# shredded coconut husk mushroom problems!!



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

hay all.
ive used coconut husk in all my tarantulas tanks and most of them are kept dry.
but in my avics tank and my H.lividums Tanks are full of these white mushrooms, they started off small but now i have two huge ones in my cobolts tank, even one from one side to the other side of my h.lividums entrence to her burrow, so she has stopped using it because its basically barred off with a mushroom!

so are these harmfull? the tarantulas keepers guide says there harmless but they are annoying.
i will be redoing my h.lividums tank but in the future, shell i worry or maybe use a diffrent substrate?

the mushorroms are white and long, sorry no photo.


----------



## odiakkoh (Sep 25, 2010)

I know a lot of people recommend peat to avoid this issue.


----------



## TerribleGrizz (Sep 25, 2010)

According to The Tarantula Keepers Guide, most fungal growths that appear in enclosures pose no real threat, but personally I wouldn't take the risk. If you want to get rid of them, clear out the enclosures and give scrub down with a bleach water solution.

Personally, I also use peat, and I have had no problems thus far.


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

ok so im dence and this is the uk so maybe its called somthing else.

but what is peat?
potting soil?
compost?


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

also does anyone know exacually which species these mushrooms are? im really curios.


----------



## TerribleGrizz (Sep 25, 2010)

Peat is basically plant material that hasn't decayed fully because of acidic or araeobic conditions.

Peat is a major component in a lot of organic potting soils, yes. I should clarify my last post. I actually use organic potting soil (no chemicals) and the major component is peat.  However, apparently peat is discouraged as a soil amendment in the UK, so I don't know if you'll be able to get any.

I'm afraid I don't know much about mushrooms, so I can't help you there.


----------



## AbraCadaver (Sep 25, 2010)

A picture would help identify the fungi.. 

I'm not sure what peat moss is called in the uk, but I will give me dad a ring. He grew up on a farm, he'll know =)

ETA; It goes under "sphagnum" in the irish garden centers. Hope it'll help ye


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

thanks for your help.
the mushorroms look abit like liberty caps but pure white, so the top bit isnt brown the whole things stalk and top is white.
its the same mushroom in both tanks so it must be a commen mushroom to the coconut husk, so if you know that then youll know the mushroom.. i think...


----------



## Ictinike (Sep 25, 2010)

Many have had similar..

Just take some tons and pull them out at the base and flush them.  No need to re-do the entire enclosure as it could be either a local variety or one that came with the coir.

I've had similar when I keep enclosures too moist and have had to move the water dish to a different corner a few times to allow that area to dry out.  Keep the enclosure dryer with a water dish and they'll do fine.

Peat moss is a common name for ground up Sphagnum moss that has broken down and decayed to the point it's much more acidic and tends not to allow fungus to grow since both the acidity as well the lack of organic compounds breaking down.


----------



## JimM (Sep 25, 2010)

odiakkoh said:


> I know a lot of people recommend peat to avoid this issue.


...This...


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

have doneso and thnks.

is there a post in this forum about the mushrooms that have been found to grow on coconut husk because id really like to know what species of mushroom it is.


----------



## TerribleGrizz (Sep 25, 2010)

bloodred1889 said:


> have doneso and thnks.
> 
> is there a post in this forum about the mushrooms that have been found to grow on coconut husk because id really like to know what species of mushroom it is.


The search function should help you out with that. Let us know if you find anything.


----------



## Toirtis (Sep 25, 2010)

Properly baking your substrate (coco-peat or real peat) first will also eliminate fungal issues coming from the substrate (bear in mind that many other things that you place in your enclosures may carry fungal spores).


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 25, 2010)

tried the search function there isnt a thread about mushrooms found in tanks, someone shoud start one with pictures as a refrence to newbies


----------



## REAPER591 (Sep 25, 2010)

If I had to guess I would imagine it would be more of a local variety found in your region of the world.  I'm sure it could be fairly easy for a spore (correct term?) to follow you in from outside and dislodge from clothing when going into the T's tank to clean, feed, etc.  The coco fiber would provide a great place for them to just start taking off. Might try looking up mushroom indigenous to your local area.


----------



## codykrr (Sep 25, 2010)

Peat is usually called 

Sphagnum peat moss or Canadian sphagnum peat.

Also yes, there is a high chance it is of a local variety.  But also, there is almost NO way to I.D. a mushroom that you know nothing about.

For me to I.D. mushrooms(even the local varieties-except a few around here that look like nothing else are easily I.D.ed I.E. the morel, hen of the woods, fly argeric)  I would need-

1. a fresh sample.
2. a spore print
3. I would need a location(this proves hard when grown in tanks on accident like this)
4. I would need a mushroom I.D. book
5. I would need to see ALL the physical characteristics. 
6. I would need to know the type(s) of substrate it was found on
7 and lastly the time of year it was found.

Mushrooms are VERY hard to I.D.  even mycologists with years of experience would have trouble identifying some random mushrooms without the above.

this is why fungi,mold, and mushrooms are so unknown.

