I keep a FH in a 30 gallon with 2 corys and a pleco. That is their permanent home.
In addition to 30 guppies in a 10 gallon.
GG
In addition to 30 guppies in a 10 gallon.
GG
Ethics in fishkeeping
- Thread starter pepe
- Start date
- Status
I think people take it too far sometimes. I have an 8x2x2 with a jardini in it and some people tell me it's too small for a jardini. Just because it's not the ideal size tank for a fish, doesn't mean it's too small for that fish and he couldn't live a healthy life in it. A lot of fish keepers (especially aro keepers) are kind of snobs like that. Almost no one is going to have a 3 or 4 foot wide tank, but a lot of people think 4 ft wide is the minimum width for an aro. I've seen lots of big and healthy aros in standard 200 or 240 gallon tanks.
+1 Sometimes, for some species especially, happiness and thriving isnt totally about having a huge tank for it. I think the jardini will be fine and happy in your 8x2x2. When it comes to fish, most people say it should easily turn around. When I had my silver aro, he always turned on a dime(less than five inches) where most people would say at that size the tank would have to be at least 2' wide. I would agree with that but he didnt use that space, so it wasnt necessary and would be a matter of opinion. I dont want to see a large fish in a small tank, but sometimes a fish thriving and people's opinions of what it would need to thrive are different. Bigger is always better, but sometimes depends on personality. A mansion sounds nice but I personally would be happier in a smaller cozy home. When we think of fish establishing their territory, does the tank really need to be bigger than the territory it wishes to esablish?
More or less, its mostly opinion. Obviously if you have a pima in a 75 without having an immediate larger home, not good. But to say someone with an oscar in a 20 gallon is bad for the hobby or irresponsible? come on, its easy and cheap to find a used tank of good size on CL when it gets bigger. Just saying we shouldnt jump on others over every fish/tank combo thats posted. as most of the tank size and other issues are a matter of opinion, when you argue that your small tank is big enough: if you all of sudden see personality changes, aggression or injuries from them running into stuff in your tank...dont ask why, because your arguement for your tank size being big enough may not be valid
We should all strive to make our fish thrive and have a happy existence, not just strive to keep the fish we really want(but may not be able to have)
Actually, it's the PERFECT site to bash people keeping large fish; if they got it to be 'cool' and stuff it in whatever pathetic tank fits in their moms spare bedroom so they can show it off. Can I stop people from keeping a RTC in a 75? No, but I'll insult them all day if that's their only plan for the fish. The biggest problem with this hobby is the internet. People want the rarest, biggest, most 'ooh ahh' fish they can get, then splatter it all over their facebook, blogspot, twitter, or whatever forum they can get on. 80% of the aro owners I've met know very little about the fish, or fishkeeping in general. Its sad. Sorry... /rant
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
+1 agree 100% with what you both said.+1 Sometimes, for some species especially, happiness and thriving isnt totally about having a huge tank for it. I think the jardini will be fine and happy in your 8x2x2. When it comes to fish, most people say it should easily turn around. When I had my silver aro, he always turned on a dime(less than five inches) where most people would say at that size the tank would have to be at least 2' wide. I would agree with that but he didnt use that space, so it wasnt necessary and would be a matter of opinion. I dont want to see a large fish in a small tank, but sometimes a fish thriving and people's opinions of what it would need to thrive are different. Bigger is always better, but sometimes depends on personality. A mansion sounds nice but I personally would be happier in a smaller cozy home. When we think of fish establishing their territory, does the tank really need to be bigger than the territory it wishes to esablish?
