underwater gravel

it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this idea of
making "calcium pucks" from plaster of paris and in acid water it can really jerk the
pH around ... lethally.

the absolute best way to stabilize calcium or "hardness" is with dolomitic limestone
(not dolomite) which also has magnesium in it (which oyster shells do not). it comes
powdered and the right stuff looks off white with bits of black flecking in it. even
limestone chunks are good (but not marble). powdered dolomitic limestone stays in
the bottom of the tank dissolved on demand. getting the right stuff is not always
easy, but a lot is not needed either. Ingrid

"Jen" wrote:


"carlrs" wrote in message
ups.com...

Nitric acid production is on going in all healthy well cycled
aquariums. Proper kH is what is important here, and not just the old
school method of baking soda, which does not add the calcium needed by
all fish (in fact all animals), and also does not add necessary
electrolytes. There are many excellent ways of doing this from Wonder
Shells to bags of aragonite in the filter.


Can you explain this please? Are you saying that Wonder Shells are needed
in all aquariums? What are they?


Jen




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...s=Group+lookup
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website.
I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan

Many people on various goldfish lists have had this happen. come home to find a fish
dead that was perfectly healthy when they left the house. most people dont do a
necropsy on their fish to find out what happened. Fortunately, many have long
handled tweezers to get the rock out of the GF mouth since this most often happens at
feeding time when GF are aggressively sucking up off the bottom of the tank.

Even a good cleaning does not really get rid of all the mulm and crap that
accumulates in and under gravel and ornaments. many people who thought there were
doing a smashing good job of cleaning their tanks were shocked when they pulled the
underground filter plates out and saw what stirred up into the water. the other
indication is a persistent high nitrates, indicative of rotting stuff under plates
where water channelizes. Another drawback is after a while people get tired of the
water changes and cleaning and it gets increasingly cursory. as this happens,
nitrate and organic acids rise and the fish start suffering. the pH drops and kills
off the good bacteria and then there is a toxic stew.

Actually the toxic gases are produced anaerobically .. hydrogen sulfide and other
partial breakdown products, typically much like those in crude oil. they stink
badly, and when undergravel plates are pulled the smell of sulfur is very strong.

nitrates are not removed by cleaning the gravel, but by replacing the water.
anything in the tank that drives up nitrates will mean more water changes.

looks are an obvious consideration. but with big flashy goldfish I prefer the zen
appearance, and the bottom does grow its own algae covering, which I leave alone like
I do the back and sides of the tank. this provides a living filtration system that
can be a life saver if the electricity goes out. and no, with proper filtration and
proper placing of air stones there is no residual poop on the bottom of the tank.
actually, any kind of string of poop is a sign that the fish are either being
overfed at one time, or the food is wrong. in ponds, GF normally graze all day long
and their poops fall apart after exiting the end. plants can be attached in other
ways. http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/care/plants.html
tied to suction cups, planted, allowed to grow free

a very good suction is required to get the detritus out of the gravel.
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/c...g%20techniques
GF are not just nosy and curious, they have an excellent sense of smell and will be
drawn to where the "action" is by the smell of leftover food. they can also be quite
fast in moving to where the bell is. I have never suctioned up a single tail nor a
koi (my mistake having koi in a tank, but I was a raw newbie). however, fancy GF are
slow compared to single tails and any with a big head or hood will suction up even
faster.

circulation in a ugf gets quickly channelized. the water flows to those areas with
least resistance. debris piles up where the water isnt flowing as strong and soon
the water is only flowing in the channels.

most people who follow your techniques would have dead fish in a short period of
time. that is the reason that Jo Ann Burke (the Goldfish Guru) came up with the
essentials list for newbies.... to maximize success.
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/c...htm#essentials
I set up a 20 gallon tank, 3 GF, for my mother. It too did fine with almost no care
at all and then all the fish died, the tank had gone toxic despite the plants, the
gravel, the string algae all over the inside. and the fish frankly hadnt grown at
all, a sign of severe stunting due to chronic toxic water conditions. only then did
I find out she was not changing water.
Ingrid



Peter in New Zealand wrote:
amosf © Tim Fairchild wrote:
wrote:

http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/c...re1.htm#GRAVEL
GRAVEL
Gravel is not recommended for keeping goldfish.

