# Common, Unnecessary Practices



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

With the explosion of people new to the hobby, I've been seeing lots of posts (particularly related to vivarium construction) that show or discuss techniques which take a lot of work and are either inferior to or no better than much easier alternatives. I thought I'd start a thread, because I am sure many people know of other examples of this.

1) Using black silicone as a base over which to apply great stuff inside the tank
-Why on Earth would you do this? Use spray paint on the outside. SO much easier, faster, and cheaper.

2) Using silicone over great stuff into which is pressed peat for the background
-This is the single biggest pain in the ass in the entire hobby. The "concrete" method (using peat/moss/tree fern fiber/dirt mixed with concrete binder) is so much better than this technique that I honestly cannot believe the silicone background isn't totally obsolete. Try the concrete method and I promise you'll absolutely never dream of using silicone again. Ace Hardware has a really good concrete binder, and there are lots of threads discussing this background technique. TRY IT.

3) Flowing water features
-This one I understand, but I think more often than not (especially for the first few vivaria constructed this way) it ends up being a huge pain. Water feature-less tanks are every bit as good for most all the frog species, and require a lot less headache in terms of wiring, drilling, etc. 

What else?


----------



## crb_22601 (Jan 12, 2006)

I get the last two but the first one for me I do it in case I want to take out the background and re-do it, for me the silicon on the back makes it easier to take off the foam. I have tried it both ways and they are both a royal pain but the once with silicon comes off easier.


----------



## UmbraSprite (Mar 2, 2007)

What ratio's did you use with the Ace binder?

I tried this method a while ago and had no luck. First it was too runny...then I couldn't get it to stick to the Great Stuff more than my hands (would stick to my gloves not the GS). 

Just curious how you mix yours...

Chris


----------



## tkromer (Dec 20, 2007)

Silicone instead of spray paint is probably safer unless you're certain the spray paint will stick under moisture and it's nontoxic, but yes spray paint is easier if you're sure it's safe.

The binder method works slightly better, but only if you get the ratios just right, otherwise it's a huge pain.

The water features are a lot of extra work, but they really do look nice, even though I'll fully agree they're unnecessary.


----------



## earthfrog (May 18, 2008)

npaull said:


> 1) Using black silicone as a base over which to apply great stuff inside the tank
> -Why on Earth would you do this? Use spray paint on the outside. SO much easier, faster, and cheaper.



I agree with your other points. The reason for using silicone as a base is that it makes a more cohesive bond with the Great Stuff than just applying the Great Stuff to the glass, especially if you're making a big, heavy display with lots of dense wood. Many people have worked too thick a first layer in the Great Stuff foam, only to have their work slide off the glass. 

The reason for the silicone on the outside of the foam is to seal its porous surface and help to prevent mold growth or damage to the surface of the foam. Spray paint has a tendency to rub off over time, especially if applied too heavily, and could contaminate the tank.


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

A few response points:

1) The spray paint goes on the OUTSIDE of the tank, not the inside, so toxicity is really not an issue. Silicone would be better if background removal were an issue, though it's pretty easy to rip a background off, and if there's debris on the glass who really cares if you are going to put a new background on?
2) I've never had Great stuff slide off of glass, I think it sticks to glass FAR better than it sticks to silicone
3) THere are threads on here that discuss good ratios for the ACE binder technique; I've given up on exact ratios and just mix until the consistency is good. The consistency I use is maybe half as thick as dough. I mix peat and the other dry ingredients (whatever I feel like, really, though it's important that most of the particles are small like peat) with ace binder and a few splashes of water. It should be thick enough to hold a ball shape reasonably well, but not too thick or sticky that it sticks to your latex gloves. I really urge everyone to try it, you won't believe how much better it is than the silicone method. Even if it hasn't worked for your previously, experiment with it.


----------



## Conman3880 (Jul 8, 2007)

I heard that the concrete binder method doesn't hold up to moisture well over the long run. Is this true?

I made my latest waterfall out of GS, and I'm wanting to try the concrete binder thing, but I heard it would probably break apart under a waterfall. Again, I'm unsure of how true that is.

Also, IMO, waterfalls are 50% of the fun when constructing a vivarium & they look nice when they're done. AND in my experience, misting is not required with a waterfall.


----------



## phrakt (Jan 5, 2007)

npaull said:


> 1) Using black silicone as a base over which to apply great stuff inside the tank
> -Why on Earth would you do this? Use spray paint on the outside. SO much easier, faster, and cheaper.


