KILL YOUR UGF

[urville]

you know what sorry. sorry for my opinion.
sorry alsobecause i'll stick to it till death.
New people to the hobby will find canisters, wet/drys, PF's, and most anything other than UGF more pleasing less internal space will be used and maintenance will be greatly reduced. i mainly siggest this as newbs to the hobby have a learning curve to overcome, have tendancies towards overstocking, and overfeeding. and in those circumstances especially, ugf's can be deadly in a tank. this is an opinion one you dont have to agree with. too often in fact in this hobby information is scattered and controversial and often you can become confused easily by the staggering array of opinions. dont take just my word for it ask around! most people will gladly reccomend a good canister over most other forms of filtration In my experience. research your options be sure you understand all the implications of any system. and try not to be an overbearing jerk about yours once your well experienced. this was never my intention, but apparently some others intentions. i hope this helps some new people to not be discouraged.

P.S. - if your new i HIGHLY HIGHLY reccommend you direct your browser to http://www.wetwebmedia.com. its a daunting task but please make your way to the freshwater faqs and read them ALL. if you have any questions email them. IMO this is THE source for info. also when reading newer info always superceeds older info.

HTH alot of people!!!

 

[Guest]

I used to have a UGF but got rid of it because I didn't like the idea of dirt being under the gravel.

 

[urville]

omg i know, it's a nutirent sink waiting to happen or well... happening

 

[hashbaz]

Sorry to be lazy, I didn't read them ALL. But I did read several that mentioned UGFs and they all spoke in favor of them. I know the general consensus is that they are old fashioned and not used anymore.

My question is what is so bad about them?

 

[RogerMcAllen]

They trap stuff in the dead space underneath the gravel. Some really nast things can gather there, and if you disturb it too much you can release them into your tank.

 

[Canuckfan]

I have to disagree with such a broad statement . With a well maintained UGf , the entire gravel bed acts as a biological filter . You do have to do a thorough gravel cleanig/churning every few weeks . It offers no mechanical filtration , but this can be solved by weekly vacuming of the tank or by adding a power filter . They are also no good for live plants unless you have java ferns or anubius attached to driftwood or rocks .

UGF's work great in tanks 20 gallons & under , & with smaller fish . I wouldn't recommend a UGF for large messy fish such as plecos or cichlids , but they are perfectly fine for tetras , smaller barbs , & cories .

If you fail to properly maintain a UGF , of course you'll have problems . But this is true of any filter , including Eheim cannister filters .

As for the gunk that accumulates under the plates , just remove the uptake sleeve & stick a tube into it & siphon out as much of it as you can . If there is gunk by the airstone , it will come out . But this is not toxic & all it will do is cloud your water up for a bit . There is absolutely no chance of this gunk accidently coming into your tank if you disturb the gravel in the middle of your tank , or practically any where in your tank unless it is right beside the uptake tube .

If you are just about to go out & buy a new tank & filter , I would recommend either a power or cannister filter . But if you already have a UGf , keep it . If you are concerned , add a power filter .

I have had tanks with UGF's for over 20 years without incident . I have had fish breed in them & fry sucessfully raised in them . To simply make a broad statement that UGF's are evil , without qualifying it , is unfortunate . UGF's work in certain situations & won't in others .

 

[oscarbreeder]

There are so many BETTER filters out there today that I wouldnt waste time on a UGF.

Canisters rock!!

 

[BASSNMAN]

I would not run only a UGF, but they are good in conjunction with other filtration. They pull water through the biofilter in the substrate. I have two 10 gals with UGFs powered by penguin power filters. I vac every 2 weeks. My new 125 has a UGF with 2 300 gph power heads plus 2 350 biowheel power filters.

 

[patryuji]

Sure UGFs will work but other filters work better.

Just like a 1980 ford escort will get you from point A to B if it is maintained properly but a modern focus will do it with better gas mileage, faster acceleration, faster stopping, better handling, fewer emissions, safer structure, and more interior room.

