Please, Suggestions!

[randallhart]

I knew the angel was going to die. I just tried to keep hope alive.

 

[Danno]

Ok bandwagon listen up! Yes it MIGHT be ok but then again, thier are two checkboxes that haven't been attended to!
One: Better then average filter
Two: Large water changes done religiously.

He didn't say he has an "awesome" filter or that he did his water changes religiously. Get off your bums and think individually and stop repeating yourselves just to get your "oh so lovely post count" higher.

 

[andywg]

Ok bandwagon listen up! Yes it MIGHT be ok but then again, thier are two checkboxes that haven't been attended to!
One: Better then average filter
Two: Large water changes done religiously.

He didn't say he has an "awesome" filter or that he did his water changes religiously. Get off your bums and think individually and stop repeating yourselves just to get your "oh so lovely post count" higher.

Sorry?

I state that a general guideline for initial stocking is not a hard and fast rule and because people agree it is jumping on the band wagon? Get over yourself. 1" per gallon is not the be all and end all of stocking and by having a few people agree it prevents the OP thinking I am way off mark by criticising one of the most overused pieces of advice on here.

We haven't established about water changes and filter, but being 10" over based on the absolute maximum the fish will grow to is not even close to overstocking. One does not need an "awesome" filter to cope with the above and a water change routine of 10% a week or 20% a fortnight would cope with the above.

1" per gallon is one of the worst things ever to hit fishkeeping IMO. It makes people who don't know a lot instantly criticise other set ups without any real information on how the system is maintained.


(N.B. Good to hear you have learnt how to spell your new favourite phrase, I was worried there would be suspensions from the site with a ban wagon )

 

[Miss Wiggle]

1" per gallon is one of the worst things ever to hit fishkeeping IMO. It makes people who don't know a lot instantly criticise other set ups without any real information on how the system is maintained.

said this on another thread about this today, but i don't find 1" per gallon to be a bad gudeline in itself

the problems start when people apply it as a rule not as a guideline

it's massivley flawed when you apply it to speific species and anyone can easily pull it apart if you apply it to a tank set up as a hard and fast rule, we can all spout about a 10" oscar not being suitable for a 10 gallon tank

however to give a beginner with a new tank a basic idea of how many of your average community tropicals they can have in an avergae sized tank it works just fine and gives a decent margin for error that beginners so often need.

 

[andywg]

Indeed, as an initial guide it is useful, but almost no one treats it as such. People either ignore it completely (such as myself) or treat it as a hard and fast rule. That is why I feel it is such a bad thing.

 

[Miss Wiggle]

it's the people at fault not the guideline in itself

that's all that bothers me, when people slate it without being clear what the real problems surrounding it are

poor defenceless little guideline, they should all pick on someone they're own size

 

[Danno]

Andywg, saying to get over myself doesn't make any sense as this has nothing to do with me. Nor did I say that this may-be-overstocking was based on the 1" per gallon rule at all, but rather on what fish can be comfortable in. I do agree that the 1" rule is a bad guideline.

(I checked that last post. I spelt it "banwagon", which was a typo for "bandwagon", never spelt it as "ban wagon". It’s a great way to categorize people feeding off one persons post)

 

[randallhart]

can't we all just get along

 

[dwarfgourami]

Indeed, as an initial guide it is useful, but almost no one treats it as such. People either ignore it completely (such as myself) or treat it as a hard and fast rule. That is why I feel it is such a bad thing.

I think this is a little unfair on us, andy. There are plenty of people here who use it as an easy means of illustrating that a tank is massively overstocked (clearly not the case here), but who try to combine it with thinking and common sense. When did you see me use it to advise people on their oscars or to tell them that their tanks are headed for disaster if they are a couple of inches over?

I sort of like the rule- within its very obvious limits- simply because it represents a counterbalance to the ideal that most beginners are going to have at the back of their head: that of the busy crowded lfs tank.

To your checkbox of filtration and water changes, I would like to add swimming space and territoriality.Even the most massive filtration in the world wouldn't justify cramming fish in so as to leave them short of individual space. Which is what lfs have to do- but then that is on a short term basis.

In the current case, the only problem is clearly that goby, which needs rehoming, or setting up in a separate tank.

 

[andywg]

Andywg, saying to get over myself doesn't make any sense as this has nothing to do with me. Nor did I say that this may-be-overstocking was based on the 1" per gallon rule at all, but rather on what fish can be comfortable in. I do agree that the 1" rule is a bad guideline.

(I checked that last post. I spelt it "banwagon", which was a typo for "bandwagon", never spelt it as "ban wagon". It’s a great way to categorize people feeding off one persons post)

The reason people have started replying about it not being overstocked is purely because someone claimed it was based on the 1" per gallon. You then moaned at people agreeing with me. You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about anyone having a view contrary to someone else and others agreeing with the second view.

