Introduction

Fish have been kept for at least 1000 years, for food, and for ornamental reasons. But seldom have they been tamed enough, to adopt the "prestige" of being considered alongside pets like other domesticated animals. Fish are poorly understood, their aquatic environment alien to most, and the human-fish interaction/bond is often limited. "Fish" is the four-letter "F" word that comes to mind when discussing animal welfare. It is a complex area, with people still debating the qualities of pain perception, and sentience in scientific forums; and in social circles, the myths of the short attention span and lack of intelligence is propagated.

Many hundreds of ornamental fish species are now bred in captivity, or collected from the wild. But where do we start our discussion about ornamental fish welfare? At the beginning of the supply-chain? There is debate about whether farm-bred fishes are more suitable for domestic life, versus free-ranging wild-caught fishes. If sourced from the wild, by what means are they caught? At the source, there is significant sorting and culling of fish for grading. These fish then travel thousands of kilometres, across multiple countries, transferring between locations before they finally arrive at the fish retailer. In the process, fish will experience many unnatural stressors such as handling, high density packing, mixing of populations, and changes in water quality. Fish may succumb to diseases, and the treatments they receive are variable.

These are just some of the welfare issues that would need to be tackled at an industry-level. Our discussion on fish welfare starts closer to home, where veterinarians can influence how we relate to fish as a society.

Welfare in the Home Aquarium

Fish-keeping knowledge of hobbyists is vastly variable and, as such, several problems can arise once the fish arrive at their final destination. Impromptu surveys conducted in classes of veterinary students consistently show that more than half have kept fish before. Why have so many people kept fish? Fish are purported to be the ideal first pet for teaching children responsibility. The society considers fish as easy to keep, are cheap, have a short lifespan, and have a low social value (people would not grieve over their death). Fish are not at all, "easy to keep." How do we know this? Surveying the same classes of veterinary students, less than 10% of the class continued with fish-keeping. The most common reason for giving up fish keeping is because, "They always died." When people talk about their pet fish, the words often used to describe their activity include: "still eating," "alive," "surviving," "haven't died yet." These are not words used to describe "easy to keep" pets.

Fish are not easy first pets because of the complexities of maintaining optimal water chemistry, and creating a sustainable, self-contained habitat. Appropriate life-support systems essential for fish-keeping requires significant investment. They are not "cheap." Many new and long-time fish-keepers are unaware of good fish husbandry, and about maintaining a bio-filter. Many fish die prematurely because owners inadvertently kill fish by over-cleaning their tanks and filters. But with proper care, species like goldfish can live for 10–25 years, and koi can live for 30–50+ years. Fish are not cheap, simple, easy, short-lived pets.

Now, if more people were successful at keeping fish from the start, there would be a much higher retention rate of hobbyists, and the ornamental fish industry would be bigger than it is now.

Low Relatability Factor

Fish are not warm, furry, cute, or cuddly, in the usual sense. They are scaly, slimy, wet, and slippery. They show no facial expressions, are unable to vocalise, and are not accustomed to being touched. They live and breathe in water, and are separated from the owner by a pane of glass in aquaria. They are simply alien to us, and this makes it difficult for people to anthropomorphise. And still, the vast majority of people still joke about flushing sick, or unwanted fish down the toilet (despite this being illegal). And it is still propagated that putting fish in the freezer is a humane form of euthanasia.

Those fishes that are presented to veterinarians include koi, goldfish, oscars, seahorses and large species. The commonality between these fishes is that they are individually identifiable, are long-lived, and can be somewhat tamed, and are interactive with the owner. When given the correct environment and attention, fish-keepers will learn that their pets actually have different traits.

Welfare Issues in the Treatment Of Sick Fish

Firstly, fish medicine not as advanced as medicine in other species. Treatments have had little change, and there has been no big breakthroughs in ornamental fish medicine. In what other area of veterinary medicine do we still use medicines that are >60 years old? This is a direct result of the limited representation by veterinarians. It is only recently that there has been increased publications on pharmacokinetics of veterinary drugs in fish.

So, what is currently available for the treatment of sick fish? There are many inexpensive, over-the-counter fish remedies available. There are several products that make wide-ranging claims. Some are marketed as cocktails of drugs such as "Cure-All" and "Multi-Cure." Then there are remedies that do not state the active ingredient/s and concentrations on their label. Additionally, fish-keepers are also resourceful, importing medicines from overseas such as antibiotics (e.g., erythromycin and nitrofurazone), anthelmintics (e.g., flubendazole), and anaesthetics (e.g., 2-phenoxyethanol). Should such accessibility to medicines be encouraged? Commonly, treatments are recommended or sold by aquarium stores and non-veterinarians, without a firm diagnosis. This can lead to unnecessary, protracted suffering and mortalities, rather than a cure.

Veterinary Care is Cost-Prohibitive

Many fish-keepers feel that professional healthcare is not warranted, the fish has a low perceived value. Subsequently, there is failure of aquarists to seek appropriately qualified help for the diagnosis and treatment of fish diseases. Many turn to internet searches, online hobbyist forums, and pet/fish shops for diagnosis and treatment. Often, treatment advice is given without proper diagnostics. Many clinical signs of fish diseases are not pathognomonic, and diagnoses need to be made after careful consideration of the history, water chemistry, and gross and microscopic findings of the fish patient. Administration of incorrect drugs may cause toxicity to the fish patient. Moreover, attempts at treating fish interferes with diagnostics.

