Who wants a tattooed fish?

[Myspoiltpiggies]

This is truly upsetting. http://www.wgrz.com/news/news_articl...4&provider=top
Fish are restrained and tattooed with a tattoo gun in a petshop. Sounds like a joke but it's real.

[thecarerescue]

How bizarre. I used to live in Singapore, and saw quite a few of the dyed fish - never the tattooed kind.
Ridiculous seeing as though they do it to barbs and platys, which don't live too long anyway.
So pointless.

[Aertyn]

"My hope is if it gets more people into the hobby it's a good thing. If a kid comes in and sees a fish with a heart on it and says I want a fish tank and learns how to care for it, I think it's a win," says Lane.

What a complete load of bull, the ONLY reason he imported these fish is to make money not to 'get more people into the hobby'. It'll only increase the amount of impulse buys of fish, especially with Valentine's Day, how many people are going to buy these fish, stick 'em in a bowl and give them to their significant other?

[OSUCavies]

Ew. This is appalling.

Although it looks aesthetically pleasing and I'm sure people would in fact buy them, it's disgusting that someone would do that to a fish, or any animal at that.

I stick this on my 'ugh' list right below the people that like to dye their dog's fur pink and blue. -shudder-

[naturestee]

I wonder what the survival rate is? I know dyed fish often die during the procedure.

[crazywiggy]

That is sick. I can't stand people who buy pets or have their current pets altered in some way for the sake of appearences. It's so shallow... not to mention totally unnecessary and cruel. Some people are so thoughtless!

[MCR_Rox]

Some day they'll come up with those disgusting type of things for mammals and stuff . Money is truely the root to all evil.

[strigercake]

If they need a tattooed fish that looks pretty to get people into the hobby, I say that is pathetic and a poor excuse. What happened to the good ol' I want fish because I like them naturally (the way they look) and they are relaxing to watch?

[PiggieMamaKelly]

I'm trying to imagine how one "restrains" a fish. Some people are just too stupid to be walking the earth unsupervised.

[momof2pigs]

This is how it is done. It is NOT done with a traditional tattoo gun. I didn't think so, as the pain factor when I got my second one was pretty bad. A little fish wouldn't survive that.

Company offers custom fish tattoos with laser | Practical Fishkeeping magazine

[katiecavyNC]

Originally Posted by landhermie

Some day they'll come up with those disgusting type of things for mammals and stuff .

Ummm... ever see a Great Dane (or other similar breed) with the ears cropped or a cocker spaniel with a docked tail? I also have seen where neutered dogs can have testical implants so that cosmetically they don't look altered.

Dogs have been altered surgically for purely asthetic reasons for many years. I believe the UK standards allow for un-altered ears and tails (I THINK cropped ears are not allowed) but US standards encourage it for certain breeds. You can show a dog that has not been cropped, but don't expect it to win.

Other breed standards absolutely ban plastic surgery. Shetland sheepdogs, for example are supposed to have ears that tip over. Truly natural ears are very rare - almost all have had them 'trained' through the use of braces or a soft bandage that doesn't hurt the dog. Some ears will go prick no matter what and only a surgery will make them tip. If the judge feels the ears have been operated on, they will disqualify the dog.

Funny how some breeds REQUIRE the alterations and others DISQUALIFY them...

Ah people are fickle.

-S

[TheQueen]

My aunt and uncle have one of these tattooed fish. (They also kept their guinea pig in a 5 gallon aquarium.) My cousin bought my aunt two parrot fish for her birthday earlier this year. Both have hearts tattooed on them. I don't know where they got them, but when I saw them, I flipped out. And, in addition, they bought one male and one female, so now they have over a hundred baby parrot fish. The other fish eat them, and many simply die or get caught in the filter, etc.

Who the heck would want a tattooed fish anyways? I think they look pretty cheesy, in addition to the tattooing being painful for them. What happened to good old graceful, elegant, plain fish? If people want fish that are colourful, they should get tropical fish or bettas. It's ridiculous.

[crazywiggy]

I'm totally against ear cropping and tail docking too, funnily enough.

Fortunately ear cropping is illegal in the UK, but sadly tail docking continues. The kennel club want the law to remain the same (breeders choice, traditionally docked breeds can be shown with full tails and docking must be done by a vet). A lot of people are campaigning for docking to be banned though - hopefully it soon will be.

I just don't get why someone would want to put any animal through a painful and potentially harmful procedure just to make it look "right". It's pathetic.

[thalestral]

Docking is illegal in the UK now, the law was passed last year and comes into force in April 2007 There are still some exceptions (working dogs, medical reasons) but it's a great step.

[lynn's Cavies]

I agree with TheQueen I don't understand why a person wouldn't want a fish with it's natural markings. It is much more beautiful than being tattoed with a silly heart. I feel sorry for the fish even though they say "it causes no pain". I don't know how they figured that out but I would never go for a tattoed fish. I think they are much more beautiful with their natural colours and markings.

