# El Natural= Low Tech??!!



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

I have still to read Diana Walstad's book or the philosophy of El Natural. I love to have my aquariums as close to nature as possible. Nature has great variations and vast methods.

SUBSTRATES: Soil, silt, sand, gravel, rocky, rock, peaty, low/high organic substrate and their combinations exist in nature.

WATER:	Alkaline, hard, soft, acidic, warm, cool, freezing, constant, variable, still, slow-moveing, fast-moving, and their combinations exist in nature.

LIGHT:	Shaded, partial shaded, sunny, variable, constant, seasonal variation, diurnal variation and their combinations exist in nature.

NUTRIENTS:	Foliar feeds, root feeds, flow-ins, soil release, mono feeds their combinations all exist in nature.

CARBONDIOXIDE: Additions from soil and atmosphere, variable percentage, CO2 banks in non-plant areas, flow-ins their combinations all exist in nature.

Then what is actually EL NATURAL simply a low tech aquarium?


----------



## Satirica (Feb 13, 2005)

Diana's book describes one type of low tech tank based on a soil substrate and utilizing natural sunlight when possible. Fish food is the fertilizer, minimal water changes.

As you note there are many varieties of tanks that could be considered natural.


----------



## sb483 (May 29, 2006)

Satirica essentially answered the question, but I thought I'd add a few comments.

There can be high-tech natural planted tanks, with CO2 injection and artificial lighting, and low-tech natural planted tanks that use window-light and common potting or garden soil. You'll find examples of both types - and the range in between - on this forum.

The advantage to the low-tech method described in Diana's book is that it's low cost (no C02 injection, no fancy lighting) and low maintenance (no gravel vacuuming, infrequent-to-no water changes). From your list I think she recommends cheap Garden/Potting Soil, Hard/Alkaline Water, Natural Sunlight, Fish-food (and soil) to provide nutrients, Fish-food/Fish to provide CO2.


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

sb483 said:


> Satirica essentially answered the question, but I thought I'd add a few comments.
> 
> There can be high-tech natural planted tanks, with CO2 injection and artificial lighting, and low-tech natural planted tanks that use window-light and common potting or garden soil. You'll find examples of both types - and the range in between - on this forum.
> 
> The advantage to the low-tech method described in Diana's book is that it's low cost (no C02 injection, no fancy lighting) and low maintenance (no gravel vacuuming, infrequent-to-no water changes). From your list I think she recommends cheap Garden/Potting Soil, Hard/Alkaline Water, Natural Sunlight, Fish-food (and soil) to provide nutrients, Fish-food/Fish to provide CO2.


HUH SB483.So essentially both you and Satirica are stating that a EL NATURAL AQUARIUM is not limited to Diana Walstad aquarium types. So we now have several types of 'NATURAL' aquariums without any limitations of any methodology. Then what is so natural about them, your convenience or your Nome culture?


----------



## sb483 (May 29, 2006)

essabee said:


> HUH SB483.So essentially both you and Satirica are stating that a EL NATURAL AQUARIUM is not limited to Diana Walstad aquarium types. So we now have several types of 'NATURAL' aquariums without any limitations of any methodology. Then what is so natural about them, your convenience or your Nome culture?


Do you mean nomenclature?
I have no idea what the official defn of el-natural is, I always thought el-natural was the same thing as a Diana Walstad style aquarium but I may be wrong, check the stickys above to get a more official answer.
The _natural _part for me has always been low-tech and low-cost methods - no CO2 injection, no expensive lighting, no gravel vacuuming, hardly any water changes.
Finally, to answer your question: sure there's all types in nature, for example the penguin habitats set up in museums make an effort to simulate nature. But it's rather costly. The term natural (and imho el-natural) means to me that you can basically leave a tank alone - aside from heating, feeding fish, and trimming plants - and consider it a mini-ecosystem. You can't just leave a penguin habitat alone, it requires constant effort (eg. washing ); in a home aquarium the el-natural tank can *almost* be left completely to itself.


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

So to you, sb483,an EL NATURAL aquarium boils down to LOW TECH + LOW MAINTENANCE.

Even the most moderate aquarium of a hobbyist is over populated. Such aquariums would require maintenance and corrections from time to time for the health of its inmates. Without maintenance, no doubt the hardiness of nature, the will to survive, would allow the inmates to continue to live, just as the poor survive. Could a hobbist be proud to have achieved it.

