I built a wildlife pond [video](youtube.com)
youtube.com
I built a wildlife pond [video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LvaX748pVI
13 comments
Just remembered, I did a video about making the pond. Includes clips of the fish under the ice.
https://youtu.be/8ExfrhjpMp4
https://youtu.be/8ExfrhjpMp4
Do you find any wild animals (raccoons) eat the fish? Also any opinions on floating plants (water hyacinth, water lettuce, frogbit) instead of Taro? I built a pond and put in a soft PVC liner instead of one of those preformed ones. I had it out for a summer expecting frogs but they didn't show. Mosquitos did tho.
See my reply upthread regarding raccoons and herons. We have tried all kinds of water plants, including fishweed, water hyacinth, water lillies and tiny little floating green plants that I have scooped from the nearby river and marsh. None of them survive, likely because it’s such a shady spot on the north side of the house and there’s very little direct sunlight, except in the morning. the only thing that does consistently well is the taro plant. It actually tries to self propagate but we don’t have enough space for another water pot.
Regarding mosquitoes: this is not standing water, because of the pump which goes year-round. I also believe the fish will eat most bugs and any larvae that start to form. they seem to be constantly hungry. Except in the fall and winter.
Regarding mosquitoes: this is not standing water, because of the pump which goes year-round. I also believe the fish will eat most bugs and any larvae that start to form. they seem to be constantly hungry. Except in the fall and winter.
I'm not the person you're replying to, but I have a pond too.
Mosquito dunks are one way to deal with mosquito larvae without resorting to a conventional pesticide. Another is to have some kind of fish. Mosquito fish are probably best. I think koi/goldfish tend to eat them too.
https://summitchemical.com/products/mosquito-dunks/
Taro needs to be moved indoors for the winter if you're in a cold climate. Water hyacinth and water lettuce also don't survive winter. I don't think frogbit does, but regardless apparently it's considered invasive where I am (Oregon) so the pond/garden supply places don't sell it anymore.
Azolla (aka fairy moss or mosquito fern) can survive the winter. It turns red when it freezes, but it starts multiplying again when it warms up.
Cattail and hardy water lily can regrow from the roots. Same with water clover.
Duckweed is similar to azolla, but does not survive in winter. If you buy water plants, you may end up with duckweed that went along for the ride.
We had a lotus, it came back after one winter, but didn't survive the next. (Our last spring was very wet and cold, and lotus apparently like hot weather and sun.)
Incidentally, if anyone reading this is in the general vicinity of the Willamette valley, I highly recommend visiting Hughes Water Gardens in Wilsonville if you get the chance. It's a plant nursery, but they sell mostly aquatic plants, and also pond supplies and koi.
Mosquito dunks are one way to deal with mosquito larvae without resorting to a conventional pesticide. Another is to have some kind of fish. Mosquito fish are probably best. I think koi/goldfish tend to eat them too.
https://summitchemical.com/products/mosquito-dunks/
Taro needs to be moved indoors for the winter if you're in a cold climate. Water hyacinth and water lettuce also don't survive winter. I don't think frogbit does, but regardless apparently it's considered invasive where I am (Oregon) so the pond/garden supply places don't sell it anymore.
Azolla (aka fairy moss or mosquito fern) can survive the winter. It turns red when it freezes, but it starts multiplying again when it warms up.
Cattail and hardy water lily can regrow from the roots. Same with water clover.
Duckweed is similar to azolla, but does not survive in winter. If you buy water plants, you may end up with duckweed that went along for the ride.
We had a lotus, it came back after one winter, but didn't survive the next. (Our last spring was very wet and cold, and lotus apparently like hot weather and sun.)
Incidentally, if anyone reading this is in the general vicinity of the Willamette valley, I highly recommend visiting Hughes Water Gardens in Wilsonville if you get the chance. It's a plant nursery, but they sell mostly aquatic plants, and also pond supplies and koi.
> Also any opinions on floating plants (water hyacinth, water lettuce, frogbit) instead of Taro
Different category. Taro is a marginal, it adds \vspace. Can be substituted by Iris or Pontederia.
