[whitetiprs13]

Is it safe to reuse driftwood that was used in an aquarium? It has been dry for about 2 years now and has been boiled atleast twice? I am guessing better safe then sorry and just leave it out but it is a nice looking piece of wood.

 

[Theanswer305]

Its fine. I boil once for a few hours and i havent had a problem. Just so you know i get mines right from the beach so its probably as dirty as it can come.

 

[DCreptiles]

reusing driftwood is fine as long as its boiled or treated before the next use. i have not had any issues reusing driftwood in the few years iv been keeping darts.

 

[Ed]

Boiling or baking wood while commonly done, doesn't really mean the wood is safe for use.. as an anecdotal report, there is an example on the forum where a person baked the wood and then when he broke it, live ants were still alive in the middle.

All it really does is make you feel like you at least tried.

Ed

 

[Theanswer305]

He obviously didn't do it properly.

 

[Ed]

He obviously didn't do it properly.

A statement like that gives the stong appearence of being made from ignorance...

See http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/pa...d-interesting-quote-confusion.html#post673702..

The standard in the literature is that you cannot disinfect organics like wood or other solid organics by baking or boiling. Neither of those reaches into the depths of the wood. If you want to be sure you have done anything then you need to autoclave it. That is the only method by which solid organics can be disinfected... otherwise you are just doing something to make yourself feel good.

Ed

 

[Theanswer305]

"If you want to be sure you have done anything then you need to autoclave it. That is the only method by which solid organics can be disinfected"

Hence he obviously didn't do it properly. It seems my statement was undeniably correct. Just sayin.. from my ignorant perspective.

 

[ChrisK]

"If you want to be sure you have done anything then you need to autoclave it. That is the only method by which solid organics can be disinfected"

Hence he obviously didn't do it properly. It seems my statement was undeniably correct. Just sayin.. from my ignorant perspective.

No, you didn't suggest that he "sterilized" or "cleaned" it incorrectly, you suggested that he boiled it incorrectly (after expressly suggesting that boiling it is fine, and that another "boiler" didn't do "it" properly), a world of difference from autoclaving, which could mean false frog-safeness.

 

[thedude]

No, you didn't suggest that he "sterilized" or "cleaned" it incorrectly, you suggested that he boiled it incorrectly (after expressly suggesting that boiling it is fine, and that another "boiler" didn't do "it" properly), a world of difference from autoclaving, which could mean false frog-safeness.

He obviously didn't read it properly

 

[Theanswer305]

By whatever means he decided to use whether it be boiling it like i do, or baking it which was the method used in the anecdotal report my statement merely states that by whatever method you might ASS~U~me i refer to the fact remains that it wasnt done properly if you had live ants in the wood after your "sterilizing" technique is through.

So that we dont make this thread flame on, your assumption at what my statement might or might not imply about my intelligence is irrelevent to me. Although you may feel great to question the intelligence of others because you are so great, i was just trying to give my 2 cents on what has worked for me.

Your statement could have been easily posted without the first line and been significantly more effective. But hey calling people ignorant on a newbie forum is a seductive siren which can get even the most noble men.

Sorry for using your thread for this OP. hope you got your answers.

 

[ChrisK]

You can bake it "properly" (which is what I meant to say, not boiling) and it's still not a frog-safe method, as with boiling.

 

[Ed]

By whatever means he decided to use whether it be boiling it like i do, or baking it which was the method used in the anecdotal report my statement merely states that by whatever method you might ASS~U~me i refer to the fact remains that it wasnt done properly if you had live ants in the wood after your "sterilizing" technique is through.

So that we dont make this thread flame on, your assumption at what my statement might or might not imply about my intelligence is irrelevent to me. Although you may feel great to question the intelligence of others because you are so great, i was just trying to give my 2 cents on what has worked for me.

Your statement could have been easily posted without the first line and been significantly more effective. But hey calling people ignorant on a newbie forum is a seductive siren which can get even the most noble men.

Sorry for using your thread for this OP. hope you got your answers.

1) you clearly lacked knowldege of the incident.. hence the comment since you chose to pass judgement without context.
2) you did not supply context as to what part was done incorrectly

If we go back to your first post in the thread, given that you cannot supply tonal context as would occur in a verbal discussion, it was clearly condescending (as was the last response by you) and intended to be insulting (since you directly inferred that it was done incorrectly implying ignorance) hence my response. You then proceeded onto insulting me and the others. It is clear that you were looking to generate a response and proceed into a flame war where you could claim you were the victim. Googling your screen name pulls up that you've been around since at least 2005 so your not a beginner....

Ed

 

[Equidoc2013]

Oh for God's sake, people. Do you really think your fancy wording and flawless grammar makes your petty arguments sound any less childish? I have read so many of these on this website, and I can assure you, you're still embarrassing yourselves.

