Some interesting opinions at last nights meeting.

[robertloop]

Hello group,

I heard some interesting points made last night about reef keeping! I have to respectfully disagree with most of what I heard last night.

First one: "Dont use carbon in a reef tank"

This is an old debate with lots of information on both sides of the spectrum. There was a variety of points made on why "not" to use carbon. No body said anything about the benefits. Not to mention, many of the broad statements made, where in my opinion... completely false. When I replace my carbon there is no noticable drop in PH,KH, or CA. BUT the water is hands down NOTICABLY clearer by the next day/morning. So, to say that carbon sucks up all chemicals seems to be incorrect. For some reason, far more water clouding arganics bind to the carbon than ca,kh suppliments. I do need to admit however. I've been running carbon since 1992.

Second: "Heavy Skimming is bad" and/or "it removes just as much good stuff as bad" eg...trace elements.

I completely disagree with this as well. Please see this month and last months "tank of the month" winners. These guys are achieving the holy grail of reef tank success? Most of them also run carbon... ALOT of it. I dont believe that skimming pulls out "that much" trace elements guys. If that was the case........ see above. Actually. If you were to pour over many months of TOTM winners, you will find lots of very high dollar skimmers and lots of amazingly successful reef tanks.

A saw a few new reefers in there scratching thier heads. Just wanted to offer a different opinion.

All that being said. I dont attend alot of meetings so I dont know the etiquette. I dont know when topics are open for any "debate" and did not want to intrupt the speaker(s). I hope I dont sound disrespectful.


Happy reefing,

Robert

 

[kdblove_99]

I agree with you Robert and i think that could be an issue just having one person do Q&A you only get his opinions which i also disagree with.

I run carbon and skim as much as possible

 

[funman1]

There are MANY successful methods of running a tank.
There is no one way, what works for you MAY work for someone else, or MAY not..

I stopped running carbon about a year or so ago, and have to say I like what I see better. So I have stopped using it on my tanks unless I have a NEED to run it. (IE: something needs to be removed)
Also when my skimmer broke down for 2 weeks I noticed the corals looked MUCH happier with better colors and polyp extension, but the water was kind of murky after 2 weeks..

So While yes I still run a skimmer, I think it was better for my corals without it.. It's a balance between aesthetics and coral happiness.

If you have a different opinion please feel free to chime in, during Q and A. There is no one correct way to get optimal results in a tank, and switching what you are doing if you have less than desirable results is recommended.

Try running your tank for a month without carbon and see if you notice a positive or negative impact.
Carbon might work well for your tank, but not be needed on others..

For every PERFECT tank running ONE way.
I can find another PERFECT tank doing the OPPOSITE with the same results.

Try different things until you find what works BEST for your tank.
But if you don't try other things then you won't know how much better (Or worse) your tank could be..

 

[mpoletti]

There has always been debate over these issues. I skim and just added another reactor to run carbon. I have always had a carbon bag in my sump baffle.

I believe it is a personal choice, but I also dose trace elements in the form of reef solution to replace what gets skimmed out.

 

[airinhere]

I understand what was being said about skimming and carbon. What was not said was the context to interpret the results people experience. If I remember correctly, that was the overall tone of Buces monolouge. (He was talking about the results Borneman was acheiving and the advice he was providing in his writings).

Heavy skimming will remove beneficial things from our tanks along with the unwanted materials. It is an indscriminate method of water quality maintenance. The wonderful results some people achieve with heavy skimming is a result of their knowing what is needed to be reintroduced to the tank and manually putting those needed things back into the water on a regular schedule. They are later removed by the skimming and you have to dose again.

Carbon is pretty much the same thing. It doesnt care if you want to leave something in the water. However, I understand it has a more limited ability to remove things from the water and thus, it is easier to compensate for. Water clarity also becomes a major factor here since many of us like to look at our tanks, and clear water makes them look nicer.

Regarless of what manner of nutrient removal you use, You must have some method of removing nutrients from your system. Otherwise they build up and rise to dangerous levels over time.

