So it's been a couple of days since I've really been on here...Things are really cranking at UC, and we're getting ready to haul out to Denver for Reefstock 2015 this weekend..A lot going on! Of course, never so much that I can't pump out a little piece about something on my mind now and again...Here's one of those "mental exercises" I went through over the weekend, and just kinda couldn't let it go. Although not a ground-shattering topic, or even "breaking news-worthy" (like the NUMEROUS PM's I received over the past couple of days asking me to look on some other vendor's forum about a "crazy new" coral that some reefers correctly deduced is a relatively inexpensive piece that several vendors been working with for two years and charge like 1/4 the price- and should go call out the guy...stuff like that.).
Note to all- I might get a chuckle out of stuff like that, but I'm never going to call out another vendor by name for something like that. I'm not the industry watchdog. Not my role. You'd be shocked at how often I'm asked to do that, as if I am some crusading good guy. No. I'm just a hobbyist like you. We all need to speak up. While it would be really entertaining for many, it would be totally counterproductive for the hobby to implode on each other like that. We all need to be educated consumers, is my advice to you. Vote with your wallets and purses, I say. I do appreciate that some of you are catching on, though, and deduce hype from reality in many cases.
****
So, anyways, here is my more civilized, more ( I think) enjoyable topic that we can all participate in.
I was thinking about all of the change we've had in the hobby in recent years, and how this seems to have largely bypassed one of the enduring marine hobby institutions, the fish-only aquarium.
As the hobby evolves, we’ve seen developments in almost every “arena”: Amazing new corals, many of which are being aquaculture and maricultured, captive bred fishes, fantastic equipment, including highly computerized controllers, LED lighting systems, and other hardware that has made keeping a reef aquarium far easier than at any time in the past. The “Postmodern” reef keeping era, which began with a bang in the middle of the first decade of this century, marked the “maturation”, if you will, from the hobby’s earlier “shoot from the hip” days, to a more sophisticated, evolved, openly-communicative, conservation-minded endeavor. Injected with new ideas, new enthusiasm, and constant “shots” of technology, the hobby is reaching more people, engaging them, and perhaps most important- retaining more than ever before!
Recently, I’ve shared a bit with you about my planning for my next reef tank, and some of the mental gymnastics I’ve been going through “thought-testing” various concepts and ideas I’ve developed. I enjoy that phase as much as I do the actual building of the system…of course, the goal is to build the system- and not get caught up in the syndrome of “analysis paralysis!” I’ve seen more than one reefer fall into that trap, with an empty tank sitting in the home for years as ideas are studied, discussed, and developed. The way I get out of that rut is to give myself a deadline to finalize and then start the build…another topic for another time, I suppose…(and yeah, I’m getting closer and closer to “Go time!” with my project!).
Anyways, I’ve ben reading a lot, and I’ve greatly enjoyed some of the articles my friend Lemon T Yi Kai from Singapore has been writing on Reef Builders about his travels to Japan and visit to a few fish collectors there. In case you’ve been living under a rock, Japan is like the Mecca for seriously high end fish collections! These guys are super hardcore, and many well-heeled Japanese hobbyists will forgo a new BMW for that latest crazy Angelfish or Butterflyfish. In his pieces, Lemon touched a bit on the systems these hobbyists use to maintain their collections…And they are surprisingly “sterile”, minimalist, and often times, decidedly 1990’s in their technology. A lot of the focus is on husbandry, not necessarily the finer points of the setup.
Interesting.
The focus is entirely on the fish!
And of course, it got me thinking: If we were to built an ultimate fish only system, what would it be like? What kinds of systems make sense for focusing mainly on the fish? I suppose it depends on your orientation, right?
We have the hobbyist who wants it all, and will maintain many of his rare fishes in his/her reef tank. Nothing wrong with that, unless you are keeping fishes that tend to munch of your corals and inverts. For years, I’ve been thinking that a full-blown reef tank is the most logical and effective way to keep fishes. I mean, they get the benefit of a stable environment, more natural surroundings, and significant amounts of attention, right?
Then we have marine fish breeders- and I’ll include the Seahorse people in that group as well. You know, the whole MBI crowd. Yeah, THOSE people. Amazingly dedicated, talented hobbyists who, until very recently, toiled in relative obscurity as they made achievement after achievement reproducing fish. Only in very recent years are these people getting the accolades and attention that they truly deserve. Many of them maintain near sterile, purposeful breeding systems, where the absolute focus is on the fish and their needs as it pertains to reproduction and rearing. Aesthetics are not the focus. I can’t say it enough…these people, along with true coral farmers- will be the salvation and future of the hobby, and we must tirelessly support all that they do.