 

[ChrisK]

Oh for God's sake, people. Do you really think your fancy wording and flawless grammar makes your petty arguments sound any less childish? I have read so many of these on this website, and I can assure you, you're still embarrassing yourselves.

Thanks for your helpful contribution, but most people would rather that false (and potentially dangerous) information gets pointed out or corrected whether or not the misinformer(s) might act a little butt-hurt

 

[Theanswer305]

Well heres what i know.
I currently have 33 frogs in my collection and all of them have a driftwood feature within their enclosures. I have lost only 1 frog in the last year and the cause was short toungue-(vit def).

So OP:

i boil my driftwood after collecting it from the beach for 5 hours in a giant commercial kitchen pot (holds about 30 gallons). The water evaporates about 3 times throughout this process. This is what i do and has worked thus far. Sometimes, the wood isn't the ideal size so i cut them to size. I have never encountered anything alive in them after this process.

There are probably other ways to try and clean the wood as best as possible,
As other infallible commentors have brought up, it might still have chemicles and/or other nasties on it and be far from "sterile" yet none have caused my frogs to die.

So hope my info helps you out or at the least gives you insight into what i have done.

 

[Ed]

Well heres what i know.
I currently have 33 frogs in my collection and all of them have a driftwood feature within their enclosures. I have lost only 1 frog in the last year and the cause was short toungue-(vit def).

So OP:

i boil my driftwood after collecting it from the beach for 5 hours in a giant commercial kitchen pot (holds about 30 gallons). The water evaporates about 3 times throughout this process. This is what i do and has worked thus far. Sometimes, the wood isn't the ideal size so i cut them to size. I have never encountered anything alive in them after this process.

There are probably other ways to try and clean the wood as best as possible,
As other infallible commentors have brought up, it might still have chemicles and/or other nasties on it and be far from "sterile" yet none have caused my frogs to die.

So hope my info helps you out or at the least gives you insight into what i have done.

The problem with it is because your argument is a fallacy.. just because it has "worked" doesn't follow that it was done correctly or will always work in the future or even worked in your case (since you can't be sure that the wood was sanitized).
The number of frogs doesn't have anything to do with the accuracy the statement ..... This is because the example is based on a fallacy argument.

See fallacy [ˈfæləsɪ]
n pl -cies 1. an incorrect or misleading notion or opinion based on inaccurate facts or invalid reasoning
2. unsound or invalid reasoning
3. the tendency to mislead
4. (Philosophy / Logic) Logic an error in reasoning that renders an argument logically invalid [from Latin fallācia, from fallax deceitful, from fallere to deceive]



Ed

 

[Pumilo]

Ed, when I was a child, I jumped off a roof. I didn't break any arms or legs. I walked away unscathed. Therefor, it is safe for anyone and everyone to jump off a roof. The fact that I did it without harm proves that it will always be safe for everyone.

 

[Theanswer305]

you guys are idiots. lmao. this whole thread is hilarious, theres really nothing else to be said. congrats you guys are the frog masters and everyone else is wrong.

ive repeatedly said im just giving what has worked for me.

I was under the impression that this was the main function of the forum but
apperantly these forums are patrolled by the forum police and i have been found guilty of not being god's gift.

reply as you wish and please take the liberty of being weird stalkers and googling my name and giving links to the definitions of common words. this totally impacts me on so many levels lol.

Since we have exhausted the usefulness of this spectacular banter i'll just see myself out of this thread.

 

[Pumilo]

Have you run fecals on your frogs before and after they were exposed to your boiled wood? You really have no way of knowing what you may have exposed them to.
The question was, "Is it safe to reuse driftwood that was used in an aquarium?"
There is only one answer. The answer is no, it is not safe unless it has been run through an autoclave. I'm glad that your frogs have shown no ill effects but that does not mean it is safe to do.

 

[npaull]

While I agree that baking wood is not 100% effective every time, (and that autoclaving would be better as it would kill spores if it were done for long enough), wood is not a perfect insulator, and if you put a piece in an oven at 325 degrees and left it in long enough, the whole thing would rise to temperature, and it *would* work. It could take more than a day, or whatever, but it would definitely work. 325 degrees would kill basically everything we care about. Not every single microbe, but close enough. I therefore don't think it's quite accurate to say that baking cannot be used as a means of sterilization. Practical? Maybe not. But an autoclave wouldn't be a perfect guarantee either, unless it were done for long enough. The critical variable is time, because the crucial problem is insulation.

I've actually started worrying less and less about completely eliminating every possible thing that could come in to my vivaria. I typically leave new cages up for 6+ months before adding frogs, and the point is to have a bit of an ecosystem going anyway, so I've personally become less neurotic about it. I recognize that this leaves me vulnerable to certain pathogens (chytrid most worrisomely) and I am not totally blasé about it, but I don't have the time or resources to (for example) prevent consistently nemerteans from getting into my larger tanks.