For myself, I run skimmerless, I do use carbon 24-7 (in a nylon sack), I run phos-guard (soon to be GFO) in a nylon sack, I run a lighted refugium with chaetoomorpha and I do frequent water changes around 20%.

I think most cheap skimmers are more trouble than they are worth and I prefer other more selective methods of nutrient removal.

I choose to use carbon to clarify my water. I understand it is supposed to absorb chemicals from my tank. I dose Iodine and do frequent water changes to keep my levels up where I feel they should be.

I use a lighted refugium loaded with chaeto (thanks Steve) as my primary means of nutrient removal. It is a very selective method of nutrient removal.

I do run phos guard (soon to be GFO). I overfeed and do not thaw my frozen food, So I get phosphates. Phos guard removes that. I am working out the kinks in using GFO (it has its issues as well) But I will incorporate that into my tanks.

My real secret weapon is frequent large water changes. Nothing else that I do has such a dramatic impact on my tanks as changing out 20% of my water.

I think people got involved in the discussion and forgot the main issue (at that time) was not about individual styles or methods of nutrient removal, but about context for methods of nutrient removal.

 

[Justin74]

I too was in disagreeance with some of the information passed around.

And not so much technically in disagreeance with some information here, but would rather challenge some of the information being passed around as matter of factly.

First off regarding skimmers and the supposed essential elements they pull. What exactly was pulled guys? Iodine, strontium, magnesium, what? Ok, now how much of it was actually pulled out? How much is still in the tank? I would love to see the answer!!

Without knowing these answers all arguments and anecdotes regarding this are moot. Period.

Also how Ozone was touched upon. Not that I entirely disagree, but I dont think anymore of an extreme at "killing everything" than UV is which also "kills everything".

Me personally I dont use ozone or UV, and presently have both tanks, one with a skimmer and one without. However on the tank I dont use a skimmer I do have a refugium and do run carbon, which some have forgot to mention they too use as a needed form of exportation, even moreso in absence of skimmer or other mechanical filtration.

Although this was explained regarding more ways than one to do things, it was touched upon lightly and more emphasis was put on the speakers personal experience as being the right way, again even though it was explained there are alternative methods, it didnt quite come across as such.
In fact my wife and stepdaughter were really taken back and turned off from the Q&A, and I had happen to step out for a smoke but when I came back they seemed quite bothered and almost offende, and said they felt bad for those that raised there hands, later I found out to be pbetito, regarding the 400w light system

I explained to them that I too understood Bruce's conviction regarding the topic as it is information easily misconstrued if not taken in it's entirety. She said she understood that, but felt the delivery was too aggressive.

I wanted her to join RC and post as an outsiders opinion can be refreshing, but she wasnt down for talking fish anymore
Just some stuff to think about.

-Justin

 

[pbetito]

I just feel that there is more than one way to skin a cat, especially on this hobby. I was dissappointed by the way the Q and A session went last night as well.

 

[kdblove_99]

I agree. The way Bruce answered the questions it was like that was the only way to do things that his way is right. Probably not how he meant it but it sure came off that way.

I know Paul and know he is laid back and probably didn’t think too much of it but I also found it offensive the way Bruce answered him. If this had been a new person I doubt they would ever come back.


All Paul said was that Karl’s tank is one of the most beautiful tanks around and that he used the 400W he never said that 400W bulbs are the only way to go and that every person will get the best results from 400W halides. Someone just asked about 400W halides and Paul told them about Karl’s tank

Bruce sorry this is not to rip on or demean you at all and I do apologize if it comes off that way it is not my intent. But to maybe let you know how you are being heard

 

[dots]

All of these "theories" and "rules" we have in this hobby are not set in stone and it ultimatly depends on the specific application and intended use of the product/equipment/procedure.

We are still learning about how/why the ocean works and are trying to do so on limited scales and with limited biodiversity in our tanks.

Its a hard thing to swallow, but once you realize that there is more than one way to skin a cat, remember that 20 years ago SPS could not be kept alive due to our lack of insite to thier requirements, and use the natural ocean only as a "guide" that is not to be 100% copied when creating your man made reef, the less stressfull and confusing it will be.

