reef / non-reef safe same system

[speedstar]

Anyone have any experience with a same system reef/nonreef safe tank. The thought is an 8' long tank 30 inches wide that would have a divider / spillover into the non reef safe side at about the 3 foot mark. The reef side would the returns and also have a closed loop system to increase flow on that area.

So the reef side would spill over to the non reef side that would have the drains.

Kinda like a giant fuge, but in this case it would be for non reef safe fish.

Thoughts if this could work?

 

[Joe0813]

only issue I see is its going to limit the size of fish you can get since the tank would be split in half

 

[Mebbid]

The biggest thing that would irritate me is the lighting, either you have to invest a ton of money into lighting that you aren't gonna use over the non reef side, or use different lights over the non reef side making half of the tank significantly dimmer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[billdogg]

IME many “non reef safe” fish tend to be messy eaters and/or create large amounts of waste that your reef won’t like.

 

[der_wille_zur_macht]

"Non reef safe" is a terrible, terrible phrase that we need to collectively give up. Fish labeled as such may:

1. Eat coral,
i. Just softies
ii. Just SPS
iii. Just fleshy LPS
2. Eat snails
3. Eat shrimp
4. Eat smaller fish
5. Eat clams
6. Eat feather dusters
7. Are just generally very aggressive
8. Any combination of the above

If you have no clams or LPS then a "non reef safe" fish that eats those things is totally safe for you. If you have no snails, or you don't care if they're eaten, same.

"Non reef safe" is, really, just a very lazy way of saying "I don't care to learn about the actual specific dietary needs of this fish." rather than using such a broad label, we should really be specific and research individual species and their needs, in order to understand compatability with the livestock we want to keep.