i have gotten frustrated many times. but iv gotten the hang of the basics of keeping a low tech planted set up and now i couldnt be happier. 
hope your next hobby is more successful.
hope your next hobby is more successful.
Done with Aquariums
- Thread starter Jag1980
- Start date
So how do other hobbyists help folks from doing this?
What ways might ensure the best chance of success given all the various habits people have?
It was too much work, frustration etc, the person thanked folks for their help, but gave up, too much work etc.
I think for many, the non CO2 method might be a better starting point, then move on to CO2, keeping the low light.
Many want high light or think CO2 = must have high light.
High light disease or HDL.
Be careful in suggesting things for folks that are new. Telling them to get CO2, high light etc and dose etc, it's a lot to bite off. Less light = slower rates of growth, so CO2 demand is less as is algae growth and nutrient demand.
This is much more manageable. So the non CO2 for those that really neglectful etc, or have more than one tank etc, and the lower light CO2 tank for the others to start. Even floating water sprite in a plain old Fish tank does a lot of good and is easy.
No special care etc.
Frustrations can be daunting and many realize it's more work than they thought. So some will leave, but once that non CO2 fully plant tank is up and running, it requires very very little care.
Less than the fish only tank.
something to ponder.........
Regards,
tom Barr
What ways might ensure the best chance of success given all the various habits people have?
It was too much work, frustration etc, the person thanked folks for their help, but gave up, too much work etc.
I think for many, the non CO2 method might be a better starting point, then move on to CO2, keeping the low light.
Many want high light or think CO2 = must have high light.
High light disease or HDL.
Be careful in suggesting things for folks that are new. Telling them to get CO2, high light etc and dose etc, it's a lot to bite off. Less light = slower rates of growth, so CO2 demand is less as is algae growth and nutrient demand.
This is much more manageable. So the non CO2 for those that really neglectful etc, or have more than one tank etc, and the lower light CO2 tank for the others to start. Even floating water sprite in a plain old Fish tank does a lot of good and is easy.
No special care etc.
Frustrations can be daunting and many realize it's more work than they thought. So some will leave, but once that non CO2 fully plant tank is up and running, it requires very very little care.
Less than the fish only tank.
something to ponder.........
Regards,
tom Barr
I agree with Tom's comments. There's a lot of emphasis on needing high light and CO2 and whatnot. I've read many threads where people say "do it right from the begining" and indicate starting with high T5, pressurized CO2, etc.
I think starting more simple and gradually working your way up to a point your happy with, is a good way to go. We all have moments of frustration when there's a problem, but it's a lot less often if there's fewer variables we're dealing with. There have been several threads where newbies are starting off with 3-4 WPG...I hate to say it but we can only HOPE that they're still here in a year and haven't burnt out.
I think starting more simple and gradually working your way up to a point your happy with, is a good way to go. We all have moments of frustration when there's a problem, but it's a lot less often if there's fewer variables we're dealing with. There have been several threads where newbies are starting off with 3-4 WPG...I hate to say it but we can only HOPE that they're still here in a year and haven't burnt out.
while its always difficult to see someone give up on the hobby, sometimes it can be very frustrating.. there were many times when i was fighting BGA in my 55 i just wanted to tear that sucker down and toss it in the yard.. thank god i had the 75 to look at... so i had hope!!
Jag, good luck in your future endeavors
as mentioned..like tom and others have suggested.
If you still have the urge. try lower light.
my experience like others.. was get lots of light add CO2 then balance fertilizers.
out of frustration I decided to try lower light. IE: 65 watt over a 29.
no ferts, no CO2.. and wow.. good growth.
albeit slower but I don't have to trim the tank weekly.
I started with sparse planting, some driftwood, easy plants.
crypts, moneywort, rotala etc.
BINGO I have plants..and easy to care for..I keep BN's( I like them) but have to feed them cause there isn't much algae.
as mentioned..like tom and others have suggested.
If you still have the urge. try lower light.
my experience like others.. was get lots of light add CO2 then balance fertilizers.
out of frustration I decided to try lower light. IE: 65 watt over a 29.
no ferts, no CO2.. and wow.. good growth.
albeit slower but I don't have to trim the tank weekly.
I started with sparse planting, some driftwood, easy plants.
crypts, moneywort, rotala etc.
BINGO I have plants..and easy to care for..I keep BN's( I like them) but have to feed them cause there isn't much algae.
Well, my point is it is as much a human social issue as it is anything to do with planted tanks.
Folks think more light, or high tech is better, it's not.
Or that CO2 is "better", it can be or not.
It depends on expectations, assumptions and most importantly, goals.
The methods do not fail, people do.
Non CO2 works well
Low light CO2 works well
High light CO2 works well.
Here's 3 examples:
All examples of successful tanks.
