|
Forums36
Topics40,963
Posts557,993
Members18,503
| |
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
|
6 members (bmicek, Fishingadventure, Bigtrh24, anthropic, catscratch, esshup),
1,264
guests, and
225
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
BUMP from: http://www.pondboss.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=126963#Post126963 Since our fish kill last summer I have become very interested in management procedures that will eliminate this possibility in the future. First of all, when you have a high nutrient level 2 acre pond, have had three 100+ degree days in a row, suddenly clearing muddy water, a cold rain, you better keep your aerating system running 24/7…!!!! Secondly, how does a pond with infrequent flushing, nutrient rich from livestock and pasture fertilization, organic materials from shoreline and aquatic vegetation, fish food, fish poop, etc, differ from a house hold septic tank, other than size? IMO, our pond is just a big septic tank. Question lingers for our scientists. Why not use household septic system products in a pond to achieve the same results as expensive aquaculture products?
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame  Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
George or anyone:
Can you give me a specific brand and price of a household septic system product that you would be considering to use in your pond?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135 |
n8ly, I used a pound of "Flush-it" last summer in my one acre pond. It appears to have a very high bacteria count per dollar value, it was $60.00 for a pound. There seems to be alot of disagreement whether or not Bacteria treatments work, I believe it did help the pond, but thats just my opinion, not scientific. http://www.flushitsolutions.com/flushit.htm
Last edited by adirondack pond; 03/07/09 05:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
George or anyone:
Can you give me a specific brand and price of a household septic system product that you would be considering to use in your pond? Nate, I am trying to learn all I can about bacterial control for our high nutrient pond. The more I learn, the more confused I get. The only septic system product that I have found so far that makes sense is Pro-Pump/HC that is recommended for septic tank treatment for “leech field” effluent, and is composed of 12 CFU’s. Cost is about $50 bucks a gallon. http://www.septicjoe.com/1gaprliliba.html http://www.septicjoe.com/info.htmlI am not considering any product until I know more than I do now. I don’t understand why a pond bug would be so expensive.
Last edited by george1; 03/07/09 08:16 PM.
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
George,
I could definitely not be called a bacteria expert by any means, but I have spent quite a bit of time studying, researching, and experimenting.
I dont think septic joes bacteria product would differ all that much if any to comparable liquid products designed and labeled for ponds. I dont think the price differs all that much if any between your septic joes product and a comparable product labeled for a pond.
The main difference in price between Septic Bacteria and Pond Bacteria is the application rates. Septic Systems are much smaller than ponds, and hold waaay more SHI$%^@@@YUCK per gallon of water than a pond does. The more !@#$%^^&* there is to eat, the better the bacteria will perform and reproduce.
I would probably steer clear of a liquid bacteria product for a bigger pond altogether. The typical application rate for your Septic Joes for a pond would be apprx 3 gallons per 300,000 gallons of water. If your pond is 1 acre with a 6 foot average depth, than you have 1.9 million gallons of water. That would be 19 gallons of Septic Joes for your initial application.
If your comparing water soluble packs of bacteria, many household septic products are more expensive than their counterpart pond bacteria products. As noted earlier, upwards of $60 per lb, but typically much less than that depending on how they are packaged.
Water Soluble Pond Bacteria products range from $10-$20 per lb. Again, application rates are much higher than septic systems, but are not quite as expensive as using liquid. Typically between 40-80 lbs per acre for a 6 month season.... I would recommend a product with at least 5 billion CPU/gram
Bing came up with a great way IMO to get more bang for your buck. He would get a 5 gallon bucket of muck and water from his pond and then put some bacteria in it. The bacteria will rapidly reproduce under those conditions and then he would dump the bucket into his ponds coves.
Maybe he will chime in with some of his experiences and research?