Or you can use opaque adhesive vynil sheets, on the outside too, but I don't get the whole "using silicone as base" thing either, it seems like a huge waste of money and time.




npaull said:


> 2) I've never had Great stuff slide off of glass, I think it sticks to glass FAR better than it sticks to silicone


Agreed! From my experience, the only time I have had GS not stick properly is when I applied too much in one shot, and the inside did not cure well. Over time, it shrunk and that created a gap between the GS and the glass. So it's simply a matter of doing several small applications to get the desired shape and let enough time to cure between each application.


----------



## thetattooedone (Mar 26, 2007)

I've used both and I'd pick the binder method any day. Much faster and easier. I have done this method in a tank that had a waterfall and it didn't lose it's durability one bit. I eventually turned the pump off, but the binder held just fine. When it dries, it's as hard as a rock. I also get really good moss growth on the binder mix as opposed to the GS/silicone backgrounds that I've done. Don't know why, but I do!

Brent


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

sometimes i wonder if a viv build is more of a engeneer/construction/landscaper fantasy camp senario rather than a whats best for the frogs.

things i wont put in my vivs any more are. water features, misting systems, falsies, leca layers.

water features look great and some frogs really like them but they can be a pain to instal and maintain plus they take up too much room ime.

misting sytems are the most unnecessary and one of the most expensive things to put in a viv. im sure they come in handy for 20+ vivs but even then not a nessecity.

falsies/leca ime is more work than needed and takes up too much vert space than i would like.

my substrate is a simple clay based one about 3 inches deep topped with about 4 inches of leaf litter. 

my setups all work well for me because everything is working together. the clay stays moist and keeps the humidity pretty stable at around 80-85% hand misting 2-3 times a week. the thick leaf litter stays fairly clean and dry on top and damp underneath which the mico fauna are triving in. most of my plants are ephytic so a moist,not soggy, substrate is fine. my broms and tillies dont rot and all pu like crazy.

the downside of my setup is that it does limit what plants will work. with all the mounted plants the bottom of my vivs are pretty shaded. but i like this as it also keeps temps stable and offers different temp zones for the frogs to go to. i have some luck with some pepperomias and jewel orchid on my viv floors but for the most part the plant life ther is sparse but my frogs do have lots of foraging area.

over misting is also unnecesary, my frogs enjoy not being wet all the time and so do my plants and my microfauna.

by eliminating the above items my vivs are pretty much maintanace free with the exception of some plant trimming/ depupping now and then.

anyways thats what works for me but obviously i like the frogs more than the plants so my setup is not for everyone.

sean


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

Hey Sean,

Do you ever have problems with too much water in the bottom of the vivarium?

I agree that most false bottoms take up lots of space... I've settled on about 1/2" of false bottom, literally just enough so that I can have a tube going to the bottom of the vivarium to siphon off water when necessary.


----------



## RBroskie (Jan 21, 2007)

water features arent difficult. even if they arent necessary they are still my favorite aspect of viv design. they just take a little planning thats all.


----------



## elscotto (Mar 1, 2005)

Well, as RBroskie and Conman3880 already stated, water features are fun! If someone feels that "water feature-less tanks are every bit as good for most all the frog species, and require a lot less headache in terms of wiring, drilling, etc." then don't put them in. I imagine that depends on your definition of "every bit as good." One could also do a quick search of certain captive habitats (particularly some of the European terraria) to see why the hobby is so much fun for some folks, as a growing number of habitats are becoming more complex and challenging. To each his own, I guess....


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

npaull said:


> Hey Sean,
> 
> Do you ever have problems with too much water in the bottom of the vivarium?
> 
> I agree that most false bottoms take up lots of space... I've settled on about 1/2" of false bottom, literally just enough so that I can have a tube going to the bottom of the vivarium to siphon off water when necessary.


no not realy but i dont mist as often as most people and the clay holds alot of water. i just let it evaporate and that seems to be keeping my vivs at a stable and high humidity even with a good amount of ventilation. i do keep my brom cups full and im sure that helps as i usually have 8-10 in each viv.

i was thinking about a short falsie as well before i experimented with how i do it now. like i said before my substrate is a bit too wet (but not soggy or muddy) for most plants and a short falsie would definately solve that but im a frog guy first and i really like the look of a sparsely planted bottom with all the leaf litter. ill try to post pics sometime but my net is out at home, all the lightning and tornadoes and whatnot.

by the way i love the look sound and function of water features but for me they just ended up being too much messing around in the viv and i really like to stay out of them as much as possible. im thinking outside filter/pump or something along that nature.

maybee someday if i had a verry large enclosure ( several hundred gallons) i would try it again but in a 30 gal it just seems like too much trouble for the space i give up.

im considering the binder method for my next build but as with anything im hesitant to change what is working well for me but at the same time i HATE silacone.

