WOW Irresposible IMO

[Matt L.]

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.

Well, I think this is the age old question of whether fish require space above and beyond that which is necessary for their survival.

This is a philosophical question, and I don't have an answer for you.

My personal opinion on the matter is that, yes, there is a bare minimum of humane space for a fish that is larger than the minimum volume the fish can be kept alive in.

For example, my PBT is in a 125gal system. This is the bare minimum volume I would keep a PBT in, and the shortest maximum length (6ft). However, he was quarantined and then held in a 40L for 8 months with no observable adverse effects, physical or behavioiral.

I would like to also note that as I have spent time in this hobby (7 years now), what I consider the minimum space for a fish has increased, and my concept of stocking density has decreased.

being a philosophical question rather than a scientific one, the matter is highly subjective.

Is it wrong to keep a PBT in a 120gal tank? I don't know. Some may think anything less than 8ft is inhumae. Is it wrong to keep a PBT in a 20L? Most would say yes. Can a PBT be kept alive in a 20L? I would say yes, for a while.

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.

Compared to the ocean, or tanks are infinitesimal. In fact, no tank remotely comes close to approaching the territory of most tangs in the wild.

Do we need to recreate a home territory? I doubt it. I believe in the goldfish myth that fish don't commit much to longterm memory (having a brain case the size of a pinhead doesn't help to that end). In short, the fish continuosuly believe they are in a novel space or forget where they just were (the Dori effect).

However, I have wittnessed fish, tangs in particular, stress over being confined, and it is very sad to watch. Watching a fish freak out over being in too small a space is horrible.

You could put a human in a container the size of a phone booth for their whole lives. With proper care, they would reach their adult size. But it wouldn't be humane.[/QUOTE]

If it is trolling then it certainly exposed who the idiots in the neighborhood are over there.

Yeah, it really is the moran crowd over there.

Matt

 

[uprr]

i'd love to know what store he works at?

 

[Behrmon]

There are a lot of boneheads over at that forum. I stopped going there awhile ago when I saw that it is mainly a bunch of kids (and adults with the mentality of kids). People over there act like they are informed with the hobby, but very few actually know what they are doing.

But Steve, you made some really great friends over there didn't you??

 

[Fingolfin]

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.

I also heard a similar theory at least a decade ago. A very experienced fish collector one time told me that it was the excessive fish hormone level in the confined tanks to limit fish's growth. Constant large water change can help lowering the hormone in the tanks. Of course, I haven't read any report to prove that theory.

And I disagree that providing enough food would eliminate territorial aggression behavior. Fish are territorial not only for food, but also for reproduction. It is embedded in their DNA. Providing enough food only solves a part of equation. Even without mates, fish still have the instinct to protect their territories. When you overstock the tank, all you do is stress them out and overwhelm them. Their surrounding is saturated with many aggressive fish that they can never settle in a comfort zone. As I stated in one of my earlier posts, fish in overstocked captivity environment simply don't survive long. Keeping fish for 3 months then bragging about it as success is an insult to the mother nature and the human intelligence.

I do not wish to make this a black-and-white issue. I understand that hobbyists can never duplicate the type of environment reef fish enjoy in the ocean. As I preach humane ways to keep reef fish in captivity, which is still far from the nature's standard, I might inevitably fall into the category of self-righteousness to blast those who treat fish inhumanely, consciously or ignorantly. To me, the best measure to make this an acceptable hobby is to make fish's captivity longevity comparable to their natural one. Generally speaking, the current state of this hobby is still quite disturbing: many of us are simply collecting those animals as trophies and bragging about it with one another. What triggered this whole debate was the atrocity of the so-called Chinese way of keeping reef fish in captivity. In this case, there is really no moral relativism to defend their position, unless you define "murdering fish" as a morally acceptable act.

 

[dz6t]

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.

People who keep salt water fish or coral in China are amount to less than 0.0000001% of the 1.2 billion population and only limited to several major cities in south China. Chinese culture is to keep goldfish which basically a man made freshwater fish that can't survive in the wild. It is a reality that people keep large amount of goldfish in limited space but goldfish doesn't behave like saltwater fish. I don't think China and HongKong will keep importing many many fish that are doomed to perish just because the market is so small. The amount of fish imported for hobbists are far less than US. You should condemn yourself and all of us here first actually.

 

[dz6t]

To me, the best measure to make this an acceptable hobby is to make fish's captivity longevity comparable to their natural one.

I don't think this is possible for wild caught fish. The best way a hobbist can do is to only keep tank breeded fish.

 

[Fingolfin]

People who keep salt water fish or coral in China are amount to less than 0.0000001% of the 1.2 billion population and only limited to several major cities in south China. .... I don't think China and HongKong will keep importing many many fish that are doomed to perish just because the market is so small. The amount of fish imported for hobbists are far less than US. You should condemn yourself and all of us here first actually.