More or less, its mostly opinion. Obviously if you have a pima in a 75 without having an immediate larger home, not good. But to say someone with an oscar in a 20 gallon is bad for the hobby or irresponsible? come on, its easy and cheap to find a used tank of good size on CL when it gets bigger. Just saying we shouldnt jump on others over every fish/tank combo thats posted. as most of the tank size and other issues are a matter of opinion, when you argue that your small tank is big enough: if you all of sudden see personality changes, aggression or injuries from them running into stuff in your tank...dont ask why, because your arguement for your tank size being big enough may not be valid
We should all strive to make our fish thrive and have a happy existence, not just strive to keep the fish we really want(but may not be able to have)
I think most people comment on things like tank size assuming adult size when in reality a lot of fish are bought as juvies. Clown loaches and oscars are two I see all the time. Of course a group of 2 in clowns can live in a 55 g will they eventually out grow the tank sure but it takes a very long time. Of course not having a plan before hand is dumb. I think the monster fish are a different issue and I have no exp with them so I wont comment.
Let's also not forget we are being anthropomorphic, no one knows if any fish cares at all about the tank size, or if they care a lot and are miserable. I try to shy away from assuming, with that being said I have for the most part shied away from really large fish these days. Mainly because every year something pushes back that "indoor pond" plan. I have a indo Dat that is around 4 inches and a small Jag, they will be going into larger tanks when they get to larger sizes I know I can obtain tanks that can house these guys. I hope to find a 300-400 soon. The rest of my fish stay a foot or under. I have also started to slim down how many fish I have, just for an easier, more peaceful, experience.
The argument isn't a matter of should we or even could we. The argument over keeping large fish could also be made for keeping ANY animal. If a dog has a little dog house it can barely fit in is this a bad situation for the dog? Is it ok to keep a Grizzly in its "New Grizzly Experience"(or whatever the zoo calls it to justify building a new cage)? Shamu was mentioned, but what about Dolphins? These are smart sea creatures. Don't you think they know they are caged?
The real issue isn't one of large fish. Its one of skill level. Newbie fish keepers shouldn't keep Aropaima, RTC, Peacock Bass etc. But one could argue for that matter. An "experienced aquarist may not be able to keep a goldfish alive either, if all they have done is tropical fish. There are exceptions to every rule.
I for one am not going to allow tank size to dictate what fish I will keep, rather, my experience and knowledge in proper aquarium husbandry.
The real issue isn't one of large fish. Its one of skill level. Newbie fish keepers shouldn't keep Aropaima, RTC, Peacock Bass etc. But one could argue for that matter. An "experienced aquarist may not be able to keep a goldfish alive either, if all they have done is tropical fish. There are exceptions to every rule.
I for one am not going to allow tank size to dictate what fish I will keep, rather, my experience and knowledge in proper aquarium husbandry.
Great topic! I hate large fish in small tanks. I see idiocy here but I also see innovation. I try not to get too vested into the tank size of others. I assume they have good intentions. I agree with the general premise about pimas and other fish (sturgeon) that we rarely see grow to size. So far I have only seen 2 Dats larger than 20" on this site. And according to 1 of the 2 owners, the guy with the larger Dat had too small a tank. I take everything with a grain of salt, I don't know the full story, but what Pacumom Has done is just as noble as anyone on this site. I find it hard to harp on another that is clearly trying to grow something out. Many people see fish as currency. I dont think its a stretch to say that 3/4 of the world rely on fish to sustain their economy. Lately, I've taken notice to a lot of people saying they are growing a species out, to later donate or sale. Hard to be unbiased in most cases. If someone has more than ample filtration for the growout tank, can we fault them if the fish dies before reaching maturity? I personally believe that stingrays are cramped in captivity. In the wild they have footprints infinitely larger than what any keeper here can provide. But on the flipside I admire most of our ray keepers. Most of them go above and beyond in their care. And the results speak for themselves. Visit the ray forum. Some of the most beautiful fish, tanks and filtration systems this site has to offer. Every day there is a thread about new pups... tank size matters, but there is a bigger picture. Having said all of that I lean more on the conservative side. I don't want to keep anything that goes beyond my initial plan. I'm still bouncing a school of giant danios around that I used to Cycle a tank 2 years ago.
