Shutting Down Bio Filter For Winter?

[Sunshine]

I was thinking of shutting down the bio filter for Winter this year. I have had my pond for a long time and always left the bio running all Winter. I was going to just leave the bog running this Winter.
Any thoughts? The pond is 1800 gal. The bog and bio are on opposite ends.

 

[sissy]

Your bog may freeze up ,but not sure and know bio's at a certain temp do not work .Addy has a bog and she should know ,

 

[fishin4cars]

For water clarity the bog would be the better of the two to leave up and running. I leave all running unless there is for sure going to be a hard freeze, but I'm far further south. If you do decide to shut down the Bio clean the bio material as good as possible with clean water. Store dry where it can not come in contact with chemicals and won't allow for mold or mildew. Rinse again in the spring before putting back in use. Be surprised how easy some types can collect dust, chemical residue, and mildew through a winter.

 

[Waterbug]

Temp range for ammonia converting bacteria. Not much use running a bio filter that depends on these animals at low temps. However if your bio filter is something like a Bakki Shower then ammonia removal by outgassing is significant. In freezing climates shower filters are often kept inside a heated building to stop the filters from super cooling the water.

So it depends on the type of bio filter you have, fish load, etc. The regular factors.

 

[Sunshine]

I just kept both filters running to keep a hole open in the ice. Since my check valve don't work on the bog, I was going to keep that one running. I was just wondering if water freezing solid on the one side where the bio filter is, if that would affect any gas build up. The bio filter is just a normal vortex filter with a waterfall weir. It has bio balls and matala mats in it.

 

[Sunshine]

Oh, I have 2 Koi and about 20+ comets.

 

[addy1]

I turn mine off, with the surface area it cools the water way down, also if the waterfall starts to freeze and we are not home it will empty the pond quickly.

I had it off for about 3.5 months or so last winter, via my views with the camera the water was real clear. The water just started to become milky looking about a week before I flipped it back on. Within a day the pond water was crystal clear all milky look was gone. We had a very warm february and march,.

 

[JohnHuff]

However if your bio filter is something like a Bakki Shower then ammonia removal by outgassing is significant.

I've read that this is a myth and there is no outgassing. What references do you have?
But thanks for that article, nice to know about the bacteria temperatures, and by the way, that article seems very old.

 

[icerabbit]

With the smaller ponds we have and the deeper one planned for next year; we shut everything down. The ponds would certainly start to freeze over pretty good by Christmas and beyond that equipment would freeze & break. For our relatively small ponds and the few fish we have, I see no sense in trying to heat lines or keep the water open, when we will have several feet of ice by mid winter.

So, in the fall, the fish come out, everything winterized, filter comes out, cleaned and stored inside till spring.

If we had a milder climate, larger ponds and more than 3-4 feet of water, I'd go year round without a doubt, with the benefit of a bigger water mass that takes longer to cool and some additional heating.

 

[Waterbug]

I've read that this is a myth and there is no outgassing. What references do you have?

Google "ammonia outgassing" will provide lots of info on how and when ammonia will outgas. For specific tests on Bakki I think Birdman's "New Test Tank" thread is pretty good. But since you consider this a myth I'm sure you'll also be able to find enough info there to support that view too.

Do you have any references supporting outgassing ammonia in a Bakki Shower is a myth?

But thanks for that article, nice to know about the bacteria temperatures, and by the way, that article seems very old.

These species of bacteria are pretty old too. Don't think they've evolved that much in the past few years.

 

[JohnHuff]

WB, these are posts that I want to kick you in the butt instead of high 5'ing you.
1) No, I don't "consider" this a myth. I merely observe and base my conclusions on what I read or find. Should I find newer or better evidence I reserve the right to change my views. So no, I don't have any "references" off hand. It's been a while since I read up on that subject. But what I had read indicated that outgassing is not significant. I will read your link and see what it says.
2) The bacteria may be old, but views change. At one time, people thought the Sun revolved around the Earth too. Just because bacteria has been around for millennias doesn't mean an article written 10 years ago is up to date.

Your posts work much better without sarcasm.

 

[Waterbug]

I didn't consider anything in my post to be sarcasm. How you take them is your choice.

The ability of a Bakki to outgas ammonia is dependent on each filter since each is a custom deal. I've seen more than a few that were called Bakki but were more of a Trickle Tower than a Bakki. If someone was to focus on these filters and consider them to be Bakki I can understand why people would think ammonia outgassing would be a myth. Like I said, plenty of info to support that view. Not really sure if that's the part you thought was sarcastic, to me it's just an observation from reading lots of posts.

By my mine personal definition, since there is no definitive definition that I know of, is a Bakki requires a strong water force, a lot of turbulence, to outgas ammonia, but there are other factors of course. I get that point of view from data provided by waste water treatment papers. My assumption is a Bakki would have a lot of water going thru it.

I'm really sorry you were upset by my post. I will do my best to not respond to you in the future. That's not sarcasm or passive aggressive...just think we would be much happier that way. Good day.

 

[Mucky_Waters]

I'd sure like to join in on this discussion, but I'm feeling a little bitter, sad and delusional today.

 

[JohnHuff]

By my mine personal definition, since there is no definitive definition that I know of, is a Bakki requires a strong water force, a lot of turbulence, to outgas ammonia, but there are other factors of course. I get that point of view from data provided by waste water treatment papers. My assumption is a Bakki would have a lot of water going thru it.

Wrong again!
Ya, and a good day to you too.
Well, passive aggressive grasshopper you can learn something today, the only definition of a Bakki is one that uses the bacteria house media, otherwise it's just a shower filter.

 

[Craig58]

John,

While I agree on your take on WB's earlier posts, sometimes I dont' think he actually understands how his posts come across.

But on your last post, you don't HAVE to use bacteria house media for a Bakki shower. i don't think Bakki is a tradename associated with one vendor's material. If it is, it's like everyone saying I need a Tylenol but just meaning any pain killer will do.

Anyway, here on the Koi forum is a thread with a ton of pictures of Bakki showers http://koionline.forumotion.com/t2626-bakki-showers

This is an article from May 2004 in Mid-Atlantic Koi on the Bacteria House media which can be used in Bakki showers. The article seems to be pretty clear that other media can be used but (of course, ) the article concludes that the Bacteria House Media was the best. http://www.makc.com/bakki.pdf

I believe the name Bakki was actually in reference to the Bakuhenseki Stone referred to in the article and was not a term coined by Bacteria House.

Craig