# Interesting article on bettas tank size requirement



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

This is an interesting article with many video showing how they catch wild bettas and in how much water they live in the wild...not much. And also how they are growing domestic bettas in jars. So if our aquariums may seem small to some, they are still improvement I think... Not sure it's been posted before though, but I could not find it when doing a search.

http://www.reef2rainforest.com/2014...52730180793986":"og.likes"}&action_ref_map=[]


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

Having watched the videos, it's clear to me that the author grossly underestimates the volume of water these fish are living in if they are using the videos to demonstrate the "puddles" the fish live in.


----------



## BlueLacee (Dec 8, 2013)

Wow, that was very interesting and informative. More people should read this


----------



## Betaphototramp (Apr 13, 2014)

Many years ago I did a few tours in South East Asia. I finally got a chance a few years ago to go back to Thailand and visit some friends in Bangkok. The took me to some Beta farms. Most beta farms there are Rice fields with 2-3 inches of water in them. wild betas thrived in them. Most rice paddies may not be very deep but they are a good 1/2 to one acre long and wide giving the fish plenty of room to roam and they have quite a bit of territory for themselves. If any body really believes that betas should be kept in a small cup they are just wrong. The tanks you transfer these fish to can be as large as you like but remember to have many places close to the surface that they can lay and rest. Remember the videos show the betas that are caught wild and are being shipped all over the world. Betas can be confined in small areas for periods of time but not for months and years.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

Yes, I saw in the article about the fish only having 2-3 inches of water. But there was no mention of how long or wide these bodies of water are. Depth alone is meaningless.


All in all I thought the article was a pretty fair piece though.


----------



## AudaxViator (Feb 5, 2014)

So...aren't some of those videos about other betta species? Species variation is pretty important, I wouldn't try to pass off information about wild hares if I was talking about the needs of domestic rabbits. Even when he's talking about _Betta splendens_, those wild counterparts are so different. Like comparing wild dogs and greyhounds. Some decent information but I'm sure some people will take it to mean they can keep their fish in cups and be perfectly happy.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

That's a good point about wild hares and pet rabbits.

The author DOES say that that does not condone keeping them in cups, IIRC.


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

They are not saying to keep the bettas in small cup, in fact I think they recommand a minimum of 2.5 gallons to follow the rule of 1 gallon per 1 inch of fish, but I think nobody should panic if someone keep his fish in 1 gallon or so. I think what they are trying to point out also is the water quality. If one can keep their betta in good water quality then the aquarium can be smaller, for others who do not like maintenance a larger aquarium is better.

I have a betta in a Fluval Spec V and I can see he enjoy the space to swim very much and he's very active and all over the tank. Before when I bought him he was lethargic and not moving much in the cup. Surely nobody is suggesting to keep them in small cups.

But look at how most breeders raise their bettas! is it not amazing to keep their fish and grow them to such beauty in jars of what? 1/4 of a gallon? maybe less? I was just amazed that this could even be possible.


----------



## bre23 (Mar 22, 2014)

I think obviously, the most important point of this article is what he mentions at the end -- that bettas can and do live in small pockets of water in the wild but that often it's difficult for people to properly maintain a small tank in captivity. The issue isn't really space but husbandry. People usually aren't proactive enough to make it safe for a betta to live in a 1/2 gallon tank. It's not only hard to keep ammonia from building up in the water but hard to heat safely.


----------



## LittleBettaFish (Oct 2, 2010)

I own smaller species of wild bettas, and most of my breeding pairs are in tanks from 3.5-5 gallons in size. I don't know why they used males with nests in their examples. Male bettas are most likely not going to stray far from their nesting site because they either have eggs/fry in there, or they are waiting for a female to come along. 

Also what season were these videos taken in? Habitats can look vastly different depending on the time of year. Some of the species I keep survive in what amounts to little more than damp leaf litter. Does this mean all I need to do is provide some damp leaf litter and my fish will be happy?

My wilds do seem to carve out small 'territories' or have certain areas they favour. But they will also use the rest of the tank, particularly during courtship or if they are on the hunt for food. 

I have no issue with keeping fish in smaller tanks. However, I don't think this article proves anything about minimum tank sizes.


