# Just did my first WC after almost a year. AMA



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

AMA = Ask Me Anything (for the non-redditors.

General Specs:
* 75g
* Medium-High planted
* Community Tank w/ Male Betta
* Low-Medium light
* Low Tech w/ Metricide

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## lksdrinker (Feb 12, 2014)

Why even bother after that much time has elapsed?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

lksdrinker said:


> Why even bother after that much time has elapsed?


Fair question.

My betta has been reclusive lately. He used to be fairly active and always front and center, but now he hides behind decor and didn't even come out to eat.
He seems healthy otherwise, but something must be wrong so I thought I'd do a modest WC. Only about 10g total. 4 of which were distilled water.

I also took the opportunity to rearrange and clean out my HOB filter.

The lights are off until later this evening, but it seems he's more active now.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## lksdrinker (Feb 12, 2014)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> Fair question.
> 
> My betta has been reclusive lately. He used to be fairly active and always front and center, but now he hides behind decor and didn't even come out to eat.
> He seems healthy otherwise, but something must be wrong so I thought I'd do a modest WC. Only about 10g total. 4 of which were distilled water.
> ...



Interesting. I'd be afraid to alter anything at all after that much time. Whats your plan going forward? (more water changes? less? none?)


----------



## AbbeysDad (Apr 13, 2016)

Oh...I misunderstood.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Here we go


----------



## theatermusic87 (Jun 22, 2014)

In the spirit of the thread, why did you wait so long? And as a follow up was it worth waiting that long?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

lksdrinker said:


> Interesting. I'd be afraid to alter anything at all after that much time. Whats your plan going forward? (more water changes? less? none?)


Probably just as infrequently as before. Maybe slightly more often if my betta seems to be more active again.

Im actually moving in about 4 months so it'll happen around that time I suspect

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> Probably just as infrequently as before. Maybe slightly more often if my betta seems to be more active again.
> 
> Im actually moving in about 4 months so it'll happen around that time I suspect
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk




FWIW I've been at the sameish frequency on my tank for years. Just top offs. I keep riparium plants though so it leaves more room for error.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

theatermusic87 said:


> In the spirit of the thread, why did you wait so long? And as a follow up was it worth waiting that long?


My theory was that I could have a healthy tank with minimal WC. I feel like I've largely succeeded but may have found the limit.

Was it worth it? I suppose so. Nothing died because of it, and my tank seems to be free of disease. The time and effort I saved made it worth it to me.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## zackariah (Jan 17, 2013)

1 Fish, lots of plants, only top offs should work. If you added a small amount of the rest of the food chain below the fish you could possibly get away with no water changes or feedings😉

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

zackariah said:


> 1 Fish, lots of plants, only top offs should work. If you added a small amount of the rest of the food chain below the fish you could possibly get away with no water changes or feedings😉
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


I have about 30-35 fish and about a hundred RCS lol

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## zackariah (Jan 17, 2013)

Only one hundred after 1 year? 

35 fish in a 75g. No water changes. 

Something is fishy

Just because things are alive does not mean they are living. 

I would hope you are monitoring the situation and not neglecting due to laziness. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

zackariah said:


> Only one hundred after 1 year?
> 
> 35 fish in a 75g. No water changes.
> 
> ...


Only? Not sure if that's sarcasm or not. Haven't seen any fry since I added the tetras. Before that, they were rampant.

I have:
14 Harlequin Rasbora
14 (I think) Rummynose Tetra
2 Khuli Loaches (2 died at one point or another)
1 Male Betta
1 Bristlenose Pleco

My water doesn't smell and it's totally clear. I test for ammonia, nitrite and nitrate periodically and TDS about twice a week.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## zackariah (Jan 17, 2013)

Yes sarcasm. Good on you it's difficult to find a balance and it seems you have. Be careful changing anything. 

I just reread what I wrote Sorry if I seemed rude not my intentions. More inquiry then anything. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

zackariah said:


> Yes sarcasm. Good on you it's difficult to find a balance and it seems you have. Be careful changing anything.
> 
> I just reread what I wrote Sorry if I seemed rude not my intentions. More inquiry then anything.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


I wish my tank was a little prettier but I just don't want to dedicate that kind of time to maintain it 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## zackariah (Jan 17, 2013)

I hear you I spend about an hour a day on 5 tanks. It's a chore no doubt. It is a therapy thing for me. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## SERRCH (Mar 27, 2016)

Do you use RO or Tap water to refill the tank..?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

SERRCH said:


> Do you use RO or Tap water to refill the tank..?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I use distilled only for top offs and for this water change I did a 60/40% tap/distilled.

I figured that the tap water probably has some trace elements that have been depleted since I originally set it up

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Bananableps (Nov 6, 2013)

1) Do you use tank water to water house plants, or do you really never remove any water at all?

2) Any inverts?

3) Substrate?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Bananableps said:


> 1) Do you use tank water to water house plants, or do you really never remove any water at all?
> 
> 2) Any inverts?
> 
> 3) Substrate?


1) Yes. It usually amounts to around 1/4g a week.
2) I have TONS of RCS and snails
3) I use dirt capped with blasting sand

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## SueD (Nov 20, 2010)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> I also took the opportunity to rearrange and clean out my HOB filter.
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


I'm surprised this was even still flowing. What filter(s) do you have and what did they look like inside?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

SueD said:


> I'm surprised this was even still flowing. What filter(s) do you have and what did they look like inside?


Well I clean my filters probably once a month. I have a Filstar XP1 and I'm not totally sure what my HOB is. I filled the cannister with cotton batting and ceramic media while the HOB is ceramic media with Spider Plants growing out of the top. Both have pre-filters.

I actually had a fair amount of roots balled up inside the HOB and it did restrict the flow, but my ceramic media seemed fairly clean.

