The useless junk they try to sell you

Chemipure... There's a thread in GCC about it... Supposedly lets you keep any fish with any fish, with no water changes, etc...


Lupin said:
Good thread.:) Would terrestrial plants sold as aquatic plants count as "junk"?:naughty:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had that at the back of my mind when I started this thread. I was thinking a thread in the planted section with pictures, scientific names and common names of terrestrial plants (i.e. 'mondo grass plant'). It's good to mention it here, too :)
 
J double R said:
I don't find anything wrong with stick-on backgrounds.. sure, theyre functionally useless, but i find them aesthetically pleasing, and not detrimental.
Click to expand...

I agree...this list could degenerate into a list of aesthetic likes/dislikes if we aren't careful. I use backgrounds to hide cables and walls...easier, quicker, more flexible and less messy than painting the back!
 
DAVIDFBT said:
The Artificial Decorations: Castles, No Fishing signs, Sunken Ships, and houses to name a few. Fish would like it better if you spend that money on a nice piece of driftwood, some artificial rock formations or plants more than a fake boat. Do you find these decorations at the bottom of the Amazon river or in natural pools in Southeast Asia?
Click to expand...

When was the last time most of our fish were at the bottom of the Amazon river or in a natural pool in Southeast Asia. Do you really think they know what is found there and what is not? Do you honestly think a fish really cares that the cave that gives him shelter is a fake boat or some artificial rock formation. Why then, when they do diving shows about underwater shipwrecks and sunken subway cars do they find these things teaming with life. If your theory was correct wouldn't they just be barren pieces of junk because all the fish would be choosing the natural rock formations. I have lots of customers who have fake boats as well as artificial rock formations and real rock formations and live plants in their tanks and guess what. The fish really don't to care and there are quite a few that actually prefer the fake ships.

Personally, that look is not for me either but just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's junk.
 
I've got some fish that were from Peru about a year ago. ;)
 
sschind said:
Do you honestly think a fish really cares that the cave that gives him shelter is a fake boat or some artificial rock formation. Why then, when they do diving shows about underwater shipwrecks and sunken subway cars do they find these things teaming with life. If your theory was correct wouldn't they just be barren pieces of junk because all the fish would be choosing the natural rock formations.

Personally, that look is not for me either but just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's junk.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. I also prefer the aesthetics of a 'natural' looking tank, but that's all it is - an aesthetic preference. I was actually going to say the exact same thing about sunken ships....in the wild, many many fish live in sunken ships etc. even though there are other 'natural' structures (rock formations, driftwood) all around. It doesn't make sense that if you give a fish a fake sunken ship and a fake rock formation, the fish will all prefer the fake rock formation - in fact, I have experience that says the opposite is true.

So, I wouldn't say at all that fake decor is 'useless junk', as it does serve an important purpose in giving structure and hiding places to the fish, and in some cases may even be preferable to similar 'natural' decor from the fishes point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom