Good advice on stocking from the RSPCA

dwarfgourami

Fish Connoisseur
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
5,090
Reaction score
1
Location
Southampton, uk
Just picked up the RSPCA Pet Guide: Care for Tropical Fish at my local Waterstones, as I saw they did stocking suggestions for a tank my size; thought it would be nice to have something to compare with. It starts with an introduction by a Chief Veterinary Officer (lots of titles after his name), all about how if you don’t look after your fish the RSPCA would rather you didn’t have them. (Quite so…and if you can’t check the facts in your books properly, a lot of us would rather you didn’t publish them).

Then you get a general overview of some of the most common tropical fish. And then (this is the best bit!) you get the tank setups. All 3 are for a 24x15x12 in., in other words a 70 ltrs tank (like the Rekord 70), pretty well a 20H.

Scheme 1 is for hard water. To provide “a well-balanced aquarium and….a congenial environment for your fish” you are advised to add:

5 tiger barbs
2 pairs black mollies
2 pairs guppies
1 pair swordtails
1 pair pearl gouramis
2-3 corydoras (bronze or peppered)
2 pairs platies
2 small angelfish

Scheme 2 is for less hard water:

5 tiger barbs
5 cardinal tetras
5 glowlight tetras
2 pairs guppies
1 pair pearl gouramis
2 corydoras (bronze or peppered)
2 pairs ruby barbs
2 small angelfish (where do they get this breed “small angelfish”?)
5 zebra danios

Scheme 3, for soft water, is the best:

5 glass catfish
5 glowlight tetras
1 betta
2-3 corys (bronze or peppered)
1 common plec
3 harlequin rasboras
2 pairs guppies
2-3 clown loaches !!!

Just take a few minutes and visualize this tank. 60 cms long, that is 2 feet, and it houses 3 clown loaches, 2 corys and a common plec!

It is true that they use the square inches of surface/inch fish rule, which is rather more generous than the fish/gallon rule, but even so only allows for 24 inches of fish in that tank. I make Scheme 1 78 inches, Scheme 2 82 inches and Scheme 3 109 inches!!! Of course, all those inches would never happen because the fish would die long before then.

Disregarding these crude inch calculations, imagine what life would be like for fish in those tanks. The bottom of no. 3 crammed with 2 corys, 3 clown loaches and a common plec, all fighting for room. The amount of crap you’d find in that tank! Or, in no. 2, 5 tiger barbs and 5 danios moving backwards and forwards in 60 cms, trying to relieve the tedium by nipping the bits off the guppies and gouramis.

There are other dodgy things about this book:
“An aerator or pump is not essential but it is useful, especially if it is combined with a filter.” This surely must give a beginner the idea that you can get away without filtration! (p, 23)

It is suggested that the tank should be left empty for one or two weeks with water in it “to let the water age”, but then the assumption is that you can just add the fish and the water will be fine! Nothing is mentioned of the cycle!!! (p. 35).

At a later stage, under Poisons, they say: “If the water in your aquarium becomes toxic, you must change 50 per cent of the water as soon as possible. …. Keep doing 30 per cent water changes until the water tests negative for ammonia and nitrate (sic) and the fish appear normal.” You are not told how, when or why your water is likely to become toxic, presumably you sit around and see if the fish die.

All in all, this is a very hit-and-miss approach to fishkeeping, totally out of date. It has clearly been republished again and again but never properly revised. Dick Mills put his name to an earlier edition, but doesn’t seem to have bothered to do any calculations on it.

The danger about this book is not only might someone try it, but it’s going to make the rest of us feel far too virtuous in comparison On reading it, I almost convinced myself that I would be alright adding that shoal of blue tetras- it’s not as if I was going to be overstocked by 80 inches!

It is also a reminder to be patient with newcomers; if they have read this sort of advice about “aging the water” in a publication by the RSPCA, you can hardly blame them for believing it.

In a crusading mood now, what do you think I should do? Write to the publishers? Write directly to the RSPCA? The publication is anonymous, and looks like a reprint of something very old (oh hang on, got hold of a 1990 edition, reprinted from the 1986, and that has an author- M. Richardson, whoever he may be. It also claims that Dick Mills has added text revisions- well, all I can say is- no, I’d better not say that on here). Something ought to be done, because people will take this as extra specially humane advice, “if the RSPC recommend it, it can't be cruel'.
 
IMHO
contact the RSPCA and advise them of your findings.
you may wish to site some referances with regurds to discrediting the infomation contained in the leaflet.
do a google search or similar for the authors and try and find a contact address for them, they maybe unaware that thier name(s) are associated with the leaflet.