Which is is best and easier?
Depends on who you ask.
Some view best as low work and longer term care. They would chose the non CO2 method.
Some would say the lower light CO2, they can grow whatever they chose and not spend much time trimming.
Others think more is better and might chose high light + CO2.
The last one is fine..........if you are experienced and good with dosing and CO2, heck there are folks with 5 years in that are still lousy with CO2 or dosing.
But telling a newbie to chose high light + CO2 because they like HC is irresponsible, not too mention wrong, because you can grow it with 2w/gal just fine.
Wanna argue about that? Then explain this tank which has 2w/gal and the lights are 12-14" high over a 24' deep tank:
It's not skill etc, it's wise choices and not falling into the assumption more is better.
This hobby will not grow and improve until we can help folks make fewer mistakes and bring new folks into it over the long term. So their success is important.
You have to be honest with them, tell them they do not require 4w/gal to grow HC. They need honesty and good advice, not the same old tired dogma and myths that float around and never improve success rates.
They do not need a pal that pads their feelings and tells them what they wanna hear, they need someone who'll tell them common sense advice.
Then you get respect and a real friendship:thumbsup:
We know there are several methods and each has trade offs.
What those are can be applied to helping folks succeed and increase the chances of success.
I've yet to find a single plant that **requires** more than 2 W/gal of lighting. That's 300+ species.
I've challenged folks to bring forth an example. Not one person has won this challenge to date. Common sense dictates: more light= more CO2 = more nutrients= faster rates of growth= more pruning, harder to maintain.
Algae seems more an issue of light(too much generally) and poor CO2 stability.
So less light, good focus on CO2 stability are the keys.
Nutrients are rather easy and straight forward. Then go from there with helping them. Might take a few back and forths with them to solve the issue. They might not take your advice either.
Regards,
Tom Barr
Folks think more light, or high tech is better, it's not.
Or that CO2 is "better", it can be or not.
It depends on expectations, assumptions and most importantly, goals.
The methods do not fail, people do.
Non CO2 works well
Low light CO2 works well
High light CO2 works well.
Here's 3 examples:
All examples of successful tanks.
Which is is best and easier?
Depends on who you ask.
Some view best as low work and longer term care. They would chose the non CO2 method.
Some would say the lower light CO2, they can grow whatever they chose and not spend much time trimming.
Others think more is better and might chose high light + CO2.
The last one is fine..........if you are experienced and good with dosing and CO2, heck there are folks with 5 years in that are still lousy with CO2 or dosing.
But telling a newbie to chose high light + CO2 because they like HC is irresponsible, not too mention wrong, because you can grow it with 2w/gal just fine.
Wanna argue about that? Then explain this tank which has 2w/gal and the lights are 12-14" high over a 24' deep tank:
It's not skill etc, it's wise choices and not falling into the assumption more is better.
This hobby will not grow and improve until we can help folks make fewer mistakes and bring new folks into it over the long term. So their success is important.
You have to be honest with them, tell them they do not require 4w/gal to grow HC. They need honesty and good advice, not the same old tired dogma and myths that float around and never improve success rates.
They do not need a pal that pads their feelings and tells them what they wanna hear, they need someone who'll tell them common sense advice.
Then you get respect and a real friendship:thumbsup:
We know there are several methods and each has trade offs.
What those are can be applied to helping folks succeed and increase the chances of success.
I've yet to find a single plant that **requires** more than 2 W/gal of lighting. That's 300+ species.
I've challenged folks to bring forth an example. Not one person has won this challenge to date. Common sense dictates: more light= more CO2 = more nutrients= faster rates of growth= more pruning, harder to maintain.
Algae seems more an issue of light(too much generally) and poor CO2 stability.
So less light, good focus on CO2 stability are the keys.
Nutrients are rather easy and straight forward. Then go from there with helping them. Might take a few back and forths with them to solve the issue. They might not take your advice either.
Regards,
Tom Barr
I know I've had thoughts about breaking it all down for a while as I battled sickness. I feel so happy that I didn't because now everything is working out again and I feel total gratification.
I sure hope you're able to find that place with your lizards.
On a side note, those can be frustrating too! I had a leopard gecko that would starve herself...she was afraid of crickets but wouldn't eat anything else! i would have to hold the crickets in my hand and wiggle them in front of her face as she would run from them, for about 30 minutes at a time, until she would finally eat it. DROVE ME NUTS! LOL
I sure hope you're able to find that place with your lizards.
On a side note, those can be frustrating too! I had a leopard gecko that would starve herself...she was afraid of crickets but wouldn't eat anything else! i would have to hold the crickets in my hand and wiggle them in front of her face as she would run from them, for about 30 minutes at a time, until she would finally eat it. DROVE ME NUTS! LOL
