In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , MELANIE
MCDONALD writes
I use the water from our water changes on the garden and the plants seem
to
appreciate it!
And as for never doing any water changes - I wouldnt have liked to be one
of
the fish in your tank/s! Partial (never full) water changes and regular
gravel vaccing are necessary otherwise you'd get a huge build up of
ammonia
and nitrate over a period of months/years and I'd say that Ford sounds
like
a responsible fish keeper if he does regular partial changes!
Mel.


Agreed - and not to mention the build-up of DOCs.

I didn't know that Doctors lived in fish tanks!


Dissolved organic compounds.
--
Paul reply-to is valid

medico wrote:
OP put back at the top where it belongs
"Ford Prefect" wrote in message
...
I keep a couple of tropical fish tanks and was wondering if the waste
water after water changes would be benificial or harmful to garden
plants, seems a shame to flush 40l a week if it could be doing some
good in the garden instead.

Unless you're keeping marine or brackish water fish the water (and added
fish waste products) should do most plants good.

If your fish like alkaline water, then obviously don't give it to
lime-hating plants, but otherwise it should be fine.

When I had a tropical tank I always put the waste water on the garden
and never boticed any ill-effects.

Why O Why are you depriving the fish of their water??
A good fish keeper wouldn't change any water in two years.

Nonsense. The accumulated waste would kill the fish long before that,
even with good filtration.


Fresh tap water is harmful to fish.

Which is why you put dechlorinator in it, or let it stand for several
hours before adding it if you have a container big enough, as any
sensible fishkeeper knows.

--
Carol
"The glassblower's cat is bompstable"
- Dorothy L. Sayers, _Clouds of Witness_

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , MELANIE
MCDONALD writes
I use the water from our water changes on the garden and the plants seem
to
appreciate it!
And as for never doing any water changes - I wouldnt have liked to be
one
of
the fish in your tank/s! Partial (never full) water changes and regular
gravel vaccing are necessary otherwise you'd get a huge build up of
ammonia
and nitrate over a period of months/years and I'd say that Ford sounds
like
a responsible fish keeper if he does regular partial changes!
Mel.


Agreed - and not to mention the build-up of DOCs.

I didn't know that Doctors lived in fish tanks!


Dissolved organic compounds.

Ta, but I still don't know what they are!

Alan

"Carol Hague" wrote in message
...
medico wrote:
OP put back at the top where it belongs
"Ford Prefect" wrote in message
...
I keep a couple of tropical fish tanks and was wondering if the waste
water after water changes would be benificial or harmful to garden
plants, seems a shame to flush 40l a week if it could be doing some
good in the garden instead.

Unless you're keeping marine or brackish water fish the water (and added
fish waste products) should do most plants good.

If your fish like alkaline water, then obviously don't give it to
lime-hating plants, but otherwise it should be fine.

When I had a tropical tank I always put the waste water on the garden
and never boticed any ill-effects.

Why O Why are you depriving the fish of their water??
A good fish keeper wouldn't change any water in two years.

Nonsense. The accumulated waste would kill the fish long before that,
even with good filtration.

What accumulated waste would that be?

As I've said, I kept fish for many years and none of them died, and the only
filtration was drawing water down through the silt at the bottom of the
tank, and never had a change of water, this was, of course, before
unrequired gadgets were developed and sold to idiots who were lead to
believe they were essential.

I'd just like to remind you that people have been keeping fish in tanks for
over 70 years, without all the modern stuff.

Fresh tap water is harmful to fish.

Never bothered mine, I always left the water for a few days before
introducing the fish.

Which is why you put dechlorinator in it, or let it stand for several
hours before adding it if you have a container big enough, as any
sensible fishkeeper knows.

No such things as declorinators 50 years ago.

Are you by any chance a seller of uneccessary fish stuff?

