Ich in 10 ft fish only

[reefcat]

:hammer:

 

[bur01014]

You need two plastic tubs, several filter sponges which are disposed of when exposed to copper or other medicine, and one hang of the back filter. You use one plastic tub whenever you quarantine a fish which is not all that frequent. You only use this tub for fish because it may be exposed to copper. You do not keep this tub set up when not in use. Fill it with display tank water and a sponge which has been in your display for a couple weeks, and you are ready to go. You use the other tub for inverts and corals which can be much smaller because inverts do not need as much space. Your invert tub can always be set up for ease if you add inverts frequently or set up on the fly in about 1 hour or less when you need to do so. Not expensive or difficult at all. All you need to do is keep a couple of sponges in your display or sump all the time so you can set up either tub immediately with a mature biological filter. You can store this stuff out of the way when not in use. Now with corals, you probably want more water volume so that you can keep water quality high enough without constantly changing the water so diping may be a better option for corals. However, with non coral inverts, macro, or rock, you can easily get by with a bare bones small tub. A five gallon bucket with a powerhead and some rock from the display often is adequate for many non coral inverts for quarantine. Most people have that immediately on hand. Keeping water quality high in a non-fish quarantine is much easier because in addition to the sponge you can use rock from your display for biological filtration b/c no medicine is being used. You can usually accomplish a newly set up non-fish 4 week quarantine if you use rock from the display without having to do a single water change.

lol, Wow...you win!
Welcome to the hobby, now go buy a 75 gallon tub....guess Home Depot, good luck finding one that won't be compromised when filled for over a week straight, rig up a HOB filter, and just fill it with old tank water....75 gallons of old tank water....big waterchange, but just take it down after 6 weeks....you can store it in the garage, if you have one, on a high sturdy stand, so your kids won't play in it...btw, buy double the salt, an extra heater, and spend all your free time putting this up and down every time you buy a fish.....all this work may keep people from overstocking their tanks....

Sounds like the biggest headache in the world...the reason being...I've done it! Good luck on holding a full-time job, spending time with your children, family, and wife.....and having any time to do anything else.....nothing I am going to say will change you....nothing you are going to say will change me....this is fun!

:rollface:

 

[Stuart60611]

Stuart....I suggest you pass along information then, these articles you have, and be done with it. I myself will continue to give advice based on experience. That is what forums are for. People searching for advice. I still haven't heard any sound advice about QTs. Stop telling people to QT their fish, instead tell them how to QT. Furthermore, stop telling people if they don't QT their fish, they will die. This just isn't true or else I would have a tank full of dead fish, and many other reefers would fall into this position. Please don't mislead those seeking advice with flattering sentences and a passionate writing style.

I have never told people they have to quarantine their fish. Rather, I have challenged anyone who thinks that quarantining their fish does not benefit their health. I spent nothing but considerable time in this thread detailing exactly how to do a correct quarantine. I have never stated that fish willl die if not quarantined. I am not misleading anyone. Perhaps you are the one who should be careful about what information you provide to others, especially when it can be proven easily false by simply looking at the posts made in this thread.

lol, Wow...you win!
Welcome to the hobby, now go buy a 75 gallon tub....guess Home Depot, good luck finding one that won't be compromised when filled for over a week straight, rig up a HOB filter, and just fill it with old tank water....75 gallons of old tank water....big waterchange, but just take it down after 6 weeks....you can store it in the garage, if you have one, on a high sturdy stand, so your kids won't play in it...btw, buy double the salt, an extra heater, and spend all your free time putting this up and down every time you buy a fish.....all this work may keep people from overstocking their tanks....

Sounds like the biggest headache in the world...the reason being...I've done it! Good luck on holding a full-time job, spending time with your children, family, and wife.....and having any time to do anything else.....nothing I am going to say will change you....nothing you are going to say will change me....this is fun!

