Can't seem to get nitrite any lower
- Thread starter MollyFan1
- Start date
Reddog80p said:
Doesn't mean they are not either unless humans can read the minds of a fish.
Last edited:
rbishop said:
Differing opinions is ok and thats what makes things interesting. What I mean buy dying- is if something is wrong with the fish you can usually tell aka listlessness, floating to the top for air, or swimming in an akward fashion. Thats when I would check water parameters. If they seem alright eating and chasing around then thats what I will consider alright and happy and I wouldn't go changing things drastically. I hope none of you are offended. I am only stating how things differentiate between each other. For me it is trial and error.
You see Why go to repair something that doesn't need to be repaired?
I am allowing also the mother nature aspect to assist in the development of the tank. I do agree with you to some extent rbishop. My opinion on the matter is if your are doing your regular maintainence then this also counts to being prepared ahead of time and not after the fact as you stated.
You can't do more than that unless you stay all day at the tank for the next 2 to 3 weeks doing water change after water change which bare in mind i think adds stress to the fish. At some point you have to stop and allow it to take its course.
I am allowing also the mother nature aspect to assist in the development of the tank. I do agree with you to some extent rbishop. My opinion on the matter is if your are doing your regular maintainence then this also counts to being prepared ahead of time and not after the fact as you stated.
You can't do more than that unless you stay all day at the tank for the next 2 to 3 weeks doing water change after water change which bare in mind i think adds stress to the fish. At some point you have to stop and allow it to take its course.
Last edited:
I'm certainly not offended. I'm a farmer and deal with dying animals all the time and most are 'worth' more than fish... But with fish it's relatively simple as far as ammonia and nitrite goes. The fish will do well if you can keep the levels down, and that is easy with water changes. You don't have to wait until a fish is swimming upside down to know there is a problem. You can use a test these days and know that you will soon have fish swimming upside down and you can correct that *before* the damage is done.
The bacteria will establish just the same whether you keep the levels down or not. The fish will do better if you keep the levels down. So the best thing all round is to keep the levels down and let the bacteria establish and in time all will be well.
Hey, sure, I get nitrite spikes now and then. i evaluated the situation and the level and try to work out if it's temporary and whether (or how much) water change is needed. We have the tools these days that I didn't really have 30 years ago, so use them and make life easy for you and the fish...
Once the tank is established I find it plain sailing for many years with normal (easy) maintenance...
The bacteria will establish just the same whether you keep the levels down or not. The fish will do better if you keep the levels down. So the best thing all round is to keep the levels down and let the bacteria establish and in time all will be well.
Hey, sure, I get nitrite spikes now and then. i evaluated the situation and the level and try to work out if it's temporary and whether (or how much) water change is needed. We have the tools these days that I didn't really have 30 years ago, so use them and make life easy for you and the fish...
Once the tank is established I find it plain sailing for many years with normal (easy) maintenance...
IMO and IME, there is something completely wrong with the tank as a whole if it is not cycled and there are no ammonia levels at all, but there are nitrite levels. I know I am sure that I havent read your other posts or anything, but unless the tank is very nearly cycled, you would have both small ammonia and a bit higher nitrites. I say this because the nitrates would then be much higher than 10 ppm unless you just did a water change...that make any sense?
I would invest in another test kit just to make sure that yours is not wrong, especially if it is test strips. With that many fish in there, and doing 50% water changes, you should not be nearly done cycling, in my opinion. This is one reason why cycling with fish actually takes longer, because when you have to do constant water changes, just to keep your fish alive, you are also taking out the bacteria's food (ammonia and nitrites), thus slowing things down a bit.
I think everyone is losing the focus of MollyFan's problem here, but I also wanted to chime in because I have noticed, over about four months since I joined, that rbishop is always getting slammed for trying to help you all cycle your tanks and do it in the most humane way possible. I am not trying to make anyone mad, and so please don't get defensive, but there are so many things that can happen negatively to a fish when it is in unhealthy or uncycled water and I just dont see why anyone would so passionately defend the thinking that it is 100% completely fine to do this. I am not saying that it cannot be done, but certainly should be avoided. Just because a fish is acting totally 'normal' and not listless or gasping for air, among the other visual ques that have been pointed out, does not mean that they are not being hurt at all. It would be the same as if one of us was stuck in a room full of smokers, the 'damage' that is being done is not always instant and has long lasting effects. Ammonia, even if it does not kill a fish, can burn its gills and do unreversable damage. You also cannot see or visually inspect a fish's slime coat most often and so how do you know the fish is healthy enough to fish off Ich and other problems when you have to replace fish during a cycle, without quaranteening them 99% of the time, because another one died?
My point is that when someone who is trying to point out how things could have been done better, they should not just be slammed and slammed from every different direction becasue there is a 'loop hole' to get around things. Everything has a consequence and the best situation would be to just cycle a tank without fish since it is now totally possible. Just because it was done in the past, does not mean it is the best method. As far as people who write books, sure most of them are qualified and full of good information, but I would also like to point out that Adolf Hitler wrote a book and I dont think anyone would quote everything he had to say as the best method for anything. I would be leery of any book 'for dummies' since all of those books are meant to written in very plain language so anyone can understand them and I am 100% sure that they do not explore all of the complicated issues behind certain situations dealing with keeping a fish tank. Just be mindful of people like rbishop and a few others, moderators or not, who really are trying to help out, and not create a debate every time he or she writes some advice.
