PlanetCatfish.com

I don't think I'll be getting a nugget 2... I'm convinced things happen for a reason... I think I may follow my own advice and build the massive tank first...

sorry about that.

MatsP wrote:

taksan wrote:I had one for 27 years ......

And how large was it at that point, and do you know what caused it's passing?

--
Mats

He was about 140cm only but very heavy probably 35kgs + .... he lived in the indoor patio pond which was about 15000 liters. He died for no apparent reason ..just was dead one morning.

My other 2 I have now are .... about 7 years old, both around 120cm and live in the 4.5m dia 1.2m high pond that I've posted pics of ages ago about 15000 liters as well.

Nice, Taksan. Can you dig up a link to the pics of the fish that passed and alive and of their quarters? If not, can you snap some? I'd be very interested to see that.

Viktor Jarikov wrote:Nice, Taksan. Can you dig up a link to the pics of the fish that passed and alive and of their quarters? If not, can you snap some? I'd be very interested to see that.

A couple of videos taken during a WC about 18 months ago here .....to give you a size perspective thats about 2.4 meters of 50mm hose you can see next to the fish.
Pond is 4.8m round by 1.2 meters tall.


http://gallery.me.com/drpopper#100027

http://gallery.me.com/drpopper#100018

Nice, nice stuff, Taksan. I like it. Beautiful happy cats.

-- Is this in Australia or UK? Outdoor, semi-outdoor, or indoor?

-- Is that filter the only thing biofiltering this nice reservoir? I love it that it is transparent and you can see the inside and the condition of the media.

-- Is it of what one would call a trickle style? Why such choice vs. other more conditional styles? Did you rig it yourself? The filter for my 2500 US gal 25' x 6' x 3' indoor pond is made of a 96 US gal plastic garbage toter. I played with a "sort-of-trickle" approach and with a traditional approach.

http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... =4&t=30141

In the end, I am 85% convinced that the traditional approach works better in my setup. I have no water quality problems even after huge, I mean, huge "pig-out" meals my cats enjoy sometimes. The next morning NH3 zero, NO2 zero. I've had some mild problems with these parameters before even though it had been 3-6 months since the pond has been running (with heavily seeded bacteria cultures in the beginning too) and I had less inhabitants then.

http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... 25&t=29488

I should have started a new thread before asking you all these questions. I hope maybe Mats can split it off, will you, please, Mats?

As the op, I don't mind at all... I say let it go, conversations morph into others in real time, why not in a forum?..

Its indoor and in Australia I can't have fish in Surrey because I've got no one to look after them but in Australia I have someone who works for me who is a fish nut who does my WC's like clockwork to my system when I'm in the UK.
Filtration on the RTC's pond consists of That trickle filter which is fed through a Oase pressure filter a 72w UV and 3.5kw heater.
Also a Nexus Eazy 310 gravity fed which outputs through another 72w UV and Clarity CL3 protein skimmer/biotower.
And a small pond filter filled with Carbon, Nitrozorb and Purigen as a chemical filter.

Total filtration is about 48,000 liters per hour

The pond still gets 2 x 50% WC's weekly ... and a WC has never been missed.

The secret to keeping big cats is water quality .... you do huge frequent WC's and use chemicals and you can keep anything.

Viktor Jarikov wrote:
-- Is this in Australia or UK? Outdoor, semi-outdoor, or indoor?

-- Is that filter the only thing biofiltering this nice reservoir? I love it that it is transparent and you can see the inside and the condition of the media.

-- Is it of what one would call a trickle style? Why such choice vs. other more conditional styles? Did you rig it yourself? The filter for my 2500 US gal 25' x 6' x 3' indoor pond is made of a 96 US gal plastic garbage toter. I played with a "sort-of-trickle" approach and with a traditional approach.

I would agree 1000000000000% on the water changes! But the only chemical I use is dechlor....

J, with the extent of your (former ) operation, I am surprised you did not dig a well to avoid having to bother with the dechlorinator and other stuff public water might have...

Same here, wouldn't it have been cheaper to run inline charcoal filters?

great thought that never occurred to me...

A well would have cost 3-4K. And I'd still have to pay for sewer... It would have taken 15 years to make it worth it....

I think what was suggested was something like this:
http://www.osmotics.co.uk/two-stage-poi ... l?cPath=77
As long as your water supply isn't Chloramine, you should be fine.

