# Minimum Water Change Frequency



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

How long can I hold off for a water change until I start seeing negative effects?

I'm lazy and want to know the minimum I can change my water and yet still have a beautiful tank. Open to hearing your experiences and observations. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! If your standards for what is a beautiful tank are flexible enough, you can avoid any water changes and still have a beautiful tank. You would have to use low light, so you could succeed without fertilizing. You would need to have a low bioload in the tank so natural processes could keep the water suitable for fish. One way to do that is the Walstad method.


----------



## mik778866 (Aug 22, 2014)

Hoppy said:


> One way to do that is the Walstad method.


The other is Tom Barr non co2 method without excel.


----------



## Bobbybills (Nov 30, 2015)

The answer is no one really knows what is good for your tank except your tank. As an experiment, I completely stopped both dosing and most of the water changes after seeing BBA ruin what was up to that point a beautiful planted tank with a much higher bio load than most. I tried to maintain the perfect PPS regiment with water changes based on TDS but nothing seemed to halt the downward spiral. Aside from a sump clean out which used 15 gallons on a 90 gallon tank, just RO top offs and metricide.

That was June 10th. Fast forward to today and the tank never looked so good. I only recently began to dose again but at a much lower level. If the BBA re-appears, back to lazy.


----------



## redchaser (Apr 27, 2015)

There's no universal answer to that question, it will vary greatly based on factors like lighting, sub strait, plant load, plant types, livestock load, filtration, perhaps even the water chemistry of your municipal system. I've seen tank journals and have read articles on tanks that can go pretty much indefinitely without water changes, but they were set up specifically to run that way, and it's not necessarily a lazy way out as it requires plenty of work in its own right.


----------



## PlantedRich (Jul 21, 2010)

Too many variables to begin to set a minimum. For started on variables, we have to look at how we each define beautiful. What is a planted tank to each of us? Defining lazy versus enjoying the work? Is it work to change water but not work to test and figure what is needed ? 
I have to find the level I like on each of my tanks. I have had as many as 13 tanks at one point and found that was too much work. But each of those tanks required different levels of and types of work. some took lots of water changing, while others took lots of time in testing and changing the routine. Many were bare bottom breeding or growout tanks but that did not mean there was not something that required attention on all of them. 
Since we each have a definite personal definition of what is fun and what is not, the answer of what is minimum water change, is going to vary a lot. 
A single turtle can go a long time in a very bare tank! It may be a stinking pond for some while the owner may love it.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

This is like asking how far can you go on 10 gallons of gas without specifying the vehicle.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

burr740 said:


> This is like asking how far can you go on 10 gallons of gas without specifying the vehicle.


im interested in your own experiences and observation. please share what knowledge you know. we can feed off each other's answers and learn together.


----------



## lksdrinker (Feb 12, 2014)

Bobbybills said:


> The answer is no one really knows what is good for your tank except your tank.





redchaser said:


> There's no universal answer to that question, it will vary greatly





PlantedRich said:


> Too many variables to begin to set a minimum.





burr740 said:


> This is like asking how far can you go on 10 gallons of gas without specifying the vehicle.


I'm starting to see a common theme here.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

lksdrinker said:


> I'm starting to see a common theme here.


Right and all those responses are correct, which brings us full cycle and the reason why 50% weekly is a good general guideline to follow in perpetuity or until someone figure out what they can get away with. 

A weekly water change schedule is realistic and keeps water quality good and ferts in the water column.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

lksdrinker said:


> I'm starting to see a common theme here.


its a open question. share what you have to offer. i can see your hurtful intent by your post. share what good you have to offer, but please stop trying to make me feel bad.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

IntotheWRX said:


> its a open question. share what you have to offer. i can see your hurtful intent by your post. share what good you have to offer, but please stop trying to make me feel bad.


I don't understand your response.

