Mosquitofish Management

[David]

I am still in the conceptual design phase of an indoor/outdoor
combination pond/water garden/aquarium, to be located in a tropical
climate. As you might imagine, this is providing some pretty unique
challenges -- those three worlds are quite well developed in and of
themselves, but I find scant evidence of them being brought together
in the same space. (I am sure for very good reasons, however foolish
people seem to always make life difficult for themselves. <g>)

Aside from all the technical challenges, one that continues to puzzle
me is how to stock this thing. One of the goals of this enterprise is
mosquito management. The koi ponders say that one should avoid
mosquitofish like the plague, because of their proclivity. But I'm
not building a koi pond; I'm building a tropical fish
pond/aquarium/water garden. And furthermore, I would like to have as
large a variety of inhabitants as possible, in a community
environment.

You are now asking yourself, why would I even bother -- I wouldn't be
able to see them anyway. The short answer is a window into the side
of the house. But that's another issue.

So, given all the above, what would you wise people recommend,
1) as a mosquitofish? Gambusia, guppies, ... ?; and
2) how best to manage their population growth? Is there a suitable
predator fish that could control the mosquitofish population, but not
also consume all the other species?

I realize that there is a lot of this that I am just going to have to
find out by trial and error, but I would sure appreciate any early
thoughts from you experts, to at least give me baseline to start from.

Thank you very much,
David

[NetMax]

"David" > wrote in message
...
>I am still in the conceptual design phase of an indoor/outdoor
> combination pond/water garden/aquarium, to be located in a tropical
> climate. As you might imagine, this is providing some pretty unique
> challenges -- those three worlds are quite well developed in and of
> themselves, but I find scant evidence of them being brought together
> in the same space. (I am sure for very good reasons, however foolish
> people seem to always make life difficult for themselves. <g>)
>
> Aside from all the technical challenges, one that continues to puzzle
> me is how to stock this thing. One of the goals of this enterprise is
> mosquito management. The koi ponders say that one should avoid
> mosquitofish like the plague, because of their proclivity. But I'm
> not building a koi pond; I'm building a tropical fish
> pond/aquarium/water garden. And furthermore, I would like to have as
> large a variety of inhabitants as possible, in a community
> environment.
>
> You are now asking yourself, why would I even bother -- I wouldn't be
> able to see them anyway. The short answer is a window into the side
> of the house. But that's another issue.
>
> So, given all the above, what would you wise people recommend,
> 1) as a mosquitofish? Gambusia, guppies, ... ?; and
> 2) how best to manage their population growth? Is there a suitable
> predator fish that could control the mosquitofish population, but not
> also consume all the other species?
>
> I realize that there is a lot of this that I am just going to have to
> find out by trial and error, but I would sure appreciate any early
> thoughts from you experts, to at least give me baseline to start from.
>
> Thank you very much,
> David

I think it's a very good idea to research this, as trial & error in the
environment you are contemplating is very difficult to correct. I
suggest you provide some more specs, such as your water's parameters
(soft or hard), pH (if at an extreme), hottest, coldest and average
ambient temperatures, expected temperature range of the water, what you
are using for turbulence, filtration, re-oxygenation and waste control,
maximum depth, level of aquatic gardening ambition and most importantly,
your threshold for maintenance ;~). You might also want to indicate what
natural wildlife might be expected to visit, such as snakeheads, predator
birds, weasel/rodents, frogs, snakes, alligators.....

I recommend that you avoid Koi as they will severely restrict future
flora/fauna choices, and you had indicated a desire for lots of
diversity.

There are countless fish which feed on insect larvae. Poecilidae
(Gambusia, Guppies etc) are used for their ability to persist in
non-ideal environments (not really applicable to you), and Gambusia (ie:
Nicaraguan) in particular can consume large amounts of mosquito larvae
before showing signs of discomfort (also not really applicable for your
situation).
--
www.NetMax.tk

[David]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:22:03 -0500, "NetMax"
> wrote:

>"David" > wrote in message
...
>>I am still in the conceptual design phase of an indoor/outdoor
>> combination pond/water garden/aquarium, to be located in a tropical
>> climate. As you might imagine, this is providing some pretty unique
>> challenges -- those three worlds are quite well developed in and of
>> themselves, but I find scant evidence of them being brought together
>> in the same space. (I am sure for very good reasons, however foolish
>> people seem to always make life difficult for themselves. <g>)
>>
>> Aside from all the technical challenges, one that continues to puzzle
>> me is how to stock this thing. One of the goals of this enterprise is
>> mosquito management. The koi ponders say that one should avoid
>> mosquitofish like the plague, because of their proclivity. But I'm
>> not building a koi pond; I'm building a tropical fish
>> pond/aquarium/water garden. And furthermore, I would like to have as
>> large a variety of inhabitants as possible, in a community
>> environment.
>>
>> You are now asking yourself, why would I even bother -- I wouldn't be
>> able to see them anyway. The short answer is a window into the side
>> of the house. But that's another issue.
>>
>> So, given all the above, what would you wise people recommend,
>> 1) as a mosquitofish? Gambusia, guppies, ... ?; and
>> 2) how best to manage their population growth? Is there a suitable
>> predator fish that could control the mosquitofish population, but not
>> also consume all the other species?
>>
>> I realize that there is a lot of this that I am just going to have to
>> find out by trial and error, but I would sure appreciate any early
>> thoughts from you experts, to at least give me baseline to start from.
>>
>> Thank you very much,
>> David
>
>I think it's a very good idea to research this, as trial & error in the
>environment you are contemplating is very difficult to correct. I
>suggest you provide some more specs, such as your water's parameters
>(soft or hard), pH (if at an extreme), hottest, coldest and average
>ambient temperatures, expected temperature range of the water, what you
>are using for turbulence, filtration, re-oxygenation and waste control,
>maximum depth, level of aquatic gardening ambition and most importantly,
>your threshold for maintenance ;~). You might also want to indicate what
>natural wildlife might be expected to visit, such as snakeheads, predator
>birds, weasel/rodents, frogs, snakes, alligators.....
>
>I recommend that you avoid Koi as they will severely restrict future
>flora/fauna choices, and you had indicated a desire for lots of
>diversity.
>
>There are countless fish which feed on insect larvae. Poecilidae
>(Gambusia, Guppies etc) are used for their ability to persist in
>non-ideal environments (not really applicable to you), and Gambusia (ie:
>Nicaraguan) in particular can consume large amounts of mosquito larvae
>before showing signs of discomfort (also not really applicable for your
>situation).

