Reef nutrition

An ethics question

IMO, there's a perspective here, food is food, pets are pets, we do not eat our pets. Like it or not that changes peoples perception of what is actually going on regardless of your standpoint.

More to the point, the old school LFS model, which is still the dominant model, perpetuates the "if a fish dies, get another one" approach (of course they make more $$$ that way and don't have to be patient with people). What that really does is undermines the hobby as a whole and will eventually lead to the ending of the hobby as we know it. Sadly the consumer and the B&Ms fail for the most part to make that connection and play Keystone Cops doing business and purchasing livestock without a larger perspective of what they are involved with and how it affects them and their business/hobby.

Years ago (around 15-20 to be specific) I could go to Martin's Aquarium and buy wild monkeys, wild parrots, all types of wild reptiles, that has since been shut down. If people would have cared for these animals along the way and done it in a proper fashion with wild stock kept in check we may still be able import those animals, of course human stupidity screwed that up (really, a monkey? seriously? WTH wants a monkey?). In the aquarium industry we are not too far from that end, humans just really aren't intelligent to grasp the complexities, we are selfish animals sadly.
 
Note that fish are not always either food or pets.
To quite a few people, they are just decorations.
Is that worse, better, or different??? Yet another fun debate.
I think I see it as worse, but needs some thought.
 
GDawson said:
Changing the food item doesn't change my opinion. I see where you're going with it but to me that's a another subject; the ethics/treatment/exploitation of food animals. Whereas they both can involve deplorable conditions, animal misery, and human greed the end "product" and consumer expectations are far different.

-Gregory
Click to expand...

Why are they different and should they be different?
 
I know what you mean about the perspective shift. Some of us would have no problem eating out pets. If any of our chickens had turned out male, we would have eaten them. I have a friend who just did it :D

I think the food thing has gotten a bit off track. The main question I am interested in is why do people like the idea of LFS saying no to certain customers, when in just about every other arena a store saying no to a customer would be met with scorn. Is it that the animal is alive? What about the animals that are sold as both food and pets, well food for other animals? Crickets, fish, mice, rats, bunnies...does the cuteness scale make a difference?
 
Thales said:
...The main question I am interested in is why do people like the idea of LFS saying no to certain customers, when in just about every other arena a store saying no to a customer would be met with scorn...
Click to expand...

IMO Because :
1) The customers view them at "pets", and that emotional attachment makes a big difference.
2) The customers assume or feel that the LFS owner should also see them as pets, and treat them as such.

It is not just fish and sales. The humane society can be surprisingly picky when giving away dogs.

Of course, in the big bad world of business, #2 is quite naive.
 
Mostly, it's the (un)sustainability of our practices that make the difference. Chickens and mice and crickets and cows are all domesticated well beyond the point where there's a concern for their continued survival. Harvesting fish and corals from the wild is a bit of a dicier proposition. We (and all of our non-fishy friends) hear all the time that sea levels are rising, the ocean is acidifying, fisheries are being taxed beyond their ability to recover, and so on. If we continue to import and mistreat wild animals with reckless abandon, it's a privilege we could lose. Whether or not yellow tangs are ACTUALLY endangered, we have no ability to captive-breed them at the moment, and since they're adorable, eventually the general public may take notice that aquarists aren't particularly good at husbandry. ;)
 
treylane said:
Mostly, it's the (un)sustainability of our practices that make the difference. Chickens and mice and crickets and cows are all domesticated well beyond the point where there's a concern for their continued survival. Harvesting fish and corals from the wild is a bit of a dicier proposition. We (and all of our non-fishy friends) hear all the time that sea levels are rising, the ocean is acidifying, fisheries are being taxed beyond their ability to recover, and so on. If we continue to import and mistreat wild animals with reckless abandon, it's a privilege we could lose. Whether or not yellow tangs are ACTUALLY endangered, we have no ability to captive-breed them at the moment, and since they're adorable, eventually the general public may take notice that aquarists aren't particularly good at husbandry. ;)
Click to expand...
Yup
 
Hey Jim.. how you sponsoring the club? :p

If I could eat the fish out of my tank, or the corals out of my tank, clams, shrimp, etc I WOULD :)

Just don't ask me to eat my dog. I don't mind people eating dogs, just not mine please :)

FWIW Mike bartenders, bars, restaurants, etc are bound by law to cut people off. They can get in a lot of trouble if they serve a person to much.