Avoid water hyacinth and water lettuce in small ponds. They will conquer all the surface and became a nuissance. They also will block you from watching the fishes.
> Mosquitoes
The worse ones dislike moving waters, this problem can be alleviated if you use a pump to move the water at a regular interval. Take in mind that water lilies dislike also moving water so you need to choose
Different category. Taro is a marginal, it adds \vspace. Can be substituted by Iris or Pontederia.
Avoid water hyacinth and water lettuce in small ponds. They will conquer all the surface and became a nuissance. They also will block you from watching the fishes.
> Mosquitoes
The worse ones dislike moving waters, this problem can be alleviated if you use a pump to move the water at a regular interval. Take in mind that water lilies dislike also moving water so you need to choose
I'm a novice when it comes to this, so apologies for the dumb question. Can you explain how you manage the taro plant? Like how can it grow in a pot completely submerged then be brought inside? Can taro be both grown partially submerged and out of water? Thanks for the info.
Google taro water garden, and you will see many results, including instructional videos for this plant. We purchased the taro plant from a garden supply store that sold us the plastic liner. This was more than 10 years ago. This species of taro can live in partially submerged pots, and we still have it planted in the original pot. The plant tries to self propagate in the late summer sending out little runners with leaves attached but it can’t root anywhere because there is no shallow muddy spots by our pond. It’s just the plastic liner which drops off to about 2 feet at the edge of the plastic. On the other side of the hard plastic liner is ordinary soil, which is not wet enough for the taro, but other plants, including ferns and ground cover take root there and grow over the edge of the plastic liner as shown in the video below.
https://youtu.be/8ExfrhjpMp4
https://youtu.be/8ExfrhjpMp4
[deleted]
I have a taro plant that I bring inside in the winter. Basically, I just transfer the pot to a large tub of water, where it can be mostly submerged.
I let the water level get pretty low last winter so only the bottom few inches of the pot were in water. It didn't do well and almost died, but over the summer in the pond it multiplied quite a bit and we could have had half a dozen taro plants if I wanted to plant all the runners.
I let the water level get pretty low last winter so only the bottom few inches of the pot were in water. It didn't do well and almost died, but over the summer in the pond it multiplied quite a bit and we could have had half a dozen taro plants if I wanted to plant all the runners.
Many robust aquatic plants are aquatic only for a while. They evolved to respond to flooding and to stand dry spells. You can just put the pot inside and treat it as any other indoor plant. You could probably just let it dry in winter. Colocasia can be cultured in water and also out of the water.
I’m not sure if it’s the same taro, but people grow it in the ground here in New Zealand.
Pleasantly surprised to see the promised "small" ponds are indeed small.
[deleted]
None of these animals which come to drink water do not try to eat fish ?
I haven't had a problem with it yet, but that's not to say I won't.
One suggestion (which I didn't follow) is to make sure the whole pond is at least a couple feet deep everywhere. Having shallow ledges just gives herons a convenient place to stand while they depopulate the pond of aquatic animals.
I wanted a place to set potted water plants though.
We did have an incident with a red-tail hawk. I was out chatting with one of the roommates by the pond when it lands nearby, and promptly catches and eats a snake.
The hawk was acting weird and not flying away, so we called up the Audubon society. They said if it looked injured we could try to catch it and bring it in to their office, so we donned welding gloves and every other available kind of PPE and chased it through the bushes and blackberry thickets of three properties before we finally caught it.
Fun fact: hawks are pretty docile when you cover their heads. We expected a fight and try to bite our fingers off but when we got a towel over it's head it pretty much just gave up and we stuffed it in a box and hauled it to Audubon. I'm not sure what happened to it after that; they probably kept it for a week or two and released it once its apparently injured wing was healed. It was an interesting day.
One suggestion (which I didn't follow) is to make sure the whole pond is at least a couple feet deep everywhere. Having shallow ledges just gives herons a convenient place to stand while they depopulate the pond of aquatic animals.
I wanted a place to set potted water plants though.
We did have an incident with a red-tail hawk. I was out chatting with one of the roommates by the pond when it lands nearby, and promptly catches and eats a snake.