Last edited by n8ly; 03/07/09 09:34 PM. Reason: spelled mucho words wrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135 |
Guys, the Flush-it is rated at 4,7 billion per gram aerobic, and 5 billion per gram anaerobic. After reading the post last year on putting the bacteria powder in warm pond water, I did just that and divided the powder into two 5 gallon buckets and let it sit and ferment for 3 hours, seemed to work well. http://www.pondboss.com/forums/ubbthread...=true#Post30701
Last edited by adirondack pond; 03/07/09 10:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
George,
I could definitely not be called a bacteria expert by any means, but I have spent quite a bit of time studying, researching, and experimenting.
I dont think septic joes bacteria product would differ all that much if any to comparable liquid products designed and labeled for ponds. I dont think the price differs all that much if any between your septic joes product and a comparable product labeled for a pond.
The main difference in price between Septic Bacteria and Pond Bacteria is the application rates. Septic Systems are much smaller than ponds, and hold waaay more SHI$%^@@@YUCK per gallon of water than a pond does. The more !@#$%^^&* there is to eat, the better the bacteria will perform and reproduce.
I would probably steer clear of a liquid bacteria product for a bigger pond altogether. The typical application rate for your Septic Joes for a pond would be apprx 3 gallons per 300,000 gallons of water. If your pond is 1 acre with a 6 foot average depth, than you have 1.9 million gallons of water. That would be 19 gallons of Septic Joes for your initial application.
If your comparing water soluble packs of bacteria, many household septic products are more expensive than their counterpart pond bacteria products. As noted earlier, upwards of $60 per lb, but typically much less than that depending on how they are packaged.
Water Soluble Pond Bacteria products range from $10-$20 per lb. Again, application rates are much higher than septic systems, but are not quite as expensive as using liquid. Typically between 40-80 lbs per acre for a 6 month season.... I would recommend a product with at least 5 billion CPU/gram
Bing came up with a great way IMO to get more bang for your buck. He would get a 5 gallon bucket of muck and water from his pond and then put some bacteria in it. The bacteria will rapidly reproduce under those conditions and then he would dump the bucket into his ponds coves.
Maybe he will chime in with some of his experiences and research? Thanks Nate, you and Todd are on the same page.
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
George,
What do you think you are going to experiment with for this year?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
Another thing to consider with Bacteria products is that labels dont really mean much of anything. Bacteria products do not need to be registered with the EPA and folks selling them can pretty much claim anything they want to.
Also many of the different brands of Bacteria Products actually come from the same source, just with different brands, labels, application rates, etc on them. That means you should do some research before buying: not only to get the best price, but to make sure that you are buying what is claimed on the label.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,499 Likes: 267
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014 Lunker
|
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014 Lunker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,499 Likes: 267 |
Nate said :
"The main difference in price between Septic Bacteria and Pond Bacteria is the application rates."
I would think that because septic bacteria is for a more concentrated use (way more stuff per gallon of water) then you would not need near as much per gallon of pond water as you would pond bacteria. That should effect cost per gallon for the pond. Don't know if you factored that in or how to do so.
I do like the grow your own method that Bing suggested. You should be able to do that with septic as well.
Count me in the skeptical group based on what I have read.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135 |
I guess that's part of the problem, many of the products don't have info on the bacteria count, and how do we verify the products that do give you bacteria info.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
George,
What do you think you are going to experiment with for this year? Nate, I'm sitting on the sidelines until some of this info shakes out. Like Eric, I was thinking that this septic stuff was more concentrated than appears. I like the "grow your own" concept as well. How long water tempwise can I wait 'til decision time?
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
Count me in the skeptical group based on what I have read. Eric, are you skeptical of the use of septic system bacteria use, or bacterial treatment of high nutrient pond water in general?
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
Eric,
I kind of look at it different, thinking that because the septic system is so full of perfect habitat for bacteria to colonize, that you dont need to apply near as much for it to do its thing and reproduce like crazy.
In a pond setting, if the bacteria doesnt find the food and suitable habitat fairly quickly within the water it wont colonize or reproduce nearly as good and will die out much quicker. That is why you would need more in a pond.
Kind of bringing in a new twist to the equation, that is why I think rotting barley straw in some ponds actually helps colonize bacteria and reduce algae in some cases. The bacteria colonies eating up the barley straw also will eat up other nutrients as well.
