• Why not take a moment to introduce yourself to our members?

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Terry I have been playing around with the hypo idea for the past few months , dropping the salinty on day two following aclimation.....then lasting a few days to weeks. Your right ,the fish seem to like it.( alot) even down to (012-08)Dont know if its having a grand effect due to the fact that I dont see much DOA DAA in the first place.But the fish seem to lose their hangover quicker. The osmotic shock on the Bio tower can be an issue as is skimming preformance. I will be trying out an oversized tower to see if this compensates for the loss of Denitration. namely nitrite to nitrate problems. Ammonia seems not to be an issue , but nitrate can creep in during the desalinity stages.(something I never seem to have issue with unless dropping gravity)
Ironicly the only fish I do have DAA issues are clown fish , of which these fish seem to not like exended hypo treatments. Even healthy clowns seem to not tolerate the extended hypo stints. Using medications with the hypo water seems not to work well and formalin with hypo is a disaster on the bio tower. What have been your results with clownfish ? What levels have you worked with for clowns and at what durations?Brooklynella ?
 

Terry B

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalk,

You may find that the fish actually recover quicker when placed directly into hyposalinity as they are acclimated on the first day. 12ppt may be a good target as 11-12ppt matches the salinity of the internal fluids of boney reef fish. However, it is more difficult to maintain water quality at 11 or 12ppt verses 14ppt. True, a protein skimmer does not work well in hyposaline conditions. Have you tried using Poly Filter (chem pad) by Poly Bio Marine to remove impurities and ammonia, nitrite, etc?

I am surprised to hear you are having problems with clownfish at low salinities. They are very good osmoregulators. I know that the people that make Instant Ocean (Tom Frakes told me) use reduced salinities with broods. Joyce Wilkerson is also a fan of hyposalinity and she has raised more than a few clowns. Could the problems with the clowns be related to a falling pH in hyposalinity? I definitely would not combine formalin with a freshwater dip. I have personally kept several clowns in hypo and you are the first person that I have heard of reporting any difficulty with clownfish in hypo.

I haven’t seen anything conclusive about a reduced incidence of brooklynella in hyposaline conditions. However, I have heard reports of less problems with external parasites in general when fish are kept in hyposalinity. Brooklynella is more opportunistic than some external parasites so I wonder if any reduced incidence of Brook in hypo could be attributed to increased resistance by the fish rather than hypo conditions directly killing the parasite.

Terry B
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
My Fish which are coming in from overseas rarely have crypto or amyloo..
The clownfish never are showing signs of Brook apon arrival either . But go down hill soon after during aclimation. {lowered pH clean Salt water} Maybe lose five percent of fish during aclimation not including clowns.Why this clown only problem? {percs not an issue}{neither are Tonga or Vanuatu clowns} But Bali and Veitnam can be a real problem .I dont like selling clowns not already paired with a mate and not without an ajusted anemone host .
Perhaps the biggest issue I deal with is that we usually have twenty to thirty clowns paired up and with a host anemone. Thats when the clowns really have trouble. Seems the clown fish in the fish only systems fair better.
Do anemones harbor Brooklynella? Seems like a paradox. At least the clowns die a happy natural death. Home sweet home is the overwelming choice which terminal humans pick to spend their final days!

:wink: But I wont settle for that........still searching for answers.
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Terry B":1adbtohx said:
Kalk,

I definitely would not combine formalin with a freshwater dip.


Terry B
not a F W D.......... "hypo aclimation " is where I run into more frequent Brookly like issues. about one third of the fish seem to drop dead with gills out and a light dusting of what looks like Brookly. Does Hypo remove the protective mucus from clowns? Seems that a good thing on a sick clown but wouldnt that be removing the protective barrier on a healthy clown?
But come to think of it I ........all the time I spend under a microscope and I have actually never confirmed my problem is Brooklynella......?
Seems I need to expand the scope of work in this area.
I will "clown around" a tad with both some scapings and a round mirror next shipment. :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
cortez marine":2t2d06nf said:
Peter writes;

I think the "problem" for the trade in the future will be that coral reef scientists will push to ban all types of fishing (including fish collecting) because reefs are declining due to global warming and other anthropogenic effects. Without action to reform fish-collection practices (away from cyanide-fishing to net-collecting), the reef scientific community will push to ban collecting (because cyanide fishing destroys coral reefs).