Also, coco fiber is used as a grow medium for lots of commercial and illegal mushroom farms.  its almost the perfect substrate.  its loose, airy, easily decomposed.

All reasons why I will never use coco fiber again.


----------



## REAPER591 (Sep 25, 2010)

Also, did you happen to use anything from outside to decorate the tank? Random branches or bark pieces? 

  I've yet to encounter any random mushroom growth either at home or at the shop and in almost all cases ( aside from desert reptile enclosures ) coco fiber is used.  If a piece of wood or bark was used from outside without proper sterilization it might explain as to how they might have gotten in.


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 25, 2010)

odiakkoh said:


> I know a lot of people recommend peat to avoid this issue.


This isn't true, unfortunately. We've had some really remarkable, brilliant yellow mushrooms growing in our _T. blondi's_ cages. 100% peat.

In the first _Jurassic Park_, what did the chaotician - Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) - say about life finding a way?


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 25, 2010)

TerribleGrizz said:


> According to The Tarantula Keepers Guide, most fungal growths that appear in enclosures pose no real threat, but personally I wouldn't take the risk. If you want to get rid of them, clear out the enclosures and give scrub down with a bleach water solution.
> 
> Personally, I also use peat, and I have had no problems thus far.


There is at least one report on the ATS forum about a tarantula that died after it drank water from a water dish in which the large yellow species of mushroom collapsed and began to rot. I presume that the rotting released some toxin into the water, thus poisoning the tarantula.


----------



## TerribleGrizz (Sep 25, 2010)

I did read about that, which is why I said I wouldn't take the risk with the mushrooms. An interesting case that one.

Also, it's nice to "meet" you. I've read your book, as I'm sure almost everyone on this forum has.


----------



## odiakkoh (Sep 25, 2010)

Pikaia said:


> This isn't true, unfortunately. We've had some really remarkable, brilliant yellow mushrooms growing in our _T. blondi's_ cages. 100% peat.
> 
> In the first _Jurassic Park_, what did the chaotician - Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) - say about life finding a way?


That's very interesting. I've seen so many members go as far as insulting coco fiber and advocating peat moss because of the mold and fungus issue. Now this has turned everything upside down lol.

ETA: I don't own any Ts yet so it's a nonissue for me.


----------



## Galapoheros (Sep 25, 2010)

I have a book about mushrooms, we are taught most are poisonous when we are kids but relatively few are poisonous to humans, just like a lot of us are taught about snakes, while most snake species in the US aren't poisonous.  It's just a parents way of keeping us safe but it spreads ignorance so I don't like that safety strategy.  And who knows if any mushrooms are poisonous to tarantulas?, or if most are?  I'd bet that none are a big threat to Ts.  But if you don't want to take the chance, why not take them out.  I have them grow in my cages sometimes, esp. big yellow ones, I just leave them and let them grow.  It looks like they grow and use up all or most of whatever it is they feed on because I don't see others grow after the first ones die off.  I don't worry about mold or mushrooms, kind of natural and the stuff is everywhere in nature.  Nothing has died while the mushrooms were growing.  What I watch for is what the mold is growing on, maybe it's something dead that needs to be removed that I missed.  I think the fungus mycelium and mold might even be beneficial in breaking things down in the cages.


----------



## Bill S (Sep 25, 2010)

Peat is naturally decomposed sphagnum mosses, harvested from peat bogs.  It is slighlty acidic, which is what prevents most species of fungus from growing on it.  However, if you take peat moss and rinse it out with slightly alkaline water, you can neutralize that acidity.  Even flushing it with distilled water can reduce the acidity.  Some fungi may be more tolerant of acidity, hence able to grow in peat.  And some peat used in our cages may not be acidic enough to prevent fungal growth.  In either case, the peat itself does not generally provide nutrient for the growth of fungi, but contaminants can exist in peat, and we certainly introduce contaminants into peat substrate every time we toss crickets into it, every time our tarantula or other arachnid deposits waste in the substrate.  Fungus spores are everywhere, and if a spore lands in fertile, damp ground with low enough acidity, it will grow.


----------



## joshuai (Sep 26, 2010)

JimM said:


> ...This...


I got a few peat tanks popping up yellow mushrooms all over the place dont think you dont get them with peat also sometimes!!


----------



## odiakkoh (Sep 26, 2010)

Bill S said:


> Peat is naturally decomposed sphagnum mosses, harvested from peat bogs.  It is slighlty acidic, which is what prevents most species of fungus from growing on it.  However, if you take peat moss and rinse it out with slightly alkaline water, you can neutralize that acidity.  Even flushing it with distilled water can reduce the acidity.  Some fungi may be more tolerant of acidity, hence able to grow in peat.  And some peat used in our cages may not be acidic enough to prevent fungal growth.  In either case, the peat itself does not generally provide nutrient for the growth of fungi, but contaminants can exist in peat, and we certainly introduce contaminants into peat substrate every time we toss crickets into it, every time our tarantula or other arachnid deposits waste in the substrate.  Fungus spores are everywhere, and if a spore lands in fertile, damp ground with low enough acidity, it will grow.


