EricTheRed
No, I'm not a communist..
I'm looking to get everyone's opinion about a topic of many heated arguements...putting a fish in a tank that is too small for them.
But how do you define what size tank a fish should be kept? There is the obvious situation of a big fish in a small tank, and that is obviously not good nor is it what I'm referring to. I'm talking about putting a small fish in an ample size tank but the fish has the ability to outgrow the tank.
9 years ago when I started keeping sw fish my LFS sold me fish that they knew would eventually outgrow my tank. I knew it and they knew. The plan was always to trade back the fish before they grew too big for my tank and replace them with smaller fish.
As an example, I had a 4" Blue Tang in a 90G tank. Now, I realize that this fish can grow up to 12" and this is why a 180G tank is recommended for this fish. (per Liveaquaria) My train of thought was this...if a 12" Blue Tang should be in a 180G tank, then why wouldn't a 6" one be just as happy in a 90G tank? After all, it's half the fish in half the tank. This logic was shared with me by my LFS when I first got into the hobby and personally, it made (makes) sense to me. The plan was to trade in the Blue before he hit 6". (Unfortunately those were the days before I learned the importance of a QT and he passed from ich
)
So here's the question...Do you think it is acceptable (within reason) to keep a fish in a tank if the tank is smaller than the recommended tank size for the maximum potential size of the fish, assuming that you will relocate the fish to a larger tank before it outgrows your tank?
But how do you define what size tank a fish should be kept? There is the obvious situation of a big fish in a small tank, and that is obviously not good nor is it what I'm referring to. I'm talking about putting a small fish in an ample size tank but the fish has the ability to outgrow the tank.
9 years ago when I started keeping sw fish my LFS sold me fish that they knew would eventually outgrow my tank. I knew it and they knew. The plan was always to trade back the fish before they grew too big for my tank and replace them with smaller fish.
As an example, I had a 4" Blue Tang in a 90G tank. Now, I realize that this fish can grow up to 12" and this is why a 180G tank is recommended for this fish. (per Liveaquaria) My train of thought was this...if a 12" Blue Tang should be in a 180G tank, then why wouldn't a 6" one be just as happy in a 90G tank? After all, it's half the fish in half the tank. This logic was shared with me by my LFS when I first got into the hobby and personally, it made (makes) sense to me. The plan was to trade in the Blue before he hit 6". (Unfortunately those were the days before I learned the importance of a QT and he passed from ich
)So here's the question...Do you think it is acceptable (within reason) to keep a fish in a tank if the tank is smaller than the recommended tank size for the maximum potential size of the fish, assuming that you will relocate the fish to a larger tank before it outgrows your tank?
