• 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.

OMG, picture of a bluering on someone's finger...

I agree with Roy that most people's interest in blue-rings is because they're exotic and deadly, and I've been reading ceph posts here and on other forums for the last five years. People don't seem to feel sorry for blue-rings in LFSs and want to give them a better life - they want to feel important because they're keeping something deadly.

I've wondered too about some people handling them without fear and having no bad consequences. Last year a baby was found petting one along an Australian beach and the little octopus harmed the baby.

Nancy
 
What do you guys see as the difference between keeping a ceph like a blue ring because keeping something deadly is cool vs keeping a non deadly ceph because its beautiful or interesting?
 
So the same link/picture was posted up on RC, and I replied by hot linking the picture in to the thread, but on seeing it here I thought I had been edited out without a word (forgetting that it was a different site) and I've been fuming about it for days.
 
Neogonodactylus;98493 said:
I don't think that there is any debate that the component that can kill you is TTX - supposedly produced by bacteria (Vibrio) that grow in the posterior salivary glands.

Interesting... I had no idea that Vibrio was one of the bacteria that can produce TTX... I did, however, know that Vibrio is the bacterium that's recruited by Euprymna scolopes (e.g. see Visick Lab: Home of the Vibrio-Euprymna Symbiosis ) Maybe everyone who studies this has already thought of this, but it makes me wonder if the use of a Vibrio byproduct as a toxin evolved through the use of Vibrio for bioluminescence... like perhaps some ancestral octopus got the TTX-producing strain of Vibrio, and fortunately had a mutated sodium channel that was immune to TTX, and that led to its recruitment as a venom? Or something like that... Of course, there are relatively few octopuses with bioluminescence at all, which may sink that theory, but it seems surprising that two coleoids would independently evolve organs that deliberately culture Vibrio.
 
Thales;98496 said:
What do you guys see as the difference between keeping a ceph like a blue ring because keeping something deadly is cool vs keeping a non deadly ceph because its beautiful or interesting?

I don't believe anything should be kept just because it is powerful/deadly. When you are looking into something that you want to keep and all you know about it is that it's deadly and has mesmerizing blue rings you are not likely to research very in-depth or in the right places. You will likely not care enough for the animal to put the time into the proper upkeep that it needs/deserves and will skimp on things that don't "really" matter just to save money.

When you want to keep something because you are interested you will research a lot more (even if it isn't helpful to you as an aquarist it will give you more information about an animal you love) than you would otherwise and will likely be more patient about getting together the proper home for your animal. Patience in this hobby is one of the most important things and hardest thing to get through. First-timers will most likely not understand the importance of cycling, water changes, chemistry, etc. until they have lost their first group of animals.

The best bet is for someone to research the group of animals (octopus, cuttlefish, or even something as broad as cephalopod) rather than a particular species at first, and as they get more familiar with the care of the animal in general they can start to decide based on time, money, skill level, and preference which species they would like to keep. This way the owner should be well-informed prior to the purchase of the pet they worked so hard to be able to keep. Then they just have to learn those things that you have to learn by doing them and make you hit your head on the wall wondering how you ever thought you would do it some other way.
 
Tangent alert! :biggrin2:

I'm not sure we can generalize that people who want a blue ring don't do research and that people who want non toxic occys do do research. IME, the majority of people getting a ceph don't do much research at all. Perhaps the blue ring discussions are more memorable?
 
Shipposhack,
I have to ask, did your dad (or mom) make you research a pet (or something else) that you wanted before they would approve obtaining it? Mine did and your theory works for those of us who believe research is a natural part of keeping/having something, particularly if it is alive. However, IMO somewhere between OSHA, the FDA and all the other regulatory authorities, we (the collective we) have come to believe that anything found in a store is common place and easily cared for and safe. If it doesn't turn out that way, the lawyers make a fortune. Common sense seems to take a vacation far to often.

The positive side, on the other hand, is that once purchased, we (the TONMO we) see people seeking information so, unlike the obituary I have received via email several times, common sense is not dead.
 
There is definitely an inferred belief that a lot of people who are "extremophiles" are also more interested in the novelty of extreme things, or in posturing about having a deep understanding to show off rather than actually having that for its own sake. And I'm probably partially inclined to see that in others because I have a bit of it myself: I like cephalopods, but I have to confess to spending more fascination on huge and/or exotic cephs than the more mundane... although the more I learn, the more I come to appreciate the diversity more than the spectacular...

I suppose it's worth evaluating whether the belief that blue-ring enthusiasts are more likely to be what Greg calls "cranks" than any other ceph keepers, I doubt anyone's done a survey, but anecdotally, it seems like the vocal blue-ring enthusiasts tend to make an impression as being irresponsible, brash, opinionated, and more interested in being hear than in listening. I'm sure some element of this is that some of us (myself included) may come across as condescending when trying to make crystal clear what the dangers are in keeping these animals: I think it would be immoral to have someone interact with a blue ring without understanding the danger, so I tend to be very blunt in pointing out the dangers. This is partially because I'm very well aware of the action of TTX, since it's a standard channel blocker used in neuroscience, and because I have some background in emergency medicine, so, pet octopuses notwithstanding, I pretty much know the clinical aspects of injecting a small quantity of TTX into the bloodstream: acute respiratory failure from complete skeletal muscle paralysis. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to say that this is not something that people should take lightly, or brush off by rationalizing "well, they don't cause problems very often..."

