Shark! shark?

[matt randazzo]

when i was looking on youtube for tank set-ups, I had seen a 120 gallon tank with a sargassum triggerfish, a SF eel, a foxface and a banded cat shark...

I was just wondering if I could keep a banded cat shark, with 2 dwarf lionfish, a blue jaw trigger, in a 125 gallon fowlr set up?

 

[skibum9884]

I'd say no, a 125 is nowhere near large enough for the shark or trigger long term. Also, triggers and sharks don't do well together. The triggers have a tendency to chew away at the sharks.

 

[reefergeorge]

IMO, not for long if at all.
I've read, so no personal experience that lions make bad tank mates for sharks. If it does work, you have about six months before the shark wont be able to turn around.

 

[gweston]

Sharks need very large tanks.

As for the triggers.. is your 125 a 6' long? There are certain smaller trigger species that would work for a 125 6' long tank, but I would not put them in a shorter length tank at all. Bluechin, Sargassum, and Crosshatch may work. For a FOWLR there may be a few other options. As with any fish, you just need to plan and stock carefully. Carnivores need very good filtration. Make sure you have a hefty skimmer.

Triggers and dwarf lions together. I'm not so sure. Some triggers will nip their spines off. Also plan the pair of dwarfs well. You may need to guarantee an male/female pair. A pair of males may fight and result in a death.

 

[THEDLO]

also lions and triggers dont mix well either. i think there's a thread somewhere here about this. it even has a video.

 

[AuroraDrvr]

Bluechin, Sargassum, and Crosshatch may work.

Sargassums and Crosshatches are open-water swimmers (more-so than Bluejaws). I'd recommend a 180 minimum for the Sargassum and 240 for the Crosshatch.

125 for a single Bluejaw will be fine.

 

[matt randazzo]

ok then what do you guys think the bare minimum tank size is for a shark? I'm on a budget, kinda... Oh and yes the tank I'm planning on getting is a 6' 125... But I'm still in the planning stages...

what is the shark was born into the tank, and that volume of water was all it knew?

Also I'm pretty sure that a blue jaw/chin trigger won't have problems with the lions... Oh and I was planing on gettin two different spicies, dwarf lions so I have less of a chance they'll fight if both end up being male...

And thanks for all the posts so quickly you guys

 

[Playerdrm]

Shark will still outgrow the tank they don't stop growing just cause they're in a small tank.

 

[mattiej]

To be quite honest, no fish grows to the size of its tank. This is a myth that has been around as long as people have kept marines. What often happens is that the fish does not reach its full max size and is really being stunted in growth. A stunted shark is a soon to be dead shark.

 

[rocking]

the onley place i know what had a shark for ten years was a lfs in the north bay and the tank was 4 too be to be in a house it was 12' long by 12' and 4' high and at year 9 thay where trying to get it a new home thay did by year ten its at the sf aquarem
and when thay came to get him he was almost 6 foot long
dont kill the shark in that small of a tank
is best to git it to some place that can keep it

 

[helicoprion]

240 gallon for a single epaulette is the minimum in my opinion. Unless you're willing to buy all your equipment used over a long period of time you aren't going to be keeping much of a budget either I'm afraid.

 

[matt randazzo]

well what about a Coral cat shark (Atelomycterus marmoratus), on bluezoo aquatics it says that they only get a little bit over 2', and only need 150 gallons... dose that 20 gallons Really make that big a difference?

 

[SkullV]

well what about a Coral cat shark (Atelomycterus marmoratus), on bluezoo aquatics it says that they only get a little bit over 2', and only need 150 gallons... dose that 20 gallons Really make that big a difference?

No shark should be in a tank under 100 as babies 180 as juveniles, and 300 as adults in my opinion. Unfortunately the setup you are planning will just never properly support a shark throughout its entire lifetime.

 

[Playerdrm]

well what about a Coral cat shark (Atelomycterus marmoratus), on bluezoo aquatics it says that they only get a little bit over 2', and only need 150 gallons... dose that 20 gallons Really make that big a difference?

I wouldn't go off that 150g statement I couldnt see keeping a 2ft shark in a 6ft tank

 

[Stumped]

well what about a Coral cat shark (Atelomycterus marmoratus), on bluezoo aquatics it says that they only get a little bit over 2', and only need 150 gallons... dose that 20 gallons Really make that big a difference?

Online fish suppliers are in the business of making money. The reality is that they sell certain fish that genuinely have no business being in the average home aquarium (aside from the massive tank exceptions). In addition to that the tank sizes they list as minimums aren't always that realistic. If they actually put down 500+ gallons for a fish, how many people would even fall into that category? Something like <1% of all aquarium owners.

 

[matt randazzo]

Oh all right then, <-(dreams crushed) lol well I'm just glad I asked before I jumped right into buying one on account of false information... and my thanks to you all.

What about a sting ray??? Is there one that would be fit for a life in a 125 gallon aquairum? If Yes, how much?

 

[Stumped]

Oh all right then, <-(dreams crushed) lol well I'm just glad I asked before I jumped right into buying one on account of false information... and my thanks to you all.

What about a sting ray??? Is there one that would be fit for a life in a 125 gallon aquairum? If Yes, how much?

Someone else can chime in, but I'm pretty sure the footprint for most standard tanks is inappropriate for rays. They're better suited for ponds or at the very least a custom lagoon type set up. They only utilize the bottom of the tank so a 3' cube (which I think is roughly like 150g) would be way better than a standard 150g.

 

[matt randazzo]

well a 3' cube would have the same foot print area as a 6' by 18" tank

 

[Stumped]

well a 3' cube would have the same foot print area as a 6' by 18" tank

Not with respect to actual function. Which is what my point is. For something like rays total gallonage is less important than what % of the actual footprint is functional for a bottom dwelling species. Ultimately they're really better off in a pool or lagoon type set up.

If you're keeping sharks/rays in a cube or pool it's really common to see the rock stacked in the center to form an island. That way there's a ton of open sand to swim around 360 degrees. With only 18" of width you cant position the rock in anyway that won't obstruct swimming in some fashion. On top of that, any swimming movement would be much more linear because not only is it a narrower space to navigate, the rock would add additional problems for turning.

 

[Xpilot]

There is a freshwater species of ray I have seen kept in smaller tanks, you may want to look into that if you really want a ray.