Could I keep these in a 46g FO?

[Anonymous]

Tony,
Sure you can, but that's about all :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Not to drag this on forever, but I think a very small yellow tang could be ok in a 46 for a year or two. When it gets too big it will still be of a desirable size and the LFS would take it back.

 

[naesco]

I have a problem with agreeing with advising a 14 year old that it is OK to place a tiny tank in a 46 gallon tank.

With the greatest respect, sir, that is dated thinking no longer acceptable by the majority of reefers on this board.

Frequently these tiny tangs are emaciated with little chance of survival. How can we justify allowing them to be sold let alone recommending them to 14 year old newbies?

Further, what happens when they grow? Is the now 16 year old going to than purchase a suitably sized aquarium? Or, as is likely to happen continue keeping the tang because he is too attached to it.

Bad, Bad advice

 

[AF Founder]

I have a problem with agreeing with advising a 14 year old that it is OK to place a tiny tank in a 46 gallon tank.

With the greatest respect, sir, that is dated thinking no longer acceptable by the majority of reefers on this board.

Frequently these tiny tangs are emaciated with little chance of survival. How can we justify allowing them to be sold let alone recommending them to 14 year old newbies?

Further, what happens when they grow? Is the now 16 year old going to than purchase a suitably sized aquarium? Or, as is likely to happen continue keeping the tang because he is too attached to it.

Bad, Bad advice

I don't agree with you. If fed properly a small healthy tang will do well in a 46 gallon tank, and the size of the tank will restrain its size, as tanks do to almost all fish we keep as our guests in captivity. THe critical issue here is not theory (old or new), but getting a healthy juvenile tang, and giving it a constant source of food; eg. Nori on a clip, or tied to a small piece of dead coral.

 

[SPC]

Posted by Terry:

and the size of the tank will restrain its size, as tanks do to almost all fish we keep as our guests in captivity.

-So you are saying that you advocate the "stunting" of fish Terry?
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Well, look. Most of us who started keeping aquariums young can reflect on countless blunders. At least he's on here asking questions. If you mommy somebody to death they won't listen to you. Everything doesn't have to be a moral stand.

 

[AF Founder]

Posted by Terry:

and the size of the tank will restrain its size, as tanks do to almost all fish we keep as our guests in captivity.

-So you are saying that you advocate the "stunting" of fish Terry?
Steve

Steve,

I think you have missed the point. I'm not advocating stunting, only observing that stunting is inevitable unless we keep only very snall fish. Furthermore, exactly what harm does it do to stunt fish? I have stunted tangs in my captive reefs for better than 15 years. My concern is that they live out a full life in captivity. It will not be a complete life, as many will not be able to spawn in captivity. This is starting to sound like how many angels candance on the head of a pin. :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

Here's a thought. Why not only keep fish in our aquariums that we can provide the proper environment for, instead of being proud that we have been able to "stunt" the growth of our fish?

I think it is extremely poor advice to recommend a tang for a tank that size. As for trading the tang in to a LFS, well, gee, there aren't too many tanks around that can properly house a tang, so once you trade it in to the LFS, what are the odds that it won't be bought by someone wanting to place it in an equally unsuitable tank?

Why don't we encourage aquarists to find fish that suit their tank, instead of trying to justify poor stocking decisions?

Brian

 

[Anonymous]

It will not be a complete life, as many will not be able to spawn in captivity.

Well we prevent our cats and dogs from breeding, so I'm not sure it's a big sin that our fish don't spawn, especially for the competitive fish that don't like their conspecifics around. Breaking up a mated pair, on the other hand...

 

[reefNewbie]

Well if your gonna argue about stunting the growth of fish maybe we should look at what we do to the 1000's of cattle daily so that we may eat. :lol:

 

[AF Founder]

Here's a thought. Why not only keep fish in our aquariums that we can provide the proper environment for, instead of being proud that we have been able to "stunt" the growth of our fish?

I think it is extremely poor advice to recommend a tang for a tank that size. As for trading the tang in to a LFS, well, gee, there aren't too many tanks around that can properly house a tang, so once you trade it in to the LFS, what are the odds that it won't be bought by someone wanting to place it in an equally unsuitable tank?

Why don't we encourage aquarists to find fish that suit their tank, instead of trying to justify poor stocking decisions?

Brian

Brian,

I think your advice in general is good. But, if you push keeping sea creatures in a proper environment to its logical extreme then nothing less than a pristine wild reef will satisfy those conditions. Though we can only keep wild sea creatures with only modest success, I think our captive ecosystems ultimately benefit the planet's reefs because it's people like you and I who will work for their survival. I doubt if too many CEOs of Exon, etc. care much about what happens to our planet's reefs.

 

[SPC]

Posted by Terry:

But, if you push keeping sea creatures in a proper environment to its logical extreme then nothing less than a pristine wild reef will satisfy those conditions.

