Good Morning,

Earlier in the year I used bacteria to help dredge a 50 year old 1 acre farm pond. Within 2 weeks I noticed much clearer water but I also noticed a pretty dramatic drop in water level. I continued treating throughout the summer applying the bacteria at recommended intervals. The water is super clear now but the level is down probably 2 to 3 feet.

In normal years I would lose probably 10 to 12 inches over the summer due to evaporation. This year it seems excessive. Is it possible the bacteria consumed so much sludge that the levels have dropped to a point where I now have seepage through the bottom of the pond ?

In other words, the sludge acted as a seal and once it was consumed there was nothing preventing seepage? The soil around here is heavy clay content so I didn't think I would have a soil seepage issue but I'm no expert which is why I am posing the question.

Greatly appreciate any thoughts you may be able to share with me. Real shame to have the pond this clear with the water level so low.

Since no one has replied, I'll bump this up in the Active Threads for you.

And, are you still planning to torch a maple tree later this month? We're expecting an incredible night time video!

Hi Morty:

I deal with leaking ponds nationwide almost every day - feel free to reach out anytime we can walk through your situation and try to figure it out. I have some free things you can do in your spare time to help identify leak rates and maybe figure out what's going on. Happy to help in any way I can.

tj@hudlandmgmt.com

Thank you and yes we are about a month away from 4 clusters of 50 foot tall maples being torched, wife is not excited about this plan.

I will either be a genius or a recipient of a 2020 Darwin award.

Extremely kind of you!

I'm kind of hoping it's a combination of evaporation overnight (heavy fog above pond each morning, more so if I live the arerator on overnight), dry conditions, and the bacteria consuming muck which would as a by product drop the levels but I just don't know. Wish we would get a heavy, steady rain so I could figure out how much I'm dropping in 24 hours.


I will be in touch soon. Thanks so much for the offer to help!

What did you use to treat it?
I don’t have any advice just curious for my own research.

And what do I dare ask is the planned technique for 'torching' a clump of 50' trees?

MR too CC

This year I used the products that Tractor Supply sell.

https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/pond-logic-muckaway-8-lb-16-scoops?cm_vc=-10005


https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/pondvalue-ultimate-pond-clarifier?cm_vc=-10005

So, once the leaves change color but still remain on the tree I plan to set the leaves on the lowest branch on fire assuming the flames will rise and burn all the way up thus eliminating leaves from falling into the pond.

I'm going to try and upload a photo of the trees that I plan on torching.

What does MR to CC mean? Did I do something bad?

Trees on the right side of the pond are the trees I plan on setting on fire. If all goes well the leaves will be gone but the branches and tree itself will remain (except for the thin branches). Should burn quickly and once the leaves are gone the fire will burn out ( no more fuel, moisture content to great for the tree to actually burn)

I'd prefer to cut them down but am to cheap to pay someone and if I attempt to cut them down myself I am predicting the tree will fall in the pond OR on me.

so the point of torching is to cause the tree to fall over on its own? Or just to prevent leaves from falling in the pond? Or is it so that when you do cut the tree down with a chainsaw that you will only have to two the branches and trunk out of the pond and not leaves?

I think the abbreviation means 'My Response or My Reply too CC,' where CC is me, Canyon Creek and he is saying, I was wondering the same thing.

If the trees are living just attempting to burn all the leaves off will never work. The tree will not burn unless you pile a lot of dry wood around the base . Even dead trees retain a lot of water making them really hard to burn. Do you have a chainsaw?

Morty
I added a 'bacterial muck reducer' for the first time this year. You can't possibly figure out which product is best by doing research because they don't list what is in the tablets. There is little controlled trials or research on this and as has been covered on this forum a lot, you don't know if the bacteria you are putting in is any more desirable than the bacteria that you already have in your pond. Bacteria do their work best with warmer water and with more oxygen too.