If I wish to keep penguins, would I not provide them with the type of environment they are used to, and try to keep them as comfortable in their captivity.

Aquariums may be called "mini eco-systems" but they are also prisons and I am the prison-keeper. 

p.s. Yes I did mean "nomenclature" sb483, sorry my mistake.


----------



## sb483 (May 29, 2006)

essabee said:


> So to you, sb483,an EL NATURAL aquarium boils down to LOW TECH + LOW MAINTENANCE.
> 
> Even the most moderate aquarium of a hobbyist is over populated. Such aquariums would require maintenance and corrections from time to time for the health of its inmates. Without maintenance, no doubt the hardiness of nature, the will to survive, would allow the inmates to continue to live, just as the poor survive. Could a hobbist be proud to have achieved it.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry you feel this way.

In tanks without plants, if the hobbyist doesn't perform water changes for an extended period of time, the fish suffer and start showing signs of distress, like ich or fin rot. In a tank filled with growing aquatic plants, the ammonia and CO2 produced by the fish are absorbed by the plants, and help them grow. This is the central idea of a balanced, el-natural aquarium - no gravel vacuuming, little-to-no water changes. If the plants are growing and healthy, the fish do fine, without the need for water changes or gravel vacuuming.


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

sb483 said:


> In tanks without plants, if the hobbyist doesn't perform water changes for an extended period of time, the fish suffer and start showing signs of distress, like ich or fin rot. In a tank filled with growing aquatic plants, the ammonia and CO2 produced by the fish are absorbed by the plants, and help them grow. This is the central idea of a balanced, el-natural aquarium - no gravel vacuuming, little-to-no water changes. If the plants are growing and healthy, the fish do fine, without the need for water changes or gravel vacuuming.


I started on this aquarium hobby some 40+ years ago and I am not sorry, for I still am enthusiatic owner of several tanks and I fuss over them as much as I fuss over my 6 dogs, and 32 birds, a flower and veg garden. I am their house-keeper, cook, maid, butler, major-domo, and not the least their TRUSTEE; I LOVE THIS LIFE.

I have never kept an aquarium without plants. None of them had lights (except for evening viewing) 
Over the years I moved from washed sand -- unwashed sand -- sand&soil -- soil covered with sand -- sand&soil covered with gravel substrate. The last is the type of substrate I have been using this last 20 years.
My first aquariums were all facing eastern windows because of the shape of my room and the space available. Then I put a new addition next to the only South window (this was my sand&soil era) and for the first time had to fight with alga.
Since then I have been using sunlight, and used laugh at the books on aquarium advising you placing your aquarium away from the sunlight.

I used to make my own aquarium gadgets. Heaters fashioned out of hard glass testtubes with souldering iron elements, sand packed and sealed with moulten bitumen! air pumps fashioned from buzzers! Till aquarium hobby became lucrative enough for commercial production of the enormous amount of consumer products, most of them unnecessary.
I have also developed my very own variation of UGF but that is a different story.
Sticking to this thread--- Sticking to this thread--- I want a debate on what to call an EL NATURAL a definitive set of parameters to stay within. A simple debate and let all put our views in, it is but el natural, for this forum is all ours.


----------



## aquabillpers (Apr 13, 2006)

Well.

"El Natural" is the name of this forum, nothing else. It was started by Robert Hudson at Aquabotanic. Diana Walstad was and is the host.

Initially it was about the kind of "natural" aquariums that she described in her great book, "Ecology of the Planted Aquarium." The forum has evolved over time, but that was and still is its basic underpinning.

There are other kinds of "natural" aquariums. Rhonda Wilson's site predates this forum by quite a bit, at Natural Aquariums

When I started with aquariums as a kid they were "natural" because I couldn't afford anything else. I had just incandescent (!) light, fish, and plants, and as i recall everything did well.

My definition of a "natural" aquarium is one that requires minimum "inputs" or, perhaps, a low financial investment. It would have water, low cost light, a heater, a low-cost fertile substrate, fish and fish food, plants, and not much else. This could also be called "low tech". As more inputs (or dollars) are added, the aquarium moves up the "tech" curve.

