Water changes on city water?

[Muni]

Yes, as the hobby evolves, I will too. That's why I'm on these forums. To see what everyone else is doing and find the new cutting edge methods, science and technology that will better the hobby for my fish and i

Then again if it's not broke, why fix it.


Different strokes for different folks. This is my first time with this issue to wanted to get a varied opinion.

Thanks for all the responses and keeping the thread civil.

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

Then again if it's not broke, why fix it.


Different strokes for different folks. This is my first time with this issue to wanted to get a varied opinion.

Thanks for all the responses and keeping the thread civil.

You enjoy walking then, ill stick with my car. There's just so much to learn from the hobby, if you stuck to old school thinking you'd only put aged water in your tank, use undergravel filters and your fish will only grow to your tank.

I advise everyone to read up, try different things and just have fun. You'll find something that works for you

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

Hello; I know of a few from fish forums which confirms a use of the internet. One from Washington state. Perhaps some who use this forum will respond. Old school perhaps, but if you live long enough all of the methods currently in use will be old school. Do you plan to stop using methods of fish keeping just because they were in use some time ago. What length of time is likely to be the cutoff, 20 years? Fifty years?

I can relate to David R's post in that a technical explaination is presented. That I will try to look into. That is the sort of response more likely to convince me to change a proceedure.

Have you learned anything? There's a thread in the lounge about these old school methods that are outdated. Good read.

 

[Jc1119]

Hello; Been following this thread and will offer a less popular alternative method for water change. For many years (five decades) I have not used any water conditioning chemicals at all. The last 23 years on city water. I now fill containers with tap water and allow them to sit for a week vented to the air (During warm weather mosquitoes will lay in the open container so I plug the openings with a bit of foam. I also have a six gallon water jug with a small vent that works well.) The chlorine in the tap water become inert during this period and the water can be poured directly into the tank. A second advantage is always having a source of drinking water on hand in an emergency. This must to be less expensive than the chemicals as well.

Gallon jugs that have thick walls last longer than the distilled water or milk type. Vinegar bottles and Clorox bottles are sturdy. I rinse them well. To clean them, I fill these bottles and let them sit a while and then dump the water into the washing machine. I do this several times before using them for an aquarium. You can likely find new containers somewhere that work if you do not wish to use the used ones. A disadvantage is finding a place to store the water.

The issue of water treatment chemicals other than chlorine should not be left out. I go to my local water treatment company and pick up their water quality report to check for the treatment methods. Your local water company will have the information. My company use only chlorine. Some water companies use additional chemicals such as chloramines which are reported to not become inert with sitting for a time. Your water company will list such chemicals if used. I have no experience with that chemical but it has been reported many times on fish forums that a treatment chemical is needed to deal with chloramines.

Should you find some of the water change threads of the past many will have suggested the use of water conditioning chemicals for all water, including well water. I have been storing water for changes since going on city water in two different communities over twenty years ago and the method has worked well. I had well water prior to that and only had to be aware of temperature issues.

But for those of us changing several hundred gallons a week, how practical would it be to fill 300-400 gallons jugs and age the water?

Some of us have several hundred tanks on this site. This is MFK.

Aging water with vigorous aeration has been and is used but lots of folks and it can certainly work, but sometimes its just not practical at all for those with large tanks and fish rooms.

I prefer Safe because 1 kilo treats 200,000 gallons. A little goes a long way.

Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

 

[skjl47]

Hello; I did some research on the chlorine issue and so far have not come to a conclusion. The aging of water in containers has worked well for over twenty years with no apparent issues, so I am not going to panic about it.
For those with very large tanks or a large number of tanks and no practical way to store the water it makes sense to use the water treatment chemicals.
At any rate we each get to run our tanks any way we want. We each should do our water changes in a manner that suits us. When on a well i was able to water directly from a tap with only temperature to consider. Thus far on city water with only chlorine as treatment the store and age process has worked well. City water with chloramines appear to be a situation where store and age does not work.

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

I could just as easily argue that I've been not treating any of my water and only doing water changes 2-3 timed a year and say its worked for 20 years (which let's be honest, unless I'm keeping sensitive fish can and has been done) but it doesn't make it the most efficient or healthiest form of fish keeping. I can only imagine how much time you'd save to enjoy other aspects of your life or more of this hobby if you weren't wasting time aging water.