sean


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

I've given up on exact ratios and just mix until the consistency is good. The consistency I use is maybe half as thick as dough. I mix peat and the other dry ingredients (whatever I feel like, really, though it's important that most of the particles are small like peat) with ace binder and a few splashes of water. It should be thick enough to hold a ball shape reasonably well, but not too thick or sticky that it sticks to your latex gloves. I really urge everyone to try it, you won't believe how much better it is than the silicone method. Even if it hasn't worked for your previously, experiment with it.do you aply it directly to the glass or do you foam first. just trying to see what works best. very tempted, very very tempted  

sean


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

I didn't mean to imply that water features are the antiChrist. Just that I think they are considered by some beginners as essential or pseudo-essential components, which is unnecessary. Don't get me wrong - making nice vivaria is a huge part of what's enjoyable. What I'm trying to point out are practices which can make that more difficult/less successful.

The only setting in which I actually do think water features are bad is when they are used in small cages (say less than 50 gallons?). A lot of surface area has to be sacrificed in order to create them, and that surface area is much better used as a microfauna-producing leaf litter than water. When people start cramming water features into small tanks, they are really thinking more about themselves than the frogs.


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

npaull said:


> I didn't mean to imply that water features are the antiChrist. Just that I think they are considered by some beginners as essential or pseudo-essential components, which is unnecessary. Don't get me wrong - making nice vivaria is a huge part of what's enjoyable. What I'm trying to point out are practices which can make that more difficult/less successful.
> 
> The only setting in which I actually do think water features are bad is when they are used in small cages (say less than 50 gallons?). A lot of surface area has to be sacrificed in order to create them, and that surface area is much better used as a microfauna-producing leaf litter than water. When people start cramming water features into small tanks, they are really thinking more about themselves than the frogs.



i mirror this statement exactly.

sean


----------



## divingne1 (Mar 21, 2008)

I did a very simple water feature in my 37g tall tank. It was a piece of cork bark siliconed to the back wall with a tube sticking out of it. The water ran down the cork bark and into a gravel bed. The water then ran underneath the gravel to the false bottom so it really didn't take up any room. Creeping fig was planted on a shelf above the cork bark so it hid the water feature. I may or may not do this again when I set it up for some Lamasi's next year. 
My husband did a large water feature in the 120g tank and it took a lot of time to complete but the frogs seem to love it. They hang out on the rocks that line the stream. The water falls down over some slate rocks so when it hits the rocks below it splashes onto the rocks. I witnessed today one of the frogs try to get on the background and couldn't grip it so he fell down to the bottom. He was covered in debris from the plants so he climbed up on the rock and sat there for a minute while the water got splashed on him. He then got into the stream and sat there for a second. Then he hopped out and started hunting springtails. He used the water feature to clean himself off. Made all the work on the waterfall worth every frustrating minute because the frogs use it. 
Water features are not a necessity but the sure help with the humidity. 
Candy


----------



## scott r (Mar 2, 2008)

If you take a 20 gallon aquarium, cover the back outside with black paper, fill it with a few inches of pea gravel, plant some plants hydroponically in the gravel and cover the gravel with sheet moss and leaf litter, and throw in some driftwood for hide spots, you will have met the needs of the frogs, and everything else is unnesssary. However, It's not visually as pleasing. Different people, different tastes, different designs, none wrong.


----------



## earthfrog (May 18, 2008)

npaull said:


> I didn't mean to imply that water features are the antiChrist. Just that I think they are considered by some beginners as essential or pseudo-essential components, which is unnecessary. Don't get me wrong - making nice vivaria is a huge part of what's enjoyable. What I'm trying to point out are practices which can make that more difficult/less successful.
> 
> The only setting in which I actually do think water features are bad is when they are used in small cages (say less than 50 gallons?). A lot of surface area has to be sacrificed in order to create them, and that surface area is much better used as a microfauna-producing leaf litter than water. When people start cramming water features into small tanks, they are really thinking more about themselves than the frogs.


"water features are the antiChrist" is one for the books. I don't think you offended anyone---but a small fogger setup might be preferable and still attractive while not bathing the whole tank.


----------



## RBroskie (Jan 21, 2007)

> The only setting in which I actually do think water features are bad is when they are used in small cages



i definately agree with this statement. thats why water features give some people so much trouble because they are trying to stuff a waterfall into a 10 gallon vert! im not a fan of any tank under 29 gallons period whether they have a waterfall or not. (unless they are grow out tanks for froglets). the more space you have to work with the easier things are.


----------



## tzen (Nov 22, 2007)

I'd like to resuscitate the original idea behind this thread. There are indeed a lot of things being done and advised that are NOT NECESSARY. That doesn't mean that they are without merit, merely that it'd be wrong to give newbies the impression that it is the only way for vivariums to be built and herpetoculture to be practiced.



