Algae problem

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:38:09 GMT, (~Roy~) wrote:

I dunno about others but 30 PPM has always worked fine for me, as long
as there was not any fish or other critters that I wanted to survive
the doseing. It does a bang up job of cleanin gup everything and
anything at that rate

Odds are though if your not fighting a prtoblem as far as fish health
is concerned, the standard 2 ppm dose applied to the entire pond and
fish will do it all a bit of good, and probably reduce your nutrient
load and knock off the algae as well.

I don't recommend it in the pond for an algae problem, as it would be just
like an algaecide. Killing it just creates more food for the next problem
which could be worst.

As far as knocking it off the roots in a separate bucket, I add enough to
make the water a nice pretty purple... or iows, I've never measured, but it
takes very little, depending on how big your bucket is. ~ jan

~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~

Jan, interesting theory there.

Last year when I had massive algae blooms I was told by AUM (Auburn
University) and the Universtiy of Florida to dose my pond with PP,
to rid it of excessive nutrients. Any remaining junk after the second
dose if a second dose was needed would essentially be inert and add
little to no nutrient value to future algae blooms.......dunno if its
true or not, but thats what I was told by them.

I know my floaters like Sensitive Fern and frog bit had so much algae
built up on them you could not see the hair roots, and my lilys and
other plants had massive amounts of algae on their stems and
leaves...After my PP treatment the roots were like they were just
washed and totally free of any algae or otehr junk. It did take two
doses, but those 2 doses were a headstart in what my pond looks like
now, which has better than 36 inches of super visibility and in the
south in a natural pond this is almost unheard of especially when it
sets in full sun all day, and is filled by runoff and rainfall. I
would think a good filtration system would catch all the oxiidized
junk in a filtered pond, or it would settle out in a settlement
chamber, after a PP dose and not add much to a future algae
bloom....Just my perspective from what I have experienced.

Regards



On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:54:53 -0700, ~ janj JJsPond.us
wrote:

===On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 01:38:09 GMT, (~Roy~) wrote:
===
===I dunno about others but 30 PPM has always worked fine for me, as long
===as there was not any fish or other critters that I wanted to survive
===the doseing. It does a bang up job of cleanin gup everything and
===anything at that rate
===
===Odds are though if your not fighting a prtoblem as far as fish health
===is concerned, the standard 2 ppm dose applied to the entire pond and
===fish will do it all a bit of good, and probably reduce your nutrient
===load and knock off the algae as well.
===
===I don't recommend it in the pond for an algae problem, as it would be just
===like an algaecide. Killing it just creates more food for the next problem
===which could be worst.
===
===As far as knocking it off the roots in a separate bucket, I add enough to
===make the water a nice pretty purple... or iows, I've never measured, but it
===takes very little, depending on how big your bucket is. ~ jan
===
=== ~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~


