Offical "DO NOT BUY" list?

[Randall_James]

The powers that be, should have a sticky "Do Not Buy" list of fish that just do not fare well in home tanks...

IE Cleaner Wrasse's

I am sure that many fish would be hotly debated as there are of course tank keepers that have had a Moorish Idol for years

 

[ratherbediving]

I second this. I could have sworn there was a sticky somewhere, but I can't find it.

I would also expand this to include a second sticky for hard to keep corals if possible. This would probably be tougher list than fish, but useful. At least if people know that certain corals tend to not fare well, then they will know what they are getting into...

 

[ReefBuddha]

there are a few of them over at the industry forums from over the years. I'll see if i can't find them. Also a list for inverts/corals would be good. non-photosynthetic gorgonians and dendroneptheas should be first on that list, imo.

 

[fishyz]

DO NOT BUY.......anything from petco or petcetera.

 

[aclos3]

I will be the first one to agree that most Petco's have terrible saltwater departments and are irresponsible to their livestock, but there are Petco's out there with good saltwater employees who keep super healthy livestock. With Petcos and the other chains that carry saltwater livestock, the quality really depends on the people who work there.

The Petco near me recently eliminated their saltwater section. I believe it was a good idea. Everytime I went there I saw lots of dying fish and aparently neglected tanks. On the flip side, I have been to another Petco where the employee running the fish department was knowledgable and kept great livestock.

I just don't think we can make a blanket statement to 'never' purchase anything from a Petco. Purchase from the good stores, and ignore the others. If you don't buy from them, they will likely close their saltwater department like the one in my area.

 

[Randall_James]

I guess this is why there is not a real thread like this...

This was a question about a thread that could list commonly purchased animals (Moorish Idols, Cleaner Wrasses etc) that within a few posts turned into a bash job on a store that primarily sells dogfood..

Aclos3 is correct, you can not make a blanket statement against as chain store like that... and it was not intention of the thread to even do that.

 

[jag1979]

scallops, ive never heard of them living very long in aquariums

 

[Samala]

Was anyone able to re-locate the lists from the industry regarding do-not-buy status?

I am particularly interested in hearing about sources like this.

>Sarah

 

[InLimbo87]

Achilles tangs imo

 

[artman18944]

bi-color anglefish, very difficult

 

[dragonladylea]

Feather Stars/Basket Stars definately a do not buy.

 

[Racso]

In order to make a Do-Not-Buy list, you have to first determine why it is not a DNB. Is it because the animals listed are hard to keep or impossible to keep? Moorish Idols are HARD to keep, but there are members here and I also know people who have kept them long term with great success.

What about Parrot fish, large Groupers, Sharks? Obviously very large fish, however, again, there are people here who have tanks big enough for these fish. A lot of large fish are not hard to keep. In fact, many of them are quite hardy. The problem is, many of them get big enough to swallow the tank they are currently in whole.

What about fish that are hardy to water conditions, however their feeding habits are very hard to replicate? Mandarins and Cleaner Wrasses come to mind. Mandarins are hardy to water quality, but their main problem is starvation. Cleaner wrasses feed primaraly on parasites, and need to do so. Even the few aquarists who get their cleaners to eat other foods usually do not succeed with these (in a simular fashion as Mandarins).

As for invertabrates... Most starfish should go on a DNB list becuase they usually do not get the proper diet that they need. All those "reef safe" chocolate chip stars seem to do well... but for some reason, none of the corals are doing well... What about the "harmless" green serpent star?

Carnation Corals, many Gorgonians, and other filter feeders are sold every day to unsuspecting aquarists, only to die of starvation or taken over by algae. However, search this forum and you will find healthy, GROWING animals.

IMO, DNB lists are bad. First, they never work. No one really follows them.

Second, if a fish is hard to house in an aquarium, and NO ONE (not even the super-dee-duper aquarists) get one, no one will find out how to properly take care of it. It takes the study out of the hobby. Lets say someone figures out how to get cleaner wrasses to live years, and BREED. Then the collecting of cleaner wrasses drops, leaving the balance on reefs alone. Then we could restock reefs with these animals where they are in small numbers.

Third, a much better idea would be "Do not buy UNLESS...:
you have a large tank...
your tank is full of copepods...
you understand the full care procedures of this animal..."

