Go Back   Aquarium Advice - Aquarium Forum Community > Saltwater and Reef > Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral
Click Here to Login

Join Aquarium Advice Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com
 
Old 07-22-2004, 12:14 PM   #11
Aquarium Advice FINatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Posts: 507
Send a message via ICQ to Gauge Send a message via Yahoo to Gauge
I feel that QTing a fish will unnecessarily stress the fish out. In my experience with smaller numbers of fish in the show tank, it's less worthwhile to QT the new fish than to add them directly to the main tank.

Basically, this is my experience. QTing is a problem. I've lost fish in QT before, frequently due to water issues or stress from tank size. If I have a 25% chance of losing a fish to QTing but only a 5% chance of losing either of my two fish in the main tank because of adding a new fish directly, I feel that in situations with smaller numbers of fish (or less expensive fish) it's safer for everyone on the whole to avoid QTing.
__________________

__________________
- Gauge

92-gallon corner tank, 100lbs of LR, 140lbs of sand, 250watt 10,000K MH, 110watts of actinic PCs, Mag 7 return, custom refugium, AquaC EV180 w/ Mag 5

Female lyretail anthias, eyelash blenny, tomato clown, saddleback clown, firefish goby, 2 sand-sifting stars
Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2004, 12:29 PM   #12
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Atari's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,468
It would appear that ray4723's experience contradicts your statistics. So far he has 100% problem with adding fish directly.

I still don't agree that any livestock is expendable simply because it didn't cost a lot of money. But I guess that does come down to personal opinion.
__________________

__________________
My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met.
- Rodney Dangerfield.


Click HERE to vote for Aquarium Advice!
Atari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2004, 12:29 PM   #13
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,832
Send a message via Yahoo to quarryshark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gauge
I feel that QTing a fish will unnecessarily stress the fish out. In my experience with smaller numbers of fish in the show tank, it's less worthwhile to QT the new fish than to add them directly to the main tank.

Basically, this is my experience. QTing is a problem. I've lost fish in QT before, frequently due to water issues or stress from tank size. If I have a 25% chance of losing a fish to QTing but only a 5% chance of losing either of my two fish in the main tank because of adding a new fish directly, I feel that in situations with smaller numbers of fish (or less expensive fish) it's safer for everyone on the whole to avoid QTing.
It only takes one infected fish to infect a whle system.
I would have to disagree with the 5% chance and even of thats correct, why chance infecting the others in the main?
I have (and am now) qt quite a few fish and have yet to loose one to water quality issues. Any fish lost in qt were due to disease. To do a proper qt it takes some work and careful monitoring, but IMO its worth it.
__________________
quarryshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2004, 12:55 PM   #14
Aquarium Advice FINatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Posts: 507
Send a message via ICQ to Gauge Send a message via Yahoo to Gauge
Atari, you are putting words in my mouth, and I appreciate it none too much. I never said that a fish was expendable. My experience has shown me that if I QT one fish, then I am MORE likely to have a casualty than if I were to not QT a fish. Only when there are large numbers of fish "at risk" in the main tank do is it more worthwhile to QT. If there's a 5% chance of an outbreak in the tank from a new fish and a 25% chance of loss of the new fish to QTing, then only if there are 6 fish is there a better chance of preserving live by QTing. (Of course, these numbers are just for example)

What I was saying is that if someone were to have the same experience as I have had with QTing, and they only had one fish in their tank (which would imply that QTing is more likely to cost a fish than to save one), but the one fish they had was a $300 black tang, then perhaps they would be more likely to take the slightly riskier approach (as I see it) and QT anyway. Neither fish is expendable in such a case.

And, just for clarification, anyone who claims that the cost of a fish in the store doesn't have any effect on how much they value that fish is a bold-faced liar. It probably feels nice to say that you love all your fish equally and unconditionally, but if you gave me the option of losing a $200 Helfrich's firefish that I've had for two months and a $6 green chromis I've had for two years, the chromis is going to have to go.
__________________
- Gauge

92-gallon corner tank, 100lbs of LR, 140lbs of sand, 250watt 10,000K MH, 110watts of actinic PCs, Mag 7 return, custom refugium, AquaC EV180 w/ Mag 5

Female lyretail anthias, eyelash blenny, tomato clown, saddleback clown, firefish goby, 2 sand-sifting stars
Gauge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2004, 01:04 PM   #15
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,832
Send a message via Yahoo to quarryshark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gauge
And, just for clarification, anyone who claims that the cost of a fish in the store doesn't have any effect on how much they value that fish is a bold-faced liar. It probably feels nice to say that you love all your fish equally and unconditionally, but if you gave me the option of losing a $200 Helfrich's firefish that I've had for two months and a $6 green chromis I've had for two years, the chromis is going to have to go.
Sorry, I am not a bold face liar and I value all my fish the same. I'm sure I'm not the only one. I don't choose my pets based on what they cost, nor do I value one over another because one was more expensive. I know some do feel this way, but one should not make a blanket statement like that.
__________________
quarryshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2004, 01:05 PM   #16
Aquarium Advice Addict
 
Atari's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,468
LOL, if you honestly place value on animal life based on how much it put you out of pocket then I'll give this debate a miss. Have a nice day.
__________________

__________________
My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met.
- Rodney Dangerfield.


Click HERE to vote for Aquarium Advice!
Atari is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ick

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on AquariumAdvice.com

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Huge ICK problem PowDerBlu3 Saltwater Reef Aquaria 16 03-31-2008 06:18 PM
ick problem.... Brian Vartanian Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 8 01-24-2006 11:30 PM
Ick problem reeftankman Saltwater & Reef - Sick Fish or Coral 5 11-27-2005 11:49 AM
ICK - problem cinciboy Freshwater & Brackish - Unhealthy Fish 11 10-07-2005 10:24 AM
ICK!!!!!!!! Problem! ADCISCO Freshwater & Brackish - Unhealthy Fish 8 11-11-2003 06:02 PM







» Photo Contest Winners








Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.