In fact, I once worked at an LFS, but unfortunately as staff, not management. We got a new manager, who immediately changed all of the tanks' water by...I forget if it was 25% or 50%. We then lost about sixty percent of our fish, which had not been a problem previously, with rarer ten percent water changes.
You are assuming that every time a water change is done, it is done 'wrong'(and thus causes the fish to die). There are also numerous examples where 25% or 50% water changes did NOT kill the fish. In fact, I just did a 30% water change in one of my tanks.
Do half the fish in the wild die out every time it rains?
Oh, absolutely, if the tank has accumulated high nitrates. Many fish can thrive in nitrates up above 100, if it got that way very slowly and they're used to it. The sudden CHANGE in nitrates, for the new fish, whose LFS environment may have been nitrates around 20, can be fatally stressful.
I'm curious to know where you got this information from. I've always thought that nitrates are not fatal to fish, but can stunt fish growth and shorten lifespan if exposed to fish in higher concentrations.
My impression of your posts is they are sort of black and white, the fish lives or the fish dies. Ex1: The new manager at your LFS did a large W/C and 60% of fish died. What about the health of a fish over a period of time? It's hard to notice stunted growth in smaller fish and there aren't really any defined lifespans for different species of fish. Some people may think "fish X" living for 2 years is normal when in reality it lives for about 3 years. An extra 1 year is the equivalent of 30 years to 45 years.
My oscar is a perfect example of a fish that is sadly stunted(my fault) and I've always assumed that it was because of high nitrate levels.
I am not saying that you are wrong, but I don't think it's possible to analyze everything that a fish needs to thrive. There certainly must be more than just nitrates. How do we replenish nutrients or minerals into the tank? Where does calcium(for harder snail shells?) in the tank come from once it is depleted? Unless we can analyze every single mineral and nutrient needed by fish, including ones that are not yet discovered, we cannot replicate mother earth.
We can prolong water changes through things such as plants to remove nitrates, but I don't think not doing water changes at all is possible. Even nature itself gets replenished with new water when it rains.
Too much of aquaria's conventional wisdom comes from inductive reasoning, like "the fish look more active when I change their water, and they spawn, so it must be good"...two signs of stress.
Oh no, people on Jamaican beaches move so slowly, they must be unhealthy...they get so much more active if it gets cold and rainy! Cold, rainy weather must be better for humans!
Lots of aspects of fishkeeping include inductive reasoning because we do not know all the facts. You are also using inductive reasoning by assuming that stress caused from water changes is bad.
Where did you come to the conclusion that fish are more active when stressed? When I buy new fish from the LFS and they are stressed from being put in a new environment, they actually move less.
Water changes, normally, are about REMOVING chemicals, not adding them. Except for the elements in Instant Ocean, reef crystals, et cetera.
And you can definitely add those trace elements without a water change, if you prefer.
Who says that water changes cannot be about both adding AND removing chemicals? How many trace elements can you really add? Throughout longer periods of time, the lack of even tracer elements that very slowly detrimentally affect the fish. Once again, we are not nature.
Besides...if you are going to pay for bottles of trace elements, why not just pay for tap water?