Betta Fish Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I recently started a post for bad fish stores and was going to put this incident on it, but until I can get a better idea of legal obligations I am just going to address it here without naming the store. However, I will say that the store is a local fish store that carries only fish and reptiles in Yucca Valley, CA.

This store seemed pretty ok (other than the fact that the store owner tried to assure me that an extremely male betta was a female) until I walked back and saw their mollies. They had all sorts of hearts, stars, etc on them and I could not fathom how they could have been bred that way. They were really neat (and me being the innocent, blond-minded person I am) asked how they bred them.

The store owner told me that they were tattooed mollies imported from overseas since tattooing fish in the U.S. was illegal (no kidding). He assured me that they were not harmed in the process but was unable to give me ANY information on, to put it in his words, how they were "put out and tattooed."

These were really cool fish, but I personally find this immoral and irresponsible. I think that it is wrong to alter an animals physical appearance purely for capital gain. To help the animal's welfare or even selective breeding is a different story. There is no proof that the fish are not being hurt or exposed to disease in the process and who even knows how they are being put under, IF they are being put under.

I give this store a huge thumbs down for first, knowing nothing about their fish, and second, condoning the mistreatment of animals. I want to know if I am just being overly sensitive about this or If you all agree with me.

Thanks for reading,
Brandi
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,893 Posts
Pretty sure the fish are put into a solution that strips away the slime coat and then they are injected with the dye.

From what I have read the dye usually isn't permanent, but the damage done to the fish in the process is.

Very barbaric practice in my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
I think that's disgusting. I am not surprised that he did not tell you how this was performed. I don't think tattoos are all that cool anyway (my opinion), but on fish the only thing that comes to my mind is "why?". What is the use? I personally think that a natural, healthy, nicely colored fish is much more worth my money than a fake-looking, unhealthy, ugly one with (maybe)nice designs. I am more curious as to how they DID it. People just don't get that animals were divinely created to be beautiful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,916 Posts
Often, the tattooing method is just grabbing the fish, dipping them in a caustic solution to strip away their slime coat, dying them (with needles, lasers, whatever), and then dumping them back into the tank. The fatality rate is extremely high due to people taking little or no precaution against cross-contamination, infection, stress on the fish, et cetera. Plus, they would want to churn out as many of these fish as possible as quickly as possible, so I doubt they would be taking the time to make sure the fish aren't hurt in the process. Furthermore, I have read that the dye apparently can leech into the fish's body and poison them, causing kidney failure and other internal damage. I think that can be consider pretty cruel to the fish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,211 Posts
I know a bit about this the ink it is usually food coloring be it it's considered "safe" as far as the tattooing process I really do not see how it can be done safely and usually tons of pet stores sell these poor fish around valentines day with hearts and stuff like that tattooed on them, I find it pretty revolting but it does not last it usually fades in about a month or so, it is animal abuse in my opinion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,893 Posts
I think if they are selling these fish they should have to explain the process of dyeing to customers if asked. Evading the question either because they are ignorant or worse, because they know how cruel a practice it is, is poor form.

I would not be inclined as a customer to support that business with my money. I can't see how a fish isn't harmed by the process of having dye injected into its skin. I doubt the people doing it are skilled tattooists or have any real interest in the fish's welfare beyond the profit they make.

http://www.deathbydyeing.org/moreau.htm

Found this site, not sure how old the info is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
I read an article on it. Fruit tetra's are another Tattoo'd fish. As well as large cichlids.

They take the poor fish. Dip them in a mild acid that strips them of there slime coat. Then they take the fish, and tattoo it quite like a person would get a tattoo.

Then they put the poor poor fishy, in an irritant that forces the fish to grow back its slime coat.

Out of 100 fish this process is done too, 50 will survive the first week. By the time they are shipped it drops down by another half. So what you saw in that pet store is only the 15 or so out of a hundred that actually lived through it.

The sad thing though is, the fruit tetra's and other fish they use to do this stuff to. Are Smart fish, many of which remember what was done to them. Thus they become people shy, scaredy cat fish. That are prone to illness.

The ink after a while will fade and start to go away in most cases, but the damage is forever done.

Yes I was one of the ten thousand who signed a petition to have it ILLEGAL to sell these fish in the united states. There are many of these floating around, you might want to put your John hancock on at least one of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
First off, THEY TATTOO FISH???!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!
How?! Why?!
Secondly, how awful. It reminds me of a section from the book Black Beauty, where Sir Oliver describes how humans cut off his tail "for fashion!" It was a permanent process too, and he lamented how he'd never grow it back. I'm not saying this book made me a better person, but I used to read the heck out of it as a kid, and it has most certainly made me more sympathetic to animal rights. Anna Sewell is rolling in her grave.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
I've seen this before in a Pet Supermarket. It doesn't even look good. I cannot understand who thinks this is a good idea. Most of the fish I saw with these "tattoos" looked very unwell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I recently started a post for bad fish stores and was going to put this incident on it, but until I can get a better idea of legal obligations I am just going to address it here without naming the store. However, I will say that the store is a local fish store that carries only fish and reptiles in Yucca Valley, CA.

This store seemed pretty ok (other than the fact that the store owner tried to assure me that an extremely male betta was a female) until I walked back and saw their mollies. They had all sorts of hearts, stars, etc on them and I could not fathom how they could have been bred that way. They were really neat (and me being the innocent, blond-minded person I am) asked how they bred them.

The store owner told me that they were tattooed mollies imported from overseas since tattooing fish in the U.S. was illegal (no kidding). He assured me that they were not harmed in the process but was unable to give me ANY information on, to put it in his words, how they were "put out and tattooed."

These were really cool fish, but I personally find this immoral and irresponsible. I think that it is wrong to alter an animals physical appearance purely for capital gain. To help the animal's welfare or even selective breeding is a different story. There is no proof that the fish are not being hurt or exposed to disease in the process and who even knows how they are being put under, IF they are being put under.

I give this store a huge thumbs down for first, knowing nothing about their fish, and second, condoning the mistreatment of animals. I want to know if I am just being overly sensitive about this or If you all agree with me.

Thanks for reading,
Brandi
I've seen this before in a Pet Supermarket. It doesn't even look good. I cannot understand who thinks this is a good idea. Most of the fish I saw with these "tattoos" looked very unwell.
I couldnt agree with you more, I live in Phoenix, Az and I ran into the same thing except they were much bigger fish. They had stars on their side, some had clown faces, it was totally uncalled for!! This store claimed they were born that way, right. What's wrong with people today? Petsmart now carries Glow in the Dark Betas!! How messed up is it to consider what these poor fish are having to ingest so these "so called", animal concious shops can gain more profits? Do you think the buyers for these pet stores, college graduates, years in the industry, really think the fish are born Glowing and Tattoo's from nose to fin?? Really? Just as sad there is clearly a market of consumers creating this demand. And yet society wants to complain when they dont have a voice on a matter, or they aren't treated fairly! Open your eyes people it starts with morals and ethics and compassion...it should be common.place. Especially with those in the business of pets and proper care of them.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top