qt and copper ?

[Michael]

hmmm, although very interesting, im not sure id prefer to treat a healthy fish with copper, im my own man here, but must say im leaning towards randys view, i dont disagree with wooden, but dont suggest his way is the right way, i suppose this is a debateable subject, good reading and certainely different views here, im wondering if copper treatment is needed on ahealthy specimen? perhaps so, perhaps not.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by Michael

hmmm, although very interesting, im not sure id prefer to treat a healthy fish with copper, im my own man here, but must say im leaning towards randys view, i dont disagree with wooden, but dont suggest his way is the right way, i suppose this is a debateable subject, good reading and certainely different views here, im wondering if copper treatment is needed on ahealthy specimen? perhaps so, perhaps not.

What is a healthy specimen in an LFS? When you use the word "healthy", you have to think precisely what does it mean.

I think you are unwilling to understand what ich is.

It is basically an itch in the ocean that turns into a killer in the confinement of a tank.

[Michael]

i havent seen itch for years, yet i dont treat with copper, i understand what itch is, i also get your point, doesnt mean your right to treat all fish with copper, i wonder how many successful reefers treat all their new fish with copper in qt for 8-12 weeks?

[sowellj]

Originally Posted by wooden_reefer

I actually get excited when I see some ich in a LFS. This is how I get a bargain. I discreetly ask to buy an ich infested fish as is at deep discount. Some LFS owners have some sense of gulit and will let go a lightly ich infested fish at cost.

Light infestation is just that, barely seen or barely unseen.

All fish from LFS go thru the same QT procedure, no difference.

While an interesting approach, I am not sure it would be wise to advocate for this, especially in the beginner forum.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by sowellj

While an interesting approach, I am not sure it would be wise to advocate for this, especially in the beginner forum.

It would be more unwise to shun a LFS that has an occasional ich infestation.

Even a newbie should know what the major role of an LFS is; it is to obtain and secure good sources of livestock that are vigorous. That includes less exposure to ammonia and other bad chemical elements in transit water, better nutrition in transit, and better transit. It includes a good method of capture.

The role of an LFS cannot be to eradicate ich. It would be too expensive to do so. I don't want to see rigorous QT in LFS be mandatory as I don't want to see much higher prices.

Even a newbie should know that strong fish can get heavy ich infestation, as heavy ich infestation is more a matter of chance of wildly varying concentration of the pathogen in the water.

[sowellj]

Originally Posted by wooden_reefer

It would be more unwise to shun a LFS that has an occasional ich infestation.

Even a newbie should know what the major role of an LFS is; it is to obtain and secure good sources of livestock that are vigorous. That includes less exposure to ammonia and other bad chemical elements in transit water, better nutrition in transit, and better transit. It includes a good method of capture.

The role of an LFS cannot be to eradicate ich. It would be too expensive to do so. I don't want to see rigorous QT in LFS be mandatory as I don't want to see much higher prices.

Even a newbie should know that strong fish can get heavy ich infestation, as heavy ich infestation is more a matter of chance of wildly varying concentration of the pathogen in the water.

fine, this does not mean that is should be sought out. Also, this is getting way off topic so lets try and bring it back to the OP.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by sowellj

fine, this does not mean that is should be sought out.

I don't really seek out fish with seen light ich, but I don't shun it the slightist bit. I welcome the chance to save money.

A newbie is a thinking person and may not want to do exactly the same as I do.

I just state what I do and perhaps to highlight what ich really is.

It is a killer if caught too late; a universal itch in the ocean that has to be eradicated in the confinement of a tank.

A healthy captured fish is a fish with light ich infestation that is vigorous as dictated by the prevalent state of host-parasite balance in the ocean.

[wooden_reefer]

Think about what "healthy" means.

Think about what criteria to use to say "it is now safe to add this fish into the DT"

Think about what observation means. What parts of a fish can you see and not see?

How long do you have to observe based on the knowledge of the lifecycle of ich?

All the answers are there.

[Reefer2727]

Wooden,

Is 12 weeks of copper treatment not overkill on a potentially healthy fish? The copper medication I have calls for 3 weeks.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by Reefer2727

Wooden,

Is 12 weeks of copper treatment not overkill on a potentially healthy fish? The copper medication I have calls for 3 weeks.

No, it is needed. Not overkill at all.

