dwarfgourami
Fish Connoisseur
Right, I've finally had a reply to the letter I wrote to the RSPCA about the errors in their Tropical Fish publication. In particular, I complained about the ridiculous stocking levels of their suggested tank set-ups: one, I think, worked out at 113 inches in a 15 gallon and included such interesting species as "small angelfish".
Can't say I'm impressed by the reply, the Senior Scientific Officer who wrote it comes across as both patronising and ignorant (funny how those two qualities often go together). I definitely need to reply to it, but I need to provide references to proper research that proves my point. Can you help folks, this is something really useful we can do for the fish!
At first he is surprised that I should have complaints about a book that has been written and reviewed by some eminent fishkeepers.
- Well, that doesn't cut much ice with me, having been an academic for 20 years, I have learnt NEVER to believe anything just because the professor says so.
Then he points out that the books has been for sale for 15 years and not many people have got back and complained to them about it.
- Well, no, they come on here instead and want to know why their fish die.
Here are the main points we need to find book and chapter for:
quote:
"Many fish have a capability in their wild state to grow without constraint . In confined situations their growth is restricted by a range of factors including hormones and other chemicals. This fact can be shown when godlfish having been kept in a tank are carefully placed in a large pond almost instantly grow....The set-ups are all designed to be run with air pumps and filters as explained throughout the book. As such, the number of fish that can be kept in a tank can be greater than without aeration and filtration. However, all calculations are made on fish that can be bought by most aquarists- that is small and/or young fish. These will grow but will be restricted in their growth by their environment so are unlikely to reach their full size in the tanks suggested. We are unaware of any work thta suggests thisd restriction in size affects the fishes' welfare" endquote
Right, folks, this is the most important one. We all know that it does, but we need chapter and verse. As far as I'm aware (oh, dear, getting influenced by his sloppy way of writing), all research about growth-restricting hormones has been on a few species (which apart from goldfish?)
- can you give me references A) to such research B) to research indicating that it does not work the same way in most tropical species. Is there any research done on say plecos in cramped conditions?
- research or other evidence that lifespans are cut short by cramped conditions
-evidence of fish being deformed by cramped conditions
The rest of it I feel I can deal with myself, the idea of letting a tank sit for a week to start off the cycle, (wilfully?) misunderstanding my ironical comment about a small breed of angelfish, and quoting bettas as proof that tanks can be run without aeration and filtration without mentioning the uniqueness of the betta in this respect.
Can't say I'm impressed by the reply, the Senior Scientific Officer who wrote it comes across as both patronising and ignorant (funny how those two qualities often go together). I definitely need to reply to it, but I need to provide references to proper research that proves my point. Can you help folks, this is something really useful we can do for the fish!
At first he is surprised that I should have complaints about a book that has been written and reviewed by some eminent fishkeepers.
- Well, that doesn't cut much ice with me, having been an academic for 20 years, I have learnt NEVER to believe anything just because the professor says so.
Then he points out that the books has been for sale for 15 years and not many people have got back and complained to them about it.
- Well, no, they come on here instead and want to know why their fish die.
Here are the main points we need to find book and chapter for:
quote:
"Many fish have a capability in their wild state to grow without constraint . In confined situations their growth is restricted by a range of factors including hormones and other chemicals. This fact can be shown when godlfish having been kept in a tank are carefully placed in a large pond almost instantly grow....The set-ups are all designed to be run with air pumps and filters as explained throughout the book. As such, the number of fish that can be kept in a tank can be greater than without aeration and filtration. However, all calculations are made on fish that can be bought by most aquarists- that is small and/or young fish. These will grow but will be restricted in their growth by their environment so are unlikely to reach their full size in the tanks suggested. We are unaware of any work thta suggests thisd restriction in size affects the fishes' welfare" endquote
Right, folks, this is the most important one. We all know that it does, but we need chapter and verse. As far as I'm aware (oh, dear, getting influenced by his sloppy way of writing), all research about growth-restricting hormones has been on a few species (which apart from goldfish?)
- can you give me references A) to such research B) to research indicating that it does not work the same way in most tropical species. Is there any research done on say plecos in cramped conditions?
- research or other evidence that lifespans are cut short by cramped conditions
-evidence of fish being deformed by cramped conditions
The rest of it I feel I can deal with myself, the idea of letting a tank sit for a week to start off the cycle, (wilfully?) misunderstanding my ironical comment about a small breed of angelfish, and quoting bettas as proof that tanks can be run without aeration and filtration without mentioning the uniqueness of the betta in this respect.
/ideas.repec.org/p/wop/iasawp/ir99050.html
