A
Anonymous
Guest
re read, you said you wouldnt say to a newbie dont do water changes..disregard my first couple of sentences 
Perhaps in your case tap water is fine..In mine NO...Still would be wrong to advise otherwise to a new person...Even asking a new person to have his/her water checked is wise, but blind faith on tap water..nuh uh, noway, youre asking for trouble...again reefnutz hit the nail on the head on Bobs approach...go through some of bobs posts and you'll see..I have loosely defended bobs technique but never agreed on it..But he keeps giving advise to new people on his approach which i think is bad mojo..If his technique works for him fine, thats ok, however im not sure of his livestock situation either..from what i hear is, that it dies rather fast only to be replaced immediately without finding what a potential cause of it is....Dr Thaler is an example of using Macros but her approach is successful and different and according to her more maintenance... her macro tanks are without any type of filtration..she also uses natural sunlight..Im not sure of her water changes and top offs but im willing to bet it isnt tap water... she keeps tanks with mechanical filtration as well ie skimmers...
reefnutz":xzrpcpdl said:
Just a minor correction here. I do recommend some circulation is salt tanks.
FW with vascular plants no circulation needed as I have done in all me Fw tanks since thelate 70's.
But salt with macros does benefit for circulation and corals and other filter feeders do requires some circulation. I have never stated anything else other than the extreme example of the 20g macro tank when first started. And the macros did better with teh addition of a powerhead.
My water tests at 30 TDS out of the tap. Thats damn good. I still run RODI because after the initial investment, its cheap and lasts long time because it isn't working that hard. I prolly could get away without, and there are several reefers in the area that do, but I use the waste water so no biggie.
I see what you mean. But what we care about here is how many apple got taken out. If you remove 3 and add another 3 back, there is no change to the number (not identity) of the apple in the barrel. There is no way, chemically nor otherwise, for the fish/coral to know a molecule that was in the tank since the very beginning, vs. a new one that you just added.
PLB":skz25ayy said:
I don't speak for anybody, but I don't know if you want a disclamer personalized for you stating that the fact RDO still let you have the posting previlege does not mean the ideas and practices mentioned in your replies are valid, scientifically sound, easy to implement by newbies, actually work for anybody, or otherwise.
so lets try to review:
edit: woops As righty points this should have been:
my assurtion is the no water changes result in more stable and constant parameters and are secondary to using plant life to filter and maintain the system.
Hey I'm human :lol:
/end edit
In this thread there are pictures of no water changes and plant life bean's and water changes with no plant life (green water)
http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... 03&start=0
You don't like my tank because it looks unhealthy Primarily the lack of corraline.
coralfarmin; Had varying parameters with water changes which settled down with plant life.
lobo42a: does water changes in several tanks but hasn't done water changes in two years in a planted reef tank.
I submit my observations that macros comsumed 30-40ppm+ nitrates per week and have maintained my daytime ph at 8.4+ for over two years.
I submit experimental data that 1/10 pound of dried macro algaes bioaccumulated the equilivant of the copper level in 90% of the homes in the US in a 55g tank when that copper level is maintained for two weeks.
I submit and encourage people to run the numbers to prove to themselves the optimal parameters and conditions will never be maintained through water changes alone.
Meanwhile righty and others offer no experimental data, Show no numbers to support water changes, show no experience where they ever maintained any system with plant life and no water changes. Just state it is proven you have to do water changes. with no experience or data to back up that assertion.
So my conclusion is it must take more the experimental data in scientific literature, more than several successful tanks in different cities, more than numbers or any other analysis.
Just don't let the newbies know this bad data.
Meanwhile, I'll go home tonight to 1 reef, 2 fo, a planted Fw and 2 betta vases. And know that all livestock and corals are fine. My new halimedia has a couple of new coins on it. And take tap water straight from the cold faucet to replace evaporative water in all the tank. And they will run for years and years with that method.
I encourage the newbies to consider these thoughts. The main thought is get the plant life thriving and let the plant life take care of the system. Everything else is secondary. But salt tanks do need some circulation. And reef tank do need some calcium carbonate to buffer calcium.
I orginally ":m8fq8krb said:
edit: woops As righty points this should have been:
my assurtion is the no water changes result in more stable and constant parameters and are secondary to using plant life to filter and maintain the system.
Hey I'm human :lol:
/end edit
In this thread there are pictures of no water changes and plant life bean's and water changes with no plant life (green water)
http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... 03&start=0
You don't like my tank because it looks unhealthy Primarily the lack of corraline.
coralfarmin; Had varying parameters with water changes which settled down with plant life.
lobo42a: does water changes in several tanks but hasn't done water changes in two years in a planted reef tank.
I submit my observations that macros comsumed 30-40ppm+ nitrates per week and have maintained my daytime ph at 8.4+ for over two years.
I submit experimental data that 1/10 pound of dried macro algaes bioaccumulated the equilivant of the copper level in 90% of the homes in the US in a 55g tank when that copper level is maintained for two weeks.
