Better method than the "1 inch per gallon" rule?

[QTOFFER]

FYI, this thread is 2 1/2 years old.

For some reason, the new related topics feature is flagging really old threads.

Always check the date of the last post before replying to one of these. No sense digging up something that was probably resolved 24 months ago. wink:

[crazyred]

Well, it does help some of us who have not been here very long as I have not seen this thread and am very intrigued by the mathmatics used in the link provided. I don't really agree with it though. I'm overtocked, I admit I'm overstocked. My nitrates show that I'm overstocked and that I over feed too, but it says that our of 360 sq in of surface in my tank....I should have 83 sq inches left to work with.....I don't think so.

Here's my conclusion:

my tank is 29 gallons, 30" L and 12" W 30 x 12 = 360

Now, I have:

needing 6 sq inches:
1 hillstream loach 1 x 6 = 6
10 harley rasboras 10 x 6 = 60
6 cherry barbs 6 x 6 = 36 total: 102

needing 9 sq inches:
6 platies 6 x 9 = 54
1 dwarf pleco 1 x 9 = 9 total: 63

needing 12 sq inches
1 opaline gourami 1 x 12 = 12 total: 12

GRAND TOTAL: 102 + 63 + 12 + 277

There is no way I have 83 more sq inches to play with.....nice idea though.

I do find these old threads useful though, QTOFFER....made me think and do some math!

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by QTOFFER

FYI, this thread is 2 1/2 years old.

For some reason, the new related topics feature is flagging really old threads.

Always check the date of the last post before replying to one of these. No sense digging up something that was probably resolved 24 months ago. wink:

Maybe AA should just delete the search function and threads older than a few months...

Personally, I believe the 1" rule is at best, a general rule of thumb and nothing more. It would be far more useful if a study was conducted that determined the actual bio-load of different varieties of fish based on their activity level and feeding habits with weight, length and circumference factored in. Face it, 1" of Neon does not equal 1" of Angel...

No way would I spend the money on a 55 gallon tank and limit myself to 5 Cory's and 20 Serpae Tetras. I want to see FISH and not just a bunch of rocks, playsand and plastic plants.

[coolchinchilla]

This thread was started in 2003.

[Graybeard]

Again, what does it matter how old a thread is???

[jadefoodog]

well for 1 the person who asked the question probably quit comming here a few years ago, i figure that kinda matters. also i find that typically after the first 4 or 5 post on any given thread and question answering quickly becomes battle royal of everyone trying to prove thier point, often saying things that have already been said a million times hoping for some quick pat on the back (aka kissing ***)

if this post had been important back in 2003 it would have made it to sticky status.

but im thinking chinchillas main point was that since the poster abandon this post 3 years ago , who are you talking to.

[coolchinchilla]

If you're interested in the 1-inch rule stuff, there is an over abundance of posts, stickies and articles on this site. I think the 1-inch rule comes up about once a month or maybe once in 2 months. The conclusion is ALWAYS the same (almost), namely that the 1-inch rule is a good general guideline for newbies but more seasoned aquarists know how to manage a tank with a higher stocking rate. Some of the posts are filled with anger that "someone" out there is imposing the 1-inch rule on their tank, criticizing, justifying their "overstocked" tank because they perform 3+ PWC per week, ... yada yada yada.

It seems that no matter how many posts, articles, stickies there are on the topic, someone brings it up anew and the topic never dies out. (I'm fully guilty of bringing up the topic as well!!) Amazing. Nothing new under the sun. Wonder why it remains so significant to us.

a few musings plus my 2 cents.

[Graybeard]

Five people responded to the post, three contributed in (revived) the discussion and two offered nothing other than stating the obvious, the post is several years old. True, the original author may be long gone as well as all the rest who responded; however, there is a completely new audience that may wish to discuss this.

If you both are irritated that a post was brought back from the dead, keep moving!

The beauty of the internet is what may be gleaned from it's use, for some this is strictly research, for other's it's learning with dialogue amongst similar minded folks and then there is the debate.

Can the 1" rule be modified by adding the weight and circumference of the fish in the equation? Has anyone tried? Our there studies on the bio-load of specific fish?

[crazyred]

Gee, I just though it was interesting that someone was trying to reason out a "new" equation for stocking rules. The "1 inch of fish per gallon" rule is so vague and not always accurate as it pertains to the particular fish. I.E. an experieced aquarist knows that a 10 inch oscar will NOT work in a 10 gallon tank, but a newbie that takes the 1"/gallon rule literally would not know this.

I couldn't care less less if this thread is 2 years old or 22 years old....it's new to me and I found it intriguing and thought provoking. Isn't that the point of this board?

[Skyrmir]

Personally I look at the 1 inch rule as being at least some kind of stopping point for idiotic LFS salesmen. First aquariums are usually pretty small, wich mean the person is only going to get a few fish to kill before they figure out what they're doing.

Anyone that's gotten far enough into aquaria to catch a case of MTS can tell you that the 1" rule is BS because it really depends on fish species. Using crazyreds fish list earlier, his platties and pleco put out more waste than most of the rest of his fish combined, despite being less than half the 'inches of fish'.

The 1" per gallon rule is out there for the same reason gas pumps have an auto shut off. So those with lacking knowledge do less harm.