But I also don't like unnatural aquariums either. For instance, blue or pink rocks and fake treasure chests. I just don't like the look of it. I find it more satisfying (sp?) when they are in tanks that mimic their natural environments. But I realize pink/purple gravel or little underwater knicknacks are not harmful, I personally don't like them.

Just my two cents, so to speak.
L.

[_Luck_]

Tattooing fish?!That is ridiculous!How on EARTH would you figure out whether it caused the fish agony or not? How do you restrain a fish? And tattooing fish to get customers to buy them sounds a rather desperate act to me...what actually goes through the person's head when they think of tattooing the slow-selling fish?
"Hmm, how can I make people want to buy these fish...I know! I'll TATTOO them! I'm so smart. Never mind the pain and no choice in it, and how it will encourage impulse buying, at least I'll get money!"
And why would you buy a tattooed fish anyway? What's so great about a fish that stands out from the crowd? It will behave the same and need the same care...I just don't get it. It's prettier I suppose, even though I don't like the look of dyed or tattooed fish at all, it's still a fish. I'm not big on fish personally, so I don't know exactly why you'd get a pet you can't hug or play with, but that's my personal opinion...
I'll wrap this up now. Sorry for rambling.

[Cavy Ema]

Out of curiosity, is there really a PURPOSE for docking a tail? Or is it just for looks?

[crazywiggy]

Cavy Ema - that depends on who you ask.

In the old days docking was done for reasons like they thought it prevented rabies, avoiding a dog tax (working/docked dogs were exempt) etc.

Now the pro-dockers say it is to prevent tail injuries - especially in working breeds like springer spaniels - or fly strike.

Anti-dockers say docking the tails of all the docked breeds just to prevent a few of them POSSIBLY hurting their tails later is ridiculous. The hygiene argument is stupid - if you look after your dog properly (i.e. groom it if you have a long haired breed) it should never get flystrike. (I have a fluffy coated dog that isn't docked - a bichon frise - but we brush her daily and bath her when necessary. If she does get poo in her fur (like when she's ill)we wash it out. Not having a tail wouldn't make any difference, her bum would still get messy.)

So yes, basically, in almost every case (maybe except in certain working dogs) docking is purely done because that is the way they think the dog is supposed to look.

[smartorl]

Off the subject sort of, two years ago we saw an ad in the paper and there was a lady in Jacksonville who had seven Great Danes for sale as a breeding group. I called and due to the fact that so many others had viewed them but not purchased and she was at the deadline for the city she sold them to me sight unseen for $75 per dog. We drove up there and her house ws teeny tiny and dirty. She had all seven in there. One male and six females. All females but one were merle which is a by product, undesirable breeding color but she didn't care, "you would make five hundred a puppy and at that price they sold quick and every dog there had at least 9 per litter". Except for the black, who upon reviewing the papers, was the mother to all of them, they all had major hair loss and were flea infected. Later looking closely at their ears they were cropped but not standing, only the black had natural ears. She "gave" us a diluted bottle of ivormec for "fleas" and "worms" and a box of scalpel blades for ear docking. She proudly proclaimed that she docked all of their ears herself. When asked what she used for anestetic, she replied "waste of money, you don't need it". She also asked if I had a strong stomach because there was alot of blood and sometimes they bled to death. We loaded all of them as quickly as possible into the trailer and left. The dogs were all of a good weight and after steroid injections and flea removal, their skin healed and all were placed for adoption. Dutchess, the black one, still comes to stay with me when there is a hurricane threat in Miami. The rest all have congenital problems with their ears, eyes, and kidneys. One has been euthenized due to seizures. The mentality of people never ceases to amaze me. Did anyone see the episode of People's COurt where the guy was suing a rescue worker for neutering his dog that he had lost. It was a Min Pin but because he had papers (from some off beat registry) he was suing because he intended to breed the dog! I was upset that when Judge Judy ruled, she told him it was his fault the dog had been lost and that he was foolish for wanting to breed but didn't bring up the overpopulation problem and his stupidity for breeding!

[VoodooJoint]

Originally Posted by smartorl

Did anyone see the episode of People's COurt where the guy was suing a rescue worker for neutering his dog that he had lost. It was a Min Pin but because he had papers (from some off beat registry) he was suing because he intended to breed the dog! I was upset that when Judge Judy ruled, she told him it was his fault the dog had been lost and that he was foolish for wanting to breed but didn't bring up the overpopulation problem and his stupidity for breeding!

I saw it - I'm a closet Judge Judy lover. I think Judge Judy has no idea, nor does she care, about the animal overpopulation problem. She seems to buy all her cute little dogs from breeders or petstores and I think she may have bred once or twice herself.