Atlantic blue surgeon

[Green Thumb]

AnemicOak, your certainly not causing trouble by posting the words of a person to be considered very knowlegable on the subject. Actualy Im realy happy that the book is actualy rather recent and from a non biased source. Thank you very much for your input, your making my desision on getting one of these alot eazier.

One of the guys in the link that pnostko put up was also refferring to Scott Micheal as a reliable source.

Now I wont get a public canning from the newbie tang police.

THATS SCOTT MICHEAL FELLAS, Probably worth a read if your planning to tell someone they cant keep a cetain type of fish in the future, you know you are so get the book

THe Kole and the ABT are my 2 favourites. They have that stocky look to them which makes them more attractive to me than say a Yellow tang.

 

[Andrew]

I have a kole in my 75 and thats the only tang I would keep in a 75. ( besides a convict tang )

 

[Flanders]

Some of those tangs that he lists appear suitable for a 75... but I'd take it as a bare minimum which I'm sure is how it's presented in the book. Have you guys ever seen a full-grown powder blue tang? It would look ridiculous in a 75.

 

[pnosko]

I don't have this book. Is it a blanket statement, or does it go into more detail regarding age, size, other existing livestock?

 

[Green Thumb]

Flanders, I think you skimmed through a little too fast, Scott Micheal doesnt mention the powder blue as suitable for the 75.

 

[Andrew]

Powered blue need a good 125 gallons ( 6 foot tank )

Green Thumb- What tang are you going with?

 

[zfunk007]

Well i've been doing a little more research on the Atlantic Blue Tang since this thread was started. And I seem to be getting conflicting ideas about how big this fish gets. Here are some of the results:

-"Marine Fishes" by Scott W. Michael (this is the book I use at work) says they get to 9"

-"Reef Fish Identification, Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas" by Paul Humann (I've been using this book since I was 12 years old) says they usually only reach 10" but can reach 15"

According to this site: http://www.exotictropicals.com/encyclo/marine/tangs/caribblue.php They reach 13.5 inches.

And finally, in my experience from diving in South Florida since I was 10 years old I have NEVER seen an Atlantic Blue Tang that was 15 inches. I have seen massive schools of them and they all looked to be well under 10 inches long.

Interesting how all these different sites and books claim to know how long this fish gets. So I think the consesus should be that they "normally" reach around 9-10" and in extreme and rare cases can reach 15".

 

[Dino]

Doesn't have anything to do with this fish, but I find Scott W. Michaels book tends to suggest a little bit too small of tank for many of the fish. I have it right here in front of me and I see it suggests a "minimum aquarium size" of 20gal for a mandarin. And at least from the general consensus on here the real minimum tank size should be closer to 75-100gal so they have enough to eat.

 

[zfunk007]

On the contrary dinoman if you have a 20 gallon tank that has been setup for quite some time or a Mandarin that is eating regular fish food (it has been done) then you could keep one in a 20 gallon. I know people who have done it in a small tank and kept them for quite some time.

 

[Dino]

I knew someone was going to post that after I read my post. I'll rephrase it, for *most* people that don't have one eating prepared food or have a system for growing food the minimum tank should be much larger (aka the people most likely going to be looking for info on them in a pocket ID book). I totally agree that one can be kept in a nano, seen several quite helthy ones. Usually people that keep them in those sizes of tanks though are somehow providing them with an outside food source.

 

[Confooseld]

ya but it's really rare for a mandarin to be eating prepared food correct? so to say that a 20g is ok when the vast majority of mandarins do not eat prepared is irresponsible to say the very least

 

[AnemicOak]

Since you can buy pods from places like Inland Aquatics, why wouldn't a Mandarin be fine in a 20 dosed with them?

Never really researched Mandarin's so personally don't know much about them, but before saying someone with his experience is irresponsible you should at least know all that he says about them IMO.

Michael does say they'd be ok in a 20, but goes on to caution about how they need to be fed, etc. He also rates them as "...best left in the wild or ordered only by the experienced aquarist with the aptitude and willingness to devote the time and energy to maintaining them."