I hope this post hasn't killed an interesting thread. 

Bill


----------



## schaadrak (Aug 18, 2006)

I believe that an El Natural tank is one that achives its balance through natural processes (i.e., the natural break down of fish food by various organisms into ammonia and CO2, which the plants consume and convert into biomass) instead of relying on an outside source (meaning the tank owner) to maintain an extremely regimented system to achieve that same balance, albeit a more ramped up one.

For me a tank loses its El Natural status when CO2 is injected. Once you do that I move the tank up to Lo-Tech.


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

schaadrak said:


> I believe that an El Natural tank is one that achives its balance through natural processes (i.e., the natural break down of fish food by various organisms into ammonia and CO2, which the plants consume and convert into biomass) instead of relying on an outside source (meaning the tank owner) to maintain an extremely regimented system to achieve that same balance, albeit a more ramped up one.
> 
> For me a tank loses its El Natural status when CO2 is injected. Once you do that I move the tank up to Lo-Tech.


In other word a balanced aquarium of fish and plants with the following-- The inputs should be limited to 
1) Fish Food.
2) Topping off
3) Trimming of plants
No questions about the top three! Now what is the opinion on the followings:-Lights? Water changes? Gravel vacuum? Water filters? In-aquarium Ph corrections? Aeration?


----------



## aquabillpers (Apr 13, 2006)

essabee said:


> In other word a balanced aquarium of fish and plants with the following-- The inputs should be limited to
> 1) Fish Food.
> 2) Topping off
> 3) Trimming of plants
> No questions about the top three! Now what is the opinion on the followings:-Lights? Water changes? Gravel vacuum? Water filters? In-aquarium Ph corrections? Aeration?


Well, light is essential, but no more than is needed for the plants to do well without additional nutrients.

The other stuff? Mainly no.

Occasionally siphoning out debris that has accumulated keeps things looking nice.

Water filters? No, but some water movement can be useful, particularly in the winter in colder climates, where the heated water can stratify.

I would add one thing: Sometimes plant growth can outstrip the supply of available nutrients. That will cause a mess unless it is corrected. Diana suggests adding excess fish food to supply them; I use KNO3 and other
other nutrients when that happens.

Aside from that, . . . .

Bill


----------



## schaadrak (Aug 18, 2006)

Basically any maintenance performed needs to be done only when it can't be done by natural means.


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

Let us quote this and answer personally as I am doing in dark red comments after deleting the earlier comments and perhaps we could decide the parameters between all of us.

According to me inputs should be limited to :-

1) Fish Food - Absolutely yes.
2) Topping off - Absolutely yes.
3) Trimming of plants	- Absolutely yes.
4) Substrate - Sand-soil-gravel- compost and their combinations
5) Lights - Not more than 2.5 watts per gallon for aquariums in low lit areas.
6) Water Changes - For removing debris and only as SOS when things go wrong.
7) Gravel Vacuum - Occasionally only if UGF used.
8)Water Filters - Simple sponge filters or UGF.
9) In-tank Ph corrections	- No, only external corrections.
10) Aerators - For filter-column only.
11) Power heads - For filters only.
12) Fertilisers - Undecided.

Feel free to add some more parameters.
ps: I think I should start this as a different thread, I am doing so, PLEASE POST THERE


----------



## Teeleton (Jun 8, 2006)

Everyone's tank is different depending on just how natural you think you can strike the balance. My tank gets fish food and light. I've had to trim plants occasionally, but mostly just to help more densly plant the tank, so the clippings get re-planted in the tank. Topping off doesn't actually happen very often on my tank. The glass tops seem to do a really good job of keeping evaporation to a minimum. Substrate is common potting soil topped with some gravel I had left around from my previous non planted tank. Light is from two 40 watt T-12 bulbs for a total of 1.45 watts/gal. I've really only done one water change to try and get the Ph in check. It slowly went back to its original value, though and the tank still seems stable. No vacuum. Just recently added my canister filter back to the tank after about 2 weeks without it. I had a leak, and didn't really have time to address it over the holidays. Aerator is currently shut off as an experiment. No power head, and no ferts.

Teeleton


----------



## Jane in Upton (Aug 10, 2005)

Hi,

Have you read the "stickies" for this forum? The question of how folks define the "El Natural" or Low-Tech methodology has been a topic on several occasions. 

