Misleading Behavior of On-Line Fish Vendors

[Stuart60611]

As much as I hate to say it, I suppose b'ness is b'ness, and in most cases, listing the correct tank size would likely cut sales by quite a bit. Just think of how many volitans are sold, and what the liklihood of all of them going home with keepers who have at least 100 gal setups.

However, as Jay mentioned, it's ultimately up to the buyer to perform their due diligence. Altho, one needs to have a reliable source doesn't one? Which brings us back to whose word to take. Personally, if I KNOW that someone is super familiar with keeping a given critter, I will defer to them, as they rarely have anything to gain from being even slightly misleading.

If you REALLY want to go nuts, take a stab at telling the masses that large species SH can't be kept in 10 gal tanx and fed live brine shrimp...it's hard to debunk old myths.

I think that sums it up pretty well. It is real unfortunate that in this hobby 'funny' business like this is allowed to come at the expense and heartache of well intended hobbyists, the animals they keep, and the reputation of the hobby as a whole. I think it is important for those who consider themselves advocates for the responsible practice of this hobby at least acknowledge what is going on here and make it known not to believe the minimum tank size information provided by on line vendors. I would like to think that opening peoples eyes to this rarely discussed and often completely ignored issue is something of value that can come out this contentious and so very lengthy discussion.

 

[Jeff]

Keep in mind that only a very small percentage of people order fish from these stores or do any research before buying a fish. It is my opinion that the vast majority (99%?) of people the aquarium hobby go to a store, see a fish and buy it thinking that it is small enough to fit in their tank or appropriate at the time of purchase.

Example #1: Customer has a basically empty 125 gallon saltwater tank and sees a 2" juvenile Sohol Tang at a great price. He buys it and it does fine...for a few months until it grows.

Example #2: Customer has a cycled 300 gallon rimless tank and sees a King Midas Blenny at his LFS. There is always room for another small fish in a 300 gallon, right? It gets spooked 2 weeks after purchase and jumps out of the tank.

Example #3: Customer has 3 year old reef aquarium loaded with corals. He purchases a Flame Angel from a friend that had the same fish in a mixed reef for a year. The angel does great...for a day or two and then eats every Purple Hornet polyp in the tank.

Example #4: Reef Central member is thinking about buying a new tang for his 220 gallon reef. He takes hours to read as much about tangs as possible on Reef Central and other reefkeeping message boards. He reads this thread and a few others. He sees a thread with a picture of a purple tang in a tank similar to his and orders the tang. A day after receiving it his yellow tang goes berserk and bullies it to death.

I can keep going but my point is, you can only make a dent here. The people new to the hobby do not even know who to believe if they take the time to do research.

If you guys really want to make a difference in this hobby and be noticed on RC then my suggestion is to take the upcoming tang guide and use it start making a dent. There will be a list of common tangs, appropriate tank sizes (gallons and length) and some pointers regarding swimming room, housing, etc...

 

[Sk8r]

And help us out in the newbie forum. One of the things hardest to describe to a newbie is how to read a fish's swimming pattern (or lack of ability to turn around) and understand that this fish is stressed. The best time to address this issue is when people are buying their tanks in the first place. I hear---"Oh, I'm getting a bigger tank," when the bigger tank they need turns out not to fit in the space they have; or when certain species are already demonstrating stress in the tank they're in. They need gentle, courteous advice, because they really don't know: their only source of interpersonal info is often the teen at the fish store, or an online friend who is also new: so be nice, and just say, "Sorry. That tank's too small. Read the sticky. What about a (species)?" What they need is just as often what they can do as what they can't.

 

[DFS]

I generally have nothing but good things to say about LA/DD (they have a lot of our money by now), but every once in a while one has to wonder...take a look at the binomial ID for this fuzzy dwarf:

http://www.liveaquaria.com/diversden/ItemDisplay.cfm?c=2733+3&ddid=104877

The correct binomial name is Dendrochirus brachypterus, NOT D. zebra. This appears on both fuzzies they have for sale, AND after Renee (seahorsedreams) has pointed it out to them via email when the first specimen went up for sale. We didn't even get an acknowledgement, nor has it been fixed.