Thank you for your reply and interest NetMax. BTW, I have spent a
good bit of time exploring in your website -- you're a champ!

I cannot answer all of your questions precisely, because the site has
not been selected yet -- only the general location: South/Central
Thailand.

My intuitions agree with you fully -- mistakes are going to be
difficult to correct. To provide a little more detail, my concept
thus far is at least a 3-tier pool, headed by a modest fountain and
waterfall, with a waterfall between each pool tier. The bottom pool
would be the largest and deepest -- possibly 5-6' deep. I would have
a "tributary" running off this pool to a bog area with lotus and
waterlilies. I estimate the overall water volume of this project to
be around 4-7000 gallons.

In the large pool I am planning on one or more "SpinDrifter" type
bottom drains, leading off to a vortex settlement chamber. Also would
be a "Savio" type skimmer for debris removal. (I haven't solved the
problems yet of small fish getting sucked in -- but that's another
issue from this thread.) I plan on extensive plant-based
bio-filtration and nitrate conversion. Although plant-based will be
primary, I will back this up with mechanical filtration if necessary.
Re water-gardening and maintenance ambition -- it's all a hobby, so
I'm not too worried; however local labor runs about $5 per day when I
expire...

Re the environment: The ambient temps will run from the low seventies
to the low hundreds, so I suppose the water will median in the
eighties, but that's about the best I can guess right now. Water
hardness, probably medium to on the soft side. pH probably close to
neutral.

Probably a few snakes and frogs. No alligators, racoons, etc.
Anticipate the dogs will keep the predatory birds away.

Re koi, I agree. I prefer lots of plants in the water, and smaller
fish anyway.

Really sorry to be so long-winded, but I don't know how else to cover
the ground...

Thank you very much,
David

[Angrie.Woman]

"NetMax" > wrote in message
.. .
> "David" > wrote in message
> ...

>
> I think it's a very good idea to research this, as trial & error in the
> environment you are contemplating is very difficult to correct. I suggest
> you provide some more specs, such as your water's parameters (soft or
> hard), pH (if at an extreme), hottest, coldest and average ambient
> temperatures, expected temperature range of the water, what you are using
> for turbulence, filtration, re-oxygenation and waste control, maximum
> depth, level of aquatic gardening ambition and most importantly, your
> threshold for maintenance ;~). You might also want to indicate what
> natural wildlife might be expected to visit, such as snakeheads, predator
> birds, weasel/rodents, frogs, snakes, alligators.....
>
>
My response isn't nearly as technical. I had a pond though, and as long as
the water was moving I never had a problem with mosquitos. I had also had 2
GF in it though. Lots of frogs, and birds came to drink...t'was a wonderful
place.

A, sniff.

[NetMax]

"David" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:22:03 -0500, "NetMax"
> > wrote:
>
>>"David" > wrote in message
...
>>>I am still in the conceptual design phase of an indoor/outdoor
>>> combination pond/water garden/aquarium, to be located in a tropical
>>> climate. As you might imagine, this is providing some pretty unique
>>> challenges -- those three worlds are quite well developed in and of
>>> themselves, but I find scant evidence of them being brought together
>>> in the same space. (I am sure for very good reasons, however foolish
>>> people seem to always make life difficult for themselves. <g>)
>>>
>>> Aside from all the technical challenges, one that continues to puzzle
>>> me is how to stock this thing. One of the goals of this enterprise
>>> is
>>> mosquito management. The koi ponders say that one should avoid
>>> mosquitofish like the plague, because of their proclivity. But I'm
>>> not building a koi pond; I'm building a tropical fish
>>> pond/aquarium/water garden. And furthermore, I would like to have as
>>> large a variety of inhabitants as possible, in a community
>>> environment.
>>>
>>> You are now asking yourself, why would I even bother -- I wouldn't be
>>> able to see them anyway. The short answer is a window into the side
>>> of the house. But that's another issue.
>>>
>>> So, given all the above, what would you wise people recommend,
>>> 1) as a mosquitofish? Gambusia, guppies, ... ?; and
>>> 2) how best to manage their population growth? Is there a suitable
>>> predator fish that could control the mosquitofish population, but not
>>> also consume all the other species?
>>>
>>> I realize that there is a lot of this that I am just going to have to
>>> find out by trial and error, but I would sure appreciate any early
>>> thoughts from you experts, to at least give me baseline to start
>>> from.
>>>
>>> Thank you very much,
>>> David
>>
>>I think it's a very good idea to research this, as trial & error in the
>>environment you are contemplating is very difficult to correct. I
>>suggest you provide some more specs, such as your water's parameters
>>(soft or hard), pH (if at an extreme), hottest, coldest and average
>>ambient temperatures, expected temperature range of the water, what you
>>are using for turbulence, filtration, re-oxygenation and waste control,
>>maximum depth, level of aquatic gardening ambition and most
>>importantly,
>>your threshold for maintenance ;~). You might also want to indicate
>>what
>>natural wildlife might be expected to visit, such as snakeheads,
>>predator
>>birds, weasel/rodents, frogs, snakes, alligators.....
>>
>>I recommend that you avoid Koi as they will severely restrict future
>>flora/fauna choices, and you had indicated a desire for lots of
>>diversity.
>>
>>There are countless fish which feed on insect larvae. Poecilidae
>>(Gambusia, Guppies etc) are used for their ability to persist in
>>non-ideal environments (not really applicable to you), and Gambusia
>>(ie:
>>Nicaraguan) in particular can consume large amounts of mosquito larvae
>>before showing signs of discomfort (also not really applicable for your
>>situation).
>
> Thank you for your reply and interest NetMax. BTW, I have spent a
> good bit of time exploring in your website -- you're a champ!
>
> I cannot answer all of your questions precisely, because the site has
> not been selected yet -- only the general location: South/Central
> Thailand.

