I like them separated. CA and SA attract largely different groups of hobbyist. There is some overlap but as people gain experience, you usually see a divergence.
South /Central fourm split.
- Thread starter dan518
- Start date
- Status
I can see why the purist would like it separated, but it has turned out to be a huge task. Im pretty sure the SA section still has 2000+ posts to go through. Most of my experience comes from african cichlids so there's alot of times where I have to google a fish to see where they are from. I was moving some threads the other day, just to come back to new posts in the wrong section.
This is my observation as well. I like catfish and toothy characins, I'm useless in helping sort this.
I like the idea of having them split, but I believe that trying to split one of our largest and most active areas may be untenable.
I like them split as well but I agree it is a crazy amount of threads to move. I was moving them in the beginning, lately have been admittedly slacking (and less active on site in general due to some personal matters). Pretty sure it's mostly james doing the moving and not fair to ask him to do all that himself.
I think if we leave them split, the idea should be to separate new threads and leave old ones buried. Too time consuming for a few volunteers to do all that. Or, I have no real problem with re-joining them. Perhaps if we go that route
duanes
can make a sticky on the vast differences of the two continents' fish.
Just my .02, either way I think is viable
I think if we leave them split, the idea should be to separate new threads and leave old ones buried. Too time consuming for a few volunteers to do all that. Or, I have no real problem with re-joining them. Perhaps if we go that route
duanes
can make a sticky on the vast differences of the two continents' fish.Just my .02, either way I think is viable
This sounds like a reasonable, and less time consuming solution, as/and if old threads are reinvigorated, moving them to their proper spot .
I noticed it the other day when an old thread about the Mexican cichlid Chuco micropthalmus reappeared, someone quickly put it in its proper geographic position.
I was initially for this split, now I'm not so sure.
Either way, I did want to address some of the comments, particularly this one.
While this is a typical purist opinion regarding water parameters between the two areas, that's all it is, an opinion, one that I do not personally share. There are numerous SA species, including some of the groups mentioned above (Heros, Geos, Angels, Oscars, and even (gasp) Discus) that can thrive for many years, in perfect health, in harder water, with higher pH values. No HITH etc! This has been proven time & time again, so while you may believe this to be true, it hardly makes it a fact. One of the most experienced discus breeders in this area raised his discus for several decades, in our tap water, that is hard, and has a pH of 8.0 The only time this becomes an issue, is during breeding periods, where the harder water causes a much lower hatch rate in eggs. In fact, in many discus camps, many believe that raising their juvies in harder water with higher mineral content, and higher pH, results in more optimum growth. The same holds true for many other species that originate from softer water.
I'm ok with whatever the masses here decide, perhaps more work than it's worth, I don't know? But I would hate to see the areas split due to purist values/reasons such as water parameters, especially when they don't always line up with reality.
Either way, I did want to address some of the comments, particularly this one.
While this is a typical purist opinion regarding water parameters between the two areas, that's all it is, an opinion, one that I do not personally share. There are numerous SA species, including some of the groups mentioned above (Heros, Geos, Angels, Oscars, and even (gasp) Discus) that can thrive for many years, in perfect health, in harder water, with higher pH values. No HITH etc! This has been proven time & time again, so while you may believe this to be true, it hardly makes it a fact. One of the most experienced discus breeders in this area raised his discus for several decades, in our tap water, that is hard, and has a pH of 8.0 The only time this becomes an issue, is during breeding periods, where the harder water causes a much lower hatch rate in eggs. In fact, in many discus camps, many believe that raising their juvies in harder water with higher mineral content, and higher pH, results in more optimum growth. The same holds true for many other species that originate from softer water.
I'm ok with whatever the masses here decide, perhaps more work than it's worth, I don't know? But I would hate to see the areas split due to purist values/reasons such as water parameters, especially when they don't always line up with reality.
Most seasoned aquarists have over time, figured out how to deal with their water.
There are discus breeders where I lived, who were able to be successful raise broods in hard, high pH water.
They don't need to bother with advice (mine or anyone else's) because they transcend the norm
keeping an aquarium is a bit science combined with art.
It is the new aquarist that when one small parameter is put on an already questionable fray of other small problems, seemingly only slightly out of place, that needs to pay attention.
One who starts losing fish one by one, or all at once, who is often backed into a corner, obvious by the many posts in the disease section, mostly brought on by stress from the combination of a toxic (yet almost untestable) soup in the tank.
It is this group that need to be concerned about pH, and other parameters, that together kill fish for noobs, or those on the verge of taking the next step, like buying a $60-$100 fish that needs pH 4, yet they have pH 8 and only do 1 wimpy water change per month, so a month or less later the fish dies, and they believe its the LFSs or shippers fault. When in reality is a lack of research and maintenance.
I admit to being a purist, but believe those purist ideas are most needed by the inexperienced, and have only a few years of experience.