Alan


--
Carol
"The glassblower's cat is bompstable"
- Dorothy L. Sayers, _Clouds of Witness_

Alan Holmes wrote:

"Carol Hague" wrote in message
...
medico wrote:

Why O Why are you depriving the fish of their water??
A good fish keeper wouldn't change any water in two years.

Nonsense. The accumulated waste would kill the fish long before that,
even with good filtration.

What accumulated waste would that be?

Fish poo. Also, any uneaten food and rotting plant material if you have
plants.

Fish poo breaks down into nitrites, which, if allowed to build up will
eventually kill the fish.

As I've said, I kept fish for many years and none of them died, and the only
filtration was drawing water down through the silt at the bottom of the
tank, and never had a change of water, this was, of course, before
unrequired gadgets were developed and sold to idiots who were lead to
believe they were essential.

Large tank, very few fish? You can get away without water changes for a
lot longer that way.

Otherwise I suspect you're talking just as much nonsense as you do on
the cycling group.


I'd just like to remind you that people have been keeping fish in tanks for
over 70 years, without all the modern stuff.

I was keeping fish about 20 years ago and most of this "modern stuff"
was already available then.


Are you by any chance a seller of uneccessary fish stuff?

No I'm not.

I'm someone who reads up on what I'm doing before I take the lives of
unsuspecting fish into my keeping.

--
Carol
"The glassblower's cat is bompstable"
- Dorothy L. Sayers, _Clouds of Witness_

"Carol Hague" wrote in message
...
Alan Holmes wrote:

"Carol Hague" wrote in message
...
medico wrote:

Why O Why are you depriving the fish of their water??
A good fish keeper wouldn't change any water in two years.

Nonsense. The accumulated waste would kill the fish long before that,
even with good filtration.

What accumulated waste would that be?

Fish poo. Also, any uneaten food and rotting plant material if you have
plants.

Fish poo breaks down into nitrites, which, if allowed to build up will
eventually kill the fish.

As I've said, I kept fish for many years and none of them died, and the
only
filtration was drawing water down through the silt at the bottom of the
tank, and never had a change of water, this was, of course, before
unrequired gadgets were developed and sold to idiots who were lead to
believe they were essential.

Large tank, very few fish? You can get away without water changes for a
lot longer that way.

Otherwise I suspect you're talking just as much nonsense as you do on
the cycling group.


I'd just like to remind you that people have been keeping fish in tanks
for
over 70 years, without all the modern stuff.

I was keeping fish about 20 years ago and most of this "modern stuff"
was already available then.

Yes but not 50 years before that!

Do you have difficulty in understanding the differencee between 20 and 70?


Are you by any chance a seller of uneccessary fish stuff?

No I'm not.

I'm someone who reads up on what I'm doing before I take the lives of
unsuspecting fish into my keeping.

I had the experience of others to give me advice, and they would not have
known about the rubbish wich is on sale today.

Thanks to all who replied constructively.
Yes I was talking about partial water changes on 2 largish tanks, try
breeding Bristlenose Pleco ( Ancistrus sp.) without partial changes
and you'll soon end up with something that resembles a muddy puddle
and a filter impeller that jams, overheats and melts.
Thanks again to everyone, sorry if I caused too many disputes :0)
Ford.

Alan Holmes wrote:

"Carol Hague" wrote in message
...

I'd just like to remind you that people have been keeping fish in tanks
for
over 70 years, without all the modern stuff.

I was keeping fish about 20 years ago and most of this "modern stuff"
was already available then.

Yes but not 50 years before that!

Do you have difficulty in understanding the differencee between 20 and 70?

Not at all.

But you were talking about "modern stuff" as if it had only arrived last
week, rather than developing over decades. I was trying to point out
that new developments have been happening for some time and just because
it wasn't available 70 years ago doesn't mean there's no use for it now.




Are you by any chance a seller of uneccessary fish stuff?

No I'm not.

I'm someone who reads up on what I'm doing before I take the lives of
unsuspecting fish into my keeping.

