Newbie: Salt or fresh water?
Bit Nybbler
Poseidon wrote:
> ARG!! I didn't get it. News server must have dropped it. Could I have
> a repost please, or it sent to me?
That's odd. It still does not show up on Deja News either. I can email a
copy to you if it still has not arrived at your news reader.
Bit Nybbler
For email remove the ".nojunk" from my address.
Pavlov
b...@cs.toronto.edu (Beverly Erlebacher) wrote:
>It's much more difficult to maintain good conditions in a saltwater
>tank than a freshwater one.
> Start with common, hardy, inexpensive fish. One of the best books
>for beginners is "The Complete Fishkeeper" by Joseph Levine, but there are
>many other good books around too. The most common beginner mistakes are
>overstocking, adding too many fish too soon and impulse buying of unfamiliar
>fish or other critters before finding out if they will do well in your tank.
>
Thank you for such a great post. I will definitely go with
freshwater. I didn't realize salt water tanks were so much more
advanced. I'm not looking to make a career out of having a nice
aquarium! :)
I will also look for the book you mentioned.
I just want something that my new son and I can enjoy together. He's
3 months old, so I'll probably be doing most of the work! :)
______________________________________________________________________
Mitch Brink, Keyboardist/ Composer
E-mail: mit...@ix.netcom.com
WWW: http://www.geocities.com/~mitchb2/
Damon Hill
Pavlov wrote:
>
> b...@cs.toronto.edu (Beverly Erlebacher) wrote:
>
> >It's much more difficult to maintain good conditions in a saltwater
> >tank than a freshwater one.
> > Start with common, hardy, inexpensive fish. One of the best books
> >for beginners is "The Complete Fishkeeper" by Joseph Levine, but there are
> >many other good books around too. The most common beginner mistakes are
> >overstocking, adding too many fish too soon and impulse buying of unfamiliar
> >fish or other critters before finding out if they will do well in your tank.
> >
>
> Thank you for such a great post. I will definitely go with
> freshwater. I didn't realize salt water tanks were so much more
> advanced. I'm not looking to make a career out of having a nice
> aquarium! :)
>
> I will also look for the book you mentioned.
>
> I just want something that my new son and I can enjoy together. He's
> 3 months old, so I'll probably be doing most of the work! :)
Hey, who knows. Once you get a few years of experience keeping
freshwater successfully, you might still consider moving to saltwater.
Goodness knows plenty of people seem to have done well at it, but it's
best to be well grounded in the basics beforehand.
Keep us posted on how it goes, and if you have
any questions, you know where to ask! :)
---PHIL
patrick timlin
harry silva (sil...@spectra.net) wrote:
: With the equiptment available to day it is as easy
: to keep many marine fish as it is their freshwater counterpart. It
: requires more 'work' and more 'attention' to details but the rewards
: are also much greater.
Hey! Wait a second now! Exactly what rewards are there that are "much
greater" when keeping marine fish vs. freshwater fish. Besides generally
being more colorful, what else about them makes them "much greater" than
freshwater fish? I would guess you could get lots of counter arguments
on that statement.
Patrick Timlin http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/4742/
pti...@geocities.com
harry silva
Actually in my opinion keeping a saltwater tank requires a great deal
of dedication. And when one applies the technics to freshwater then
one will far for sucessful at that as well.
My most sage advice is to have a few of each. But if one were to have
only one then start with Saltwater.. the experence will be most
rewarding.
that' my opinion....
Damon Hill <da...@halcyon.com> wrote:
>
> ---PHIL
/harry/ , le Ol Captain...
(all opinions by me are my own unless outherwise noted,
are based on my 30+ years of experence. I welcome reasoned
debate on any fishy topic. I believe there is more then one
way to keep fish... and that we can learn every day.I am
prepaired to justify or explain my position. Yet I acknowledge
that it may not be the only right one... come let's talk about
it)
Mark A. Stone
harry silva (sil...@spectra.net) wrote:
> Actually in my opinion keeping a saltwater tank requires a great deal
> of dedication. And when one applies the technics to freshwater then
> one will far for sucessful at that as well.
> My most sage advice is to have a few of each. But if one were to have
> only one then start with Saltwater.. the experence will be most
> rewarding.
> that' my opinion....
I've looked from a distance at marine aquaria . . . .they sure are
purrrrrty fishes! --Mark
> Damon Hill <da...@halcyon.com> wrote:
> >
> > ---PHIL
--
--------------------------------
bh...@rgfn.epcc.edu
The ".edu" meens i are smart.
harry silva
bh...@rgfn.epcc.edu (Mark A. Stone) wrote:
>harry silva (sil...@spectra.net) wrote:
>> Actually in my opinion keeping a saltwater tank requires a great deal
>> of dedication. And when one applies the technics to freshwater then
>> one will far for sucessful at that as well.
>> My most sage advice is to have a few of each. But if one were to have
>> only one then start with Saltwater.. the experence will be most
>> rewarding.
>> that' my opinion....
>I've looked from a distance at marine aquaria . . . .they sure are
>purrrrrty fishes! --Mark
They sure are. Sure there are many extremely pretty freshwater fish,
discus and pearl gouramis come to mind. But Marine fish are exciting.
