Water Changes

[Lam Nguyen]

Mike, I was reading your lengthy post and trying to absorb and comprehend its contents without looking at who was posting it and I thought that it was Jasper who wrote it! I don't know if that's a compliment or not, but I just wanted to say that it was a very good post!

[gspotmc]

Lam,
I also trickle fresh water daily about 5% daily. My pond used to be overstocked. The result was great. When I thought that adding fresh water daily did'nt do any good I stopped doing it. I was wrong for an overstocked pond it would help maintain the quality of water. But for a pond that is stocked just right. The benefit seems endless.
michael

[farne230]

Thanks Mike-see new thread started to see what effect increased filter cleanings, may have on reducing accumulated foam. I suspect GH had something to do with this foam, but will see. I agree with water changes, but there is still alot we do not know about what koi gather from nutrients in the water, how these water conditions effect growth, color and skin development. Not sure we will ever know, except by experimenting.
Thanks,
Bob

[MikeM]

Before we wrap up this year's repeat on this subject, for the benefit of those not yet convinced, let's look at the impact of doing 10% weekly water change. Assume that your feeding regimen, natural leaf-input etc. results in 10 units of water pollution per week. You have condemned your koi to a year of deteriorating conditions. Huh???.... Perhaps the following will help you think through it.

Week 1: 10 units of pollution, less 1 unit per 10% water change, leaves 9 units in the pond.

Week 2: 9 + 10 = 19 pollutant units, less 1.9 per 10% water change, leaving 17.1 units.

Week 3: 17.1 + 10 =27.1, less 2.7, leaving 24.4 units.

Week 4: 24.4 units + 10 = 34.4, less 3.4, leaving 31 units of pollution.

Week 5: 31 + 10 = 41, less 4.1, leaving 36.9 units.

Week 6: 36.9 + 10 = 46.9, less 4.7, leaving 42.2 units.

Week 7: 42.2 + 10 = 52.2, less 5.2, leaving 47 units.

Week 8: 47 + 10 = 57, less 5.7, leaving 51.3 units.

Week 9: 51.3 + 10 = 61.3, less 6.1, leaving 55.2 units.

Week 10: 55.2 + 10 = 65.2, less 6.5, leaving 58.7 units

Week 11: 58.7 + 10 = 68.7, less 6.9, leaving 61.8 units.

Week 12: 61.8 + 10 = 71.8, less 7.2, leaving 64.6 units.

Week 13: 64.6 + 10 = 74.6, less 7.5, leaving 67.1 units.

Week 14: 67.1 + 10 = 77.1. less 7.7, leaving 69.4 units.

Week 15: 69.4 + 10 = 79.4, less 7.9, leaving 71.5 units.

Week 16: 71.5 + 10 = 81.5, less 8.2, leaving 73.3 units.

Week 17: 73.3 + 10 = 84.4, less 8.4, leaving 76 units.

Week 18: 76 + 10 = 86, less 8.6, leaving 77.4 units.

Week 19: 77.4 + 10 = 87.4, less 8.7, leaving 78.7 units.

Week 20: 78.7 + 10 = 88.7, less 8.9, leaving 79.8 units.

Week 21: 79.8 + 10 = 89.8, less 9, leaving 80.8 units.

Week 22: 80.8 + 10 = 90.8, less 9, leaving 81.8 units.

Week 23: 81.8 + 10 = 91.8, less 9.2, leaving 82.6 units.

Week 24: 82.6 + 10 = 92.6, less 9.3, leaving 83.3 units.

Week 25: 83.3 + 10 = 93.3, less 9.3, leaving 84 units.

Week 26: 84 + 10 = 94, less 9.4, leaving 84.6 units.

Week 27: 84.6 + 10 = 94.6, less 9.5, leaving 85.1 units.

Week 28: 85.1 + 10 = 95.1, less 9.5, leaving 85.6 units.

Week 29: 85.6 + 10 = 95.6, less 9.6, leaving 86 units.

Week 30: 86 + 10 = 96, less 9.6, leaving 86.4 units.

Week 31: 86.4 + 10 = 96.4, less 9.6, leaving 86.8 units.

Week 32: 86.8 + 10 = 96.8, less 9.7, leaving 87.1 units.

Week 33: 87.1 + 10 = 97.1, less 9.7, leaving 87.4 units.

Week 34: 87.4 + 10 = 97.4, less 9.7, leaving 87.7 units.

Week 35: 87.7 + 10 = 97.7, less 9.8, leaving 87.9 units.

