Arguing against the arguments against stuff!

Scott Fellman

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
395
Reaction score
710
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Definitely the weirdest title I've ever come up with!

It’s been a lot of fun to mix it up here and chat with some many of you over the past few weeks. It’s been a great exchange of ideas, philosophy, and camaraderie,and I couldn’t be happier.

photo-10.JPG


In fact, this lively atmosphere has gotten the old gears spinning, as I contemplate my next step on the planning of my next reef aquarium. And what’s neat is that I think I’m going to incorporate a lot of “old school” thinking with “new school tech”, with more emphasis on diversity than any other reef tank I’ve worked with in a long, long time. I planned on taking a look at some of the things I’m planning on incorporating in my next tank, and when I started thinking of some of these concepts, I realized that they bring up a lot of old feelings and disagreements between reefers…perhaps you’re thinking of some of the same things,too,for your tank, and can remember the raging debates and such on them?

Vincent Thomas Tank.jpg


I figured it might be as much fun to think about the counterarguments for those…arguments to “not do that!” In fact, I like this idea so much, I think it might just be the topic of my next reef talk…Can you imagine the battles I could start? :)


Here are some examples…I’m just going to give you a couple and let you run with it…or run me out of town or whatever…

Well, let’s start at the bottom…literally! Substrates are, IMHO, a must have. I know all of the reasons why people don’t like sand and such in their tanks, ranging from the “nutrient sink blackhole” paranoia to “my VorTechs blow the $&(^)__-*&% out of it and create a sandstorm in my tank.” Yup- heard them. And I personally couldn’t care less. Grr…


Why is that? Because, let’s face it. Every dive trip I’ve ever been on, every reef I’ve ever swam or surfed over…had sand. Not acrylic, glass, or whatever. And the fishes, animals, and microorganisms which inhabit them have adapted to this for eons. No, of course, the counterargument is that there are no pumps, heaters, gas walls, etc, in a reef. (Let’s not waste our energies on arguing that one, okay?)

Scott_in_Roatan_in_gear_grande.jpg


So, the reality, in my mind, is that a substrate of some sort is just the right thing to do in a biologically diverse aquarium.

IMG_1060.JPG


I think that part of the “knock” against sandbeds was that they were often managed in such a way as to work against the system they were implemented on. I mean, if you view a sandbed as a living, breathing microcosm of its own, and, as Ron Schimek and so many others preferred for years- actually feed and maintain it, the benefits are obvious and manifold. If you don't foster biodiversity within the sandbed, keep it stirred up a little bit, over-feed, are lax on routine maintenance, don’t have sufficient water movement and nutrient export systems in place, etc… Yeah, your sandbed will show you it’s displeasure by leaching the excess nutrients, etc. into your tank. I think the "arguments" are more outmoded than the issue!

dsb.JPG


Oh- another question? Why are macro algae reactors the “big thing” of the moment? I mean- I love them…I've always loved macro algae, period. I had the opportunity to play with some of the first commercial Pax Bellum ones, and I was impressed by the growth of macro algae they produce. But really, why is everyone so crazy about them? Is it because everyone always loved chaetomorpha, but just hated floating it in a sump? Is it because they save space? Is it because…well, maybe…because it’s another gadget we can add to our system?

pax-bellum-arid-chaetomorpha-filter-900x900_grande.jpg


I think so. I think gadget people love this kind of stuff. It's like a "hack" for them, I'll bet.

REALLY, I love my fellow reefers. And I love the people who market reactors and such. But gee, how freaking difficult is it to grow Chaetomorpha in a reverse daylight area of your sump (for those who have one)? Has this always been a problem that we needed to solve? I mean, do you really need a reactor to do this? Or am I somehow missing the whole point? They do work very well, I’ll give you that…but I think they might also foster laziness for some. You know, you DO have to clean these things, and harvest the macro algae…a lot. I’m just sayin’…not “set and forget.”

It’s all about reactors and stuff these days, isn’t it? I LOVE them, but the algae reactor idea mystifies me for some reason; not sure why. Just seems like a somewhat unnecessary way of doing something that we can already do just fine. I am still waiting for a sump manufacturer to simply create an "onboard" macro algae compartment with similar lighting, and then at least it will simplify things.

