Forums36
Topics40,899
Posts557,082
Members18,451
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
8 members (homewardbound, Justin W, Sunil, DenaTroyer, Freg, Donatello, jludwig, catscratch),
756
guests, and
207
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 55
Lunker
|
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 55 |
beneficial bacteria makes sense if you could prove that it worked. The only way I can prove that is though lots of measurements of a pond treated with and without the stuff and take measurements of muck over years of study.
A lot of people claim they do ok--other than walking around your pond and feeling how much muck is there, how do you know?
I'm adding it and I think it's gotten better but my results are confounded with my other preventative measures so it could be helping, but I just don't know to what extent.
I think this might work better in preventative maintenance plans instead of treating an existing muck issue.
Bennie LMB, HBG, YP, CC, FHM, located SE Michigan 1/3 acre 8-9' deep, aerated 24/7 1/4 hp rocking piston
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|