Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cheeks69 I wouldn't recommend a Nano to anyone who doesn't have any SW experience. |
i used to take that position, but nowadays after seeing what some "newbies" can do with nano-reefing, i've changed my stance.
i've altered it to be: "i wouldn't recommend nano-reefing to anyone who doesn't have the
patience to learn the hobby first."
because imo, whether you do traditional reefing or nano-reefing, ignorance will result in the same thing, tank crash or livestock loss. the difference between the two is the scale of monies involved. it's that economic difference that makes the average person think twice/give more thought/research more for the traditional reef. will the traditional reef has a slightly bigger cushion of error? sure, but the basic "oops" are still the same.
but allowing for the same amount of research and patience, i think anyone can succeed at nano-reefing or traditional reefing. while i would still agree that the arguement of the inherently high cost of traditional reefs should weed out the casual hobbyist it's not a likely scenario to force nano-reefers to pay a surcharge or something to that effect.
the push should be for educating the new hobbyist versus pushing them to larger tanks as historically advised. a small bit of information/education will be much more effective than having an extra 40-gallons of volume imho.
btw, i also don't agree that nanos are a fad. it's a viable niche that will likely outgrow the rest of the niches and imo
dominate the hobby in the future, because it now makes reefing accessible to anyone. traditional reefing limited the audience to deep-pockets (relatively) or hard-core dedicated hobbyists.
otoh, nano-reefing now increases the target audience to everyone! (whether that's a good thing or a scary thing is another topic of discussion)