mmcguffi Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Color variations are not considered deformities since the clown is still the same physically as the other normal color variation. Well, that's really personal opinion more than anything else. Scientifically they are both mutants just in different senses. There are less misbar clowns and less stubby clowns in the wild because both phenotypes are obviously selected against more so than wild-type fish. Link to comment
Euphyllia Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Well, that's really personal opinion more than anything else. Scientifically they are both mutants just in different senses. There are less misbar clowns and less stubby clowns in the wild because both phenotypes are obviously selected against more so than wild-type fish. Analogies: A light-skinned person is exactly same as a dark-skinned person. Just because somebody, or something, has a different skin pigmentation doesn't mean they're deformed. Some people may have long fingers and others may have short fingers. They aren't deformed. It's genetics. Link to comment
Christmasclowns Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 So I'm reading this and getting a chuckle out of those that oppose these clownfish. First albinos could be considered a mutation yet no one will rant how these fish should be culled and should not be bred to further the genetic line. I have a couple questions to the people who oppose these fish. Do you consider little people or people with dwarfism as humans? That is what these fish are in a sense little fish or dwarf clowns. Would the people opposed tell a little person they don't have the same rights as a big person or that because of the way they were born they shouldn't be allowed to marry or have children? Should we "cull" these people? I think the last person who had thoughts of breeding the impuritys out had a funny mustache and ran Germany until 1945. I think culling any fish based on it's deformitys is sad but it is especially sad when the doesn't appear to be in any pain or discomfort. Link to comment
JaneG Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 So I'm reading this and getting a chuckle out of those that oppose these clownfish. First albinos could be considered a mutation yet no one will rant how these fish should be culled and should not be bred to further the genetic line. I have a couple questions to the people who oppose these fish. Do you consider little people or people with dwarfism as humans? That is what these fish are in a sense little fish or dwarf clowns. Would the people opposed tell a little person they don't have the same rights as a big person or that because of the way they were born they shouldn't be allowed to marry or have children? Should we "cull" these people? I think the last person who had thoughts of breeding the impuritys out had a funny mustache and ran Germany until 1945. I think culling any fish based on it's deformitys is sad but it is especially sad when the doesn't appear to be in any pain or discomfort. Whoa...old topic, but interesting: I agree in a sense - humans should not be culled. However, I think animals are different. Saltwater shouldn't go down the same road freshwater did: bettas with long tails that make it hard for them to swim, goldfish that have to be put in plain tanks to prevent bursting their "cheeks," and parrot cichlids that constantly try to upright themselves and have trouble eating. The difference here is that these animals *should* have a good life - we're putting them in little glass boxes after all. Encouraging "disabilities" for the "cool" appearance is not ok. ORA has always stood for "sustainability" and "positiveness," but I don't think they should go down the same path fw did/does. By the way, I think albinism is different: a lot of people don't know that it causes vision problems...as with a lot of these things, the buyer is usually just unaware that it's a problem. Additionally, little people are completely different. Depending on the particular situation, it could almost be considered a blessing as they usually live longer on average and (most of the time) aren't impeded by anything other than their size and their treatment. These clownfish are different - honestly, we don't know if it affects swimming ability or anything, but it's leading down a bad path. At the same time, ORA shouldn't leave it up to the consumer to "research" - they should take any "mutant" fish out of the equation. Just as with nudibranches and other "impossible but cool" aquarium things being sold at stores, I think that while everyone should *know what they're buying,* the store is somewhat responsible for offering them in the first place as the buyer nearly 100% of the time has no idea about the care. Link to comment