Granted, ID-ing scorps can be a challenge, but lions are pretty EZ, and a zebra looks nothing like a fuzzy. Something like this seems like it should be simple enuff to change, not to mention messing it up a second time after they have been informed, UNLESS they have some info that is making them refer to the fish as Dendrochirus cf zebra that they don't mention, but it sure looks like a fuzzy to me...

Greg,
I appreciate you kind words about LiveAquaria and the Divers Den fishes. The error with the scientific name on these Fuzzy Dwarf Lionfish was a mistake and oversight on my part that I didn't catch. These fishes scientific name should now be accurate.
Cheers,

 

[DFS]

Volitan Lionfish Aquarium Size

Volitan Lionfish Aquarium Size

Greetings,

Providing accurate information is something that is very important to all of us at Drs. Foster and Smith. We feel strongly about animal care and their continued health and well-being on a long term basis.

The recommended minimum aquarium sizes listed for each species displayed on LiveAquaria.com are either from personal observations over the 30 plus years of handling and keeping aquarium fishes, or are from the recommendations of authorities in the aquarium hobby. One such authority is Scott W. Michael, a good friend of mine and an icon who has written and published countless books over the last 10 years on marine fishes. Scott recommends a minimum aquarium size of 55 gallons in both Reef Fishes Volume 1, pp. 506, and in Marine Fishes A Pocket Field Guide, pp. 77.

I would agree that a standard 50 gallon aquarium (36 x 18 x 18) can be a tight fit for a full grown 15" adult fish. For this reason I have updated all of the Lionfishes minimum aquarium sizes that are listed on LiveAquaria.com. The minimum aquarium size for Pterois volitans is now 120 gallons (48 x 24 x 24) which should provide adequate space for even the largest of these fishes.

Happy Fishkeeping, and wishing you all a safe and happy holiday season!

 

[Stuart60611]

Greetings,

Providing accurate information is something that is very important to all of us at Drs. Foster and Smith. We feel strongly about animal care and their continued health and well-being on a long term basis.

The recommended minimum aquarium sizes listed for each species displayed on LiveAquaria.com are either from personal observations over the 30 plus years of handling and keeping aquarium fishes, or are from the recommendations of authorities in the aquarium hobby. One such authority is Scott W. Michael, a good friend of mine and an icon who has written and published countless books over the last 10 years on marine fishes. Scott recommends a minimum aquarium size of 55 gallons in both Reef Fishes Volume 1, pp. 506, and in Marine Fishes A Pocket Field Guide, pp. 77.

I would agree that a standard 50 gallon aquarium (36 x 18 x 18) can be a tight fit for a full grown 15" adult fish. For this reason I have updated all of the Lionfishes minimum aquarium sizes that are listed on LiveAquaria.com. The minimum aquarium size for Pterois volitans is now 120 gallons (48 x 24 x 24) which should provide adequate space for even the largest of these fishes.

Happy Fishkeeping, and wishing you all a safe and happy holiday season!

Since I have spent quite a bit of time here arguing in a very negative tone about LA/DFS minimum tank size information, I think it is only appropriate to clearly recognize that the above decission is truly admirable and responsible. I strongly commend this decission. I do not think many companies in this industry would voluntarily make such a change, and this company's willingness to do so speaks volumes about its credability and continued leadership role in the hobby. I am very impressed.

Now, just to be clear, my big gripe and long rant about the volitan lionfish really was just a prime example. I want to point out that there are many other items of minimum tank size information for various species LA/DFS sells that I think need to be reviewed and modified in a similar fashion. I have listed just a few other prime examples on page 2, post 31 of this thread, but this list is in no way exhaustive or all inclusive.

For example, the 100 gallon minimum tank size for the full grown 15 inch very popular emperor angelfish (as well as some of the other large angelfish) is one which I think needs some immediate attention, among others (and also specifically the tangs Jeff mentions).

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/1/fish

I would respectfully ask that the company carefully review, examine, and adjust accordingly the minimimum tank size information for these fish, as well as the other species LA/DFS sells.

Again, this is a wonderful bit of progress and a very possitive change, especially around holiday time.

