Forums36
Topics40,957
Posts557,915
Members18,494
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
14 members (Theo Gallus, Donatello, ghdmd, DrewSh, FishinRod, catscratch, phinfan, Theeck, Cliff76169, Justin W, Shorthose, canyoncreek, Boondoggle, Bigtrh24),
858
guests, and
223
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902 Likes: 281
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902 Likes: 281 |
The reason that I am aggravated by it is that about 10 years ago I tried running it part time to keep the water temperature down (I had trout in the pond) due to the people on here suggesting that without providing data and I wanted to keep the pond water cooler so they'd live longer into the summer. What I found out was that they actually lived longer if I didn't aerate at all, because the water actually warmed up faster and they croaked. I only ran the system when the night time temps were below 70°F. On the flip side of the coin, I was able to keep trout alive longer if I ran the system 24/7 and ran a surface agitator 24/7 too. That raised the O2 levels in the pond high enough so that the trout would stay alive in water temps that were 79-80 degrees. This has my curiosity piqued. Is it fair to say that trout live longer without aeration unless one operates a surface agitator? Though you didn't try this, I wonder what the results would be if you ran the surface agitator only.
It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|