my fish don't grow
- Thread starter timdam
- Start date
- Status
vermonter310
New member
The only tank that would be "absolutely" to small would be one that the fish physically wouldn't fit in... therefore there is room for debate... there always is... "reasonable minds cannot differ" you're kidding right? I get your point to the OP but that comment is kinda out there.... reasonable minds often differ.... ethics are comprised of many,many variables... yours are by no means absolute for everyone...
I don't want to get into a huge debate... I don't type nearly fast enough... and...I'd prefer to sit on the back porch and drink a beer while doing it... so if you ever get to Maine, look me up and I'll buy ya one and we can debate....errr... chat all afternoon... there's always room for that isn't there...
Last edited:
Stuart60611
New member
When I used the terms "reasonable minds cannot differ" I am apparently acting too much like the lawyer that I am. I borrowed this phrase from the "reasonable man"concept imbeded in the law and ultimately drilled into our heads as lawyers. It is used by lawyers to differentiate between a subjective and objective standard and is not used to mean that the subject matter is not worthy of discussion which I guess is how it comes off to a non-lawyer and not my intent in using these words. Discussion on any issue is always good and should be encouraged. What I mean when I borrow this phrase from the law is that whether a tank is too small for a fish is often and even usually something that can vary wildly depending on who you ask, the fish, and other variables. However, I am suggesting that at some point a tank becomes so small for a given species' needs that it becomes an objective issue not subject to the particular viewpoint of the person you ask and these other variables. Whether that applies here is certainly debateable. However, whether it is feasible for one under appropriate circumstances to be able to credibly, categorically, and objectively determine whether a tank is too small for a given species is in my opinion undebateable because there comes a point when a tank is so small that species' primary needs for movement and living space are not being satisfied.
But yes, thank you for the invitation, and I would love to someday take you up on discussing this and anything else over a beer or any other vice of your liking.:fun4:
Last edited:
reefergeorge
New member
I'ld like to see a picture of this tank.
LobsterOfJustice
Recovering Detritophobe
Are we going in circles here? It's not full size because it stopped growing because it's overcrowded (too many fish, too little tank).
if yall say it's too small, i'm not really going to disagree. yall are the experts here and definitely know better than me.
but my point is that it's hard to say what makes a fish really happy. saying that a fish doesn't want to be "like in a jail cell" for the rest of his life, but then agreeing that he would "want to be in a small room instead" for the rest of his life seems a little absurd to me. i mean, even if it was a football field, one would not won't to be in confinement over the deep blue lovely ocean.
but my point is that it's hard to say what makes a fish really happy. saying that a fish doesn't want to be "like in a jail cell" for the rest of his life, but then agreeing that he would "want to be in a small room instead" for the rest of his life seems a little absurd to me. i mean, even if it was a football field, one would not won't to be in confinement over the deep blue lovely ocean.
Stuart60611
New member
Apparently around and around.
29reef
It's all about the flow
First of all your 110 is 48" long? So basically IMO you've got a 60 gal with a big sump as far as swimming room. Your fishes size have nothing to do with anything. It's the types and how many you have. My suggestion is you get a panther grouper and see if you can stunt it's growth before it eats all your other fish. Problem solved; or if you prefer there's some tank raised bumblebee groupers out there. That way you don't continue to kill fish from the ocean. :fun2:
Beaun
It's pronounced Bone
But that person dosnt need to get a great dane, they can get a chiwawa that would be more comfortable wiht less room.
You can keep a tank with a few more fish than it should, but the problem is the size that these fish achieve. I think the thread is on two tracks, one that is saying the fish are too large, the other which is saying there are too many of them. The problem is both; there are too many fish, most of which are to large for a 110. Fish more sutable for a 110 would be dwarf angels, basslets, clowns, gobies, a brisstle tooth tang, blennies...hope this helps, good luck with your tank.
continue to kill fish from the ocean? i've lost like 4 or 5 fish in a year. sorry, my tank is not perfect. i do have casualties. but what's in there now, they've all been in there for about a year.
but hey, i do respect your answer. i hope this doesn't offend u.
