# My experience cycling with fish



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

I'll preface by saying I'm not necessarily recommending this way of cycling, but I had a couple dynamics that made it reasonable for me. Fishless cycling is definitely preferred.

I chose to cycle with fish for two reasons: I had no access to testing kits to monitor what's going on (finally got one and levels are great a month later) and I could buy juvenile mbuna very cheaply (like under $1 per pair).

So I set up and let it run for 2 days, then I added 2" of fish (2x 1 inchers) then after a couple days I added 2 more, then after 4 days I added 4 more. This might have been a bit quick, but even then I had 12" in a 112 gallons, so still not producing a big bio load. Gradually (over the next 2 weeks) I added until I hit around 30.

I did have some deaths. Living in India and buying fish under $0.50 each, you can imagine the LFS water quality and even stock quality. I also think at one point I had a nitrogen spike due to a dead fish that was very difficult to locate. My tank smelled for 2-3 days until I finally dug around the back of a structure and got what was left of a corpse out. I also added some 'non activated carbon' (don't know what it really is, from a Chinese company) and did some serious water changes and no one else died (after a scary 12 hours of a few weaker fish looking sick, sniffing for air near the surface). All together I think I lost 5-6 fish, $3 or something, and now everything's stabilized at around 30 fish, no one's died in the last 2-3 weeks.

Finally got my testing kit and Amonia and Nitrite are 0, Nitrate around 20 and I'm due for a water change. I think the thing that helped this method work was frequent water changes. Every 2 days for the first couple weeks. Now I do like 25% every 3-4 days. I also had a lot of filter media (first a top filter (like HOB) that was jammed packed, then a canister filter.

So if you add fish very gradually and conservatively, and change water frequently, this type of cycling is possible, but if I were buying more expensive fish, or had a testing kit, then fishless is preferable for certain.


----------



## newforestrob (Feb 1, 2010)

sounds like your fish suffered,with gasping for air,and the deaths,not having a test kit,you never really knew how much poison was in the water,meaning ammonia and nitrites,chances are your fish may have suffered long term damage,can't say that I would recommend this method


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

just cause your fish survived doesnt mean they are healthy if you have to cycle with fish NEVER use a fish you plan to keep and wc every 2 days desnt help much you should have atleast done 2x a day at 50-75%. also if you were cyclying with fish dont put decor in just go with substrate. easier to find dead fish


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Seems I ruffled some feathers, causing punctuation, capitalization and grammar to fly out the window! I'll say it a third time, just so we're clear: I'm not recommending this method, but from my vantage point, it worked. If I had access to a test kit, or had to pay more than 40 cents a fish, I would not have done it this way.

I probably increased my stock a bit too quickly, and should have kept digging/searching for the dead fish when I started to suspect (I only found it after 45min of searching 2-3 times... the suggestion to not decorate till later is wise). I know it's cichlid-forum blasphemy, but tanks do cycle with fish in 'em.

My fish are happy, healthy and growing :wink:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> I know it's cichlid-forum blasphemy, but tanks do cycle with fish in 'em.
> 
> My fish are happy, healthy and growing


I don't see any ruffled feathers. People are pointing out the risks and drawbacks. You have to expect that. Ammonia can do long term damage to fish. You may have 'mysterious' fish deaths as you go along. Too early to say that your fish were unharmed.

It's common knowledge that anyone can cycle with fish and experience pretty much what you did. It can actually be managed better with fewer losses than what you experienced. To me, it's all about thinking long term and getting your fish off to a good start. Not just getting them to survive being subjected to toxins. I understand you're not recommending this method.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

ranchialex said:


> My fish are happy, healthy and growing :wink:


you claim theyre healthy but fish who are put throught a cycle is never truely healthy. just like someone with aids. they may appear to be healthy but you will never know


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

I wouldnt be so critical because I feel one has to put himself in Alex's shoes to really give a judgement whether its right or wrong. Alex has clarified at the very outset that the test kits were not available in his place. Yes, I would be critical of that person had he been in the US or Europe or some place having all the supplies. And I havent heard of even aquarists and experts in the US condemning it outright, all they say is that fish-cycling should be avoided bcoz it doesent many of the advantages of the fishless cycling. Most articles just mention, that its one way of cycling but has some disadvantages.

Thinks, we should avoid the MORAL question here in this case, specially when Alex himself admits that perhaps it was wrong but he didnt have any option and we are not judges here. I could then say, we should then haul up any person who isnt cleaning his filters regularly or missed a week of WC.

*I say, the very fact that he is apologetic about it is enough. Look at his question from the scientific point of view rather than being a MORAL POLICE. Period. Thank you all*.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Fishy_Cichlid said:


> I wouldnt be so critical because I feel one has to put himself in Alex's shoes to really give a judgement whether its right or wrong. Alex has clarified at the very outset that the test kits were not available in his place. Yes, I would be critical of that person had he been in the US or Europe or some place having all the supplies. And I havent heard of even aquarists and experts in the US condemning it outright, all they say is that fish-cycling should be avoided bcoz it doesent many of the advantages of the fishless cycling. Most articles just mention, that its one way of cycling but has some disadvantages.
> 
> Thinks, we should avoid the MORAL question here in this case, specially when Alex himself admits that perhaps it was wrong but he didnt have any option and we are not judges here. I could then say, we should then haul up any person who isnt cleaning his filters regularly or missed a week of WC.
> 
> *I say, the very fact that he is apologetic about it is enough. Look at his question from the scientific point of view rather than being a MORAL POLICE. Period. Thank you all*.


read the last paragraph of his original post -.-

also if he cant find a test kit why not order one? he also claims his fish are healthy and fine which theyre not. i could care less what he does with his tank because its his tank. but for him to claim that lossing 4 fish is a good turn-out is wrong. als he said he did the fish cycling because it was only 40-50 cent -.-


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

perhaps, here I need to explain a bit. I know Alex personally and he is a great person, a wonderful person. Lets not make any assumptions here. He did order from an online store here in India just to be cheated. Personally, I never order online and getting fish supplies & equipments in India isnt so easy like the US. All items are imported and quality things are often not available. Alex did recently visit the US and he purchased his test kits. Had he asked for my advice, I would have managed to get him one at 1/10th of the price he purchased in the US.

*I think, he had his limitations.*


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

i understand his limitations as everyone has some. all i was saying was for him to lose 4 fish and claim that his fish are now happy and healthy is just BS. im not judging him as i dont know him but if you do a cycle with fish 99.99% of the time the fish are not healthy. and to lose fish during a cycle is even more of a hint that the fish that did live are not healthy. i have cycle with fish before and i have lose fish but i have also come out when i did not lose any. in the end all the fish did not live to expectations.

im just trying to say there could have been ways around the fish cycling or he couldve done better job with the cycling. if he got rip off ordering online he could have order from a us website i know alot deliever internationally. lets just chalk this up as a learning experience.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

I dont think theres any point arguing. *There are points I do agree with you, but now I am no longer a novice.* But if I were a novice, it would be unfair statement. I have heard people here in this forum make worse mistakes and that too after not being a novice. Lets put it this way - Alex does care for his fish ..... no one knows it better than him, not me, not you nor anyone else.



> he could have order from a us website i know alot deliever internationally.


The price is over double the price you guys pay in the US with the transportation charge included. I have recently taken some quotes for Gibberosas Zaire - Moba, so I do have some knowledge.

Yes, its a learning experience for all. I doubt any person loving this hobby will resort to any cruelity. *Whatever happens ....... happens mostly due to ignorance.*


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> I say, the very fact that he is apologetic about it is enough. Look at his question from the scientific point of view rather than being a MORAL POLICE. Period. Thank you all.


I'm still not seeing a 'moral police' attitude here. I think that card is just being played to discourage any contrary feedback. No one has attacked him personally. I'm sure he's a fine person also. What am I missing in the above posts that displays an attack on him personally or a moral police attitude? I see only posts pointing out that long term damage may have been done to the survivors, that's all.

In the meantime, all should feel free to post any feedback they like as long as it doesn't violate forum rules.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Fishy_Cichlid said:


> I dont think theres any point arguing. *There are points I do agree with you, but now I am no longer a novice.* But if I were a novice, it would be unfair statement. I have heard people here in this forum make worse mistakes and that too after not being a novice. Lets put it this way - Alex does care for his fish ..... no one knows it better than him, not me, not you nor anyone else.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yea the price may double but thats how it is when you live in a different place. prices varies. most members will agree that a bag of pfs where they live is about 5 bucks where i am its 15 after tax. its the cost of fish keeping. this is an expensive hobby but a rewarding one when its done correctly.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

The hobby is as costly as you want it to be. For Ex., you can have just the right enough filteration (basic filteration) or you could spend some $$$$$ and have ROs, UVs, FBFs, Canisters .... the works. The fish will be happy in both the cases. If the hobby were only for those who could afford it, then its not a hobby - its a costly past-time for the rich. Sorry, couldnt agree with you on that.


----------



## newforestrob (Feb 1, 2010)

one of the problems I see,is that you ended up with a test kit,why not wait?another issue is the value of the fish,and if they were more expensive you would have done it fishless

I was pointing out the fact that since you couldnt test,you really dont know(for now) what damage was done,

you arent the first to do this,I'm sure you wont be the last


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

> another issue is the value of the fish,and if they were more expensive you would have done it fishless


YES, its a logical question.



> you arent the first to do this,I'm sure you wont be the last


*Very well said, couldnt agree with you more.*


----------



## Mr.Dempsey (Jan 4, 2012)

He posted this to show us his findings. He did his experiment with a fished-cycle and told us what happend. I dont think he wants to be bombarded with people claiming that he dosnt like fish or that hes incompetent. He tryed somthing differnt and he knows now how it will turn out.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Fishy_Cichlid said:


> The hobby is as costly as you want it to be.


i cant agree. i would love for a 5000 gallon tank for only $100. either way there is a bottom cost and usually it runs in 100+ dollars. yes i agree that u can skip on the fancy stuff but there are things you cant skip on. either way this hobby will cost u alot whether its the conditioner, the gas bill when its winter, the tank lights and all that. either way you will be spending 100s if not thousands.


----------



## Mr.Dempsey (Jan 4, 2012)

R/O unit was the best thing i ever bought


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Thanks, Fishy for the defense, but it's ok. I don't see this thread growing to being terribly productive, so I'm fine if it's deleted or closed. I thought I had helpful data for the forum readership. It's not a glowing success story, but definitely a learning experience. I hope others learn, too.

There are lots of reasons why fish could have died. I found (and pointed out) a dead fish concealed in a tank in a large LFS in the US last week. Here in India (where I've bought all my fish) I see dead fish every single time I visit a LFS, and I've been to a dozen in this city. My $3 of fish probably did die due to a partially cycled tank. I sleep pretty well and my remaining fish are thriving. I'd guess they were exposed to worse conditions than my tank before I bought them. Not 1 of the 12 LFSs in this city (1.8 million people) has a testing kit or knows how to use one. I brought a second kit (saltwater) back for a friend who wants to try his hand at marine.

Also, jd lover, I'd love to see the supporting data for your claim that 99.99% the fish are not healthy. You've done it 10,000 times and had it work only once? Sounds like you did it twice.

As for the value of the fish, and if I would have done some variant of fishless had they been much more expensive. But if they were 10x more expensive, I'd have done the same thing. 100x then maybe I'd have dropped in some food to rot (true, tested fish cycling wasn't a possibility) for a couple weeks, maybe.

The biggest problem was the dead fish rotting in the tank for days on end. I think that can happen no matter how careful you are about cycling fishlessly. His location was very uncanny and I literally had to go outside and look in through a window at a funny angle to find see the corpse, then spend half an hour getting it out.

I'm trying my best not to be combative or defensive. I've learned a lot from this forum and wanted to pass on the data of how my fished cycle worked, so far. If they do grow a third eye or die tomorrow, I'll post back.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

ranchialex said:


> Thanks, Fishy for the defense, but it's ok. I don't see this thread growing to being terribly productive, so I'm fine if it's deleted or closed. I thought I had helpful data for the forum readership. It's not a glowing success story, but definitely a learning experience. I hope others learn, too.
> 
> There are lots of reasons why fish could have died. I found (and pointed out) a dead fish concealed in a tank in a large LFS in the US last week. Here in India (where I've bought all my fish) I see dead fish every single time I visit a LFS, and I've been to a dozen in this city. My $3 of fish probably did die due to a partially cycled tank. I sleep pretty well and my remaining fish are thriving. I'd guess they were exposed to worse conditions than my tank before I bought them. Not 1 of the 12 LFSs in this city (1.8 million people) has a testing kit or knows how to use one. I brought a second kit (saltwater) back for a friend who wants to try his hand at marine.
> 
> ...


you read my post out of context. i said 99.99% of fish put through a cycle is not healthy. that is true due to the toxin it was expose too. maybe the percentage is high but the fact remains if you put a fish through a cycle it wont be healthy. will you be able to see it? maybe not but that doesnt mean it isnt sick.

same thing as your liver if a person drinks a lot is their liver healthy? no. can you tell? no. point is you subjected your fish and they probably wont live as long.