Thank you for the educational post. What type of water do you recommend we use to keep as much of its acidic level as possible?


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 26, 2010)

TerribleGrizz said:


> I did read about that, which is why I said I wouldn't take the risk with the mushrooms. An interesting case that one.
> 
> Also, it's nice to "meet" you. I've read your book, as I'm sure almost everyone on this forum has.


And, thanks for the compliment. I haunt several of these forums, sometimes to lend my "vast wisdom and knowlege" (I often have to refer back to my copy of TKG3 to make sure I get it right! ), but especially to learn more about our little 8-legged buddies.

Keep up the good work everybody!


----------



## Bill S (Sep 27, 2010)

odiakkoh said:


> Thank you for the educational post. What type of water do you recommend we use to keep as much of its acidic level as possible?


To be honest, I have no particular recommendation on this.  I suppose rain water would be a good choice - people are usually surprised to learn that rainwater is generally acidic, somewhere around 5.5 on the pH scale by the time it hits the ground (and I'm not referring to "acid rain" - that's something completely different).  

The cage is never going to be a duplication of nature.  We're constantly adding various forms of nutrition to the substrate that would be put to use somehow in nature.  My vote is to just get used to the idea that every once in a while we need to do some cage cleaning and provide new substrate.  Depending on your local climate, habits and circumstances, your mileage may vary.


----------



## odiakkoh (Sep 27, 2010)

Bill S said:


> To be honest, I have no particular recommendation on this.  I suppose rain water would be a good choice - people are usually surprised to learn that rainwater is generally acidic, somewhere around 5.5 on the pH scale by the time it hits the ground (and I'm not referring to "acid rain" - that's something completely different).
> 
> The cage is never going to be a duplication of nature.  We're constantly adding various forms of nutrition to the substrate that would be put to use somehow in nature.  *My vote is to just get used to the idea that every once in a while we need to do some cage cleaning and provide new substrate. * Depending on your local climate, habits and circumstances, your mileage may vary.


But that requires effort


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 27, 2010)

*DISCLIAMER: Note that this dissertation is not aimed at the original poster, but at the arachnoculture hobby in general. There is absolutely nothing personal here!*

The large, brilliant yellow mushrooms that we see growing on damp peat go by the scientific name _Leucocoprinus birnbaumii_. It used to be called _Lepiota lutea_. If you're interested in finding out more about it, Google the following.

*"Leucocoprinus birnbaumii" site:edu*

Trying to change the acidity (pH) of peat in your tarantula's cage will have little lasting effect. Peat is acid for a very good reason: Damp peat rots slowly and the rotting process releases acid. Make it alkaline today and next week it'll be acid all over again.

Aquarists fell into a similar trap decades ago. People living in areas with very alkaline water often had trouble maintaining fish arising from acid water (e.g., people using well water in central Michigan trying to keep cardinal tetras newly imported from Brazil). So, ignorant or unscrupulous aquarium shops would sell them a pH testing kit and a small container of sodium bisulfite.

The aquarists would immediately go home, test their water, find that it was markedly alkaline, and dope it with sodium bisulfite to lower the pH. In a few days they would find that the water had returned to alkaline, so they'd treat the aquarium again. This would repeat for several weeks until all their fish finally died.

What was happening? The hard water, heavily laden with calcium, was naturally alkaline because the calcium acts as a buffer system that naturally maintains the water at an alkaline pH. And, the final pH depends a lot on the calcium concentration in the water, with harder water being more alkaline.

If you add some acidifying agent like bisulfite you are trying to overpower this calcium buffer system. The deceptive part is that it works for a few days making the aquarist think they've actually accomplished something. But, the various biological processes working in the aquarium would eventually consume the bisulfite, allowing the calcium buffer system to recover.

But why did the fish still die? The pH roller coaster ride would weaken them, they'd contract some hideous infection, and die. Or, the salt concentration from all that bisulfite would eventually reach a level that was harmful to the fish. (South American catfish and tetras, for instance, are notoriously sensitive to excessive salt concentrations.)

In the meantime the aquarium shop sold hundreds of pH testing kits, thousands of bottles of bisulfite, and eventually untold numbers of tanks full of expensive tropical fish before the hobbyist (usually by pure luck) happened on fish that were pre-acclimated to hard water, or figured out the problem.

What should the aquarist really do? Remove the calcium from the water. There are two good methods for doing this. One is to set up the aquarium with distilled, demineralized, or reverse osmosis water (no calcium at all), then check the pH daily, adding small quantities of hard (i.e., calcium laden) tap water until a uniform pH was reached within the desired range. Once an appropriate but small amount of calcium built up to maintain only a weak buffer system, the pH would remain indefinitely near the desired value.

