Your Low Tech Setup and it's Success (or lack of!)

Water is cheap. RO water is not cheap, and IMHO wasteful most of the time unless you are breeding fish which require low TDS. The use of RO is not in any way "low-tech". The electricity to operate the tanks costs several-fold what the water does, are you likely to advocate turning off filters and lights? IMHO & IME tanks have some basic requirements for operation. If you cannot afford the water, you cannot afford the tank.

Ms Waldstad does not change water other than at wide intervals, does not filter (but does use current), and does not use artificial light. Nor does she aquascape or groom nor feed her plants. If you buy that package, buy the whole package. I do not buy it - I do not want my tanks to look like the one photo I have seen of one of her tanks. But that is personal choice.

Water changes are perhaps the cheapest and easiest thing that can be done to a tank to promote health an stability. I have yet to have, or even hear of tanks damaged by water changes (assuming the hobbyist involved has heard on chlorine, chloramines, and temperature - and if they have not they are not a hobbyist). I read posts daily in multiples on tanks which have been harmed either directly or secondarily by lack of changes.

I have several tanks operating with plenums. They don't show nitrate other than when I supplement. They get the same changes the other tanks do. Is that wasteful? To suggest that is, again IMHO & IME, absurd. The fish there exceed there natural lifespans - just as they do in my other tanks. And yes, suggestions that water changes are not needed, or are wasted money, do strike a nerve with me as I consider that both false economy and extremely poor aquarium practice. Your tanks are your business, operate them as you will. But if you suggest as a general rule that not changing water is good aquarium practice, I will exercise my option of opposing that view strongly.
 
Well I think you are both right. RTR says changing water is a good idea. Pike says it can be done effectively with infrequent water changes.

I think you'll both agree that the vast majority of hobbyists will and should do frequent water changes because for the vast majority of users it will help maintain a healthy environment. Low maintenance or not. Those attempting to go without water changes better know exactly what they're doing.

So for the newbie out there reading this thread... No, you can't have a fish tank without changing the water.

These terms "low-tech" and "low maintenance" should be defined before we argue for or against them.
 
PlantBrains, You out there!!!

RTR,
My apologies for striking a nerve, but I think SuperJohnny got it right on the head in regards to defining what is meant by “Low-Tech” and “Low maint.” From my understanding the term was coined from her book. So therefore, that’s the general idea that people would follow when trying to setup that kind of tank. Of course there are small adjustments that are made. It’s whatever works for you, but it’s more the concept I think we’re trying to focus on.

Her tanks may not be groomed and aquascaped to be put in AGA Contest, but they do seem successful. And whose to say that if you a have low tech setup, you’re not grooming. As I stated, I have to groom my Italian val. Every now and then. If not, it’ll block all the light toward the back of my tank.

I know it’s hard to buy the idea of not doing water changes, but I’m not saying that you don’t have to. I’m just saying that I don’t do it that often in my 90g, and it works for me, and that’s what I felt the original post was getting at. And just because I don’t do weekly water changes, I don’t think that’s poor aquarium practice. I think my 90g is quite successful. If you look at the first shot to the most recent shot of my tank, there’s a bit of a difference. On top of that, my apistos have spawned in there. (For all of you that do not know, apistos can be a tough cichlid to breed. They require extremely clean water and the optimal conditions to get them to spawn.)

When I started doing research on this whole concept. I kept coming up with hits on the “low-tech” thing. To later find out that they were adding CO2, ferts, and all these other things. To me that’s not low tech and they are using the term in the wrong context.

There are basic things needed, such as filters, lighting, heat, etc. But that’s basics. There’s only a few people that I’ve read that have had success with using natural lighting and no heaters. But they live in the desert where it’s warm and they put there tanks right up against the window. So there is a bit of overhead cost for the majority of us, but again…basics. What I would like to figure out is getting rid of the excessive.

I have 30g right now with high lighting, CO2, and I have to fertilize and do weekly water changes. If not, the algae goes crazy and the plants suffer. I love my hobby, but I don’t want to make it full time job. I have other things to do with my time.

My whole angle is trying to get a nice looking tank without all the work. And to also hear other people’s input on their similar experiences. So hopefully this can be a whole new approach in having a successful planted tank. Too many people follow the very successful formula of 50% weekly water changes followed up by fertilization 3 times a week. But I’m sure there are other ways. Especially if your tank is nowhere near being fully stocked.

If I only had 15 cardinals and 8 ottos in my 90g, is it necessary to do weekly maintenence? Again, it’s what works for you and is dependent upon the scenario.

I would like to be able to go on vacation for maybe 3 weeks and not have to worry water changes, ferts, co2, etc. And again, that’s what I feel was really the target of this whole post.

I agree with you saying that water changes are the cheapest and easiest thing to stabilize the tank. But if my car only has 1500 miles since the last oil change, I’m not wasting my time or money in getting another until it’s do.

So don’t take it as if I’m bashing you for saying that your method is wrong for doing higher maintenance. I just have a different approach as I’m sure others do as well.

I would be interested on Tom Barr’s opinion on this post. As I recall he also had his own method at the Low-tech thing.
 
High tech vs low tech debate was around long before Ms. Waldstad's book. It dates back at least to the original publication of The Optimum Aquarium if not before. That was 1986 vs 1999.

RO is not low tech, PCFs are not low tech (but may be applied to low tech with care), monitors and controllers are not low tech, nor are repeated doses of supplements during the week low tech, plenums are not low tech (they require either heavy stocking and feeding or dosing), substrate cables are not low tech. I suspect the any CO2 supplement is not low tech to a purist, but for myself I'm on the fence on that one as all my tanks are not low tech.

When your small Tetras average to 6-10 years in your care, most of your cichlids to their teens at least, your puffers over 20, and your loaches much longer than that, tell me about it and I'll listen. Otherwise I'll continue preaching that frequent and significant water changes are the most effective single aquarium technique. Conversely I will argue that failure to do water changes is other than good aquarium practice and a risky technique.
 
Wow…Touchy Touchy. I didn’t think replying to a post can push someone’s buttons that bad.

I guess this is going to go on and on with your views vs my trial and error. I may not have the decades of experience as you do in this hobby. But maybe that makes it easier for me to accept newer methods. There’s a saying about that, but I forget what it is. I’m sure most of you can recall…Can’t you? ;) :D

But as mentioned above, there are basics involved with keeping an aquarium. And all the technology, no matter how inexpensive they are, still have a bit a good technology involved. Even if you have a low-tech Tank, you should still be able to test the water if you want with a PH meter. We should go crazy now and go back to cave tank days.

For all you newbies out there, in order to go about my approach and the many many others, you do have come at it with great care. Careful planning, monitoring, and patience is involved. So make sure you do a lot of research.

And for those that are interested in some resources on “low-tech” methods, here are some links:

http://mike-edwardes.members.beeb.net/plant/lotech.html

http://communitytank.aaquaria.com/articles/algae.htm
Scroll down to Basic Guidlines

There’s more out there, but I’m a bit tired. I never thought I would get in such a debate over aquariums. I hope this doesn’t make me an honorary “Fish Geek”. But I’m sure there are many more sites out there. I’m just tired of filtering things out from the garbage that’s on the web. Good luck to all of you with you low-tech plans.
 
Here's my low tech tank.

My 30 gal hex low tech plant tank with glass top(15w NO Fluorescence, no CO2, aquaclear 150 HOB filter, only add fluorish) . Plants (Anubias sp., Java Fern, Crypt sp.) grow slow, no pearling, but are doing great.

I do plan on upping the lighting to because my very low light does not show the fish and their colors well. I'm sure the plants would like it a bit better as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom