lduncan

Really depends on how fast detritus is being produced. The less of it you have sitting in the tubs, and in the pores of the rock, the faster the cooking process happens. So you basically prolong the process by not swishing and dunking to remove the detritus produced. The more you dunk and swish, the faster you'll cook the rock, and the more crap you'll purge from the rock (and the lower the nutrient equilibrium point becomes). I read heaps of different forums. Some I'll post on, others I won't. Layton

There's your answer.

It's just a small shop, but very high quality. It's the best presented shop in ChCh by a long shot.

Do you expect that a tank started with dry rock, which then has fish and corals added, doesn't end up with pods, mysis, bristleworms, etc in it? The problem isn't getting these things into the tank, it's keeping them out of it. None of that stuff you mentioned really helps clean up, they're just another waste producing step in the chain. Just tagging along for the ride. To me it seems that "biodiversity" is just one of those feel good words people love to hear and use. Layton

I've seen some misleading statements about cooking rock and sand (I can't see how cooking sand would even work), so I thought i'd make a couple of points here: Dunk and Swish! This is key. Rock cooking is more than just chucking some rocks in the dark for a while. You're wanting to purge the rock of nutrients as fast as possible. Part of this is remove bacterial detritus and export the waste. If you're not dunking and swishing, you're not really cooking the rock. Timeframes, this is like asking how longs a piece of string. Rock cooking is done when it's done. It's dependent on a few variables, like how filthy the rock is, how often you dunk and swish, how clean you keep the surrounding water, etc It could take anywhere from several weeks, to several months. There's no set timeframe. When it's done it's done. Sand cooking, i'd like to see some rational behind that, I can't see any point to it. Cooking, done right, is a great way to completely avoid the algae cycles some people consider a normal succession in starting a new tank. Layton

Yes, some corals (the ones NOAA could get hold of) were eventually returned after a series of emails concerned about the condition and use of them, finally culminating in a formal letter requesting the return of all corals collected under the permit. Many were returned in "a very poor condition" (bleached and dying) Chopped up and unattached to bases. They were basically neglected. I think there are still some other outcomes pending, according to the rumours I heard last year, but I haven't seen anything "official" about it yet, so I won't comment on that.

The Japanese whale in a marine sanctuary under the understanding that they kill whales only for research purposes. They abuse this, and chop up whales they kill and sell it as food in Japan. But who cares, there are always more whales there to harvest right? A guy gets permits to collect corals in a reef sanctuary under the understanding that they are to be used for research into Caribbean coral diseases. He abuses this, collecting bigger corals than allowed, contaminates them with pacific corals, and chops them up for sale. But who cares, there are always more corals there to harvest right?

Maybe it's actually because he and associated company were granted these collection permits over other researchers and projects. And some people are probably pissed off that he squandered and abused the rare opportunity. That's an unusual statement. If that was everyone's attitude, no-one would ever be criticised for doing wrong, and no one would be held accountable for their actions. Layton

It's a little more serious than just bending some rules.

I don't know the in's and out's of the permit systems. But relatively speaking Caribbean corals are rare compared with Pacific ones. The issues were, He took large corals which he was specifically instructed not to, because the Navy were required to be transplanted by law. He could not verify that reasonable steps were made to keep these Caribbean corals separate from pacific corals, meaning that reintroduction as required wasn't possible. This was done deliberately. He apparently used corals which he acquired for research purposes for his personal financial gain. Selling them, and running a "chop shop". He said that he had certain restricted species, which were not available in the collection zone. These were obtained illegally. His tank "crash" coincides with the formal letter revoking the permit. Those people that he said came to his home to sabotage his tank were probably the authorities repossessing corals. I think there is more to come here. The released info so far is not entirely complete yet. Layton

It sure will. The reason it took so long to become "public" was because he had tried to keep it quiet, apparently threatening legal action against any who attempted to disclose the details. But now it's all out under FOIA.

What "life" are you after? Personally I'm interested in keeping corals and fish. Layton

Mainly because they can end up multiplying quickly, and they aren't that attractive. However, they usually don't cause problems with corals like the sea spiders can.

Exterminate it. They cause trouble from what i've seen. You might want to get rid of that star fish too. One of the reasons I always like to start from dry rock is that you don't get all these parasites, and the crap some people refer to as "life". Layton

I while back I heard some rumours about Eric Borneman while chatting with some prominent US reefers. Basically it was about some dubious collection practises of restricted coral species by him and his associated company. Interestingly it was around the time he said his tank crashed (that never really did add up). Anyway, looks like he's managed to piss someone off enough for them to setup a website with some of the relevant documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act: http://www.opportunitylost.org/ Layton

Yip, freight, GST, customs and duties are the killers. That's why I suggested the injection moulding route.

What use would one have for a metric tonne of bioballs? That's going to be a large volume! For that sort of volume, I would suggest a plastic injection moulding company. Get a die made and go nuts.

Yip, let me know a day/time which suits you.

I was talking with John in the weekend (stocking up on some freshwater fish / plants) and he said he was going to bring some in. I'll have to check them out on Wed.

I was asking if you had sand, but I see from your pics a few threads down that you do. The mandarin should be fine without changing anything. Layton

sand?

what size tank have you got? It's more than likely there are plenty of pods to support a mandarin, most pods aren't too visible. Which means that you don't need to trap any more detritus and filth with macroalgae, or yellow the water with algae leachates. So the MM may not be necessary. Layton

What are you looking to achieve with it?

Here's the answer: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/3/aafeature1 Very good article on a quantitative look at photosaturation, and photoinhibition for various corals. Layton

What I was meaning is that any water which has been ozonated going back into the main tank should ideally pass through a skimmer, then totally through carbon. Rather than just a separate carbon filter, or passive bag of carbon sitting in the sump. You want to try and offgas or absorb as much of the nasty by products created by the ozone as possible. If you're running fish only, this isn't as critical. Yip. Although perceptially people seem to find ozone more effective, but that's really because most people undersize UV units, relative to ozone units. Layton