LS vs CC (again)

[1journeyman]

"don't bring your prejudices into an otherwise informational thread"
Prejudices? Anyways..
This thread's all over the map. As I said in an earlier thread, I'd love references to articles backing up your claims about cc and DSB (you offered them, and in all fairness I provided a site full of information defending mine..)
Basically, if I understand correctly, your point is that macro algaes and live rock are safer ways to control nitrates than a DSB. Is this correct?
If so, I'd argue with that premise. Both tanks have live rock so that is a wash. Macro algae can die and "crash" just as anything else. Furthermore, DSBs and macro algaes are not mutually exclusive.
This leads back to what exactly is the benefit of a CC bed? You have to vaccuum them (you don't vaccuum a DSB.), you don't get as much of a calcium buffer as you with a DSB, a CC substrate provides nothing to the nitrogen cycle.
I guess that leaves appearance. If you like it, go for it. Just don't play down the benefits of other systems in the process.
PS "This was not what I was talking about... When I said this, I was referring to people who set up their CC substrate deep like they would a sand bed. CC does not function like sand and you can't have it being 4-6 inches deep like you do with sand"
What thread are you talking about where this has occured?

 

[snipe]

LOL this thread is getting to be funny.
1journeyman I hear ya and I agree.
I have to add something if you say sand bed "will always" crash no matter what then how come most of the hobbiest here have one?

 

[sly]

http://www.pondenterprises.com/PAQ/p...ses%20iii.html" if you are not relying on the gravel to provide a proper substrate for bacterial populations, then you can often get away without it. In most cases, when I create a reef, I do not use any gravel at all, I rely on the living rock to provide the strata for biological filtration site, as well as the trickle filter, etc. I prefer to minimize anaerobic areas as much as possible, and since an undergravel filter is not part of the set-up, there will always be a large place where anaerobic activity can occur if gravel is used." -note: This applies to DSB also. If you don't rely on your substrate for anaerobic processes, you won't run the risk of crashing it if you denitrify through other means- Sly
http://www.wetwebmedia.com/marine/se.../biofiltr1.htm
-CLIP FROM FAQ
"<Some folks claim this "in-between" depth (of a DSB) is too likely to foster other, undesirable anaerobic processes... most notably rotten egg, H2S (Hydrogen Sulfide)production>
--Just know it is. Also as
far as LR, the bacteria alive on these would be in the
prescence of oxygen.
<Actually... no. Both oxygen-using and absence-of-oxygen spaces are provided by such live rock... nitrification and denitrification>
So LR is good for nitrification
and not denitrification right?
<As stated... real, healthy live rock is good for both. Lots of tiny nooks and crannies in live rock for anaerobes.>
Macro algae on the
other hand (to a point) would use some of the nitrates
in the system. "- again, macros and living rock both remove nitrates. In a system like mine, I rely on these exclusively- Sly (oh yea... That's the source you gave me)
http://web.ask.com/redir?u=http%3a%2...nip&Complete=1
"Should you still change water? In my experience water changes can be reduced as the mangroves are maintaining a high water quality level. Perhaps they are not yet eliminated by using mangroves but I have reduced mine by half without any ill side effects. I am monitoring this more and will elaborate in the next update." -note, this is a discussion of someone using mangroves for denitrification. They were able to reduce their water changes considerably without any adverse effects. I have eliminated mine without any adverse effects. -Sly
" * Be patient and let the mangroves clean up your water. You will be surprised at how efficiently they reduce nitrate and phosphate and recycle organic materials and improve the water quality. "- from the same article
http://www.athiel.com/lib10/mangrove7.rtf - actual data collected regarding nitrate levels and the use of mangroves (which I use) notice that in all test cases, nitrate, phosphate and silicates are practically eliminated after a few months. -Sly
http://faq.thekrib.com/filters.html#denitrator
"The Berlin Method of reef aquariums involves the use of large quantities of live rock harvested from tropical reefs. Aquarists report good nitrate control in live rock systems, which, though not well understood, probably involves the denitrification of the nitrates within the ******** of the rocks."
http://animal-world.com/encyclo/reef...htm#filtration
"The Berlin method in general relies on live rock for biological filtration and some denitrification, and a large foam fractionator, or protein skimmer, for nitrate control."- This is similar to what I am doing with my tank. There are several means to do the berlin method. The important thing is to chose a method for denitrification and stick with it. Bang Guy has a berlin setup. He uses a DSB as one of his denitrifiers. I use mangroves instead. He used mangroves at one time and was happy with the results, but had problems keeping calc. up. I haven't had this problem. -Sly
" Stirring the sand actually impedes the nitrate removing ability of the DSB. These small animals are what cause the Nitrate rich water to flow to the lower depths of the sand. Without them the bacteria will die and it will become an anaerobic detritus collection zone." --quote from Bang Guy, reiterating my point that regular maintenance is needed to maintain biodiversity in order to keep a DSB for an extended period of time. -Sly
"I also recommend sand swapping with other hobbiests on a regular basis to maintain diversity. The smaller the DSB, the more often it will need to be recharged to maintain diversity. Sandbeds smaller than 2 square feet need to recharged so often that they cannot be effectively maintained IMO."-- Bang Guy -- Again, he has success with his because of the large fuge that he uses (750 gallons) even he admits that keeping a DSB is more difficult the smaller the tank. This is who my post was written for... people who want a low maintenance, alternative to DSB approach for thier tanks. -Sly
"Animal diversity. In my opinion this is the key to a healthy sandbed that it too often overlooked."- Bang Guy -- That is what I have been saying. If you chose to use a DSB as your primary form of denitrification, then expect to run into eventual problems if you don't have a large biodiversity. I don't have this problem with the CC setup because I don't rely on the DSB for denitrification. Instead I rely on heavy skimming, LR and mangroves. They work just as well and have the added benefit of not crashing if the system is disturbed or if the "animal diversity" is limited. -Sly
I could list more and more sites and quotes but it would fill up the whole forum and you wouldn't read it anyway since you are predetermined to disregard anything that I say...