In the grand scheme of things, we know just enough to get ourselves into trouble and should never quit experimenting and trying different techniques, or else the hobby will not learn and advance.

Personal opinions, brand loyalty, and proven track records do hold value in guidance of the uninformed because they offer some clearcut and straight forward answers when first starting off. This guidance is intended to avoid larger problems that could go unforseen for quite a long time to the uninformed, (though not there for the discussion or what events took place), I can see this to be the rationale behind the statements. In addition, helping with the ultimate bottom line, COST.

If you remember the above, realize there are ALWAYS exceptions, and that the hobby, (and RC especially), always has the unwritten IMO, (In My Opinion), attached to every statement one makes.........well you get the point.

This hobby is not for the insta-reef type nor the cookbook recipe types of people as none of our methods are truly proven in the long term. Unfortunatly, with strong opinions and theories mixed in with some real irrefutable science, its hard to seperate fact from opinion.

We need to be critical thinkers when you hear "rules" and determine the reasoning behind them and see if it applies to our application. As well, never forget the most important question.....Why?

Short and sweet reply: Different strokes for different folks, every tank is different, take it or leave it.......after all its your tank, right?

As well, its perfectly alright to disagree, scientists do it all the time, eventually enough is learned and one can say....."See, I told you so!!!!"

 

[wpnorton]

Bruce does this for a living....He's seen more tank set-ups than most of the members (Maybe not all, but most) and is willing to share his experiences...In this hobby, that's golden! Not that he's always right or wrong, but it adds to the decision making process when dealing with my personal tanks. We take it all in for consideration. His opinions were not presented as absolutes at all, just his experiences. I tend to believe that when your results dictate your paycheck, you tend to pay a little more attention to your methods. THANKS Bruce...I appreciated your input and willingness to step forward and host the activities. Good on you!

 

[MandM]

One of the frustrating things about starting in this hobby is trying to follow advice from several people who could all be considered experts. You will often find more opinions than people in one of these debates. Some of the experts can be quite passionate about their own way of reef keeping. Very rarely is there any real disrespect, though it can sound abrasive to a newcomer when strong opinions are exchanged. I think we need to remind the members that differing opinions are part of the hobby and why we have had so much advancement in the keeping of corals.

I think the best advice i got early in the hobby was to find a person in the club who YOU think has a really cool tank with long term success and is willing to guide you. Follow their advice and methods until you are having success on your own. Then you can try out some of the methods that others have found successful.

I think it would be a good idea for our club to have sponsors for the new members, kind of like an AA sponsor! :lol: Not that you would call them from a bar at 2am but a guide for your first year in the hobby.

 

[robertloop]

MandM is suggeting we're all ADDICTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well. I suppose if acknowledgement is the first step..... "I'm a reef-aholic" and "My name is Robert" and dont forgett... "I haven't been dry for at least 10 years"

Whew! I feel so much better.

 

[CaptiveReefSystems]

Like I always try to preempt what I say is that this is what has worked for me. That does not mean that it will work for you. There are people that attend our meetings that are just starting out and they hang on every word that is said at our meetings. There is nothing right or wrong about this. Its just a fact. So when a blanket statement is made that 400 watt light produce the best SPS colors I have ever seen, you just might get some of these people to rush out and buy a 400 watt MH system to try to achieve the same result. There is only a 50/50 chance that they will achieve anything near similar.

All I ways trying to state, and I think I did it as well as I could, that 400 watt MH are not the single reason SPS corals have wonderful color.

About carbon, it has a purpose. I never said it did not. I just don't run carbon 24/7 like many people do. IMO, it removes things that you want in your water. Now if your water is real yellow, sure it will clear it up, but you might ask yourself, why is your water yellow.

I am not hear to wrestle to and end the debate over skimming, carbon and lighting. I just offer what I have experienced produced positive results.

Also, the meeting is not run by me nor is it a dictatorship. It is a forum to stimulate conversation. Anyone is more then welcome to share there experiences and what has worked for them. I welcome that information and that is why I joined the board to help facilitate the flow of information.

If you are not willing to speak up at the time of the discussion and question me or anyone else about a statement or potential fact, don't bring it to the forum here. I have little respect for those that want to trash someone on a forum when they are not willing to address the person face to face.