Now that I've alienated every manufacturer out there, yet again...

Bonus "nice guy" consolation argument FOR them: These things kick butt. They grow the heck out of macro algae. I think they are essential equipment for propagation facilities, fish hatcheries, and large fish only tanks. And could you imagine if you ran a macro algae propagation facility? You could just use them to grow algae- super
quickly..or to grow plants like mosses for freshwater applications...The commercial applications for this technology are endless, and it's beyond my comprehension why, to my knowledge, that no commercial facility has really jumped on these for the purposes above.

chaetomorpha-pax-bellum-filter-1.jpg


Back to the hobby level...

Is there any limit to this stuff? Or do we always like to try to solve "pain points" that really don't need to exist?

Is the next big thing a “refugium reactor?” Like, all of the stuff you normally just throw in a sump, you’d put it in an expensive piece of self-contained gear (ya know, another possible point of failure)….? Now, you get a pass if your system lacks a sump…but I’d hazard a guess that a very high percentage of reef systems (except maybe from the AIO crowd) have sumps associated with them these days… Of course, the counter-counter argument is that "A separate refugium" is another piece of complication...You said so yourself about the algae reactors, Fellman.."

Sigh.


So, why we're on the topic- what’s WRONG with a refugium? What did they do to fall out of favor so badly over the past 5-8 years or so? The only arguments I ever hear is that they are “bioload” and compete with the corals for available nutrients…Sort of weak, IMHO. A refugium gives today’s “minimalist” reefer who likes limited biodiversity in his display aquarium the ability to have a tremendous, if not unseen- “supporting cast” of macro and micro life forms, including plants/macroalgae, crustaceans, worms, etc., all of which literally enrich the closed aquarium system with numerous benefits.

Seagrass_Japan2.jpg


Sure, haters will continue to make the suggestion that the extra biodiversity is really "bioload", or detracts from the prime focus of a reef aquarium for many people, that being to grow coral. I beg to differ, because production of natural food sources, nutrient processing, and biodiversity create a more "natural" system, less susceptible to the potential failings of near sterile, technology-driven systems with little "backup", and, in my opinion, reduce reliance on technological "props" and potential failure points. A little insurance policy against a biologically-impoverished system relying too much on reactors, controllers, and such is never a bad thing.

2014-09-22 18.36.10.jpg


The real beauty of the refugium, in my opinion, besides the obvious benefits, like supplemental food production- is that it simply embraces natural processes and minimizes the shortfalls of some of the more aggressive approaches to aquarium husbandry. Of course, being virtually a separate aquarium in and of itself, the refugium offers yet another advantage to an aquarium it supports- additional water volume for the system . And, as we know, greater water volume translates into greater overall stability in a well-managed system. (“Hater argument” against THAT? “Get a bigger tank!” Urghh, there’s no winning…)


These concepts might be considered “out of style” in current reef keeping “culture”, which makes no real sense…Mother Nature hasn’t gone “out of style for billions of years”, and the biological processes which govern these ideas work as they have for eons…Aren’t they worth another shot in your 75 gallon “SPS” reef?

C’mon…please?

In my opinion, this is not just resurrecting an old friend- it's utilizing correct and useful technique to achieve what we all want- a healthy, thriving reef system. These ideas are just a few of many that would benefit from the latest technology (ie; controllers, electronic pumps, water testing, etc.). The arguments that embracing diversity in our aquariums is somehow “outmoded’ or locked into the 90’s or whatever, is just an excuse, IMHO to try to “bypass” the learning curve and process of understanding nature’s systems in favor of “technology” that makes life easier. If you don’t make the effort to understand the “hows and whys”, let alone the way your equipment works (read the owner's manual), the whole concept becomes sort of…lost.

CIMG3108.jpg


Deep breath...

Okay, this whole piece was like an ugly and maybe even angry detour written by a grumpy old man…And perhaps a bit ignorant to some. But I had to share it! You know R2R is my "reef therapy" stop. I’d love to hear your "arguments against the arguments against doing stuff" in the hobby!


I promise…no further provocations…for now, at least. Next week, we’ll actually have a nuts-and-bolts piece on creating a more biologically diverse reef aquarium system!

