The Planted Tank Forum banner
1 - 15 of 71 Posts

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In response to many questions about dosing I've decided to explain my views on why we do what we do. I need a reference to send people to rather than repeating the same thing over and over. If anyone notices errors or problems please let me know since I will refer to this frequently.

It seems that most people learn "how" to dose fertilizers without understanding why those steps work. Learning the "how to method" first causes a lot of confusion when we finally ask the question, WHY?

We need to supply all the necessary nutrients to the plants in adequate quantities. Quantities that are high enough so the plant growth is never limited by the amount of any one nutrient. This idea is based on Liebig's law of the minimum .

Look at the barrel in this image. The water height of this barrel is limited to the lowest slat. Imagine each slat as a single nutrient and the barrel as the plant; the water height representing growth rate. Now the maximum growth rate will be defined by the lowest slat, or nutrient. So the growth rate of the plant would follow the nutrient in least supply.

So what would be the best option to get maximum growth rate from our plants? The answer seems obvious. Supply nutrients above the top of the "barrel". This would represent non-limiting nutrients.

Now we know the concept behind non-limiting nutrients. Let’s talk about the steps to obtain that condition. Again I'm going to use science. Hoagland's solution is nutrient rich water for plants to grow in. Sound familiar? Here’s what Wikipedia says about Hoagland’s Solution...
The Hoagland solution is a hydroponic nutrient solution that was developed by Hoagland and Arnon in 1933 and is one of the most popular solution compositions for growing plants (in the scientific world at least). The Hoagland solution provides every nutrient necessary for plant growth and is appropriate for the growth of a large variety of plant species. The solution described by Hoagland in 1933 has been modified several times (mainly to add iron chelates and the like), but the original concentrations for each element are shown below.
• N 210 ppm
• K 235 ppm
• Ca 200 ppm
• P 31 ppm
• S 64 ppm
• Mg 48 ppm
• B 0.5 ppm
• Fe 1 to 5 ppm
• Mn 0.5 ppm
• Zn 0.05 ppm
• Cu 0.02 ppm
• Mo 0.01 ppm
The Hoagland solution has a lot of N and K so it is very well suited for the development of large plants like Tomato and Bell Pepper. However, the solution is very good for the growth of plants with lower nutrient demands such as lettuce and aquatic plants with the further dilution of the preparation to 1/4 or 1/5. Hoagland solution must be made from 7stock.

Wikipedia, Hoagland's solution
Notice the nutrients listed as ppm (parts per million) above. The amounts in that list are far higher than we want in a planted tank. Remember, we have fish, shrimp, bacteria and an entire eco system in our tanks to worry about. In addition, the ratios are different for our purposes. So where do we turn now? We know we want to supply those 12 nutrients at various levels but what levels? Well, a hobbyist named Tom Barr thought the same thing. He’s determined the appropriate range for each nutrient through years of testing. The method of supplying non-limiting nutrients to our plants is known as the EI method or Estimative Index. I prefer the term EI concept because “method” implies a one size fits all mentality. This couldn't be further from the truth.

The ranges for EI are listed below.

CO2 range 25-35ppm
NO3 range 5-30ppm (KNO3)
K+ range 10-30ppm (K2SO4 or GH booster)
PO4 range 1.0-3.0 ppm (KH2PO4)
Fe 0.2-0.5ppm or higher (?) (Plantex CSM +B)
GH range 3 degrees ~ 50ppm or higher (GH Booster)

I know what you may be thinking. Where are all the other nutrients? And what does GH have to do with nutrients?

The "other" nutrients are supplied through one dry fertilizer called the trace mix. It's a combination of all the other nutrients mixed at the proper ratios, the most popular blend being Plantex CSM +B. The GH is listed as a nutrient because GH is a measurement of calcium plus magnesium; more on this below.

So from those 12 nutrients in Hoagland's solution we only have to deal with six. Nitrogen, Phosphorus, potassium, iron, GH and traces (the other nutrients).

We can dose nutrients using any frequency we like, daily, weekly or monthly as long as we stay within range. There are advantages to dosing smaller amounts over time. We get into a daily routine when we do something over and over. This helps us to remember to dose. It also prevents large swings which can impact some inhabitants. Most hobbyist with CO2 injected tanks dose every other day; macros one day micros the next. This can prevent nutrients in the trace mix from binding to macro nutrients, iron and phosphate in particular. However, low tech tanks can easily withstand monthly dosing with many other variations in between. Remember, EI is a concept not a step by step method.