----------



## CITADELGRAD87 (Mar 26, 2003)

Let's change gears a bit.

If YOU were someplace where you could not GET a testing kit, would you try to set up a tank or just get hampsters?

Ideally, sure, order one from somewhere, but leave that out.

I guess if I could get a large enough tank, and small enough fish, I would do a slow fish cycle rather than give up the hobby. I guess, alternatively, one could dose the tank and just wait it out, maybe. You'd have to re dose pretty accurately, though.

Food for thought


----------



## bluenosebully6 (Oct 24, 2011)

Has nobody ever went to a pet store bought a tank and filter filled it up and thrown a Buchanan of goldfish in and had them all die???? All by listening to what the largest chain petstores tell u to do?? That's how I got into the hobby around 7 yrs old and up until I became a member of this site I've never heard of fishless cycling and I've had many successful tanks in between. Without diseased or infermed fish. I believe its just more of an ethical thing. My lfs will still give u a bag of gold fish to throw in ur tank and have u bring him ur water periodically until its cycled then have u do a water Chang flush those fish and then sell u some real fish. And a lot of times cycling with fish can be as fast if not faster than doing a fishless cycle


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

bluenosebully6 said:


> Has nobody ever went to a pet store bought a tank and filter filled it up and thrown a Buchanan of goldfish in and had them all die???? All by listening to what the largest chain petstores tell u to do?? That's how I got into the hobby around 7 yrs old and up until I became a member of this site I've never heard of fishless cycling and I've had many successful tanks in between. Without diseased or infermed fish. I believe its just more of an ethical thing. My lfs will still give u a bag of gold fish to throw in ur tank and have u bring him ur water periodically until its cycled then have u do a water Chang flush those fish and then sell u some real fish. And a lot of times cycling with fish can be as fast if not faster than doing a fishless cycle


he didnt cycle with fish he basically threw his stock in as he claims they are now happy and "healthy" witch is illogical if theyre were put through such treatment. the way i see this thread wasnt about the fishless cycling but more of how he loss 4 fish (when he could have done it without lossing any) about how he only did it because they were cheap fish. and about the fact that he claims his fish are healthy without knowing what he has done longterm to them.

have i cycle with fish before? yes have i had some died? yes am i against fish cycling? no. it more about him claiming success with healthy stock after he put his fish through a treatment not recomended.

if it was a tank where the toxin slowly build up through lack of water change it wouldve been a little less lethal than a spike from a cycle.

like i said before i am not judging him as i dont know him on a personal level but im more of critiqing him on the way he chose to do the fishcycling as he couldve done better.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Well jd lover you and I aren't going to see eye-to-eye. I absolutely did a fish cycle. I waited, then started adding fish very slowly. 2 inches of fish in 112 gallons. Whoa watch out for those toxins! I added more because I figured that was too little ammonia going in for the size of the tank. I added them slowly. I'm not going to write a book about the perfect fish cycling, but I did do A fish cycle and now my water's in great shape and so far, so are my fish.

I'm not defending this as the optimal way (if you've got access to a testing kit then fishless cycling is better, hands down), but my fish swim fast, eat well, have great colors and are very active. I'm sorry if you can't get your mind around the possibility of them being healthy. During the couple days when some died and the few hours when others were gasping, I did serious water changes often (daily or more) and did everything I could to improve the situation (60% water changes, buying carbon that I found in a new store, adding/changing/cleaning filters) - and it worked. They sprung back to normalcy, and haven't looked back.

Could I have done better? Yes. We agree. But I think I did pretty well with the situation I face. You're welcome to disagree.

Finally, which and witch are not the same word. I'm not sure why you feel such a strong need for 'critiqing' me when from the get-go I've been clear that I'm not trying to promote this method, but reporting my experience. I also find it fascinating that you're now deciding what 'this thread was about'.


----------



## bluenosebully6 (Oct 24, 2011)

jd lover said:


> bluenosebully6 said:
> 
> 
> > Has nobody ever went to a pet store bought a tank and filter filled it up and thrown a Buchanan of goldfish in and had them all die???? All by listening to what the largest chain petstores tell u to do?? That's how I got into the hobby around 7 yrs old and up until I became a member of this site I've never heard of fishless cycling and I've had many successful tanks in between. Without diseased or infermed fish. I believe its just more of an ethical thing. My lfs will still give u a bag of gold fish to throw in ur tank and have u bring him ur water periodically until its cycled then have u do a water Chang flush those fish and then sell u some real fish. And a lot of times cycling with fish can be as fast if not faster than doing a fishless cycle
> ...


.

I just wanna know how u r sooooo sure that this guys fish are not healthy. We all know that very prolonged exposure to ammonia and such can damage gills etc.... But how are u sooooo positive that his fish are not perfectly healthy??? U state it like its a fact. Have u inspected his fish??? Does everyone that lives in a big polluted city have cancer and athsma?? I think u r going a Lil overboard.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

fish being expose to amonia is the same as the human liver being expose to alcohol. im not debating this any farther as i have said before just because a fish seems healthy does not mean it is. its been proven that being expose to ammonia hurst the fish long term so ill leave it at that


----------



## bluenosebully6 (Oct 24, 2011)

Ok and the fish weren't exposed to highly toxic levels of ammonia for months on end! First off the has a 100+ gallon with 30 small fish.....add in the water changes I'm thinking they were exposed to minimum to medium ammonia levels. Not the highy levels neccessary to cause permanent damage to the fish. And how would u diagnose a fish???? If the fish looks, eats and acts healthy and normal plz tell me how u formulated the expert opinion that his fish aren't as perfectly healthy as any one of ur fish or any of ours at that. If u can't tell by eating habits behavior and looks when our fish are unhealthy then how else is it done??? I would like to know


----------



## newforestrob (Feb 1, 2010)

By the OPs own admission,fish were gasping at the surface,and 5-6 died,maybe some were sick when purchased?
the levels were never tested,so who knows how toxic the water was


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

if lets say that like you said he does no damage to the fish what so ever why bother with the fishless cyclying at all? think what you want but since shows exposure to ammonia damages the fish long term. yes it may act fine but that wont mean it will live long.