 

[urville]

well first of all ugf's are non natural, they are nutrient sinks, they are bad for plants, and counter to their main claim they only support aerobic bacteria not anaerobic thereby essentially making them a failed filter in the nitrification process and against their own claims. this is my opinion.

i dnt like canisters or wet dry's either. i dont like chemicals. i shy from wet/drys for the same reasons, and i can guarentee an all natural system works far better. i'm just advocating my school of thought. But i WILL reccomend other filters the only one i will outright tell someone not to use ifs UGF period.

no one will be followed and/or harrassed because i dont agree. i feel it's a higly qualified statement. i applaud you your good fortune, but my stand remains the same. it's my opinion to newcomers to not use them for an easier and less maintenance filled tank, and for an all over healthier tank. he's right there are better filters why even bother. and why require such large scale maintenance from newcomers. You do know that its reccomended every 12 months to 18 motnhs to take the plates out and clean underneath them? thats moving your whole substrate... compared to any other filter thats insane maintenance even just once a year.

ph yeah, i forgot, please read recent faq's as the archive at wetwebmedia goes back quite a ways. i had a few emails wih chuck about how new info always superceeds old info in their archives.... and well the industry and hobby as a whole.

 

[Canuckfan]

I absolutely agree that power filters & cannister filters are superior to UGf's . But they aren't useless . I would tell any beginner to buy a power or cannister filter .

What do you mean by unnatural ? Are you advocating using no filtration at all ? To rely on a heavily planted tank & water changes is not good advice , unless you also tell people to only stock about 10 neon tetras in a 50 gallon tank .

All filters produce nitrate . Anerobic bacteria consume it & may be present in say , an Aquaclear filter , if you use two sponges & let the second one completly clog-up . The end product of a properly functioning filter will always be nitrate . So your claim that , because UGF's don't contain anerobic bacteria , they are an unnatural & failed method , is simply not true . There are plenty of reasons for not using UGF's , but that isn't one of them .

Eheim cannister filters are probably the best filters out there . How can you possibly bad-mouth them ? I can understand your stand on UGF's , but you lost all credibilty , in my eyes , by saying that an all natural system is superior to using canister filters .

I think that it's highly irresponsible to tell a beginner to use no means of external filtration . And like I said before , I wouldn't tell a beginner to buy a UGF either .

If your first concern is the well-being of your fish , you will use some means of filtration , be it power filters , cannisters , or UGF's .

I hope that this doesn't come off as some sort of attack , but I very strongly disagree with your stance on a natural system .

 

[SaltwaterDreams]

i just had a conversation with my favorite (knowledgable) fish store, i am in the market for a stronger filter for another of my 20gals.. they actually told me, no matter what anyone says, the UGF is a great filter and the most like the fishes normal habitat, plus the bio filtering.

Personally i have no problems with mine. i thought about removing it (seriously), however .. luckly i didn't. My HOB filter crapped out and now the only thing saving my tank is my UGF. Personally, my UGF supports 9-10 live plants that are all thriving and doing well. I don't find them any easier or more difficult to take care of than any other type of filter. The maint. is simply all part of having a tank in my opinion. So i wouldn't be so quick to completly and utterly dismiss the UGF. It simply can work, and work very well. Not for everyone, and not for all tanks, but such a broad statement is rather harsh and misleading.

 

[wright4lfe]

lol at this guy really not knowing what he is talking about...

in any case, i like the UGF i have in my 20gl. it gives the plants in the tank something to attach to and absorb the fertilizer beneath the filter

 

[urville]

canuck fan... whoa.... i use no filtration other than mechanical an inline sponge to the inlet of my refug and i infact do have success with it and i'll bet you anything it can withstand a full load. what i said was IN MY OPINION.
OPINION
I feel it is a failed filter completely, that i dont like cannisters or wet/drys. hey i dont like them. you dont like the natural system. oh well i certainly am not running off assuming alot of things you didnt say.and i would never say DONT USE ONE like i do the ugf. that it is unnatural is exactly what i mean, that it isnt a "system of" or a "replicated system of" nature, like bacterial filtration by use of hob pw's, or even wet/drys and cannisters, there may nt be cermaic media and floss in nature but the bacteria that create the process are present just as they are in nature in fact without the bacteria all a canister is, is a hideable really expensive HOB PF. theres no huge hollow run under streams and whatnot, in fact the system is closer to RO. it's filtered through tons of sand, rock, layers tiny open places of oxygen made by worms and comes into contact with anearobic bacteria, etc... etc... ultimately absorbed, some is returned as it finds it way into underground water systems, etc. it's easier for instance to run a cannister and make maintenance easy and enjoyable and the hobbist especially as a beginner is much happier. it's quite certainly for me the last and worst choice out of a pile of others. but you werent really reading i said in my opinion i didnt like them i never said i wouldnt reccomend one. i said i successfully use a natural system not that i would reccomend it to the beginner.
i researched my system heavily wading through piles of contradictory opinions and thoughts to get what i built. thanks.

wright4life: well thats YOUR opinion and i certainly never made wild claims to your knowledge level, i simply complimented your success.

good luck with all that....

