Tangs in "small" tanks.

[stig]

What I would really like to know is how people are deciding that, say, 90G is fine for a tang but a 55 is not. Many will say that tangs like swimming room and therefore you need a big tank. OK, fine, but when you consider tank size vs. tank volume the arguments stop making sense.
All measurements in inches: (Length*Width*Height)
48*12*21=55G.
48*18*25=92G.
I have never heard anyone question the idea of keeping a tang in a 92G, but many people have been told they shouldn't keep one in a 55. So, the extra 6 inches in width and 4 in height make the tank big enough? Obviously it depends on the exact tank dimensions but the overriding factor that everyone refers to is tank volume. How do people arrive at the answer that x gallons is acceptable but y is not? From personal experience? From asking the fish "How small is too small"? Sorry if I sound flippant but how are people arriving at these conclusions that "x" gallons is fine but "y" is way too small?

 

[fshhub]

tangs do need swimming room,
IMO, 4 ft minimum and some species need more yet
now as for the 55, i believe they are 12 inches front to back, Tangs again, really do need swimming room, not just room to turn around, twistin and turning to do so, vs swimming.
some tangs are only 7 inches, but many are much larger and this would not allow them much in turning room either. And being 60 % wider, that really is a big difference, not just a few inches, as we would see it.

 

[maroonclownfan]

I don't really like the "Recommended tank size" for fish, but for those new to the hobby, it is a good guideline as to prevent problems or maybe cruelity to their marine creatures.
Some people, not necessarily on this site since most are saltwater junkies, buy a tank, put fish in it, and away they go. Not really looking down the road at a larger tank some day. This could cause problems for the animals that get too big for their current surroundings
IMO, everyone has to make their own choices, guidelines are meant for exactly what they sound like, to "guide" you in the right direction, thats why they are not "rules."
Ones own experience will help to dictate their actions in this hobby.
Well for what it is worth, I might push the limits in my own tank, but I would never reccommend someone else do the same, but I would advise them as to the "guidelines" accepted by most saltwater enthusiasts.
My two cents.......MCF

 

[bang guy]

Originally posted by Stig
What I would really like to know is how people are deciding that, say, 90G is fine for a tang but a 55 is not.
Strictly anecdotal evidence but run a poll on this, it would be interesting.
I have seen a few 10 year old+ Tangs in well cared for 90 gallon tanks.
I have seen at least 10X more 55 gallon tanks because the size is so popular but I have never seen nor even heard of a 10+ year old Tang in a 55.
Keep in mind that Tangs live for 40 - 60 years depending on the species. 10 years is at most only 25% of the expected lifespan.
Just Guy's $0.02 worth.

 

[flamehawk]

The difference between a 55 and 92 is quite significant as already pointed out by fishub. I for one think a 55 is ok for the smaller type of tangs. A 1 1/2 inch hippo in a 40 is also ok as long as you truly plan to upgrade. I personally don't think you should put a fish in a tank w/o the full intention of keeping him there through adult size but that's everyone's individual decision.

 

[stig]

Thanks for the replies. Yeah, a poll would be interesting. I've never started one - what would be a good question to ask for a poll of this kind?
Yeah, I guess if you think in % terms, the difference is significant. If you look in Fenner's book, p. 304, he says:
"....yellow and hippo tangs can easily get along on a 10 to 15 gallon allocation when they are small......". and "I would recommend at least a 50-gallon system for a growing surgeonfish".
It's interesting to note that when I first started reading this board about 3 years ago the same debate was going on. The arguments were slightly different, though. At that time people were arguing that tangs shouldn't be kept in anything less than a 55G. Now, the minimum seems to have increased. I wonder if this is a result of more people going with larger systems or more people with negative experiences with tangs in "small" systems. Indeed, it was interesting to note a shark's reply to a problem with a 55G system yesterday. Three years ago, I never heard anyone refer to a 55G as small. This particular shark yesterday used the term "small tank" repeatedly. Are people going bigger and bigger and, therefore, what used to be big is no longer so? Perhaps in 3 more years people will be arguing that anything smaller than a full-length swimming pool will make any tang feel cramped. Just some food for thought.
Stig.

 

[bang guy]

It varies a lot for each Tang. I think the Kole Tangs may be the smallest but I'm not sure.
You should also remember that 10 years ago keeping a fish 2 years was considered success. The bar has been raised.

 

[starfishjackedme]

I would personally prefer a 6' tank for any tang, otherwise I would stick to damsels etc.

 

[koiman6]

I agree with Guy. I want the fish I buy to be happy for their whole life and be totally satisfied with their enviroment. My friend has a 4 inch Yellow tang in a 15 gallon tank Thats why Im digging a 4000 gallon pond for my koi so that they have a better home, because although the 1000 gallon pond that they are currently in is the recomended by some, it is the minimum pond size for koi. Just my .02