TO SKIM OR NOT TO SKIM.. is the question

[musho3210]

IMO the skimmate overflowing from the cup will not crash a tank. This is why manufacturers often recommend having the skimmate drain back INTO the tank overnight when tuning it. If the tank was so toxic and the skimmer so effective that the skimmate killed the tank, well I think the tank was dead with or without the skimmer. And honestly you're the first to tell me running a skimmer is a huge risk. Overloading the tank, or putting all the eggs in one basket, are 2 things I never advocated, so don't try to use that nonsense to argue your point. Do you water changes people! Happy??

Well, if you have a general problem with people having false hope, or "newbs giving crappy advice" like that, don't take it out on me. Did I say anywhere in mhy response to him that he could do that? This is actually the main problem I have with your responses to my post. You seem to be trying to get at something I'm not advocating at all. For example, skimmers replace live rock. Or water changes. Where did I say that?

Again, you seem to be reading into my post way more than what is really there.

 

Yes, the drain pipe flows directly into a recirculating skimmer, but not all of it. No, that's not how my nano is setup, but that's how my 70g is being setup. But, I didn't tell him to do that, and I'm not assuming that he is doing that. That scenario was merely a response to YOUR post: "The only thing the skimmer has done for you is pick up some of the slack for the fact that 1. you may be overstocked, 2. may be over feeding (whether it be fish food or coral food), or 3. not managing your nutrient levels well with water changes." I wanted to point out that a skimmer can and is used as a primary method of filtration in tanks. I don't think anything is 100% efficient, so why even bring that up? Courtesy of H&S:

More info on skimmer as primary source of filtration here:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthre...threadid=650985

Are you just trying to be argumenative now or what? If my skimmer is not doing much more than picking up some slack for me, why would I be screwed? Or are you saying now that it IS playing an essential role in my tank's health?

No, I justify the purchase of a skimmer "after seeing what it did for my tank." Obviously my original post must have been misleading in some way because you keep twisting my s*&t out of context. If I had to choose between a skimmer and a fuge I would choose a skimmer. I didn't always feel this way, so I'm not just talking out of my ass! Why is it okay to tell newbs to run a fuge and yet it's bad to advocate a skimmer? Okay I guess I should've saved that for another discussion. My apologies.

I disagree with you about skimmate vs macroalgae growth, but again, you seem to be upset about other issues that I don't really have anything to do with, nor do I advocate (like poor tank husbandry, duh!). Don't take it out on me, and if you want to teach the guy, then address him and don't quote my post.

 

 

Wow, great job, i had the same feelings on his post about him saying how noobs think skimmers replace live rock etc., you never said that lol.

 

Good post, motivated me to get a tunze DOC skimmer for my 20 gallon mixed reef. Ordered it like 30 minutes ago on marine depot.

[dzhuo]

my current tank is 10g. it's bb with about 10lbs of LR. i have no fish so i never feed anything to my tank. i have a fuge but the chaeto has almost die off completely after the initial cycle since there is no nutrient to sustain the growth. here is a one week skimmate:

 

 

i skim on the wet side (or the skimmate used to be much darker) and all those are just from the pods and bateria bio-mass.

 

between the time you do water change, nutrient will continue to build up in the tank. depends on the tank's bioload, this build up process will be faster in some tanks and slower on others. you might not notice the corals react negatively during those build up time but it's there. if you miss one or two water change in a row (trust me on this one, you will!), the build up process will accelerate and your corals will suffer. a skimmer works 24/7 and despite what others say, water change is not a replacement for it regardless of tank size.

 

a tank without skimmer will usually yellow over time and carbon will need to be run regularly to polish the yellowness. again, you will probably not be able to notice the yellowness because it happens slowly and you have nothing to compare with.

 

if you have a chance to get a good skimmer for cheap, i would say go for it. judge by youself when you see what it pulls out.

[dga]

in a 8 gallon no. you can but its just not needed with water changes. running activated carbon will help with removing any waste and keep water column clarified. all the "crap" many users say that a skimmer will "pull" out of the tank is also removed by a quality carbon in such a small tank with a light to medium bioload, in the case of carbon, you just cant see it. and has the added benifit of removing ammonia, so it wont break down into nitrate and nitrite.

[lgreen]

Don't let skimmate fool you. The amount of skimmate produced is proportional to the amount of garbage you put in your tank. Keep your tank light and you may not see much skimmate at all, regardless of whether you have a $30 or $500 skimmer. Keep the load heavy or feed a lot and you will get skimmate. Point is, just having a skimmer is not going to give you a cup of yellow/brown sludge every week.