Interesting opinion, but...

1. Gravel is the leading cause of sudden death when gravel gets stuck in
their throat.

Possible perhaps, but never seen it actually happen.

2. Food drifts down into gravel and rots. Goldfish will sift and work
thru the
gravel looking for food. Rotting food is toxic for goldfish.

I imagine rotting food is potentially bad for all fish, but then that's why
you clean the gravel. Mind you I notice fish tend not to eat 'rotting
food'. They tend to be a little selective.

3. Gravel creates "dead" spots where anaerobic bacteria thrive and secrete
toxic gases.

Toxic gasses? Ammonia perhaps. Of course that's why you clean gravel.

4. Organic compounds contribute to the waste in the tank, driving up
nitrate levels. High organic loads in gravel can easily equal the waste
output of an extra fish for two which drastically lowers the "carrying
capacity" of the tank (1 gf per 10 gallons).

Nitrate factory, sure. That's why you clean the gravel. Nitrates can be
great, but we know about plants and goldfish

5. Organic compounds are acidic and can lower the pH to the point that it
kills off the biobugs. The nitrite converting bacteria are the first to
die, which causes a
nitrous acid spike. This will cause a sudden crash that kills the entire
biofilter. Unlike cycling, where the keeper knows and is checking for
wastes and changing water, sudden crashes are not detected until the fish
are showing severe symptoms.

That's why you clean the gravel. And of course with correct kH the pH is not
going to crash on you... And we all check the parameters now and then,
right

6. It is more work to clean gravel and do water changes. Any gravel or
rocks on the bottom require a bell of some kinds to suck up debris that
gets caught under the items. In a bare bottom tank, the circulation of the
water in the tank means all the crud and wastes are sucked out by the
filter intake. There is no siphoning required.

If you want to save work maybe, but I like the look of gravel and it gives
you somewhere to stick plants (anubias with gf of course - as well as some
salad for them to snack on). But even in a bare bottom you have to clean up
wastes. The crap still sits all over the bottom anyway.

7. Fish can be sucked up into a siphon bell and be maimed or killed every
time the
gravel is cleaned. When there is no gravel to clean, a nylon sockie can
be put over the siphon and even fry wont get sucked out with the waste
water.

This is the silliest one. The whole idea of the bell siphon is to reduce the
suction so that the gravel isn't sucked out. Fish don't get sucked into the
siphon. And fry? In a goldfish tank? Yum!

Not great reasons to go to a bare bottom. Point 6 to make vacuuming easier
maybe.

But this was about UGF, and with UGF you change many of the points above in
that there is circulation in the gravel and so it's not "anaerobic"...

Whew! I can see all these points, but I have a little tank of about 40
litres with four decent goldfish and two white cloud minnows in it.
There's gravel on the bottom and all the plants are plastic. It's away
from any direct sunlight and I allow algae on the end and back panels. I
have a very good external pump/filter hung on the outside of the tank,
and change around half the water three or four times a year. I dump
chlorinated water straight from the tap on the assumption that what's
already in the tank will dilute anything unpleasant for the fish. Apart
from that all I do is feed them lightly once a day. This little tank has
run without a single hiccup for over two years now, and brought endless
enjoyment to me and the grandkids when they come to stay. In fact each
grandchild has his/her own fish they have named.

Now, my point in all this is simply this - people often remark on how
clean and fresh the tank looks, and how healthy and energetic the fish
are. I never check Ph or any other parametres - the only three
principles I use are - (a) watch the feed quantity, (b) understock the
tank, (c) have a good filter setup and keep it running sweetly. So,
ahem, why the need for all these other things, or am I just plain lucky?
I am not seeking to be provocative, and I respect the obvious experience
and knowledge of others in this group, which is far greater than mine. I
just want to know if all this extra stuff is good for the fish.

