I often visit a pond that is on "public" land here in Mexico. It recieves runoff from some fields where I am sure they use some sort of pesticide.
There are actually two ponds right next to each other with a 100 ft strip of land with a road between them. The first one (higher up) seems like more work than it is worth at this stage of the game. The second one (lower down) seems more promising. It has an earth dam with a small concrete dam section. I don't know its depth yet, but due to the slope and the age of the pond (+50 years guessing by trees that have grown on or near the dam), I don't think it it is more than a few feet deep, maybe six feet at the absolute most.
When up there the other day, evening time around five, I noticed there were no birds drinking the water, no tadpoles, no frogs, very few insects in the water and none in the air bothering me either. I thought I saw some fish activity but it was more likely just methane gas bubbles popping up. (which was common) Although it was a bit of a cool eveing here at about 8,000 ft, it seems like there should have been SOME sort of critter activity.
The water was white and the pond seemed to be about 50% covered in what I think is giant duckweed and some sort of grass.
I took some photos for your assesment. I would appreicate your input on what is wrong with the pond, its potential, and what can be done.
The land gently slopes downward toward the SW.
View of upper pond from the road that devides them:
View of lower pond from the same point in the road that devides them:
Close to the edge:
Closeups:
Backside of dam. Notice the large trees.
Harry, the number of plants might be decomposing and sucking out all of the oxygen.
Dave, thank you for your response!
Would it be good to start with pulling out the duckweed? basic dredging of some sort?
Harry, Explain a little better about this pond being on public land? Seems like your hands may be tied from doing certain things, and how much control do you have over it, both in maintenance and other people fishing it.
...by the way, welcome to PONDBOSS !!!!!!!
How deep is it? A piece of line and a weight will tell you a lot. I bet it's very shallow.
If you think there are no fish or none to worry about, you could just nuke the whole thing a couple of times and restock.
I would suck um both dry first cut a 12 foot tunnel between the 2 and make one large pond with a bridge! That was my first thought anyway. But like Fishnchips said if it's public land what really can be done or not done?
Pulling all those weeds that sounds great and all but I been there done that man you just don't realize how hard that is and how many are there! That's a LOT of work specaily for a pond that isn't even yours??
Maybe find out who owns that land? Get some kind of a lease wrote up for a certain amount and tell them you will clean it all up if you have spacific rights to said propertey for certain lease time and amount??
I don't know that I would do all that work and not have anything to show for it?? That's just M.O.
RC
The reproductive rate of duck weed makes manual removal almost impossible. That generally takes successive doses of chemicals.
Wow, great feedback folks.
fish n chips, First off, down here there is a whole different concept for property rights than most folks are used to. This weekend I was able to meet up with some ecology majors at a local university and we'll look into who actually owns the property. For all intents and purposes, the ponds are completely open to the public in a fairly remote area. There doesn't seem to by much interest is stocking them or maintaining them for any purpose other than to prevent excess runoff. (though I did find some dove hunters up there once)
RC51, The area is not level and the ponds are not at the exact same elevation...plus, unless it can be done with manual labor, getting any sort of heavy equipment is going to take an act of congress...remember, this is a 3rd world country.
Bocomo, I was planning on doing just that this weekend but couldn't get back up there. I would say you are probably right...it is probably no more than three feet deep. Will investigate better next time. Have any suggestions for how to measure its depth towrd the middle of the pond? (no boats available)
Dave Davidson1, Thanks for that bit of info about duck week...though I can tell you, manual labor is much more available than any sort of chemical...well, except for some basic stuff like bleach etc.
I have no personal vested interest in this pond other than I know that it is in bad shape, I grew up around ponds and fishing and if it could get back on its feet, I would feel much more at home, which is something distictly lacking in these parts. This is just a personal interest project.
As far as measuring depth, can you use a slip float and some weight? Cast out to where you want to take a measurement, and allow the weight to pull slack line through the float until the 'stop' makes contact and pulls the float into a loaded position. Repeat this process, adjusting the depth stop to a little deeper setting each time, until the weight contacts the bottom before it pulls the float upright. Measure the distance between the stop and the weight, and you'll have a pretty good idea of the depth.
sprkplug, Bingo! That sounds like the right trick for me! Will give it a try next time I am out there. Thanks for the suggetion!
Any other info I should gather next time I am out there? (I just got put on crutches so it make take a few weeks.)
I do what Sparkplug suggested, but use a heavy enough weight so it'll sink the bobber. No questions that way.
I haven't seen a real bobber in years...it'll end up being something a bit more rudimentry...probably a coke bottle.
I haven't seen a real bobber in years...it'll end up being something a bit more rudimentry...probably a coke bottle.
