No water changes for one year

[Bob Wennerstrom]

I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen
right after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover
stuff and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment
beginning last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I
have had zero fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the
filter every couple weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every
3 months. No UGF.

So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the
fish are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water
quality is and how important water changes are yet I get good results
for a whole year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up
for evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?

Comments?

[[email protected]]

I had a related question. I bought a HOB (wisper) filter the other day,
and on the box it claimed to remove nitrates from the water. I was
under the impression that nitrates could only be removed by water
changes, plants, or de-nitrification (usually in the substrate). Any
thoughts?

[dfreas]

My guess would be that the bio wheel on your filter has enough greenery
growing on it to eat the nitrates produced in your tank. Also a good
amount could be growing in the tank and getting eaten by the pl*co.
Something is eating it - I seriously doubt that a year's worth of
nitrate buildup is just sitting in your tank with no bad effects on
anything.

Be careful with your tank! It's nice to have a balanced setup and not
have to work to keep fish...don't mess it up by disturbing the balance
too much! Good job - and good luck.

-Daniel

[Elaine T]

Bob Wennerstrom wrote:
> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
> plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen
> right after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover
> stuff and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment
> beginning last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I
> have had zero fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the
> filter every couple weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every
> 3 months. No UGF.
>
> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the
> fish are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water
> quality is and how important water changes are yet I get good results
> for a whole year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up
> for evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
> Comments?

The only way to know what is happening is to test the water. Anything
else is mere speculation. Perhaps your LFS could do a nitrate test so
you don't have to buy the whole kit if you don't want to.

--
__ Elaine T __
><__'> http://eethomp.com/fish.html <'__><

[Richard Sexton]

In article om>,
> wrote:
>I had a related question. I bought a HOB (wisper) filter the other day,
>and on the box it claimed to remove nitrates from the water. I was
>under the impression that nitrates could only be removed by water
>changes, plants, or de-nitrification (usually in the substrate). Any
>thoughts?
>

Bacterial will do this:


NH3 --> NO2 --> NO3 --> N2

that is, they'll convert ammonia from waste form fish into atmospheric
nitrogen. But, only in the presence of plenty of oxygen.

Plants will use up ammonia, and nitrates (which they convert to
ammonia first, except crypts that canuse nitrate directly) as
well of course.

--
Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org

[[email protected]]

Richard Sexton wrote:
> In article om>,
> > wrote:
> >[snip]I was under the impression that nitrates could only
> >be removed by water changes, plants, or de-nitrification
> >(usually in the substrate). Any thoughts?

That's right.

> [Bacteria] will do this:
>
> NH3 --> NO2 --> NO3 --> N2
>
> that is, they'll convert ammonia [***] into atmospheric
> nitrogen. But, only in the presence of plenty of oxygen.

Note that the steps of this oxidation are performed by different types
of bacteria.

The steps up to NO3 require O2.

The N03 --> N2 step is *anaerobic*. It is an example of true anaerobic
respiration. The principle is like aerobic respiration, but something
other than oxygen is used as an electron acceptor. Googling the
details is left as an exercise for the curious.

To the extent that the anaerobes have a strict requirement to be
delivered NO3 for their anaerobic respiratory process to create N2, and
that such NO3 arrives only by dint of some aerobic steps, it is proper
to say that ammonia->N2 requires oxygen. However, the actual step
producing N2 does not rely on oxygen directly.

> [***]

--Trapper

[Andy Hill]

Bob Wennerstrom <nospam> wrote:
>I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
>plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen
>right after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover
>stuff and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment
>beginning last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I
>have had zero fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the
>filter every couple weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every
>3 months. No UGF.
>
>So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the
>fish are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water
>quality is and how important water changes are yet I get good results
>for a whole year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up
>for evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
>Comments?
>
Freshwater fish can tolerate very high nitrate levels if they're allowed to
gradually adjust. That's probably what you've got going on, although it's
impossible to tell without a water test. God help any new fish you add.