If you look back, you twice have referred to a bandwagon without the d, though I care little for whether you have made it one word or two. To paraphrase Wilde:

To typo once can be regarded as a misfortune, to typo twice looks like carelessness

I sort of like the rule- within its very obvious limits- simply because it represents a counterbalance to the ideal that most beginners are going to have at the back of their head: that of the busy crowded lfs tank.

The guide's limits are the moment you apply it to real life. It only applies to small slim bodied fish under 3". This means that it doesn't apply to a somewhat large number of fish likely to be bought by people new to the hobby (as can be seen by the OP's stocking). Then it also contains a huge amount of leeway to allow for mistakes (bad filtration, overfeeding, inadequate water changes et al), so even if you are overstocked (even up to 2" per gallon) it is by no means a problem that cannot be sorted by just changing the maintenance regime (if necessary).

To your checkbox of filtration and water changes, I would like to add swimming space and territoriality.Even the most massive filtration in the world wouldn't justify cramming fish in so as to leave them short of individual space. Which is what lfs have to do- but then that is on a short term basis.

In the current case, the only problem is clearly that goby, which needs rehoming, or setting up in a separate tank.

I was referring to the current situation, where the swimming space and territorial requirements are not a problem. I myself did not mention about checkboxes, just that if the OP has them then this tank is in absolutely no problems regarding the stock's sizes (notwithstanding the advice I gave on suitablility to water conditions).

When it comes to me stocking my tanks I apply a Saltwater method of evaluating the tank; how the new inhabitant(s) might fit in, how it will affect the tank as it is and whether I can provide suitable care.

The only time I ever count up inches per gallon is to see just how flamed I would get for listing my current tanks' occupants if I were a newcomer to this forum.

 

[The-Wolf]

The only time I ever count up inches per gallon is to see just how flamed I would get for listing my current tanks' occupants if I were a newcomer to this forum.

I dare you to create a new account,
go on I dare you

 

[Miss Wiggle]

awww andy love, i've told you if you really want a flaming i'm sure i can arrange it.

actualyl you'd probably eb in luck today, my tempers somewhat warn thin and i'm spoiling for a fight!

 

[Darkstar]

Jumping on the bandwagon or not, I agree. The 1" guideline is exactly that, a guideline that it set in place for beginners. Once you've mastered the basics the guideline can be abused to the degree that it's no longer worth discussing. However, it does seem to set some people off when they hear of others who have exceeded it...don't know why, I imagine it comes down to the 'I know better than you!' syndrome.

I think the following text is a much better rule which although still not perfect is better able to cope with the differences in peoples fish. I've quoted this from another site and it was originally written by Shane Linder:

Here is something I wrote some time ago. It takes into account various points (name removed) made above and covers "over stocking." The 1" of fish per gallon rule works ok if all the fishes in the tank are 1" or less. Mass, not length, is the key and a 6" fish does not have six times the mass of a 1" fish but more like 12 times. In other cases, two fish of the same length may not require the same amount of space. A 10 inch Farlowella does not take up the same space (nor impact filtration) like a 10 inch Hypostomus. No system is perfect, not even mine.
-Shane

Shane’s Stocking Guidelines (Version II)
Current formulas do not take into account the two most important aspects that affect stocking levels - Filtration and Frequency/volume of water changes. Imagine a 20 gallon "long" type tank with 30 small Corydoras. If it had a powerful sponge filter (say rated at 40 gallons) and the aquarist did 50 percent water changes every three to four days, this tank would run very well. Now imagine the same tank with a small hang on the back power filter receiving 20 percent water changes every two weeks. In the second tank the fish would be dropping like flys in a short while.

I do understand why people seek out stocking "rules" as everyone needs some sort of general guidline. Perhaps the best way to do it would be on some sort of points system.

Tank points:
Since O2 exchange takes at the water's surface, surface area is the key factor.
A tank's available stocking points are its length X width (L X W).
Depth gives extra gallons that help dilute fish waste between water changes, but has no impact on the available "breathing space" of the tank.

Standard US 10 gallon 20" X 10" (200 points)
Standard US 20 "long" 30" X 10" (300 points
Standard US 40 "breeder" 36" X 18" (648 points)
Standard US 55 gallon 48" X 12" (576 points)

Quickly obvious is that twice the gallons holding capacity does not always equal twice the available "breathing space." It is also clear that tank shape (surface area) is more important than actual gallons held.

Fish points:
Points are for the size of an adult fish and are standard length. Round less than 20 points down (i.e. 310 fish points in a 300 point tank is ok).