I tend not to take it particularly well when people get cavalier and posturing about things that are potentially extremely serious. I didn't like the guy on a dive boat bragging about how he'd disabled the safety on his speargun and how he never dives with a buddy (and I spent a lot more time watching out for crazy speargunners than looking for octopuses on that trip). I didn't like it when I saw/smelled some ski patrollers smoking dope on duty (and boy, did I ski carefully for the rest of the day...) I know plenty of people who collect exotic weapons of various sorts, and I generally find that the ones who make the show of bragging about them are the ones who are least likely to know how to use them properly, or to keep them responsibly, or to take care of them... I remember some guy lashing out to near my throat with some martial-arts move when we were both in a hot tub and announcing "I could have just killed you" out of the blue. At the time, I thought "yeah, whatever," but now that I know some people that are actually good martial artists, I also know that anyone who would do that sort of thing would be pretty much considered an amateurish ass in most respectable martial arts schools... I tend to see a lot of the same mannerisms in many of the people who are enthusiastic about keeping dangerous animals and disinterested in keeping similar but less dangerous animals, so I tend to (perhaps unfairly) assume that they tend to be cut from the same cloth.
 
I guess it sort of comes down to who has the "right" to the left hand lane, the guy that wants to do 80 (129 kilometers) or the woman who wants to drive at 100 (161 kilometers) . The speed limit is 70 miles (112 kilometers) an hour.
 
D - huh?


Monty,
I think BR discussions become more memorable and more volatile because they so often become flame fests.
 
No, they don't make me research it. I do it myself on any fish, coral, or invertebrate I want to keep. I want to give them the best environment, care, and diet that they can have. It just makes sense to me to at least research the animal a little before you buy it, or if it is something like a fish that would have similar care to other fish it would be ok to research it after you purchase it.
 
monty;98520 said:
I didn't like the guy on a dive boat bragging about how he'd disabled the safety on his speargun and how he never dives with a buddy (and I spent a lot more time watching out for crazy speargunners than looking for octopuses on that trip).

A bit off topic but did he give you any reason why on earth he disabled the safety? He probably never dives with a buddy because they've all found out about his speargun!
 
Thales,
I was just trying to put your prior, "what's the difference" question into a non-ceph thought about everyday observations. I think both questions are rhetoric but say a lot about human nature.
 
Thanks D!

On a related note, I think if we really want to make the statement that blue rings are not an animal for people to have in their tanks, Tony should remove the blue ring photos from the cycle in the new mast head (which I love BTW).
 
Thales;98637 said:
Thanks D!

On a related note, I think if we really want to make the statement that blue rings are not an animal for people to have in their tanks, Tony should remove the blue ring photos from the cycle in the new mast head (which I love BTW).

I don't think we should ban photos of them in the masthead. I don't want to ban your wunderpus avatar, even though I really want to discourage their import and sale, and I don't want to get rid of the vampyroteuthis tatoo pic in the rotation, but I don't think people should be keeping vampyroteuthis in their home tanks (although it does have some appeal, I have to admit... the "no tresspassing: premises guarded by infernal vampire squid" sign to discourage door-to-door people being a particular perk.) I also don't think we should ban anyone from talking about their actual blue-ring experiences, whether that's Greg, Paradox, and Colin (I think they've all kept them), or Roy (who does "official" research), or even random people. I just think we should make sure that information about our reasons for concern is very easy to find, and respond to people with our own views... the consensus around here seems strong enough that people should at least be informed of why a lot of smart, experienced, and rational people think it's unwise to keep blue rings, so I don't see any reason to put out "you must muzzle yourself and walk in lock-step with our ideas."

I'm sure you're pointing this out more as a discussion point than because you've forgotten this, but part of the ethics blowup a while back was that people felt that your wunderpus pictures were too good PR for keeping the animals as pets, and at that point I argued that draconian measures against that were unwarranted, and that the correlation between pictures showing off an animal and people believing they can keep it as a pet is not proven. Denying that blue rings or wunderpuses exist is not obviously helpful in any way... just making sure that most of the time that they're mentioned or shown to be impressive that they are also described accurately. I'd object to attractive pictures of an animals we're concerned about tied to "dude, this is the coolest animal ever! you want one! anyone can have one! order now for only $99.95!" but not pics with appropriate descriptions of the issues, and references that if husbandry is to be discussed, it be in the exotics forum, because we're concerned about keeping these animals as pets for reasons X,Y, & Z.

I wonder if it would be helpful to be able to tag posts or threads with some boilerplate wording like: "this thread is discussing blue ringed octopuses, which are a species that TONMO has ethical or safety concerns with. Click here for details of why we are concerned about keeping this species of cephalopod in captivity." Where moderators could easily add this tag if the threads seem to warrant it. Does that seem too big-brotherly? It seems more friendly for opinionated moderators to post their opinions, but being able to make a quick and formal link to a prepared FAQ about species we have concerns about seems both convenient and to add a bit of strength to the position.
 

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