Before we get into how to calculate doses let’s talk about water changes.

Clearly if we dose nutrients “above the barrel” there is a point at which some of them will become toxic. To prevent this we do regular water changes. The frequency of water changes is no different than the dosing schedule we choose. We can do water changes 3 times per week or once per year. It all depends on the system we happen to be running. The common theme being that we keep nutrients in a specific range. Balancing water changes and dosing schedules can easily be visualized using wets calculator.

As you can see, with a little tinkering on a calculator we can tailor any nutrient level we want. This is the easiest way to balance water changes and nutrients. Simply keep nutrients within the given range.

For new systems water changes of 2-3 times per week for the first 1-2 months can prevent many problems such as substrate leeching or absorption, removing nitrogen cycle wastes, and other problems we may face with a new setup. Many of these can lead to algae outbreaks and inhabitant stresses. All of which can be easily alleviated by frequent water changes and healthy plant growth.

To explain how we dose each nutrient let me use nitrogen as an example.

Nitrogen, represented by NO3 (nitrate) above. This is the result of nitrifying bacteria. This means we can have nitrogen without dosing. The amounts we have are based on the amount of organic matter that is processed by the bacteria. We can also get nitrate through our tap water. Many water supplies have nitrate levels from agricultural runoff. Since there are other sources for nitrogen we need to test for that first before we calculate a dose. In the list above the range for NO3 is 5-30ppm. If we will never go below 5ppm even after a 50% water change we may not need to dose nitrogen. If we will go below we should calculate how much is needed to keep nitrogen in that 5-30ppm range.

Let’s assume we have 0 nitrates and we want to calculate for 10ppm. Let’s further assume we want to dose every other day. If we want 10ppm then three doses per week would be…oh let’s just round it up say 4ppm. Notice we don’t have to be exact since the range is 5-30ppm! Always round up. We can taper off dosing later until we see changes in plant health. This nutrient level is called the critical point; the point at which nutrients become limiting. Just like everything else, this point is tank specific.

Now we have to figure out how much of something we need to add to raise NO3 to range. We can use a list of fertilizers to raise nitrogen. The most common one used is KNO3 or potassium nitrate. Below is a list of the common fertilizers used to raise the other nutrients within range.

NO3 (nitrogen) – KNO3 potassium nitrate.
K+ (potassium) – K2SO4 potassium sulfate. Found in many GH boosters as well.
PO4 (phosphorus) – KH2PO4 mono potassium phosphate
Iron (Fe) – Ferrous gluconate, EDTA iron chelate and DTPA iron chelate.
GH – Magnesium MgSO4.7H2O (Epsom salt) OR GH booster
Calcium CaSO4 (calcium sulfate) OR GH booster

Making these calculations couldn't be simpler. We simply use a nutrient calculator . There are many options on the calculator listed. Suffice it to say most people can figure out how to use the calculator rather than explain its use. This is how we decide how much of a fertilizer to add to raise that nutrient within range. The calculator can calculate for dry dosing or solutions, solutions being more appropriate for smaller tanks.

One point I would like to make in regards to the calculator output. Many fertilizers supply more than one nutrient as seen below. We need to keep a "running total" to account for this.

Notice how the KNO3 above also adds 2ppm of potassium?

We make these calculations for each nutrient in the list.

Three glaring issues still remain that we need to talk about; GH, iron and traces.

Gh, often noted as dGH (degrees of general hardness), is a measurement of the concentration of divalent metal ions such as calcium and magnesium per volume of water. Notice, other things can influence this measurement. However, calcium and magnesium are the two most valuable players here. Generally a GH of 3-5 degrees is considered adequate for plant growth. Sometimes the ratio of calcium to magnesium can be skewed to one side leaving the other out of range. So if we have access to a water report we can make an informed decision on whether we should dose additionally Ca or Mg based on total GH. This usually isn’t necessary. If we wanted to be safe we could add enough GH booster to raise the GH 1-2 degrees. This won’t have any impact on plant growth. It can however impact very sensitive fish and invertebrates.