Google on "old tank syndrome". Since it sounds like you're doing zero gravel
cleanings too, OTS is in your future. Not if, but when.

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
...
> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
> plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen right
> after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover stuff
> and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment beginning
> last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I have had zero
> fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the filter every couple
> weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every 3 months. No UGF.
>
> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the fish
> are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water quality is
> and how important water changes are yet I get good results for a whole
> year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up for
> evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
> Comments?

interesting you should bring this up.

i've got one of the lab instructors over in the biology department running
an experiment of the exact same nature. the set up is three non-planted 10
gallon tanks; one with no water changes; one with weekly water changes;
another with bi-monthly water changes. when and if we ever write it up i'll
be sure to follow up here and let everyone know the results. (i would be
more forthcoming with information on it now except i'm not the one
monitoring them.)

tedd.


--
I believe everything exists; unicorns do not exist.

[NetMax]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>I had a related question. I bought a HOB (wisper) filter the other day,
> and on the box it claimed to remove nitrates from the water. I was
> under the impression that nitrates could only be removed by water
> changes, plants, or de-nitrification (usually in the substrate). Any
> thoughts?


I find that in scientific circles, it's more important for the question
to be precise, rather than to get the correct answer which might mislead
you.

The correct question (imho) would be:
Is the amount of NO3 removed by this filter going to be significant in my
application?

The answer would then be (imo) *hugely* simplified.... no.
--
www.NetMax.tk

[NetMax]

"Tedd Jacobs" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
> ...
>> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it,
>> no plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to
>> happen right after water changes even though I was using that chlorine
>> remover stuff and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an
>> experiment beginning last March. I stopped changing the water. In the
>> last year I have had zero fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor,
>> wash the filter every couple weeks and change the filter/carbon thing
>> about every 3 months. No UGF.
>>
>> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the
>> fish are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water
>> quality is and how important water changes are yet I get good results
>> for a whole year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up
>> for evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>>
>> Comments?
>
> interesting you should bring this up.
>
> i've got one of the lab instructors over in the biology department
> running an experiment of the exact same nature. the set up is three
> non-planted 10 gallon tanks; one with no water changes; one with weekly
> water changes; another with bi-monthly water changes. when and if we
> ever write it up i'll be sure to follow up here and let everyone know
> the results. (i would be more forthcoming with information on it now
> except i'm not the one monitoring them.)
>
> tedd.


Kewl, I love hard data, especially when it doesn't go like you expected,
and you have to figure out why. Thanks in advance tedd!!!
--
www.NetMax.tk

[Squeek]

after the tank cycles...water changes are there to dilute urine and stuff
like that from the fish....water changes are the best to dilute this and
keep fish happier...especially in a small tank like yours.

I just think that i wouldnt like living in my own crud in a tiny room
......so why would a fish....the fish can't get away from its own waste!
"Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
...
> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
> plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen right
> after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover stuff
> and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment beginning
> last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I have had zero
> fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the filter every couple
> weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every 3 months. No UGF.
>
> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the fish
> are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water quality is
> and how important water changes are yet I get good results for a whole
> year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up for
> evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
> Comments?

[[email protected]]

No one (fish, human, etc.) would want to breath the same air (or water
in this case) over and over again in a small room either. That's the
conclusion I came to when I was young trying to determine how important
water changes are. Of course my opinion since that determination is -
change some of the water regularly, and don't take short cuts like
chemicals or electrical (just over 10 years ago there was supposedly a
new product that did something like run an electrical current through a
tank and it killed off the bad bugs while not harming the fish so
supposedly water changes weren't necessary,no one believed it and time
telled that that product was all hype, the experts were not
representatives of the water supply industry so in my opinion those
experts that said the device was really worthless were right by saying
water changes are just as necessary as they are before the product was
released and to not use the product - it was too good to be true and
only hype). After all - would you like to breath the same air for
months at a time? Airliners use recycled air and people still get sick
from it all the time. Those experts never got paid for selling water so
they are practically unbiased. My 2 cents - later!