----------



## Betaphototramp (Apr 13, 2014)

I feel the same way as LittleBettaFish. The article does not prove anything about the size of tank that a Betta should be housed in. In each one of my fresh water tanks there is a male and female betta. I have kept them in these tanks for many years. the tank sizes range from 4 gal to 150 gal. but each tank has exactly what my bettas need to survive in a way these regal fish deserve. 
The other day I was in a big box pet store. (name will remain left out.) I over heard the young clerk telling a family interested in a betta that they need only buy the fish in the cup and that is his home. the family said Thank you and started walking away. The little girl turned to her dad and said she would take car of it and change the water every day. Her father was just about to tell her yes when I stepped in. I told them who I was and gave them my card. ( I do tank setups and care part time for some local companies.) I explained about the betta keeping and how in the wild these fish can survive in very little depth of water. But I also explained the joy of having one as a pet. They ask me to recommend what they needed. I started out with a 2.5 Fluval V tank and explained all the features of the tank, I got them a heater, gravel, and a few plants to make the tank look nice and also useful for the betta to rest in. I told them about feeding and cycling the tank to start asking them to put their new pet into a 1 gal bowl until the tank cycled. I got a call from the family today saying that by me giving them some of my water and putting a little food in the unused tank it had cycled very fast. I ask about the pH and ammonia levels and he read off the test done each day and what he had today. I told him it was time to put their new Dumbo into his new home. 
Now the store didn't care weather they sold the fish or not. The clerk was not informed about fish care. But this is the way things are in stores now. However the store made a $110.00 sale because someone had the knowledge and cared enough to guide a family to a new and exciting hobby.


----------



## 16kehresmann (Feb 5, 2014)

I honestly and truely beileve that article is a bunch of biased crap. -_- "you can't truly understand a fish's emotional state" You can't tell truely any animals emotional state then. So I guess shoving my dog in a closet for it's entire life is fine. A wild betta may stay in smaller spaces and there are for sure some bettas that prefer smaller areas but that doesn't mean you can stick any betta in a 1 gallon bowl and say OH WELL THEY MUST BE HAPPY LIVING IN A GALLON OF WATER THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. They are once again living breathing animals, if you want a decoration go buy a freaking houseplant. Every living animal deserves optimal living conditions. And let's face it normally 1 gallon isn't the best quality of life for a fish. Whether it's a betta, neon tetra, guppy, or whatever fish a gallon of water isn't going to make the fish reach full potentional or be at it's happiest. Rant done. -_-


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

I agree with you. I think it's pretty easy to see the emotional state of a betta. As if they can feel pain or not, I am 500% sure they can feel pain, every animal can.

I just thought it was interesting to see the wild betta habitat and where they can live.



16kehresmann said:


> I honestly and truely beileve that article is a bunch of biased crap. -_- "you can't truly understand a fish's emotional state" You can't tell truely any animals emotional state then. So I guess shoving my dog in a closet for it's entire life is fine. A wild betta may stay in smaller spaces and there are for sure some bettas that prefer smaller areas but that doesn't mean you can stick any betta in a 1 gallon bowl and say OH WELL THEY MUST BE HAPPY LIVING IN A GALLON OF WATER THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. They are once again living breathing animals, if you want a decoration go buy a freaking houseplant. Every living animal deserves optimal living conditions. And let's face it normally 1 gallon isn't the best quality of life for a fish. Whether it's a betta, neon tetra, guppy, or whatever fish a gallon of water isn't going to make the fish reach full potentional or be at it's happiest. Rant done. -_-


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

Fish don't have the brain structure to support feeling pain that other animals have. It's certainly logical to think that because they lack the brain structure to feel pain, they don't feel pain. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't. It may happen another way - a way scientists don't understand yet. What makes it difficult is the differentiation between just responding to noxious stimuli and actually feeling pain. One does not necessitate the other.


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

If anything, they might even feel more pain than we do. I know they do feel pain because in my saltwater aquarium at some point one fish was stung by a coral and it was instant panic. From his reaction I would say he did feel pretty bad about the contact. Also if they scratch when having a parasite then they must feel something. If they feel itch, they probably feel pain as well.