You're free to do what you want though and free to give whatever advice youd like. I just want it to be clear to newcomers that aging water is a thing of the past that a small percentage of fishkeepers still do

 

[skjl47]

I could just as easily argue that I've been not treating any of my water and only doing water changes 2-3 timed a year and say its worked for 20 years (which let's be honest, unless I'm keeping sensitive fish can and has been done) but it doesn't make it the most efficient or healthiest form of fish keeping. I can only imagine how much time you'd save to enjoy other aspects of your life or more of this hobby if you weren't wasting time aging water.

You're free to do what you want though and free to give whatever advice youd like. I just want it to be clear to newcomers that aging water is a thing of the past that a small percentage of fishkeepers still do

Hello; Interesting tactic. You imply that this water change method is harmful to the fish without any real knowledge of the condition of my tanks.
While it seems apparent that the forum members favoring the use of water treatment chemicals seem to comment in greater numbers, that in itself likely does not constitute proof that only a few percentage of fish keepers do the age and store method.

There is a notable push toward conformation on these fish forums with regard to several issues such as undergravel filters, fish stocking densities and the use of water treatment chemicals. I have seen the effect in threads on this and other forums when these particular issues are mentioned. The negative comments abound such as the "old school" label or as you have just done with the implication that some method you do not agree with must cause harm and that a person is a poor fish keeper if the methods are used.

I have, on another forum, come to the defense of a new fish keeper on one of these issues (stocking density). The OP made a reasonable inquiry and was subjected to multiple unpleasant posts. In a long series of back and forth posts it emerged that the main person was pushing an unnecessarily light density stocking agenda in the belief that a new fish keeper could not handle a normal stocking density. The person eventually acknowledged that a greater stocking density was indeed possible and was trying to protect fish because the new fish keeper might make a mistake. I can see how some may be intimidated by the way threads are attacked and choose not to post and be subjected to the attacks.

As far as the time involved to store water, that is not an issue. I have some 5 gallon containers as well as a few 1 gallon containers. The only time involved is to fill the containers and a few seconds to set them in place. I imagine that there will be little difference in total time over any other method of water change. I also have the issue of water temperature differences pretty much solved as the containers are stored within the same environment as the tanks and there is usually very little temperature difference with the tanks.

The research I have managed so far has shown that the chlorine reactions can yield a couple of acids. My take thus far is that these must be in very small amounts and are greatly diluted. It may be that living in a karst limestone region the acids are offset as I have not noted a pH issue. I will continue to look into the issue when I find sources. Feel free to provide links and sources as this will be a more appreciated tactic.

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

Can you please quote where I said it was harmful or a poor fish keeping practice?


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

 

[soul_assassin]

Pretty sure Chloramine does not evaporate and is more dangerous than chlorine

Wikied it: Removing chloramines from water

Chloramines should be removed from water for dialysis, aquariums, hydroponic applications and homebrewing beer. Chloramines can interfere with dialysis, can hurt aquatic animals, and can give homebrewed beer a medicinal taste by forming chlorophenols. In hydroponic applications it will stunt the growth and fruit production of plants.

When a chemical or biological process that changes the chemistry of chloramines is used, it falls under reductive dechlorination. Other techniques use physical—not chemical—methods for removing chloramines.

 

[skjl47]

Pretty sure Chloramine does not evaporate and is more dangerous than chlorine
Wikied it: Removing chloramines from water

Chloramines should be removed from water for dialysis, aquariums, hydroponic applications and homebrewing beer. Chloramines can interfere with dialysis, can hurt aquatic animals, and can give homebrewed beer a medicinal taste by forming chlorophenols. In hydroponic applications it will stunt the growth and fruit production of plants.

When a chemical or biological process that changes the chemistry of chloramines is used, it falls under reductive dechlorination. Other techniques use physical—not chemical—methods for removing chloramines.

Hello; Yes, I do not think there has been any dispute about city water where they use chloramines. The store and age method seems good for water that is treated only with chlorine as mine water is now and where I lived before.

Here is a link to a discussion on chlorine and chloramines - http://water.me.vccs.edu/concepts/chlorchemistry.html