[Squeek]

Thanks for backing me up!
I believe, if you are going to keep any animal 9fish in this case) it
deserves a clean environment in which to live
> wrote in message
ups.com...
> No one (fish, human, etc.) would want to breath the same air (or water
> in this case) over and over again in a small room either. That's the
> conclusion I came to when I was young trying to determine how important
> water changes are. Of course my opinion since that determination is -
> change some of the water regularly, and don't take short cuts like
> chemicals or electrical (just over 10 years ago there was supposedly a
> new product that did something like run an electrical current through a
> tank and it killed off the bad bugs while not harming the fish so
> supposedly water changes weren't necessary,no one believed it and time
> telled that that product was all hype, the experts were not
> representatives of the water supply industry so in my opinion those
> experts that said the device was really worthless were right by saying
> water changes are just as necessary as they are before the product was
> released and to not use the product - it was too good to be true and
> only hype). After all - would you like to breath the same air for
> months at a time? Airliners use recycled air and people still get sick
> from it all the time. Those experts never got paid for selling water so
> they are practically unbiased. My 2 cents - later!
>

[Richard Sexton]

In article om>,
> wrote:
>No one (fish, human, etc.) would want to breath the same air (or water
>in this case) over and over again in a small room either.

Can you imagine an alien guide to keeping humans as pets?


http://aquaria.net/articles/random/aliens/


--
Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org

[Dick]

On 9 Mar 2005 21:39:19 -0800, wrote:

>No one (fish, human, etc.) would want to breath the same air (or water
>in this case) over and over again in a small room either.

But we all do live in the same air and water, don't we? Isn't it more
important to have conditions in the tank that are livable and not
worry about the ingredients?

It is my experience that water changes balance out lots of problems.
It seems to me that filters do not remove solids, they hold them until
the passing water erodes the solids enough they can pass through the
media. Smaller particles can be more efficiently handled by the tank
bacteria.

>That's the
>conclusion I came to when I was young trying to determine how important
>water changes are. Of course my opinion since that determination is -
>change some of the water regularly, and don't take short cuts

I totally agree. Addinging spices to a good soup may make it worse.
I will never forget my early tank experience where I decided to adjust
everything. I did something wrong in the pH adjustment and lost
several fish before I could correct the error. I decided that I was
not capable of managing the tank better than natural forces, including
water changes.

> like
>chemicals or electrical (just over 10 years ago there was supposedly a
>new product that did something like run an electrical current through a
>tank and it killed off the bad bugs while not harming the fish so
>supposedly water changes weren't necessary,no one believed it and time
>telled that that product was all hype, the experts were not
>representatives of the water supply industry so in my opinion those
>experts that said the device was really worthless were right by saying
>water changes are just as necessary as they are before the product was
>released and to not use the product - it was too good to be true and
>only hype). After all - would you like to breath the same air for
>months at a time?
>Airliners use recycled air and people still get sick
>from it all the time. Those experts never got paid for selling water so
>they are practically unbiased. My 2 cents - later!

I think you overdo the "same air" theme. The important thing is we do
reuse air and water. It is great that the natural process is good
enough that life has existed without human intervention for a long
time without our help. No new air or water, but biologically recycled.

