Have You Overlooked These Fish?

[Tommy Gun]

 

[Lynden]

...I have to admit that I have never heard of any springs that spew out saltwater

Well, neither have I, and as such the spring I was reffering to spews cold, fresh water, which can drive the SG in smaller tide pools down very quickly. Conversely, the majority are not fed by a spring, and this can be even worse, as evaporation and the beating sun can drive the SG and temperature through the roof. And while the open ocean may be an extremely stable environment, the reefs and tide pools are rarely as. The idea that they are extremely stable is another beginner misconception.

Not to imply that anyone else isn't, perhaps I happen to be the first person to read your list and am not scared to point these things out. And for the record, not everyone has completely agreed with you, including a moderator. While I completely understand that in many cases, being a moderator does not make him/her an expert; meaning, perhaps Navarre's post doesn't hold as much gravity than anyone elses --- however, this is not to imply that I believe Navarre is or isn't an expert since that could very well be true.

Nav is one of our best people, but that doesn't make his opinion more or less respect-worthy than anyone else's. By the way, Andy is better with this subject than Nav is simply because he has so much experience with those "iffy" fish than Nav does. And Andy agreed with me.

Just a piece of paper??? Do you have any clue what it takes to earn a Doctorate's Degree? If you do, then you would know that these people hold much much much much much more than a piece of paper...and I bet some of them would be offended by your comment here. Let's be realistic here, neither one of us are in a position to be telling Dr. Foster and/or Dr. Smith that they are completely wrong since they obviously know much more about this hobby than we do; which is what you are doing.

The website they run is indeed an exceptional one and most of their info is very correct, but the team behind fishbase likely blows them out of the water, as they are specialists in ichthyology. That's where I get my info; from the specialists.

Liveaquaria is wrong about certain fish. I don't care how long they (or anyone) spent in school, they could have spent a hundred years for all I care; they still can't magically transform untrue statements into true ones just by stating them. That's what you need to realize here.

I feel we may be slowly leading off-topic....

 

[andywg]

Rarely live for more than a month? Do you have any kind of figures to back that up?

Since I have never kept one of these eels myself, I am going on the info and ideas of others when I make that statement regarding ribbon eels. For example, the "The PocketExpert Guide: Marine Fishes" explains that "most individuals of these species do not acclimate to the home aquarium, often refusing to to feed and wasting away in captivity" --- however, the book also goes on to point out that this may not be the case with some of the ribbon eels.

That book is a massively abridged compilation of the Reef Fishes series written by Scott W. Michael. In the full article on ribbon eels (Rhinomuraena quaesita - Reef Fishes Volume 1) he states that "in some captive venues they may refuse to feed" after which Michael goes on to detail how to get one to feed in captivity (though again liking guppies as a feeder fish rather than offering live inverts).

Let me preface this by pointing out that I am extremely aware that Wikipedia is not a trusted source in a lot of cases, however, by clicking HERE you can read the warning as to these eels not being long-lived in captivity. Additionally, clickHERE to view some comments regarding these eels - posted on the 'Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine', which IMHO and IME, should prove to be a more reliable resource.

However, since it sounds as though these eels have gained this reputation because they do not refuse to eat, it would not surprise me to hear that your eel is an exception to the rule. In fact, I am currently keeping three fish which share that same 'starvation' problem and have been able to keep them alive and healthy because the are the exception to that rule in that they all eat frozen/prepared foods.

But are they really the exception to the rule? My experience, and that of those I speak to in real life is that ribbon eels are nowhere near as hard as is often written. How do you know that the people who have had problems before have just not offered the correct settings? So many idiots have no idea on how to research looking after their fish and only wonder how to do it when it is too late.

Additionally, while I may not be 100% accurate on this, it is my understanding that the ocean is pretty much a stable environment for the most part (which excludes those tide pools and whatnot).
...


True, I am sure the ocean changes to some extent, but I am sure those changes must be extremely slow due to the sheer amount of water,

Perhaps you should try and read some accounts of people diving in waters on reefs (or even better get out there and do it, it's a great hobby) where the difference in temperature between the lagoon water and the incoming tide is so much that heat shimmers occur. The fish happily swim between the two areas without any problems. The open ocean itself is somewhat stable, but very few animals live therein (when considered to its size).

Reefs and shore areas, on the other hand, are far from stable. I have snorkelled over reefs where the water quickly ranged from bath-like to somewhat cool. On Heron Island the reef flat experiences daily temperature fluctuations of 2.5-5 degrees C and even the fore reef has 3 degrees of variability per day in it. Despite common misconceptions about reefs, the areas where most of our fish are caught from are extremely variable from day to day and even tide to tide.

