# What's with the water features??



## Rusty_Shackleford

Why is every newbie building a 20gal viv with a water feature?
Not necessary. I've produced hundreds of froglets, not a single water feature in any viv. I've visited the homes and viewed collections of more than a handful of established, successful, fellow hobbyists, not a single water feature in any viv. 
Yet is seems like everyone who joined this forum from 1/16 through 7/16 is building a small viv with a water feature. 

A water feature in your viv takes away from the little floor space you have in a viv. It reduces the amount of usable space in your viv. It impacts the population of microfauna your viv can support. Space is already at a premium, why waste what little you have. I'm not even going to touch on the nightmare that water features can become. If you look through threads, you'll find many a hobbyist posting a thread on their water feature build, then just a few months later, scrapping it, filling it in, ditching their waterfall. 

Learn from the mistakes of the past. 
I welcome your comments and discussions.


----------



## Encyclia

I have to agree with Jon. Water features are one of the very few ways you can mess up a starter vivarium that have a decent chance of forcing you to tear everything out and start over. Another thing that makes me wary of water features in dart frog tanks is that I have not seen any tried and true way that people can duplicate to make sure they have some chance at success. This means that every water feature design is basically experimental. I just haven't seen any convergence on this board or anywhere else in terms of best practices for a water feature. 

Here are some reasons that I can think of off the top of my head that water features might not be a good idea in a dart frog tank:

1) Dart frogs aren't very strong swimmers so open water (especially deep) may not be a great idea
2) Keeping the water out of your substrate (to avoid anaerobic conditions) is hard in the long run (and the short run)
3) As Jon said, you are taking floor space (which is usually at a premium) away from your frogs
4) Water splashes on the glass in all but the best-designed waterfalls
5) The need for exposed water from the drainage layer in most designs makes it very difficult to avoid mixing your substrate and drainage layers at the lip of the "pond"
6) Humidity is not easy to control in tanks with water features
7) You always have to monitor the water level and make sure that it is not too high (hits the substrate layer) or too low (pump runs dry)
8) Whenever there is flowing water, you have transport of debris that will accumulate somewhere. Eventually, something will gum up and you will need to clear the gunk out. This accumulation is not always in a place that you can get at easily...

Having said all that, I understand why people want water features. They look cool (at first) and they enhance the whole rain forest aesthetic. Many of us came from an aquarium background, too, so we are very comfortable (maybe even TOO attached) to the idea of a lot of water in a tank. We figure we can handle all the plumbing issues, etc. In some cases, we may be right. 
I think that in many cases, though, people end up with a mess on their hands. I have a feeling that these stories don't get told on the boards as often as they should be.

Anyway, if you want a water feature, knock yourself out, but be aware that 1) it's for you, not for the frogs 2) it has a much lower chance of being a success than if you just have a simple vivarium (that has a steep enough learning curve all by itself) 3) it will require more maintenance over time even if it is successful.

My comments are mainly directed at new folks. By the time you have a couple of vivarium builds under your belt, you will be much more capable of making a decision about whether you want to put water features in future builds. I would just caution people that are trying it on their first (or second...or third?) build. Keep it simple at first then dial up the difficulty level if you still want to.

Have fun and take good care of your froggies 

Mark


----------



## Andrew Lee

Yeah I agree. This is a pretty big problem. They seem to focus on aesthetic appeal rather than utility for frogs. I don't think water features are bad but only put them in really large vivariums and study a lot before utilizing them.


----------



## 55105

This should be sticky

What's the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word amphibian?

Maybe that's why it's so hard to kill... 

I know I've had plans stuck in my head to build an awesome paludarium for years. I probably won't ever do it but it is very tempting.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

I would LOVE to do a cool water feature in a BIG viv. By big I mean 200 gallons or bigger. I think that's the only way it would actually work effectively. 

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


----------



## Boondoggle

It's seems to be a right of passage. Every newbie (myself included) seems to try it. I think it plays into the whole "chunk of rain forest in a box" mentality. I think there's also the temptation to prove that you're the one that can build a better mousetrap and make it work. I just dismantled my first two tanks that were both over a decade old and both had water falls. I planned them as carefully as possible and, while they took a fair bit of maintenance, they worked the whole time. That being said, of the 20+ tanks I've built since (including a large-ish display tank), I've abandoned the waterfall because it's just not worth it. I agree with every disadvantage listed above. The only advantages I can think of are... 

1. They can be pretty if designed correctly. Moss slowly growing on a waterfall is a nice thing to look at.
2. They will raise humidity pretty drastically, which can be good if the tank design needs that.
3. They usually go a long way towards selling the idea to a spouse. You significant other may not be wild about having frogs in the house, but having a waterfall in the house sounds nice.

For what it's worth.


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

Boondoggle said:


> 3. They usually go a long way towards selling the idea to a spouse. You significant other may not be wild about having frogs in the house, but having a waterfall in the house sounds nice.


Sell the spouse on the waterfall, just don't tell them about the fruit flys and other bugs.


----------



## Fingolfin

Before finding this board, I attempted to make a waterfall viv in a tank with only 12 inches of headroom. (Lol what a noob) and well... it failed misrably. Did not even last a month. Lots of time and money wasted. Luckly, the frogs all survived and are still going strong today. If you are someone really attached to water features, just do a small, shallow pond, as they are much easier to manage. 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## TJ_Burton

In my experience, a water feature, if designed properly, can be useful provided you intend to let your tads develop in-viv. I have an auratus enclosure (36"x18"x12") that has a small still pound that measures 10" x 3" x 0.75" that tads are currently utilizing. There is no water circ, and it is essentially a low point in the drainage layer. Anubias, mosses, and a few other water plants keep it chemically clean.

As for water features with running water, they are hard to build so that they work effectively with the necessary redundancies that allow for long term maintenance and upkeep. I have found the best way to create a water feature with necessary access, is to drill the tank and run a sump system so that the reservoir is external along with the return pump. That way you can prefilter the water going to the pump, have a surplus of water, and also always have the same water level within the viv so that evaporation becomes a non-issue. 

I will agree that most water features serve no purpose other than aesthetics, and that they are not necessary for most species we keep. I also find it funny that it is the newer frog keepers that seem so drawn to having them. Especially due to the difficulty of building a feature that will last.


----------



## Encyclia

TJ_Burton said:


> In my experience, a water feature, if designed properly, can be useful provided you intend to let your tads develop in-viv. I have an auratus enclosure (36"x18"x12") that has a small still pound that measures 10" x 3" x 0.75" that tads are currently utilizing. There is no water circ, and it is essentially a low point in the drainage layer. Anubias, mosses, and a few other water plants keep it chemically clean.
> 
> As for water features with running water, they are hard to build so that they work effectively with the necessary redundancies that allow for long term maintenance and upkeep. I have found the best way to create a water feature with necessary access, is to drill the tank and run a sump system so that the reservoir is external along with the return pump. That way you can prefilter the water going to the pump, have a surplus of water, and also always have the same water level within the viv so that evaporation becomes a non-issue.
> 
> I will agree that most water features serve no purpose other than aesthetics, and that they are not necessary for most species we keep. I also find it funny that it is the newer frog keepers that seem so drawn to having them. Especially due to the difficulty of building a feature that will last.


Agreed on all counts, TJ. I think it's good that you bring up the distinction between having a low point in the substrate that touches the water table vs. a water feature with running water. I was assuming the latter in my post above, but that is not necessarily a valid assumption. 

I also agree that a drilled setup with a separate sump is one of the safest ways to get away with a running water feature. That is a pretty tall order for a person's first tank, though. The drilling alone is daunting (heck, figuring out whether the bottom glass is tempered first is challenging!).

Good points,

Mark


----------



## NichKnoll

I'm still in the "planning build" stage and while I can appreciate a well done water feature, they just don't interest me much. Only way I'd ever really consider one would either be a giant build or a specific frog that frequents streams/ponds as a necessity for life. I think proper misting is more appropriate for many species.


----------



## spdybee

As a newb building a water feature I figured I just had to post a response of some kind. I'm currently building my first real viv (sortof - see my build log for an explanation of why I consider this my first viv. though that could be argued) http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/parts-construction/287249-undercut-1st-viv-sortof.html

I should start by saying that I do agree with what I think is the general spirit behind this thread - if that is:

"Water features are not necessary for a successful tank, they add another layer of difficulty that is not necessary, and a first timer is likely to have a better chance of success without one*. (*UNLESS they are willing to do the research and take the steps necessary to learn what other successful tank builders have done and incorporate those lessons into their tank.)"

That being said, I see a lot of confusing statements, assumptions, and opinions throughout this thread. (Not that opinions aren't allowed, but they shouldn't necessarily be passed off as fact.) One of the first assumptions is that the original post said "water features" and most people seem to assume that that means "waterfall". Even the original post ended with


> If you look through threads, you'll find many a hobbyist posting a thread on their water feature build, then just a few months later, scrapping it, filling it in, ditching their waterfall.


As pointed out later a water feature could be a still pond in the drainage layer. Or it could be a dripwall, or a stream, or a waterfall, possibly something else. Different water features present different levels of difficulty and may be more or less suited for new builders. It may help to define if we are really discussing any and all water features or just waterfalls. I agree that waterfalls are probably the most difficult water feature to add successfully. Another subjective point is the size of the tank. What constitutes a "small" tank? What is a "large" tank? I do think that the smaller the tank the harder it is to create a water feature without negatively impacting the welfare of the inhabitants. In may be impossible is some of the smallest tanks though I'm not experienced enough to say that as fact.