Water changes are invigorating for the fish, and very rarely a bad idea. But, that doesn't mean you have to do regular water changes, or even any water changes at all. If you want to grow all of the vast variety of plants now available to us you will need to use high light, which means you will need to use CO2, and those together mean you will need to dose fertilizers. The fast plant growth will probably mean you will be doing regular pruning. With all of that, water changes are very desirable.

But, if you are just looking for a tank you enjoy looking at, which pleases your sense of beauty, then you can limit yourself to low maintenance plants, which require less than high light, and don't need CO2, or much CO2, to grow well, and the slower growth may mean you don't need to fertilize. With that, you may find that the tank will do well with no water changes, just top-offs as needed.

So, there is no one answer to your question. It really does depend on how your individual tank is set up.


----------



## lksdrinker (Feb 12, 2014)

IntotheWRX said:


> its a open question. share what you have to offer. i can see your hurtful intent by your post. share what good you have to offer, but please stop trying to make me feel bad.


Hurtful intent? trying to make you feel bad? Not sure where you're getting that from?! No one is out to get you or trying to make you feel bad here. If that was my intent I'd come right out and say it! You essentially asked a question that has no answer and multiple people have nicely tried to explain that the question really cant be answered the way you posed it. Are you just waiting for someone to provide an answer that you agree with or something?....something to justify the way you're approaching the hobby?

I keep a fishroom with 18 tanks running currently. I have multiple bare bottom discus tanks that I aim to do 50% (or more) water changes on it daily (I say aim to do so because the fact of the matter is I dont always have the time to do so). I have planted tanks that seldom get water changes.....maybe 50% bi-weekly or sometimes monthly. I have other planted tanks that get large water changes often....at least 50% weekly. I have certain tanks that I do no more than 10% water changes on it weekly. For a period of time I dosed all of my planted tanks via the EI method and as such religiously did 50% weekly water changes. 

Certain things work for certain tanks and for certain people but there are soooooo many variable that come into play. Bottom line is water changes are good and this hobby is not for the lazy!


----------



## AbbeysDad (Apr 13, 2016)

IntotheWRX said:


> How long can I hold off for a water change until I start seeing negative effects?
> 
> I'm lazy and want to know the minimum I can change my water and yet still have a beautiful tank. Open to hearing your experiences and observations. Thanks for sharing.


Unfortunately, to a degree, fish (and plants) can adjust to tolerate poor water quality before there are any visible signs. Although if you look closely, you might begin to see some signs of stress (shimmy, flashing, surface gulping, erratic swimming or behavior...)

To a point, we might use nitrates, phosphates, and TDS test results to help identify the need for a partial water change...but by far the easiest method is to do a modest water change at least weekly to maintain a consistent water chemistry that is better for the fish. Waiting for long periods and doing a larger water change could potentially shock the fish.
I am shooting for a Nearly Natural Habitat, so I just do modest water changes to allow the plants to use the organic nutrients and purify the water. I use chemical additives only as absolutely necessary, watching the plants for any cues. 

In the end, if you care about the fish, it's better to err on the side of too much volume/frequency of water changes vs. too little. And suffice it to say that for over 50 years, scientists and expert hobbyists have been 'preaching' the merits of partial water changes in fish only AND planted tanks. 

Experimentation is great, but we don't need to prove the world is round because we know that to be true.

Wanna have a beautiful aquarium with healthy fish - prepare to spend 1 hour a week for tank maintenance - it's more than worth the effort!


----------



## redavalanche (Dec 7, 2014)

lksdrinker said:


> I keep a fishroom with 18 tanks running currently. I have multiple bare bottom discus tanks that I aim to do 50% (or more) water changes on it daily (I say aim to do so because the fact of the matter is I dont always have the time to do so). I have planted tanks that seldom get water changes.....maybe 50% bi-weekly or sometimes monthly. I have other planted tanks that get large water changes often....at least 50% weekly. I have certain tanks that I do no more than 10% water changes on it weekly. For a period of time I dosed all of my planted tanks via the EI method and as such religiously did 50% weekly water changes.