 

[Sk8r]

Which reinforces my opinion of Foster&Smith as one of the most positive commercial influences in this hobby. Their care to inform buyers of the requirements and compatibility of species they sell is exemplary, and they are a good source of organized information that users can understand. The information in such charts has to be based on *some* authority. It has come from a very good source; and if standards need to change due to further information and experience, a change by F&S will certainly influence opinion.

 

[JHemdal]

Stuart,

Congratulations, and kudos to Kevin for showing such class. At first I thought he had over-reacted, because my formula shows more along the lines of 85 gallons of open space for an adult lionfish. Then, in giving it some more thought, I agree that for a web site, 120 gallons is more reasonable because people keep over-looking the term OPEN space, so a 120 decorated tank is likely to have 85 gallons of open space anyway. (btw: I DO have confirmation of an adult lion in 85 gallons of open water as a long term, healthy captive, so that bears out my calculations).

More importantly for me was the issue with Scott Michael, and his 50 gallon minimum size for lionfish. He can't just go and change his book to reflect somebody's personal opinion, so is he then liable? What about my own writing? I checked my Advanced Marine Aquarium Techniques book, and saw that TFH includes a legal disclaimer for my information. Whew!
Then I got to thinking, what about my posts here on RC? I knew a person who once advised somebody to dose a medication, but he accidently wrote g/L instead of mg/L - killed a bunch of fish. Mistakes do happen when writing posts "on the fly" - just look at your own propensity to edit your previous posts!
I give a lot of fish disease advice here, what if I made an error and fish died as a result? What if I simply omiitted something? What if I was actually wrong? (shudder!) Very frightening! I thinking of adding the signature below whenever I give out information here....

Jay

 

[Stuart60611]

Stuart,

Congratulations, and kudos to Kevin for showing such class. At first I thought he had over-reacted, because my formula shows more along the lines of 85 gallons of open space for an adult lionfish. Then, in giving it some more thought, I agree that for a web site, 120 gallons is more reasonable because people keep over-looking the term OPEN space, so a 120 decorated tank is likely to have 85 gallons of open space anyway. (btw: I DO have confirmation of an adult lion in 85 gallons of open water as a long term, healthy captive, so that bears out my calculations).

More importantly for me was the issue with Scott Michael, and his 50 gallon minimum size for lionfish. He can't just go and change his book to reflect somebody's personal opinion, so is he then liable? What about my own writing? I checked my Advanced Marine Aquarium Techniques book, and saw that TFH includes a legal disclaimer for my information. Whew!
Then I got to thinking, what about my posts here on RC? I knew a person who once advised somebody to dose a medication, but he accidently wrote g/L instead of mg/L - killed a bunch of fish. Mistakes do happen when writing posts "on the fly" - just look at your own propensity to edit your previous posts!
I give a lot of fish disease advice here, what if I made an error and fish died as a result? What if I simply omiitted something? What if I was actually wrong? (shudder!) Very frightening! I thinking of adding the signature below whenever I give out information here....

Jay

Thanks and congratulations to you as well for your valuable input here. I do not want to go backwards and approach this from a legal perspective, but your advice and others in book form or posting here on RC is different than information provided by a seller of fish in terms of the legal implications. In summary, I would not be at all concerned from your perspective from a legal point of view.

 

[namxas]

Greg,
I appreciate you kind words about LiveAquaria and the Divers Den fishes. The error with the scientific name on these Fuzzy Dwarf Lionfish was a mistake and oversight on my part that I didn't catch. These fishes scientific name should now be accurate.
Cheers,

Hi Kevin,

I'm really glad you took this issue in the manner that it was intended, and as mentioned you are to be commended for your efforts to keep the info appearing on the DFS site up to date and accurate.

I have actually met and spoken with you in person (IIRC, it was at the "last" IMAC in Chicago), and recall thinking I was glad that DFS has someone like you on their staff. Someone at our booth (seahorse.org) had asked me to pop over and see if you needed help burping an angler, and we had a chat instead.

Jay,

I get what you mean about typos and whatnot, but everyone is human. No matter how many times something is reviewed, there is almost always SOMETHING that gets missed. Unfortunately, in today's litigation-happy society, there's always somebody who decides to cause trouble.

Along those lines, I'm really surprised that I've only come across one LFS in So. CA that actually had a notification/release form that had to be signed whenever they sold a venomous fish, and this was close to 20 years ago.

