Misleading Behavior of On-Line Fish Vendors

[JHemdal]

It isn't "buyer beware" that I would advocate for, but rather "buyer be aware".

Jay

 

[Stuart60611]

It isn't "buyer beware" that I would advocate for, but rather "buyer be aware".

Jay

... which, indeed, is one of the primary purposes of my starting this thread.

 

[Stuart60611]

A bit of other useful information on this topic from LA. Below is what you will see if you click on the minimum tank size information for a given fish LA sells:

<TABLE class=blackText><TBODY><TR><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 14px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Minimum Tank Size: </TD></TR><TR><TD>The smallest aquarium that we recommend for housing this species of fish or invertebrate; this takes into account its size at maturity, temperament, swimming habits, as well as food and water requirements. Many species in their juvenile state can be kept in a smaller aquarium, but we only recommend this as temporary holding or housing in a quarantine aquarium.

http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/refinement_definition.cfm?rid=1


To me, this situation is even worse. According to LA, their minimum tank size informatoin is based on the adult size of the fish, its temperament, and swimming habits. The minimum tank size information of LA for the fish described above now seem even more absurd, especially when they state that these fish can even be kept in smaller tanks when young.

Moreover, the below is what you will see if you click on the maximum size information for a given fish LA sells:


<TABLE class=blackText><TBODY><TR><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 14px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Max. Size: </TD></TR><TR><TD>Displays the maximum size the individual species will attain in the average home aquarium. This will vary depending on the size of the aquarium, the quantity and size of other tank mates, the diet that the fish is provided, water conditions and the amount of free-swimming room within the aquarium. We highly recommend using this maximum size when planning the inhabitants for your aquarium so you do not run into an overstocked aquarium in the future.

http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/refinement_definition.cfm?rid=10

So following LA's recommendation on using maximum size of the fish when making stocking decissions, how does a 15 inch (max size listed by LA) volitan lionfish fit into a standard 48 1/4"L x 12 3/4"W x 20"H 50 gallon aquarium?











</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>






</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[JHemdal]

Stuart,
I've heard you cite the lionfish example a number of times, so for grins, I ran it through my swimming space calculator, and for a single fish, in an open 48" x 18" 50 gallon tank, and an estimated adult size of 15", it isn't good, but it doesn't work out nearly as bad as you would portray:

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=3048

It comes out to be a 1:4.4 ratio. You can't have any rock in the tank, and no other fish, but it CAN work as an absolute minimum. Would I suggest it? No - but it can be done without causing acute mortality in the fish. The problem is that it is still a bit subjective to categorize lionfish as either sedentary or a maneuverable swimmer (my category 1 or 2). Personally, I would categorize lionfish in 2, (and thus need a 1:5 ratio) but if LA thinks they are more sedentary, then the numbers actually work.

So - can you refute this? Can you say that a fish in this scenario will outright die from that size tank? If so, by what mechanism and in how much time? Will the fish just be unhappy? If so, how do you measure this? Regarding the problem of hepatic lipidosis in this species - do you think the fish will even live long enough in the hands of a typical home aquarist to grow too large?


Jay

p.s. - I have never purchased a fish from LA, so I'm not defending them per-se, its just that I want to see some more objective measures be used when determining tank sizes for fish.... "I feel it is too small of a tank" just doesn't cut it any longer.

 

[Stuart60611]

Stuart,
I've heard you cite the lionfish example a number of times, so for grins, I ran it through my swimming space calculator, and for a single fish, in an open 48" x 18" 50 gallon tank, and an estimated adult size of 15", it isn't good, but it doesn't work out nearly as bad as you would portray:

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=3048

It comes out to be a 1:4.4 ratio. You can't have any rock in the tank, and no other fish, but it CAN work as an absolute minimum. Would I suggest it? No - but it can be done without causing acute mortality in the fish. The problem is that it is still a bit subjective to categorize lionfish as either sedentary or a maneuverable swimmer (my category 1 or 2). Personally, I would categorize lionfish in 2, (and thus need a 1:5 ratio) but if LA thinks they are more sedentary, then the numbers actually work.