OK. I needed some inspiration to do a water change this afternoon. LOL.


----------



## PlantedRich (Jul 21, 2010)

I have a 120 gallon that I like to get 50% weekly but often gets 25% bi-weekly, more or less. A newish 75 gets a full 25% every ten days. A 20 that has only got a now and then 20-50% for the last six months. And last is a ten that gets 50% every three days as I dose meds for a sick fish. 
The difference is in the tanks. The 120 has my best fish and I should do better but I'm not motivated. The 75 has my current main interest, so it gets the best care while the 20 has nothing but holding a couple of females holding fry and waiting their turn to release them. The 10 is a QT and I would like to save that fish. The med specs doing two treatments, water change and treat, so I want to get the best results from the med. The sick fish came shipped in sick but I mostly try to avoid more sick ones. But I also know that I can do the best at preventing disease if I do water changes! Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

Hoppy said:


> I don't understand your response.


Hoppy the reason you don't understand the response is because you need to understand the OP.

He's been jumping into threads for the past month or so declaring that water changes are a waste of time, and if you have to change your water you obviously don't know how to manage your tank. He's received a little flack here and there about his position, and has ruffled a few feathers with his responses. 

He's kind of been taking the position that everyone is out to get him.

I was curious when he started this new thread, as I am not sure what the motive is. I'm sure we will find out soon.


----------



## Doogy262 (Aug 11, 2013)

Do you have a python changer? just get it going sit back relax and refill ,not to taxing...


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Greggz said:


> ..I was curious when he started this new thread, as I am not sure what the motive is. I'm sure we will find out soon.


I think he's just playing us. IntotheWRX - The Jig Is Up


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

houseofcards said:


> I think he's just playing us. IntotheWRX - The Jig Is Up


dont be mad


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

IntotheWRX said:


> dont be mad


So it's true!


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

houseofcards said:


> So it's true!


Houseofcards......it was going to be an ambush!


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Greggz said:


> Houseofcards......it was going to be an ambush!


Sorry Man, LOL!


----------



## trailsnale (Dec 2, 2009)

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/12-tank-journals/1042170-ada45p-9gallon-cave-tree-1st-tank.html

the op has a terrific thread going re his tank. it doesn't seem like energy or motivation is an issue at all. actually he seems pretty experienced to me based upon that thread. 

maybe this thread is just a discussion-starter and not one the op practices. i think most posters on this board are conscientious about their tanks. and perhaps this topic, on it's face, just rubs people the wrong way. i certainly understand the slight pushback but the op's own tank thread shows me he's not practicing the question he's posed above.

my .02

as to my wc schedule, i'm more of a 'fish first, plants second' guy. so weekly wc's tends to the norm for my 3 tanks (caveat, 1 tank of new fish is twice weekly).


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

trailsnale said:


> ...
> 
> the op has a terrific thread going re his tank. it doesn't seem like energy or motivation is an issue at all. actually* he seems pretty experienced to me based upon that thread. *
> .


It sounds like you just looked at the pictures. You obviously didn't read the thread.


----------



## trailsnale (Dec 2, 2009)

houseofcards said:


> It sounds like you just looked at the pictures. You obviously didn't read the thread.


i did skim thru most of the posts.

and i overlooked the vernacular due to a probable age difference. no biggie.

do you agree or disagree his tanks look terrific? the proof was in the pudding for me.


----------



## Greggz (May 19, 2008)

trailsnale said:


> as to my wc schedule, i'm more of a 'fish first, plants second' guy. so weekly wc's tends to the norm for my 3 tanks (caveat, 1 tank of new fish is twice weekly).


I would guess, according to the OP, that you sir are not the master of your tank.

This is a quote below from the OP in a different thread.

