This should be a reality check for all the pipedreamers with grand "plans to upgrade." The cost to run huge tanks like Jack's is astronomical.
"I think the volume of Jack's current tank is also putting off many private individuals from coming forward, although the fish would be fine in half of that 6' water depth if enough swimming length and width were provided. "
They should edit the article published on 1/31/2014 that says, "One vital stipulation is that any prospective tank needs to be as large as, or larger, than the fishs current home, and smaller set-ups will not be considered." They are basically eliminating any private party since Jack's is the largest known private tank in the UK.
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=6236
The predicament he's in is one of the reasons I choose not to buy fish that grow over 14". If for whatever reason I had to tear my tank down, I would hate to have to choose between giving my fish to someone with an undersized tank, or putting the fish down.
"And in an ideal world, once stripped down, experts from leading pond and aquatic companies could even advise Jack on making the tank much more energy efficient and who knows, his fortunes could change in the future, making the tank once again financially viable."
"Seriously reducing that £6000 a year electricity bill through more efficient pumps, heating and lighting could be quite the publicity coop for the right equipment company."
He should be able to run a much more efficient system. Especially if he just keeps the remaining fish, he can get away with running 300 watt pumps versus the 1,000 watt pumps he's currently using. Heating is probably his biggest expense. Not sure what the cost of gas is over there, but changing over to gas heat from his 6,000W electric heaters (while expensive up front) may save him a lot over the long term.
Bummer to see this. If my electric rates doubled, I would almost surely tear my tank down too.
I hope he's able to find suitable homes for these giants.
