I continuously see people quoting maximum fish size as though it's the word of God or something. Every time some one asks about keeping a fish someone is sure to point out the maximum size and then go one to say the fish needs a certain size tank due to this maximum size. We need to confront this fallacy. maximum fish is not the size a fish should be expected to attain. Even in the wild or under perfect conditions (which seldom occur in the wild either) fish very seldom reach their maximum size. this is especially true when the record fish size is used to figure the maximum size a fish is expected to reach. I'll use a fish i am relatively familiar with as an example. When the shovelnose sturgeon is mentioned you get lots of replies. too big to keep, gets to be 18 feet long, huge fish needs a thousand gallon tank, maximum size if four feet. It will eventually weigh 100 pounds. If you can't keep a tank big enough to keep a four foot fish then don't get it.
The reality is the fishes maximum size is listed as 1060 cm, about 40 inches and about 8.17 kilos, this is considered a very big shovelnose sturgeon. Most fish caught are in the 24 inch range and in the home aquarium the best that can be expected is 18 inches or so. Very much a reasonable sized fish compared to many others the MFKers keep. I think we should get off the maximum size wagon and look at these fish a little more realistically. Yes some of the fish we keep do indeed get to be huge, even the average wild size of an arapaima is simply outrageous but how big do they really get in one of our members tanks? Sometimes the fish we keep do indeed approach maximum size, mostly the smaller ones to be sure but a 20 inch brown bullhead is a big brown bullhead any way you look at it. Lets top trying to rain on each others parades and look to keep our fish healthy and not assume maximum sizes or assume that a fish that doesn't reach this size is somehow less than a healthy fish. Even in the wild many fish never even approach maximum size, lets keep this in mind next time we want to jump on someone who is keeping a big fish and concentrate on what the fish needs to be the pet it's owner wants.
http://wwwaux.cerc.cr.usgs.gov/micra/SHOVELNO.HTM
The reality is the fishes maximum size is listed as 1060 cm, about 40 inches and about 8.17 kilos, this is considered a very big shovelnose sturgeon. Most fish caught are in the 24 inch range and in the home aquarium the best that can be expected is 18 inches or so. Very much a reasonable sized fish compared to many others the MFKers keep. I think we should get off the maximum size wagon and look at these fish a little more realistically. Yes some of the fish we keep do indeed get to be huge, even the average wild size of an arapaima is simply outrageous but how big do they really get in one of our members tanks? Sometimes the fish we keep do indeed approach maximum size, mostly the smaller ones to be sure but a 20 inch brown bullhead is a big brown bullhead any way you look at it. Lets top trying to rain on each others parades and look to keep our fish healthy and not assume maximum sizes or assume that a fish that doesn't reach this size is somehow less than a healthy fish. Even in the wild many fish never even approach maximum size, lets keep this in mind next time we want to jump on someone who is keeping a big fish and concentrate on what the fish needs to be the pet it's owner wants.
http://wwwaux.cerc.cr.usgs.gov/micra/SHOVELNO.HTM
and just cause ck can get 3+ feet dont mean you prolly couldnt keep one in a 240 gallon