 

Know your system. If you have a high bioload or feed a lot, then yes, a skimmer may be worth its cost.

[dzhuo]

don't let your keep-your-tank-clean-so-no-skimmer-is-needed fool you. i don't know if you actually take time to read my post or not. i have no fish and i never feed my tank. i have a bb and never anything settle on the rock or bottom glass due to strong current. how much more clean do you want me to keep my tank? the skimmate i post are from the tank itself. the pods and the bacteria bio-mass. regardless of your load, your skimmer is going to produce skimmate simply because in a mature tank, the bio-mass of the bacteria and the pods themselves will produce more waste then you ever thought. the pictures are just prove of it whether you want to believe it or not.

 

also, take a look at any SFS frag tank where fish is almost none and feeding is so freaking min, you will still see lots of skimmate produced from a quality skimmer.

 

again, if you get a chance to get a quality skimmer, go for it. water change is never a replacement for a quality skimmer regardless of tank size.

[raleej337]

Why doesnt everybody just get a skimmer, refugium, and do 25% water changes weekly, just have a bit of everything, would be a great tank.....

 

I'm with you! I have a sump/fuge, a skimmer running 24/7 and do 25% water changes every week. I have pair of BW clown, six line wrasse, yellow coris and a firefish in my 28gal. I feed every other day or three days.

 

I skim just to make sure I'm getting the extra help in making my water quality in a good shape.

[121a]

This is an age old question with so many opinions that there is no simple answer anymore.

I never skimmed on my 10 and 12 gallon tanks but now that they are going to be combined into my 20g i'm using a skimmer. My tanks before were just fine. If you have it in your budget buy one since you said you'll be upgrading in the future.

Just my opinion.

[musho3210]

I'm with you! I have a sump/fuge, a skimmer running 24/7 and do 25% water changes every week. I have pair of BW clown, six line wrasse, yellow coris and a firefish in my 28gal. I feed every other day or three days.

 

I skim just to make sure I'm getting the extra help in making my water quality in a good shape.

 

Yay lol, i plan on a tunze nano skimmer, modded aquaclear as a fuge, and 25% RO/DI changes weekly.

 

in a 8 gallon no. you can but its just not needed with water changes. running activated carbon will help with removing any waste and keep water column clarified. all the "crap" many users say that a skimmer will "pull" out of the tank is also removed by a quality carbon in such a small tank with a light to medium bioload, in the case of carbon, you just cant see it. and has the added benifit of removing ammonia, so it wont break down into nitrate and nitrite.

 

Hehe you rely on carbon too much, are there big carbon blocks in the ocean? No, carbon barely does what skimming does, skimming barely does what carbon does, water changes barely does what carbon does etc. There is no substitute, ok maybe you can have the tank doing well with no carbon or skimming but thats not the point.

 

Carbon does not take in ammonia at a high rate, thats why scientist invented zeo-lite. Carbon wasnt made to take out protein, it was made to take out impurities (and sometimes purities) carbon takes out good stuff as well remember that.

 

Ok heres an anology, would you rather spend money on a product that claims it can substitute MH light, well probably but heres the catch, that product is a chemical, its man made. Would you go with the MH? (ok ok i know MH lights are man made but there not chemicals or additives) Would you rather go chemical or natural? Would you rather eat only chemicals or would you eat organic food? Activated carbon isnt natural, it needs men to make large quantities of good quality carbon, but protein skimming is natural, the ocean does it all the time.

 

Carbon DOES NOT DO WHAT PROTEIN SKIMMING DOES!!!!

 

Sorry i thought that had to be said.

[lgreen]

don't let your keep-your-tank-clean-so-no-skimmer-is-needed fool you. i don't know if you actually take time to read my post or not. i have no fish and i never feed my tank. i have a bb and never anything settle on the rock or bottom glass due to strong current. how much more clean do you want me to keep my tank? the skimmate i post are from the tank itself. the pods and the bacteria bio-mass. regardless of your load, your skimmer is going to produce skimmate simply because in a mature tank, the bio-mass of the bacteria and the pods themselves will produce more waste then you ever thought. the pictures are just prove of it whether you want to believe it or not.

 

also, take a look at any SFS frag tank where fish is almost none and feeding is so freaking min, you will still see lots of skimmate produced from a quality skimmer.

 

again, if you get a chance to get a quality skimmer, go for it. water change is never a replacement for a quality skimmer regardless of tank size.

 

That post just proved you have no idea what you are taking about. You have some issues with cause/effect logic.

 

" water change is never a replacement for a quality skimmer regardless of tank size."

