Tang quandry

[BoomerD]

I have a 90 gallon FOWLR with some mish soft corals & 2 BTA's, currently home to my 3" Kole tang. Great fish. I recently "inherited" a 3" Naso tang which has spent the last 3 weeks in my 20 gallon QT. I'd like some opinions on adding the Naso to the 90 with the Kole. I realize that the tank is too small for 2 adult tangs in the long run, but I'm trying to upgrade to a 180 which is where the Naso would end up. Should I leave it in the QT, put it in the 90 for now, or trade it to someone with a larger tank? Please, no tang police... I'm interested in doing what's right for the fish.
Thanks.

[BrianD]

Please, no tang police

I'm interested in doing what's right for the fish.

So.....

If we tell you that what is "right" for the naso is not to put it in either a 90 or a 180, will we be dismissed as tang police? Or by saying that you don't want "tang police", does that just mean you want to hear from people who tell you it is ok whatever you do?

I am confused as to your sincerity in requesting opinions, if you have already dismissed the conservative point of view.

Brian

[hcs3]

well said :thumbsup:

[BoomerD]

Sorry no. Not my point. I realize some people take the view that NO tang should be housed in ANY aquarium. I ended up with a tang I really wasn't looking for. I didn't want to see it get kept forever in a 20 gallon tank either (previous owner), so I agreed to take it, knowing I'm planning on a 180. If you take the view that "no tangs ever, in any tank", why not apply that to ALL fish, and just shut down the hobby, after all, I'm sure that angels, large & small inhabit a much larger territory than we give them. Same applies to Clowns, and the majority of other fish. Hell, let's stop the importation of any corals too, because we certainly can't provide for them as well as Mother Nature.
Again, I know that the Naso in a 90 isn't going to be good for a long term thing, just a bit better than languishing in a 20, or even in a 55, which ofter happens when sold from a LFS. If the consensus is to trade it in, I'll probably do that. Then someone else can put it in a 20 or 55 or whatever. Right? I'm at least trying here.

[hcs3]

If you take the view that "no tangs ever, in any tank", why not apply that to ALL fish, and just shut down the hobby, after all, I'm sure that angels, large & small inhabit a much larger territory than we give them. Same applies to Clowns, and the majority of other fish.

this happens to be an often used arguement by people fighting the 'tang police.' truth is, it is pretty much a useless arguement as it tends to show a lack of knowledge for fish requirements.

for many fish their known territorial limits are well researched and easily provided for. point in case, your aforementioned clownfish. we do not need to give them an aquarium the size of the ocean because we know they heavily defend a host anemone, and rarely if ever move more than a couple feet from their host. dwarf angels, another of your examples, is also well researched with many of the territorial restraints known. BrianD's 500g aquarium has nearly the same square footage as the territory defended by a trio of cherub angels. many RC members have an aquarium that could easily hold a harem of 5 to 7 cherub angels.

the information is out there, you just have to be willing to look for it, then provide the requirements.

[JPerkins]

So many tang problems, so little time.

[BoomerD]

Problem resolved. Stuck him on a spit and tossed him on the BBQ!:lol:

Actually, he's going to a friend who has a 240 & 360 to house this little guy.

[naesco]

Originally posted by BoomerD
Problem resolved. Stuck him on a spit and tossed him on the BBQ!:lol:

Actually, he's going to a friend who has a 240 & 360 to house this little guy.

:thumbsup:

[EdKruzel]

naesco,
I'm so proud of you! You didn't jump in to the middle of this one.

For anyone that has read naesco's replies knows that his soap box is just a "wee-bit" higher than mine when it comes to tangs.

Another Tang Saved!

Take Care Buddy,

Ed