JB
July 12th 07, 12:08 AM
FOR ROCKS
Subject: rock vs no rock
From: "Glenn Rieker" >
There are two schools of thought in watergardening as we see
it..............the old timers are set in their ways saying simple
liner
ponds are the way to go.........I think these are the same people who
may
still listen to 8 tracks.....:) I can't tell you how many people come
into
our garden centre and tell us they have read this book or that
magazine and
they installed their ponds like that and they constantly have
challenges...as I have told them most of these authors are just that,
great
writers, unfortunately as a group they have probably installed less
than 10
ponds, we do this on a daily basis and must answer to our demanding
clients......one school of thought is you need to "filter" your
water.....like a sewage plant.....the other school of thought we
prefer is
to create an "ecosystem"
Most of the "filters" out there are based on sewage treatment plant
design
and/or chlorinated pool systems which are sterile.........The email I
had an
opportunity to review mentioned the appearance of the bottom of a
watergarden is a judgment call .....Hmmmmmmmmmm.....let's
see........when I
was out west in Yosemite and the Tetons I can't tell you how much I
longed
to see a clean black liner on the bottom of those rushing crystal
clear rock
bottom streams in the park :) Rock bottom streams and watergardens win
the
aesthetic award hands down.
But Glenn..........what about maintenance?????????? Well, we drain the
pond
down in the spring and wash the stones down and the pads in the
skimmer and
falls and fill the pond back up with water, salt and
bacteria....during the
season we have an automatic fill valve in the skimmer to top off the
pond
while we are casually resting on the back deck instead of pulling
hoses
around......in the fall we set up our fall netting protection because
even
skimmers can only handle so many leaves and then take it down in late
fall.
In the meantime we have enjoyed the crystal clear water, healthy fish
and
lily blooms galore from the plants planted directly in the bottom of
the
watergarden.......not one time did I have to trapse into the
watergarden to
clean a pump intake.....or have cloudy water.......
Can you have crystal clear water in a simple liner pond.........yes,
we did
it for seven years until we saw "the light".........now my life is
simple,
create watergardens with considerable less calculations, crystal clear
water, happy clients across the country and no more headaches!!!!
Our business model is based on focusing on success, not
failures......I have
not had the opportunity to visit this site due to this being obviously
our
busy season....but when I looked today the questions and answers are
still
the same...........Unfortunately Doctors are the same as this
newsgroup...........they treat sickness.....they are not taught to
promote
health......ever have a 300 lb. smoking doctor tell you your blood
pressure
is high???? I am sure this commentary will raise the ire of the usual
people in this newsgroup, however, I feel I need to tell you how "I"
see
watergarden development changing on a daily basis..........don't get
me
started on the Koi Gods and how you have to have a $20,000 filter
system
that takes up half of your basement and bottom drain to keep their
championship fish.
We have happy, healthy fish worth thousands in our ponds and they love
the
rock bottom.....
--
Glenn Rieker
BS Landscape Architecture
Remember.....Life is a game don't live it on the bench!
http://www.gardenhaus.com
AGAINST ROCKS IN THE POND
The Case for Smooth Bottom Pond Design:
Todo --- North Florida Koi Club,
Past President & News Letter Editor
Recently there has been an ongoing debate on the news group rec.ponds
discussing several ponders preference for ponds with a layer of gravel
across their pond's bottoms. Among their reasons for this are 1) The
light
bottom makes the fish easier to see, 2) the gravel is more attractive
than a
smooth black liner, 3) what possible difficulties that may occur due
to
trapped organic matter can be solved by biological and/or chemical
means.
There are however, real reasons to reconsider the decision to place
gravel
in a pond.
The bottom may be lighter in color, but often times this light rock
gets
covered with dark green algae, which defeats the intention. The gravel
can
get covered with mulm, the dark organic material that is a byproduct
of the
natural biological functions of a pond. The mulm can totally or
partially
obscure the bottom. Hence, it is an open question how long the bottom
will
stay pristine.
As for the aesthetics of the gravel. There is not discussion on taste
so
this becomes no real argument for or against this question.
The third point is then the most critical and most contentious. With a
gravel bottom the mulm, fish waste and decaying plant matter from the pond
does not flow quickly to the drain or sump, where it can be removed from the
pond. The gunk gets trapped in the spaces between the stones and there it
sits.
