Jim Tansey
Well-Known Member
I just love the tang police
WOW Irresposible IMO
- Thread starter DangHobbies
- Start date
stingythingy45
Well-Known Member
If you read much on there you'll notice a pattern.
A lot of them(ones that overstock) complain about overly aggressive fish
Gee..........wonder why?
A lot of them(ones that overstock) complain about overly aggressive fish
Gee..........wonder why?
IffersTankSlave
C'mon SPRING!!
It's kind of sad when your sump is larger than your display
I know there is something there, waiting for a comment... I just know it!
DangHobbies
Non-member
Theres nothing wrong with your sump being bigger than your display IMO. When I setup my 12G nano my sump is going to be 22G.
Fingolfin
Humble Christian
FishNemo is from China, probably HongKong. As the moderator stated, the fish husbandry is very different down there. Nevertheless, there was absolutely no excuse to treat animals like collectibles, i.e. what the Chinese are practicing down there. I've periodically browsed a popular aquarium website from HongKong, and I can testified that majority of the hobbyists do treat fish like collectibles. Once in a while when someone keep a fish for more than a few months then he/she started bragging about the longevity of fish under his/her care. From what I've seen, they universally overstock their tanks. Granted, many hobbyists own very large tanks, routinely over 300 gal. However, those tanks are also populated with many many large angelfishes. Imagine multiple adult French angels and Maculosus angels, each over 15 inches long. To their standard, fish surviving more than a few months is considered a successful practice. It pains me to see those animals tortured and stressed but owners keep bragging about how they thrive.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that their practice is going to end any time soon. With the preferable location, right in the middle of Indo-pacific, and the booming economics, China and HongKong will keep importing many many fish that are doomed to perish. I refuse to yield to the political correctness by tolerating the inhuman practice from another culture. For that, I condemn their behavior.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that their practice is going to end any time soon. With the preferable location, right in the middle of Indo-pacific, and the booming economics, China and HongKong will keep importing many many fish that are doomed to perish. I refuse to yield to the political correctness by tolerating the inhuman practice from another culture. For that, I condemn their behavior.
Matt L.
Non-member
I don't think political correctness is related to tolerating or even keeping silent about what one perceives as inhuman[e] behavior.
From what I understand, political correctness typically refers to minimizing (not eliminating) offence to groups of people.
I would consider myself somewhat of a politically correct person.
Yet I feel the need to chasitse inhumane behavior always trumps offensiveness.
I got in trouble right here on this board for derisive comments towards China for their use of the death penalty.
So the exchange would go something like this:
Me: You have too many fish in your tank.
Fishkeeper: It's part of my culture.
Me: Tough s*** that doesn't make it right.
The example I like to use is vaginal circumcision. Just because it is part of your culture does not make it right.
Matt
From what I understand, political correctness typically refers to minimizing (not eliminating) offence to groups of people.
I would consider myself somewhat of a politically correct person.
Yet I feel the need to chasitse inhumane behavior always trumps offensiveness.
I got in trouble right here on this board for derisive comments towards China for their use of the death penalty.
So the exchange would go something like this:
Me: You have too many fish in your tank.
Fishkeeper: It's part of my culture.
Me: Tough s*** that doesn't make it right.
The example I like to use is vaginal circumcision. Just because it is part of your culture does not make it right.
Matt
Fingolfin
Humble Christian
Matt,
I do not disagree how you define it. The thing is, offense is an act of perception. Sometime when we state something different from the others, certain population in other group may feel offended by our statement. It's just our human nature.
My political-correctness statement mainly referred to the moderator in that nanoreef forum. I understand the difficulty forum moderators need to conduct. However, that moderator obviously compromised his principles by tolerating FishNemo's behaviors. He simply used political correctness to justify his compromise. To me, that was a bunch bull.
bradig
Non-member
There is no justification
I always ask myself this question. How long should the animal live for, if a fish lives for 20 years in the wild, then why should it be any different if it is in our possesion. We as human beings have the ability to see these animals to the end of their respective lives according to the history of their pasts, not what joe schmo next door did.
I have a clownfish that has been living in my reef for about five years. If he does not make it to over ten years old I will consider myself as a failure with this particular specimen.