_i first believed in the 50% weekly water change from this forum. I did one water change and found how much of a hassle it was. So I got lazy and did it every two weeks, then every month, now never. I will let you guys know how long I can hold out with no water change. at least i dont have the fear of not changing the water. ill do the exploring for you guys. you guys can wish me luck, or you can wish me to f*** off because it seems like people on this forum dont like me because I dont agree with you. at the end of the day, the tank speaks for the tank master. but no one should be bashing on my style._

Now I have no issue if someone can actually create a self sustaining tank with no water changes. I believe it is an anomaly, but find it interesting to read about. The problem is the OP has been advocating that anyone who does water changes just doesn't know what they are doing. In my personal experience, the vast majority of people can only benefit from regular water changes. In fact, for EI tanks, it is integral to keeping a good balance. 

I can tell you this, I wouldn't want to be a fish in that tank. It's been a short life for many. On the other hand, I do like the general scape of the tank. My guess is that his livestock would gladly a welcome a water change.


----------



## trailsnale (Dec 2, 2009)

Greggz said:


> I would guess, according to the OP, that you sir are not the master of your tank.
> 
> This is a quote below from the *OP in a different thread*.
> 
> ...


i don't know how many threads the op has going on and i am certain i haven't read all of his posts.

i agree with you, and maintain my tanks accordingly, that 'more is better' when it comes to wc's. no issues there.

where i am heading with my response, is that his tanks do not reflect a total hands off approach (as his posts seem to imply). this is my earlier point to h of c's, his tanks look amazing to me and i'm not convinced one can do this by doing nothing. certainly agree w/ you there's a disconnect between some posts and what i see in his tanks.

Bump:


Greggz said:


> I would guess, according to the OP, that you sir are not the master of your tank.
> 
> This is a quote below from the OP in a different thread.
> 
> ...


i did get a chuckle out of this!


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

trailsnale said:


> i did skim thru most of the posts.
> 
> and i overlooked the vernacular due to a probable age difference. no biggie.
> 
> do you agree or disagree his tanks look terrific? the proof was in the pudding for me.


There's 3 things you want to accomplish, grow plants, keep fish alive and not have any real algae issues. He's accomplished one. If you read his thread he killed off a ton of fish and he has so much BBA that he's running lights only 4 hours and maxing out excel, for what to try and prove he can run a tank without water changes. 

Do you actually think some pictures tells the whole story? That's why you need to read not just look at some pretty pictures.


----------



## trailsnale (Dec 2, 2009)

houseofcards said:


> There's 3 things you want to accomplish, grow plants, keep fish alive and not have any real algae issues. He's accomplished one. If you read his thread he killed off a ton of fish and he has so much BBA that he's running lights only 4 hours and maxing out excel, for what to try and prove he can run a tank without water changes.
> 
> Do you actually think some pictures tells the whole story? That's why you need to read not just look at some pretty pictures.


http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=683785&d=1477417299

this was his post (by his friend? i don't get the macdre connection posting of op's tanks) of his tank on 10/25. does that look like a mess to you? covered in bba? what am i missing?


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

trailsnale said:


> http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=683785&d=1477417299
> 
> this was his post (by his friend? i don't get the macdre connection posting of op's tanks) of his tank on 10/25. does that look like a mess to you? covered in bba? what am i missing?


So you actually think because you see a picture the tank always looks that way. Why would he say he has BBA, turn up his co2 to fight algae, reduce lighting to 4 hours and be dosing excel constantly if his tank was stable and it always looked the way in the pic. I didn't make it up, it's in this thread.


----------



## Kubla (Jan 5, 2014)

IntotheWRX said:


> How long can I hold off for a water change until I start seeing negative effects?
> 
> I'm lazy and want to know the minimum I can change my water and yet still have a beautiful tank. Open to hearing your experiences and observations. Thanks for sharing.


You don't have anywhere near enough info here to formulate advice with. It is irresponsible to give out advice without enough information. In order to come up with any kind of advice on water changes I should know everything that is going on with your tank, tank size, filter, water parameters, plants, livestock. If you are dosing quite a bit of fertilizer on a daily basis your tank would probably benefit by 50% weekly changes. If you are lightly dosing or not at all it could go considerably longer.