Cheers,



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...s=Group+lookup
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website.
I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan

wrote:
it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this idea of
making "calcium pucks" from plaster of paris and in acid water it can really jerk the
pH around ... lethally.

the absolute best way to stabilize calcium or "hardness" is with dolomitic limestone
(not dolomite) which also has magnesium in it (which oyster shells do not). it comes
powdered and the right stuff looks off white with bits of black flecking in it. even
limestone chunks are good (but not marble). powdered dolomitic limestone stays in
the bottom of the tank dissolved on demand. getting the right stuff is not always
easy, but a lot is not needed either. Ingrid


Are you even familiar with this product?
It is not new, nor is it perfect.
Although dolomitic limestone is a good control for pH and somewhat for
kH, magnesium in small quantities is essential for proper osmotic
function, and even more so as a Redox reducer which new research shows
is very important for proper water chemistry.
I have used these Wonder Shels in literally thousands of aquariums I
have maintained without ever experiencing what you are talking about.
These products are admittedly poorly named, as they do not do wonders,
nor are they a cure all, but they are a usefull tool in good aquatic
husbandry.

As to water channeling in UGFs, you are absolutely correct, but this is
a problem in many poorly maintained filters, including wet drys. The
design of the Nektonics unit tends to somewhat alleviate this problem.
I am not however promoting this filter, as it is not even available any
more, but those who have been involved in the aquatics industry for any
amount of time are familiar with it (such as Netmax).

The site you posted is very good beginner information, but there is
newer research that can be added (such as the fact that Redox plays a
larger roll in aquatic health than pH for many fish, especially dirty
fish such as goldfish).

Anearobic activity is not hard to control in properly maintained
aquariums, and as I stated earlier, I have only accidentally suctioned
goldfish 3 times in over 56,000 cleanings, not bad odds (and those
accidents were years ago). The Nylon sock is however a good idea, but
others still can gravel vacuum properly without one, and honestly the
Lees is amuch better value than the Python.

In article .com,
"carlrs" wrote:

Jen wrote:
So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good
or bad?


Jen

I have used UGFs extensively over the years. I personally do not
recommend them do to the extra maintenance sometimes needed (especially
with flat plate UGFs), especially if poorly cared for. But UGFs do not
deserve all the flack they get either. Proper gravel (#3) with about
2-3" of depth works best. The Nektonics UGF was actually very good and
I actually clocked higher flow rates with the same air pump with these
UGF filters vs. the more common flat plate design (placing a 1 gallon
jug just under the out flow and timing the rate of fill).
There are better filters now, but even some newer ones popularity are
based in hype (bio wheel comes to mind). I recommend redundancy with
two filters. In a smaller aquarium a HOB with an internal or sponge
filter is effective, or at least a HOB with a pre filter attached for
improved bio filtration.

For more aquarium filtration information:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

Also I have an article about Bio Wheels he
http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/

Carl

I totally concur with the UG proponents.

Hi, haven't been around this NG much since I set up a tank about a year
ago. I had tanks through most of my teenage years and recently as an
adult - 20 years latter - I set up another.

First of all before I chime in on UG filters I have to say that I guess
I forgot how much work and constant care an aquarium requires to get it
in good balance and keep it that way. I just don't have the time to
watch my tanks that I did as a youth. As a result I have set up a
stringent tank-care schedule and keep mostly hardy fish.

What surprised me, though, when I went to buy my current aquarium is
that I couldn't find a UG filter system at any retail store. The staff
would also keep telling me that they simply don't work.

I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these
days. However, I'm a also big proponent of the dual-filtration system:
having say an outside power filter combined with an UG filter. I had
this as a youth in a 25 gallon tank and I swear that regular aside from
normal required attention this tank was a beautifully balanced system.
I nice stable ecosystem.

The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your
normal tank care. I recently put a UG filter in my current tank and
already notice a definite difference in the quality of the environment
and the health of my fish. A lot of that may have to do with my annual
'big clean' that I just did - but I think the UG filter (that I had to
buy online) is helping as well and will continue to do so if used
properly.

In addition to Carl's points, which I obviously agree with, I've found a
really good online article that talks about the proper use of the UG
filter including the use of a dual filtration set-up:

http://www.aquariumfish.com/aquarium...01&cid=3806&se
arch=

I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap
UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the
stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy. I
don't remember having to buy all that stuff as a youth - and like I said
I had good success with my aquariums for years.