Week 36: 87.9 + 10 = 97.9, less 9.8, leaving 88.1 units.

Week 37: 88.1 + 10 = 98.1, less 9.8, leaving 88.3 units.

Week 38: 88.3 + 10 = 98.3, less 9.8, leaving 88.5 units.

Week 39: 88.5 + 10 = 98.5, less 9.9, leaving 88.6 units.

Week 40: 88.6 + 10 = 98.6, less 9.9, leaving 88.7 units.

Week 41: 88.7 + 10 = 98.7, less 9.9, leaving 88.8 units.

Week 42: 88.8 + 10 = 98.8, less 9.9, leaving 88.9 units.

Week 43: 88.9 + 10 = 98.9, less 9.9, leaving 89 units.

Week 44: 89 + 10 = 99, less 9.9, leaving 89.1 units.

Week 45: 89.1 + 10 = 99.1, less 9.9, leaving 89.2 units.

Week 46: 89.2 + 10 = 99.2, less 9.9, leaving 89.3 units.

Week 47: 89.3 + 10 = 99.3, less 9.9, leaving 89.4 units.

Week 48: 89.4 + 10 = 99.4, less 9.9, leaving 89.5 units.

Week 49: 89.5 + 10 = 99.5, less 10, leaving 89.5 units.

Week 50: Equilibrium reached.

Now, run through the numbers based on 35% fresh water each week and see the difference.

[PapaBear]

Equilibrium in 7-8 weeks vs 50 is a wee bit of an improvement...

Reading through this again naturally brought me back around to some of the many dialogs that have taken place regarding filtration systems, water exchange/flow rates, TT's vs. BS, etc...

Finding that point of a healthy equilibrium and maintaining it in a continuum seems to be the sticking point for most ponders. My own preference is for a continual trickle, but no matter what, the need to dump settlement does alter the dilution ratio from time to time, as does evaporation rates changing throughout the year. Add to that the fact that during the peak evaporation season we are also feeding at the heaviest rate it is small wonder that so many seem to experience 3 seasons of water issues.
Season 1. Dead filters and a pond full of leaves, etc... every spring and the associated "new pond syndrome", aeromonas outbreaks, etc... being repeated annually.
Season 2. Mid-summer nights bad dream. Heavy feeding with unstable oxygen levels caused by a 2nd round of green water due to inadequate filtration, little or no fresh water exchange, day/night ph swings, etc...
Season 3. Feeding too much as summer turns to fall, thereby re-creating a polluted pond just in time to shut down filtration and put the fish to bed for the winter...
While these scenarios may not hold true for most of the ponders on this forum, it is one that is constantly repeated on some. Following an intelligent and rational program of water maintenance as Mike has described would save most ponders the yearlong frustration of constantly battling for "equilibrium" and only finding it 2 or 3 weeks at a time...

[MikeM]

I know my last post was rather tedious, but I think seeing it that way helps to get the point across. And, yes, PapaBear, nothing about a pond is static. The contaminant input will vary with the seasons. Over such a long period some contaminants are altered by the biomass to a form that settles out; and, if contaminant levels are lower, appetite improves and more feeding occurs, so inputs increase, etc., etc.

The point to absorb is a year of deteriorating conditions with equilibrium at 10 times the weekly input of contamination, vs a couple of months with equilibrium at less than 3 times the weekly contamination is a huge difference. DickB's 10% per day through constant trickle is on an entirely different plane.... equilibrium takes 50 days (not much different that 35% weekly water changes), but the ambient contamination is less than 1.5 weeks' worth and there is virtually no significant fluctuation.

[JasPR]

Mike, as I said previously, this is a great thread and you have made the very best of posts. But I fear now you are moving away from the big picture with this example.

we all agree that water changes are the method that brings water back to the ideal base line parameters where koi can operate and grow uneffected by outside negative factors of pollution , gas imbalance, pH decline, hormonal feedback and mineral interference.

But The water change is also the demarcation line between open systems and closed systems. This is important because this is the moment where systems change in regard to the level of microbal dependency. THIS is the real point of equilibrium. The balance between fish and microbe is what makes for the rate of deterioration and exhaustion fo water.

So I would not call the water change a point of equilibrium without making it clear that 'equilibrium' is a term meant to describe the relationship between fish mass and microbes. And water changes return parameters to ideal base line readings. - JR

[MikeM]

Yes, it is a simplistic way to make the point and not the best word choice. Thanks for the save.