In a properly designed pond the solids produced in it are carried by
the
flow of the water down to where the pump can suck the material out and
send
it to the filter system where it belongs. (Please note that I do not
imply
that a pond with gravel is by definition poorly designed, for there
are many
smooth bottom ponds whose specifications do not add to its efficiency.
However, I do say that no matter what the design, gravel degrades the
efficiency of a pond).
What then, is the detrimental effect of having gravel. The first thing
to
remember is that a pond is not an aquarium outside. Gravel, used in an
aquarium has a purpose, it acts as part of the filter system. Water is
drawn through the gravel, mechanically removing debris and providing a
surface for aerobic bacteria which neutralize ammonia and other
byproducts
of the aquarium system. The water is then pumped back into the tank.
In a pond there is not under-gravel filter. Water is not drawn through
the
stones, it passes over the top and the mulm that accumulates under and
between the pebbles builds up in an oxygen deficient environment. As a
rule, aerobic bacteria are beneficial and anaerobic bacteria are not.
Anaerobic bacteria survive without oxygen and their byproducts are
often
harmful, such as sulfur dioxide, the chemical that give a rotten egg
smell.
In addition to these bacteria, other harmful organisms fester in the
goo at
the bottom of gravel ponds.
To counter the foulness of the gravel bottom, practitioners say that
chemicals can be used to reduce the mulm to an inert material. There
are
other products, such as PondZime which reduces the mulm with enzymes.
The
efficiency of these remedies is questionable, not to mention that even
if
the crud is neutralized it still continues to accumulate. Hence, more
chemicals must be used to deal with the problem. It seems that a much
better, less costly, and far preferable solution is to have the pump
remove
the gunk.
Here, a counter argument says that the mulm is only deposited in the
filter
and so it doesn't matter where it sits, in the filter or on the
bottom, it
is still in the pond system. This argument fails when the mechanisms
of
filtration are known. For in a filter system, water is passed though
the
filter, supporting aerobic bacteria just as it is in the under-gravel
filter
in an aquarium.
So the issue comes full circle just as water is pumped from a pond,
just to
be filtered and returned. The idea of having gravel comes from
aquariums,
but as ponds are different than aquariums the function of the gravel
is
shifted to the filter system in ponds. Ironically and in opposition to
the
logic of some ponders, the gravel becomes detrimental to the pond.
Subject: rock vs no rock
From: "Glenn Rieker" >
There are two schools of thought in watergardening as we see
it..............the old timers are set in their ways saying simple
liner
ponds are the way to go.........I think these are the same people who
may
still listen to 8 tracks.....:) I can't tell you how many people come
into
our garden centre and tell us they have read this book or that
magazine and
they installed their ponds like that and they constantly have
challenges...as I have told them most of these authors are just that,
great
writers, unfortunately as a group they have probably installed less
than 10
ponds, we do this on a daily basis and must answer to our demanding
clients......one school of thought is you need to "filter" your
water.....like a sewage plant.....the other school of thought we
prefer is
to create an "ecosystem"
Most of the "filters" out there are based on sewage treatment plant
design
and/or chlorinated pool systems which are sterile.........The email I
had an
opportunity to review mentioned the appearance of the bottom of a
watergarden is a judgment call .....Hmmmmmmmmmm.....let's
see........when I
was out west in Yosemite and the Tetons I can't tell you how much I
longed
to see a clean black liner on the bottom of those rushing crystal
clear rock
bottom streams in the park :) Rock bottom streams and watergardens win
the
aesthetic award hands down.
But Glenn..........what about maintenance?????????? Well, we drain the
pond
down in the spring and wash the stones down and the pads in the
skimmer and
falls and fill the pond back up with water, salt and
bacteria....during the
season we have an automatic fill valve in the skimmer to top off the
pond
while we are casually resting on the back deck instead of pulling
hoses
around......in the fall we set up our fall netting protection because
even
skimmers can only handle so many leaves and then take it down in late
fall.
In the meantime we have enjoyed the crystal clear water, healthy fish
and
lily blooms galore from the plants planted directly in the bottom of
the
watergarden.......not one time did I have to trapse into the
watergarden to
clean a pump intake.....or have cloudy water.......
Can you have crystal clear water in a simple liner pond.........yes,
we did
it for seven years until we saw "the light".........now my life is
simple,
create watergardens with considerable less calculations, crystal clear
water, happy clients across the country and no more headaches!!!!
