.....am I Missing Something

[saz326]

So, when you're inexperienced, or a young kid and you get your first starter tank:

£25 for a plastic aquarium with lid, Maybe £20 for a filter or air pump for undergravel, £5 for some gravel, (or if you're lucky maybe a £100 starters kit with glass tank etc)

...so why the flippin' heck do some starters get expensive fish to go in their cheap setups. Fish like oscar's, Cichlids etc.


When I was a kid I was only allowed goldfish, and then when I eventually went tropical I had neons, a bristlenose (who is still alive actually - gotta be 10 years now), some glowlights and a pair of dwarf gourami.

Maybe this topic is out of jealousy - I don't know. But why do people spend so little on a tank and then spend so much on a fish. If they can afford an expensive fish then surely they'd save up just that bit longer and buy a larger set-up to keep the fish in.

...its like buying a broken table with wonky legs, and putting a delicate Ming dynasty Vase on the top of it.

Pah.

 

[lilfishie]

i know where your coming from, i payed about £100 for my 60l with all except heater, then got playsand substrate so fairly cheap few plants, but the most i personally have spent on a single fish (that i can remember) was £6 each, the whole setup came to around £130 fully stocked and planted, i am not too bad, i guess if people like them they'll buy them whether they are good for the tank or not.

also these days you can pick up some bargin tanks about that are decent quality

 

[arobinson1984]

I think a lot of the younger or inexperienced fish keepers don't tend to realise how much effort goes into keeping fish, they tend to see it as a bit of fun rather than a full time commitment.

Hence the reason they think a £25 tank, inadequate filtration, inadequate heating and inadequate cycling 'will do'

I by no means would call myself experienced, I've been keeping fish about 2 years but I take the time to learn what is required rather than just throwing everything together and expecting things to work out. I guess it prob stems from the time as a child when you won a goldfish at the fairground, you took it home and put it in a tiny bowl of cold water and that was it and the reality is it's not that simple.

Andy

 

[degsod]

I don't think it fair to paint all younger fish keepers in this category, I know a lot of younger fish keepers (there are some on here) who know a lot more than the 'experienced' fish keepers.

Oh, I am an older fishkeeper who is re learing the hobby after being away from fishkeeping for about 10 years

 

[Spishkey]

have to agree with the above statement, there are some younger fishkeepers on here that have taught me so much, so not all youngsters are clueless about fishkeeping. im sure a lot of older people make the same mistake.
its all down to inexperience and its why people should be edcutated before buying their first set up. its not hard to go down to a library and read a few books, or search the web for some decent advice

 

[Curiosity101]

Although it's only after you start reading that your realise just how much there is to learn... Until then it all seems so simple. Tank + Water + Fish + Food...how could it possibly be complicated.

 

[degsod]

Exactly, we are all still learning. I have been keeping fish since I was 13 (am 50 now) and I have probably learnt more in the last few months than I did back then.

I used to have books galore and used to get TFH. What seems to have happened is that there has been more research done into the Biology and Chemistry of fishkeeping which was very laking in the past.

People believed that filters where for physically filtering dirt out of a tank an dwhen it got 'dirty' you replaced all the media with 'nice clean' media.

Thank god we know more now!!!

 

[kribensis12]

I wouldn't blame it on all young keepers( not saying you are, but It appears that way). I mean, I am 15, and know a little bit about the hobby. i do my best to learn more everyday on TFF( Bieng here 3 years and still learning more things everyday, now that's a good deal!). I mean, when I started out at the age of 4, it was because I won 2 goldfish at church. So, we bought a bowl. Then the goldfish died. So, my dad got a 30g tank out of our garage( he used it at his old church office). We put a couple goldfish in that. They died eventually. Then we bought a heater, and then some neons and swords and mollies. Eventually we moved up to buying a filter. Then my uncle gave me a custom made 20g flat hexagon tank w/ stand for free( he didnt want it anymore). Then last summer I bought a 30g for about 27 dollars( store was closing).

So, in my OP, its all a learning experience. People who start the hobby might not know you cant put a oscar in a 2.5 g tank.

 

[youngfisher]

I would also like to add, some youngsters dont have the room for a big tank set up. (like myself) - so instead of getting yourself down because you carnt have a nice big tank, you can just get an 'average' tank and have a brilliant fish.

But personally I think 90% of the time in fish keeping its all trial and error

 

[smbgpd]

I'm not young any more and I am coming back to fish keeping after 4 years and I agree with youngfisher, I might not be able to get a huge (expensive?) tank in my home at the moment due to space constraints, but the fish I stock in my tank will be the best I can afford. I am also a great believer that quality always costs, either in monetary value or time looking for healthy stock. To say that people with "starter" or cheap set ups should not spend money on expensive fish smacks somewhat of jealously but I understand where the original poster is coming from.

 

[youngfisher]

Well my opinion is - Aslong as the fish are happy, who cares who owns them and how much they cost

 

[markandhisfish]

i dont really think cost is the point here. what really gets my goat is when people put a fish in a tank that is way too small for it. example i once knew somebody who had 2 oscars in a 3 foot tank.

wether the fish / tank cost a lot is irrelivant its wether the 2 are suited to each other that matters

 

[karigupi]

i dont really think cost is the point here. what really gets my goat is when people put a fish in a tank that is way too small for it. example i once knew somebody who had 2 oscars in a 3 foot tank.

wether the fish / tank cost a lot is irrelivant its wether the 2 are suited to each other that matters

Agreed, I've nothing against anyone using their own money to buy any fish, as long as they have the tanks ready & understand how to care for it.

Age, I think is irrelevant, experience doesnt necessarily come with age, I'm a newbie fishkeeper but couldnt be classed as young anymore

 

[jmkgreen]

I'd love to know why there is no restriction preventing these tiny tiny tanks being sold in the likes of Pets at Home. My sister got sold one and has two fish in hers, bit small for my liking but they come much smaller still!

It's one thing getting a small tank as a hospital for sick fish it's another to sell them with pictures of a small shoal of fish on the box.

 

[youngfisher]

To many people care about the money.

Lets get all the managers of p&h and put them in a small tank, see how they like it.