I have seen dozens of angelfish and butterfly fish (my favorate types)
and Wrasses and such that have no freshwater equal.
They are expensive, some are very hard to keep but the effort is worth
it in my opinion. Plus the techincs I learned had/have many
applications in fresh water keeping. One thing... moving from fresh
to salt is a lot harder then one would think. May lazy habits in
freshwater can mean disaster in saltwater.
just my opinion...
Patrick Eason
> : to keep many marine fish as it is their freshwater counterpart. It
> : requires more 'work' and more 'attention' to details but the rewards
> : are also much greater.
>
> Hey! Wait a second now! Exactly what rewards are there that are "much
> greater" when keeping marine fish vs. freshwater fish. Besides generally
> being more colorful, what else about them makes them "much greater" than
> freshwater fish? I would guess you could get lots of counter arguments
> on that statement.
Uh-huh. It is after all a matter of personal taste.
I find that there is something a bit "arrid" about marine setups. A big tank, some coral, some anemones,
a few dayglow fish, and that's about it. Sure the fish can be very beautiful, and it must be quite a
thrill having a mini-reef ecology in your own home, but I have to say that I much prefer the freshwater
"aesthetic". Lots of lush plants, shoals of tiny tetras, a few pearly gouramis poking about, the shy
bottom feeders that make up for their hilarious ugliness by being eating the muck, and so on. If a marine
tank is a painting dome with an airbrush and bright acrylic paints, then a tropical tank is a
watercolour.
Now I'm not saying this to put down marines or start an argument - just to counter the comment above
about greater "rewards" from marine tanks. Freshwater tropical is definitely NOT second best!
--
* Paddy Eason
* Computer Film Company, London
* mailto:pa...@cfc.co.uk
yummy picture:
http://www.lam.mus.ca.us/lacmnh/departments/research/entomology/phorids/ant.html
harry silva
Patrick Eason <x...@cxxx.com> wrote:
>patrick timlin wrote:
>>
>> harry silva (sil...@spectra.net) wrote:
>> : With the equiptment available to day it is as easy
>> : to keep many marine fish as it is their freshwater counterpart. It
>> : requires more 'work' and more 'attention' to details but the rewards
>> : are also much greater.
>>
>> Hey! Wait a second now! Exactly what rewards are there that are "much
>> greater" when keeping marine fish vs. freshwater fish. Besides generally
>> being more colorful, what else about them makes them "much greater" than
>> freshwater fish? I would guess you could get lots of counter arguments
>> on that statement.
The term 'greater' may tend to indicate one fish life is greater then
another. However, fish behaviour can be considered part of the whole
experence. With out commenting on the relative value of a life one
can definately explain behaviour in marine fish that have no
freshwater counterparts.
For example, the seahorse. This creature is part horse, part insect
and part fish all in one. There are not many fish where the Male
gives birth to the babies after holding the eggs in it's pouch for up
to 2 months.
Or the goby where the male actually becomes part of the female.
Or the Wrasses who make themselfs pajamas to sleep in at night.
Or the Difference in colors between juvenile and adut fish - or male
and female- some so signifant that they were once thought to be
different speci.
How about the vairous invertebrates. The animal that looks like a
plant. Or the vairous seastars. How about the lobsters, shrimps,
crabs and nearcrabs (ie:hermits). Moving pin cusions (sea urchins)...
I could go on and on.
Now I realize that freshwater fish have some very interesting
creatures. Like the Discus that feed's it's babies Milk from it's own
body. Or the say the Dottyback sickleback will breed with several
females and care for the eggs kept in a pit in the ground.
>Uh-huh. It is after all a matter of personal taste.
true... or opinion.
>I find that there is something a bit "arrid" about marine setups. A big tank, some coral, some anemones,
>a few dayglow fish, and that's about it. Sure the fish can be very beautiful, and it must be quite a
>thrill having a mini-reef ecology in your own home, but I have to say that I much prefer the freshwater
>"aesthetic". Lots of lush plants, shoals of tiny tetras, a few pearly gouramis poking about, the shy
>bottom feeders that make up for their hilarious ugliness by being eating the muck, and so on. If a marine
>tank is a painting dome with an airbrush and bright acrylic paints, then a tropical tank is a
>watercolour.
>Now I'm not saying this to put down marines or start an argument - just to counter the comment above
>about greater "rewards" from marine tanks. Freshwater tropical is definitely NOT second best!
never said they were.
darrylnotpar...@bit.net.au
On 1 Sep 1997 03:01:17 GMT, pti...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (patrick timlin)
wrote:
>Hey! Wait a second now! Exactly what rewards are there that are "much
>greater" when keeping marine fish vs. freshwater fish.
Paradoxically, the reward for me was that I was able to maintain them
in good health. It DOES take more knowledge and effort IMHO. So when
I succeed, I feel rewarded. I also have gained knowledge, and that's
always enjoyable as well.
Darryl
\_____________________________________________________
If either heated discussion or civil argument results
in either you or me understanding the situation
a little better, then it was all worth while.....