Excellent location for an extremely wide variety of indigenous fishes,
which is the way I would approach this, unless the project specifications
require non-indigenous varieties.

> My intuitions agree with you fully -- mistakes are going to be
> difficult to correct. To provide a little more detail, my concept
> thus far is at least a 3-tier pool, headed by a modest fountain and
> waterfall, with a waterfall between each pool tier. The bottom pool
> would be the largest and deepest -- possibly 5-6' deep. I would have
> a "tributary" running off this pool to a bog area with lotus and
> waterlilies. I estimate the overall water volume of this project to
> be around 4-7000 gallons.

Typically, waterfalls occur across a threshold of some type of
obstructions (large flat fieldstones most commonly used). Field stones
(or other suitably flat surface) make up the base of the section feeding
the waterfall (typically hiding some type of liner, but giving you a very
flat surface to give the smooth wide waterfall effect). Above the
waterfall crest, fieldstones (or other large pieces of debris such as
driftwood) are often placed, to hide the less than natural flat edge
which produces that smooth wide waterfall. To make the story brief, the
body of water immediately preceding the waterfall does not need to be
connected to the body of water which appears to feed the waterfall
(through the use of these stone/wood elements naturally placed in the
vicinity). You have a pool of water (ie: 3000g) and a small adjacent
section (ie: 500g) which feeds the waterfall. The 500g pool is fed by
filters/pumps draining the 3000g pool. This adresses the problem of
isolating the fish species by pool, and keeping them out of the filters
is conventionally handled. Perhaps you can imagine 3 stone walkways
crossing the edge of the pool near the waterfall. The first walkway is
an inch below the waterline and creates the waterfalls edge. The 2nd
walkway is held above the 1st, and above the water, hiding the artificial
edge. The 3rd walkway extends above the water line, marking where the
500g pool meets the 3000g pool (disguising that they are different bodies
of water).

> In the large pool I am planning on one or more "SpinDrifter" type
> bottom drains, leading off to a vortex settlement chamber. Also would
> be a "Savio" type skimmer for debris removal. (I haven't solved the
> problems yet of small fish getting sucked in -- but that's another
> issue from this thread.) I plan on extensive plant-based
> bio-filtration and nitrate conversion. Although plant-based will be
> primary, I will back this up with mechanical filtration if necessary.
> Re water-gardening and maintenance ambition -- it's all a hobby, so
> I'm not too worried; however local labor runs about $5 per day when I
> expire...

The waterfalls should do an excellent job of re-oxygenation, and with a
controlled fish population, I can see the plants symbiotically matching
the waste (nutrient) production of the fish. Be sure to use a good
variety of plants, including bog type plants which will expand
terrestrially instead of consuming too much space in the water. I see
your filtration being primary mechanical, the removal of mostly floating
debris, and the prevention of fish being accidentally transported from
pool to pool. This would be achieved with a series of easily inspected
and serviced grids in diminishing screen sizes. Conceptually, I would
design the system to have a single pump feeding the top from the bottom.
Each filter chamber feeding a lower pool would use oversize piping (to
minimize flow restriction) and would need a well-thought out filter grid
(also to minimize the potential of restriction). This would result in
the waterfall pool (ie: 500g) being a few inches below the feeding pool
(ie:3000g), but the 3rd walkway of field stones could be made wide enough
(and using other elements of plants and wood) to disguise this fact. A
single pump would also use the least amount of electricity (an expensive
commodity in Thailand?) and be the most simplified system to maintain
(rather than balancing multiple pumps with varying degrees of
obstructions).

> Re the environment: The ambient temps will run from the low seventies
> to the low hundreds, so I suppose the water will median in the
> eighties, but that's about the best I can guess right now. Water
> hardness, probably medium to on the soft side. pH probably close to
> neutral.

Certainly no issues there. With a controlled fish load, I would expect
the water's variability to remain well within the fish's requirements.
If the fish load were to be uncontrolled, then water parameter changes
(ie: sudden softening during their rainy season) would cause stress,
which can sometimes cause a chain reaction (a few dead fish,
decomposition feeds something else, which preys on weakened fish, which
causes a few more to die etc etc).

> Probably a few snakes and frogs. No alligators, racoons, etc.
> Anticipate the dogs will keep the predatory birds away.
>
> Re koi, I agree. I prefer lots of plants in the water, and smaller
> fish anyway.
>
> Really sorry to be so long-winded, but I don't know how else to cover
> the ground...

LOL, being long-winded is something I have plenty of personal experience
with ;~)

Before continuing on a conceptual stocking plan, which pool has the glass
interface, what is its depth and what are the elements you want to
emphasize here (black water pool, mangrove estuary, fast open riverine,
etc)?

I think this might be a good time to introduce you to
http://www.mongabay.com/fish/preface.htm, specifically the biotope
sections, such as
http://www.mongabay.com/fish/data/ecosystem_index.htm
and peruse the south east Asian, Burmese and Indian sections.
--
www.NetMax.tk

> Thank you very much,
> David

[David]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:28:16 -0500, "NetMax"
> wrote:


>> I cannot answer all of your questions precisely, because the site has
>> not been selected yet -- only the general location: South/Central
>> Thailand.
>
>Excellent location for an extremely wide variety of indigenous fishes,
>which is the way I would approach this, unless the project specifications
>require non-indigenous varieties.
>
I fully agree to stick with the indigenous fishes. The variety
available at the Bangkok "tropical fishmarket" is, for me, a novice,
completely astounding, without non-indigenous help.

