Seriously? Has anyone seen this video??

errattiq

errattiq

Member
So I was searching for some nice reef tanks on youtube and came across this video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-pl_sM_p-o
Seriously? They are making some pretty "eyebrow raising" implications that our hobby has deteriorated our world's reef and that there artificial corals are more colorful than real "dull" corals
. I mean its one thing to sell a product but its another thing to make a false argument. Just listen to the narrator as she makes her statements. She does have some points but the company is pretty good at masking their true claims. Well I've said my piece, what do you all think about this? (I also posted a comment on the video using this same username, feel free to comment about that too). I'm open to support and criticism, this just seems like a good conversational/debate point for the ethics section of this site

-Josh
 
the_bandit

the_bandit

Member
I like the idea of people buying these large fake reef pieces. I would rather people spend money on this rather than go to a LFS and buy hundreds of dollars on coral that will die because the person doesnt have the knowledge on how to keep them. I would rather they buy these so more advanced and knowledgable people can buy a nice coral and turn it into a huge mother colony.
I like to think our hobby as a great thing for the ocean. Not in the sense that we are removing coral but because people are buying these coral and growing them out huge so if it ever comes down to it and the ocean is deprived of a certain coral due to overharvesting or unhealthy water conditions, scientists and divers can take a sample of the aquarist mother colony and start repopulating the ocean. I feel we are helping preserve the oceans coral.
I dont think this compant should bash saltwater hobbist though. I didnt like the fact that she was talking about us removing live rock. Yes we do this, but it is a must in order to have saltwater tanks with beneficial critters. As the live rock supply gets lower, I believe that more and more people will turn to making their own rock. I plan to make 100lbs + in my next tank and only seed it with a small amount of live rock. Most people that I have seen that do keep coral have very vibrant and beautiful colors to them. I believe these fake rock work also gives a false sense of security. With the fish in that tank, being mostly grazers, should have less coral and more "live rock".
My two cents. :)
 
aquaknight

aquaknight

Active Member
Listen to how it's worded....
"Human Activities have put 58% of the world's coral at risk." Sure, no doubt humans have done some damage to the reefs. However that is not specifically saying its from collectors for aquariums. Commerical fishing and collecting for decorations have done more damage then we ever will.
The second, "some 90% of some popular coral species die soon after they reach the home aquarium." Sure, some meaning one-to-a-few corals are really hard to keep. I bet over 90% of flowerpot corals die, almost all long tentacle plate corals die, etc.
As for the fake coral itself. My only problem is it seems to replace Live Rock in the tank. You can almost correct that by using a large wet/dry bioball sump to remove ammonia and nitrites. But the add targets non-reef safe species, namely Angels and Butterflies. Both of species IMO/IME do HORRIBLE without Live Rock to graze on. It might be just me, but the colors on the Regal Angel in the vid seems pretty faded.
 
errattiq

errattiq

Member
Nice responses. I have to say so far I agree with both of you as you guys make some pretty sound arguments. I was just thinking of this after I posted last night, the colors on the artificial coral may be very bright now, but UNLIKE real coral, good luck trying to keep those colors shining through once other algaes i.e. coralline begin to take over. It seems like with all those nooks and crannies in that piece, the owner is going to spend more time trying to scrape the darn thing clean than it would probably take just to maintain live coral LOL.
 
small triggers

small triggers

Active Member
the problem with tanks like that is indead they look fake, just as the product is. This company INSTANT REEF, The manufacturing process makes a huge difference, these are hideaous and fake looking cheap attemtps at corals, there are a few companys that do a much better job. They exclude live rock as a filtration method and tell hobbyists that they dont need to use RO water, lol yeah, cuz the algae will look better than the fake corals.
I will be adding some fake corals when i have a large tank built for my triggers BUT very limited, and the company im looking at actually make 'frag plugs' to insert into live rock,,Their corals are attached to fake live rock that looks real, and the rock is not completely covered with fake coral,, i think that is a big difference..
its one thing to push your product, its another to mislead people on what and why they should by them.
 