I think both say 50g on the box but I don't remember the flow rate. I don't have a very substantial current, but they seem pretty efficient. 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## RWaters (Nov 12, 2003)

I'm curious if you added any new fish in the last few months. I ask because I suspect that your fish slowly became acclimated to your water parameters and that's how they have survived. I would think that any fish introduced into your tank wouldn't be able to survive.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

RWaters said:


> I'm curious if you added any new fish in the last few months. I ask because I suspect that your fish slowly became acclimated to your water parameters and that's how they have survived. I would think that any fish introduced into your tank wouldn't be able to survive.


I was waiting for this question!

The last fish was the betta. I'm not sure when I got him, but I'd guess at least 3 months ago.

Im considering adding a few more khuli loaches since I only have 2 left after a couple initially died. I've heard they are more sensitive to water quality so I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not in case the other fish simply got used to it.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gatekeeper69 (Jan 22, 2017)

You're probably very lucky your fish are still alive, not doing water changes means you get a build up of ammonia and nitrates in the water that your filter cannot get rid of, I feel sorry for your fish swimming around in dirty water for so long, it is quite irresponsible and you could have endangered the fishes lives. I hope your going to do more regular water changes in future for the sake of your fish.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Gatekeeper69 said:


> You're probably very lucky your fish are still alive, not doing water changes means you get a build up of ammonia and nitrates in the water that your filter cannot get rid of, I feel sorry for your fish swimming around in dirty water for so long, it is quite irresponsible and you could have endangered the fishes lives. I hope your going to do more regular water changes in future for the sake of your fish.


All my ammonia tests read normal. 0ppm Ammonia, 0ppm Nitrite and <20ppm Nitrate. This is due to my large plant population, including several house plants rooted in my tank

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## maxhrbal (Mar 19, 2016)

Happy to hear of your success in this matter. So far, I personally am on the side of water changes are necessary, but I certainly won't join the crowd calling you an irresponsible monster...haha. I also think it would be a tough point to reach, not having to perform wc's. My current tanks would certainly fail! 

1.)What is your ph, tds, kh/gh and any other parameters that you test for, before the water change?
2.) a tougher question maybe (this is why I personally think wc's are necessary, but again I don't judge, it obviously works for some,) but what's your opinion on the build up of other chemicals and debris and "crap" we don't know about? Hormones pheromones, suspended oil particles in the air, even smoke in the air and dust etc etc etc and who really knows what fish and maybe even plants might release into the water and what not. Life is complex, ya know? There's so much more going on than we know. The oils and products on and in our skin when we play in the tank. Etc etc etc etc, lots of "chemicals/contaminants build up over time and not all may or may not be broken down or maybe even something harmless broken down into something hazardous in larger quantities.....you get my point. Just curious what your thoughts on this is as there's not much talk about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

maxhrbal said:


> Happy to hear of your success in this matter. So far, I personally am on the side of water changes are necessary, but I certainly won't join the crowd calling you an irresponsible monster...haha. I also think it would be a tough point to reach, not having to perform wc's. My current tanks would certainly fail!
> 
> 1.)What is your ph, tds, kh/gh and any other parameters that you test for, before the water change?
> 2.) a tougher question maybe (this is why I personally think wc's are necessary, but again I don't judge, it obviously works for some,) but what's your opinion on the build up of other chemicals and debris and "crap" we don't know about? Hormones pheromones, suspended oil particles in the air, even smoke in the air and dust etc etc etc and who really knows what fish and maybe even plants might release into the water and what not. Life is complex, ya know? There's so much more going on than we know. The oils and products on and in our skin when we play in the tank. Etc etc etc etc, lots of "chemicals/contaminants build up over time and not all may or may not be broken down or maybe even something harmless broken down into something hazardous in larger quantities.....you get my point. Just curious what your thoughts on this is as there's not much talk about it.
> ...


I didn't check any levels prior to the WC but I have checked for those things in the past but I quit testing so frequently since the levels always seemed normal. I do check my TDS fairly regularly and it usually falls in the mid 300s.

As far as the particles we don't test for...thats ultimately why I decided to go ahead a change out some of the water. I started worrying about things like dust, mold, etc. and thought it was better to safe than sorry.

My guess, however is that we don't give our plants enough credit. I'd have to imagine that, after a year, those particulates would have already built up to a toxic level. My guess is that my plants actually absorb a lot, if not all, contaminants.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kubla (Jan 5, 2014)

Gatekeeper69 said:


> You're probably very lucky your fish are still alive, not doing water changes means you get a build up of ammonia and nitrates in the water that your filter cannot get rid of, I feel sorry for your fish swimming around in dirty water for so long, it is quite irresponsible and you could have endangered the fishes lives. I hope your going to do more regular water changes in future for the sake of your fish.


It's irresponsible to pass judgement without at least reading the thread. He stated earlier that he checks ammonia and nitrates along with other parameters.

My filter can remove nitrates and ammonia.


----------



## kolet66 (Dec 11, 2016)

This thread has made me reflect on some irony in my own fishkeeping. I usually do weekly WC on my tanks. Things are pretty stable and unless I'm adding something I don't worry about things much beyond that change. This is just "what I do", it is habit. When reading this thread I also realize that I have 3 whiskey barrel ponds on my patio that are perfect eco systems... snails, fish (feeder type goldfish which are known to be big on waste) and lots of plants. I change the water once a year... in April. My youngest fish in these barrels is 4... the oldest 7 (which is the year after I started the barrels), the only fatalities I have had are twice a fish has jumped out after a water change and once a raccoon or other unknown intruder had a little feast. I have often found people that have the rip type tanks do fewer water changes. Now, I have no interest in studying the science and debates about it... mostly because I don't enjoy the science part. Just the result.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> All my ammonia tests read normal. 0ppm Ammonia, 0ppm Nitrite and <20ppm Nitrate. This is due to my large plant population, including several house plants rooted in my tank
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk




I mean according to that guy we should all be going to local lakes and doing some water changes to help out the poor fish. 