But, I don't want to ignore that we have learned to manage special
closed systems, such as airliner air, pretty well. As for my tropical
fish tanks, I trust that the simple trust in the biological processes
plus frequent water changes is the best for my abilities.

dick

[Squeek]

yeah....we may all be sharing the air and water...but think about it.....we
arent in a room the size of a toilet cubicle...are we....we can escape if
someone does a fart or something like that....you know!
"Dick" > wrote in message
...
> On 9 Mar 2005 21:39:19 -0800, wrote:
>
>>No one (fish, human, etc.) would want to breath the same air (or water
>>in this case) over and over again in a small room either.
>
> But we all do live in the same air and water, don't we? Isn't it more
> important to have conditions in the tank that are livable and not
> worry about the ingredients?
>
> It is my experience that water changes balance out lots of problems.
> It seems to me that filters do not remove solids, they hold them until
> the passing water erodes the solids enough they can pass through the
> media. Smaller particles can be more efficiently handled by the tank
> bacteria.
>
>>That's the
>>conclusion I came to when I was young trying to determine how important
>>water changes are. Of course my opinion since that determination is -
>>change some of the water regularly, and don't take short cuts
>
> I totally agree. Addinging spices to a good soup may make it worse.
> I will never forget my early tank experience where I decided to adjust
> everything. I did something wrong in the pH adjustment and lost
> several fish before I could correct the error. I decided that I was
> not capable of managing the tank better than natural forces, including
> water changes.
>
>> like
>>chemicals or electrical (just over 10 years ago there was supposedly a
>>new product that did something like run an electrical current through a
>>tank and it killed off the bad bugs while not harming the fish so
>>supposedly water changes weren't necessary,no one believed it and time
>>telled that that product was all hype, the experts were not
>>representatives of the water supply industry so in my opinion those
>>experts that said the device was really worthless were right by saying
>>water changes are just as necessary as they are before the product was
>>released and to not use the product - it was too good to be true and
>>only hype). After all - would you like to breath the same air for
>>months at a time?
>>Airliners use recycled air and people still get sick
>>from it all the time. Those experts never got paid for selling water so
>>they are practically unbiased. My 2 cents - later!
>
> I think you overdo the "same air" theme. The important thing is we do
> reuse air and water. It is great that the natural process is good
> enough that life has existed without human intervention for a long
> time without our help. No new air or water, but biologically recycled.
>
> But, I don't want to ignore that we have learned to manage special
> closed systems, such as airliner air, pretty well. As for my tropical
> fish tanks, I trust that the simple trust in the biological processes
> plus frequent water changes is the best for my abilities.
>
> dick

[Geezer From The Freezer]

The other point not mentioned is diluting the hormones released into
the water. Imagine never changing the water too, surely you
would eventually experience a PH crash too.

[[email protected]]

I Meant what i said in a practical way. Technically what I meant was if
a human lived in a glass room totally sealed off from the environment,
the size of a bedroom and never got new air for over a month at a time
that air would be horrible if not deadly by the time that over a month
new supply of air arrived. That's basically what I meant and it is
practically comparable to keeping fish in a glass tank, those fish and
other organisms (invertebrates, plants) don't have acres of land or
water enough for natural processes to renew their breathing water. You
are right by what you say but I think you misunderstood what I meant.
I'm glad you agree that a change of some water regularly is better than
not though. Later!

[Squeek]

Could this guy (original poster) be screwing us around....
it sure seems that way
"Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
...
> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
> plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen right
> after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover stuff
> and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment beginning
> last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I have had zero
> fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the filter every couple
> weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every 3 months. No UGF.
>
> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the fish
> are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water quality is
> and how important water changes are yet I get good results for a whole
> year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up for
> evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
> Comments?

[Elaine T]

Squeek wrote:
> Could this guy (original poster) be screwing us around....
> it sure seems that way
> "Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
>>plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen right
>>after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover stuff
>>and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment beginning
>>last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I have had zero
>>fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the filter every couple
>>weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every 3 months. No UGF.
>>
>>So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the fish
>>are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water quality is
>>and how important water changes are yet I get good results for a whole
>>year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up for
>>evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>>
>>Comments?
>
>
>
I hate top-posting.

No, but many who have responded to this thread has been screwing around.
It's really interesting how people have jumped to conclusions about
the water quality and gone on to criticize Bob in the complete vacuum of
meaningful data.