>> To provide a little more detail, my concept
>> thus far is at least a 3-tier pool, headed by a modest fountain and
>> waterfall, with a waterfall between each pool tier. The bottom pool
>> would be the largest and deepest -- possibly 5-6' deep. I would have
>> a "tributary" running off this pool to a bog area with lotus and
>> waterlilies. I estimate the overall water volume of this project to
>> be around 4-7000 gallons.
>
>Typically, waterfalls occur across a threshold of some type of
>obstructions (large flat fieldstones most commonly used). Field stones
>(or other suitably flat surface) make up the base of the section feeding
>the waterfall (typically hiding some type of liner, but giving you a very
>flat surface to give the smooth wide waterfall effect). Above the
>waterfall crest, fieldstones (or other large pieces of debris such as
>driftwood) are often placed, to hide the less than natural flat edge
>which produces that smooth wide waterfall.

I like this idea! I have seen this effect before, but hadn't yet
thought how to create it.

>To make the story brief, the
>body of water immediately preceding the waterfall does not need to be
>connected to the body of water which appears to feed the waterfall
>(through the use of these stone/wood elements naturally placed in the
>vicinity). You have a pool of water (ie: 3000g) and a small adjacent
>section (ie: 500g) which feeds the waterfall. The 500g pool is fed by
>filters/pumps draining the 3000g pool. This adresses the problem of
>isolating the fish species by pool, and keeping them out of the filters
>is conventionally handled.

I like where you are going with this, however the concept it is not
completely clear to me.
1) If filters would be required to keep the fish and debris from
entering the 500g, what would they achieve differently than instead
just placing these same filters between the 3000g and the waterfall?
2) Would a weir work in here, to allow a fixed height of water to
flow down into the 500g, (or to the waterfall)? This would avoid the
need for adding an additional pump -- but then do fish just swim over
weirs?

> Perhaps you can imagine 3 stone walkways
>crossing the edge of the pool near the waterfall. The first walkway is
>an inch below the waterline and creates the waterfalls edge. The 2nd
>walkway is held above the 1st, and above the water, hiding the artificial
>edge. The 3rd walkway extends above the water line, marking where the
>500g pool meets the 3000g pool (disguising that they are different bodies
>of water).

OK, I think I am picturing the the first two walkways well enough, but
not the third. Is it to be on top of the other two?
>
>> In the large pool I am planning on one or more "SpinDrifter" type
>> bottom drains, leading off to a vortex settlement chamber. Also would
>> be a "Savio" type skimmer for debris removal. (I haven't solved the
>> problems yet of small fish getting sucked in -- but that's another
>> issue from this thread.) I plan on extensive plant-based
>> bio-filtration and nitrate conversion. Although plant-based will be
>> primary, I will back this up with mechanical filtration if necessary.
>> Re water-gardening and maintenance ambition -- it's all a hobby, so
>> I'm not too worried; however local labor runs about $5 per day when I
>> expire...
>
>The waterfalls should do an excellent job of re-oxygenation, and with a
>controlled fish population, I can see the plants symbiotically matching
>the waste (nutrient) production of the fish. Be sure to use a good
>variety of plants, including bog type plants which will expand
>terrestrially instead of consuming too much space in the water. I see
>your filtration being primary mechanical, the removal of mostly floating
>debris, and the prevention of fish being accidentally transported from
>pool to pool. This would be achieved with a series of easily inspected
>and serviced grids in diminishing screen sizes.

I follow your thinking here -- that is one that I was struggling with!
Some of the koi folks use a set of "brushes" as part of a mechanical
filter. I am thinking that this might work as the first level of the
grid, to catch the big stuff -- leaves, etc.?

>Conceptually, I would
>design the system to have a single pump feeding the top from the bottom.
>Each filter chamber feeding a lower pool would use oversize piping (to
>minimize flow restriction) and would need a well-thought out filter grid
>(also to minimize the potential of restriction). This would result in
>the waterfall pool (ie: 500g) being a few inches below the feeding pool
>(ie:3000g), but the 3rd walkway of field stones could be made wide enough
>(and using other elements of plants and wood) to disguise this fact. A
>single pump would also use the least amount of electricity (an expensive
>commodity in Thailand?) and be the most simplified system to maintain
>(rather than balancing multiple pumps with varying degrees of
>obstructions).

I fully agree with all the above -- a gravity fed system leading down
to a single pump. Oversize piping, yes. The "well-thought out filter
grid", coupled with a plant-based bio-converter, while minimizing
daily maintenance, is where I still need to do a lot of
"well-thinking". The costs of electricity are not so bad, but there
is a problem of power outages.
>
>> Re the environment: The ambient temps will run from the low seventies
>> to the low hundreds, so I suppose the water will median in the
>> eighties, but that's about the best I can guess right now. Water
>> hardness, probably medium to on the soft side. pH probably close to
>> neutral.
>
>Certainly no issues there. With a controlled fish load, I would expect
>the water's variability to remain well within the fish's requirements.
>If the fish load were to be uncontrolled, then water parameter changes
>(ie: sudden softening during their rainy season) would cause stress,
>which can sometimes cause a chain reaction (a few dead fish,
>decomposition feeds something else, which preys on weakened fish, which
>causes a few more to die etc etc).
>
>> Probably a few snakes and frogs. No alligators, racoons, etc.
>> Anticipate the dogs will keep the predatory birds away.
>>
>> Re koi, I agree. I prefer lots of plants in the water, and smaller
>> fish anyway.
>>

>
>Before continuing on a conceptual stocking plan, which pool has the glass
>interface, what is its depth and what are the elements you want to
>emphasize here (black water pool, mangrove estuary, fast open riverine,
>etc)?
>
The large bottom pool will have the glass window. Actually, I am
thinking of perhaps three rectangular windows, staggered, so that one
can view what is going on in the top, middle, and bottom strata of
the pool. The depth would be 5-6' feet. However, both of these
really depend upon "where the interesting things are to look at". And
this what I really just don't have much feeling for. Maybe there won't
be anything interesting to look at, at 5-6'?? (I will design this
pool so to maximize the interest from the side). (Whereas everything
else in the project will be designed so to maximize the view from the
top.)

