RE: Re: !>>Note to Wright>>Note to R. Park

[IDMiamiBob@aol.com]

This mailing list is an opportunity to share personal experiences, rather
than simply cite a bunch of writers tied to the Aquarium magazine industry.
 Let me cite two other examples of where the literature will get you into
trouble because of false information. 
1) "Oscars reach a maximum length of 12 inches"- I know of one that is
fifteen inches, and a local pet shop has one in excess of eighteen inches.  I
personally owned one at on time that was twelve-and-a-half when I got it and
thirteen when I put it in a petshop where it was sold in less than a day.
 Most oscars don't reach more than twelve inches for the same reason that
comets in a goldfish bowl don't get over two or three inches.  THis twelve
inch limit rumor is tough on a fine, intelligent creature that deserves more
repect and more room than a 55-gallon per pair.

2) The names, both scientific and common, given tio the various Apistogrammas
in most of TFH Publications' books.  They continue to plague every sincere
dwarf cichlid hobbyist who attempts to bring knowledge to the other
hobbytists in his local community.

I prefer to rely on both personal experience and literature for knowledge.
 This mailing list and the "Net Boards" provide me and you both with more
exposure to personal experience.  I did not mean to come off as "attacking"
you, and apologize if I have offended you in any way.  I simply am distressed
when someone cites some article that I already know is full of bogus data.  I
get even more distressed when that person gets bent when I challenge the
article he is citing.

The fact remains that Algae Eaters are not suitable tankmates for small fish,
but the retail trade has a vested interest in perpetuating the myth of their
compatibility.

Bob,
PS- This kind of debate is what I look forward to.  It brings out the best
(and sometimes the worst) of this hobby and its participants.