FlCandy Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I may be opening another can of worms here but isn't this just another strange form of evolution? I mean humans are influencing the changes but it is still evolving. Who knows, maybe all clownfish are moving that way and they just haven't gotten there yet, but because of that you don't see them on the reefs as they are picked off bc they are either slower or etc, but in the end everything adapts and changes eventually. Look at the Chihuahua and the Great Dane. They both descend from the same original dog but because of man influencing the different traits and breeding for specific qualities, small size so they can chase the rats in their homes or Larger size with long legs to hunt with the horses. In the end it is preference and honestly as long as the fish is living a happy comfortable life I am not against it. At least it isn't a fish with two heads that can't even swim and fend for itself. I think they are cute, I wouldn't buy one but hey to each their own. If you like it more power to you and if you don't then hey you can't yell at someone for their taste, as long as my above statement holds true and it can live a happy healthy life. Link to comment
Euphyllia Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I don't believe in culling humans either, though I don't think anyone said they were for it. There was a couple that my mom knew and they were both mentally retarded. They loved each other, and they had three kids, all of which were of "usual" mental health. Their parents payed their bills and got the kids and education, and they all loved each other. Everyone has the right to life, as they were put into this world by god, who intended them to live a good life. And according to most country's plan of government, it would be illegal to cull anyone if you don't count abortions. I believe that abortion of babies just because they have a health issue is wrong. If you don't want them, then put up with the birth and give them to a family who wants the baby. I can understand if you aren't able to provide for the needs of a baby, but at least put the baby up for adoption. How we got from reef tanks to abortion, that's your issue. Just my two cents. Link to comment
ednangel Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Jane I contacted ORA about the stubby and they replied by saying they don't produce this fish. Redding between the lines they were saying they don't produce it but certainly don't cull it either. Culling usually occurs after metamorphosis when the physical characteristics of the fish are visible; in this case they don't advertise it because they cannot purposely reproduce it. LFS usually don't sell this to the public because as soon as it arrives an employee calls dibs on it, as I’ve seen on my LFS. Bottom line These animals were not purposely bred to be like this They are alive because someone decided they could be sold They will never be release into the wild, even if they were, wouldn't survive Humans are responsible for every bad gene on domesticated animals, but no one seems to care so long they can get their teacup this, their pocket size dog, they fancy mini pig etc. Link to comment
JaneG Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Jane I contacted ORA about the stubby and they replied by saying they don't produce this fish. Redding between the lines they were saying they don't produce it but certainly don't cull it either. Culling usually occurs after metamorphosis when the physical characteristics of the fish are visible; in this case they don't advertise it because they cannot purposely reproduce it. LFS usually don't sell this to the public because as soon as it arrives an employee calls dibs on it, as I’ve seen on my LFS. Bottom line These animals were not purposely bred to be like this They are alive because someone decided they could be sold They will never be release into the wild, even if they were, wouldn't survive Humans are responsible for every bad gene on domesticated animals, but no one seems to care so long they can get their teacup this, their pocket size dog, they fancy mini pig etc. I didn't think culling implied killing but I guess it usually does Thought it just meant that it is "removed" from the group to be bred In that case, I think they should be given away or sold but not bred on purpose. I guess what I mean is that while it wouldn't be bad as it is necessarily, it could lead down a path that wouldn't be good. If they're already born, I think they deserve the right to live, but I don't think more should be purposefully made just for appearance - that's a little selfish (to me...but the dog argument is kinda true). It's good to know ORA isn't selectively breeding them for this! Thanks for clearing that up Link to comment
mmcguffi Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I may be opening another can of worms here but isn't this just another strange form of evolution? Yep. Domestication. e.g. humans selected the mutant or 'deformed' wolves that were tamer. Humans shaped dogs' evolution Color morphs ARE mutants and their fate is shaped by human selection, not natural section. Humans are responsible for every bad gene on domesticated animals, but no one seems to care so long they can get their teacup this, their pocket size dog, they fancy mini pig etc. very shortsighted Link to comment
ednangel Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Yep. Domestication. e.g. humans selected the mutant or 'deformed' wolves that were tamer. Humans shaped dogs' evolution Color morphs ARE mutants and their fate is shaped by human selection, not natural section. very shortsighted It might be shortsighted but whether intentional or not we have forced animals to breed for looks or specific traits regardless of the overall health of the specimen. Link to comment