 

[snipe]

actually Im just agreeing with him nothing wrong with that.
And im not the one taking a forum to heart its just a forum and not everyone "and just about everyone" will not agree with you on this post. Even on other things not everyone will agree with you and your the one looking childish trying to "make" everyone agree with you.

 

[sly]

That's absurd. The whole purpose of a forum is to share ideas and to comment on them. That is exactly what I am doing. I have provided information on how to set up a tank properly with a CC substrate, I have seen it work in my tank and in other's tanks and have provided links to back up the information I'm saying. I have run this setup for a long time without any problems and when I come here to tell people about it, you tell me I'm wrong! You're the one taking it to heart! I only came here to share what I've learned in the saltwater field. I tend to find new ways of doing things and through trial and error, just like any one who uses the scientific method, I have found out what works about this particular setup. So then I share with people in the community on how they can run a CC setup and not run into the problems that other people have had and that's when the war starts...
I didn't come here for you to tell me that the sky is green when I can see that it's blue. You have had "years" experience with bad CC setups and so you have pre-determined that anything regarding CC is invalid. Your closed mind will get you nowhere.
Here's the thread where I posted some pics of my tank. They are not complete since I haven't gotten my USB port to work yet since I reinstalled Linux. But when I do get it installed, I will post follow-ups and full descriptions and pics of the actual filter setup. https://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/show...4&goto=newpost');
This is not snake oil medicine people! It's just simple science.

 

[robchuck]

It's my opinion that each type of substrate has its merits and its drawbacks; there are examples of successful tanks using all sorts of different substrates, and there are also tanks that have failed using those same substrates. No one method is bulletproof.
From reading this and other threads, it seems to me that CC works for Sly. Though there's more maintenance involved with his method than if he were to use any other substrate, who's to say he's wrong?
CC is nice to use in tanks where large amounts of flow are desired and the aquarist doesn't want to deal with sandstorms. That aquarist just needs to understand that CC will likely trap detritus and that proper maintenance will need to occur to prevent nitrate, nitrite, or worse, ammonia to build up. Additional sources of filtration may also be needed (way oversized skimmer, refugium or remote sandbed, etc.)

 

[snipe]

I agree RobChuck. Its just when you try to point something out he takes it out of context and just gets madder and madder as stated above in my other post. The way this thread is going it will be locked soon anyway so no problem for me.

 

[1journeyman]

Sly: Thanks for the links. I hadn't read a couple of those.
This thread nows seems to be evolving into a "CC is ok to use" thread. If that is the intent, I'll agree.
From reading your other thread Sly it's clear we disagree on some basic fundamentals. You don't believe in water changes for instance.
As for your wetwebmedia quotes.. you seem to be overlooking some of the information.
"Which is why to me a DSB is so
important to this process b/c it harbors anerobic
bacteria? <Mmm, yes... as well as a source of carbonate, calcium... surface area.> (taken from about aparagraph above some of the info you quoted) Live rock in itself does not have enough surface area to harbor enough bacteria to remove the nitrates. (point of fact, I guess theoriectically if you have a very light bio load it could..)
I'm all for a forum to discuss ideas. I like reading other points of view. The only reason I poster on this thread to begin with was becasue in your opening paragraph of this thread you made it sound like a DSB will always fail. You also stated a couple of other things about a DSB that are incorrect (it can be too deep, it is more likely to crash, you need to lightly vaccuum it, etc..)