 

That is the most moronic ignorant thing I have ever read. Then again, you have BB tank, so it doesn't surprise me.

[dzhuo]

i told you my points and i showed you the pictures. i described my tank exactly as it's, there is nothing more left for me to argue or defend. whoever reads this thread will be smart enough to figure things out (by judging both sides of the arguments) and make a intelligence decision.

 

instead of calling me not knowing what i am talking about, show some substance of your argument. well, i guess you don't have one other than "it's not needed because everyone else is saying the same thing so i am going to go with the majority here. look, i don't have a skimmer myself and my tank is running fine so how can a skimmer is required?" btw, i would suggest that you do a 100% water change every week. you have a nice day and good luck with your tank. i am done with this thread

[musho3210]

That post just proved you have no idea what you are taking about. You have some issues with cause/effect logic.

 

" water change is never a replacement for a quality skimmer regardless of tank size."

 

That is the most moronic ignorant thing I have ever read. Then again, you have BB tank, so it doesn't surprise me.

 

May i ask why its the most moronic ignorant thing you have ever read and how the BB comes into play, you seemed to have left that out. What do BB tanks have to do with skimming anyway, i guess we will never know......

[lgreen]

i told you my points and i showed you the pictures. i described my tank exactly as it's, there is nothing more left for me to argue or defend. whoever reads this thread will be smart enough to figure things out (by judging both sides of the arguments) and make a intelligence decision.

 

instead of calling me not knowing what i am talking about, show some substance of your argument. well, i guess you don't have one other than "it's not needed because everyone else is saying the same thing so i am going to go with the majority here. look, i don't have a skimmer myself and my tank is running fine so how can a skimmer is required?" btw, i would suggest that you do a 100% water change every week. you have a nice day and good luck with your tank. i am done with this thread

 

Ok...well here is my tank. 10g w/ no protein skimmer. I do water changes once a month and my nitrates are at 0ppm. No fish, and I never feed.

 

 

This tank won the 2006 nano-reef stock contest. How is that for substance? I don't flock with the majority, I set what the majority flocks to.

 

Learn the actual biology, ecology, and chemistry of what is going on in a reef tank and you too can do the same with out all sorts of fancy equipment. Sand beds and live rock can do amazing things when applied correctly.

 

My 58g will have a massive protein skimmer, along with a plenum and macro algae, to accommodate several fish, in addition to SPS corals.

[lgreen]

May i ask why its the most moronic ignorant thing you have ever read and how the BB comes into play, you seemed to have left that out. What do BB tanks have to do with skimming anyway, i guess we will never know......

 

Because a protein skimmer is not a requirement to keep a successful reef tank. Water changes however are, regardless of whether you have a protein skimmer or not.

 

I'm not going to comment further on bare bottom tanks as I'm sure that will just start another major fight. All I can recommend is for anyone deciding between BB and sand beds to do you research and consider the opinions of some of the top experts in this hobby about BB and sandbeds. You'll find most of us biology/marine biology nerds are not very fond of BB. I highly recommend reading The Reef Aquarium Vol. 3 by Julian Sprung for more info.

[dzhuo]

you have a nice tank, i don't deny that.

 

as for substance, no it's not. all you have done is show a tank (which happen to be yours) that is kept successfully without a skimmer. i can show you more tanks that are equally impressive (or more impressive) which do have a skimmer. if using an example prove or disprove anything, does keeping a tang in nano, clams under PC, tap water for top off mean anything to you because i can find example of each in a reasonablly well maintain tanks.

 

Because a protein skimmer is not a requirement to keep a successful reef tank. Water changes however are, regardless of whether you have a protein skimmer or not.

 

i said "water change is never a replacement for a quality skimmer regardless of tank size.". if you interpret my statment correctly (which you don't seem to have base on what you said above), it's not the same as "water change is never as good as a quality skimmer regardless of tanks size."

 

water change happens (most likely) once a week (but in your case, it's once a month), but between water change, nutrient will continue to build up in the tank. the bacteria and micro organism in your tank will help break down part of it. but in a close system, the build up is inevitable and that's why a water change is very welcome and carbon (and other chemical if used at all) is encouraged to be run regularly from time to time. if you miss 1 or 2 water change, however, the build up process will acclerate. if this stress any coral or kill anything, the effect will be snowballing.

 

a skimmer that works continuously ensures that in a small valume of water, this nutriental build up is kept to miminal. it's not an aboslute requirment to run a nano but one that is more important than you try to down play it.

[yardboy]

I think the original question was "In a small nano tank, do I have to have a skimmer?" and I still think the answer is NO.

