Validation for QT .....

ca1ore · Feb 19, 2018

..... Well, for me at least.

I'm in the process of building up my fish population. I've been using QT for all new fish for over a decade now (after 20 years of no QT), and would do it no other way. I recently purchased a few dwarf Angels online, and after a few days they developed velvet. Though I keep CP on hand, it was not able to contain the parasite and all fish died. I shall not be pejorative and say who the vendor was because these kinds of things can happen with any fish source; suffice it to say I am extremely happy to be using QT otherwise my many $thousands resident fish population would be at risk. Velvet makes ich look like the proverbial walk in the park.

I don't post this to elicit sympathy, rather to 'celebrate' the fact that I do QT. Also, FWIW, this is only my second (maybe third) case of velvet in 30 years in the hobby. So the argument that 'I don't do QT and have never had a problem' is a mostly specious one.

HotRocks · Feb 19, 2018

I am fairly new to the hobby (a year or so) and very intrigued by fish disease and treatment. I was luckily introduced to the hobby by @4FordFamily and taught to QT Everything no matter what! I one day hope to say I have 30 yrs in with lots of success too. The fish I like are way to expensive to take a chance on not QT. Sorry for your recent loss. I can relate. I just lost a regal angel in QT, very unfortunate because he was eating well and everything was going great up to the point that my bacterial bloom occurred.

chipmunkofdoom2 · Feb 19, 2018

+1. I got one of those cheap 9 for $99 SPS packs off Ebay a few months ago. I put the corals in QT, which I always do. A few days later, I see a montipora-eating nudibranch munching on one of the monti caps. If that was in my display, that would have been the end of the world. Since it was QT, though, it was no big deal. I got three monti frags in that pack, so I just dipped them every few days for a week or two. No problem at all. I also found an aiptasia on one of the frag plugs. Again, no big deal cuz it's in QT. I covered the little monster with super glue and that was the end of that.

People complain that quarantine is expensive and takes time. Let's not forget that the healthy animals in a display tank were also expensive and they take a lot of your time to keep healthy.

TheEngineer · Feb 19, 2018

chipmunkofdoom2 said:
People complain that quarantine is expensive and takes time. Let's not forget that the healthy animals in a display tank were also expensive and they take a lot of your time to keep healthy.

This. All. Day. Long.

ca1ore · Feb 19, 2018

QT done properly does take time, but it is FAR more expensive in my view to not do it. Although I'd deem my current fish population to be inadequate for my now much bigger tank, I'd still get very little change back from $10K to replace them. In that context, a couple of hundred $ for a proper QT setup is inconsequential. OK, if I had $30 of damsels in a 20L I might make a different calculation.

ca1ore · Feb 19, 2018

HotRockTarBaby said:
I am fairly new to the hobby (a year or so) and very intrigued by fish disease and treatment. I was luckily introduced to the hobby by @4FordFamily and taught to QT Everything no matter what! I one day hope to say I have 30 yrs in with lots of success too. The fish I like are way to expensive to take a chance on not QT. Sorry for your recent loss. I can relate. I just lost a regal angel in QT, very unfortunate because he was eating well and everything was going great up to the point that my bacterial bloom occurred.

I think 'apprenticing' from a successful, tenured reefer - particularly if you can see their success - is the best way way to enjoy the hobby. And be successful yourself.

HotRocks · Feb 19, 2018

ca1ore said:
QT done properly does take time, but it is FAR more expensive in my view to not do it. Although I'd deem my current fish population to be inadequate for my now much bigger tank, I'd still get very little change back from $10K to replace them. In that context, a couple of hundred $ for a proper QT setup is inconsequential. OK, if I had $30 of damsels in a 20L I might make a different calculation.

Agree, but nothing about the hobby is inexpensive, so one lost fish that costs more than 100 bucks, covers a QT setup off Craigslist. If that hundred dollar fish wipes out your whole tank because you don't QT, your way in the hole. Not to mention the time spent. Forget about the money... That's my 2 cents for what it's worth. And I know you have several high end fish from previous conversations, so really no matter what QT costs you would be crazy not to.

HotRocks · Feb 19, 2018

ca1ore said:
QT done properly does take time, but it is FAR more expensive in my view to not do it. Although I'd deem my current fish population to be inadequate for my now much bigger tank, I'd still get very little change back from $10K to replace them. In that context, a couple of hundred $ for a proper QT setup is inconsequential. OK, if I had $30 of damsels in a 20L I might make a different calculation.

Agree, but nothing about the hobby is inexpensive, so one lost fish that costs more than 100 bucks, covers a QT setup off Craigslist. If that hundred dollar fish wipes out your whole tank because you don't QT, your way in the hole. Not to mention the time spent. Forget about the money... That's my 2 cents for what it's worth. And I know you have several high end fish from previous conversations, so really no matter what QT costs you would be crazy not to.

HotRocks · Feb 19, 2018

ca1ore said:
QT done properly does take time, but it is FAR more expensive in my view to not do it. Although I'd deem my current fish population to be inadequate for my now much bigger tank, I'd still get very little change back from $10K to replace them. In that context, a couple of hundred $ for a proper QT setup is inconsequential. OK, if I had $30 of damsels in a 20L I might make a different calculation.

Agree, but nothing about the hobby is inexpensive, so one lost fish that costs more than 100 bucks, covers a QT setup off Craigslist. If that hundred dollar fish wipes out your whole tank because you don't QT, your way in the hole. Not to mention the time spent. Forget about the money... That's my 2 cents for what it's worth. And I know you have several high end fish from previous conversations, so really no matter what QT costs you would be crazy not to.

HotRocks · Feb 19, 2018

ca1ore said:
I think 'apprenticing' from a successful, tenured reefer - particularly if you can see their success - is the best way way to enjoy the hobby. And be successful yourself.

Agree 100%, lucky to have it!

Maritimer · Feb 19, 2018

Even if all we did was to successfully acclimate our new finned friends to captive conditions, without competition, we'd still be able to increase survival in our busy, competitive tanks. The fact that we can - more often than not - intercept contagious diseases and infestations is almost a bonus.

~Bruce

GoldeneyeRet · Feb 19, 2018

ca1ore said:
suffice it to say I am extremely happy to be using QT otherwise my many $thousands resident fish population would be at risk

I agree with this philosophy. My primary reason for qt is to protect my established fish population. Any benefits (or detriments for that matter) to the new arrivals are merely secondary cobenefits and no exception to qt is ever made in my fishroom.

This is why I cringe every time someone says an individual fish will fare better in dt so just "plop it in".

To each their own, but I'm with you!

ca1ore · Feb 20, 2018

Oh yes, not that one shouldn't care about the newcomer ...... but the primary reason is to protect the resident fish population. Interestingly as my 'investment' grows, I find myself more likely to use prophylactic QT measures.