Skill is now considered luck and magic.
observations of an old salt
- Thread starter Sump Crab
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Snoopdog
Valuable Member
I was just having this discussion. I am a rather old salt myself, been out of the hobby for over 10 years. I just got back into this week and holy hell I am floored at the sterile tanks. I picked up my new one and just saw no life on the rocks. My local supply guy stared at me strange when I mentioned this to him. He told me for every good thing that comes in on seeded live rock there is something bad, that starting a sterile tank is the way to do it. I have a hard time believing that. My entire fun existence of a reefer back in the day was staring into my tank and going "what the heck is that? Where did that come from?"
Last edited:
I think its interesting to consider why things are the way they are, rather than just argue over competing preferences.
Why are we in a position where live rock (=dead coral skeletons with a natural community of marine microorganisms living in it), which is clearly established to be the best way to start a reef tank, so hard to come by? Its not rare -- this material is hugely abundant in nature - it is literally everywhere in tropical regions of the global ocean.
There are a few important reasons.
1. Over-zealous and mis-applied environmental regulations.
a) Importing: under current regulations, importing of live rock counts the same (for permits) as importing corals. So why would an importer spend money importing heavy live rocks when they could import corals that sell for much more per pound?
This is obviously an error in the regulations. Rocks don't require the same level of regulatory protection as corals.
b) Collection: the fact that live rock collection in the Caribbean is banned outright is simply not justifiable. Collecting rocks didnt contribute to killing Caribbean reefs, and prohibiting rock collection won't do a thing to encourage their recovery. The establishment and growth of reefs is simply not limited by the availability of rock, full stop.
2. Profitability for large-scale companies. Because of the issues discussed above, real live rock is hard to come by. Still, its available. So why do so few wholesalers import it and offer it for sale?
Theres a lot more dry rock than live rock. So a company that promotes dry rock can sell a lot of it, and grow into a large national chain. While the growth of a company that promotes live rock will be limited.
The large company then produces a bunch of youtube videos promoting starting tanks with dry rock and voila -- its 2020 and we have large numbers of reefers thinking dry rock is a preferable way to start a new tank.
Why are we in a position where live rock (=dead coral skeletons with a natural community of marine microorganisms living in it), which is clearly established to be the best way to start a reef tank, so hard to come by? Its not rare -- this material is hugely abundant in nature - it is literally everywhere in tropical regions of the global ocean.
There are a few important reasons.
1. Over-zealous and mis-applied environmental regulations.
a) Importing: under current regulations, importing of live rock counts the same (for permits) as importing corals. So why would an importer spend money importing heavy live rocks when they could import corals that sell for much more per pound?
This is obviously an error in the regulations. Rocks don't require the same level of regulatory protection as corals.
b) Collection: the fact that live rock collection in the Caribbean is banned outright is simply not justifiable. Collecting rocks didnt contribute to killing Caribbean reefs, and prohibiting rock collection won't do a thing to encourage their recovery. The establishment and growth of reefs is simply not limited by the availability of rock, full stop.
2. Profitability for large-scale companies. Because of the issues discussed above, real live rock is hard to come by. Still, its available. So why do so few wholesalers import it and offer it for sale?
Theres a lot more dry rock than live rock. So a company that promotes dry rock can sell a lot of it, and grow into a large national chain. While the growth of a company that promotes live rock will be limited.
The large company then produces a bunch of youtube videos promoting starting tanks with dry rock and voila -- its 2020 and we have large numbers of reefers thinking dry rock is a preferable way to start a new tank.
Snoopdog
Valuable Member
Well this tank came with that life rock crap. It was nice and porous and the slightest amount of life on it. I am trying to get pieces of rubble from people with established tanks that will hopefully jump start my tank.
AlexKintner
Active Member
I'm not sure the cost argument holds up when you look at the entire process.
Considering the cost of curing/cycling dry rock and the addition of cycling bacteria you're already approaching the cost of TBS or other Gulf live rock.
Now add in some optional stuff like foundation rock, shelf rock, dry rock cement, coralline-in-a-bottle etc... and I'm not sure you've saved anything.
That said, my next build will most likely be 50/50 mix of Marco and TBS. I'd like to be able to build some structures with the dry rock and add the biodiversity of the live stuff.