Generally, because most "El Natural' tanks use some sort of soil underlayer in the substrate, an UnderGravel Filter is not used. The Plants act as the filters, so filtration is generally kept to mechanical, as the plants themselves act as the biological filters. 

As Bill mentioned, "El Natural" was the name of the forum which relocated to APC last spring. The name itself is a bit of wordplay, much as the small compact car dubbed "Le Car" was in the early 1980's - a prefix like "El" seeming to give it a bit of formality, when in reality its a rather casual grouping which can span quite a few variations of method. For some, the addition of low levels of CO2, but using a soil layered substrate still qualifies as El Natural. For others, their plain coarse gravel substrate, which has accumulated mulm and is growing plants quite well can qualify. Its a spectrum, rather than a precice set. 

In general, the plants are not pushed - ie, the limiting factors are what they are. CO2 supplementation changes that limiting factor, so the next becomes nutrient availability. Addition of fertilizers overcomes that limiting factor. Strong lighting removes the barriers of that limiting factor (for some plants). Each "high tech" method ramps up plant production, and usually requires more investment of time and resources. In general, and this is admittedly a vast generalization, the "El Natural" folks forego the high tech methods, or only adopt a few, loosely, and opt for a lower tech approach. Plant growth is not as fast as could be physically feasible, but that is not the goal. Fish stocking is kept moderate, but the fish are well fed. 

I think the El Natural method is quite synonymous with Low Tech. But, for instance, I don't have a lot of windows, and the ones I do have are filled with terrestrial plants. So, my tanks are all lit artificially, with flourescent and compact flourescent fixtures. I even break one of the "rules" by lighting one soil substrate tank quite strongly (over 3 watts per gallon, although that is a flawed measure). I also kept two tanks which had a kitty litter substrate, per the writings of Dan Quackenbush, who made a good case for using a deep (2.5") clay layer, covered, and capped by a fine sand layer. I couldn't grow stem plants in this setup, but I had a ton of Vals, Crypts, Echinodorus, Java Ferns and Ceratopteris. Although the method used a clay layer rather than a soil layer, and the theory was quite different, I considered those tanks "El Natural", albeit on the fringe (LOL!) because I did not supplement CO2, nor Ferts, and the lighting was moderate. 

The one thing I've found time and again in the Aquatic Plant hobby is that there are many methods which can work. The variety of experiences out there is a testament to the adaptability of a lot of aquatic plants, and the imaginations and exerimentation of growers. When I really think about it, with the myriad of variables - water quality, light intensity, light spectrum, substrate, allelopathy, etc., its pretty amazing! Everyone is going to have a slightly different spot on that spectrum that falls under "El Natural". Even the same person, using the same size tank, same soil, same gravel, same lighting setup, etc cannot produce the exact same results twice! I've tried! 

Its great to hear about the variations, and learn about the experiences of others. I enjoyed your mentioning your progression from plain sand to soil underneath sand/gravel. What a journey!

You'll find a surprising range of methods that can fit in the "El Natural" group!
-Jane


----------



## essabee (Oct 11, 2006)

Yes I have read the stickys, Jane. Yes again you can naturally achieve much without recourse of 'high-tech' just look at untouched bit of nature. Believing this I started the 'Parameter' thread, to liberate every-one to use all the natural method without becoming 'too' technical. My personal belief is that pushing growth of plants is because of lack of patience, an athlete trying to increasing achievement by use of steroids.

I have had the priviledge of reading Dan Quackenbush, including the unpublished last part of his writing. We all have to learn from each other and the forum is a great place to do so, a meeting place of all opnions, helps you a lot, not the least in making you ask questions about things you were blind to.

One way of looking at this hobby is--- the aquarium is the canvas, the plants and animals are your paint, your method is your brush-work---- now you are trying to achieve your masterpiece ---- what will be your style is your choice-- EL NATURAL is not cubism, but realism, perhaps impressionism.


----------



## Jane in Upton (Aug 10, 2005)

Beautifully stated!


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

> El Natural" is the name of this forum, nothing else. It was started by Robert Hudson at Aquabotanic. Diana Walstad was and is the host.


I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it! I find it amusing and complimentary that a phrase I picked as a title for the forum has become a catch phrase to describe Diana's methodology! And I didn't even spell it right apparently!

