biggest achara?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
I gotcha....so my tank's 24" wide, but really 22" on inside..never thought of it that way. So, then he's 27" head to tail, but truly 25/27" then. The rtc been nipping quite a bit lately. Think that permanent home for the rtc is demanding quicker installation as the 265g is the achara's home first.
So, I'd be expecting a total of 30" fullgrown? I know we have had him for 4-5 yrs now, fast grower in the beginning.
And, thank you...hybrids are a different, unpredictable story as I have had a couple.
 
2songbirds said:
So, I'd be expecting a total of 30" fullgrown? I know we have had him for 4-5 yrs now, fast grower in the beginning.
Click to expand...

I would count he will reach 3' TL if you give him good room and good water and diet. Good room means 4xL by 2xL by 2xL rule of thumb for a MINIMUM size tank. 2xL for the depth could be an overkill for a large fish but 4xL by 2xL footprint is a must IMO. This is what's recommended by high-level, serious hobbyists (who can afford to house fish properly), experts, and ichthyologists.

There is an opposing school of thought here that the tank width can be the same as the fish's length. I have not seen this supported by the kinds of serious folks listed above. I fear it is mostly the ideas of youngsters who cannot afford to house the fishes as the experts advise the fishes should be housed but still choose to keep a large fish. I may be wrong but such is my impression.

Pick your poison.
 
I had to re-home mine at 30 in, its now in 20000gal at "The Deep" in Hull uk-for any new owners you will need more space than for RTC very skittish fish.
 
thebiggerthebetter said:
I would count he will reach 3' TL if you give him good room and good water and diet. Good room means 4xL by 2xL by 2xL rule of thumb for a MINIMUM size tank. 2xL for the depth could be an overkill for a large fish but 4xL by 2xL footprint is a must IMO. This is what's recommended by high-level, serious hobbyists (who can afford to house fish properly), experts, and ichthyologists.

There is an opposing school of thought here that the tank width can be the same as the fish's length. I have not seen this supported by the kinds of serious folks listed above. I fear it is mostly the ideas of youngsters who cannot afford to house the fishes as the experts advise the fishes should be housed but still choose to keep a large fish. I may be wrong but such is my impression.

Pick your poison.
Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm a bit confused on your statements...4xL by 2xL by 2xL....LxWxH? That being the case, I've old threads from several posted on my questions about the achara's forever home. It was agreed upon that its current house is the bare minimum, setting aside the rtc; yet along with the 30g sump the tank came with, there's a FX5 and a UV sterilizer on the tank.

As I don't know how old he was when I brought him home, I'm estimating him to get at 30" fullgrown. As for the fish's length, his tail curves when he's facing forward, begging for food. I"m not quite understanding your second statement.

also, although my tank may be small for a larger fish, it's 7 feet long, 2 feet wide, 30" deep. I'm just asking how big to expect an achara to get over a period of maybe 10 years??
 
2SB: Forgive my ignorance, but I'm a bit confused on your statements...4xL by 2xL by 2xL....LxWxH?
T: No problem. Please forgive me if I wrote unclear. Yes. That's a pretty standard formula.

2SB: That being the case, I've old threads from several posted on my questions about the achara's forever home. It was agreed upon that its current house is the bare minimum,
T: Unknowingly/instinctively, I addressed this question with the above post.

2SB: setting aside the rtc; yet along with the 30g sump the tank came with, there's a FX5 and a UV sterilizer on the tank.
T: I don't see the relevance. We are discussing the tank size, not the water quality.

2SB: As I don't know how old he was when I brought him home, I'm estimating him to get at 30" fullgrown.
T: I think it is fair.

2SB: As for the fish's length, his tail curves when he's facing forward, begging for food.
T: if your glass is 1/2" thick (as opposed to 1" as I guessed before), your fish must be over 26" right now. He is longer than the width of your tank.

2SB: I"m not quite understanding your second statement.
T: Second paragraph? Please specify... if you will.

2SB: also, although my tank may be small for a larger fish, it's 7 feet long, 2 feet wide, 30" deep. I'm just asking how big to expect an achara to get over a period of maybe 10 years??
T: I offered my (and only my) opinion: I'd expect 3' TL on the conditions I cited. The conditions I cited needed an explanation - hence, came about a longer than could-be-necessary prior post. Sorry.
 
"There is an opposing school of thought here that the tank width can be the same as the fish's length. I have not seen this supported by the kinds of serious folks listed above. I fear it is mostly the ideas of youngsters who cannot afford to house the fishes as the experts advise the fishes should be housed but still choose to keep a large fish. I may be wrong but such is my impression"....this is what I was confused on, if you don't mind elaborating on this statement more
As for me stating the filtration systems on the achara's tank, making note on your comment about the fish reaching its full potential with good water (etc), I"m just preparing myself for any bashing that may come along on my part for having such a small sump, along with 2 catfish. This tank was the first one I've ever come acrossed that had overflows. As I learned from it, and had leaks and overflows along the way, I would've upgraded the sump size before set up. I cannot do it now, thus stating the excess filtration needed. I understand most bash those people who keep a rtc, alhough I special ordered him knowing full well what I was in for. I was just covering my basics.
 
I am highly uncomfortable with accusing anybody of (supposed or not) wrong-doing. I reflected on the two schools of thought on the minimum adequate tank size that appear to clearly exist and the differences between them.

The second school of thought evident here on MFK professes that the tank width can be the same as the fish's length. I have not seen that this idea is supported by the serious folks, experts, ichthyologists, etc. My take is, then, that the second bunch of folks are mostly youngsters who cannot afford to house the fishes in the way that the experts advise... but still choose to keep a large fish because they want to. I really don't want to offend or even make uncomfortable any one and this is not about you whatsoever (as I said, I was merely explaining my answer to your question) and 'd rather not discuss this further in the open forum. Please pm me if you'd like more.

There should be a way for one to say what they think is right and not accuse any one else who does things differently. This is an open forum. On the surface, we are all equals. It is either hard or impossible to know if the one, who is replying to your questions and "advising" you, is young and inexperienced or old and seasoned or even a professional... because people do not state these things for obvious reasons - some do not want to expose their weaknesses while others do not proclaim their great knowledge because of modesty and goodness. This knowledge comes from participating in the forum for a long time and then one learns to heed what some say more than others.

Yes, now I understand why you delved into filtration better. If you really sincerely trying your best and do your research as best you can, there is no reason to fear bashing. Besides, some people will find fault with any one regardless of what they do or don't do. Life's too short to worry about them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom