Why do so many parents tell their kids to take care of a fish

>>2003623
>Properly caring for fish basically entails carefully simulating an entire ecosystem.
no it doesn't.

>>2003625
elaborate please

>>2003623
When I was a kid, I was given a mouse as a first pet.

>>2003628
all you need is water, a heater, a filter, and food. None of which is qualitatively like anything in nature.

you can't simulate an entire ecosystem in a tiny box, and if you could it would be nothing like the hobby of fishkeeping.

because nobody cares when fish die.

File: 1432107806933.png (13KB, 350x268px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 350x268px

>>2003625
>>2003633

>>2003633
and monitoring Ph levels, and making sure a nitrogen cycle is going before adding fish, and regularly changing the water and filtering the substrate, and so on

>>2003640
none of that happens in nature.

you aren't recreating an ecosystem, you personally take over jobs done by insects, worms, fish, bacteria, algae, plants, sand, soil, etc.

File: 1447523432817.jpg (78KB, 832x584px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 832x584px

>>2003640
>replying to b8

>>2003652
>anything I disagree with is bait
low iq detected

File: 1448050010925.jpg (23KB, 439x474px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 439x474px

>>2003653
>still trying to b8

>>2003623
Basic responsibility. Caring for a fish by the way can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be.

>>2003648

but if you are taking over those jobs, aren't you at the very least "simulating" the end-state of a healthy ecosystem by cutting out the middlemen? i don't see a problem with OP's statement

>>2003673
No. That's like saying masturbating is simulating sex with a woman. It's not the same thing

>>2003678

i think it'd be more like saying artificial insemination is simulating the act of procreation, which would be correct in a similar sense.

sex --> baby
insemination --> baby

full ecosystem --> endstate
introduced factors --> endstate

in both circumstances you end up with a roughly equivalent outcome regardless of the differing inputs. i guess whether or not you want to call it "simulation" is pretty semantic, but i personally have no problem with the application

A fish tank is just like maintaining an ecosystem. You are not keeping fish healthy, you are keeping the bacteria that keep the fish healthy.

Because no one knows how to care for fish.

>>2003634
This.

No one gives a shit if Goldy the one year old gold fish suddenly goes belly up and has to be flushed down the toilet.

>>2003633
Motherfucker doesn't know what the walstad method is.

>>2003831
the premise of the thread is that emulating an ecosystem is NECESSARY to keeping fish-
the fact that it might be possible doesn't make it necessary.

>>2003846
How are human keepers not emulating nature when maintaining a tank? Well, outside of fish selections and flake food anyway.

> Filtration
Mimics natural filtration caused by the earth and aquatic plants. Also helps mimic currents.

> Water changes (taking water out)
Simulates water flowing out of the system such as via current circulating or streams flowing.

> Water changes (adding water in)
Simulating water flowing back in via rain, streams and currents.

> Fish flakes
Simulating fish's natural foodstuffs in the least messy way possible. Some people raise and feed live plants and animals for their fish.

> Plants, rocks, deccorations
Mimic a fish's natural habitat. I'm aware spongebob isn't natural, but having various objects in the water for fish to dart through and hide in is natural.

>>2003853
>How are human keepers not emulating nature when maintaining a tank? Well, outside of fish selections and flake food anyway.
the ecosystem implies more than just the geology of the habitat, it also implies the thousands of species of organism present in that habitat. And while we emulate the geology and biology in the crudest forms, we don't actually need to recreate the ecology of the system to keep fish. In fact we work very hard to exclude the predators, parasites, prey, microorganisms, and plants commonly found in most fishy biotas.

then there's the water and substrate. Most brightly-colored tropical fishes come from waters that look like coffee or mud or white paint. They live in rivers and lakes paved with mud or trash or algae or weeds. Most people don't like that look and won't keep it on purpose. But even when they do, you can't argue that it's necessary. A fish doesn't NEED places to hide or turbid water or tons of parasites or fishermen hunting it to survive.

all that's needed are a handful of things that aren't found in their ecosystem.

>>2003683
the output is very different though, even if all we measure is a binary criterion like "alive" and "dead."

fish in the wild die much more quickly and more often than those in a well-kept tank, and when they die in captivity it's almost never from the sorts of things that kill them in the wild.

but when we look closer the difference becomes much more pronounced. The biomass in aquaria behaves essentially nothing like a natural ecosystem, and looks nothing like it.