--
Mats

MatsP wrote:I think what was suggested was something like this: http://www.osmotics.co.uk/two-stage-poi ... l?cPath=77 As long as your water supply isn't Chloramine, you should be fine.

Nice info. Thanks, Mats!

TheFishGuy wrote:A well would have cost 3-4K.

Wow. Did not know. A simplest well? Or is it because you have to drill real deep in your neck of the woods?

taksan wrote:The pond still gets 2 x 50% WC's weekly ... and a WC has never been missed.

Could you have rigged something like a continuous small flow in and a matching flow out? Flow in would be simple. Flow out might have been tricky - could either set up a simple siphon using a small diameter flex tube or pipe ('d need to have smth like a cage at the point of entry to prevent detritus and other particles from plugging the weak flow) or a small-duty pump, like for miniature tabletop waterfall fixtures etc. Appear to me the cause 'd be worth it and save tons and tons of labor and time and as a side benefit, the water chemistry'd be stable without big fluctuations brought about by a large WC every other day - more comfortable for the fish?

TheFishGuy wrote:As the op, I don't mind at all... I say let it go, conversations morph into others in real time, why not in a forum?..

Well, I've been reprimanded for exactly (unintentionally) doing that. Written conversations do not equate oral conversations. See http://www.planetcatfish.com/forum/view ... =2&t=30579 and the tread that this one originated from.

I think this thread is still (roughly) on track. The problem comes when a subject that requires other peoples response is raised in a long, old thread. Like asking for ID's in the middle of a "Here's pictures of my fish"...

I did consider splitting it, but I don't actually see any need to do that right now.

Trickle water change works really well. Easiest way to get the drain bit to work is to simply use an overflow - drill a hole of suitable size at the level you want as max water level, connect a bulkhead and route pipe/hose to suitable drain point - unless you are below suitable drain level, of course, in which case some sort of reservoir/sump and auto-starting sump-drain pump would be required to make sure it all works OK.

--
Mats

Yep, Mats. I did not think about the simplest solution. Of course. The overflow.

So, Taksan, why not?

Why bother I've got access to unlimited water and it only take's 12 mins to pump out 8000 liters and another 12 mins to refill the pond . WC's for me are no issue whatsoever just a case of switching on the pump and turning a tap. Switching it off and turning another tap the switching it back on.

My big tank is automatic, the water exits at the high side of the sump... Very simple...

As for the cost of the well, it's not just the digging of the well, it's everything else that's involved... I might be able to get it done for around 2500, but won't entertain that till my building is built.... ten years from now LOL

I don't worry about the money my chemical bill alone for all my tanks runs about £100 a month for BioChemZrob, NitraZorb and Purigen. I try to keep my fish perfectly, completely perfectly no shortcuts, no mistakes, no ghetto solutions.
My view on fishkeeping is simple ... if we are going to keep fish away from their natural enviroment against their consent for our own amusement then we are given a blind trust, a trust we must accept to keep that fish is the best possible conditions. I try to do that without compromise. Whether that be going into golf courses at night to source the right kind of palm wood for my Titanic's or making sure my Tig's are kept in the closest possible conditions to their natural enviroment or managing the still massive bioload the RTC's put out I do it. I do not consider myself to have a choice. It was a responsibility I accepted when I decided to buy or keep them.
Too many people consider fish as a whim or a disposable pet I consider them a privilege and keeping up my side of the deal is a easy choice in fact the only choice morally I could possibly make.

Well said.

Hear Hear

Apart from eventual environmental issues - what effects would the disposal of the BioChemZrob, NitraZorb and Purigen have? (I have not a clue) I can fully agree

taksan wrote:to keep that fish is the best possible conditions

Well, this is relative, obviously. Define "best". 15,000 liters or 4,000 US gal is outstandingly nice for two 1.2 meter RTCs but only by comparison to other fish keepers' conditions. Someone might say 150,000 l is best, or 1,500,000 l is the best (or my personal best), or moving to Amazon and buying/renting up a stretch of the river and modifying it into a super "pond" is the best to keep your pet fish in (and still be able to view them and interact with them, of course, as this goal is important).