The hawk was acting weird and not flying away, so we called up the Audubon society. They said if it looked injured we could try to catch it and bring it in to their office, so we donned welding gloves and every other available kind of PPE and chased it through the bushes and blackberry thickets of three properties before we finally caught it.
Fun fact: hawks are pretty docile when you cover their heads. We expected a fight and try to bite our fingers off but when we got a towel over it's head it pretty much just gave up and we stuffed it in a box and hauled it to Audubon. I'm not sure what happened to it after that; they probably kept it for a week or two and released it once its apparently injured wing was healed. It was an interesting day.
Raccoons do, by scooping (they do not like to stand in the water or swim). The pond has deep areas and we put broken pots and cinder blocks so fish can hide. We also get darker fish which are harder for predators to see. Certain local bird species such as herons do too, but they won’t come under low tree canopy or near the house.
> Raccoons do, by scooping (they do not like to stand in the water
That’s funny, because out here (California) the raccoons will take other food to the water and stand in it while eating. They stand on the steps of pools and dunk their food - presumably to wash it off - between nibbles.
Quite funny to see, and leaves some hilarious paw prints if your pool isn’t clean.
That’s funny, because out here (California) the raccoons will take other food to the water and stand in it while eating. They stand on the steps of pools and dunk their food - presumably to wash it off - between nibbles.
Quite funny to see, and leaves some hilarious paw prints if your pool isn’t clean.
By the way, the French word for raccoon is "raton laveur" which means "washing rat-like-thing". So it looks like they're supposed to wash their food indeed.
The german word is "Waschbär". As you may guess, that translates to "wash bear".
The dutch word is "wasbeer". As you may guess, that translates to "wash bear".
It’s possible the pond is too deep (shallowest area is about 8 inches). We have a security camera, which sometimes catches them at night frantically pawing in the water from the edge of the pond to try to catch the fish. But they never go in.
Yep, but fishes will reproduce also until finding some equilibrium. Koi ponds need special needs but non-fish ponds are a very good choice and much better for wildlife.
See also this thread on Permies.com forums: "My Progress Gleying a Pond With Pigs" https://permies.com/t/38201/Progress-Gleying-Pond-Pigs Long story short: pigs make ponds. You gotta see it to believe it.
It's a technique that goes back to Russian peasantry (and likely before that). But it's also possible with ducks as Geoff Lawton has shown in another video. If you don't have the patience to let a bunch of ducks breed but you still want to build a pond without plastic liner you can also look into buying bentonite clay (or you may already have some clay underneath already. Just dig and find out! Just make sure to preserve the topsoil so you can replace it)
Another interesting project would be to monitor how much wildlife the cat will kill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_predation_on_wildlife
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_predation_on_wildlife
I once found a huge trail of lemmings outside leading up to my cat. Quite difficult feeling for somebody who loves cats and also all other creatures. Luckily the cat has fully adjusted now for an indoor live.
I believe the author mentioned that the cat was adjusting to life indoors.
Is there anything a cat owner can do, when having an indoor cat isn't an option? Some kind of collar that produces noise maybe?
Yes, a collar with a bell reduced predation by cats, and is recommended by the Royal Society for Protection of Birds, among others.
Now, to be fair, it is not without its cost. It happens that cats get it tangled in fences or other obstacles and die by strangulation or predation.
Now, to be fair, it is not without its cost. It happens that cats get it tangled in fences or other obstacles and die by strangulation or predation.
You can put a wide-ruffled, brightly-colored collar (with a bell) on the cat. My wife found one on Etsy for our little fluffy hunter, and the combo of noise/color allows the birds to hear/see him coming and skedaddle.
I will never look at cats the same way again.
It was quite malnourished so I'm guessing it didn't catch much.
Probably none? Sounds like they brought her in to live indoors…
Slightly OT, but is youtube even usable without an ad blocker?
Occasionally I make the mistake of going to it in a browser without aggressive ad blocking and it's miserable.
Occasionally I make the mistake of going to it in a browser without aggressive ad blocking and it's miserable.
It is usable but incredibly frustrating. It seems that Youtube's strategy is to annoy users with ads as much as possible to get them to upgrade to the paid plan.