>I think this might be a good time to introduce you to
>http://www.mongabay.com/fish/preface.htm, specifically the biotope
>sections, such as
>http://www.mongabay.com/fish/data/ecosystem_index.htm
>and peruse the south east Asian, Burmese and Indian sections.

I have spent some time at the Mongabay site. Very interesting. I am
again humbled by how much I have yet to learn. After a good bit of
thought, I am afraid that I am not yet sufficiently sophisticated to
really appreciate a "biotope-optimized" design. My intuition tells me
that this comes later, after one has lived in the tropical fish world
for a while. Like you have. I realize that this probably sounds like
heresy, but right now I think that for me, and for my family,
optimization toward the largest variety of fish and plant life
possible would provide the greatest level of interest. However, I'll
just bet that interest in biotope-optimization will follow, later,
naturally, but a bit further downstream...

Again, sorry for being so long-winded; and thank you so much for your
time and interest.

David

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
For email, please eeliminate the threee dubbel-ewes in:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~

[David]

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 17:45:28 GMT, "Angrie.Woman"
> wrote:

>My response isn't nearly as technical. I had a pond though, and as long as
>the water was moving I never had a problem with mosquitos. I had also had 2
>GF in it though. Lots of frogs, and birds came to drink...t'was a wonderful
>place.
>
>A, sniff.
>
Hi Angrie,
My problem won't be with the mozzies *in* the water, it is with the
mozzies *out* of the water. The idea is to con them into going to the
pond to lay their eggs, the fry of which will be (hopefully) consumed,
thereby depleting the reproductivity of the local mozzie population.
Mozzie demographics of a sort <g>

[NetMax]

"David" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:28:16 -0500, "NetMax"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>> I cannot answer all of your questions precisely, because the site has
>>> not been selected yet -- only the general location: South/Central
>>> Thailand.
>>
>>Excellent location for an extremely wide variety of indigenous fishes,
>>which is the way I would approach this, unless the project
>>specifications
>>require non-indigenous varieties.
>>
> I fully agree to stick with the indigenous fishes. The variety
> available at the Bangkok "tropical fishmarket" is, for me, a novice,
> completely astounding, without non-indigenous help.
>
>>> To provide a little more detail, my concept
>>> thus far is at least a 3-tier pool, headed by a modest fountain and
>>> waterfall, with a waterfall between each pool tier. The bottom pool
>>> would be the largest and deepest -- possibly 5-6' deep. I would have
>>> a "tributary" running off this pool to a bog area with lotus and
>>> waterlilies. I estimate the overall water volume of this project to
>>> be around 4-7000 gallons.
>>
>>Typically, waterfalls occur across a threshold of some type of
>>obstructions (large flat fieldstones most commonly used). Field stones
>>(or other suitably flat surface) make up the base of the section
>>feeding
>>the waterfall (typically hiding some type of liner, but giving you a
>>very
>>flat surface to give the smooth wide waterfall effect). Above the
>>waterfall crest, fieldstones (or other large pieces of debris such as
>>driftwood) are often placed, to hide the less than natural flat edge
>>which produces that smooth wide waterfall.
>
> I like this idea! I have seen this effect before, but hadn't yet
> thought how to create it.
>
>>To make the story brief, the
>>body of water immediately preceding the waterfall does not need to be
>>connected to the body of water which appears to feed the waterfall
>>(through the use of these stone/wood elements naturally placed in the
>>vicinity). You have a pool of water (ie: 3000g) and a small adjacent
>>section (ie: 500g) which feeds the waterfall. The 500g pool is fed by
>>filters/pumps draining the 3000g pool. This adresses the problem of
>>isolating the fish species by pool, and keeping them out of the filters
>>is conventionally handled.
>
> I like where you are going with this, however the concept it is not
> completely clear to me.
> 1) If filters would be required to keep the fish and debris from
> entering the 500g, what would they achieve differently than instead
> just placing these same filters between the 3000g and the waterfall?
> 2) Would a weir work in here, to allow a fixed height of water to
> flow down into the 500g, (or to the waterfall)? This would avoid the
> need for adding an additional pump -- but then do fish just swim over
> weirs?
>
>> Perhaps you can imagine 3 stone walkways
>>crossing the edge of the pool near the waterfall. The first walkway is
>>an inch below the waterline and creates the waterfalls edge. The 2nd
>>walkway is held above the 1st, and above the water, hiding the
>>artificial
>>edge. The 3rd walkway extends above the water line, marking where the
>>500g pool meets the 3000g pool (disguising that they are different
>>bodies
>>of water).
>
> OK, I think I am picturing the the first two walkways well enough, but
> not the third. Is it to be on top of the other two?

The 3rd sits on top of the edge of the 300g and the 500g, hiding the fact
that they are 2 seperate containers.

>>> In the large pool I am planning on one or more "SpinDrifter" type
>>> bottom drains, leading off to a vortex settlement chamber. Also
>>> would
>>> be a "Savio" type skimmer for debris removal. (I haven't solved the
>>> problems yet of small fish getting sucked in -- but that's another
>>> issue from this thread.) I plan on extensive plant-based
>>> bio-filtration and nitrate conversion. Although plant-based will be
>>> primary, I will back this up with mechanical filtration if necessary.
>>> Re water-gardening and maintenance ambition -- it's all a hobby, so
>>> I'm not too worried; however local labor runs about $5 per day when I
>>> expire...
>>
>>The waterfalls should do an excellent job of re-oxygenation, and with a
>>controlled fish population, I can see the plants symbiotically matching
>>the waste (nutrient) production of the fish. Be sure to use a good
>>variety of plants, including bog type plants which will expand
>>terrestrially instead of consuming too much space in the water. I see
>>your filtration being primary mechanical, the removal of mostly
>>floating
>>debris, and the prevention of fish being accidentally transported from
>>pool to pool. This would be achieved with a series of easily inspected
>>and serviced grids in diminishing screen sizes.
>
> I follow your thinking here -- that is one that I was struggling with!
> Some of the koi folks use a set of "brushes" as part of a mechanical
> filter. I am thinking that this might work as the first level of the
> grid, to catch the big stuff -- leaves, etc.?