In all seriousness though I think those that don't use riparium/house plants plus a planted tank don't realize their capacity to absorb everything equal to/beyond the ability of a filter.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

kolet66 said:


> This thread has made me reflect on some irony in my own fishkeeping. I usually do weekly WC on my tanks. Things are pretty stable and unless I'm adding something I don't worry about things much beyond that change. This is just "what I do", it is habit. When reading this thread I also realize that I have 3 whiskey barrel ponds on my patio that are perfect eco systems... snails, fish (feeder type goldfish at that which are know to be big on the waste) and lots of plants. I change the water once a year... in April. My youngest fish in these barrels is 4... the oldest 7 (which is the year after I started the barrels), the only fatalities I have had are twice a fish has jumped out after a water change and once a raccoon or other unknown intruder had a little feast. I have often found people that have the rip type tanks do fewer water changes. Now, I have no interest in studying the science and debates about it... mostly because I don't enjoy the science part. Just the result.




Whiskey barrel ponds sounds awesome. Do you have a thread about them?


----------



## kolet66 (Dec 11, 2016)

No thread... I'm sure I have a picture somewhere in my files. when I get a chance to go through I'll send you one. They really are a lot of fun, minimal work and beautiful. 

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

kolet66 said:


> No thread... I'm sure I have a picture somewhere in my files. when I get a chance to go through I'll send you one. They really are a lot of fun, minimal work and beautiful.
> 
> Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk




Nice! What climate do you live in? How much is a whiskey Barrel?

Sorry for the derail @Tbonedawg08


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

bbroush said:


> Nice! What climate do you live in? How much is a whiskey Barrel?
> 
> Sorry for the derail @Tbonedawg08


No that's fine! I'm intrigued as well. Too bad I love in the Midwest 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> No that's fine! I'm intrigued as well. Too bad I love in the Midwest
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk




have you had any issues with algae in your tank? Or since your WC have you had any issue?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

bbroush said:


> have you had any issues with algae in your tank? Or since your WC have you had any issue?


I got the typical diatoms at first, but I haven't even needed to clean the glass for months now. I noticed some really fluffy looking green algae growing on my Java Moss the other day but I think I cut it away during the WC

I have a ton of RCS, 1 Amano Shrimp and probably a thousand snails (ramshorn, mts, pond and an assassin). My Bristlenose probably helps some too. 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> I got the typical diatoms at first, but I haven't even needed to clean the glass for months now. I noticed some really fluffy looking green algae growing on my Java Moss the other day but I think I cut it away during the WC
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk




I've had a decent amount of diatoms since my rescape. I've also decided to go full walstad and take out the canister filter, so I've had a bit of mulm buildup and I'm unsure what I want to or should do about it. Without a filter I think I'll be doing WCs more often than before when they were once a year or so.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

bbroush said:


> I've had a decent amount of diatoms since my rescape. I've also decided to go full walstad and take out the canister filter, so I've had a bit of mulm buildup and I'm unsure what I want to or should do about it. Without a filter I think I'll be doing WCs more often than before when they were once a year or so.


I have probably a quarter of an inch of mulm in my tank. It doesn't seem to bother the bottom feeders any and I assume it helps leak nutrients in to my sand cap 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## kolet66 (Dec 11, 2016)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> No that's fine! I'm intrigued as well. Too bad I love in the Midwest
> 
> Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


I sent you both a message with pics rather than hijack the thread

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk


----------



## Bananableps (Nov 6, 2013)

1) Ever had an problems with hydra?

2) How has your TDS changed over time? Has it always hovered around the mid 300s? Do you have any impression of what makes TDS go up or down in a no water change tank?

I don't mean to sound critical. On the contrary, I myself very rarely do water changes.




kolet66 said:


> _whiskey barrel ponds_


Perhaps you can start a thread? I'd like to see these whiskey barrel ponds as well. My parents used some whiskey barrels as planters. They have rotted horribly over the years, making quite a mess. Also, as a city dweller, curious to hear about raccoon pond "feasts".


----------



## jr125 (Mar 5, 2015)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> I didn't check any levels prior to the WC but I have checked for those things in the past but I quit testing so frequently since the levels always seemed normal. I do check my TDS fairly regularly and it usually falls in the mid 300s.
> 
> As far as the particles we don't test for...thats ultimately why I decided to go ahead a change out some of the water. I started worrying about things like dust, mold, etc. and thought it was better to safe than sorry.
> 
> ...


I'm curious, did you ever do regular water changes on this tank and just decided they weren't needed because your tests showed little change between water changes, or no water changes from the start. To be honest I would probably do fewer changes but it's the only way I can keep nitrates from climbing. I think everything else could just about be adjusted to stay within a range after a bit and then spot checked every once and a while.

It's interesting that you were able to add the new betta with no problem. Did you acclimate it in another tank and slowly match water parameters or do the basic bag float, equalize temperature, introduce some tank water over 15-30 minutes?

I don't doubt that with the right water chemistry, bio-load, plants, lighting etc. you can get a tank that is pretty self sustaining. The proof is that it sustains the life, both plant and animal, it is intended to support. There are just so many variables that could throw things out of balance.

Well, I gotta go start my water change.

Just had another thought regarding the previous posts referring lakes, rain etc. It would seem any new water in the form of rain would also come with an array of various pollutants, either from the air or surface runoff. These may be compensated for naturally or may not. Or even climatic changes. A couple examples come to mind.
After a heavy rain with lots of runoff a lake may not be able to quickly handle the increased organics and there is an increase in harmful bacteria. Swimming beach gets closed until things improve.
Or everything is just fine until an extended heat wave and in a couple days time there is an algae explosion.

