Are these reef safe?

I would not feel comfortable adding any of these to my tank. Im sure people have, but temptation is a difficult thing to eliminate from your fishes appetite.
 
I have a Flame in a reef tank no problem, I tried a Raccoon in a softy reef but the experiment lasted a day before I had to get him out when he ate about 30 mushrooms in a 10 hour period. I thought since I had a Threadfin and Saddleback butterfly in the same tank no problem for 8 months that a Raccoon might work, boy was I wrong. I have no experience with Longnose Butterflies.
 
The flame and long nose are both add with caution usually are both fine but their are some cases of where it dosent work. Keep them well fed and the bigger the tank the better your chances.

As far as the racoon butterfly i wouldn't risk it.
 
no on the raccoon, the long nose will eat all your tube worms but mine never touched corals at all. The flame angel is a 50/50 chance you have to decide if you want to take the chance.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7835338#post7835338 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bubbaOPPD
I have a Flame in a reef tank no problem

I would adjust that to say that a flame angel may be no problem. They're probably a little better than 50-50 for not picking at corals and clams. They more often go after soft corals than hard.

Dave
 
Bob Fenner said that a flame angel is about 80% safe. Safest is a flameback angel, which I have with no problem (about 85-90% safe, probably). Strange psychology on these fish: they will pick at zoanthids if you have a little patch, but not when you have a bunch of them.

Butterflies are hit or miss with the best of them. I have never met anyone who has kept those butterflies you mentioned successfully in a reef, though I have met a number of folks who tried and failed. Probably not good bets.
 
To be honest, I find these percentage figures rather comical. I think Bob Fenner is a great resource, and he has likely observed more fish than I can dream of, but putting a number on something so unmeasureable seems misleading. I woudl say every angel is 50%, because you never know. I have heard from people on this forum who tell me the genicanthus angeels picked at corals!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7839159#post7839159 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by keeperofthefish
Bob Fenner said that a flame angel is about 80% safe. Safest is a flameback angel, which I have with no problem (about 85-90% safe, probably).

There's no doubt that he has more experience with angels than I do (and in the hobby in general), but I based on what I've seen, I can't get myself to agree with that number. I've never heard any of the other experts throw out numbers that high.

It partly depends on what kind of tank you're keeping them in. If you keep all SPS, then flame angels are probably in the 80% range. But if you keep mostly softies and zoanthids, then your odds are considerably worse.

Dave
 
I have a yellow longnose butterfly and it is doing well in my mixed reef with clams. I know another reefer in the Phoenix area who also has a yellow longnose with his mixed reef. Actually, I only attempted after seeing his success. My LFS did warn me about the YBF but I wanted to take the chance because it is such a pretty fish.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7840625#post7840625 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by vanmle
I have a yellow longnose butterfly and it is doing well in my mixed reef with clams. I know another reefer in the Phoenix area who also has a yellow longnose with his mixed reef. Actually, I only attempted after seeing his success. My LFS did warn me about the YBF but I wanted to take the chance because it is such a pretty fish.

I've never done it, but I know others who have also kept them in reefs successfully. It's a gamble, but it can work.

Dave
 
Back
Top