It seems like there's a lot of talk lately about the superiority of a system without a UV.
Is there a concensus now that if you have one it's a crutch because you don't have a good
enough bio filter system?
My pond season in Washington usually consists of 3 or 4 months. For the first 3 years I used my
UV's religiously and always had nice clear water. If I turned them off the water would be pea soup
in a couple weeks. About the 4th year I left them off and they remained clear.
But I see them as simply a tool to be installed and used at will. I have spare bulbs in the closet
ready at a moments notice. My pond season is so short I don't want to wait patiently for the water
to clear, which may happen in 2 days or 2 months. Only Mother Nature seems to know. For those
first few years it definitely made my ponding more enjoyable, which let's face it, is what it's all about.
Was my filtration system lacking? It has changed over the years but to many I think they'd
say it got worse: SC > 2 - MB's and 2nd circuit skimmer > UV > s/g filter; and now is sieve > bead
and 2nd circuit still skimmer > UV > s/g filter. But I've still, for whatever reason, not had to turn the
UV on.
I'm not trying for a debate about what combination of filters will provide crystal clear water with out a UV
because honestly I don't know... but this post is only to give the abused UV a shout out for doing a thankless
job at a moments notice. I'm not sorry I installed mine and know it's there if needed. I wouldn't
hesitate to tell new ponders the same.