> 1) Dart frogs aren't very strong swimmers so open water (especially deep) may not be a great idea
> 2) Keeping the water out of your substrate (to avoid anaerobic conditions) is hard in the long run (and the short run)
> 3) As Jon said, you are taking floor space (which is usually at a premium) away from your frogs
> 4) Water splashes on the glass in all but the best-designed waterfalls
> 5) The need for exposed water from the drainage layer in most designs makes it very difficult to avoid mixing your substrate and drainage layers at the lip of the "pond"
> 6) Humidity is not easy to control in tanks with water features
> 7) You always have to monitor the water level and make sure that it is not too high (hits the substrate layer) or too low (pump runs dry)
> 8) Whenever there is flowing water, you have transport of debris that will accumulate somewhere. Eventually, something will gum up and you will need to clear the gunk out. This accumulation is not always in a place that you can get at easily...


1. agreed. But have also seen a lot of posts and even videos showing that as long as the water features are made with available exits frogs will get out safetly and that the risk of a healthy frog drowning in a water feature may be exaggerated. From some of the long term and highly regarded members of this forum I believe, though I would have to do some digging to find a quote.
2. subjective. Depends on the water feature and your definition of "hard"
3. subjective. Again depends on the type of water feature. A drip wall is not going to take up a lot if any extra floor space. I agree that most water features will take up "some" floor space. It would then depend on the size of your tank, the layout, the species, and the stocking amount, whether this loss is acceptable or not.
4. I'm not sure from the way this is stated what the problem is. Is water spashing on the glass the problem? As in it makes it hard to see in the tank? Or is causes more evaporation..?
5. Agree that the lip of a pond can be a problem area.
6. As a newb, I'm not sure if this is true or not, maybe it completely is and I'm about to learn something. I'm sure humidity will be higher in a tank with a water feature but does that mean its harder to control? Have any evidence or further explanation to support this?
7. Subjective. This is assuming that there is a pump, that it's inside the tank, and that evaporation or addition of water affect the water level in the tank (which I know you now already know from a later post may not be the case  )
8. agreed.


> Anyway, if you want a water feature, knock yourself out, but be aware that 1) it's for you, not for the frogs 2) it has a much lower chance of being a success than if you just have a simple vivarium (that has a steep enough learning curve all by itself) 3) it will require more maintenance over time even if it is successful.


1. subjective. Probably true but depends on the species of frog, they type of water feature, and whether you are including the breeding of tads in the viv (as brought up in a later post where you agreed!  )
2. agreed
3. agreed.


> My comments are mainly directed at new folks. By the time you have a couple of vivarium builds under your belt, you will be much more capable of making a decision about whether you want to put water features in future builds. I would just caution people that are trying it on their first (or second...or third?) build. Keep it simple at first then dial up the difficulty level if you still want to.


Understood and agree, except....what if you aren't planning to have two, three, four or more vivs? But just want one nice one, with a water feature? 


> I don't think water features are bad but only put them in really large vivariums and study a lot before utilizing them.


"really large" is subjective. Agree that should study A LOT (gah! now I'm being subjective!) before utilizing any water feature.


> I would LOVE to do a cool water feature in a BIG viv. By big I mean 200 gallons or bigger. I think that's the only way it would actually work effectively.


This post is mostly your opinion and as such you are entitled to it. However, others are entitled to their opinion as well. First you would have to define what makes an "effective" water feature. That would likely depend on what you are trying to get out of it. Which would influence which type of water feature you are trying to build in the first place. After that I would have to point out that what you think is cool and what someone else thinks is cool could be completely different, and that they may have what they think is a "cool" and "effective" water feature in something much smaller than a 200 gallon tank. (when I finish my tank I will let you know if I feel I was successful in this, you of course could feel otherwise about my tank!  )


> I think there's also the temptation to prove that you're the one that can build a better mousetrap and make it work.


I can't speak for anyone but myself on this. I didn't set out to prove anything to anyone. What I did set out to do was build a tank with a water feature, because I wanted one, that WOULD work. I know it can be done because of post documenting in on this very forum. You yourself said you built two that did work. 


> hat being said, of the 20+ tanks I've built since (including a large-ish display tank), I've abandoned the waterfall because it's just not worth it.


As I'm writing this, this may be the crutch of the whole thing. This is entirely your opinion. The problem may be that most people will end up agreeing with you and that's why most people give up on the water feature. However, there is no way to prove to another person that it's not worth it when you then said...


> The only advantages I can think of are...
> 
> 1. They can be pretty if designed correctly. Moss slowly growing on a waterfall is a nice thing to look at.
> 2. They will raise humidity pretty drastically, which can be good if the tank design needs that.
> 3. They usually go a long way towards selling the idea to a spouse. You significant other may not be wild about having frogs in the house, but having a waterfall in the house sounds nice.


#1 pretty much says it all. Its obviously a statement of opinion on where a particular water feature is pretty or not. But I think the vast majority of water features are built because we are hoping the will be pretty. The level of success in how "pretty" we feel it is compared with how much extra maintenance is required will determine whether an individual person feels its "worth it" or not.


> In my experience, a water feature, if designed properly, can be useful provided you intend to let your tads develop in-viv. I have an auratus enclosure (36"x18"x12") that has a small still pound that measures 10" x 3" x 0.75" that tads are currently utilizing. There is no water circ, and it is essentially a low point in the drainage layer. Anubias, mosses, and a few other water plants keep it chemically clean.
> 
> As for water features with running water, they are hard to build so that they work effectively with the necessary redundancies that allow for long term maintenance and upkeep. I have found the best way to create a water feature with necessary access, is to drill the tank and run a sump system so that the reservoir is external along with the return pump. That way you can prefilter the water going to the pump, have a surplus of water, and also always have the same water level within the viv so that evaporation becomes a non-issue.
> 
> I will agree that most water features serve no purpose other than aesthetics, and that they are not necessary for most species we keep. I also find it funny that it is the newer frog keepers that seem so drawn to having them. Especially due to the difficulty of building a feature that will last.


I think this is an outstanding post and I salute you TJ_Burton!


> I also agree that a drilled setup with a separate sump is one of the safest ways to get away with a running water feature. That is a pretty tall order for a person's first tank, though. The drilling alone is daunting (heck, figuring out whether the bottom glass is tempered first is challenging!).


As a newb this is exactly what I'm attempting to do, because through my research I was led to believe this is what will give me the best chance of being successful. I can't yet say if it worked or not. But if multiple people agree that this IS what works, maybe we should be posting it more. Letting people know, "if you want a water feature that WILL work this is what its going to take. If you are not prepared to do this you should probably rethink your desire for a water feature as you will very likely encounter problems. See link, link, link of problems."  

I hope no one feels attacked or that I was picking on them personally! That was certainly not my intent. Just some conversation.

**DISCLAIMER** I'm waiting on foam, paint, and glue to dry on my viv build and needed SOMETHING to do!! 

(also if anyone can tell me how to make quotes so that you get the "originally posted by..." part I will try to edit this to reference the quotes I used! Sorry I'm a newb at forum posting for sure!)


----------



## 55105

spdybee said:


> (also if anyone can tell me how to make quotes so that you get the "originally posted by..." part I will try to edit this to reference the quotes I used! Sorry I'm a newb at forum posting for sure!)


Use the multi-quote







option next to quote







and it should show OP


----------



## spdybee

After all that I forgot to offer up my own sage advice for those considering a water feature. 

My advice: Research abundantly, Plan extensively, Build slowly (and with redundancies wherever possible), and Prepare to scrap it all if the health or safety of your frogs are in jeopardy!


----------



## Scott

Newbies always have to learn for themselves that water features are where vivariums go to die.

s


----------



## Boondoggle

Scott said:


> Newbies always have to learn for themselves that water features are where vivariums go to die.
> 
> s


 Like I said, it's newbie right of passage.


----------



## Encyclia

spdybee said:


> As a newb building a water feature I figured I just had to post a response of some kind. I'm currently building my first real viv (sortof - see my build log for an explanation of why I consider this my first viv. though that could be argued) http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/parts-construction/287249-undercut-1st-viv-sortof.html
> 
> I should start by saying that I do agree with what I think is the general spirit behind this thread - if that is:
> 
> "Water features are not necessary for a successful tank, they add another layer of difficulty that is not necessary, and a first timer is likely to have a better chance of success without one*. (*UNLESS they are willing to do the research and take the steps necessary to learn what other successful tank builders have done and incorporate those lessons into their tank.)"
> 
> That being said, I see a lot of confusing statements, assumptions, and opinions throughout this thread. (Not that opinions aren't allowed, but they shouldn't necessarily be passed off as fact.) One of the first assumptions is that the original post said "water features" and most people seem to assume that that means "waterfall". Even the original post ended with
> As pointed out later a water feature could be a still pond in the drainage layer. Or it could be a dripwall, or a stream, or a waterfall, possibly something else. Different water features present different levels of difficulty and may be more or less suited for new builders. It may help to define if we are really discussing any and all water features or just waterfalls. I agree that waterfalls are probably the most difficult water feature to add successfully. Another subjective point is the size of the tank. What constitutes a "small" tank? What is a "large" tank? I do think that the smaller the tank the harder it is to create a water feature without negatively impacting the welfare of the inhabitants. In may be impossible is some of the smallest tanks though I'm not experienced enough to say that as fact.
> 
> 1. agreed. But have also seen a lot of posts and even videos showing that as long as the water features are made with available exits frogs will get out safetly and that the risk of a healthy frog drowning in a water feature may be exaggerated. From some of the long term and highly regarded members of this forum I believe, though I would have to do some digging to find a quote.
> 2. subjective. Depends on the water feature and your definition of "hard"
> 3. subjective. Again depends on the type of water feature. A drip wall is not going to take up a lot if any extra floor space. I agree that most water features will take up "some" floor space. It would then depend on the size of your tank, the layout, the species, and the stocking amount, whether this loss is acceptable or not.
> 4. I'm not sure from the way this is stated what the problem is. Is water spashing on the glass the problem? As in it makes it hard to see in the tank? Or is causes more evaporation..?
> 5. Agree that the lip of a pond can be a problem area.
> 6. As a newb, I'm not sure if this is true or not, maybe it completely is and I'm about to learn something. I'm sure humidity will be higher in a tank with a water feature but does that mean its harder to control? Have any evidence or further explanation to support this?
> 7. Subjective. This is assuming that there is a pump, that it's inside the tank, and that evaporation or addition of water affect the water level in the tank (which I know you now already know from a later post may not be the case  )
> 8. agreed.
> 
> 1. subjective. Probably true but depends on the species of frog, they type of water feature, and whether you are including the breeding of tads in the viv (as brought up in a later post where you agreed!  )
> 2. agreed
> 3. agreed.
> 
> Understood and agree, except....what if you aren't planning to have two, three, four or more vivs? But just want one nice one, with a water feature?
> 
> "really large" is subjective. Agree that should study A LOT (gah! now I'm being subjective!) before utilizing any water feature.
> 
> This post is mostly your opinion and as such you are entitled to it. However, others are entitled to their opinion as well. First you would have to define what makes an "effective" water feature. That would likely depend on what you are trying to get out of it. Which would influence which type of water feature you are trying to build in the first place. After that I would have to point out that what you think is cool and what someone else thinks is cool could be completely different, and that they may have what they think is a "cool" and "effective" water feature in something much smaller than a 200 gallon tank. (when I finish my tank I will let you know if I feel I was successful in this, you of course could feel otherwise about my tank!  )
> 
> I can't speak for anyone but myself on this. I didn't set out to prove anything to anyone. What I did set out to do was build a tank with a water feature, because I wanted one, that WOULD work. I know it can be done because of post documenting in on this very forum. You yourself said you built two that did work.
> 
> As I'm writing this, this may be the crutch of the whole thing. This is entirely your opinion. The problem may be that most people will end up agreeing with you and that's why most people give up on the water feature. However, there is no way to prove to another person that it's not worth it when you then said...
> 
> #1 pretty much says it all. Its obviously a statement of opinion on where a particular water feature is pretty or not. But I think the vast majority of water features are built because we are hoping the will be pretty. The level of success in how "pretty" we feel it is compared with how much extra maintenance is required will determine whether an individual person feels its "worth it" or not.
> 
> I think this is an outstanding post and I salute you TJ_Burton!
> 
> As a newb this is exactly what I'm attempting to do, because through my research I was led to believe this is what will give me the best chance of being successful. I can't yet say if it worked or not. But if multiple people agree that this IS what works, maybe we should be posting it more. Letting people know, "if you want a water feature that WILL work this is what its going to take. If you are not prepared to do this you should probably rethink your desire for a water feature as you will very likely encounter problems. See link, link, link of problems."
> 
> I hope no one feels attacked or that I was picking on them personally! That was certainly not my intent. Just some conversation.
> 
> **DISCLAIMER** I'm waiting on foam, paint, and glue to dry on my viv build and needed SOMETHING to do!!
> 
> (also if anyone can tell me how to make quotes so that you get the "originally posted by..." part I will try to edit this to reference the quotes I used! Sorry I'm a newb at forum posting for sure!)


You make some great points in here, spdybee. Most are completely valid, in my opinion. I really appreciate you weighing in. As I said, it's not impossible to include a water feature in your first build, but I still contend that it adds a large burden to a first build that many new folks are not equipped to handle. As subjective as my statements may be, I still say they hold true in a majority of circumstances. This thread is not for outliers that do the research, move slowly and are successful on their first go (as you seem to be doing!). This is for the folks who might be on the fence. There are lots of ways that a vivarium can look cool that don't involve the usually-needless complexity of a water feature. Maybe new folks should at least consider the much larger body of best practices surrounding builds that don't involve water features. To those that do that and still want a water feature, I still say knock yourself out, but don't be surprised if you are eventually dissatisfied with the results (to be honest, I think this is the case with most 1st builds, whether they have a water feature or not 

I will add one more thing - yes, the majority of what you have read in this thread is opinion. Not all opinions are based on the same amount of experience, however. It's fairly seasoned people in this thread that are sharing their experience with you. You don't have to agree with or take as Gospel any of these opinions, but if given the choice, I am going to take more-experienced opinion over that of new folks who just haven't had a chance to build up that experience yet. Research is a great idea, but until you have had a chance to put it into practice, it is largely theoretical and can me misapplied. Please don't take this as a slight on all of the hard work you have done in your build or in the research you did before you started. I am just pointing out that the school of hard knocks is a powerful learning tool, and many of us have advanced degrees from that institution ;-) If I can encourage someone to learn from my mistakes, I view that as a win 

I wish you all the success in the world in your new build!

Mark


----------



## Boondoggle

Not to beat a dead horse...

I realize I was reading "water feature" as "water fall" and after looking at some of the comments I realize those terms aren't necessarily synonymous. I've found that I've abandoned "water falls" in builds but I still like to leave a small pond "water feature" that dips into a corner of the tank on all my builds. The pond is small enough to not drown in, but large enough to deposit any tads. I find some of the frogs hang out in them more than you might expect. 

Also, full disclosure, there might be some opinions nestled in the above comment.


----------



## Gibbs.JP

Ever since I read Jon's OP on this I keep getting that nagging feeling to add a response. Mostly since I'm one of those newbies from 1/16 - now that added a water feature to my first (and another) vivarium. He's calling me out and I'm answering!  Sorry for the tl;dr!

Yes, I came fresh in to this hobby with a grand idea to make a really cool paludarium for some dart frogs, complete with waterfall and small pond for some fishies. I wanted several elements my kids could enjoy watching in one awesome rain forest tank. I'd seen it done before while searching through countless pictures and posts on this forum, other forums and google images. Seemed doable. Not easy, but still manageable if planned out. Consensus here seemed to be that so long as you made the water area safe for frogs, it was fine. So, I jumped in. I got an 18x18x24 (33g) Exo Terra tank. Being my first ever vivarium build, I tried to plan it out as much as possible - overkill the planning. Well, as most anyone who's build vivariums can attest to, things seem to always come up that you didn't plan for or couldn't foresee. 

I finished my cool new tank and was very happy with it! Everything worked as I planned and looked awesome. I had a cool waterfall that ended in a small pond area, sectioned off from the false bottom. It was only about 3 gallons of water. No frogs yet. Here's where my issues started coming up - I couldn't keep any fish alive I put in there. The water parameters were just too hard to control and get right. So, although it looked really cool, and the concept worked, the whole point of that pond was to hold a couple small fish. Since I couldn't keep any alive, I decided to just fill it in so the frogs could have more floor space. I kept the waterfall, but now it just empties into a small ceramic rock dish I drilled holes in which drains right into the LECA balls below. I all still works great, about 5 months later. 

I have to drain the water, clean algae from the output tube and then refill the reservoir about 1-2x a month to keep the flow going strong. That whole process is super easy to do and only takes about 10-15 min. I never have to drain excess water from the drainage layer and it helps keep my humidity up. Not to mention I think the visual and audio aesthetics of the waterfall are awesome. A very small price to pay for having a cool feature that everyone (maybe even the frogs!?) really digs. It also doesn't really take up much more of the tank than most custom backgrounds already do - especially those that go crazy with foam. And my Varadero in there are absolutely thriving. I'd call that tank a definite success. You can see it here: http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/members-frogs-vivariums/272914-first-viv-18x18x24.html (I need to add some updated photos since it looks way different 4 months later all grown in.)

My 2nd tank was a 100g 36x18x36 Exo Terra that I also did another waterfall in. You can see the whole build process here: http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/parts-construction/278194-77g-azureus-tank-build-log.html I did spend a lot of time debating with myself whether or not I should bother doing a waterfall in this one, but ultimately being a big display build, I opted to do it. Yes, it was much more work. Yes it was frustrating and hard to get working properly. And yes it was a pain! But, at the end, I think it turned out really well and I'm glad I stuck with it. 

So, when the day is done, I fully agree that most water features are a huge pain and can often go wrong and maybe even get scrapped all together. They add a much higher degree of difficulty and maintenance to any vivarium. I agree that some tanks are just too small, and the addition of any type of water feature would end up taking too much away from an already small area. On larger tanks, they can be made in such a way to minimize subtracting from usable area, and sometimes can even add usable area for frogs. 

I'm not going to rehash all the points made in this post, and countless others - but for the most part I _agree_ with all the CONS against doing waterfalls/water features. BUT, as spdybee mentioned, I think they can also be successful and add a lot to a vivarium if done the right way. 

I likely won't do another one though, simply because I'm not planning on doing anymore large display vivariums that would even warrant a water feature. And the 2 I have going now are already enough maintenance for me!


----------



## kimcmich

Greetings,

I've kept vivaria for over two decades - and most of them have had water features. Like many aspects of the vivarium upkeep, well-planned water features can be great additions; badly-planned water features can be enormous mistakes.

I should note here that I don't yet keep darts - but I have kept other amphibians for 30+ years. When it comes to wasting foraging space with a water feature, I would merely note that feeding techniques should be able to compensate for the effects of a properly proportioned water feature.

