Dakota, I couldn't have put it any better. As someone who, regretfully, made contributions to that 'pile of dead fish' you refer to, I can also say that it was not without huge benefit. Years ago (1970's) I had the best equipment available and a lot of knowledge for the time. I lost more than I could keep alive. Once we got the chemistry down, disease would scour our tanks. The foods available were woefully inadequate, and many of us learned to make our own. I gave up 'buying' fish for a while (forget keeping corals). Living in Florida I had access to the ocean and collected my own. I felt better about this, and the specimens were in better shape. I realized the loss during shipment must have been horrific (mostly due to cyanide use in collection)! Later on objective reporting on the collection and shipment methods, led to major change and improvements. In the mean time, we learned about compatibility, food requirements, better water maintenance techniques/chemistry. The quality and variety of foods available increased dramatically. The previously mentioned revolution in collection and shipment methods took place. A guy named George Smit, whom many of you have never heard of, came to the US from Holland. He applied known wastewater filtration technology to marine aquaria and introduced 'wet-dry trickle filters' to us. While many of us no longer accept these as desireable filters, they revolutionized marine aquarium technique and our level of success. These all led many aquarists to study variables we were oblivious to in decades past. NONE of this would have occured without those fish in the pile mentioned above. I never encourage keeping known difficult fish (ie-Pinnatus Batfish, for example). However, I do welcome the responsible exploration by known thought leaders in our hobby, of advanced techniques and technology. It is not without cost, but necessary IMO. I believe strongly, that advanced level hobbyists have contributed more to the successful husbandry of reef organisms than even professional investigators/scientists have during this period. I think I can say this objectively having been both.
Anybody here have a Moorish idol?
- Thread starter mapleredta
- Start date
Dakota, I couldn't have put it any better. As someone who, regretfully, made contributions to that 'pile of dead fish' you refer to, I can also say that it was not without huge benefit. Years ago (1970's) I had the best equipment available and a lot of knowledge for the time. I lost more than I could keep alive. Once we got the chemistry down, disease would scour our tanks. The foods available were woefully inadequate, and many of us learned to make our own. I gave up 'buying' fish for a while (forget keeping corals). Living in Florida I had access to the ocean and collected my own. I felt better about this, and the specimens were in better shape. I realized the loss during shipment must have been horrific (mostly due to cyanide use in collection)! Later on objective reporting on the collection and shipment methods, led to major change and improvements. In the mean time, we learned about compatibility, food requirements, better water maintenance techniques/chemistry. The quality and variety of foods available increased dramatically. The previously mentioned revolution in collection and shipment methods took place. A guy named George Smit, whom many of you have never heard of, came to the US from Holland. He applied known wastewater filtration technology to marine aquaria and introduced 'wet-dry trickle filters' to us. While many of us no longer accept these as desireable filters, they revolutionized marine aquarium technique and our level of success. These all led many aquarists to study variables we were oblivious to in decades past. NONE of this would have occured without those fish in the pile mentioned above. I never encourage keeping known difficult fish (ie-Pinnatus Batfish, for example). However, I do welcome the responsible exploration by known thought leaders in our hobby, of advanced techniques and technology. It is not without cost, but necessary IMO. I believe strongly, that advanced level hobbyists have contributed more to the successful husbandry of reef organisms than even professional investigators/scientists have during this period. I think I can say this objectively having been both.
- Messages
- 1,208
- Reaction score
- 0
As always, well said, Ich. Man, those Dutch are engineering geniuses, aren't they?
I'm one of those that pilfered the oceans in the 70's. I was reasonably successful in keeping Fish Only without Live Rock. In those days I used a 5 gallon bucket with crushed oyster shell, overflow into the bucket and a little giant external pump for the return. I had no clue as to what I was doing. Now that I'm back in the hobby a hundred years (or so it seems) later, I'm overwhelmed by the advances. I'm struggling to keep up but thanks to the ARC and some quality LFS people I may make it through. Ichthyoid: I appreciated your comments!</em>
- Messages
- 1,208
- Reaction score
- 0
Wow. You guys are old. I wasn't even born till '84. 
- Messages
- 1,208
- Reaction score
- 0
HAHA! That's awesome. So you graduated from High School last year?