I was thinking more along the lines of this:
vs. this:
I can't speak for the flat four bobber, but that Thill pro series slipper in esshup's photo is my go to in off-the-shelf floats.
Oh my...I see a thread hijacking in the makings.
Okay fellas, I was able to make it back up to the site and have some info for you and some eye candy.
Info: The pond is 6-7ft deep.
Observation #1: When reelingin my rock-on-a-string-with-trash-as-a-float setup to measure the depth, a trail of bubbles followed the rock dragging the bottom of the pond which tells me there are som sort of bubbles on the bottom of the pond. (I observed an obvious delay as they rose to the surface, so it did not have anything to do with the string.)
Observation #2: The island of grass in the third photo circulates around the pond as the wind blows, and seemed to be centered in the deeper part of the pond but does not reach the shore. (but gets within 10 ft of the dam) I would guess that has +10ft long roots that give it quite a bit of working room for it to go around and around in the pond like that.
Observation #3: I also observed what looked like a miniture eel. That's the only sign of life in the water that I have seen:
Depth at the dam 7ft
Depth toward the middle of the pond 6ft
Upper pond on right, lower pond on left:
Eye candy:
View from upper pond of lightining behind a volcano:
Your comments?
Wow, with views like that, who cares if there are fish in the pond. Just sit back and enjoy!!!
From your current photos, it looks like the water is less covered with weeds? I wonder if the rock scraping along the bottom is just releasing trapped air/gasses that's down in the muck. Have you considered taking a water sample to have it tested? How about throwing in a batch of FHM to see if they make it till spring? If they don't live, nothing will.
Is there any signs of the water ever running over the dam. I'm curious if you get flash flood type scenarios that might flush out fish life. Are you sure that's not a giant leech
Fish and chips,
Thanks for the response. Yes the water does look less covered with weeds this time but still is very murky. I also saw more insects this time. There is signs of water running over the dam, we have had quite a bit of rain lately, but I wouldn't be too worried about it being such a rush of water that it would sweep away any fish, it doen't even wash away any dirt. (See photo dead dead weeds in front of a black backpack.)
Yes, I am sure that the rock was releasing trapped gasses...but if it is methane, is that a bad thing? (sign of too much decomposition?)
FHM...For Him Magizine? Former Head Master? sorry...enough of that...Flat Head Minnows?
No, I am not sure it isn't a giant leech...frankly that was the first thing to come to my mind when I saw it. I shot a quick video of it, and it swims like a snake and reminds me of a miniture fresh water eel that I had in an aquariam as a kid. Same size etc...either way, it is a sign of life!
Why do I want fish in the pond? I guess more than anything because it is pretty lonely up there. The most I have seen is an occasional farmer with some livestock (see photo below) or a hunter, and I have always liked watching fish breaking the surface of the water. Fishing would be nice, but not a main interest. I would really like to see the area healthy if I am going to hang around there, get away from the filth in the city.
I just can't get over those great photos your putting up....
Sorry, forgot your new to the lingo.
Bookmark this link, you'll be using it a lot.
http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=92442#Post92442
FNC, thanks for the lingo decoder!
I have done some digging and MIGHT be able to find some FHM here in Meixco to put in this pond, with the owner's permission of course. Question is...how many?
Water sample, this is a possability...is there a US based lab you can reccomend? What am I looking for? (I read something about PH levels in another thread.)
Thanks again!
If you can't find FHM, maybe try gambusia?
Thanks esshup! Truth be told, I do have a local lab with limited abilities...I can ask them what they can test, but it would probably be better if I have an idea of what I am looking for, then ask if they can do it. (If they saw that checklist I think they'd faint.)
There is a dramatic drop in pond weed...is that due to a slight rise in the water level?
There was another section on grass on the other end of the dam, they didn't go anywhere...what am I seeing happen? (I was really surpised that it was seven feet deep in this section!)
Maybe this grass is what turned into the "flotilla" I saw this time around.
All the floating stuff in October looks like FA to me.
That is what I was thinking also Esshup. Looks like what floats on my pond when it breaks loose from the bottom.
Wow what potential! But like so much of Mexico, potential that is likely not going to be realized. Wife and I used to travel a lot in Mexico. So much potential. That could be a couple of really nice ponds with a week or two worth of heavy equipment work.
There may not be any fish in the ponds because none were ever stocked? Unless other ponds/rivers are in the near area, no one may have ever made the effort. Looks like critter life is there so likely fish could live there.
The pesticides from runoff might be a problem but I doubt it. If excessive herbicides likely would not see the weeds and grass around the pond. If insecticides were at lethal levels likely not see the insects in the pond. With the turbidity of the water, I would not be surprised if you did not see fish even if there were some.
