oldtime reefing on the cheap

[SDguy]

Ooo, that's right. Made it look so....scientific

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9326378#post9326378 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SDguy
Oh yeah, wasn't that published by Seachem?

It was Aquarium Systems. I think you guys are confusing Seacure with Seachem.

 

[Misled]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9326465#post9326465 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Peter Eichler
It was Aquarium Systems. I think you guys are confusing Seacure with Seachem.

What do you expect, I told you we'd be showing our age! :rolleye1:

 

[Peter Eichler]

Anyone else remember Fishnet on Compuserve? I think might have actually been where people got all up in arms about me calling out Thiel.

 

[SDguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9326507#post9326507 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jllndmb
What do you expect, I told you we'd be showing our age! :rolleye1:

Sorry, still shaking some dust out of one ear

 

[Peter Eichler]

I just went through some old issues of Marine Reef from 1988. It's quite the funny read now with all the mentions of redox potential, disolved oxygen, oxygen reactors, and the importance of keeping your DKH over 15.

 

[gregbot9000]

so do you think in 10-15 years, the methods that we use today will be incorrect. we will look back and say "what the heck were we thinking."

 

[SDguy]

Well, I think methods will be improved upon. There was nothing particularly awful about U/G filters or N.O. lights for the species I kept. I personally think the next big step will be keeping heterotrophic coral tanks.

 

[Misled]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9327266#post9327266 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gregbot9000
so do you think in 10-15 years, the methods that we use today will be incorrect. we will look back and say "what the heck were we thinking."

I don't think we'll become incorrect, I think there will be advances. Like in my previous post algae scrubbers were similar to a sump with fuge. Skimmers have been improved since then but the application is the same. There isn't much we can't keep now, the trouble is normally because of the size tanks we try to keep. Think about a tang in a 150gal. In the wild, how long do you think he would stay in a space that small!

 

[tom sumter]

I had my first marine tank in 1982 (I was 11), when my dad bought me a 20-gallon setup as I was healing from a bus wreck. A few days later he filled the tank with a couple of damsels, and angelfish of some sort, and a seahorse. Needless to say, only one of the fish, a damsel, made it very far.

Then in 1991 I set up my idea of a "reef" which consisted of dead rock topped by dead coral skeletons. Hard to believe I used to prefer that look over a "natural" reef. I didn't know any better. After experimenting with a 20-gallon, I bought a 75-gallon with a wet-dry filter. I let the tank cycle and proceeded to buy the best-looking fish in the store -- a 4" GORGEOUS Passer Angel. That fish was so mean, so tough, that I could never house another fish in the tank with him. Lesson learned: go with peaceful fish if you want a community. That Angel lived until around 2001, then I tore down the tank.

Now I'm up to speed: quality skimmer, metal halides, plenty of live rock, everything I didn't have before.

 

[Paul B]

By the time the early 90s hit I was rejoicing in nothing more than a skimmer and some live rock for filtration and the introduction of less expensive and fewer additives like Kent and Seachem.

Thats my reef now except I don't use Seachem or anything else.
I remember Compuserve but I started with salt in the sixtees so there was no computers. I still have about ten issues of
"The Marine Aquarist" which were published in black and white. The only thing in them is some common damsels.
I also still use my UG filter only now it is run in reverse.
You are correct about the advancement of knowledge though. I feel that now I can keep any fish for it's normal lifespan.
Paul

 

[Putawaywet]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9326679#post9326679 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Peter Eichler
Anyone else remember Fishnet on Compuserve? I think might have actually been where people got all up in arms about me calling out Thiel.

Sure do! And wasn't it accessible only if you had the upgraded membership? I distinctly remember finding out that a coworker had the deluxe membership and how I disappeared for hours surfing all the posts. Oh wait... guess things haven't changed all that much after all....

And what about undersized, poorly made skimmers that used limestone air diffusers that slowly rotted away in like a month?

Those new-fangled german 10K MH bulbs that were shunned by purists as being TOO BLUE!

Seeing an ad for some cool looking piece of equipment in the back of one of the aquarium mags and then sending a SASE along with a couple bucks for a catalog. People don't know how good they have being able to order stuff over the internet and having it on their doorstep in a week or two.

Brett

 

[Paul B]

I remember there was a place named "Aquarium Stock Company" in Manhattan around the corner from the Trade Center that sold newborn sea turtles. I am glad that never took off, but I do have to admit, I almost bought one. What a mistake that would have been.

 

[SDguy]

Oh boy, let's not even get into the inappropriate animals LFS used to sell...from the blue ring octopi, to the nautilus, to the "assorted" butterflies (Meyer, ornate, melons), to the sawfish :eek1: :eek1:

 

[Sk8r]

Medusa worms, sea apples, basket stars, sea pens,---sea fans---butterflies, nudibranchs, anything catchable. Never a word about mandarins needing pods. Mine lived, a pair of them with scooter blennies, in a 100g built from dead rock, so I was doing something right. Didn't have luck with the medusa worm, which headed persistently for the downflow and finally made it. Sigh. Hope sprang eternal that these creatures would live, the more fool I.

Re things we're doing now we may not do in future---I still think we're keeping the dkh too high. I prefer 8.3.

 

[O'Man]

My first tank was a 5 gallon-hex with an under gravel filter & a Dolomite substrate. Water was dechlorinated tap water. The tank had a rust-colored lava rock with a hole in it. The tank housed 1 tomato clown, 1 large feather duster and a very white sebae anemone. After about 6 months, I did an upgrade to a 20 long. I moved everything including the substrate and added more dolomite. Two dead coral skeletons, and away I went.
I had that anemone for 2 years, my light was a 20 watt Vita-light and I used to hand feed that nem 1 freeze dried krill every other day. Eventually I upgraded to a 38g long with three 30 watt NO bulbs, a silica sand substrate and a (The Latest & Greatest) HOB Biologic Wet-Dry filter. I still remember being excited when "grass" began to grow in the sand :lol: Now that I had lights aglae grew & I did not need to feed my nem anymore, he could get all he needed from light Needless to say my nem shrank & disappeared. I also remember adding Hydrogen Peroxide to the water to help oxygenate it.

Later on I went through the ORP controller & Ozone generator to fight that hair algae I was excited to see.

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9329864#post9329864 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SDguy
Oh boy, let's not even get into the inappropriate animals LFS used to sell...from the blue ring octopi, to the nautilus, to the "assorted" butterflies (Meyer, ornate, melons), to the sawfish :eek1: :eek1:

I don't think we've advanced a whole lot as far as that goes... I still see stuff that will almost certainly die far too often. Saw a Nautilus not long ago in a store that also had just gotten about a dozen Moorish Idols, some Ribbon eels, and some flying fish.

I made a list of difficult "impossoble" to keep species on aqualink some years ago and a large majority of them still apply. The list is on here somewhere and one of these days I'll actually complete it.