So you are saying that putting fish in a bigger tank is just for our entertainment? No! If you ask someone why they have their oscar in a 75, they will say, "The bigger tank is better for the fish and the fish will be healthier." They will not say, "I thought it would be cooler to watch it in a 75."
I doubt that people would pay more for a big tank so then the fish would be cooler to watch. They buy it because it creates a healthier environment for the fish. If we had the option of putting an oscar in a 30 gallon without negatively impacting the well-being of the fish, quite a few more people would do it. Nobody would want to buy a bigger tank if they could house it just as well in a smaller one. But you can't house an oscar just as well in a smaller tank, and that is why you see people go out and buy a 75 for an oscar even when they have an empty 55 sitting around in their house. It is better for them.
Okay, so let's examine your statement: You're saying that if you ask people, a bigger tank automatically makes the water cleaner thereby making the fish healthier? Who are these people and what qualifies them to make this statement? Experience? Gut Instinct? Human emotion? Something they read in a book? I happen to know that statement is far from the truth as I have cleaned a number of people's larger cesspools that they called aquariums. But let's just say that you have a 200 gal tank with proper filtration and do routine water changes and you acheive the following water parameters: Ammonia: 0, Nitrite: 0, Nitrate: less than 25 PPM, and you only have 2 Oscars in the tank and they grow to be 12" long and they are breeding. You would believe that you are doing the absolute right thing for them. Correct? Well that's what I had but I was doing in a 50 gal tank and they were breeding like rabbits. I know I've had this conversation before but the truth of the matter is that fish don't breed when they are stressed out. Find me any breeder with crap for water and their fish still producing both viable eggs and living healthy fry. I'm not talking about wild fish in wild situations, I'm talking home aquarium fish in home aquariums.
Why "a 75 when they have an empty 55?" I don't know! A standard 75 is the exact same tank as a standard 55 only 6 inches wider. (I've had and sold both.) You don't gain swimming length but gain turning space. If you lived in a 4' closet and someone made it 6 inches wider, would you do better in that?
The points I was making were that since these are not wild fish anymore, their needs have changed and AS wild fish, they didn't use as much space (even tho it was available) as many hobbyists believe they need. I believe that was the point of this thread: What makes a large tank MANDATORY for this fish? I believe, based on my multiple experiences with these magnificent fish, that it's human emotion that demands the larger tank and not the fish themselves. The fish adapt. You finished your post by saying "
It is better for them." My question is: Better in what way? You gave them more space that they didn't need because you wanted them to have more space but you didn't give them better water than I did as my water would have tested the same as yours. WHY do the
fish think it's better?
To address the poster who asked about putting a 24 inch fish in a 24 inch wide tank, no, it's not a good idea but what if the tank was 25 inches and the fish had enough room to turn around, would that be okay? In fact, when was the last time any of these new Oscars grew to be 24"? Should today's Oscars that don't grow to the wild Oscar's size require the same tank sizes?
To the poster who mentioned putting a dog in a crate and asking if it was okay because they bred: We are not talking about mammals, we are talking about fish. Is that good husbandry? Not for dogs, so don't buy them.
But I'm talking about the fish still being able to naturally complete their mission for being, which is to procreate and pass along their genetic material. So I pose this question to you: Since domesticated dogs are man made and created to do different things, would it be cruel to keep a, say, St. Bernard or let's say an Alaskan Husky in a 3000 sq. ft house but only in the house? It's a big house isn't it? I'm sure if you ask any Vet worth his salt, he'd tell you you were being cruel to the dog. I'm also sure that the animals themselves would suffer both physical and emotional damage by doing this. That's because theses types of dogs require more space. Would a tea cup poodle do okay in this situation? Sure would, because it doesn't need all the extra space. Oscars don't
require the amount of space that everybody thinks is appropriate. The evidence points to that. If people want to give it to them, I'm sure not going to stop them. It's their choice.
I'm also not proposing bad husbandry just a better
understanding of the fish that we are keeping.
But let's not stop at Oscars, I believe all Koi living in a fish tank, NO MATTER HOW LARGE, are being kept cruely because this fish grows larger than most anyone's aquarium, yet people still put them in one when they are small. Is tank stunting this fish cruel? Are the posters on this thread going to confront the hobbyists doing this or Boycott the stores selling Koi to a tank person? What about Parrot Cichlids? Don't you think it's cruel to make a fish with a contorted mouth that it can't feed "normally" and it's body is a disfigured form of it's original species? If this fish isn't an example of an entertaiment fish, I don't know what is? How about Glo- fish, Berry tetras, painted Glassfish, etc. Aren't these entertainment fish too? They are certainly not natural!!!!
I'm sure I've entered a hornet's nest with this post so I'll let you all keep bashing. Truth is, I know what I know because I've done what I've done and seen what I've seen. Like it or not, if you've experienced what I have experienced, you wouldn't be having this conversation and probably not be keeping today's fish as a "Hobby."
Let the bashing recommence