If I say that "Water changes are enough" and you respond "Buit if you don't do them, then the tank will crash, so you need a skimmer."

I can respond, "if you depend on a skimmer and you don't clean it or keep it tuned regularly, then your tank will crash too"

I saw the pictures of the results of a week's skimming in your tank. It was pretty pitiful. Doing a 10-15% water change every week will certainly remove as much waste as that little cup produced. Maybe you should consider either tuning or getting a better quality skimmer.

[dzhuo]

I saw the pictures of the results of a week's skimming in your tank. It was pretty pitiful. Doing a 10-15% water change every week will certainly remove as much waste as that little cup produced. Maybe you should consider either tuning or getting a better quality skimmer.

 

why? you are the one who suggest that no skimmer is needed at all. you call this pitiful? in a 10g with no fish, never feed anything, bb, a cup of wet skimmate produce consistently every 5 days is pitiful? cool...

[yardboy]

Pitiful that you consider that small amount significant enough to run a skimmer all week. As I said, I believe a 15% water change in a week would remove as much funk as that skimmer did.

[The Ultimate DanK]

While you can get by without a skimmer, on systems larger than, say 10 gallons, I would reccommend them. Yes, you can keep the amount of waste low to negligible by doing weekly water changes, but you can go a little bit longer without having to do a water change while using a skimmer. This is not to say that regular water changes can be neglected if you use a skimmer. As far as over skimming goes, don't by a skimmer too large for your system. Skimming not only removes organic waste from the tank, but it oxengenates the water, helping keep the Ph high. If you are still worried about over skimming, dose whatever you think you are losing.

 

btw, I'm no expert, this is just my opinion based on my personal experience. On my system, I run a skimmer and I have caluerpa and will soon be switching over to the refugium with skimmer by orca.

[10" Red Devil]

OKAY, OKAY some people are just plain arguing to argue now! Can we please end this now. This is getting frigging ridiculous and is starting to spin out into arguments that have nothing to do with the original topic (IE BB or DSB).

[musho3210]

I think the original question was "In a small nano tank, do I have to have a skimmer?" and I still think the answer is NO.

If I say that "Water changes are enough" and you respond "Buit if you don't do them, then the tank will crash, so you need a skimmer."

I can respond, "if you depend on a skimmer and you don't clean it or keep it tuned regularly, then your tank will crash too"

I saw the pictures of the results of a week's skimming in your tank. It was pretty pitiful. Doing a 10-15% water change every week will certainly remove as much waste as that little cup produced. Maybe you should consider either tuning or getting a better quality skimmer.

 

Ok, so a 25% water change will take out that much waste, makes sense, so you would have to do a 50% water change to get the same effect as that person who had the watery skimmate.

 

Doesnt make sense? Well heres this, if his skimmer takes out an equivalent of 25% water change it means without changing water he gets 25% a week from his skimmer. With 25% actual water changes plus the 25% taken from his skimmer, his total weekly change is 50%. I dont need to ask if that is what you meant since you wrote it and never did anything to correct it so im sure that is what you mean.

 

And im pretty sure that collection cup comes of a remora, so you saying getting a better quality skimmer is kinda hard since remora and tunze are pretty much the two best nano skimmers out there. Unless we over skim which was previously stated not good to do.

[shaggydoo541]

If you want to skim go for it. If not, it is not necessary ime for a healthy tank. Both types of setup work obviously or people would not show success in both.

 

However, just because a skimmer removes stinky material does not mean that it is beneficial. Stinky does not equal bad. Any living organisms sucked out by a skimmer will decay rapidly and stink.... therefore who is to say what is skimmed out is necessarily bad? Does anyone know exactly what a skimmer pulls out? No. So for this reason I run skimmerless and my fat well fed tangs and colorful acros are perfectly fine with this.

[yardboy]

Hello guys and gals...

 

Im thinking of getting a skimmer for my lil 8gBC... I was looking at the Aqua C nano version... I want the best water quality for my livestock...

YES or NO and why?

 

PLEASE HELP!

===========================

10" Red Devil Posted Today, 02:13 PM

OKAY, OKAY some people are just plain arguing to argue now! Can we please end this now. This is getting frigging ridiculous and is starting to spin out into arguments that have nothing to do with the original topic (IE BB or DSB).

======================

musho3210 Posted Today, 02:22 PM

QUOTE(yardboy @ Jun 20 2007, 04:47 AM)

 

I think the original question was "In a small nano tank, do I have to have a skimmer?" and I still think the answer is NO.

If I say that "Water changes are enough" and you respond "Buit if you don't do them, then the tank will crash, so you need a skimmer."