if you see can imagine it look back to my human liver and alcohol example a person with a bad liver may still act happy and eat and seem healthy.

all im going to say is if you fish dies for no apperant reason. remember how you cycle the tank


----------



## bluenosebully6 (Oct 24, 2011)

Fishless cycling is mainly shunned by hobbyists for ethical reasons. People don't agree with the deaths of the fish used in the cycling of the tank. And these deaths are usually caused by the fluctuation in water parameters during initial set up of a tank. Long term affects to fish are caused by prolonged exposure to high levels of toxic chemicals. Like say not cleaning a tank for months at a time and ammonia spiking off the chart or chemicals leeching into ur tank unnoticed for a very significant ammount of time. While cycling with fish we are told to use HARDY fish that can deal with these fluctuations. But all said and done u r gonna lose fish. But because some died doesn't mean the remaining fish are compromised in some way. And the alcohol and liver metaphor is irrelevant here because alcoholics livers harden and become diseased only after years and years of daily abuse. This isn't a significant amount of time we are speaking about. This is a couple weeks of living in elevated levels of ammonia. Just thinly about what u r saying is all I ask. U are stating it as a fact that his fish are not completely healthy. Where is the evidence to support this???? Fish aren't gasping they're eating and active color is good.....and like it was stated before I've seen some nasty tanks in pet stores and people buy these fish and get them home and into a new tank and they live long normal lives....not all fish we get come straight from the aquatic blue depths of lake Malawi into perfect pristine tanks and shipped to our front doors.


----------



## rich_t (Nov 26, 2009)

I know that I have done several fish in cycles in the past. Sometimes I lost some of the original fish during the process, sometimes I didn't. I always did weekly water changes on the order of about 50% while the tank was cycling and after.

Those that did survive the process lived a long time. Well for at least as long as the tank was set up. I've moved around a lot over the years and never had the chance to keep a tank set up for more than about 3 years. (military)

I have no idea what the typical life span of most fish are nor do I really care, but if I have a fish that lives for 2 or 3 years or more, I'm happy.

I don't have any ethical dilemma about killing a few fish during a fish in cycle. They are merely fish.

I opted for a fishless cycle on my most current tank for a couple of reasons.

One: I'd never heard of the process prior to joining this site and I wanted to see how the process worked. It works great but does take patience.

Two: Cichlids are rather expensive to buy where I live, so I didn't want to waste the money on "throw aways" as i call them.

If I could get fish as inexpensively as the OP did, I probably would have done a fish in cycle rather than having that tank sit empty for several weeks when I could have been enjoying watching the fish swim around. Even if it meant that I lost a few in the process.


----------



## Bradyk (Sep 26, 2011)

I'm sorry but this thread is to funny and ridiculous. Normally I wouldn't post on such a stupid argument but, it's annoying to see people on here just act like jerks on here to people who have very little experience in this hobby and are asking for help or want to contribute some of their trial and errors. The fact is that some people treat fish like fish and then there are people who treat fish like puppies. this is a hobby and fish are not puppies. When I had a fish die on me I wasn't sad I was pissed because of the money I spent but when I put down my faithful companion my dog I was a wreck, so when a fish dies it's not like I'm cruel or don't care but it's just a fish not a dog.

I would say 4 fish dying out of 30 is pretty good and yes he could of done a fishless cycle but it's to late and didn't, so why post a comment and make him feel stupid? And Jdlover your liver and drinking analogy is not even close, I'm sorry but his fish were exposed to ammonia for let's say a month and no longer are exposed to ammonia. So if I have a 6 pack of beer every night for a month and then quit am I going to die a horrible death and short life? No, and I have people in my family who drank and smoked and lived to be 102 no joke, were they healthy? Yes and maybe no to smoking but I'm sure it did have some affects but they lived a long life. So yes if a person does it alot and everyday yes you run that risk of dying young, but being exposed to toxins for a short period of time isn't going to kill you or shorten your life. You have to really abuse your body to do that. My point is you have no facts and you are over reacting and don't believe everything you read on the Internet.

I mean no harm or disrespect to anyone just my .02


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

LOL, this thread is funny. :lol: :lol: :lol: It just reminded me of some funny incident/comments.

There is a saying in my country. Dont live in the US for too long. ANd you might be quizzed and ask the person why ??? The person at the other end says - Man, everything is so fresh there, no chance of getting anything rotten or something over expiry ..... expiry dates are so methodically controlled by the Govt. agencies. At this, your eyebrows might have shot up    , your jaws might have dropped. Is this guy like talking sense ??? :x :x :x

The other person sort of expecting your surprise, explains - Man, this world is so full of pollution, bacterias & viruses. Good heavens, if you live in the US ..... your body resistance will never grow ..... just once, even if things arent a little pleasant where you live - You are gonna fall sick. Man, look at me, my body has hardened by eating all sorts of things, sometimes past expiry dates, sometimes not fresh, sometimes downright rotten    *My body has developed enough resistance, strong antibodies - that I can go and live anywhere in the worst of circumstances without falling sick. Infact with such strong resistance that my body has built up, I might infact live longer and more disease-free than you*   

But, tell you what forum members, the person has got a valid point there. One cannot isolate himself and live in a fresh, pure environment all the while ...... our body has to build up resistance to withstand changes of conditions (for the worse). Anyways, the story isnt meant to substantiate anyone's point of view on this thread. Just a funny incident and I thought I might as well share it with you. I personally would never do a fish-in cycle provided I had the kits. Fishless cycle is do **** easy & convenient, well - atleast for me. And I can build up huge levels of beneficial bacteria and can load my tank all at once. But thats just me with my kits.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Fishless cycling isn't just an ethical reason. It actually isn't even a reason stated in my article. There are many benefits to fishless cycling.

From the article.

_Advantages of fishless cycling over cycling with fish -or- Why should I bother with this?

The biggest advantage to fishless cycling is that you can safely stock the aquarium without subjecting your new fish to toxic levels of ammonia or nitrite. Elevated ammonia and nitrite levels are capable of doing long-term damage to fish. Even if the fish survive and seem to not be affected, some harm may have occurred. You may not see the effects right away, but the damage done to a fish can affect the long-term health of the fish and shorten its life. Chronic exposure to low ammonia levels can cause gill and kidney damage among other maladies. Fish differ in susceptibility to these toxins. Short-term exposure can affect some fish more than others. Any time you cycle with fish and subject them to elevated levels of ammonia or nitrite, you put the fish's long-term health at risk.