Considering the cost of curing/cycling dry rock and the addition of cycling bacteria you're already approaching the cost of TBS or other Gulf live rock.
Now add in some optional stuff like foundation rock, shelf rock, dry rock cement, coralline-in-a-bottle etc... and I'm not sure you've saved anything.
That said, my next build will most likely be 50/50 mix of Marco and TBS. I'd like to be able to build some structures with the dry rock and add the biodiversity of the live stuff.
This is my personal experience only, but I think Dinoflagellates took a lot of people out of the hobby, and instilled some fear. Some are still struggling a bit for a few years. IMHO bigger issue is running systems with 0 nutrients, then clean rock/sand. I personally start with clean rock, but I let it sit there for months cycling, not expecting to add coral and have a beautiful setup within a week.
Snoopdog
Valuable Member
I also noticed one more thing in my travels this week. Is everyone running more blue lighting than before? I do not remember my lighting being this blue 10 years ago. The defaults on my Red Sea Reefer is way more blue than I am used to, or maybe the tint of blue is off? Sure I can change it but before I do I want to find out why this new thing is happening.
OP
OP
Sump Crab
Valuable Member
Ppl are way into the "psychedelic" fluorescent coral colors these days that they do everything they can to make them "pop". I still prefer 14k lighting over this straight actinic stuff.
Vette67
Reefing since 1997
I don't think that is an entirely bad idea, but I think you are still missing out by putting the rock in a filter sock. The micro diversity is important, but I think macro diversity is equally important. And don't mistake my comments for thinking I'm advocating for taking no safety measures. If I bought some TBS rock, I would put it in a bucket for a week or 2 and try to entice the gorilla crabs and mantis shrimp out with a piece of raw fish. But I will just use my sump as an example. I replaced my 18 year old sump about 6 months ago, and installed a Rubbermaid 150 gallon sump. In that time, and like I stated in my original post, I literally have countless thousands of tube worms that started growing on the wall of my sump. In addition to that are the countless thousands of what I think are pineapple sponges (not sure exactly). Each one of these individual animals is a filter feeder. As they grow, they are exporting nutrients from my system and filtering my water. I did not intentionally add these to my system. They obviously hitchhiked on my live rock. I'm no chemist, but I can't see how this isn't a net benefit to my system as a whole. Just look up cryptic zones. But I would hate to miss out on this part of the diversity equation by adding rock that was stuck in a filter sock. It's hard to get a clear picture, but this is about a 1 foot section of my 150 gallon sump. See if you can count the sponges and tube worms. Each one of those white dots is a tiny tube worm, except one is a limpet.
OP
OP
Sump Crab
Valuable Member
Loved the 14k Phoenix. I too have considered going back but don't want to deal with the heat. I have radion now and it does not compare to a 14k Phoenix in the looks and growth dept ime.
There is so much going on in this thread that it's confusing even the OP.
It's funny that when we reminisce, we only remember the positive and forget the negative.
True live rock (or if you want to play the semantic game "mericultured") was great for bio diversity. We took the good with the bad, because there was no other way. Pesky micro fauna was a trade off for a robust diverse bacteria culture. The hobby as a whole didn't realize that bacteria was a big piece of the puzzle. We are now starting to realize that we lost the diverse bacteria cultures when we started using dry rock.
The hobby took a turn and suggested that in order to avoid all those pesky creatures let's use dead rock instead. But we failed to consider what else we were losing by doing that. Flash forward to today and we see tank after tank battling dinos and taking 18 months to see real coral growth.
Come to find out by starting with sterile rock we unwittingly lost all the necessary bacteria that makes up a successful tank. Now our tanks don't have the healthy bacteria to dominate the bad, so we get the ugly stages.
But the question to the OP and those that are eating the 'member berries is, "Is taking a huge step backwards the right way to go?"
Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Start with dead rock and then seed the tank with true culturing bacteria. And I'm not talking about bacteria in a bottle, none of that cultures inside a tank, in order to get the benefits from bacteria in a bottle you have to continue to dose it.
Why can't someone bottle live bacteria that only needs one shot to the tank and it starts to multiply? And to be clear, I'm not talking about nitrifying bacteria.
