• Looking to buy a cephalopod? Check out Tomh's Cephs Forum, and this post in particular shares important info about our policies as it relates to responsible ceph-keeping.

Keeping Octopus in Captivity.

Status
Not open for further replies.
In re-reading this thread, it seems that a lot of assumptions have been made, perhaps by myself as well as anyone else, that this is an issue of division...I think it is actually an issue of cohesion...we are all interested in cephalopods, in the wild, in the aquarium, and in the lab...we all want to know more. Please don't assume that I don't agree with PETA on certain issues, or with the NRA on others...I am always open to new ideas, and this is a good forum to express them in. I have seen lab discussions at UCLA devolve into fistfights over issues like this one, scientists are certainly allowed to be human, and this is a very explosive idea...but one that can be answered easily, and at the same time allowing each individual to form their own opinion...which should be free from external ridicule...so, I erred by insinuating that pacok is juvenile, as did he/she from using slang. Lets let that all go, and work out the best way to study and learn from cephs...shall we?
Happy cephing!
Greg
 
You certainly do deserve your own opinion, and I don't mean to overemphasize my questioning of it. I'm intrigued by your thinking on academia compared to hobby. I didn't mean to imply one was more WORTHY, specifically. I feel the captive maintenance approach has its own reasons for being of great value, often independent of science. My question is rather that if one is arguing that scientific gains are a mitigating factor to the potential pain, suffering, or ecological damage in animal research and private captive maintenance, wouldn't it be logical that between the two communities in their entirety, academia would produce a greater volume of results, also at a higher level of quality?

I certainly don't mean a specific criticism of your personal methods/habits, indeed, I at this time can only aspire to practice such a thoroughly blended approach as you (honored scientists of the past indeed were never truly confined to lab, field or home, but combined all three.) But I am trying to compare the practices of academia and captive maintenance as a whole...aren't you an exception to the rule? Don't most dog owners (thinking the analogy might be a bit simpler to ponder) simply enjoy their pets, usually taking good care of them, sometimes not, and rarely ever making any noticeable contribution to canine science? This thinking fuels my suggestion that the benefits lie elsewhere in those circles, and that we are not obligated to think only of the good of the animals but also ourselves. I certainly don't deny the scientific contributions that DO come from us, I'm just questioning the degree.

Remember, I'm not arguing a point against captive maintenance, but just wondering about the details of the scientific elements of the average hobbyist or pet owner's practices. I do feel our hobby is ethical, especially if we are informed and responsible. I get the impression that maybe you have some further thoughts on this, though? I'd be eager to hear those...

As for this being an issue of cohesion...well... :rainbow: ...I do agree with you. But I'm awfully pessimistic (me, the optimist) that all those little details are just murder on such cooperation, long-run.

rusty
 
Captive octopus question

This appears to be like the real world equivalent of Schroedingers cat (On the quantum scale a cat in a box is both dead and alive until you look, when it becomes one or the other)
Pet octopi have to be obtained from their natural environment, then maintained (spare athought for all those creatures they consume, which also have to be extracted from THEIR environment). These cephalopods have the advantage of owners that develop an emotional attachment to them, and an environment that is therefore produced to keep them as responsive as possible. (This may well include restricted feeding to prevent them over-eating.)
Octopi used for scientific research are more likely to be treated as objects to provide data, and dissected into their component parts - behavioural or physical. Life is often kept simple to gain clarity of observation, and interaction may well be restricted.
Octopi in the wild have only the natural hazards and stimuli to cope with (Plus being fished for food, pets or science as above). Even observation in the wild has influences, from airport runways to food supply and waste disposal. (It may also be difficult as we are not adapted to long term endurance in their world!) Our presence also will affect behaviour, while captive animals learn we are no threat (beneficial).
Therefore until the deed is done, the benefits (length of life, fulfilment [reproduction more unlikely in captivity?], anxiety, knowledge and understanding) are matters of opinion. Once the cephalopod is captured its future is fixed in a human environment unless it is released almost immediately.
 
