splendidbetta Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 Can anyone suggest a fish that isn't too big to live in something like a 2-3ft tank, tropical, is nice to look at, will eat the bettas that I need to cull, and won't break the bank to buy and keep? Just exploring options here Thanks, Stefan :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 how big will the bettas you are culling be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 Small fry to fish about 3cm not incl. fins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figure_8 Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 nothing comes to mind that would be happy in that size tank :dontknow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callatya Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 Does it have to be a fish? I'd get a red claw or a yabbie. They are great at the job and dead easy to care for :dontknow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 24, 2006 Report Share Posted December 24, 2006 a Jaguar cichid would be perfect, but not in a 3' tank :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 I'm thinking of Ctenopoma acutirostre (not my own photos btw) They do fine in 3ft tanks. Yabbies etc tear their food apart, Abbey... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 chewing them up so so much kinder! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Are you agreeing with me Lisa? Or is that sarcasm? Being eaten mostly whole by getting sucked and crushed down the throat of a big fish seems much more attractive than being caught in the sharp claws of a crustacean and being slowly minced... Ctenopoma is an ambush predator by the way. It keeps to itself in a very well planted tank and creeps up to its prey and sucks them in super-fast. Anyone like C. acutirostre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jess Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 I wouldn't buy a fish to eat culls. If you had a fish that would already, then wooohoo! bonus! Just freeze them, it's not being more eco friendly by feeding them to a fish, nor does it really make it more humane. Then stick them in your garden :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 I don't freeze mine. I use clove oil. I want a predatory fish. I wanted ctenopoma before wanting a big fish to feed culls to, if you remember my previous thread on them. If snakeheads were legal in Aust, I'd get some of those too... Channa bleheri. So in a way having a culling machine would be a bonus anyway. Still a long time before I move onto things other than bettas though. Clove oil will do the trick till then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 you seem very preoccupied with culling. This isn't the first culling thread you've started. I'm sure there are more positive aspects to betta breeding to concentrate on! We all get that you intend to cull for quality, but I suggest that you have a go at raising a spawn until the fry are old enough to show all their characteristics. In the past you seem to have culled the instant a fish had a top-line "defect" without waiting to see what else it has to offer. As many people here at AAQ are aware, I have a specific form that I like, and a specific form that I despise. But I don't cull all the fry I get with "imperfect" (to me) finnage, because many people are oblivious or impartial to the "defect" I see and will give them good homes because they are otherwise beautiful fish and have other things to offer. I'm just saying that you might consider growing up 100% of the healthy fry you get from the next spawn, overlooking the "defects" (in your eyes), to see for yourself how the fry develop and what they come to offer over time. I realise that this entails jarring etc but realistically are you likely to get 200 fry, or more like 50? Hell, if you get metallic fish with a top-line irregularity but even wedge-shaped anal and dorsal fins, I'd take a bunch off your hands! Sorry, that ended up being a longer post than I intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Lisa, I understand what you are saying. At this stage I'd be happy to simply have a few successful spawns grow up and cull only when absolutely necessary. I post a lot about culling and I have done a lot of culling because it is a very important aspect of seriously selective breeding any kind of organism. I don't want to breed bettas to provide culls to other people. I think that if a spawn produces fish that carry or show the same characteristics in a serious form that I would not breed, then I don't believe I should let other breeders continue with those fish. It's like being a 'puppy mill' and it reflects on the breeder... "I got this fish from Stefan and it has a 'defect' but I like it anyway." An artist wouldn't display his art if he didn't like it, and in a way Betta breeders are artists. The case you refer to where I culled an entire spawn because of a topline fault... The whole spawn showed it to varying degrees. This suggested that the trait was pretty strong in that spawn. If only a couple fish showed the trait, it could have been dismissed and the line continued. Being that I had limited rescources, I could not do a test spawn to see if the 'fault' would be passed on. Topline faults I believe are not faults that should be dismissed as easily as unbalanced anal finnage. Topline faults directly affect the body of the fish, and if the fault is heritable, then more extreme forms can develop, which can affect a fish's ability to carry that perfect anal fin. Many of us agree that other characteristics which affect the body are BAD and should not be encouraged. For example poor scalation as seen in extreme rosetails, and short and/or crooked spines as found in DT. Why should poor scalation and short and/or crooked spines be focussed on more than topline shape? Different people will breed for certain characteristics and cull for others. It's why standards have been made. And I know I don't stand alone in my topline fetish, just as you are joined by others who prefer short even anal fins and full dorsals. I'm sure there are more positive aspects to betta breeding to concentrate on! Yes, there are, but the topic of culling shouldn't be ignored. Besides, I haven't spawned