Our business model is based on focusing on success, not
failures......I have
not had the opportunity to visit this site due to this being obviously
our
busy season....but when I looked today the questions and answers are
still
the same...........Unfortunately Doctors are the same as this
newsgroup...........they treat sickness.....they are not taught to
promote
health......ever have a 300 lb. smoking doctor tell you your blood
pressure
is high???? I am sure this commentary will raise the ire of the usual
people in this newsgroup, however, I feel I need to tell you how "I"
see
watergarden development changing on a daily basis..........don't get
me
started on the Koi Gods and how you have to have a $20,000 filter
system
that takes up half of your basement and bottom drain to keep their
championship fish.
We have happy, healthy fish worth thousands in our ponds and they love
the
rock bottom.....
--
Glenn Rieker
BS Landscape Architecture
Remember.....Life is a game don't live it on the bench!
http://www.gardenhaus.com
AGAINST ROCKS IN THE POND
The Case for Smooth Bottom Pond Design:
Todo --- North Florida Koi Club,
Past President & News Letter Editor
Recently there has been an ongoing debate on the news group rec.ponds
discussing several ponders preference for ponds with a layer of gravel
across their pond's bottoms. Among their reasons for this are 1) The
light
bottom makes the fish easier to see, 2) the gravel is more attractive
than a
smooth black liner, 3) what possible difficulties that may occur due
to
trapped organic matter can be solved by biological and/or chemical
means.
There are however, real reasons to reconsider the decision to place
gravel
in a pond.
The bottom may be lighter in color, but often times this light rock
gets
covered with dark green algae, which defeats the intention. The gravel
can
get covered with mulm, the dark organic material that is a byproduct
of the
natural biological functions of a pond. The mulm can totally or
partially
obscure the bottom. Hence, it is an open question how long the bottom
will
stay pristine.
As for the aesthetics of the gravel. There is not discussion on taste
so
this becomes no real argument for or against this question.
The third point is then the most critical and most contentious. With a
gravel bottom the mulm, fish waste and decaying plant matter from the pond
does not flow quickly to the drain or sump, where it can be removed from the
pond. The gunk gets trapped in the spaces between the stones and there it
sits.
In a properly designed pond the solids produced in it are carried by
the
flow of the water down to where the pump can suck the material out and
send
it to the filter system where it belongs. (Please note that I do not
imply
that a pond with gravel is by definition poorly designed, for there
are many
smooth bottom ponds whose specifications do not add to its efficiency.
However, I do say that no matter what the design, gravel degrades the
efficiency of a pond).
What then, is the detrimental effect of having gravel. The first thing
to
remember is that a pond is not an aquarium outside. Gravel, used in an
aquarium has a purpose, it acts as part of the filter system. Water is
drawn through the gravel, mechanically removing debris and providing a
surface for aerobic bacteria which neutralize ammonia and other
byproducts
of the aquarium system. The water is then pumped back into the tank.
In a pond there is not under-gravel filter. Water is not drawn through
the
stones, it passes over the top and the mulm that accumulates under and
between the pebbles builds up in an oxygen deficient environment. As a
rule, aerobic bacteria are beneficial and anaerobic bacteria are not.
Anaerobic bacteria survive without oxygen and their byproducts are
often
harmful, such as sulfur dioxide, the chemical that give a rotten egg
smell.
In addition to these bacteria, other harmful organisms fester in the
goo at
the bottom of gravel ponds.
To counter the foulness of the gravel bottom, practitioners say that
chemicals can be used to reduce the mulm to an inert material. There
are
other products, such as PondZime which reduces the mulm with enzymes.
The
efficiency of these remedies is questionable, not to mention that even
if
the crud is neutralized it still continues to accumulate. Hence, more
chemicals must be used to deal with the problem. It seems that a much
better, less costly, and far preferable solution is to have the pump
remove
the gunk.
Here, a counter argument says that the mulm is only deposited in the
filter
and so it doesn't matter where it sits, in the filter or on the
bottom, it
is still in the pond system. This argument fails when the mechanisms
of
filtration are known. For in a filter system, water is passed though
the
filter, supporting aerobic bacteria just as it is in the under-gravel
filter
in an aquarium.
So the issue comes full circle just as water is pumped from a pond,
just to
be filtered and returned. The idea of having gravel comes from
aquariums,
but as ponds are different than aquariums the function of the gravel
is
shifted to the filter system in ponds. Ironically and in opposition to
the
logic of some ponders, the gravel becomes detrimental to the pond.