I don't know where you came up with that figure, 0.0000001% which is about 0.001 ppm. Personally I really have a hard time to believe it even in a micro-second. The market in Hong Kong and Taiwan is absolutely huge. In terms of the sheer volume imported, the far east market can't compare to the US market yet, but there is no denial that it is a booming market down there. In the city of Taipei, Taiwan alone, there are many many tropical fish stores. There is even a street called the fish block in Taipei. Let's face it. Chinese like to keep fish as an auspicious reason. The percentage of Taiwanese/Cantonese population getting into the fish keeping hobby is far greater than the percentage of American population. Now China is getting wealthier so it is understandable for them to jump into this expensive hobby.

I'm a Chinese descent, but I will not defend Chinese way of fish-keeping practice for the sake of cultural pride, neither will I apply a relativism to justify their practice. Even way before this thread took place, I had vehemently promoted humane ways of keeping reef fish in captivity. Personally I'm not 100% guiltless in that I killed many fish over the years, and I admit that I'm one of those who deserve condemnation for my past doing. For this matter, I preach the humane practices not from my moral authority, which I have none, I do it because of my moral responsibility.

 

[Fingolfin]

I don't think this is possible for wild caught fish. The best way a hobbist can do is to only keep tank breeded fish.

I know a guy in the midwest who has kept his pair of clown fish for almost 20 years. Personally I have an angelfish that has been with me since 1999. It's only impossible to have captive fish to live up to their natural lifespans if the hobbyists choose not to make it happen. It's up to us! Lacking of discipline, responsibility, and the love for the fish would cause the fish to terminate way before their life spans dictate otherwise. You want that powder blue tang? no, you need to consider your own purple tang in your 125 gallon tank. The impulse to add that powder blue will create stress in your tank then subsequently sabotage both of your tangs' life spans. It's called lack of discipline.

In terms of tank bred fish, I don't see any difference between them and the wild-caught ones. Just because they are bred in captivity, it doesn't grant them less right to be treated accordingly. Lives are lives, the only difference is that those tank bred fish use captive environment as the breeding ground. We didn't artificially create those eggs and sperms.

 

[dz6t]

HongKong and taipei are two cities that absolutely no representation of Chinese culture in whole. HongKong is a long time British colony and you should blame the British. Taiwan is so americanized so you should blame the US. Also, it is not a cluture of keeping saltwater fish throughout Chinese history.

By the way, have you ever look at Japan market?

Back to the topic, my two tangs are much happier and more active and attractive after they were moved to a 6 foot tank.

One of my original intend to get a 6 foot tank was to give my beloved purple tang a good home. But he passed away in his 4 foot tank before the 6 foot tank was set up.

 

[dz6t]

In terms of tank bred fish, I don't see any difference between them and the wild-caught ones. Just because they are bred in captivity, it doesn't grant them less right to be treated accordingly. Lives are lives, the only difference is that those tank bred fish use captive environment as the breeding ground. We didn't artificially create those eggs and sperms.

In MA, a wild turkey has more rights than a farm raised turkey.

A wild fish is used to the ocean, a captive bred fish is born in a tank. I think they will be all tramatized after being put into a small tank. The wild one will be stressed out more.

On the other end (for the people who sells them fo r a living), remove a fish from the wild for profit and raise a fish captive for profit is quite different.

 

[Fingolfin]

HongKong and taipei are two cities that absolutely no representation of Chinese culture in whole. HongKong is a long time British colony and you should blame the British. Taiwan is so americanized so you should blame the US. Also, it is not a cluture of keeping saltwater fish throughout Chinese history. Since your are a Chinese descent, you should learn more about the actural China instead of what you are taught here. By the way, it does give you some leaway to bash Chinese culture

By the way, have you ever look at Japan market?

I grew up in Taiwan, which is more influenced by Japan than America. Nevertheless, Taiwanese are Chinese. In a way, Taiwan represents Chinese culture better than Chinese in China do. The culture revolution did great damages to China.

I do know the Japanese marketsomewhat. After all, the Japanese market is the mother of the far east reef fish market. From my limited experiences, Japanese are militant about maintaining their fish. Some Japanese exercised the big-tank-low-fish-load practice long ago. Many husbandry techniques were actually originated from Japan.

 

[Fingolfin]

On the other end (for the people who sells them fo r a living), remove a fish from the wild for profit and raise a fish captive for profit is quite different.

How so? So the breeding pair in captivity would've not bred if they had been left along in the wild? We are making a lot of assumption about lives here. Lives are lives. The definition of life doesn't change through different economical means. When you sell a fish, you are involved in a life. Selling a captive-bred fish doesn't make the seller more righteous than one who sells a wild-caught fish. The righteousness comes from how you treat your fish, not where the fish comes from.

 

[Dragon2115]

Well...

I think if we're going to bring the moral righteousness of keeping an animal captive into this then no matter how well we care for them we're still in the wrong as we never should have put it into captivity at all.