Ok, I think I'm done now...

BUT I do have a side story. There is a store that has had a cleaner wrasse live for over 5 or 6 years now. It is not for sale. It is back in their QT area. Any fish that has any external problem is put into the 90 gallon tank, and pulled out a few days later, and put into a different QT tank, where very LIGHT medication is added.

 

[InLimbo87]

My opinion is that, even if you are able to keep a certain species in an aquarium, doesn't mean you should support the overall selling of this species. For example: I have a large tank and mounds and mounds of experience with caring for tangs, and other fish. I have the right conditions, a mature tank, and I decide to delve into trying to purchase an achilles tang (a tang known for being very hard to keep in an aquarium). Even if I am successful in keeping that tang, I have just contributed to the overall popularity of collecting a fish that the average person can not keep alive in an aquarium.

I believe a "do not buy" list is a great idea, in that it would discourage the selling and collecting of certain species that have proven time and time again to be only successfully kept by the experienced (and oftentimes also lucky) aquarist.

 

[ratherbediving]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9130981#post9130981 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Racso
In order to make a Do-Not-Buy list, you have to first determine why it is not a DNB. Is it because the animals listed are hard to keep or impossible to keep? Moorish Idols are HARD to keep, but there are members here and I also know people who have kept them long term with great success.

....

IMO, DNB lists are bad. First, they never work. No one really follows them.

Second, if a fish is hard to house in an aquarium, and NO ONE (not even the super-dee-duper aquarists) get one, no one will find out how to properly take care of it. It takes the study out of the hobby. Lets say someone figures out how to get cleaner wrasses to live years, and BREED. Then the collecting of cleaner wrasses drops, leaving the balance on reefs alone. Then we could restock reefs with these animals where they are in small numbers.

Third, a much better idea would be "Do not buy UNLESS...:
you have a large tank...
your tank is full of copepods...
you understand the full care procedures of this animal..."
.....

Racso-- In your post, you gave a lot of reasons why there SHOULD be a "Do Not Buy list".

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9039126#post9039126 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Randall_James
The powers that be, should have a sticky "Do Not Buy" list of fish that just do not fare well in home tanks...

IE Cleaner Wrasse's

I am sure that many fish would be hotly debated as there are of course tank keepers that have had a Moorish Idol for years

So going back to the original post... let's define a Do not Buy list as "fish that just do not fare well in home tanks" as a general rule. Calling it a "Do Not Buy list UNLESS" would be fine, as that is really what the list is.

Doesn't mean that no one can care for them. A person who understands the specific needs of the fish, and felt that he or she could meet them-- by all means-- buy it. The list should contain not only the species... but also, why it doesn't fare well in a home tank.

I understand that some people will disagree with any particular list. However, it probably would benefit a lot of people to have this list to know what to avoid when they go the LFS. I am sure I have seen at least one such thread in the past that was very useful as a reference, and I can't find it. It would have been nice if it was a sticky.

In almost any LFS, you will probably find a few of these animals on the list. Unless you really know what you are doing, it would probably be best to steer clear of them. Without the list, you may be relying on the advice of the LFS, which sometimes isn't all that great.

 

[kathainbowen]

How about a SERIOUSLY RECONSIDER PURCHASING list, for those points. This way, you can have your cake and eat it too. People can list the animal in question, and after that, give the reason why.

For example:
Blue Linkia Starfish Linkia laevifata
The Blue Linkia is notorious for shipping poorly. One anonymous distributer reported an estimated 90% mortality rate from collection to distribution center, even with the very best care in collection, transportation and acclimation. They are a beautiful and reef safe specimen, a wonder in a reef tank. However, their track record and history as a delicate species, even in the very best of conditions.

Nurse Shark Ginglymostoma cirratum
While a hardy and relatively easy to keep shark (although, all sharks can be difficult), the Nurse often grows FAR too large for most home aquariums (*although, I'm certain some of the guys and gals in the Large Tank Forum might argue otherwise judging from the size of some of their tanks!). The Nurse can easily get larger than 8 feet long. If you must get a shark, stick with a Marble, Coral Cat Shark, Epaulette, Banded Cat, or Bamboo Shark.