Or, use a small Zeolite, water softening kit (available in any really good aquarium shop) in the filter to remove the bulk of the calcium from the initial tap water. This too requires daily checks of pH, but when it reaches the desired value one must merely remove the water softener kit, and the pH will remain at the desired level almost forever. (Don't waste your money on a calcium test kit. You don't care about the calcium. It's the final pH that you're interested in.)

The moral to this story: Don't waste your time trying to fiddle with peat's pH. You're fighting a naturally occurring system that has complete control of the game, and the game is fixed: You lose!

You also need to understand that even if you were able to magically make peat less acid in an effort to retard something's growth, there are 12 dozen other species of something else waiting in the wings that will grow just fine on neutral or alkaline peat. You haven't changed the game one bit. You've only changed the players!

*BEGINNING OF RANT*

So, how do you get rid of the mushrooms once and for all? Dry the tarantula's cage out. Very few fungi are capable of living in an arid habitat. And, if you've been paying attention, that's what we've been preaching for decades.

Very few tarantulas require a high humidity or a swamp cage. Unless you're trying to keep one of those few, keep the peat, coconut husk, whatever substrate bone dry. You can raise the humidity in your cage by simply installing a larger water dish and covering the open part of the cage with plastic food wrap. Problem solved! No more mushrooms, mold, mites, springtails, etc. And, the tarantula still has a reasonably humid habitat if that's your concern.

But, you cry, "How do I grow my XXXX plant in a desert dry cage?"

Don't be silly. The only reason you're trying to grow plants with your tarantula is that you like to see the plants growing. I'll give you big odds that your tarantula has never, Never, *NEVER* told you it needed a live plant in its cage!

If you need to grow live plants, set up a Wardian case or something similar for the plants. Keep you tarantula in a cage that's designed for tarantulas. (But refer to the very last paragraphs for an intriguing workaround.)

"But, I want to keep my tarantula in a natural and organic habitat that mimics its natural environment to keep it happy and healthy!" Horse pucky! Haven't you been paying attention? In the jungle or desert, everything tries to parasitize the tarantula, infect the tarantula, or eat the tarantula alive. Tarantulas die in the wild! And, because they breed naturally by themselves, Mother Nature doesn't have to pay for them, and doesn't give a rat's behind.

But, you have to pay good, hard cash for yours! *BIG DIFFERENCE!* So, you should care a lot. And, it would behoove you to pay attention, and set the cage up so you don't have to worry about mold, mushrooms, pH, mites and a zillion other little creepy crawlies killing your prized investment.

Marguerite and I have been keeping tarantulas successfully for over 40 years now. So have just a lot of other people. We've killed our fair share of tarantulas trying to learn how not to kill any more. Listen to us! If you're going to make mistakes, don't be copy cats. At least be original about it!

At this point I would reasonably expect to hear from the isopod contingent, and perhaps justifiably so. They have a valid argument that isopods would eliminate most, if not all the problem.

But, the major difficulty here is that now we have to turn our attention from keeping tarantulas to keeping isopods. And a lot of us, particularly novices and those who (for various reasons) want to keep only a tarantula or three, simply don't want the bother. And the rest of us may be interested in tarantulas, but couldn't care less about crustaceans. So, although isopods may work, they aren't a universal solution.

Perhaps an arid cage is also not a universal solution, but perhaps it comes significantly closer. Ultimately it may be a lot easier than either the constant concerns of maintaining a damp cage or trying to maintain isopods.

*END OF RANT.*

AND NOW LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BOYS AND GIRLS...

The aforementioned workaround. This is a trick borrowed from the aquarium hobby. Basically, all you need do is seal a carefully fitted piece of glass vertically, lengthwise in any aquarium that's not too tall for your particular tarantula.

Thus, the aquarium is now divided into two separate compartments, front and back, that run left to right along the length of the aquarium. (A variant might also be diagonally, corner to corner.) They are sealed watertight with aquarium grade silicone so the moisture required for the plants is forever blocked from effecting the tarantula's compartment. The glass divider should go all the way to the top of the aquarium's plastic rim and the cover to forestall any escapes.

(WARNING: ALMOST EVERY ENTHUSIAST AND AMATEUR AQUARIUM BUILDER USES WAY, WAY TOO MUCH SILICONE! Look at the way the professionals made the aquarium: Almost no silicone.)

A custom, absolutely escape proof cover must be made for the forward compartment where the tarantula will live. Provision should also be made for both a water dish and someplace where the tarantula can hide from the bright light. And, a fluorescent (*NOT* incandescent!) aquarium light fixture can be arranged over the rear half for the plants.

In effect you have two separate cages joined Siamese twin fashion, plants in the back and tarantula in the front, each with its own special conditions for its occupants. If done properly, the dividing glass barrier can be made almost invisible, and at first glance it *LOOKS* like you have plants in the same cage as your tarantula.

Enjoy your little 8-legged compartment dweller!


----------



## codykrr (Sep 27, 2010)

odiakkoh said:


> That's very interesting. I've seen so many members go as far as insulting coco fiber and advocating peat moss because of the mold and fungus issue. Now this has turned everything upside down lol.
> 
> ETA: I don't own any Ts yet so it's a nonissue for me.