Is that really the strategy, or is it to sell as many ads as possible?
I think running ads is more profitable than selling paid plans.
For YouTubers, paid users watching the video pays more than ad supported users.
For me it is! In exchange for $12 or so a month, I never see any ads.
Can someone explain to me why this sentiment is often downvoted on HN? Why is YouTube seemingly the only software platform that people chafe at having an ad-free tier and seemingly believe should be completely free to all with no ads?
It seems absolutely intuitive to me that if you don't want to see ads on a content enterprise, which are monetizing that content enterprise, you should generally be prepared to pay. Why is that deemed so outrageous with regards to YouTube?
It seems absolutely intuitive to me that if you don't want to see ads on a content enterprise, which are monetizing that content enterprise, you should generally be prepared to pay. Why is that deemed so outrageous with regards to YouTube?
YouTube is getting progressively worse every year with ads, introducing unskippable ads, mid rolls, end rolls, several ads queued, etc. At times it feels plain hostile for the users, especially those who have been watching for a long time, before any of the monetization existed.
YouTube used to be totally different, also it was free with very unintrusive ads. It's hard to sell people on the current monetization model and a lot of the current practices to get you to pay just antagonize viewers. The content is also not always perceived to be worth your money.
There are also moral issues, like Youtube showing ads on demonitized videos, or on channels that don't qualify for monetization. Meaning not all creators even benefit from YouTube's ads.
But eventually it boils down to user experience. You can block ads and get a massively better experience for free, or pay to have an OK experience (sponsor block isn't included in YouTube premium).
YouTube used to be totally different, also it was free with very unintrusive ads. It's hard to sell people on the current monetization model and a lot of the current practices to get you to pay just antagonize viewers. The content is also not always perceived to be worth your money.
There are also moral issues, like Youtube showing ads on demonitized videos, or on channels that don't qualify for monetization. Meaning not all creators even benefit from YouTube's ads.
But eventually it boils down to user experience. You can block ads and get a massively better experience for free, or pay to have an OK experience (sponsor block isn't included in YouTube premium).
On sponsor block, most of the creators I follow have visual indicators for the sponsor time so I can just tap the arrow key or the screen until that goes away. I guess I don't mind that 'skip ad' arrangement since the creators are getting paid directly by the sponsor. Some creators also have Patreon model where you can get sponsor-free edits for regular payments which seems like an alright decentralized solution.
> Some creators also have Patreon model where you can get sponsor-free edits for regular payments which seems like an alright decentralized solution.
Patreon is OK for some things but you have to be very passionate about what this creator is doing to spend the time (besides money) to follow and consume their content on an additional platform.
I completely and fully respect people who choose to do this, but as a more casual YouTube user who just wants to see a video once in a while from one of my subscribed channels, this is not something I am going to do personally.
To each their own but personally I feel as if ads and sponsor blocking is the best experience you can get at this time, and it doesn't cost you anything. It's a hard deal to beat.
Patreon is OK for some things but you have to be very passionate about what this creator is doing to spend the time (besides money) to follow and consume their content on an additional platform.
I completely and fully respect people who choose to do this, but as a more casual YouTube user who just wants to see a video once in a while from one of my subscribed channels, this is not something I am going to do personally.
To each their own but personally I feel as if ads and sponsor blocking is the best experience you can get at this time, and it doesn't cost you anything. It's a hard deal to beat.
[deleted]
Because compared to other streaming services, that money is made off content that YouTube didn't produce and pays peanuts for. And because YouTube/Google will still track you and use that data to make more money in their other advertising schemes.
YouTube didn't produce the content(except sometimes when they do actually pay content creators), but they pay massive amounts(billions of dollars per year), not peanuts, to build the hosting and discovery infra that lets people get these views, which is why very few huge creators host their content on, say, Vimeo, or by themselves, or on peertube. On top of that, creators have ways of monetizing their videos which completely leave YouTube from getting any kind of a cut, such as Patreon, sponsorships, in-video ads, etc.
AFAK, Traditionally it was:
Producer pays for content and profit is derived from distributers that charge for access to the content. If people don't view money is lost.