Certainly when one imagines "their own little world" inside a glass box, water tends to be a part of the vision. The problem is that water features in nature seem deceptively simple - they are just the places water flows to when it is no longer contained in a bucket or a cloud. In addition, the world outside of vivariums is on the scale of meters and acres - whereas the world inside vivariums is on the scale of inches and postage stamps. 

To put it another way, all the aspects of water features don't scale the same way: One can shrink the size and depth of a pond from park-sized to vivarium-sized or shrink the height and flow of a waterfall from jungle-sized to paludarium-sized easy enough. But you _ can't_ shrink osmotic forces or the wetting effects of splashing by the same factor.

On the scale of the vivarium, water in a pond doesn't just sit in the low spot - it also creeps back upward/outward again - water-logging any absorbent substance in contact with it. Even a lightly splashing waterfall in a vivarium is going to quickly soak its surroundings. Of course osmosis and capillary action occur in the larger world too - but no one expects the ground 6 inches from the water's edge of a lake or stream to be anything but waterlogged. In a vivarium we must take explicit, unnatural measures to deal with these aspects of water feature - but those measures can be successfully taken.

I have had very good success across 15 years of setups with "dribblefalls" - ie a steeply inclined piece of wood or rock over which a gentle flow of water is directed. This feature is a close cousin of the dripwall noted by some other posters. As one of them notes, the growth of moss, liverworts and higher plants as they colonize a dribblefall (and develop patterns of succession as they grow atop each other) is a long-term enjoyment.

*But there is a learning curve!* The main newbie mistake is always not realizing how much you don't know (whether it be about feeding, plant care or water feature design). Take the time to listen to all those vivariophiles who have come before you with the same visions of mosses and jungles dancing in their heads - and already learned from all the mistakes you're apt to make...


----------



## scubafreak

I think what most newbies, Me included forgot is to do a proper water feature test with everything as you want, without substrate etc.
I started a 33 gallon horizontal, with a small waterfall on the side, got exited and added substrate before thoroughly testing the waterfall.
resulting in water on the wrong side of the divider, and having to fill up my pond every 2 days. 
the terrarium is gone now and in my head I'm planning a new one, before building or buying one, but I know I have to "dry" test the waterfall before actually adding substrate etc.


----------



## cam1941

A lot of people will say that you shouldn’t add a water feature to your first build but I think that is the wrong way of thinking about it.
It should be that if you haven’t researched and built a fish tank than you should never consider building a water feature, first build or otherwise. 

Anyone with experience would know that the key to a healthy aquatic environment is the volume of water. To think you could keep anything healthy and stress free long term in a small volume of water in a place where detritus will constantly be entering the water is naive and a danger to any fish. 

I never considered a water feature because of this experience and the fact that I got into this hobby in part to avoid fish tank maintenance  I would consider building a paludarium in the future but that would only happen with a sump and a huge volume of water. IMO you need more water than a normal fish tank because of all the crap that is going to end up in the water. 

Also, people will say that water features add aesthetics but unfortunately most end up having the opposite effect. If you’ve never built a successful water feature yourself and your dead set on having one then at least look at what other people have successfully done in the past…


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

This has turned out to be a very interesting discussion. Many members are agreeing that perhaps newbies shouldn't have water features yet defending and justifying their reasons to have water features. 
Let's add a couple of additional thoughts to address. How many locales of dart frogs actually even encounter a pool of water such as is found in a viv? Not talking about broms filled with water, not seed pods filled with water, not plant axils filled with water. 
Why is it with much justification that many people new to dart frogs justify that a water feature is ok even with their limited knowledge of dart frog husbandry or vivarium design. Yet basic best practices like adequate ventilation or quarantine procedures are ignored?
I only ask because while this has turned into a discussion on the merits of a water feature, the original thought behind this thread was the seeming preponderance of new froggers building a water feature in their first viv. Where did they get the idea this was necessary? What research yielded that information? 

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gibbs.JP

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> This has turned out to be a very interesting discussion. Many members are agreeing that perhaps newbies shouldn't have water features yet defending and justifying their reasons to have water features.
> Let's add a couple of additional thoughts to address. How many locales of dart frogs actually even encounter a pool of water such as is found in a viv? Not talking about broms filled with water, not seed pods filled with water, not plant axils filled with water.
> Why is it with much justification that many people new to dart frogs justify that a water feature is ok even with their limited knowledge of dart frog husbandry or vivarium design. Yet basic best practices like adequate ventilation or quarantine procedures are ignored?
> I only ask because while this has turned into a discussion on the merits of a water feature, the original thought behind this thread was the seeming preponderance of new froggers building a water feature in their first viv. Where did they get the idea this was necessary? What research yielded that information?
> 
> Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


I don't know that a lot of people (newbies or otherwise) view a water feature as necessary... especially if they've done any research. If so, one will quickly find that the (dart) frogs get minimal to no benefit from having one. As many people have said already - we typically build them for our own sake. I sure did. That's where a lot of people will take sides though, I think, because some will say "build for the frog, not yourself!" I say, so long as it's not harming the frogs in any way, why not make it something you will enjoy. If designing a water feature that will not create any harmful detriment to your frogs can be achieved, and will also create a feature you will greatly enjoy - why not? 

I've never been to any rainforest, nor have I don't much deep research on them enough to know how often a frog in it's natural habitat would be in close proximity to a water feature. If we're talking about waterfalls, then probably not as many, but I assume some frogs live near/around some falls. If we're talking about small ponds or large puddles, I would assume many frog locales could be near those. But, only a very minute percentage of people will try and create an exact replica of their particular frogs' locale in their vivarium. It would take tons of research and trying to track down very specific plants and microfauna that inhabit that particular locale. But how often do you see people arguing over plant selection on here? Why should the addition of a water feature be any different - in that respect? Probably 90% of the frogs kept by hobbyists are not in their natural habitat. 

I think when people (newbies mostly) decide whether or not to create a water feature in their new vivarium, it's at the very beginning of the whole creative idea stage. All the technical details about ventilation, quarantine, maintenance, etc - usually don't come up til after that point in their thoughts.

I think the typical new frog hobbyist's thought process is very similar to:

1. Cool dart frogs! I want one!
2. I need to make a cool tank for them... let me research how I can build a cool tank.
3. I saw pictures, read posts, and did some research on how to construct a cool vivarium, now I'm going to build it. (With or without a water feature)
4. Awesome, I got my tank built, now to let it sit and then get some frogs.
5. Cool, I got my first frogs! The tank is all ready for them to go in.
6. Oh man, one doesn't look so good. I should start troubleshooting... hmm, ventilation, pathogens, acceptable heat levels, best humidity levels, oh man, quarantine!? 
7. Ok, now I feel like I have a better understanding of all that stuff. I wish I would have known all that sooner!

No one is ever an expert when they are new to something. You can spend months researching and reading through the subject and still things will inevitably come up that you're not prepared for. I'm sure many people on here can agree to and attest to that - whether they'll admit it or not. 

I wouldn't (personally) tell someone just coming into this hobby not to build a water feature if they are really excited about one. I'd let them know just how tough it could be to do it right, and that they may end up scrapping it. And that even if they get it right, it will require a lot of maintenance as long as you have it. Give them the right mindset and advice going into it, and let them experience how it goes. It might work, it might not. I wouldn't just say "don't do it, it's not worth it and you'll get it wrong and it's bad for the frogs." I think that's unfair to them and the hobby.

Practice makes perfect. Research will never be as helpful as experience. You've got to start somewhere... 

Good thread though. Great discussion.


----------



## RichardA

LOL this is all great! 

I actually know a guy that did a water feature first build and it worked completely. However......He did it completely different then any of us would have as a newb. He made a very very simple drip wall on one side and that was it. Self contained catch area large adult frogs made it all possible. other than that, they usually get scrapped quick!


----------



## toostrange

So darts don't encounter any pools of water? In my mind it's hard to imagine a rain forest or tropical jungle not having pools of water during the rainy season. I've had a 75 gal with a stream that empties into a shallow pool going on 4 yes with absolutely no issues. The tincs in this enclosure have deposited many tad in the pool. When I cycle my collection up I always add some kind of pool even if it's only an 8oz deli cup with some pea gravel. I just find it hard to believe that these frogs do not come into pooled water of any kind.


----------



## wikiwakawakawee

My reason for making a water feature? Because I thought it would look cool. I never planned on putting in any creatures in the first place, it was just kind of a display tank. 

But having a water feature is a lot of work, im going to stay away from them for a while!

I recently built my first vivarium that DOESN'T have a water feature, and i enjoy it MUCH more than the ones i built with water features! Everything seems to grow better too.


----------



## spdybee

I'll start with the second part of your post:


Rusty_Shackleford said:


> I only ask because while this has turned into a discussion on the merits of a water feature, the original thought behind this thread was the seeming preponderance of new froggers building a water feature in their first viv. Where did they get the idea this was necessary? What research yielded that information?
> 
> Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


I haven't got the feeling that anyone felt it was necessary. I'm sure some people new to the hobby thought that for some reason or another. But I don't see anyone on this thread, or any other, saying "what? I don't need a water feature? That's not what I heard". I hear most people saying "I WANTED a water feature".

As such I like Gibbs quote:


Gibbs.JP said:


> I wouldn't (personally) tell someone just coming into this hobby not to build a water feature if they are really excited about one. I'd let them know just how tough it could be to do it right, and that they may end up scrapping it. And that even if they get it right, it will require a lot of maintenance as long as you have it. Give them the right mindset and advice going into it, and let them experience how it goes. It might work, it might not. I wouldn't just say "don't do it, it's not worth it and you'll get it wrong and it's bad for the frogs." I think that's unfair to them and the hobby.