So - can you refute this? Can you say that a fish in this scenario will outright die from that size tank? If so, by what mechanism and in how much time? Will the fish just be unhappy? If so, how do you measure this? Regarding the problem of hepatic lipidosis in this species - do you think the fish will even live long enough in the hands of a typical home aquarist to grow too large?


Jay

p.s. - I have never purchased a fish from LA, so I'm not defending them per-se, its just that I want to see some more objective measures be used when determining tank sizes for fish.... "I feel it is too small of a tank" just doesn't cut it any longer.

Jay,

I appreciate your comments about proof, and they are well-taken. I guess if you play wih the tank dimensions you can come up with a way to at least make the fish fit within the aquarium. But using standard tank dimensions (which most hobbyists would reasonably believe appropriate based on the description LA provides indicating no special dimensions are required), how can a fish that is 15 inches survive in a tank only 12 3/4 inches wide. Lionfish, although more sedentary than other fish, do move on occassion. My view that a 50 gallon standard tank is too small for a volitan is not a mere feeling or guess when using standard tank dimensions. I believe it is an undeniable fact. If a specially shaped 50 gallon tank was necessary for a volitan, don't you think LA should indicate such to the consumer? Is it not misleading to not indicate such?

Edit:

Jay,

I do not think even your example can work for a volitan. A 50 gallon aquarium that is 48Lx 18W will be only 13 inches tall. How can a 15 inch tall fish live in a 13 inch tall tank?

 

[kduen]

First the fish cant be 15 inches long 15 inches high and 15 incehs wide so your theory is one of a two year old throwing a tempor tantrum. Seccond you could twist and contort any reasonable claim that anybodoy else says just because your mind is made up and you are not willing to listen. So when your done with your tantrum maybe it's time for a time out.

 

[Stuart60611]

First the fish cant be 15 inches long 15 inches high and 15 incehs wide so your theory is one of a two year old throwing a tempor tantrum. Seccond you could twist and contort any reasonable claim that anybodoy else says just because your mind is made up and you are not willing to listen. So when your done with your tantrum maybe it's time for a time out.

Now that is a mature response and completely unfounded. If you look at my very last post in the thread you will see that I expresslly lead the post by stating "I appreciate your comments about proof, and they are well-taken." How is that not listening to what others are stating and not considering such comments? If anything, your personal attack upon me is childish and actually against the rules of RC. You don't see me feeling the need to attack anyone here personally in order to make my point. I guess when you cannot articulate an appropriate substantive response to a position taken all you are left with is to attack the otherside on a personal level. I will take the mature road and not respond in kind.

On a substantive level, I think that a volitan's spines will go out in any direction up to I believe 15 inches from the base of the fish. That is how the fish is 15 inches tall and long. Someone with more lionfish knowledge should correct me if I am wrong.

 

[kduen]

i wasn't attacking just stating what "seemed" like someone who no matter how much anyone says something different then your opinion is wrong. example: I do not think even your example can work for a volitan. A 50 gallon aquarium that is 48Lx 18W will be only 13 inches tall. How can a 15 inch tall fish live in a 13 inch tall tank?

 

[Stuart60611]

i wasn't attacking just stating what "seemed" like someone who no matter how much anyone says something different then your opinion is wrong. example: I do not think even your example can work for a volitan. A 50 gallon aquarium that is 48Lx 18W will be only 13 inches tall. How can a 15 inch tall fish live in a 13 inch tall tank?

I don't know how not telling someone that they are acting like a two year old child and having a temper tantrum and suggesting that the person take a time out simply for not agreeing with another person's point of view can be considered anything other than a personal attack. The example you just made did not involve any comments from me directed at Jay on a personal level, but it instead was a very important substantive point concerning how this size fish could not even fit in a tank only 13 inches tall which I did not consider at first (hence the edit) and which I thought Jay may have not accounted for either since he made no mention about the tank height he suggested.

I am more than willing to accept many other views and certainly am willing to accept that the views I have taken in this thread may be out of line. What is clear, however, is your comments are more than merely inappropriate and rise to the level of being unnecessarily rude and personally insulting. If you do not have anything meaningful to contribute to this discussion other than personal attacks, then, perhaps, it is best to contribute nothing at all.

Now, let's get back to our regularly scheduled programing.

 

[ackee]

Actually, a standard 50 gal. tank has interior dimensions of approximately 35 X17x20 inches. You could easily keep a full grown lionfish, perhaps two, in such an aquarium if you restrain it securely by limiting all but the smallest motion, as is done in commercially designed aquatic troughs or cages, fold the extended fins close to the body, employ an advanced toxin and metabolite scrubbing filter, run oxygenated water over the gills, and force feed pellets. Problem solved. Where in the ads does it say you have to let the fish swim around?

 

[Stuart60611]

Actually, a standard 50 gal. tank has interior dimensions of approximately 35 X17x20 inches. You could easily keep a full grown lionfish, perhaps two, in such an aquarium if you restrain it securely by limiting all but the smallest motion, as is done in commercially designed aquatic troughs or cages, fold the extended fins close to the body, employ an advanced toxin and metabolite scrubbing filter, run oxygenated water over the gills, and force feed pellets. Problem solved. Where in the ads does it say you have to let the fish swim around?

You know, you are right (see, I can admit when I am wrong). It actually is 36x18x18 (see below). I must have been looking at another version of a 50 gallon when I made the above post. I don't see how this changes much. I still submit that you cannot keep volitan with so little width and height in the tank. Merely 3 inches grace in either direction does not provide hardly any room to move.

As to the rest of your comments, obviously you are just joking because I suspect a new hobbyist may not be up to to the task of employing an "advanced toxin". :lolspin:

http://www.aqueonproducts.com/products/standard-aquariums.htm

 

[ackee]

The older original 50s were 20 inches high. Like candy bars, standard sizes have shrunk slightly over the years. More importantly, the dimensions you quote are EXTERIOR dimensions. I wrote "interior" dimensions. Next time use a ruler, not a publication. In your business, you should know better. Read carefully.

I also specified that the fins be folded as part of the restraining process. A sentence to which you make reference has a compound descriptive adjective: "a toxin and metabolite (etc)". One filter removing two substances. Like an argumentative and untruthful client. Two qualities in one person. 'Cleans and deodorizes your laundry' One detergent doing more than one thing. Fairly clear English, I think.

In any case, a 'toxic filter" is an oxymoron. Not that such things do not exist.

 

[Stuart60611]

The older original 50s were 20 inches high. Like candy bars, standard sizes have shrunk slightly over the years. More importantly, the dimensions you quote are EXTERIOR dimensions. I wrote "interior" dimensions. Next time use a ruler, not a publication. In your business, you should know better. Read carefully.

I also specified that the fins be folded as part of the restraining process. A sentence to which you make reference has a compound descriptive adjective: "a toxin and metabolite (etc)". One filter removing two substances. Like an argumentative and untruthful client. Two qualities in one person. 'Cleans and deodorizes your laundry' One detergent doing more than one thing. Fairly clear English, I think.

In any case, a 'toxic filter" is an oxymoron. Not that such things do not exist.

Well, I read the link I posted carefully, and it does not indicate whether the dimensions are internal or external. Maybe I missed something in the link, but I did not see any mention of this. I do not own a 50 gallon tank so having a ruler to measure such a tank would not help, and I have no choice but to rely on written material for this information. Thanks for the advice to read carefully and on how to practice my profession, but I think I have those bases covered. As to the rest of your comments, I do not even know how to respond.

 

[GreshamH]

It's fairly common knowledge that aquarium manufacturers use OD dimensions to measure tanks. Most if not all are what they say they are. Hey, another lawsuit for you :lol:

 

[Stuart60611]

It's fairly common knowledge that aquarium manufacturers use OD dimensions to measure tanks. Most if not all are what they say they are. Hey, another lawsuit for you :lol:

You learn something new every day, and I better get started on drafting some pleadings.:lol2:

 

[ackee]

The last post, beyond the section that dealt with tank measurements, was so obviously meant as sardonic satire, I am amazed that you do not know how to respond. Did you think I was seriously suggesting the encasement of fish in mechanical cocoons? Do you take things that literally? Have you seen the film 'The Rain Man"?