YouTube is different:
Creators pay to create their own content and are imbursed as they gain views.
YouTube, the distributer in this case, has no skin in the game. They have no overhead, it's all profit.
Perhaps that has something to do with it. It feels somehow like you're paying the middle man for nothing?
Producer pays for content and profit is derived from distributers that charge for access to the content. If people don't view money is lost.
YouTube is different:
Creators pay to create their own content and are imbursed as they gain views.
YouTube, the distributer in this case, has no skin in the game. They have no overhead, it's all profit.
Perhaps that has something to do with it. It feels somehow like you're paying the middle man for nothing?
I mean, is it worse than a traditional Hollywood type model for low level creators? Aren't traditional media firms famous for shenanigans like making entry level work so underpaid that you basically need wealthy parents to get your foot in the door? Or crunching visual effects artists because their whole craft was born post-unionization? The elites ultimately win everywhere, (in this case it is Google instead of say, Disney) but at least with YouTube it is ostensibly meritocratic to climb the career ladder from the bottom?
But I definitely can see the dystopia in an algorithmic platform seeking content hegemony at highest possible profit as opposed to how traditional firms work which is... not too different to me. But I can see a higher ceiling to the gray goo problem in the notoriously willing-to-be-bad-at-customer-service Google.
But I definitely can see the dystopia in an algorithmic platform seeking content hegemony at highest possible profit as opposed to how traditional firms work which is... not too different to me. But I can see a higher ceiling to the gray goo problem in the notoriously willing-to-be-bad-at-customer-service Google.
Idk necessarily if the issue is 'who are you paying' as much as it is 'what are the people I'm paying actually contributing.'
And in the case of YouTube the answer seem to be: we created and refined some amazing video compression and streaming techniques. Now that that's done we just want to profit indefinitely?
And in the case of YouTube the answer seem to be: we created and refined some amazing video compression and streaming techniques. Now that that's done we just want to profit indefinitely?
>"They have no overhead, it's all profit."
I have just about zero warm and fuzzy feelings towards big corporations. But to claim that Youtube's giant infrastructure its development and maintenance has no cost (zero overhead) is totally wrong.
I have just about zero warm and fuzzy feelings towards big corporations. But to claim that Youtube's giant infrastructure its development and maintenance has no cost (zero overhead) is totally wrong.
Yes, 'no overhead' was incorrect. I meant 'significantly less overhead.'
>"'significantly less overhead.'"
Well, this requires numbers. Like percentage. Do you have any or it is just an assumption?
Well, this requires numbers. Like percentage. Do you have any or it is just an assumption?
My opening phrase ("As far as I know") was intended to imply that I am not an industry insider. These are indeed assumptions.
Are they unreasonable assumptions in your eyes? May I ask why? They seem reasonable to me.
Are they unreasonable assumptions in your eyes? May I ask why? They seem reasonable to me.
I think they are unreasonable and the expenses in absolute numbers are huge. What it is percentage wise I've got no clue. So we are both clueless ;)
first link below estimates that YouTube's total storage needs for all of its content are roughly 10 exabytes. It goes into a lot of detail that you can check for yourselves, because it's a bit too much to copy over here, and though I can't say it's correct for sure, the description of how they reach their calculation is quite robust.
Anyhow, if we assume storage costs for YouTube are the same as what AWS charges per month (roughly 2 cents), this would mean that it costs YT about $2.4 billion per year just to store those 10 exabytes. I'm assuming that Google can cost its storage at quite a bit cheaper than 2 cents per GB at the immense scale it operates on, so let's halve that. This still means simple storage costs of $1.2 billion per year.
These of course don't include hardware replacement, other capital costs, or the bandwidth costs of all that video being uploaded (and downloaded).
Youtube's revenues for 2019 (so a bit out of date) were nearly 16 billion (2), so while they certainly have lots of costs beyond what I described above, they're also wonderfully profitable it seems.
1 https://www.productmanagementexercises.com/9018/estimate-tot...
2 https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2019Q4_alphabet_earnings...