I guess my point is that even in a so called "balanced" eco-system sometimes things can overwhelm the balance until the system has a chance to compensate.


----------



## roadmaster (Nov 5, 2009)

Reminded of those who change oil in their car/truck once every 100,000 miles.
They say the car/truck run's great till it don't anymore.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

jr125 said:


> I'm curious, did you ever do regular water changes on this tank and just decided they weren't needed because your tests showed little change between water changes, or no water changes from the start. To be honest I would probably do fewer changes but it's the only way I can keep nitrates from climbing. I think everything else could just about be adjusted to stay within a range after a bit and then spot checked every once and a while.
> 
> It's interesting that you were able to add the new betta with no problem. Did you acclimate it in another tank and slowly match water parameters or do the basic bag float, equalize temperature, introduce some tank water over 15-30 minutes?
> 
> ...


The tank hasn't had ANY WC from the start. Pretty risky, but I tested the water almost daily for over a month before I learned to trust it more.

I basically did the float method for the betta and all fish. I use a syringe to measure metricide and the dechlorinator so I used it to slowly drip water in to the bag as it floated. Probably took me an hour total.

Side note: I put the betta in a breeder box for at least a week before introducing him to the entire tank. I think it helped him adapt to both the water conditions and the stimulus of all the movement in the tank 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## AbbeysDad (Apr 13, 2016)

I just don't understand the motivation to not do routine partial water changes. 
Time, effort, money, bad source water???

EXPERTS ALL AGREE that routine partial water changes ensure the best water chemistry and quality in the aquarium. I'm 'all in' for an eco-system setup that aids in water purification...lighting, plants, filters, substrate, bottom feeders, snails... and perhaps this can result in less frequent or reduced volume of water changes. 

However, there simply is no denying that a continued routine partial replacement of old tank water with fresh, clean, pure water is beneficial. 

The ideal system would be a drip/overflow system where fresh, pure water is constantly entering the system, replacing old water. Second to that are our weekly or bi-weekly partial water changes with pump or siphon and refill hose or buckets.

To the member that said we don't do water changes on lakes. Nature does, it's called rain and rain runoff. Sometimes the water is filtered through the soil, picks up calcium, magnesium etc. and enters a body of water through springs. Sometimes it's creeks, streams and/or river inlets and outlets. The point is that nature is doing partial water changes all the time...and just as we say that larger tanks are more forgiving, so are the larger ponds and lakes.

Some say their ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate levels are zero-low. But we simply do not have the resources to fully analyze tank water to determine purity. 

A well developed 'nearly natural' eco-system can help maintain higher water quality but nothing eliminates the need for pure, fresh water replacement.


----------



## Doogy262 (Aug 11, 2013)

AbbeysDad said:


> I just don't understand the motivation to not do routine partial water changes.
> Time, effort, money, bad source water???
> 
> EXPERTS ALL AGREE that routine partial water changes ensure the best water chemistry and quality in the aquarium. I'm 'all in' for an eco-system setup that aids in water purification...lighting, plants, filters, substrate, bottom feeders, snails... and perhaps this can result in less frequent or reduced volume of water changes.
> ...


I agree and am also curious why no water changes.I have been doing this for 40 years and actually enjoy the process and the way things look and the vitality of the fish after a water change. and for any newbies reading this it is not something to try until you have the experience to observe any problems and actually all that testing is more of a pia than changing water.How about when you clean the glass{inside} does all that just go into the mix? Not criticizing just curious...


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

AbbeysDad said:


> I just don't understand the motivation to not do routine partial water changes.
> 
> Time, effort, money, bad source water???
> 
> ...




The lake comment was in jest. Obviously in an aquarium there is only so much we can do to emulate a natural ecosystem. Topping off with RO or distilled water as OP does obviously helps. Monitoring your TDS and ammonia metabolites also is important (as OP does) and the other micronutrients or chemicals that can't be measured easily are the reason he did a WC after a year anyway. I think we can all agree a year might be long but it's not like he hasn't done a WC in a decade. 

What other chemicals do you think determine purity? For the health of the plants and the fauna you wouldn't want a tank of distilled water with a TDS of 0. That would be more detrimental than what OP has done. A baseline of waste nutrients and ions are important to maintain pH, shell health for invertebrates and growth for plants and nitrifying bacteria.

It's easy to discredit the OP without recognizing he has been monitoring his tank. There's a difference between laziness and trying something more hands off. I argue it's a similar argument between monitoring liquid frets closely and having a dirted tank. Is it irresponsible to allow the dirt to fertilize the plants an maintain the balance of nutrients? I'd argue it's just a different level of control. Not laziness.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Doogy262 said:


> I agree and am also curious why no water changes.I have been doing this for 40 years and actually enjoy the process and the way things look and the vitality of the fish after a water change. and for any newbies reading this it is not something to try until you have the experience to observe any problems and actually all that testing is more of a pia than changing water.How about when you clean the glass{inside} does all that just go into the mix? Not criticizing just curious...




I completely agree Doogy. This is NOT something for a beginner to try.


----------



## Bananableps (Nov 6, 2013)

AbbeysDad said:


> EXPERTS ALL AGREE


So Diana Walstad is, what, an amateur? 


As for your point about water changes in natural bodies of water, that really just depends on where you're looking. Yes, there are fast flowing streams and lakes, but many of the fish and plants we keep come from swamps. I'm sure the TDS level of OP's tank does not hold a candle to what you might find in certain wetlands and bogs. 