The ONLY data we have is that fish were dying and now they're living. I
can think of a lot of ways the water quality would be just fine, but I
don't want to speculate.

I would still very much like to see some water tests on this tank.
Wanna snail mail someone with good test kits a water sample of your tank
and tap, Bob? I'd offer but I only have nitrate and not phosphate or
conductivity, which I'd want to see.

--
__ Elaine T __
><__'> http://eethomp.com/fish.html <'__><

[Geezer From The Freezer]

Elaine T wrote:

> No, but many who have responded to this thread has been screwing around.
> It's really interesting how people have jumped to conclusions about
> the water quality and gone on to criticize Bob in the complete vacuum of
> meaningful data.
>
> The ONLY data we have is that fish were dying and now they're living. I
> can think of a lot of ways the water quality would be just fine, but I
> don't want to speculate.
>
> I would still very much like to see some water tests on this tank.
> Wanna snail mail someone with good test kits a water sample of your tank
> and tap, Bob? I'd offer but I only have nitrate and not phosphate or
> conductivity, which I'd want to see.
>

Thing is was bobs tank going through a cycle when his fish were initially dying.
Also he notes that his fish are no longer dying, but are they happy,
they may be being tortured, but cannot scream to let him know!

[Bob Wennerstrom]

Well, it's usenet and anything is possible. However, I'm not screwing
you around. I really haven't changed the water since last March and no
fish have died. They're not breeding, I think all eight are males but
they seem happy to be fed in the morning and are all swimming about
actively. My 15g tank is pretty shallow and I get a lot of the poop up
off the gravel and into the filter when I pour in a gallon that's being
replaced from evaporation.

I'm truly wondering what's going on here. I don't like it when fish die
and I seem to have found a way to keep them alive by ignoring the common
advice to change the water often. I do have a nitrate test kit around
here somewhere. Maybe I'll scrounge it up and get back to the group with
the results.

Squeek wrote:
> Could this guy (original poster) be screwing us around....
> it sure seems that way
> "Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
>>plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen right
>>after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover stuff
>>and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment beginning
>>last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I have had zero
>>fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the filter every couple
>>weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every 3 months. No UGF.
>>
>>So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the fish
>>are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water quality is
>>and how important water changes are yet I get good results for a whole
>>year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up for
>>evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>>
>>Comments?
>
>
>

[Bob Wennerstrom]

Geezer From The Freezer wrote:

>
> Elaine T wrote:
>
>
>>No, but many who have responded to this thread has been screwing around.
>> It's really interesting how people have jumped to conclusions about
>>the water quality and gone on to criticize Bob in the complete vacuum of
>>meaningful data.

>
> Thing is was bobs tank going through a cycle when his fish were initially dying.
> Also he notes that his fish are no longer dying, but are they happy,
> they may be being tortured, but cannot scream to let him know!

No. The tank was over a year old when I stopped changing water. Your
tortured argument makes no sense. If I do something to the water that
routinely kills the fish, that is humane and they are not being
tortured. If I let natural processes take over and the fish stop dying
and are active and are eating, that's torture?

[Dan White]

"Bob Wennerstrom" <nospam> wrote in message
...
> Well, it's usenet and anything is possible. However, I'm not screwing
> you around. I really haven't changed the water since last March and no
> fish have died.