Sometimes, economics are not a factor when it comes to saving their pet fish. The fish owner is able afford help for their fish. Commonly their first point of contact is the fish store where they had purchased their fish. They may be given well-intentioned advice, to help save them the expense. Sometimes the treatment given does not work and the owner seeks help form the next fish store, and the next, and so on. Is it a failure if they do not alert the owner that fish veterinarians are available? Though not every case needs a fish vet, the offer of referral would never do harm.

Even if economics were a factor, would it be more costly not to seek veterinary attention? The average price of a pet fish site visit ranges from $250–$450. The average price of a 20 cm koi at $200 each, and the average price of marine fish ranges from $50–200. When disease strikes, owners would face losing 5–10 fish or more without correct intervention. Many clients have expressed that they would not have lost hundreds of dollars worth of fish, had they known to call a fish veterinarian.

Welfare Concerns Due to Lack of Veterinary Involvement

The historic lack of involvement of veterinarians in ornamental fish health has had a number of consequences, all of which are to the detriment of the fish. We may speculate that the lack of veterinary input has led to the failure of the pharmaceutical companies to become involved in ornamentals or a failure to keep pace with improvements in the health care of other companion animals.

Even when fish owners seek veterinary help, they are rejected. Many veterinarians do not feel equipped to treat fish patients. This is understandable, because at present, veterinary college curricula dedicate little time to fish medicine. But so many of our colleagues do not know, what they do know. Already it was mentioned that more than half of the veterinary students have kept fish in the life. So, fish are not "foreign" to veterinarians. Moreover, the veterinary training has given us the foundation to treat just about any animal if we are given the time, and have the desire. Though, realistically, it may not always be possible to pursue in-depth knowledge to be confident to see fish, especially when working in busy clinics.

So, if some veterinarians decline seeing fish patients, they need to be aware of who they can refer to. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for our veterinary colleagues to refer potential fish clients to fish stores or pet stores (as had been done in the past with less commonly seen species like birds and pocket pets). Do we need to do more, to educate vets to attend to fish, or to be aware of who to refer to?

Historically, and currently, to fill the void of fish veterinarians, there are numerous non-veterinarians practicing acts of veterinary science such as diagnosing conditions, supplying medicines and treating fish. Within the hobbyist clubs, senior members are providing such services. Then there are others who trade as "fish doctors," "pond doctors," and "aquarium doctors." Hobbyists may find it difficult to discern whether service providers are qualified doctors of veterinary medicine. A major concern is that surgery may be carried out by untrained people, and that under current legislation, there is little that can be done to prevent it. Are there controls on the use of "doctor" and "vet"? Can a non-veterinarian trade as a "dog doctor," or a "horse doctor"?

Conclusions

Veterinarians need to have a greater presence and show leadership, fostering changes in public perception of fish. It starts at veterinary school, helping students achieve Day-1 Competency with fish, upon graduation. We need to help change societal views in accepting that veterinary intervention should be sought on ethical and emotional grounds, rather than economic. Fish need to achieve the same status as other companion animals. We need greater availability of information and awareness of the availability of fish veterinarians within the hobby, and within our own profession.

The Veterinary Surgeons' Board will need to protect the use of "doctor." Veterinary schools need to encourage inclusion of more aquatics in their curriculum. The Health Department, needs to restrict the availability of over-the-counter availability of drugs.

Who diagnoses fish ailments? Who medicates? Who prescribes? What's the Health Department's call on it? What's the Veterinary Board's call on it? What's AVA's call on it? What's RSPCA's call on it?

References

1.  CAWC. Report on the Welfare of Non-Domesticated Animals Kept for Companionship. Companion Animal Welfare Council; 2003.

2.  Fossa S. Man-made fish: domesticated fishes and their place in the aquatic trade and hobby. OFI Journal. 2004;44:1–16.

3.  Huntingford FA, Adams C, Braithwaite VA, et al. Current issues in fish welfare: a broad overview. Journal of Fish Biology. 2006;68:332–372.

4.  Johnson E, Hess R. Fancy Goldfish. Boston, MA: Weatherhill; 2001:80.

5.  Koi Carp Magazine. March 2003 & February 2003. http://www.koi-carp.com/.

6.  Lim KKP, Ng PKL. A Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Singapore. Singapore: Singapore Science Centre; 1990.

7.  Ng PKL, Tan HH. Freshwater fishes of Southeast Asia: potential for the aquarium fish trade and conservation issues. Aquarium Sciences and Conservation. 1997;1(2):79–90.

8.  Rasidi E, Walster C, Saint-Erne N, Loh R. The welfare of ornamental fish in the home aquarium. Companion Animal. 2015;20(5).

9.  Rhyne AL, Tlusty MF, Schofield PJ, Daufman L, Morris JA Jr, Bruckner AW. Revealing the appetite of the marine aquarium fish trade: the volume and biodiversity of fish imported into the United States. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e35808.

10. Sadovy Y, Mitcheson G, Rasotto MB. Early development of the mandarin fish, Synchiropus splendidus (Callionymidae), with notes on its fishery and potential for culture. Aquarium Sciences and Conservation. 2001;3(4):253–263.

11. Walster C, Saint-Erne N, Loh R. (in-prep). In: Southgate P, ed. Fish Welfare. 2nd ed. Wiley.