And while we could argue that OP's point is correct, keeping fish is more difficult and complex than keeping a dog or cat, perhaps that's why parents expect them to do it. If you can keep a fish alive for years at a time, a dog or cat shouldn't be any problem at all. On the flip side, fish are more delicate than mammals, so any weakness in the child's responsibility and organization will quickly become obvious.

>>2003623
And half the time it's a goldfish in a bowl.
I swear that was popularized by shit parents just to convince their shit kids to stop asking for a dog.

"oh, look, you can't even take care of this fish! even though we provided you with none of the commodities to properly care for it! How could you possibly care for a dog??"

>>2003623
Because /an/-tier care of fish isn't anywhere near /an/-tier care of mammals.
Have you not seen the amount of shitposting that occurs in cat and dog threads compared to aquarium generals? Like any hobby on 4chan the amount of autism that is displayed is staggering for your average pet owner.

>>2003623
because they wont have to do anything for it besides buying the food.
>don't have to worry about it running away
>doesn't stink up house with shit smell
>doesn't destroy stuff

You do something wrong with a fish and it'll die in a couple of days. Do something wrong with a dog and it will complain and tell you you're doing it wrong or hassle you into doing the right thing.

>>2005768
Dudebro
I got a 20 gallon fish tank
About 10 of the slimy bastards inside
All between 5 and 10 years old
I chucked a delayed - release food circle in there and didn't touch them for a month, absolutely nothing happened. Fish don't care unless they get a disease.

OP I agree that keeping fish is more complicated than people think.

But properly caring for a dog is much more than giving it food and water and letting it exercise outdoors. If that's all you do for a dog you'll end up with a bored, lonely, destructive, obnoxious and poorly socialized animal. Properly caring for a dog involves not only caring for physical needs of food, water, and exercise, but also socializing it, training it (which is a lifelong pursuit, not something you do and then it's finished,) giving it attention and affection, taking it for regular vet checkups and vaccines, etc. etc. Properly caring for a dog takes a lot of time effort, research and understanding, patience, etc. Leaving a kid to take care of a dog on their own isn't a great idea either.

Lots of people do give dogs only food, water, and outside exercise, but that doesn't make it proper care; just like lots of people keep goldfish in bowls and it's not proper care.

In any case I really don't think giving a child the responsibility of taking care of any animal is a great idea. Instead the kid should learn how to care for animals by learning from their parents taking care of animals, and being allowed to help with the care/training of a pet. Potentially they could be assigned with a specific task(s) as part of taking care of the pet, etc. If the kid is good with all that, then perhaps it'd be an ok idea to leave them in charge of an animal of their own.

>>2005858
>20 gallon
>10 fish
They better not be goldfish, motherfucker.

>>2005760
>doesn't stink up house with shit smell

A badly kept fishtank smells worse than dog or cat shit.

>>2006266
They're all between 1 and 2 inches long and no more than 1/3 of an inch tall.

>>2003623
This seemed like a good place to ask this. I got two goldfish a while back, one is the kind with the brainy looking stuff poking through, and the other is one with the big googly eyes. Each are between two-three inches long, and I currently have them in a 15 gallon tank. I keep reading they each need 40 gallons, so now I know I dun goofed. Is there any way to remedy this? My apartment complex only allows 15 gallons, so I can't upgrade. Does anyone know of a solution? Is there a place I can go to sell them where I know they'll be well taken care of?

>>2008843
> Craigslist
Or if it hasn't been too long you can return them. Not the best answer but better than nothing as goldfish both get HUGE and produce massive waste.

>>2008859
its been almost a year

>>2008843
just change more water more often.
also get a bigger filter.

>>2008872
Is it possible that they will grow?

>>2008878
yes, if you change water often enough.

They will eventually outgrow your ability to clean up after them in that tiny tank, and they'll probably die. That's 3-10 years down the road though depending on how well you take care of them.

if you really don't want the hassle, pretty much any fish store will take donated fish. There's no guarantee the next person to buy them won't have an even smaller tank or bowl though.

>>2008882
Oh ok. Well, in that time I should have a new place and a new tank for them.

File: 1440702796250.jpg (42KB, 336x567px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 336x567px

>>2003625
Listen her you little shit