There are discus breeders where I lived, who were able to be successful raise broods in hard, high pH water.
They don't need to bother with advice (mine or anyone else's) because they transcend the norm
keeping an aquarium is a bit science combined with art.
It is the new aquarist that when one small parameter is put on an already questionable fray of other small problems, seemingly only slightly out of place, that needs to pay attention.
One who starts losing fish one by one, or all at once, who is often backed into a corner, obvious by the many posts in the disease section, mostly brought on by stress from the combination of a toxic (yet almost untestable) soup in the tank.
It is this group that need to be concerned about pH, and other parameters, that together kill fish for noobs, or those on the verge of taking the next step, like buying a $60-$100 fish that needs pH 4, yet they have pH 8 and only do 1 wimpy water change per month, so a month or less later the fish dies, and they believe its the LFSs or shippers fault. When in reality is a lack of research and maintenance.
I admit to being a purist, but believe those purist ideas are most needed by the inexperienced, and have only a few years of experience.
I respectfully disagree, Duane. While there are indeed various blackwater species that require extra attention, or more precise water conditions for long term success, I don't feel that lumping all of these fish together by precise regions, is being as educational as one could & I feel should be. It's your personal bugaboo that drives this mantra of soft/hard water, not one of reality.
That local breeder that I know wasn't an exception that pulled this off due to decades of experience, there are numerous people in this area that successfully keep many of the species that you described, healthy & thriving long term, with no health issues. Here's an example from the past, where I can state definitively that your water parameter argument, was 100% wrong.
www.monsterfishkeepers.com
I know this, because I have not only kept this species in our local water, for years, I also know many others that have - including those who live in the same city as the OP in that discussion, which is an hour north of me. Big beautiful specimens, breeding & thriving for years. To blame his situation on the local tap water is ludicrous. This is a complex subject, one that covers bacteria types and loads as much or IMO more than pH values. Take good care of the water and the fish will be fine, is the mantra that we should be promoting, not don't do it because it will stress the fish. Clean water, and lots of it, seldom stresses fish.
I can't even fathom the notion of attempting to tell someone in my area that they shouldn't keep heros, or Oscars, or angelfish. Even beginners can easily achieve success with these groups of fish if they have the proper guidance.
I see a LOT of poor management decisions in the disease section here & elsewhere including on a forum where I was a mod in that area for a few years. I get it. But bad decisions & poor choices, and sloppy husbandry doesn't equate to it being a case of soft/hard water as being the main cause, or even a contributing cause. Sometimes, perhaps, but certainly not enough to start pushing everyone away from soft water species, because they have hard water.
What next, Asian aros, clown loaches? It's a long slippery slope.....
That local breeder that I know wasn't an exception that pulled this off due to decades of experience, there are numerous people in this area that successfully keep many of the species that you described, healthy & thriving long term, with no health issues. Here's an example from the past, where I can state definitively that your water parameter argument, was 100% wrong.
Tapajos pockmarks?
Hi everyone, Ive had these guys for months now, they're 3x the size they were when i bought them. A few months ago i noticed that two of my largest specimens had what looks like scarring or pockmarking behind their eyes and on their foreheads. They don't seem to mind, and they certainly don't...
www.monsterfishkeepers.com
I know this, because I have not only kept this species in our local water, for years, I also know many others that have - including those who live in the same city as the OP in that discussion, which is an hour north of me. Big beautiful specimens, breeding & thriving for years. To blame his situation on the local tap water is ludicrous. This is a complex subject, one that covers bacteria types and loads as much or IMO more than pH values. Take good care of the water and the fish will be fine, is the mantra that we should be promoting, not don't do it because it will stress the fish. Clean water, and lots of it, seldom stresses fish.
I can't even fathom the notion of attempting to tell someone in my area that they shouldn't keep heros, or Oscars, or angelfish. Even beginners can easily achieve success with these groups of fish if they have the proper guidance.
I see a LOT of poor management decisions in the disease section here & elsewhere including on a forum where I was a mod in that area for a few years. I get it. But bad decisions & poor choices, and sloppy husbandry doesn't equate to it being a case of soft/hard water as being the main cause, or even a contributing cause. Sometimes, perhaps, but certainly not enough to start pushing everyone away from soft water species, because they have hard water.
What next, Asian aros, clown loaches? It's a long slippery slope.....
I'm going to go ahead and be the one who makes the call-
I'm going to recombine SA and CA into each other. I'll take care of moving the threads. From my top down perspective as the site manager, this split would only work if we could properly split the archived information completely, otherwise most of the info will be in the wrong place.
I've already sorted out a few forums that were far smaller than SA/CA and I can attest to the fact that it is nightmarishly difficult to do. The cichlid mods have lives outside of MFK, and I don't wish to place such a burden on them so as to make them lose their interest in helping with the forum. They're far too valuable to the community for me to allow that to happen.
duanes
- would you be so kind as to write up your thoughts on the water parameters of Central and South America and the impact it may play on husbandry so we can have it as a sticky?
