# i think i am going to send my talapia into the wild...



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

my talapia is ok in his tank but i have noticed of late that he is getting lazy and just resting on rocks and only swims when i feed him.

there is nothing wrong with him i just feels he bored in this tank alone.

i noticed a local lake that is basically talapia infested...so i feel that i might just toss him in there and let him get on with what he was suposed to do rather than hanging out in some glass box.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

It is very unethical to release a captive animal into the wild, and in the state I live in, and the Province of Canada I moved from, it is also very illegal.

I suggest you rethink why you would risk damage to the environment just to avoid being responsible for your own animal.


----------



## bac3492 (Jul 25, 2008)

Is that where you got the tilapia from? (your lake i mean)

If not. Dont release it into the wild. Tilapia are infesting waters all over the world because people released them into the wild


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

dont worry..i should have said ..this is the philippines...lol.

the talapia is known locally as food fish and the locals love it.

they have started to introduce them to local waters because they love to eat the dengue mosquito...

the reason i have this monster fish is because some idiot gave me the wrong fish..but i couldnt bring myself to kill it.

he is a seriel killer that bites me whenever i put my hand in.....and has killed so many of my other fish before i knew what it was...

so rest assured i am well within legal and ethical boundarys on this one.

i was acctually wondering if this was fair on the fish?


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

Where did you get this fish? Is it the same species as what is already there?


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

zazz said:


> dont worry..i should have said ..this is the philippines...lol.
> 
> the talapia is known locally as food fish and the locals love it.


it is illegal in my state and prior province... so two places, two countries. It does not matter if it is the exact same species nor does it matter if the fish was taken from the lake, kept a while and returned to the same body of water... it's still illegal in Ontario, Canada and Florida, USA

You better check your local laws...

I also believe it is unethical treatment of the animal since you have interfered with it. Once you take it from the wild (especially if young) then you have modified the development a behavior of the animal. I do not believe it to be fair to the animal.

There is also a chance of affecting the resident animals. Sure it is slim, but the possible harm far outweighs any possible benefit of releasing that fish, so why do it.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

Number6 said:


> zazz said:
> 
> 
> > dont worry..i should have said ..this is the philippines...lol.
> ...


as i said before its the philippines... imagine the wildwest a hundred years ago and then imagine this conversation....do you know anything about this part of the world??

so at some stage i am either going to kill it humanely because it is so big or i am going to let it go into the wild.

and you can make that descision.

i dont know if you read my post but this fish was thrust upon me unknowingly...i had no idea it was going to get this big.

so you want me to kill it.....personally i would think he would vote for the lake. :wink:


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

Number6 said:


> I also believe it is unethical treatment of the animal since you have interfered with it. Once you take it from the wild (especially if young) then you have modified the development a behavior of the animal. I do not believe it to be fair to the animal.


I agree wholeheartedly.

If you can't care for the fish, euthanize him/her.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

cichlidaholic said:


> Number6 said:
> 
> 
> > I also believe it is unethical treatment of the animal since you have interfered with it. Once you take it from the wild (especially if young) then you have modified the development a behavior of the animal. I do not believe it to be fair to the animal.
> ...


ok...ill do what you say. Thanks for making the choice.


----------



## gtphale (Oct 12, 2008)

If its ate by the locals and enjoyed, why not filet it up and eat it? Atleast it dies for a reason.


----------



## Solchitlins (Jul 23, 2003)

ouch, sorry.

Not to add insult to injury but I read that putting alchol in a bucket of water will make him fall into the "big sleep" with out any pain.

If thats what you decide to do.

I agree that it probally isn't a good idea to ever release.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

i have just filleted it.. :thumb:

only kidding....but sure why not.. its kind of the standing joke with talapia cichlids ... that they taste so **** good.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

ok..final plea from the defence ...can anyone substantiate with any links ect that a fish brought up in a tank is by that very fact unsuitable for release?


----------



## CICHLUDED (Aug 4, 2006)

Sinigang or Escabeche... (joke)

Just kidding, euthanize it...


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

ok..i hear you but..whats the facts?

you see i think he could get on just fine in the wild but if i could see that it was a hopeless futile act then it would make it a lot easier for me to kill him.

just trying to weed out any kneejerk opinions.

i care for the guy and want to make sure he gets a chance if at all possible.


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

Well, here's one thing to consider...

Tank raised fish can often be carriers of diseases that wild fish would never be exposed to under normal circumstances. A seemingly healthy fish can still carry disease and transmit this disease to other fish. (The same goes for introducing wild fish to a tank full of tank raised fish.)