So what references do most of you use in choosing fish? I mean there are plenty of opinions on this forum, but I also know that if I ask enough I'll get all kinds of answers & half the time if you want someone to qualify their answer they seem to get offended. I don't trust a retailer to always give me a 100% straight answer as they have a vested interest in what I might buy (call me cynical). Besides Marine Fishes and his Reef Fishes series every reference I've seen seems pretty old.

 

[Dino]

Never really researched Mandarin's so personally don't know much about them, but before saying someone with his experience is irresponsible you should at least know all that he says about them IMO.

I assume this was kinda aimed at me. I never said his book/him were irresponsible, just said that the book tends to go a little small on the minimum tank size which it often does (IMO). Besides the tank size I find this book great! I use it a lot, especially when I'm planning a new tank. I also have the first book in his Reef Fishes (has any more come out?) and look through it quite a bit too, though it doesn't have many of the fishes I'm interested in.

 

[AnemicOak]

No dinoman it wasn't aimed at you at all. Feeling that his tank sizes are a little small is a perfectly valid opinion IMO. I'd like to understand why you think so though. Are you saying in general or on specific species? With the Mandarin's specifically he's very quick to point out the need for live foods, types of food (doesn't have to be pods), & his recommendation that most people shouldn't have one.

I posted in the first place because I found myself asking, if I can't trust the advice of someone with his kind of experience who's can I trust? Most folks here seem to have run a tank or two for 1-5 years. I'm not saying they don't have great experience, but this guy has over 25 years & has specifically focused on stuff like this.


My comment was more aimed at Confooseld, with no offence intended, who said it was "irresponsible to say the very least". I had a bit of a problem because someone who lists little experience is calling out a man with decades of it without knowing all that he says about them. He's of course entitled to his opinion as is everyone else.

To answer your other question, yes there are two more Reef Fishes books out.


Sorry Green Thumb, I seem to have taken your thread a bit off topic.

 

[Dino]

okie dookie, figure it was aimed at me sice I kinda started the tank size talk. Maybe its because I like to give my animals LOTS of space (I have a 4'x2'x4' cage for a 2ft. lizard) that I feel many books list "small" tank sizes. To answer your question kinda both, there's many that I feel are a little small but some more so than others. Just flipping through the pages here I see a violitans lionfish has a minimum tank size of 55gal. Again my IMO but I believe a 55 that is only 12" deep would be a little cramped for a fish that can grow to over 15"(even though lions tend not to move whole lot).

In the end we probably shouldn't be focusing on the minimum tank sizes anyway as we should be shooting for an optimum environment instead of a minimum one.

And to answer your second question, you just have to compile as much info as you can then arrive at your own conclusion. Instead of using a single book as all the info, instead just make it a piece of the puzzle.

Going to have to look for the other books, didn't think they had come out yet for some reason...

-Dino-

 

[pnosko]

Maybe its because I like to give my animals LOTS of space (I have a 4'x2'x4' cage for a 2ft. lizard)

I hate to break it to ya, but I don't think there's a single person in this hobby (even Mr. 4000) that can make such a claim.

 

[tsquad]

A sinlge chromis in Mr. 4000's tank would have LOTS of space.

 

[Dino]

I hate to break it to ya, but I don't think there's a single person in this hobby (even Mr. 4000) that can make such a claim.

Maybe I should have phrased it "more space"? I like to take what is recommened and at least double it (though even I have to break this once and a while). I do agree you can't give them natural space though . I was kinda aiming my comment at my "non-fishy" pets. I have a green anole pair in a 55gal and have thought about getting a 90 for them if it would fit where most people would put the same in a 10gal. Not natural size but certainly better.

 

[pnosko]

A sinlge chromis in Mr. 4000's tank would have LOTS of space.

Compared to an ocean?

 

[AnemicOak]

And to answer your second question, you just have to compile as much info as you can then arrive at your own conclusion. Instead of using a single book as all the info, instead just make it a piece of the puzzle.

Totally agree, I'd just like a good reference that is accurate to start things off. I'm still planning, but for each fish I check the book first to get an idea if it's even a feasible species, then I check Liveaquaria, Marine Depot Live, etc. Then check posts here on the forum. Problem is more times than not I end up mostly ignoring the forum & gravitating toward the book, because most of the posts will just say yes you can or no you can't, but don't answer my biggest question of why.