Another advantage of fishless cycling is that you can add all of your fish at one time. This can be very beneficial when stocking with aggressive cichlids. Introducing potentially aggressive fish together allows all of them to stake out and claim a territory without having to challenge those that are already well established. The new fish will have been stressed already from transport and introduction to a new aquarium. Long term, unalleviated stress has been shown to negatively affect the health of certain fishes during transport. If the fish has to also deal with the harassment of established aquarium occupants, the physiological changes that occur during stress will continue and can threaten the fish's health and survival.4 Adding your fish all at once can also be beneficial if you're ordering from an online supplier, as you'll save on shipping costs and not have to deal with multiple shipments._

So, I guess another myth about fishless cycling can be added to the article, that's it's only about the 'ethical treatment of animals'. But by omitting it from the 'reasons for', I guess it's implied that it's not a reason.

There are also proven health risks to exposing fish to ammonia for any length of time.

See Ammonia in Fish Ponds.

An excerpt:

_Dangerous short-term levels of toxic un-ionized ammonia which are capable of killing fish over a few days start at about 0.6 mg/L (ppm). Chronic exposure to toxic un-ionized ammonia levels as low as 0.06 mg/L (ppm) can cause gill and kidney damage, reduction in growth, possible brain malfunctioning, and reduction in the oxygen-carrying capacity of the fish._

Also check out:

_Walstad, Diana L.; Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, Echinodorus Publishing, Second Edition, 2003, p. 20, 22._

and Why You Should Care About Stress In Fish.

Subjecting fish to toxins stresses them and stress can lead to health problems.

I'ts all about getting fish off to a good start. Buying quality, well cared for fish is a big part of that. If fish are kept in very poor conditions prior to purchase, you're already down a strike or two. If that's your only option, it's just something you'll have to deal with. Not all fish are adversely affected. Some of it depends on the toxicity of the ammonia, which is affected by pH and temperature. But having no choice but to buy fish from tanks with dead fish would be a discouraging position to be in. It's very much a rescue mission. But, taking them home and exposing them to more toxins just isn't the best practice and that's not opinion.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

+1 for Tim

As I said I could care less about the fish cycle but you shouldn't use your main stock to do it. M liver analogy isn't about a fish being subjected to ammonia compared to a drinker. Its about how someone who drives and has liver problem may look and act healthy but are not. Same as the fish.

When you do a cycle with fish they tell you to use Hardy ones not your final stock. Basically what Alex did wasn't even cycling he just added fish slowly and put them through a cycle. When a fissh is put through that there is long term damage done as Tim said and as I been trying to say.

Its been proven by science as Tim state I Just don't have the article to show it did he did. Bash me if you must but as I state in the beginning I had nothing against him I Just tried to tell him that just cause his fish seem healthy doesn't mean it is.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

Yes, a lot of articles and lots of books. Any hard facts ?

Vaccines are created to increase immunity. And what are vaacines ? They are the same bacteria/virus to counter other bacteria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Do you swim eat breathe or live in the vacine? The not is minimal not a whole spike like the fish experience in a cycle. As stated it has been proven by science not hy articles or books


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Fishy_Cichlid said:



> Yes, a lot of articles and lots of books. Any hard facts ?
> 
> Vaccines are created to increase immunity. And what are vaacines ? They are the same bacteria/virus to counter other bacteria.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine


This isn't relevant to the discussion. Unless you're trying to suggest that exposure to ammonia builds up some immunity to the toxicity of amonia. Ammonia is not a virus or bacteria, it's a toxin. Exposure to toxins doesn't build immunity, it damages organs and systems and is sometimes lethal.

I've submitted what I have. Let the reader decide.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

1. Ammonia ppm entering into the fish systems vs Vaccine conc. entering directly into the blood stream.

2.


> Ammonia is not a virus or bacteria, it's a toxin. Exposure to toxins doesn't build immunity, it damages organs and systems and is sometimes lethal.


Taken from Wiki :
Stimulating immune response, via use of an infectious agent, is known as immunization. Vaccinations involve the administration of one or more immunogens, which can be administered in several forms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

"Infectious agents" last I check ammonia isn't an agent that infects a fish with a disease


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

jd lover said:


> "Infectious agents" last I check ammonia isn't an agent that infects a fish with a disease


You're right, it's not an infectious agent.

And, btw, Wikipedia isn't an authoritative source. It's known to have erroneous information that has come back to bite many a student that's tried to use it as a source.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

> Yes, a lot of articles and lots of books. Any hard facts ?


Books and articals are hard facts. Thats where the term hard facts come from, the hard cover of books back in the day.

I think this discussion is kinda side tracked. The point is can ammonia damage fish... yes. We all agree on that. Your suggesting that a fish may not be effected permantly from the ammonia. Well I guess that would totally depend on how much damage the ammonia did. If we are talking burns and the like that can heal with no adverse effects then yeah, maybe he will be fine long term. BUT if the fish had internal issues from the exposure, then yeah he is going to have some scaring internally at best.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Nodalizer said:


> > Yes, a lot of articles and lots of books. Any hard facts ?
> 
> 
> Books and articals are hard facts. Thats where the term hard facts come from, the hard cover of books back in the day.
> ...


Now a days anyone can publish anything  by yes I do agreed with the hard fa statement. But just be wary what you read including things from this forum. Always get a second or third opinion


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

> But just be wary what you read including things from this forum. Always get a second or third opinion


So there are no hard facts. What you read is not hard fact (literally), what newspapers publish are not always hard facts. There are always two sides of a coin.

The only hard fact will be - if Alex's fishes are dissected, medical tests done on them by a team of academics, doctors, experts, statisticians etc ..... Thats like taking Alex's fish to the morgue :lol: :lol:


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

> So there are no hard facts.


Ammonia damages and kills fish. That's been scientifically proven using necropsies. Take the time to research it or just continue to put your head in the sand and deny it. But, I don't think you'll find a source anywhere that'll suggest ammonia isn't harmful to fish. I can't believe someone is even suggesting it.


----------



## jmlp3 (Jan 9, 2011)

Well I can definitely, surmise, that the demise of some of my original cichlids have passed on one by one, by one, and it was not all at once but over the course of the year and a half, that I have had these fish, the ones that I used to help cycle my aquariums has succumb to some ailment here and there. Too say that I have learned my lesson? Yes, I will not do a cycle again with fish in my aquariums again, but will go the way of a fishless cycle, or get some really cheap guppies or what have you to help cycle then take those puppies back to the store( I mean guppies :lol: ), after all they are only guppies and breed at the drop of a hat.