I just want to clarify.  mushrooms are very different from "mold"  while yes it is a fungi as well, their are certain sp. and whole families of mushrooms(best example is the morel)  that will and can only grow in substrate that is acidic.  

When I suggest peat over Coco, I do so because its cheaper,  holds better burrows, retains moisture better and is more acidic which helps prevent "mold".

Peat and coco fiber are used in commercial and illegal mushroom farms. so dont think using peat is 100% fool proof way to never deal with fungi.  

I am just biased towards peat for the above reasons.  Not to mention I hate seeing people waste 9 dollars for maybe 1 cubic foot of "pet grade" brick coco coir.  when you could spend 12 bucks for 4 cubic feet of peat.  this would allow you to save more money, which means more Ts.  

Also Stan. great post.  Thanks for the info on the mushrooms.  though I will say I have seen some mushrooms in tanks I know arent always that species.  Its nice to get an idea of what they are. 

To edit in.-  I believe the yellow mushrooms found in some enclosures with peat moss, might have gotten into the peat from being stored next to and around potting soil.  Since that particular sp. is typically found in potted plants it makes sense.  

think about it.  when you go to lowes where do they keep the bales?  next to the potting soil.  they might be in plastic bags, but there are holes in them sometimes and even on the outside of the bag.  we could easily transfer the spores into the enclosure with out hands, from touching the outside of the bag.


----------



## odiakkoh (Sep 27, 2010)

Cody I hope you don't think I was pointing you out without using names. I was just stating what I've generally noticed while reading the archives for the past couple weeks.


----------



## codykrr (Sep 27, 2010)

No thats fine, I just wanted to clarify, because I do advocate peat over coco.  There was a recent thread on this subject where I said "it will help prevent mold and fungus"  

I just wanted to make it clear, that peat is not a 100% fool proof way of preventing fungus.


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 27, 2010)

the mushrooms growing in my tanks arnt the yellow kind, the head of the mushroom isnt like that... the only way i can decribe the head of these mushrooms expesially the small baby ones is they look like.. a penis.

they dont grow in patches just one or two in a tank and there white but when there young the top bell shaped heaf is brown tipped and then when older its blue/brown.

ive had this mushroom gfrow in two diffrrent tankjs that used two diffrent packs of cocofibre.. so i dont know if the spores came from me, i would have thought the spores would be already in the pack...


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 27, 2010)

bloodred1889 said:


> the mushrooms growing in my tanks arnt the yellow kind, the head of the mushroom isnt like that... the only way i can decribe the head of these mushrooms expesially the small baby ones is they look like.. a penis. ...


And, at this juncture I will only mention a group of fungi called stinkhorns and let you Google the following string.

*"stinkhorn" fungus site:edu*

And, if yours aren't some species of stinkhorn, there are literally hundreds or thousands of other fungi that they could be. If you're really driven to identify them, take them to a local county agriculture agent or a local college or university mycologist and ask them to help you. You can get the county agriculture agent's phone number in the government pages of your local phone book. Look for the listing of the college or university in the white pages or Yellow Pages, and ask to speak to someone in the Botany Department. If they don't have one, ask for the Biology Department.



bloodred1889 said:


> ... so i dont know if the spores came from me, i would have thought the spores would be already in the pack...


The original spores likely came in on a pack of peat or shredded coconut husk, or even just fell out of the air. It's even possible that a neighbor was mulching their flower bed or garden with either of those two or even with composted wood byproducts and the wind blew the spores your direction.

Once they gain a toehold in your cages it's almost impossible to completely rid yourself of them. They're now all over your home (a lot like tarantulas' urticating bristles), and every time you rearrange the furniture or even vacuum the carpet you raise a few into the air. And, all it takes is one spore in the right environment (e.g., a damp tarantula cage), and the infestation continues.

Dry the cage out. You live in a mite, fungus, bacteria, etc., etc., laden world. Accept the fact, dry your tarantula cages out, and get on with enjoying the hobby.


----------



## Irfin (Sep 28, 2010)

Clean your enclosure.  Fungi don't go away, especially mushrooms.  Most of the fungi is underneath the soil (mycelium) so if you are seeing mushrooms it means that most of your medium if not all is contaminated with mycelium which will lead to mushroom growth, spore propagation which leads to more mushrooms.  Remove everything organic and start over.  Also, I would recommend using a different source of medium.  It's likely that your initial medium was already hosting spores.


----------



## LeilaNami (Sep 28, 2010)

codykrr said:


> No thats fine, I just wanted to clarify, because I do advocate peat over coco.  There was a recent thread on this subject where I said "it will help prevent mold and fungus"
> 
> I just wanted to make it clear, that peat is not a 100% fool proof way of preventing fungus.