Stay Bold. Stay determined. Stay engaged. Stay humble.


And Stay Wet.



Scott Fellman
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FugeReefer

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
45
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Definitely the weirdest title I've ever come up with!

These concepts might be considered “out of style” in current reef keeping “culture”, which makes no real sense…Mother Nature hasn’t gone “out of style for billions of years”, and the biological processes which govern these ideas work as they have for eons…Aren’t they worth another shot in your 75 gallon “SPS” reef?

C’mon…please?


Stay Bold. Stay determined. Stay engaged. Stay humble.


And Stay Wet.



Scott Fellman

Scott, you have got to get out of my head brother! (It's scary in there ;)) But honestly, this article and your last on Celebrating Patience are the topics I have been mulling over for the past few weeks myself.

For the sake of transparency, at the moment my Reef DT is bare bottom, but that is because I am transitioning from black sand to traditional aragonite. It will have a 2-inch soft substrate soon.

As many may have guessed by my username, I do run a refugium in line with my Reef DT. It is not a sump fuge either. It is a Refugium DT.
Display Refugium.jpg

Yes and I have been asked several times why I don't just run an algae scrubber or an algae reactor, and my answer is always, those take too much work. IMO having a large refugium is much easier to maintain and has so many more benefits than the scrubbers and reactors.

Thank you for your arguments against arguments against stuff.

-Chuck
 

Big G

captain dunsel
View Badges
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
12,921
Reaction score
27,296
Location
Southern Oregon
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I kept hearing George Carlin's voice while reading. His comedic take on "Stuff" is legendary. He would have appreciated the font style too. But to your argument, the battle/love affair of Art vs. Science continues to drive the hobby. And to what end? Ah the "perfect tank" is as elusive as a unicorn. And perhaps as fleeting.
 

keddre

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
985
Reaction score
575
Location
Ohio
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
There is two things I love on my tank, minus the display: the refugium and my deep sand bed. While I didn’t know that refugiums are outdated, I can’t see my tank without one; especially with all the special care inverts I have/plan on getting.

Same goes for my dsb, with a ton of research, a dsb can become a powerful tool that breathes extra life into the tank. I even had one back in my freshwater days.

With all the fancy equipment out, the only one I have in my tank is a (diy) algae scrubber and that’s so I can have an extra food source for my tank
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,849
Reaction score
23,776
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
there's a certain test ive always wanted to see on aged dsb's

take airline hose and tape to a wooden dowel

insert into the area in the tank most likely to be a detritus catchpoint...near a rock, a corner etc and push down to the bottom. carefully siphon out half a cup of the brownwater

let sit for 48 hours and keep topped off to levels

test for nitrate in 48 hours, compared to testing from the water column which I assume reads low

to me that tells if we're getting mineralization or just secreting wastes away. it needs to be one of the funked multicolored sandbeds w gas bubbles etc/aged and tested and ready for dredging micro
 

Nano sapiens

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
2,493
Reaction score
3,682
Location
East Bay, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So here's the thing...that's really a 'Thing', or at least I think it's a thing... ;)

I find so much of this hobby is based on the reef keepers personality. Time and again, real life examples have shown that the only gadgets needed to maintain a thriving mixed reef tank are a good pump to provide sufficient flow, proper lighting, a heater and a thermometer (can throw in a reliable ATO, too, for convenience/stability). But, for many people, that's just too simplistic/boring a system when there are so many 'goodies' that can be added. And that's fine, I get that. I personally find it interesting to follow along with the many build threads of this type to see how the systems do over an extended time period.

Speaking of refugiums, I have nothing against them but also haven't seen the need in the decades I've been keeping reef aquariums. Guess I'm just the uber-simplistic/anti-add-on/anti-gadget/salt-crusty 'old school' reefer type :)

Ralph.
 

keddre

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
985
Reaction score
575
Location
Ohio
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
there's a certain test ive always wanted to see on aged dsb's

take airline hose and tape to a wooden dowel

insert into the area in the tank most likely to be a detritus catchpoint...near a rock, a corner etc and push down to the bottom. carefully siphon out half a cup of the brownwater

let sit for 48 hours and keep topped off to levels

test for nitrate in 48 hours, compared to testing from the water column which I assume reads low

to me that tells if we're getting mineralization or just secreting wastes away. it needs to be one of the funked multicolored sandbeds w gas bubbles etc/aged and tested and ready for dredging micro