 

[michealprater]

Trying to quantify such a thing is basically insanity. It is a never ending debate, the care of the aquarium is more important than the size. While I believe the bigger the aquarium the better, but most aquarist prefer to ignore the fact that putting a fish in an aquarium is basically cruel considering where they came from. I also do not believe it is a good thing to drudge one of our best online vendors through a thread that basically challenges their knowledge. Thanks for the invite, but I prefer not to enter a debate that will not have a resolution that satisfies everyone. If you believe fish require a bigger aquarium, follow your own personal guidelines. I do what my experience has taught me.

 

[MedRed]

Did I not say that Live Aquaria would update its sizes if only someone contacted them? A lot of hot air was blown in this thread and I feel it was meant more the sake of dragging out the thread than affecting change. Thanks DFS... I knew you guys would do the responsible thing. If only this thread really had intentions to aid in that instead of harping. I never felt that Live Aquaria's sizes were meant for $$$. Mistakes were made. Once again... thanks LA for doing the responsible thing.

 

[ktweddle]

Did I not say that Live Aquaria would update its sizes if only someone contacted them? A lot of hot air was blown in this thread and I feel it was meant more the sake of dragging out the thread than affecting change. Thanks DFS... I knew you guys would do the responsible thing. If only this thread really had intentions to aid in that instead of harping. I never felt that Live Aquaria's sizes were meant for $$$. Mistakes were made. Once again... thanks LA for doing the responsible thing.

What I read here only re-enforced my respect for LA and what they do.

I was a very active member of an online fish community several years ago. Wrote some basic articles to help out new people and try and challenge some myths and attitudes prevalent in the hobby at that time. I think it is like a right of passage or transition in the hobby from clueless newb to enlightened newb. And these days I also realize there is a huge difference between Housing a fish and keeping a tank. I am glad there are active members with such specialized backgrounds, mixed with professionals from the industry, that I can tap into on this forum because after decades of keeping tanks I am still a newb looking to learn. :fish2:

 

[Stuart60611]

Did I not say that Live Aquaria would update its sizes if only someone contacted them? A lot of hot air was blown in this thread and I feel it was meant more the sake of dragging out the thread than affecting change. Thanks DFS... I knew you guys would do the responsible thing. If only this thread really had intentions to aid in that instead of harping. I never felt that Live Aquaria's sizes were meant for $$$. Mistakes were made. Once again... thanks LA for doing the responsible thing.

Although I applaud the decission of DFS/LA to re-examine and increase in most instances well beyond 100% the minimum tank size information for the lionfish it sells, I think it is very naive to think that somehow this thread opened the eyes of DFS\LA to some sort of inadvertant error that they were unaware of before this thread. As indicated in this thread, this issue has been raised before to DFS/LA to no avail, and the degree to which this information is undersized combined with the pervasiveness of the incorrect information in terms of number of species to which it applies does not suggest merely a "whoops". Appropriate minimum tank size information has been available for many marine fish for quite a few years long before this thread was started. The lionfish changes are just a drop in the bucket so to speak because there are many other groups of fish which are also in strong need of substantial increased revisions.

For example, the below article which appeared in Advanced Aquarist nearly 4 years ago and is considered by many to be the most authoritative artilce on keeping large marine angels clearly indicates that the minimum tank size information of DFS/LA for most full grown adult large angels is also grossly undersized, even when taking into account the subjectivity of this issue and the degree by which there may be a disagreement as to what is appropriate:

As the title of this article indicates, by home aquarium standards these are large fish. This is a subjective term of course, and adult size varies from 6" to 20" or so in the wild depending on species. While adult size in the wild doesn't necessarily translate into size attained in the home aquarium under average conditions (more on this below) you can easily choose a species that will be very at home in your 80 gallon, or very, VERY cramped in a 200 gallon tank if you're not careful. So the first thing you need to determine is what species your tank will accommodate in the real estate department. Given the diversity of the family, and the varying growth rates and sizes of various species, coupled with conditions that vary greatly from one living room to the next, generalizations are difficult at best here. To further complicate this matter, some angels will attain a size close to their wild adult maximum under the right conditions, while others almost never reach full size in most living room tanks, even relatively large ones. As a general rule, and I stress that this is a generalization, most larger species can be expected to eventually attain half to three quarters of their maximum wild adult size under very favorable conditions. Most of the time, growth also slows as size increases, and appears to all but stop at various sizes depending on species and conditions at hand. This is due to stunting, and is a problem not dealt with in most publications with regards to this family.