-I don't buy this argument Terry, there are plenty of sea creatures that can be kept in a tank without stunting their growth. In fact, if you have the right size tank you could even keep tangs without this stunting you are proud of.
As far as I am concerned all you are accomplishing here Terry is giving more ammunition to those who would ban imports of marine life. If we as hobiest can't regulate ourselves (or have enough self control) then you can bet someone will do it for us.
Steve

 

[AF Founder]

Posted by Terry:

But, if you push keeping sea creatures in a proper environment to its logical extreme then nothing less than a pristine wild reef will satisfy those conditions.

-I don't buy this argument Terry, there are plenty of sea creatures that can be kept in a tank without stunting their growth. In fact, if you have the right size tank you could even keep tangs without this stunting you are proud of.
As far as I am concerned all you are accomplishing here Terry is giving more ammunition to those who would ban imports of marine life. If we as hobiest can't regulate ourselves (or have enough self control) then you can bet someone will do it for us.
Steve

Steve,

Perhaps I'm dense, but I don't follow your logic. Furthermore, I never said I was proud of stunting a fish's growth; I said it was the inevitable outcome of keeping most of the fish we keep in the confines of a tank.
In nature, all animal growth is determined not only by habitat area, but also nuitrition. Where I live, for example, coyote's size is determined by the availability of food, which is true of many species.

Why do you see stunting, in the scheme of things, as such a great evil? We all know that nature cares a lot less about individuals then most of us do. In nature, it is the survival the species not an individual that matters.

 

[Anonymous]

Nature may care about the species as a whole, but as aquarists we should be concerned about the individual representatives of that species we choose to keep.

I am sorry Terry, but it is extremely disheartening to see someone with your position in the hobby take the stance you have. Over the last few years we have seen a cosmic shift in the attitudes towards keeping larger fish in home aquaria. Instead of the questions we commonly saw 4 years ago "Can I keep xxx in a 30 gallon tank", now the question is much more often "Can I keep xxx in a 100 gallon tank". There has been a tremendous increase in awareness of the requirements of keeping tangs, angels, butterflys, etc, as well as a realization that not everyone "deserves" to keep whichever fish they want to, merely because they want it.

No, we can't duplicate the ocean, but that is just rationalizing a poor choice. I could fill a 46 gallon tank with fish that would make a wonderful display, and these fish could behave relatively naturally. Gobies, jawfish, fridmani, ocellaris, etc etc could all make a 46 gallon tank look awesome. Why force a large fish into a little tank for no other reason than we can?

brian

 

[AF Founder]

Brain,

I'm indeed sorry that you feel that I have betrayed one of your ideals, but as I said earlier we are talking about a 1.5 to 2 inch tang, which assuming it doesn't become a meal for a larger fish in the wild, will only grow to a size smaller than it would have in the wild. If the aquarist is skilled enough for it to live a long, healthy life in captivity then I'm satisfied -- clearly you're not.
I guess that we will have to agree to disagree. It's all a matter of perspective.

 

[Djm9288]

oooh my head hurts! :wink: could some one please summerize that for me?

 

[danmhippo]

Terry, thanks for your enlightenment. Would you say it would be OK for me to go and spread the words that for all those with tanks bigger than say, 50 gal, to go and purchase bamboo sharks, naso tangs, emperor angels, and queen trigger. Because it's apparent that, according to you, as long as I control their diet, their size will be limited by the space provided. Furthermore, I can always purchase smallest specimens that will fit into the 50Gal. Besides, I am doing all those pewny little fish a favor because if I did not demand for them, they would not have been caught by the divers, and they will eventually wind up as other bigger fish's dinner, or snack. Heck, I think I will enjoy having a big white (stunted small white in this case) in my tank and watch my friends ooooooo, ahhhhhh.

This is a wonderful news to all of us at RDO, RC, and various other boards. We can now help boost economy by increase our spending. This way, we are happy, fishes are happy, LFS are happy, uncle Sam is happy, and everyone can all agree.

Thanks again for your wonderful expert's advice.

 

[AF Founder]

Is it not possible for you guys to engage in a discussion, where there is a legitimate difference of opinion, to refrain from sarcasm, character assination, hyperbole and stick to the issue?

 

[Anonymous]

Terry,
Are you of the opinion that in , say, a 1000 gallon tank, said yellow tang would not achieve its wild size? I am trying to fond out why you make that statement.

I must say, I do not agree with your stance so far in this issue, but agree with your last post. Unfortunately, I have been guilty of the same thing. I told somebody the other day that that reflects worse on the one talking than the one being talked about. I hope to avoid it in the future. [/b]

 

[wombat1]

I'd just like to mention to the original poster that two Centropyge angels can be housed in the same tank, even a relatively small one, WITH REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS. I kept a 2" caribbean pygmy in an 80 gallon for three months before adding a 4" coral beauty. A year together and they did fine. I would only advise this under two conditions 1) You get two species whose max size is very different and 2) you introduce the smaller species first. A good choice would be the caribbean pygmy or african flameback and a larger hardy one like the flame or coral beauty. I would never place a coral beauty and flame together because eventually they will be the same size and fighting might happen. Just my experience, I may have just been very lucky. Good luck with your tank.