finnipper wrote: I'm quite surprised after reading message after message telling folk that their tank isn't big enough and with the big fish campaign being promoted on here, that this is even considered as being anywhere near adequate.
The absolute minimum for the width should be 2x the fish's adult length, and lets be honest even that wouldn't offer very much for the fish's quality of life. The slow moving argument has never been used when accessing the tank size required for fancy goldfish so why is it being used for this fish?
Unless these and similar fish can be housed properly, i.e where they can exhibit natural behaviour they really shouldn't be kept. Remember, these fish are similar in size to most koi!!! In my opinion 1200 gall is the absolute minimum.
2*30" (the largest estimate on this thread of the fish) =60" which is 5foot I believe? even at 24" that's 48" which is 4foot so my 5foot width is fine.
I'll hold my hands up to screwing up on that one. I'm so used to SF being pretty accurate when it comes to tank size that I ignored my gut feeling and tried to justify their minimum. So, back to a policy of "trust no-one" (at least not without engaging brain) and in retrospect, I agree with finnipper and would go as far as to say indoor tropical pond only.
Like many of the tank busters I'd prefer that they were not on sale at all to the general public as even at the size of tank recommended by SF, barely anyone will have the means to do it and most of these big fish are sold to the unsuspecting who have no idea what they're taking on.
As for goldies, our minimum recommended length of 3ft for fancies is shorter than 6x because their ponderous movements are taken into account. For commons we recommend more length with a strong recommendation that they be kept for ponds only.