Iron and trace mix are interrelated because most trace mixes contain iron. Many hobbyists have realized that higher iron levels are beneficial to multiple plants. Yet adding more of “everything else” is not needed. So a basic dose of trace mix is usually calculated to obtain an iron concentration of about .2ppm. That leaves iron at the minimum level while supplying sufficient levels of “everything else”. If we want to add additional iron we can use various forms of it.

Iron comes in many forms. The two basic types are non chelated or chelated. Essentially, chelated is a fancy name for time released. We can use iron without chelates which will last a short time, hours. This would be analogous to an injection from your doctor. It won’t last long but it works fast. We can also use iron that has been chelated with various chemicals. The time it lasts and the availability to your plants depends on the chemical used. The two most popular are EDTA and DTPA. EDTA can last up to 24 hours depending on the PH of your water. EDTA is the form of iron used in Plantex. DTPA can last up to 48 hours and is even more dependent on your PH. The higher the PH the more need for a stronger chelate such as DTPA.

So now we know why we need to dose, what we need to dose, how much we need to dose and more importantly, how to do it. Many debates are forged arguing levels, which fertilizer works better, or many other factors. The root issue always remains the same. Supplying non-limiting nutrients is the most efficient method to obtain maximal growth rate.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks guys. I think it's more important to understand a technique rather than following the steps of one. Without understanding, when problems arise, we have no idea where to turn.

Hobbyist have done this same thing for many decades with fish, they "dose" fish food, LOTS of it to grow the fish well, then do frequent water changes to prevent waste/build up.

Hardly my idea. I just argue for it since it's simple and easy.
Give yourself a little credit. It matters little that others have noticed improved plant growth with a given technique. Describing a common application and improving it happens to be the birth of many new discoveries.

“Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” Albert Szent-Gyorgyi

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
According to the nutrient calculator, using the EI low light weekly dosing, I would have to add 22ml of Flourish Nitrogen once a week to my 40g tank? Surely that can't be right?
Can't it be? Let's look and see why that makes sense. This is a good time to explain why water changes and dosing amount and/or frequency are closely related. Changing either will significantly impact the other.

We have 40 gallons of water we want to dose.

Using a nutrient calculator, it recommends 22ml of Seachem Nitrogen for low/light weekly EI dosing. The 22 ml dose raises NO3 (nitrates) to 10 ppm.

The range we want to maintain is 5-30ppm of NO3. So 10 ppm is in that range. Great!

Below are a couple of graphs from wet's calculator. We enter the PPM, the dosing frequency, water change amount, and finally water change frequency.

The first image is 10ppm weekly and a 50% weekly water change.

Notice how that 5-30 ppm range for NO3 are seen for each uptake group? This uptake percentage (ratio) will be driven by many factors but the most important two are light and CO2 (excel included). So the uptake ratio will change based heavily on which type of tank we have, "low" - "high tech".

The image below depicts the same 10ppm weekly dose of NO3. However, we changed the water changes to 50% monthly.

Now we see a huge change. Our range is from 7 ppm - 75 ppm! That range has crumbled away without weekly water changes. Not to worry. If we don't want to do weekly water changes we can adjust our dose. Changing the weekly dose to 3.5 ppm we can stay within the range we want using monthly water changes.

This concept is important to understand. Modeling nutrient ranges in this way can predict very accurately what we can expect to see based on our own maintenance schedules. A "one trick pony" way of dosing for EI or any other method is not necessary. EI is NOT simply daily dosing and weekly water changes. It can be scaled to any application you wish.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
It was mostly to get away from test kits.
It also worked well because large water changes mitigate CO2 and algae issues.

Can water changes be greatly reduced using EI? Yes. In fact, that's one of the goals once the user get some good observational experience. I do many

No set method will be all things to all goals, but a conceptual approach will allow someone to adjust and understand how to do it.
It's funny I was writing my response above when you posted this lol.