ORA is only one of the more visible prisoners in marine ornamental breeding. There are numerous other individuals we need to support!
That being said, a lot of hobbyists don’t want to breed fish, or keep tanks that are the equivalent of a lab experiment in their living room. I get it, and I know breeders will, too. Different strokes, right?
Other hobbyists- well, the bulk of the marine fish keepers- have maintained their fishes in what we call “FOWLR” (“fish only with live rock”) systems…Logical, cool….and, if we’re honest with ourselves- very much un-evolved since the mid 90’s! Think about the FOWLR concept. It was big breakthrough for it’s time- I mean, live rock. LIVE ROCK! The stuff we build reefs with! Using it for FISH tanks? Woaah. It was a quantum leap forward over the 1970’s technology of UG filters, bleached coral skeletons, and plastic plants that were the hobby mainstay for decades. But the reality is that fish-keeping philosophies and system designs haven’t evolved much in the last 25 years or so. Oh, sure, you can throw an example of someone who uses LED’s or a controller, maybe embraces some other new ideas, but the reality is, most of them have wet/dry filters, skimmers, and maybe a
U/V sterilizer, and an underlying philosophy that seems to have changed little.
Still "state of the art" in many places. Time for an evolution, right?
Its not like this is anyone’s “fault” or anything, but it seems like, when you penetrate the veil of the modern marine fish aquarium- that you’re looking into a time capsule from earlier in the century, or farther back…It’s like the "land that time forgot.” We haven’t really done all that much with marine fish systems. Who could blame us? I mean, we've been busy most of the last couple of decades, playing with coral, developing techniques, equipment, and ideas to keep reef aquariums. It’s been awesome, and a true renaissance for the aquatic hobby!
What would a more evolved “FOWLR” system have that the typical one wouldn’t? What equipment choices and “software” (ie; biological) consideration would you make? I know that I’d probably make mine all about nutrient export…And not just a big old mechanical filtration system (unless I was keeping a ton of Triggers and fishes like that). I’d think like a reefer more. I wouldn’t equip my fish aquarium as if it were “easier” than a reef, which is, weather we like to admit it or not- how many “modern” fish only systems are run.
Wouldn’t it make sense to strive for more “reef-like” conditions, instead of letting ourselves “get away” with high nitrate, phosphate, and varying alkalinity levels “just because” fishes “can handle it better?” Why have we made that more acceptable than we would in a reef tank, I wonder?
I’d be all about a big sump…I would blow off the whole bio-ball thing, even though there are some good rationales for employing them in a fish system. Rather, I’d rely on a large sump, with a significant refugium, stocked with animals like sponges, tunicates, feather dusters, and perhaps even clams. Yes, a refugium. The concept seemingly kicked to the curb in the reefing world earlier this century, for no apparent reason- replaced by…what?
Yeah I’d really embrace natural systems in a “Postmodern” fish aquarium.
I’d place heavy emphasis on macro algae, grown on a reverse daylight schedule- just like we do in reef systems. We’re talking gallons of Chaetomorpha, Ulva, and other diverse macro algae, harvested regularly, and not illuminated as an afterthought, either. Give them the best lighting possible. I’d use an advanced LED light system designed for freshwater planted tank use (ie; lower K). As we know from reef keeping, not only do growing marine algae assist with nutrient control and export (assuming you harvest them regularly), they are thought to release substances like amino acids, vitamins, and types of sugars that other aquatic life forms (including fishes) can continue to use. As an added bonus, growth of macro algae is more rapid when nutrient content is higher, meaning that macro algae as a filter adjunct is super adaptable and essentially “self-customizing” for any aquarium without external influences or tinkering on our part. And a lot of fishes eat them, too.
I’d even be very open to incorporating Leng Sy’s “Miracle Mud” methodology for a system for fishes…Seems like encouraging the growth of macro algae for both nutrient export and for the positive biochemical affects might be a win-win, reviving yet another seemingly moribund approach for use in the “Postmodern Era.”
The macro algae refugium deserves another look!
Nothing should be off the table when considering options here, IMHO.
