30 kicking (now 2 weeks later) so im pretty happy! Even if you are giving the fish away, it is not acceptable to loose half the group during transit, and you should not be "happy" about only losing this much ! They are terrible losses of life – bugger the money (or lack of it), how about some respect for a fish's right to a decent chance at survival . BTW - Five years in the hobby = less of a newbie Craig ← Craig - maybe my maths is out, or maybe Andy's is - but there is IMO no way I sent him 45-60 demasoni. That would have to be some kind of record as it was a single mouthful, and they hadn't even been promoted from fry floaty to tank life. If Andy has 30 still kickin I think he lost alot less than suggested. He is obviously just over-estimating my generosity (ps. Andy at $5 each you owe me another $450-600) As I say, the fact we lost some to aggression really surprised me since they had only ever been in a fry saver so they weren't exactly used to their own space. I estimate they went from about 3 litres of actual water space in the floaty to about 6-800mL in the bag. Jason I don't know if you were referring to me as one of the demasoni sellers having a go at Simon. I wasn't - I was trying to be diplomatic and look at it as a generic species, not one I keep and genuinely love keeping. Like I said, it comes down to whether someone is prepared to buy them at that price, knowing the risks and confident they can care for them. IMO it rests with potential buyers knowing their own ability and the risks, and there are most definately more risks in buying fish at this size - they are weaker and they may carry undesirable traits that can't yet be seen. Personally when I sent the small demasoni (and small peacocks) to Andy it was because I think he is in the right position to take them, and knowing I wouldn't likely have opportunity to send more at a later date once grown to a more 'sendable' size. I would send them to him again, but I wouldn't sell them locally - not because I think I will make more money but because I would rather the risk on my shoulders. I also honeslty believe very few people can take on fish this size with minimise losses. I was definately horrified to learn that the demasoni bag had some trouble on the way over. It was quite heart-breaking for me, as it was first DOA from shipping. For what it is worth, and now choosing to be species specific:- Do I think they are worth $20 at 3cm? Probably, if they bred as readily and were as easy to raise and grew as rapidly as yellows, then I wouldn't, but IMO the market is keeping the price up for a reason. I have also seen, time and time again now, people walk past cheaper options to buy quality fish, which IMO says alot for the hobby, it is a great thing. The first time I was honestly and genuinely surprised to learn someone had turned down $12 fish to pay me $20 each, but I realised I would and have done the same so it shouldn't shock me at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatoscarlover Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Craig - maybe my maths is out, or maybe Andy's is - but there is IMO no way I sent him 45-60 demasoni. That would have to be some kind of record as it was a single mouthful, and they hadn't even been promoted from fry to floaty life. If Andy has 30 still kickin I think he lost alot less than suggested. He is obviously just over-estimating my generosity (ps. Andy at $5 each you owe me another $450-600) As I say, the fact we lost some to aggression really surprised me since they had only ever been in a fry saver so they weren't exactly used to their own space. I estimate they went from about 3 litres of actual water space in the floaty to about 6-800mL in the bag. Yes i think my maths is a bit out too.... I stopped counting the bodys in the bag after about 10 (there was plenty dead in there) and i reckon ive got atleast 20-25 alive still. Hard to count really.... they spent a week in a fry saver here too with no dramas. Cheers Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardukar Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I think the whole quality control problem would be solved by not removing the fry from the breeding tank. Only a few fish will survive each batch, but those that do survive will be the strongest and have no problems; thus selling only quality fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducksta Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Sardukar I disagree with your logic - I used to feed my convict fry to my oscar and company and the only one to survive past 3cm was a male who had a deformed (or horribly injured from a young age) mouth/jaw/head. Nothing gaurantee's the surviving fry will be the best quality, just that they were the luckiest. They were perhaps 'smartest', or just as possibly the least visible because their colour was the least vibrant. Predatory tankmates wont be discerning regarding the shape of the fish, the colour, or the barring, they will eat anything they see, which means totally crap fsh can avoid death by avoiding sight, maybe staking the best claim under a filter or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Andy I thought I made some good points and most of the replies after mine have said the same thing but in a much nicer way I am over the whole subject now. You cant argue with people like that, its not worth me trying to make my point. The people who are in it for the fish will understand me. If you cant breed and raise the fry properly then dont breed them. The people who do this are the greedy ones. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatoscarlover Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 If you cant breed and raise the fry properly then dont breed them. The people who do this are the greedy ones Cheers Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gav Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 If you cant breed and raise the fry properly then dont breed them. The people who do this are the greedy ones. thats almost signature worthy Josh. a quick browse of recent classifieds will show more than a few people around doing just that which is a damn shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poxboy Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 a quick browse of recent classifieds will show more than a few people around doing just that which is a damn shame. What's that supposed to mean ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardukar Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I used to feed my convict fry to my oscar and company and the only one to survive past 3cm was a male who had a deformed (or horribly injured from a young age) mouth/jaw/head. I agree that my 'theory' might not work. However if you're breeding fish in a species only tank with plenty of space, and the male is taken out whilst the females are holding, then shouldn't the fry grow well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotto Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Sardukar I disagree with your logic - I used to feed my convict fry to my oscar and company Animal cruelty guidelines prohibit the feeding of live vertebrates to other animals. We discourage this practice and will remove posts, which indicate its implementation without notice. Why arnt the mods deleting that. . Duksta should be following the rules like the rest of us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Maybe he is following the rules now I used to feed Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropheusQueen Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Just slightly off tangent - why do people feel it is OK to feed invertebrates but not vertebrates??? Just an odd way to view the feeding of live organisms - do people feel less icky if it doesn't crunch? Aline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducksta Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Probably the same reason your post hasn't been deleted arnt ... Duksta Please take your time to write your post correctly. "Posts wot hav b33n rite'n like dis 1" - will be deleted. Leet speak will not be tolerated (because it's annoying and geeky), even if you have "m4d l33t sk1llz" Similarly, "AOL speak" or similar will not be tolerated. Sentences or posts written like "wat r u gonna b doin L8tr?" will be deleted with no explanation. Finally, no "sticky caps". StUfF wRiTtEn LiKe ThIs LoOkS sTuPiD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotto Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Please take your time to write your post correctly. "Posts wot hav b33n rite'n like dis 1" - will be deleted. Leet speak will not be tolerated (because it's annoying and geeky), even if you have "m4d l33t sk1llz" Similarly, "AOL speak" or similar will not be tolerated. Sentences or posts written like "wat r u gonna b doin L8tr?" will be deleted with no explanation. Finally, no "sticky caps". StUfF wRiTtEn LiKe ThIs LoOkS sTuPiD Ummmm clearly i was not trying to speak like that seeing all my other posts are not like that and i only left a "c" out of the word "ducksta". If you could not see that you must have the IQ of a prawn sandwitch. Also leaving a "c" out of a word is allot milder compared to feeding little fish to big fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropheusQueen Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Also leaving a "c" out of a word is allot milder compared to feeding little fish to big fish That would be 'alot' and has someone told the fish that or Darwin for that matter Cheers Aline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducksta Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 rules is rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotto Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Just slightly off tangent - why do people feel it is OK to feed invertebrates but not vertebrates??? Just an odd way to view the feeding of live organisms - do people feel less icky if it doesn't crunch? But there is no need to feed fish to other fish in the Hobby, not when there is that many different types of flake pellets etc on the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropheusQueen Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 That was not my query. Pellets are not invertebrates Cheers Aline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Its not wrong Ben. Its just not talked about here. I happen to have some Peacocks that breed at an amazing rate. I dont strip my females cause its not the correct thing to do. But I have way to many fry. These fry get left in the tank and they do get eaten. Is this wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gav Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 aline, must be cos vertebrates are smarter?? or at least some of them are, as ducksta seems to be around the prawn sandwich level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropheusQueen Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 A few nerve endings and everyone cares. Cheers Aline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.