Common Misconceptions In the Hobby

[Peter Eichler]

Re: Common Misonceptions In the Hobby

Re: Common Misonceptions In the Hobby

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10579251#post10579251 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Peter Eichler


6.) Zoanthids are prefer low to moderate levels and flow, and they like dirty water.

Damn beer... :lol:

6.) Zoanthids prefer low to moderate levels of light and flow, and they like dirty water.

 

[edwing206]

:lol:

 

[Peter Eichler]

16.) The phytoplankton I put in my tank feeds my corals.

Very few corals are know to consume phytoplankton and some research suggests that most corals are unable to digest phytoplanton even if they can ingest it.

Conclusion: Phytoplanton has direct benefits to filter feeding organisms as well as pods. The addition of phytoplanton may indirectly benefit your corals but if you goal is to feed your corals directly it's best to look elsewhere.

 

[TriniStylez]

I agree with mostly all of it. I have never worried about temperature swing unless the tank reaches about 88 and even then I have never lost anything. I also dont have any desire to keep nitrates at 0 and my corals look great and are growing much faster than when I did try to keep nitrates at 0...

I think your right on about people worrying too much and not just enjoying their tanks. I have a friend who is like that and the other day he was over at my place and noticed the temperature was a bit high...man he was all over me to turn off the lights, do a water change with cool water, ect, ect. I laughed and told him to look at the corals and tell me if they looked stressed. They did not. But he still had this thing in his head that it needed to be lowered! So I told him to just relaxed and we got to talking about maintenance. Turns out he cant even remember the last time he sat infront of his tank for a long period of time without adjusting or tinkering with something...Thats sad...

 

[awestruck]

Beer was a staple in my diet throughout my college years. Maybe I should try some again!

 

[Kaos]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10581054#post10581054 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by virginiadiver69
Kaos, your signature kind of adds to this discussion. Also, you being in the coast guard (Thank You) should know better than many how cruel the ocean can be.

I need to somehow change how I worded my occupation. I'm not in the USCG (even though it appears that way). I'm a contractor for the USCG that overhauls their C-130H's. I do work on the largest CG base in the U.S. Needless to say I am a very big fan of the CG and the work they do. I do know the cruelness of the ocean first hand though. Living really close the the Outer Banks I have spent and do spend allot of time there.

Sorry to interrupt, I just didn't want to take thanks that belonged to someone else.

 

[rynon]

Here's my 2 cents on all of this. DON'T WORRY SO MUCH ABOUT EVERYTHING. While being careful is a good idea, such as QT, you do not need to go nuts with all this stuff. I have LPS, SPS, softies, shrooms, zoas, etc. All in the same tank. I believe flow is important but alk swings.........big deal. My alk ranges from 8 Dkh to 12.5 and I've never had it cause any problems with anything. Also your tank being "sterile" for SPS is another myth IMO. My tank is not sterile by any means, I have algae, small amount of nitrates......0.2, obviously phosphates if I have algae. My acros look great, in fact they LIGHTEN color in my tank, so apparently the all mighty super important parameters are not as important as people think. I bought a purple aquacultured coral and in a matter of weeks it turned sky blue in my tank....due to lower nutrients, higher lighting, I don't know? All I know is that there are a LOT of people who do not go nutzo on all this stuff and have GREAT tanks. Nature.....whatever you believe, finds a way to make it work in TIME. I am not saying buffers, water changes, skimmers are not important, just that "swings" in numbers have not hurt a THING in my tank. I may come up with more later

 

[aninjaatemyshoe]

"Reducing the demand for wild corals may help some, but it won't make a very big dent in the amount of corals being taken from the reef. As large as it has gotten, the live coral trade is still small compared to other uses for the reef such as construction. Regardless of the demand from the hobby, there will always be more demand for corals than supply and the collectors will always need jobs. To truly reduce the amount of corals being taken, economic alternatives to harvesting from the reef have to be offered and simply cutting our demand doesn't do that. Eco-tourism and responsible aquaculture are two possibilities."

Agreed with this one. I've never been convinced that our hobby is a real threat to the reefs. It makes some impact, but when you consider what climate change and polution are doing, it is like a scraped knee on a cancer patient. I'm certainly not advocating unethical collection, and I think aquaculture is best, but there needs to be some perspective here. Our focus should be on projects to decrease oceanic pollution and promote sustainable methods of fishing/collection from the sea.

