Forums36
Topics40,963
Posts557,993
Members18,503
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
7 members (bmicek, Fishingadventure, esshup, anthropic, 4CornersPuddle, gautprod, FishinRod),
1,192
guests, and
252
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,248 Likes: 548
|
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,248 Likes: 548 |
The sediment/muck is a big part of the nutrient source (thinking out loud) if you increase the depth to a point any useful vegetation will not grow then I would say you will never duplicate/replicate nutrient use by plants. I would have to go back to the 20-25% rule. (of the newly opened up area) I'm also on board with TJ's "5".. However, should we also have a handle on what plant species is best at converting nutrients as well? This would change the amount, or % needed to replicate Spatterdock, would it not? Also..if removing nutrient load in muck/sediment, will it REQUIRE the same conversion rate?.?….
Last edited by Snipe; 12/10/19 08:20 PM.
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
OK, here's a tough question.
|
esshup
|
12/10/19 06:09 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
teehjaeh57
|
12/10/19 10:51 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
Snipe
|
12/11/19 01:16 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
esshup
|
12/11/19 01:27 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
Snipe
|
12/11/19 01:47 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
Bill Cody
|
12/11/19 01:57 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
ewest
|
12/11/19 04:31 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
esshup
|
12/13/19 04:29 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
RAH
|
12/13/19 11:37 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
esshup
|
12/14/19 04:11 AM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
RAH
|
12/14/19 02:44 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
ewest
|
12/15/19 12:52 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
esshup
|
12/15/19 08:12 PM
|
Re: OK, here's a tough question.
|
ewest
|
12/16/19 06:56 PM
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|