Re: [APD] Walstad

[Stuart Halliday <stuart at stuarthalliday_com>]

I believe Steven Pituch wrote this email section below:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stuart Halliday
> 
> I believe Wojciech J. Pilat wrote this email section below:
>> Wow that's something new I've never heard of. Does the large amount 
>> plants keep toxic levels down? thanks again Vaughn
> 
> Plants and a good soil.
> 
> See http://theaquariumwiki.com/Walstad_method
> _______________________________________________
>  
> Hi Stuart and all,
> I strongly recommend reading Walstad's book several times if anyone is going

I only read it twice. :-)

> to attempt this, as I see some misleading information (as I interpret
> Walstad's book and this Wiki) at this website:

So why didn't you edit the page? Or at least add your thoughts in its
'discussion' section?

> 1) I don't think that Walstad is much into water testing.  After you know
> the chemistry of the local tap water, and determined that it isn't poison,
> it shouldn't be necessary.

That's not very responsible. Tap water is very variable across the World,
even from month to month.
If I did a 50% water change and added my local tap water with its Chloramine
in it, would my Walstad tank instantly make it safe for my fish?
I think not.


> 2) "At least 2 Watts per gallon", "More light, more plant growth, less
> algae", and "replacing tubes every 9 months" is more in line with a high
> tech tank requiring CO2 injection and adding fertilizers.

I disagree.
2 watts is considered average and you should replace your tubes every 9
months. They do fade.

Diana also says use daylight. That's considerably more than 2wpg!
:-)

>  Walstad's tanks
> about 50 gallons in size appear to normally have about 1 Watt per gallon of
> low tech fluorescent lighting.

I can't remember, I'd have to re-read it.

Diana's own tanks on her web site, are 1.7 - 1.8wpg plus daylight.
http://www.aquabotanic.com/diana_walstad_gallery.htm

> 3) Adding a powerhead is unnecessary and can reduce the available CO2.

Diana Walstad disagrees with you there...

> I guess my regime is a modified Walstad scheme.  I gave up on soil
> substrates after about 3 years of experimenting.  I couldn't get a soil
> locally that was either not contaminated or wasn't so hot in nutrients.

People have often criticised Dianna on that aspect of her book.
It's terribly vague about the soil you can use.

My first attempt was with a commercial pond aquatic soil bag (Ideal I
thought!). I set up a 60L tank with it and then noticed that the bag said it
was sterile!

Took 2 months for the tank to get it together.

Later small tanks I created, the ones you see pictures of on the page, were
done using potting soil and worked a real treat!

> Also, whether it is a high light-high tech tank or a low tech tank, the
> plants in either case are purifying the water.

Yes of course.


See my Walstad tanks here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/stuarthalliday

-- 
Stuart Halliday
http://theaquariumwiki.com/
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants