i am the catfish king(wels catfish)
- Thread starter oscar n redtail cat
- Start date
- Status
Oscar, as I actually wrote, the maximum size ever confirmed for a wels were 2,78 m and 144kg. And you should really not believe in every old report only because you would like it if it were true. You won´t find photos of any bigger specimens. The specimens on the photos are actually much smaller than you think, about in th 2,2-2,3m range but look much bigger cause of the forced perspective.
The fish on the old photo is without any doubt a beluga and not a wels, this is for sure. It is also false to think everything was bigger in the past. Okay, many fish are today actually overfished today and there are often smaller average sizes and lesser big individuals. But in the case of the wels it is nearly the opposite. During the last twenty years there were much more reports of exceptionally large specimens than in than around 1900. This is not only because there is today much lesser inland fishery in Europe than in earlier times, but also because this species was introduced in many other regions like Italy or Spain. They have there much better conditions than they had ever in their natural habitat, because the climate is much better. Similar to many other examples, they grow much better in this new regions than in their original habitat.
A highly interesting thing is that even in old books there is no indication that this species was ever bigger. I own several old reprints (1923) of a series about the wolrd´s wildlife, by Alfred Brehm(1829-1884)which was one of the most famous german zoologists of all times. In the book about fish, reptiles and amphibians he wrote about Silurus glanis, that according to Heckel and Kner specimens of 3m and 200-250 kg were not rare in the river Danube. Okay, this alone is strange, because a wels of this lenght would be much lighter. Even the 2,78m italian specimen, which was very fat, weighed only 144kg. Even if you keep in mind that the weigth increases with the cube, this seems ways too much. The wels seems to grow fatter in warmer waters, for example in italy to southern France, and the specimens from Germany for example, have often a lesser weight than same-sized specimens from Italy or Spain. The Danube is not especially warm, so I really have problems to accept this claims. It seems that there were also authors which wrote further information in this issue, because there is a specimen mentioned, which was caught in 1894 with a harpoon, and which was unusual large. But even this one, a specimen which was already in the 19th century (when you could still find very large sturgeons in the river Danube, and when there was much lesser population than today) a sensation, was only 2,2m and weighed 68kg. For a middle-european wels this is very large. But if the wels could really reach a weight of more than 200kg, isn´t is a bit strange that already 2,2m was quite unusual even in the late 19th century? Furthermore even those old authors don´t speak about 4,5m or 5m lengths. Interestingly today there are some even larger ones known, like the one with 2,47m. The even larger ones from Italy show that this species has the biological potential to reach sizes of close to 3m (and note, 3m are not always 300cm, but very probably also sometimes lesser...) and as the amount of available food is also a very important factor for the growth of this species, I could imagine that in the unpolluted big rivers and lakes with large amounts of baitfish, in some exceptional cases some specimens probably reached even in the native habitat lengths close to 3m, but this was surely never average.
I would also don´t give too much about all the reports of alleged giant flatheads and bluehead catfish. There are countless stories of specimens allegedly the size of great white sharks or even cars, and nearly everyone seems to know somebody which has an uncle or a friend which has seen one. Okay, if they would get that big, why was there never an actual proof for this? We would have countless confirmed specimens well over two metres, but in fact there is not a single one. You have always to keep in mind biological limits. In a population you will find a lot of specimens with average size, a lesser part which are big, a small part which is very big and a very very small part which is unusual big, it´s the same thing with fish as well as humans. To take again the wels as example. 2m is already a very rare and big size, 2,5m is extremely rare and extremely big and the record of 2,78m is like a lottery win, one among many millions. Perhaps sizes around 3m could be able, but everything even bigger is just unrealistic.
The fish on the old photo is without any doubt a beluga and not a wels, this is for sure. It is also false to think everything was bigger in the past. Okay, many fish are today actually overfished today and there are often smaller average sizes and lesser big individuals. But in the case of the wels it is nearly the opposite. During the last twenty years there were much more reports of exceptionally large specimens than in than around 1900. This is not only because there is today much lesser inland fishery in Europe than in earlier times, but also because this species was introduced in many other regions like Italy or Spain. They have there much better conditions than they had ever in their natural habitat, because the climate is much better. Similar to many other examples, they grow much better in this new regions than in their original habitat.
A highly interesting thing is that even in old books there is no indication that this species was ever bigger. I own several old reprints (1923) of a series about the wolrd´s wildlife, by Alfred Brehm(1829-1884)which was one of the most famous german zoologists of all times. In the book about fish, reptiles and amphibians he wrote about Silurus glanis, that according to Heckel and Kner specimens of 3m and 200-250 kg were not rare in the river Danube. Okay, this alone is strange, because a wels of this lenght would be much lighter. Even the 2,78m italian specimen, which was very fat, weighed only 144kg. Even if you keep in mind that the weigth increases with the cube, this seems ways too much. The wels seems to grow fatter in warmer waters, for example in italy to southern France, and the specimens from Germany for example, have often a lesser weight than same-sized specimens from Italy or Spain. The Danube is not especially warm, so I really have problems to accept this claims. It seems that there were also authors which wrote further information in this issue, because there is a specimen mentioned, which was caught in 1894 with a harpoon, and which was unusual large. But even this one, a specimen which was already in the 19th century (when you could still find very large sturgeons in the river Danube, and when there was much lesser population than today) a sensation, was only 2,2m and weighed 68kg. For a middle-european wels this is very large. But if the wels could really reach a weight of more than 200kg, isn´t is a bit strange that already 2,2m was quite unusual even in the late 19th century? Furthermore even those old authors don´t speak about 4,5m or 5m lengths. Interestingly today there are some even larger ones known, like the one with 2,47m. The even larger ones from Italy show that this species has the biological potential to reach sizes of close to 3m (and note, 3m are not always 300cm, but very probably also sometimes lesser...) and as the amount of available food is also a very important factor for the growth of this species, I could imagine that in the unpolluted big rivers and lakes with large amounts of baitfish, in some exceptional cases some specimens probably reached even in the native habitat lengths close to 3m, but this was surely never average.
I would also don´t give too much about all the reports of alleged giant flatheads and bluehead catfish. There are countless stories of specimens allegedly the size of great white sharks or even cars, and nearly everyone seems to know somebody which has an uncle or a friend which has seen one. Okay, if they would get that big, why was there never an actual proof for this? We would have countless confirmed specimens well over two metres, but in fact there is not a single one. You have always to keep in mind biological limits. In a population you will find a lot of specimens with average size, a lesser part which are big, a small part which is very big and a very very small part which is unusual big, it´s the same thing with fish as well as humans. To take again the wels as example. 2m is already a very rare and big size, 2,5m is extremely rare and extremely big and the record of 2,78m is like a lottery win, one among many millions. Perhaps sizes around 3m could be able, but everything even bigger is just unrealistic.
Hy basslover...actually did not wrote this all for this post but copied the biggest part from another post I wrote several months ago, so my fingers still work.
this is like a big thread about some catfish ll but owell im going 2 be having 3 catfish soon and going 2 feed the wels alot 2 get him 2 the 2ft mark so he will fatten out and then the is no way the rtc could eat him (im getting a rtcxtsn aswell because they grow very big fast im gonna do what nicro has done with his (big boy)try and get him as big as we can 
so wish me luck) and so he carnt eat the rtc aswell lol Good Luck 
Personally at your age I was out chasing girls and not taking on commitments like Big Catfish... its almost like having kids... Worst case with a catfish is that you miss a meal for them and they reward your lack of attention with eating the most expensive fish in the tank... Take the time to read everything you can about eat fish that your getting... they all have special requirments and you'll be a better handler for them... Also don't forget that these cats are (or at least should be) a Long term commitment, consider when you get one of these guys ike getting married... only more expensive... and you don't get the ummmm... "benefits" (family website
)
Personally at your age I was out chasing girls and not taking on commitments like Big Catfish... its almost like having kids... Worst case with a catfish is that you miss a meal for them and they reward your lack of attention with eating the most expensive fish in the tank... Take the time to read everything you can about eat fish that your getting... they all have special requirments and you'll be a better handler for them... Also don't forget that these cats are (or at least should be) a Long term commitment, consider when you get one of these guys ike getting married... only more expensive... and you don't get the ummmm... "benefits" (family website
)
oscar n redtail cat;2282106; said:
so starving him so he wont grow as fast now thats a smart decsion he should be taken off u.... fish that large shouldnt be kept in a dinky back yard pond full stop! get some respect for the fish u keep
"so starving him so he wont grow as fast now thats a smart decsion he should be taken off u"
I don't think anyone is suggesting starving the fish now !! But why shouldn't we as fish keepers control the way our fish grow? Do you think that in the wild these fish have unlimited access to food and swim constantly with full stomachs?
If you knew anything about large cats then you'd know that they are intermitent feeders anyway - gorging themselves and then going off food for a period - surely the everyday food availability of an aquarium with someone like yourself is in fact the artificial environment and will surely lead to a shortened lifespan.
wels catfish here in the UK (and certainly in the North) do not feed for a 5 month period --- that is almost half a year !!!! and when they are feeding between March and October they feed in spurts often not feeding for long periods - surely once per week feeding is going to be better than that - that's home grown, UK bred fish -- do not feed for almost half the year !!!!
so all this suggestion of starving fish is complete 'BS' fed by individuals with little basic knowledge of fish biology !!! All to often idiots on forums such as this jump on the same band wagon - which is frankly ill informed and inaccurate!!!
Whilst I appreciate that environmental parameters determine the natural behaviour of fishes - we control the environment in captivity although basic biology remains the same - we do not keep in captivity a different strain of fish that has immediate and daily demands for food.
Anyway - the boy says that he is planning a pond for his fish - have you ever observed such fish in the wild / or garden pond setting? How is it different keeping a wels in a suitably sized pond any different to keeping an arrowana in an aquarium - how many of us keep fish in tanks that undergo seasonal migrations ????
Whilst I wouldn't keep a wels with tank mates, and certainly not other large cats (due to their territorial nature) - I think this fish has been well planned for, he has planned a feeding regime that means that he will be able to get maximum enjoyment from the fish and not have to move it too soon, has made a large financial commitment and will probably be able to give it a long and 'happy' life !!!
carl
I don't think anyone is suggesting starving the fish now !! But why shouldn't we as fish keepers control the way our fish grow? Do you think that in the wild these fish have unlimited access to food and swim constantly with full stomachs?
If you knew anything about large cats then you'd know that they are intermitent feeders anyway - gorging themselves and then going off food for a period - surely the everyday food availability of an aquarium with someone like yourself is in fact the artificial environment and will surely lead to a shortened lifespan.
wels catfish here in the UK (and certainly in the North) do not feed for a 5 month period --- that is almost half a year !!!! and when they are feeding between March and October they feed in spurts often not feeding for long periods - surely once per week feeding is going to be better than that - that's home grown, UK bred fish -- do not feed for almost half the year !!!!
so all this suggestion of starving fish is complete 'BS' fed by individuals with little basic knowledge of fish biology !!! All to often idiots on forums such as this jump on the same band wagon - which is frankly ill informed and inaccurate!!!
Whilst I appreciate that environmental parameters determine the natural behaviour of fishes - we control the environment in captivity although basic biology remains the same - we do not keep in captivity a different strain of fish that has immediate and daily demands for food.
Anyway - the boy says that he is planning a pond for his fish - have you ever observed such fish in the wild / or garden pond setting? How is it different keeping a wels in a suitably sized pond any different to keeping an arrowana in an aquarium - how many of us keep fish in tanks that undergo seasonal migrations ????
Whilst I wouldn't keep a wels with tank mates, and certainly not other large cats (due to their territorial nature) - I think this fish has been well planned for, he has planned a feeding regime that means that he will be able to get maximum enjoyment from the fish and not have to move it too soon, has made a large financial commitment and will probably be able to give it a long and 'happy' life !!!
carl
I know of a scientific study (from a great book about the biology of Silurus glanis) in which the stomaches of many wels catfish were examined. Actually most of them were empty, even at the summer.
- Status
