Misleading Behavior of On-Line Fish Vendors

[Sk8r]

Here at Reef Central, we believe that dialogs between participants should be conducted in a friendly and helpful manner. If you disagree with a posting, please express yourself in a way that is conducive to further constructive dialog. Conversely, when you post on any given subject, you must be willing to accept constructive criticism without posting a hostile or inflammatory response. Personal attacks of any kind will not be tolerated. Please work to insure that Reef Central remains a friendly and flame free site where everyone, especially newcomers, can feel free to post questions without fear of being unfairly criticized. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[ahud]

I think the real problem stems from using a unit of measure that has absolutely no significant value in terms of fish size in our hobby. I can make no sense of that fact that X amount of gallons is appropriate for a fish when really the dimensions of the tank are far more important. Why not list tank requirements as dimensions?

The only thing gallons could impact is water quality.

 

[Stuart60611]

I think the real problem stems from using a unit of measure that has absolutely no significant value in terms of fish size in our hobby. I can make no sense of that fact that X amount of gallons is appropriate for a fish when really the dimensions of the tank are far more important. Why not list tank requirements as dimensions?

The only thing gallons could impact is water quality.

I completely agree, and this would solve the issue that Jay and I were discussing about a volitan in terms of whether a 50 gallon standard, tall, or long could be appropriate for this fish. If dimensions were listed both for a juvenile and a adult fish with some guidance about what size, number and behavorial traits of other fish which could typically be kept in such dimensions with the given fish then the issue could be resolved. Great idea, and I think that this is a simple but very effective solution.

Edit:

Consistent with Jay's comments, some information should also be provided about how much of the dimensions suggested can be taken up by rock work or decorations. Also, larger dimensions could be suggested for more active fish than more sedentary fish. Dimensions could also be provided for keeping the fish alone vs. with a certain number, size, and type of tankmates as I describe above. This really seems like a workable framework to get accurate information out to the consumer. Moreover, I agree that it is real smart business to do so as Seahorsedreams suggested in her post one page back. A company that provided this information could market itself as a more reputable and knowlegeable seller which consumers should choose to do business with as opposed to companies who continue to provide inaccurate or incomplete information concerning fish minimum tank sizes.

 

[DoubleM 10]

incomplete information concerning fish minimum tank sizes.[/QUOTE]

Alright i think this might be something we can agree on.

I agree that a lot of the information is posted incomplete, but that comes back to educating yourself on the animal you intend on buying.

It is the buyers responcibility to do his/her homework.
All the information on websites like LA are IMO just guideline.

Anytime i have posted about a fish someone has posted without fail "the bigger the better".

yes i understand that.

I posted not to long ago that i have a marine betta, coral beauty, fuzzy dwarf lion, and a blue spotted puffer. i wanted to see what people thought about adding another fish. Some people said not to because im over stocked. and others said they thought i would be ok.

This hobby matters a lot on opinion and personal experience.

The sized and info given online is has to be for PERFECT tank.
Which is next to impossible to acheive because there are to many variables that we would need to account for in our tanks.

Weather a V. Lionfish is in a 50, 75, or even a 90gal setup there are to many things that come into play.

the current biolaod of the tankmates before adding the lion

how good is the equipment that is set up with the tank.

the temperment of the other tankmates

or on the other hand how big are the dementions (how much rock, sand etc.)

You also have to think of the people who look at a specific fish and only want that one. Some people will search online till one of the websites say that X fish will fit in their tank.

for some it is hard for them to understand that some fish cant fit where others can and why.

that will go for any amount of experience in the hobby.

its how much the individual is willing to hear(yes they heard it but dont care:thumbdown) or listen(they are told and take it into concideration:thumbsup

IMO this is what it breaks down to.