I think Mike did a great job in describing the impact of collection and study on wild octopi (or pusses), and in a fair and balanced way. Thanks for saying what I have been unable to! Rusty, I never meant to put myself on a pedestal at all...I am just lucky enough to be able to work in a lab as well as in the field in my career as a zoological artist, and can see the results from both sides...you are certainly correct about the general animal keeper being not as dedicated ( sometimes even anally so) as a specialist, and maybe I took umbrage over something that was of a broader issue and not as personal as I had thought? Thanks for making me step back and take another look at all that had been written.
I have a problem with the academics who don't go into the field, or whose idea of studying animals is out of the pickled collection in the dusty back room...they miss 50% of the animal, as an animal is alive, and changes its mind, its habits, and in octos, its colour or shape, on a 24 hour basis...and that study, at this moment, can only come from captive study...most lab researchers have no/little reef-tank experience, and rely on hobbyists with dedicated tanks to provide them with bits of information and photos...I am sure if you asked Dr. Axelrod or Dr. Innes about the impact of fish hobbyists on the scientific world of freshwater fish, they would tell you how almost all modern understanding of behaviour , habits, breeding, etc. have come from the private sector, not a lab. I think that a reef enthusiast probably has more dedication, on the whole, than anyone who keeps a domestic animal...many of us take hundreds of photos, write down observed behaviors, and keenly study the animals in our tanks, as can be evidenced by the plethora of images on TONMO, as well as little notes from different people about something unusual that their ceph has done...leading to new trains of thought, and perhaps new venues for a professional scientist, who owes much of current scientific knowledge to the bright minds of the hobbyist!
Happy Cephing,
Greg
 
I certainly do agree, Greg...most don't realize the contributions hobbyists get, and "getting your hands dirty" is an essential part of science. That's not to say I don't respect the lab-centric types. Indeed, I remember an ongoing debate between two professors (working side-by-side) whether study should be confined as strictly as possible to field or lab. Both had some very interesting arguments, and I realized I had no clue who I agreed with more. But I like both (probably field a little more... :wink: ) and wouldn't generally recommend being quite so extreme as they were.

Slightly, you OUGHT to be on a pedestal. At least, you should serve as an example. I think blending your professional science with your personal recreation and hobbies is an excellent practice. Indeed, maybe this suggests a point I've overlooked here. Scientific contributions can be valued by their novelty and their diverse point of origin. When you get biologists and physicists in the same room long enough, fascinating things start to happen--they exchange novel ideas that bring fresh perspective and solutions to problems. Perhaps one great scientific asset of private captive maintenance isn't that we are trying to mimic a lab or field science project, but rather that we are simply doing our own hobby, and in the process learn things that a lab/field researcher might never have otherwise found. Often coincidence, sure, but perhaps worth more than I'd originally assumed.

Mike, I thought your analogy was spot-on and eloquent.

rusty
 
a reply.

Isnt it interesting that the subject everyone here has discussed, the difficult dillema of confronting the issues relevant to everyone involved in every discipline centred on animal husbandry, has raised such a series of different responses.
Forget for a moment the insults, the reprisals, all the off topic threads that flew between everyone here; I have seen anger, ridicule, humour, reasoned debate backed up with published papers and quotation from the learned and those in the know. There has been indignance and annoyance that those who oppose keeping animals in captivity have raised their heads and caused more irritation once again. A kind of resignation and stoicism that you all are having to slowly explain to yet another animal rights activist and having to dust off your collected portfolio of tried and tested rebuttals for those people who simply do not understand what your 'hobby' is all about!!