My main tank has not had the water changed for a few months, but I have also almost completely backed off dosing during this time. Some of my plants are suffering slightly, others are thriving. I will say none of my plants are very demanding. The tank still looks good and all the livestock seems happy and healthy


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

trailsnale said:


> http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=683785&d=1477417299
> 
> ..don't get the macdre connection posting of op's tanks) of his tank on 10/25..


That is interesting isn't it?


----------



## Tom Barr (Nov 16, 2012)

While some can get away with seemingly paradoxes, most do not. 
They get algae, they overlook things, they make mistakes, some much more than others, most still make mistakes. 
I do, but I can fix it them much easier and know what I did to cause them. 

Given the OP goal................

An emergent tank, non CO2, rich sediment perhaps, decent algae eating shrimp and fish would work well. 
But, they would need to do frequent water changes the first few weeks, regardless of the set up. 

If you cannot do that, you signed up for the wrong hobby. 

New folks make a lot more mistakes, water changes fixes those and resets the tank. 
Telling new folks that you can do it without any water changes this is not a good idea. 
Yes, experienced folks, some specific goals and styles/methods can help, but new folks make far too many mistakes.

Still, if lazy is a goal whether you are lazy or not, new or well seasoned: non CO2, emergent growth, good algae eater population, rich sediment, water changes for the 1st one to two months, plant heavy from the start, relatively low light, enough to grow the plants. 

Here is one such example I did that met most of the advice I just gave(sediment is inert and the light it high, but blocked from above and I fed the tank pretty well. No dosing of ferts, just fish waste)


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

Hi @IntotheWRX,

How about a pic of your beautiful tank? I suspect that you were not doing EI dosing per the recommended schedule during the 18 month period?

I have only been keeping fish for 5 or 6 decades so I don't know a lot. But there is one thing I do know and that is for me to have healthy fish, that grow to their maximum size and beauty, I have to do regular water changes. When it comes to my tanks my primary consideration is a healthy environment for my fish with minimal organic waste and detritus. Weekly water changes help me to attain that goal. I have not yet met a successful fish breeder that spawns and sells fish on a regular basis that doesn't do 1, 2, or even 3 water changes per week.


----------



## zerodameaon (Dec 2, 2014)

IntotheWRX said:


> after a year and half of testing the lazy person's limits of minimal water change, it would say 2 months. change 50% every 2 months tank runs strong.
> 
> many people were telling me 50% every week on the internet. i wouldn't believe the hype. better to listen to your tank instead of someone else made up rule.


That rule is for EI dosing and its not really made up and the guy that developed it knows what he is doing, if you are not doing EI dosing once a month is a bit more acceptable.

EDIT: Was it really necessary to go bump a bunch of old threads with your faulty advice?


----------



## PlantedRich (Jul 21, 2010)

It's all about the internet, look closer and we can see it brings out the worst in all of us. We used to be able to walk away when we met the sort we don't want to talk to at all. Now they can follow us around on our electronic dogchains like we were tethered to them.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

you can do fewer water changes when the tank is more balanced.

its like the build up of co2 on our planet. too bad we cant do a water change on our earth. balance is key. 

and why you guys deleted my posts?


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Jun 15, 2008)

> and why you guys deleted my posts?


?????????????????? Maybe one of the other threads you opened this morning? This is the first response from you I have seen in this thread.


----------



## zerodameaon (Dec 2, 2014)

They were likely deleted because you bumped about 6 old threads, one of which was 12 years old, with bad info.


----------



## Triport (Sep 3, 2017)

I have gone months and months without water changes during chaotic times of my life. I wouldn't recommend it but most fish will probably survive. Plants in a high tech situation need more care though (low tech will usually be OK IME). 

