water changes

[Joe Cool]

Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
water test shows it needs it?

[Phil]

Hi Joe

I am relatively new to reef tanks -- 11 months total. Our tanks is 6*2*2
with a large sump / refugium. When I started I was changing 10-15% of the
water every 3 weeks or so, but I have now adopted the approach of watching
the water parameters and then deciding what to do. I run a good skimmer
(Berlin HO), with a refugium (which is full of caulerpa, algae and crawling
with bugs), add Seachem Reef Plus and Seachem Reef Advantage calcium only.
I also keep a bag of activated carbon in the sump. The water parameters are
good:

S.G. 1.025
Temp 25-26 C
pH 8.3
Nitrate -- undetectable
Phosphate -- undetectable
T.A. 3.5 mEq ( a bit low, but working on it)

All the fish and corals seem happy. See
http://community.webshots.com/album/149890982jXnxRs

We also have a quarantine tank and a small FOWLR -- so every few weeks I
take a small amount of water from the reef to do water changes in those
(approx 5% of the reef every 4-6 weeks). They are happy too.

Hope this helps

Phil




"Joe Cool" > wrote in message
news:C8Pnd.541729$mD.298148@attbi_s02...
> Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
> water test shows it needs it?

[Phil]

Joe

Sorry -- I add Reef Builder, not Reef Plus.

Phil

"Phil" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Joe
>
> I am relatively new to reef tanks -- 11 months total. Our tanks is 6*2*2
> with a large sump / refugium. When I started I was changing 10-15% of the
> water every 3 weeks or so, but I have now adopted the approach of watching
> the water parameters and then deciding what to do. I run a good skimmer
> (Berlin HO), with a refugium (which is full of caulerpa, algae and
crawling
> with bugs), add Seachem Reef Plus and Seachem Reef Advantage calcium only.
> I also keep a bag of activated carbon in the sump. The water parameters
are
> good:
>
> S.G. 1.025
> Temp 25-26 C
> pH 8.3
> Nitrate -- undetectable
> Phosphate -- undetectable
> T.A. 3.5 mEq ( a bit low, but working on it)
>
> All the fish and corals seem happy. See
> http://community.webshots.com/album/149890982jXnxRs
>
> We also have a quarantine tank and a small FOWLR -- so every few weeks I
> take a small amount of water from the reef to do water changes in those
> (approx 5% of the reef every 4-6 weeks). They are happy too.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> "Joe Cool" > wrote in message
> news:C8Pnd.541729$mD.298148@attbi_s02...
> > Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
> > water test shows it needs it?
>
>

[Wayne Sallee]

I don't go by schedule. I just do a 50% water change whenever I see that things
in the tank are not 100% up to par, like corals not blooming out quite as much
as normal, then it's time to do a water change. Or other facter that shows a
nead for a water change. I like doing 50% water changes. Most people think
that's extreem, but I like to see results when I do a water change.

Wayne Sallee

[Wolf]

seems the 50% would be too much of a shock to corals, how is theyre life
span?

and i would watch the params, i like to see how well the system is doing by
seeing how long i can go without a water change. but if you do that, then
you may want to make sure your testing PH, ALk, Ca, Nitrate, Salinity often,
and prob even PO3 too.


"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
>I don't go by schedule. I just do a 50% water change whenever I see that
>things
> in the tank are not 100% up to par, like corals not blooming out quite as
> much
> as normal, then it's time to do a water change. Or other facter that shows
> a
> nead for a water change. I like doing 50% water changes. Most people think
> that's extreem, but I like to see results when I do a water change.
>
> Wayne Sallee
>

[Wayne Sallee]

Yea most people think that 50% is extreem, but there are those of us that like
50% water changes.

Wayne Sallee



In article t>, "Wolf"
"> writes:

>seems the 50% would be too much of a shock to corals, how is theyre life
>span?
>
>and i would watch the params, i like to see how well the system is doing by
>seeing how long i can go without a water change. but if you do that, then
>you may want to make sure your testing PH, ALk, Ca, Nitrate, Salinity often,
>and prob even PO3 too.

[Toni]

"Wolf" "> wrote in message
nk.net...
> seems the 50% would be too much of a shock to corals, how is theyre life
> span?
>
> and i would watch the params, i like to see how well the system is doing
by
> seeing how long i can go without a water change. but if you do that, then
> you may want to make sure your testing PH, ALk, Ca, Nitrate, Salinity
often,
> and prob even PO3 too.
>



Waiting so long to do changes is why it is such a shock to the system- if
you did it more frequently it would be less of a difference.


--
Toni
http://www.cearbhaill.com/reef.htm

[Wayne Sallee]

In article >, "Toni"
> writes:

>Waiting so long to do changes is why it is such a shock to the system- if
>you did it more frequently it would be less of a difference.
>

LOL it's not a matter of how long you wait, it's a matter of when the water
change needs to be done, and if you want to make a water change great enoupgh
to see a change.

