Jump to content


WAMAS Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rt502

  • Rank

Custom Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

205 profile views
  1. Have had anemones die via getting stuck in powerheads and disintegrating in tanks as small as 5g. In my experience, the amount of damage a dead anemone causes is overblown, so long as you remove the pieces and use carbon/floss. I wouldn't do a change larger than 50%, especially if your fish and corals seem to be doing okay. If anything, do the large volume change and then do a series of smaller changes over the subsequent days. When my decent size rbta got shredded in the 5g, the hammers and zoa's were angry for a few days but were just fine, and the fish didn't really seem to notice at all. Years ago I had a very large rbta bite the dust in a 40g, and I lost nothing, despite not even running carbon. A guy in the forum has a tank with like, 30 anemones that all died within days and the fish and most of the corals were unharmed. Keep an eye on things, but unless you notice some serious struggling, it'll probably be okay.
  2. We're all complicit in the nasty side of keeping ornamental marine fish. We can try to mitigate our negative impact on the overall environment and on the lives of the fish themselves by purchasing aquacultured fish and corals when possible and doing our best to source our wild-caught purchases to areas that are known to be more humane and have fewer animals killed in transport. We can make ourselves feel better by arguing that the hobby brings awareness to the creatures of the ocean and can spur compassion and funding for various environmental initiatives, etc. Really though, most of us just want to have beautiful fish and corals in our homes, and are willing to accept the relative harm that the industry itself causes. However, that can be said about many things. Do you eat meat? You're causing harm to the environment. Driving a car that gets less-than-ideal mileage given your own budget, especially if you drive for fun? Damaging the environment. Purchase timber that isn't a fast growing and sustainable type to use for projects? Damage. Play a sport like golf that destroys local environments and uses an enormous amount of water? damage. Etcetcetc. The overall impact of our individual choices is relatively very small, and the best we can do, unless we have an absolute moral issue with a specific activity, is to act in good faith and cause the least harm in achieving our goals (in our case, keeping and growing pretty fish and corals in a window box filled with saltwater). In my own case, if there's a fish I like that I know I can take good care of and there's an aquacultured option, I buy it, because it also is more likely to survive, even if it's double the price of a wild-caught specimen. However, I still have a few wrasses and a blue spot puffer that I really like and they aren't available aquacultured, so I made the arguably immoral choice to purchase them, and have since justified the purchase to myself by feeding them high quality foods and taking care of their environment. That said, that has not always been the case, and I've been directly responsible for the deaths of many fish due to a lack of knowledge and user error, and I did a ton of research beforehand. I assume that most of us have been through that phase and many others remain there. I'd imagine that a forum like Wamas will have among the most knowledgable and humane reekeepers, so there's a lot of preaching to the choir here, but most don't really care all that much. These arguments seem to pop up on this board every few years and generally elicit the same reaction. The very long-term reefkeepers will argue that things have improved considerably over the past couple of decades and that it's possible for the industry to be relatively sustainable. It may or may not be better, but the overall impact of the hobby is pretty undeniably negative. I think that, so long as we acknowledge it, it's no worse than many, many other choices we make daily that are almost universally accepted and just as damaging, if not moreso than keeping pretty fish and corals in saltwater boxes..
  3. Have you tried leaving a clam or mussel in the tank for them to pick at during the day (tied to a rock so it doesn't get pushed around)? You just remove it at the end of the day so that it doesn't cloud up the tank, but they can also be a good transition food that is relatively cheap.
  4. Used to buy regularly from tropical lagoon. Had a cbb that ate the worms, but he went nuts for LRS, so you may want to give it a try as a transition food.
  5. Nice tank you got there. You can get a cheap black yoga mat at five below and cut it to size if you don't want to drop $20+ for an 'aquarium leveling mat.' I have a lagoon 25 and it works fine under it. It'd probably be fine with the blanket, but why risk it when you technically don't have anything in there to kill yet?
  6. If ocellaris or a percula, it shouldn't be too bad if you find a considerably smaller clown (ideally the smallest juvenile you can find) and use a breeder box. If you don't have a breeder box, you can add the smaller fish and keep an eye on them and separate if the aggression kicks up. Worst experience I've had with the roughly 6 pairs I've had was a maroon/ocellaris hybrid female that nearly beat a black ocellaris to death over the course of a few weeks before finally accepting him. The black clown was ragged for months, but they ended up forming a really strong bond. Regardless, you'll want to have a separate small quarantine tank up and ready in the event that the female is hyper aggressive and a threat to kill the new clown. Rehoming clowns is relatively easy in the area and some of the LFS' will take them back for credit if the pairing is unsuccessful (of course clarify before purchase).