While your particular fish may not be showing any signs of illness, that does not mean that it does not carry diseases that could be harmful to an entire population of wild fish. Your fish, being tank raised, may have developed immunities against certain organisms or germs, if you will, while wild fish have never even been exposed to these "germs" so they have no immunity to them.

I just don't really understand what more you need to know here. You've been answered by some pretty conscientious fish keepers, and the consensus is pretty much the same...

I really don't condone euthanizing healthy fish just because a mistake was made and you didn't realize what you were getting into. But, if your only other option is to dump him in with a wild population (rather than rehome him, or turn him over to a LFS who will try to rehome him) then I don't see that you have any other choice other than euthanasia.


----------



## DJRansome (Oct 29, 2005)

The problem is that he can damage the environment. Google non-native invasive species. I don't know what the laws are there, but just because it's not illegal does not mean it's a good idea. 99% of the laws making importing difficult are due to an animal being released where he was not born.

My neighbor was a licensed small mammal rehabilitator (deer, fox, racoon, chipmunk, possum, everything). Animal taken from the wild even had to be released, once rehabilitated, into the same general area (within a mile or so) where it was originally caught. They used to release on my property because no traffic (dead end) and nice stream, woods, etc.

Use clove oil to put him to sleep and then the freezer for the final step.


----------



## mormodamballa (Feb 21, 2007)

its not good to consume a fish if it's been feed or treated with chemicals or food not meant for farm fish. Normal chemicals used for food and treatments in tanks contain diffrent chemical make-ups than those speciffically designed for fish that will be intedned for human consumption.


----------



## schlekw (Oct 25, 2007)

alright, i love my african cichlids and have been a big fish keeper and would not normally even consider this...

but is anyone else thinking "its just a fish"?


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

schlekw said:


> alright, i love my african cichlids and have been a big fish keeper and would not normally even consider this...
> 
> but is anyone else thinking "its just a fish"?


Did you read the entire thread?


----------



## schlekw (Oct 25, 2007)

yes


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

Then you should understand why "its just a fish" doesn't really apply here. :thumb:


----------



## F8LBITEva (Nov 9, 2007)

also, fish hobbiests strive to keep species pure throughout. if you released this fish that is of a different strain and it mated with an indegineous fish, the fry would be a hybrid and eventually alot of fish could hybridize and you wouldnt know what fish was the original strain. Euthanize him or find a local person willing to put it in their tank or pond.


----------



## schlekw (Oct 25, 2007)

cichlidaholic said:


> Then you should understand why "its just a fish" doesn't really apply here. :thumb:


What are you talking about? yes it does apply here.

The general consensus is that releasing it would be a very bad idea, because of its implications, and that eating it also would not be the way to go because of health issues.

So the only option left is to kill the fish, but there is a debate as to whether or not this is just, because the only reason is that the owner does not want to care for it anymore. So I was wondering how many other people feel that it is fine to euthanize the fish, because it is "just a fish"

I think if you read the thread again you will see what I'm talking about.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

schlekw said:


> So I was wondering how many other people feel that it is fine to euthanize the fish, because it is "just a fish"
> 
> I think if you read the thread again you will see what I'm talking about.


"just a fish" could also have been taken to suggesting that releasing it would be inconsequential as it's "just a fish".

I certainly had the same thought as your explanation of your first post.

There is ZERO benefit to anyone but the individual fish (who cannot care) and even that is debatable as chances for survival are questionable if it lacks experiential knowledge of the new environment.

Chance for harm- slight to great depending on multiple unknown factors such as health of fish, genes, etc.

Benefit to zazz? He gets to shirk his responsibility.

What's really sad IMHO is that in life, there are 3 guaranteed outcomes...

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. Zazz will do whatever Zazz planned to do before this conversation even began. :lol:

Sorry to be harsh (IF you're still reading this) but I happen to jump to the above conclusions when I see someone accuse me of a kneejerk reaction in my replies in which I tried to be open, non-judgmental, and simply informational.

My two cents!


----------



## becadavies (Apr 2, 2007)

*zazz *asked for advice,
the majority voted to euthanise,
*zazz* questioned the advice,
the majority voted to euthanise AND stated reason why
*zazz* questioned the advice again.....

zazz- you asked opinions, you were given valid reasons with whats the best thing to do, so just take the advice, euthanise the fish and be done!

or

don't take the majorities advice, do what (i think) you were going to do anyway and release it!