Kind of like everything else in the pond- Create the proper habitat and it will thrive........That being said, in order for a bacteria program to be the most effective it would probably be a good idea to make sure that everything it needs is available.
Key factors to address would be proper temperature, oxygen, aeration, and suitable hosts/food (decaying matter, floating islands, barley straw, etc)
For example, just throwing a whole bunch of bass or crappie into a pond, even if they are the best genetics available will not mean that your 'stocking' would be classified as successful unless you have created the right habitat and conditions ahead of time. The same would be true for bacteria.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
I guess that's part of the problem, many of the products don't have info on the bacteria count, and how do we verify the products that do give you bacteria info? Stick with a very well known and reputable company and talk to others who have used the product. Do some research on the specific product you are thinking about using.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135 |
Nate, I first heard of the flush-it on the post from aug. 2005, It seemed like the bacteria count was pretty high so I gave it a try.
I spread one 5 gal. bucket along the 50ft bubble hose and the other bucket in other parts of the pond. I did see an improvement in water clarity and the pond muck appeared reduced, but since that was the first year for aeration I can't be sure if the bacteria or aeration or both were responsible for the improvement.
Do you have any suggestions for a bacteria product that might be more cost effective that the flush-it?
Larry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
I failed to mention in above post that the product is a concentrate used to restore failed septic sytems.
It is applied to tank after waste removal in order to cleanse laterals in the leaching field.
It has to be a concentrate or it is a bogus claim.
I have emailed the manufacturer for more information.
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
Larry,
I actually don't have any suggestions (except keep experimenting) until I finish my experiments and research. I am definitely looking hard for a cost effective way to reduce nutrients!
I know of some products and applications that do indeed help, but they are definitely not cost-effective! Many Pond Boss advertisers offer these types of products, they would definitely be considered reputable companies.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,135 |
Thanks for the info guys, there are so many variables that I guess you would need to have controlled conditions to experiment with, and thats beyond my resources.
I would like to use a bacteria product again this summer, but need more concrete evidence that it works.
If I come across any new info I'll post it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 95
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 95 |
All,
Another factor to consider is phosphorus is the single most limiting nutrient in an aquatic ecosystem. In the subject of nutrient loading, there is "internal loading" such as the phosphorus and nitrogen that are released by the substrate and "external loading" which are the nutrients carried in by runoff from the watershed.
Although nitrogen is important to consider, there are very few aquatic organisms that can convert it into useful compounds. So the main concern is still the phosphorus available in the water column and substrate.
Aluminum sulfate has proven itself extremely useful in sequestering phosphrous, and trace elements such as arsenic, zinc, copper and iron. Heavily saturated substrates of phosphorus can be tied up by using aluminum sulfate.
The rate at which aluminum sulfate is applied for this purpose varies according to concentration of P, substrate makeup and water chemistry (especially pH), but a professional in limnology should be able to assist you with the correct application rate for your lake.
Beneficial pond bacteria are useful, but not the only solution to reducing nutrients. In fact, better results may be seen if an alum treatment were combined with regular use of beneficial pond microbes.
We do need to achieve a balance, though. Completely nutrient-free water is sterile and unproductive for food chain initiation, so use caution when considering alum and/or microbes.
Trent
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
Nate said :
"The main difference in price between Septic Bacteria and Pond Bacteria is the application rates."
I would think that because septic bacteria is for a more concentrated use (way more stuff per gallon of water) then you would not need near as much per gallon of pond water as you would pond bacteria. That should effect cost per gallon for the pond. Don't know if you factored that in or how to do so.
I do like the grow your own method that Bing suggested. You should be able to do that with septic as well.
Count me in the skeptical group based on what I have read. Comparisons of $/lb between pond product bacteria and septic bacteria have been misleading, due to the fact that pond products use bran for a “starter”. “Reliable” source septic bacteria is in pure form and more concentrated, and uses a “waist” material starter for reproduction. Bing and Ad. Ponds have used pond muck for “starters”. I’m learning just enough to be dangerous ... 
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57 |
|
.gif)
