Koi-lo wrote:

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
.. .

Koi-lo wrote:


"Cliff L" wrote in message
oups.com...

It's more natural than a plain glass bottom.



True, but I wonder how common a gravel subtrate is
for aquarium fish in the wild, as opposed to mud or
larger river stones.


======================
That depends where you live. Here the river bottoms are covered with
stones and pebbles of various sizes, the soil washed downstream ages
ago. On L.I. the ponds and inlets were sand, pebbles and stones.
The lake here has a mud and rock bottom.


If memory serves me rightly, the bottom of the Thames is squidgy mud
with the odd bit of stone/gravel but predominately mud...used to get
stuck between your toes - lol. It was a long time ago when I was mad
enough to swim in there but I'm pretty sure that it won't have changed
much....

======================
Your Thames then is much like our Hudson and East Rivers in NYC. Those
rivers have a sludge over the soil and whatever boulders, stones and
pebbles are there. You can well call it squidgy mud. And we have
trash! Ugh, trash of every description from broken bottles to used baby
diapers in those rivers. Very nasty stuff you don't even want to put
your feet in.... :þ

The Thames has been through some major clean ups but I rather fancy the
seventies were the hay day in terms of safety for swimming (not that it
was safe we just didn't know any better)...I wouldn't let my kids swim
there now but that might also be down to us understanding the dangers of
swimming in a river such as the Thames with all its currents without
considering toxicity which I don't really believe is a major issue these
days...There is no real junk issue in the Thames or the majority of our
major rivers...trash in the odd pond/lake/river/stream - yes it
happens...but the environmental people are so much on the case now that
it is the exception rather than the rule....

Gill