Who uses Miracle Mud?

Harleyguy;410760 wrote: Like many folks around here I'm planning on having both a refugium and a skimmer in hopes that I will have a happy medium.

Thanks for clarifying that 1.5" should be good on the Mud... On a side note... I did go on YouTube and watch the "promotional videos" for Miracle Mud and it turns out I have Mineral Mud... So my new question... Does it really make a difference, Mineral Mud or Miracle Mud? If you watch the You Tube video they claim it make a world of difference, but at one point in the video they compare both muds and state "look, they even look identical..." So what gives???

Ahh your screwed nothings like miracle mud without the mircale it's just mud.:lol2::D

Na for me I would not worry about it but thats up to you. I don't know anything about the other stuff.

Joe
 
sailfish;410763 wrote: Ahh your screwed nothings like miracle mud without the mircale it's just mud.:lol2::D

Na for me I would not worry about it but thats up to you. I don't know anything about the other stuff.

Joe

:lol2::lol2::lol2:LMAO:lol2::lol2::lol2:

That's kind of what I'm thinking (typed through tears from laughing)
 
I've never used it, but I've bought it. I have some that's been sitting in my garage forever.

Mud as a filtration device is nothing new and has been around for ages. It does a good job of it, but I wouldn't rely on it 100%.

You can use mud to filter drinking water. It'll be muddy, but it'll be somewhat clean and safe to drink. Would I reccomend this to be your only filtration? Heck no! You'd definately want at at leas some activated carbon. The same applies to the aquarium: more means of nutrient export would be optimal.

I had a successful reef in my 29g in college. It had a seaclone skimmer on it. At that point, I thought more/better filtration would be a waste as my reef was looking good. Now that I've actually used better filtration to yield results that are eons better that the seaclone tank, I know better; what may seem great pales in comparrison to what you can have with clean water.

The main this is your happiness. If you're happy with the results, then that's all that matters. I'm happy with my filtration extravagence and Augusta's happy with his mud; all is well and balanced in the world :)
 
I'm going with what I got... Keep your fingers crossed... Although my fuge isn't going to me nearly as big as yours... Mine is 20x9x15 or 11.5 gallons (actual water volume)... My theory is some fuge is better than no fuge...
 
AugustaSalty;410626 wrote: they dont malfunction like a skimmer can? pumps dont go bad, water levels can fluctuate, they only thing that can happen is a bulb goes out, then nothing bad happens, algae just doesnt grow until you pop in a new light. How are nitrates removed from any ecosystem? they are used up. I know that protein skimmers mimic ocean foam and some gets removed that way. but what about in swamps, lakes, fields, any system? nitrates and phosphates stay in water until used. If the nitrates and phosphates are used by algae in a refugium, they cannont be spilled or leaked back into the system, they are bonded inside the algal tissue. Foam Fractionation works, but it removes things that I believe are better left in the ecosystem. Because at the end of the day thats what we are recreating, an ecosystem. You say that in your opinion there is no better way. what other ways have you tried? I've tried big skimmers, they are successful. I'm not saying they dont work, i mention that many times. However, going with a natural system, and trying to replicate all parts of the ecosystem is actually more stable. Cannot offer a long term solution? I've been running my tank for close to two years on this system and have no plans or reason to make any changes. Its worked for eons in nature, it will work for the life of my tank. Before you knock something, try it, or listen to people who have tried it. Its easy to just say "ooh its just smoke and mirrors" but if you havent tried it, how do you know?. There are many people who have had a great deal of success with it. Whats more likely, that it is a successful system, or thousands of people have just gotten lucky?

To the other question of having a half inch wondering if you need more? If you have a half inch, I'd do one more bucket and make it an even inch. It will be two years before you have to replace half of it, then a half every year. another $30 in two years shouldnt be too much of a wallet strain.

Disagree!!! Every reef has a protein skimmer. Here is an EXTREME example of one:
foam1.jpg
alt="" />


All that foam and grunge on the beach is foam fractionation. But, regardless, comparing our closed, realtively nutrient massive waters to oceanic ecosystems is rather comparing apples and shoelaces.

I do not doubt that your tank runs well, I do not doubt that skimmerless systems can be run, I am merely stating that the "drawbacks" you are suggesting are innaccurate.

FWIW, I HAVE tried algal scrubbers. It failed horribly. I have read more than my fair share of similar stories. IMHO, a protein skimmer is a piece of equipment that should be run on EVERY system. Just my opinion.
 
Also, FWIW, doesnt the ecosystem method mandate using caulerpa, and not chaeto?

Nitrate is also reduced by anaerobic process. That is what makes live rock and deep sand beds effective filters.
 
Back
Top