I submit and encourage people to run the numbers to prove to themselves the optimal parameters and conditions will never be maintained through water changes alone.
Meanwhile righty and others offer no experimental data, Show no numbers to support water changes, show no experience where they ever maintained any system with plant life and no water changes. Just state it is proven you have to do water changes. with no experience or data to back up that assertion.
So my conclusion is it must take more the experimental data in scientific literature, more than several successful tanks in different cities, more than numbers or any other analysis.
Just don't let the newbies know this bad data.
Meanwhile, I'll go home tonight to 1 reef, 2 fo, a planted Fw and 2 betta vases. And know that all livestock and corals are fine. My new halimedia has a couple of new coins on it. And take tap water straight from the cold faucet to replace evaporative water in all the tank. And they will run for years and years with that method.
I encourage the newbies to consider these thoughts. The main thought is get the plant life thriving and let the plant life take care of the system. Everything else is secondary. But salt tanks do need some circulation. And reef tank do need some calcium carbonate to buffer calcium.
beaslbob":1oruyon9 said:
Now you are saying water changes result in a more stable enviornment? You were saying they don't. Before you were pointing out that waterchanges led to a less stable enviornment. Which is it?
Before you said every tank has plant life.
What is in the water that makes it green?
Cherry picking your examples is a bad way to make your case. There are plenty of cases of people with tanks with macros and nusiance algae and there are plenty of cases of tanks without macros and nusiance algae. There are plenty of cases of tanks without macros and no nuisance algae and plenty of tanks with macros and no nuisance algae.
No. Why you insist on only selecting one reason out of the many that you tank looks unhealthy is strange.
See above.
See above.
And how did you test that? Did you test your water for nitrates and then have your macros tested for nitrate? You do realize that there are other mechanisms than macros that deal with nitrates?
I don't think you have a basic understanding of 'the cycle'.
Back to this again...
You are citing a study of cold water macros, and there is very little reason to assume they act the same way as the macros we keep.
You also fail to discuss the fact that the copper could easily impact the corals in the tank before the macros could supposedly uptake them.
I find your jump from experimental data on cold water plants to rates of uptake in the macros and tanks we keep to be misleading and dangerous. You simply have no data on how much copper is being added to your tank or how much your macros are uptaking.
I don't think anyone has argued that anyone should maintain water quality through water changes alone.
Although that is exactly how most coastal Aquariums keep their tanks.
On what? What have I posted that you want data on?
Support water changes as what? I don't believe you understand (or even read) what I have said about water changes.
When I did this in the 80's is was a dismal, eutrophic failure. But it was the 80's and we thought we were doing well.
I have never said anything remotely like what you are suggesting I said. You are trying to polarize the argument again, and like I keep saying the hobby is more complicated than you seem to believe.
Your experimental data has nothing to do with our tanks. We have been over this and over this - you simply have no data on any of the macros we keep in our tanks.
And you continue to ignore the myriad tanks that run macros that are unsuccessful.
More like irresponsible data - your data has nothing to do with our tanks.
Great - glad you can see the future.
I encourage the same thing. The holes in Bob's logic should serve as a guide for developing the critical thinking skills needed in a hobby where pseudo science, old wives tales and snake oils run rampant.
The part of the above quote after the 'but' alone should make people wary of Bob's claims.
There is nothing wrong with macros in a reef system (although I would keep them out of the show tank because they grow like kudzu and can smother corals, and I prefer to keep things I want to show in the show tank). The idea of a planted 'fuge has been around for a long time, and the potential benefits of such macros is well understood. Macros are not, however, the panacea that Bob makes them out to be.
See I told you so.
Righty runs no numbers, submits no experiemental data.
Just that water changes are necessary.
And that assertion is false if even a single tank does not need water changes.
No analysis necessary. No proof is necessary. that's just the way it is.
I encourage all newbies to research the facts and all aquarium keepers to conduct theri own analysis and experiements. Do not tank Righty's or my word for it. Find out and experiment for yourself.
Righty runs no numbers, submits no experiemental data.
Just that water changes are necessary.
And that assertion is false if even a single tank does not need water changes.
No analysis necessary. No proof is necessary. that's just the way it is.
I encourage all newbies to research the facts and all aquarium keepers to conduct theri own analysis and experiements. Do not tank Righty's or my word for it. Find out and experiment for yourself.
omg...never have I encountered someone so thick. Bob, as I have stated, and a few others have stated, I understand your method, I can even agree with it to a point. If it's working for you, that's fine. But the pics you show look like an ugly tank, that frankly I would be embarrassed to have in my home! It looks like a clean-ish salt water swamp. It does NOT look like a healthy reef replication. Have you ever seen a reef? When people come over to my home, I don't want it to look like a pit.
I'd like to see pics of coralfarm's tank too, please.
Now, again, you state a few cases, and coralfarm states a case or two which I'm happy for you guys.
However, to tell new people it is ok to use tap water is a huge mistake. While your tap may be fine, most people cannot do this. If they get a water test done first, fine, I say use it if ya want.
Telling people all the problems in atank can be solved with plants is ridiculous.