It's basic. An animal that does not feel pain would probably end up dead quite fast by getting into dangerous places or situations.

I don't really beleive they don't feel pain.






jaysee said:


> Fish don't have the brain structure to support feeling pain that other animals have. It's certainly logical to think that because they lack the brain structure to feel pain, they don't feel pain. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't. It may happen another way - a way scientists don't understand yet. What makes it difficult is the differentiation between just responding to noxious stimuli and actually feeling pain. One does not necessitate the other.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

daniella3d said:


> If anything, they might even feel more pain than we do. I know they do feel pain because in my saltwater aquarium at some point one fish was stung by a coral and it was instant panic. From his reaction I would say he did feel pretty bad about the contact. Also if they scratch when having a parasite then they must feel something. If they feel itch, they probably feel pain as well.
> 
> It's basic. An animal that does not feel pain would probably end up dead quite fast by getting into dangerous places or situations.
> 
> I don't really beleive they don't feel pain.


You can believe whatever you want - there is no definitive scientific answer for whether or not fish feel pain. 

How does not feeling pain put the fish in a dangerous situation? Why would that negatively impact its survival instincts?

Not feeling pain doesn't mean it doesn't feel sensations. Thats what "responding to noxious stimuli" means - reacting to something. There's not really a need for a fish to feel pain if it can feel pressure - the response to both would be exactly the same. Pain is an inhibitor - I have to question the advantage that has for a fish....because it would not exist if it did provide an advantage. An inhibited fish falls behind and gets eaten. 

I'm not saying fish don't feel things - they clearly do because as you mentioned they scratch when they have ich. No doubt your fish that was stung felt something and was acting panicked. But pain is an evolved feeling. Why feel pain when pressure will do?


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

Then pressure must feel painful to them.





jaysee said:


> I'm not saying fish don't feel things - they clearly do because as you mentioned they scratch when they have ich. No doubt your fish that was stung felt something and was acting panicked. But pain is an evolved feeling. Why feel pain when pressure will do?


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

daniella3d said:


> Then pressure must feel painful to them.



No, that's the whole point of what I'm trying to explain to you - if the fish reacts to pressure than there's no need for it to feel pain. Fish are primitive animals that rely on instincts. It's easy to anthropomorphize them though.

Again, I'm not saying that they do or don't feel pain because I recognize that people who study this stuff professionally don't know. I'm just articulating the no pain position. I think it's important to understand both sides of a debate.


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

This whole debate of animals not feeling a thing, just acting on instincts. well I don't buy that. It's easy for humans to speculate on a living creature but in fact we know nothing 

We can only believe what we want. It's sort of believing in God in a way. 





jaysee said:


> No, that's the whole point of what I'm trying to explain to you - if the fish reacts to pressure than there's no need for it to feel pain. Fish are primitive animals that rely on instincts. It's easy to anthropomorphize them though.
> 
> Again, I'm not saying that they do or don't feel pain because I recognize that people who study this stuff professionally don't know. I'm just articulating the no pain position. I think it's important to understand both sides of a debate.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

daniella3d said:


> This whole debate of animals not feeling a thing, just acting on instincts. well I don't buy that. It's easy for humans to speculate on a living creature but in fact we know nothing



As I've said a couple times now, no one claims that they (fish) don't feel a thing. It is easier to speculate that they do feel pain than that they don't, since we feel pain. It can be difficult to think outside ones own paradigm because of our need to conform everything to our understanding of life. Acknowledging that we "know nothing", you can't close the door on the idea that fish don't feel pain. Likewise, anyone who thinks they don't feel pain can't discount the idea that they do.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

jaysee said:


> Acknowledging that we "know nothing", you can't close the door on the idea that fish don't feel pain. Likewise, anyone who thinks they don't feel pain can't discount the idea that they do.


The assumption that the fish feel pain because of their response to something is equal to the assumption that fish don't feel pain because that part of the brain is missing. Neither are wrong, yet both are wrong, and only one is right. who knows if we will ever know. 

Its always nice to have these discussions without things breaking down to name calling and hurt feelings. I think if anyone wants to talk more about this that a new thread be made.



The topic of the thread is bettas natural habitats and what that means for the hobbyist. Sorry for going off topic.