Even though this trade may dispute the reason for any move to ban it...it also disputes any reason to reform it beyond token gestures.
Out of touch and out to lunch"eco-sci-fi" types may well try and make a name for themselves by pushing to ban this trade.
They have already done it largely in Mexico...and permits are harder and harder to get in every country now.
ONE MORNING YOU WAKE UP...AND THE TRADE WILL NEVER AGAIN BE THE SAME.

Like this morning in California; Salmon fishing...as we have known it for 100 years is on the edge.
Things do get banned. Salmon fishing may in fact be banned soon in California for the entire season. First time ever!

See the fishermans group newsletter excerpt below;

Coastsiders and the Fishing Community
We have a crises that potentially will change your fishing for the rest of your life, and cause economic disaster at an unprecedented level to a fishing industry, and we are the target.
I ask you in the strongest language to stand up and be counted, I need everyone on this not just the same guys. There are 12000 members and I want everyone of you, this is that important. If you choose to sit on the sidelines on this, that will tell me and the rest of the political team we are just wasting our time, because you could care less whether there is a salmon season or not. We have have many things going on a lawsuit over MLPA funding etc. We are working full time for you please stand up and be counted on this one.

I grew up fishing here for Salmon and rockfish. Both are now changed forever and its not going back to the way it was....
Our trade is clearly following this path...deserved or not...
Steve




well, with mentalities like that one....... :?
 

Terry B

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalk,

I don’t think anemones harbor brooklynella and I don ‘t think hypo causes reduced mucus production. I do think a temperature change that is too fast or too much of a swing can reduce mucus production. I would expect to see some hyper production of mucus in fish with brooklynella. I am interested to see what shows up under a microscope. The problem may have more to do with water quality issues. As you have noted, it takes a little time for the biofilter to recover after a large shift in salinity. This can cause a temporary problem depending on how much the salinity is changed, how quickly and what the final salinity is. The water quality is more difficult to maintain at 11 or 12ppt than at 14ppt. You might try a product called Algone to see if it helps you. It will remove some of the toxins from the water. Here is a link: http://www.algone.com/directions.htm
I would like to hear from you what your results with it are. Keep in mind that the pH is unstable in hyposaline conditions. You need to check it each day and buffer as needed. A drop in pH can certainly cause difficulties for the fish.

Terry B
 

mkirda

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalkbreath":2bxt2lq4 said:
No one has ever established that there is a problem.

And anyone who has been diving on a collector's reef could tell you that there *is* a severe problem, Kalk.

The evidence is there. You just keep putting your fingers in your ears while yelling "LALALALALALALALA".

Do what?

Mike
 

mkirda

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalkbreath":3fdd57de said:
TAgain, Today people are slamming Bali without the least shred of evidence to support the claim.

So, when a boat is caught with squirt bottles filled with cyanide on-board and MO fish on it, this isn't evidence enough?

I'm curious what level of proof you need here.

Mike
 

mkirda

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalkbreath":3pzqlksr said:
An SUV gets 29 percent less MPG then the average US car , but it also holds 400+ percent more passages when in use.[an SUV is almost five times more likely to have more then one occupant when in use.]
An SUV is more fuel efficient not by design , but by the way it is used.

That's pretty funny. Ya ought to visit Chicago during Rush hour...
SUV after SUV after SUV after SUV... All filled with EXACTLY ONE person, the driver. Every other one with cell phone glued to their ear...

Yes, there are occasional SUVs with *TWO* passengers. About as many as with normal cars.

My Honda Civic holds four people. I don't think I have ever seen a 20 person capacity SUV... Maybe if you got a bunch of crazies from the 60's (who loved stuffing themselves into cars, phonebooths, etc...) and a Hummer you could cram 20 people in there and still drive... Maybe. I don't know... Do they do that in Atlanta? Hell, I've seen that in Sulawesi, even on a few Jeepneys in the provinces of PI, but never in the US of A.

Mike
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
mkirda":7pen5c39 said:
Kalkbreath":7pen5c39 said:
An SUV gets 29 percent less MPG then the average US car , but it also holds 400+ percent more passages when in use.[an SUV is almost five times more likely to have more then one occupant when in use.]
An SUV is more fuel efficient not by design , but by the way it is used.