BTW, don't ring the RSPCAs emergency line you need to find a non-emergency number
 
Bloody hell! I mean, I know bog all about decent fishkeeping but even I wouldn't be that stupid! :eek: I mean, surely common sense has a part to play? How can you put a whole host of varied bottom feeders and not so small fish in a tank that size ever? Ok if they're alone or a pair and breeding or sick or whatever but to live in crowded conditions??? If they even had a filter the conditions in the tank would be serious within a week!! Poor damn creatures. Got a good mind to kick their arses for such stupidity. :X
Hugs,
P.
P.S:Apologies for the rant. It just made me cross is all.
 
:eek: Oh my gosh ! That's quite unreal. As you have the source of the information there, I strongly suggest you contact the RSPCA and address that directly with them. They really should (I expect them to) respond fairly swiftly.
 
I wouldn't expect too much from the RSPCA, in my opinion they are pretty hopeless. :(
Most of their care books on animals I do know a lot about having been a breeder for many years, rabbits and guinea pigs are very poor.
Its a shame they don't put more effort into this side of their organisation.
 
The RSPCA is good at saving animals but it appears their advice on keeping them to the general is extremely poor, especialy in the manner of fish- i mean they go about saving animals but there would be far less that need saving if they actually gave proper advice about keeping them :( !
 
Still, if no one points it out to them - why should they ever bother changing it. Perhaps if enough people speak up, at some point something might change. Nothing will always come from nothing.
 
I must admit I am shocked at the stocking suggestions, but not surprised. I know there are a number of charities that prefer not to deal with the RSPCA due to their willingness to put down healthy animals.

But that information is just blatently wrong. :no:
 
andywg said:
I must admit I am shocked at the stocking suggestions, but not surprised. I know there are a number of charities that prefer not to deal with the RSPCA due to their willingness to put down healthy animals.
Its actually amazing how many healthy animals the rspca puts down but this is mostly due to the fact that their space and budget is rather limited and they cannot look after every single animal that gets brought in, some examples i have come across myself are;

a. One day my mum decided to get some cats to replace an old one that died on her farm and she decided to go to the rspca to get them.

As she parked her car a man was literally bringing some cats into the reception centre at the rspca; the story goes that his cats had been breeding out of control on his farm and were going feral and he didn't have space for these 2 particular cats he was bringing in and they were almost totally wild and had been living in a remote barn for the last couple of years.
The cats were going to be euthanised simply because they were feral and no one wants to adopt a cat that scratchs you to peices everytime you try to stroke it, so the rspca were going to put them down despite being perfectly healthy.
My mum felt sorry for them and adopted them.
Because they were going to be working cats on the farm to help try and control the rat population and not indoor pet cats my mum wasn't bothered about them being feral. We still have them are they are still almost completely feral although they do a good job on the farm but the facts are they would have been put down many years ago at the rspca if my mum hadn't been there at the right moment at the right time.

b. Vets are very expensive and when you have an animals thats going to cost £500's to pay for an operation on it, the rspca simply doesn't have the spare cash to treat it and as far as they see it, its much easier and cheeper to put it down -_- ...
 
Sorry to go off topic here, but there are many "charities" and other welfare organisations who also have a euthanasia policy towards healthy animals (here in the UK) - they just don't "advertise" the fact. If they receive animals they don't have space for, they euthanize the old, ugly and "more difficult" to home animals first and will always keep the younger ones for adoption. :blink:
Its by far not just the RSPCA here in the UK I'm afraid (not that you said it was only them, but I’m pointing that out).
Apologies - I don't intend for the topic to stray.
 
^Very true. And, no doubt, true worldwide sadly. I'm incapable of deliberatly killing a spider let alone a mammal or fish. Probably why both me and my Mum have deformed creatures in residence. My Mother the sister of my cat. She has no tail. And I have a deformed fishy who can't close his mouth. No doubt I'd be informed they should not be allowed to live.
Hugs,
P.
 
Please do not disrespect dwarfgourami by going off topic here. This thread was started to discuss the fishkeeping booklet he read, so let's keep to that.

If the discussion strays to talk of euthanasia, other non-fish types of cruelty, or the practices of other agencies, I will have to close it.

Inchworm
 
Inchworm said:
Please do not disrespect dwarfgourami by going off topic here. This thread was started to discuss the fishkeeping booklet he read, so let's keep to that.

If the discussion strays to talk of euthanasia, other non-fish types of cruelty, or the practices of other agencies, I will have to close it.

Inchworm
Sorry boss :fun: !
 
I don't have the book in front of me now so I'm not sure of the title but I bought one last year when we got our first tank and the stocking suggestions in it were pretty bad too. Fortunately, I had done some research and knew that their list were way off. Also, the pamphlet that came with our 29 gallon starter kit had stocking suggests that were also bad.
 
My bad. :*)

I would say that with that leaflet you should definately try and contact someone. If you head for the website and hit contact you should find somewhere to take you to an area where you can submit a query (or else it will give you the address to write to).
 

Most reactions

Back
Top