> 1) Using black silicone as a base over which to apply great stuff inside the tank
> -Why on Earth would you do this? Use spray paint on the outside. SO much easier, faster, and cheaper.


(personally, I think just having slick glass on the outside looks better.)



> 2) Using silicone over great stuff into which is pressed peat for the background
> -This is the single biggest pain in the ass in the entire hobby. The "concrete" method (using peat/moss/tree fern fiber/dirt mixed with concrete binder) is so much better...
> 
> 3) Flowing water features
> -This one I understand, but I think more often than not (especially for the first few vivaria constructed this way) it ends up being a huge pain. Water feature-less tanks are every bit as good for most all the frog species, and require a lot less headache in terms of wiring, drilling, etc.





> 4) water features, misting systems, falsies, leca layers.
> water features look great and some frogs really like them but they can be a pain to instal and maintain plus they take up too much room ime.
> misting sytems are the most unnecessary and one of the most expensive things to put in a viv. im sure they come in handy for 20+ vivs but even then not a nessecity.
> falsies/leca ime is more work than needed and takes up too much vert space than i would like.
> my substrate is a simple clay based one about 3 inches deep topped with about 4 inches of leaf litter.


So additional Unnecessary practices:

5) Viewing mites as the Antichrist. :wink: 
Sure, it is best to avoid them, and a little prevention is fine, and they can be another reason cultures crash. But you can also make peace with them.

6) Using eggcrate _and_ LECA.
I just don't get the point of this one. (Although it should probably be in a "Uncommon, Unnecessary" list, I've seen it twice recently.)


I'm sure there are others.


----------



## froglet (May 18, 2005)

I guess i have to trow my two cents in .. 


I personally use the silicone to peat/cocoo method and it works fine for me, i am not going to try the binder method " if its not broken why fix it " .......... 

As far as the water features i think they are a total waste of time and like i've stated many many times before people need to stop thinking of themselves and start thinking about the frogs. I think its ridiculous that in a 10-20 gallon tank someone wastes 1/2 of the space so there can be dirty/stagnant/ugly water sitting there for the frog to possibly deposit some tads/take a bath......... it is absurd that we do this, no reason at all for that. I am not stating that some frogs might not like it but why in the world does an imitator need 1 gallon of water running through its habitat, just stupid IMO. If you want frogs that need water get some red eye trees or something and leave the darts for those who know that pdf's are not aquatic. 

I am in no way attacking anyone and do know that everyone has their right to do what he/she pleases with the frogs but i find that after all the discussions and all the veterans in the hobby saying the same thing over and over again people still waste their time making seaworlds in their vivariums.

Just my two thoughts ...


----------



## RBroskie (Jan 21, 2007)

they arent a waste of time in larger tanks. if you dont like them dont build them. 10 gallon tanks suck with or without a water feature.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

npaull said:


> The only setting in which I actually do think water features are bad is when they are used in small cages (say less than 50 gallons?). A lot of surface area has to be sacrificed in order to create them, and that surface area is much better used as a microfauna-producing leaf litter than water. When people start cramming water features into small tanks, they are really thinking more about themselves than the frogs.


I have said this before and I will say it again. Well said.


----------



## jdogfunk99 (Oct 16, 2007)

For me concrete binder just didn't work. I waited 5 days for it to dry before giving up. Granted, I didn't use Ace Hardware binder.


----------



## UmbraSprite (Mar 2, 2007)

tzen said:


> 5) Viewing mites as the Antichrist. :wink:
> Sure, it is best to avoid them, and a little prevention is fine, and they can be another reason cultures crash. But you can also make peace with them.


Have to agree here. Mites are definitely on the menu for darts in the wild...whether intentionally eaten on present on their other prey. Some have even hypothesized mites are a critical link to toxin creation.

I keep a large micro-fauna sweater box that is teeming with life...and mites are definitely one of the inhabitants. In my opinion they are just another piece of the natural cycle of things. I use this "mother" culture to seed all my egg feeder tanks.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

UmbraSprite said:


> I keep a large micro-fauna sweater box that is teeming with life...and mites are definitely one of the inhabitants. In my opinion they are just another piece of the natural cycle of things. I use this "mother" culture to seed all my egg feeder tanks.


That is a great idea!


----------



## sports_doc (Nov 15, 2004)

RBroskie said:


> 10 gallon tanks suck with or without a water feature.













I beg to differ IMO :wink: ....I've seen a lot of opinions in this thread, not a lot of "unnecessary practices" IMO, or scientific evidence or even consensus. Opinions should be stated as such and everyone should be open to theirs being questioned. 