I had sticker shock with the name brand, off the shelf muck dissolving pellets. I figured for my 1/4 acre pond I would need a 25 pound bucket, and would administer in divided doses and give a little time to see what the outcome was.

I picked a no-name, nonadvertised, but made in America product. I'm guessing it is used in ponds, lagoons, and perhaps waste water treatment applications. Worked great to clarify the water even though it is not advertised as a water clarifier. I have yet to see how much the muck is reduced as I did not sample the deep muck areas. Shallows show such clear water that I'm afraid the predators will have an easier time of cleaning up the forage and smaller fish. I had much more algae on the bottom (or maybe I can see more of the algae that was on the bottom already..)

Water is down quite a ways, but I'm not refilling as this will help me rake more algae out and then hopefully we refill with fall rains.

...sorry, forgot an important point. I chose this 25 pound pail of 'muck reducer' because it came in a convenient 25 pound supply, shipped in a free five gallon bucket with well sealing lid, AND was a couple hundred dollars less than the other available products.

It might have been a fat fingered typo too. MR to CC = Me to Canyon Creek.

I think he meant "Me too, Canyoncreek" (in reply to Canyoncreek wanting to know how you plan on torching your trees)

Thank you.

I'm starting to think this is a bad idea, maybe I will bite the bullet and have them professionally cut down.

Wouldn't be the first time where I said, what could go wrong only to find out a whole lot could, like the time I used fire to remove a snake nest from the catch basin in front of the two 24 inch pipes that run 30 feet to carry overflow into the creek that runs through the property. Can you guess what happened?

Don't want to burn the trees down, just want to remove the leaves before they fall in the pond.

Just want to remove the leaves without incurring the cost of cutting the tree down.

Excellent information, thanks for sharing your experience. I typically buy the brand that Jones Fish in SW Ohio sold but was on a budget so I used tractor supply's brand and had good results. Do you remember the name of the stuff you used or where you purchased it at?

Sounds like you noticed some drop in levels as well.

Morty, my drop in levels could be from reducing muck, but I think it is much more likely that as a water table or ground water pond, when we hit several weeks of dry weather and the grass starts turning brown under the bases of trees, that the water table goes down. So does my pond. I see where large trees have their roots that the grass is looking bad or dying. I think they are really sucking water out of the surface because the water table has dropped. They probably are pulling lots of water out of my pond too since I have mature oaks and maples on the west side of my pond with extensive roots. That cluster of trees by your pond probably also enjoy getting water from your pond as their deep water supply drops.

I wouldn't cut the trees down. I know they take water but they also are beautiful and I love that our kids can fish in the shade. The downside is lots of oak or maple leaves in the fall. I would not try to burn the leaves off a living tree. I would just let them fall. If you are really dedicated you can make what is dubbed a 'prickly rope' on this forum. IT is a long section of rope with various sections of swim noodles on it to help it float and some person with some ingenuity put a couple hundred zip ties on the rope with ends left long to snag the leaves as they pull the rope in a big arc towards shore.

I'm sure if we all put our heads together we can come up with a slightly more effective 'prickly rope' I was wondering if you could string on to the rope those cheap 3' sections of 3" or 4" wide plastic mesh that you can get at a big box hardware store that snap over the top of your gutters as a cheap leafguard? If you could zip tie those to the rope and make sure they stay vertical to the water surface the water would flow through those very well and they might gather up the leaves and hold them more strongly than zip tie loose ends would.

Something like this: (about 50 cents a foot, comes with or without the very fine mesh cover)

white vinyl mesh


I have never tried this myself but thought it would be worthwhile having some type of labor saving device that would sift off the leaves for me. Maybe a boat mounted tow net?

My leaves float for a few days and then slowly sink. if the wind is right they will all blow to one side and then it is easier for me to rake them out but most of the time I just give up and let them fall and sink. The ones that land in deep water are more of a concern since in the deep water the oak leaves do NOT break apart. Maybe some muck reducer enzymes would help with that. But the hundreds of pounds of dark oak leaves that pile up in the shallows are my chore in the spring to rake out.