I think you are exagerating quite a bit. I have done this also, and it takes very little time. I spent 1 hour setting up the tub quarantine. Did no water changes for the entire quarantine period. Drained and stored the quarantine tub in 1 hour. Fed and top offed the quarantine daily which took about 10 minutes at most. If you have no time to see your family with that effort, then there is another cause.

 

[bur01014]

stop telling people if they don't QT their fish, they will die.

I have never told people they have to quarantine their fish.

Your are right that many get emotional about this topic because so many fish die as result of not quarantining.

They get parasites in their displays, and fish die needlessly based on following misinformation. If you want to risk your fish that is your choice, but please do not risk other peoples by passing off misinformation.

:reading:

 

[bur01014]

btw, you edit your posts too much.....I go back to respond to something strange you said and its gone!:thumbsup:

 

[Pallobi]

If any of your tanks are ich-less...which I doubt they are and there is no way for you to prove this, it is a miracle and it won't last. Any inverts you buy and yes I assume you will eventually buy some because they just don't last long....will bring ich into your system. You can't possibly dry them out completely so there is not one micro droplet on them. Free swimming ich can and will easily get into your system. I don't know of a tank that doesn't have ich.....we can argue about this all night, but its my word against others.....there is little research done on common parasites found in home kept reef fish.....any that have been done lack compelling evidence, contain bias, confounding, etc......again, I have had several of my fish get ich and never has any of them died.....clean water and good nutrition.....I have done the QT route....I am still waiting to see some pics of some of these QTers.....let me see those little 29 gallon tanks with HOB filters and some PVC....sounds like nothing but a torture chamber for your fish with some white spots that WILL KILL! Don't get me started on black ich either....lol, simply harmless, your fish will survive if cared for properly and if you have a stable environment.

dont be silly, of course i can have an ich free tank if i have and i have had taken the necessary steps... if it has no way to get in, it wont be in there... again, dry rock, dry sand, fresh salt water and proper QT, WILL ensure no ich...

and what you "doubt" and what is, does not need to necessarily be the same thing... heaven forbid someone might actually be right and you may actually be wrong...

 

[Idle Moor]

I find it somewhat offensive and morally bankrupt when people act as if they are doing so for the fish's benefit.

For the fishes benefit? If it was all about the fish we would leave them in the ocean where they belong, and where life would be "nasty, brutish, and short". They would be constantly predated and parasitized. But they would be a proper part of the food chain and have hope of passing on their genes, which is what being alive is about to most animals. Is it better for them to be stuck in a tiny box (and allllll tanks are tiny, compared to natural habitat, tangs or no they are still like a dire wolf in a Manhattan apartment) and be (yay!) "ich-free" while still being, for genetic purposes, dead? We probably should leave morals, whatever that means, out of this argument, I think. And please don't be offended. It's possible that some pple, including me, believe it is better to skip the QT and that is their perogative.

I think the answer of what is best comes down to what sort of aquarium (reef or no) the fish is going into, and the ability and willingness of the person to provide "adequate" QT facilities. Should pple who cannot or will not provide those facilities just get out of the hobby? Maybe - what do you think Stuart60611?. But then maybe all of us should. Again, we are doing the fish no favors here - let's disabuse ourselves of that notion and not try to morally defend an indefensible position.

 

[Nanz]

This is absolutely and unequivocally untrue. Crypt can and does kill fish. The most common way crypt kills fish is the parasite attaches in mass to the gills. The parasite while feeding does damage to the gills causing the fish to die. In this context, fish do not die from a secondary infection or complications from crypt, but the death of the fish is proximately caused by the crypt parasite damaging the gills. The increased respiration that is sometimes seen with fish infected with crypt is generally indication that the crypt parasite is negatively affecting the gills. Also, I have treated many fish with cupramine. If done correctly, virtually all fish tolerate the treatment very well, behaive normally, and eat throughout treatment. Your assertion that the use of copper nearly kill the fish is plainly untrue. Numerous people here have done so without a problem. Most people kill their fish in quarantine by not having adequate qurantine facilities, mature biological filter in quarantine, and misapplication of medicine (adding too much cupramine too fast). If you have a large enough quarantine, mature biological filter in quarantine, stay on top of ammonia and do water changes, and properly dose medicine you will rarely, if ever, loose fish in quarantine unless you purchase a very sick fish. People who try to quarantine fish in very small systems that were just set up usually run into trouble. People think that it is difficult or expensive to have a large quarantine. This is also untrue. You can purchase a plastic tub at walmart to hold about 100 gallons of water for well under $50.00. All you need is a small filter and you are good to go. Total cost well under $100.00. Moreover, you can store the tub out of the way very easily when not in use. All you need to do is keep your filter sponge for quarantine in your display at all times. To immediately set up the quarantine with a mature biological filter all you need to do is fill the tub with tank water and use the sponge which is fully mature with filtering bacteria. Not difficult, expensive, or involve taking up a lot of space. No good reason not to do so. Provided you have a large enough quarantine, all fish will benefit from being in quarantine, rather than being placed directly in the display, even when they do not have any parasite or disease. Quarantine gives the fish time to feed and live in complete peace without any stress from other fish. Remember, when you purchase a fish it has gone through quite a trip and a great deal of stress between being taken from the ocean and geting to your home. Moreover, during this period, most fish have not been fed well. Quarantine gives you a chance to fatten up the fish in a quiet calm surounding so that it can more easily compete for food with your other fish once added to the display. Moreover, whenever you add a new fish to the display many fish already living in the display will interpret the new fish as an intruder and show aggession toward the new arrival. As such, it can often be important the the new arrival is well fed, fattened up, and in good condition before you expose the new arrival to this aggression from existing fish in your display, or the new arrival may not be strong enough to handle the aggression. If you approach it right, there is absolutely no valid reason not to quarantine fish, and fish will benefit from it and rarely, if ever, die in quarantine.

I agree 100%. Great write up!

 

[Nanz]

I risk disease or pests in my display tank because it is much less risk than the stress and disease of a QT, which can all be pointless when adding a CUC, since there is no safe way to treat/QT inverts....thus, disease is introduced.

This is why is it highly looked down upon when an LFS keeps their fish in copper based systems....yes, there is less disease, but their immunity is MUCH MUCH weaker (side effect of treatment), so when disease does come (yes it will, sooner or later, some form of disease will enter your tank), or stress...your disease free fish will more readily die.

BTW- yes, I did mention size of QT causes stress on fish....did I mention anything about LFS tank sizes? NO....but I can now...yes small LFS holding tanks are quite stressful....the only positive aspect to them is that water quality is usually kept pristine because of the constant change over (good luck on WQ with no LR and a small HOB filter)....fish are shipped in plastic bags, and can live in plastic bags for days... doesn't mean it isn't stressful....as for fish in an LFS for several months in a small holding tank.. The fish won't last.....or it's chances are decreased....hence the reason why we should avoid having tangs in 55 gallon tanks, has it worked? yes, but your chances are decreased. I do things in this hobby that likely increase my chances for success....we all will inevidably have problems sooner or later.

Sorry I was using the LFS tank size as a comparison. I never said you mentioned it.

Even if the fish has no disease or parasites in QT it gives the fish a chance to become stronger before it is introduced into the display tank. Once it is introduced into the display tank it will have to find its own sleeping spot and become part of your tank's community. If you put an already stressed fish in that environment your most definitely asking for problems. I would rely more on prevention than luck.

 

[Palting]

The regal is eating pallets just fine. It is strange that sometimes I see a lot of spots in the evening and sometimes much less in the morning.

I just lost the Flagfin whom I purchased along with the Regal (she eats pallets in the Lfs.)

All my other 7 fish which I have had them for 5 - 8 years have not a single spot.

I plan to do hypo salinity treatment if other fish start to show spots.

