# The fish in your planted tank



## JanS (Apr 14, 2004)

This topic has always had a pretty split bunch of opinions among the plant community, so I thought it would be interesting to see how it stands here.

What is the main purpose of the fish in your tanks, and why?

Are your fish healthy and well cared for, or are they something you don't focus on and if they die, they're replaceable?

What are your thoughts and opinions?

For me, the fish are always the first priority, and the plants are what make the habitat for the fish a nice healthy, attractive natural environment.


----------



## milalic (Aug 26, 2005)

I think it depends on what you want to do. if it is a biotope fish are as important as the plants you get. If its a discus tank, you get plants good for discuss. 

A knowing your final goal will let you decide the plants and fish. In terms of aquascape, If i pick from your options I would have to go with the plants.

Cheers,
Pedro


----------



## brad (Jul 10, 2005)

I consider it all a system. I try to choose things that fit together, and take good care of both.


----------



## Bert H (Mar 2, 2004)

IMO, they all kind of go together. Healthy plants = healthy fish. I can tell you that since I learned how to grow healthy plants, my fish have never been healthier.

In one tank I keep very basic fish (guppies) because I like them and never have to worry about needing to buy new ones  . In another tank where I have fish that don't (haven't in my hands) breed everytime I need to get more, I worry about the introduction of some sort of disease. I don't have any q tanks.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

I find it hard to choose a category since my thoughts are in-line with Bert's. If you judge by where most of my thought, time, and effort goes, then yeah, the plants probably come first. Would I ever consider a setup without fish - no. Would I ever consider a tank without plants - probably not anymore, but maybe if I had a good reason to.

One of my goals for the hobby is to get to the point where regular people going to their LFS are automatically directed toward setting up a successful planted tank. At present the planted tank community still represents a small percentage of the people keeping fish.

To get there we'll need to greatly simplify the process. Standard tanks will need to come with better lighting and a more economical & simple way of providing CO2. A simple basic fert solution or two will also be needed. If we ever get to that point people will have much better luck at keeping their poor fish alive. If the plants are happy the fish are in nirvana.


----------



## Chris S (Feb 27, 2006)

In my planted tank i think the fish and plants are of equal value and importance to me. In my other tanks fish take priority, plants are a bonus.
I do want the fish to be happy however as well as the plants. The guppies in my planted tank do seem to be very happy also. I can tell 'cause they have a smile! haha.
In the tanks where fish are my priority, I do like having a substancial amout of floating plants or java moss in them. It seems to really help with water quality and clarity as well as security for the fish.


----------



## T-Bone (Nov 23, 2005)

to be perfectly honest I got in to the hobby to raise angelfish. They are overly popular and overrated, but I don't care they are beautifull. But the first tank I bought had plants in it. I was lucky enough to go to a store that was actually knowlegable and sold me easy to care for plants. I knew before I set up, that plants were essential. If there were no plants on earth than life would not exist so it made sence to me to get plants. I have an emotional attachment to my fish, if a fish dies I have empathy for it and feel ashamed and sadened. I honestly cannot say the same for plants. It is a life form and should get the same treatment empathy, but I just can't feel bad if a plant dies. Frustrated, angered, dissapointed, but not saddened. To me a fishless aquarium is silly, sorry to those few people who have one, it's just IMHO. On the other hand a plantless aquarium is equally as silly. Fish inhale O2 exhale CO2, and plants inhale CO2 exhale O2. It's a no brainer to me. But I'm getting off topic. if you want to have african cichlids then there is choices you have to make in plants(allthough there are some sucess stories) You would not choose a bunch of dainty little plants and then decide I want to put oscars in. To me a balance must be acheived, plants and fish living in symbiosis. But there are people who crave chaos, whatever floats your boat.....or aquarium 

Sorry about the rambling and sentance structure but I'm anebriated from St patties day  lol


----------



## RTR (Oct 28, 2005)

I keep planted fish tanks, not plant tanks. To me that dichotomy is real and meaningful. When I set a new tank, it is for a particular fish, or breeding group, or school and is set to that end. If plants are compatable with the fish, it will be planted. If not, it may have a veggie filter. If it has neither and is fish-only, it is okay, I can live with that, but I prefer planted for the reason already given by others - health, looks, more natural even if in no way biotype.