Just a piece of paper??? Do you have any clue what it takes to earn a Doctorate's Degree? If you do, then you would know that these people hold much much much much much more than a piece of paper...and I bet some of them would be offended by your comment here. Let's be realistic here, neither one of us are in a position to be telling Dr. Foster and/or Dr. Smith that they are completely wrong since they obviously know much more about this hobby than we do; which is what you are doing.

Dr Foster and Dr Smith put no references on their website. As a future point, all of the doctors associated to their site are in the more common area of dogs and cats. The aquatics section is completely devoid of any Ph.Ds. I think it is more than possible that I know more than the Doctors on that site about the hobby. If the site knows so much about the hobby, why are they still selling unrefrigerated bottles of bacteria to "colonize" a filter when research by Hovanec et al since the late 1990s shows that those conditioners do not work and contain the wrong nitrite oxidising bacteria?

With regards to what is reef safe or not, the qualifications someone holds mean little. I doubt any degrees of any sort focus on whether a fish is reef safe in a small captive aquarium.

As an example, they give out hugely wrong details on frogfish, completely different to that in Reef Fishes Volume 1. Reef Fishes Volume 1 has a reference section where you can check the accuracy of the information from Scott Michael and decide whether you think he is right. Liveaquaria has a "buy" button where they can make money from you. Their mixed "Antennarius sp" frogfish is just some random frogfish they can't identify, yet they give it a max length of 6", compeltely omitting to inform you of the possibility of Antennarius commerson reaching 12". The people on the site may have more letters after their name than I do, but that does not mean my information is suddenly incorrect.

Also, perhaps you should look at some of nmonks posts. nmonks has a doctorate and has worked in labs looking after fish. He admits that the scientists and learned people often care less for their fish than the average hobbyist. I would never accept as true at face value anything written on a page trying to sell me something.

 

[Tommy Gun]

 

[Lynden]

Mmm, yes... anyone with further questions on "reef safe fish" is encouraged to PM one (or all) of us.

-Lynden

 

[andywg]

- why isn't it important to include information as to what "risks" each of these fish might pose to a reef set-up so that others can be aware of them and take a serious second look at them?

Becasue these fish are universally tarred with the brush of not reef safe. The idea (at least in my mind) of this thread which I encouraged Lynden to work on was that people could learn of some fish which are usually stated to be non reef safe which can be included in a reef if you research and provide the right settings. Let's be honest, almost everyone knows the main reasons why these fish are not reef safe, this is about providing information which may counter such a view.

Regarding the ribbon eels.....like I said, I have never kept one of these eels before and hence, I am only speaking from what I have read and heard about them --- which, in the vast majority of cases, seems to state that they are much better off in nature versus captivity.

Which brings us to the point of this thread, pointing out that the general consensus may not be the actual truth for what our members consider the real world. Consider the difference between the same author's abridged view (many die from not eating) to the full book (some may be stubborn to feed).

I have also visited fish base quite a few times over the past couple days and agree...it appears to be a very reliable resource. However, while the provided information is useful, I haven't noticed any sort of 'tips' or 'tactics' included regarding how to approach keeping them in captivity. Granted, as was already pointed out, this seems to be more of a scientific versus hobby-related website, so perhaps that information is not relevant to the websites goal....however, I would feel as though this website is only a 'spring-board' of information for us to base further research on.

Indeed, but fishbase is a great site to compare max sizes to, something many sites get completely wrong from time to time.

I also agree that the PocketExpert book is also just a springboard of information for us to base further information on, and will get a hold of the books you mention Andy and read them as soon as I can. However, my entire motivation for pointing out the idea that ribbon eels can be 'hard' to keep, which you even point out the author states as well, was simply to point out this fact so that those who are not as experienced as you, or others, do not fall under the false impression that we can buy one and expect massively successful results without placing the extra efforts and/or research into keeping them...if that makes any sense.

I don't think this thread ever states that one can just buy these fish and dump them in, just that they are possibles (As mentioned above).

some accounts of people diving in waters on reefs (or even better get out there and do it, it's a great hobby)

Unfortunately, the closest body of water to my house, Lake Michigan, doesn't have the spectacular reefs that might motivate me to add that hobby to my resume, but I will take you advice and look in this area to learn more.

Diving in reefs is nice, but the best diving is in cold water I dive the waters around the UK, and (to be frankly honest) I prefer the single figure temperatures and 5 metre viz of british waters to the super clear warm reefs of Fiji.

I truly encourage you to try local diving, but don't do it with PADI. PADI is good for holiday reef diving, but frankly woeful for cold water or mildly technical diving.