 

[Jeff]

Maybe I missed it but did you start a conversation with Live Aquaria Stuart? Did you ask them any questions about how they came to their decisions regarding tank sizes and other housing information? I know DoubleM 10 did.
Dr. Fosters and Smith are regarded as the most reliable around. Wether I agree on this point is not important, the reefing world accepts them as the Holy Grail. I personally have not found another company of it's kind in over 20 years in this hobby. They, along with message boards like this, are where people get their information and advice. In a perfect world, we would consider buying a fish, do hours of research, and then purchase the fish from the healthiest place we could find. We don't live in a perfect world and we are not going to ever make it perfect. The fact is, most people will see a fish they like and buy it without looking down the long road. Dr. Fosters and Smith are run by veterinarians but they are a business. A business that makes money. We are hobbyists. We are here to help each other. As a matter of fact there is a big project underway creating a list of suggested tank sizes for tangs. The list is based on experienced moderators and Team RC members. The list is simply a suggestion/guideline. No matter what people think of the suggestions, there will be people that don't think it is accurate and will do whatever they want anyway.
Stating your views and asking people what they are going to do about it as you wrote in your first post, is not helpful in my opinion. Calling these companies and asking them to consider changing certain aspects of it is. Creating a list of suggested tank sizes and asking people to at least consider the list is also. This all goes back to keeping an open mind and considering other people's opinions and experience. Changing thinking goes a long way, that's why ReefCentral is here. Complaining about something without offering any real constructive advice to the companies or the members of this message board is not helpful.

 

[ahud]

Jeff,

Stuart said he would like for this thread to develop and then he intends on letting LA know about it.

DoubleM,

I think we all agree on the fact that buyers should do their own research. That said, how many people include LA in their research? I know I pop on LA to see pictures of the fish and estimated max sizes. I think Stuarts main concern is that a credible source should give credible information. I am all for people doing their research, but I think that giving tank sizes that are less than ideal is marketing, because you make each fish open to a larger market.

I am very new at the hobby, but I know enough from freshwater and life in general to cross check sources, I check multiple sites and I have a couple of books. Of course we all agree that this is the best method and we try to push research, but most people are not going to research. They give getting a new fish the same priority as getting a new decoration for the house.

 

[Stuart60611]

Maybe I missed it but did you start a conversation with Live Aquaria Stuart? Did you ask them any questions about how they came to their decisions regarding tank sizes and other housing information? I know DoubleM 10 did.
Dr. Fosters and Smith are regarded as the most reliable around. Wether I agree on this point is not important, the reefing world accepts them as the Holy Grail. I personally have not found another company of it's kind in over 20 years in this hobby. They, along with message boards like this, are where people get their information and advice. In a perfect world, we would consider buying a fish, do hours of research, and then purchase the fish from the healthiest place we could find. We don't live in a perfect world and we are not going to ever make it perfect. The fact is, most people will see a fish they like and buy it without looking down the long road. Dr. Fosters and Smith are run by veterinarians but they are a business. A business that makes money. We are hobbyists. We are here to help each other. As a matter of fact there is a big project underway creating a list of suggested tank sizes for tangs. The list is based on experienced moderators and Team RC members. The list is simply a suggestion/guideline. No matter what people think of the suggestions, there will be people that don't think it is accurate and will do whatever they want anyway.
Stating your views and asking people what they are going to do about it as you wrote in your first post, is not helpful in my opinion. Calling these companies and asking them to consider changing certain aspects of it is. Creating a list of suggested tank sizes and asking people to at least consider the list is also. This all goes back to keeping an open mind and considering other people's opinions and experience. Changing thinking goes a long way, that's why ReefCentral is here. Complaining about something without offering any real constructive advice to the companies or the members of this message board is not helpful.

Actually, I did contact Live Aquaria after DoubleM did and pretty much got the same information he posted. The purpose of this thread is not only to point out a major problem, but it is also to provide a solution which is now being explored as described in the last few posts. Before, however, one can even offer constructive advice on how to solve a problem, the first step is to demonstrate that even a problem exists which is what the first portion of this thread was attempting to do. As you can see, there are plenty of people who do not even think that minimum tank size information on-line vendors provide is any way problematic. They may be right, or they may be wrong. I have no problem accepting that. But exploring whether there is a problem needs to be accomplished before one can effectively suggest an appropriate solution because a thorough understanding of the problem is often the best way to reveal a solution.