----------



## logisticsguy (Sep 7, 2012)

You can take the Victoria Braithwaite position. They do feel pain.

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/oct/08/opinion/oe-braithwaite8

http://www.fishpain.com/braithwaite.htm

or the James Rose position that they do not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9797948/Fish-cannot-feel-pain-say-scientists.html

Interesting subject indeed. Another article worth a read is here.

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=5436


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

James D. Rose has papers published in peer reviewed scientific journals about whether or not they feel pain.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

Here's a thread over in the advanced section, for anyone who would like to continue this discussion. In the thread I've linked a 34 page published research paper - for those that like to read 

http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/showthread.php?t=382394


----------



## rpadgett37 (Jan 1, 2014)

To say a Betta does equally well in 8 oz of water or 5 gallons of water has been around for a while, and is one I find questionable. Even still, I tried to keep an open mind about this article. My problem with the article is that the author's point of view is based on a two very tiny areas of study.

The first is a the idea that no matter how much room a Betta has to swim around in, they spend their entire lives under bubble nests or hiding in bushes. It's a fact that when breeding, with eggs and fry in the bubble nest, the male stays put because that's his job that he takes very seriously.

What the author fails to mention is what a male betta will do once the family leaves the nest. He suggests they find a bush to hang out in. Really? Ludicrous and to base an entire argument on this super slim evidence that doesn't even consider the territorial nature of bettas in the wild is misguided at best. In my 5.5 gallon tank, my betta doesn't just build bubble nests and remain in one place or pick a bush to nestle into and stay put. He moves all around everywhere. That is his territory and he would defend it I am sure.

His second piece of evidence coming from a breeders setup. He suggests breeders keep bettas in small containers because that's how they are in the wild. What he fails to mention is the fact that it is in the best interest of breeders to find the smallest amount of water in which a betta can survive because they have hundreds and hundreds of bettas at any given time to care for. It simply isn't practical to have larger tanks so I don't see that there is any basis of comparison whatsoever from which any conclusions can be drawn.

Better evidence (much better) would be needed to put forth a reasonable argument on this topic. I really think the author missed the boat. A controversial topic with flimsy evidence to back it up is no argument at all.


----------



## TerriGtoo (Jul 2, 2013)

Very true. I totally agree with your point!





AudaxViator said:


> So...aren't some of those videos about other betta species? Species variation is pretty important, I wouldn't try to pass off information about wild hares if I was talking about the needs of domestic rabbits. Even when he's talking about _Betta splendens_, those wild counterparts are so different. Like comparing wild dogs and greyhounds. Some decent information but I'm sure some people will take it to mean they can keep their fish in cups and be perfectly happy.


----------



## Betaphototramp (Apr 13, 2014)

I think you have hit the nail on the head. Very sound reasoning and logic. It's too bad the article was miss used. It should have been used to promote better humane care and treatment of these gorgeous fish. Breeders are business people and it's all about the mighty dollar. Its people like the ones on this forum who see and deal with their product who really know how to care for our pets. Breeders don't care what happens after the product leaves their hands.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

I agree, breeder practices should not be emulated by hobbyists. As someone mentioned, it's just not feasible for them to put fish in 5 gallon tanks, or even 2.5s for that matter.


----------



## daniella3d (Mar 19, 2014)

Also with the breeders, most fish won't spend all of their live in these jars. Most will be sold and will only be there for a few months at max.


----------



## jaysee (Dec 9, 2009)

Its the same as fish store "stocking". The ends justify the means.


----------



## aselvarial (Feb 21, 2014)

I didn't get the point of showing us wild bettas. These fish aren't wild bettas. They are RELATED to wild bettas, much the same way my cat is related to wild cats of Africa. However, my cat, for her own safety, is an indoor only cat, and so has special needs of an indoor only cat. My bettas are likewise, indoor only fish. They do not get rain to give them fresh water, dirt and plants to filter out the bad (well plants but they are still tiny). They rely on me to make sure that they are given fresh water, and healthy conditions. So fish do not perceive the world the way humans do. Is that to say that if something more advanced comes along that perceives the world in a way humans cannot, that we deserve to be treated with so little care?


----------

