The truth about bettas is that you can keep them - quite well - in a quart mason jar or bowl. You just need to change the water frequently and keep them relatively warm. Used to keep hundreds of them... Ask folks from the IBC how they keep their fish.
The truth about bettas?
- Thread starter Buphy
- Start date
The truth is, you can raise puppies in cardboard boxes(provide breathing holes, food and water); not that I would recommend others do it. IMO
Hello; Some points to consider about the betta.
I think the impression many have about keeping bettas in small containers is because they see them packaged that way for sale in stores and fish shops. The stores do it that way (1) because male bettas cannot be kept together in regular tanks. (2) if male bettas were kept in regular store tanks it is likely the other fish would shred their fins (Ask me how I learned this). (3) because bettas can get supplemental O2 from the air, they can survive where other fish would not for as long. (4) I think people see them packaged for sale this way and assume the small containers are the way to keep them long term. I think small containers are not the way to keep bettas (refer back to my tightrope analogy).
Another set of points. The betta's evolutionary adaptations to live in low oxygen water and agressivness to the point of fighting to the death in small enclosures set the stage for the way they are kept. Also a factor is the selective breeding to develope the impressive fins we all like so much.
For the breeders to develope a line of "show" bettas requires a lot of pairings with a lot of offspring. The large numbers of offspring raised to the point of seeing the results cannot be kept together. It is likely few breeders could house enough of them if the bettas could not survive in the small bowls. I also imagine the breeders have to be very dilligent about the frequent water changes to keep the fish as healthy as possible. I also speculate that the exceptional specimens, male and female, get better tanks than the others.
The way the breeders and stores keep bettas is not an indicator, to me , as to how to properly keep one when I get it home as a pet.
One other "truth" about bettas might well be the number of healthy fish that are culled in the selective breeding process. My speculation being the number of culled individuals is high among those that are ot so "pretty".
I think the impression many have about keeping bettas in small containers is because they see them packaged that way for sale in stores and fish shops. The stores do it that way (1) because male bettas cannot be kept together in regular tanks. (2) if male bettas were kept in regular store tanks it is likely the other fish would shred their fins (Ask me how I learned this). (3) because bettas can get supplemental O2 from the air, they can survive where other fish would not for as long. (4) I think people see them packaged for sale this way and assume the small containers are the way to keep them long term. I think small containers are not the way to keep bettas (refer back to my tightrope analogy).
Another set of points. The betta's evolutionary adaptations to live in low oxygen water and agressivness to the point of fighting to the death in small enclosures set the stage for the way they are kept. Also a factor is the selective breeding to develope the impressive fins we all like so much.
For the breeders to develope a line of "show" bettas requires a lot of pairings with a lot of offspring. The large numbers of offspring raised to the point of seeing the results cannot be kept together. It is likely few breeders could house enough of them if the bettas could not survive in the small bowls. I also imagine the breeders have to be very dilligent about the frequent water changes to keep the fish as healthy as possible. I also speculate that the exceptional specimens, male and female, get better tanks than the others.
The way the breeders and stores keep bettas is not an indicator, to me , as to how to properly keep one when I get it home as a pet.
One other "truth" about bettas might well be the number of healthy fish that are culled in the selective breeding process. My speculation being the number of culled individuals is high among those that are ot so "pretty".
To the OP bettas tend to inhabit fairly small bodies of water in nature with poor oxygen content and fluctuating water conditions. This makes them fairly adaptable. What size tank is best for them is debatable as it is with most fish. There's a whole bunch of factors to consider such as if they're being kept singly or if you're trying to breed, reproduce a natural environment for them, etc,etc.
Without knowing the cognitive abilities of Betta it's impossible to say with any real degree of certainty what instance a Betta may thrive in. We tend to humanize our pets but as far as I know we don't know if fish are even highly developed enough to possess emotion. They may simply run on instinct. If that's true as long as we give them what instinct tells them they need not to feel stressed they maybe for lack of a better word be content.
With that said IMO a decent indicator of thriving is whether a fish will breed or not. If a fish is willing to breed I take that as a sign that they feel as comfortable as they do when breeding in nature. Which IMO means that I've created a environment as comfortable as good conditions in their natural habitat. This is of course just my opinion but I think it's at least a logical assumption if nothing else.
Without knowing the cognitive abilities of Betta it's impossible to say with any real degree of certainty what instance a Betta may thrive in. We tend to humanize our pets but as far as I know we don't know if fish are even highly developed enough to possess emotion. They may simply run on instinct. If that's true as long as we give them what instinct tells them they need not to feel stressed they maybe for lack of a better word be content.