@aldiaz: I remember that exchange. Definitely one of those phantom defenses that reflect on the poster more than the intended target.
Sent from my LG-P509 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
@aldiaz: I remember that exchange. Definitely one of those phantom defenses that reflect on the poster more than the intended target.
Sent from my LG-P509 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
We are talking about monster sized fish, not Clown Loaches or even Oscars.+1 Sometimes, for some species especially, happiness and thriving isnt totally about having a huge tank for it. I think the jardini will be fine and happy in your 8x2x2. When it comes to fish, most people say it should easily turn around. When I had my silver aro, he always turned on a dime(less than five inches) where most people would say at that size the tank would have to be at least 2' wide. I would agree with that but he didnt use that space, so it wasnt necessary and would be a matter of opinion. I dont want to see a large fish in a small tank, but sometimes a fish thriving and people's opinions of what it would need to thrive are different. Bigger is always better, but sometimes depends on personality. A mansion sounds nice but I personally would be happier in a smaller cozy home. When we think of fish establishing their territory, does the tank really need to be bigger than the territory it wishes to esablish?
More or less, its mostly opinion. Obviously if you have a pima in a 75 without having an immediate larger home, not good. But to say someone with an oscar in a 20 gallon is bad for the hobby or irresponsible? come on, its easy and cheap to find a used tank of good size on CL when it gets bigger. Just saying we shouldnt jump on others over every fish/tank combo thats posted. as most of the tank size and other issues are a matter of opinion, when you argue that your small tank is big enough: if you all of sudden see personality changes, aggression or injuries from them running into stuff in your tank...dont ask why, because your arguement for your tank size being big enough may not be valid
We should all strive to make our fish thrive and have a happy existence, not just strive to keep the fish we really want(but may not be able to have)
If your aro had a 5" turning radius, it must have been a small one. A full grown Silver Aro can be upwards of 5" thick, so a 5" turning radius is impossible. I agree they can turn on a dime, but a full grown aro still needs space to turn. Their flexibility is often used as an excuse to keep them in undersized tanks. I think the argument that they can contort themselves in order to change direction in the tank is a poor excuse for keeping them in a small tank.
If the goal of keeping a fish is to keep them alive and grow them to their full potential, a 4' wide tank is the bare minimum for a Silver Aro. A lot of people see the little guys in the stores and don't realize just how large they will grow if properly cared for. Check out some public aquaria to see just how large these awesome fish can grow when properly cared for. I think you will realize that a 2' wide tank is no where need wide enough.
In regards to keeping true monster fish, the "plan to upgrade" argument is used all the time, but how many people actually follow through? The responsible thing to do is have a setup large enough to keep the species before the fish is purchased. People use this argument to justify buying an Arapaima or other monster fish, completely ignorant of what is involved in setting up huge tanks. Things happen and life gets in the way of big "pipe dream" plans.
The Anthropomorphism argument is another one I've seen quite a bit. Do you really have to be anthropomorphic to know that a creature so large it can barely move is in an unsuitable environment? I realize having "enough space" is a subjective issue, but there are times when it is obvious.
I think if more people followed your lead and kept lower stocking levels with species that are appropriate for the size tank there would be a lot more successful fish keepers and fewer dead fish threads.
Huh?
What you wrote is a complete contradiction of terms. If you are going to put your experience and knowledge in proper aquarium husbandry to use, your aquarium size will absolutely dictate what fish you will keep.
How would your experience and knowledge enable you to keep an Arapaima if all you have is a 100 gallon tank?
+1
There are a few active threads where this is cleary the case. People buying more fish just to show them off when they clearly do not have the resources or are already over their heads with their current stock. What is really irritating is when they post the deaths of their fish and expect to receive sympathy for their "loss." The outcome is pretty predictable; it's amazing they do not see the pattern of their irresponsible behaviour. I feel sorry for the fish, not the selfish owner.
- Status