The fact that minimum tank size is often grossly understated for most species in some trusted sources doesn't help matters either. I will stress the previous point by saying that some very popular, current and often-referenced material is preposterously off the mark with regard to tank requirements for these fish, including just about every reference you'll find on fish retailer websites. In short, the tank sizes given insure a stressed and possibly stunted animal, and therefore the accompanying health issues and shorter life span that comes along with it. A German Shepard will live in a 10' by10' room for years, and he might look just fine for the most part during that time, but would you subject the animal to this? I'm betting you wouldn't. The conditions many keepers subject their fish to, often from the guidance of local fish stores, books, or fellow keepers posting in online forums is tantamount to exactly this.

What happens when you keep an angel in a tank that is too small? In short, you induce psychological and physical stress that has profound effects on the growth, color, immune response, and life span of the fish. In a physiological sense, cramped surrounding encourages stunting, which in extreme cases affects muscle and organ development, and leads to a dead fish well before it's lifespan is reached. Minimally, a tank that is too small prohibits these fish from reaching their full majesty not only with regard to size, but some species will not attain full adult coloration, or the adult colors will be lackluster compared to wild specimens. (Diet plays into this too, more on that later).

It's unfortunate that many aquarists do not appreciate the psychological stress that cramped surroundings create. Some species adapt to a confined environment with no apparent ill effects, at least not in the first years of life. Angels do not fall into this category however. Aside from the buildup of growth limiting substances that cramped surroundings encourage, psychological stress stunts growth in a huge way as well. More importantly in the short term -it breaks down the immune response, which will invariably lead to disease. While often we see disease almost immediately due to this stress, these effects are not always apparent at first, and make take weeks, months or even years to become evident, again depending on species and circumstances. A tank might be too small because of the size, or eventual size of the angel, or it might be too small because of tank mates that you've chosen to keep with your angel. Forcing an angel to cohabitate with aggressive species, especially without allowing enough room for the angel to escape the aggressor's attentions is a recipe for trouble. In any case, the results will be the same for the angelfish eventually. Further, what would be an acceptable sized tank for a 10" trigger is not necessarily an acceptably sized tank for a 10" angelfish. This is simply because the Pomacanthids are generally more prone to the psychological stress that comes with going from the infinite ocean to the confines of a glass box. Remember, an angelfish in the wild often maintains a territory as large as the lot that your house is sitting on! In short, they need more physical space than you're probably used to providing, and certainly more than most wishful thinking in current literature indicates.

So what does all of this mean in actual practice? While some of the Chaetedontoplus species will live long term in quarters as small as 80 gallons, most Holocanthus and Pomacanthus species require at least a 250 to 300 gallon tank to live a proper life span in optimum health. If this sounds ridiculous, think of the size difference between a tennis court and an 8' aquarium. I think asking the fish to adapt to the 300 gallon tank is quit enough, don't you?

Let's look at a popular, easily obtained species - the Koran Angelfish, Pomacanthus semicirculatus. This species attains a maximum adult size of 15" or so in the wild. Now, most literature will tell you that you need anywhere from a 100 to 135 gallon tank as a minimum to maintain this species. Not so fellow fish keepers! Will a juvenile Koran live in a 135-gallon tank for quite some time? He sure will. Will he live for 20 years, reach his full adult size and thrive? Most definitely not - he'll most likely become stunted and eventually, sick. A more appropriate long term home for this species would be in the 200-gallon range, or even better, 300 gallons. Having said this, this is one of the species that will suffer least from such treatment. Other species that are often lumped into the "minimum 135 gallon tank" category will suffer to a greater extent, both in ways that are, and are not readily apparent, and often simply wither and die for reasons typically unbeknownst to the keeper. To see the Emperor or Queen angel sited as needing such meager quarters is just ridiculous. An adult Queen angel, by the time fin trailers are measured pushes 2 feet, a 135-gallon tank is typically 18" wide! The Annularis Angel pushes a foot in length, yet many would have you house it in a 100 or 120 gallon. The Emperor Angel attains almost 18" - again, the idea of a 135-gallon tank is just silly.