Indeed, the portion of the discussion about whether a standard, long, or tall tank should be used for minimum tank size information for a volitan resulted in Ahud pointing out that using gallons rather than dimensions for such determinations is, perhaps, the wrong unit of measurement. This is a very valuable insight in my opinion which only developed in this thread as result of a thorough discussion of the problem.

I believe that the assembling the varying views on whether the problem exists and flushing out and vigrously debating the nuances and intracacies of those views, even without yet a solution in mind, is very important and not unhelpful as you suggest. Once this has been accomplished, solutions to the problem should and are, indeed, being explored. This will lead to thoughtful solutions which I think should then be brought to the attention of Live Aquaria and other on-line vendors.

I do not quarel in the slightest as I expressly posted that Live Aquaria is an incredibly reputable company which has, perhaps, done more to improve this hobby than any other. They also consist of some the nicest and most pleasant people I have had the pleasure to do business with. This level of credability in the hobby as you describe is in my opinion part of the problem in terms of the minimum tank size information Live Aquaria provides because it enhances the reliability of this information in the eyes of the hobbyist. I also think that the extremely reputable way that Live Aquaria does business results deservingly in a high degree of customer loyalty which in my opinion has caused many, such as yourself, to respond strongly to my negative comments about Live Aquaria as it relates to this issue.

In summary, I think this thread has been very helpful so far in terms of flushing out the issue. Now, I remain hopeful that this thread can continue doing so and move on to appropriate solutions which have now have begun to be suggested.

 

[Jeff]

I agree that the problem exists but not nearly at the level stated in this thread. The problem is being taken care of here on RC...for it's members. While I do wish that LA would amend some of their posted suggestions, I don't feel this thread will sway their beliefs. There have been discussions in the past with them and they have not changed their suggestions. That is one of the reasons a list has been drafted regarding tangs and another list for hard to keep fish is in the works for members of RC.

 

[ahud]

Hate to seem like I am camping this thread (writing a paper, I take a minute break every twenty minutes.....just how I do it lol)

In regards to using the wrong unit of measure, I think implementing dimensions would be incredibly easy. A minimum tank size suggestion could be "At least 36" long and 18" wide" and if height was needed then that could be added as well.

Now of course there will be gray areas areas such as cube tanks, but I think there will be much more concise information with the dimension system than gallons.

 

[Stuart60611]

I agree that the problem exists but not nearly at the level stated in this thread. The problem is being taken care of here on RC...for it's members. While I do wish that LA would amend some of their posted suggestions, I don't feel this thread will sway their beliefs. There have been discussions in the past with them and they have not changed their suggestions. That is one of the reasons a list has been drafted regarding tangs and another list for hard to keep fish is in the works for members of RC.

In terms of the seriousness (or lack thereof) of this problem, you may be right, but I feel based on my discussions with many new hobbyists that the problem is every bit as serious as I stated. But certainly that is fair area to disagree about. In terms of whether this this thread has any meaningful impact in causing any on-line vendor to change its behavior, I think that will largely depend on where this discussion leads and what kind of solutions people suggest. However, as you point out, these on-line vendors run a business, and I have to imagine that hobbyists who frequent RC account for substantial revenue. The louder these voices become the more likely these companies may elect to change the way they do business, paricularly because as Seahorsedreams pointed out giving good fish advice to the consumer is good business and a way for a company to differentiate itself from others who do not.

 

[Jeff]

They may be right, or they may be wrong. I have no problem accepting that.

I also think that the extremely reputable way that Live Aquaria does business results deservingly in a high degree of customer loyalty

This is unacceptable.

Exactly, and I want to emphasize that we are not talking about a grey area here.

Love them? Hate them? Admire them? Work with them? Think they are misleading? In your first post you suggested LA and others mislead buyers and they used rhetoric to do it. If you were LA and you came to them with this thread, what would you say?