 

[Randall_James]

Do not buy UNLESS...
Does ring a bit better I agree. As far as people not following the list? not sure I agree with that, many read and follow guides fairly well. The problem is "Which" guide they are using.

Some distributors are aware of the issues but continue to sell the fish anyway. This is likely motivated by 2 things, some keepers are capable of care and profits. "Well if I do not sell it to them, someone else will" is a powerful inducement. Add to that some distributors are willing to "fudge" parameters so that their "Yellow Tang" can survive in a 50G tank and the other store says 75G.

Retailers need to be somewhat accountable and the only way that happens is places like this with good exposure. There will always be a store that sells snowflake eels to people with nano cubes however. Calling those stores out may or may not work (more likely not IMO)

A standardized chart is sounding more and more like a need in this hobby... Now how and who to get it endorsed as "gospel"

 

[Paul B]

There should be a criteria of rating fish as easy to keep. I can't think of a fish that does not live at least ten years in the sea, most of them live twice that long. Keeping a fish three or four years in a tank is IMO not a success. If we can't keep a fish at least somewhat close to it's natural lifespan than have failed with that fish.
Paul

 

[mhurley]

Hey all....I'm not supportive of a "Do Not Buy" list...but I am supportive of a "Very Difficult to Keep" list. But I'm sure you are aware that things you put on there will always have exceptions and therefore, drive arguments and disagreements with folks. You will never, ever get a fully endorsed and agreed upon list of either difficult fish, or tank size recommendations for animals.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9127974#post9127974 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by artman18944
bi-color anglefish, very difficult

Case and point....I've had my bi-color for 6 years now....I've done nothing special in keeping him/her alive and in fact, made a few good attempts at killing my livestock via equipment and power failures.

I would think it would be best to break something like this into separate lists...Fish, inverts, corals..Thereby allowing the specific lists to be transferred into other appropriate forums.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9203447#post9203447 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Randall_James
A standardized chart is sounding more and more like a need in this hobby... Now how and who to get it endorsed as "gospel"

Sorry...but never gonna happen. Just whose gospel will it be? To translate to life, is it the King James version, Latter Day Saints, Lutheran, Roman Catholic?...

Not to compare religion to this hobby, but the range of opinions and "experts" here is about as vast as religion.

I say, you, the members compose a list based on the vast experience of this board and that is more of a research "bible" than any expert endorsement.

My $.02.

 

[bobafet1]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9130981#post9130981 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Racso
Then the collecting of cleaner wrasses drops, leaving the balance on reefs alone. Then we could restock reefs with these animals where they are in small numbers.

Ive yet to see or hear of any hobbiest restocking the reefs with their own livestock, and I heard that it was illegal to do so. I think the main problem with the decline of species in the ocean is due to overfarming, poor fishing practices, weather, and so on. This all comes full circle to us. Most of the specimens we keep come from 3rd world countries that pay chump change to the locals to go out and harvest their reefs for livestock. I have heard from other distributors that only 10% of the fish collected actually make it to our aquariums and that 90% of the fish for sale are caught from the wild. The responsibility lies with us. The distributors would not be selling us livestock that we didnt keep buying. I am guilty as so many others of buying livestock without knowing its requirements or having the proper set up for them. Its been made clear that most pet stores will sell you anything even while knowing you cant care for it because they know you'll be back for more!! I think this thread has very good intentions but I think it should focus on how to keep specimens instead of what not to keep. It can be argued as to what to put on a "don't keep list" but no one will have a problem with an informative thread on "how to keep". Thats why I think RC is so successful. Ok Im done talking.

 

[ratherbediving]

While I would agree that it is unlikely that reef enthusiasts will ever restock the worlds oceans, it is useful to keep in mind that our hobby has had a detrimental effect on some species. Cleaner wrasse are a commonly mentioned fish, because they don't appear in great concentrations, but were relatively easy to capture. So their capture visibly impacted the waters in which they were commonly taken. You hear the same argument about anemones, actually.

The problem with making a thread about how to keep certain fish vs a 'Difficult to keep' list, is that it would be very long and detailed (harder to write, and more time consuming to read through). Aquarists could skim a list of fish and invertebrates they should stay away a lot easier. If they see a fish or invertebrate they like on the list, if they still want to keep it, they can probably do a search and find out more information on what others experiences have been.