I can see your perspective, and Dave's.
Despite the Bettas, and the size thing, and the 'they can take my fish
from my cold dead fingers' (all valid arguments), the basic fact remains
that as long as there are goldfish bowls, people will put goldfish in
them. It is a bit like the old tonics for children that were full of
cocaine and morphine - people didn't HAVE to feed them to their kids,
but many did. When in doubt, people take the easiest way. This easiest
way is a bit hard on the poor old goldfish. Better, I think, that they
die swiftly in the belly of a pet Barramundi than suffer in the bowl.
I am not a legislator, or a member of Animal Liberation, or a fanatic. I
just don't like goldfish bowls because to me they symbolise everything
that is wrong with the aquarium hobby. There is a lot right with it, but
a few things wrong with it too. I believe that as soon as we start
seeing live animals (including people) as commodities, we lose a bit of
ourselves. If I see a man beating a donkey with a stick, I will offer to
help him understand the error of his ways. If someone asks me my opinion
on goldfish bowls, I will tell them.
Your opinion may vary :)
Best regards, Andrew
Mike Luchsinger wrote:
>Dave,
>
>You are absolutely right. Education beats legislation. Banning of
>"goldfish bowls" would also prevent the keeping of the Betta, which
>prefers, even thrives in, the confines of a bowl.
>
>I have been in the pet shop business (and a rainbow hobbyist) for almost
>20 years. We used to give coupons for a "free goldfish"to the local
>fairs as prizes. When the winner would come in to claim their prize we
>would do our best to sell them on a Betta. The benefit of the coupon,
>though, is the same principal retailers use when they give a rebate.
>Only a small percentage of the winners actually claim the fish. Out of
>the 500 coupons that we would usually give out, maybe 50 would be
>redeemed, and 10 or 20 of those could be talked into buying a Betta and
>the necessary accessories. Often after the goldfish died, they would
>return for something "longer-lived". This is a strategy that give a
>local fish store the ability to make more money, so i don't understand
>why most of them have not adopted a similar policy.
>
>Use of the word "ban" on such a ubiquitous item as a goldfish bowl is
>certainly excessive.
>
>mike
>
>
>Does bowl equal aquarium. How big is a bowl. Careful Andrew, I think the
>intent of the bunny huggers is to stop you keeping pets all together. I
>put Blue-eyes in 200 litre water lily bowls on my front verandah to eat
>mozzies. I know what you mean by bowl but there are those out there hell
>bent on stopping you keeping that nice fish you have in any
>aquarium/bowl at all. Education is way better than legislation. If you
>are dead set against goldfish in bowls you should prove to all those
>buying little bowls and big goldfish that what they do is not nice for
>the goldfish. If a law in Australia was passed banning goldfish in bowls
>the NT Govt would interpret that to include all aquarium fish in any
>water anywhere. In Darwin I can only keep one New Guinea species of fish
>legally. In the NT you can only keep NT Native fish and most of the
>species on the allowable import fish except Oscars. The recent 6 species
>added by DEH Minister Ian Campbell have been banned here in the NT.
>Australian native Pacific Blue-eyes are a prohibited import here in the
>NT. My advice is be very careful when siding with fanatics who have an
>agenda much bigger than yours. Dave On 26/10/05 9:15 PM, "Christophe
>Mailliet" <christophe.mailliet at web.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>>Good on you for that!
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Christophe
>>>
>>>r_m_l at yahoogroups.com schrieb am 26.10.05 13:35:12:
>>>
>>>Hi fiesta,
>>>
>>>I've been subtly trying to ban goldfish bowls for years :)
>>>
>>>In an interesting moment last week I applied for a part-time position at
>>>one of the local pet shops - apart from a bit of cash to supplement the
>>>'writing career', I was also after some human contact. One of the
>>>reasons I did not get the job was, I believe, a statement I made about
>>>the abject uselessness of anything smaller than a 100 litre tank for
>>>keeping goldfish. Bad for business, I guess. If being in the pet trade
>>>means I have to actively promote cruelty then I will sleep better if I
>>>am not part of it.
>>>
>>>Best regards, Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-- ----------------------------------------- Andrew Boyd andrew at friendlymanual.com Web Development/ePublishing Solutions http://www.friendlymanual.com http://www.successadvances.com -----------------------------------------