Even the NE Aquarium would fall short here when you look at the pelagic species that are kept in the GOT. These are animals that are used to swimming for miles in open water but are now confined to swim in a circle day and night for the rest of their lives. And these are wild caught specimens not tank raised. Kinda falls short on the moral righteousness test when looked at in that light even though the animals still live out their normal lifespans in good health.

Which brings me to the point about some species being better able to adjust to life in captivity than others. For example, nurse sharks can be kept in captivity relatively easily (for a large, generally public, aquarium) whereas a Great White can't.

As for what I said about food delivery removing some of the aggression I stand by that. In the captive environment with a conscientious caretaker no animal has to compete for it's food. It's needs are catered to. Therefore there is no reason to fight over food. If there are no others of it's kind then there is no one to fight with over a mate. And yes, I recognize that some fish just have a naturally bad attitude and don't get along with anyone else. Obviously those species should be avoided if the intent is to keep a community tank. If otoh those are the particular fish to be kept then it has to go into a tank all by itself. But we know this already.

 

[dz6t]

Well...

I think if we're going to bring the moral righteousness of keeping an animal captive into this then no matter how well we care for them we're still in the wrong as we never should have put it into captivity at all.

.

That sums it up very very nice!

 

[dz6t]

When there is plenty of food and space, some fish can't get together in the wild will tolerate each other or even stay together. I have a gang of trio that always stay together in the day time and each has its sleeping quater at night. The gang is consists with a hippo tang, a yellow tang and a seabae clwonfish.

 

[~Flighty~]

I feel a little different about this topic.

I don't equate fish life with fuzzy pet life. I have a lose hierarchy in my brain (like I think most everyone has to to some extent) and my dogs and cats come way before fish in my head. Even the wild mice, that I try to drive away, trap and release, or cleanly kill with with a snap trap are somewhere above fish in my brain.

Flame me if you want, I can take it

That being said, I am in the hobby to see a fascinating display of nature in my own home. I want to create a little slice of ocean and see what goes on in there. I do not want to see fish who move great distances during the day confined into a 2x2x4 foorprint all day and night. It makes me very turned off to see any tang or more active distance fish in a home tank. When you see them in the wild, they are swimming. period. They stop and grab algae off rocks and then zoom on in large groups at high speed.

I strive to keep fish that I can reproduce their main day to day activities- chromis, clowns, butterflys, regal angels(unlike other large angels, the regals aren't big swimmers, have extremely small territories and stay within yards of their caves and crevices all day) mandarins etc. My one exception is my rabbitfish. He is there as an algae control and was chosen because rabbits, although they do travel long distances in the wild, spend much more time down in and among the rocks and will stay more stationary if there is ample food. Cows vs antelopes may be an apt comparison.

Anyway. I try to chose animals that I can give a decently normal life to. I don't think anyone short of the NEAQ can do that for tangs and tuna. But, I'm not going to tell anyone else what to do with their fish. I'm probably less disgusted than most when I see fish die from improper care, but I would confront you if you were beating your dog.

ta-da! thats my 2 cents if anyone cares

 

[Fingolfin]

Kinda falls short on the moral righteousness test when looked at in that light even though the animals still live out their normal lifespans in good health.

Your assumption is that fish "do" enjoy swimming around for sake of pleasure. Yes, many fish do swim miles per day, but I believe that it has more to do with searching food and mates. Fish's territory defines resources that can "support" their existence. If we can supply fish's resources for their existence, I don't see how we as hobbyists fail the moral righteousness test. Nevertheless, I don't think food alone is going to cut it. So far, I haven't seen any successful overstocked tank with fish enjoying longevity, no matter how much you feed them.

 

[JohnK]

I like to refer to the elevator analogy;

Yes, you could keep several people in an elevator for their lifespans if you provided fresh air, food, water, a toilet of sorts, and a liveable tempature.

No, I don't think those people would have very happy or fufilling lives....

 

[Sherri]

I don't have a hierarchy for animals .. life is life. A fish,a crab .. is as important to me as my dog, cat, birds, my horses were. They all matter and it matters that I create the best environment possible. But I guess that's what is at the core of the controversy .. what does that mean. And then there's the extreme that we cannot create what is in the wild in terms of space, environment, or quality. So it is individual choice. We each choose the environment that we want to create. Can we judge others? We certainly can but I guess education for those that question is our best approach. Many here patiently answer questions and that seems to be the best way ...

 

[dz6t]

. If we can supply fish's resources for their existence, I don't see how we as hobbyists fail the moral righteousness test. .

I don't understand your logic here.

We take fish out of ocean for what? To save them? For their suvival and pleasure? No, we do that for our own entertainment. Now face it, we as hobbyists have no moral righteousness. It is time to suck it up and admit that we are selfish, we do that for our own pleasure.

When we are eatting steak, we are not into the well being of that cow

On the other hand, keeping cats and dogs is different. Without the owner to provide them food and shelter, cats and dogs will live a worse life on the street.

Salt water fish? they don't need your tank to survive and be happy. they have the ocean and we kidnape them from their home and claim self righteousness?