Wayne Sallee

[Toni]

"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
>
> LOL it's not a matter of how long you wait, it's a matter of when the
water
> change needs to be done, and if you want to make a water change great
enoupgh
> to see a change.
>



LOL in the interests of stability frequent changing beats waiting until it
is so bad even the fish notice a difference.


--
Toni
http://www.cearbhaill.com/reef.htm

[[email protected]]

There's a lot of us that would think anything less than a 50% water
change is almost a pointless excercise. Im one of them! Ive never
done anything less in 5 years of successful reefing.. If one does the
maths on 5 - 15% water changes whether it be weekly / monthly etc they
will find they may as not so one at all!


On 25 Nov 2004 03:16:49 GMT, (Wayne Sallee) wrote:

>Yea most people think that 50% is extreem, but there are those of us that like
>50% water changes.
>
>Wayne Sallee

>
>
>In article t>, "Wolf"
"> writes:
>
>>seems the 50% would be too much of a shock to corals, how is theyre life
>>span?
>>
>>and i would watch the params, i like to see how well the system is doing by
>>seeing how long i can go without a water change. but if you do that, then
>>you may want to make sure your testing PH, ALk, Ca, Nitrate, Salinity often,
>>and prob even PO3 too.
>

[Wayne Sallee]

In article >, "Toni"
> writes:

>
>LOL in the interests of stability frequent changing beats waiting until it
>is so bad even the fish notice a difference.

If the water is so bad that even the fish are complaining, it's *real* bad. But
as one becomes more experienced with reefkeeping one can tell the slightest
displeasure of the corals. One can also see other things in the environment,
all without using a single test kit, not that test kits aren't important, as
it's quite sad how people will spend a lot of money on the fish and stuff, but
not spend money on enough qualtity test kits, but that a well experienced
reefkeeper can see a lot of what's going on just by daily observance of the
reef tank, and most of us advanced reef aquarist have ph meters constanty
monitering the tank, giving us a view of the hartbeat of the reef tank.

So learning to read the reef, is a vital ability for knowing what actions need
to be done. And don't get me wrong, test kits are very important too, but
there's a lot to be told by daily observace of the tank.

And when I do a water change I want to see a difference in the corals and other
environmental factors.

Besides, natural reefs don't get a 50% water change :-)


Wayne Sallee

[Wayne Sallee]

Wrong newsgroup. Try troling in rec.troles.troling.webetroling

Wayne Sallee


In article >, Lady Chatterly
> writes:

>Subject: Re: water changes
>From: Lady Chatterly >
>Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:55:36 GMT
>
>In article >
>(Wayne Sallee) wrote:
>>
>>If the water is so bad that even the fish are complaining, it's *real* bad.
>But
>>as one becomes more experienced with reefkeeping one can tell the slightest
>>displeasure of the corals. One can also see other things in the environment,
>>all without using a single test kit, not that test kits aren't important, as
>>it's quite sad how people will spend a lot of money on the fish and stuff,
>but
>>not spend money on enough qualtity test kits, but that a well experienced
>>reefkeeper can see a lot of what's going on just by daily observance of the
>>reef tank, and most of us advanced reef aquarist have ph meters constanty
>>monitering the tank, giving us a view of the hartbeat of the reef tank.
>
>Do you think that going on just by daily observance of the reef tank
>is?
>
>>So learning to read the reef, is a vital ability for knowing what actions
>need
>>to be done. And don't get me wrong, test kits are very important too, but
>>there's a lot to be told by daily observace of the tank.
>
>Nevertheless, the merging of these various contingents is now
>underway.
>
>>And when I do a water change I want to see a difference in the corals and
>other
>>environmental factors.
>
>Are you wondering if you want to see a difference in the corals and
>other environmental factors?
>
>>Besides, natural reefs don't get a 50% water change :-)
>
>Congratulations on bringing light into the dark-room!
>
>--
>Lady Chatterly
>
>"And while you're at it, pull your head out your ass, since, judging
>from the know-it-all, smug, pseudo-intellectual and arrogant tone of
>your posts, that's where it's been for a long time" -- Ed
>

[Phil]

What are the maths? The maths are dependent on the water parameters. If
the chemistry is under control, why would you want to do anything that made
a major shift from those stable conditions?

I understand the need to do a major change if for example nitrates have gone
very high and you need to get the level down in a hurry -- but other than
something like that I think the "if it ain't broke -- don't fix it" rule
applies. Continual monitoring of the important parameters and a regular
bleed from the system (in the form of small regular changes) is IMO a better
strategy.

