chrgerondavins
Member
My tang is fine in his 2.5 gallon aqaurium. Oh and he is a naso tang. His porsche won't fit in there though :-/
Am I a member of the "Tang Police"?
- Thread starter m0nk
- Start date
crashbandicoot
Active Member
Me too and now we both are imagine the odds of that .
muggiwhplar
Member
I'll preface this by saying that I'm relatively new to the hobby (a little under two years) and I have had a hippo tang in my 75 gallon tank for about a year and a half. I understand where the "tang police" are coming from to a degree. I myself get irked when I see people with tanks that even I can tell are way over-stocked--or when I see someone with a small yellow tang in a 20 gallon or something--but I still manage to be polite in explaining why I don't think their systems are going to be successful with their current stock.
However, despite the large number of people who insist that I should have at least a six foot tank for my tang, there are at least a few with a decent amount of experience who will say it will be OK in a 75. Without any rigorous scientific studies on the matter, how are us non-experts supposed to know who to trust? I'm not one for simply siding with the majority on any issue.
I have no issue with people strongly suggesting that tangs should be kept only in larger tanks, but I see no reason to act as if this is some kind of commandment passed down directly from the reefkeeping gods along with "thou shalt not use silica sand" and "thou shalt quarantine thine new fish". The simple fact of the matter is that we are essentially using these creatures as ornaments. If we were really that concerned about their well-being, we'd leave them in the ocean. So any I find any BS about the fish's welfare to be just that--BS. Even in a six or eight foot tank, these fish will not reach the same sizes they would in the wild because of the sub-optimal living conditions. What we're really concerned about is whether it will in some way or another make our reefs ugly. In this case, that would happen as the result of the large amount of waste produced by such a large fish in a relatively small tank, or by the fish becoming diseased due to the stress caused by cramped quarters and dirty water.
Rather than spending their time going around insisting that tangs should be kept only in tanks of at least this length or that, I'd like to see the "tang police" go out and collect some data on the matter. Maybe they could conduct some kind of poll of hobbyists, and tabulate data regarding tangs kept in various size tanks, hobbyist experience level, and frequency if disease incidence in their tangs. I suspect that the results would support the positions held by the "tang police", but short of something like this they're still only working with anecdotal evidence.
However, despite the large number of people who insist that I should have at least a six foot tank for my tang, there are at least a few with a decent amount of experience who will say it will be OK in a 75. Without any rigorous scientific studies on the matter, how are us non-experts supposed to know who to trust? I'm not one for simply siding with the majority on any issue.
I have no issue with people strongly suggesting that tangs should be kept only in larger tanks, but I see no reason to act as if this is some kind of commandment passed down directly from the reefkeeping gods along with "thou shalt not use silica sand" and "thou shalt quarantine thine new fish". The simple fact of the matter is that we are essentially using these creatures as ornaments. If we were really that concerned about their well-being, we'd leave them in the ocean. So any I find any BS about the fish's welfare to be just that--BS. Even in a six or eight foot tank, these fish will not reach the same sizes they would in the wild because of the sub-optimal living conditions. What we're really concerned about is whether it will in some way or another make our reefs ugly. In this case, that would happen as the result of the large amount of waste produced by such a large fish in a relatively small tank, or by the fish becoming diseased due to the stress caused by cramped quarters and dirty water.
Rather than spending their time going around insisting that tangs should be kept only in tanks of at least this length or that, I'd like to see the "tang police" go out and collect some data on the matter. Maybe they could conduct some kind of poll of hobbyists, and tabulate data regarding tangs kept in various size tanks, hobbyist experience level, and frequency if disease incidence in their tangs. I suspect that the results would support the positions held by the "tang police", but short of something like this they're still only working with anecdotal evidence.
S
sexyshrimp101
Guest
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477636
Rather than spending their time going around insisting that tangs should be kept only in tanks of at least this length or that, I'd like to see the "tang police" go out and collect some data on the matter. Maybe they could conduct some kind of poll of hobbyists, and tabulate data regarding tangs kept in various size tanks, hobbyist experience level, and frequency if disease incidence in their tangs. I suspect that the results would support the positions held by the "tang police", but short of something like this they're still only working with anecdotal evidence.