The justification that the fish will not attain adult size in captivity, and therefore not require such a large tank is erroneous and indicative of poor husbandry philosophy. The health of the fish kept under such methodology will suffer sooner or later. There are fish that do not suffer as greatly from such an approach (within reason) such as the triggerfish, or many grouper species. While a genus or species being generally forgiving in this regard should not be interpreted as license to cramp them into tight quarters, the Pomacanthids offer no such level of forgiveness. They eventually and invariably show faded color, and/or withering health, and begin a long, (or not so long) downward spiral. If that all sounds discouraging, no worries, the good news is that you can split the difference between a small inland sea in your living room, and a tank that is too small to allow for a long and healthy life for your angelfish. The bottom line here is that you will have greater success the more room you provide from the get-go, even beyond the sizes I'm about to list. This means that despite it's small size, a 3" juvenile Queen angel will do much better in the long run starting out in a 180 gallon tank than it will an 80 gallon tank, even though from a space perspective, 80 gallons would seem large enough for the time being, and certainly would be for a 3" Hawkfish. Remember, we're concerned just as much about the psychological effect of the environment at this point, and by extension we are managing the stress level, immune response, growth rate and color of our specimen. When upgrading to something larger, do so before he's starting to look too small for the 180 gallon, say around 6" or so. To reiterate, artificially stunting these fish by keeping them in inadequate quarters is not appropriate husbandry practice, despite how common this practice is, whether it be from ignorance, or lack of space, or limited finances. While the above statement moves a majority of aquarists out of the realm of being able to keep these fish, considering the frequency with which these fish die under the care of well meaning but ill-equipped hobbyists - I think this is justified. This family is without a doubt for advanced keepers in multiple respects. Just because a fish is collected and imported, does not mean it's appropriate for your living room. The aquarist must be, above all things, conscious of the well being of the animals he/she keeps.

As stated before, these fish generally do not grow quickly, even under the best of circumstances, but some species will buck this slow growth tendency, even in less than adequate surroundings, such as Pomacanthus paru, the French Angelfish. This species will not only grow large, it will do it rather quickly, often going from the size of a half dollar to the size of a dinner plate in a year. While I haven't personally seen any other species grow quite this quickly, that doesn't mean it's not possible. By large though, fish belonging to this family are relatively slow growers in captivity when provided with typical accommodations, and for the most part they will not reach full adult size in tanks that are available or affordable to most hobbyists.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/1/fish

I am hopeful that DFS/LA will truly honor its commitment in its above own words to "[p]rovid[e] accurate information" to hobbyists and not limit this correction to just lionfish which are only a small portion of the fish the company sells to which this inappropriate minimum tank size information issue relates.

 

[LisaD]

I also think LA gives smallish tank sizes for the larger fishes. (IMO they are pretty much spot on with the smaller fishes.) But they do give accurate adult sizes, and almost always correctly ID the fish (even seahorses and anglers, which are rarely correctly ID'd). This is very useful for doing research on the species. LA is also not out of line in their minimum tank size recommendations with Scott Michael, a respected author (his minimum tank sizes are my one and only gripe with him). I'm a big fan (and customer of) Kevin Cohen and LA Diver's Den. So they aren't perfect, but IMO they are pretty darn close.

Caveat emptor applies. We have so much information available to us now, as hobbyists, we really do need to be responsible for researching our animal purchases. When I got my start in the hobby, in the 70s, there wasn't a lot of accurate information anywhere, there weren't any experienced hobbyists I could talk to, there wasn't any internet, and the tanks had metal rims and slate bottoms! Now, if you know how to find it, you have great, largely free, information at your fingertips.

And my rule with any vendor, no matter how reputable, is to always verify. Vendors ultimately are looking for the sale - get your information from numerous experienced hobbyists and reputable author/experts in the hobby. When you have the best information you can obtain, make your best decision. And give back to the hobby by sharing your experience, including what you learned from your mistakes. Collective experience does much to advance our hobby.