----------



## why_spyder (Mar 2, 2006)

If you really wanna get some "non-cichlid hobbyist advice" - look up NANFA and see how well your idea goes over. I have seen MANY people talk about catch, captivate, and release of wild species and it has not gone pretty when people don't want to take good, solid advice.

Personally - I'd euthanize it - or invest in a bigger tank so that I could raise it until it died of natural reasons. Or just eat it if I had invested no chemicals into the fish......

mmmmm, tilapia..... :thumb:


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

schlekw said:


> So I was wondering how many other people feel that it is fine to euthanize the fish, because it is "just a fish"
> 
> I think if you read the thread again you will see what I'm talking about.


*YOU* should have been more specific with your initial "it's just a fish" comment. At best, you were _vague_, leaving the comment open to interpretation.

Because you were vague, I took it in reference to the entire thread being insignificant, because "it's just a fish". :thumb:

Some have more trouble with euthanasia than others. I have difficulty adopting the "it's just a fish" attitude in the context you meant, so I can well understand others having difficulty doing the same. But, the truth of the matter is, once you've exhausted all other options, you can keep the fish yourself or euthanize it.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

becadavies said:


> *zazz *asked for advice,
> the majority voted to euthanise,
> *zazz* questioned the advice,
> the majority voted to euthanise AND stated reason why
> ...


i love these little resumes of the issues so far...sure i asked the question and i was told to kill it ....time and time again.

but i simply asked what are the facts and logic backing up this consensus of opinion .

as far as i can tell the only reason for me not introducing my fish to a lake of the same species is that he may be harbouring a repressed disease.

unless i have missed something that is about it.

also ...since i am getting a lot of negative feedback about how i purchased a fish and now i am unwilling to look after it ...

let me tell you all the story of how i got into malawi cichlids..

My sons school fair runs one of these scoop a fish stalls.

Basically some guy buys a ton of goldfish ..puts them all into several kids paddeling pools.

The kids spend the afternoon catching them and sticking them into plastic containers where they might if they are lucky end up in a caring home but more then likely die before they even leave the premises after being left on some table in the sun for the whole afternoon.

At the end of the day when its all packing up the powers that be tip all the fish onto the grass field to die.

I see this and step in and grab a couple of handfull of the critters simply because i cannot bring myself to see them all die like that.

So now i get myself a fishtank to keep them in.

Only problem is that the goldfish keep dying at an alarming rate.

Low and behold...the one left isnt a goldfish its a cichlid!!

So in the end i buy more cichlids and a 150g tank so that he can hang out with his kind.

but!! he just keeps on growing so that he is way bigger than the cichlids that he was meant to hang out with.

it was at that point i realised that he was a talapia and he suddenly ballooned to monster size!!

but now i am very happy with my 150g tank of really excellent cichlids but i have the problem of my huge talapia.

so thats it really.

and i told the school that what they were doing was acctually illegal in the uk....you are not allowed to give fish as prizes to children ..but it was like water of a ducks back. :roll:


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

zazz said:


> as far as i can tell the only reason for me not introducing my fish to a lake of the same species is that he may be harbouring a repressed disease.
> 
> unless i have missed something that is about it.


I believe more than that has been discussed. :wink:

why_spyder made an excellent suggestion above when he advised you to do a search for NANFA, not to mention the obvious suggestions others have made within this very thread.

But, if all you have taken away from this discussion is the part about disease and you truly comprehend the significance behind that, then that should be enough to convince you that releasing this particular fish into the wild could have huge ramifications. :thumb:


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

surely after this whole thread of releasing a fish into the wild..and having all these fish experts giving their opinion....

i would expect a list of bullet points of reasons for and against.

so now i have the repressed disease angle .. a search oppurtunity ...and a beleif that more has been discussed.....but not backed up by any fact.

i just was hoping for more... but if that is all then i will take that.... thanks for everyones input.


----------



## Alleycat (Dec 2, 2006)

zazz,

Had you started off this thread with the facts and the story of how you came to have this fish, I think you may have read a few different posts or suggestions. 
I would have done the same as you, tried to rescue a few before they became fertilizer, and likley been in the same boat.

What the heck do I do with this fish?

Simple answer,

Time to upgrade to a 280 !!


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

Zazz, have you confirmed, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Tilapia is the exact same species as is in the body of water you intend to release the fish into?


----------



## cichlidaholic (Dec 7, 2005)

Number6 said:


> Zazz, have you confirmed, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Tilapia is the exact same species as is in the body of water you intend to release the fish into?