AbbeysDad said:


> However, there simply is no denying that a continued routine partial replacement of old tank water with fresh, clean, pure water is beneficial.


If you say so, although we've had this discussion before and I recall quite a few people denying this point. Without the opportunity to crack open Ecology of the Planted Aquarium this moment, two benefits to infrequent water changes that I can recall are a higher concentration of allelopathic chemicals and a higher concentration of dissolved organic carbon. Mature tanks can also generate a nice culture of copepods, which can be beneficial for tank maintenance and provide a nice food source for fry. This last summer was my first experience really pushing the minimal water change approach, and my sunfish spawned twice (and quite prodigiously!).

As we discussed last time, you keep a very particular type of aquarium that you want to look a very particular way. For those of us who don't care about having dwarf baby tears with tiny leaves, this method works just fine.


----------



## jr125 (Mar 5, 2015)

AbbeysDad said:


> To the member that said we don't do water changes on lakes. Nature does, it's called rain and rain runoff. Sometimes the water is filtered through the soil, picks up calcium, magnesium etc. and enters a body of water through springs. Sometimes it's creeks, streams and/or river inlets and outlets. The point is that nature is doing partial water changes all the time...and just as we say that larger tanks are more forgiving, so are the larger ponds and lakes.
> 
> Some say their ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate levels are zero-low. But we simply do not have the resources to fully analyze tank water to determine purity.
> 
> A well developed 'nearly natural' eco-system can help maintain higher water quality but nothing eliminates the need for pure, fresh water replacement.


 I wonder if pure, fresh water is even possible in nature.



jr125 said:


> Just had another thought regarding the previous posts referring lakes, rain etc. It would seem any new water in the form of rain would also come with an array of various pollutants, either from the air or surface runoff. These may be compensated for naturally or may not. Or even climatic changes. A couple examples come to mind.
> After a heavy rain with lots of runoff a lake may not be able to quickly handle the increased organics and there is an increase in harmful bacteria. Swimming beach gets closed until things improve.
> Or everything is just fine until an extended heat wave and in a couple days time there is an algae explosion.
> 
> I guess my point is that even in a so called "balanced" eco-system sometimes things can overwhelm the balance until the system has a chance to compensate.


I don't think I've ever heard an logical argument that doing partial water changes in an aquarium are a detriment. There are many that point to possible consequences of not. I think the "better safe than sorry" adage applies here.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

I had planned to only do water changes as I read Diane Walstad did but BBA killed all of my plants. Later read that Diane Walstad uses a UV sterilizer. That is not low tech to me as she advertises she does.

Do you use a UV sterilizer?


----------



## fishman922 (Oct 26, 2016)

The way I look at the no or low WC tanks is a little different than the two sides:
If i have an ecosystem with certain amounts of bacteria, plants, fish, shrimp, snails etc... They can keep each other in fairly good balance for a long time in a well developed and "balanced" aquarium, but that balance is also effected by the tank size. If i only have an excess gain of .0002ppm of nitrates in my tank per day I can easily go for a year before the nitrates increase noticeably. Minerals are added by food, and how much depends on the food. Without building an exhaustive list of possible tank parameters i believe you can have things in balance to where the deficiencies or excess of any tank parameter is going to take a while to become problematic. This is somewhat supported by Diana Walstad.

Is your tap water really always the exact same parameters? Probably not, though they are in some variance of parameters. If the variance of parameters in your tank is less it might cause your fish to be less stressed to be left alone than with a WC until a certain point.

Larger tanks have more capacity to buffer excess, due to the larger volume of water. I think how balanced your tank is will effect how often you should perform a WC. Nature is simply big enough that on a global scale it is largely balanced. The algae blooms in the ocean show however that sometimes nature is unbalanced in places and returns to "normal" after a time.

If someone is keeping up with their tank and checking their coloring, swimming patterns, tank parameters, etc. I would be hesitant to call them irresponsible. They could conceivably go quite a long time without a water change. For any new aquarists though this is a really really really bad idea. It takes time to even know if something is wrong, much less to figure out how to make it stable. I think these highly stable yearly WC tanks are like having a horseshoe standup on end after thrown, possible but highly improbable. The caveat to that is if someone is really paying attention they can balance the tank and standup the horseshoe so to speak. I am trying to go the route of balancing things by looking at the imbalances i have and trying to fix them naturally... Just my 2cents. Cool thread.


----------



## AbbeysDad (Apr 13, 2016)

Bananableps said:


> So Diana Walstad is, what, an amateur?


In a word, YES. Diana Walstad [interview] is the first to admit that she is not an expert fish keeper. She saw livestock stock tanks with muck (prolly manure) in the bottom growing luscious plants and decided to try it with soil in an aquarium after failing in other methods to grow aquatic plants.
What's important to realize is that the Walstad method was/is limited. It's a relatively heavily planted tank with very few fish. Far fewer fish than the average hobbyist would have. The plants get most of their nutrients initially from the 1" of soil used, which tends to peter out after about 6 months and many plants die out, after which fish food/fish waste is the only plant food. 



Bananableps said:


> As for your point about water changes in natural bodies of water, that really just depends on where you're looking. Yes, there are fast flowing streams and lakes, but many of the fish and plants we keep come from swamps. I'm sure the TDS level of OP's tank does not hold a candle to what you might find in certain wetlands and bogs.


I don't think we really should try to compare a home aquarium to foul bodies of water found in nature.



Bananableps said:


> If you say so, although we've had this discussion before and I recall quite a few people denying this point. Without the opportunity to crack open Ecology of the Planted Aquarium this moment, two benefits to infrequent water changes that I can recall are a higher concentration of allelopathic chemicals and a higher concentration of dissolved organic carbon. Mature tanks can also generate a nice culture of copepods, which can be beneficial for tank maintenance and provide a nice food source for fry. This last summer was my first experience really pushing the minimal water change approach, and my sunfish spawned twice (and quite prodigiously!).
> 
> As we discussed last time, you keep a very particular type of aquarium that you want to look a very particular way. For those of us who don't care about having dwarf baby tears with tiny leaves, this method works just fine.