At first when I had the pond it was stressful to see them come down and float and know they were going to sink and not be able to do anything about it. But now I've learned to let it be. There is a positive to that bed of leaves in the shallows. The tadpoles and turtles like to burrow in them and they find some very nice insulation that way. In addition, when ice is ready to come off the pond in spring, where the leaves are the sun gets to warm up the bottom faster and the ice comes off a bit faster. This also means that turtles and tadpoles under that bed of leaves are also warming up faster. They seem to like this. I have raked piles of leaves in the late fall out of the shallows and by mistake raked up an embedded hibernating turtle. They do not like this and then they have to get all embedded, slow down their metabolism, and settle in again...

The other plus is that the perch seem to like the bed of oak leaves just fine to lay their eggs on. They do this just as readily or more readily in my pond than on twigs, branches, or obstacles. They seem to prefer either going way up in 6" of water and laying it on the oak leaves, or they will sometimes leave eggs around the base of my stands of reeds or sedges that clump in the shallows. It seems like they like to hook the egg strand on something and that may help pull it out?

So, I can't completely explain the dramatic drop in water level you had with the muck tablets.

My choice has limited info about it but is sold from Wisconsin and was found on Amazon:

Great Lakes Bio Systems Muck pellets

Just to add to what CC has said, I am on the other side of Michigan and have a pond which is 100% clay. This has been the worst year in the seven we have had the pond for water levels. We would drop maybe 12-18 inches, but this year we were down nearly 36 inches during our hot July and are still down 24 inches. During these really hot days like we had in July I think the clay wickes water to the surrounding areas, sharing the water. Point in fact our grass never turned yellow or brown, and needed to be cut weekly even though we were so dry. The Muck tablets may have had some effect, but Morty is in Ohio and most likely had the same weather patterns as we did. Just my 2 cents worth.

Morty - Here's my take on your tree leaf situation, fwiw...

1) Burning the leaves off of live trees will injure the trees, and likely will kill them, maybe not right away, but eventually. That will put you in a situation where they either
must be cut down, or left to decay, shed limbs, and eventually fall.

2) If you cut and remove them you will be removing a point source of pond detritus. I'm sure these aren't the only trees in the neighborhood, and the wind blows all winter, so the
major reduction in detritus that you're hoping for may not pan out as expected.

3) If you're not comfortable cutting them yourself - don't. Hire a pro. Felling trees is dangerous, especially for people who are not experienced at doing it.
There is a lot of energy stored in a standing tree. You don't want that energy transferred into your body when a tree falls on you, or kicks out and launches you halfway across the pond.

So it comes down to weighing the pros/cons of removing them, and then deciding if the pros (reduced organics load, slower water loss in hot weather, etc.) outweigh the cons (removal cost).

Thanks yet again, I had not thought about the tree roots taking water out of the pond but I bet you are 100% correct. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I think I'm relatively intelligent but got so locked in on the other variables that I did not consider that trees will absolutely consume water as close as they are to the pond.

I also love the idea of a prickly rope and will give some thought on how we may be able to enhance the concept. My pool uses a mesh cover to keep leaves out but obviously the size of the pond would prevent that solutions unless I went with multiple small sections stretched across the water.

I also appreciate your wisdom of just letting them drop to the bottom and as I reflect that may be the best way to go. We've lived here 15 years and over the past 5 to 10 years the trees have become large enough to drop significant numbers. The pond actually looked pretty good this year so I guess they couldn't be doing to much harm. I dread thinking about the cost of a mechanical dredge project but I have fair depth in all but about an 1/8 of an acre so perhaps I just take em out and take advantage of the dry periods to manually remove what I can get to.

Thanks so much for taking the time to provide your thoughts, you have helped me to look at this from a very different perspective. I owe ya big, hopefully I have something I can offer to you and the forum over time.