I do have a big 6 ft fiber glass which I kept all the fish while I cook the old rocks. They were doing fine for 3 months.

When I came back from 10 days vacation (the fish is tended by my mother with an auto-feeder),10 fish dead after keeping them for at least 5 years including a Powder blue, Flame angel, Flame hawk, Porter angel, Majestic angel and Cornate angel. Even strong fish such as Bangle cardinal, yellowtail damsels, Royal Gramma and percula clown died some I had since the beginning of the hobby.

I suppose maybe it was over crowded with 23 fish but the tank has almost 500 GL of water and filled with old rocks and I even uses my H&S A200 1260X2 skimmer.

By the way, the 10 ft tank has just been setup and running for 2 weeks but all the rocks were cooked for 3 months. I had to make the swift move because I am afraid of loosing more fish in the big QT tank. Currently I am "cooking" the QT tank pitch black after 100% water change to get ready for next fish purchase.

Just to clarify:
You have a 10 foot tank that is fish only, with Ich. It is only 2 weeks old?
You have a 6 foot tank that killed several fish. This is where the fish with Ich that is in your 10 foot tank came from. You did a 100% water change, and are currently "cooking" it? How are you "cooking" it.

 

[Stuart60611]

For the fishes benefit? If it was all about the fish we would leave them in the ocean where they belong, and where life would be "nasty, brutish, and short". They would be constantly predated and parasitized. But they would be a proper part of the food chain and have hope of passing on their genes, which is what being alive is about to most animals. Is it better for them to be stuck in a tiny box (and allllll tanks are tiny, compared to natural habitat, tangs or no they are still like a dire wolf in a Manhattan apartment) and be (yay!) "ich-free" while still being, for genetic purposes, dead? We probably should leave morals, whatever that means, out of this argument, I think. And please don't be offended. It's possible that some pple, including me, believe it is better to skip the QT and that is their perogative.

I think the answer of what is best comes down to what sort of aquarium (reef or no) the fish is going into, and the ability and willingness of the person to provide "adequate" QT facilities. Should pple who cannot or will not provide those facilities just get out of the hobby? Maybe - what do you think Stuart60611?. But then maybe all of us should. Again, we are doing the fish no favors here - let's disabuse ourselves of that notion and not try to morally defend an indefensible position.

I cannot argue with your point that it is certainly in the fishs' best interest to leave them in the ocean and not place them in our little glass boxes for our entertainment. However, once we choose to do so, it is my strong view that our ethical and moral obligations to the fish increase and are not eliminated. If we are going to capture fish for our entertainment, then I submit we have a moral obligation to provide the fish with appropriate living conditions and health care. Dogs used to be wild and live free roaming in packs in nature. Now, over the centuries, dogs have pretty much been domesticated, and you rarely see dogs living in nature in packs as they did many hundreds of years ago. We domesticated and indeed engaged in controlled breeding of dogs for our benefit. Nobody credibly argues that because our domestication of dogs was immoral that we no longer have any moral obligations to properly care for the dogs in our care. Why would not the same hold true for fish?

I think this argument is particularlly forceful as it relates to ich. Ich is present in the ocean, and many fish have a few parasites attached to them all the time while in the ocean and never have any material health problems from it. Ich has evolved to become very adept at finding a host fish (studies have been conducted which show that ich has developed suprisingly good senses to find a host fish). This adaptation is critical to the survival of the ich parasite because in the vastness of the ocean it is no easy task at all for ich to find a host. Now in our tiny glass boxes, ich can breed in extremely high densities (much higher densities than in the ocean) and find a host fish virtually every time it muliplies because of the small water volume and ichs' excellent ability at finding a host. Fish have no where to hide from the parasite. We have created a situation by placing fish in a glass box which unnaturally gives the ich parasite a much greater probability of being lethal to our fish, or at bare minimum, infest our fish to such an unnaturally high degree that it greatly reduces the health of the fish. Since we created this unnatural health problem with ich merely so that we can be entertained by fish, do we not owe the fish reasonable measures to counter the unnatural health problem we created?

