Pond in the foothills

[waynefrcan]

Hi Mitch sad start to the ponding this year. I thought the pondbreathers were not reliable for our winters as I mentioned in the past. When I over wintered I used an aerator with a fine diffuser. Forgot what model but it works great for our winters and supports large ponds. I'll find it for you.

 

[waynefrcan]

Pondmaster AP-100. Bought it off ebay for a good price.

 

[callingcolleen1]

Sorry to hear about your goldfish Mitch. I wonder if you could adapt a large filter to that breather then it would last longer, like the barrel style under water filters I use?

 

[callingcolleen1]

You could always just run a EZ bio filters to pump and run good size pump on front of lower watt heater. Try my method....

 

[addy1]

Pondmaster AP-100. Bought it off ebay for a good price.

A guy here used that aerator, all his fish died. He had a decent sized pond.

 

[MitchM]

Thanks folks.
I'm leaning more towards aeration because I would need a fairly strong water pump to move the water around and even then I'm pretty sure the pond would ice over, preventing any gas exchange. Aeration would at least keep pumping fresh air under the ice. The excess air would find it's own way out, probably around the edges.

Alberta Environment has been having success installing bottom aerators in some lakes around the province in order to prevent fish kill from some lakes that stock trout. They've tried subsurface aeration and that hasn't worked so well, so that shows that the preferred location is at the bottom of the pond, not a short distance below the ice.

I think the pond breathers still work fine, but I of course can't control where a school of minnow fry will go while under the ice. During the summer I see schools of perhaps 100 fry staying together, so I think what happened was that a school got too close to the breather intakes.

 

[cas]

Alberta Environment has been having success installing bottom aerators in some lakes around the province in order to prevent fish kill from some lakes that stock trout. They've tried subsurface aeration and that hasn't worked so well, so that shows that the preferred location is at the bottom of the pond, not a short distance below the ice.

So no need to keep a hole in the ice?

 

[MitchM]

So no need to keep a hole in the ice?

The important thing is to maintain a healthy dissolved oxygen level in the pond. (above 3 mg/l)
How that is accomplished will vary by pond design, stocking levels and climate.

 

[Tula]

I'm sorry about your gold fish A positive to the aerator you posted the link to, says it can keep an opening in the ice, for geese

 

[callingcolleen1]

Might not work for your big pond Mitch, but just covering my two upper ponds with cattle panel cold frame with heavy plastic sure cut the ice down big time and saved lots of energy too. I also read years ago that farmers used to put a square bale of hay in the dugouts so air could exhange better as straw is quite pourus and allows better air exchange.

 

[brokensword]

Mitch; I'd ask Meyer re the depth, but my research came up with NOT putting the aerator at the bottom but mid-height or near the top. Here's the link to further pond research in which fish farmers are trying to do what you want to do; keep their fish alive. The link is to a forum thread.


http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50723&page=1

I think, without knowing your own Alberta research, that the reason they're having success is because the lake/pond is deeper. You need 5' depths before any stratification starts. If the data you're looking at is for those and deeper depths, it would explain why it's working; they're mixing the different strata and keeping the deeper from being oxygen deficient. Most of our ponds are not that deep and there is no stratification, so no need to mix. Take a look at the link I posted and see if there's any info pertinent to your situation.

From what I understand; keeping a hole open lets the toxic gasses escape. These toxic gases build from the further decay of organic matter at the bottom of your pond. This decay process ALSO uses up oxygen as well. The bubbles you're going to put INTO the pond do nothing re aeration--they only provide current to mix and turbulence at the top. THAT'S where the ONLY aeration is going to occur. There's also data to show that keeping the ice clear of snow helps the algae below to continue living/growing/putting out oxygen. If your pond was completely covered the whole winter with snow (according to data, 5" or more) then the algae wasn't getting enough light.

Putting the aerator at the bottom is only going to make the bottom water colder as it mixes upper and lower temp levels. And since all you are really doing with an aerator is providing turbulence at the top, no need to mix, but it can keep the ice from forming, which is all it's really going to do.