Should we try to make it clear to beginners that (most) dart frogs don't need any kind of water feature? YES.
Should we let them know it will be harder, possibly much harder, to make a working vivarium if they decide to include a water feature? YES.
Should we tell them they shouldn't put a water feature in a vivarium? I don't think so. Like others have said, its very often a part of that "rainforest" ideal that draws (some of) us in to the hobby in the first place. I knew I wanted a waterfeature as soon as I decided to make a vivarium. If everyone and everything I read said "Dart frogs can not survive or will not thrive in a vivarium with a water feature" I probably would have looked for something else to keep.



Rusty_Shackleford said:


> Why is it with much justification that many people new to dart frogs justify that a water feature is ok even with their limited knowledge of dart frog husbandry or vivarium design. Yet basic best practices like adequate ventilation or quarantine procedures are ignored?


Hopefully most new people are not trying to justify anything based on their own limited experience, but are instead standing on the experience of others. Obviously many of you with more experience are trying to caution new people against trying to add water features. I think though that if people come to this forum and try to search "waterfall" or "pond" or whatever they have an idea to build they will find post on how to do it. And that the general consensus is that its OK to do. New people don't search for "ventilation" "evaporative cooling" and "quarantine" because they don't know to.



Rusty_Shackleford said:


> Let's add a couple of additional thoughts to address. How many locales of dart frogs actually even encounter a pool of water such as is found in a viv? Not talking about broms filled with water, not seed pods filled with water, not plant axils filled with water.


I'm no scientist, nor do I spend my free time perusing scientific journals or the like. However, my limited google-fu found this:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjTrJy6t57OAhUh5IMKHddXDgcQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcostarica.jsd.claremont.edu%2Fpdf%2FThesis%2520-%2520Jennie%2520Miller%2520-%25202007.pdf&usg=AFQjCNEIBWtxeXizEFfYni19bllNJffYpQ&sig2=pOPhr87_VeA6R5PnmuGMGw
which found the most dart frog viewings near bodies of water. 

Poison Dart Frogsmentions frogs rarely go into water except to lay eggs. Later it says "Once the tadpoles are hatched, they climb onto the male's back where he will carry them to a safe location such as a stream, a lake, little ponds or even broken trees and branches for them to continue their development."

The Frogs that Carry Their Tadpoles on Their Backs | The Ark In Space
Which says "Once they hatch the tadpoles will wriggle on to the back of the male or female (this depends on the species) and they are taken to a place of greater safety. For some species (like the three-striped poison frog, Ameerega trivittata, above) this will be the local pool or water filled crevice but for the poison-arrow frogs such as the Panama (Colostethus panamensis, below) and others, this involves something of a climb." Then it goes on to talk about bromeliads which I know is off limits. 

What I did discover very quickly is that nearly all the shorter generic discriptions of dart frogs say they come from areas "near bodies of water" or near "streams and pools of water". So perhaps more newbies do come in with the thought that dart frogs require water features than I thought. If so, the problem may not be in the information on this forum but on the web in general. A much harder problem to correct.



Rusty_Shackleford said:


> This has turned out to be a very interesting discussion.





Gibbs.JP said:


> Good thread though. Great discussion.


Agreed, good discussion!


----------



## Boondoggle

Another thing to consider is how many tanks you have/plan to have. I kept two waterfall tanks properly maintained for 10 years or so, and that was fine. I'm currently simplifying my life a bit and I'm down to 19 tanks and after getting rid of the tanks with pumps/water features I have to say I don't miss them a bit. They were impressive displays but I've got enough maintenance as it is.


----------



## surferseatsharks

I have been to nine different rain forest around the world including three different areas that had dart frogs, that being said for whatever reason I rarely see tiny trickling streams/waterfalls. Most of the water I have seen has been in larger streams and rivers, many bordering on huge. I think many, myself included when I started, have a mental picture of the frogs living in these tiny little streams and that simply has not been my experience.


----------



## Gibbs.JP

surferseatsharks said:


> I have been to nine different rain forest around the world including three different areas that had dart frogs, that being said for whatever reason I rarely see tiny trickling streams/waterfalls. Most of the water I have seen has been in larger streams and rivers, many bordering on huge. I think many, myself included when I started, have a mental picture of the frogs living in these tiny little streams and that simply has not been my experience.


So, were the dart frog areas you saw in close proximity to one of these larger bodies of water?


----------



## Ed

spdybee said:


> Poison Dart Frogsmentions frogs rarely go into water except to lay eggs. Later it says "Once the tadpoles are hatched, they climb onto the male's back where he will carry them to a safe location such as a stream, a lake, little ponds or even broken trees and branches for them to continue their development."


You need to refine your googlefu ... All of the dendrobatids I can think of off the top of my head (with the exception of possibly some Colostethus and some Hyloxalus) do not lay eggs in the water (for tadpole development). This should have led to a more critical review of the information. 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## Ed

One of the things to consider with water features is that there are negative health risks to these features. One of the primary ones is that there is an upper threshold for humidity in the enclosures as humidity above 90% is getting into the range where the ability of the frogs to thermoregulate is compromised requiring a lower temperature than is often considered optimal for the frogs. 

Second is that saturated substrates which are common near water features are potential risk zones for infections of the feet or the evolution of noxious gases such as hydrogen sulphide which are toxic particularly in enclosures without sufficient air exchange (aka ventilation). 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## kblack3

You would think that hydrogen sulfide would be on the top of most new hobbyist's minds considering it is a fairly common nuisance and killer of aquarium inhabitants considering the large number of aquarists joining the hobby (myself included) https://www.theaquariumwiki.com/Hydrogen_sulphide


American Dad Living The American Dream


----------



## spdybee

Ed said:


> You need to refine your googlefu ... All of the dendrobatids I can think of off the top of my head (with the exception of possibly some Colostethus and some Hyloxalus) do not lay eggs in the water (for tadpole development). This should have led to a more critical review of the information.
> 
> some comments
> 
> Ed


In my defense, I mentioned that my google-fu was limited.  It also reinforces my point that most of the easily found and accessible information about dart frogs from the web is often wrong or misleading. So perhaps a lot of newcomers do enter the hobby thinking dart frogs need a water feature. I'm not sure, as I still don't see many people posting that they THOUGHT their frogs NEEDED a water feature. 
Thanks for chiming in Ed. I value the resource the hobbiest with much more experience such as yourself bring to this forum.


----------



## Darrell S

It was nice to read all the comments without someone launching personal attacks . I have been dabbling into water features as well and I have switched over to turface instead of any type of soil , I still add a leaf layer on top , and the plants and mosses are doing real well , the turface is great for not getting water logged when the water goes where you don't really want it . My frogs always surprise me with how much time they spend soaking under a drip or almost submerged in a pool .


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

spdybee said:


> After all that I forgot to offer up my own sage advice for those considering a water feature.
> 
> My advice: Research abundantly, Plan extensively, Build slowly (and with redundancies wherever possible), and Prepare to scrap it all if the health or safety of your frogs are in jeopardy!


I've seen your build and it's a great example of why Rusty is making this post. You have sacrificed a good 60% or more of that viv for a water feature that just isn't needed. It's not suitable for dart frogs now. There's just not enough land. 
Also you assume silicone and coco coir will stop wicking but it really won't it takes time for it to begin mostly because the coir has to get saturated but it will indeed wick up into your soil causing it to go anaerobic. 
So by all means scrap it all and start over if you want to house darts in there 
You should have planned more extensively and done more research.....
Not trying to attack you or be rude I'm just shooting straight with you 














The quarantine tank you're about to build would be way more suited for dart frogs since I'm guessing you're not gonna put a huge water feature in that viv.
Like I said in my reply to your thread this viv you're building would suit fire belly toads great but not dart frogs they need more land than you have given.


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

I agree with you Rusty. If one is going to do a water feature it shouldn't take up more than 15% of the viv. Maybe not even that much. My first dart frog viv, well paludarium, is a 40 breeder and the water feature only takes up a corner and it's built upwards to not take up more space. 
In the end is it really needed? No. Though the frogs love sitting on the edge watching the fish swim around. Here is a pic all there there were watching until the one spotted me and turned to stare me down lol 








Also I knew Azureus really like to climb so I put in overhanging branches and cork ledges and such giving them plenty of places to wander around. The only time they really chill on the floor of the paludarium is when they are hunting. Even then they sometimes don't come down until I throw some flies in there. 
A water feature in a 20 gallon should just not be attempted it's just gonna take up so much valuable real estate. 

Idk who has seen my paludarium and who hasn't. I'd like to note even though this was my first true dart frog build I had been around on the forums and such for 5 years before this build so I know what I was getting myself into. 

Before some trimming and rearranging









After. I rearranged things because the move from Iowa to Georgia took it's toll on the viv and things died and whatnot. PLus it was too dense so I took plants and stuff out so it could grow in again but just more the way I wanted.


----------



## BrainBug

Brandon, that's a pretty vivarium. I have a couple of questions for you. 

Should your frogs jump into the water how do they get out?

What kind of fish are you keeping in the water feature and what type of filtration and cleaning regimen are you using?

Thanks.


----------



## BrainBug

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> How many locales of dart frogs actually even encounter a pool of water such as is found in a viv? Not talking about broms filled with water, not seed pods filled with water, not plant axils filled with water.


The girl I blow glass with just returned from a month in Costa Rica and told me stories of seeing dozens of granulifera next to a waterfall and pond they would swim at. 

Also, since these are rainforest animals I have no doubt that they encounter large puddles after heavy rains.

That being said, they are not confined to a small enclosure and this information does not negate all of the aforementioned hazards associated with building a water hazard in your vivarium.


----------



## pirumparum

Forgive me if I screw something up with the formatting, this is my first post on this site.