 

[Stuart60611]

I also think LA gives smallish tank sizes for the larger fishes. (IMO they are pretty much spot on with the smaller fishes.) But they do give accurate adult sizes, and almost always correctly ID the fish (even seahorses and anglers, which are rarely correctly ID'd). This is very useful for doing research on the species. LA is also not out of line in their minimum tank size recommendations with Scott Michael, a respected author (his minimum tank sizes are my one and only gripe with him).

Lisa:

With respect to the other unquoted portion of your post, fair point of view, and g-d knows no one wants to hear me yet again describe mine.

I do, however, want to respond to the quoted portion of your post. Yours and everyone else's propensity to do research at the LA website is a direct result of DFS/LA's promotion of itself and affirmative assumption of the role as a leading pet educator. I think this also goes to Jeff's post above because the minimum tank size information LA posts is not only relied upon by hobbyists who purchase fish from the company, but many others (the number of which may exceed the number of people who actually buy fish from the company) who never purchase fish from the company and instead rely on the company as a leading pet educator. I would add that the minimum tanks size information that I have challenged, as you point out, is mixed in with what otherwise is accurate information making it very difficult to sort out the accurate from the inaccurate information.

Finally, when I as well as another person who posted here called LA, customer service explained to us that Scott Michael provides input into the company's minimum tank size information, and Mr. Kohen in his above post describes Mr. Michael as a friend and cites his publications. I wonder if there is any financial or business relationship between Scott Michael and LA which may explain the oddness that they both provide very good husbandry information other than minimum tank size with respect to certain similar groups and species of fish.

 

[GreshamH]

many of us in the industry are friends which is not uncommon at all. Equating that to there some how being some underhandedness or financial dealings is really stretching it though I am afraid. I'm friends with several of our competitors in fact , as is Kevin :lol: Scott is not employed, nor does he have any financial steak in DFS. AS one of the leading hobby writers in the realm of marine fish, Kevin has great respect for Scott as do I.

FWIW the company I work for has zero dealings with DFS yet DFS has mentioned our products on occasion in their blog as Kevin found them to be effective for his needs.

 

[Stuart60611]

many of us in the industry are friends which is not uncommon at all. Equating that to there some how being some underhandedness or financial dealings is really stretching it though I am afraid. I'm friends with several of our competitors in fact , as is Kevin :lol: Scott is not employed, nor does he have any financial steak in DFS. AS one of the leading hobby writers in the realm of marine fish, Kevin has great respect for Scott as do I.

FWIW the company I work for has zero dealings with DFS yet DFS has mentioned our products on occasion in their blog as Kevin found them to be effective for his needs.

Fair enough, and I am not accusing anyone of underhandedness in this regard. It was just something I was wondering.

 

[DoubleM 10]

well this thread actually got somewhere? Well i feel sorry for LA because they felt that since their name was used so much during this thread that they had to do something about it. This thread was directed at LA wether it was or not. So now they had to do something about it to make all the people who had an OPINION and said something happy.
IMO LA should not have had to do anything because we have OPINION.
They have/had research why they gave the fish they gave the tank sizes they got.

LA it is very honorable what you did. Thank you

 

[LisaD]

LA is doing the right thing in monitoring hobby boards. It is their responsiveness to their customers and attention to service that keeps their business successful.

A few years ago, I actually wrote a memo to the president of my company (not a competitor of LA) about how we should be more like them in terms of customer service. My recommendations were ignored, and I moved on a few years ago. My point is that I think LA is an excellent company doing a difficult job. Shipping many small packages of highly perishable materials to often not very well informed customers is a huge challenge.

For the most part, they have the communication with customers, and fish information right. Tank size is always going to be a big debate. And while I appreciate a vendor that is educating folks, I still say the smart thing to do is verify.

BTW, I believe EVERYTHING Scott Michael writes, except tank size. He is awesome! I have kept anglers, and his frogfish chapter in Reef Fishes volume 1 is the best single source of information I have ever found. His evaluation of moray eels temperament and size in the same book is also spot on. I don't know him personally, but I don't see any signs of industry collusion. I do know Kevin Cohen, and have a lot of respect for him.