While mine isn’t aged to the point I want it, I’m confused on your test. So you want water from the bottom of the sand bed to sit in a container for 48 hours and to get nitrate levels after?
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,849
Reaction score
23,776
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
that delay is used in labs that determine nitrate samples for wastewater and for beef processing plants etc. the bed would have to be old and matured before the test had significance

the instant test is ok too, if they reveal higher nitrates even before 48 hours that's not implicating sandbeds as doing very much for waste reduction.

if there is a delay in indicating the nitrate where a 48 hour sample shows nitrate and the instant test didn't, then sandbeds could be helping nicely by creating the oxic zones that prevent nitrate leaking/headings towards true reduction. the sandbed claims are among the most heated in reefing, id love to see how a handful registers on this test.

**in no way do I hate sandbeds I ran a six inch one for nine years in my pico, just interested in dynamic testing to see how they perform. I have never owned any reef test kit beyond temp and salinity so I was unable to score my own readings. sandbeds provide zones for animals and ideally waste mineralization and will create a helpful food web for sure. its just fun to test their limits of helpfulness.

after extensive sandbed testing in picos ive moved to all clean reefing no waste whatsoever. I still run the sandbed, but its rinsed occasionally to be purely free of waste. rinsed in hot tap water in fact. its a challenge to get other pico reefers to do this lol but its a fun sell. its the first thing we do in nano rescue threads to stop fighting cyano for months.

and diatoms

and dinos

and algae

we start at the sandbed and work up, that's so backwards to the norm (dose the water, for everything in reefing)
 
Last edited:

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,579
Reaction score
6,635
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I have enjoyed many of your articles and even seeing you talk in person, but I don't enjoy articles that are condescending and talk down to fellow reefers. If modern reefing has taught us anything it's that there are many, many ways to have a thriving reef tank - you can find LPS, SPS, and mixed reef tanks with just about every combination of lights, substrate, and filtration imaginable.

Do you have personally a wide variety of reef tanks running at your home? Nanos, medium cubes and tanks like that? I am curious how you found room for macro algae (or preventing light bleed) in those small sumps as only sumpless tanks get a "pass" on macro reactors. Likewise with substrate in nanos when coral is so think you can't reach the bottom with a siphon?

You talk about "haters" a lot but you seem the be the hater here.
 

Scott Campbell

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 26, 2017
Messages
278
Reaction score
614
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So here's the thing...that's really a 'Thing', or at least I think it's a thing... ;)

I find so much of this hobby is based on the reef keepers personality.

Ralph.

I think that about sums it up.

My current tank is 30 years old and I have always had a second refugium tank attached to my main tank, have always grown a lot of macro-algae, have always had a sand bed and have never siphoned out one speck of detritus. But I recognize the bare bottom, lower bio-load, siphon out everything, lots of water changes approach is likely as effective, if not wildly more effective, than what I choose to do. I just have no interest in that level of direct oversight and participation in the tank's well-being. And given that my teenage son has to turn on the television for me - the cutting edge technology is also a non-starter. I also enjoy the worms and the micro stars and shrimp and such that inhabit the refugium as much as I enjoy the corals and fish in the main tank.

You have to find an approach that keeps your interest and that you are willing to maintain. Once that happens - most any approach will likely be effective.
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,849
Reaction score
23,776
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Scott I was curious about something.

that's the ideal arrangement for sure, are you using any offsets to waste compounding in the system beyond skimming and basic water changes and what the refugium takes up>

am looking for offsets in place like liquid carbon dosing or relying on algae systems

finding 30 yr old unassisted Berlin setups is ultra rare, that mode went out of commonality as attaining natural nitrate reduction turned out to be inconsistent among reefers. It would be neat to know if you had to increase offsets as the years went by or if the system seems to be using natural reductions beyond plant export.

in a recent post referencing tanks of the masters, none of them was concerning over nutrients here and there, they were living a freer approach as well. many hands off tanks are getting a dilution benefit justifiably as well, very hard to replicate that approach in old nanos, there's somewhat of a breakpoint where only gallonage determines a hands off status (we have no ten year hands off nanos in the active forums, for ex. all old nano tanks are taking export action somewhere, somehow)

on the smaller tanks we find it easier to just force clean them, big tanks= that's a headache.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Scott Fellman

Scott Fellman

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
395
Reaction score
710
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Scott, you have got to get out of my head brother! (It's scary in there ;)) But honestly, this article and your last on Celebrating Patience are the topics I have been mulling over for the past few weeks myself.