We all know the value of water movement for corals, so why not apply the same thinking to a fish-only system? In other words, the amazing variety of electronic water pumps that we use to create beneficial flow patterns for corals will offer the same for fishes. Concepts like gyre flow and alternating pulse can work great in fish aquariums. One of my friends jokes that his fish system has “too much flow for corals”, and that makes perfect sense to me! At the risk of sounding too “charming”, the reality is that fishes need the “exercise” that swimming against a current will provide. They receive the physical activity necessary to continue proper growth and development of their muscles and other organs. It is also postulated that water movement assists with the digestion and other metabolic processes of fish.
Strong water movement assists in maintaining a cleaner, more stable environment by keeping particulate and other solid wast material suspended in the current, where they are readily trapped and removed via the overflow weir into…your sump…where it can settle for physical removal and also be processed by the creatures in your refugium. Not revolutionary, but logical. So IMHO, a “Postmodern” fish system would not use filter socks, as they would deprive other beneficial organisms of potential food sources. Dissolved waste materials would be absorbed by chemical filtration media, and utilized by macroalgae, and oxygenation of the water would be enhanced. So in other words, I’d open those MP60’s, Korallias and Tunzes full throttle, cycling them up and down from zero to 100%.
Since I mentioned chemical filtration, I’d definitely utilize activated carbon in a reactor of some sort. I wouldn’t go too crazy with phosphate removers because A) It’s not tremendously detrimental to fish, and B) If you take out the phosphate you're competing with you algae bed, which will utilize it as fuel for growth. Of course, that begs the question, why fuss with macro algae when you can use phosphate removal media, and then answer, as stated above is that macro algae growth and harvest offers numerous collateral benefits that the media alone doesn’t.
I’d continue to use a protein skimmer. I wouldn’t necessarily run a huge one, either, because I believe that removing every single bit of dissolved organic material from the water will deprive your macro algae and refugium organisms the materials they need to do their job. I’d go with an “adequate” skimmer, but I wouldn’t go for a huge one, or even an oversized one. What are your thoughts on this?
For water parameters, I’d do my best to keep things stable. I’d try to maintain “reef quality” water conditions as much as possible, including alkalinity. I wouldn’t necessarily be dosing anything, unless testing dictates, although I think it is possible that fish only systems may end up running with trace element excesses or deficiencies, and this could be monitored by testing and adjusting as you see fit.
I’d run my water temp a bit cooler- like 76-77F, to keep as much dissolved oxygen in the system as possible. And I’d keep my specific gravity at 1.025, rather than a suppressed specific gravity, which could lead to long-term physiological issues for the fish.
How would I aquascape a fish only tank? Nothing really new here. Well, personally, I’d use live rock. Yep, LIVE rock. Sure, you could mix some of the dried or artificial stuff in there, but I’d go for a high percentage cured live rock (of course, cultured). My simple rationale is that it provides biological diversity- and biological diversity is something that I feel can benefit such a system in numerous ways. As far as substrate is concerned, unless your specimens require a thick sand bed to sleep in, I’d go for a shallow layer of sand in the system, largely for decorative purposes. I’d keep it reasonably stirred up, too.
I think that it means no coral, in my book…Yeah, I’d think that in this instance, coral would detract from the focus on fishes, and I think would add some boiled that a fish only system can probably do without, IMHO. Do I dare say that synthetic corals would be cool? I am torn, both ethically (because a fish cant nibble on plastic..) and aesthetically, although they are very nice these days.
Speaking of nibbling, I think I’d try to incorporate far less in the way of super fatty foods, and integrate more vegetable matter into their diet. I have never been a fan of pelleted foods until recently, when the new generation of super nutritional products has changed the game considerably. I would definitely incorporate these foods into my mainly frozen/fresh dietary approach to fish nutrition.
As far as maintenance, would you go with frequent water changes? We’ve beaten about this topic in terms of Triton and other philosophies, and in the end, I know that I’d do water exchanges on a fairly regular basis in a fish only system. I’d probably do something like 10% a week, perhaps larger if the population dictates it. What are your thoughts here, given all the discussion on biological processes and such?
In the end, nothing discussed here is landmark stuff, or even radical in any way. However, I think that we did discuss some basic changes to the philosophy of marine fish keeping, and can perhaps revisit the manner in which we have been equipping and managing such tanks for the last couple of decades. What’s important- and fun- is that we continue a dialogue in the hobby that encourages progression and moves us steadily forward from the status quo, farther into the realm of what was previously though to be unconventional or even not practical. We should continue to apply our latest discoveries, technology, and out out of the box thinking to all areas of the aquarium hobby, which will enrich our lives and the lives of the organisms that we cherish, for years to come.