Cheers,

TS
Edmonton SCTV Locations:
http://members.shaw.ca/pumpkin27/iwebber2

My Blog feed:
feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml

Trevor Stenson wrote:
In article .com,
"carlrs" wrote:

Jen wrote:
So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good
or bad?


Jen

I have used UGFs extensively over the years. I personally do not
recommend them do to the extra maintenance sometimes needed (especially
with flat plate UGFs), especially if poorly cared for. But UGFs do not
deserve all the flack they get either. Proper gravel (#3) with about
2-3" of depth works best. The Nektonics UGF was actually very good and
I actually clocked higher flow rates with the same air pump with these
UGF filters vs. the more common flat plate design (placing a 1 gallon
jug just under the out flow and timing the rate of fill).
There are better filters now, but even some newer ones popularity are
based in hype (bio wheel comes to mind). I recommend redundancy with
two filters. In a smaller aquarium a HOB with an internal or sponge
filter is effective, or at least a HOB with a pre filter attached for
improved bio filtration.

For more aquarium filtration information:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

Also I have an article about Bio Wheels he
http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/

Carl

I totally concur with the UG proponents.

Hi, haven't been around this NG much since I set up a tank about a year
ago. I had tanks through most of my teenage years and recently as an
adult - 20 years latter - I set up another.

First of all before I chime in on UG filters I have to say that I guess
I forgot how much work and constant care an aquarium requires to get it
in good balance and keep it that way. I just don't have the time to
watch my tanks that I did as a youth. As a result I have set up a
stringent tank-care schedule and keep mostly hardy fish.

What surprised me, though, when I went to buy my current aquarium is
that I couldn't find a UG filter system at any retail store. The staff
would also keep telling me that they simply don't work.

I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these
days. However, I'm a also big proponent of the dual-filtration system:
having say an outside power filter combined with an UG filter. I had
this as a youth in a 25 gallon tank and I swear that regular aside from
normal required attention this tank was a beautifully balanced system.
I nice stable ecosystem.

The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your
normal tank care. I recently put a UG filter in my current tank and
already notice a definite difference in the quality of the environment
and the health of my fish. A lot of that may have to do with my annual
'big clean' that I just did - but I think the UG filter (that I had to
buy online) is helping as well and will continue to do so if used
properly.

In addition to Carl's points, which I obviously agree with, I've found a
really good online article that talks about the proper use of the UG
filter including the use of a dual filtration set-up:

http://www.aquariumfish.com/aquarium...01&cid=3806&se
arch=

I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap
UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the
stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy. I
don't remember having to buy all that stuff as a youth - and like I said
I had good success with my aquariums for years.

Cheers,

TS
Edmonton SCTV Locations:
http://members.shaw.ca/pumpkin27/iwebber2

My Blog feed:
feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml

That was an interesting article you posted. I have been the process of
writing a more in depth article about this subject, I have just been
too busy to finsih and research the article for any relevant studies (I
do discus UGFs in somewhat in my filtration article:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html )

The interesting point about UGF and many other aquatic subjects is that
these methods and products seem to go thru fads (I have got caught up
in them too, even in my service business), but when I stop and go back
and look at the facts, such as UGFs, these filters are not as bad as
all the bad press they get (this is not to say they are without some
problems). As I pointed out earlier the type of plate makes a BIG
difference in flow and mulm that will cause problems with UGFs.

What I find interesting is that many of these UGF bashers have not done
their homework when it comes to HOB filters, in particular the Penguin.
These filters are riding the crest of un-deserved popularity (and I
admit to helping before I did my homework). As your article pointed out
HOBs are not very good biologically, and the bio-wheels in particular
are over rated. The theory behind the bio wheel is excellent, but in
practical application water deposits and more destroy the surface area
of these wheels and the point of more oxygen in the air for bio
bacteria is true, there is plenty in a properly maintained aquarium,
otherwise you have more serious issues for the fish (compare live rock
in the tank to a wet dry out of the tank). I have a more in depth
article about bio wheels in this blog:
http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/

I do have to differ with the article in regards to Sponge filters.
These too were filters that have swung in popularity (and again I also
fell victim too). When I originally used them I used the cheaper Tetra
and others, but these had poor flow designs and even more important
poor sponge media designs. When I re-discovered the Hydro Sponge (as I
started testing many different products in my service business often
side by side with business clients such as the Bahooka Restaurant), I
found them to have a much better sponge design than the others (they
hold a patent) that allows much more bio bacteria and less mechanical
clogging (one of the week spots for some sponge filters). I have found
when comaparing apples to apples when comes to sponge filter with other
filters for bio capacity they come out favorably.
Here is my article about sponge filtration:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

Carl

Trevor Stenson wrote:
In article .com,
"carlrs" wrote:

Jen wrote:
So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they good
or bad?


