Pond Boss Forums AQUATIC VEGETATION Controlling unwanted plants Floating heart eradication continued

My eradication of floating heart with Rodeo has been relatively successful. There are only a few spots that need the occasional reapplication. As expected, algae has formed on the decaying vegetation, and with Cutrine Plus this too has been killed. I was hoping for a heavy rain to sink the dead algae and vegetation to the bottom, but it doesn't look like it's coming any time soon. I treated my 1 acre pond with a brewed up sludge eating enzyme-bacteria product. This was poured throughout my pond and I am awaiting results. So far, so good. My fish population shows no signs of distress. Is there anything else I should do? I'm assuming it will be 2-3 weeks before I see a significant improvement. I can still spot treat for algae with Cutrine and not effect the micro-organisms according to the supplier.

Call me a skeptic, but I have a problem with the concept of brewing "sludge eating enzyme-bacteria".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you happen to collect some water from your pond into a large pail or trash can and then add some of the "product" (most likely some type of enzymes) to the collected water? And, did the product supplier say that the resulting culture of microbes will take care of the excessive nutrients in your pond????
If so, here's my rhetorical question. Why is it necessary to "brew up" a batch of microbes - that ALREADY inhabit the pond - so they may then be added BACK into the pond to devour the nutrients that would otherwise fuel the growth of various forms of algae?
Or, did the product supplier say that the "product" actually contained certain types of microbes? And, if that is the case, why was it necessary to utilize water FROM the pond in the culture-brewing process? For that matter, why was it even necessary to brew the microbes before adding them into the pond?
I ask these questions because I've seen several "brew-your-own microbe" products within the marketplace - and have yet to hear a good report on any of them.

Bill Cody; do you or anyone else have anything to add or comment regarding the thoughts/questions penned above?

Hopefully tac5 will give you a few more details about this and your questions.

Kelly and Bill-- I too am skeptical of most manufacturers' claims of quick fixes of any kind. My reasoning for using "added" microbes and enzymes was that, with the sudden and heavy increase in nutrients (dying vegetation) the natural organisms might need a little help. The existing microbes will eventually devour the nutients but would a little "reinforcement" not accelerate the process?
I used water from my well and "brewed up" 25 gallons of product which I distributed evenly throughout my pond by boat. The manufacturer claims this product contains 11 species of bacteria and 7 different enzymes.I know, the magic formula. The cost was very little and I just thought I'd give it a try. It is too early to give you an evaluation of its true effectiveness, but my dead algae is disappearing and there was a lot of it.
My theory for "brewing" up 25 gallons of liquid for dispersal is that it facilitates the even distribution, as opposed to sprinkling 1 lb. of dry product on top of the water. The "brewing" process also requires a maintained temperature of 90 degrees for 24 hrs (easily accomplished with an aquarium heater).The resulting "witches brew" certainly smelled impressive.
After this cleanout of dead Nyphoides Peltata and the resulting algae, hopefully my pond will return to its normal state, with its preexisting nutrient level.My intention is not to have perfectly clear water.I'll let you know in a few weeks the results of this biological treatment.Thanks for responding to my thread. I need all the input I can get.

tac5: I agree with the concept of using microbe-products for certain situations (such as what you described). However, my question-in-logic centers on the need for the brewing process.

I distribute two different blends of microbe-products (this is not a marketing ploy) that are packaged in dry-form (in water-soluble bags), coupled with enzymes. Users have all (with only one or two exceptions) reported very noticeable effects through the use of these products. The bags are simply tossed into the pond, where the water-soluble membrane dissolves and releases the contents into the pond - where, in theory, the microbes go to work doing things that microbes do best: eat and multiply.

The "brew your own" products that I've seen (and tested) have generally turned out to contain only enzymes; which are (in theory) intended to stimulate the population of microbes that are collected from the pond in the "brewing water". If (and when) that is the case, what is the benefit of stimulating a population of microbes that ALREADY exist in the pond? If they're already there, and conducive pond-water conditions already exist within the pond for their activities and proliferation, shouldn't they be doing their job in the pond without the need for introducing a "stimulated culture" - or, for that matter, any additional strains of microbes?

On the other hand, if the product that you used did in deed contain seven strains of microbes within the formulation (along with enzymes), it would appear that the culturing-process is needed to increase the microbe-count prior to adding the culture to your pond. The short-cut to this process would be to simply have a higher microbe-count in the original product - which could be added directly to the pond without requiring the count-building culturing-step.

