A discussion about "monster" fish and their tank size

[msjinkzd]

So I have noticed a lot of times people recommend that if someone wants to raise monster fish, they need to start with the huge tank immediately.

For the sake of this conversation, lets use Polypterus endlicheri endlicheri as the example of our monster fish.

As adults, they reach 30-36". This means they really need a tank that is at least 3' front to back (ideally 4') and at least 6-8' long. Often in the pet trade they are sold at 3-5".

As I own 4 of these, I feel comfortable in giving my 2 cents on why its totally unnecessary to start them out in the tank they will need as an adult.

They do grow quickly, a few inches a month until they hit about 12" or so. The majoriity of keepers have a difficult time even getting them to reach that size, let alone adult size.

It is much easier to monitor and maintain them in a tank that is considerably smaller than what they will eventually need. They are also not the most efficient eaters so in a huge tank with a large filter, its likely a lot of the food would just make a mess. In a smaller tank, as they are growing, its easier to feed them and remove the uneaten food.

Its also easier (and quicker) to do a lot of frequent large water changes to aid in their growth and foster their health.

So I guess my point is that although upgrades will absolutely be necessary, often its more than appropriate to grow out a potential monster fish in a tank that is considerably smaller than it will need as an adult.

Having had my polys for 2 1/2 almost three years now, they are all around 20-24". They are still not in their "forever" tank, but have been upgraded as time passes to suit their needs. The same goes for my gar and my large cichlids. The majority of them were grown out in tanks that are smaller than their "forever" tanks.

I would like to hear discussion, both pros and cons without anything becoming personal or rude, please.

 

[Inka4040]

I think these are pretty common sense recommendations. For the most part, IME, the people who are touting that any baby monster fish immediately go into their permanent housing fall into one of two camps: people who genuinely care about fish, and have been around long enough to see how many people will repeat to the death their intentions to upgrade and never do, and those who want to speak with authority about things they only have a cursory google search worth of knowledge on. Without a healthy base of experience from which to make these sorts of judgment calls, too many will just parrot things they've heard/read before, without really knowing the impetus behind why certain things are required/recommended. This is the same trap so many people fall into screaming about how each betta needs at least 5 gallons to live healthily. If this were even remotely true, I'd like to know why the countries that don't keep bettas "properly" are churning out far more of them, at far higher qualities than the western countries where they are pampered to the point of extravagance. Granted, there are some fish that really should be put into permanent/semi-permanent housing almost immediately (goldfish, which do most of their growing in the first year or two of life would fall into this category), but especially with many of the monster fish, it's not only acceptable, but often ideal to grow out in smaller quarters.

 

[user_name]

It all depends on the actual person. I know that there are a lot of people out there who buy an Oscar for a smaller tank and say "Well when he gets big I'll get a bigger tank" What happens when you CAN'T get one?

Personally I only get fish which can go into my current tanks as full grown adults. I DO grow out fish like my baby BN's in other tanks, but I make sure that their is space for them as adults in their future tank.

 

[BadFishPa]

I have to agree,all my fish started out in smaller tanks. Even with Oscars who grow really fast ,a 1 -2 inch fish in a 75 gallon tank or larger looks to be in distress. Large filter systems toss them around,and i have seen smaller cichlids actually get stuck against the intake tube in the aquarium..Plus as you have said , getting food to them could be a problem. Unless its a financial decision,where you may not be able to upgrade later i would start smaller. Plus you can usually find deals on smaller used grow outs and save for the dream tank as they grow..

 

[Khemul]

It all depends on the actual person. I know that there are a lot of people out there who buy an Oscar for a smaller tank and say "Well when he gets big I'll get a bigger tank" What happens when you CAN'T get one?

:iagree:
And that is basically where the 'proper tank size' lecture comes from.

It's one thing to say "I'm gonna put this baby Oscar in a 40g until it gets a little bigger then move it to a larger permanent tank that I have". It's another to say "I'm gonna put this baby Oscar in a 40g and upgrade later on". It's more a problem with newbies to the field since the implications of those upgrade plans financially or for space and amount work required may not be as well thought out as someone with experience setting up and keeping multiple tanks.


Most people will agree that a baby Oscar doesn't need to go right into a 75+g tank. But they will make sure the person asking if they can keep a baby Oscar in a 30g knows that the tank is not a proper home long-term and will quickly be outgrown.

 

[fishorama]

I agree too, especially for fish like clown loaches that grow quite slowly. Altough anything less than a 4 ft tank is only for the very short term, a 75g is ok for several years until they hit say 8 inches. Some fish grow way faster, get much bigger & will need upgrades sooner.
Not everyone realizes the fishes' eventual needs since we almost always see quite young fish. But the "buy them then trade them in" mentality is not responsible fish keeping to me.
I also thinks it's irresponsible of most shops to sell IR sharks, red tailed cats etc without proper informed warnings & many people still believe the "grow to tank size" myth.

 

[msjinkzd]

also, to be nit picky, I don't consider oscars a "monster fish". Most people can attain a 75g. I am thinking more the fish that take 4-5 years to reach size, or longer, and require tanks well over a few hundred gallons.

For instance, it will probably take 5 years or so for my endlis to hit full size. There is no way I was going ot have the 600g (that I hope to have) sitting around for 6 years while they grow out, lol

 

[excuzzzeme]

I am one of the ones that will tell people to opt for the larger tank immediately.

As Inka pointed out,

. . . For the most part, IME, the people who are touting that any baby monster fish immediately go into their permanent housing fall into one of two camps: people who genuinely care about fish, and have been around long enough to see how many people will repeat to the death their intentions to upgrade and never do . . .

I do this with the mindset that "OK, this person doesn't have the ability to invest in numerous tanks until the optimum size is reached." or it is obvious from the postings that they will only invest in the smallest tank they can get away with.

It is those kinds of people that actually negate the wisdom of MSJINKZD opinion. Personally, I have the luxury of being able to graduate tank sizes as needed as I have many unused and unneeded at the present time. For those that can't, I feel it is common sense to go with the larger tank right off the bat. Even while raising small community fish, I had my eyes out for a 150 gallon tank. I was able to forestall the acquisition of any large fish until I had the tank I wanted. Luckily for me I ran into a sweet deal on a 90 and and 100 and had them on-hand when I need to jump to a much lager tank.

I have never seen or felt the need to put a betta in a 5 gallon tank so I don't get into those postings. Other community fish, I see no reason they can't go in a 10 gallon and yet I am voted down when I recommend one. One of the few community fish I have had that would be better off in a long tank is the giant danio. I feel they are better in a 20 long than a 20H.

If you have the means and the tanks, graduate up, if you don't - get the largest tank it will possibly need as an adult.

 

[BettaFishMommy]

also, to be nit picky, I don't consider oscars a "monster fish".

i'd have to agree with you Rach, oscars usually don't get over the 12 inch mark in captivity. monster fish IMO are those that grow to be at least 20 to 24 inches.

 

[Khemul]

It isn't really so much that a person must have the tank on hand. But that they must have a rather safe upgrade plan that is extremely unlikely to get derailed. For most people this doesn't include the rather obvious backup plan (rehoming) and so is doomed to potential disaster.

It's all about experience and how well the person puts forward this experience in the discussion. If the person seems to know what they are doing, has multiple backup plans, and knows what they will be getting into then most people will agree that it is fine.



Although I'd say the Oscars do make a good example here. A 75g isn't all that hard to come by or keep up, but look at how often upgrade plans fails due to unforeseen circumstances or loss of interest.