Please, do not get me wrong - what you do is wonderful by my book and you do deserve high praises. For the sake of the discussion, I am merely saying that the terms like "best" and "without a compromise" are relative terms and are subject to your goals and abilities and to what else is going on around in the world. But that is perhaps already obvious to all without my vocalizing it.

taksan wrote:Whether that be going into golf courses at night to source

?? why golf course? why at night?

taksan wrote:the right kind of palm wood

?? driftwood?

taksan wrote:for my Titanic's

?? a nickname for your pond? tank? fish?

taksan wrote:Why bother I've got access to unlimited water and it only take's 12 mins to pump out 8000 liters and another 12 mins to refill the pond . WC's for me are no issue whatsoever just a case of switching on the pump and turning a tap. Switching it off and turning another tap the switching it back on.

Sure, understandable. If it was me though, I'd likely shy away from so much work and time spent: 24 min every other day amounts to 73 h a year and 61 days over 20 years. Not that much but, again, it is all relative Having someone who works for you do it for you when you are away is surely helpful - I ain't got that "luxury"

I think "Titanic" refers to aka "Titanic pleco" (or L203).

--
Mats

[Edit: Update name to scientific name for L203 and clarify...]

Bas Pels wrote:Apart from eventual environmental issues - what effects would the disposal of the BioChemZrob, NitraZorb and Purigen have? (I have not a clue) I can fully agree

Zero Nitrate ,crystal clear water, higher DO, lower chance of any PH variations.

Well Viktor I think 4x the length of the fish in diameter is fairly good in fact its higher then what most of our tanks with small fish are. If it helps I've got a 24'x12'x6' waiting to go in when I build another shed.
I go to golf courses at night because there are no security guards around to ask me WTF I am doing cutting off palm fronds ! And yes its for my LDA65/L418/L203 whatever they are I call them Titanics and my Watermelons and other Panaques.
As for the WC's 24 mins is nothing as its not as if I can't be doing something else at the same time. Besides the more time I spend working on my fish the less time I have to work in my boring day job of taking photos of near naked women ;)

Viktor Jarikov wrote:

taksan wrote:to keep that fish is the best possible conditions

Well, this is relative, obviously. Define "best". 15,000 liters or 4,000 US gal is outstandingly nice for two 1.2 meter RTCs but only by comparison to other fish keepers' conditions. Someone might say 150,000 l is best, or 1,500,000 l is the best (or my personal best), or moving to Amazon and buying/renting up a stretch of the river and modifying it into a super "pond" is the best to keep your pet fish in (and still be able to view them and interact with them, of course, as this goal is important).

Please, do not get me wrong - what you do is wonderful by my book and you do deserve high praises. For the sake of the discussion, I am merely saying that the terms like "best" and "without a compromise" are relative terms and are subject to your goals and abilities and to what else is going on around in the world. But that is perhaps already obvious to all without my vocalizing it.

taksan wrote:Whether that be going into golf courses at night to source

?? why golf course? why at night?

taksan wrote:the right kind of palm wood

?? driftwood?

taksan wrote:for my Titanic's

?? a nickname for your pond? tank? fish?

taksan wrote:Why bother I've got access to unlimited water and it only take's 12 mins to pump out 8000 liters and another 12 mins to refill the pond . WC's for me are no issue whatsoever just a case of switching on the pump and turning a tap. Switching it off and turning another tap the switching it back on.

Sure, understandable. If it was me though, I'd likely shy away from so much work and time spent: 24 min every other day amounts to 73 h a year and 61 days over 20 years. Not that much but, again, it is all relative Having someone who works for you do it for you when you are away is surely helpful - I ain't got that "luxury"

MatsP wrote:I think "Titanic" refers to Panaque sp(l203) aka "Titanic pl*co".

Shows you my "Plecognorance".

taksan wrote:If it helps I've got a 24'x12'x6' waiting to go in when I build another shed.

Nice!!

taksan wrote:I am doing cutting off palm fronds ! And yes its for my LDA65/L418/L203 whatever they are I call them Titanics and my Watermelons and other Panaques.

A-a-ah. See the first comment.

taksan wrote:As for the WC's 24 mins is nothing as its not as if I can't be doing something else at the same time.

Yeah. It'd just be such a loss of freedom for me...

taksan wrote:Besides the more time I spend working on my fish the less time I have to work in my boring day job of taking photos of near naked women ;)

Hmmm... This is interesting on a few levels... Let me cautiously start here: Are you a swimsuit model photographer? NNTR (no need to reply)