  7. Very nice. What light are you running?
  8. Had a 20g Nuvo at my office a few year's back. Coworkers loved dropping by and checking out the fish, and with the 2 clowns and pistol shrimp/goby pair it was relatively easy to maintain (smart ato for top off, and heavy feedings before the weekend). I'd do a 5 gallon water change every few weeks and only kept hard soft corals and lps. That said, they shut the power off in the (government) building over a long weekend with no warning, and I lost everything, including the clown pair and goby I'd had for 3 years. It was pretty devastating. Even if you're familiar with your office's power situation, I'd be sure to add a backup battery. Otherwise, I'd do it again - the fish were peaceful company.
  9. Yeah man. I was 'this' close to picking up a baby CBB to keep for 6 months or so, just because I enjoyed the process of weaning them onto prepared foods, and finding a new home for a healthy CBB is a cinch. Yours is obviously in good hands. Your tank looks great.
  10. Was the CBB the reason for the emergency LRS post? Had one a few years ago that was my fave fish ever, and loved him some LRS. Only thing I dislike about my lagoon 25 is that it's 1/4 the size of a proper CBB tank.
  11. Def enjoys it. He'd be running or pecking if he didn't. Has to feel good.
  12. Ugh, your tank is amazing. So many colors and personalities. Love it.
  13. I agree with Origami that regulated and environmentally sound collection practices are possible. That said, the industry probably isn't set up to support it on a global scale. Maybe that will change, but the incentive structure for collection still encourages destructive collection methods throughout most of the world. Hawaii is in the unique position of being regulated by the US government, whereas a large number of the other countries that collect and ship ornamental fish are developing. The most problematic regions from which fish are collected are still the largest exporters of ornamental marine fish (Singapore, Thailand, Philippines, etc), and the passage and enforcement of ornamental fish collection regulations is pretty low on their priority list, and wholesalers and marine shops are incentivized to purchase from them. It's difficult to find data on, for example, the percent of fish that are killed in collection and transport, but the WWF estimated the number to be roughly 80% (Scientific American article linked at the bottom of the page), which is insane, and not subjective. That's not counting those fish that die within months due to disease or negligence, or the impact that removing those fish has on the collection areas (that's not counting corals). Until the cost to someone along the supply chain is so egregious that it changes the incentives and behavior of the collectors, wholesalers, aquarium shops, and consumers, the hobby as a whole will continue to exist on a morally gray line. I'm sure others will vehemently disagree. I understand the very specific Hawaii example. It's a great model that will hopefully spread and be sustainable. In the future, it's possible that the ornamental marine hobby will be sustainable and good for the environment, but there's a very long way to go before we can start to argue that it's beneficial on the whole. There are pockets of the hobby that are doing wonderful things, as discussed re. Hawaii/captive-breeding/coral propagation, and hopefully they'll spread, but the relatively low cost of fish/corals for those in this club that care about environmental health is driven by the vast majority that don't. The marine ornamental hobby will exist whether we have those people trying to improve it or not, so I'm glad we have groups like Wamas to at least try to plant the seeds for the future. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tropical-depression-your-saltwater-fish-tank-may-be-killing-the-ocean/
  14. Origami, you're right. 90% was on the high side in the study, and by all accounts it's much better now. On the whole, the hobby of keeping reef fish and corals is probably bad for the ecosystems from which they're collected, at least up to now. It's pretty inarguable. That said, If we reach a point where 95%+ of the fish and corals for sale are captive-bred, the hobby probably would be net neutral or even positive, if propagation and reintroduction efforts continue to grow. I just think it's disingenuous for most to argue that what we as hobbyists are doing is intrinsically good, given the industry we support. Again, I'm as guilty as anyone else, but I'm not trying to justify it as anything other than a hobby I keep because I enjoy keeping the beautiful ecosystems in my home. No different than someone who eats meat just accepting that the majority of meat production is bad for the environment (I eat meat). As far as the club itself, as others have pointed out, it's the exception. Most people in this forum are familiar with everything discussed and seem to make it a point to try and make the ethical choice when possible. As Gmerek also pointed out, it also keeps the propagation in-house for the most part and keeps corals in the ocean by satiating our desire for the awesome corals available, and also provides info for new reefkeepers so that they don't make the same mistakes we all did.
  • Create New...