Originally Posted by FishinRod
Theo,

I think most people these days to want to avoid strong chemical interventions whenever possible.

When the pond management company was pushing #5, did it seem less likely to upset your pond balance than the herbicide option on FA?

For people that cannot get on top of their FA with tilapia, etc., was #5 reasonably priced, or did they want an arm & a leg for the treatment? What was the chemical reaction they were seeking?

Thanks,
Rod
I don't believe I even had the management company price #5.

IIRC #5 is a straight forward chemical reaction, causing phosphorus to be bound up and precipitate down to the bottom, thereafter unavailable for plant growth. To me, that might be less "nasty" than herbicides.

I am honored by the Eastwood comparison. “There’s plain few problems can’t be solved with a little sweat and hard work.”

"Live like you'll die tomorrow, but manage your grass like you'll live forever."
-S. M. Stirling
[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]