Jen

I have used UGFs extensively over the years. I personally do not
recommend them do to the extra maintenance sometimes needed (especially
with flat plate UGFs), especially if poorly cared for. But UGFs do not
deserve all the flack they get either. Proper gravel (#3) with about
2-3" of depth works best. The Nektonics UGF was actually very good and
I actually clocked higher flow rates with the same air pump with these
UGF filters vs. the more common flat plate design (placing a 1 gallon
jug just under the out flow and timing the rate of fill).
There are better filters now, but even some newer ones popularity are
based in hype (bio wheel comes to mind). I recommend redundancy with
two filters. In a smaller aquarium a HOB with an internal or sponge
filter is effective, or at least a HOB with a pre filter attached for
improved bio filtration.

For more aquarium filtration information:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

Also I have an article about Bio Wheels he
http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/

Carl

I totally concur with the UG proponents.

Hi, haven't been around this NG much since I set up a tank about a year
ago. I had tanks through most of my teenage years and recently as an
adult - 20 years latter - I set up another.

First of all before I chime in on UG filters I have to say that I guess
I forgot how much work and constant care an aquarium requires to get it
in good balance and keep it that way. I just don't have the time to
watch my tanks that I did as a youth. As a result I have set up a
stringent tank-care schedule and keep mostly hardy fish.

What surprised me, though, when I went to buy my current aquarium is
that I couldn't find a UG filter system at any retail store. The staff
would also keep telling me that they simply don't work.

I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these
days. However, I'm a also big proponent of the dual-filtration system:
having say an outside power filter combined with an UG filter. I had
this as a youth in a 25 gallon tank and I swear that regular aside from
normal required attention this tank was a beautifully balanced system.
I nice stable ecosystem.

The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your
normal tank care. I recently put a UG filter in my current tank and
already notice a definite difference in the quality of the environment
and the health of my fish. A lot of that may have to do with my annual
'big clean' that I just did - but I think the UG filter (that I had to
buy online) is helping as well and will continue to do so if used
properly.

In addition to Carl's points, which I obviously agree with, I've found a
really good online article that talks about the proper use of the UG
filter including the use of a dual filtration set-up:

http://www.aquariumfish.com/aquarium...01&cid=3806&se
arch=

I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap
UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the
stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy. I
don't remember having to buy all that stuff as a youth - and like I said
I had good success with my aquariums for years.

Cheers,

TS
Edmonton SCTV Locations:
http://members.shaw.ca/pumpkin27/iwebber2

My Blog feed:
feed://members.shaw.ca/kitschy/iwebber/TheStenonsNewDigs/Blog/rss.xml

That was an interesting article you posted. I have been the process of
writing a more in depth article about this subject, I have just been
too busy to finish and research the article for any relevant studies (I
do discus UGFs in somewhat in my filtration article:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html )

The interesting point about UGF and many other aquatic subjects is that
these methods and products seem to go thru fads (I have got caught up
in them too, even in my service business), but when I stop and go back
and look at the facts, such as UGFs, these filters are not as bad as
all the bad press they get (this is not to say they are without some
problems). As I pointed out earlier the type of plate makes a BIG
difference in flow and mulm that will cause problems with UGFs.