Anyhow, if we assume storage costs for YouTube are the same as what AWS charges per month (roughly 2 cents), this would mean that it costs YT about $2.4 billion per year just to store those 10 exabytes. I'm assuming that Google can cost its storage at quite a bit cheaper than 2 cents per GB at the immense scale it operates on, so let's halve that. This still means simple storage costs of $1.2 billion per year.
These of course don't include hardware replacement, other capital costs, or the bandwidth costs of all that video being uploaded (and downloaded).
Youtube's revenues for 2019 (so a bit out of date) were nearly 16 billion (2), so while they certainly have lots of costs beyond what I described above, they're also wonderfully profitable it seems.
1 https://www.productmanagementexercises.com/9018/estimate-tot...
2 https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2019Q4_alphabet_earnings...
How is not paying for content a huge expense?
>It feels somehow like you're paying the middle man for nothing?
They also promote your content and find and auction off ads for you. Unless if you're an advertiser, you aren't paying YouTube anything. If you have a problem with it, you're free to host your content on another platform. Keep in mind that that YouTube has to serve the hundreds of millions of videos that get a handful of views, and if you're a monetized YouTuber, it's only fair to be taxed to pay for hosting these videos as everyone starts in that position.
They also promote your content and find and auction off ads for you. Unless if you're an advertiser, you aren't paying YouTube anything. If you have a problem with it, you're free to host your content on another platform. Keep in mind that that YouTube has to serve the hundreds of millions of videos that get a handful of views, and if you're a monetized YouTuber, it's only fair to be taxed to pay for hosting these videos as everyone starts in that position.
they offer unlimited space to store video! this actually good, but YouTube didn't display friendly to creators.
I'm not paying Google to track me while I watch videos with hardcoded sponsor segments and product placement.
Because Alphabet will have around $280 billion in revenue for 2022, and the masses need to pay them $12 a month to see less ads because YouTube has decided to ratchet up the frequency and length to force that? And users are already paying via their data being collected and sold.
What amount of money would Alphabet need to make before you felt OK paying them $12/month for YouTube?
Yeah, I get enough out of YouTube that I’m willing to pay that. Apparently a premium view pays out more to creators than hundreds of regular views, so that feels good too. But I can’t believe so many normal people (who don’t know about adblockers or watch in the app) are able to stand non-premium YouTube, honestly.
ublock wasn't enough ? i never felt the need to pay with it
My problem is that I hate the suggestion algorithm. Does paying get rid of that?
javascript:void(document.getElementsByTagName("video")[0].playbackRate = 10)
The pond is fun and beautiful, but the wildlife videography in this video makes it totally worth watching.
Can we get {video} tags added to the title? Every time one of these links opens directly to a video I feel like I've been Rick rolled
It shows what domain the link goes to. Did you expect a text post at youtube.com?
It doesn't for me in my rss reader :(
I watched this yesterday after a friend recommended it. Very nice videography with the birds footage. Also he handled the feral cat situation quite humanely.
Wow. This is like playing simulation games but in the real. It takes a lot of patience, but this guy seems to know what he's doing so it's worth it!
One of the most inspiring "small" things a man can do.
On a side note It really shows the guy doing this video is fully enjoying what he does.
Is there some way of determining how deep you’d have to dig for water to naturally fill it faster than it evaporated away?
I don't think depth matters that much, except that with a deeper pond you have less risk of it drying out completely in a dry season.
More important is: how much rain do you get, how warm is your climate, what is the average humidity, is the pond well sealed, and does the pond collect runoff from the surrounding area?
I'm in Oregon. I made a pond during the pandemic that's probably about 1500 gallons, and about 3 1/2 feet deep at the deepest. When it gets hot and dry in the summer I have to add a couple inches of water maybe every couple weeks, but for the rest of the year I don't add anything at all.
(I tend to get a fair bit of silt runoff in the pond during the winter, because some of the ground nearby drains into the pond.)
More important is: how much rain do you get, how warm is your climate, what is the average humidity, is the pond well sealed, and does the pond collect runoff from the surrounding area?
I'm in Oregon. I made a pond during the pandemic that's probably about 1500 gallons, and about 3 1/2 feet deep at the deepest. When it gets hot and dry in the summer I have to add a couple inches of water maybe every couple weeks, but for the rest of the year I don't add anything at all.