 

[Stuart60611]

The last post, beyond the section that dealt with tank measurements, was so obviously meant as sardonic satire, I am amazed that you do not know how to respond. Did you think I was seriously suggesting the encasement of fish in mechanical cocoons? Do you take things that literally? Have you seen the film 'The Rain Man"?

It was so obvious that apparently I did not understand it. I guess my radar for picking up "sardonic satire" is a bit rusty. Have you seen the film, "Windtalkers" or maybe "Forest Gump"? Without knowing the speaker or having the aid of voice inflection or body language, sarchasm can be sometimes a bit difficult to detect in merely the printed word. Anyway, probably best to stay on the topic at hand.

 

[ackee]

I wonder if, when you read ( every educated person I've ever met has read this essay in basic required literature classes) Jonathan Swift's 'Modest Proposal' you were filled with moral outrage and attempted to contact him, even though he's been dead for two centuries. In 'Modest Proposal', Swift suggests in a most serious and well reasoned manner that instead of having impoverished Irish children starve to death, a system be devised through which they be raised in well nourished comfort, and killed for their meat around the age of 10. Without having seen Swift, somehow every reader knows immediately that this is satire. Swift was commenting on the cruelty of the 18th century British government, and its willingness to allow children to perish in agony. With similar intent, but in a far less skillful and unavoidably brief manner, my suggestion that big fishes be placed by aquarists in restraints and force fed pellets in order to house them in small containers was meant as satire. I thought that was obvious, but clearly I was wrong.

I apologize for any misunderstanding, and have no doubt that the fault lies in my poor writing skills and not in any problems with sophisticated reading and interpretive skills on your part. I mentioned the Rain Man film because the central character has a form of autism that, among other things, prevents him from understanding things like irony and satire. Have you read George Orwell's 'Animal Farm'? In Animal Farm Orwell writes "Everyone is equal. Some are more equal than others." If you ever read this short, entertaining book, let me warn you that Orwell was fully aware of the comment's inner contradiction. It was meant as political satire. When reading his text you do not get to observe Orwell, so I thought it might be useful to reveal his intent.

 

[Stuart60611]

I wonder if, when you read ( every educated person I've ever met has read this essay in basic required literature classes) Jonathan Swift's 'Modest Proposal' you were filled with moral outrage and attempted to contact him, even though he's been dead for two centuries. In 'Modest Proposal', Swift suggests in a most serious and well reasoned manner that instead of having impoverished Irish children starve to death, a system be devised through which they be raised in well nourished comfort, and killed for their meat around the age of 10. Without having seen Swift, somehow every reader knows immediately that this is satire. Swift was commenting on the cruelty of the 18th century British government, and its willingness to allow children to perish in agony. With similar intent, but in a far less skillful and unavoidably brief manner, my suggestion that big fishes be placed by aquarists in restraints and force fed pellets in order to house them in small containers was meant as satire. I thought that was obvious, but clearly I was wrong.

I apologize for any misunderstanding, and have no doubt that the fault lies in my poor writing skills and not in any problems with sophisticated reading and interpretive skills on your part. I mentioned the Rain Man film because the central character has a form of autism that, among other things, prevents him from understanding things like irony and satire. Have you read George Orwell's 'Animal Farm'? In Animal Farm Orwell writes "Everyone is equal. Some are more equal than others." If you ever read this short, entertaining book, let me warn you that Orwell was fully aware of the comment's inner contradiction. It was meant as political satire. When reading his text you do not get to observe Orwell, so I thought it might be useful to reveal his intent.

Thanks, and appology accepted, although unnecessary. My skin is not particularlly thin, and nothing you stated offended me to my core. Now, can we PLEASE refrain from these off-topic posts. If you wish to discuss literature, movies, sardonic satire, or anything else other than the topic of this thread, I respectfully ask that you do so in your own thread and not in mine. I want to keep this thread focussed on the important issue for which it was started. We have now nearly taken up a page of posts concerning off-topic issues. No need to respond to this post with another off-topic comment.

 

[ackee]

The problem is that I was discussing the topic. The reduction to absurdity method I used was opaque to you, so I merely tried to clear things up so that you could see that I was in fundamental agreement with your concerns about severe overcrowding, undersized aquaria, and the inaccurate information peddled by those who profit thereby.

No need to reply to this, Stu.