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

The plants are decoration for me and inturn are replaceable. That does not mean that I'm going to give poor care to my plants and just let them die. This would in turn be bad for the fish, which are my main concern. However I try to take equal care of my fish & plants, providing them both with the care they need to thrive. But if I had to choose weather to let a fish die or a plant, I would choose the plant.


----------



## SnakeIce (May 9, 2005)

I have both fish tanks with plants in them and plant tanks with fish in them. Honestly if I fussed with the tank that has my angelfish in it as much as I do my plant tanks he would get annoyed at me. And yes, Sheriff, the angelfish, knows how to let me know what he thinks about stuff. He hates duckweed, but that's another story.

Do our aquatic gardens have to have fish in them? Do arboretums and botanical gardens have to have animals as part of the display?


----------



## standoyo (Aug 25, 2005)

haha... agree with jans, t-bone, RTR whole heartedly but doesn't look like majority opinion as far as the poll is concerned!

i've seen people starve their fish just so the tank doesn't get too much mulm because the plants are priority to them. kinda cruel...

the depressing part about losing fish like discus is they are each unique with their own character. not so much with rummies or other dither fish. still anger and frustration. 
plants on the other hand become more of a challenge...like 'try again' on the PS.


----------



## Lauren (Mar 18, 2006)

hobby wise, plants take up much more of my attention, time and money. But I think the fish are equal to the plants if not more important. I like how they compliment each other, and I wouldn't want to lose any. I get a little bit more upset when I lose a fish than a plant, because plants don't have much personality. But either is replaceable. I think there is only one organism in my tank that I'd cry over if I lost, and that is my angelfish Mikey.


----------



## jstageman (Mar 6, 2006)

Time and effort goes almost 100% toward keeping the plants healthy, which keeps the fish healthy, as many have mentioned.

Concern and worry goes almost 100% toward the fish, which are not nearly as replaceable as plants.

Does that make sense?

Joe


----------



## Phil Edwards (Jan 22, 2004)

Taking proper care of the plants is definately a much higher priority for me than caring for my fish. Why? Being a responsible aquarist I choose fish species that do well in the conditions I keep in my tanks (for my plants). In maintaining those conditions my fish are provided habitat and level of care that is superior to what they would otherwise encounter in a fish-only system. If you think about the levels of "pollutants" we strive to maintain in our planted aquaria and then compare them to the levels fish-only people work to bring their tanks *down* to I think you'd agree with me. 

I guess you could call it an organismal view of aquaria. It's a whole system; one part isn't independent of the other and the whole benefits from care that may be directed at one part. 

If a plant dies, I get embarassed and upset with myself for not being able to keep it alive. If a fish dies I get embarassed and upset with myself because I did something that caused it to die. I know in both cases the plant/animal's death was a result of my actions or inactions. As an experienced aquarist that bothers me because I should know better. 

Is the death of one more upsetting than another? No, because to me my plants are as important as my fish. They're both living organisms that depend on me for their survival. Just because a plant is less interactive than a fish doesn't make it any less significant in my view. 

How would you view fish if you had to trim them every so often? Would it be easier to throw out fish if we had to regularly remove significant portions of its body and dispose of the cuttings? 

Long answer to a short question.

Regards,
Phil


----------



## Jason Baliban (Feb 21, 2005)

Fish are decoration......

I care for my critters. Whether it is a shrimp, a fish, or a plant, i do my best to make sure that everyone of them is healthy, it is my responsablity once i put them in my tank. 

But when it all boils down, for me fish are just an accent to the overall look of the tank.


----------