And btw those little tanks have water features, small pond sections...present in all 60 of my tanks. But that is just how I like to do it...


----------



## sports_doc (Nov 15, 2004)

> 1) The spray paint goes on the OUTSIDE of the tank, not the inside, so toxicity is really not an issue. Silicone would be better if background removal were an issue, though it's pretty easy to rip a background off, and if there's debris on the glass who really cares if you are going to put a new background on?


painting the outside is actually an interesting idea. Often done in the aquarium trade. Something to consider trying.



> 2) I've never had Great stuff slide off of glass, I think it sticks to glass FAR better than it sticks to silicone


Oh it comes off glass quite easily IME as it cures and shrinks and even over extended periods of time in a viv. "There is 2 kinds of GS, those that have come off the glass, and those that will"  but is it still very versatile and workable. A european technique that Blk Jungle pioneered in the US. 



> 3) THere are threads on here that discuss good ratios for the ACE binder technique; I've given up on exact ratios and just mix until the consistency is good. The consistency I use is maybe half as thick as dough. I mix peat and the other dry ingredients (whatever I feel like, really, though it's important that most of the particles are small like peat) with ace binder and a few splashes of water. It should be thick enough to hold a ball shape reasonably well, but not too thick or sticky that it sticks to your latex gloves. I really urge everyone to try it, you won't believe how much better it is than the silicone method. Even if it hasn't worked for your previously, experiment with it.


Not something I've tried but I'm open to giving it a try.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

sports_doc said:


> I beg to differ IMO :wink: ....


Oh snap! Ha ha. I am not a big 10 vert guy myself, but I have no problem with them if properly used (many are). I think Shawn has beautiful tanks, and I even like his water features because they are practical, not too big. I think a small tank with a large pool and waterfall can be a different story though. I agree though that we should not be too dogmatic about this things. There are times when something we may not favor works very well for others. I have some beautiful frogs that we born and raised in a 10 vert.


----------



## RBroskie (Jan 21, 2007)

the 10 verts look awesome shawn but they,re tiny! you have probably produced tons of frogs from them, but my opinion 8) is that i dont want my frogs crammed into something that small, if i can help it.


----------



## sports_doc (Nov 15, 2004)

RBroskie said:


> the 10 verts look awesome shawn but they,re tiny! you have probably produced tons of frogs from them, but my opinion 8) is that i dont want my frogs crammed into something that small, if i can help it.


If I can/could help it, I'd put them all in 30 gal tanks....

I'd need a warehouse if I did...

S


----------



## RBroskie (Jan 21, 2007)

understood, my "collection" is definately quite a bit smaller than yours. :wink:


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

IMO - getting into the water feature type deal here... when referring to a beginner starting out, I always try and stear them away from water features... focus on learning one thing at a time... frogs and their food is hard enough. Then learn some plants. Then mess with some water features/complex backgrounds. Doing it all at once has caused some very frustrated beginners that don't tend to do a good job mostly because they don't have the understanding yet to get away with it. Learn the basics, then build from there.

Like the leca/false bottom debate... they are both forms of drainage layers... and as long as your total drainage layer is deep enough for what you want to do, doesn't matter how it's done, false bottom, loose inert substrate (LECA, styro, gravel), or a combo there of... but a combo in certain ways certainly does make me wonder what is being accomplished, K.I.S.S.!


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

> And btw those little tanks have water features, small pond sections...present in all 60 of my tanks. But that is just how I like to do it...


ive always been amazed that you get a working water feature in all your tanks. you are a much better engeneer than i sir. the closest thing ive had to a reliably working water feature was when a pipe broke in my crawlspace and i had to have the fire dept pump it out before i could fix it.

i always ended up with burned out/clogged pumps that had to be tweaked constantly. 

sean


----------



## Rain_Frog (Apr 27, 2004)

I don't bother with backgrounds anymore. Use tall plants and you won't even see the background.


----------



## pl259 (Feb 27, 2006)

> ive always been amazed that you get a working water feature in all your tanks...


I do the same thing in my tanks. They are just small ponds, not "working water features". In other words, no pumps. It doesn't take an engineer. You can do it too. Just pull back some of the substrate/drainage layer.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Rain_Frog said:


> I don't bother with backgrounds anymore. Use tall plants and you won't even see the background.


Why when you can have a background with many more plants on it and it fully covers the back? I like my epiphytes, and at minimum it gives my vines places to cling. I just do it the lazy way with treefern/epiweb on the back and let the plants do what they like.


----------



## flyangler18 (Oct 26, 2007)

> I just do it the lazy way with treefern/epiweb on the back and let the plants do what they like.