If anyone feels they would like to host the Q&A session, see me at the start of the meeting and it's all yours. I am not trying to have the last word, but if you cannot offer some positive criticism, maybe its best we end the hate mail towards Bruce.

If you want to take me to task on something I said, please e-mail me and I would be happy to share my views with you.

 

[MrMikeB]

I think we all can realize that this hobby is not a set science, and there are indeed many ways to get results - none of which is absolute. Personally I sometimes agree, other times disagree with the advice given. Rather than go into the merits of what was said/not said - I first would like to point out that it takes a lot for somebody to be up there and lead Q+A sessions, and for that I have to commend those who are willing to do the job. Surely opinions will differ, and personally, that is what I think makes the Q+A session so valuable - getting different perspectives.

With this in mind, and as a member of the newly elected Board - how would you all recommend the Q+A session go? I can think of a couple different formats that we can use to change things up a bit. A couple ideas:

Expert panel - say around 4-5 seasoned reefers from the club (we can rotate this) where questions are bounced off of.

Ask the Audience - All questions are answered by members in the audience, and the facilitator does just that - facilitates who is speaking.

Same style, but rotating facilitators - so we get a good mix of ideas/methods of delivery/etc.

Lets hear em!

 

[pbetito]

I was on the fence of whether or not to even post anymore here but I am most annoyed because I NEVER IN ANY CAPACITY SAID:

" So when a blanket statement is made that 400 watt light produce the best SPS colors I have ever seen,"

What I said was that Karl uses a system of 6 days a week at 5 hours a day with a day off. Then someone asked me what wattage he used and I said 400 watts. That has now been turned into the nonsense I was misquoted as saying above. In turn it makes it looks like I was giving irresponsible advice, which was not the case. I am not trying to attack anyone but please realize that when you misquote me, then criticize what I didn't say it is very unfair to me.

I have no problems with Bruce and feel that what Bruce does is very difficult and I certainly would not want to do it. I do however feel that for some reason the meeting Q&A came off as a bit too critical which is why this post came about. I agree with the persons above that it would be a good thing if questions can be answered by the group as a whole, drawing from many of the experts, instead of just one of them. Bruce has a GIANT wealth of knowledge but there are obviously many different ways to do a good job with a reef. If anyone gives what is considered by the masses bad advice, I am sure with this group 20 hands will go up to correct him/her I still feel Bruce should moderate as Mike said, he just needs to realize I am never wrong

 

[pbetito]

Bruce: I just reread your last post and hope you aren't taking this all to heart. I don't think people are trying to attack you or dump on Bruce. I just think the Q&A came off the wrong way. Maybe you misheard me, and maybe what I said didn't come off the way I thought it did. Please don't feel attacked by me, I consider you part of the same team. If I didn't feel as though I had a good rapport with you, I never would have said anything at all.

 

[MrMikeB]

I think I heard Paul say 400w bulbs = automatic reefing success! In fact, I was so excited about this holy grail of knowledge, I went out today and changed my 12g nano's 18w PC to a 19" lumenarc with a 400w MH bulb. Right away my orange percs are now turning black! I never would have guessed they were really black percs all along! See, already seeing the success! Thanks Paul!!



(disclaimer: No, I am not serious - please do not put a 400 watt MH on your nano or think it will turn your orange percs black - well at least not in a good way)

 

[pbetito]

Mike...YOU ARE SUCH MORON!!!! I told you to use 2 metal halides. Your corals are going to turn brown for sure... IDIOT!!!

 

[airinhere]

I think you clowns just burned up under the lighting. might want to check if their crispy or not......

And I agree that Bruce is doing a good job. He is used to speaking with authority about reefing topics and was in that mode last night. He was relating his methods that work. He was also trying to point out that many other methods do work, but regardless you have to have a context for why any method works.

There is no magic solution for anything in our tanks.

 

[Jareth]

I thought Btruce was pretty clear to give the impression that this is his opinion and there are others. He was adamant to defend his position, as I would be when I thought I knew the correct answer. But he did say it was his way not everyones.