Your last statement is quite untrue. I have a low to medium tech tank attempting a nearly natural eco-system (although I am toying with DIY CO2 and slightly increased ferts to keep plants happy). 
With my 24" depth and current lighting, I could not begin to grow ground covers.

I merely maintain that routine partial water changes are beneficial, if not crucial to the benefit of both plants and fish. Plants are forgiving and fish will adapt to poor water conditions...but survival is not thriving.

Practically every book and reference paper on tropical fish keeping recommends periodic partial water changes...and with about 50 years in the hobby, I know this to be true. 

Quite silly really. In the previous thread on this subject Tbone said he just didn't have time to do weekly water changes. But apparently has time to do routine ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH and TDS tests/checks. 
<rhetorical> What's really so hard about taking an hour, (two at the most) a week for tank maintenance? 

As already mentioned, with a partial weekly water change any/all testing/checking is nearly insignificant/pointless!

Note: I do believe that in a heavily planted established tank with a good eco-system, partial water changes could be less frequent or lower volume....but likely not eliminated without a resulting lower water quality.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

Seems those whom have well water don't have to work hard to have a balanced tank. Living near Atlanta my water is terrible. I try not to drink it if it is not filtered.


----------



## SERRCH (Mar 27, 2016)

roadmaster said:


> Reminded of those who change oil in their car/truck once every 100,000 miles.
> 
> They say the car/truck run's great till it don't anymore.




This is completely different.. 
A tank is a living ecosystem.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Every time this comes up there's someone wanting to discredit the walstad/not method and say things like, soil loses nutrients in 6 months and plants die off. SMH. Maybe start another thread to debate this and let people that want to ask OP about his tank do so.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Hilde said:


> I had planned to only do water changes as I read Diane Walstad did but BBA killed all of my plants. Later read that Diane Walstad uses a UV sterilizer. That is not low tech to me as she advertises she does.
> 
> Do you use a UV sterilizer?


I do not but I have considered it. At this point I probably won't, but I do dose with metricide daily and that may be why I haven't really had any algae.

In fact, I got my Rummynose Tetras from a tank rampant with BBA and I'm sure some ended up in my tank, however none grew so maybe I'm just lucky?

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

AbbeysDad said:


> What's important to realize is that the Walstad method was/is limited. It's a relatively heavily planted tank with very few fish. Far fewer fish than the average hobbyist would have. The plants get most of their nutrients initially from the 1" of soil used, which tends to peter out after about 6 months and many plants die out, after which fish food/fish waste is the only plant food.


I did have a few stem plants die off recently. I attributed it to lighting, but I suppose it could be the soil too. 



AbbeysDad said:


> Quite silly really. In the previous thread on this subject Tbone said he just didn't have time to do weekly water changes. But apparently has time to do routine ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH and TDS tests/checks.
> <rhetorical> What's really so hard about taking an hour, (two at the most) a week for tank maintenance?


I don't really check very often anymore. Probably once every three weeks? Or if I feel something is wrong.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> I do not but I have considered it. At this point I probably won't, but I do dose with metricide daily and that may be why I haven't really had any algae.


I dose metricide daily and still have a little algae. Since I only do water changes month bottom feeders can not live in my tank. Thinking now because the filter needs cleaning.

How often do you clean you filter?
Do you have a prefilter?
What is your substrate?

Bump: I frankly don't understand why some like doing water changes even if a python is used.


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Hilde said:


> I dose metricide daily and still have a little algae. Since I only do water changes month bottom feeders can not live in my tank. Thinking now because the filter needs cleaning.
> 
> How often do you clean you filter?
> Do you have a prefilter?
> ...


I'm sorry I didn't understand. Why can't you have bottom feeders?

I probably clean my filter(s) once every three weeks. I'm trying to get better at doing them more often. I do have pre-filters on both filters and they only get squeezed out when I clean them.

I have dirt capped with blasting sand. On top of that is about a quarter inch of mulm.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

Tbonedawg08 said:


> I'm sorry I didn't understand. Why can't you have bottom feeders?


They just can't live in my tank. The die.

Read here  that you add a gallon of distilled water a week. So your tanks aren't covered?


----------



## roadmaster (Nov 5, 2009)

SERRCH said:


> This is completely different..
> A tank is a living ecosystem.
> 
> 
> ...


 Tanks are glass boxes of water that we begin polluting the moment we add dirt,fishes,fish poo,fish food's,fertilizer's etc.
All of the afore mentioned will have direct bearing on how well (or not) the system perform's.
Smart money learn's fairly early on this truth.0


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Hilde said:


> They just can't live in my tank. The die.
> 
> Read here  that you add a gallon of distilled water a week. So your tanks aren't covered?


It's covered, but not sealed. It's like a big humidifier [emoji13] 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr. Bean (Jul 10, 2016)

I have to admit I didn't read 65 entries, so maybe someone mentioned this. 

I don't know how anyone could continually "top off" an aquarium for a year without creating an inhabitable concentration of calcium and water hardness. If that was already addressed, my apologies for being redundant.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

Mr. Bean said:


> I have to admit I didn't read 65 entries, so maybe someone mentioned this.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how anyone could continually "top off" an aquarium for a year without creating an inhabitable concentration of calcium and water hardness. If that was already addressed, my apologies for being redundant.




