Staying eco-friendly

[Will B]

Hi,
I like to think and act eco-friendly, and I was wondering about the consequences of the choices that I have to make, to create and keep my vivarium/paludarium.
These are some topics that occured to me, which could determine whether I can make this in a more or less eco-friendly manner:
1) Species choice - probably the most critical aspect. Besides the legal aspects, perhaps even more important is knowing if an endangered species and how it was obtained, raised and transported. Also relevant in terms of effort/expense in keeping it ( a tropical species in Alaska or a mountain species in the sahara are much harder and more expensive and less eco-friendly to keep).
2) The enclosure - its structure, size and shape have a big influence on how it performs. Its placement is also a crucial factor (if you need a cool environment its best kept on the coollest side of the house and room, or...)
3) The materials - specially (perhaps) the soil medium which needs frequent replacement or cleaning/disinfecting. I think that local materials should be chosen, whenever compatible with the species kept (doesn’t make much sense to me having coconut fibers imported from so far away when we can get leaf litter, moss and bark locally);
4) Food - Whenever possible, I think that local food items should be chosen. Not only because this greatly reduces the carbon footprint, but perhaps even more important, to avoid alien species invasions, which occur too often worldwide.

Any comments on these aspects, or any further topics that anyone could add to this list?
I guess some reflection on this matter can have a significant impact on the consequences of our actions regarding this hobby.

W

 

[Molch]

You raise some excellent points. Funny you mentioned Alaska:

we up north here may live in paradise - surrounded by pristine wilderness. But the embarrassing truth is that our lifestyle up here is quite costly, ecologically speaking. It's not just the newt keeping - that's a teeny tiny part of it - it's everything:

- we have to heat our houses for most of the year
- everything we get, all our food (except a few berries and fish or wildlife we hunt), our gas, our heating oil, our furniture, everything! gets flown in by air.
- we use air travel far more often than people living on a road -connected system
- when we do drive somewhere, it's hundreds of miles.
- a lot of us use gas-guzzling snow machines or 4-wheelers to get around in roadless areas (yours truly uses cross-country skis or a mountain bike powered by a hyperactive golden retriever)

all of this means that we living in the north must have just about the biggest carbon footprint of anyone.

Alaskans have this image of themselves as these pristine close-to nature types. Puh. I get annoyed at my fellow Alaskans when they rant against "city folks" or "outsiders" (which is anyone NOT from Alaska, if you can believe the arrogance of that phrase). I remind them that those "city folks" are on the whole a lot more eco-conscious than your average Alaskan and that they, per capita, probably contribute a lot less to resource consumption than we up here do.

so you might ask, if I know all this, why do I live here? Because I would wither and die if I had to live anywhere else...that's the whole truth of it.

 

[Will B]

I hadn't realized all the aspects that you raise... I thought that for example the oil and fuel that alaskans use was drilled and refined in Alaska, so on that area I thought that you were better served than most of us. Although the refineries and oil fields do raise big concerns anyway.
I'm a big nature and wildlife admirer, and so have watched many many documentaries, and truth be told, I still did feel that for the most part Alaskans had the opportunity of leading eco-friendly lifestyles... even though some "TV and politics stars" are so committed to killing bears and wolfs for sports or even other less noble reasons!!!

Are there any local anphibians ?

W

 

[Jennewt]

You have raised some good questions, which all of us should give some thought to (even if, for some people, it's driven by frugality as much as carbon footprint reduction). Anything that requires an electrical appliance that runs 24/7 does increase our energy consumption. And growing your own live food does reduce both cost and carbon footprint.

I've tried to think of ways that I can minimize the number of electrical appliances that I run. Since I have multiple tanks, I've installed shop lights that can illuminate many tanks at once. I'm thinking about replacing my old shop lights with the more energy-efficient fixtures that use the skinny fluorescent tubes. I use a air pumps that have 2 outlets/pump and split the air from each outlet so that I can serve 4-6 tanks per pump.

 

[Molch]

I hadn't realized all the aspects that you raise... I thought that for example the oil and fuel that alaskans use was drilled and refined in Alaska, so on that area I thought that you were better served than most of us.
W

wish it were so. We have the most expensive gas in all of the US. In NOme, gas has been 5 $/gallon for 2 years, and is expected to go to about 6.50 this fall when the barge brings the next shipment.

That's nuthin' though - some of the villages in the bush pay anywhere from 8 to 12 $/gallon, including heating oil.

I've tried to think of ways that I can minimize the number of electrical appliances that I run.

me too
I set up a new Walstad tank a few months ago. It's a 5-gallon with soil, gravel layer, and lots of Vals and Rotala. It sits by a window and has no artificial light, no filter, no electrical gadgets of any kind. Inhabitant is one rescued African Dwarf Frog, 4 mini mollies and a few bloodworms and Daphnia. It's going great and is definitely my most eco-friendly tank

 

[fishkeeper]

It is pretty standard for my tanks to not have any electrical appliances used for them. I currently have a 60 gallon for my P. waltl, and a 46 gallon for the Cynops ensicauda popei. Both tanks do not have filters or airpumps-which suits them fine so long as the water stays clean enough. The waltl are on the patio, the golddusts in the living room so they have a little light fixture over them. It is only on for viewing for several hours per day on a timer and the plants(low light Syngonium rayii and Monstera) seem to thrive. I might consider switching to a flourescent tube fixture or maybe putting my old CF lights over the tank again to grow more variety of plants.

 

[Azhael]

I do worry about this stuff too. I don´t use filters or air pumps which is nice, but i worry about the lights. I´ve managed to reduce the number of lights i use, and now 4 of my tanks have no light. The problem (but also the blessing) is that my house receives no direct light at all, so even if the tanks are right in the window sill they are exposed to low light. Good news is that the plants i use do well under those conditions. Bad news is that anything that is separated from the window gets too little light. I´ve been looking into getting LED lights because they say they consume substantially less, but they are bloody expensive and i´m poor as a rat, so that´s going to take time.

 

[eljorgo]

I dont use a single electronic device at the moment. And I rarely used. Only filters sometimes before but now not even it. Its the good thing about keeping strictly terrestrial species. Cheers,