I had the experience of others to give me advice, and they would not have
known about the rubbish wich is on sale today.

I had the experience of others too - it just happened to be in written
form rather than verbal.

Is it really unthinkable to you that people might actually have learned
new things in the last 70 years?

If so, what are you doing using one of those new-fangled computing
machines ? We didn't have them seventy years ago, so obviously they're
unnecessary rubbish.

I'm trying very hard to be civil here and my apologies if I haven't
always succeeded, but I find your superior attitude exceedingly
provoking.

--
Carol
"The glassblower's cat is bompstable"
- Dorothy L. Sayers, _Clouds of Witness_

In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , MELANIE
MCDONALD writes
I use the water from our water changes on the garden and the plants seem
to
appreciate it!
And as for never doing any water changes - I wouldnt have liked to be
one
of
the fish in your tank/s! Partial (never full) water changes and regular
gravel vaccing are necessary otherwise you'd get a huge build up of
ammonia
and nitrate over a period of months/years and I'd say that Ford sounds
like
a responsible fish keeper if he does regular partial changes!
Mel.


Agreed - and not to mention the build-up of DOCs.

I didn't know that Doctors lived in fish tanks!


Dissolved organic compounds.

Ta, but I still don't know what they are!

Alan
Well, Google it!
--
Paul reply-to is valid

Ken Castro wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:19:51 +0100, "BoyPete"
wrote:

Ford Prefect wrote:
I keep a couple of tropical fish tanks and was wondering if the
waste water after water changes would be benificial or harmful to
garden plants, seems a shame to flush 40l a week if it could be
doing some good in the garden instead.
Cheers,
Ford.
It's great for the garden. But, what are you doing with 40l changes
a week?? When I kept tropicals, I only did partial changes if water
parameters were off the normal. unnecessary changes will stress
your fish.

Large tank? Lots of tanks?

At one time, 4 four foot tanks, plus a breeding tank. I mainly used an
undergravel filter, plus an external and a powerhead. Over about 8 years of
fish keeping, losses were minimal. (Like, 1 a year) I now keep Koi and
variaties of goldfish in a pond. I know some people who advocate 10% water
changes in ponds too. 'Fishpoo'!! Apart from a good filter system, I use a
pond vac to keep things clean. Water parameters are fine, fish healthy, and
breeding like mad!
Good filtration, good planting, good housekeeping = no water changes.

--
ßôyþëtë
London, UK

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , Alan Holmes
writes

"Paul" wrote in message
...
In message , MELANIE
MCDONALD writes
I use the water from our water changes on the garden and the plants
seem
to
appreciate it!
And as for never doing any water changes - I wouldnt have liked to be
one
of
the fish in your tank/s! Partial (never full) water changes and
regular
gravel vaccing are necessary otherwise you'd get a huge build up of
ammonia
and nitrate over a period of months/years and I'd say that Ford sounds
like
a responsible fish keeper if he does regular partial changes!
Mel.


Agreed - and not to mention the build-up of DOCs.

I didn't know that Doctors lived in fish tanks!


Dissolved organic compounds.

Ta, but I still don't know what they are!

Alan
Well, Google it!

I'm not happy goggling.

--
Paul reply-to is valid

On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:52:03 GMT, "Alan Holmes" & others wrote:
Fresh tap water is harmful to fish.
Never bothered mine, I always left the water for a few days before
introducing the fish.

That is ok if your water company uses chlorine, it will de-gas ok in
that time,
however a new(ish) treatment is chloramine (which was probably not
much used in 'Alans time' by the companies and is less used by them
today than in the '80s and '90s) and that takes much longer to
dissociate and disperse and is especially harmful to gills.

Which is why you put dechlorinator in it, or let it stand for several
hours before adding it if you have a container big enough, as any
sensible fishkeeper knows.

No such things as declorinators 50 years ago.