 

[Jeff]

However, as you point out, these on-line vendors run a business, and I have to imagine that hobbyists who frequent RC account for substantial revenue. The louder these voices become the more likely these companies may elect to change the way they do business, paricularly because as Seahorsedreams pointed out giving good fish advice to the consumer is good business and a way for a company to differentiate itself from others who do not.

It's all about how you do it.

 

[Stuart60611]

Love them? Hate them? Admire them? Work with them? Think they are misleading? In your first post you suggested LA and others mislead buyers and they used rhetoric to do it. If you were LA and you came to them with this thread, what would you say?

I would think that the company does some things very well and other things very poorly. If I were LA and reading this thread, I would think that the company needs to address this problem because it is materially inconsistent with the highly reputable way the company otherwise does business, as well contrary to the strides and commitment the company has made to being a leading resource for pet education relied upon by consumers, researchers, and accademia. I would further think that if the change was handled appropriately and marketed effectively it could actually lead to increased sales by driving more consumers to do business with the company as opposed to others and further foster the already strong loyalty that exists wthin its customer base.

 

[Jeff]

There are a lot of inconsistencies...on both sides of this discussion. I am normally critical of retail companies but I guess just plain satisfied with them. I've never had a problem with their way of doing business.. I don't mean to take sides but saying that they do certain things very poorly is not something I have found with them. I agree there is room for improvement with their recommendations regarding tang homes but that can be achieved with constructive suggestions on the hobbyist side. Perhaps emailing them the list from RC and explaining that you don't necessarily agree with their veterinarian based suggestions would go further then putting them on the defensive and using some of the words used in this thread. No matter how they change their suggestions, if they do, I doubt everybody will agree with them.

 

[Stuart60611]

There are a lot of inconsistencies...on both sides of this discussion. I am normally critical of retail companies but I guess just plain satisfied with them. I've never had a problem with their way of doing business.. I don't mean to take sides but saying that they do certain things very poorly is not something I have found with them. I agree there is room for improvement with their recommendations regarding tang homes but that can be achieved with constructive suggestions on the hobbyist side. Perhaps emailing them the list from RC and explaining that you don't necessarily agree with their veterinarian based suggestions would go further then putting them on the defensive and using some of the words used in this thread. No matter how they change their suggestions, if they do, I doubt everybody will agree with them.

Points well-taken. To be clear, my reference to "poorly" was meant to refer only to their tank size information, and otherwise, I have no bone to pick with them. There are a lot of different roads one can take to the same destination The advantage of a thread like this to address this issue is it allows for a lot of debate and constructive criticism from knowlegeable people like yourself and often results in a much better outcome in terms of understanding the problem and proposing a solution.

In terms of the strong language I use, I definitely understand where you are comming from with that comment. My problem is that for nearly 20 years I have hoaned my writing style to suit the needs of my profession and am conditioned to write in this way which has served me well in my professonal pursuits but is not always conducive to having a discussion outside of the legal arena. I admitedly have difficulty tuning down my tone sometimes, particularlly when I find myself arguing in favor of something for which I feel strongly on a personal level. I would add, however, that my use of strong language in this thread to make my point is a far more gentle approach than I was at first considering.:hammer:

In terms of everyone agreeing with any change LA made in their minimum tank size information, I am sure you are correct that there will be those who disagree with any change made. However, my hope is that if at least they revised minimum tank size information in a way so that most experienced hobbyists would read this information and not feel it was not grossly inaccurate or incomplete.

 

[NyReefNoob]

i personally dont think it is up to the seller to do your homework for you. If your not sure then look it up, not all tanks are the same as far as open swimming space, i've probably got more room in my 80g 3x2x22" tank then alot of 120g or bigger tanks, my rock work is very open and minor. if people spent more time reading and researching, they might find more answer's. if i remember correctly a yellow tangs needs a tang around the size of a football field. bet there is alot of people here with yellow tangs, with tanks slightly smaller then those dimensions. while you are petitioning, why don't you ask them why they don't post all the food requirements as well. or temp and salinity the fish came from, or whether my blotchy anthias will like my high lights ? one thing about the human race is no matter what you tell them, or show them if they have their mind made up they are going to do it. and honestly don't think it was fair to name any vendor in particular. shoot most local fish store's don't ask you crap when you purchase nor have a tank size chart