Until next time...rethink the FOWLR...love those fishes..
And stay wet!
Regards,
Scott Fellman
Unique Corals
Note to all- I might get a chuckle out of stuff like that, but I'm never going to call out another vendor by name for something like that. I'm not the industry watchdog. Not my role. You'd be shocked at how often I'm asked to do that, as if I am some crusading good guy. No. I'm just a hobbyist like you. We all need to speak up. While it would be really entertaining for many, it would be totally counterproductive for the hobby to implode on each other like that. We all need to be educated consumers, is my advice to you. Vote with your wallets and purses, I say. I do appreciate that some of you are catching on, though, and deduce hype from reality in many cases.
****
So, anyways, here is my more civilized, more ( I think) enjoyable topic that we can all participate in.
I was thinking about all of the change we've had in the hobby in recent years, and how this seems to have largely bypassed one of the enduring marine hobby institutions, the fish-only aquarium.
As the hobby evolves, we’ve seen developments in almost every “arena”: Amazing new corals, many of which are being aquaculture and maricultured, captive bred fishes, fantastic equipment, including highly computerized controllers, LED lighting systems, and other hardware that has made keeping a reef aquarium far easier than at any time in the past. The “Postmodern” reef keeping era, which began with a bang in the middle of the first decade of this century, marked the “maturation”, if you will, from the hobby’s earlier “shoot from the hip” days, to a more sophisticated, evolved, openly-communicative, conservation-minded endeavor. Injected with new ideas, new enthusiasm, and constant “shots” of technology, the hobby is reaching more people, engaging them, and perhaps most important- retaining more than ever before!
Recently, I’ve shared a bit with you about my planning for my next reef tank, and some of the mental gymnastics I’ve been going through “thought-testing” various concepts and ideas I’ve developed. I enjoy that phase as much as I do the actual building of the system…of course, the goal is to build the system- and not get caught up in the syndrome of “analysis paralysis!” I’ve seen more than one reefer fall into that trap, with an empty tank sitting in the home for years as ideas are studied, discussed, and developed. The way I get out of that rut is to give myself a deadline to finalize and then start the build…another topic for another time, I suppose…(and yeah, I’m getting closer and closer to “Go time!” with my project!).
Anyways, I’ve ben reading a lot, and I’ve greatly enjoyed some of the articles my friend Lemon T Yi Kai from Singapore has been writing on Reef Builders about his travels to Japan and visit to a few fish collectors there. In case you’ve been living under a rock, Japan is like the Mecca for seriously high end fish collections! These guys are super hardcore, and many well-heeled Japanese hobbyists will forgo a new BMW for that latest crazy Angelfish or Butterflyfish. In his pieces, Lemon touched a bit on the systems these hobbyists use to maintain their collections…And they are surprisingly “sterile”, minimalist, and often times, decidedly 1990’s in their technology. A lot of the focus is on husbandry, not necessarily the finer points of the setup.
Interesting.
The focus is entirely on the fish!
And of course, it got me thinking: If we were to built an ultimate fish only system, what would it be like? What kinds of systems make sense for focusing mainly on the fish? I suppose it depends on your orientation, right?
We have the hobbyist who wants it all, and will maintain many of his rare fishes in his/her reef tank. Nothing wrong with that, unless you are keeping fishes that tend to munch of your corals and inverts. For years, I’ve been thinking that a full-blown reef tank is the most logical and effective way to keep fishes. I mean, they get the benefit of a stable environment, more natural surroundings, and significant amounts of attention, right?
Then we have marine fish breeders- and I’ll include the Seahorse people in that group as well. You know, the whole MBI crowd. Yeah, THOSE people. Amazingly dedicated, talented hobbyists who, until very recently, toiled in relative obscurity as they made achievement after achievement reproducing fish. Only in very recent years are these people getting the accolades and attention that they truly deserve. Many of them maintain near sterile, purposeful breeding systems, where the absolute focus is on the fish and their needs as it pertains to reproduction and rearing. Aesthetics are not the focus. I can’t say it enough…these people, along with true coral farmers- will be the salvation and future of the hobby, and we must tirelessly support all that they do.
ORA is only one of the more visible prisoners in marine ornamental breeding. There are numerous other individuals we need to support!
