Fish welfare vs CO2 levels.

[Dave Spencer]

Thanks for the measured response Mowze. You can go back on everyone`s Christmas card list.

Dave.

 

[andyh]

As for your comments about returning to shop and swapping surely this is a good thing. If i create a new scape which doesn't suit the fish isn't unfair to keep them in a unsuitable environment? (by the way i don't change my scapes every month) 😀

Its not that the scape doesn’t suit the fish and that the environment created is unsuitable but more from what I have seen the fish themselves not suiting the scape and people wanting more complimentary fish. As somebody who works in an LFS I very often get people asking to return fish because they are aggressive or too large. Very rarely do we actually give out credit or replacements and if we do it is not to the same value as the fish themselves however if somebody was to purchase some fish then ask me if they could return them a few days later because they didn’t suit the scape and no other good reason I would very politely refuse. If you purchase a fish then it is in my eyes a commitment and unless the other criteria inadvertantly filled (aggressive/grown too large) or the customer becomes unable to provide a suitable environment then that commitment should be fulfilled by the new owner of the fish for the duration of its lifespan. It is very stressful to move fish around all the time and especially stressful when fish are being returned for such a trivial reason considering they have probably been re-caught by chasing them around a heavily planted aquarium by somebody who may be inexperienced in catching fish and then returned to a shop very soon after the initial stress of having been sold in the first place. The way I see it this is a pretty irresponsible attitude towards welfare both on the part of the customer and the LFS.

Mowze

You seem to have an issue with a certain group of people who have obviously changed fish purely for a cosmetic reason and i could understand why you would find this disturbing, there is nothing worse.

However you are taring everybody with the same brush, (and yes we all have bad days, but when speaking in a public domain some care and thought is required) within UKAPS there are some very serious long term fish keepers. In fact i myself take great pleasure in providing my livestock with the correct environment and their health and well being is a key part of the process. I have successfully kept fish for almost 20yrs now and i am only 33! 🙂

You will notice we have a sale/trade/swop area for members, i personally prefer to find the fish a good home and people trade fish for all manner of different reasons, a lot at the moment is economic.

With ref to your Apistogramma spawning (good spawning gets 30-50 fry) surely you get to the point of having too many and have to sell/give away/trade? Is it irresponsible to keep breeding them if you do not have the capacity to house them all? I suppose the same example could be used here would it be fare to keep a softwater fish like Apisto in a pH of 7 (ideally they prefer 5.5-6.5)? Long term it wouldn't be good for the fishes health/well being. So i am sure you keep the PH monitored and try to stop it getting to high to prevent stress to the fish, isn't this just the same as your CO2 argument?

The one thing i agree with his livestock health, if people are killing their fish due to neglect that's bad, but surely places like UKAPS educate and give people the tools to provide a optimum environment for our livestock. One thing that i can confirm is that all my fish live like royalty!

As for aquatic retailers all too many have problems, having visited hundreds of stores across the UK, the whole breach of animal rights thing could open up a can of worms! They have a duty of care that exceeds all the of the above comments, as they are the supposed to be the experts. I attempt to rationalize this by supporting the decent specialist aquatic retailer and buying my fish from them. The one who knows what fish is selling and what parameters it requires/how big it will grow etc.

Respect t you for coming back in a controlled manner though, many would of come back shouting!

Responsible bit:
Oh and getting back to the CO2 thing, people don't run your CO2 too high as it kills your fish! Get advice, read the UKAPS guides, or ask questions!


Andyh

 

[Mowze]

However you are taring everybody with the same brush

I don’t wish to tar everybody with the same brush I realise it is a minority that are doing this and not all of those users on on UKAPS in fact the majority of those are not even English fish keepers at all (We have some of the best welfare standards in the world!) However a few of those who I have seen mention it here and elsewhere are high profile users who more inexperience’s users like myself look up to and they should be setting a better example.

With ref to your Apistogramma spawning (good spawning gets 30-50 fry) surely you get to the point of having too many and have to sell/give away/trade? Is it irresponsible to keep breeding them if you do not have the capacity to house them all? I suppose the same example could be used here would it be fare to keep a softwater fish like Apisto in a pH of 7 (ideally they prefer 5.5-6.5)? Long term it wouldn't be good for the fishes health/well being. So i am sure you keep the PH monitored and try to stop it getting to high to prevent stress to the fish, isn't this just the same as your CO2 argument?

My pH is 6.5, GH 30ppm KH 20ppm RO water buffered using tropic marin discus mineral with peat filtration and is tested weekly and recorded for NH3/NH4, NO2, NO3, PO4, pH, GH, KH and then corrected twice weekly 10% water changes if required.
In the case of the CO2 a lot of people use drop checkers, KH tests and CO2 charts and bubble counters to monitor the CO2 levels which is reliable enough but there are a lot of people out there that seem to push the CO2 as high as possible without stressing the fish and a few others that use the signs of fish stress themselves as an indicator to tell when the CO2 is too high. When somebody is pushing the CO2 level so high its at its safest maximum even if it isn’t causing any harm to the fish at the time it would only take the tiniest accidental adjustment or slight equipment failure to mean the difference between life and death for a fish.