Well I want to tell you all something.
PAKOC is a joke. A laugh, not serious.
As the person who is a 'serious academic from Dorset who's interest is only 'reading' he does not exist. Pakoc is not, as someone suggested, a South American demon but stands for "People Against Keeping Octopuses in Captivity". PAKOC, get it. Not only am I not against keeping Octopuses in captivity but I am a Zoologist who spends his life keeping many different animals and even designing commercial displays and collecting the inmates.
And I have hopefully brought something to your notice that may make some of you stop for a moment and think. Two or three things really.
1. Everyone, including Tony (who I wholeheartedly apologise to for suggesting he was an idiot as I apologise to Greg, I just took two quotes at random to 'spice' things up a bit as part of the 'stuffy academic' personna. :shock: ) instantly reacted aggressively in defense of their right to use humour and banter at any time in response to a question or point of view. It is ironic that this entire post was based on a misdirection and on my own humour. I wonder if, when the joke is on you, you will be quite as quick to defend this.
And also on the same point, where would someone, who may well actually believe what I was spouting about, go to have a serious debate. I think (and no, surely you spotted how ridiculous PAKOC had become when he suggested that he become a moderator) you should consider the person behind the point of view. It may be that there are people who do not respond to your 'style' who have a contribution to make to your site and who feel there is not an appropriate medium to engage in constructive discourse. (Why not an entirely serious message board for serious discussion where everyone knows everything other than serious discussion is banned. That might be a forum that would become a focus for furthering the extremely 'academic' points that perhaps now do not have a natural home at tomno) Just a thought anyway.
2. You do keep animals in captivity. You do not always remember the issues that carries as baggage. It is not enough to simply chuck some throw away comments onto the issue and then get back to your hobby or profession. Everyone needs to think about the issues that what we do raises. Yes you do take animals from captivity. You do impact on the reef and that is indefensible. Remember that I do not, now that I have come out (and I don't mean that in a homosexual way), advocate what PAKOC was so arrogantly ranting about at the beginning. So I do not try to defend it. People do buy an octopus and see it die and get another etc. The whole point of this post and the subsequent thread is exactly that. PAKOC was able to make these statements because unlike a real animal rights objector, I have kept animals and I know what makes us uncomfortable.
I suggest that we choose to defend our position in another way. Step over the counterpoints that can be fired back, the "ah, but...." tactic.
Use evidence and results. How many peole have bred Octopus. How many are being reared. How many are being bought. What numbers are being imported. How many members are currently attempting to work on breeding, rearing, disease control etc. Collate the results of the collective body of expertise that resides here and turn it into a tool, a weapon, to justify what you all are doing. Use it to say "This is what we are doing because we care about these animals. There will not be a stop to the exploitation until like minded people like us develop ways to render it unnecessary and unprofitable. I get the feeling that there are many willing footsoldiers out there who would be delighted to take part in such a survey and join in some serious work. Maybe concentrate, in groups, on a certain species. Have groups that are working on one particular species. Share specimens etc. I'm not suggesting that this is not already happening but it is not happening on a scale that makes any impact.
3 And finally.
I brace myself for your fury.
I have chained myself on the steps of the alter and cower as the storm passes over, taking the demon PAKOC on his way to the depths of the underworld from whence he came. And the great nine legged biped squats on the edge of oblivion and ponders the carnage that has erupted from his bowels and washed this place with fetid aroma. I am cleansed and enlightened and my new brethren embrace me as a kindred sole. I am reborn though tarnished forever with the blight that is my name, PAKOC.
 
I guess I'll respond here, just 'cause I'm the Webmaster and, well, it's all pretty interesting, isn't it? :smile:

There has been indignance and annoyance that those who oppose keeping animals in captivity have raised their heads and caused more irritation once again.
You are incorrect. My being on the "defensive" is directly related to your insulting words. If you look at my first post, I think you'll see that I responded with respect, as did, I believe, all others. As I intimated to you via private message, there is a stark difference between attacking ideas, and attacking people. Despite apologizing (accepted), you haven't demonstrated that you understand that point as of yet, based on your assessment of your "experiment".

But whatever, I'm not here for you to toy with, nor are the others. That's a bit insulting in itself. Still, I'm not removing your posts because it's all still fairly entertaining to me, but I am interested in pointing out to you that you (not your alter-ego) seem to have misjudged just about everything that has gone down here.

The subject matter is an interesting one -- octopuses in captivity -- you (not your alter-ego) seem to believe (mistakenly) that everyone would be against you from the start. As some have demonstrated, that's not necessarily the case. Sure, some things in your posts were obviously not based in logic, so whatever -- you made some arguments, and people disagreed (and bantered), and then you called them idiots. I for one don't think there's much of a story there. I'm not all that moved by your experiment with human response. I think everyone here would react pretty much the same way were we presented with the same thoughts and words again.

Anyway... it's much less interesting to me whether you're a real person or a cartoon, but what is interesting to me is the discussion at hand. I think some good points have been made, as well as some good jokes. I welcome you to the community, and am glad you've removed your "mask" -- but I won't go on record saying that I feel it was a successful experiment on your part. TONMO.com is a community with a certain feel -- it will certainly evolve, but it won't be disbanded by unfounded logic, of that I can assure you. Whether your comments were sincere or not is moot. The thread stands in tact, IMO.