Maybe the reason people are willing to buy coco over peat, cody, is because peat mining is an unethical practice that so one seems to know or care about.  I'd rather not participate in the degradation of peat bogs because a surprise mushroom pops up and I want to be a cheapskate.  Also, how often really do you need to clean the cocofiber (provided you spot clean)?  Is a rare payment of 9 bucks too much to ask?  I'm happy to pay it.  You can also buy topsoil from gravel yards if you can.  
/endrant (no offense to you cody. The lack of awareness to this issue perturbs me)


----------



## codykrr (Sep 28, 2010)

LeilaNami said:


> Maybe the reason people are willing to buy coco over peat, cody, is because peat mining is an unethical practice that so one seems to know or care about.  I'd rather not participate in the degradation of peat bogs because a surprise mushroom pops up and I want to be a cheapskate.  Also, how often really do you need to clean the cocofiber (provided you spot clean)?  Is a rare payment of 9 bucks too much to ask?  I'm happy to pay it.  You can also buy topsoil from gravel yards if you can.
> /endrant (no offense to you cody. The lack of awareness to this issue perturbs me)


I have heard the arguments. but note.  coconut farming condones deforestation.   so there really isnt a better or worse when it comes to ethics.  

my take.  there both bad for the environment. why not use the one thats cheaper, and makes for a better overall substrate.

besides.  I used coco fiber for years.  Untill my collection grew to over 50 or so.  then tank maintenance can cost big money.  When I clean tanks, I do all at once.  You know how many bricks that would take.  I have well over 100 tarantulas, plus scorpions and pedes.    probably close to around 12 to 15 bricks.  

also alot of the "peat farming is from bogs that have dried up.

doesnt look like there is a bog there...

[YOUTUBE]eVTMBXMKxNU&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

and this is where tons of forest once stood.

[YOUTUBE]_aLIkoAqn8c[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## LeilaNami (Sep 28, 2010)

codykrr said:


> I have heard the arguments. but note.  coconut farming condones deforestation.   so there really isnt a better or worse when it comes to ethics.
> 
> my take.  there both bad for the environment. why not use the one thats cheaper, and makes for a better overall substrate.
> 
> ...


Of course, any resource is going to take from the environment but peat bogs are damaged a lot faster and do not renew as quickly.  As for dried up bogs, just because it is dried up, doesn't mean the ecosystem is dead and farming it makes it stay depleted.  Peat takes centuries to become what it is whereas coconut farming not so much.  Rather than cost, I try to choose the lesser evil.  I can understand the cost issue of having a large collection.  At the very least, use a soil with little peat additive.  I'm more concerned with people having small collections and insisting on using 100% peat.


----------



## donal (Sep 28, 2010)

peat is called peat moss hear ireland the trick is to get the cheapest one you can there grean shamrock ones heare thing there 10 euro for 180 litere it is soil like . its the bog itself think you call them moorsover there in the uk spagmum is the uper few inches of its green moss like stuff is mainly used for frog ceaping and such but iv seen a few use it on hear as an adition. thew often use the term peat moss this is from a few inches down to i forget exactly but lets say 3ft this is what makes the best for gardening and is what youll find in the garden center just look for peat moss have a good look at the packet and stay away from anything that says inriched, micronutriates, or anything along those lines when you get it home have a sift threw it for anything that looks like small beads about the size of two mach heads this is the most common fertiliser the use in it but the cheap stuff should not have any as for coconut husk i think im going to avoid it two i added some to my t rose tank and he dosent seem to like it


----------



## codykrr (Sep 28, 2010)

Forests dont grow over night either.  And if the demand for coco fiber goes us, the more forest will be destroyed.  and I doubt there going to let the forest grow back as long as there is a demand for coco fiber.

Like I said, I have debated this dozens of times before on here. and I still stand with peat.  IMHO it is the better of the two, and a plus that its cheaper.

To each their own.  but there both bad for the environment, so I wouldnt base your purchased based solely on this.  

Go for what suits your personal needs.  Peat suits my needs, therefore thats what I buy.


----------



## Ictinike (Sep 28, 2010)

While I won't get into personal rants about these types of issues, depleating of resources, etc, there comes a time when one must realize that while we do a real good job of mucking up the planet the planet also has ways of taking back.

Forest Fires that are caused by lightning causes millions and millions of damage to human homes and businesses but at the same time it's vital for some conifers and evergreens to have their seeds charred by forest fires.  

Does this mean forest fires are bad?  Maybe to those who've lost homes and material things but in the above scenario fire is needed and expected by those species of plants and animals who've worked around annual fires.

Who's wrong here?  Just by our existence we've changed the dynamic and there will come a time when nature will have enough and decided to shake the very nuisance that is man; if she feels so strongly about it.

If the bogs or the coco fields are raped by man I'm sure we'll find another way or evolve into another path for we are mere animals, no different that any, albeit with a higher competency to self destruct.


----------



## Stan Schultz (Sep 29, 2010)

I'm coming down rather hard on you in an effort to dispel a massive misunderstanding held by far too many armchair naturalists and the vast number of _ignorati_ who've been hoodwinked by them.