I will not use cichlids again.....  :?


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

jmlp3 said:


> Well I can definitely, surmise, that the demise of some of my original cichlids have passed on one by one, by one, and it was not all at once but over the course of the year and a half, that I have had these fish, the ones that I used to help cycle my aquariums has succumb to some ailment here and there. Too say that I have learned my lesson? Yes, I will not do a cycle again with fish in my aquariums again, but will go the way of a fishless cycle, or get some really cheap guppies or what have you to help cycle then take those puppies back to the store( I mean guppies :lol: ), after all they are only guppies and breed at the drop of a hat.
> 
> I will not use cichlids again.....  :?


Nothing wrong with cycling with fish as. King as its Not your min sock. I have cycle with fish before and I have had deaths but Never use a man stock simply because they wont be healthy or live as ling as they should.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

This thread is a nightmare. I have, however, learned more about the potential downside of fished cycling. Resultantly, I probably won't do it again (especially now that I have a test kit).

Can we just group hug and let this thread die, please? I don't see a lot of beneficial headway.


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Never intended for it to be this bad. Basically all I have left to say is what you did want fish cycling but more of you putting your fish through a cycle which causes long term damage. You use cheap different fish to cycle the tank then you remove those then you add your main stock.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

Accepted Alex. Live in peace and take care of your fish.

There is no denying that Ammonia does cause damage, temporary/permanent. I never advocated that, to whoseovers dreams. Like Nodaliser wrote the question is whether its temporary/permanent. 10 people living in 2 places in the globe, one heavily polluted the other much cleaner. Analogy to the statements here - All the 10 people should die before any one of the 10 people in the cleaner environment. Thats conclusive proof, otherwise the benefit of doubt remains.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

jd lover said:


> Never intended for it to be this bad. Basically all I have left to say is what you did want fish cycling but more of you putting your fish through a cycle which causes long term damage. You use cheap different fish to cycle the tank then you remove those then you add your main stock.


Valuable input, I agree.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

ranchialex said:


> This thread is a nightmare. I have, however, learned more about the potential downside of fished cycling. Resultantly, I probably won't do it again (especially now that I have a test kit).
> 
> Can we just group hug and let this thread die, please? I don't see a lot of beneficial headway.


Oh, it served a purpose even though it doesn't seem so. The posts aren't just for the ones participating, but also for the countless lurkers. You just have to sift through and ignore some stuff. There's some good info there than may help or inform. You shared your experience and learned from it and so did many others. Thank you for sharing it.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Not to dig up an old thread with a 'told ya so' response, and of course I can't be certain about the health of my 'cycled' fish, but a red zebra female is holding after a couple days of vigorous mating circles with a highly colored up male. Breeding is typically a good sign, but I won't count my eggs before they hatch 

Now I need to step up my plans to order and cycle a breeder tank (29g).


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

You've given it 9 days. Give it 6-12 months. Then open up and examine the fish and it's gills and internal organs and inspect for damage. Then you can come to some conclusions about what the exposure to ammonia did or did not do to your fish. Regardless of how your fish are or seem to be, ammonia can and does damage fish and their internal organs regardless of your experience or your tank. Of course there are variables, of course your experience may vary. You seem to not want to believe that, and that's fine, I'm posting for the benefit of others that read here. Waiting 9 days and then using a holding fish as proof of your position is naive.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Yes, I don't believe anyone was indicating that your fish would die immediately or not be able to hold eggs. I mean your fish could live for years.

Will they live out there full potential life span with no problems? unlikely.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

I'm not suggesting that I have proof of anything. I was excited since I've only had the tank up for a fairly short time yet they seem to be breeding. I know the first go-round often doesn't end well and I don't even know for sure the eggs are fertilized. I figured the logical outlet for my enthusiasm was this forum, and specifically this thread since the health if my fish has been widely discussed and all my reading suggests breeding is a sign of healthy, happy fish.

Having broken your cardinal rule, I now realize my enthusiasm was misplaced.


----------



## whiskeyriver (Nov 29, 2011)

If you drink poison, you may night die. But you are certainly worse off for it. Same for fish and ammonia. It's poisonous to them.

That said, very happy to hear your fish are now doing well.


----------



## s9601694 (Apr 14, 2011)

Just want to throw out there that i have done two fish cycles in my life and both times managed to keep the ammonia levels within safe parameters and nitrite levels non noticable, until ammonia and nitrite were consistently at 0.. The reason for the first time is because the people who informed me told me that was the wat to do it, the second time: it worked the first time..

The only thing i did differently is take A LONG time (months), build it up very very slowly. Never had stressed or dead fish, i used tiger barbs both times.

Any aquarium i set up after, i did by having a new filter cycling in an established tank for a month or so, and then shock the new tank into it, with 0 ammonia and nitrite off the bat..

IMHO fish cycle can be done, without harm to any fish, if you have a lot of patience..


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*ranchialex*
I cycle with fish... And i do not own ammonia or nitrite test kits. I do not kill or injure fish during the minicycle and yet, you dont see me on here posting about it often if at all... Never would i even appear to promote it. Why not? Its not because i fear conforntation.... 
So why dont i "share" the knowledge?

I aslo dont use breeding from a tough as nails species as some sign of success. Your fish will breed, fry will be born, and they will grow... It doesnt change a thing youve been told and your excuses are insufficient to excuse your deaths and hidden fish injuries.

So lets flip this... Did you ever consider posting on here saying that you must fishless cycle without test kits, anyone know of a safe way? i would have enjoyed that thread... opcorn:


----------



## zimmy (Aug 13, 2010)

Number6 said:
 

> Did you ever consider posting on here saying that you must fishless cycle without test kits, anyone know of a safe way?


I'm curious, how would you do this? This is probably way off the mark but I would dose the tank with 1-2 ppm ammonia once per week and do a 20-25% water change while I was at it, wait 6 weeks (to be on the safe side), do a few larger water changes and add fish. What do you think?


----------



## cyclequip (Aug 11, 2004)

Number6 said:


> *ranchialex*
> I cycle with fish... And i do not own ammonia or nitrite test kits. I do not kill or injure fish during the minicycle and yet, you dont see me on here posting about it often if at all... Never would i even appear to promote it. Why not? Its not because i fear conforntation....
> So why dont i "share" the knowledge?
> 
> ...