+1. My life is complicated enough to be messing with GS and all that rot


----------



## zaroba (Apr 8, 2006)

npaull said:


> 1) Using black silicone as a base over which to apply great stuff inside the tank
> -Why on Earth would you do this? Use spray paint on the outside. SO much easier, faster, and cheaper.


its also a pain in the butt to scrape off black spray paint. why on earth would you do that? what if a year or two from now you want to use the tank for something else but have ruined it with spray paint? what if the front gets scratched? you wont be able to turn it around to use the back as the viewing side. what if you want to sell it? i'm sure you can get a lot more money from a clean tank then one with ugly black paint on 3 sides.




npaull said:


> 2) Using silicone over great stuff into which is pressed peat for the background
> -This is the single biggest pain in the ass in the entire hobby. The "concrete" method (using peat/moss/tree fern fiber/dirt mixed with concrete binder) is so much better than this technique that I honestly cannot believe the silicone background isn't totally obsolete. Try the concrete method and I promise you'll absolutely never dream of using silicone again. Ace Hardware has a really good concrete binder, and there are lots of threads discussing this background technique. TRY IT.


maybe its not 'obsolete' because it works easily and great for many people. just because you found it hard doesn't mean others do to. others could find it much easier and less messy then mixing everything. hmm...a caulk gun with a large tube of silicon, cut off the end so theres a big hole, squeeze out a lot, then use a sponge on a sick to push it everywhere. no mess at all. then just dump a thick layer cocofiber on it, pack it, and let it set. dump off the excess. to me it sounds and seems a lot easier then making a big mix of stuff. plus its safer then possibly having harmful chemicals leach out of the concrete binder.




npaull said:


> 3) Flowing water features
> -This one I understand, but I think more often than not (especially for the first few vivaria constructed this way) it ends up being a huge pain. Water feature-less tanks are every bit as good for most all the frog species, and require a lot less headache in terms of wiring, drilling, etc.


water featureless tanks also require other more expensive or ways or more laborious ways to maintain humidity levels and do water changes. nobody said you HAD to drill a tank to put in a water feature. all you need is a small pump under the false bottom to pump water to a place over the substrate. 1 small wire to plug in to power the pump. no leaks, nothing to worry about. humidity is also added by them so you don't need to spend a hundred + on a misting system and no need to constantly mist the tank by hand. for example, the stream, water falls, and ponds in my viv keep the humidity around 90% and the substrate moist. as long as the pump is moving water threw the tank, i don't have to mist or water the plants. the only watering that i have to do is adding water to the reservoir every 2-3 months and its as simple as taking a hose and filling it for 5-10 mins. for a water change all i need to do is connect the same hose to a y valve on the pump and open it up to have the pump push the water outside.




keep in mind that just because you find a method hard or undesirable doesn't make it a bad idea. thats really quite an arrogant thing to say. its all a matter of opinion. some people find some ways more enjoyable and some people like the long term appearances more.


----------



## zaroba (Apr 8, 2006)

heyduke said:


> falsies/leca ime is more work than needed and takes up too much vert space than i would like. my substrate is a simple clay based one about 3 inches deep topped with about 4 inches of leaf litter.


erm...if you have 7 inches of substrate 'without' a false bottom, why would you not be able to eliminate 5 inches of that and use a 1 or 2 inch false bottom? sounds like your wasting more vert space without a false bottom then you would ever use with one.

i have yet to see anything that says false bottoms CAN'T only be 1 or 2 inches tall.
yet so many seem to believe and act like they have to be 5 inches or more


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

just remeasured clay is like 2" leaf litter is 4". yeah i could make a short falsie but for me it works out that i dont need one. i dont have standing water because i dont over mist, my humidity stays in the mid 80's for about a week with out misting. and i wont give in on deep leaf litter. 

i dont consider leaf litter as a substrate. its not like its 4 inches of a solid thats unusable by the frogs, its a little eco system that is shared by the frogs, micro fauna, and bacterias that i beleive keep my viv and frogs healthy. when its that deep the frogs will scavenge and burrow in it

i was just saying what works for me, make all the falsies, waterfalls, bulkheads, ponds that you want. im sure your frogs will be just fine happy and healthy as well.

but are all those things necessary? in my opinion no. ive done it both ways and the simple set up i have now ends up being less maintanance, less expensive, and less intrusive to my frogs while being able to add another inch - inch and a half of leaf litter which imo is far more useable to frogs than a plastic platform raised above run-off water.

anyways thats what works for me.

sean


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

pl259 said:


> > ive always been amazed that you get a working water feature in all your tanks...
> 
> 
> I do the same thing in my tanks. They are just small ponds, not "working water features". In other words, no pumps. It doesn't take an engineer. You can do it too. Just pull back some of the substrate/drainage layer.


i have alot of broms that hold water and pods that hold water as well i guess i could consider those a "water feature". 

sean


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

Elaborate false bottoms
Elaborate water features
Elaborate anything

All things in moderation until you have more experience and you will be fine.