anything in such a long time, which makes my mind visit the aspects of breeding that get left in the broom closet under a pile of old rags. Anyhow, my topline irregularity issue has been left untouched on this forum for months now. I started this thread to discuss predatory fish for feeding culls to, not to be questioned over my reasons for culling. Why did you automatically assume that I was back on my topline irregularity soapbox with this thread when plenty of other breeders feed their culls to predatory fish; and when I said nothing to imply that I wanted predators specifically to cull my topline irrgularities? Also, that I wanted to cull a large number of fish all in one go, instead of to cull weak and deformed fish? "Still a long time before I move onto things other than bettas though. Clove oil will do the trick till then," implies that it will be a long time before I get a culler fish, and that I will use clove oil as my method of culling for whenever I find it necessary to cull... that is all. And you said it yourself: I intend to cull for quality. Isn't that what all serious breeders should be doing; culling for quality (not necessarily quantity), whatever that quality may be? (And for that matter, which ever culling method that may be.) I probably have more points to address that I can't think of now, but I think you'll bring them up in your reply. Merry Christmas and bring on the New Year! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callatya Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Yabbies are pretty fast when it comes to it, live things are harder to hold and eat. Two strong claws, bang bang straight across the body in a scissor fashion, snaps the spine in most cases and crushes most else. if they get it with the claw tip first, that pierces straight through. At the size you are talking it would be really fast. The adults may need a bit more manhandling, but I've seen the larger fish take them in and spit them out also, as do axolotls. You would of course have to get an adult yabbie, otherwise it really might take a while. If you are worried about being more humane, stick the fish in a plastic fish bag and belt them across the edge of a table or brick wall or something so they are dead before they hit the water. It sounds pretty bad, but its likely kinder than trying to hold them still and severing their spine at that size, its a bit impractical and would probably take some time to line up correctly. You could also kill them (it'd have to be mechanically) mince them and make your own frozen fish cubes for feeding, although I suggest you add some spirulina powder etc. I do recall there being much uproar about it when it happened, but do you all recall the goldfish in the blender at the art expo? I recall thinking at the time that with a small amount of water that it would be fairly humane in comparison to a lot of methods employed by fishkeepers for culls. I don't think it'd be too good to watch or listen to, and social aceptability of such a think would be pretty non-existant, but IMO it would be quite quick. Seriously, if you are worried about a quick dispatch and you can only spare a 3' tank, do the actual killing yourself to ensure it is speedy and feed the carcasses to something that would fit nicely in the tank. That lets you pick something predatory, size-appropriate, and not necessarily with a mouth that can take a 3cm+ live betta in one single mouthful (haven't seen that fish you mention around, is it legal?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Abbey, I think that would have to be the single most graphic post I've read regarding how to cull. For that I thank you So many methods to consider, but enough time to choose one Thanks. Yabbies are coldwater... so bettas would be fairly uncomfortable in a yabbie tank until they are caught and eaten, yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callatya Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Um, sorry about that. Pent up post-family gathering grouchiness They are all useful methods though, I promise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callatya Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Red claws go well in temerate tropical, and there are some long armed shrimp that quite like warmer water. I think the question really is what is the primary reason for getting the fish? 1) to cull bettas of 3cm or less as humanely as possible 2) to own a predatory fish 3) to fill an empty tank (which is a perfectly valid reason) If you want a predatory fish, then getting a cray is pointless, even if they are skilled hunters. If you want a humane killer, you are going to have to watch a few and see if they can get an entire betta in their mouth (or dispatch is quickly) as finding something that can do that which won't fast outgrow thetank will be difficult. If you want to fill the tank then you can get whatever you like and just use the culls for home-made food for them. Each fulfills all the requirements, just with more emphasis on one point oir another. I've also heard of people using SW lionfish, although I suspect the osmotic shock would be most unpleasant for the betta if it was put in live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 I used to have a sw Lion fish, i think you would need a minimum 3ft tank for it. I had mine in a 2ft and he was quite happy. They are good hunters. I had to feed him live guppies sometimes and it was one bite and they were gone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 25, 2006 Report Share Posted December 25, 2006 Why did you automatically assume that I was back on my topline irregularity soapbox with this thread ...when I said nothing to imply that I wanted predators specifically to cull my topline irrgularities? I didn't. When did I use the word soapbox? I was (quite discreetly, I thought) using the example of your past reaction to a top-line "defect" - AND my personal preferences - to make a point of comparison. It was a valid one, and one which you have dismissed as silly by arguing that a top-line "defect" affects a fish's ability to swim, unlike my aestehtic preference for certain finnage traits. Frankly, I find that argument unsustainable. Almost all the bettas you put up photographs of as demonstrative