To All People Planning Reefs or FOWLR

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 29, 2007
1,550
1
0
33
Before you buy that fiji premium rock at your lfs, look at these aquacultured sites. These are much more environmentally friendly things that wont harm our delicate reefs out South East Asia.

These rocks are taken from artificial reefs, thats right man made reefs. People buy land from our government out in the sea. They then buy a huge amount of limestone (calcium carbonate) in other words base rock and dump all that rock into the land that they bought from the government. They wait 5+ years and boom, they have an actual reef no joking. Then they go out and take the rock that people want, come back and now its in your tank, environmentally friendly live rock. Most of these artificial reefs (also called Live Rock Farms) are in Florida although a few are in Hawaii and Fiji.

http://www.reefermadness.us/RM-Hawaiian_cultured.htm
http://www.hawaiiliverock.com/
http://www.reeferrocks.com/liverock/index.htm
http://www.gulf-view.com/index.html
http://sealifeinc.net/catalog/index.php?cPath=25
http://www.tampabaysaltwater.com/
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/prod_Display.cfm?pCatId=2565

So please take a look at these sites and consider doing your part to help our natural reefs but still have that special life you get from live rock.
 
Last edited:
And for our Canadian viewers?
 
If you can't find any, thats fine, I'm just bugging you:silly:
 
I'd have to argue on whether or not that's actually environmentally friendly.

Organism X spawns in ocean
Baby X's land on the real live rock, and the fake stuff
[the amount of baby X's is still the same]
fake stuff is removed, along with Baby X's

See the pattern?
 
the baby X's population will increase with the increased living space of these artificial reefs. Also what about the rock itself, reefs took centuries to create there rock that they reside on, we are just destroying centuries of work, with aquacultured we arent destroying any of the centuries work that has living things but rather just mine up some limestone with 0 living things on it and make it into live rock.
 
I see some of your points. But we cannot really say what the impact of dumping tons of limestone into the ocean will have. There are a number of issues, you are covering up what was once NOT reef with a fake reef, so you killed a bunch of life that was not reef life. Not everything in the ocean lives on a reef. But still probably better then taking true live rock that took centuries to build, but would be better if we left the ocean out of it, and just created huge salt water swimming pools and let it grow.
 
to me it's no different than farming.
being a SCUBA diver..much of the bottom is Barren..oddly the best diving is in shallower waters or waters with great visibility.
 
I see some of your points. But we cannot really say what the impact of dumping tons of limestone into the ocean will have. There are a number of issues, you are covering up what was once NOT reef with a fake reef, so you killed a bunch of life that was not reef life. Not everything in the ocean lives on a reef. But still probably better then taking true live rock that took centuries to build, but would be better if we left the ocean out of it, and just created huge salt water swimming pools and let it grow.

aquaculuring with swimming pools, i agree, more environmental than aquaculturing in sea but aquaculturing in sea is still more environmental than taking century old live rock from the ocean.
 
I'd have to argue on whether or not that's actually environmentally friendly.

Organism X spawns in ocean
Baby X's land on the real live rock, and the fake stuff
[the amount of baby X's is still the same]
fake stuff is removed, along with Baby X's

See the pattern?

OR... don't put any fake rock in the oceans...

Organism X spawns
Baby X's Land on real reef's, and none of them land on the fake stuff and end up dieing out in the open ocean

AND were still taking live rock from the real reefs...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
AquariaCentral.com