It is probably the culture-count issue that prompts some of the better microbe-formulators to quantify the actual microbe-count within their raw product - which also justifies a higher price for their product since it may be more "concentrated" than others. Also, I've been "told" that successive generations of certain strains of microbes may become less efficient in their nutrient-consumption capabilities. Either that, or the strains are so prolific that they may rapidly exhaust the readily available nutrients that are required to sustain an exponentially expanding population - thereby causing their population to crash, and requiring subsequent "re-inoculations" at various intervals.

Tac5, I'm stating concepts more that known facts; so I'm definitely not blasting the product that you're using, nor promoting the blends that I carry. It is "factual answers" that I seek for the above issues.

Unfortunately, I do know "for a fact" that the microbial market is full of many snake-oil products. And, the information-gap is so clouded with smoke-n-mirrors and technical-fluff that it is hard to tell a really good product from a mediocre product that is primarily designed to part one from their money.

Bill - my knowledge-level in the microbe department is relatively shallow, but slowly deepening. So, anything that you can contribute to expand on the above issues would be greatly appreciated. In instances like this, the best sources of information need to be "unbiased" (such as yourself).

Very good topic. I am wanting to speed up cleanup of my old pond. Have been researching various concoctions. Most say only "contains billions of bacteria and enzyme spores". Then there is a "super concentrated" type for 5x the money. Is there any regulation in labeling, ie type/names of bacteria/actual count per unit wt?
I dont see that the brewing process would be an exercise in futility, if it establishes the ideal conditions for quickly upping the count of bacteria. But, I doubt that supplying a container with 10 billion vs. 50 billion spores is a big cost of manufacturing difference.
Strictly conjecture on my part.

Burgermeister: There is no regulation of microbial water-treatment products since these products are not (technically) marketed as algaecides. Actually, if an unregistered microbial product makes an "algae control claim", it is somewhat in violation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act), which requires that any product making pesticidal claims must be registered as a pesticide with the EPA. Even biological agents (ex. BT) are required to be registered with the EPA if they're marketed as pesticides. Oddly enough, you can probably check the anti-bacterial hand-soap container sitting near your bathroom sink, and find an EPA registration number on its label.

On the microbial-count issue: Saying that a product contains "billions of bacteria" is a gross oversimplification of quality-inference. My best analogy to this type of vague claim would be something along the line of taking a whole dog-pound full of dogs into the field to hunt quail. Maybe, by pure luck, you'd have one stray dog that might be of use - but its innate or trained abilities would be severely hampered by the other mongrels that came along for the ride.

I think the primary challenge of manufacturing a quality microbial agent involves isolating the desired strains and then producing them in high-concentrations while excluding the "mongrels" from the blend. Also, the method and media in which the microbes are packaged have a great deal to do with their viability and shelf-life. I have not heard glowing reports of liquid-media products, possibly due to limited shelf-life.

Final comment for now: I would not necessarily associate a high-price tag with "quality" in the microbial-agent market. I feel that some marketers know that they won't achieve repeat business (due to poor performance). So, they charge as much as possible for the user's first experience (I'll leave out the obvious analogy for that observation).

Yes it is a very good topic. Too bad it's burried under Topic: Floating heart eradication continued
I'm sure there are others that have tried some of the products that might like to contribute but haven't stumbled on this hidden thread.
Could we move it?

Ric - what catagory would this discussion appropriately fit under?

That works for me Kelly!

You had some very thoughtful posts that I thought should be easier to find, at least for someone like me that can't remember where to look.

Hopefully there will be others with some experence they will share.

I have been brewing my own microbes for the past 2 years, and I have to say it works. At least in my small pond I have seen great improvment. I think I have my watermeal problem under control, not eradicated but alot better than in past years. The fil algae is also under control. Check out my post in July 03 under the topic microbes to get an idea of what I have been trying.
Last year and this I have been using cheap store bought Koi pond microbes (one small container) and brewing them up in a 20 gallon can to add to the pond(3 times a year). . I dont think they work any better than the rid-x or the homemade tea, but I feel safer using the specific pond products. Even tho the septic microbes are probably the same strain and come from the same lab factory just in a diffrent package and price tag. IMHO Kevin

http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000455