So, aeration isn't going to add much then, is that the consensus?
Perhaps I should not weigh in on this, because I do not have aeration myself, and you said you want folks who have actual experience. However, I think the statement above is a little to broad to say yes/no to for a simple answer. Perhaps if you said "in my situation with it's past track record". I bet the consensus would be in favor to the fact that each pond is different, and some need aeration, and there are some(usually to the rare case) that do not. So every pond has to be considered individually.
Like Sparkplug said, it only takes one fishkill and to look back in the mirror and said "should-a". Perhaps in your case if you did have aeration, your pond could really excel above most others. But, is that your goal? Are you happy with what you got now? Do you want insurance to keep it that way, and if so what are you willing to spend?