Maybe make up a minnow trap or fish trap and throw it in? Some different things on U-tube on how to make traps out of various materials.
Do you know the owner to ask to put in fish? I thought it was public land?
What area Mexico? What city is in the background if you don't mind saying?
Also curious about location.
The 2 big things that I look for are PH and alkilinity. But if you can get a swimming pool test kit, you can come close as a lab can. That would be a good start.
In the past year I have come across some tidbits of information. I don't think they use nearly as much pesticides as I thought. I believe I overlooked the fertilizers are in use.
I ask around and I believe this is "public land" in that it is owned by the local community and individuals exercise their rights to use this public land on an allocated basis. (A common land ownership system used in rural areas of colonial era Mexico.) That said I have been watching for signs of any maintainance at all...yeah, none of that to be had. I think the last maintainance was +20 years ago when they did some repair work to the dam. I see signs of human life, but mostly people cutting wood, farming, etc.
Regardging wild life, I have FINALLY seen some sign of sizable life. Twice I have caught a glimpse of a larger critter (+1 lb) breaking the water near the edge. Might be a turtle or a large frog, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a muskrat.
In the area I have seen a number of field mice and chipmunks in the fields nearby. Other than that, not much. (No deer, raccon tracks, etc) Oh it might be worth mentioning that I last time I was up there I thought I heard a few small frogs singing. I hadn't noticed that before. (Maybe I wasn't holding still for long enough. I was tring to see what was breaking the water like that.)
I would be tempted to see if there are any fish etc but I wouldn't be able to check on the traps with any regularity. As you can tell, I don't get up there as much as I would like.
If you put some bait in the traps it is actually a good thing to check them in about a half hour to an hour. So you could put the trap in and take it back out on the same visit. A slice of bread for bait would tempt any hungry sunfish or if it is a smaller minnow trap, minnows or small sunfish. It does not take fish in the area of the trap long to discover the bait and get to it. Many species of fish are very curious and will come investigate the sound of a trap splashing into the water in their "territory" pretty quickly.
Can you fish it with a line and hook? All I ever seen in Mexico as far as fishing was with mono-filament line, a hook and bare hands. There are some tough fishermen in Mexico with cut up hands to show it.
Dave,
That's Mexico City in the background.
A friend of a friend of mine works in a lab that tests drinking water. So, about a year ago I asked if they could run some basic tests on a sample I brought down.
Roughly translated, this is what I was told:
Bacteria Count Paramiters: 1-5 Good, 6-10 Very Good, 10-20 Excellent
Lower Test Results: 3 (I dudeuce from the hand written notes that this was from on the settled matter in the sample or the low end of the test results, I really can't be sure.)
Upper Test Results: 0 (I think that's pretty bad using the scale above)
Chlorine:
Lower Test Results: 0.78 mg/L
Upper Test Results: 1.67 mg/L
Turbidiity
Lower Test Results: 127 NTU (I don't know what NTU means)
Upper Test Results: 232 NTU
Alcalinity
PH Lower Test Results: 6.59
PH Upper Test Results: 6.77
Alc Lower Test Results: 40
Alc Upper Test Results: 44
How does the chlorine get in there?
.
I hope those water tests from last year indicate something useful. I don't know what I am looking at there. Comments?
I have gathered the materials for a minnow trap and will have that and a nice stale piece of bread ready for the next trip to the ponds.
Good news and bad news.
Bad news first. I went back up to the ponds with a minnnow trap. After 45 mins in the lower pond, I had a trap full of soggy bread. After another 45 mins in the upper pond I caught what I am pretty sure is just a 1" long leach.
Good news. Although it sprinkled a bit, it was a very fine afternoon. Photos to come.
Well at least you know it is probably not a good place to go swimming unless you need some bloodletting done.
I still wonder if the reason there are no fish is because none were ever stocked? It may have been built as a public service for the local livestock producers as a watering hole? Or even as a communal project by ranchers??? Just some guesses.
The water Ph level looks acceptable.
Mexico City is down in a hole so you must be at some elevation. Do you know the approximate elevation of the pond?
I can see why you want to get out of the city is that is where you work. Been there a couple of times and that was more than enough. Way too many people for a country boy.
*correction* Mexico City and the greater area are at 7,500 feet.
I have see onther resivoirs in the greater area that have small finger-sized fish in them, but haven't seen any such critters in this particular area. Though I might find some if I went looking.
I was with some locals up there the other day and thay talked about the idea of stocking it with beta fish because of their oxygen requirements. That said, I know, for a fact, that someone put $2 worth of minnows in there a year ago. There is no sign of them now.
