Are Water Changes Actually Necessary?
- Thread starter kazvorpal
- Start date
- Status
opcorn: and?
I seriously wonder what makes him think he's so qualified to shoot down everyones responses to his question without ever telling where his info is from. "Deep sand bed will do this", and "any biologist will tell you that" just makes you look like an idiot, honestly. You have to produce something factual (other than in your own diluted mind) or no one here will ever take you seriously. Is anyone else pissed that he's basically came in and started attacking us for no apparent reason?
Once again I need to stop you dead in your tracks about plants in aquaria.
First off, ferrtilization is ABSOLUTELY necessary once you reach a certain plant mass. This is highly subjective to the tank, but it is an absolute truth. If you believe that topping up and fish waste and other by products of fish metabolism is all that plants need to survive you are sorely mistaken. As with any living organism, certain macro and micro nutrients must be met. You have very similar thinking to a lot of aquarists I used to talk to 15 years ago. They had the same thinking that plants were the miracle cure to an old dirty tank and that they would magically absorb all the nitrates and other nasties in their tanks. Here is the rub. Potassium, nitrate, phosphate, iron, magnesium, sodium, copper, etc. Does tap water contain enough of these nutrients to support more than a handful of plants at best? No. Is there a fish that produces these in enough quantity to satisfy the needs of a planted tank? No. Unless you have a couple hundred square feet or more of river rock to run your aquarium water through before it goes back into the tank, you are going to run into deficiencies. By the time a visual indicator is present, ie. yellowing leaves, pinholes etc. the damage has been done and is irreversible. Plain and simple and no way around it.
Second, it seems you are very highly opinionated, but lacking in practical experience and knowledge. Not once in 21 pages of posts have you provided one iota of proof of your theories.Yes I will call them theories, because I see no scientific data that you have produced that proves anything you have posted. Ever heard the saying "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
Maybe you dont see it, but many here have been keeping aquaria for many many years and a lot of people here who have posted to you have taken the hobby at least one step further than the average person. What you see as anecdotal is most likely based off real time observations in their own aquariums. One step away from lab environments.
Finally I would like to close with this. What you deem as unnecessary, I call an ounce of prevention. You CANNOT compare any glass box with a natural ecosystem. You are only fooling yourself if you are. You really need to scratch below the surface and take in the entire picture before you start passing off false information and show your true lack of knowledge on the subject. So please, if you are going to use plants as a crutch for your argument, at least get the facts right.
First off, ferrtilization is ABSOLUTELY necessary once you reach a certain plant mass. This is highly subjective to the tank, but it is an absolute truth. If you believe that topping up and fish waste and other by products of fish metabolism is all that plants need to survive you are sorely mistaken. As with any living organism, certain macro and micro nutrients must be met. You have very similar thinking to a lot of aquarists I used to talk to 15 years ago. They had the same thinking that plants were the miracle cure to an old dirty tank and that they would magically absorb all the nitrates and other nasties in their tanks. Here is the rub. Potassium, nitrate, phosphate, iron, magnesium, sodium, copper, etc. Does tap water contain enough of these nutrients to support more than a handful of plants at best? No. Is there a fish that produces these in enough quantity to satisfy the needs of a planted tank? No. Unless you have a couple hundred square feet or more of river rock to run your aquarium water through before it goes back into the tank, you are going to run into deficiencies. By the time a visual indicator is present, ie. yellowing leaves, pinholes etc. the damage has been done and is irreversible. Plain and simple and no way around it.
Second, it seems you are very highly opinionated, but lacking in practical experience and knowledge. Not once in 21 pages of posts have you provided one iota of proof of your theories.Yes I will call them theories, because I see no scientific data that you have produced that proves anything you have posted. Ever heard the saying "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
Maybe you dont see it, but many here have been keeping aquaria for many many years and a lot of people here who have posted to you have taken the hobby at least one step further than the average person. What you see as anecdotal is most likely based off real time observations in their own aquariums. One step away from lab environments.
Finally I would like to close with this. What you deem as unnecessary, I call an ounce of prevention. You CANNOT compare any glass box with a natural ecosystem. You are only fooling yourself if you are. You really need to scratch below the surface and take in the entire picture before you start passing off false information and show your true lack of knowledge on the subject. So please, if you are going to use plants as a crutch for your argument, at least get the facts right.
Thanks so much for your eloquence, 247. I could never have said it better.
(BTW, I meant Kaz was full of big brown pretzels.
What did you think I meant?)
(BTW, I meant Kaz was full of big brown pretzels.
What did you think I meant?)
I bought that exact thing when I was younger, and it is not a pretzel:bs:.
Anybody else notice that kaz backed off?
Anybody else notice that kaz backed off?