I still don't understand why people keep saying everyone is working with anectdotal evidence. Many people have the experience with them, and pass that knowledge on to others, giving those without the personal experience plenty of anectdotal evidence to go by, along with the disease forum.
Hey Crash, aren't we supposed to get t-shirts or something, or is that just clubs???
http:///forum/post/2477636
Rather than spending their time going around insisting that tangs should be kept only in tanks of at least this length or that, I'd like to see the "tang police" go out and collect some data on the matter. Maybe they could conduct some kind of poll of hobbyists, and tabulate data regarding tangs kept in various size tanks, hobbyist experience level, and frequency if disease incidence in their tangs. I suspect that the results would support the positions held by the "tang police", but short of something like this they're still only working with anecdotal evidence.
I still don't understand why people keep saying everyone is working with anectdotal evidence. Many people have the experience with them, and pass that knowledge on to others, giving those without the personal experience plenty of anectdotal evidence to go by, along with the disease forum.
Hey Crash, aren't we supposed to get t-shirts or something, or is that just clubs???
crashbandicoot
Active Member
There will be Clique t shirts . But since we arent police we dont need no stinking badges .
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by sexyshrimp101
http:///forum/post/2477650
I still don't understand why people keep saying everyone is working with anectdotal evidence. Many people have the experience with them, and pass that knowledge on to others, giving those without the personal experience plenty of anectdotal evidence to go by, along with the disease forum.
Hey Crash, aren't we supposed to get t-shirts or something, or is that just clubs???
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
http:///forum/post/2477650
I still don't understand why people keep saying everyone is working with anectdotal evidence. Many people have the experience with them, and pass that knowledge on to others, giving those without the personal experience plenty of anectdotal evidence to go by, along with the disease forum.
Hey Crash, aren't we supposed to get t-shirts or something, or is that just clubs???
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
S
sexyshrimp101
Guest
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
Seriously??? So you're saying that many people experience's with similar results don't count
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
Seriously??? So you're saying that many people experience's with similar results don't count
S
sexyshrimp101
Guest
Originally Posted by Crashbandicoot
http:///forum/post/2477660
There will be Clique t shirts . But since we arent police we dont need no stinking badges .
http:///forum/post/2477660
There will be Clique t shirts . But since we arent police we dont need no stinking badges .
crashbandicoot
Active Member
Oh yeah I'm not speaking from text book or cut and paste . When I had my 125 set up I kept a yellow tang in it and "It is my opinion that a 125 gallon tank is still not big enough to house a full grown adult tang " .
groupergenius
Active Member
For all the non-believers. I'll bring in my camera to work tomorrow, take some pics of some "rescued" tangs at a LFS here. It's a shame how deformed these fish became.
Don't get me wrong, I have had 6" Atlantic Blues in a 55 before. Actually 3 of them at one time. But I also usually only kept fish for a few months before I released them and caught new ones. Usually different types. I didn't keep any long term.
And before the "never release tank fish" police come on. Realize that ALL my tank inhabitants were caught in the same area. Tanks allways started with dead sand and dead rock.
All this took place before I took the hobby serious and there were not Forums, or internet for that matter. Al Gore hadn't invented it yet.
I have now 5 tanks running. 15-50-75-90-120 The only 1 with a Tang is my 120. And it's a small Powder Blue.
Don't get me wrong, I have had 6" Atlantic Blues in a 55 before. Actually 3 of them at one time. But I also usually only kept fish for a few months before I released them and caught new ones. Usually different types. I didn't keep any long term.
And before the "never release tank fish" police come on. Realize that ALL my tank inhabitants were caught in the same area. Tanks allways started with dead sand and dead rock.
All this took place before I took the hobby serious and there were not Forums, or internet for that matter. Al Gore hadn't invented it yet.
I have now 5 tanks running. 15-50-75-90-120 The only 1 with a Tang is my 120. And it's a small Powder Blue.
ecooper
Member
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
LOL! I think it's kind of funny to be asking for statistical evidence on a discussion forum!!!
No offense to muggiwhplar or anyone else, but I don't come to this forum for statistical evidence. I come here to find out that anecdotal evidence! "How did this work for you?" and the like.
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
LOL! I think it's kind of funny to be asking for statistical evidence on a discussion forum!!!
No offense to muggiwhplar or anyone else, but I don't come to this forum for statistical evidence. I come here to find out that anecdotal evidence! "How did this work for you?" and the like.