(I tend to get a fair bit of silt runoff in the pond during the winter, because some of the ground nearby drains into the pond.)
I’m in the Rockies. The vast majority of our annual rainfall comes in the form of snow and then a short melt that leads to a late spring to late fall that is quite dry and warm. I’ve got 5 acres and would love to dig a pond to attract wildlife.
Based on what you say, I think the keys for me would be 1) digging it at the bottom of the property and building a berm On the low side to collect as much snowmelt as possible 2) digging it deep enough to hit clay to ensure it is well sealed 3) adding some shade plantings to minimize evaporation
Did you find any good resources before you dug yours?
Based on what you say, I think the keys for me would be 1) digging it at the bottom of the property and building a berm On the low side to collect as much snowmelt as possible 2) digging it deep enough to hit clay to ensure it is well sealed 3) adding some shade plantings to minimize evaporation
Did you find any good resources before you dug yours?
I've built ponds before, so I was already familiar with the process.
I don't know how much water you'd lose from soil percolation; I've always just used a liner. EPDM rubber is what most people use. It's not terribly expensive and can be purchased in surprisingly large continuous sheets, or multiple sheets can be glued together if you want to go even bigger.
I keep koi in my pond. Koi have particular requirements with respect to aeration and filtration and depth. If you're just building a general purpose pond those aren't as much of an issue. Be aware that if you use herbicides or pesticides that you don't want to end up in the pond, then you probably shouldn't design the pond to capture the maximum amount of runoff.
You'll probably want to at least get some mosquito fish to keep mosquitoes under control. Mosquito dunks are another solution -- they're these floating things you toss in the pond that contain a bacteria that's specifically harmful to mosquito larvae.
Some pond plants can survive a freeze (cattail, azolla, lily pads, horse tail) whereas others don't (water lettuce, water hyacinth, taro). I'll usually buy a clump or two of water lettuce and water hyacinth in the spring, and then by the end of summer I have so much I have to fish it out of the pond to keep it from taking over completely.
I don't know how much water you'd lose from soil percolation; I've always just used a liner. EPDM rubber is what most people use. It's not terribly expensive and can be purchased in surprisingly large continuous sheets, or multiple sheets can be glued together if you want to go even bigger.
I keep koi in my pond. Koi have particular requirements with respect to aeration and filtration and depth. If you're just building a general purpose pond those aren't as much of an issue. Be aware that if you use herbicides or pesticides that you don't want to end up in the pond, then you probably shouldn't design the pond to capture the maximum amount of runoff.
You'll probably want to at least get some mosquito fish to keep mosquitoes under control. Mosquito dunks are another solution -- they're these floating things you toss in the pond that contain a bacteria that's specifically harmful to mosquito larvae.
Some pond plants can survive a freeze (cattail, azolla, lily pads, horse tail) whereas others don't (water lettuce, water hyacinth, taro). I'll usually buy a clump or two of water lettuce and water hyacinth in the spring, and then by the end of summer I have so much I have to fish it out of the pond to keep it from taking over completely.
>>> I'll usually buy a clump or two of water lettuce and water hyacinth in the spring, and then by the end of summer I have so much I have to fish it out of the pond to keep it from taking over completely.
To expand on this, if anyone is interested in water hyacinth: it is beautiful, but if you want it in your ponds, you _will_ have to clear it out by hand at some point. It grows unbelievably quickly, and if left unattended it will happily suffocate everything else in the pond.
To expand on this, if anyone is interested in water hyacinth: it is beautiful, but if you want it in your ponds, you _will_ have to clear it out by hand at some point. It grows unbelievably quickly, and if left unattended it will happily suffocate everything else in the pond.
It's kind of interesting how the plants compete. In spring and early summer, azolla usually dominates. Once the water lettuce and water hyacinth get going, the azolla starts to die off and is largely replaced by duckweed. Eventually even the duckweed starts clearing out, and the water lettuce starts looking kind of malnourished even as it (along with the water hyacinth) takes over every available surface.