I can't blame you for holding this against me, but maybe in the years to come you'll gradually come to see the truth. Forgive me for being as religiously adamant as you.



LeilaNami said:


> ... peat mining is an unethical practice that so one seems to know or care about. ...


"Unethical?" How so? Or, in what way that's different or less ethical than our or your use of any other natural resource?

Let's face facts. We're all damned souls in Hell unless we live naked in a swamp, eating grubs and roots. Oops! Sorry. In the broad sense, even eating grubs and roots is also an unethical practice since it uses a natural resource.

What would you suggest as an alternative to your polyester clothes, your cell phone, your gas guzzling car, your leather shoes, the steak you ate last night, etc.

I'm not buying it. I have every much a right to live on this planet as any of the other creatures that evolved here. The fact that my species has managed to learn the magical arts of controlling and usurping the resources of this planet while none others have is not of itself bad, unethical, immoral, illegal, or fattening.

And while the argument goes that what we're doing is in some small way promoting changes and damaging "the environment," those changes are nothing new, nothing that hasn't already happened at least several times before man was even a twinkle in Mother Nature's eye. (Please forgive the anthropomorphism.) 

Mother nature doesn't give a d@$n about the tarantula that died parasitized by a wasp, the deer that was gutted alive by wolves, the little fish that was eaten by the big one, the big fish that was eaten by a bigger one, or even by our "unethical practice" of using peat from a bog.

After the deed is done, Mother Nature merely makes an adjustment and life on Earth moves on. Some species go extinct. Others arise _de novo_. It's been happening for 3.8 billion years, and with many, many millions of species. It'll continue to happen for another 5 billion years. And, Earth abides.

You vastly overestimate the importance of our and your participation in the vast scheme of things. Such egocentrism! Such audacity!

In the far distant future, the descendants of our little 8-legged buddies will be digging burrows on our graves!

(Also, please visit http://people.ucalgary.ca/~schultz/errata3.html#p139a.)


----------



## codykrr (Sep 29, 2010)

Pikaia said:


> I'm coming down rather hard on you in an effort to dispel a massive misunderstanding held by far too many armchair naturalists and the vast number of _ignorati_ who've been hoodwinked by them.
> 
> I can't blame you for holding this against me, but maybe in the years to come you'll gradually come to see the truth. Forgive me for being as religiously adamant as you.
> 
> ...


saved me some typing! LOL.  I can fully say I agree 100% to that rant.

Like I said earlier, I wont debate this topic again(Stan I know you have before as well-I was in that thread a few years ago too), but dont base the purchase on which is more "eco friendly"  because both are destroying something that took vast amount of time to create and years to destroy.

I will say, from research in this subject in the past, Most(not all) canadian Sphagnum peat farms are on old bogs that have dried out, and very little lives on.  except for grass. and maybe a few various other species of insect, and small mammal.  

Also if you consider the living conditions the workers live in and work in to harvest coco fiber it makes vacuuming peat off a field look like cake.(not all coconut farm are bad quality either im sure) but a lot are.

Anyway.  this topic is senseless. As it boils down to personal preference, and in my findings, its hard to turn someones preference.Especially established ones.


----------



## MIC (Sep 29, 2010)

I had also the same kind of mushrooms in a couple of mine enclosures without any problem, except a slight irritant odour (IMO) that i don't like. 

My only action, when I was stuffed of this, was simply uprooting the mushrooms for some short period of time (because they usually tend to re-emerge for a couple of times) and in the meantime to mantain a lower humidity in the enclosure.


----------



## bloodred1889 (Sep 29, 2010)

well ive redone my cobots tank with cocofibre but its just temp because im getting two tall rectangle shaped tanks for my burrowers one for my cobolt and the other one was for my h,minax but she died. but today i bought another sub adult h.lividum 
and im going to use what it says in the tarantulas keepers quide for the best burrow which is just normal garden soil. i know a shop near me that sells a brand that is organic with nothing else in it.
cant wait to get my new tanks and put both my h.lividums in them and watch the diffrences between them 

thanks for all your opinions.
-bloodred


----------



## LeilaNami (Sep 30, 2010)

Pikaia said:


> I'm coming down rather hard on you in an effort to dispel a massive misunderstanding held by far too many armchair naturalists and the vast number of _ignorati_ who've been hoodwinked by them.
> 
> I can't blame you for holding this against me, but maybe in the years to come you'll gradually come to see the truth. Forgive me for being as religiously adamant as you.
> 
> ...


You have completely misunderstood everything I have said in this thread complete with incorrect, egotistical assumptions.  Using natural resources is not unethical and I never said it was.  Using things that may harm the environment that can quickly recover or using resources that are renewable are a completely different matter than what I am actually discussing.  Have you even read the threads?