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by sexyshrimp101
http:///forum/post/2477674
Seriously??? So you're saying that many people experience's with similar results don't count
No, I'm saying that it's not a thorough examination of the issue. There are all kinds of variables that need to be acounted for, such as hobbyist experience, feeding regimen, filtration system, other inhabitants, frequency of water changes, typical water parameters, etc. Without at least attempting to take all of these things into account, we're just talking about anecdotal evidence. That doesn't make it totally worthless, but I don't think it puts anyone in a position to be making claims with the degree of certainty, and sometimes belligerence, that I see from a lot of people.
http:///forum/post/2477674
Seriously??? So you're saying that many people experience's with similar results don't count
No, I'm saying that it's not a thorough examination of the issue. There are all kinds of variables that need to be acounted for, such as hobbyist experience, feeding regimen, filtration system, other inhabitants, frequency of water changes, typical water parameters, etc. Without at least attempting to take all of these things into account, we're just talking about anecdotal evidence. That doesn't make it totally worthless, but I don't think it puts anyone in a position to be making claims with the degree of certainty, and sometimes belligerence, that I see from a lot of people.
m0nk
Active Member
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
I'm going to compile all of the scientific data that I can and will post when I have a chance. I'm also emailing several prominent names in the hobby to see what data they can provide as well as sources on their data, in hopes of better illustrating a point one way or the other.
It may take me a while to compile everything, but I think it will, in the long run, help everyone here. "The truth shall set us free"....
http:///forum/post/2477663
How is that not just anecdotal evidence? Where's the statistical analysis? Anecdotal doesn't mean it's wrong; it just means it isn't the result of a rigorous, structured study of the issue taking into account many separate trials.
I'm going to compile all of the scientific data that I can and will post when I have a chance. I'm also emailing several prominent names in the hobby to see what data they can provide as well as sources on their data, in hopes of better illustrating a point one way or the other.
It may take me a while to compile everything, but I think it will, in the long run, help everyone here. "The truth shall set us free"....
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by ecooper
http:///forum/post/2477707
LOL! I think it's kind of funny to be asking for statistical evidence on a discussion forum!!!
No offense to muggiwhplar or anyone else, but I don't come to this forum for statistical evidence. I come here to find out that anecdotal evidence! "How did this work for you?" and the like.
I'm not really expecting to get it. As I said in the post I put up just a minute ago, I just think that people need to ease up on their alleged certainty on this and any other issue for which they don't have that kind of hard evidence. If it's anecdotal evidence, that's fine and it can still be valuable. I do a lot in this hobby based on anecdotal evidence. I just don't care for people who act so certain and arrogant about an issue that they haven't thoroughly investigated.
http:///forum/post/2477707
LOL! I think it's kind of funny to be asking for statistical evidence on a discussion forum!!!
No offense to muggiwhplar or anyone else, but I don't come to this forum for statistical evidence. I come here to find out that anecdotal evidence! "How did this work for you?" and the like.
I'm not really expecting to get it. As I said in the post I put up just a minute ago, I just think that people need to ease up on their alleged certainty on this and any other issue for which they don't have that kind of hard evidence. If it's anecdotal evidence, that's fine and it can still be valuable. I do a lot in this hobby based on anecdotal evidence. I just don't care for people who act so certain and arrogant about an issue that they haven't thoroughly investigated.
m0nk
Active Member
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477709
No, I'm saying that it's not a thorough examination of the issue. There are all kinds of variables that need to be acounted for, such as hobbyist experience, feeding regimen, filtration system, other inhabitants, frequency of water changes, typical water parameters, etc. Without at least attempting to take all of these things into account, we're just talking about anecdotal evidence. That doesn't make it totally worthless, but I don't think it puts anyone in a position to be making claims with the degree of certainty, and sometimes belligerence, that I see from a lot of people.
There's belligerence on both sides of the isle.
http:///forum/post/2477709
No, I'm saying that it's not a thorough examination of the issue. There are all kinds of variables that need to be acounted for, such as hobbyist experience, feeding regimen, filtration system, other inhabitants, frequency of water changes, typical water parameters, etc. Without at least attempting to take all of these things into account, we're just talking about anecdotal evidence. That doesn't make it totally worthless, but I don't think it puts anyone in a position to be making claims with the degree of certainty, and sometimes belligerence, that I see from a lot of people.