I'm not sure what resource the plants are competing for. Phosphorous maybe?
I'm not sure what resource the plants are competing for. Phosphorous maybe?
> what resource the plants are competing for.
Gardener's patience.
I would suggest avoiding all four, as many time as possible.
Gardener's patience.
I would suggest avoiding all four, as many time as possible.
Post photos of your garden and we will be able to take a look.
Priorities.
When you design deep you must take in mind first: safety.
Ponds with too vertical sides can be very dangerous for toddlers and pets.
Evaporation depends on climate, shadow location, covering of the surface by plants, rains and extra income of new water. In very dry places with minimum work, you could desire a temporal pond, and let it dry naturally each year. If you want fishes and live in an arid place use killies, specially the native species. Take in mind that fishes in a pond are totally optional.
Carps are normally too big and behave as a bunch of piglets so better not in very small ponds. If your water is cold and from snow take a look to the (non american) Tanichthys albonubes. If you live in UK use crucians and Gasterosteus
When you design deep you must take in mind first: safety.
Ponds with too vertical sides can be very dangerous for toddlers and pets.
Evaporation depends on climate, shadow location, covering of the surface by plants, rains and extra income of new water. In very dry places with minimum work, you could desire a temporal pond, and let it dry naturally each year. If you want fishes and live in an arid place use killies, specially the native species. Take in mind that fishes in a pond are totally optional.
Carps are normally too big and behave as a bunch of piglets so better not in very small ponds. If your water is cold and from snow take a look to the (non american) Tanichthys albonubes. If you live in UK use crucians and Gasterosteus
What matters is the depth to your water table. This site seems like a good resource: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-can-i-find-depth-water-table-s...
Note that the water table in that case would only fill the pond to the depth of the water table. Otherwise the surface of your pond will flow out into the water table.
The other strategy (as used in this video) is to instead cut off flow with ground water. In that case, what matters is whether more water flows in on the surface (rain, creeks, what have you) verses evaporation and any leakage.
Note that the water table in that case would only fill the pond to the depth of the water table. Otherwise the surface of your pond will flow out into the water table.
The other strategy (as used in this video) is to instead cut off flow with ground water. In that case, what matters is whether more water flows in on the surface (rain, creeks, what have you) verses evaporation and any leakage.
Yeah just check your water level. If you have an area where the water level is already really high, you can get away with just digging
Otherwise you'll have to add clay or use techniques like gleying.
Or you can do it the easy way and use plastic like in the video. Just make sure it's not biodegradable plastic. That'd be the fastest route to a microplastic polluted pond you can take
Otherwise you'll have to add clay or use techniques like gleying.
Or you can do it the easy way and use plastic like in the video. Just make sure it's not biodegradable plastic. That'd be the fastest route to a microplastic polluted pond you can take
Sepp Holzer uses pigs to "waterproof" his ponds. They roam around and eventually compress the earth. And he famously said, if you don't have pigs, you will have to do the pigs' work!
The best part of my garden, by a mile. If you enjoy wildlife and have a boring coin in a sunny place just do it.
That's super beautiful. Many thanks!
I've done two small fish ponds using heavy duty rigid plastic liners expecting only the fish (koi and shubunkin) would enjoy it. We live less than ~10 miles/~15 km from downtown Boston.
We were surprised to see the second pond, which is next to the north side of our basement and on a small hill, gets all kinds of animals and birds coming to drink. Racoons, possum, fox, squirrels, and many types of small birds. Without fail, one or two tree frogs find it every summer and settle in on the water plant we put out there (taro) in a semi-submerged pot.
The frogs disappear in the early autumn. Before the first hard frost, we bring the taro plant inside in a bucket, and place it next to a sunny window for the next 5 or 6 months. By mid-December the pond freezes over except where we have a small pump running. The fish go dormant at the bottom, under the ice.
Then in spring it starts back up again. The ice melts, the fish come back to life, and the animals return to drink. We put the taro plant back out, and once again the pond is the center of life in our side yard.
Images:
https://www.instagram.com/p/4O0ZZGJJvH/
https://www.instagram.com/p/CiwTVBLOuUG/