Just for informational purposes here, Number6, might this not require some pretty serious testing to confirm? Would you not have to test both the species in the lake, as well as the "pet"?

Don't many variants very closely resemble each other?

And, going at this from a completely different standpoint (I've had two cups of coffee this morning  ) how would a pet fare in the wild?


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

At a minimum, you would have to identify what the species of tilapia is, what else it might be and how to id the differences. You would also need to have a 100% positive ID of the species in the lake. (This includes variants, sub-species, etc.)

As you say, the scary part is that some species are very hard to tell apart. I think if I searched for some posts by Bernie C. that there was one giant discussion on just this topic.

As for how well a pet can learn to cope in the wild, there are so many factors there... I've seen pet aquarium fish learn how to cope and fare very well (invasive species) and I've seen pet fish picked off instantly because it was different and predators spotted it a mile away in a big school of fish.

A quick google search finds many simple pamphlet style (Zazz's bullet point request) that tries to educate folks on the common sense answer: 
http://fl.biology.usgs.gov/education/Fish.pdf

The problem that I see is in argument that their (people like Zazz) behavior is inconsequential.

That is a nigh impossible position to argue against because you instantly fall into their trap by rising to the argument. If I try to show significant harm, I would actually just feed the position since we know that the world won't end if this fish gets released.

What can happen are *just *potential risks. I can't state that letting this fish go would be the start of a massive invasive species problem like the lionfish in Florida waters, because no one can predict a disaster... I can't say that the genes Zazz is about to introduce will be the future subject of a study showing the founder's affect of disastrous alleles being introduced to what was a wonderful sub-species.

Those are potential futures... in truth, this fish might swim 15 meters away and get chomped by a turtle... big nothing effect.

Fact is... with my Crystal ball being on the fritz, I tend to say that when the potential risks FAR outweigh any possible benefits, there is only ONE responsible position.

But hey... let's not get crazy with being all responsible and ethical. It's "just a fish" :fish: 
:lol:

sorry schlekw! couldn't resist it!  After venting, I need to return to some light hearted fishie posting... I come to this site for fun! 8)


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

ok..a bit of research..the talapia in the phillipines is one basic species. It is an industrial fish bred specifically to survive in the harshest enviroments that nature can throw at it. also its growth rate is fast and it is hardy to illness and disease. the fish that came to be in my tank came from a fish supplier where one of thes guys came to jump the fence into the goldfish section...its obvious.

there is no question that it might be different ..its the same ...its what they call locally "foodfish"!!

now my one worry is that he might not be able to cut it in the wild because he has had it easy but beyond that i think things in this neck of the woods are ok.

the lake that i mentioned is in the grounds of a hotel...they introduced it simply to eat the dengeue mosquito..


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

thanks a lot... but i like it here way too much.... i have given loads of good advice based on my personal experience and i like a good debate on areas that i am not sure of.

also i have gained a lot by being on this forum..... :thumb:


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

zazz said:


> ok..a bit of research..the talapia in the phillipines is one basic species. It is an industrial fish bred specifically to survive in the harshest enviroments that nature can throw at it.


 What you are referring to is the common fish farm hybrid Tilapia. 
I do know your suggestion to be false as the pure Nile Tilapia and T. Zilli have also been introduced.

Again, do you *know* what species you have and what is in the lake? 
or are you acting on assumptions about fish jumping ponds?

and I don't care if the hotel introduced the Tilapia... imagine if the Hotel bought t.zilli because they think that is the species that will work without harming THEIR property, don't you think you ought to know if you are about to toss a Nile Tilapia or the Tilpia hybrid into the mix?

Don't you want to consider the consequences?


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

i spoke to them at length about it and they said it was fine....but for sure i will do a check on the exact species.

thanks for that.....but i suspect that all the talapia here are the same....we will see.


----------



## why_spyder (Mar 2, 2006)

Number6 said:


> Fact is... with my Crystal ball being on the fritz, I tend to say that when the potential risks FAR outweigh any possible benefits, there is only ONE responsible position.


Please get your ball fixed soon - I need to know when the next great Cynotilapia species will be available for importation..... :lol: :lol:


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

all i ever wanted to know was if he could adjust to the wild...that was it...but all you guys focus on is the big picture....but i am not asking about the big picture...just the fish...can he adapt.

whats so hard about that...

seems like thats been missed out completely in all this......i will check the species.


----------



## why_spyder (Mar 2, 2006)

Well, that has been answered by Number6.

Can he adapt? It's possible.

What I'm afraid of is - sometimes people need to learn to see the big picture in order to help with the small picture....