I agree it needs to be mentioned the thought process behind why you initially conceived this. Balancing water changes with dosing eliminates regular testing not to mention the other benefits to regular water changes. From my experience however, most new and many old hobbyist never learn the basics of nutrient management. So they usually get stuck into following a dosing regime without understanding how to adjust. This basically prevents them from ever making those needed changes based on their own tank. As you said nutrients are easy. This is especially true when you understand the basics. Without that knowledge, it's like the difference between riding a bus and driving your own car. The bus will take you where it wants to go. Drive a car and you decide where to turn.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Not too different from dosing drugs and pharmacokinetics in humans.
Maybe that's why this makes sense to me. Nearly 30 years of dosing patients. Administration types, therapeutic levels, clearance times etc. all relate to this. All the way down to the acid base balance system used to interpret blood gases.

According to the tropica article that Tom Barr linked, seems to indicate that nitrogen and phosphate supplementation are not required for well stocked planted tanks?
Yup. Remember this from the initial post.

"Nitrogen, represented by NO3 (nitrate) above. This is the result of nitrifying bacteria. This means we can have nitrogen without dosing. The amounts we have are based on the amount of organic matter that is processed by the bacteria. We can also get nitrate through our tap water. Many water supplies have nitrate levels from agricultural runoff."

Phosphates are another thing we can see from a well stocked tank. Accounting for endogenous nutrients is easily done when we understand the basics.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
I think both would agree that dosing excess nutrients without water changes or compounding that problem by dosing incorrectly (tablespoons instead of teaspoons) would lead to toxic levels of anything. We cannot dose "above the barrel" without reset. It's simple logic.

Why argue over whether toxic nutrient levels can exist, they can. Water changes and proper dosing can prevent all of this. The problem lies in the sentence preceding this one. Every hobbyist makes mistakes. Yes, they may be huge mistakes by our standards but the possibility still exists.

What is the toxic level for trace element X in aquatic plants? Beyond a few papers on copper, nitrates, zinc and a few others I have no idea. It would be nice to know, as well as what to look for just in case. I'm like every other hobbyist. I'm human and prone to error.

As you both probably know I'm from a medical background. What would happen if doctors decided no one would ever eat 5 bottles of Tylenol? We would have a lot of unknown deaths. Instead accept that the possibility exists and develop a clear identification method of what may be going on. It just makes sense.

What can we do to prevent toxicity? Dose appropriately and perform water changes. Sorry to derail any debates. But I'm more interested in managing nutrients to prevent both limits and toxicity in the first place. To put it bluntly you are both correct. You just need to move towards the middle a tad more. I respect both of you tremendously but that's what I see here.

Well, then you get folks who say they do not want all that, just tell me what to do:cool:

Ya cannot win.

So I just take each person one at a time and others watch and get the ideas and info they want.

Many are that way. The problems are much more social than anything.
Yes, I've seen the same thing. Those "just tell me what to do folks" invariably are asking for help a month after you tell them dose X and change Y every Z days lol.

This thread is for those folks that watch and get the info on their own. I can't force everyone to understand the basics but I can offer information for those that want to learn more than the "insert part A into slot B" audience. Social? I would tend to agree.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #33 ·
So, If you are not dosing CO2 (I'm just using Flourish Excel), should I not do either EI or PPS? Or should I use one of the systems, but at a reduced amount of dosing?
You can certainly use a reduced EI dose. I would reduce the dose to 25-33% of EI if you are not using CO2 injection.

Folks have done this many times, the tanks did not have issues. I suppose if you went out long enough. Or you did not do any water changes, but that's not EI. That's just bad care. No method prevents that.
This is my entire point. I’m not suggesting that the EI method causes toxicity. However, I think it’s important to make cautionary statements when explaining something. My suggestion that toxicities can develop is accurate. If you don’t follow the advice this is a consequence. I don’t need to have specific ppm for every nutrient to make this statement. There are toxic levels for various nutrients. You realize this so I don’t need to support an argument that they exist.

I thought you said you had a medical background?
What is the risk there .....compared to someone who did not read the article about what to dose their plants and dumped a pound instead of teaspoon of X Y and Z?

I can make such statements also, they do not support your argument however.
I think you have misunderstood my point. It appears to this reader that you’re suggesting we shouldn’t warn that toxicities can occur if the plan is not followed because thousands of users have had success. People do make mistakes. You can kill your fauna and/or flora with excess nutrients. I doubt the same number of people who have made mistakes post their failures as opposed to success stories. The statement I made that you quoted was intended to mean “don’t stick our heads in the sand” thinking users will follow the plan. A surprising number of people don’t read directions leading to problems every day. We can’t ignore that. Providing cautionary statements was my argument. Nothing more.