That being said, a lot of hobbyists don’t want to breed fish, or keep tanks that are the equivalent of a lab experiment in their living room. I get it, and I know breeders will, too. Different strokes, right?
Other hobbyists- well, the bulk of the marine fish keepers- have maintained their fishes in what we call “FOWLR” (“fish only with live rock”) systems…Logical, cool….and, if we’re honest with ourselves- very much un-evolved since the mid 90’s! Think about the FOWLR concept. It was big breakthrough for it’s time- I mean, live rock. LIVE ROCK! The stuff we build reefs with! Using it for FISH tanks? Woaah. It was a quantum leap forward over the 1970’s technology of UG filters, bleached coral skeletons, and plastic plants that were the hobby mainstay for decades. But the reality is that fish-keeping philosophies and system designs haven’t evolved much in the last 25 years or so. Oh, sure, you can throw an example of someone who uses LED’s or a controller, maybe embraces some other new ideas, but the reality is, most of them have wet/dry filters, skimmers, and maybe a
U/V sterilizer, and an underlying philosophy that seems to have changed little.
Still "state of the art" in many places. Time for an evolution, right?
Its not like this is anyone’s “fault” or anything, but it seems like, when you penetrate the veil of the modern marine fish aquarium- that you’re looking into a time capsule from earlier in the century, or farther back…It’s like the "land that time forgot.” We haven’t really done all that much with marine fish systems. Who could blame us? I mean, we've been busy most of the last couple of decades, playing with coral, developing techniques, equipment, and ideas to keep reef aquariums. It’s been awesome, and a true renaissance for the aquatic hobby!
What would a more evolved “FOWLR” system have that the typical one wouldn’t? What equipment choices and “software” (ie; biological) consideration would you make? I know that I’d probably make mine all about nutrient export…And not just a big old mechanical filtration system (unless I was keeping a ton of Triggers and fishes like that). I’d think like a reefer more. I wouldn’t equip my fish aquarium as if it were “easier” than a reef, which is, weather we like to admit it or not- how many “modern” fish only systems are run.
Wouldn’t it make sense to strive for more “reef-like” conditions, instead of letting ourselves “get away” with high nitrate, phosphate, and varying alkalinity levels “just because” fishes “can handle it better?” Why have we made that more acceptable than we would in a reef tank, I wonder?
I’d be all about a big sump…I would blow off the whole bio-ball thing, even though there are some good rationales for employing them in a fish system. Rather, I’d rely on a large sump, with a significant refugium, stocked with animals like sponges, tunicates, feather dusters, and perhaps even clams. Yes, a refugium. The concept seemingly kicked to the curb in the reefing world earlier this century, for no apparent reason- replaced by…what?
Yeah I’d really embrace natural systems in a “Postmodern” fish aquarium.
I’d place heavy emphasis on macro algae, grown on a reverse daylight schedule- just like we do in reef systems. We’re talking gallons of Chaetomorpha, Ulva, and other diverse macro algae, harvested regularly, and not illuminated as an afterthought, either. Give them the best lighting possible. I’d use an advanced LED light system designed for freshwater planted tank use (ie; lower K). As we know from reef keeping, not only do growing marine algae assist with nutrient control and export (assuming you harvest them regularly), they are thought to release substances like amino acids, vitamins, and types of sugars that other aquatic life forms (including fishes) can continue to use. As an added bonus, growth of macro algae is more rapid when nutrient content is higher, meaning that macro algae as a filter adjunct is super adaptable and essentially “self-customizing” for any aquarium without external influences or tinkering on our part. And a lot of fishes eat them, too.
I’d even be very open to incorporating Leng Sy’s “Miracle Mud” methodology for a system for fishes…Seems like encouraging the growth of macro algae for both nutrient export and for the positive biochemical affects might be a win-win, reviving yet another seemingly moribund approach for use in the “Postmodern Era.”
The macro algae refugium deserves another look!
Nothing should be off the table when considering options here, IMHO.
We all know the value of water movement for corals, so why not apply the same thinking to a fish-only system? In other words, the amazing variety of electronic water pumps that we use to create beneficial flow patterns for corals will offer the same for fishes. Concepts like gyre flow and alternating pulse can work great in fish aquariums. One of my friends jokes that his fish system has “too much flow for corals”, and that makes perfect sense to me! At the risk of sounding too “charming”, the reality is that fishes need the “exercise” that swimming against a current will provide. They receive the physical activity necessary to continue proper growth and development of their muscles and other organs. It is also postulated that water movement assists with the digestion and other metabolic processes of fish.