As a LFS employee I have turned a lot of people away, many times directly risking my job. In the end most people I did that to turned out to be better customers :D
 
Rich I have seen a car dealership refuse to sell a car to a customer for fear they would kill them self or someone else.
"Young kid 18-19 trying to buy a corvette."
He bought one somewhere else and totaled it in 2 weeks. No lives lost but lots of property damage from it.
 
Just a side addition .
Is it then hypocritical to deny a purchase while also selling products that are Non- beneficial to those denied (fish,corals,etc.).
For profit must of the time. I wish I was denied when I first started. Would of saved some pretty awesome coral from quick death. And they weren't ORA or Aqua cultured. And like Tuberider said . I had a friend that bought some of those Exotic Reptiles and wanted to release them in a
creek in Pacifica to watch them feed on the very few Steelhead in there at the time. Luckily his parents found them in his bath tube. He didn't realize they made any noises. They were calling for their Mom, alot. Went back and got one of the Monkeys , for a week . Caulerpa taxifoliaer is another example of the industry not doing whats right,in the beginning . So, this is a great question because I believe there should be some responsibility, but I hate Government intrusion .


Spelling
 
I am amazed how happy my fish are. Why just the other day my 6 year old royal gramma looked at me so sweetly with his big black eyes and said "JAR, thank you so much for feeding me the mysis feast! Back when I was swimming out in the wild we never got such tasty food. Your the best JAR! And by the way if you get one more fish I will pop all the scales from his body one by one until the ich in hear takes him down!.
Crap... fire call... gotta go!
 
Let me pose a different but smilar question to you and everyone else Rich (call it semi devils advocate)... Who is to say that said LFS owner or employee is even qualified to make the decision of who is or isn't qualified to make a purchase? Now I know there are exceptions to so don't start blasting out a few specific examples, but how much training does the typical LFS employee have that would even be relevant in this case and/or can you really expect that kind of knowledge from employees who probably don't make that much more then minimum wage? or better yet, who polices the LFS to ensure that they should even be able to sell livestock in the first place?

Pie in the sky it is a great idea don't get me wrong. I would love to see less waste an more personal responsibility in this hobby. The problem with rules or regs on things like this is that the people that get hurt by them are usually the unintended receipients and the people who are the real dirtbags in the industry figure out another way to rape and pillage.
 
seminolecpa said:
Let me pose a different but smilar question to you and everyone else Rich (call it semi devils advocate)... Who is to say that said LFS owner or employee is even qualified to make the decision of who is or isn't qualified to make a purchase? Now I know there are exceptions to so don't start blasting out a few specific examples, but how much training does the typical LFS employee have that would even be relevant in this case and/or can you really expect that kind of knowledge from employees who probably don't make that much more then minimum wage? or better yet, who polices the LFS to ensure that they should even be able to sell livestock in the first place?

Pie in the sky it is a great idea don't get me wrong. I would love to see less waste an more personal responsibility in this hobby. The problem with rules or regs on things like this is that the people that get hurt by them are usually the unintended receipients and the people who are the real dirtbags in the industry figure out another way to rape and pillage.
Click to expand...


Absolutely. Its one of the main arguments against 'certification' or denying a sale; there is no consistency and the potential for power trips is huge.

Being denied a purchase from someone who knows less than you is very strange.

I really am on two minds in this discussion. People should be allowed to sell or not to sell as they see fit. Protect the animals or make as much money as possible (the LFS is not your mother).

What brought this up for me was thinking about people who say LFS should be responsible for the animals they sell.
 
Tumbleweed said:
Rich I have seen a car dealership refuse to sell a car to a customer for fear they would kill them self or someone else.
"Young kid 18-19 trying to buy a corvette."
He bought one somewhere else and totaled it in 2 weeks. No lives lost but lots of property damage from it.
Click to expand...

Awesome. Is that something your industry is actively looking for?
 
... some kids put too much wood on there beach fire so people call 911 instead of going down to the beach and telling the kids to not do that. So I show up and say, " do you guys think you can put that out?" Kids say " no problem" I say "thanks!"