Distilled or RO water


----------



## lksdrinker (Feb 12, 2014)

I tend to think one of the biggest "problems" with the idea of less frequent water changes is that for the most part there are a lot of "new aquariums". Whether or not you've been a hobbyist for a while it seems that many, if not most, dont really keep a tank set up for months/years without tearing it down and starting over (or setting up another new tank). Having a long established aquarium (and a long established eco system in that aquarium) definitely has an impact on some of this. Not doing water changes can be a recipe for disaster but that doesn't mean it always has to end that way! I'm sure plenty of us have, or have known someone else who has, had a tank and kept up with regular maintenance and water changes yet still failed. Obviously they didnt fail because they did water changes; but no one jumps up and down screaming at that person about how they're doing it wrong. Yet when someone bothers to come forward to say hey look what I've done despite what everyone else seems to think/say, they're immediately chastised for succeeding. Is it simply because they chose a path to success that is not often traveled? Is it jealousy? (I wish I didnt have to do water changes on 20 tanks in my fishroom; yet I still do!)



AbbeysDad said:


> EXPERTS ALL AGREE that routine partial water changes ensure the best water chemistry and quality in the aquarium.


I think a lot of the information in this hobby gets a bit mis-construed after it passes through an experts' lips and gets regurgitated on web forums. I'm sure experts (and novices alike) would agree that having the best water chemistry/quality in the aquarium is the basic goal. However, that doesn't always mean water changes are the only path to that goal. It certainly is one possible way to achieve "the best water quality" (I'm sure we could get another multi page thread going on what constitutes "best"). Also not sure which "experts" you're speaking of since a lot of the hobbyists with planted tanks try to emulate the walstad method which does not necessarily promote the idea of frequent water changes. 



Gatekeeper69 said:


> You're probably very lucky your fish are still alive, not doing water changes means you get a build up of ammonia and nitrates in the water that your filter cannot get rid of, I feel sorry for your fish swimming around in dirty water for so long, it is quite irresponsible and you could have endangered the fishes lives. I hope your going to do more regular water changes in future for the sake of your fish.


This is just bad information and you really shouldn't try to pass judgment nor advice unless you really understand whats going on in our aquariums. Not doing water changes in no way means there is a buildup of ammonia. Is that possible? sure. However, the beneficial bacteria that we require in our tanks is present with or without water changes In fact, I have to wonder if that colony of beneficial bacteria might be greater in a tank that sees no water changes than it might be in a tank that sees constant water changes. Typically the only time you should ever see an ammonia reading in an aquarium is right after setting it up while the tank is cycling and while that colony of beneficial bacteria is growing. After that there should be 0 ammonia at all times. Can a tank thats neglected eventually crash and can you see ammonia? Sure. However, its not necessarily going to happen each and every time. The nitrogen cycle does result, in the end, with the production of nitrates. Nitrates can be a problem if the levels aren't kept in check. However, nitrates are consumed by plants so it is possible that the nitrate level can naturally be kept in check just by the plants using it as fertilizer.


----------



## Mr. Bean (Jul 10, 2016)

I gotta' say...nice and healthy looking tank/plants for no CO2...hats off!


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

lksdrinker said:


> I tend to think one of the biggest "problems" with the idea of less frequent water changes is that for the most part there are a lot of "new aquariums". Whether or not you've been a hobbyist for a while it seems that many, if not most, dont really keep a tank set up for months/years without tearing it down and starting over (or setting up another new tank). Having a long established aquarium (and a long established eco system in that aquarium) definitely has an impact on some of this. Not doing water changes can be a recipe for disaster but that doesn't mean it always has to end that way! I'm sure plenty of us have, or have known someone else who has, had a tank and kept up with regular maintenance and water changes yet still failed. Obviously they didnt fail because they did water changes; but no one jumps up and down screaming at that person about how they're doing it wrong. Yet when someone bothers to come forward to say hey look what I've done despite what everyone else seems to think/say, they're immediately chastised for succeeding. Is it simply because they chose a path to success that is not often traveled? Is it jealousy? (I wish I didnt have to do water changes on 20 tanks in my fishroom; yet I still do!)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Preach. But seriously though can we get back on track. 

Hey TBone, have you always had a cover on your tank? Is the 1 gallon top off a week because of evaporation or because you use some tank water on house plants?


----------



## Bananableps (Nov 6, 2013)

AbbeysDad said:


> In a word, YES. Diana Walstad [interview] is the first to admit that she is not an expert fish keeper. She saw livestock stock tanks with muck (prolly manure) in the bottom growing luscious plants and decided to try it with soil in an aquarium after failing in other methods to grow aquatic plants.





AbbeysDad said:


> Practically every book and reference paper on tropical fish keeping recommends periodic partial water changes...and with about 50 years in the hobby, I know this to be true.


Diana Walstad is a microbiologist who has done extensive secondary research on the keeping of fish and aquatic plants. There may be aquarists who have put in more years (and it should be noted that she is clearly speaking modestly), but Walstad has a scientific prospective which cannot be substituted with anecdotal, subjective, personal observations. You cannot replace scientific rigor with loud, confident assertions of seniority either. 



AbbeysDad said:


> What's important to realize is that the Walstad method was/is limited. It's a relatively heavily planted tank with very few fish. Far fewer fish than the average hobbyist would have.


As for your complaint that Walstad's method is too narrow: I can easily say the same about your setup. For those of us who do not wish to cram animals so tightly into small boxes that they need to have the bulk mass of their habitat replaced on a weekly basis, this method works great. I personally find overcrowded tanks ugly, chaotic, and unnatural looking*. Who are you to tell me and others that we are irresponsible for not wanting a tank that is so overcrowded that it is perpetually just a couple of days away from crashing? 

*Of course all of this is "unnatural". That's why I added "looking": talking aesthetics here. 



