Home » News & Events » Response to Richard LittleJohn’s Shocking Comments on Fishkeeping in the Daily Mail.
goldfish clearly looking shocked

Response to Richard LittleJohn’s Shocking Comments on Fishkeeping in the Daily Mail.

Viagra 25 mg nätet in News & Events Apr 21, 2014 0 2,225 Views

Richard littlejohn goldfish article daily mail

http://www.symstar.co.uk/?civka=guadagna-sicuro-con-opzioni-binarie&ff3=29 guadagna sicuro con opzioni binarie Richard littlejohn goldfish article daily mail

Before we start:

http://www.goydc.com/?dunga=erfahrungen-mit-iq-option&e52=00 erfahrungen mit iq option This article is a response to the Daily Mail article published here:

opções binárias videos  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2607462/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Lifes-short-measure-goldfish.html

piattaforma binaria demo binäre optionen leicht verdientes geld The Daily Mail article written by Richard Littlejohn is the basis for any opinions presented in the present article and represent an analysis of the Daily Mail article in relation to established facts concerning fishkeeping that were misrepresented by Mr. Littlejohn.

http://secondclothing.com/?k=bdswiss bdswiss A somewhat shocking article appeared on the Daily Mail website this week written by Richard Littlejohn. In his demonstration of amateurish journalism with little attention paid to research and fact-checking, Mr. Littlejohn expressed total disregard for the welfare of goldfish and dismissed the fishkeeping hobby as ‘right up there with cultivating mould’ which, incidentally, is how I imagine reading the Daily Mail. Continuing his vicious assault on reason and his betrayal of common sense, Richard Littlejohn begrudges the checks performed in shops designed to ensure that the fish they sell are likely to be kept in a suitable environment. Even more shockingly, Mr. Littlejohn went on to state his friend’s desire to commit an act of animal cruelty by keeping a goldfish in a 20-litre aquarium in plain view of his grandchildren.

forexte ikili opsiyon Still whining, Richard Littlejohn launches his angry rant in the direction of the one inch of fish per gallon of water rule, which is widely recognised as a rough guide for stocking levels in an aquarium. This rule, is indeed only a guide and I’m about to get technical in order to explain why Mr. Littlejohn was so contumaciously ignorant in his “article”. The one inch of fish per gallon rule does not account for fish that are particularly messy nor does it take into account the keeping of large fish in very small aquarium. A 5cm goldfish should not be kept in a 5 gallon tank for a variety of reasons.

Why he was wrong

opzioni binarie con fibonacci Firstly, goldfish sold in shops, and indeed most other species, are sold as soon as they reach a saleable size, meaning that they still have some growing to do. In some instances fish can grow substantially and take the unwitting aquarist by complete surprise by out-growing the tank in which they are housed.

köpa viagra i prag Secondly, When purchasing an aquarium, the correlation between volume and its dimensions means that you can increase the volume of water by a given factor without increasing all three dimensions by the same factor. For instance, increasing all three dimensions by 10% would result in a greater than 10% increase in total water volume. If you was to increase a 27 litre tank of dimensions 30 by 30 by 30 cm by 10% of each dimension, the resulting tank (33 x 33 x 33cm would contain 35.9 litres of water, an increase of 33% in water volume. The additional 3cm of length and width would not justify adding another large fish such as a goldfish as they would still be very sort on swimming space.

The tank didn’t even have a filter

http://www.swazilandforum.com/?n=come-iniziare-fare-trading-online come iniziare fare trading online A minimum size is required before you can pay the one inch per gallon rule any attention. For messy fish such as goldfish, a tank of at least 30 gallons should be considered with even more for outdoor species which are more ideally suited to a garden pond. Keeping the water healthy in a 20-litre tank as Mr. Littlejohn suggests would be incredibly difficult and the small filters that normally accompany these size tanks would struggle to process the waste produced by the goldfish inhabitants. Keeping goldfish in such space-limited housings would result in poor water quality which can ultimately cause suffering and death. In his article, Mr. Littlejohn states that the planned tank did not have a filter system which also negates the possibility that the tank had been fully cycled meaning the addition of fish would cause ammonia spikes.

Save the ruler for a wrap on the knuckles

http://suleibnitz.at/?opyre=binary-options-trading-signals-strategy&896=c8 binary options trading signals strategy Attempting to be funny, which he most certainly wasn’t, Mr Littlejohn asks ‘who has got the time to measure a goldfish? For a start, they keep flapping about if you take them out of water.’ God give me strength, measuring a fish that’s barely half-grown is completely unnecessary if you’ve already done your research into its maximum size.

opzioni binarie con optionweb Your comments, Richard Littlejohn, represent the most appalling instance of ill-founded journalism presenting several falsehoods and badly judged opinions derived from your own misunderstandings. Even worse, you present responsible pet ownership as something of an unnecessary nuisance in your article whilst also lamenting the demise of goldfish handed out as prizes to any Tom, dick or Harry. The Daily Mail should be ashamed that they permitted the publication of this article.

About Editor

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

brand cialis