For the sake of transparency, at the moment my Reef DT is bare bottom, but that is because I am transitioning from black sand to traditional aragonite. It will have a 2-inch soft substrate soon.

As many may have guessed by my username, I do run a refugium in line with my Reef DT. It is not a sump fuge either. It is a Refugium DT.
Display Refugium.jpg

Yes and I have been asked several times why I don't just run an algae scrubber or an algae reactor, and my answer is always, those take too much work. IMO having a large refugium is much easier to maintain and has so many more benefits than the scrubbers and reactors.

Thank you for your arguments against arguments against stuff.

-Chuck
LOL, Chuck! Better to be in your head than under your skin, as they say!

I love the utility and simplicity- and let's face it- interest- of a refugium! Can't look into a reactor to see pods swimming around...and you sure as heck wouldn't want to keep any Mandarins or Pipefishes in one!

Reef on like it's 2003!! :D
 
OP
OP
Scott Fellman

Scott Fellman

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
395
Reaction score
710
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I kept hearing George Carlin's voice while reading. His comedic take on "Stuff" is legendary. He would have appreciated the font style too. But to your argument, the battle/love affair of Art vs. Science continues to drive the hobby. And to what end? Ah the "perfect tank" is as elusive as a unicorn. And perhaps as fleeting.

Agree...I mean, far be it from me to tell anyone how to run a tank...I mean, I like stirring the pot a bit...and I am likely a bit hypocritical, really...But that being said, I think we make things just too darned complicated, for reasons I can't entirely explain. It has nothing t do with nostalgically longing for the days of the trickle filter, and everything to do with creating interesting, biologically diverse systems with a higher likelihood of success for the greatest number of hobbyists. I'm not 100% convinced that some of the fancy gadgets we love so much are the way...I mean, everything has its place, but I just wonder- as I mentioned in my last piece- why even with all of the knowledge and advanced stuff available, that some have the same old problems? I think we rely too much on technical "crutches" and not enough on learning...

My 4 cents worth (inflation-adjusted, of course!)

-Scott
 
OP
OP
Scott Fellman

Scott Fellman

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
395
Reaction score
710
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Exactly my point! You are a poster child for logical thinking in the reef world, my friend! Be proud...:p
 
OP
OP
Scott Fellman

Scott Fellman

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
395
Reaction score
710
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
there's a certain test ive always wanted to see on aged dsb's

take airline hose and tape to a wooden dowel

insert into the area in the tank most likely to be a detritus catchpoint...near a rock, a corner etc and push down to the bottom. carefully siphon out half a cup of the brownwater

let sit for 48 hours and keep topped off to levels

test for nitrate in 48 hours, compared to testing from the water column which I assume reads low

to me that tells if we're getting mineralization or just secreting wastes away. it needs to be one of the funked multicolored sandbeds w gas bubbles etc/aged and tested and ready for dredging micro
A very cool idea... I don't know if that will be all-telling, and if nitrate contained in a DSB is indicative of it being a "nutrient sink" or merely that it's doing what we want it to do- processing nutrients, etc...But the spirit and idea are right...With all of the crazy cool technology and really smart reefers out there, it would be cool to see some new research into this! Who's game?

-Scott
 

Tentacled trailblazer in your tank: Have you ever kept a large starfish?

  • I currently have a starfish in my tank.

    Votes: 63 32.3%
  • Not currently, but I have kept a starfish in the past.

    Votes: 51 26.2%
  • I have never kept a starfish, but I hope to in the future.

    Votes: 40 20.5%
  • I have no plans to keep a starfish.

    Votes: 39 20.0%
  • Other.

    Votes: 2 1.0%
Back
Top