I agree, but disagree with the fact that your fish are to big for your tank. If all of your fish were full size and in your 110 most would die (can any one disagree). My roommate has a 4 inch trigger, a 5 inch yellow tang a maroon clown, and a few damsels in a 125 and the clown is the only thing that has grown in over 2 years. He feeds 6 types of food alternating including live brine shrimp. It's all your own personal opinion, i think you have one or two fish that may get, or are too big. But thats just what I think!
I've kept a 110 before, and got rid of it really quick. IMO it's a terrible tank, too tall, not wide enough and not nearly long enough. It's not at all suitable for fish that need swimming room. You would be better off with a 6' 125, though that would ultimately not be big enough for some of your fish. A few years ago, I upgraded from a 5' 120 to a 6' 210 because the fish I want need more room. If I keep the fish I have, I will most likely have to upgrade to a bigger tank in a few years.
If you care about your fish, and want to keep them long-term, I suggest you look for a bigger, longer tank. There are good deals to be found, as people get out of the hobby for financial reasons in the down economy. A 180 would be a good size for you, for now.
You could keep some of your fish for life, but others would eventually outgrow the tank. I'm not the tang police - but your tank is really not suitable for many of your fish.
If you care about your fish, and want to keep them long-term, I suggest you look for a bigger, longer tank. There are good deals to be found, as people get out of the hobby for financial reasons in the down economy. A 180 would be a good size for you, for now.
You could keep some of your fish for life, but others would eventually outgrow the tank. I'm not the tang police - but your tank is really not suitable for many of your fish.
vermonter310
New member
When I used the terms "reasonable minds cannot differ" I am apparently acting too much like the lawyer that I am. I borrowed this phrase from the "reasonable man"concept imbeded in the law and ultimately drilled into our heads as lawyers. It is used by lawyers to differentiate between a subjective and objective standard and is not used to mean that the subject matter is not worthy of discussion which I guess is how it comes off to a non-lawyer and not my intent in using these words
I understand the US jurisprudence "reasonable and prudent person" test. And while this may have been the impitus for your argument it is not what you stated in your post. Which is why I made the comments I did. Also, It's generally the starting point for much debate as few situation fall within the center of reasonable and prudent but rather the fringe or gray area.
Not questioning your argument that this paticular tank is too small for these paticular fish, it is in my opinion, in all likeyhood and I think we agree on that point. Just that there are many variables in all of our tanks that could be debated to determind acceptable tolerences for our inhabitants. We do it in our own minds every day to justify "our" choices and what we choose to do or not. Someone had to debate the merits of what we now understand as "acceptable".
I understand the US jurisprudence "reasonable and prudent person" test. And while this may have been the impitus for your argument it is not what you stated in your post. Which is why I made the comments I did. Also, It's generally the starting point for much debate as few situation fall within the center of reasonable and prudent but rather the fringe or gray area.
Not questioning your argument that this paticular tank is too small for these paticular fish, it is in my opinion, in all likeyhood and I think we agree on that point. Just that there are many variables in all of our tanks that could be debated to determind acceptable tolerences for our inhabitants. We do it in our own minds every day to justify "our" choices and what we choose to do or not. Someone had to debate the merits of what we now understand as "acceptable".
vermonter310
New member
Agreed, I'm off topic and I apoligise. I rather enjoy a light hearted and civil debate and got a bit caught up.
look guys, yall may be tired of debating this. but to me, i enjoy it. hearing everyone's insight is good for me to hear. if anything, it makes me think twice before buying another fish.
but the point i am trying to make is that it's kinda hypocritical sometimes with some comments, while we ALL keep fish in tanks. i do understand yall's point though.
also, while we are all on a fish lover's site, and i do love my fish too, there is no like PETA for fish. Michael Vick would never have served a year in jail for mistreating a fish. So you can't really compare a dog to a fish. JMO. but i do understand that we're in a fish lover's forum, so i don't blame anybody for trying to tell me to change my ways.
but the point i am trying to make is that it's kinda hypocritical sometimes with some comments, while we ALL keep fish in tanks. i do understand yall's point though.
also, while we are all on a fish lover's site, and i do love my fish too, there is no like PETA for fish. Michael Vick would never have served a year in jail for mistreating a fish. So you can't really compare a dog to a fish. JMO. but i do understand that we're in a fish lover's forum, so i don't blame anybody for trying to tell me to change my ways.
- Status
Similar threads
