So... why am I working so hard?

I was reading somewhere that a 90 gallon tank could house 15 mbunas.
(!) I have 10 in a 30 gallon. Hmmmmmmm.... I also read that
Mbunas prefer a sand or small pebble substrate. I have large
gravel. It also said that UGFs are no good because the fish waste
would overwhelm it and because the fish like to dig so much. I have
a UGF on this tank.

But the guy I got it from had happy healthy fish with no aggression
problems, he changed 10% of the water twice a month w/light gravel
vac, never tested the water, fed 'em 2 large tablespoons of flakes
twice a day (I timed about 4 minutes for 1 teaspoon), and quite lax
about changing the HOB filter cartridge (it came to me really gunked
up).

From what I've read in my short tenure of being a cichlid owner
that this guy wasn't takeing care of his fish well enough. But when
I tested his water it was fine with maybe too much nitrate (40ppm),
the fish all looked healthy and they went through the stress of
moving generally just fine. So... why am I working so hard?

Is what I'm doing making their life better? Can I tell myself that
they were "surviving" before and under my care they are "thriving"?

Just being reflective here. :-)
coolchinchilla

"coolchinchilla" wrote in message
...
I was reading somewhere that a 90 gallon tank could house 15 mbunas.
(!) I have 10 in a 30 gallon. Hmmmmmmm.... I also read that
Mbunas prefer a sand or small pebble substrate. I have large
gravel. It also said that UGFs are no good because the fish waste
would overwhelm it and because the fish like to dig so much. I have
a UGF on this tank.

But the guy I got it from had happy healthy fish with no aggression
problems, he changed 10% of the water twice a month w/light gravel
vac, never tested the water, fed 'em 2 large tablespoons of flakes
twice a day (I timed about 4 minutes for 1 teaspoon), and quite lax
about changing the HOB filter cartridge (it came to me really gunked
up).

From what I've read in my short tenure of being a cichlid owner
that this guy wasn't takeing care of his fish well enough. But when
I tested his water it was fine with maybe too much nitrate (40ppm),
the fish all looked healthy and they went through the stress of
moving generally just fine. So... why am I working so hard?

Is what I'm doing making their life better? Can I tell myself that
they were "surviving" before and under my care they are "thriving"?

Just being reflective here. :-)
coolchinchilla

I've read varying things about the number of fish and tank sizes. I have
around 15 in a 47UK gall tank plus one pl*co - I say around as looking at
them as I type I think at least 3 of the fry must now count as fish in terms
of bio-load. Water parameters are fine in the tank so I'm guessing that the
load is OK - I do weekly 10-20% water changes once a week and scrape algae
twice a week off the front.

There is a reason behind using fine gravel/sand. Mine scrape it up in their
mouths and then drop it back out again. I remember reading somewhere that
this helps with digestion - and then somewhere else that they are sifting
for food. I'm not convinced why they do it but I would certainly say that it
appears to be part of their natural behaviour so fine gravel/sand is a good
idea.

Like you, I used to be concerned about this tank - in fact a few weeks ago I
wanted to go trade all the fish back and have a "normal" community tank
again. I lost 3 fish in tank - two almost certainly down to bullying. I
removed a fourth as I could see that they were tormenting her - I took her
back to the shop. From time to time some of the fish get picked on and end
up with injuries (usually tattered tails) - however they do recover while
remaining in the main tank (I keep an eye out for any infections) - this is
normally followed by the sudden arrival of more fish..... :-)

I used to worry about the rock work, the algae, the bullying - but this is
how these fish are and I suppose this is part and parcel of keeping Mbunas.
I no longer worry if one disappears into the rock work for a while and
doesn't feed for a few days - it normally means more fry on the way....

I don't worry about the algae too much either - it seems to provide a good
source of food for the fry (and the Pl*co). It just means a bit more
scraping of the front for me....

I've let it be for the last 6 weeks or so (apart from water changes) and am
now being rewarded with a very interesting tank with the whole thing working
on different levels. There is the adult community at the top and the baby
community at the bottom. Some of the older fry are now venturing out more
and more and exhibiting the behaviour of the adults but in minature. The
really small ones (this weeks batch - labs I think) just poke their heads
out of small crevices in the rocks, grab what food they can and go straight
back in....I even put up with the sand mountains that some of the larger
ones are intent on creating...I suppose it gives the tank a more natural
look...

My advice really is don't worry about the number of fish, keep up the water
changes, if you think you have sufficient caves leave these be now and
perhaps consider sand/fine gravel as a substrate - although I'm not sure how
this would work with your filter....maybe you could just add some in a
container....Hopefully then after a few weeks you'll have a tank that is a
community much like mine now is....

Gill

"coolchinchilla" wrote in message
...
I was reading somewhere that a 90 gallon tank could house 15 mbunas. (!)
I have 10 in a 30 gallon. Hmmmmmmm.... I also read that Mbunas prefer
a sand or small pebble substrate. I have large gravel. It also said
that UGFs are no good because the fish waste would overwhelm it and
because the fish like to dig so much. I have a UGF on this tank.

All true (to varying degrees of importance imo).

But the guy I got it from had happy healthy fish with no aggression
problems, he changed 10% of the water twice a month w/light gravel vac,
never tested the water, fed 'em 2 large tablespoons of flakes twice a
day (I timed about 4 minutes for 1 teaspoon), and quite lax about
changing the HOB filter cartridge (it came to me really gunked up).

