for those that are contemplating Cleaner Wrasses
- Thread starter ralph atl
- Start date
seth the wine guy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 30
I've fallen prey to buying one. I could somehow justify taking them from the reef if they lived and thrived in our mini ecosystems but they don't. I think they are best left where they do the most good.
- Messages
- 105
- Reaction score
- 0
I bought two one died the other still kicking going on a year now he eats everything I put in tank 
and cleanes fish and searched rocks for food it looks like anyway. I must be the exception or just haven't had him long enough what's average life in a tank?
and cleanes fish and searched rocks for food it looks like anyway. I must be the exception or just haven't had him long enough what's average life in a tank?The real point was not to remove them from the wild due to the effect they have on the eco-system. Many people have them and some do well in captivity. The more people buy them the more they will be limited in our natural oceans and will continue to have an affect on the natural system.
I am not critisizing anyone on this thread...just emphasizing the point of importance in the big picture.
I am not critisizing anyone on this thread...just emphasizing the point of importance in the big picture.
Plenty of LFS *do* take a stand and don't order them.
And many hobbyists buy them to solve a problem (ie parasites), but IMO that's not the best way to address the problem of parasites. Neither is UV, for example. Both might help to some extent but unless the causes are addressed, the problem will persist.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That would eliminate the perceived "necessity" of having a cleaner wrasse.
One of the biggest problems with identifying organisms as "unsuitable" is that in some cases, the opinion is very subjective. There are always exceptions - keepers who have unexplained (or explained) success with a creature that is generally considered impossible to keep in captivity.
Heck, at one time, just about everything was considered impossible to keep. Through study, trial and error, the hobbyist community has learned to keep many things that weren't doable even a few years ago.
IMO education is the key. While a given creature may not be a good impulse buy to a beginner, it might be perfectly suitable to an advanced hobbyist with a specialized system.
I do agree that cleaner wrasses and many other species, are best left in the wild, for the most part. And yes, when consumers stop demanding them, the rest of the chain of custody will eventually respond.
Jenn
And many hobbyists buy them to solve a problem (ie parasites), but IMO that's not the best way to address the problem of parasites. Neither is UV, for example. Both might help to some extent but unless the causes are addressed, the problem will persist.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That would eliminate the perceived "necessity" of having a cleaner wrasse.
One of the biggest problems with identifying organisms as "unsuitable" is that in some cases, the opinion is very subjective. There are always exceptions - keepers who have unexplained (or explained) success with a creature that is generally considered impossible to keep in captivity.
Heck, at one time, just about everything was considered impossible to keep. Through study, trial and error, the hobbyist community has learned to keep many things that weren't doable even a few years ago.
IMO education is the key. While a given creature may not be a good impulse buy to a beginner, it might be perfectly suitable to an advanced hobbyist with a specialized system.
I do agree that cleaner wrasses and many other species, are best left in the wild, for the most part. And yes, when consumers stop demanding them, the rest of the chain of custody will eventually respond.
Jenn
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
The point is not at all survivability in the aquarium. Even if every single one survived a long life in the aquarium. The point is that removing them ruins the ecosystem.
I realize that too - just didn't specify it in my post - my omission.
Surprised actually that they haven't been added to CITES. I don't know if they are considered endangered, but some species that are considered vulnerable have their trade limited by CITES.
Surprised actually that they haven't been added to CITES. I don't know if they are considered endangered, but some species that are considered vulnerable have their trade limited by CITES.
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes they should be left to the wild. But if its in the lfs its not going back so you should try and give it the best home you can I have one for 2 yrs. I can't keep cleaner shrimp my clowns just kill them. Yes there are other ways too handle this but this works for me so if something happens too this guy I will get another. Judge not least ye be jugde
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Nope. Then you dont think they should be left in the wild. As soon as you purchase it, it has validated the collection and sale, and promotes further collection. "Saving" fish from stores that we agree should not be collected is cutting off your nose to spite your face. The store that you "saved" it from now has a market for them. And will look to sell more. You've made them marketable.
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
Spliting hairs .
Not really. Economics 101. If I (a store) carry it and it sells, it's worth carrying.
If I (a store) carry it and it dies... repeatedly and nobody buys it, it's a bad choice economically (never mind ethically) to carry and I'll likely stop carrying it.
Apply that same logic to businesses at the supply level and the effect trickles back.
When demand ceases, collection will stop.
I've never carried cleaner wrasses. Twice I was sent them as "fillers" (by the same supplier, 4 years apart). Both times I let him know in no uncertain terms, that I don't carry these and don't want them. The first one survived about 3 days. The second one, we put in our 1000g when I had it, and it lived about a week and then disappeared - not sure if one of the large fish ate it or what.
Not a good risk for a store unless they can flip them quickly. They only way they flip quickly is if people buy them. The article quoted above was a more compelling reason NOT to buy them, but many industry types and hobbyist types don't care about stuff that happens half a world away from them, but hit them in the pocketbook and it gets their attention. Sad, but that's the reality.
Jenn
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
How so? They're best left in the ocean unless you want one? Then they're better in your aquarium, despite the scientifically shown harm to the reef, and arguably abysmal survivability in the home aquarium?
Regardless of how you feel ecologically or ethically on this issue, when you purchase this fish from a store, you absolutely, without doubt, 100% promote their continued removal from the reefs. No splitting hairs about it.
The complete research article can be read here:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0021201">http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0021201</a>
I suspect that completely removing any species from the reef will cause problems. Kudos to the researchers for completing this study, and I bet you would find similar problems if every Cleaner Shrimp, Hermit Crab, Turbo Snail (etc) was removed from a reef.
The long-term viability of reef aquariums & coral reefs depends on aquaculture.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0021201">http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0021201</a>
I suspect that completely removing any species from the reef will cause problems. Kudos to the researchers for completing this study, and I bet you would find similar problems if every Cleaner Shrimp, Hermit Crab, Turbo Snail (etc) was removed from a reef.
The long-term viability of reef aquariums & coral reefs depends on aquaculture.
Similar threads