Anyway, that's how I understand it. An aerator, no matter where you put it, is not adding oxygen except at the surface. If you have a small hole and any ice/slush at all, the turbulence is lessened and so is the aeration. Again, I think Meyer can confirm or correct me in this understanding.

Michael

 

[MitchM]

Mitch; I'd ask Meyer re the depth, but my research came up with NOT putting the aerator at the bottom but mid-height or near the top. Here's the link to further pond research in which fish farmers are trying to do what you want to do; keep their fish alive. The link is to a forum thread.


http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50723&page=1

I think, without knowing your own Alberta research, that the reason they're having success is because the lake/pond is deeper. You need 5' depths before any stratification starts. If the data you're looking at is for those and deeper depths, it would explain why it's working; they're mixing the different strata and keeping the deeper from being oxygen deficient. Most of our ponds are not that deep and there is no stratification, so no need to mix. Take a look at the link I posted and see if there's any info pertinent to your situation.

From what I understand; keeping a hole open lets the toxic gasses escape. These toxic gases build from the further decay of organic matter at the bottom of your pond. This decay process ALSO uses up oxygen as well. The bubbles you're going to put INTO the pond do nothing re aeration--they only provide current to mix and turbulence at the top. THAT'S where the ONLY aeration is going to occur. There's also data to show that keeping the ice clear of snow helps the algae below to continue living/growing/putting out oxygen. If your pond was completely covered the whole winter with snow (according to data, 5" or more) then the algae wasn't getting enough light.

Putting the aerator at the bottom is only going to make the bottom water colder as it mixes upper and lower temp levels. And since all you are really doing with an aerator is providing turbulence at the top, no need to mix, but it can keep the ice from forming, which is all it's really going to do.

Anyway, that's how I understand it. An aerator, no matter where you put it, is not adding oxygen except at the surface. If you have a small hole and any ice/slush at all, the turbulence is lessened and so is the aeration. Again, I think Meyer can confirm or correct me in this understanding.

Michael

Thanks Michael.

My challenge is keeping an open hole at all. The breathers did that by way of the hard plastic breather tube that extended through the ice layer. They worked fine until they clogged for a reason I couldn't control.

Right now Alberta Environment is putting a hold on some of their aeration projects because of some criminal liability issues with causing open water to a lake during the winter.

So far I've seen where they are providing aeration by windmill generation, electric compressor, surface aerators and subsurface aerators. The subsurface aerators failed as did some windmill aerators. The surface aerators are not practical in my case

My pond is only 5 feet deep and the water temperature is equal throughout so I'm not that concerned about mixing warmer and colder layers.
I'm trying to find out more detail on which system exactly Alberta Environment is trying out.

Here are some reference papers I'm looking at so far:

http://www.ab-conservation.com/programs/fish/aca-aerated-lakes/
http://www.ab-conservation.com/defa...ports/2015/fish/ACA_Lake_Aeration_2014_15.pdf
http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/science-an...on/aerating-in-cold-weather/?id=1370376874549
http://www.ab-conservation.com/downloads/aca_aeration/aca_aeration_plan_2015_16.pdf

 

[tbendl]

I'm sorry about your fish Mitch.

 

[MitchM]

Might not work for your big pond Mitch, but just covering my two upper ponds with cattle panel cold frame with heavy plastic sure cut the ice down big time and saved lots of energy too. I also read years ago that farmers used to put a square bale of hay in the dugouts so air could exhange better as straw is quite pourus and allows better air exchange.

I would have to build a pretty substantial cover to withstand the wind and snow. My pond covers about 31' x 31'.
I'm too lazy for that.

 

[MitchM]

...Here's the link to further pond research in which fish farmers are trying to do what you want to do; keep their fish alive. The link is to a forum thread.


http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50723&page=1

...

Michael

I've read through that thread and others and they only seem to address O2 and water temperature.
One question I have about these winter aeration setups is if the bottom aeration was only set up during the winter?
If so, then I would think that perhaps the change of bottom water circulation stirred up some sediment that contained H2S and that's what caused the fish kills. Maybe these bottom aeration systems would work better if they operated year round.

.