[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Another Algae Problem?

On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, J. Bennett wrote:

> 	My other question was how come people don't post any responses to these
> algae questions to the APD. I've seen a few others with similar Q's and
> problems, but they never seem to get any public responses. Any reason? I'm
> guessing it's to save space maybe. In any case, thank you for your time in
> reading this and for any advice that you can offer and sorry for the length.

I moved the first question up to the front to answer first, as I probably
can't do that much for the first question.

"I have an algae problem, what do I do?" is one of the most often repeated
of all the questions we ask and answer; it's also probably the most
difficult of the Big Questions to actually answer.  Just the same, it's
been asked and answered on the list about a kabillion times over the
years.  Usually the response is limited to one of only a few answers, but
there is the occasional surprising burst of creativity.

Someone else a couple years back asked why all the questions didn't get
answered, and Karen Randall replied with a fairly exhaustive list of
reasons.  George Booth even made an offer to handle all the outstanding
QYNGA (Questions You Never Got Answered).  Maybe he'd be willing to
repeat that.

In the case of the "algae problem" question, it's commonly asked, so those
of us who respond (right or wrong) on the list are probably tired of
answering it.  Besides, all the normal answers can be found (over and
over) in the archives.  In my case, I rarely answer a question if the
word "Dupla" is found anywhere in the letter, and I don't usually have a
lot to say when the questioner is using PMDD.

You used the PMDD word, so I don't have that much to say.  Just the

> Water Chem.
> ph    7.1 +-.1 (does not want to hit 6.8 for some reason)
> Kh    6
> Gh    5.5
> TH    14  (Any ideas on what the extra 2.5 dgh might be? Toronto water)

What is TH?

> Fe     .25 aprx.
> No2   0.
> No3   0. ? (triple checked, PMDD measures 80+ ppm per .1 ml)
> PO3/4  .25 aprx ? (test starts at 0-.5ppm)
> NH3/4 0.
> Co2   12-15 ppm (I hope) consistent result prior to the addition of peat
> filtration.

[Practiced reply follows] Refer back to the Sears and Conlin letters
(conveniently available at www.thekrib.com) and the follow-up letters.
The PMDD regime should be complete, and it doesn't use plant tabs. I think
it calls for a lower iron level than you're providing, and you should have
nitrate present in the water.  When it works your phosphates should be
very low.

Good luck.

Roger Miller