Pond Boss Forums POND CONSTRUCTION Creating habitat Is too Much Habitat Possible?

Curious if it's possible to have too much habitat? If one were to cover the entire bottom of their 2 acre pond, for instance, in PVC fish attractors similar to the porcupine fish attractors, could their be a "negative"? I'm trying to create the perfect fish habitat and maximize cover and tend to over due it.

Yes you want roughly 20%

How deep is the pond and how tall is the habitat? What is the structure made of?

I've read that, the 20% advice, but what about 20% makes it ideal and why would it not be good to cover your entire pond with structure? I understand different fish require different habitats but it seems all fish would benefit from cover on the entire pond. Peepaw, I've added a lot of brush piles already and cinder block hotels, but I'm likely going to build some 6-7 foot tall PVC porcupine-like trees among other artificial fish habitat.

Well for one your babies would be able to hide from predators to easily and your pond would over populate and stunt..

Too much cover gives the young fish a lot of places to hide, and makes it harder for the larger fish to get a meal. Fish tend to congregate around cover, so it's easier to find the fish for angling purposes.

The benefit of a lot of pvc structure will be the raw surface area to grow fish food in the form of bio film. I can't see any negative aspect of over 20%. This is just a rule of thumb and not an exact figure. The floating island technology proves the multi faceted benefits of mass amounts of inert surface area to purify the water as well.

If the ultimate goal is to create a self sustaining pond that maximizes potential for fish production and size, we should start by establishing a healthy forage fish environment.

I have never head of a pond that has too many minnows. The biggest source of over crowding is typically the next step up in the food chain (panfish). It seems logical that a large minnow population would increase panfish size and that a suitable panfish balance could be maintained with a combination of predators and habitat.

Sunfish typically require mud or gravel beds for breeding. At that time, they are most vulnerable to predators (and fisherman).

I bet a 50% habitat in a pond could work wonders. Creating structures throughout the pond near spawning beds could provide predators quick access to fish in open water.

Predator population can be influenced by limiting suitable breeding habitat:

Channel catfish prefer hollow structures. Without them, reproduction is reduced.

Northern pike could keep the bass from over populating, but without shallow marsh-like areas for spawning, pike too would be less likely to reproduce. A large amount of structure would also make it difficult for the pike to devastate a whole population.

In my opinion, too many ponds look like mud bottom swimming pools and would benefit from more habitat.

Are you looking to increase your fish population, or increase catch opportunities?

The big ones will have a hard time catching the little ones for dinner if you have too much cover for the little ones to hide in.
Good luck,
Dan

The 20% cover philosophy resulted from research on a BG-LMB fish community with submerged vegetation as habitatcover. Other types of fish communities may benefit from other percentages of bottom cover. The type of cover/habitat, its density, fluffy versus course, the amount, and species involved all may affect the beneficial nature of the cover. Cover is not just fish avoiding predators but also food production - food web potential relating to diversity of habitat. Considering prey and predator behavior the 20% coverage would be close to optimum.

There are potential population consequences that can lead to genetic/adaptation consequences from too much of just about any aspect of pond mgt and that includes specifically too much structure/cover. Read the Cutting Edge material from PB mag.

I suggest reading the structure archive (not just the pics) including the links to cover types and how structure works. Keep in mind (think in 3-D) that the biggest structures are the pond bottom then pond edges and the water column depth , then any weeds/plants and after that all the add ons like rock piles , ditches , brush piles , pvc structures , spawning areas , pallets etc. So the 20% add ons is a good general #. It is critical to understand cover/structure as it relates to your location and goals and use it specifically to match. Each item is a tool to use and a random cover it all approach is not a wise tool selection IMO.

Imagine what must occur in Northern ponds during winter where all the fish must go deep. If there is nowhere to hide, the forage fish and panfish are vulnerable to predators.

I believe this is what typically occurs in ponds. Many pictures posted look like clay bottom swimming pools and posts refer to annually stocking minnows which never survive and spawn.

There are diving videos showing bodies of water where the bottom looks like a moonscape (few places for fish to hide) and others showing structure and habitat that look like a fishing paradise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQdpJ1kSTZA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpiOIx9RD1I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THXRRh-ryfM

Feeding really slows during winter months.. Only the strong survive which in turn helps keep #'s in check and populations under control.. I'm not sure about the annual stocking of minnows you mentioned but it seems any annual stocking would be a waste if part of your 20% of structure didn't in corporate somewhere for your smallest forage to flourish..

In winter fish aren't very active and they feed less. Predators too. By the way, perch and pike are preparing for their spawning in spring and it means less space in stomach because of fish eggs.

Can someone point me to the archives? Is there a separate site, or are they buried down in the forums hiding?

Thanks,

-RFL

It is one of the first topics. I think it is called Frequently Asked Questions.

I think it depends on the species present, and the goals to be met. In four of our ponds, we have a variety of cover and structure present, as these four are typical of a balanced, self-sustaining environment. However, the fifth pond has no cover present whatsoever, and that includes aquatic vegetation. None, zip, nada. This pond is managed in a manner, and with a species, that lends itself more to a non-reproducing, (unbalanced?) put-and-take scenario. This experiment is in its third year, and thus far has worked very well.

There are three porcupine fish attractors, (structure) in this pond, in the hope that it will concentrate the fish for winter ice fishing activities. If it ever gets cold again, we will put that theory to the test.

Here is the archive thread

http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=92463#Post92463

Thanks for that. I missed the 'archives' in the topic title. I was looking for an entire Archives section.

-RFL