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

ok..lets boil this down....is there any sceanario in which a fish can be introduced after being kept in a tank?

sorry to labour the point but i suppose that should have been my initial question....and in hindsight i wish it was.

..i guess from the previous posts it ought to be that as long as the fish is the same species and in good health ..then it should be ok.


----------



## Alleycat (Dec 2, 2006)

zazz said:


> the lake that i mentioned is in the grounds of a hotel...they introduced it simply to eat the dengeue mosquito..


If it's in the grounds of this hotel, would it be small enough to be considered a pond?

Just curious?


----------



## Fogelhund (Dec 3, 2002)

On the flip side, what benefits are to the population of fish where this will be introduced? I'd suggest no benefits, and a host of potential negatives.

I'd suggest putting the fish in the garden.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

Alleycat said:


> zazz said:
> 
> 
> > the lake that i mentioned is in the grounds of a hotel...they introduced it simply to eat the dengeue mosquito..
> ...


yep..maybe a pond ..a very big pond....in the scale of say north america..it would be classed as a pond.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

zazz said:


> ok..lets boil this down....is there any sceanario in which a fish can be introduced after being kept in a tank?
> 
> sorry to labour the point but i suppose that should have been my initial question....and in hindsight i wish it was.


Yes, of course they CAN. Many tank raised younglings are released into ponds lakes and streams every year to keep populations of game fish very high. Mortality rates are MUCH higher for these vat raised fry than wild fry of the same size but many live to become adults... the best of the best of the best survive.

Could your fish survive? Yes. Could he also be dealt a viscious death blow because it's too dumb to know how to interact properly with the large territorial males he's about to encounter? Of course... could he be eaten by a turtle or fish eagle tomorrow as he's too dumb to know to look down and up for predators? of course...

I've said all of this before... but I'll say it again as I am trying to be honest and open to you, just not your action.

Hope this helps :thumb:


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

Fogelhund said:


> On the flip side, what benefits are to the population of fish where this will be introduced? I'd suggest no benefits, and a host of potential negatives.
> 
> I'd suggest putting the fish in the garden.


i can see what your saying and i agree...god this has blown up to such a big deal....but its good to talk it through..for sure ..like someone said before ..its just a fish...

but its in my house and i need to resolve this.

thing is i said im gonna kill it and then when i see him i think what the **** you could get a second chance.


----------



## zazz (Apr 5, 2008)

Number6 said:


> zazz said:
> 
> 
> > ok..lets boil this down....is there any sceanario in which a fish can be introduced after being kept in a tank?
> ...


thankyou!!!! :thumb: apreciated.


----------



## Lindsey Dindsey (Jul 14, 2004)

Okay, I hope no one hates me for saying this, but I understand where you are coming from Zazz. I am *NOT* saying you should release it, I agree with everyone else that you shouldn't. However, I am a huge animal lover of all kinds and can see that it would be a hard decision. I shed tears when I had to euthanize a very sick, almost dead fish before. 

I would probably end up trying to find a deal on a large used tank for it, or talk myself into euthanizing it, thinking of all the other fish in the wild that I would not be putting at risk by doing the hard thing for the greater good.

Anyway, just wanted to say that I do understand your struggle.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*Lindsey Dindsey*
agreed! It's not a fun part of pet ownership, to put it mildly... but anyone and everyone who owns pets for life has either experienced this, or will.

It's your ultimate responsibility that you accepted the day you bought or adopted that pet!


----------



## StngStr (Mar 1, 2006)

I vote FREE WILLY!!!

Dump his fish arse in the lake and let him eat some mosquitos. If he gets eaten by a fish hawk or a turtle...so what? Someone else suggested eating him or euthanizing him...either way he dies.

If he survives, even better. Sounds like the fish that are in this pond are not native anyway, so what's the harm in dumping another non-native into the mix? man-made pond full of non-native fish + 1 more non-native fish = non-native fish kumbaya!

FREE WILLY!


----------



## CichlidLover2 (Jul 31, 2005)

> man-made pond full of non-native fish + 1 more non-native fish = non-native fish kumbaya!


That my friend is the wrong formula, let me show you the correct one...

Man-made pond full of non-native fish + 1 more non-native fish = Introduced parasite/disease that kills off all the fish in the pond

OR

Man-made pond full of non-native fish + 1 more non-native fish = Aggression issues (more dead fish)

OR

Man-made pond full of non-native fish + 1 more non-native fish = Hybridized fish

I could keep going if you'd like


----------

