Would it be wrong to surgically or genetically alter a fish to keep it small?
- Thread starter Piranha86
- Start date
I'd say both are OK. It's not like it would be done majorly, it would be expensive and only serious fishkeepers could afford it. And if they keep it small, it would probably be sterile.
I hope you're not planning to doing this. Why is it that you ask?
I said no on both. I feel like ATM science cannot keep a creater small and proportional. Stunting a fish is where the fish's growth is slowed but it's organs continue to grow and develop causing great internal pressure, thus killing the fish. If, however, scientists could create some sort of hormone to allow the fish to fully develop yet still small, then it wouldn't be so bad but I fear the testing and test subjects needed would cause quite a bit of harm to the fish. Even if they were able to keep fish small (and healthy), I say neither should be done. Why mess with natures creations? There are so many species of fish, why not just choose one that you can fully take care of
I said no on both. I feel like ATM science cannot keep a creater small and proportional. Stunting a fish is where the fish's growth is slowed but it's organs continue to grow and develop causing great internal pressure, thus killing the fish. If, however, scientists could create some sort of hormone to allow the fish to fully develop yet still small, then it wouldn't be so bad but I fear the testing and test subjects needed would cause quite a bit of harm to the fish. Even if they were able to keep fish small (and healthy), I say neither should be done. Why mess with natures creations? There are so many species of fish, why not just choose one that you can fully take care of
A good point. I would still love a mini redtail catfish or arowana. Isn't that what axototls are? Actually, I think that happened relatively naturally. But still...
"Serious fishkeepers" a very general term. I consider myself a serious fishkeeper but if I had the money to alter a fish, why wouldn't I just buy a bigger tank so I could keep it in it's full glory?
No way, and I'm just curious/provoking interest.
Some people do not have the space/money for a large tank. I agree it would be best to find another species, but if someone really wanted a goldfish to live healthily in a 10g, I don't see why it would be wrong to do that.
Good point. What I mean by serious is someone willing to spend the extra sum of money to get the smaller fish. I imagine the money required for a 2000g tank for a redtail catfish would be less than the price of the genetically altered one or the surgery for it.
Well that brings up the point of ethics.
While GloFish are pretty, I would NEVER buy one. Blood Parrots are cute, but I would NEVER buy one... And then there are fancy goldfish... I do not feel like genetically altered [or strange hybrids] should be sold. I don't think scientists should be focusing their efforts on creating a profit by selling un-natural fish to the public.
While GloFish are pretty, I would NEVER buy one. Blood Parrots are cute, but I would NEVER buy one... And then there are fancy goldfish... I do not feel like genetically altered [or strange hybrids] should be sold. I don't think scientists should be focusing their efforts on creating a profit by selling un-natural fish to the public.