While I say you are right,and I can't argue with you if it works for you, by right, you should acknowledge the success of THOUSANDS of reefkeepers who use water changes and their tanks are gorgeous with thriving life in a neat looking clean tank. That's all I ask. All of the tanks that Ive seen that are beautiful beyond words use water changes. So far, allI've seen of your methods are ugly tanks that don't have the color, thriving life and the look of an authentic reef with healthy fish and coral that people that have used water changes.
Frankly, Ive had enough of this convo and am bored with it. When you have a tank that looks like a real reef set up with coral and fish, let me know.
I'd like to see pics of coralfarm's tank too, please.
Now, again, you state a few cases, and coralfarm states a case or two which I'm happy for you guys.
However, to tell new people it is ok to use tap water is a huge mistake. While your tap may be fine, most people cannot do this. If they get a water test done first, fine, I say use it if ya want.
Telling people all the problems in atank can be solved with plants is ridiculous.
While I say you are right,and I can't argue with you if it works for you, by right, you should acknowledge the success of THOUSANDS of reefkeepers who use water changes and their tanks are gorgeous with thriving life in a neat looking clean tank. That's all I ask. All of the tanks that Ive seen that are beautiful beyond words use water changes. So far, allI've seen of your methods are ugly tanks that don't have the color, thriving life and the look of an authentic reef with healthy fish and coral that people that have used water changes.
Frankly, Ive had enough of this convo and am bored with it. When you have a tank that looks like a real reef set up with coral and fish, let me know.
beaslbob":11v7vchl said:
That convinces me that you aren't actually reading what I write, but rather you are polarizing the argument in an effort to make your ideas seem good. Either you are doing it by accident (which calls into question everything you have to say) or you are doing it on purpose, which is even more frustrating.
I have never said that water changes are necessary. The hobby is more complicated than that.
Good thing I never mad that assertion.
See above.
I would further suggest that you, unlike Bob, actually do the research - he is lacking a basic understanding of the nitrogen cycle.
There is no need to reinvent the reefing 'wheel' so to speak, and kill more animals in the process. Boards like RDO were started so people could keep their own tanks with a better chance on not killing things. There is room for experimentation, however I don't think it makes sense for someone new to the hobby to be doing much experimentation. stand on the shoulders of those who have made mistakes and happy reefing!
Righty: So I guess you didn't assert that newbies should not be told that water changes are unnecessary with thriving plant life. I am sorry and apologise if that is now your assertion.
Again no data presented by you.
Again you assert my tank had deaths even though fish and corals have lived and thrived for two years after adding the macros. And salt and fw tank have thrived for years and years with no water changes.
As I stated, it is my hope that newbies read all moy posts and this thread to not repeat the mistake I made on the 55g. that mistake was not insuring plant life was thriving. Once it was the tank recovered in a week.
Again no data presented by you.
Again you assert my tank had deaths even though fish and corals have lived and thrived for two years after adding the macros. And salt and fw tank have thrived for years and years with no water changes.
As I stated, it is my hope that newbies read all moy posts and this thread to not repeat the mistake I made on the 55g. that mistake was not insuring plant life was thriving. Once it was the tank recovered in a week.
beaslbob":1dot1qdz said:
That is in no way my assertion.
I think the problem you are having is that you believe there are only two choices, when in reality there are many.
For the critical thinking fans out there, what Bob has just done is akin to asking 'when did you stop beating your wife' and only accepting a yes or no answer.
Again, what do you want data on? What have I said that requires data?
Where did I do that again? I don't think you are actually reading what I write.
If you tank is only 2 years old, and you added macros at 6 months how could your tank be 'thriving' for two years after adding macros?
Fro the millionth time, those are different than reef tanks. I give my dog tapwater, but that is no reason to expect it to be safe for a reef tank.
I disagree. I think the mistake you made was not knowing what you were doing and not understanding the nitrogen cycle. The post dug up from WWM clearly shows that. Your tank was over stocked and under circulated. I think you think plants cured all your ills buy means of post hoc ergo proctor hoc and a lack of understanding the nitrogen cycle.
define: eutrophic
rich in dissolved nutrients, often caused by pollution
www.aquabotanic.com/glossary.htm
Adding tap water in my book is a polluted water source. My TDS is now up to 414ppm. For reefs... that's pollution.
And this pic clearly demonstrates that fact:
folks... lets move on. :roll:
rich in dissolved nutrients, often caused by pollution
www.aquabotanic.com/glossary.htm
Adding tap water in my book is a polluted water source. My TDS is now up to 414ppm. For reefs... that's pollution.
And this pic clearly demonstrates that fact:
folks... lets move on. :roll:
beaslbob":173tgjh1 said:Righty":173tgjh1 said:For comparison:
What happened to that open brain and the anemone?
the open brain is still there. I did lose the anemone after disturbing the system.
Is the brain just not in the pic?
When did you lose the anemone?
What about the zoa's and the mushrooms?/ricordia? They don't seem to be in the recent pic of your tank.
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