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

> keep in mind that just because you find a method hard or undesirable doesn't make it a bad idea. thats really quite an arrogant thing to say. its all a matter of opinion.


keep in mind that just because you find a method less complicated and undesirable doesnt make it a bad idea. its all a matter of opinion.  

sean


----------



## earthfrog (May 18, 2008)

I think we've pretty much exhausted these topics. Unless there's something that hasn't been covered yet, let's try to stay encouraging and not get too critical of others' techniques. I haven't read anything yet that was harmful to the frogs, just an argument over 'which shade of orange' is best (that's a metaphor, BTW) :wink: .


----------



## LittleDip (May 20, 2007)

UmbraSprite said:


> What ratio's did you use with the Ace binder?
> 
> I tried this method a while ago and had no luck. First it was too runny...then I couldn't get it to stick to the Great Stuff more than my hands (would stick to my gloves not the GS).
> 
> ...


I am really interested in this as well..looks easier and looks like i will hold up much better. I haven't been able to find many post about it at all.. just a few here and there..


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I'd be interested to know why you were trying to put it on great stuff? I usually have heard the binder being used on styro and great stuff being a different/seperate technique. I have a feeling the binder would have issues clinging to such a smooth surface... which is why I've not see GS referenced as the substance that forms the shape the binder covers.


----------



## LittleDip (May 20, 2007)

I've seen ppl use it on styrofoam and make really nice rocks out of them.and thought that would be a nice rock wall/background..the GS just doesn't not work for me, I've applied the silicone with the coco bark and it just does NOT STICK!! and would keep falling off.. :x


----------



## earthfrog (May 18, 2008)

LittleDip said:


> I've seen ppl use it on styrofoam and make really nice rocks out of them.and thought that would be a nice rock wall/background..the GS just doesn't not work for me, I've applied the silicone with the coco bark and it just does NOT STICK!! and would keep falling off.. :x


If you apply a few millimeters of silicone to the GS, WAIT 2 or 3 minutes for it to set a bit, then just pile on the DRIED coco bark thickly and press firmly onto the piles of coco without moving your hands from left to right, it should do much better. WAIT ten minutes before vacuuming the excess in the spot you just worked on or it will suck up your work---silicone and all!


----------



## LittleDip (May 20, 2007)

THANK YOU!! i will try this..
I have a few tanks i picked up that were already done and i need to actually cut into the background (foam) to get to the tubing it keeps cloggin and the pump's cord is foamed into the background as well..so I might need to do some surgery on the tank and redo the background :?


----------



## thetattooedone (Mar 26, 2007)

I've used the binder method on GS with no problems. But I also score the GS after it cures, which helps the binder stick. I've also used the binder method on non-scored GS and it has held in that particular tank for over a year now. I really think it all depends on the consistancy of the mix. Too runny and it has a hard time sticking, too thick and it doesn't spread correctly. It's a pretty forgiving process, but you've got to get a good consistancy to work with. I also press it in and leave the tank on it's back for a couple of days to let it set. I have not seen this method fail yet. Ultimately, both silicone and concrete binder are viable options, just boils down to preference. Time wise, the Binder method has always been much more efficient for me. Less time to cover the background and less curing time. When it's dry it's as hard as a rock and doesn't flake like the GS/Coco method, at least that's been my experience. 

Brent


----------



## Dangerously (Dec 19, 2007)

Rain_Frog said:


> I don't bother with backgrounds anymore. Use tall plants and you won't even see the background.


I'm with you on that one. Over half of my tanks don't have backgrounds, but unless you really look you won't ever know. Some brown cardboard taped to the outside of the back of the tank does wonders to blend things together.


----------



## LittleDip (May 20, 2007)

even better!!  



Dangerously said:


> Rain_Frog said:
> 
> 
> > I don't bother with backgrounds anymore. Use tall plants and you won't even see the background.
> ...


----------



## skylsdale (Sep 16, 2007)

> I'd be interested to know why you were trying to put it on great stuff? I usually have heard the binder being used on styro and great stuff being a different/seperate technique.


Sometimes people will add Great Stuff foam in just a few places on the glass to create some variation of depth or protrusions...then it's all covered with the bonder slurry.


