• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Is keeping fish in bare tanks an act of cruelty?

KipperSarnie

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
427
Location
Aldington Kent
I can't help feeling keeping fish in bare tanks is the same cruelty practised by zoo's back in the 50's & 60's where animals were kept in small cages without stimulation "For their own good"!
"It's easier to maintain & keep them free from disease" I'm told but did not the same argument apply to Lions, Tigers, Elephants & the such back in the day?

I'm keeping Discus but refuse to keep them in bare tanks, even my breeding pairs have wood, plants & a base layer.
OK I have to work a bit harder on maintenance but isn't this what it's all about?
I enjoy my fish as well as the tank "Aquascaping" .... Perhaps not to your high standards.
 
The reason I don't use bare tanks, is because I find them boring. I don't however feel there's a whole lot of evidence to suggest it's a cruel practice. Most fish we keep have been bred in captivity in bare tanks and know no better, and i don't believe they have the cognitive ability to want for more. Providing the tank is large enough and the fish kept in large enough numbers I'm OK with it.
 
I wonder if bare bottom is any more cruel than say 30ppm CO2 (gassing them) ,Uber lighting being blasted at them for ten hour's or more, (no cover /floating plant's to provide some relief), or if some species appreciate the sharp increase in total dissolved solid's from the addition of near daily mineral salt's we use for fertilizer's.
Have seen many fishes raised in bare bottom tank's sans the afore mentioned gas/light's/fertz and made a purely unscientific observation that the fishes seemed less skittish/spooky when the bottom glass was painted on outside, or white/blue foam was placed down before placing the tank down.
Some fishes did not seem to like the reflective properties of the glass while other's were unfazed.
 
The reason I don't use bare tanks, is because I find them boring. I don't however feel there's a whole lot of evidence to suggest it's a cruel practice. Most fish we keep have been bred in captivity in bare tanks and know no better, and i don't believe they have the cognitive ability to want for more. Providing the tank is large enough and the fish kept in large enough numbers I'm OK with it.

An elephant or Lion bred in a cage knows no better but in my opinion that doesn't make it right!
 
Most fish we keep have been bred in captivity in bare tanks and know no better, and i don't believe they have the cognitive ability to want for more.

They do. Just move those same fish to a suitable tank, plants, suitable cover and tank mates, etc... and you'll see them behave like they've just seen heaven.

I wouldn't be worried about bare bottom tank much if it has cover such as driftwood and plants in pots if needs be. It's the lack of any cover whatsoever that stresses fish out. Plus its a known issue with bottom dwellers losing their barbels in bare bottom tanks. The bare glass promotes the growth of harmful bacteria and needs to be wiped regularly. A thin layer of substrate prevents that.
 
An elephant or Lion bred in a cage knows no better but in my opinion that doesn't make it right!

Poor Ivan the gorilla. (can google Ivan the gorilla)
 
This is a very sensitive subject of discussion, probably one that will never come to a consensual conclussion. This just because of the personal interest someone has in keeping animals for entertaining purpose.. As so often said in this hobby is that no matter how you scape it or don't scape it in this case in the end it is you who has to like it.

Tho if you break it down to it's actual meaning what Vivaristic stands for, i think there can be put a lot of questionmarks to it in many cases...

It's vivaristic we all try to practise here, which means recreating an as natural as possible biological/ecological invironment to keep animals in a confined living space (Vivarium = livingspace). In our case it's Aquarium = Aquatic living space or Riparium, paludarium etc. all under the same umbrella where a waterbody is involved.

If you break down the actual meaning of biologic and ecologic then it is meant from the logic part as "Knowing". That there should be a certain degree of knowledge involved.

Since we are in majority all just hobbyists and far from specialists we can put a very big questionmark to the knowing part..

The only thing i know, if i break it down like that, it is nothing more than logic that keeping fish in a bare tank is far from practising vivaristic.. Ok literaly it's a living space, they have a space and they live.. But from a biological and ecological standpoint of view and if fish are just stupid animals living instinctively, we should at least take there instictive needs into consideration when trying to recreate a livingspace for them. And this is something one should know, since it is observed and documented enough by now.

But then again, field researchers reported finding adult kilifish living in a flooded footprint of an elephant.. Now it gets complicated, doesn't it? Nature does that. If it's a justification for us to do that too? I don't know..

I thought about it a lot since i'm for the biggest part of my life involved in this hobby.. Also questioned myself a lot and never realy found a truly honnest answer..

Once a very well known Austrian zooligist said
"Every single captive stickleback cared to death, contributed more to wildlife conservation than any sign at the park entrance ever did"...
 
I think this is an excellent summary, Marcel. I don't like to judge people in our hobby unless they're causing clear harm to their animals (Oscars in 100 litre tanks, inadequate filtration etc.). Equally, I know we've all made mistakes, killed fish, kept a goldfish in a bowl as a child.
 
The point is, one would know if fish are happy in their environment by their general health and life span. That's the only way to know for sure you're doing the right thing...If you're changing fish often, change your habits..

The problem is, when you browse the discus forums, knowing that majority of so called experienced discus keepers use bare bottom tanks, it does raise your eyebrows why the forums are saturated with topics on sick discus....Don't get me wrong, I love reading the topics because the knowledge on diseases is great in there.

But there's a big connection between stress and disease...Fish diseases and regular deaths are a sign of severe or/and consistent stress...I don't know if its more difficult or easier for the fish care taker to keep fish in bare bottom tanks in that case. But hey, they say it works better for discus.....I think the problem with keeping discus in decorated/planted tanks is the amount of food one needs to feed them if you want to grow them big... Such food and amounts will wreak havoc in any tank early or later....So for growing up fish I understand why its done that way...But adult fish should be in planted or biotope tanks with all the cover necessary...

