Tank size for Tangs? An evaluation... - Page 5

StirCrazy · #41 09-24-2002, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by stephane:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by stephane:
I bet this tread will finish in a kids war ;)

Did I win someting yet!!!!!!!!!!! :D [img]tongue.gif[/img] :eek: [img]smile.gif[/img] <hr /></blockquote>um.. the only person I see being childish is you Steph.. there are some realy good discussions happening here.

the only comment I have is for the tang police themselves.. have you ever wondered how many people that have knowlage and hands on experiance with tangs that you are scarring from making posts to help people? I am not talking about people with 33 gal tanks but rather of people who are running 90 to 120 gal tanks with two tangs or bigger with more that are helthy and have been doing good for years.. It sure is a shame that we cannot benifit from the experence of thease people because they don't want to put op with the "Crap" from the so called "Tang police"

JMHO

Steve

naesco · #42 09-24-2002, 01:18 AM

I think you may be of the mistaken opinion that the tang police are a group of reefers experienced with tangs who just have very large tanks.
That is not the case.
Most reefers who have 90 to 120 gallon tanks who are experienced in keeping tangs might not post because they would agree with most of what they, the tang police, say.
Crap?? Come on be nice, eh

What do you disagree with Stircrazy?
What is the size of your tank?How long has it been up and running?
What species of tangs do you keep?
Thank you

[ 23 September 2002, 21:21: Message edited by: naesco ]

EmilyB · #43 09-24-2002, 01:18 AM

My doubleband surgeonfish appeared to have HLLE, actually, it looked like someone shot it.

We immediately ran some tests for stray voltage and got a problem with the new skimmer pump.

I was sick about the tang, but we basically watched this hole disappear when the problem pump was shut down.

I really didn't post that largely because of anti-tang threads. That scares me.

EmilyB · #44 09-24-2002, 01:28 AM

BTW, I kept a harem of lemon peels in the 155g for about ten months and they spawned nightly..it was awesome.

When I changed the tanks over, and moved them to smaller quarters every one of them died. :(

I still regret that so much.

StirCrazy · #45 09-24-2002, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by naesco:

What do you disagree with Stircrazy?
What is the size of your tank?How long has it been up and running?
What species of tangs do you keep?
Thank you

this is what I mean.. it doesnt matter what I put you are going to blast it as being to small.. but it is a 92 gal tank with a yellow tang.

but you yourself are looking for corals for a brand new tank with out any regard for them.

Do I see anyone being a Anthias police? they are small and the min recomendation for them is 50 to 60 gal PER fish, but no one cares..

tangs are a nice fish but as with any type of fish they have different requirments for each type.. I can almost understand that you should warn people that traditionaly powder blues have a bad track record but I also have seen a large numbers of powder blues that are healthy and happy.. same goes for other types..

my main problem is that when some one does ask for help or advice the first thing the "tang Police" say is "do the right thing take it back to the store." "shame on you how could you" ect.. instead of trying to actualy help people.

Emily was a case and point.. she was scared to post about her tang because the first thing said would have been "thats what you get for a tang in a tank that small" or some garbage like that.

just to set the record strait .. I am not condoning a large tang in a 33 gal tank.. nor am I saying that you should have a min 180 gal tank , or 5 foot long tank befor you get a tang.. all I am trying to say is lets try to help people with out the garbage remarks, other wise people don't come back and we could be missing out on some other valuable experiance that they might have had.

Steve

Troy F · #46 09-24-2002, 01:29 AM

C'mon guys, Stephane was just joking around. If anyone should take offense from his comments it's me as I'm the one that strayed off course.

Deb, you shouldn't shy away from sharing that kind of information. It may save someone's tang one day. Though many people may know that HLLE is often often caused by stray voltage or malnutrition, there are many that don't.

StirCrazy · #47 09-24-2002, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Troy F:
C'mon guys, Stephane was just joking around. If anyone should take offense from his comments it's me as I'm the one that strayed off course.

true Troy and I apolagize Steph (even if I can't spell it right [img]smile.gif[/img] )

I just didn't think that it helped much.. sorry again..

Steve

Canadian · #48 09-24-2002, 02:54 AM

What's with the hang up on the whole "Tang Police" issue? Truth be told, I see a lot of problems with people having Anthias, Large Angels, Puffers, Triggers, and the list goes on and on. Tangs just happen to be one of the most commonly acquired specimens that are subjected to conditions that I feel are less than ideal (for a captive environment). Furthermore, the issues regarding water quality and so forth are moot. One should assume that, first and foremost, the basic care requirements such as appropriate water quality, feeding regimen, etc are invariably being met.

What about sharks (in particular Epaulette spp.) being kept in captivity? How many of you believe that they should be housed in very large aquariums, if kept at all? The people who most strongly defend the husbandry practice of keeping Tangs in "smallish" aquariums are typically those who are doing so - as is often the case with those people who choose to house sharks, large Angels, etc. Now, how many of you who have several Tangs in aquariums of 100g or less disagree with keeping sharks in your typical hobbyist's aquarium?

I agree that this thread is going off on a tangent. The "Tang Police" are generally people who are fairly conservative and concerned about the long-term sustainability of the hobby (that's not to say that the people who obviously have some serious disdain for the "Tang Police" don't also share the same concern for the sustainability of the industry/hobby). Perhaps my concern and strong stance stems from the fact that, as someone who worked in the industry for several years, I've seen countless people go to greater and greater lengths to cram more and more fish into their aquaria while viewing the fish as disposable, material possessions.

(P.S. According to my room mate's girlfriend - who has graduated from photography school and is a professional photographer - my calculations of the fish's length are valid. The ratio of the size of the tank to the size of the fish would presumably be constant unless the picture had been doctored in one way or another with something like Photoshop. And the picture was obviously not taken with a "fish-eye" lens or something of the sort that would significantly distort the aspect ratio.)

[ 23 September 2002, 23:26: Message edited by: Canadian ]

DJ88 · #49 09-24-2002, 03:45 AM

My response to all of this.

Read my signature.. Easy as that.

If more people would heed this. There wouldn't be a need for "Tang Police".

Use your head.. If you wouldn't live in those conditions. Why subject an animal to it. It has as much right to a healthy life as you do. Keep yourself penned up in a tiny apartment 24/7 for a few weeks. See if bothers you to be so enclosed. Especially if you were an active person.

Too many people are shooting for the bare minimum. Far to many. As well, many are now seeking instant gratification by filling their tanks as fast as possible. At the possible downfall of the creatures within. Put the creatures you hope to own ahead of your desires for "eye candy".

[ 23 September 2002, 23:49: Message edited by: DJ88 ]

Samw · #50 09-24-2002, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DJ88:

As well, many are now seeking instant gratification by filling their tanks as fast as possible. At the possible downfall of the creatures within. Put the creatures you hope to own ahead of your desires for "eye candy".

Well, I hear what you are saying. But I recall back in Oct/Nov 2001, I think your heater was stuck on and you lost almost everything and had to restart. Yet, a month later, you were completely restocked and we were all giving you high praises and compliments because it was so amazing to look at. Is this what you mean by too fast though?

[img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 24 September 2002, 01:14: Message edited by: Sam W ]