Phil

> wrote in message ...
> There's a lot of us that would think anything less than a 50% water
> change is almost a pointless excercise. Im one of them! Ive never
> done anything less in 5 years of successful reefing.. If one does the
> maths on 5 - 15% water changes whether it be weekly / monthly etc they
> will find they may as not so one at all!
>
>
> On 25 Nov 2004 03:16:49 GMT, (Wayne Sallee) wrote:
>
> >Yea most people think that 50% is extreem, but there are those of us that
like
> >50% water changes.
> >
> >Wayne Sallee
>
> >
> >
> >In article t>, "Wolf"
> "> writes:
> >
> >>seems the 50% would be too much of a shock to corals, how is theyre life
> >>span?
> >>
> >>and i would watch the params, i like to see how well the system is doing
by
> >>seeing how long i can go without a water change. but if you do that,
then
> >>you may want to make sure your testing PH, ALk, Ca, Nitrate, Salinity
often,
> >>and prob even PO3 too.
> >
>

[Wayne Sallee]

In article >, "Phil"
> writes:

>What are the maths?

1 15% water change leaves 85% remaining.
2 15% water change leaves 72.25% remaining.
3 15% water change leaves 61.4125% remaining.
4 15% water change leaves 52.200625% remaining.
5 15% water change leaves 44.370531% remaining.

1 50% water change leaves 50% remaining.

>The maths are dependent on the water parameters. If
>the chemistry is under control, why would you want to do anything that made
>a major shift from those stable conditions?

If the chemistry is under controle, then a 50% water change would not be
stressfull.

Think how much of a water change that the reefs get in the ocean.
They don't get the same water going round and round and round.

Wayne Sallee

[KevinM]

"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
> Wrong newsgroup. Try troling in rec.troles.troling.webetroling


C'mon Wayne....don't you recognize a 'bot when you see it? ;-)

Kev

[Phil]

Wayne

I understand and agree re the arithmetic, but my point is more about why the
need for the maths?-- What are we actually achieving by making major
changes? If the water parameters (NH4, NO2, NO3, Ca, Mg, PO4, I, TA, pH,
SG) are all consistently at target levels, then perhaps other non- measured
parameters are possibly changing slowly over time -- possibly not. So
therefore, isn't a small continuous bleed and continuous replacement with
new water the best and least disturbing way to go? We don't do it
continuously, so therefore small frequent changes are the next best
approximation.

Re ocean reefs -- I think that the scale of the ocean system is so vast, and
the currents and tides are so frequently changing, that the reef is unlikely
to ever get a set of water conditions that are much different to any other
surrounding water -- so you could argue that there is no change at all --
possibly the biggest short term change on a shallow reef is when you have a
major rainstorm.

Phil


"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Phil"
> > writes:
>
> >What are the maths?
>
> 1 15% water change leaves 85% remaining.
> 2 15% water change leaves 72.25% remaining.
> 3 15% water change leaves 61.4125% remaining.
> 4 15% water change leaves 52.200625% remaining.
> 5 15% water change leaves 44.370531% remaining.
>
> 1 50% water change leaves 50% remaining.
>
> >The maths are dependent on the water parameters. If
> >the chemistry is under control, why would you want to do anything that
made
> >a major shift from those stable conditions?
>
> If the chemistry is under controle, then a 50% water change would not be
> stressfull.
>
> Think how much of a water change that the reefs get in the ocean.
> They don't get the same water going round and round and round.
>
> Wayne Sallee
>

[Wayne Sallee]

In article >, "Phil"
> writes:

> So
>therefore, isn't a small continuous bleed and continuous replacement with
>new water the best and least disturbing way to go?

If you think that's the best way to go, then set up a drip system to constantly
change the water. It would not be that complicated to do. It's quite simple to
set up. Then you will have what you call the best way to go.

Wayne Sallee

[PaulB]

Doesn't "seeing a change" imply intentionally allowing the water quality to
degrade noticeably?



"Wayne Sallee" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Toni"
> > writes:
>
>>
>>LOL in the interests of stability frequent changing beats waiting until it
>>is so bad even the fish notice a difference.
>
> If the water is so bad that even the fish are complaining, it's *real*
> bad. But
> as one becomes more experienced with reefkeeping one can tell the
> slightest
> displeasure of the corals. One can also see other things in the
> environment,
> all without using a single test kit, not that test kits aren't important,
> as
> it's quite sad how people will spend a lot of money on the fish and stuff,
> but
> not spend money on enough qualtity test kits, but that a well experienced
> reefkeeper can see a lot of what's going on just by daily observance of
> the
> reef tank, and most of us advanced reef aquarist have ph meters constanty
> monitering the tank, giving us a view of the hartbeat of the reef tank.
>
> So learning to read the reef, is a vital ability for knowing what actions
> need
> to be done. And don't get me wrong, test kits are very important too, but
> there's a lot to be told by daily observace of the tank.
>
> And when I do a water change I want to see a difference in the corals and
> other
> environmental factors.
>
> Besides, natural reefs don't get a 50% water change :-)
>
>
> Wayne Sallee
>

[kryppy]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 22:01:06 GMT, Joe Cool > wrote:

>Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
>water test shows it needs it?