Lack of communication, misunderstanding? Probably. The way I see it we actually agree. I’m sure you’ve had to argue many issues over the years and had huge criticisms from other hobbyists. I’m not one of them. EI works. The idea of providing non limiting nutrients is a logical approach. Why would I argue this?

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
If I don't use any CO2 or Excel ,and follow the EI/Low light weekly ,dosing as suggested by the calculator (for the water column volume only) ,- can I have easy ,fast growing plants(wisteria ,Najas G. for ex) ,along with low light plants like ferns and anubias?(to help remove any excess?)
Or - are the fast growers a No-No ,if dosing the amounts suggested by the calc?can the result be imbalance and algae on the slow growers?
You can grow many stem plants without CO2 and high light. They just grow much slower. Choose plants based on their light requirement. I would recommend Excel or generic glutaraldehyde. It does make a difference albeit nowhere near as effective as CO2 injection.

Don't confuse yourself or over think nutrient management. I realize it may sound daunting with all the chemical names and jargon but in essence just supply non limiting nutrients and you're done. As long as you have enough nutrients for the most "hungry" plant you're all set. You can house any number of plants together. Plants don't care if their neighbor uses more or less as long as there's food in the fridge for them lol.

EI for low light weekly would be fine. I would prefer to dose more often but that's my own preference. It provides some nutrients that won't be available all week. However, your plants will still survive on once a week dosing just fine. As far as excess nutrients causing algae I have not seen this to be true. I have dosed far above EI levels and never experienced an issue. It's an easy thing to blame when you can't figure out what is going on. It's a myth many people still hold fast to.

Btw. Nice looking tank. You're certainly doing something right ;)

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
Thanks again for the response and this article!

I purchased a Fert. pack for PPS dosing and it is on its way to me. I think I want to try the EI method instead as I like the idea of doing 1 large water change for the fish's sakes too.

I like the PPS because it tells me how much of each fert (in grams) to put into the bottle, along with the other Ferts., then tells me how many ml to dose. Is there a calculator for EI that can do the same?

I have a 29g tank for reference, and here is a link for reference as well if that helps here.
There is a calculator. Here is the link. The problem many people seem to have is the differences in tanks parameters. Should I choose EI, low/light, PPS because I have XYZ? I am in the process of writing another calculator. I intend to add a wizard to ask these questions and suggest a good starting point to work from. Carlos (Wet) has been a great help with this endeavor thus far. Beyond that the calculator is very helpful and accurate. Where do you start?

You have a moderately planted tank. The plants are rather undemanding. I would start with 1/3 or so of the EI dose to start. Once you see how your plants respond you can slowly reduce that dose until you see a change.

Using that calculator you can choose EI low light weekly. There is another option you can start with. Choose EI daily and dose that amount every other day. It's a little more than you need but won't cause any problems what so ever. I like dosing something every day for several reasons.

The traditional EI method requires weekly water changes. This is important if you choose those doses from the calculator. If you want to modify the water change schedule you can look at the levels that will be expected in this calculator. Our goal here is to maintain a range of nutrients listed in the original post.

So basically, if you're willing to do weekly water changes I would choose the daily dose and use that every other day (more than you need but not harmful). We want to start above that barrel. Then decrease and find that critical point where we see changes. Do we need to reduce doses? Honestly I don't see any reason to. The levels are not toxic to fauna or flora. Is it expensive? Not at all. Do we need this much fertilizer. No, but is there any harm?

The entire point to this method is to supply non limiting nutrients. Then we can work on more important things like CO2 and basic gardening. Nutrients are the easiest part. We can tinker with various levels and argue over other aspects but the fact always remains the same. Just dose enough fertilizers for the plants needs.

Using EI low light weekly or daily dosing using that amount every other day, schedule below, will provide appropriate nutrients for any plants you may have.

Mon Macros
Tues Micros
Wed Macros
Thrus Micros
Fri Macros
Sat Micros
Sun 50% water change (GH booster)

Does this make sense?

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·

The calculator tells me to add "this many milligrams" for my tank size. Do I need to bring out the scale every day to measure, since I can't really convert milligrams into teaspoons since the mass of various substances are different??