It is kind of like the whole Mike Vick thing with the pitbulls, it is unjustifiable homicide and flat out cruel.
I always ask myself this question. How long should the animal live for, if a fish lives for 20 years in the wild, then why should it be any different if it is in our possesion. We as human beings have the ability to see these animals to the end of their respective lives according to the history of their pasts, not what joe schmo next door did.
I have a clownfish that has been living in my reef for about five years. If he does not make it to over ten years old I will consider myself as a failure with this particular specimen.
It is kind of like the whole Mike Vick thing with the pitbulls, it is unjustifiable homicide and flat out cruel.
Fingolfin
Humble Christian
If all hobbyists are like you, this hobby would become noble. Unfortunately, many treat this hobby like collecting stamps.
Dragon2115
Non-member
Ok, tighten down the old nomex flame retardant suit and away we go...
I read the NR thread from the link, all of it. And at the end it finally started to make sense. First off the guy was confusing the words "breed" with "keep" so he was saying that he was breeding stuff when he really meant that he had been keeping stuff for years.
Second, I understand the concept. There is no biological filter. That is what's throwing everyone off. There's no sand and no rock work for detritus to settle into. The water is kept circulating and the detritus is picked up by the filter floss which is changed daily. When he says his nitrates are high it sounds like it's still on the order of what we consider normal for a FOWLR tank. I don't know how to convert mol/L in ppm so I can't be sure. And he clearly says there's no way he could keep any coral in the tank. For that he says he'd have to radically reduce the bioload so he could get the nitrates down to an acceptable range.
Yes, I would challenge his conclusions about the psychological health of his fish being kept in such a confined space (particularly with regard to the rabbitfish) but then again there is room for debate on this too when you stop and think about it. How much do fish really think about beyond the basics of food, territory, and mating? If the food is being delivered to them and there aren't any other fish of the same kind to fight or mate with how much space does a fish really need to be content? And yes, I see the argument about keeping large dogs and their need to run for exercise. Otoh dogs are higher animals with more complex social behavior. Like I said, there's room for debate.
At first I started reading that thread and thought wow, this guy has no clue. After reading it, getting past the language issues, and thinking about it for awhile I start to think this guy may not be as far off base as I first thought.
I read the NR thread from the link, all of it. And at the end it finally started to make sense. First off the guy was confusing the words "breed" with "keep" so he was saying that he was breeding stuff when he really meant that he had been keeping stuff for years.
Second, I understand the concept. There is no biological filter. That is what's throwing everyone off. There's no sand and no rock work for detritus to settle into. The water is kept circulating and the detritus is picked up by the filter floss which is changed daily. When he says his nitrates are high it sounds like it's still on the order of what we consider normal for a FOWLR tank. I don't know how to convert mol/L in ppm so I can't be sure. And he clearly says there's no way he could keep any coral in the tank. For that he says he'd have to radically reduce the bioload so he could get the nitrates down to an acceptable range.
Yes, I would challenge his conclusions about the psychological health of his fish being kept in such a confined space (particularly with regard to the rabbitfish) but then again there is room for debate on this too when you stop and think about it. How much do fish really think about beyond the basics of food, territory, and mating? If the food is being delivered to them and there aren't any other fish of the same kind to fight or mate with how much space does a fish really need to be content? And yes, I see the argument about keeping large dogs and their need to run for exercise. Otoh dogs are higher animals with more complex social behavior. Like I said, there's room for debate.
At first I started reading that thread and thought wow, this guy has no clue. After reading it, getting past the language issues, and thinking about it for awhile I start to think this guy may not be as far off base as I first thought.
Matt L.
Non-member
Okay, a couple of things.
First, I tried to read the thread but couldn't, so I really can't see all of what was going on. I can't stand the Borat English (You like?). A flame war is bad enough, a flame war in broken English is a living Hell.
Second, I agree with Fingolfin that by failing to lock the thread or chastise the fish keeping practices of Fish Nemo, the moderators were guilty by omission.
Third, I suspect this may have been a well orchestrated trolling.
Fourth, there's a quote in there that pretty much sums up a very real sentiment that is out there:
Fifth, the NanoReef forum really seems to really be the bottom of the fishkeeping barrel -- it makes me really appreciate the BRS. Those aren't your sharpest knives the drawer, if you catch my drift. It't kind of like the "YOU'RE WRONG, MORAN" crowd.