 

[urville]

btw i take things i hear at any lfs with high suspicion and i learned that from a lady here. and in the very off chance it's denziens of the deep in ft. collins or any the surrounding cities, then i can only laugh at that from personal experience.

 

[cowfish7]

They trap stuff in the dead space underneath the gravel. Some really nast things can gather there, and if you disturb it too much you can release them into your tank.

I poked around a bit at that site (so much to read!). But I was wondering-- what is this nasty stuff, and how does it get disturbed? I really don't see how it would get disturbed, but maybe I am missing something.

I have used UGFs for many, many years. Each filtration system has its pros/cons. Used properly, a UGF has merits.

cowfish7

 

[Canuckfan]

The single most important thing any filter provides is biological filtration . You seem to not understand that all a UGF provides is biological filtration . UGF's provide exactly the same biological filtration as cannisters or HOBs . Your arguement that UGF's are unnatural simply doesn't wash . None of these three filtration systems are "replicated systems" of nature . The very fact that we keep fish in glass "prisons" is "unnatural" .

Maintaining a UGf only requires a thorough churning/cleaning of the gravel every few weeks , something that most people do anyways . You have obviously never used a UGF & have absolutely no grasp on how they perform . To say that UGF's are unnatural is absurd .

To repeat , all UGF's provide is biological filtration . Your statement to the contrary is 100% false .

 

[urville]

i know i did a change of substrate once and it was a nasty mess down there. and that, AHEM at the time i switched to PF, and later tried a canister. i was much more pleased. canisters are okay much like a seperate PF in a way, but they fully submerse bio material and therefore rob it of much needed oxygen it would have in a true wet/dry system thereby for that type of filtration isnt very efficient. a good wet/dry will really change that, and then about the wet/dry which i like okaaay, BUT i use plants. and wet/drys rob the water of co2 and so for me it doesnt work.... why buy a co2 system, a reliable one, to counter act something i imposed on the system... blech.. some people have success with ugf by following proper maintenance which is time consuming, it doesnt remove nitrates, and it has to be cleaned underneath every so often. not the best thing for newbies, they have enough trouble becoming acclimized to the hobby. it works, AHEM although not up to it's claims on any ugf box i've ever seen, and is a battle against the inefficiency and high standards it requirs to operate due to it's own design. it clogs with debris stopping flow, you cant use a chemical media <which i wouldnt anyway> with a powerhead on it and it reduces already dismal flow if you use air instead, the biological media/gravel is submersed and therefore operates at very low efficiency compared to the wet/dry bio media just for instance. how far from the bottom of that lift tube does the pressure of suction become useless? can the lift tube even support enough suction to drive the plate to it's edges, or even half way.

it has been known to seemingly work great and then crash a system. of course these are most likely new people who no more know to not overstock a tank than to suck the media. SO, i figure i should warn newbs away from the ugf to a filter that they may more easily handle, and in the future i would dubt they would purposely choose ugf over any other filtration once they become seasoned hobbyists as it were.

sheesh

 

[urville]

you know what sorry. sorry for my opinion.
sorry alsobecause i'll stick to it till death.
New people to the hobby will find canisters, wet/drys, PF's, and most anything other than UGF more pleasing less internal space will be used and maintenance will be greatly reduced. i mainly siggest this as newbs to the hobby have a learning curve to overcome, have tendancies towards overstocking, and overfeeding. and in those circumstances especially, ugf's can be deadly in a tank. this is an opinion one you dont have to agree with. too often in fact in this hobby information is scattered and controversial and often you can become confused easily by the staggering array of opinions. dont take just my word for it ask around! most people will gladly reccomend a good canister over most other forms of filtration In my experience. research your options be sure you understand all the implications of any system. and try not to be an overbearing jerk about yours once your well experienced. this was never my intention. i hope this helps some new people to not be discouraged.

 

[SaltwaterDreams]

(ps, of course lfs opinions have to be taken with a grain of salt but just posting that to show another opinion.)

you know it is great that you are passionate about this all. It provoked a huge discussion that -will- help some people out in their own debates. Just perosnally i wouldn't have made it such a blanket statment because we know it works some places and not others and with some fish and not others.. and we all have an opinion. But hey a lot of information has come out of this topic.
Good luck with everything, and thanks for posting because i suppose i even learned something.