I find using natural sea water from the shore to work best. 50% change
every few days and they think they are still in the ocean.
It is best to use it hours after collecting it. I believe I read the
phyto begins to die quick for some reason or another.
I just got another 60 gallon plastic barrel today. Perhaps I will do
more in the future. It is way cheaper then buying all the supplements
I question are even proper for our creatures sometimes.

I swear some of the weird things in my tank arrived as larva in the
water! I have 'glass shrimp?' breeding in my fuge now from this
weekends collection!! They are growing fast and I wonder if they will
turn pink and get big enough to eat. :)

Works well for me and my ten year old grouper.

[kryppy]

On 28 Nov 2004 06:28:23 GMT, (Wayne Sallee) wrote:


>
>If you think that's the best way to go, then set up a drip system to constantly
>change the water. It would not be that complicated to do. It's quite simple to
>set up. Then you will have what you call the best way to go.


Damn I like this idea!!

[PaulB]

Many large Aquaria use this method. Of course, the live plankton can also
include things like predatory isopods and such.


"kryppy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 22:01:06 GMT, Joe Cool > wrote:
>
>>Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
>>water test shows it needs it?
>
>
> I find using natural sea water from the shore to work best. 50% change
> every few days and they think they are still in the ocean.
> It is best to use it hours after collecting it. I believe I read the
> phyto begins to die quick for some reason or another.
> I just got another 60 gallon plastic barrel today. Perhaps I will do
> more in the future. It is way cheaper then buying all the supplements
> I question are even proper for our creatures sometimes.
>
> I swear some of the weird things in my tank arrived as larva in the
> water! I have 'glass shrimp?' breeding in my fuge now from this
> weekends collection!! They are growing fast and I wonder if they will
> turn pink and get big enough to eat. :)
>
> Works well for me and my ten year old grouper.
>
>
>
>

[[email protected]]

I always daydream about having a house on the water with a return pipe
into the ocean ...Just imagine ...no need for water changes or fresh
water top up no need for a chiller no need for anything exept light
and water movement...i guess i can only dream!


On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:24:41 -0500, kryppy > wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 22:01:06 GMT, Joe Cool > wrote:
>
>>Just wondering, do most people do water changes on a schedule or when
>>water test shows it needs it?
>
>
>I find using natural sea water from the shore to work best. 50% change
>every few days and they think they are still in the ocean.
>It is best to use it hours after collecting it. I believe I read the
>phyto begins to die quick for some reason or another.
>I just got another 60 gallon plastic barrel today. Perhaps I will do
>more in the future. It is way cheaper then buying all the supplements
>I question are even proper for our creatures sometimes.
>
>I swear some of the weird things in my tank arrived as larva in the
>water! I have 'glass shrimp?' breeding in my fuge now from this
>weekends collection!! They are growing fast and I wonder if they will
>turn pink and get big enough to eat. :)
>
>Works well for me and my ten year old grouper.
>
>
>

[kryppy]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:55:04 GMT, "PaulB" > wrote:

>Many large Aquaria use this method. Of course, the live plankton can also
>include things like predatory isopods and such.


I have often wondered about filtering it. The guys around here who
service tanks claim to use filtered sea water collected as the tide is
coming in out in a boat...:) I doubt it as my friend uses one of
these guys. I tested the water he brings and found it at 1.020.

I just deal with the bad guys as they show up. Everybody has a
predator.

[kryppy]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 02:14:00 GMT, wrote:

>I always daydream about having a house on the water with a return pipe
>into the ocean ...Just imagine ...no need for water changes or fresh
>water top up no need for a chiller no need for anything exept light
>and water movement...i guess i can only dream!


You and me both. I was just at a restaurant in the Keys. (Paradise) on
Big Pine Key. They had two large ponds in the ground plumbed to the
ocean with two pool pumps.
Very cool wavemaker action. It was dark, but the thee foot nurse shark
and lobsters were quite visible and happy along with a monster tang,
parrot fish and a bunch of other stuff.
Super cool.

[Don Geddis]

wrote on Wed, 01 Dec 2004:
> I always daydream about having a house on the water with a return pipe
> into the ocean ...Just imagine ...no need for water changes or fresh
> water top up no need for a chiller no need for anything exept light
> and water movement...i guess i can only dream!

The Atlantis resort in the Bahamas (Paradise Island) claims to have
"the largest fish tanks in the world". Which really just means artificial
outdoor lagoons, with underwater viewing windows.

But they do just what you suggest: pump in real seawater through the system,
so water chemistry and quality is never an issue.

-- Don
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Don Geddis http://reef.geddis.org/