Yes, however in your stocking plan you have to allow expansion by fry
(which will get past your mechanical filters), so to allow this without
messing everything up, your more predatory fish will be in the lower
levels. These larger fish will also be easier to trap into the lower
level and not be pumped upstairs.

>>Conceptually, I would
>>design the system to have a single pump feeding the top from the
>>bottom.
>>Each filter chamber feeding a lower pool would use oversize piping (to
>>minimize flow restriction) and would need a well-thought out filter
>>grid
>>(also to minimize the potential of restriction). This would result in
>>the waterfall pool (ie: 500g) being a few inches below the feeding pool
>>(ie:3000g), but the 3rd walkway of field stones could be made wide
>>enough
>>(and using other elements of plants and wood) to disguise this fact. A
>>single pump would also use the least amount of electricity (an
>>expensive
>>commodity in Thailand?) and be the most simplified system to maintain
>>(rather than balancing multiple pumps with varying degrees of
>>obstructions).
>
> I fully agree with all the above -- a gravity fed system leading down
> to a single pump. Oversize piping, yes. The "well-thought out filter
> grid", coupled with a plant-based bio-converter, while minimizing
> daily maintenance, is where I still need to do a lot of
> "well-thinking". The costs of electricity are not so bad, but there
> is a problem of power outages.

In an outage, the 500g would drain to the level of the waterfall rim,
taking the 3000g down to the same level. Your lowest level will need to
have sufficient extra capacity to hold the levelling of all the ponds
above, or if water is cheap, let it run off. I recommend a combination
of the two, as cyclical fills are more easily handled through reserve
storage (no worries about losing fish), and seasonal fills will need to
be accomodated by release.

>>> Re the environment: The ambient temps will run from the low
>>> seventies
>>> to the low hundreds, so I suppose the water will median in the
>>> eighties, but that's about the best I can guess right now. Water
>>> hardness, probably medium to on the soft side. pH probably close to
>>> neutral.
>>
>>Certainly no issues there. With a controlled fish load, I would expect
>>the water's variability to remain well within the fish's requirements.
>>If the fish load were to be uncontrolled, then water parameter changes
>>(ie: sudden softening during their rainy season) would cause stress,
>>which can sometimes cause a chain reaction (a few dead fish,
>>decomposition feeds something else, which preys on weakened fish, which
>>causes a few more to die etc etc).
>>
>>> Probably a few snakes and frogs. No alligators, racoons, etc.
>>> Anticipate the dogs will keep the predatory birds away.
>>>
>>> Re koi, I agree. I prefer lots of plants in the water, and smaller
>>> fish anyway.
>>>
>
>>
>>Before continuing on a conceptual stocking plan, which pool has the
>>glass
>>interface, what is its depth and what are the elements you want to
>>emphasize here (black water pool, mangrove estuary, fast open riverine,
>>etc)?
>>
> The large bottom pool will have the glass window. Actually, I am
> thinking of perhaps three rectangular windows, staggered, so that one
> can view what is going on in the top, middle, and bottom strata of
> the pool. The depth would be 5-6' feet. However, both of these
> really depend upon "where the interesting things are to look at". And
> this what I really just don't have much feeling for. Maybe there won't
> be anything interesting to look at, at 5-6'?? (I will design this
> pool so to maximize the interest from the side). (Whereas everything
> else in the project will be designed so to maximize the view from the
> top.)

Here you will be severely limited by physics and the expense/availability
of the material (glass, acrylic etc) which will be holding back the
water. A structural engineer will have lots of fun designing this.
Windows across the first 36" depth will be fairly conventional, but
beyond that, and all sorts of challenges need to be adressed.

>>I think this might be a good time to introduce you to
>>http://www.mongabay.com/fish/preface.htm, specifically the biotope
>>sections, such as
>>http://www.mongabay.com/fish/data/ecosystem_index.htm
>>and peruse the south east Asian, Burmese and Indian sections.
>
> I have spent some time at the Mongabay site. Very interesting. I am
> again humbled by how much I have yet to learn. After a good bit of
> thought, I am afraid that I am not yet sufficiently sophisticated to
> really appreciate a "biotope-optimized" design. My intuition tells me
> that this comes later, after one has lived in the tropical fish world
> for a while. Like you have. I realize that this probably sounds like
> heresy, but right now I think that for me, and for my family,
> optimization toward the largest variety of fish and plant life
> possible would provide the greatest level of interest. However, I'll
> just bet that interest in biotope-optimization will follow, later,
> naturally, but a bit further downstream...

LOL, your familiarity with biotopes will make this easier to explain
then. You are misunderstanding something. In a small tank, adhering to
a biotope (a naturally existing grouping of fish, plants, materials and
organisms) requires extra effort and can be problematic. This phenomenon
(effort & difficulty probability) decreases as the body of water grows
larger (approaching the natural equilibrium of that biotope's evolution).
At a certain volume, the phenomenon reverses itself, and it requires
*more* effort and is *more* problematic to NOT adhere to a biotope's
natural grouping. I think that in your application, and in the locale
being considered, the easiest approach would be to select 3 naturally
occuring biotopes (which fall into your geographical and environment
range), and try to follow them. This will simplify collection, research
into requirements, reconstruction and maintenance, all the while using
flora/fauna which are completely familiar to the locals. The local fish
have evolved to spawning in the local plants, which have evolved to the
local water conditions caused by the local substrates and minerals. All
these have evolved to deal with the local weather (sunlight intensity,
duration, seasonal changes such as rainfall dilution etc etc). I think
this will be your path of least resistance.

This is not to say that you need to be fervent about adhering to the
biotope. I'm no purist either. Selectively plan where and what foreign
bodies will be added. Brazilian Amazon chain swords will more than
adequately match one of your biotopes, but something like Egeria densa or
species of Anacharis could be disasterous in that environment. Keeping
to local flavours reduces the risk and the research required. I'm trying
to make your life easier :o). Also note that if you were to manage a
100% compliance, the government might subsidize some aspect of the
operation ;~).