Thank you all for your cooperation and understanding in our experiment with this split. I hope the reasons for deciding to reverse course here are well understood and don't brook resentment.
I'll be closing this thread here simply due to the fact that I consider this matter settled and I don't want this notice lost in discussion.
I'm going to recombine SA and CA into each other. I'll take care of moving the threads. From my top down perspective as the site manager, this split would only work if we could properly split the archived information completely, otherwise most of the info will be in the wrong place.
I've already sorted out a few forums that were far smaller than SA/CA and I can attest to the fact that it is nightmarishly difficult to do. The cichlid mods have lives outside of MFK, and I don't wish to place such a burden on them so as to make them lose their interest in helping with the forum. They're far too valuable to the community for me to allow that to happen.
duanes
- would you be so kind as to write up your thoughts on the water parameters of Central and South America and the impact it may play on husbandry so we can have it as a sticky?Thank you all for your cooperation and understanding in our experiment with this split. I hope the reasons for deciding to reverse course here are well understood and don't brook resentment.
I'll be closing this thread here simply due to the fact that I consider this matter settled and I don't want this notice lost in discussion.
Most pathogenic bacteria thrive in a very narrow pH range, and when removed from that range their virulence subsides.
When I was making media to grow certain pathogens in the lab, if a batch was cooked up that fell even slightly out of a specific pH range for that bacterial species, a pH range as narrow as 7.5 +/- 0.2, it had to be tossed.
While many bacteria will survive outside these narrow ranges, but to be infective, the optimum range is often required,
Spironucieous AKA.Hexamita prefer range, pH 7-8
Aeromonas is one of the few that transcend that sweet spot, pH 4-10.
So its not so simple as pH alone because pH range might not effect affect a fish directly, because many higher animals can tolerate swings and/or adjust.
But if a certain species of fish has evolved to live in water with a narrow range of pH 5 to 6, that water may also be filled with antibacterial tannins, (even just seasonally), this may mean that species has not needed to develop resistance to those bacteria that live in higher pH waters, and (as is obvious) from posts in the disease section, oscars, Heros, and some Geophagines seem to be very commonly afflicted with certain bacterial diseases like HLLE in tanks, where these bacteria become ubiquitous, in the higher pH waters from our taps.
It could be that because these long lived species are so widely kept, that they will naturally be the showpieces of chronic disease.
I agree that its not just pH alone for the fish itself, but the combination of stressors of higher than normal nitrate, sometimes crowded conditions, in too tiny tanks, that when added to a higher pH range than the fish has evolved to live in, but that fishes inability to resist the onslaught of hungry bacteria that creates problems. So yes, it’s not the pH alone that directly hurts the fish, but its certain species inability to cope with pathogens or even non-pathogens that take advantage of a non-resistant species lack of immunity, in the pH range where these bacteria run wild.
And as we have seen in many tanks when even hard water species are subjected to stress, resistance wanes and they fall victim to bacterial and viral maladies.
When I was making media to grow certain pathogens in the lab, if a batch was cooked up that fell even slightly out of a specific pH range for that bacterial species, a pH range as narrow as 7.5 +/- 0.2, it had to be tossed.
While many bacteria will survive outside these narrow ranges, but to be infective, the optimum range is often required,
Spironucieous AKA.Hexamita prefer range, pH 7-8
Aeromonas is one of the few that transcend that sweet spot, pH 4-10.
So its not so simple as pH alone because pH range might not effect affect a fish directly, because many higher animals can tolerate swings and/or adjust.
But if a certain species of fish has evolved to live in water with a narrow range of pH 5 to 6, that water may also be filled with antibacterial tannins, (even just seasonally), this may mean that species has not needed to develop resistance to those bacteria that live in higher pH waters, and (as is obvious) from posts in the disease section, oscars, Heros, and some Geophagines seem to be very commonly afflicted with certain bacterial diseases like HLLE in tanks, where these bacteria become ubiquitous, in the higher pH waters from our taps.
It could be that because these long lived species are so widely kept, that they will naturally be the showpieces of chronic disease.
I agree that its not just pH alone for the fish itself, but the combination of stressors of higher than normal nitrate, sometimes crowded conditions, in too tiny tanks, that when added to a higher pH range than the fish has evolved to live in, but that fishes inability to resist the onslaught of hungry bacteria that creates problems. So yes, it’s not the pH alone that directly hurts the fish, but its certain species inability to cope with pathogens or even non-pathogens that take advantage of a non-resistant species lack of immunity, in the pH range where these bacteria run wild.
And as we have seen in many tanks when even hard water species are subjected to stress, resistance wanes and they fall victim to bacterial and viral maladies.
Last edited:
- Status