What I find interesting is that many of these UGF bashers have not done
their homework when it comes to HOB filters, in particular the Penguin.
These filters are riding the crest of un-deserved popularity (and I
admit to helping before I did my homework). As your article pointed out
HOBs are not very good biologically, and the bio-wheels in particular
are over rated. The theory behind the bio wheel is excellent, but in
practical application water deposits and more destroy the surface area
of these wheels and the point of more oxygen in the air for bio
bacteria is true, there is plenty in a properly maintained aquarium,
otherwise you have more serious issues for the fish (compare live rock
in the tank to a wet dry out of the tank). I have a more in depth
article about bio wheels in this blog:
http://aquarium-answers.blogspot.com/

I do have to differ with the article in regards to Sponge filters.
These too were filters that have swung in popularity (and again I also
fell victim too). When I originally used them I used the cheaper Tetra
and others, but these had poor flow designs and even more important
poor sponge media designs. When I re-discovered the Hydro Sponge (as I
started testing many different products in my service business often
side by side with business clients such as the Bahooka Restaurant), I
found them to have a much better sponge design than the others (they
hold a patent) that allows much more bio bacteria and less mechanical
clogging (one of the week spots for some sponge filters). I have found
when comaparing apples to apples when comes to sponge filter with other
filters for bio capacity they come out favorably.
Here is my article about sponge filtration:
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

Carl

What has changed is more people are keeping much fussier fancy GF with deep bodies.
those plain old comets or pond fantails won at fairs can stand pretty bad conditions
without dying. not so the fancier GF with long fins.
We still call them "goldfish bowls" and they were never appropriate for GF because
too little water and high maintenance. the same is now true for UGF, they are high
maintenance compared to bare bottom tanks with good external filters.

a bare bottom tank does not require chemical treatments. for an absolute newbie who
has never had any kind of fish, and for people who want a low maintenance set up,
nothing compares to BBT. Typically the tank is set up with double the usual amount
of external filters. So a 20 gallon tank would have a filter rated for a 40 gallon
tank. 2 big airstones and a heater to keep temps constant. it is not easy to get a
couple fish and cycle this kind of tank without using some biofilter startup, either
a filter pad from a cycled tank, some biospira, or start with some fish food and do a
fishless cycling before getting the fish. however, once this is up and running it is
very stable and easy to maintain. water changes once a week, rinse out the filter
pad(s).
the only thing easier is a pond with a veggie filter. Ingrid


Trevor Stenson wrote:
I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these
days.
The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your
normal tank care.
I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap
UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the
stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...s=Group+lookup
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website.
I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan

wrote:
What has changed is more people are keeping much fussier fancy GF with deep bodies.
those plain old comets or pond fantails won at fairs can stand pretty bad conditions
without dying. not so the fancier GF with long fins.
We still call them "goldfish bowls" and they were never appropriate for GF because
too little water and high maintenance. the same is now true for UGF, they are high
maintenance compared to bare bottom tanks with good external filters.

Yes Goldfish bowls are hardly appropriate and never have been. But to
imply that UGFs worked before and do not now as compared to others is
presumptious. There are definately better filters, I have not sold a
UGF for years to a client. But there is a difference between UGFs and
the cheaper flat plate UGF that took over the maket and made aquarists
who do not do there home work think that they are all equal.
Also as for HOB external filters this where more aquarist homework
needs to be done as most are poor bio filters (although a pre filter
attached to htem improve this). The bio wheels are not as effective as
a good Sponge filter (not all sponge filters are equal either, of which
I admit to the assumption after poor results with some Tetra Sponge
filters that they do not work, the patented Hydro Sponge Filters are
superior)
http://americanaquariumproducts.com/SpongeFilter.html
A properly aerated aquarium (with a proper Redox Potential) provides
all the oxygen the bacterial colonies in a sponge filter need.



a bare bottom tank does not require chemical treatments. for an absolute newbie who
has never had any kind of fish, and for people who want a low maintenance set up,

No arguing with the ease of a BBT, especially with a Sponge filter
which is how my breeder and hospital tanks are set up. But most new
aquarists are NOT going to want this spartan a set up.

nothing compares to BBT. Typically the tank is set up with double the usual amount
of external filters. So a 20 gallon tank would have a filter rated for a 40 gallon
tank. 2 big airstones and a heater to keep temps constant. it is not easy to get a
couple fish and cycle this kind of tank without using some biofilter startup, either
a filter pad from a cycled tank, some biospira, or start with some fish food and do a
fishless cycling before getting the fish. however, once this is up and running it is
very stable and easy to maintain. water changes once a week, rinse out the filter
pad(s).
the only thing easier is a pond with a veggie filter. Ingrid

Again veggie filters are great, although my pond installations always
included a pressurized filter such as the Clear Stream and/or a Hydro
Pond Filter for mechanical and additional bio filtration. In So Cal I
usually included a UV Sterilizer too.