I wouldn't recommend it obviously. You will over time be more likely to lose sensitive fish if you let the Nitrates get too high and it can lead to problems. Certain fish are more sensitive to it than others. For example in my tetra tank when I would go too long I had Hyphessobrycon sp. HY511 (candy cane tetra) that would develop pop eye when the Nitrates got into the 80ppm or above range. They would usually live with it for a while but eventually it would kill them. I am still not the best at doing water changes but try to do them at least twice a month for all my tanks.


----------



## IntotheWRX (May 13, 2016)

zerodameaon said:


> They were likely deleted because you bumped about 6 old threads, one of which was 12 years old, with bad info.


your info is bad info, im here to give good info to everyone.


----------



## KrypleBerry (May 23, 2017)

Telling people to skip water changes or avoid them all together is a recipe for disaster for 98% of aquarium enthusiasts, and out right irresponsible considering all systems are different with varying levels of demand for cleanliness and maintenance. Honestly, every tank will be different, but best to err in the side of safety than laziness as a general rule of thumb for life and our aquariums. If aquarium maintenance is too much of an inconvenience best to pick another hobby so other living things arent relying on how energetic you feel that day as their health depends on it. Theres more in the water than nitrate, hormones from all the creatures in your tank are mixing in 24/7 and fish require balanced mineral content in the water as well to maintain health and organ function.
I have 42 collapsed joints, 6 slipped discs, 5 permanently dislocated ribs, 2 implants holding my side together, severe osteo arthritis, nerve damage, and my hip is constsntly out by over an inch to name a few things... so I believe I have just as much reason as anyone else to dread physical labor... I still do weekly 50% water changes, why? Not because it is fun, or easy but because its necessary for my EI dosed, high tech, and my low tech planted and breeding tanks to keep them balanced and healthy.


----------



## zerodameaon (Dec 2, 2014)

IntotheWRX said:


> your info is bad info, im here to give good info to everyone.


See that is where you are wrong, and you are not going to find much support here. You are omitting so much info and parading around like you know best when you are right in some cases but wrong in most and clearly do not understand where that 50% weekly rule comes from. You are also not using evidence other than using the word equilibrium over and over and ignoring the confirmed info others are giving you in an attempt to educate you.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

Didn't want to reply to this controversial subject but!!!

Having an 80G (claimed to be) no WC tank with plants only.
It still required WC's in the way of vacuuming the substrate periodically.
Snail crap, decayed plant matter, cap breaches, etc... No fish for 6 months.
Some weeks even got a double EI dose of ferts, consumed by the plants.
So many plants TDS was always dropping.

But I still had a reason for removing and replenishing water!
Even with zero "Phish"!

More recent times prompted me to add some baby Cory's.
There only purpose is to stir the substrate, keep things moving about.
Their trivial amount of excreted waste is like me dosing Urea in this uncycled tank.
Plants remove it before it is detectable.


----------



## zerodameaon (Dec 2, 2014)

Maryland Guppy said:


> Didn't want to reply to this controversial subject but!!!
> 
> Having an 80G (claimed to be) no WC tank with plants only.


This would be one of the cases where 50% weekly rule doesn't apply but you are also not applying this as a blanket statement either like IntotheWRX did.


----------



## Maryland Guppy (Dec 6, 2014)

zerodameaon said:


> This would be one of the cases where 50% weekly rule doesn't apply but you are also not applying this as a blanket statement either like IntotheWRX did.


My point was even with plants only I still needed to change some water.
Frequency was certainly not as often as a tank with Phish.

We all have a need to change some amount of water.
Many just need to find the amount and embrace it!


----------



## zerodameaon (Dec 2, 2014)

Maryland Guppy said:


> My point was even with plants only I still needed to change some water.
> Frequency was certainly not as often as a tank with Phish.
> 
> We all have a need to change some amount of water.
> Many just need to find the amount and embrace it!


Yeah sorry didn't mean to sound like I was calling you out or disagreeing with you.


----------