I'm quite sure that as many fish die from excess care as from neglect.
'Dirty' filters which still pass water and 'dirty' aquariums with algae
are not bad things from a fish's perspective. Calling them happy is
subjective. There might have been significant DOCs in that water, and
their immune systems might have been quite inactive. If exposed to a
contagion, they might have turned bad very quickly, so don't read too
much into it. Agression or non-aggression is not a reliable method to
assess their conditions. They can be non-aggressive in poor conditions,
and give them something to fight about (new caves) and war breaks out.
The key is to achieve both, good conditions and an environment which does
not cause excess aggression.

From what I've read in my short tenure of being a cichlid owner that
this guy wasn't takeing care of his fish well enough. But when I
tested his water it was fine with maybe too much nitrate (40ppm), the
fish all looked healthy and they went through the stress of moving
generally just fine. So... why am I working so hard?

Fish are adaptive, and mbuna are tough fish. Other tropicals might not
have made the move so easily, so then you would feel more justified in
improving their lot ;~).

Is what I'm doing making their life better? Can I tell myself that
they were "surviving" before and under my care they are "thriving"?

Just being reflective here. :-)
coolchinchilla

There are relatively few absolute truths. Most information is in shades
of gray, slowly shifting their aquatic environment to something which is
more suitable. The less experience you have, the more useful the
guidelines are. Some recommendations are based on their natural
environments (which the fish may have never seen or experienced, and fish
can't read either). Other recommendations you simply cannot get around
(the physics of the nitrogen cycle, or depletion of your buffer).

One of the best tools is observation, watching for changes in behaviour,
color etc. Assess any new information you hear or read against what you
are doing now and use your discretion as to how much and how fast to
implement it. Familiarize yourself with what causes stress to fish, so
that you can safely experiment a little.
--
www.NetMax.tk

There are relatively few absolute truths. Most information is in shades
of gray, slowly shifting their aquatic environment to something which is
more suitable. The less experience you have, the more useful the
guidelines are. Some recommendations are based on their natural
environments (which the fish may have never seen or experienced, and fish
can't read either). Other recommendations you simply cannot get around
(the physics of the nitrogen cycle, or depletion of your buffer).

One of the best tools is observation, watching for changes in behaviour,
color etc. Assess any new information you hear or read against what you
are doing now and use your discretion as to how much and how fast to
implement it. Familiarize yourself with what causes stress to fish, so
that you can safely experiment a little.
--
www.NetMax.tk


These two paragraphs should be published. When so many variables are
involved, as in reducing an ecosystem to a millionth of the original,
prediction and science are merely starting points.

"Alpha" wrote...


There are relatively few absolute truths. Most information is in shades
of gray, slowly shifting their aquatic environment to something which is
more suitable. The less experience you have, the more useful the
guidelines are. Some recommendations are based on their natural
environments (which the fish may have never seen or experienced, and fish
can't read either). Other recommendations you simply cannot get around
(the physics of the nitrogen cycle, or depletion of your buffer).

One of the best tools is observation, watching for changes in behaviour,
color etc. Assess any new information you hear or read against what you
are doing now and use your discretion as to how much and how fast to
implement it. Familiarize yourself with what causes stress to fish, so
that you can safely experiment a little.
--
www.NetMax.tk


These two paragraphs should be published. When so many variables are
involved, as in reducing an ecosystem to a millionth of the original,
prediction and science are merely starting points.

just about everything Netmax writes should be published. ;-)

--
Fading into the dark recesses of phylosophical thought-
I always liked recess.

"Tedd Jacobs" wrote in message
...

"Alpha" wrote...


There are relatively few absolute truths. Most information is in
shades of gray, slowly shifting their aquatic environment to
something which is more suitable. The less experience you have, the
more useful the guidelines are. Some recommendations are based on
their natural environments (which the fish may have never seen or
experienced, and fish can't read either). Other recommendations you
simply cannot get around (the physics of the nitrogen cycle, or
depletion of your buffer).

One of the best tools is observation, watching for changes in
behaviour, color etc. Assess any new information you hear or read
against what you are doing now and use your discretion as to how much
and how fast to implement it. Familiarize yourself with what causes
stress to fish, so that you can safely experiment a little.
--
www.NetMax.tk


These two paragraphs should be published. When so many variables are
involved, as in reducing an ecosystem to a millionth of the original,
prediction and science are merely starting points.

just about everything Netmax writes should be published. ;-)

--
Fading into the dark recesses of phylosophical thought-
I always liked recess.


If I ever go to print, can I use Alpha's line :
"When so many variables are involved, as in reducing an ecosystem to a
millionth of the original, prediction and science are merely starting
points."
.... now * that's * prosaic!
--
www.NetMax.tk

Isn't an UGF useless with large gravel??

stupid question: Why does everyone refer to Plecos as Pl*co?

"spiral_72" wrote in message
oups.com...
Isn't an UGF useless with large gravel??

stupid question: Why does everyone refer to Plecos as Pl*co?


Superstition....

http://www.planetcatfish.com/shanesworld/s_c_175.php

Gill

"Gill Passman" gillspamattaylorpassmanspam.co.uk wrote in message
.. .

"spiral_72" wrote in message
oups.com...
Isn't an UGF useless with large gravel??

stupid question: Why does everyone refer to Plecos as Pl*co?


Stupidity and superstitious behavior (see Skinner for both).

"Alpha" wrote in message
...

"Gill Passman" gillspamattaylorpassmanspam.co.uk wrote in message
.. .

"spiral_72" wrote in message
oups.com...
Isn't an UGF useless with large gravel??

stupid question: Why does everyone refer to Plecos as Pl*co?


Stupidity and superstitious behavior (see Skinner for both).



You can say that....but in reality what difference does it make if someone
types Pleco or Pl*co?

Everyone knows what they mean....