Last edited:
Chiming in, I think this thread has generated great discussion and shown a couple general trends:
1. Most people (so far) perform some form of regular water changes
2. There is no right or wrong method - Do whatever works for your situation.
Two more points that I've seen partially mentioned in these posts is adaptability of the inhabitants and consistency. These are interdependent of each other. If you're doing regular changes, every week, that's consistent and the inhabitants are adjusted to this. If you're not doing changes, and the inhabitants are healthy then I would surmise they are adjusted to their water conditions. Inhabitants that are more tolerant to change or extremes will do better than inhabitants requiring strict parameters.
Speaking of water conditions, everyone probably has different composition in the water they put into the tank. I’m no chemist, but I presume the water in Ohio is different in it's total composition than water in TX or OR. I understand that RO water is "Pure", but also has little buffering capacity for any pH swings or changes thereby other "things" are needed for consistency.
I guess my input/opinion is this: As I read the OP and subsequent replies, I read a specific request for exact reasons substantiating a water change (or specific caveats to not do a change). My reply is that’s non existent in general terms. There’s just too many variables. How adaptive are the fish? What’s the water chemistry? Light period? Level of algae/plants? Filtration? Bio-load? Etc… So I go back to point #2 above.
Historically, I am a horrible water maintenance person. I am only recently getting into a routine with the 75, and have noticed improved water parameters when testing and my inhabitants appear to be more active after changes. Since I like this behavior I will try to set up a more routine schedule and observe, again figuring out what works for me in my tanks.
BTW - Earlier in the post i noticed the statement that regular changes "stress" the fish into breeding/altering behavior/color; I propose that is presumptuous. It can also be observed as "De-stressing" the fish prompting behavioral changes. Again, not right/wrong, just a different point of view here.
1. Most people (so far) perform some form of regular water changes
2. There is no right or wrong method - Do whatever works for your situation.
Two more points that I've seen partially mentioned in these posts is adaptability of the inhabitants and consistency. These are interdependent of each other. If you're doing regular changes, every week, that's consistent and the inhabitants are adjusted to this. If you're not doing changes, and the inhabitants are healthy then I would surmise they are adjusted to their water conditions. Inhabitants that are more tolerant to change or extremes will do better than inhabitants requiring strict parameters.
Speaking of water conditions, everyone probably has different composition in the water they put into the tank. I’m no chemist, but I presume the water in Ohio is different in it's total composition than water in TX or OR. I understand that RO water is "Pure", but also has little buffering capacity for any pH swings or changes thereby other "things" are needed for consistency.
I guess my input/opinion is this: As I read the OP and subsequent replies, I read a specific request for exact reasons substantiating a water change (or specific caveats to not do a change). My reply is that’s non existent in general terms. There’s just too many variables. How adaptive are the fish? What’s the water chemistry? Light period? Level of algae/plants? Filtration? Bio-load? Etc… So I go back to point #2 above.
Historically, I am a horrible water maintenance person. I am only recently getting into a routine with the 75, and have noticed improved water parameters when testing and my inhabitants appear to be more active after changes. Since I like this behavior I will try to set up a more routine schedule and observe, again figuring out what works for me in my tanks.
BTW - Earlier in the post i noticed the statement that regular changes "stress" the fish into breeding/altering behavior/color; I propose that is presumptuous. It can also be observed as "De-stressing" the fish prompting behavioral changes. Again, not right/wrong, just a different point of view here.
Tanks are too small to be self-contained ecosystems. Heck, entire farms are too small to do it. Food goes in, waste goes out. The waste has to go all of the way out of the tank. No amount of planting and microflora will be able to cope with it within the confines of a tank. It's elementary.
As a rule of thumb, if your tank is so rich provisioned you don't need to provide any food at all, them you might be able to skip water changes.
As a rule of thumb, if your tank is so rich provisioned you don't need to provide any food at all, them you might be able to skip water changes.
I apologize in advance for the 'i' word, that was unprofessional of me. Its becoming more apparent to me by the post that this guy is probably just trying to get a rise out of us, as any good forum-troll would. I propose this test to be the end all:
Get an average sized pool, above ground. We'll fill it up and dechlor it, pack the filter out with as much established filter media as we can fit in it, as any plants you care to, and that will be your home for the entire summer. You will eat, sleep, fornicate and defecate in it. We will not change out any of the water, only add some fresh hose water when the level gets low. Hell, you can even have a sand bed in it if it makes you happy. At the end of that summer will you still be sticking your head under the water?
Get an average sized pool, above ground. We'll fill it up and dechlor it, pack the filter out with as much established filter media as we can fit in it, as any plants you care to, and that will be your home for the entire summer. You will eat, sleep, fornicate and defecate in it. We will not change out any of the water, only add some fresh hose water when the level gets low. Hell, you can even have a sand bed in it if it makes you happy. At the end of that summer will you still be sticking your head under the water?
- Status