of a topline "defect" and which you therefore had to cull have had defects invisible (or irrelevant) to other people. Nothing so insignificant can possibly be said to have a detrimental effect on the fish's ability to function. It is purely an aesthetic issue. Comparing it to the kinked spines some DTs have is not a genuine comparison. It is an aesthetic issue, exactly as my preference is an aesthetic one. Essentially your concern seems to be that it would reflect badly on YOU if people with taste not as discering as your own still found those fish you didn't want to continue to breed with to be of value. You are suggesting that breeders who don't cull imperfect fish are no better than puppy mills. Can you see why, as such a breeder, I may find that offensive? Also, that I wanted to cull a large number of fish all in one go, instead of to cull weak and deformed fish? When did I say that? If anyone is jumping to conclusions, it isn't me. I never said you intended to cull a lot of fish in one go - how could you possibly have read that into my post? was it where I suggested that you'd be more likely to raise 50 HM fry to maturity than 200? Sorry, but that's just a simple fact. HMs are not as hardy or easy to raise as VTs and odds are you wouldn't have as many to deal with as you may think. It also wasn't me who mentioned that you had in the past culled an entire spawn - that was you. If you start threads on controversial issues, you can't be surprised or offended when people respond to them. I also find it interesting that you refer to them as "culls" rather than fish. Why? I only ever think "cull" as a verb, not a noun. They are always fish to me. I have done a lot of culling because it is a very important aspect of seriously selective breeding any kind of organism. One last thing - if this were true, my gorgeous, darling, clever, funny, cheeky, sassy and spirited "26 going on 5 year old" mare would have been culled as a foal. She was bred on a coloured horse stud and was intended to be a paint, but didn't end up with more than a white blotch on her chsetnut belly. Thank God her breeder didn't subscribe to this approach to selective breeding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howlsn Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 Steering away from which fish will eat culls to suit for a moment.......I just think a few less serious or newbies to the forum that aren't up with the Culling that comes with serious breeding & faults such as extreme Rosetails etc. let alone the best suited fish to eat them if thats the way you want to do it might be a bit to them. Just my 2cents worth , I agree with you Stefan in some regards but I also personally believe that when culling for undesired traits etc. that is it just as important to allow the fry to mature especially in initaial F1 & F2 providing they aren't deformed or ill, as otherwise IMO you get tunnel vision & not a full understanding of the line your developing. X amount may have multiple serious faults per individual, other individuals may have a lesser fault & yet develop an exceptional Caudal for eg...& this may turn into a % due to the genetic makeup of that cross. I think in F1 & F2 it is just as important to know just how the bad ones mature as the great ones do, so you can give buyers on your line the most accurate information on what to expect & how to go about preserving the good & ultimately your line & respect as a breeder as not every breeder has a full understanding/education....providing honest & useful information about the fish you have just sold from a spawn with mixed results intended for breeding makes good reputable breeders. I'm not opposed to culling fish as it is mother nature's way.... of any age with severe faults but I personally watch/document those individuals that aren't perfect as they or individuals with lesser faults grow so I get an overall picture & see if there is a % of the same giving me the knowledge of how to proceed & chose an appropriate outside cross when the time comes to try & limit the amount of needed. Those that have homes with people that don't know A VT from a DT ...I take that option with a NOT TO BE BRED as really who that goes into that house or sees that fish is going to care in the grand scheme of things. & personally prefer the Clove Oil method unless I have a big oscar. EDIT- Does anyone ever sell fish they've bred with a info sheet or pedigree type background telling buyers/other breeders what is in that line... both good & bad? I used to & will be with all fish I sell, I think they key is limiting the number of culls needed as a breeder by knowing exactly what is in a line & breeding it not only to produce exceptional individuals that can be creditted to you but also reduce the number & severity or faults in that line that would require culling. I agree with culling in the regard to severe issues like deformities but it doesn't stop the undesired genes being carried through by the best individuals unless it is a progressional line over many generations where the problem is bred out not culled out which takes time & unless you sell nothing until the line is perfected & an overall even/quality spawn is produced, the bad will still be part of your line just as much as the good, whether it is on show or not. Not aimed at you Stefan....just my own opinion & longterm experience breeding pedigree animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callatya Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 *throws bucket of water on the anal finner and the topliner* Now it looks really bad when I wander off topic Anyway... Something like pedigrees and 'spawn registered' certificates were considered, the downloadable spawn records would easily do that job and could be printed off quickly to go with the fry. Doubt many people do though, unless they are of a horse or dog background where that sort of thing is somewhat expected. A little off topic again (and don't cull threads always end up like this ) but the method of culling other organisms, particularly warm-blooded ones, is to desex them, or sell them with no identification or registration so the animal is more than likely just going to stay a pet. You can't stop people breeding with them unless they