As for aquatic retailers all too many have problems, having visited hundreds of stores across the UK, the whole breach of animal rights thing could open up a can of worms! They have a duty of care that exceeds all the of the above comments, as they are the supposed to be the experts. I attempt to rationalize this by supporting the decent specialist aquatic retailer and buying my fish from them. The one who knows what fish is selling and what parameters it requires/how big it will grow etc.

There are a few retailers out there that are blatantly breaking the law and have absolutely no care for livestock in the shop itself let alone once it leaves the shop in a customers hands. These places literally make my blood boil, I'm not going to go into details but when you get customers who come in and tell you the horrific advice they have been given or the things you have been sold it almost makes you want to take matters into your own hands. Unfortunately because fish aren’t fluffy cute little animals the RSPCA and many other protection agencies simply just cant be bothered to do anything about it.

 

[Steve Smith]

Guys, let's not turn this into a "he said, she said" bashing thread. Clearly we're all passionate about the hobby, and about keeping fish 🙂

Going on from this discussion, how do you all feel that newcommers to the hobby should be educated (for want of a better expression)?

 

[plantbrain]

Okay hopefully I'm not sticking the hand in the hornet's nest🙂
No one ever accused me of doing things the easy way.

One issue I have is the whole getting the CO2 just below the "point where fish start gasping" I’m not naming names but reading through this forum it seems a lot of high profile users just use fish as accessories to an aquascape sometimes it get to the point where welfare seems to be sacrificed.

Yes, I often see similar aquariums, really nice looking, but few or no fish, and they seem like they have been added for the pic and I rarely see the same fish, scape after different scape. Scaping is a different goal than say being a top notch aquarist. that said, you can be both.

And you can more importantly to address your concern, do things that minimize the respiratory stress from low O2 and high CO2. I've long been a proponent of this approach. Often to death ears and "look at the pretty aquascape", but ignore some of these other issues, such as fish.

I also test and do risk assessment.

Are the fish really stressed?
What levels are stressful?
What is the best method to monitor and measure CO2 over time?
What best management practices would provide the best solution for aquarist wanting both a nice scape and a nice fish population? If fish and shrimp are breeding and living many years, is this a good criteria for health and well being?
How does light intensity influence CO2 demand and algae?

Such questions ask and answer the information that's specific to aquarist keeping plants and using CO2.

Adding fish or inverts even if its just a small cleanup crew when the conditions you are creating are borderline dangerous could result in loss or welfare, prolonged stress or outright death. Also in some other cases people are returning fish to a store to swap for others because "they don’t suit the aquascape" is in my eyes both are a serious breach in animal welfare and is pretty much the same as buying a puppy to match a handbag keeping it zipped up in the handbag and then abandoning it when you get a new handbag... We are after all fishkeepers at the end of the day and we have a duty of care to these animals. If those fish have been gasping on and off over the last few days or weeks no doubt they are under some level stress even if they show normal behaviour at other times I understand you are trying to up the CO2 ppm to reduce the algae and encourage growth and the ottos are also in there to reduce the algae but you are playing with fire, choose either one or the other for the sake of welfare (I’m not saying get rid of the CO2 altogether just reduce it a little.) Also I see you introduced the fish whilst there was still a level of NO2, this should be avoided as even a small level of NO2 can be very toxic and stressful to fish and may cause long term damage. If a level is indicated this usually means that the cycle has not completed and introducing fish could have resulted in a spike with NO2 levels increasing to an even higher and more harmful level.

I really do not think anyone would disagree with this or your statements here.
I do not.

I think going back and looking critically at the questions I posed and some of the BMP's will resolve much more Then folks learn something or already know it, but know more.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[andyh]

Somebody should put together a UKAPS guide for real beginners, covering the key areas!
All new members should be pointed to it!

Steve - well volunteered!

 

[plantbrain]

I don’t wish to tar everybody with the same brush I realise it is a minority that are doing this and not all of those users on on UKAPS in fact the majority of those are not even English fish keepers at all (We have some of the best welfare standards in the world!) However a few of those who I have seen mention it here and elsewhere are high profile users who more inexperience’s users like myself look up to and they should be setting a better example.

So what criteria would we use to best help newbies avoid such CO2 errors and killing tank loads of fish?
I've heard all sorts of rubbish over the decades about how terrible NO3 is, or PO4 etc, I speak rhetorically and bitch and moan, mostly about some idea/myth, not anyone specifically.

But I also apply this to CO2. There's a lot more to it than just adding more, or the test methods used for assessment.
I think on the 6 or so forums I frequent, I see one a week that kills their fish due to CO2 negligence, and it was very often in the last few years, these where the same groups of people who railed against EI dosing as bad , harmful etc.

That's enough to get your goat.

Respiration is both O2 and CO2, algae is a multiple parameter issue, and light is a huge issues as well.
So a more holistic approach shpould be used, we often focus on one issue, one bright shiny coin or topic.
This is true in aquariums as it is in politics, cars, public preceptions etc.

Taking a step back and looking at ther whole picture is hard for any newbie to do, but the seasoned folks should be able to do this and help the hobbyist.