The fear with starting with dry rock is not having that diversity or eventually getting a single dominant mono culture that promotes a dino outbreak. We need a robust culture of diverse bacteria and NOT have the pest that come from ocean live rock. Stepping back is not the answer. Moving forward we need to understanding what a tank with biodiverse bacteria looks like and then be able to easily replicate it.
It's funny that when we reminisce, we only remember the positive and forget the negative.
True live rock (or if you want to play the semantic game "mericultured") was great for bio diversity. We took the good with the bad, because there was no other way. Pesky micro fauna was a trade off for a robust diverse bacteria culture. The hobby as a whole didn't realize that bacteria was a big piece of the puzzle. We are now starting to realize that we lost the diverse bacteria cultures when we started using dry rock.
The hobby took a turn and suggested that in order to avoid all those pesky creatures let's use dead rock instead. But we failed to consider what else we were losing by doing that. Flash forward to today and we see tank after tank battling dinos and taking 18 months to see real coral growth.
Come to find out by starting with sterile rock we unwittingly lost all the necessary bacteria that makes up a successful tank. Now our tanks don't have the healthy bacteria to dominate the bad, so we get the ugly stages.
But the question to the OP and those that are eating the 'member berries is, "Is taking a huge step backwards the right way to go?"
Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Start with dead rock and then seed the tank with true culturing bacteria. And I'm not talking about bacteria in a bottle, none of that cultures inside a tank, in order to get the benefits from bacteria in a bottle you have to continue to dose it.
Why can't someone bottle live bacteria that only needs one shot to the tank and it starts to multiply? And to be clear, I'm not talking about nitrifying bacteria.
The fear with starting with dry rock is not having that diversity or eventually getting a single dominant mono culture that promotes a dino outbreak. We need a robust culture of diverse bacteria and NOT have the pest that come from ocean live rock. Stepping back is not the answer. Moving forward we need to understanding what a tank with biodiverse bacteria looks like and then be able to easily replicate it.
Fauna and micro fauna is easily replicated. The benefits of live rock is primarily deverse bacteria.
Snoopdog
Valuable Member
I am still thinking "What in the heck happened while I was away". I do not like this new era. This is like in my day job how I.T. everything seems to cycle from locally hosted to remotely hosted and back again every 10 years.
tvan
Active Member
LOL, read the archives over at reef central. Same issues, same posted problems.. No nitrates, No phosphates, watts X gallons was the go to answer. Best part of live rock died under newspaper. Coral didn't have these funny names.. Over priced gear. And just as many reef tanks failed
I don't think that is an entirely bad idea, but I think you are still missing out by putting the rock in a filter sock. The micro diversity is important, but I think macro diversity is equally important. And don't mistake my comments for thinking I'm advocating for taking no safety measures. If I bought some TBS rock, I would put it in a bucket for a week or 2 and try to entice the gorilla crabs and mantis shrimp out with a piece of raw fish. But I will just use my sump as an example. I replaced my 18 year old sump about 6 months ago, and installed a Rubbermaid 150 gallon sump. In that time, and like I stated in my original post, I literally have countless thousands of tube worms that started growing on the wall of my sump. In addition to that are the countless thousands of what I think are pineapple sponges (not sure exactly). Each one of these individual animals is a filter feeder. As they grow, they are exporting nutrients from my system and filtering my water. I did not intentionally add these to my system. They obviously hitchhiked on my live rock. I'm no chemist, but I can't see how this isn't a net benefit to my system as a whole. Just look up cryptic zones. But I would hate to miss out on this part of the diversity equation by adding rock that was stuck in a filter sock. It's hard to get a clear picture, but this is about a 1 foot section of my 150 gallon sump. See if you can count the sponges and tube worms. Each one of those white dots is a tiny tube worm, except one is a limpet.
![IMG_6499[1].JPG](https://www.reef2reef.com/attachments/img_6499-1-jpg.1731060/ "IMG_6499[1].JPG")
All true. I've used true live rock for all the reasons that you state and dealt with any 'nasties' that came in with it.
The 'rock in a sock' idea is just a simple way for people who are totally averse to dealing with pests to add microorganisms to their sterile dry rock set ups. As I mentioned at the end of my post, they'd of course be loosing out on some of the bio diversity. For some, this would probably be an acceptable compromise.
Similar threads