Since Diana first accepted my invitation to host this forum when it's home was at my WEB site, it was to be a home for those who have read and follow her book and people who were becoming interested in her book. Up until that time there really wasn't a mainstream place where this could be discussed without constant bickering from people who did not follow this frame of thought. It becomes tiresome to have to constantly defend your own ways to other people.

I am glad this forum has evolved to include other ideas and interpretations of what low tech is without putting anyone off. There have always been champions of low tech alternative methods and they have always been somewhat out of the mainstream


----------



## Jane in Upton (Aug 10, 2005)

What wasn't spelled correctly? I'd hope the forum wasn't meant to be AU NATURALE, LOL! I don't know how comfortable I'd be participating in that!

I kind of like the wordplay, like the current planted tanks "stripped" down so to speak.

*chuckle*,
Jane


and PS - yes, I've made use of the wordplay in my signature, and its been suggested that Blackberry picking and snowboarding are NOT things that should be attempted 'El Natural', LOL!


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

Thats actually what I originally had in mind, I just didn't know how to spell it! :heh:

We will start a new club Jane, sitting in front of the aquarium AU NATURALE, catching our reflection in the glass... give the fish something to look at... maybe thats why my fish hide so often!


----------



## Teeleton (Jun 8, 2006)

steel wool... can't... erase...


----------



## Plantcounter (Jan 16, 2007)

My two cents:
What drew me to the book was the word Ecology, and that is the essence of this type of aquarium construction and maintenance. Your emphasis on parameters is appropriate for quantifying exactly what the consensus is on the definition of a natural aquarium, but it misses the essence of the book itsef, in my opinion. So what is this essence? The goal of the natural aquarium is to have a functional ecosystem. This means that it is self-regulating, with nutrients, matter, and energy traveling in a complete circle, with as little input and output as possible. No ecosystem is completely enclosed, energy must enter to preserve the second law of thermodynamics, but nutrient, energy, and matter cycling are defining characteristics of ecosystems. So use whatever light, substrate, plants, fish, fertilizers you want, but by trying to mazimize closed cycles, while still maintaining the health of the desired species in the aquarium, you will an excellent natural aquarium make. What fascinates me is not that I only add fish food and light, but the thought of bacteria, nutrients, plants, fish, arthropods, annelids, protists, and all the other forms of life all balancing each other within the microcosm of my tank. This balance is the goal, and the goal defines the pursuit, not the parameters.


----------



## littleguy (Jan 6, 2005)

Plantcounter said:


> My two cents:
> What drew me to the book was the word Ecology, and that is the essence of this type of aquarium construction and maintenance. Your emphasis on parameters is appropriate for quantifying exactly what the consensus is on the definition of a natural aquarium, but it misses the essence of the book itsef, in my opinion. So what is this essence? The goal of the natural aquarium is to have a functional ecosystem. [snip] This balance is the goal, and the goal defines the pursuit, not the parameters.


Wow. Well said.


----------



## Mr Fishies (Apr 9, 2006)

Plantcounter said:


> ...<SNIP> This means that it is self-regulating, with nutrients, matter, and energy traveling in a complete circle, with as little input and output as possible. <SNIP>...


Well said indeed.

Although I realize it is not a perfect circle, for me it was this sentence that best explains my vision or "version" of El Natural (or Au Naturale) and what drew me to the old AB forums and now here to APC. With soil substrate and plants left as much as possible to their own devices, I think of my tanks more as glass contained miniature ponds than aquariums.

I want to spend my time looking through the water, _not carrying or siphoning it_, and looking at the flora and fauna, _not my arm_.


----------



## aquabillpers (Apr 13, 2006)

Robert Hudson said:


> Thats actually what I originally had in mind, I just didn't know how to spell it! :heh:
> 
> We will start a new club Jane, sitting in front of the aquarium AU NATURALE, catching our reflection in the glass... give the fish something to look at... maybe thats why my fish hide so often!


Well, Robert, and meaning no disrespect, and your plants are good, but, gee, I think that club wold be better without you <g>

Bill


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

LOL! I agree completely! No eye candy here!


----------



## schaadrak (Aug 18, 2006)

Aw man, we were just starting to move past that subject.


----------