Low light, enough for the plants, but just barely, , this = less CO2 demand, thus you can use less and have a lot more play in the range. This in turn makes dosing and nutrients management much easier and wider ranges and less work, hassle, sediments also can be a larger source, more neglect can be tolerated for the aquarium without detriment for the fish, plants or cause algae.

But many have HLD, high light disease and tell newbies to have more light, not lower/less.
Many newbies erronously(irony in mispelling this one eh?) assume more = better.

Good current and accepting some CO2 off gassing for more O2 also is hard to accept, patience is yet another problem.
Measuring CO2 which changes faster than any other parameter is also very tough.

When somebody is pushing the CO2 level so high its at its safest maximum even if it isn’t causing any harm to the fish at the time it would only take the tiniest accidental adjustment or slight equipment failure to mean the difference between life and death for a fish.

I've long taken the approach, add enough CO2 to make the plants grow well and no algae, this is a slow gradual adjustment. Fish get large water changes and good feeding, reasonable stocking, a good home for their entire lives, good current and high O2 (something I do measure). CO2 is really fussy, but once set well, there's no issues.

Fish should not be gassed as a method to add CO2.
I'm one of the few folks that has really addressed CO2 in a much more critical and controlled manner, as well as really looked into testing it, and taking a step back to view the whole picture that drives growth and wher ethe BMP's can be placed to make it easier for everyone.

Meanwhile, some clown is poo pooing me or one of the 1/2 dozen methods I use about the 5ppm NO3 vs 20ppm NO3 🙄

That's okay, that will never change.


Low light, lots of nice fish, I sold about 800$ worth of plants from this one tank in the last 2 months, 200$ worth of super red cherry shrimp, Fish are about 3 years old, survived a move, checker boards are doing great etc.
I bred cories in two other tanks, some rare plecos in another.

Scaper vs an aquarist or better yet, do both.
View it more holistically.

See what things can be joined together for a more synergistic approach overall for a goal.


Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[paul.in.kendal]

Thanks again Mowze for your reasonable response to what really was a bit of a wind-up posting from me. But as you said, it was only fair in the circumstances! And I won't do it again Moderators - promise!

Going on from this discussion, how do you all feel that newcomers to the hobby should be educated (for want of a better expression)?

Somebody should put together a UKAPS guide for real beginners, covering the key areas!
All new members should be pointed to it!

Steve - well volunteered!

As someone who would be a prime candidate for such 'education', I don't think UKAPS needs to get carried away with this. Fishkeepers need to take responsibility for their actions themselves, and do the research (as I did) before taking ownership. UKAPS does a brilliant job of providing the required info - it's all here already, for sure. Perhaps a back-to-basics Tutorial purely on fishcare in the planted tank would be useful, but to be honest, anyone seriously thinking about starting out with a high tec planted tank (again as I did) really needs to take responsibility themselves and do proper, in-depth research.

While UKAPS should continue to strive to present the very highest standards, it shouldn't lose sight of just how far ahead of the game it already is - as a result of using UKAPS as one important source of info, in just a few months of fishkeeping I know more about my fish than the local LFS seems to, and can make a good judgement about my LFS's such that there's only one I'd be happy to buy livestock from.

It seems to me that in fishkeeping, the industry itself trails woefully behind the responsible fishkeepers who populate this forum.

As an aside, I don't eat meat, do eat fish, and personally kill shocking numbers of animals every year - slugs, snails, aphids, caterpillars, scale insects - and now pond snails. What about their welfare?

 

[plantbrain]

T
As someone who would be a prime candidate for such 'education', I don't think UKAPS needs to get carried away with this. Fishkeepers need to take responsibility for their actions themselves, and do the research (as I did) before taking ownership. UKAPS does a brilliant job of providing the required info - it's all here already, for sure. Perhaps a back-to-basics Tutorial purely on fishcare in the planted tank would be useful, but to be honest, anyone seriously thinking about starting out with a high tec planted tank (again as I did) really needs to take responsibility themselves and do proper, in-depth research.

It seems to me that in fishkeeping, the industry itself trails woefully behind the responsible fishkeepers who populate this forum.

As an aside, I don't eat meat, do eat fish, and personally kill shocking numbers of animals every year - slugs, snails, aphids, caterpillars, scale insects - and now pond snails. What about their welfare?

I agree, and such discussions as this are helpful. No easy answers for some questions, and we live in a world where many want black and white answers.

As a whole, the UK planted groups seem way ahead on many areas compared to the US/Canada IMO.
A good wise focus, but this is due to those involved and the general % of reasoned thinking.
This is harder sell here on this side of the pond.

I wish I could say otherwise.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[George Farmer]

Great thread!

As a whole, the UK planted groups seem way ahead on many areas compared to the US/Canada IMO.

That's good to hear.

There is many more planted clubs and societies in the US (even taking into account population). UKAPS is the only one in the UK, as far as I know. And not forgetting who gave us the push to set it up, eh Tom.... 😉

Maybe we're quality over quantity!!

 

[Aeropars]

Quality?? Not if my scapes have anything to go by 😀