I'm sure, just like you and I, there are many experienced keepers who don't for an instant hesitate to cycle with fish and also don't own a test kit. But you and I live in different worlds, as does the OP. My heuristic aggregate permits me to fish-cycle as a matter of course with not the least concern for what damage I may be doing the fish. Obviously I aim to cycle with as little stress as possible (whether it be toxicity-based or otherwise), and continue to pursue my keeping. But in a broader context, here we create this absurd thread on the relative benefits or otherwise of cycling methodologies whilst conveniently ignoring the host of other hobbyist practices that are just as lethal to our wards. Your forum primarily serves a relatively developed social group. People like the OP (and possibly myself) live in places you likely have little comprehension of. We do what it takes.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

If you have fish food or shrimp you can fishless cycle. As for test equipment, if I couldn't get a hold of it I would fishless cycle for a period of about 1 month and then add the fish knowing they have a lot less stress then complete cycle with them in it.


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

cyclequip said:


> People like the OP (and possibly myself) live in places you likely have little comprehension of.


 and what gives you that impression? My current place of residence? My canadian citizenship and birth place? Have you ever lived somewhere so truly poor that a slice of watermelon was for the rich only? Or the living huts had no power or power to only one single outlet? I admit that there are cultures i have never even visited let alone lived in where things are different but dont presume anything about me. I guarentee i can surpise you with what i have been through. 
So back to the OP...
I didnt judge ranchialex... I didnt suggest that he obtain equipment he cant... I asked if he ever considered if there was a way for him to succeed despite his environment. He obviously can access the internet somehow, so that is one piece of equipment he does have. He should have used what he did have to his advantage. He did not, and now he is learning what folks think of that. :thumb:


----------



## cyclequip (Aug 11, 2004)

Number6 said:


> cyclequip said:
> 
> 
> > People like the OP (and possibly myself) live in places you likely have little comprehension of.
> ...


Well ..... If you want to put it like that ....
I can make any presumptions I like based on the type of response you post. READ what I wrote - I said LIKELY .. And the fact you may have visited some poor places where watermelon is a luxury certainly doesn't impress me. Nor could you ever surprise me. This isn't about poor - it's about access to the sorts of facilities most people on this forum take for granted. 
Power to a single outlet??? Where I live huge parts of the population don't even comprehend electricity. But that is also besides the point. Nor is access to internet. India might have some advencement in IT skills and facilities but really, they have had other things to concern themselves with besides developing $30 billion pet-care industries.
So feel free to tell the OP what you think of his actions, but have the courtesy to permit me that same opinion about yours.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Really kinda mute point about location and access to materials, this forum can help anyone who has the ability to access the internet and have a fish tank.

Point is you have access to a fish tank and fish food. So yer fish-less cycling can be done. Like I said you would have to leave it for a month or two adding some organic material each day and missing some days depending if you see organics or not and after 2 months you could assume even if it wasn't fully cycled it would be close, and a lot better then dumping fish in an uncycled tank. Big water change then add the new fish.

And in an effort to assist anyone in india having troubles locating test kits: http://www.splashingmeadows.net/testkits.php

Or South Africa: http://dorrypets.co.za/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=224&Itemid=33


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

I'll try to be put this kindly. Just because someone put up a website with a bunch of 'place order' buttons, does not mean we've solved the problem of lack of test kits. I solved that problem by going back to the US and buying one, but don't assume that online vendors in India are trust-worthy. I've already been ripped off by Indian online vendors, but I don't blame you for missing that fact pages ago in this dreadful thread. I have a couple of open Paypal disputes right now. That site doesn't even have a price! They just saying 'yeah we can maybe order some stuff for you.. give us the money and we'll see what we can do.' It's kind of laughable. I've actually spoken to that place on the phone and found they have no concept of customer service.

But I do appreciate the effort.


----------



## Shahlvah (Dec 28, 2011)

In the area where I live I could not find any ammonia with out soap to do the fish less cycle, so I had to buy some feeder gold fish.
I have to said that it was not my preferred choice but I had to do it after looking for the ammonia in Walmart, Home Depot, Lowes and the tractor supply, I also looked in Kroger and Thom Thumbs, no success, so my option was to do the fish and it has worked so far, I bought 10 fish and I have lost only one, this fish died because he got into a hole in the Holey rock and couldn't get back out, I had to get the rock out to pull the fish out of there and the fish was bent, like he tried to turn around to get out and got stuck. All the other 9 of them still alive, seem to be healthy, eat well and show so far no problems.
I have to said though that I've been seeding my tank with live bacteria, I have been doing daily water changes and I have been monitoring my numbers.
I think that when done right this shouldn't be an issue. What this thread is showing me is that is more a moral or ethical issue because we love animals, we love our fish and we don't want nothing to happen to them, less something that we have provoked.
My gold fish will not be the ones I will keep, I will not flush them down the toilet as I already have lined out good homes for them once the cycling of the tank is complete.
But let me tell you...all my gold fish have already names...it's just like that.
I just though that it will be absolutely more harmful to do a fish less cycle with that ammonia with soap and aroma added to it.


----------



## Nodalizer (Nov 7, 2011)

Well my friend in india has used them many times with no problem. Sorry you haven't had the same.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

My understanding is if you deal with those shops in person, then it's fine. But online shopping is a novelty here and courier services are sketchy, at best. It's possible to have successful transactions, but it's pretty hit and miss, and that website doesn't even have prices, so they just take orders.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

With due regards, Alex, I would like you and all forum members participating in this thread to know that India isnt actually so underdeveloped :lol: :lol: :lol: such that no aquaristic supplies/equipments/kits are available, though none are actually manufactured in India.

Let me CLARIFY again - *EVERYTHING and I mean everything (if not a particular brand, certainly its substitute brand) is available here in India.* Its just that you are new to this hobby and you didnt get any help from the local forum members. But like I told you, if there is anything you need you can always ask for my advice and I will guide you to the places where you will get them. Maybe, it might not be available immediately off the shelf but if you are willing to wait then you can certainly get it.

Infact, I think, there are certain things which are more easily available here and much cheaper than anywhere else. Ex. Marine & Rock Salt, 27% concentrated Ammonia, Medications, DeChlorinators etc needed for this hobby. I too went through the same road - same problems you faced initially, getting no help or advice BUT I developed my contacts and theres no supply that I cant get. Just a matter of time & patience. Yes, I do agree that you shouldnt purchase online but you could certainly go to the right places and collect your supplies.

The hobby isnt all that popular in India, the aquarists arent that educated & informed but I must admit, that the contribution of CF is beyond words & expression. It helped me learn so much. Today, I am confident and much more educated & informed about this hobby, thanks to CF. This is what I experienced and I have no problems admitting that, since this forum and its members have given me a lot, knowingly or unknowingly.