I think not changing water is pretty common... prolly not right, but I think
many people end up not changing water. I know when I was a kid I did very
few changes, and my father said he never, ever changed water when he had a
tank years ago. He just topped off and changed filters once in awhile. I'm
not saying this is right, and that old tank syndrome will probably kick in
at some point (the fish did eventually die here and there from maybe old
age, maybe poor water quality). However, I have to believe that the people
doing 25 - 50% water changes every week or two are doing more potential harm
than good. I don't know much, but it just seems like overkill.

dwhite

[Richard Sexton]

In article >, Bob Wennerstrom <nospam> wrote:
>
>
>Geezer From The Freezer wrote:
>
>>
>> Elaine T wrote:
>>
>>
>>>No, but many who have responded to this thread has been screwing around.
>>> It's really interesting how people have jumped to conclusions about
>>>the water quality and gone on to criticize Bob in the complete vacuum of
>>>meaningful data.
>
>>
>> Thing is was bobs tank going through a cycle when his fish were initially dying.
>> Also he notes that his fish are no longer dying, but are they happy,
>> they may be being tortured, but cannot scream to let him know!
>
>No. The tank was over a year old when I stopped changing water. Your
>tortured argument makes no sense. If I do something to the water that
>routinely kills the fish, that is humane and they are not being
>tortured. If I let natural processes take over and the fish stop dying
>and are active and are eating, that's torture?

Dollars to donuts the ammonia is high and the pH is low. In
this sate the fish will not be affected by ammonia. When you
add new water the pH drops andthe ammonia is now lethal and
fishdie. Google "old tank syndrome".

--
Need Mercedes parts ? - http://parts.mbz.org
http://www.mbz.org | Mercedes Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Killies, killi.net, Crypts, aquaria.net
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Old wris****ches http://watches.list.mbz.org

[Matt]

"Squeek" > wrote in message
...
> Could this guy (original poster) be screwing us around....
> it sure seems that way

It possible he is joking, but I got my first fish tank when I was 10 and had
it for over 2 years before I found out that you needed to do water changes.
For the first 2 years I only replaced the water that had evaporated. And
whenever I added new fish to the tank, I'd use to pour in the water from the
bag. Looking back I'm surprised any of my fish survived.

Matt

[dfreas]

Boy did this one get blown out of proportion. It is enirely possible to
never do water changes and have a perfectly healthy aquarium. As stated
several times now the only way to know for sure is to test but just
because you don't change the water does not mean the quality is bad.

I had a ten gallon tank that I stopped doing water changes on for about
six months with no serious problems. In it I had ramshorn snails,
between one and two dozen guppies (it fluctuated as they were
born/eaten), an african dwarf frog, and half a dozen freshwater clams.

I tested water quality every week, never any problems. In fact my
readings were always 0/0/<5 And if you've ever kept freshwater clams
you know even without the test results that the water couldn't have
been too bad - those things are very demanding when it comes to clean
water.

The only difference was that I had a large anubias growing in the
center of the tank and the top of the tank was covered with frogbit.
Pretty big difference, but still I think it is entirely possible that
your tank conditions are fine.

It is also possible that Richard is correct and your tank conditions
aren't so great. Testing is the only way to know, but I would
completely disregard all of the postings talking about how horrible not
changing the water is. You had good reasons to stop water changes and
there is nothing wrong with what you did.

-Daniel

[Elaine T]

Bob Wennerstrom wrote:
> Well, it's usenet and anything is possible. However, I'm not screwing
> you around. I really haven't changed the water since last March and no
> fish have died. They're not breeding, I think all eight are males but
> they seem happy to be fed in the morning and are all swimming about
> actively. My 15g tank is pretty shallow and I get a lot of the poop up
> off the gravel and into the filter when I pour in a gallon that's being
> replaced from evaporation.
>
> I'm truly wondering what's going on here. I don't like it when fish die
> and I seem to have found a way to keep them alive by ignoring the common
> advice to change the water often. I do have a nitrate test kit around
> here somewhere. Maybe I'll scrounge it up and get back to the group with
> the results.
>
That would be wonderful! Post any test results you can scrounge up -
pH, ammonia, nitrate, etc. Clearly we're all very curious about what is
actually happening in your tank.

I'm betting you've gotten lucky and have denitrification going in your
gravel and breakdown of DOC on the bio-wheel. (a la Frank's
observations in alt.aquaria).