 

[ahud]

i personally dont think it is up to the seller to do your homework for you. If your not sure then look it up, not all tanks are the same as far as open swimming space, i've probably got more room in my 80g 3x2x22" tank then alot of 120g or bigger tanks, my rock work is very open and minor. if people spent more time reading and researching, they might find more answer's. if i remember correctly a yellow tangs needs a tang around the size of a football field. bet there is alot of people here with yellow tangs, with tanks slightly smaller then those dimensions. while you are petitioning, why don't you ask them why they don't post all the food requirements as well. or temp and salinity the fish came from, or whether my blotchy anthias will like my high lights ? one thing about the human race is no matter what you tell them, or show them if they have their mind made up they are going to do it. and honestly don't think it was fair to name any vendor in particular. shoot most local fish store's don't ask you crap when you purchase nor have a tank size chart

You completely missed the point of the thread, and discussion.

 

[BFG]

It's a business. They sell, you buy. That's it. When you buy a car, you need to have a license, insurance and what not to drive it on the road. They will NOT tell you HOW to drive the car as it is up to you. You can drive it on the wrong side of the road for all they care. Or drive in reverse to your destination, it's all up to you really.

Same as fish too. Up to you to provide the necessary space and equipment to house a particular fish. Ideally, you should find out how much space a fish need BEFORE purchasing it. Not for the lfs or online company to dictate to you what THEY think is ideal. If you like to keep a certain fish, get a suitable size tank for it and then purchase the said fish. Not the other way of setting up a tank and get a fish which will outgrow your tank.

Geez, it's your money and you have a say and power on your purchase. If you think it will outgrow your tank, don't buy it. No need to raise a thread and put a well known online retailer name and dragged it into the mud to raise awareness. There will always be people who purchase stuff on the impulse and it's not your job to get them edumacated.

Hope this helps!

 

[JHemdal]

BFG,

I agree with you comments, I was trying to say the same thing, but it wasn't as clear I guess.

I would also add that people keep ignoring the subjectivity of "tank size". I asked for specific cases where people had seen fish DIE from being in too small of a tank, and nobody offered any. I gave an estimation of fish density in the ocean of a clownfish in a 20,000 gallon tank to show that ALL aquarists are keeping their fish in smaller tanks than in nature....it is just a matter of degree. While I don't agree with the LA numbers of putting a lionfish in a 50 gallon tank, they are not off the mark by that much. I would say that the minimum size for a captive adult lionfish is 75 gallons of open water swimming room.

In addition to my tank size calculator that I posted a link to earlier, here is another resource for people to ponder. It is a set of rules that I operate under: My working definition of "appropriate aquarium husbandry":

If the fish shows no signs of chronic disease or abnormality, exhibits normal feeding and reproductive behaviors and most importantly, exhibits a normal lifespan compared to that of wild counterparts (minus the predation that wild fish incur of course!), then there is no other metric we can use to determine if a certain suite of husbandry techniques are suitable or not.

And with that, I thank you all for you attention and wanted to say that I'm pretty much done trying to bring some objectivity to this discussion.

Jay

 

[ahud]

Jay,

While the math may work out to be one clownfish to 20,000 gallons I doubt you will disagree with the fact that clownfish never stray far from there host. There is a big difference in a clownfish and a blue tang as far as space requirements. A largemouth bass in my pond has a much smaller fish to water ratio in my pond than a clownfish does in the ocean, but the clownfish is much better suited for a twenty gallon tank. So I don't understand your argument,

BFG,

Nobody is disagreeing with buyer responsibility, ect. What "rubs me wrong" if you will is the fact that LA is so respected and reputable so people will take there word as gold. If Toyota recommended a certain brand of oil,gas,ect for one of their models and it screwed up your car or gave you inferior performance would you say you should have done your research or would you be mad at Toyota?

the point being made, is when you hold a lot of experience and people believe what you say you should provide accurate information.