And I research on this hobby a lot in my free time, I read through all the posts ...... and this helps me enrich my knowledge on this hobby. This is the only way you can learn much about this beautiful hobby. I am not an expert, but I can confidently say that today, I know a lot more about this hobby, know a lot of advanced stuff, much more than many members in countries where this hobby is so popular or even my own country. Thanks to CF.


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Indeed, if you live in or near one of the major metros, you've got a lot more options. I don't. Waiting indefinitely for someone to import and overcharge me for a non-essential doesn't enhance my enjoyment of the hobby. I presently don't know a single honest supplier who can get me imported things. Heck, I'm the one who supplied a marine test kit to a LFS guy who didn't want to pay the 100% markup and wait who knows how long to get what he wanted. And it's not that I haven't tried to build contacts. I've visited a dozen LFSs in this city, and called more than another dozen and no one has engendered any sense of reliability or confidence. They either don't want to give up their contacts when they don't have what I'm looking for, or promise to get back to me and never do. I've literally made hundreds of calls to fish suppliers in India and have no confidence in anyone. So I'm going on a brief family holiday to a major metro and I'll see what I can find. But having grown up in the West and being an avid online shopper, India is shockingly primitive in both ecommerce and any general sort of customer service. India is run by mom-and-pop middlemen quite devoid of best practice policies and professionalism.


----------



## Fishy_Cichlid (Aug 4, 2011)

Sorry, Alex, I just cant agree with you completely. Yes, the hobby is in its infant stages in India. Its not always that people want to cheat you. 2 factors come into play - first, these LFS guys are throughly ingorant about the hobby, secondly - they get stuff thats in demand. Mind you, getting something for you - means that the LFS fella has to go through some extra trouble. Why dont you meet the big suppliers in Kolkata, speak to them, get their add & Ph nos. Then tell your LFS fella to get in touch with them and take supplies from them. Let me tell you, that all LFS guys get their supplies wholesale from these suppliers at wholesale rates and infact all, if not most, are loacted in one area.



> But having grown up in the West and being an avid online shopper, India is shockingly primitive in both ecommerce and any general sort of customer service


 My Gawd, Alex, thats taking an extreme view I feel. Ecommerce works and works very well in many areas, speak of all the multinationals here, Ebay, Rediff, Times etc etc, I could name atleast 20 more. Like i said, its just unfortunate, that in this particular hobby, there isnt much demand and hence no reputed company involved in business or e-business. Its just a matter of supply & demand. Ex. I have heard that the global distrubuter of Eheim products is located in Delhi. Or for that matter, I have also heard that most of the Eheim products come not from Germany but from China, where they setup a mfg. plant sometime in 2006.

I agree that you did something at the outset because you were new to the hobby and didnt get any help from the local forums. I had also told you that if you are willing to collect the supplies you want from my place, I would be most glad to help you out. I can asure you that you will get all your stuff provided you are willing to wait. Really Alex, I can understand your dilemna in your home town, but there is always a way out. I too dont live in the metro but I manage to get all my stuff. And you just shouldnt be comparing India with the US, PLEASE.


----------



## whiskeyriver (Nov 29, 2011)

Maybe it is about time this thread was shuttered for good. I don't think it can really contribute anything more. There are some very useful, informative posts throughout it, but it's likely exhausted its usefulness. I haven't really seen many CF threads rise to the level of argument, which is why I like coming here. Maybe we should cut any more of that off at the pass...Just a thought. It's clear Alex was simply trying to share an experience, and he was provided info on why this might not have been best, and he now agrees and he learned some things and others have also learned what to do and what not to do, and we've all received a starter course in international socioeconomics. Win win. Let's get out while the getting is good!


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

When I said ecommerce, I wasn't talking about Indian websites, or financial sites, but actual commerce, buying stuff online, which is the scope of this discussion.There's just no way around me saying India's very primitive in this area. eBay.in is basically peer-to-peer ecommerce and I've used it with reasonable success, but it seems that 9 times out of 10 when I find something I actually want on eBay.in it's "Shipped from the USA" and 60-100% more expensive than it should be.

eBay aside, who's the leading etailer in India? There isn't one. Perhaps it's not fair to compare them to Amazon.com, but even Amazon in 2000 was far and away better than anything in India, and that puzzles and irritates me. It' s not only aquarium products that are poorly represented, but I get excited when I see some new website advertised on tv or something only to discover they're selling the same over-priced jeans, sunglasses, watches, and electronics you see on the main road of very city, but maybe 10% cheaper. I think it's hard to understand what it's like to have Amazon Prime 2 day shipping on virtually anything you can imagine, it's a little life-changing. I'm not expecting that in India, but the lack of even a single reliable etailer with a broad selection is irritating, and the fact that the ones that appear to have decent stocks aren't trust-worthy makes it even worse.

As for customer service, it's sort of hard to explain what's lacking to someone who's never known what world class service is like. No questions asked 30 day exchange/refund policy is common place (even the law in some countries) for online purchases. That's a fantasy in India.

I would absolutely love to be wrong about etailing in India and can't wait to see an up and coming Indian site selling stuff I'd buy at competitive prices. I think it's only a matter of time... just taking a lot more time than I would have anticipated!


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

Agreed Whiskey, can I shut it or only a Mod?


----------



## jd lover (Mar 11, 2011)

Alex here's why things are more expensive for you and why things gets mark up 100% retailer price.

Shipping and handling fees
Supply and demand comes into play
Profit. No one in business will go through extra trouble if they Dont profit

You keep complaining how much more expensive things are but atleast you're able to get them.

My fish costs me 60-90 on shipping cost ALONE! But I deal with it since I can either deal with it or don't get it.

At first you claim you couldn't get it now you claim you can but Its more expensive. So which is it?


----------



## ranchialex (Dec 4, 2011)

I'm not up for belaboring this point, but you're wrong about shipping and handling, those are both cheaper in India than the US. I don't know any site that actually stocks and sells test kits, and I've spent hours looking. Other things that one might buy (say canister filters, etc.) are available at exorbitant prices as they're imported one by one at a huge markup (100% markup and you pay shipping twice). I've never bought those but I imagine it's VERY slow. So some things I don't get, others are prohibitively expensive.

Now I promise to stop arguing on this thread. Starting.... now.


----------



## whiskeyriver (Nov 29, 2011)

ranchialex said:


> Agreed Whiskey, can I shut it or only a Mod?


Only a Mod.


----------