Finally, if there was anything good that came out of this thread, it was this:
First, I tried to read the thread but couldn't, so I really can't see all of what was going on. I can't stand the Borat English (You like?). A flame war is bad enough, a flame war in broken English is a living Hell.
Second, I agree with Fingolfin that by failing to lock the thread or chastise the fish keeping practices of Fish Nemo, the moderators were guilty by omission.
Third, I suspect this may have been a well orchestrated trolling.
Fourth, there's a quote in there that pretty much sums up a very real sentiment that is out there:
Some people do not believe that fish are anything different than stamps, as Fingolfin said.
Fifth, the NanoReef forum really seems to really be the bottom of the fishkeeping barrel -- it makes me really appreciate the BRS. Those aren't your sharpest knives the drawer, if you catch my drift. It't kind of like the "YOU'RE WRONG, MORAN" crowd.
Finally, if there was anything good that came out of this thread, it was this:
Matt L.
Non-member
Nitrate tes kits usually measure as nitrate nitrogen (so results can easily be combined with nitrite and ammonia). There are 14g of nitrogen in 70.99g of nitrate. 100mol/L nitrate still equals 1.4kg N/L, which is way to high, so I don't know what this guy is talking about. Based on the numbers, I think he means mg/L and not mol/L.sickens me, where is this guy getting his information from!?!
LMAO... 50-100 mol/L thats 50mol x 70.99g NO3 which is about 3.5kg (about 7 pounds) NO3 per 1 Liter (about 1/4 gallon)... that is not possible.
Matt
Nitrate tes kits usually measure as nitrate nitrogen (so results can easily be combined with nitrite and ammonia). There are 14g of nitrogen in 70.99g of nitrate. 100mol/L nitrate still equals 1.4kg N/L, which is way to high, so I don't know what this guy is talking about. Based on the numbers, I think he means mg/L and not mol/L.
Matt
lol, woops, I was thinking sodiums molar mass instead of nitrogens it should be 50-100 mol/L thats 50mol x 62.01g NO3(NO3 molar mas) which is about 3.1kg (about 6.8 pounds) NO3 per 1 Liter (about 1/4 gallon)... thanks for correcting me. He must be mistaking moles for mg/L.
I really do think that whole thread is a joke, literally, just some guy playing a joke.
Last edited:
Dragon2115
Non-member
Ok, stop focusing on the slog-fest and instead on the subject, keeping large fish (or large numbers of fish) in a small tank in what would traditionally be considered an over-stocked condition.
I've read books by respected authors here in the U.S. that discussed the myth about fish not outgrowing their tank and how it was really due to water quality stunting the fishes growth.They talked about how large fish have been kept in incredibly small tanks by maintaining exceptionally high water quality. I could see it working. If the fish is getting really good water, it's food is coming right to it, and there are no stresses like maintaining territory what defines content? It's not like fish hang there in the water column contemplating quantum physics. At least not mine, one of them just swam into a rock. Ok, so maybe that one might live longer if he couldn't move around so much.
Thanks for converting the numbers. It does sound like he's got his terms screwed up. My guess, he really means ppm, which makes a lot more sense. 50 - 100 ppm for FOWLR and <30 for reef.
If it is trolling then it certainly exposed who the idiots in the neighborhood are over there.
I've read books by respected authors here in the U.S. that discussed the myth about fish not outgrowing their tank and how it was really due to water quality stunting the fishes growth.They talked about how large fish have been kept in incredibly small tanks by maintaining exceptionally high water quality. I could see it working. If the fish is getting really good water, it's food is coming right to it, and there are no stresses like maintaining territory what defines content? It's not like fish hang there in the water column contemplating quantum physics. At least not mine, one of them just swam into a rock. Ok, so maybe that one might live longer if he couldn't move around so much.
Thanks for converting the numbers. It does sound like he's got his terms screwed up. My guess, he really means ppm, which makes a lot more sense. 50 - 100 ppm for FOWLR and <30 for reef.
If it is trolling then it certainly exposed who the idiots in the neighborhood are over there.
Matt L.
Non-member
Similar threads