I definitely agree with the whole "newbie right of passage" thing even though I find it kind of embarrassing. I'm new to this as well. Before I got my red eyed tree frogs I got the idea in my head that I _had_ to make their exo terra into a paludarium. After some frustration I realized it was probably impossible with my current level of knowledge and experience, so I just went for a raised bottom in the back and clay balls in the front. 

I think the whole idea that new people get in their heads about water features come from a misunderstanding of how incredibly complicated and hard it can be to make it work. It can also be somewhat confusing for a complete newbie, you don't know exactly where to go for info and you're probably going to have tons of questions. I know I did.


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

pirumparum said:


> Forgive me if I screw something up with the formatting, this is my first post on this site.
> 
> I definitely agree with the whole "newbie right of passage" thing even though I find it kind of embarrassing. I'm new to this as well. Before I got my red eyed tree frogs I got the idea in my head that I _had_ to make their exo terra into a paludarium. After some frustration I realized it was probably impossible with my current level of knowledge and experience, so I just went for a raised bottom in the back and clay balls in the front.
> 
> I think the whole idea that new people get in their heads about water features come from a misunderstanding of how incredibly complicated and hard it can be to make it work. It can also be somewhat confusing for a complete newbie, you don't know exactly where to go for info and you're probably going to have tons of questions. I know I did.


meh I wouldn't say it's too much about it being complicated they just aren't needed in small tanks it takes space away fromt he frogs. There is species like Ameerega that are known to be found near streams or so I've been told. 
So really the frogs don't need water features it's more for the viewing pleasure of the builder.


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

BrainBug said:


> Brandon, that's a pretty vivarium. I have a couple of questions for you.
> 
> Should your frogs jump into the water how do they get out?
> 
> What kind of fish are you keeping in the water feature and what type of filtration and cleaning regimen are you using?
> 
> Thanks.


I tested their swimming abilities before I made it their permanent home. I also let them grow a bit so they were more agile. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLku9h9iSMc

Idk wtf is going on but it's not doing the [ youtube ] coding thingy to show players on the pages 

it's best to make sure there is nothing they can dart under and get trapped. There has been cases where people's frogs get spooked and they will jump in the water and go down and wedge themselves between rocks so river rocks are a really bad idea. Also if you have bodies of land that overhang the dart could jump into the water then swim under the land portion and drown so it's best to block that off. 

the fish in there are galaxy rasboras aka celestial pearl danios. Here is a video I shot of the others I had in there but they died during the moved from Iowa to Georgia. I have 4 more in there and they look just like this. I get males cause they are brighter and so I don't have to deal with breeding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPrtRXDiLr8

The filter I am using is a Tom's Rapids mini canister filter. It's like the Zoo Med 501 turtle filter but like 1/2 the price. I had it on an aquarium so it had beneficial bacteria built up in it. The bacteria and the Malaysian trumpet snails clean the tank the best. 








Amazon: KollerCraft TOM Rapids Mini Canister Filter


The intake is behind the rock wall and the outlet is coming into a foam box (covered inside with silicone) that has 2 holes where the water comes out. Red arrow is pointing towards the intake and you can see the outlet hose on top 

























I'm about to shoot a video and post it in this thread here http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/ge...s-your-successful-running-water-features.html

EDIT: not gonna even bother folling with recording a video because the youtube embedding isn't working.


----------



## Ed

BrainBug said:


> The girl I blow glass with just returned from a month in Costa Rica and told me stories of seeing dozens of granulifera next to a waterfall and pond they would swim at.


There are many reports of granulifera being more common along streams so this is more of a niche for this species (even though they use smaller water sources for deposition of tadpoles) and some caution should be used to extrapolate to all dendrobatids. 

Many dendrobatids are found considerable distances from larger water sources including fairly well drained or steep slopes ... 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## Ed

DragonSpirit1185 said:


> the fish in there are galaxy rasboras aka celestial pearl danios. Here is a video I shot of the others I had in there but they died during the moved from Iowa to Georgia. I have 4 more in there and they look just like this. I get males cause they are brighter and so I don't have to deal with breeding.


So not zoogeographic species? 



DragonSpirit1185 said:


> The filter I am using is a Tom's Rapids mini canister filter. It's like the Zoo Med 501 turtle filter but like 1/2 the price. I had it on an aquarium so it had beneficial bacteria built up in it.


So cross contamination again? 

With respect to the filter, this is another product that dumps heat into the water as it passes through the filter and these can raise the temperature of enclosures by not an insignificant amount so using them with an enclosure with minimal ventilation can easily result in issues with heat and excess humidity preventing evaporative cooling as a physiological response. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

Ed said:


> So not zoogeographic species?
> 
> 
> 
> So cross contamination again?
> 
> With respect to the filter, this is another product that dumps heat into the water as it passes through the filter and these can raise the temperature of enclosures by not an insignificant amount so using them with an enclosure with minimal ventilation can easily result in issues with heat and excess humidity preventing evaporative cooling as a physiological response.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


Not sure what you mean in the first quote. I'm guessing you mean they aren't from the same location which would be true. 
The beneficial bacteria is the same bacteria that should exist in wild streams and such I'm not sure how Tetra safe start does things. I don't see there being a cross contamination issue. 
Idk the details about all that 

Would the frogs need evaporative cooling if the paludarium doesn't go above 75°F. I m eventually gonna install a vent. It was an oversight. 
I'm not sure if I should add a ventilation bar on the front or just drill holes for ventilation on the top.


----------



## Ed

DragonSpirit1185 said:


> Not sure what you mean in the first quote. I'm guessing you mean they aren't from the same location which would be true.
> The beneficial bacteria is the same bacteria that should exist in wild streams and such I'm not sure how Tetra safe start does things. I don't see there being a cross contamination issue.
> Idk the details about all that


So you don't have any issues with mixing species from different areas even though there is a risk of novel pathogens? Its not like fish can't carry ranavirus or other viruses that can infect frogs ...

So it was on an empty tank before you put it on the paludarium? You stated it was on an aquarium before you moved it, if you had it on an empty tank then even with the additive you wouldn't have an established filter. 



DragonSpirit1185 said:


> Would the frogs need evaporative cooling if the paludarium doesn't go above 75°F. I m eventually gonna install a vent. It was an oversight.
> I'm not sure if I should add a ventilation bar on the front or just drill holes for ventilation on the top.


How about for the one time it doesn't stay at 75 F.. I have to admit that I have a hard time believing that the temperature in the paludarium is at 75 F. 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

Ed said:


> So you don't have any issues with mixing species from different areas even though there is a risk of novel pathogens? Its not like fish can't carry ranavirus or other viruses that can infect frogs ...
> 
> So it was on an empty tank before you put it on the paludarium? You stated it was on an aquarium before you moved it, if you had it on an empty tank then even with the additive you wouldn't have an established filter.
> 
> 
> 
> How about for the one time it doesn't stay at 75 F.. I have to admit that I have a hard time believing that the temperature in the paludarium is at 75 F.
> 
> some comments
> 
> Ed


The filter is off an Aquarium. The tank was brand new. The only thing that's associated with the old tank is the filter media. It's very common practice to use filter media from an established Aquarium to help cycle a water feature or an aquarium.

This thermometer hygrometer is actually made by pretty reputable company that makes monitoring systems for vivariums.
There's an air circulation fan and there's also a fan that's blowing towards the front there would be a third fan but it died out and I haven't replaced it yet.
There's three different lights on top each one has a fan that keeps them cool.
I don't see why it maintaining 75 degrees it's hard to believe.











In case people didn't know frogs will actually try to eat the dot on a laser pointer lol
The whole time I was trying to take the picture the Azureus was trying to eat the red dot. 

Sent from my Samsung GALAXY Note4 using Tapatalk


----------



## Brad_

Boondoggle said:


> Like I said, it's newbie right of passage.


I'm about as brand newbie as they come, I'm building a water feature that I believe this hobby refers to as a bowl of water.


----------



## dysphoria

> Let's add a couple of additional thoughts to address. How many locales of dart frogs actually even encounter a pool of water such as is found in a viv? Not talking about broms filled with water, not seed pods filled with water, not plant axils filled with water.
> Why is it with much justification that many people new to dart frogs justify that a water feature is ok even with their limited knowledge of dart frog husbandry or vivarium design. Yet basic best practices like adequate ventilation or quarantine procedures are ignored?
> I only ask because while this has turned into a discussion on the merits of a water feature, the original thought behind this thread was the seeming preponderance of new froggers building a water feature in their first viv. Where did they get the idea this was necessary? What research yielded that information?


This is an interesting set of questions. It's got to do with a thing that the individual has to ask themselves when they get into any hobby - what is more important to me, the enclosure or the inhabitants. 
I know (from personal study of several different South American biotopes) that there are many areas in Peru, French Guiana, Venezuela, and Columbia that often will flood out during the rainy season and form pools and streams where there were none before. The pools and streams persist until the rainy season is over and then eventually dry and disconnect from the major rivers and tributaries, and then sometimes dry up altogether. This definitely occurs along the full Rio *****, Orinoco, Amazon, Oyapock and many other river basins throughout South America. 
Do the frogs encounter pools of water? Probably to most definitely. Do they use them in their life cycle? No(perhaps one or two MIGHT use them, but I'd rather not raise precious frogs on a maybe)
That really isn't an issue though. The only question that matters to me is this: Are water features necessary for the health and well being of your inhabitants? If the answer to that question is no, but you still want to have a water feature.. then perhaps you should build a frogless vivarium, paludarium, or riparium. This might sound a bit forceful, but I will explain a bit..