There's belligerence on both sides of the isle.
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by m0nk
http:///forum/post/2477713
I'm going to compile all of the scientific data that I can and will post when I have a chance. I'm also emailing several prominent names in the hobby to see what data they can provide as well as sources on their data, in hopes of better illustrating a point one way or the other.
It may take me a while to compile everything, but I think it will, in the long run, help everyone here. "The truth shall set us free"....
Sounds good, and I look forward to seeing it. As I said earlier, I think that the evidence will largely support the views of the "tang police". I'd just like to see them back up their claims and harsh criticisms with some harder evidence.
http:///forum/post/2477713
I'm going to compile all of the scientific data that I can and will post when I have a chance. I'm also emailing several prominent names in the hobby to see what data they can provide as well as sources on their data, in hopes of better illustrating a point one way or the other.
It may take me a while to compile everything, but I think it will, in the long run, help everyone here. "The truth shall set us free"....
Sounds good, and I look forward to seeing it. As I said earlier, I think that the evidence will largely support the views of the "tang police". I'd just like to see them back up their claims and harsh criticisms with some harder evidence.
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by m0nk
http:///forum/post/2477716
There's belligerence on both sides of the isle.
Are you saying that I'm being belligerent, or are you talking about people who insist that tangs can do fine in a 30 because their yellow tang hasn't died after two months?
http:///forum/post/2477716
There's belligerence on both sides of the isle.
Are you saying that I'm being belligerent, or are you talking about people who insist that tangs can do fine in a 30 because their yellow tang hasn't died after two months?
m0nk
Active Member
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477732
Are you saying that I'm being belligerent, or are you talking about people who insist that tangs can do fine in a 30 because their yellow tang hasn't died after two months?
The later. I think people who are trying to rationalize their personal situations are a little more defensive than people trying to offer advice against that situation. You've certainly been a gracious debater.
http:///forum/post/2477732
Are you saying that I'm being belligerent, or are you talking about people who insist that tangs can do fine in a 30 because their yellow tang hasn't died after two months?
The later. I think people who are trying to rationalize their personal situations are a little more defensive than people trying to offer advice against that situation. You've certainly been a gracious debater.
muggiwhplar
Member
Originally Posted by m0nk
http:///forum/post/2477747
The later. I think people who are trying to rationalize their personal situations are a little more defensive than people trying to offer advice against that situation. You've certainly been a gracious debater.
OK, no argument here then, and the same to you. I just emailed an online livestock seller that I consider to be pretty reputable, who suggests a minimum tank size of 70 gallons for a blue tang, asking what their rationale is for not recommending a 125 or larger (i.e. a six-foot tank). I'll post their response, or at least a paraphrasing of it, once I hear back.
http:///forum/post/2477747
The later. I think people who are trying to rationalize their personal situations are a little more defensive than people trying to offer advice against that situation. You've certainly been a gracious debater.
OK, no argument here then, and the same to you. I just emailed an online livestock seller that I consider to be pretty reputable, who suggests a minimum tank size of 70 gallons for a blue tang, asking what their rationale is for not recommending a 125 or larger (i.e. a six-foot tank). I'll post their response, or at least a paraphrasing of it, once I hear back.
groupergenius
Active Member
Originally Posted by muggiwhplar
http:///forum/post/2477756
OK, no argument here then, and the same to you. I just emailed an online livestock seller that I consider to be pretty reputable, who suggests a minimum tank size of 70 gallons for a blue tang, asking what their rationale is for not recommending a 125 or larger (i.e. a six-foot tank). I'll post their response, or at least a paraphrasing of it, once I hear back.
Online livestock seller?? What do you think they're going to say? Rationale behind that is more people have less than 125 gallon tanks. And Momma needs to make the car payment.
http:///forum/post/2477756
OK, no argument here then, and the same to you. I just emailed an online livestock seller that I consider to be pretty reputable, who suggests a minimum tank size of 70 gallons for a blue tang, asking what their rationale is for not recommending a 125 or larger (i.e. a six-foot tank). I'll post their response, or at least a paraphrasing of it, once I hear back.
Online livestock seller?? What do you think they're going to say? Rationale behind that is more people have less than 125 gallon tanks. And Momma needs to make the car payment.