Contemplating a Skimmerless Tank

[Der_Iron_Chef]

Wow. Pretty awesome. Hard to argue with *that*

[ron101]

Originally Posted by Delphinus

Well, MY point is (and always was if you "read my posts carefully" see? two can play at this game ) is that skimmerless is certainly an option, because it's not about what equipment you have, but what your nutrient import/export balance is all about. It's a simple producer/consumer scenario. If less goes in, there's less to accumulate. If more goes in, you need to take more out. The goal is equilibrium. A skimmer is but one tool in the arsenal for this goal. There are several others.

I'm sorry but I guess what bothering me here is that over the years I've heard this argument again and again where someone takes a stand and seems to implicate that we should all throw our skimmers away "because they don't use it, and they have success." To turn things around on you a bit, it's the same thing as saying "Because *I* use a skimmer and have success, everyone who doesn't have one should go out and buy one" and that's the very sentiment to which you seem to be objecting. Never at once disputed success isn't possible, but MY point is that there is value in a properly tuned, good design skimmer.

Agreed. The pro- anti- skimmer debate is just another example of an argument that is more emotional than factual. It is hard to fault the hobbyists though because there is not all that much factual information available and many are not familiar with more 'scientific' methods for reaching accurate conclusions (ie accounting for ALL the variables). They run a skimmer and their tank is doing well so it must be making a positive contribution...

I have never seen a complete study that determined that the skimate from foam fractioning is indeed harmful to reef life (I think Borneman did some work but was it conclusive?) yet we assume it is. Why? Because it looks gross and smells bad to us so it must be bad for reef life?

One variable that I do think is often overlooked is the marketing from the industry. As with most others, consumption is encouraged to increase profit and more/bigger is better (and more expensive). Quality skimmers are expensive in an already expensive hobby.

If I had to set up a new system I would definitely look at avoiding purchasing a skimmer if at all possible by keeping the bioload reasonable and choosing corals that thrive at moderate or higher nutrient levels (ie no sps). This would reduce cost and reduce the possibility of 'equipment overload.'

[Voxboy]

Originally Posted by ron101

One variable that I do think is often overlooked is the marketing from the industry. As with most others, consumption is encouraged to increase profit and more/bigger is better (and more expensive). Quality skimmers are expensive in an already expensive hobby.

If I had to set up a new system I would definitely look at avoiding purchasing a skimmer if at all possible by keeping the bioload reasonable and choosing corals that thrive at moderate or higher nutrient levels (ie no sps). This would reduce cost and reduce the possibility of 'equipment overload.'

Excellent points. I'm not sure which industry encourages more consumption/gadgets for profit.For me its between this one....... and golf. Unfortunately I have a passion for both

Skimmer verses no skimmer is a stupid debate/argument due to the variables involved with individual reef tanks and with no impiracle proof otherwise. I have seen amazing tanks with and without. I am still a firm believer in water changes (50% a month) ...always will be. I think by me adding a skimmer to my system will further aid in the water quality...I know it wont hurt it.