The vivarium is necessarily an artificial reproduction of nature. We generally try to replicate as much as possible to give the frogs a habitat that mimics where they are from so we can observe them behaving as they would in their natural habitat. One thing that you have to keep in mind though(and any past aquarists who've kept high-tech tanks, or those who've kept a hot-rod reef tank will definitely understand) is that it's still an artificial reproduction of nature. There are pieces missing from the environment - so many variables in fact, that you couldn't possibly hope to replicate it in it's entirety. That then leaves us trying to do "our best" to manage the variables we can control in the vivarium to maintain a optimum environment. When you introduce a water feature, especially those with a large water area, flowing water, etc(but not to exlude even a small pool), you are now having to manage two separate ecosystems. One that is frog focused, the other aquatic. This may or may not include fish, plants, etc. 
You now not only have to worry about terrestrial microfauna, substrate condition(degradation, increased fungal activity, aerobic/anaerobic activity, washout of nutrients that could potentially be utilized by terrestrial plants..) - You now have to also worry about water chemistry, and how that will effect any aquatic organisms, plants, and the frogs if they come into direct contact with the water at any point. Pools could be a potential source of fairly concentrated ammonia/nitrite if the pH drops out due to filtering through or contact with peat in the substrates. This will drastically lower the ability of nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria to do their jobs reducing these chemicals into less toxic forms. On top of this, you have to somehow manage both environments separate/but together, and do it as well as nature does. 

Furthermore, even if a frog were to encounter a stagnant ammonia ridden pool from fish die-off or some other factor - they can choose to relocate to a spot that is more favorable(a good example of this is Red Frog Beach on Isla Batimentos, where frogs left areas that humans turned into a garbage piled cesspool). In the vivarium, if they encounter this they have no choice but to deal with it, as they are your captive.

This brings me back around to the first line.. you have to make a choice. Are you going to have:

1. A really beautiful vivarium paradise that may or may not replicate that actual biotope you are trying to replicate.. and oh yeah there are frogs from there too.

OR 

2. A vivarium set up in the best interests of the frogs, and you try and create a scape from those elements that is the most appealing to you. 

I personally feel that #2 will give you the most enjoyment, as you get the satisfaction in knowing you have something beautiful, with a manageable number of environmental variables, that the frogs love and flourish in.

}end_wall_of_text


----------



## dysphoria

I just thought I'd add a secondary post here to address the "do frogs occur near pools/streams/etc" question that I've seen pop up a number of times.

These are species that I was able to find with some search-fu that occur in areas where there is most definitely rainy season flooding, streams, pool forming.

Ranitomeya variabilis "lowland"
Ranitomeya amazonica
Ranitomeya ventrimaculatus
Ameerega pepperi
Ameerega trivittata 
Dendrobates auratus

Basically any frog that is found below 200m and is found around nearly any part of the amazon basin will encounter pools and streams of water at some point. Some of the more arboreal lowland frogs are likely arboreal because of rapidly changing conditions on the forest floor.

Does this change the points I made in the prior post? No.. not at all. Just because nature does it, doesn't mean you can.


----------



## cam1941

dysphoria said:


> Furthermore, even if a frog were to encounter a stagnant ammonia ridden pool from fish die-off or some other factor - they can choose to relocate to a spot that is more favorable(a good example of this is Red Frog Beach on Isla Batimentos, where frogs left areas that humans turned into a garbage piled cesspool). In the vivarium, if they encounter this they have no choice but to deal with it, as they are your captive.


Just wanted to point out that many people report the opposite... It seems counter intuitive but according to anecdotal reports, frogs are more prolific in piles of garbage. More bugs? More pools of water with or without the rainy season? I don't know but I've never heard that frogs leave these areas before.

Not trying to start a debate or derail this thread, I'm just curious which is actually true.



skylsdale said:


> In talking with people who have traveled to areas of Central America and visited populations of _D. auratus_ and _O. pumilio_, one of the things I noticed is there comments about how they would often find frogs in trash piles and among human debris (some of the highest population densities I've heard people recount were in piles of garbage). These species seem pretty adaptive to disturbed areas and things like bottles, cans, bedpans--pretty much any vessel that can hold water--become excellent tadpole deposition sites.


----------



## dysphoria

cam1941 said:


> Just wanted to point out that many people report the opposite... It seems counter intuitive but according to anecdotal reports, frogs are more prolific in piles of garbage. More bugs? More pools of water with or without the rainy season? I don't know but I've never heard that frogs leave these areas before.
> 
> Not trying to start a debate or derail this thread, I'm just curious which is actually true.


When the local population likes to pile trash against the trunks of large trees that the frogs inhabit(and also throw trash bags directly in to the ocean and waterways), then yeah, you are going to see them around the trash. Nothing counter intuitive about it. If your neighbors piled trash in your driveway, then some random person saw you climbing over it to get into your house - would they assume that you are more prolific that way?


----------



## cam1941

dysphoria said:


> When the local population likes to pile trash against the trunks of large trees that the frogs inhabit(and also throw trash bags directly in to the ocean and waterways), then yeah, you are going to see them around the trash. Nothing counter intuitive about it. If your neighbors piled trash in your driveway, then some random person saw you climbing over it to get into your house - would they assume that you are more prolific that way?



I was expecting you to say that you saw these relocations yourself. Or that your friend did at least but you didn’t address your assertion that frogs “relocate” from areas that are “turned into garbage piled cesspools” at all.




dysphoria said:


> they can choose to relocate to a spot that is more favorable(a good example of this is Red Frog Beach on Isla Batimentos, where frogs left areas that humans turned into a garbage piled cesspool).


I’m definitely not interested in a back and forth, especially since I have never been too or seen any evidence with my own eyes. You just seemed confident in your assertions so I figured you had some real world experience or evidence. I had heard that frogs seem drawn to garbage piles so I was simply curious which was true.


----------



## dysphoria

Hey man.. sorry if that sounded like I was trying to be combative. I think my writing style may perhaps be at fault  I didn't mean it at all that way. I will have to look around for some more links, but "The Red Frog Story" documents a lot of this on video, with interviews with people who actually live there - 
https://youtu.be/DO8jAditfAk?t=639 

That link is right at the spot were they address what I was talking about. The whole video is interesting though, and speaks to the disappearance of the frogs to what almost certainly seems to be human influence. 

Edit - I thought I should add something after thinking about this further. Correlation doesn't equal causation either(although it does have more impact when I call it a garbage piled cesspool  ). It may well just have been a lack of access to quality leaf litter nearby because it was covered in trash, and/or removal of leaf litter and bromeliads from trees in proximity to the resort and tourist spots that caused a decline in population. Either way my point is that the frogs have the option to leave adverse conditions. In the vivarium this isn't possible.




cam1941 said:


> I was expecting you to say that you saw these relocations yourself. Or that your friend did at least but you didn’t address your assertion that frogs “relocate” from areas that are “turned into garbage piled cesspools” at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m definitely not interested in a back and forth, especially since I have never been too or seen any evidence with my own eyes. You just seemed confident in your assertions so I figured you had some real world experience or evidence. I had heard that frogs seem drawn to garbage piles so I was simply curious which was true.


----------



## cam1941

Very cool and no worries, I will check it out... Been meaning to watch that video for awhile but never get around to it. 

The thought that frogs proliferate in garbage piles is fascinating to me for some reason. Would never have thought that. Would definitely like to know what the truth is... 

Thanks for the link...





dysphoria said:


> Hey man.. sorry if that sounded like I was trying to be combative. I think my writing style may perhaps be at fault  I didn't mean it at all that way. I will have to look around for some more links, but "The Red Frog Story" documents a lot of this on video, with interviews with people who actually live there -
> https://youtu.be/DO8jAditfAk?t=639
> 
> That link is right at the spot were they address what I was talking about. The whole video is interesting though, and speaks to the disappearance of the frogs to what almost certainly seems to be human influence.


----------



## Ed

dysphoria said:


> they can choose to relocate to a spot that is more favorable(a good example of this is Red Frog Beach on Isla Batimentos, where frogs left areas that humans turned into a garbage piled cesspool).


There is a difference between the piles of trash that are used as deposition sites (as this is a population limiting factor) and one that is part of a septic system. Dendrobatids are adapted to take advantage of disrupted environments which is why they are often found in large numbers in those locations. This has been documented repeatedly (including a picture in Poison Frogs, Lotters et al where multiple calling male pumilio are within very close proximity). 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## Ed

DragonSpirit1185 said:


> The filter is off an Aquarium. The tank was brand new. The only thing that's associated with the old tank is the filter media. It's very common practice to use filter media from an established Aquarium to help cycle a water feature or an aquarium.


Your dodging the question. I suggest rereading my post. 

I


DragonSpirit1185 said:


> n case people didn't know frogs will actually try to eat the dot on a laser pointer lol


I should have been more clear, I don't believe that is the highest temperature in the enclosure over a period of time. 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## DragonSpirit1185

Ed said:


> Your dodging the question. I suggest rereading my post.
> 
> I
> 
> I should have been more clear, I don't believe that is the highest temperature in the enclosure over a period of time.
> 
> some comments
> 
> Ed


I'm not dodging the question I'm not understanding your question apparently.
The tank is brand new the filter was used on an aquarium. The aquarium was running all the way up until I moved the filter then I went through the gravel and everything and picked out all the Malaysian trumpet snails and put them in the new water feature so yes the filter is off an established aquarium. It didn't take very long at all for that water feature to cycle since it's so small.

edit: Here is the aquarium it came off of











Sent from my Samsung GALAXY Note4 using Tapatalk


----------



## Rusty_Shackleford

I think what Ed is getting at is both the aquarium filter and the trumpet snails are potentially vectors for introducing a pathogen into your viv. 