However, my point there was not focused on water temp....lord knows my own water can vary throughout the day and night...but more so on the ability for saltwater fish to acclimate to certain water chemistry changes in a short amount of time -- basically to say that I flatly disagree with the notion that we don't need to acclimate our fish when we bring them home, or that we do not need to focus on keeping acceptable, and stable water parameters in our aquariums - in any sort of water.

Well, there is a large school of thought that longer acclimatisations are a problem. There are a few threads which indicate that once a bag is opened it is having a raising pH together with ammonia in the water and it is better to throw the fish in as soon as possible. A not so local fish store always drives back from his wholesaler (easily an hour drive, more often 2) and just cuts each bag and dumps the fish into the sales tank.

Now I am not advocating the above, but fish are far more resilient to problems than we give them credit for. pH is actually probably responsible for almost zero deaths (though hardness may be something different). The science forum has a good couple of threads on it.

To end this highly entertaining, and I agree, off-topic debate, I will simply say that my point here is that if you want others to take a closer look at these fish...it might be even more helpful if you were to more specifically highlight the main areas of concern that we would need to overcome first. Which, in my mind, is a very simple concept and I apologize if I have not been able to convey that thought more clearly.

In consideration, that may be useful, but do we then start to lean towards trying to give full care details, rather than giving a springboard to go off and consider fish as they research? I honestly don't know. Adding more detail is always tempting, but do we then present a wall of text that puts people off reading and leads them to skim and pick the words they like the look of?

 

[Tommy Gun]

 

[Lynden]

few, if not any fish on the list which does not pose a somewhat unique challenge to reefer above and beyond the challenges related to fish which are commonly known to be 'reef-safe'

...such as?

I realize that some of them do burrow or throw rocks about (larger wrasses) or perhaps exude a larger bioload but really since most of those fish come from and are adapted to the exact same conditions as gobies, clowns, damsels et al. why should they need different conditions?

 

[Tommy Gun]

 

[Lynden]

So basically you're saying the challenge is to not buy animals that might be eaten? I guess that would be a challenge for some people, me included, but not really enough to rewrite an article over...

Liveaquaria is flat out wrong about several points. For instance, the niger trigger is well suited for the average larger reef tank; gentle, colourful, adapted to high flow/light... but yet, liveaquaria gives it a flat 'no'. I've actually kept two planktonivorous triggers with many organisms that "will be eaten" and indeed more than a few people told me, on this forum and other ones, that all triggers will eat all shrimp. This is clearly not the case as the shrimp, small fish, hermits et cetera were untouced with the sole exception of the pinktailed trigger eating two small shrimp as opposed to starving to death as he previously wouldn't take food.

I now even have a benthic feeding trigger, something I myself doubted the reef-safeness of, in a full reef tank with shrimp, smaller fish, cnidarians, hermits, snails, et al. though admittedly the trigger did eat a tiny whelk (I assume) and bullied the puffer for the first few days. This shows that liveaquaria is, once again, less than correct regarding the "reef-safeness" of many fishes as Rhinecanthus aculeatus is another fish they give a flat 'no' but that can be kept in many reef conditions, and this holds true even if mine is an exception as no trigger eats large amount of corals (both Rhinecanthus and Balistoides viridescens often consume small amounts of SPS, specifically Acropora, in the wild). An aquarist that wishes to stock both soft corals, LPS and Rhinecanthus will not experience any "challenges", and I for one would have not got that idea if I had read nothing but liveaquaria. That is my purpose for making this list.

 

[Musho3210]

i wouldnt want to dive in the michigan lake, too many "beach is closed down for possible bacterial infestation" or something like that, i guess its just because i live right next to chicago.....

 

[Lynden]

Doesn't that lake have lampreys? Signs warning of "bacterial infestations" don't scare me all that much since, really, every lake and body of water is swarming with deadly bacteria (but a sign like that would admittedly keep me clear); but lampreys are one of the very few animals I would be hesitant to enter the water with...

 

[Tommy Gun]

 

[Lynden]

Planktonivorous triggers do not rearrange the tank one bit, but I see where you're coming from.

Sheesh! You are either impervious to many of the things most everyone else is not, or you just enjoy 'going against the grain' more than I have ever seen probably. It is true that Lake Michigan's beaches are closed from time to time....and since it is usually becasue of something silly like it rained a lot and the sewers are full so they have to dump some into the lake - hence, the bacteria that can be found in the lake sometimes poses a much different risk than it otherwise would. Although, perhaps a decent case of Cryptosporidium would change your mind on that 'who cares' attitude.

One could call me impervious to most things, I think owning a reef tank proves that to the fullest extent. One thing that does bug me is man-made things; I rarely bat an eye at run of the mill bacteria, viruses or protists but highly virulent strains or species, man made poisons or city waste would definitely get a reaction from me.

 

[Tommy Gun]