Plus it won't hurt a thing to put a few potted plants and a driftwood for some cover in any bare tank...I think its laziness and stubbornness...Fine layer of sand to prevent bacterial growth won't hurt either. No one can convince me you can't siphon it well....Majority of their home tanks by my observation are majorly under-filtered.... Add to that the high temperatures and slow moving waters lacking oxygen....Everything in those types of set ups would shorten the lives of majority of fish...

In discus nurseries, there's a subtle difference in how fish are kept. The filtration is massive. I can't remember which one I watched lately, but they had massive trickle filters under the tanks that they Didn't clean at all often because the enormous sponges were on top and the debris settled on the bottom where it gets flushed...The water changes are automatic, no wiping and messing with the tank with the fish inside. Its drain and fill...

In a home aquaria it becomes different with the amount of food those fish are being fed, wiping everything like a lunatic, washing the clogged media daily, they are disturbing the bacs non-stop...leading to immature filtration consistently..
And they often deal with lingering ammonia and nitrite as a result....Then dump meds to remedy the problem....led by the panic and fear of losing their expensive fish...

Some don't even bother with filtration because of the large daily water changes...I couldn't even keep 3 shrimp in an immature fish tank. even with water changes...The test was barely reading 0.25 ammo and the shrimp had frozen on their chosen spots and not moving...

Rant over....
 
Last edited:
I think Roadmaster hits the nail on the head with the examples he gives in that there are no black & white answers - just varying degrees of grey...

For breeders perhaps conditions are designed to produce highest yield & not considered optimum longterm? But who am I to judge when I benefit from the choice of livestock available to me as a hobbyist?

I would like to run an iwagumi in the future (out of curiosity) which would be plants & soil substrate, however would like to keep either Norman's lampeye or clown killifish. Both together would be stressful for the fish so will run an iwagumi for some months and then disassemble & run a more appropriate layout with cover for the livestock later.

I think we have to do our best with our own level of knowledge & personal responsibility over our tanks & lucky to have access to more resources than ever to aid us!
 
I feel keeping fish in a bare tank is awful. Whats the point?

To answer this question you have to observe the animals in the wild. Understand their instinct. Even if they're bred in a tank they still have instinct, it would take thousands of years to breed out instinct and even then it may not work. The best example to back this up would be a dog. They all have the instinct to..
-find food
-shelter
-breed

It has been proven that animals have emotions. I don't know if fish do. But instinct tells them where is safe in the water.. this is their shelter. Instinct might not tell a fish to find under a certain species of plant but it'll tell it to go under something, close to something etc etc..

The whole reason i got into growing plants was to keep my fish happy even though I enjoy the plants as much as the fish.

We can read things as humans and a fish is definitely happier in an aquarium with plants.

I have no phd people. I don't need one, go get a rescue dog from a shelter and let it loose in a forrest and you see instinct. You will also see how happy it is.. you will pick up on its emotions as a human we have this ability.
 
It has been proven that animals have emotions. I don't know if fish do.

There are more and more studies done proving animals have emotions. Majority are very recent and I read many on dogs. And I am certain fish have emotions too on some level, or at least the vast majority of the few underwater species discovered and studied.. It needs people that are capable of empathy to feel emotions in non-human beings creatures....Its us that are ignorant and need centuries to admit or discover the obvious. I am not a vegetarian by the way...And I love fish food... a bit of a hypocrite.:)
 
a bit of a hypocrite

That's why i never found a realy honnest answer.. We all contribute and have our fair (analogic) share and live in our own little soap bubble. Looking beyond my bubble i absolutely agree, i reject the idea of keeping fish in a bare tank or a bird in a cage.. But in the reflection of my bubble, i still i keep fish captive in a tank.. I also had chickens running through the garden and at one time i had so much i made my own chickensoup.. So i had to chop off chicken heads to manage that.. The first one felt realy odd, killing something you love and eat it.. Some people asked me and other even found me cruel without asking. And these last ones are the real ignorant. They do not find it cruel to go to the supermarket and buy a already dead chicken for dinner.. They ignore the fact that this animal actualy realy had a rather cruel live in a to small cage bred in 8 weeks to get ready for beeing slaughtered by a machine.. That's very easy after all it's a chicken you do not love. But yes deep down i am cruel even if it is with respect and love, maybe that's what makes me a human spoiled with luxery, but at least i do not ignore that.
 
I also had chickens running through the garden and at one time i had so much i made my own chickensoup.. So i had to chop off chicken heads to manage that..

Yep, nothing wrong with that. Sure your "soup" chickens had a lot better life than 99% of chickens sold in the supermarket. Its disgusting how they raise them on a large scale. Its barely bearable watching those documentaries....

Though, Marcel, I doubt it you'd ever eat your aquarium fish :) unless we're talking World War 3 scenario and starvation, which isn't far off either...We may want to stock on yummy, meaty fish that breed easily :)
 
Some people asked me and other even found me cruel without asking. And these last ones are the real ignorant. They do not find it cruel to go to the supermarket and buy a already dead chicken for dinner.. They ignore the fact that this animal actualy realy had a rather cruel live in a to small cage bred in 8 weeks to get ready for beeing slaughtered by a machine.

Yes, i've always been puzzled by peoples reaction to hunting. If I go out, shoot a deer, use it's skin, prepare the meat and eat it for 4 months, i'm somehow cruel? That deer had a far more dignified death and happy life than the one in the farm killed in an abattoir. To make it clear, I haven't personally done this, but I have friends that have and I do aspire to source all my own meat one day.
 
For me it's about seeing the fauna behave in a natural way, so I want to create an environment in which they are able to do this, and which I enjoy aesthetically. Not too hard to achieve in my experience
 
Back
Top