Decimating a practically (and probably) nonrenewable resource is unethical, especially for things we don't need to use while alternatives are widely available.  Humans constantly take pride in being able to overcome instinct and natural ability yet when it comes to actually controlling yourself it seems you arbitrarily choose "I'm just an animal too".  Other populations of animals have predators and such that keep them from overpopulating their niche while we do not and have the ability to completely overtake and destroy anything we choose. Of course nature doesn't give a crap of our existence because we are nothing but a speck in time.  You want to talk about egocentrism? Take a look at yourself and what you just posted.  Just because Earth abides in the end does not make our practices ethical or justified and I find it incredibly sad that people even entertain this view.

Cody, you have completely ignored my counter argument by repeating your previous statement. Dried bogs are not a dead ecosystem.  They try and re-establish bogs they do mine (and they still regularly mine bogs that have not dried up) but they fail or is a completely different ecosystem from before.  Also, the peat layer they leave is inadequate to support the flora that had been there. 

I am simply bringing to light an issue that is often overlooked and might change your choice in paths to take.  I am not here to condemn you for using peat but I feel very strongly about this issue being that ecology is my field of study.


----------



## REAPER591 (Sep 30, 2010)

Last I checked..... coco bedding is made from the husks of coconuts.  Meaning that they took a by-product waste material and found a use for it.  I find it laughable to think that some folks here believe that they are de-foresting for the sake of coconut husks.


----------



## MIC (Sep 30, 2010)

LeilaNami said:


> You have completely misunderstood everything I have said in this thread complete with incorrect, egotistical assumptions.  Using natural resources is not unethical and I never said it was.  Using things that may harm the environment that can quickly recover or using resources that are renewable are a completely different matter than what I am actually discussing.  Have you even read the threads?
> 
> Decimating a practically (and probably) nonrenewable resource is unethical, especially for things we don't need to use while alternatives are widely available.  Humans constantly take pride in being able to overcome instinct and natural ability yet when it comes to actually controlling yourself it seems you arbitrarily choose "I'm just an animal too".  Other populations of animals have predators and such that keep them from overpopulating their niche while we do not and have the ability to completely overtake and destroy anything we choose. Of course nature doesn't give a crap of our existence because we are nothing but a speck in time.  You want to talk about egocentrism? Take a look at yourself and what you just posted.  Just because Earth abides in the end does not make our practices ethical or justified and I find it incredibly sad that people even entertain this view.
> 
> ...


I would add that our planet is a small and delicate ecosystem that it can make through small changes but suffers pain from bigger ones. Unfortunately humans have reached the ability to "accelerate the time" in terms of environmental changes. Millions of years of evolution are now substituted by few years of humam activity and there is no need to report examples that everybody know.
So yes Mother Nature can heal an ecological wound but I doubt she can raise up from the dead unless we accept that NO LIFE is another option in our planet evolution.


----------



## Bill S (Sep 30, 2010)

REAPER591 said:


> Last I checked..... coco bedding is made from the husks of coconuts.  Meaning that they took a by-product waste material and found a use for it.  I find it laughable to think that some folks here believe that they are de-foresting for the sake of coconut husks.


Have you got a source for this?  Many years ago I worked for a company that grew exotic plants, and a one product used as a growing medium came from the trunk of palm trees, not the husks of the fruit.  And the material from the trunk is highly fibrous.  I've never seen any reliable description of how coco fiber is produced, but your comment makes me wonder.  In either case, coconut and other palm trees are a renewable resource, and groves are planted and cultivated.  That certainly makes the potential for benign environmental impact high.  

I'm not familiar enough with the real impact of peat mining to get worked up one way or the other about it.  Certainly there's the potential for it being environmentally destructive - but I'd like to see actual statistics fom modern peat operations before passing judgement.


----------



## REAPER591 (Oct 1, 2010)

"Eco Earth® Loose Coconut Fiber Substrate is an eco friendly product made from the husks of coconuts and can be safely composted or recycled into potted plants or gardens."

Straight from the zoo med website:  

http://www.zoomed.com/db/products/E...zOjE6IjAiO3M6ODoiU2VhcmNoX3kiO3M6MToiMCI7fQ==

Unless they are intentionally deceiving us about how it's made I'd say that's pretty straightforward.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 1, 2010)

REAPER591 said:


> Unless they are intentionally deceiving us about how it's made I'd say that's pretty straightforward.


Thanks for the info.  Their wrappers (I usually have at least one around the house) state the green, renewable resource angle, but don't specifically mention the coconut husk.  They'd have more to lose than gain if they put false information on their advertising, so I'll believe them.  And I guess this knocks down the stories (and videos) of forests being destroyed for tarantula substrate.


----------



## Bill S (Oct 1, 2010)

MIC said:


> So yes Mother Nature can heal an ecological wound but I doubt she can raise up from the dead unless we accept that NO LIFE is another option in our planet evolution.


I'm sure someone will jump in with the idea that "Life will find a way", so I'll suggest that LIFE will indeed continue.  However, the diversity of life will undoubtedly be affected by our actions.  I'd prefer not to live in a world where "wildlife" meant more than sewer rats, pigeons and cockroaches.


----------