With that said IMO a decent indicator of thriving is whether a fish will breed or not. If a fish is willing to breed I take that as a sign that they feel as comfortable as they do when breeding in nature. Which IMO means that I've created a environment as comfortable as good conditions in their natural habitat. This is of course just my opinion but I think it's at least a logical assumption if nothing else.
Hello; I have been thinking about mating being an indicator of acceptable water and/or tank conditions for some time. There was a time in the dim past when I felt this to be an absolute. Back when I was attempting to induce various species to spawn, I was often having difficulties providing a successful breeding tank setup. There were some species that no one had been able to induce to spawn in captivity. Other species were difficult, but some had managed it. My interpretation at that time was that tank conditions in which fish would spawn must be considered "good" or even "pristine". Now days I tend to use terms such as "adequate" or "minimal". A difference with significance to me at least.
A couple of observations that might possibly support my down grade from good to minimal. First, back in the 1960's and 1970's the Cumberland River that has its head in Harlan County would often run black from coal mining activity. There was also a lot of sulphur released as well. There also was then and likely even now, a lot of straight pipe sewer lines running into the rivers and streams. (Ask me how I know about this) The water quality was by no means good, but yet the river was not dead.
For some years I thought that there must be a few tributaries with good water that acted as a safe haven the fish could escape into. Now I am not so sure this is the only answer. I have talked to people who pulled fish from the river during these times.
I now consider it possible that the natural imperative to continue the species overrides the need for ideal water conditions. I suspect that fish will spawn under less than "good " conditions. It may well be that the eggs or fry cannot endure the conditions, but the adults do seem to go ahead and spawn.
Let me speculate further. It may be that water quality means less in those species which do not spawn in captivity than some other trigger. A guess, perhaps there is some sort of insect hatch that has to happen to trigger a spawn??
One last analogy and a poor one. I see documentaries about human refugee camps or famine areas from time to time. More specifically, those that have been going on for many years. In all the filmed and reported cases there is always a portion about the suffering children. Condition in those camps and famine areas must be horrible, yet it does not prevent mating??
At any rate, I am no longer so convinced that spawning is an indicator of "good " conditions.
Google images of "betta fishroom" and you'll get an idea of how the people who breed and raise the highest quality bettas house them.
Matt
Matt
Of course there are exceptions to any rule though I hardly implied breeding is a sign of a thriving fish as a rule. I purposely used decent, meaning okay not absolute nor more then likely. I was trying to give myself wiggle room to not get into too much detail about the exceptions since my reply was already lengthy.
You're right biological imperative plays a role. Instinct urges wildlife to not just survive but to procreate. We also have to realize that while poor water quality will kill some fish in the area at the same time it increases the amount of resources available to those who do survive. This in itself may serve as a trigger to their imperative to try and spawn. So while general water quality may be down in the area other resources may be in over abundance causing the fish to feel secure enough to attempt spawning. Which is why I believe it's a decent indicator. It doesn't necessarily indicate good water quality but it does indicate that there's something in the environment that makes them feel comfortable enough to try spawning.
I have to agree the human analogy is a poor one. Mostly because people don't just procreate out of instinct. Sex plays a huge role in our psychological well being. In a survival situation we may actually use it as a tool to increase our survival chances. We may use it as a way of dealing with stress, enhancing bonds or any number of ways to change our own out look in a dire situation. Fish on the other hand have shown that in some instances their biological imperative to procreate is stronger then their imperative to survive. I believe it's one of the major ways we are fundamentally different then fish.
All in all you've offered some good points but I'm still of my original mind in this respect. I also say again so there's no confusion I'm not stating breeding is a definitive or factual good sign of a fishes comfort. I am merely stating my opinion based on what I understand presently.
It has never been a question(in my mind anyway) of it can be done but more of a question of should it be done. I think the commercial production strategy shouldn't apply to permanent housing.
Are you asking what the bare minimum is for bettas? Cause that will differ from person to person. It's really not what the betta needs as much as it is what you, the owner are willing to give. Personally if I get a betta,meaning a single one with no other tank mates then I'll go for 2.5-5 gal, well planted(real or fake) with good, low flow filtration, small regular feedings of good quality pellet and the occasional blood worm. That to me is bare minimum, but I am of the mind set of providing the best I can. However if it was a community setup then it would depend on the other inhabitants, if I had enough stock and only one male betta and a group of females then tbh the minimum could be anything. But, for me, the good filtration, well planted and good feeding schedule will always be the bare minimum regardless of tank size.