> Again, sorry for being so long-winded; and thank you so much for your
> time and interest.
>
> David

I'm enjoying the discourse, and maybe even a few others are following
along as well.
--
www.NetMax.tk

[David]

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:21:12 -0500, "NetMax"
> wrote:
>
>Yes, however in your stocking plan you have to allow expansion by fry
>(which will get past your mechanical filters), so to allow this without
>messing everything up, your more predatory fish will be in the lower
>levels. These larger fish will also be easier to trap into the lower
>level and not be pumped upstairs.
>
I understand by "lower levels" that you mean the lower ponds, right?
(Not the lower strata within an individual pond?) If so, then your
idea sure seems reasonable to me. So then maybe this requires a
design rethink? If the bottom pool will become the chamber of
ichthyophagous terror (sorry -- bad, bad !!<g>), then maybe that is
not the best pool for the side windows? Perhaps one of the higher
level pools, where life is more serene and harmonious? (I clearly
don't know what I am talking about -- I really don't have any feeling
for what the environment might be like in this bottom pool.) For
example, how large are you thinking in your mind's eye when you say,
"these larger fish"?

>In an outage, the 500g would drain to the level of the waterfall rim,
>taking the 3000g down to the same level. Your lowest level will need to
>have sufficient extra capacity to hold the levelling of all the ponds
>above, or if water is cheap, let it run off. I recommend a combination
>of the two, as cyclical fills are more easily handled through reserve
>storage (no worries about losing fish), and seasonal fills will need to
>be accomodated by release.
>
I am OK on the first sentence, and agree fully. But could you please
expand on your second?

>Here you will be severely limited by physics and the expense/availability
>of the material (glass, acrylic etc) which will be holding back the
>water. A structural engineer will have lots of fun designing this.
>Windows across the first 36" depth will be fairly conventional, but
>beyond that, and all sorts of challenges need to be adressed.

I am not too uncomfortable with the physical design aspects, as I am
an engineer, but I am way out of my element regarding what goes on
*inside* the pools.
>
>LOL, your familiarity with biotopes will make this easier to explain
>then. You are misunderstanding something. In a small tank, adhering to
>a biotope (a naturally existing grouping of fish, plants, materials and
>organisms) requires extra effort and can be problematic. This phenomenon
>(effort & difficulty probability) decreases as the body of water grows
>larger (approaching the natural equilibrium of that biotope's evolution).
>At a certain volume, the phenomenon reverses itself, and it requires
>*more* effort and is *more* problematic to NOT adhere to a biotope's
>natural grouping. I think that in your application, and in the locale
>being considered, the easiest approach would be to select 3 naturally
>occuring biotopes (which fall into your geographical and environment
>range), and try to follow them. This will simplify collection, research
>into requirements, reconstruction and maintenance, all the while using
>flora/fauna which are completely familiar to the locals. The local fish
>have evolved to spawning in the local plants, which have evolved to the
>local water conditions caused by the local substrates and minerals. All
>these have evolved to deal with the local weather (sunlight intensity,
>duration, seasonal changes such as rainfall dilution etc etc). I think
>this will be your path of least resistance.

You have convinced me! One issue that I'm wondering about though, is
that most of the water in that region, (except for mountain creeks and
streams), is muddy, silty, and opaque. Not being a customary design
goal for aquaria, how will this impact the fish and plants in a
simulated biotope?
>
>This is not to say that you need to be fervent about adhering to the
>biotope. I'm no purist either. Selectively plan where and what foreign
>bodies will be added. Brazilian Amazon chain swords will more than
>adequately match one of your biotopes, but something like Egeria densa or
>species of Anacharis could be disasterous in that environment. Keeping
>to local flavours reduces the risk and the research required. I'm trying
>to make your life easier :o).

Thank you! I think I am understanding that you are saying that the
best thing for me to do regarding a stocking plan, (at least an
initial one), is to study and select from only the regional biotopal
species as identified in, for example, the Mongabay site. And then,
if desired, think about including specifically compatible foreign
species later.(?)

>Also note that if you were to manage a
>100% compliance, the government might subsidize some aspect of the
>operation ;~).

I'll look into that..... <g>

BTW, I am in the process of making contact with a local breeder farm
outside of Bangkok, which should hopefully be able to add a little
enlightenment to the subject....
>
>> Again, sorry for being so long-winded; and thank you so much for your
>> time and interest.
>>
>> David

[NetMax]

"David" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:21:12 -0500, "NetMax"
> > wrote:
>>
>>Yes, however in your stocking plan you have to allow expansion by fry
>>(which will get past your mechanical filters), so to allow this without
>>messing everything up, your more predatory fish will be in the lower
>>levels. These larger fish will also be easier to trap into the lower
>>level and not be pumped upstairs.
>>
> I understand by "lower levels" that you mean the lower ponds, right?
> (Not the lower strata within an individual pond?) If so, then your
> idea sure seems reasonable to me. So then maybe this requires a
> design rethink? If the bottom pool will become the chamber of
> ichthyophagous terror (sorry -- bad, bad !!<g>), then maybe that is
> not the best pool for the side windows? Perhaps one of the higher
> level pools, where life is more serene and harmonious? (I clearly
> don't know what I am talking about -- I really don't have any feeling
> for what the environment might be like in this bottom pool.) For
> example, how large are you thinking in your mind's eye when you say,
> "these larger fish"?

Lower levels does indeed mean lower ponds. Regarding larger fish, I was
thinking about the 5" to 9" range. In a pond, small fish are not very
.... impressive, unless you have millions of them, so for optimal viewing
purposes, your window would be located where you have fish which can be
easily seen several feet into the depths of the pond. Also you do not
need big carnivores, only fast efficient carnivores, such as Monos (I
think they are called Moon fish or Finger fish in Thailand) or various
shark (are ID sharks native?) and cat species (I can't recall which are
native to that area, but something of the size and disposition of
Pimoledellas). Every region has its successful high speed hunters.