I can respond, "if you depend on a skimmer and you don't clean it or keep it tuned regularly, then your tank will crash too"

I saw the pictures of the results of a week's skimming in your tank. It was pretty pitiful. Doing a 10-15% water change every week will certainly remove as much waste as that little cup produced. Maybe you should consider either tuning or getting a better quality skimmer.

 

================

 

Ok, so a 25% water change will take out that much waste, makes sense, so you would have to do a 50% water change to get the same effect as that person who had the watery skimmate.

 

Doesnt make sense? Well heres this, if his skimmer takes out an equivalent of 25% water change it means without changing water he gets 25% a week from his skimmer. With 25% actual water changes plus the 25% taken from his skimmer, his total weekly change is 50%. I dont need to ask if that is what you meant since you wrote it and never did anything to correct it so im sure that is what you mean.

 

And im pretty sure that collection cup comes of a remora, so you saying getting a better quality skimmer is kinda hard since remora and tunze are pretty much the two best nano skimmers out there. Unless we over skim which was previously stated not good to do.

=======================

I don't know exactly where you leaped from my statement of 10-15% to 25% to 50% and don't really care to know. As the last poster said:

========================

shaggydoo541 Posted Today, 02:33 PM

If you want to skim go for it. If not, it is not necessary ime for a healthy tank. Both types of setup work obviously or people would not show success in both.

 

However, just because a skimmer removes stinky material does not mean that it is beneficial. Stinky does not equal bad. Any living organisms sucked out by a skimmer will decay rapidly and stink.... therefore who is to say what is skimmed out is necessarily bad? Does anyone know exactly what a skimmer pulls out? No. So for this reason I run skimmerless and my fat well fed tangs and colorful acros are perfectly fine with this.

 

The twisted arguments on this thread are really weird. I'm glad my Ghetto Beauty isn't listening, because it's doing just fine too, without a skimmer.

[dzhuo]

there is really not much for me to say. like i said before, you will find equally number of people with or without skimmer with a successful tank. this can't be used to prove or disprove anything. if you would rather have the skimmate be in your tank between the time you do water change, that's fine. if you think a consistent skimmate in a relatively well maintained tank with no fish and no feeding is pitiful, that's fine. if you don't think what the skimmer pulls out is harmful to your tank, that's fine. it's ultimately your tank to take care of. good luck.

[10" Red Devil]

there is really not much for me to say. like i said before, you will find equally number of people with or without skimmer with a successful tank. this can't be used to prove or disprove anything. if you would rather have the skimmate be in your tank between the time you do water change, that's fine. if you think a consistent skimmate in a relatively well maintained tank with no fish and no feeding is pitiful, that's fine. if you don't think what the skimmer pulls out is harmful to your tank, that's fine. it's ultimately your tank to take care of. good luck.

 

Dude take your arguments off thread. If you want to argue cool but do it in private message or whatever. Why do you take the bait man? This is not helpful or productive to the thread. I think its great that people are passionate about this hobby but this is just getting ridiculous.

[proraptor2]

First of all if you are running a tank that is only housing softies, zoas, LPS you will be better off without a skimmer (unless you have fish or do massive water changes religiously)….In my experiences those specific corals will grow faster with dirty water (This doesn’t mean slack off on water changes). If you have SPS (which I have a ton of) you want pristine water as the SPS will be more colorful, and will grow a heck of a lot faster, not to mention be more immune to getting infection leading to RTN/STN.

 

Over skimming is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and don’t believe in it especially with SPS enthusiasts. I had a life reef VS 24 skimmer with a mag 9 pump (900GPH which is rated for a 200+ gallon system) on a system with a total of maybe 80 gallons and my SPS never looked so good. I didn’t get very good growth with zoas, shrooms, softies, etc etc but the SPS were growing and looking perfect….Now that I have added my prop tank to the mix (my whole system is probably 180-200 gallons) my SPS colors weren’t as nice and rich and the growth slowed a bit but the other corals were fine and my yumas started multiplying like crazy!…I went out and bought a mag 12 for the skimmer and everything is fine again….The skimmer is a straight up monster…..The SPS look great and grow fast (if I can keep up with calcium!).

 

Why doesn’t everyone do 25% water changes every week? Cause there is no way in hell I can afford to or have the time to change 50 gallons a week! That’s just insane….I will say though that I run fans constantly over my tanks to keep heat down and promote evaporation….Evaporation is a good thing in my eyes as my auto top off is always putting new water in the tank (about 2-3 gallons a day replenishing some of the things I loose in the water column as it gets older…..