I think that the LFS should care and become as engaged as possible with the customer. However, no matter what the LFS says or does "the customer is always right" and if you are in retail you need to sell to pay the bills. If you send a customer away that is eager to buy something they may just go buy it somewhere else. I agree with what Rich says in that a lot of problems could be solved if the animals were costly enough to make someone think twice before buying a certain animal.
 
I will never sell an animal I know is going into a death trap, that goes against every grain in my body. My denial of sales 90% of the time were such cases (water tests beyond pretty colors), the rest were obvious cases even the owner of the store had no issue with (FW bowl for clownfish, etc). Refusing to have stuff in your store, or denying a sale at the time does not have to equal a pissed off customer. Most mine had just the opposite reaction besides one group of customers that ended up getting banned from the store.

Proper guidance and truly helping someone goes a long way to helping them be successful. Happy customers return, and breed other happy customers. I did not have a line every single day waiting for me to help them because I was some fish Nazi. Most the time customers would wait even when other fishroom people were not busy. I know I am not an isolated case either, the guy who got me into this is the exact some. I see excellent LFS staff across the nation. 6Th Ave is not the norm, its the exception and unfortunately the one we are judged by.

Not sure how any of you can justify selling in such cases and I am SUPER glad none of you are working in a LFS :p "business is business" results in nothing good unless your the CEO of Enron or Worldcom. It'll come back and bite you in the ass at some point.

Personally I think all sales people need to take responsibility for what they sell (if they re "actively selling it, not some register person). Financial adviser should tell the whole story... Realtor advising of issues.... used car salesmen advising of history. Sales doesn't = douchery, just some douches are in sales.


FWIW google "Fish and other Ichthy Stuff" in Oldsmar, FLA. John is the true fish Nazi and wears the badge with pride. He forces wholesalers to do things they never thought they'd do... like bag every single damsel in a 4" bag, not ganged bagged 12 to a 9" bag. He paid more for the service and never haggled on the price. He only sells healthy fish and his methods ensure that is the case. He's been doing this IIRC for 30 years.
 
JAR said:
I agree with what Rich says in that a lot of problems could be solved if the animals were costly enough to make someone think twice before buying a certain animal.
Click to expand...

I suggest working in a LFS.. your idea above will turn 180 degrees very quickly. Money doesn't make you care. It may sting to those with out it, but you forget this is luxury hobby and there are some mega rich people in it and an awful lot of very well off.... many of them don't care.
 
seminolecpa said:
Let me pose a different but smilar question to you and everyone else Rich (call it semi devils advocate)... Who is to say that said LFS owner or employee is even qualified to make the decision of who is or isn't qualified to make a purchase? Now I know there are exceptions to so don't start blasting out a few specific examples, but how much training does the typical LFS employee have that would even be relevant in this case and/or can you really expect that kind of knowledge from employees who probably don't make that much more then minimum wage? or better yet, who polices the LFS to ensure that they should even be able to sell livestock in the first place?

Pie in the sky it is a great idea don't get me wrong. I would love to see less waste an more personal responsibility in this hobby. The problem with rules or regs on things like this is that the people that get hurt by them are usually the unintended receipients and the people who are the real dirtbags in the industry figure out another way to rape and pillage.
Click to expand...

Couldn't that be said about any business? What makes you qualified to do my taxes? A degree from a college? Some of the dumbnest LFS employees I worked with were... wait for it... marine biologists. Schooling did not do a damn thing for them but to your average customer, the M.B. is the "qualified one" :lol:

FWIW hobbyists are just as much to blame for "rape and pillage" by supporting the very people they complain about. Nearly everyone is a hypocrite when it comes to this, myself included.
 
bmhair03 said:
. Caulerpa taxifoliaer is another example of the industry not doing whats right,in the beginning .
Click to expand...

How so? The "industry" had no real hand in the original cultivation of the particular cold hardy strain, it was hobbyists and public aquariums. "Industry" had real no part in it getting here, again, hobbyists and public aquariums. It was not something even on the radar of the "industry" back then... that came very much later and with wild caularpa (which to this days still remains the bulk of what is sold). Our neighbor to the south has several native calurapa strains don't forget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top