If your test kit does show an unstable situation like very high nitrates
or ammonia/low pH, maybe we can help you figure out how to use your tap
water to stabilize the tank without killing fish.

--
__ Elaine T __
><__'> http://eethomp.com/fish.html <'__><

[[email protected]]

I just stated that changing some of the water regularly is something
all of the books and mags I read a decade ago said is mandatory
according to those sources. I'd love it if it was wrong - could you
imagine how low tank maintenance would be if you never had to change
the water? When I was 11 or 12 with my first tank I never changed the
water and all of my fish kept dying until I got mosquito fish (tough
cousin of the guppy, plain grey in color but can survive in almost
anything) and then I eventually took them to an lfs disgusted that they
were the only fish I could keep without water changes. I raised a
goldfish or 2 after that for a short while and then took them to a lfs.
Lastly (before my current situation) when I was 15 I had a betta for a
year after which it passed away from what I discovered later to be a
betta specific disease (basically a cyst or ulcer on it's back which
grew fungus often then I systematically cured with the salt treatment)
which eventually was just too much for him or he died from old age (he
may have already been a year or so old when I bought him). Just stating
my experience. Later!

[[email protected]]

My further 2 cents - those emperor filters are awesome aren't they? I
use biowheel pro 60's myself and they are awesome. I even was able to
use a biowheel pro 60 daisy chained to a fluval msf filter for my fancy
guppy/turtle tank. The turtles don't even mess the tank up like
everyone says they would. I still do water changes and will continue to
until someone proves not changing the water is preferred though. Later,
and enjoy that filter!

[[email protected]]

I am pretty sure that hob whisper filter denitrates the water via the
cartridge it uses. It is pretty common for filters to control
ammonia/nitrates/nitrites with a cartridge containing something like
zeolite that absorbs such things. However my impression is if you use
such measures you're committed to doing so until a major change takes
place with the tank. Tank cycling involves good bacteria eating ammonia
and nitrates, reproducing, and populating surface area aerobically (the
good bugs need oxygen) so if you take away the ammonia etc. then those
good bacteria are greatly reduced if not eliminated. Then, if you start
not using cartridges or replacing them in other words then fish will
probably die off because the tank will start cycling again now that
ammonia et. is there and not absorbed by the zeolite or whatever. So in
the long run it is best to not use such cartridges and cycle the tank
before more than 1 or 2 fish are in the tank. Otherwise you just have
to keep replacing cartridges for the life of the tank setup. Hope I've
helped and if I'm wrong someone please step up and point out what they
want. Later!

[Steve]

Bob Wennerstrom wrote:
> I've got a 15 gallon tank with about eight platys and a pl*co in it, no
> plants. I used to lose a fish every 6-8 weeks. This seemed to happen
> right after water changes even though I was using that chlorine remover
> stuff and only changing about 2 gallons/week. So I did an experiment
> beginning last March. I stopped changing the water. In the last year I
> have had zero fishes die. I'm using a Marineland Emperor, wash the
> filter every couple weeks and change the filter/carbon thing about every
> 3 months. No UGF.
>
> So do you think I've got wicked nitrates buit up in the tank and the
> fish are just used to it? I keep reading about how important water
> quality is and how important water changes are yet I get good results
> for a whole year never-ever changing the water, just adding to make up
> for evaporation. Carbon doesn't remove nitrates does it?
>
> Comments?
I suppose that, by only adding make-up water required by evaporation,
the tank water may become quite hard. Platies may require harder water.
Steve

[[email protected]]

I sent an email to Tetra, just to see what they would say. I got this
response:

On the filter boxes I have here, the filter talks about eliminating
ammonia and nitrites but nothing about nitrates. If you can e-mail me
the bar code I can have Quality see if there was a misprint on the box
you have.

Thank you
Consumer Relations

At first I thought that I may have been mistaken, but after checking
the box, I was not. I am going to write them back and tell them. I
wonder if I should ask for coupons, eh?