 

[Idle Moor]

Well again the problem with ethics and morals is that it always comes down to who's ethics and who's morals are you talking about? U may think it is unethical and immoral to not qt. Or to not qt for at least 4 wks, or in a tank less than 100 gallons. I may disagree but think it is immoral and unethical to keep a dog locked up in an apt or even a house all day while I'm at work. Or for two men to have sex together. Best to leave ethics and morals out of the discussion.

I would rather see some aggregate data about survival rates vs quarantine time with quarantine conditions as well as final DT conditions thrown in, as well as everything else that can affect survival, so that I can make a judgment and balance that w MY willingness to do all that is required to execute an adequate quarantine (or not), or just get out of the hobby altogether.

 

[Stuart60611]

Well again the problem with ethics and morals is that it always comes down to who's ethics and who's morals are you talking about? U may think it is unethical and immoral to not qt. Or to not qt for at least 4 wks, or in a tank less than 100 gallons. I may disagree but think it is immoral and unethical to keep a dog locked up in an apt or even a house all day while I'm at work. Or for two men to have sex together. Best to leave ethics and morals out of the discussion.

I would rather see some aggregate data about survival rates vs quarantine time with quarantine conditions as well as final DT conditions thrown in, as well as everything else that can affect survival, so that I can make a judgment and balance that w MY willingness to do all that is required to execute an adequate quarantine (or not), or just get out of the hobby altogether.

Fair point. However, as I stated above, such information which has been assembled for literally decades already exists. Every recognized authority, published article, book, public aquarium, and zoo vigorously qurantine every fish. They have unanimously taken this postion for many years and feel it is the only appropriate course of action. No recognized authority in the hobby states otherwise. I think that is sufficient evidense to support the conclusion that this is the appropriate course of action.

 

[Idle Moor]

Perhaps they do and that's fine as it's their decision. I may agree if I had the money invested and the facilities available that they do. Or I may disagree based on my positive experiences with putting fish directly into a reef aquarium. But either way I've made a decision that for me I think is best. It is a compromise like all decisions, including those made by the experts and public aquariums as they have to decide how long to quarantine and under what conditions. But none of these decisions I would consider immoral or unethical.

 

[Stuart60611]

Perhaps they do and that's fine as it's their decision. I may agree if I had the money invested and the facilities available that they do. Or I may disagree based on my positive experiences with putting fish directly into a reef aquarium. But either way I've made a decision that for me I think is best. It is a compromise like all decisions, including those made by the experts and public aquariums as they have to decide how long to quarantine and under what conditions. But none of these decisions I would consider immoral or unethical.

Well, remember, these authorities are not merely public aquariums or zoos, but authorties consisting of everyday hobbyiests-- many of whom use pretty bare bones and inexpensive quarantine systems. As I stated above, I do not think anyone is unethical just because they do not quarantine their fish. I absolutely do believe that it is unethical to publish postings here advising others not to quarantine their fish because you have learned through your years of experience that it is better not to quarantine when all recognized authorities clearly state otherwise. The immorality here is that you are inducing less experienced hobbyiests to follow your lead under false pretenses, thereby literally causing others to unknowingly risk the very lives of their pets. You want to make a knowing and purposeful decission for yourself not to quarantine, then that is your choice. It is immoral to induce others to follow your lead under the false appearance that this is what experienced aquarists do, particularlly when knowing all, and not just some, of the vast amounts of data points the other direction.

 

[Idle Moor]

Then we continue to absolutely disagree, and I am pretty damned insulted by your statement about my "guise that I am an experienced aquarist", as well as many of your other statements. What gives you the right? The same delusion that give you the right to pass moral and ethical judgment I expect. I don't think we'd get along well in real life somehow. I'm done with this one thanks.

