Hi Everyone,
I don't want to ruffle any feathers [or perhaps scales??] here but I
think the original poster, Deb may be getting confused by the experts
apparently contradictory comments & sugegstions.
We all agree that the good bugs that keep our tanks eco system running
should be preserved whenever possible but I think I can see both sides of
the argument here & they are both valid. Patrick & Charles are saying that
it is ok to rinse away the small amount of good bugs on a replceable carbon
pad. Assuming the tank is large & the filtration area also large then a
small carbon pad is nothing compared to the tank it is in but if we are
talking about smaller tanks with consequently smaller filters then the
proportional amount of surface area on a small pad is then far greater & so
destroying the beneficial bacteria on there could be risking a bacterial
bloom or worse as Ray suggested.
Personally I don't like the idea of disposable pads purely because they are
geatred to the beginner & smaller tanks which need established colonies of
good bugs & in my opinion thye are counter productive. I also have a
problem with the vast amount of filter systems that include carbon as a
default part of the set-up when [again in my opinion] that area would be
far better used up with some inert sponge or polyester foam/floss because
carbon does not hold a great deal of good bacteria, it needs replacing
often or else it can leech the toxins back into the tank & you don't really
need carbon in your filter unless you have a very heavy bio load or need to
remove medications or other toxins from the water.
The bottom line is that there are probably several hundred people reading
these posts & if the experts are seeming to disagree [which they are not]
then the newbies will not only get confused but may go elsewhere & we all
know how hit & miss the aquatic info is on the net so having a great source
of info like ours is quite a precious thing.
The only time that I rinse filter material under tap water is when I am
putting in new polyester foam/polyfilter pads as a water polishing stage or
changing my filter socks but then it is just to make sure there is no loose
fibres or dust on them.
Finally I would say that almost all of the manufacturer's claims about
replacement filtration is based a lot more on profit margins than tank eco
system longevity. A couple of examples-the first filter I bought about 9
years ago was a Fluval 3 Plus & although I no longer use it regularly it is
still in fine fettle & is used occasionally. They recommend changint the
sponges in there at [I think] 3 month periods but htey are very good
material & I still have the original pads although they are a little
discoloured now. The only thing I did swap out regularly was the thin strip
of polyester floss between the sponges for water polishing but that stuff
is dirt cheap from any uphostery suppliers. As another example, I bought an
Eheim 2026 canister about 6 or 7 years ago & it's still in use as part of a
sub system on my 100 gallon & a most excellent machine it is too! However,
they recommended changing the ceramic media in each tray alternately over a
6 month period which is quite ludicrous because that stuff is virtually
indestructible & will last forever. There is also a thick blue sponge pad
in the lower basket that they recommend replacing the same time & I still
have the original one & it is completely intact. The supplied carbon pads
supplied with both devices has never been used!
John
On 3 April 2013 23:03, <sevenspringss@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
> You may have seen that I posed several questions to Charles on this, to
> which I have not yet seen his response. Until then, I'll reserve my take
> on
> whether filter media should or should not be rinsed under hot, chlorine
> injected tap water. I'm almost sure that hot water, if not chlorine, would
> kill
> off much of the nitrifying bacteria -- but of course, this too is due in
> part
> by how hot the water actually is. Also, a much decimated population of
> nitrobacters may or may not affect the nitrogenous waste levels to any
> toxic
> levels, but this is also due large in part to the bioload level and the
> amount
> of organic wastes that are produced by it. It goes without saying, that a
> low stocking level wouldn't adversely affect the parameters nearly as
> much,
> if the cycle were interrupted, as would a tank that's fully stocked to its
> limit. For one thing, we're dealing with a lot of variables here -- even
> including just how long the media is held under chlorinated, hot water..
>
> As for Deb's replaceable filter media cartridges, I truly have to wonder
> where you've been -- and this is not meant as a put down. Perhaps you just
> don't always read the posts on here that don't pertain to your situations,
> but
> time and time again, many of us have stated that "replaceable" filter
> cartridges are NOT to be replaced, except when they're worn out beyond
> further
> use. Surely, you must have seen us recommend this. When I said that filter
> media should be rinsed in old aquarium water, I also had these cartridges
> in
> mind as a filter media to be treated in this manner. For one thing, it's a
> big waste of money to replace these cartridges every couple of weeks or so
> -- although I don't recall her saying she does. Secondly, each time the
> "used" filter cartridge is discarded for a new one, all of the nitrifying
> bacteria on the media is discarded with it, with the end result of
> possibly
> causing a mini-cycle since the new cartridge now needs to become
> established with
> new nitrobacter populations. Again, the chance of a mini-cycle is in part
> very dependent upon the bioload level, and may not necessarily reach
> dangerous proportions in a moderately stocked tank - since there's still
> bacteria
> on every other surface, albeit not in hugh numbers, but why risk it?
>
> It's generally recommended that when replacing the filter media, that a
> portion of the old media be retained and added to the new media to help
> jump
> start the bacteria populations. This goes also for cartridges with which
> just
> often have the carbon (if its felt that it's needed) replaced by slitting
> the top of it open -- buying the carbon in bulk -- and adding new. This
> would be the main reason why the newer hobbyists would replace the
> cartridges --
> to have renewed carbon; the outer surface can just be rinsed off in old
> water, many, many times. As we know though, carbon is not really needed
> anyway
> and all too soon -- with no way of actually being made aware of to us --
> it
> loses its effectiveness. It can act as another surface for bacteria to
> populate though. The manufacturers would have us all use it and replace it
> every week though, if they thought we all fall for this ruse.
>
> Ray </HTML>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (13) |
Please, DELETE this line and EVERYTHING below it when replying, Thank You.
���`�.��.><((((�>.���`�.��.���`�.�><((((�> �.���`�.�. , .���`�..><((((�>
PLEASE, when you REPLY to a post, DELETE all TEXT that is NOT important to the reply & if CHANGING the TOPIC of the original message MODIFY the SUBJECT LINE -> i.e. "new subject (was re: old subject)" <-
<�((((><.���`�.��.���`�.�<�((((><�.���`�.�. , .���`�..<�((((><���`�.��.
We Thank You in Advance for Your HELP in this matter.
If you do not want all of the groups emails, instead of unsubscribing, you can change your delivery option by clicking on "Edit My Membership" on the home page.
Or e-mail aquaticlife-digest@yahoogroups.com to receive the digest, which includes up to 25 posts at a time in a single email
Or email aquaticlife-nomail@yahoogroups.com for the No E-Mail option where you will still be able to read messages on the group and post replies.
Or email aquaticlife-normal@yahoogroups.com to receive individual e-mails.
No comments:
Post a Comment