I would invest in another test kit just to make sure that yours is not wrong, especially if it is test strips. With that many fish in there, and doing 50% water changes, you should not be nearly done cycling, in my opinion. This is one reason why cycling with fish actually takes longer, because when you have to do constant water changes, just to keep your fish alive, you are also taking out the bacteria's food (ammonia and nitrites), thus slowing things down a bit.
I think everyone is losing the focus of MollyFan's problem here, but I also wanted to chime in because I have noticed, over about four months since I joined, that rbishop is always getting slammed for trying to help you all cycle your tanks and do it in the most humane way possible. I am not trying to make anyone mad, and so please don't get defensive, but there are so many things that can happen negatively to a fish when it is in unhealthy or uncycled water and I just dont see why anyone would so passionately defend the thinking that it is 100% completely fine to do this. I am not saying that it cannot be done, but certainly should be avoided. Just because a fish is acting totally 'normal' and not listless or gasping for air, among the other visual ques that have been pointed out, does not mean that they are not being hurt at all. It would be the same as if one of us was stuck in a room full of smokers, the 'damage' that is being done is not always instant and has long lasting effects. Ammonia, even if it does not kill a fish, can burn its gills and do unreversable damage. You also cannot see or visually inspect a fish's slime coat most often and so how do you know the fish is healthy enough to fish off Ich and other problems when you have to replace fish during a cycle, without quaranteening them 99% of the time, because another one died?
My point is that when someone who is trying to point out how things could have been done better, they should not just be slammed and slammed from every different direction becasue there is a 'loop hole' to get around things. Everything has a consequence and the best situation would be to just cycle a tank without fish since it is now totally possible. Just because it was done in the past, does not mean it is the best method. As far as people who write books, sure most of them are qualified and full of good information, but I would also like to point out that Adolf Hitler wrote a book and I dont think anyone would quote everything he had to say as the best method for anything. I would be leery of any book 'for dummies' since all of those books are meant to written in very plain language so anyone can understand them and I am 100% sure that they do not explore all of the complicated issues behind certain situations dealing with keeping a fish tank. Just be mindful of people like rbishop and a few others, moderators or not, who really are trying to help out, and not create a debate every time he or she writes some advice.
Shermanator said:
If you dont want to fix something that is broke, then why put fish in a tank that is not completely 'built' yet?
I think you are comparing apples to oranges Shermanator...sure you need to do regular maintenance and this will solve 99% of the problems that can happen in a tank, but that applies to a cycled tank, of which this thread is not talking about.
You simply cannot argue using mother nature as your scapecoat at all since if that was the case, your fish would be in a river or lake. Too add to that, you cannot say that your fish tank is even a drop in a bucket compared to a river, lake or ocean and so the same rules do not apply.
Why would you want to defend cycling with fish when mother nature never intended things to be that way and you can drop some fish food into a tank or add ammonia and walk away and let everything take its course? That is just a really unintelligable answer for people who want to defend a mistake.
Ok -I have of alot of respect for the advise that all forum members are stating. As I am no expert in the field thats for sure. I am not slamming rbishop- to the contrary I have alot of respect for his advise and he is very well informed. But you have to understand that we are talking of a global range of members here and certain ways of doing things in other countries.
If you go to Asia they have zillions of fish vegetating in a bucket. I point this out as loosley if you get the point.
As much as I would have liked to have done the fishless cycle in some parts of the world you can't buy ammonia of the shelf. So fishy cycles have to be done. For me this is a learning experience and the only way to learn is to converse with others to get a good perspective so that you could apply to your particular problem. Somethimes things dont work sometimes they do. Nobody is dismissing others opinions here as rubbish or I am not disagreeing with anyone for the sake of argument sake. Your taking it out of context TG. I was merely stating what is working for me at this stage of my cycle. I evaluate the problem as I encounter it not predict that next week I my fish might get a fungus so I should dump some medication into it. If you get my drift.
As I said before please don't get offended that is not the purpose that I am trying to establish here.
RBishop- Your the Man! - I hope I didn't offend you thats not my intentions.
If you go to Asia they have zillions of fish vegetating in a bucket. I point this out as loosley if you get the point.
As much as I would have liked to have done the fishless cycle in some parts of the world you can't buy ammonia of the shelf. So fishy cycles have to be done. For me this is a learning experience and the only way to learn is to converse with others to get a good perspective so that you could apply to your particular problem. Somethimes things dont work sometimes they do. Nobody is dismissing others opinions here as rubbish or I am not disagreeing with anyone for the sake of argument sake. Your taking it out of context TG. I was merely stating what is working for me at this stage of my cycle. I evaluate the problem as I encounter it not predict that next week I my fish might get a fungus so I should dump some medication into it. If you get my drift.
As I said before please don't get offended that is not the purpose that I am trying to establish here.
RBishop- Your the Man! - I hope I didn't offend you thats not my intentions.
Last edited:
