ophiura
Active Member
This is true, and it is an argument that has been brought up before. Though we should start a new thread for it, I will give my opinion here on why this is a different issue.
Most people know enough not to buy fish that will reach 2+ feet long, like many parrotfish (or by default they head for smaller prettier fish). It is obvious with some simple math, that a 2 foot long fish which swims will not be happy in a 4 foot, 6 foot, 7 foot (standard) tank. Well, I won't say most (I only hope that) many people can do that, and many stores will not sell them.
Unfortunately, many people do buy sharks, parrotfish, and other large fish because in their mind they are objects and possessions, not animals. It is for the responsible reefkeeper to read and learn which fish are sustainable, and indeed which fish thrive in captivity. There are numerous fish which are territorial, and do not, in the wild, have a range larger than that found in their captive home. There are numerous fish that, though they reach large size, are not active swimmers, but stalkers (groupers, lionfish) and are also quite sustainable in tanks (with some exceptions in the grouper line). Some, however, need larger tanks, and this is where groups like the so called 'tang police' come in to remind people that active swimmers, that reach 10+ inches long, do not do well in 29g tanks. In these cases, some research should be done into which tangs do best (grazers like Koles) versus those that are big cruisers (naso, etc). I believe that people can provide excellent homes for many types of fish, especially those that are adaptable, and take well to prepared foods.
Most fish kept in the hobby reach a size that is sustainable in most standard tanks (meaning, not custom), and can survive as long in captivity as in the wild. I have a damsel going on 8 years. Many people keep fish 10+ years, and some have them reproducing. If you can get fish to reproduce, that the captive habitat is very good.
We are talking about animals which, if they thrive in captivity, are doomed to eat themselves out of house and home. That should be a very clear indication of which animals are not suitable for captivity. An animal that reached 3 feet in diameter is one of those.
Sterling,
I am not critical of you for taking care of this animal as you are, because indeed, most would have died by now. This is a testament to the care you are taking to give it the best home possible. But, since you know how much of a challenge it has been, I think it is good to make that clear in any other 'reef safe starfish' threads
There are a lot of people who would see that, read that it needs a few guppies, and put it in their nano tank. So, hopefully they've read through the whole thread, and know that, though it is a beautiful animal, it is a pain in the rear to take care of!
Anyone thinking about a basketstar- here is a more detailed answer than I gave, believe it or not! (I know I am a bit wordy on topics like this):
http://www.reefs.org/library/article/r_toonen17.html
And finally, a spectacular closing image of our friend.
copyright Jonathan Bird: http://www.oceanicresearch.org
Most people know enough not to buy fish that will reach 2+ feet long, like many parrotfish (or by default they head for smaller prettier fish). It is obvious with some simple math, that a 2 foot long fish which swims will not be happy in a 4 foot, 6 foot, 7 foot (standard) tank. Well, I won't say most (I only hope that) many people can do that, and many stores will not sell them.
Unfortunately, many people do buy sharks, parrotfish, and other large fish because in their mind they are objects and possessions, not animals. It is for the responsible reefkeeper to read and learn which fish are sustainable, and indeed which fish thrive in captivity. There are numerous fish which are territorial, and do not, in the wild, have a range larger than that found in their captive home. There are numerous fish that, though they reach large size, are not active swimmers, but stalkers (groupers, lionfish) and are also quite sustainable in tanks (with some exceptions in the grouper line). Some, however, need larger tanks, and this is where groups like the so called 'tang police' come in to remind people that active swimmers, that reach 10+ inches long, do not do well in 29g tanks. In these cases, some research should be done into which tangs do best (grazers like Koles) versus those that are big cruisers (naso, etc). I believe that people can provide excellent homes for many types of fish, especially those that are adaptable, and take well to prepared foods.
Most fish kept in the hobby reach a size that is sustainable in most standard tanks (meaning, not custom), and can survive as long in captivity as in the wild. I have a damsel going on 8 years. Many people keep fish 10+ years, and some have them reproducing. If you can get fish to reproduce, that the captive habitat is very good.
We are talking about animals which, if they thrive in captivity, are doomed to eat themselves out of house and home. That should be a very clear indication of which animals are not suitable for captivity. An animal that reached 3 feet in diameter is one of those.
Sterling,
I am not critical of you for taking care of this animal as you are, because indeed, most would have died by now. This is a testament to the care you are taking to give it the best home possible. But, since you know how much of a challenge it has been, I think it is good to make that clear in any other 'reef safe starfish' threads
There are a lot of people who would see that, read that it needs a few guppies, and put it in their nano tank. So, hopefully they've read through the whole thread, and know that, though it is a beautiful animal, it is a pain in the rear to take care of!Anyone thinking about a basketstar- here is a more detailed answer than I gave, believe it or not! (I know I am a bit wordy on topics like this):
http://www.reefs.org/library/article/r_toonen17.html
And finally, a spectacular closing image of our friend.
copyright Jonathan Bird: http://www.oceanicresearch.org
