Snorvich, what is the therapeutic level of copper?

[.Chris.]

I have seen you post many many times about the ineffective use of copper at non-therapeutic levels, and how non-therapeutic levels will only mask certain diseases, but for the life of me, I can't find where you indicate the proper level of copper for therapeutic treatments.

Maybe I have just missed it, and if I have, then I apologize, but I am genuinely curious as to your notion of therapeutic levels.

[snorvich]

I have seen you post many many times about the ineffective use of copper at non-therapeutic levels, and how non-therapeutic levels will only mask certain diseases, but for the life of me, I can't find where you indicate the proper level of copper for therapeutic treatments.

Maybe I have just missed it, and if I have, then I apologize, but I am genuinely curious as to your notion of therapeutic levels.

It depends on what you are using. But you can check out this (http://reefcentral.com/forums/blog.php?b=709). Noga recommends (2000): 0.15-0.20 mg/l Always rising slowly over a couple of days. Using the test kit produced by the supplier is preferred. Or you can read leebca's article found here. (http://www.reefsanctuary.com/forums/fish-diseases-treatments/23130-copper-treatment-use-problems.html)

[.Chris.]

Thank you very much.

[avandss]

why would a LFS run copper at .2 vs .5?

would it not be beneficial if they run it at .5 vs just masking disease at .2?

[snorvich]

why would a LFS run copper at .2 vs .5?

would it not be beneficial if they run it at .5 vs just masking disease at .2?

There are various issues. Some fish species do not do well with copper at a therapeutic level. Maintaining the proper level requires a lot of attention to testing that level. Too high kills fish or damages the internal organs of fish (liver); too low masks but does not solve the problem.

[.Chris.]

From a business perspective, would it still not be more beneficial for LFS' to run higher levels of copper? Losing a few fish, vs. losing a large number to velvet or ich?

What other realistic options do LFS owners have for keeping the health of their fish in tact?

[snorvich]

From a business perspective, would it still not be more beneficial for LFS' to run higher levels of copper? Losing a few fish, vs. losing a large number to velvet or ich?

What other realistic options do LFS owners have for keeping the health of their fish in tact?

There would be advantages to doing that but there are some issues. To cure a fish of a given parasite, it needs to be exposed to copper (or CP or hyposalinity in the case of ich) for the complete life cycle since only one part of the life cycle is vulnerable to treatment. As such if you add fish in the inter rim, in the effect the clock restarts for that new fish. If the fish is not exposed for the entire life cycle (such as if it were sold), the parasite would be masked until it reaches a lower level (or no level) of copper. If all sales go through tank transfer after leaving you, and then have a total observation time of 4 weeks (5 would be better) your customer will catch 99.9% of all issues. Getting customers to do that? Well, after working here for years, I can assure you that the odds are slim and none.

[.Chris.]

So what you're saying is that in your experience there's really no recourse for an LFS. This is the best of the terrible options open to retail stores? In your opinion.

[snorvich]

So what you're saying is that in your experience there's really no recourse for an LFS. This is the best of the terrible options open to retail stores? In your opinion.

Well, I don't really want to get into the LFS issues as this is primarily a hobbyist board. However, the incident rate of parasites seems to be increasing (I have been doing saltwater for about 30 years, with 20+ years of fresh water before that) and that may be somewhat of a collection issue in some locations and somewhat of a handling issue subsequent to collection. Very large suppliers have more options whereas brick and mortar stores have business model pressure which limits their options. Unless you have a business model that allows you to simulate financial decisions, you cannot intelligently analyze what would be best. I know if I were in the business (which will never happen) I would tend to order from Australian sources for fish especially. Even as a hobbyist, I go in that direction.

So, while there are some things one can do as an LFS, thir value is determined by the effect on the business model and customer base.