 

[snipe]

That is what I was trying to say.
Its not that we hate you or that we just think your plain wrong its jut some of the info you said was mis-leading. We always like reefers with the edge to try diffrent things. Heck I got some cheap equipment and love it. If no one challenges the hobby then it will never get any better.

 

[sly]

Can I take off my bulletproof vest now?

 

[sly]

.

 

[snipe]

I dont know someone els might come through.

 

[ib4shore]

And you have to think about the ppl ppl dont want "virtually" maintenance free they "want" maintenance free. [/B]
If this is what some ppl feel then maybe they are in the wrong hobby. I for one agree totally with what sly is saying. I must be the only other one that uses UG filters and CC substrate. My lionfish and my snowflake eel lived for 8 yrs in a tank with CC substrate and UG filtration. And I would not clean my tank weekly. Not even once a month and I never had any problems with dirty water. Anyone who knows the least bit about fishkeeping should be able to keep a clean virtually maintenance free tank. This is by the way a saltwaterfish message board. The key word being fish. There is a reef board also. In my opinion most ppl here are reef aquarists not fish keepers.

 

[sly]

exactly, I've never heard of a maintenance free system. Even the Aquarium in Wakiki is not maintenance free and they cycle their water straight from the Pacific. You will always have to at least periodically clean the glass. If anyone has figured out a way to never have to touch the tank, let me know. I want to hear how you did it.
I'm like you, if you set things up right and don't do many of the stupid mistakes that people do (I'm included in that), it is easy to set up a tank that will almost take care of itself. I strongly recommend crushed coral for that purpose unless you have a tank that is gi-normous like Bang Guy's. Truthfully... I don't want a tank that is completely maintenance free. I like seeing my little guys swim around and me cleaning their home is a way for them to become familiar with me. My fish know me apart from my roommate. When I walk into the room, most of them swim over to the side of the tank where I am. Some of them will even follow me if I walk back and forth. But when my roommate walks into the room, they all dash for the rocks and hide. :happyfish

 

[snipe]

Originally posted by IB4SHORE
And you have to think about the ppl ppl dont want "virtually" maintenance free they "want" maintenance free.
If this is what some ppl feel then maybe they are in the wrong hobby. I for one agree totally with what sly is saying. I must be the only other one that uses UG filters and CC substrate. My lionfish and my snowflake eel lived for 8 yrs in a tank with CC substrate and UG filtration. And I would not clean my tank weekly. Not even once a month and I never had any problems with dirty water. Anyone who knows the least bit about fishkeeping should be able to keep a clean virtually maintenance free tank. This is by the way a saltwaterfish message board. The key word being fish. There is a reef board also. In my opinion most ppl here are reef aquarists not fish keepers. [/B]
That is what were always working towards less maintence. And as far as that maintence free thing that was about the substrate not the hole tank.

 

[ib4shore]

I too have made MANY mistakes of the stupid nature. I believe that it took a few yrs or more, before I learned about less CC on the bottom is best for me too. My fish were dying and I had no clue why, but after a while I learned. I also don't mind cleanings. They aren't that bad. My fish got to know me pretty well. They would even greet me when I came home from work.

 

[lizzy]

I'm new to this SW thing...And I was going to go with LS. I still think that thats what I want to do. I personally like the look of the sand better than the CC. So what I was wondering was if I did a thinner layer of Sand would that be better than doing a 3 inch deep Sand Bed? I would also have live rock as well. I was thinking about 1-2 inches of sand. what do you think?

 

[snipe]

1-2 inches would work. Its just that ppl like the deep sand bed cause it is more "free" filtration no electricity. I would fill it up just to the bottom of the black plastic that goes around the bottom of the tank.

 

[1journeyman]

"There is a reef board also. In my opinion most ppl here are reef aquarists not fish keepers."
Not really fair. After all, the majority of the fish we all keep come from reef habitats. That's like going the Australia Zoo and calling Steve Irwin a fence keeper.
Our fish need healthy environments to survive and thrive. That includes a "natural" habitat.

 

[snipe]

Who are you talking to 1journeyman.
LOL the steve irwin thing is kinda funny im sure he helps but I dont think he dose most of the work there.
And I agree your tank should be as natural as it can be.