AbbeysDad said:


> The plants get most of their nutrients initially from the 1" of soil used, which tends to peter out after about 6 months and many plants die out, after which fish food/fish waste is the only plant food.


This is so unbelievably false. I have literally never heard of anyone having anything close to that experience. Dirted tanks last for years. You should probably read Ecology of the Planted Tank before you talk crap about it. If you have read it, maybe you should read it more carefully.



AbbeysDad said:


> I don't think we really should try to compare a home aquarium to foul bodies of water found in nature.


"Foul" is a meaningless, subjective term that you are applying to a legitimate biome. As I stated before, many of the organisms we keep in our aquariums originate from what you call "foul bodies of water". It stands to reason that they are not only tolerant of these conditions but have also adapted to benefit from them. 



AbbeysDad said:


> Your last statement is quite untrue. I have a low to medium tech tank attempting a nearly natural eco-system (although I am toying with DIY CO2 and slightly increased ferts to keep plants happy).
> With my 24" depth and current lighting, I could not begin to grow ground covers.


Fine, so you have many of the inconveniences of a high tech tank and few of the benefits. Not sure what this proves.



AbbeysDad said:


> I merely maintain that routine partial water changes are beneficial, if not crucial to the benefit of both plants and fish. Plants are forgiving and fish will adapt to poor water conditions...but survival is not thriving.


The thing is, unlike you, I can keep thick, low growing ground cover. So who are you to tell me about survival vs thriving? My dollar sunfish spawned thousands and thousands of fry over the summer. I'm sure I'm not the only person to have achieved this, but I haven't found anyone else online who has produced more than a couple dozen dollar sun fry in an aquarium. I think I'm doing okay in terms of thriving. Granted, I did not manage to rear as many of those fry as I hoped, but that had nothing to do with infrequent water changes (as evidenced by the fact that they were immediately removed to other, frequently changed tanks). Will cover this in an upcoming thread in more detail.



AbbeysDad said:


> As already mentioned, with a partial weekly water change any/all testing/checking is nearly insignificant/pointless!


Strange you say that, because I'm pretty sure I see no shortage of people who do weekly water changes posting about fish/plant problems in these forums. Not saying that weekly water changes are the cause of these problems, but they are not the panacea you make them out to be.



bbroush said:


> Preach. But seriously though can we get back on track.


lol sorry, but you know it was inevitable. The Sterile-ists always end up jumping into these threads, and I think it's worth the time to defend Tbonedawg and all dirted tanks against their dogma.

But in the spirit of keeping on track, I'll add some AMA questions: 


1) How frequently do you clean the glass?

2) What plants (if any) have not worked out so well in this setup?


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

bbroush said:


> Preach. But seriously though can we get back on track.
> 
> Hey TBone, have you always had a cover on your tank? Is the 1 gallon top off a week because of evaporation or because you use some tank water on house plants?


Yes I've always had the cover. Its plexiglass that covers 80% of it (not the back end where the filters are) and a wooden hood that houses the CFLs. Yes, I said CFLs [emoji12] 

Im guessing that it's mostly due to evaporation than anything. Even when I forget to water it seems to need nearly a gallon.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

Bananableps said:


> 1) How frequently do you clean the glass?
> 
> 2) What plants (if any) have not worked out so well in this setup?


1) almost never. I used to need to do it frequently, but in the last 3 months I don't remember the last time I cleaned it. I can't explain it, but something must have changed because it really pretty spotless.

2) I really wish I could tell you but I have no idea of their names [emoji28] 

Edit: I found pictures I took at the pet shop. The ones who didn't make it are labeled: Ludwigia Cuba and Rotala Macranda.

I have no idea if those names are correct or not.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## pandazebra (Jan 25, 2017)

May I ask: Do you use the bottle of activator solution that comes with the Metricide ?


----------



## pandazebra (Jan 25, 2017)

Just in case the OP didn't see my question, may I ask you the same, when you purchased the Metricide, it comes with a bottle of activator, Do you add it to the metricide or dose the metricide without it? THX


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

pandazebra said:


> Just in case the OP didn't see my question, may I ask you the same, when you purchased the Metricide, it comes with a bottle of activator, Do you add it to the metricide or dose the metricide without it? THX


You don't use the activator.

Seachem Excel contains 1.5% Glutaraldehyde. Metricide 28 glut 2.5% and Metricide 14 2% glutaraldehyde Metricide or Cidex. Not cidex odt. 
A qt $25 on Ebay. At dealmed. 1 gallon $18.20. shipping $9.99 

Formula
glut = (1.5 x container)/ cidex glut% 
glut = (1.5% * 100ml)/2.5%.
500ml bottle = 300ml of 2.5%(Metricide 28) + 200ml of water


----------



## Tbonedawg08 (Apr 11, 2016)

pandazebra said:


> May I ask: Do you use the bottle of activator solution that comes with the Metricide ?


Yeah definitely don't use it. Mine didn't even come with one..? 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk


----------



## pandazebra (Jan 25, 2017)

THX very much for your detailed reply but I am not smart enough to understand the formula part, let me make my question simpler, I have a 55 gallon tank, how many ml's should I dose straight from the metricide 14 bottle (no dilution)? THX.

Bump: THX, I will dump the activator then.


----------



## bbroush (Sep 13, 2012)

pandazebra said:


> THX very much for your detailed reply but I am not smart enough to understand the formula part, let me make my question simpler, I have a 55 gallon tank, how many ml's should I dose straight from the metricide 14 bottle (no dilution)? THX.
> 
> Bump: THX, I will dump the activator then.




Dosing metricide 14

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...share_tid=1066945&share_fid=4235&share_type=t

The search function is your friend.


----------



## pandazebra (Jan 25, 2017)

THX for the link, I searched b4 unsuccessfully for some reason


----------