==============================================
Put some color in your cheeks...garden naked!
"The original frugal ponder"
~~~~ }((((o ~~~~~~ }{{{{o ~~~~~~~ }(((((o

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:24:03 GMT, (Roy) wrote:

Jan, interesting theory there.

Last year when I had massive algae blooms I was told by AUM (Auburn
University) and the Universtiy of Florida to dose my pond with PP,
to rid it of excessive nutrients. Any remaining junk after the second
dose if a second dose was needed would essentially be inert and add
little to no nutrient value to future algae blooms.......dunno if its
true or not, but thats what I was told by them.

I know my floaters like Sensitive Fern and frog bit had so much algae
built up on them you could not see the hair roots, and my lilys and
other plants had massive amounts of algae on their stems and
leaves...After my PP treatment the roots were like they were just
washed and totally free of any algae or otehr junk. It did take two
doses, but those 2 doses were a headstart in what my pond looks like
now, which has better than 36 inches of super visibility and in the
south in a natural pond this is almost unheard of especially when it
sets in full sun all day, and is filled by runoff and rainfall. I
would think a good filtration system would catch all the oxiidized
junk in a filtered pond, or it would settle out in a settlement
chamber, after a PP dose and not add much to a future algae
bloom....Just my perspective from what I have experienced.

Hmmmm, well now you have me rethinking, I do know there is a KHA that
treats his water garden ponds with 2ppm now and then to rid them of the
organic mulm.

PP is an oxidizer, but where would the organics go/become? I know I was
going to try this in the D.pond this spring, and totally forgot, the D.pond
has this light fluffy mulm, that doesn't move for nothing towards the
bottom drain. Yet it puffs right up when disturbed. 2000 gallon pond with
turn around time of once/hour. So I was going to try his PP solution to see
what it would do with that mulm. Maybe next year, or this fall. We'll see.
~ jan

~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~

I do not know what the oxidized matter becomes afater treatment, only
that it is more inert in the oxidized stage than unoxidized, but it
does ot "remove" anything in the process.If you had say 10# of mulm in
the pond and you PP'd it, your still probably goping to have 10# and
maybe more of mulm when yur done, except its rendered inert......with
maybe a little less with vaporized material but its still going to
leave a residue........and not only inerting mulm and nutrients but it
knocks back or kill off any parasites that may be in there, which is a
help sometimes as its impossible as you know to rid the water of all
of these things as they are naturally occuring to some degree, but it
does good to reduce the community of nasties. The organics and
residue left after PP dose just have to be filtered out. I know when I
clean up a stock tank to get it ready for more fish I use the same
water, and PP it, and those tanks need 2 or 3 times the filter changes
until I get all the organics removed.

Regards

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:16:17 -0700, ~ janj JJsPond.us
wrote:

===On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:24:03 GMT, (Roy) wrote:
===
===Jan, interesting theory there.
===
===Last year when I had massive algae blooms I was told by AUM (Auburn
===University) and the Universtiy of Florida to dose my pond with PP,
===to rid it of excessive nutrients. Any remaining junk after the second
===dose if a second dose was needed would essentially be inert and add
===little to no nutrient value to future algae blooms.......dunno if its
===true or not, but thats what I was told by them.
===
===I know my floaters like Sensitive Fern and frog bit had so much algae
===built up on them you could not see the hair roots, and my lilys and
===other plants had massive amounts of algae on their stems and
===leaves...After my PP treatment the roots were like they were just
===washed and totally free of any algae or otehr junk. It did take two
===doses, but those 2 doses were a headstart in what my pond looks like
===now, which has better than 36 inches of super visibility and in the
===south in a natural pond this is almost unheard of especially when it
===sets in full sun all day, and is filled by runoff and rainfall. I
===would think a good filtration system would catch all the oxiidized
===junk in a filtered pond, or it would settle out in a settlement
===chamber, after a PP dose and not add much to a future algae
===bloom....Just my perspective from what I have experienced.
===
===Hmmmm, well now you have me rethinking, I do know there is a KHA that
===treats his water garden ponds with 2ppm now and then to rid them of the
===organic mulm.
===
===PP is an oxidizer, but where would the organics go/become? I know I was
===going to try this in the D.pond this spring, and totally forgot, the D.pond
===has this light fluffy mulm, that doesn't move for nothing towards the
===bottom drain. Yet it puffs right up when disturbed. 2000 gallon pond with
===turn around time of once/hour. So I was going to try his PP solution to see
===what it would do with that mulm. Maybe next year, or this fall. We'll see.
===~ jan
===
=== ~Power to the Porg, Flow On!~


==============================================
Put some color in your cheeks...garden naked!
"The original frugal ponder"
~~~~ }((((o ~~~~~~ }{{{{o ~~~~~~~ }(((((o

~ janj JJsPond.us wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 22:24:03 GMT, (Roy) wrote:

Jan, interesting theory there.

Last year when I had massive algae blooms I was told by AUM (Auburn
University) and the Universtiy of Florida to dose my pond with PP,
to rid it of excessive nutrients. Any remaining junk after the second
dose if a second dose was needed would essentially be inert and add
little to no nutrient value to future algae blooms.......dunno if its
true or not, but thats what I was told by them.

Hmmmm, well now you have me rethinking, I do know there is a KHA that
treats his water garden ponds with 2ppm now and then to rid them of the
organic mulm.

PP is an oxidizer, but where would the organics go/become?

I would have _thought_ (I'm no chemist) that it just precipitates the
organics out of the water column - I would expect "mulm" to still be there,
but perhaps as a denser precipitate. I can certainly see how it would make
nutrients unavailable to algae.
--
derek