What counts as success?

[OrionGirl]

Recently, there have been a rash of claims from people who are claiming success with dubious maintenance or fish combinations. Not referring to anyone in specific, or even confining this to AC threads, but it seems to be a trend inbelievers that if the fish have survived for a month or more, than obviously they are fine.

I don't agree with this idea at all. Fish that live for 10+ years should not be judged fine on the basis of a few months. Most species of fish can survive in suboptimal conditions, with poor food quality or little food at all for months. Few people (myself included) know what behavior fish display in the wild, so have little way to determine what is 'normal' behavior, and can't determine if the fish is comfortable or not. Often times, people complain because a fish is not behaving as they wish it would, ignoring the natural behavior of the fish (ie, nocturnal fish aren't the best choice if you want to see them out and about at lunch time). Some combinations of critters (especially fish and inverts, though including many combinations of fish) will not work in the long term, and stories of short term co-existance doesn't prove otherwise. Same for keeping large fish in small tanks--it can work for a while, but in the long run is not in the best interest of the fish.

So, my advice: do not assume that just because something works in the short term that it is a good long term plan. Get many opinions, but pay attention to the length of time for the success stories, especially when they seem at odds with advice from experienced aquariasts.

 

[Z Man]

Excellent point OrionGirl. I have not answered as many questions as I could here because many times I say that this fish can not go with that fish and someone always comes on and says "My friend has those together for 6 months now and they are doing great!". But they never come back a year later and say one of the fish killed the other. I have been keeping and breeding cichlids for 25 years now so maybe I don't know what I am talking about. That's just the way I feel anyway. Keep up the good work OrionGirl.

 

[TKOS]

I just went scuba diving on the weekend and saw what would have been a 2 inch perch staying in a hole occupied by a 10-15 pound lobster. While they seemed happy enough for the 10 minutes I watched them, I wouldn't be going out and telling people to keep such combinations in captivity.

 

[Andy16]

This could be made a sticky i think You have a great point oriongirl. A lake/ocean is a lot bigger then even the biggest fish tank.

 

[Matak]

I agree Andy. Most of us want to see our fish thrive, not just survive.

 

[Slappy*McFish]

Success, by my definition, is raising a juvenile fish to adult-hood and having that fish grow close to it's maximum size and live it's life expectancy with little or no disease/ill-health. A healthy fish that eats well, exhibits full coloration, behaves naturally, and breeds in it's environment could be considered a "success", IMO.

 

[OrionGirl]

With the exception of the breeding, I agree. I have a few 'loners'--fish where I have only one specimen, so can't really expect them to breed. The only breeding that has happened in my tank--those silly kuhli loaches!--was unintentional, but certainly indicates they thought the tank was acceptable.

With some species, I don't think breeding to be proof of good maintenance. Take guppies--they will breed in just about all conditions, and a few fry will survive each batch with even minimal cover. I don't have any experience in my tanks, but have seen kribs spawning in the LFS sale tanks--not the best environment, one would think. For many species, yes, this is clearly a good standard for care, but not for all.