Potentially healthy, what does it mean? it means potentially a calamity for the DT.

A fish is in the ocean with one white spot of ich now; it is now healthy in the ocean?

If you capture this fish and put it in the confinement of a tank, is it still healthy now and for the next 10 days? 50 days in the same tank?

What is healthy depends on the how you have altered the environment, from the dilution of the ocean to the confinement of the tank.

8 or more weeks in the QT for ALL fish from commercial sources to eradicate ich. One slip and the situation can be as bad as not having done any QT for any fish at all.

3 weeks is barely one lifecycle of the ich organism. No treatment is instantaneous. To have a very high probability to break the cycle, to kill the very last ich organism in the system, it is necessary to have gone thru several lifecycles of ich. 3 weeks is too risky; six weeks is a possiblity that I don't have strong opinion on, but I go a min of eight weeks, often 10-12 if by unintended delays.

If you had prepared the QT well, and you know of the importance, you would not be constantly lamenting the passing weeks of almost no work, or as little work as in the DT for the fish in QT. 8-12 weeks, not a big deal.

[Reefer2727]

So if I am using Cupramine, the instructions say to leave it at 0.5 ppm copper for 14 days. You are suggesting 56 days at 0.5 ppm? (8 weeks).

[Chris27]

Originally Posted by Reefer2727

So if I am using Cupramine, the instructions say to leave it at 0.5 ppm copper for 14 days. You are suggesting 56 days at 0.5 ppm? (8 weeks).

If you are absolutely certain that you have eradicated the parasite from the display tank, then 5-6 weeks in a bare bottomed, properly dosed QT should be sufficient. The key there is to stay on top of everything, for example, if you dose copper too low, the parasite may survive, if the temp is low enough the parasite could incubate for 4-5 weeks vice a few days in higher temps. There are many variables, and a recommendation of 8-12 weeks is enough time to ensure the variables don't contribute to you inadvertently introducing the parasite to a nice healthy display tank....

[Reefer2727]

Are there certain fish that cant handle copper treatment?

[Chris27]

Originally Posted by Reefer2727

Are there certain fish that cant handle copper treatment?

Sharks, rays, puffers and lionfish are sometimes difficult to treat with copper. For those fish, I will use chelated copper, it's not as effective on the parasite as ionic copper, but it's better then nothing.

[Reefer2727]

Blennys and Gobies ok with copper?

[wooden_reefer]

Wrt ich, what can you observe?

You can tell qualitatively if a fish is at risk of dying soon. You can put it in categories, light, moderate, or critical.

You can't open the gills.

Ich infestation is described as a white dot the size of a period (.). Do you think it gets to be this size the first hour ich anchor onto the fish? No. It is very small the moment it anchors onto a fish; it grows to the size of a period.

What can you tell by observing? You CANNOT tell if ich is present or absent by observing.

You are satisfied that there is a very high chance of ridding ich from a fish by a process of QT. Eight weeks or more of active and continuous treatment.

[sowellj]

12 weeks of copper treatment is not needed. I understand that this is they way you may do it and that is great. However, I think you need to qualify that this is not the ONLY way to approach things.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by sowellj

However, I think you need to qualify that this is not the ONLY way to approach things.

Actually, I aim for eight weeks but frequently do 12 weeks unintendedly. Are you saying that seven weeks is enough? What duration are you suggesting as enough?

Do you think copper or hypo will kill ich instantaneously?

If not, do you think copper is effective when ich is already on a fish?


Do you think then that there is a good chance that a few ich organisms can anchor on a fish even in the presence of copper or in hypo?

Why would you think that a treatment duration of just one lifecycle is enough? Or what duration do you have in mind? I have said that I don't necessarily object to six weeks.

Why are you so eager to that a fish out of QT? What motivates you to keep a QT short?

[sowellj]

Relax .... breath deeply

I am only saying that there is more than one approach to things ... that is it.

[wooden_reefer]

Originally Posted by sowellj

Relax .... breath deeply

I am only saying that there is more than one approach to things ... that is it.

Materially, practically, there is only one approach; that is to eradicate.

If you say active treatment of only six weeks is good enough, I won't necessarily object.

You cannot confidently eradicate ich with only three weeks of treatment.

[bertoni]

Okay, this thread seems to be growing far beyond the original issue.