That's pretty funny. Ya ought to visit Chicago during Rush hour...
SUV after SUV after SUV after SUV... All filled with EXACTLY ONE person, the driver. Every other one with cell phone glued to their ear...

Yes, there are occasional SUVs with *TWO* passengers. About as many as with normal cars.

My Honda Civic holds four people. I don't think I have ever seen a 20 person capacity SUV... Maybe if you got a bunch of crazies from the 60's (who loved stuffing themselves into cars, phonebooths, etc...) and a Hummer you could cram 20 people in there and still drive... Maybe. I don't know... Do they do that in Atlanta? Hell, I've seen that in Sulawesi, even on a few Jeepneys in the provinces of PI, but never in the US of A.

Mike
Just like a school bus,even if the SUV is empty on the way back from dropping of the kids.......... An SUV is five times more likely to have more then one occcupant compared to a car. That alone negates the 29 % less fuel loss and actually makes SUVS better at saving fuel. {In the real world}
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
mkirda":mbr2bvrh said:
I'm curious what level of proof you need here.

Some photos would be nice. Everything else is just edited heresay.

Peace,

Chip
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
mkirda":233nu0o7 said:
Kalkbreath":233nu0o7 said:
No one has ever established that there is a problem.

And anyone who has been diving on a collector's reef could tell you that there *is* a severe problem, Kalk.

The evidence is there. You just keep putting your fingers in your ears while yelling "LALALALALALALALA".

Do what?

Mike
Please read the topic heading again,
There is no "mortality" problem. You have nets on the brain. Every importer here is agreeing that Peters 60 percent or even 30 percent DOA DAA is preposterous!
Only 21 percent of the fish out of PI were found to have cyanide present.
Even if cyanide killed every fish collected with it , then only 21% of the total fish would come in DOA as a direct result of squirt fishing.
Or do have you found a link between cyanide fishing and Delta Airlines Baggage handlers? :roll:
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
mkirda":1crpxw60 said:
I've seen that in Sulawesi, even on a few Jeepneys in the provinces of PI, but never in the US of A.

Mike
And there in lies your answer,

You look at the world from you own limited perspective.
World wide which scenario do you think an SUV is more likely to be used?
One guy driving around Chicago in his Blazer?
Or millions of people in third world countries hanging off jeeps and SUVS riding into town to get supplies? In PI or BAli,how many single occupant jeeps do you see driving MO fish into town?
Even in most of America, the inner city commuter is not the norm.
Half of America is still red states , farm land and pick up tucks.
The average house hold in Fly over territory has half the the number of vehicles yet an equal number of people. Do we really expect farmer Bob and his family to "ride into town" to get some hay in a Toyota civic?
Two average US cars actually burn more fuel then one SUV.
Take a ride in the middle 46 states and notice the average number of passages in pick ups and SUVS.
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
marillion":2mvlujum said:
mkirda":2mvlujum said:
I'm curious what level of proof you need here.

Some photos would be nice. Everything else is just edited heresay.

Peace,

Chip
Images can make a point.
 

Attachments

  • 2324saabumine.jpg
    2324saabumine.jpg
    120.8 KB · Views: 5,168

mkirda

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Kalkbreath":145yzh56 said:
Just like a school bus,even if the SUV is empty on the way back from dropping of the kids.......... An SUV is five times more likely to have more then one occcupant compared to a car. That alone negates the 29 % less fuel loss and actually makes SUVS better at saving fuel. {In the real world}

You make this claim, but my experience on my daily commute tells me that you are way off-base.

I made it a point to look this morning. Cars with two passengers outnumbered SUVs with two passengers. I didn't see a single SUV with more than two people in it, while I saw more than one car with four people in it.

From my office window, there is a busy intersection visible. At the last light round, 5 SUVs, 2 cars, one truck. All single passenger visible, except for one car carrying two passengers.

My little study is over a wide area of Chicago, and would take into account dozens of cars vs. SUVs. I'd feel rather comfortable stating that your assertion isn't borne out by real world data.

Regards.
Mike Kirda
 

Sponsor Reefs

We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.

Click here to sponsor $10:


Top