1.0reef Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 this thread has gone wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy south, even farther south than Antarctica! Link to comment
fmfa0801 Posted October 9, 2011 Author Share Posted October 9, 2011 this thread has gone wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy south, even farther south than Antarctica! i agree I didnt even remeber starting this Link to comment
mmcguffi Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 it's a year old. what do you expect EDIT: sorry almost 2 years Link to comment
ednangel Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I brought it back to life (trying to avoid creating a new thread) and someone start bashing ORA and me for fomenting the reproduction of deformed animals and then I got carried away. Anyways still in my quest to get me a pair. Link to comment
FlCandy Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 I brought it back to life (trying to avoid creating a new thread) and someone start bashing ORA and me for fomenting the reproduction of deformed animals and then I got carried away. Anyways still in my quest to get me a pair. Post pics when you do! Link to comment
lizardfish Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 My gf had to have one cuz she thought it was the "runt" and was adorable all squished looking. I didn't want it cuz the purest in me was like that's deformed and Un-natural, but got it for her tank. Anyway it jumped into my tank with my black clown and they paired up. Now the lil guy is growing on me, his (he became the male) name is re-re cuz he's "special" lol. My new Opinion on this is this is evolution it has a Trait that keeps it alive (via its cuteness) and that trait makes it suitable for the smaller tanks were putting them in. A deformation is only bad if it impairs the survival. And too all the ppl saying this is wrong cuz out tanks should be a Representative of the reef you have no room too talk unless all your coral are broun and blan like they are in nature. Link to comment
ihatesears18 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 My gf had to have one cuz she thought it was the "runt" and was adorable all squished looking. I didn't want it cuz the purest in me was like that's deformed and Un-natural, but got it for her tank. Anyway it jumped into my tank with my black clown and they paired up. Now the lil guy is growing on me, his (he became the male) name is re-re cuz he's "special" lol. My new Opinion on this is this is evolution it has a Trait that keeps it alive (via its cuteness) and that trait makes it suitable for the smaller tanks were putting them in. A deformation is only bad if it impairs the survival. And too all the ppl saying this is wrong cuz out tanks should be a Representative of the reef you have no room too talk unless all your coral are broun and blan like they are in nature. "purest" Link to comment
Tamberav Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Holy crap.. old thread! They are kind of cute but too cartoony for me. Link to comment
lizardfish Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Lol I laughed at myself for calling myself that too, but you know what I ment lol Link to comment
PwnMe Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 I've personally called ORA and asked them about these Clowns a year ago. They give them away for free. They just need a fish store to send them to. Pay some shipping for them. So no greediness and a fish that gets to live. Edit: Totally just lied to you. Went on AquaCon to see that they are selling the Stubbies for double the price I pay for regular ones. Down with ORA. Link to comment
Based Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Reminds me of a damsel.. Nice looking though! I've personally called ORA and asked them about these Clowns a year ago. They give them away for free. They just need a fish store to send them to. Pay some shipping for them. So no greediness and a fish that gets to live. Edit: Totally just lied to you. Went on AquaCon to see that they are selling the Stubbies for double the price I pay for regular ones. Down with ORA. you're talking about aquacon though.. Link to comment
ednangel Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Post pics when you do! Sorry no pics yet, kind of ashamed of my briopsis riddled tank. I got one black stubby for $37 at my LFS in San Mateo, CA. they rarely carry them. Link to comment
PwnMe Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Reminds me of a damsel.. Nice looking though! you're talking about aquacon though.. I have had a phone call and an email from ORA saying those fish are free. So I assume Aquacon is really trying to screw people over. Link to comment
Ssteve Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 Talked to Ora yesterday and they said they aren't free anymore. My lfs has one coming for me and it was like $20-$25 I think. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.