>>In an outage, the 500g would drain to the level of the waterfall rim,
>>taking the 3000g down to the same level. Your lowest level will need
>>to
>>have sufficient extra capacity to hold the levelling of all the ponds
>>above, or if water is cheap, let it run off. I recommend a combination
>>of the two, as cyclical fills are more easily handled through reserve
>>storage (no worries about losing fish), and seasonal fills will need to
>>be accomodated by release.
>>
> I am OK on the first sentence, and agree fully. But could you please
> expand on your second?

Sure, when the pump stop (power outage) each pond will level to the
lowest point of the waterfall crest, so the level in the lowest pond will
go up, so the water capacity of the lowest pond should be greater than
where the waterline is normally kept. When you have a cyclical event
(power failure, rainfall) the lower pond fills to the brim. When you
have a seasonal event (deluge during the rainy season), the lower pond
might overflow, so design it to overflow in a controlled manner. The
upper ponds would normally be capable of handling torrential rainfall by
topping the weir between the 300g and the waterfall 500g. Ideally, you
arrange it so that during any event, you do not lose any fish, but in the
case of a disasterous torrential rainfall, it is better to provide safe
run-off capability, than to have the structure damaged.

>>Here you will be severely limited by physics and the
>>expense/availability
>>of the material (glass, acrylic etc) which will be holding back the
>>water. A structural engineer will have lots of fun designing this.
>>Windows across the first 36" depth will be fairly conventional, but
>>beyond that, and all sorts of challenges need to be adressed.
>
> I am not too uncomfortable with the physical design aspects, as I am
> an engineer, but I am way out of my element regarding what goes on
> *inside* the pools.

Being an engineer will certainly allow you to seek the right people and
evaluate their findings. The glass gets real thick and expensive as you
go deeper.

>>LOL, your familiarity with biotopes will make this easier to explain
>>then. You are misunderstanding something. In a small tank, adhering
>>to
>>a biotope (a naturally existing grouping of fish, plants, materials and
>>organisms) requires extra effort and can be problematic. This
>>phenomenon
>>(effort & difficulty probability) decreases as the body of water grows
>>larger (approaching the natural equilibrium of that biotope's
>>evolution).
>>At a certain volume, the phenomenon reverses itself, and it requires
>>*more* effort and is *more* problematic to NOT adhere to a biotope's
>>natural grouping. I think that in your application, and in the locale
>>being considered, the easiest approach would be to select 3 naturally
>>occuring biotopes (which fall into your geographical and environment
>>range), and try to follow them. This will simplify collection,
>>research
>>into requirements, reconstruction and maintenance, all the while using
>>flora/fauna which are completely familiar to the locals. The local
>>fish
>>have evolved to spawning in the local plants, which have evolved to the
>>local water conditions caused by the local substrates and minerals.
>>All
>>these have evolved to deal with the local weather (sunlight intensity,
>>duration, seasonal changes such as rainfall dilution etc etc). I think
>>this will be your path of least resistance.
>
> You have convinced me! One issue that I'm wondering about though, is
> that most of the water in that region, (except for mountain creeks and
> streams), is muddy, silty, and opaque. Not being a customary design
> goal for aquaria, how will this impact the fish and plants in a
> simulated biotope?

Same problem found at the public aquariums and our own tanks. It will
certainly impact many things, which can be somewhat artificially
compensated for. For example, in any biotope, clear water favours
predators, so to compensate add elements with small ingress (tree root
ball) at a higher concentration than would normally be found. For
substrate, duplicate the muddy silt in a small area (bordered by some
type of retaining wall). This will allow some/most of the spawning
rituals, which is your concern. Another ritual associated with the
specialized substrate is feeding, but you are providing that
artificially. Another ritual (or more properly behaviour) is shelter,
and the fish will compensate for that themselves, utilizing alternate
shelters provided (rocks, wood, plants etc). You will also find that the
depths plants will grow at, will be improved, but plants are remarkably
fast at compensating for conditions, if they have enough nutrients, CO2
and light to fuel them.

>>
>>This is not to say that you need to be fervent about adhering to the
>>biotope. I'm no purist either. Selectively plan where and what
>>foreign
>>bodies will be added. Brazilian Amazon chain swords will more than
>>adequately match one of your biotopes, but something like Egeria densa
>>or
>>species of Anacharis could be disasterous in that environment. Keeping
>>to local flavours reduces the risk and the research required. I'm
>>trying
>>to make your life easier :o).
>
> Thank you! I think I am understanding that you are saying that the
> best thing for me to do regarding a stocking plan, (at least an
> initial one), is to study and select from only the regional biotopal
> species as identified in, for example, the Mongabay site. And then,
> if desired, think about including specifically compatible foreign
> species later.(?)

Yup.

>>Also note that if you were to manage a
>>100% compliance, the government might subsidize some aspect of the
>>operation ;~).
>
> I'll look into that..... <g>
>
> BTW, I am in the process of making contact with a local breeder farm
> outside of Bangkok, which should hopefully be able to add a little
> enlightenment to the subject....

There are several other aspects which come to mind, such as underwater
lighting, shallow sections with stone pathways to bring visitors into the
environment, selecting fish which have a greater presence at the water's
surface such as Archers, Gouramis,... and disease control (unfortunately
this is a big one, and the quantity of quarantine tanks will be
interesting). The last thing you need is to have a mature population
(which would be worth a small fortune), devastated by a fast acting
bacterial infection brought in from one of the fish farms. The volumes
of water we are discussing are generally beyond the practical expense of
medicating (especially for bacteria).

An interesting project to be sure, with plenty of design challenges.
Don't hesitate to post questions. I can monopolize a thread with my own
long-windedness ;~), but there really are lots of experts in this
newsgroup able to assist you.
--
www.NetMax.tk

>>
>>> Again, sorry for being so long-winded; and thank you so much for your
>>> time and interest.
>>>
>>> David
>