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


----------



## dart345

My tank is going strong over 5 years and amazed how lucky I got in regards to not having issues.

I do agree that a water feature is something that shouldnt be taken lightly though. I feel like I always have beginner luck and that my 1 st try is always a success but then I go to repeat I can struggle.

Hence why it took several years for me to start building my second tank with a water feature in it as well.

The common problem people repeat about a water feature is the floor space it takes. However I am only using less than 10% by using a false bottom. 

My first tank this has allowed me to get humidity levels up and pretty much leave and forget the tank. Very little maintenance on my end. The pump is still going strong and should it ever go out I made access hole to get to it very easily. I also ran a pvc pipe to run my cords should I have to move it around. The pvc pipe had great stuff sprayed around it then sealed. that way I did not have to go to great lengths to adjust anything.

I am not against a water feature and the 1st and only tank I have is going strong.

I hope to get things in order to finish my second build to show people. I enjoy doing it as it brings out the artistic side in me. However you still have to do hours and hours of research and cross referencing to make sure you have right information and doing things right. Even then you still may come across a hurdle.


----------



## Ed

Rusty_Shackleford said:


> I think what Ed is getting at is both the aquarium filter and the trumpet snails are potentially vectors for introducing a pathogen into your viv.
> 
> Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk


As are the fish, there is abundant evidence that iridoviruses are able to infect fish and amphibians as well as many invertebrates and that they can cross infect species for whom they are not the normal host. 

It also makes quarantine a pretty moot point as your just throwing things together because you think it looks cool. 

some comments 

Ed


----------



## eek_420

Ok I've seen all kind threads on water features how they are just too much of a hassle to knee up with this that and the other so my ? Is what about water fountains just about every tank I see has a place of cords to go in and if you have an issue with it you could just pull it out and service it an put it back Exo terra makes them in different sizes to fit in just about any Viv any thoughts on this idea


----------



## dr.cichla

To respond to the OP's question (why do so many new froggers try to include water features in their tanks), consider where most people get an idea of what a vivarium should look for (I did): just Google "vivarium" and see what proportion of photos there include water features. Most do. And most of the build logs that I saw, the ones that get linked and end up in the search results, almost invariable have a waterfall, drip wall, or large water area.

A similar example is the amount of vivariums that have moss, either all over the sides or all over the bottom. Moss is not a particularly common part of the environments of most dart frogs (at least, the ones I've been to or seen actual photos of), but people think it looks exotic and like to include it.

As has been pointed out, both are of some service to the frogs in increasing the humidity and reducing the effects if their keepers are not quite so diligent about spraying the tanks. But they are probably not as useful as more space for leaf litter. I would be curious to see a side by side comparison of the degree to which either actually did increase the humidity.

I did make the choice (mistake?) of including a small waterfall into my fist viv, which (despite the advice I saw; I'm usually one to think I'll be the one to break the trend) was large (75g) as most first vivs go. I also have a drip system in there, which runs for 30 seconds several times a day. I don't know how much the waterfall adds to the humidity, which is part of why I chose to include it, and it's hard to see if you don't know to look for it. But it does add ~2 degrees to the temperature of the tank (during the day; it is on the timer with the lights), so not such a great thing. The other reason that I chose to include it is I didn't like the idea of water sitting stagnant down in the clay balls. With moving water the high surface area of the balls act as a very effective biological filter (which is good, since the drip wall draws water from there).

The times I have been in the same places where dart frogs are (though that's not why I was there) there are often puddles of water, small terra firme streams, or shorelines, but not always. I doubt, however, that these are used particularly much by the frogs themselves, even to deposit tadpoles, since they will invariably be filled with hungry fish or predatory insects that would love tadpoles. Clearly, based on empirical evidence, the frogs will use ponds/puddles in the vivarium when available, but it's probably not the natural destination for most tadpoles. Of course, these same places also usually have 110% humidity (at least it feels like it) because of rainfall and transpiration. We have to recreate that in the vivarium, which is harder for some than others (living in south Texas, it's barely a thought for me ;-)). 

In any event, all of these issues are compromises; there's something unnatural about every vivarium. I do think it's important to keep in mind what the necessary aspects are to keep the frogs healthy, e.g. humidity, leaf litter, hiding places, variety of foods with supplements, etc. Other than that, let people learn and enjoy their hobby.

Stu


----------



## Xan

Ed said:


> Dendrobatids are adapted to take advantage of disrupted environments


What does this mean, exactly? Sounds very interesting, but Google isn't being helpful on the definition of "disrupted environment". And I'd love to know how and why the frogs are adapted. Do you have any links to reading material on this topic?


----------



## ToddG

As a noob, I want to thank everyone involved in this post. Just as you guys are saying, my mentor is old school and doesn't use water features. However I just put my first tank together, and I'm already thinking about the second one. I have to admit that I wanted a water feature, but all of you brought up some really good points, may not be worth it. You still have a beautiful tank regardless.

Thanks everyone. very good insight here


----------



## Ed

Xan said:


> What does this mean, exactly? Sounds very interesting, but Google isn't being helpful on the definition of "disrupted environment". And I'd love to know how and why the frogs are adapted. Do you have any links to reading material on this topic?


Here's are some examples 
http://www.revistas.usp.br/phyllo/article/download/73945/77605
Cove, Michael V., and R. Manuel Spínola. "Pairing noninvasive surveys with capture-recapture analysis to estimate demographic parameters for Dendrobates auratus (Anura: Dendrobatidae) from an altered habitat in Costa Rica." Phyllomedusa: Journal of Herpetology 12.2 (2014): 107-115.

http://education.tropicalstudies.or...ndergraduate/coursebooks/reunsf05.pdf#page=30

Farallo, Vincent, Ralph Saporito, and Craig Guyer. "Population density of Dendrobates pumilio in primary, secondary, and abandoned agro-forestry forests." RESEARCH EXPERIENCE FOR UNDERGRADUATES (REU-NSF): 30.

http://www.revistas.usp.br/phyllo/article/download/42724/46392

Born, Marga, et al. "Dry-season retreat and dietary shift of the dart-poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius (Anura: Dendrobatidae)." Phyllomedusa: Journal of Herpetology 9.1 (2010): 37-52.

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Calebrh

Just coming from someone who has had many years Experience in freshwater planted aquariums, small water features are not practical for any vivy that you can dedicate at least a system of 10g or more to. I've only had 2 vivys with water features in them that have had success, I've tried many more than that. In an aquarium, the more water you have the easier the tank is to maintain as far as water parameters go. The amount of biological filtration needed with bacteria is ignored in most builds I've seen. You can't just have a water pump moving water around to work. If you just have a small water feature in a vivy, your setting up a miniature aquarium that only advanced aqua scapers succed with. Adding in the fact your setting up a cage that's not just for fresh water, that's no easy task, and you shouldn't attempt it until you have quite a few notches under your belt. Another thing that is often overlooked is the water hardness you will have in a water feature (gH and kH). Can your frogs handle minerals in the water, if so, what kind? If you have rocks in your feature they will dissolve, and your water hardness will increase.


----------



## Keni

I am a noob and my water feature is designed pretty well I think. I guess time will tell.


----------



## CharlesT0271

I didn't. Even though I have a pile of pumps calling my name.


----------



## stalknbear

Water features were in gen years agony boy did they cause problems months in or years down the road


----------



## T1NY

Although I am still a noob in the dart frog world i have built two vivs with water falls that I have had for over a year..the water is really shallow and i have not done any maintenance on them what so ever and they are still running great

Coming from an aquascape background most people are more into how the tank looks as oppose to how it should function for the frogs/fish themselves and i completely agree with you guys that a waterfall does nothing for the frogs and its all just for personal preference 

But a waterfall looks so amazing..plus I have a surplus of aquatic plants and having a water feature with running water was important to me to use those plants

And the way the tank looks is what draws noobies into the hobby..same for aquascaping..i have seen many people fail at attempts to doing great aquascape because they didnt do the research and don't understand how difficult it can be and how much work you have to put in

All in all I love the idea for waterfall features in a viv and won't disagree with you guys that it is pointless and useless but I can say the same for you guys..You try to make a "Slice of jungle" in your tank when most frogs really just need is a big ugly pothos plant, coconut hut and a couple of pieces driftwood

Do a lot of people fail? YES but as for all things we first attempt Im sure they will get better


----------



## MasterOogway

It's not just how it looks. Water features almost *always* leak/wick and end up saturating your substrate to the point where it is unhealthy for your frogs. Plus, they take up valuable real estate in a vivarium that most times frogs are unable to use. Both of which are definitely negatives that simply don't need to be added into a tank.


----------



## Dane

Seeing a lot of 'first builds' on the site over the past weeks with water features. Thought it was a good time to bring this thread to the top. 
If you are smarter than the experienced froggers offering the advice to 'keep it simple' for your first build, then by all means, spend a few hundred bucks on your paludarium and learn the lessons yourself.


----------



## brendan0923

Water features, if done properly, can certainly be a nice feature. 

However, there can be several different issues with building one, and they often end up being more work than you bargained for. For a first build, it is typically best to stick to a simpler build so that you understand the concepts and processes behind building vivs, rather than building a complex palidarium that requires a good deal of maintenance.

Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk


----------



## Merkwood

Back when I had a breeding pair of vittatus I had a small pond in their 29 gallon, the one my reason I had it was because they deposited all their tadpoles in there, it made it easy to remove them because I could wait till they were almost morphed. Other than that I wouldn't have a pond at all unless the tank was just for show and didn't house frogs


----------

