Quote:
Originally Posted by Myka
Keeping a lower fish load is the easiest way to achieve lower nutrients. That's pretty simple logic, although people really don't seem to link the two for some reason.
Personally, I despise battling nutrients so I keep a small fish load. I am not using any artificial filtration at all; no carbon, GFO, filter socks, skimmer - not even a sump. The only mechanical things in my tank are the Tunze Wavebox, a MaxiJet 1200, and a heater. You will find very little algae in my tank, and my phosphate and nitrate are undetectable using both Salifert and Elos kits. Oh, and I'm one lazy SOB...I have done two 15% water changes since I set the tank up in June. 
I have been using Zeo lately (my phos and nitrate were already undetectable before starting Zeo), but really only for the last 6 weeks or so for most of it. I'm not using any of the Zeo biological additives (yet), and I'm not dosing a carbon source. This isn't the first low fish load tank I've had either! I figure there is a simple way and a not so simple way. I would rather my tank is simple than have a large aesthetically pleasing fish load.
So a person shouldn't trivialize lowering the fish load like that!  |
While one person may be happy with less or no fish another may not, that was the only point to the previous quote. There are other options besides feeding less and removing fish.
On another note a tank setup in June with low stock won't require much to keep nutrients down but over time they will build up following the "lazy SOB" approach.