Trevor Stenson wrote:
I agree that they have a bad, and I think, undeserved reputation these
days.
The trick is not to overfeed, use relatively large gravel and do your
normal tank care.
I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist but It seems to me that a cheap
UG filter has given away to the numerous chemical treatments that the
stores hook you into buying to keep you tank biochemistry healthy.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at
http://weloveteaching.com/puregold/
sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?...s=Group+lookup
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I receive no compensation for running the Puregold list or Puregold website.
I do not run nor receive any money from the ads at the old Puregold site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zone 5 next to Lake Michigan

Carl
http://americanaquariumproducts.com/...formation.html
http://www.americanaquariumproducts....iltration.html

"Jen" wrote in message
...
So what's the general consensus on using undergravel filters? Are they
good or bad?


Jen


absolute pain to clean.
now obselete with the air powered sponge filter so cheaply available
they can be handy for fish only marine tanks
and they hide well
but compared to a sponge filter under gravel is a pain.

"carlrs" wrote in message
ps.com...
wrote:
it is best to be careful of "wonder shells" because there has been this
idea of
making "calcium pucks" from plaster of paris and in acid water it can
really jerk the
pH around ... lethally.

the absolute best way to stabilize calcium or "hardness" is with
dolomitic limestone
(not dolomite) which also has magnesium in it (which oyster shells do
not). it comes
powdered and the right stuff looks off white with bits of black flecking
in it. even
limestone chunks are good (but not marble). powdered dolomitic limestone
stays in
the bottom of the tank dissolved on demand. getting the right stuff is
not always
easy, but a lot is not needed either. Ingrid


Are you even familiar with this product?
It is not new, nor is it perfect.
Although dolomitic limestone is a good control for pH and somewhat for
kH, magnesium in small quantities is essential for proper osmotic
function, and even more so as a Redox reducer which new research shows
is very important for proper water chemistry.
I have used these Wonder Shels in literally thousands of aquariums I
have maintained without ever experiencing what you are talking about.
These products are admittedly poorly named, as they do not do wonders,
nor are they a cure all, but they are a usefull tool in good aquatic
husbandry.

As to water channeling in UGFs, you are absolutely correct, but this is
a problem in many poorly maintained filters, including wet drys. The
design of the Nektonics unit tends to somewhat alleviate this problem.
I am not however promoting this filter, as it is not even available any
more, but those who have been involved in the aquatics industry for any
amount of time are familiar with it (such as Netmax).

The site you posted is very good beginner information, but there is
newer research that can be added (such as the fact that Redox plays a
larger roll in aquatic health than pH for many fish, especially dirty
fish such as goldfish).

Anearobic activity is not hard to control in properly maintained
aquariums, and as I stated earlier, I have only accidentally suctioned
goldfish 3 times in over 56,000 cleanings, not bad odds (and those
accidents were years ago). The Nylon sock is however a good idea, but
others still can gravel vacuum properly without one, and honestly the
Lees is amuch better value than the Python.


By the mere name alone 'wonder shells' I am sceptical.
I like to know exactly what it is I am adding.
pH is such a small part of the game anyway
I keep mine good with partial water changes
If I wanna be lazy I throw a few bits of coral in a filter.

Only thing I actually buy to add is dechlorinator
everthing else is easily knocked up

As a cure all
go buy some human food grade bentonite clay.
health food shops
a tablespoon in a bottle of aquarium water
shake it up
pour it in
go to bed
yes it will cloud the tank up for a bit
try a small dose first
but it will rip any crud out of the water

how this effects pH I don't quite know
but I just solved a wacky swingin' one with it.

Keep in mind water needs to degass after coming out of tank before it shows
true pH
and plants swing pH up and down thru day so always test at same time if
possible.
ALmost every fish can handle the pH 7.6 to 7.8 that a bit of shellgrit in
the gravel provides.

5am and ramblin on usenet
w000t
livin the dream eh