As far as the temperature thing goes, there is plenty of scientific evidence and reason to support keeping temperature at/around 78 degrees. The counter-argument that "their natural habitat experiences wild temperature shifts from low 70s to low 90s" is fallacious because we are not talking about keeping them in their natural habitat. There are differences, and keeping things optimal helps make up for other stresses we impose on our livestock. Granted I'm sure I can sit and read a hundred and one stories about how someone had a tank that survived a week of temps in the 90s, but how does this make it a good idea? I've gotten away with plenty that I should never have. Not once have I quarentined anything, not once have I had a disease in my tank. So? I should still do it. Just take measured risks.

 

[Sk8r]

I agree: I think at a certain point you arrange your tank as best you can, put in some corals and trade off the ones that, after a certain time, do not thrive; concentrate on the ones that do, and don't dose without testing---I think a certain amount of benign neglect lets a tank settle, in the sense that I don't want to be one of the guys that are so micro-managing their tanks that it's like riding a constantly jolting vehicle: lots of little bumps and corrections. I've had periods of good growth meet me after I've returned from vacation and my skilled tanksitter [who can't get there daily] has just been struggling to keep the skimmer going during one of its cranky phases: so much for ego, eh?

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10582441#post10582441 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aninjaatemyshoe
"Reducing the demand for wild corals may help some, but it won't make a very big dent in the amount of corals being taken from the reef. As large as it has gotten, the live coral trade is still small compared to other uses for the reef such as construction. Regardless of the demand from the hobby, there will always be more demand for corals than supply and the collectors will always need jobs. To truly reduce the amount of corals being taken, economic alternatives to harvesting from the reef have to be offered and simply cutting our demand doesn't do that. Eco-tourism and responsible aquaculture are two possibilities."

Agreed with this one. I've never been convinced that our hobby is a real threat to the reefs. It makes some impact, but when you consider what climate change and polution are doing, it is like a scraped knee on a cancer patient. I'm certainly not advocating unethical collection, and I think aquaculture is best, but there needs to be some perspective here. Our focus should be on projects to decrease oceanic pollution and promote sustainable methods of fishing/collection from the sea.

As far as the temperature thing goes, there is plenty of scientific evidence and reason to support keeping temperature at/around 78 degrees. The counter-argument that "their natural habitat experiences wild temperature shifts from low 70s to low 90s" is fallacious because we are not talking about keeping them in their natural habitat. There are differences, and keeping things optimal helps make up for other stresses we impose on our livestock. Granted I'm sure I can sit and read a hundred and one stories about how someone had a tank that survived a week of temps in the 90s, but how does this make it a good idea? I've gotten away with plenty that I should never have. Not once have I quarentined anything, not once have I had a disease in my tank. So? I should still do it. Just take measured risks.

Our hobby is a very very real threat to reefs. The Philippines are a perfect example of this. Our hobby is certainly not the only factor that contributed to the destruction of the reefs there, but it's was a significant factor. Thing is, collection of corals isn't nearly as destructive to reefs as improper fish collection is.

My statement about temp is not fallacious, it's fact. At no point did I suggest people try to duplicate these extreme temperature swings, I was simply pointing out that the old belief that temperatures must remain stable is bunk.

 

[aninjaatemyshoe]

It isn't that we "must" maintain stable tank temps, it's that we "should." Like I said, people have gotten away with it, including me. But stable tank temp is something to strive for. As far as what temp to maintain, there are good reasons to stay below 80s, but I've never read anything that says we should be keeping the temp in the mid 80s. Temps above the low 80s encourages spawing in inverts (which can foul tank water), increases bacterial metabolism (which depletes oxygen), is less than optimal for calcification, and can be the activator for certain diseases. I said that your argument is fallacious, not because it contained incorrect information (which is not what fallacious means), but because it was based on an premise that simply doesn't fit our situation. We do not run oceans in our living rooms. The differences do matter and OPTIMUM conditions (not anything within a range of conditions that something can survive) is what we need to strive for to make up for the numerous factors in the ocean for which we cannot recreate.

As far as the destruction of the reef goes, I won't argue against ethical collection and keeping methods. Irresponsible collection methods have made an impact, but I think our ever improving efforts to reduce this are helping to minimize this. The sad fact is that our hobby is a miniscule wound to the reefs in comparison to the real problems of climate change and pollution.

