Pond Boss Forums GENERAL QUESTIONS Muddy water Different kind of Flocculent

I've been looking at alot of websites about clearing muddy ponds and ran across the following web page that uses a different kind of flocculent for clearing muddy water. The name of the company is Clearwater Consulting here in Houston.

Here is what it says:


We would attempt the same old tired processes of adding gypsum,lime or alum and only get a back ache and positive results in maybe 50% of these cases. So we decided we were going to find a way to clear water safely and do it overnight so our clients could see the results immediately. So our team got together and created a way to clear water, not harm fish, and create beautiful productive water.

Our product works overnight and does not effect the water or the fish adversely. Our product is not a dye or a gimmick it actually makes the mud fall out of the water and sink to the bottom and stay there.

Most lakes stay muddy because of positively charged clay particles that bounce off of one another and never settle. Our product changes the charge and the particles then cling together and become too heavy to stay suspended so they sink to the bottom.

We have conducted tests all over Texas and have a 100% success rate. We've even cleared catfish and trash fish lakes that have a reputation of being muddy because of the stirring effect just to see if this material would work. Water skiing lakes, Cattle ponds and many other lakes have been cleared using our flocculant and to this day remain clear. We've found even in retention ponds where there is high runoff the water remains clear.


So my question is there another flocculent that works better than gypsum or alum that is safe for fish? Any ideas?

I think this sounds too good to be true but who knows. The web site does not give any information on the ingredients. I emailed them to request more info.

Frank

Ask for am MSDS and CAS # for the product. There are many inorganic and organic flocculants on the market. Cationic coagulants and anionic flocculants are common in the water treatment industry. They range in charge density and molecular weight. TRhe right choice is dependent on the chemistry of he water and the results you desire. A common cationic poymer that is used is DADMAC, and may be what they are touting. most polymers are developed by major chemical companies like Monsanto, Ciba, Dow, and Dupont. they are likely just a marketer and not a developer.

You have to be careful using some of the organic high molecular weight products. They can attach to the gills of fish and act to suffocate them if over fed. That is the biggest advantage to using an inorganic coagulant like alum, PAC, ACH or gypsum. They are much more forgiving from overfeed.

Ha! They'll never tell! I bet you would have to hold a gun on them to get an MSDS sheet!

In my jar tests, common H2SO4 proved to be a very good flocculant. So there are many out there. I doubt that any "formula" or "combination" would be any more effective than what we normally used.