Strong water movement assists in maintaining a cleaner, more stable environment by keeping particulate and other solid wast material suspended in the current, where they are readily trapped and removed via the overflow weir into…your sump…where it can settle for physical removal and also be processed by the creatures in your refugium. Not revolutionary, but logical. So IMHO, a “Postmodern” fish system would not use filter socks, as they would deprive other beneficial organisms of potential food sources. Dissolved waste materials would be absorbed by chemical filtration media, and utilized by macroalgae, and oxygenation of the water would be enhanced. So in other words, I’d open those MP60’s, Korallias and Tunzes full throttle, cycling them up and down from zero to 100%.
Since I mentioned chemical filtration, I’d definitely utilize activated carbon in a reactor of some sort. I wouldn’t go too crazy with phosphate removers because A) It’s not tremendously detrimental to fish, and B) If you take out the phosphate you're competing with you algae bed, which will utilize it as fuel for growth. Of course, that begs the question, why fuss with macro algae when you can use phosphate removal media, and then answer, as stated above is that macro algae growth and harvest offers numerous collateral benefits that the media alone doesn’t.
I’d continue to use a protein skimmer. I wouldn’t necessarily run a huge one, either, because I believe that removing every single bit of dissolved organic material from the water will deprive your macro algae and refugium organisms the materials they need to do their job. I’d go with an “adequate” skimmer, but I wouldn’t go for a huge one, or even an oversized one. What are your thoughts on this?
For water parameters, I’d do my best to keep things stable. I’d try to maintain “reef quality” water conditions as much as possible, including alkalinity. I wouldn’t necessarily be dosing anything, unless testing dictates, although I think it is possible that fish only systems may end up running with trace element excesses or deficiencies, and this could be monitored by testing and adjusting as you see fit.
I’d run my water temp a bit cooler- like 76-77F, to keep as much dissolved oxygen in the system as possible. And I’d keep my specific gravity at 1.025, rather than a suppressed specific gravity, which could lead to long-term physiological issues for the fish.
How would I aquascape a fish only tank? Nothing really new here. Well, personally, I’d use live rock. Yep, LIVE rock. Sure, you could mix some of the dried or artificial stuff in there, but I’d go for a high percentage cured live rock (of course, cultured). My simple rationale is that it provides biological diversity- and biological diversity is something that I feel can benefit such a system in numerous ways. As far as substrate is concerned, unless your specimens require a thick sand bed to sleep in, I’d go for a shallow layer of sand in the system, largely for decorative purposes. I’d keep it reasonably stirred up, too.
I think that it means no coral, in my book…Yeah, I’d think that in this instance, coral would detract from the focus on fishes, and I think would add some boiled that a fish only system can probably do without, IMHO. Do I dare say that synthetic corals would be cool? I am torn, both ethically (because a fish cant nibble on plastic..) and aesthetically, although they are very nice these days.
Speaking of nibbling, I think I’d try to incorporate far less in the way of super fatty foods, and integrate more vegetable matter into their diet. I have never been a fan of pelleted foods until recently, when the new generation of super nutritional products has changed the game considerably. I would definitely incorporate these foods into my mainly frozen/fresh dietary approach to fish nutrition.
As far as maintenance, would you go with frequent water changes? We’ve beaten about this topic in terms of Triton and other philosophies, and in the end, I know that I’d do water exchanges on a fairly regular basis in a fish only system. I’d probably do something like 10% a week, perhaps larger if the population dictates it. What are your thoughts here, given all the discussion on biological processes and such?
In the end, nothing discussed here is landmark stuff, or even radical in any way. However, I think that we did discuss some basic changes to the philosophy of marine fish keeping, and can perhaps revisit the manner in which we have been equipping and managing such tanks for the last couple of decades. What’s important- and fun- is that we continue a dialogue in the hobby that encourages progression and moves us steadily forward from the status quo, farther into the realm of what was previously though to be unconventional or even not practical. We should continue to apply our latest discoveries, technology, and out out of the box thinking to all areas of the aquarium hobby, which will enrich our lives and the lives of the organisms that we cherish, for years to come.
Until next time...rethink the FOWLR...love those fishes..
And stay wet!
Regards,
Scott Fellman
Unique Corals
Last edited:
