Pond Boss Forums GENERAL QUESTIONS Water chemistry Should I use bacteria???

luckily, they are across a field from the pond, but that stuff blows everywhere!

Coach, you could run a windmill but a compressor would give you more control and ensure that you have aeration when you need it. You don't have to run power to the pond assuming that your pond is within 1000' of your existing power source. You can place the compressor at the existing power and run 1.5" PVC (glued) from the power to the pond edge. Then just pump the air into the PVC and out to your diffuser.

I wouldn't expect too many problems your first year. However, as a general rule of thumb, a bottom laid aeration system will help the existing bacteria consume about an inch of organic sediment per year. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure so get started with aeration ASAP.

I live in Arizona and we have a huge pond (lake?) that is man-made close to downtown Phoenix. It's about a mile around and a great place to retreat from the city. But...it's without problems. We have had issues with golden algae and botulism over the past few years. I know that there is a regular usage of copper sulfate and I am fearful of continual use of such a product. I am told it builds up on the bottom and becomes toxic. I realize we need additional aeration but I also want to go to a natural form of adding good bacteria to our pond/lake but seem to only get quotes and little of the one/one help. If the product was so good...wouldn't they be using it in AZ? Wouldn't a salesperson review the problems before selling me a product?

At the risk offending anyone I have seen little actual empirical data that shows adding bacteria is really as good as those that promote it. If it's so good where is the data?

That said, I used some several years ago and stopped mainly because it was too expensive. Initially I thought it got rid of my filamentous algae in the trout pond, but I know now the filamentous algae disappears every year at the same time water temps reach a certain level, and/or the Chara (also a form of algae) gets going well enough to out compete it for nutrients.

Bill Cody did some research and compared the results of adding bacteria vs. raking the bottom to stir up sediment to allow it to be oxidized. (Presentation at the last Pond Boss Convention) If I remember right he found the raking more effective hands down.

From my limited education in biology and microbiology my belief is there is already a beneficial population of bacteria present in a well aerated pond. Since an ecosystem can only handle so much bacteria, adding more could be a lesson in futility or wasted money. Mind you that is my opinion.

To me a well designed aeration system will do wonders for aerobic bacteria for obvious reasons and adding bacteria is not needed.

Well said Cecil...

This may be too simple and may have later adverse effects, but I cleared my one year old pond last year by throwing two barley straw bales, broken up into mats about 6" thick. It took about two days of it floating around with the wind for the sediment to adhear to the mats, but it worked. Mats eventually sunk and I think are good for creating a 'food chain' for fry. Yes/no??

Not real technical, but worked for me. I routinely have a ph of 7.8-8.4 (depending on time of day), hardness of 40, and alkalinity of 50-60 without adding anything.

No adverse effects will come from the barley straw used. The bacteria grown to decay the barley will provide a good base for the food chain as well. Too much organic decay could deplete oxygen though.