lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 A skimmer is a requirement for any tank, whether it has corals or not. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petplanet Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Layton, I think your lossing the skimmer fight IMO. I agree skimmers are great but not essential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 It's no fight. If people want to ignore my advice so be it. But I give it for a reason. Tell me this. How does algae distinguish between a tank which has coral in it, and one that doesn't? Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianemone Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 imo he's winning it, because hes right skimmers are just as benefitial for the fish as they are for the corals and for a begginer to start without one is asking for problems straight away. i know afew people here in hamilton that have either dead or dying fish because one local fish store does not reccomend skimmers at all for a marine tank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Often the difference between a successfull tank and a failed one is that of the skimmer. Not have to read to much in books or the internet to find that out. "The biggest advance in marine fish tanks since the advent of the glass heater is the protein skimmer" Bob Fenner. Not reccomending a skimmer is poor, if not negligent advice. This goes 10 fold for a beginner. I see the comments about 'Layton loosing the arguement'. What a complete crock, have a look around and OPEN YOUR EYES, I would guess 99% of all reefkeepers are using a skimmer. Do you think we use them because we like the idea of spending our money on worthless equipment? I am tireing of seeing this 'advice', more like propoganda. Show me your results, if you really want to push the point lets compare yours with mine. I've already showed you mine, lets see yours, prove to us all why skimming is un-nessessary. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 It is not poor. Show both and explain in each why one is better than the other so that anyone that looks at the informatoin in the future can see the proplems that each method has. This is supposed to be a referance guide for people in the future, not just for peole who are looking at it now. Aaron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 It is poor advice, almost inexcusable for anyone that has run marine tanks for any length of time to say that you could do without a skimmer, no matter what type of tank you are running. How does algae distinguish a fish only tank from a reef? Does water quality not influence the health of fish? Alois and Jetski - looks like you wasted a lot of money on skimmers for your fish systems in your quarantines. Apparently because they are fish only, you don't need one. Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Its not often Layton and I agree on things like this, but I am going to go with it. Here is a statement. The water required to keep corals+fish and just fish should be the same. Unless of course you are advocating that fish are hardier thus they can live is substandard/un-natural conditions. Reef water is reef water, regardless of its intention. Show both and explain in each why one is better than the other so that anyone that looks at the informatoin in the future can see the proplems that each method has. OK how about this: no skimmer/inadiquite skimming = unhealthy environment for most fish and invertibrates, longevity of live-stock is questionable due to poor water conditions. adiquite skimming (over skimming?) = Healthy environment for most fish & inverts, longevity of live-stock greatly improved, pristine water paramaters possible. Now that we have it defined, choose, skim or not to skim? Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Its not often Layton and I agree on things like this, but I am going to go with it. I think we usually agree on the fundamentals ... don't we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 I think we usually agree on the fundamentals ... don't we? Lets not argue about it Piemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 OK how about this: no skimmer/inadiquite skimming = unhealthy environment for most fish and invertibrates, longevity of live-stock is questionable due to poor water conditions. adiquite skimming (over skimming?) = Healthy environment for most fish & inverts, longevity of live-stock greatly improved, pristine water paramaters possible. Now that we have it defined, choose, skim or not to skim? Yes. Brilliant. Lets use it. Why did it take all of that argument for someone to come up with this? Aaron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie extreme Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 i once had a tank with no skimmer!! approx. 140ltr had 2 fish in it (one very nasty but good looking damsel). the tank received lots of natural daylight, had a very small powerhead and a 150 m/h. needless to say it was covered in hair algae (ok so what it was 18 years ago and quite normal then!!), but this tank produced massive amounts of little critters plus i had 4 free swimming jellyish in it for almost 4 weeks, they from nowhere and went the same way. still it was a very awsome sight seeing them cruising around. haven't seen it since or anything even close to it. but then again that tank contained no sps or lps at all a just a couple leathers (which were hard to keep, if you believed the books then). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 CAn I risk adding, Timers for lights, pumps, topup, etc $100 RCD $120 power boxes $30 temp controller $120 fish food $50+ (for a mix of dry and frozen) box of salt incase its been raining and you cant get water $60+ carbon, phos-sorb $50 I also think $50 for plumbing is a bit low, bends cost about $5 each, taps $30+, glue or clamp things $20, plus tube/pipe, adaptors, bulkhead, standpipe parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lduncan Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Just out of interest. Do you have a link for info on the temperature controller you use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suphew Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 same type as pies and jetskisteve use, sorry mine is buried behind my cabinet now so I cant even see the brand name. Set and forget! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Why did it take all of that argument for someone to come up with this? Its common sense, wasn't worth the effort saying it. Similar to saying "heater = water the correct temprature" "no heater - Water to cold, fish and inverts probably die with 6-48 hours". Adding saltwater to the tank = "Fish can swim in a more natural environment" Adding bleech to tank = "Fish melt" Some things just are not worth pointing out. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies Posted April 28, 2005 Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 Layton - I think its this one: http://www.marinedepot.com/aquarium_con ... sp?CartId= Has both chiller and heater functionalty, up to 2000 watts. 10/10 - Must have device. Pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimera Posted April 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2005 yup that's the one. also rate it 10/10. an item i just couldnt do without either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.