 

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10582434#post10582434 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rynon
alk swings.........big deal. My alk ranges from 8 Dkh to 12.5 and I've never had it cause any problems with anything.

But as you stated you don't keep sps. Alk. swings to sps is deadly. So obviously some corals do prefer/require different conditions.

 

[rynon]

I DO keep SPS and have never had a problem. I have NEVER lost a acropora due to anything. Every acro in my tank has lived, grown, colored up nicely and my alk swings all over the place. I can post some pictures if you'd like?

 

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

No need to get all on the throne. I do doubt the validity of your statement though, but no big deal.
I just don't see how you've had Alk. swings 'all over the place' and never lost an acro. That flies in the face of countless numbers of sps keepers experiences including my paersonal own.

How do you measure your alk., what does it swing from and to, and how often do you test it. Do you use a Ca. Reactor or two part dosing?

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10582753#post10582753 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aninjaatemyshoe
It isn't that we "must" maintain stable tank temps, it's that we "should." Like I said, people have gotten away with it, including me. But stable tank temp is something to strive for. As far as what temp to maintain, there are good reasons to stay below 80s, but I've never read anything that says we should be keeping the temp in the mid 80s. Temps above the low 80s encourages spawing in inverts (which can foul tank water), increases bacterial metabolism (which depletes oxygen), is less than optimal for calcification, and can be the activator for certain diseases. I said that your argument is fallacious, not because it contained incorrect information (which is not what fallacious means), but because it was based on an premise that simply doesn't fit our situation. We do not run oceans in our living rooms. The differences do matter and OPTIMUM conditions (not anything within a range of conditions that something can survive) is what we need to strive for to make up for the numerous factors in the ocean for which we cannot recreate.

As far as the destruction of the reef goes, I won't argue against ethical collection and keeping methods. Irresponsible collection methods have made an impact, but I think our ever improving efforts to reduce this are helping to minimize this. The sad fact is that our hobby is a miniscule wound to the reefs in comparison to the real problems of climate change and pollution.

Once again, I'm not suggesting we try to mimic the everchanging conditions on a reef, nor am I suggesting people try to maintain temps on the extremes of the scale or even mid 80's. You're creating a red herring of my argument and then calling it fallacious. You're the one commiting the fallacy. Most indications point to low 80's being optimal since that's average for the areas where most corals are collected. Do you have an references to higher temps (above 80) being an activator for certain diseases or inhibits calcification.

Here's an article for you to read and think on.

http://www.reefland.com/rho/1105/reefc7.php

 

[rynon]

Here are some pictures.

That's just a few. The last coral got LIGHTER in my tank, it was purple, now blue. Vacuuming the sump and stuff like that is crazy IMO. I am not trying to fight with anyone, all of this is just my opinion. OH and this is a point and shoot cam.

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10582856#post10582856 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by E-A-G-L-E-S
No need to get all on the throne. I do doubt the validity of your statement though, but no big deal.
I just don't see how you've had Alk. swings 'all over the place' and never lost an acro. That flies in the face of countless numbers of sps keepers experiences including my paersonal own.

How do you measure your alk., what does it swing from and to, and how often do you test it. Do you use a Ca. Reactor or two part dosing?

I'd like to point out that I do feel stable PH and alkalinty is far more important than temperature and salinity. Regular and drastic swings in either is cause for concern and can do harm IMO/E.

 

[rynon]

I do try to prevent alk swings but until I figure out my tanks demands I will continue to have them. I just got a kalk reactor and my alk went from 8.6 to 9.6 in one day so perhaps that will help?

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10582906#post10582906 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rynon
I do try to prevent alk swings but until I figure out my tanks demands I will continue to have them. I just got a kalk reactor and my alk went from 8.6 to 9.6 in one day so perhaps that will help?

It should help you maintain your PH and alkalinty. Just keep an eye on readings and get it dialed in. You may have to supplement calcium and buffers in addition to the kalkwasser. In my tank and many others there is not enough daily evaporation to allow enough kalkwasser to be added.

 

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

How long has it been running? The rock still looks fresh.
Just because it's new doesn't mean it 'has' to swing. If you tested and dosed daily you would keep it pretty stable.