 

[steelhead77]

Well, remember, these authorities are not merely public aquariums or zoos, but authorties consisting of everyday hobbyiests-- many of whom use pretty bare bones and inexpensive quarantine systems. As I stated above, I do not think anyone is unethical just because they do not quarantine their fish. I absolutely do believe that it is unethical to publish postings here advising others not to quarantine their fish because you have learned through your years of experience that it is better not to quarantine when all recognized authorities clearly state otherwise. The immorality here is that you are inducing less experienced hobbyiests to follow your lead under false pretenses, thereby literally causing others to unknowingly risk the very lives of their pets. You want to make a knowing and purposeful decission for yourself not to quarantine, then that is your choice. It is immoral to induce others to follow your lead under the guise that you are an experienced aquarist who knows that it is better not to quarantine, particularlly when all, and not just some, of the vast amounts of data points the other direction.

Uhhh.... ALL the data does not point in that direction at all. As an authoritative, everyday hobbyist, I have my own data, as do others here, that suggests that QT does indeed stress fish and in fact can kill fish - just read some of the other threads on this subject lately. My data also suggests that fish can and will fight off the ich parasite and that a tank can be, and will be ich free, or fish will develop immunity, after a certain period of time. Maybe I should publish my data so that you and others can use it as a data point.
I do not think it is immoral to tell people that there is another side to the argument of QT vs no QT and I resent this characterization of people you disagree with. Especially when some data suggests that QT, if done improperly, can indeed kill fish. Why do you have a problem with providing both sides of an argument? Your point of view is not so unstable that it cannot withstand scrutiny. Neither is the other point of view. Most people here are grown-ups and can make rational decisions based on others experiences as well as the facts. Like others have stated, it can be argued that keeping wild fish at all is immoral - so please get off your high horse and quit telling the rest of us what your version of morality is.

 

[Stuart60611]

Idle Moor and Steelhead77:

I will respond, without geting personal, by saying I have just as much right to challenge those who advise others here not to quarantine in what I consider a misleading way as immoral as such people have the right to give this kind of advice to others here. That is my view. I have a right to voice my view in just the same way that you both get to voice your view. You do not like the fact that I labled certain behavior immoral. I do not like the fact that some engage in behavior that I find immoral. Freedom allows both viewpoints to co-exist. Civil discourse generally involves discussing the same without any personal attacks.

Oh, and Idle Moor, your welcome.:wavehand:

 

[lordofthereef]

ARRGGHHH!! Please stop spreading this kind of stuff! Ich is NOT a death sentence! My Purple Tang had a SEVERE case of ich (see pic) and he survived just fine with no treatment, other than UV, and no other fish came down with it in a 72 gallon tank. Fish can and do survive bouts with ich everyday.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/steelhead77/3526844642/" title="Prince_Ich2 by steelhead77, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3402/3526844642_841f746b6a.jpg" width="500" height="343" alt="Prince_Ich2" /></a>

This was almost two years and two tank upgrades ago, so before people start flaming me and tell me that ich is still in the tank and all it takes is a little stress to infect and kill everything, I call BS. They have been stressed. I am convinced that ich is no longer in my tank OR my fish have immunity, but I have added about nine other fish since this pic (including several Tangs) and NONE have come down with ich. So I lean toward there is no ich in my tank. Keep you water params pristine, and as long as the fish is swimming and eating normal, wait and see what happens.

Sell that baby as a gem tang to some sucker that will believe you!

Only kidding. That's a pretty hardcore infestation IMO. I commend you (and your fish) for coming out on top!

 

[lordofthereef]

So I actually read through this thread and am pretty disappointed. People are arguing back and forth about whether a QT is good, bad, mandatory, moral or immoral. Why aren't you working on helping the guy who has the problem in the first place? Regardless of what you think about a quarantine tank, a quarantine obviously didn't happen in the OP's case. Spend your time alleviating the problem. Nobody over the internet could care less if you are morally just or not...