are desexed, but you can lessen the likelyhood that you'd be associated with it or that it'd go to a breeding home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 you got WATER up my nose! PS - they tend not to desex lady horses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splendidbetta Posted December 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 My mind is still reeling as to why you asked my reasons for culling in the first place, Lisa! I just don't see how I attracted that. The thread wasn't made to discuss reasons - we already have one or two of those threads! You didn't say anything about soapbox, or about culling massive numbers of fish. But by using my topline case as an example you would have had to know the full story as you seem to regarding other aspects of it. Which means that you must have known how strongly I feel about it and that an entire spawn was culled. I felt that carried over as an undertone with your comment. It was this comment that got me: We all get that you intend to cull for quality, but I suggest that you have a go at raising a spawn until the fry are old enough to show all their characteristics. In the past you seem to have culled the instant a fish had a top-line "defect" without waiting to see what else it has to offer. Can you see how clearly that relates to my second paragraph in this post? Regarding DT defects: Ok, I will agree with you there. But what about extreme rosetail scalation? That's basically an aesthetic issue, but it is still culled. I think you know that I share your anal and dorsal fetish, Lisa. Your mare seems very healthy. I can't justify culling an animal that is completely healthy. Which supports my argument; Even if topline irregularity is not genetic, then it is environmental. Which usually means that it is caused by insufficient minerals like calcium, which is perfectly credible in water with low hardness. Which suggests that the fish is not perfectly healthy and the damage has been done. But then this argument would be crushed by saying that 'If the fish still has a quality of life, then it shouldn't be culled.' I refer to them as culls because that's how I have seen them refered to by others, and it is easier to call them 'culls' than to call them 'bettas that I intend to cull,' plus, why say that if we all know ALREADY that those 'culls' are bettas? Come on Lisa, hasn't the topic of culling topline irregularities been exhausted? Was there really any justifiable reason for jumping in and questioning my intent to use a predatory fish for culling? Seriously, I don't see it, so I don't think your post should have been made. And if it hadn't been made then the resulting comments wouldn't have been made either. What happened to "It makes me sad that lately every coffee shop thread seems to have descended into mudslinging and criticism of other people's beliefs. I realise that it is a foru, ie discussion and debate is expected, but for Gods' sake, we are 3 days away from Christmas. Even as a "bah humbug" adherent of the highest order, I would have expected some HAPPY posts to be made by SOMEONE at SOME stage." ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 You certainly seem to have taken a great deal of offense at a post that was not intended that way. As the person who drove Mouse's good-hearted christmas letter suggestion entirely off topic and into a debate about the ethics of promoting a child's belief in Santa Claus, I am rather surprised that you would take such enormous offence at a thread moving slightly off topic. Especially when it is a topic like culling, that is always going to stir controversy. FWIW I never asked your reasons or questioned your intent for culling, nor did I attempt to enter into some sort of debate the issue of culling topline irregularities. I did make an observation that you seem to have a preoccupation with culling, and as a relatively experienced breeder I attempted to encourage you to experence the happy side of breeding bettas rather than being preoccupied with what might go wrong. You say yourself that breeding bettas is an art - isn't art supposed to bring us pleasure? This is not a coffee shop thread. And do I even need to point out that a thread asking about predators for culling isn't exactly a happy post? I find it hard to see why my suggestion that you raise a spawn until an age beyond which a defect might become a non-issue was any more offensive that howlsn's almost identical comment. I tried to assist you directly on topic and I could have made several suggestions, had your proposed accomodation been more than a 2 - 3 foot tank. I asked for more details, I asked what size fish you were proposing to cull, and I said that had the tank you had in mind been larger, a jaguar cichlid would be perfect. So please don't suggest that all I have done in this thread is attack you or criticise your beliefs. That is simply untrue. What is with this recent spate of people telling one another their posts should not have been made? Nobody has said ever that to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jess Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 I can't justify culling an animal that is completely healthy. Which supports my argument; Even if topline irregularity is not genetic, then it is environmental. Which usually means that it is caused by insufficient minerals like calcium, which is perfectly credible in water with low hardness. Which suggests that the fish is not perfectly healthy and the damage has been done. But then this argument would be crushed by saying that 'If the fish still has a quality of life, then it shouldn't be culled.' I can't agree with that. If it is not suffering then you can't say damage has already been done due to insufficient minerals as one could say "OK, don't buy any sort of tropical fish from wholesalers, because we do not know what sort of water they were raised in and you cannot breed them because some form of damage may already be done although we can't really see it" I know you were referring to the reasons behind the topline irregularity, but I am just throwing this in. Besides, really, how do you know a fish is perfectly healthy? without any underlying illness? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.