Where do these statistics come from?
I would say it depends who you ask. Most experienced Oscar keepers I talk to would not agree.
tank mate for oscar in 75g
- Thread starter OscarDaddy69
- Start date
I would say it depends who you ask. Most experienced Oscar keepers I talk to would not agree.
Couldn't say it any better Stanzzzz7.
As being one that upgraded an Oscar's tank to a 6ft 125gal, she became a totally different fish. More outgoing and active. In my eyes they use the whole volume of the tank. They spend as much time digging pits on the bottom as they do swimming mid or top.
As being one that upgraded an Oscar's tank to a 6ft 125gal, she became a totally different fish. More outgoing and active. In my eyes they use the whole volume of the tank. They spend as much time digging pits on the bottom as they do swimming mid or top.
Do you have a study that you could show me about this? I'm rather interested in this now.
Well I did use the word "I" so the statistics were made by me. Here's how I see it.
Let's say 80% believe a 75 is the minimum.
10% believe a 55 is the minimum.
5% believe a 125 is the minimum
The last 5% believe anywhere from 40 breeder to above a 125.
Those statistics have not 1 shred of factual data to back it up but that's how I've put it together after countless hours of researching the topic of oscars overy the years.
Now I'm not looking to start a debate and I can tell you aren't either, I do however enjoy getting other people's thoughts on topics such at this one. I can tell you're a well informed man and I respect your ideas.
Perhaps when I am able to obtain a 125 I will be able to test it myself by keeping an oscar in a 75 and then moving him to the 125. Perhaps I will see the change you both have talked about them undergoing. Perhaps then I will finally understand why people reccomend a 125 as a minimum for an oscar... But until then I'll keep believing a 75 is good for an oscar. Until then my friend.
Just raising one to adulthood and keeping it healthy for the duration of its natural life. Most people think an oscar is done growing at around 12", but in reality this is when they really start to bulk up. When a properly kept oscar reaches 15-18" theyre probably 2-3x as massive as they were when they were 12".
Just to clarify, i myself have been guilty of cramming oscars into small tanks several times in the past, so im coming from a place of experience, not trying to be condescending. I rehomed my last oscar, who i intended to keep in a 75, to a fellow with a pond just last year.
I think most of the people here saying that the 75 gal is too small has at one point or another tried to house a fish in too small of a tank. It may seem like criticism but it truly is more about the fishes comfort/ quality of life that is in question more so than someone’s intent.
I am actually of the belief now that a 180 is a min for a full grown Oscar tbh. I have had many in the past and now seeing the difference of having them in a bigger space, I would have to agree with
Stanzzzz7
comments about their intelligence etc. But in the same token I think we need to be gracious with people who are learning about their fish on here and not scare them off when they are asking about care. If this forum is going to grow, we need to play nice together. Even if your tank is bigger. Lol
Well I just proved myself half right and half wrong.
Out of 7 pages of a thread on a site devoted to oscar lovers, only 1 person had one that was 15 inches. And he even said it was 14-15 so not a guarenteed 15 inches.
http://www.oscarfishlover.com/oscar...ar-fish/300663-how-big-is-your-oscar?start=10
If you truly have proof of a captive bred oscar hitting 18 inches then please show it and I'll eat my fedora and post the video here as proof.
Out of 7 pages of a thread on a site devoted to oscar lovers, only 1 person had one that was 15 inches. And he even said it was 14-15 so not a guarenteed 15 inches.
http://www.oscarfishlover.com/oscar...ar-fish/300663-how-big-is-your-oscar?start=10
If you truly have proof of a captive bred oscar hitting 18 inches then please show it and I'll eat my fedora and post the video here as proof.
Google it. Its quite a well covered subject that has many experiments and articles under its belt.
Lack of stimulation can result in stress. Stress is detrimental to fish health.
That is your choice to do so.
Do you not think a 75 would be a much better home to something the size of a kribensis?
This would allow space for territory, tank mates, stimulation, exercise and the opportunity to swim out of its own urine.
You could give it a mate, the instinct to breed is very strong in cichlids. It's shaped their evolution and success.
An oscar in a 75 can have none of the above.
Ignorance is bliss so believe what you will.
This is the part that I just don't understand. The hobby has hundreds upon hundreds of species of fish to choose from.
Yet so many people choose the very largest one they can possibly cram into a 75. Why?
It makes no sense to me. I'd rather give a fish a simulation of a home from home. Not solitary confinement in a tiny glass box.
This debate could be a complete waste of time, I've had this debate many times.
Maybe a newbie may stumble across it and think twice about the fish they are about to stock. Maybe not.
People will do what they want to do and they will take the advise that suites their own desires. I think that's happened to you my friend.
I must disagree with you. I have not taken the advice that tells me what I want, I listen to the advice the the majority of the hobby agrees upon.
As for that part as for you not understanding why people tend to want the biggest fish they can have, it's human nature. Tell me, does the average person not desire a big house, a big pay check, a big expensive beautiful car, and the other big things in life? It's human nature to want more then what we have, it's what has driven us to do things we wouldn't have had we not had that lust. If we want more land then we'll buy it or invade that land and take it. Man seeks power, man has also let the thought of "big" things become the connotation of power.
"Oh you have a 2,000 gallon fish tank with 3 feet fish? You must be rich!"
Humans are a selfish species. We take whatever we want with very little thought. EVERY human has been selfish at one point or another and most are selfish on a daily basis but we just don't realize it.
Why do we keep living animals in tiny glass boxes? In the wild most of them would have far more space. The answer is that mankind as a whole is selfish.
As for that part as for you not understanding why people tend to want the biggest fish they can have, it's human nature. Tell me, does the average person not desire a big house, a big pay check, a big expensive beautiful car, and the other big things in life? It's human nature to want more then what we have, it's what has driven us to do things we wouldn't have had we not had that lust. If we want more land then we'll buy it or invade that land and take it. Man seeks power, man has also let the thought of "big" things become the connotation of power.
"Oh you have a 2,000 gallon fish tank with 3 feet fish? You must be rich!"
Humans are a selfish species. We take whatever we want with very little thought. EVERY human has been selfish at one point or another and most are selfish on a daily basis but we just don't realize it.
Why do we keep living animals in tiny glass boxes? In the wild most of them would have far more space. The answer is that mankind as a whole is selfish.