Thanks so much, truly appreciate info regarding what you experienced this year. You all have put my mind at ease a bit, really hope we get some decent rains. It really is stressful seeing so much of the bank exposed, start thinking the worst.

Excellent points and advice Aggie. Tons of wisdom on this forum.

Thank you all so much!

I'm guessing that in future years your trees will be taking more and more water from the pond as the trees get bigger and bigger. Their impact on the water level may not be all that noticeable in a wet year, but in a dry year they will be trying to get the water they need from the nearest available source. Tree roots naturally grow towards their water source; that's why they have a tendency to plug sewer lines.

What about cutting down only some of the trees? That would leave some shade, cut down on the amount of leaves, and cut down on the amount of water they are stealing from the pond, especially if the trees you kept were the ones that were further back from the pond.

As for burning the leaves while they are on the trees, it's likely that the heat from the burning leaves would damage the end buds for next year's growth. You might end up with trees that looked like they were "topped", with new branches coming out everywhere. Even if this didn't happen the heat would cause some damage to the buds and limbs, weakening the tree so that over several years of burning the tree would gradually die.

On the other hand, if you are going to cut them down anyway, it would be a neat experiment!

I have hoped that someone would come up with an ingenious solution to the need to scoop leaves out quickly and easily before they sink.
Managing floating ropes that have some type of capturing device near the surface works, but is mostly a 2 person operation and if you get too long of a rope you would need a tractor to pull the loaded rope with wet heavy leaves in.
A mesh cover over the whole pond would not be good for me as I like the surface open for aeration, for my turtles, and for my minnows to feed off the surface.

To me it would be easiest if I had a powered solution. An old jet ski that floats well enough that the operator doesn't get wet but can push a skimmer basket on the front to push the leaves up on the shore. A way to tip/dump the basket once beached on the shore would be idea. Just 'mow lanes' across the surface whenever leaves are starting to float. If the skimmer rides about 6" under the surface you would get them all.

A manual process could be done with 2 people. You could make a similar wide and shallow basket that rides bout 6" under the water but also has a portion above the water with floats to help suspend the leaves as they are netted. It could be pulled back and forth across the pond. One person could attach it to the middle of a very long rope, pull it across the pond, empty it out, turn it around, leave it ready for the return trip, then walk around the pond, grab the long other end of the rope and pull it back across, etc.

I'm thinking a PVC rectangle frame, 3/4" pvc, maybe 8'-10' long, 24-30" wide. Make 2 identical frames and mount them one on top of the other with maybe 10" vertical PVC posts in the 4 corners. You could use any mesh that is strong enough to handle sticks and leaves dragging in it, maybe reuse an old seine net section. Cover the bottom, the two short sides and the back side, keeping the top open and the front entrance open between the frames. Let the bottom frame sink in the water as the floor of the 'skimmer' and wrap the top frame with pool noodles to keep it floating.

Probably best to scale it down and do a smaller test model first?

The same setup, but this time weighted by drilling holes in the pvc frame and filling the tubes with pea gravel might work well to drag muck off the bottom if pulled across with a garden tractor. You probably could use the same setup for both, you just would have to add pea gravel and take off floats during spring and summer season and empty gravel and add floats during fall season.

Google parachute skimmer.....

I am looking to cleanup my 40 year old 3acre lake, it has a bunch of muck in it, the bio-3 says it takes 125lbs per surface acres for a treatment! i'd go broke doing that, the muckaway TL is $699 and says it treats 3 acres, and advertises it is "delayed release" pellets. Have you used both? or would reccomend anything else?

thanks

Talk to both companies and see how many inches of muck per year they estimate that it will remove. If your pond is more than 8 feet deep, you will need aeration for it to have a chance of working.

There is no silver bullet for removing muck shy of draining and mechanically removing it. That's the only way I know of guaranteeing that it will work. (the muck removal)