Yes there was, but it was known as 'hypo' as used by photographers,
also known as sodium thiosulphate, but even that name has had a modern
politically correct name change.
Sodium thiosulphate is much cheaper than the "de-chlorinater" sold to
fishkeepers who dont know any better.

On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:04:19 +0100,(Carol Hague) wrote:
Fish poo breaks down into nitrites, which, if allowed to build up will
eventually kill the fish.

but it will not remain as nitrite (unless you have a badly overstocked
tank and/or bad fitration)
You of course meant to say nitrate which is the final decay product
which is not especially harmful to the fish, in contrast to nitrite.
Nitrate can only (conveniently) be got rid of by water changes, **

But I agree that water changes can be infrequent but best practice
suggests more often than once in a blue moon.

Alan is right that many fresh water trops can be kept without frequent
water changes, however, in Alan's day not many people were
keeping/breeding for example discus. That is now much more common
(easier) with modern practice.

** unless you have vast amounts of anaerobic reactors
or huge plant growth
or access to ion exchange resins at considerable cost

anyone for going to uk.rec.aquaria.misc ??

WaltA wrote:

On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:04:19 +0100,(Carol Hague) wrote:
Fish poo breaks down into nitrites, which, if allowed to build up will
eventually kill the fish.

but it will not remain as nitrite (unless you have a badly overstocked
tank and/or bad fitration)
You of course meant to say nitrate which is the final decay product
which is not especially harmful to the fish, in contrast to nitrite.
Nitrate can only (conveniently) be got rid of by water changes, **

Sorry, I'd got it backwards ! I thought it was nitrates turning into
nitrites, but you're right, it's the other way round. They'll be asking
me to hand in my Chemistry O level at this rate :-)


But I agree that water changes can be infrequent but best practice
suggests more often than once in a blue moon.

Alan is right that many fresh water trops can be kept without frequent
water changes, however, in Alan's day not many people were
keeping/breeding for example discus. That is now much more common
(easier) with modern practice.

Alan seems to be saying (if not insisting) that water changes are
completely unnecessary however, which was what I was arguing against.

anyone for going to uk.rec.aquaria.misc ??

We have wandered a bit off topic now, I guess - sorry about that.

--
Carol
"The glassblower's cat is bompstable"
- Dorothy L. Sayers, _Clouds of Witness_

On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:29:06 +0100, (Carol Hague)
wrote:
Sorry, I'd got it backwards ! I thought it was nitrates turning into
nitrites, but you're right, it's the other way round. They'll be asking
me to hand in my Chemistry O level at this rate :-)

Hehee, no worries,
(pokerface) I see you an O and raise you an A **[/pokerface)
but I could see that you were a serious student of the art whereas we
must take pity upon poor Alan and try to gently introduce him to
concepts of best practice (contrary to his announced determinant of
good husbandry as being "no fish died" ! )

But from an amateur (casual student) point of view the water chemistry
of ur average fish tank is Quite Interesting

**I have to admit that I lost track of itall at about that stage, all
that organic stuff and amino acids and DNA and fings seriously worried
me so I took the easier road and went on to maths phys. and electrical
engineering ;-!)

Alan seems to be saying (if not insisting) that water changes are
completely unnecessary however,

Yes he did seem to be saying that, but we know better, and he does
need to be gently re-introduced to the real world from time to time
[poor ol thing !]
and his judgement of what is and is not necessary against which
expected results could be called into question at much greater length
than I am willing to give him,
But we must humour his little trolls from time to time.

which was what I was arguing against.

you were indeed, and I do agree with you, we just had a wee bitty bit
of chemistry to get out of the way first ! !

anyone for going to uk.rec.aquaria.misc ??

We have wandered a bit off topic now, I guess - sorry about that.

No prob. one of the beauties of usenet newsgroups
I did leave a responsible gap between FP getting an answer to his
fundamental question and the subsequent deviation