How do you easily and somewhat accurately dose then? This was a little bit of why I was liking the making of a liquid because I could just pull up a few ml's, and be done.

What about my question regarding the extra minerals that come along with dosing KNO3 for example? Where do I enter into the equation that dosing KNO3 also gives me extra K, for example?
What size tank do you have? It's easier and more accurate to dose smaller tanks with solutions. Dry dosing is easier for larger aquariums.

The calculator has a teaspoon conversion. In the "and I am calculating for" selection choose "The result of my dose". Then you can enter amounts in teaspoons for the selected fertilizer. The result does not need to match the target exactly, just get as close as you can with the teaspoon sizes you own.

Here is an example for a 10 gallon tank using 500ml and 5ml doses. This is EI daily dosing...

Selecting EI daily says I need to add 19.751 g to the container for each dose to raise NO3 3.2 ppm. So if we want to convert this to teaspoons choose "the result of my dose". Entering 3 3/4 says it will raise NO3 3.16ppm, close enough.

The results of your dose are listed on the right side. i.e.

Element ppm/degree
K 2.02
N 0.72
NO3 3.20

Forget the nitrogen. The NO3 is a conversion of the nitrogen listed. Notice KNO3 also adds 2.02 ppm of potassium.

If we also dose KH2PO4...

Element ppm/degree
K 0.25
P 0.20
PO4 0.60

We see this adds 0.25 ppm of potassium.

Add the potassium together. 2.02 + 0.25 = 2.27 ppm. The K in KNO3 is usually enough. If you want extra you can add the difference. 3.2 - 2.27 = 0.93 ppm. So you're lacking 0.93 ppm if you want the full dose of K. The EI daily dose of potassium is 3.2 ppm. I wouldn't bother using extra potassium unless you notice problems.

Basically, just total all the elements. It doesn't matter which fertilizer provides it as long as you're doing them.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #56 ·
I'm convinced but I would still like to know if my crypts,who are heavy root feeder, will actually benefit from water column fertilizers? If so, I'll be ordering some dry ferts from Green Leaf.
Yes they will. I prefer water column dosing to root tabs. I've never had a problem using only water column dosing. The crypts below (wentii green) had no root tabs and 1/3 EI dosing in a low tech tank. Sorry that's the only picture I have from those. They simply got out of control for that tank which is why they are on the counter.


· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #59 ·
I'm going to place my order for some dry ferts tonight but have one question..GH Booster, yay or nay?
Sorry I missed your post last night.

It depends on the water you're using. High GH? you probably won't need it. That said, the cost is pretty minimal if you add it to the order (five bucks or so). Adding it now will save the shipping charge which will be more than the item. It never hurts to have extras laying around. You may decide to use R/O for something in the future.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #62 ·
Can somebody please explain why the maximum concentration reaches a plateau at day 36 of the graphical chart in the original post. Why doesn't the maximum concentration keep rising like the preceding 30 days?
Think of it as a bank account. Deposit the same amount every week and withdraw 50% of the balance once a week. Eventually your balance will be equal to what your weekly deposit is. You can't make money out of thin air.

Your plants would represent the bank fees. Your bank may deduct $1/week or $10/week. It all depends on the bank. Plants aren’t greedy like banks. The more they deduct from your account the more growth and health they return. Of course there is a limit to how much they can deduct. So as long as you keep your balance over that amount you’ll never see an “overdraft fee”.

Also I like how the OP used a barrel for the analogy. BARRel reminds me of Tom Barr. Heh heh.
That analogy is not mine. It's been used for years to explain that idea.

· Registered
2,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #65 ·
Very nice!!!
Thanks. That's nice to hear!

The initial post was geared towards education. Hobbies are much like people IMO. We're all helpless infants from day one ( I certainly was :confused1:). Then we have parents (mentors) explaining things rather than ordering behavior..."sit up", "don't chew with your mouth open, "hold that door open"...

When we understand why things work it seems to fall into place. It took me a while to get it. Once I did I didn't understand why people weren't explaining it in a way people can grasp. I don't know about you but I didn't get into the hobby to learn organic chemistry.

So that's what this thread was all about. "Teaching a man to fish rather than giving him a fish".
1 - 15 of 71 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.