would the length of the tank make any difference

fatpuffer · Post by **fatpuffer** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:13 pm

I have a one inch f8 puffer. I am probably going to get flamed here but my only tank right now will be a 32x 6x 8 inches (6.5 gallon) tank. I do 25-50 percent h2o change q2-3 days. I currently feed 5 x per week as the tank is at work.

Okay let me have it...lol.

JRC3 · Post by **JRC3** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:44 pm

Well one inch of fish per gallon of water is the general rule.

sevenyearnight · Post by **sevenyearnight** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:59 pm

JRC3 wrote:Well one inch of fish per gallon of water is the general rule.

I hope this is a joke, as this only applies to fish like small tetras etc.

fatpuffer · Post by **fatpuffer** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:08 pm

one fish per gallon is not really a rule i like to follow. I would never keep a 10 inch oscar in a ten gallon. But would a full grown 3 inch pufferfish thrive in a 32 x 6 x 8 inch tank w frequent water change?

Flutter · Post by **Flutter** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:15 pm

No, it wouldn't, it would live a very poor existence. F8's are very active and intelligent fish. If at all possible we recommend a 20long tank to give them extra swimming room. I think something like a betta would be more suitable for your tank.

How do you manage mixing the BW at work?

Post by **Pufferpunk** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:19 pm

Although JR had the

smiley after his post, I don't even consider that something to joke about here. Not everyone will see it that way.

fatpuffer · Post by **fatpuffer** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:43 pm

I have premix bucket at my desk. So far, he is not doing bad. Bright coloured eating well. I bought him and he already had ich (typical big store) and I treated him. he is clear of parasites now. I do not have room for a 20 gallon long. I believe he does have enough swimming space but again it is not the most ideal situation but better than dying in the store.

I will see if i can get him re-homed.

Post by **RTR** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:43 am

"So far..." for a fish which should have a captive lifespan of 15 or more years is meaningless.

The one inch per gallon "rule" is meaningless and always has been. It is a guarantee that the fish involved will not be in optimum conditions.

This site is for folks who want to learn to keep pufferfish as well as they can. If you have other aims, this may not be the best site for you. If you want to keep puffers as well as you can, we will be glad to help you do so.

fatpuffer · Post by **fatpuffer** » Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:06 pm

okay.

Iliveinazoo · Post by **Iliveinazoo** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:30 am

Flutter wrote:If at all possible we recommend a 20long tank to give them extra swimming room.

15(US)G?

Flutter · Post by **Flutter** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:31 am

15USgal is the minimum tank size but many people keep theirs in a 20USgal -long- (vs. regular or tall) tank to give them extra horizontal swimming room. Does that clear it up?

Iliveinazoo · Post by **Iliveinazoo** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:11 am

Flutter wrote:15USgal is the minimum tank size but many people keep theirs in a 20USgal -long- (vs. regular or tall) tank to give them extra horizontal swimming room. Does that clear it up?

Yes thanks. I think we should say if the minimum tank size that we recommend is over and above the recommendation stated in the Pufferpedia.

J-P · Post by **J-P** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:31 am

Iliveinazoo wrote: Yes thanks. I think we should say if the minimum tank size that we recommend is over and above the recommendation stated in the Pufferpedia.

minimum isn't optimum.

Post by **RTR** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:42 am

I' go farther than J-P and say that minimum is not likely ever optimum. Minimum is just that word, no more. It also assumes that upkeep is not minimum but optimum - which from reading these posts does not often seem to be the case.

Optimum is far more likely to also be easier and often cheaper in the long run. Optimum is aimed at the long run. Optimum provides extra margins of safety.

It has taken me a number of decades of experience to realize that optimum is much much better, along with having more than sufficient margins of safety both from the fish's viewpoint and the keeper's.

Puffer King · Post by **Puffer King** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:36 am

RTR wrote:I' go farther than J-P and say that minimum is not likely ever optimum. Minimum is just that word, no more. It also assumes that upkeep is not minimum but optimum - which from reading these posts does not often seem to be the case.

Optimum is far more likely to also be easier and often cheaper in the long run. Optimum is aimed at the long run. Optimum provides extra margins of safety.

It has taken me a number of decades of experience to realize that optimum is much much better, along with having more than sufficient margins of safety both from the fish's viewpoint and the keeper's.

+1

The Puffer Forum

The Puffer Store

would the length of the tank make any difference

would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference

Re: would the length of the tank make any difference