Each 1" fish = 20 points
Each 2" fish = 40 points
Each 3" fish = 80 points
Each 4" fish = 160 points
Each 5" fish = 200 points (the formula changes as a 5" fish is not twice as massive as a 4" fish)
Each 6" fish = 250 points

Sample tanks:
Our aquarist has a 20 gallon “longâ€￾ aquarium (30â€￾ X 10â€￾) and 300 tank points.
A) 15 Corydoras habrosus (fifteen 20 point fish)
B) 8 Corydoras panda (eight 40 point fish)
C) 20 gallon community: 8 neon tetras (160 points), two dwarf cichlids (80 points) and three Otocinclus (60) equals 300 points. I think that this is a safe stocking level for the average community tank with "normal" filtration and 10-20 percent water changes every week or two.

Important: No SINGLE fish's points should ever add up to MORE than half of the tank's total available points. This means that no fish over 4" (160 points) will be comfortable in a 20 gallon tank (300 points).

For the advanced aquarist that pays close attention, add the following variables:

Water Changes:
Every water change per week over 30 percent (up to 3 water changes): Add 25 percent more points. Our sample 20 gallon long, with a weekly 30 percent water change, could now hold 75 more points or 375 points total. With three 30 percent water changes per week it could hold a total of 300 plus 75 plus 75 plus 75 = 525 points. Note that these figures are about where we see importer and pet store stocking levels. Keeping a tank’s points this high through water changes should only happen in an emergency or temporary holding tank.

Filtration:
Average filtration would be considered a filter in good maintenance, and maintained by the manufacturer's instructions with regards to changing the filter's media, that turns the tank's volume over 8 times per hour (4 for canister filters). Thus, for our sample 20 gallon long tank, a powerfilter rated at 160 gallons per hour (gph) would be considered average. For every doubling of the turnover rate, add 25 percent more points. Thus if the 20 long had 320 gph of filtration, it would gain 75 additional stocking points.

The water changes and filtration variables should work together. In other words, our 20 gallon long tank with once weekly water changes of 30 percent (plus 75 points) and a 320 gph filter (plus 75 points) can now hold 450 points.

Some Notes:
No formula takes into account specific behaviors, aggressiveness or territoriality.

Slender, sedentary fishes should be counted accordingly. As stated, a 10 inch Farlowella does not need the space of a 10 inch Hypostomus.

All in all, a tank should be considered FULL at 1.5 times its base points. Going over this should be temporary, such as in the case of an exporter's holding tank or a quarantine tank.

Our fish length points formula continues. I stopped at 6 inches as this is about as big of fish as the average hobbyist will maintain. Above 6", points go up 10 percent per inch to reflect smaller increases in mass vs. length.

Each 7" fish = 275 points
Each 8" fish = 302.5 points
Each 9" fish = 332 points
Each 10" fish = 365 points

Remember that no single fish's points should ever add up to more than half of the tank's total available points. A 10 inch fish needs a 730 point tank (60" X 12" or 48" X 15" for example) to move around.

Sorry if you think in metrics.

 

[andywg]

I have 3 problems with that system:

1) it would allow me a little over 5 10" fish (say bala sharks) in my 6x2x2 and nothing else. This is just a little too lean a stocking for my liking. 150 gallons of water can surely handle more than that.

2) it doesn't scrutinise for surface agitation. The available oxygen will be massively different between a planted tank with almost no surface agitation and a tank with a filter outlet above the water line and massive surface agitation.

3) see the below quote:

Remember that no single fish's points should ever add up to more than half of the tank's total available points. A 10 inch fish needs a 730 point tank (60" X 12" or 48" X 15" for example) to move around.

I have some problems with keeping 10" fish in a tank only 12" front to back. Hardly the best of tanks to keep them in.

It is certainly a bit better at coping with fish than 1" per gallon, but is also far harder to remember and is less likely to be able to be used when quickly trying to work out if a fish would be ok in your tank.

 

[Darkstar]

Agreed it isn't a perfect system as Shane and myself for that matter stated, however it is imo a more robust system than the standard one. The truth is you're never going to find a rule that will encompass everyones set-up as there as simply too many variables....well, not without having to pass it onto a mathematician to work it out for you.

but is also far harder to remember and is less likely to be able to be used when quickly trying to work out if a fish would be ok in your tank.

Again, I agree that it is more difficult but at the same time it isn't a rule/guideline meant for beginners....that's where the 1" guideline comes in. As I said though you're never going to find a simple rule or guideline which is perfect for all occasions. The more variables you take into account the more complicated it's going to get. Although I do think if you worked with this system for any length of time it wouldn't be that difficult to grasp.