ANYway... it seems just about everyone here is in agreement on the subject, then. :smile: The good points that were raised created good content, but I'm not sure there are any real conflicting opinions amongst the group... or were there? Now I don't remember... ah yes -- Tintenfish, I insist, mediocre things should *not* increase, and optimism should be adjusted at the individual level. :smile:
 
Further... :smile:
(Why not an entirely serious message board for serious discussion where everyone knows everything other than serious discussion is banned. That might be a forum that would become a focus for furthering the extremely 'academic' points that perhaps now do not have a natural home at tomno) Just a thought anyway.
This statement demonstrates that you are not too far from PAKOC after all. :smile: I respectfully disagree that the style of TONMO.com prohibits enlightened discussion, period. The community is capable of having focused discussion, and is also capable of humorous digressions. Either way, as I said to PAKOC and I say to you, you may read whatever posts you find interesting to you -- please ignore the others. TONMO.com is careful not to over-police the forums -- the community does a fine job of that naturally, using communication and people-skills rather than administrative tools.

Our forums are properly segmented and the growth TONMO.com has experienced and continues to experience validates our community methodology. Thanks, though, for the suggestion! If nothing else, I do appreciate your interest in the community, and look forward to getting to know you better through your postings.
 
..... personally, all of these intellectual challenges and big words just lose me :roll:

.... where did I leave that Asterix comic?
 
Hey Clem, did you call this one or what??? LOL! Kapoc, you are amusing to yourself perhaps...I don't know of anyone who is yucking it up at a PETA conference right now...but I still seem to feel that you think of yourself as an intellectual "snob" looking down on us from some sort of tower...personally, I have nothing to say, because Steve asked me to be polite.
Happy Cephing!
Greg
 
pakoc,
I am disappointed that I wasted so much time responding to your post. I knew something was amiss when you described yourself as "an acedemic" and a "scientist," words that few academics or scientists use to identify themselves, and then structured an arguement in a way that no scientist would. I very gracefully alluded to this in point 5 of my post. I figured that you were serious about your question, but felt that you had to say you were an academic to be taken seriously, so I didn't pounce too hard on that. I tried to be gracious and informative, as did others, but as a fun-loving group, the thread strayed. You said ...
It is ironic that this entire post was based on a misdirection and on my own humour. I wonder if, when the joke is on you, you will be quite as quick to defend this.
The humor was not a joke on you - the "bad" pakoc or the "good" pakoc or whoever you really are. I don't much care and I'm not much interested. Your original post was actually more provocative and illicited more usefull dialogue than your "man behind the curtain" routine.
Who was it - P.J.O'Rourke I think - who said that life is full of ironies for the stupid. So if I don't jump to your defense, it isn't ironic, but it makes perfect sense: people don't respond well to others who deceive them. If you make forum members angry it does not speak ill of them - and they seem like a great group of people to me - but it speaks ill of you. Try some straightforward social interaction.
As for me, I'm going to go read some threads about cephs now ... not about human social experiments ...

Gayla
 
Most of what I was thinking has been said here. I do think this thread had some intriguing discussion going regardless of its genesis. I can even imagine that under some very specific circumstances an experiment like this might have worked. Maybe. Perhaps. But as it happened...no, I think this was a very poor idea. It cripples your credibility in the eyes of the community, and it leaves us all feeling stung and injured. Doesn't really matter what you were trying to accomplish. It started with deception in a real-world setting and used inflammatory tactics that violate traditional online etiquette.

If you DID have a genuine purpose, trying to accomplish what you claimed, even then this is an underhanded and manipulative way to attempt it. Frankly, as it stands I now have a hard time trusting you at all and would thus find it difficult to engage in a future serious discussion without fear of further misdirection and manipulation. Never mind the fact that I'm quite ticked. :| That will pass, but the trust...

rusty
 
Thanks all for your input on this one... I'm going to lock this topic -- I don't believe there's much more constructive discussion that can go on here. If there's interest in the original topic, I encourage any of you to strike up the "octopuses in captivity" discussion again (perhaps take up Dr. O'Shea's invitation to post to the Physiology & Biology forum).

It wasn't necessary before, but I will explicitly state in our guidelines that blatant, purposeful misrepresentations are prohibited, as are multiple identities (e.g., multiple usernames from the same user). Violations will lead to note removal and/or board / IP banning. Thanks for your support! :wink:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Shop Amazon

Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Back
Top