----------



## pl259 (Feb 27, 2006)

This is an interesting topic. What's constitutes "unnecessary" will always vary from frogger to frogger, so I'll approach this from a minimalist perspective. The only necessary things are those things that keeps the frogs safe and healthy, assuming of course that proper temp, humidty and food have already been established. (Some of these have already been said)

1. *In the tank backgrounds*. Be them foam, silicone, binder, coco fiber mats, tree fern panels, coco panels, whatever. They aren't necessary. However, IMO, frogs will have a greater sense of security and be "happier" if the sides and back of the tanks are covered, which can be done from the outside.

2. *Active water features* Any pump driven water feature is unnecessary except for those species that prefer moving water for breeding. However, IMO, frogs should have a source of water so they can self regulate their moisture levels. This can be as simple as a pond or the dreaded water dish. 

3. *False Bottoms* There are simpler drainage methods that don't take away from the planting height of the tank. 

4. *LECA, Lava rocks, Bio Balls* Going lightweight isn't strickly necessary. Your basic gravel will work fine. If you must go lightweight, packing peanuts have been used successfully. 

5. *Verts for climbers/horizontals for terrestrials* Unless your tanks are >1m tall, it really won't make any difference. IMO, this is mostly driven by how you rack and stack your tanks.

6. *Automated misting systems* Strickly speaking this is generally a convenience rather than a need. Depends on the frogger's available time. I like manual misting because it adds a periodic check of all of the tanks.

7. *Timers for lighting* ... but they're a really nice to have.

8. *Exotic, Expensive Plants * Half the fun in this hobby is the plants, IMO. But simpler, cheaper plants work just as well. 

9. *Maximizing Breeding/Profit* It's not necessary to max out the production of these frogs. In fact, it may be very stressful and unhealthy. Pulling every clutch of eggs is a common practice that may need to be reconsidered. I personally don't pull eggs, except when I believe in tank conditions are affecting their development.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

Well said Eric, I can't see anywhere I disagree.

I will add on backgrounds, that even primarily terrestrial frogs will use a background. All of my Tincs climb (I use taller tanks too, around 24-25"), and some sleep up high. So a background, even a simple one can add more areas for the frogs to occupy, even slightly different climates. Backgrounds can also take up valuable floor space however, so balance is needed.


----------



## heyduke (Sep 19, 2006)

hey eric my thoughts exactly 

sean


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

pl259 said:


> 3. *False Bottoms* There are simpler drainage methods that don't take away from the planting height of the tank.


My only comment... why would this take away more planting height from the tank than other drainage methods? All the drainage methods should be taking about the same amount of space... that is unless you're doubling your drainage by adding the "loose" drainage materials on top of your drainage layer :?: 

Common, unnecessary practice... moss laws. Eek!

I guess this is more of a how to keep it simple thread... keeping it simple saves my sanity! As do timers


----------



## pl259 (Feb 27, 2006)

> why would this take away more planting height


Probably because of the way I've built them. Other's mileage may vary. I do use a small drainage layer, in the handful I've built, between the substrate and the high water line. Not double, but about an inch or so. Without it I found the substrate got too wet even though it wasn't in direct contact with water.

Also, even though I've built a few, I never really saw what the big advantage was to a false bottom. Water is heavier than LECA, frogs and tads can get trapped in it, you can create a sump for a pump without it, has little or no surface area for good bacteria to grow on, smells w/o good bacterial breakdown, takes more effort to build and to make look nice, just as easy to drain with or without one. 

I must be missing something.


----------



## zachxbass (Apr 21, 2008)

I skipped through alot of this thread because i'm at work... but one thing i can comment on is the whole silicone, coco background.... Now, i'll first admit i have never used this method because it seems way too time consuming/ smelly. I've messed w/ the coco/binder method, seems to be good... although i haven't actually used it in a viv, just experimented with it. My 55 gallon i used grout and concrete binder, then painted it with acrylic craft paint... it's only been a few months but it is holding fine, and i think it looks amazing. Even the part that has water running over it is solid as a rock and no paint is coming up. no frogs in it yet, but the betta in the pond is doing great. The tank i am working on now i actually just mixed the acrylic paint in w/ the grouter/binder mix, and so far look just like realy rocks. I know i'm rambling now, but thought i would tell you my experiences... i have some pictures of the 55 gallon on some other post if you wanna see results. Or PM me if you want more details on my methods...


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I always thought the FBs were too much of a pain to make, and I didn't like the lack of surface area for beneficial bacteria to grow which is why I like LECA and gravel.


----------



## Mywebbedtoes (Jul 2, 2007)

I agree with Corey. I don't think false bottoms are bad per se, but can be over rated. There are much simpler ways to go.


----------



## Mitch (Jun 18, 2010)

This is a good thread. I'd like to see more members adding to it. Bump!


----------