S

shrimpy brains

Guest
Am I the only one who heard her list one of the invertabrates you could keep as "sea amenities".
 
rlablan

rlablan

Active Member
I heard it too. HAHAHAHAHA MAN! Those sea amenities sure are a lot of upkeep.
lol it's a living creature people, not a country club. hahaha!!!
 
kjr_trig

kjr_trig

Active Member
With a tank like that, the emphasis is on the fish. My first "biggish" tank, I inherited with the house we bought back in South Carolina, it had fake coral, and a wet/dry when we moved in and I never saw the need to change it. I really enjoyed the tank and had some amazing fish that were very long lived. I like my 240 now with loads of LR, and some basic corals and similar fish. Mine didn't have any "fake live rock", just spread out "large fake sps type stuff" and tons of open swimming area. I thought mine looked a lot better than that one, but who knows.
 
fishkid13

fishkid13

Active Member
I thought it was kinda funny when she said we are killing reefs, which is true in some aspects, but then said that the creators of instareef were looking at real corals and copying the looks to make the artifial ones. Now no Sherlock Homes but wouldn't that be taking live corals from the reef too, for their own needs?
 
srfisher17

srfisher17

Active Member
These inserts would be just like the old "dead coral" tanks. Constant algae cleaning of the skeletal coral was considered the #1 reason hobbyists quit. These can't be any different, unless they're coated with teflon.
 
rlablan

rlablan

Active Member
You would still have to scrub with a teflon coating.
Every had that really tough algae on your glass? It's like little bits of paint sometimes and nothing short of a razor can get it off.....
Imagine that crap on these cheapy things. Eventually, you would scrub the color right out!
(think about all those nooks and crannies... bleh)
 
srfisher17

srfisher17

Active Member
Originally Posted by rlablan
http:///forum/post/3187314
You would still have to scrub with a teflon coating.
Every had that really tough algae on your glass? It's like little bits of paint sometimes and nothing short of a razor can get it off.....
Imagine that crap on these cheapy things. Eventually, you would scrub the color right out!
(think about all those nooks and crannies... bleh)
Yeah, at least with skeletal coral, all it needed was a day in the sun.
 
rlablan

rlablan

Active Member
Day in the sun?
I just soak mine in a bleach/water solution. and then rinse very well. Never had an issue.
 
davebrace5533

davebrace5533

New Member
this shouldnt be an ethical question at all, reefers are nothing but good for the world's oceans. think about it this way, most reefs in the world are in tropical areas around developing nations. these reefs have no real use to the people here and so why should they care if it dies out, but when you create a demand for a species and thus an economic interest in preserving that species, the local people will respond by making sure that reef is kept as healthy as possible. It is the same reasoning behind elephant and polar bear hunting. A government now has a true reason to stop a declining population of that species. an elephant tag in africa averages $65,000. and as is the case in botswana(country with the most elephant hunts per anum) that money is used to help these elephants survive and breed. also in botswana, in the early 80's there were almost no elephants but since they have began to have legal hunts the number of wild elephants has steadily increased and that country now has a huge elephant population. the same thing has been happening with polar bears since the early 2000's.
the best way to promote conservation is to let the open market do its thing and give people a reason to want to conserve them.
just look at the stats, the top groups that have made the most habitat and population increases are all hunting/fishing groups, not the sierra club, not greenpiece.
 
wangotango

wangotango

Active Member
Originally Posted by davebrace5533
http:///forum/post/3195827
this shouldnt be an ethical question at all, reefers are nothing but good for the world's oceans. think about it this way, most reefs in the world are in tropical areas around developing nations. these reefs have no real use to the people here and so why should they care if it dies out, but when you create a demand for a species and thus an economic interest in preserving that species, the local people will respond by making sure that reef is kept as healthy as possible. It is the same reasoning behind elephant and polar bear hunting. A government now has a true reason to stop a declining population of that species. an elephant tag in africa averages $65,000. and as is the case in botswana(country with the most elephant hunts per anum) that money is used to help these elephants survive and breed. also in botswana, in the early 80's there were almost no elephants but since they have began to have legal hunts the number of wild elephants has steadily increased and that country now has a huge elephant population. the same thing has been happening with polar bears since the early 2000's.
the best way to promote conservation is to let the open market do its thing and give people a reason to want to conserve them.
just look at the stats, the top groups that have made the most habitat and population increases are all hunting/fishing groups, not the sierra club, not greenpiece.
A lot of those countries depend of the reefs for food, so whether they're exporting triggers or eating them, they are affected by the decline of the reefs. Also, some of the countries in the south Pacific whose economies run on reefs/fish export don't always practice "good" harvesting techniques just because there is a demand for their product. If it's easier for the collectors to use cyanide to catch the fish, then they are going to use it because they can get away with it.
Conservation isn't the only thing we have to worry about either. There are many more problems that natural reefs face, some caused by man and some which aren't. Regardless, people need to be more aware of what's going on.
Get aquacultured with whatever you can.
-Justin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top