Ok, thanks for the update, that high elevation may make a difference and the experts (of which I'm not one) may be able to help in that aspect.
I remembered staying in an old hotel right in the middle of the city where we could see an old church to our left on the square from the balcony. They talked about everything being built on an old lake bed and that the church (large and all built of stone) had sunken something like 4 feet over the many years. Mexico City being built on an old lake bed (Azetc's I believe?) I made the incorrect assumption the elevation was low. But it is in fact pretty high. Plus you are looking down from the pond so the pond I assume is a fair amount higher?
I'm at a little under 1000 feet above sea level so have no experience with fish at that elevation. Interesting pond you are working with. Keep us posted.
Mexico City is at around 7,000 feet and this pond is around 8,000.
Is there a thread where I can start reading and "Idiots guide" to keeping fish alive? There has got to be some basic theory that I am missing in this pond. (Maybe I am just in the wrong part of the forum)
Have you ever found out if you can get the Fat Head Minnows somewhere? If not, what other cheap baitfish is accessible? You need something to start testing with, something cheap. Perhaps even throw up a picture here to ID what you can get. Up here, if FHM can't live in the water, nothing else can. So it would be a good test there, if you can get them. Put in some cover for them like a dead tree with lots of small branches, and then add spawning structure for them like a pallet in shallow water. See if they make it for a year's cycle. If they don't, then you have to figure it out.
Okay, sounds like a plan. (I did investigate minnows last year, but didn't take a photo.)
The pond is likely shallow and basically a glorified wetlands and looks to be highly eutrophic. Dense algae bloom crashes could cause periodic strong oxygen shortages which would be enhanced by shallow very warm conditions thus causing fish kills.
Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU) is an old standard method.
Here is a link to some examples of water color and how they relate to NTU.
http://www.water.ncsu.edu/watershedss/info/turbid.htmlTurbidity.
Several methods are used to measure turbidity. All of them involve measuring the amount of some type of light that can pass through a standard width of water.
A Formazin Nephelometric Unit (FNU) is similar to a Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU) in that both measure scattered light at 90 degrees from the incident light beam, but the FNU is measured with an infrared light source according to the ISO 7027 method whereas the NTU is measured with a white light according to EPA method 180.1.
Background. From Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TurbidityTurbidity is the cloudiness or haziness of a fluid caused by large numbers of individual particles that are generally invisible to the naked eye, similar to smoke in air. The measurement of turbidity is a key test of water quality.
The propensity of particles to scatter a light beam focused on them is now considered a more meaningful measure of turbidity in water. Turbidity measured this way uses an instrument called a nephelometer with the detector set up to the side of the light beam. More light reaches the detector if there are lots of small particles scattering the source beam than if there are few. The units of turbidity from a calibrated nephelometer are called Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU). To some extent, how much light reflects for a given amount of particulates is dependent upon properties of the particles like their shape, color, and reflectivity. For this reason (and the reason that heavier particles settle quickly and do not contribute to a turbidity reading), a correlation between turbidity and total suspended solids (TSS) is somewhat unique for each location or situation.
Turbidity in lakes, reservoirs, channels, and the ocean can be measured using a Secchi disk. This black and white disk is lowered into the water until it can no longer be seen; the depth (Secchi depth) is then recorded as a measure of the transparency of the water (inversely related to turbidity).
The Secchi disk has the advantages of integrating turbidity over depth (where variable turbidity layers are present), being quick and easy to use, and inexpensive. It can provide a rough indication of the depth of the euphotic zone with a 3-fold division of the Secchi depth, however this cannot be used in shallow waters where the disk can still be seen on the bottom.
An additional device, which may help measuring turbidity in shallow waters is the turbidity tube.[6][7] The turbidity tube condenses water in a graded tube which allows determination of turbidity based on a contrast disk in its bottom, being analogous to the Secchi disk.
Turbidity in air, which causes solar attenuation, is used as a measure of pollution.
Bill, I read you post twice. Seriously good information there. Thank you! Let me see if I can get some useful information on the ponds turbidity. In the center is is 4' deep and 7' at the dam if I remember right. (it's posted above)
FWIW, I have found out that a common local variety of fish called Charal is what was put into the pond.
Since they are native to Mexico, there isn't much written on them in English. So here is the Wikipedia article translated by Google:
CharalI am tracking down FHM now.
They are a type of silverside. If that is what is in the pond you should see them swimming near the surface as they feed. Silversides are normally a topwater type of fish. When predators chase them they will jump 'skip' out of the water avoiding predators. You won't really know for sure what is in the pond until you set a fish trap and catch some. The water quality of the pond does not look good enough for this type of fish to live in the pond. From my reading so far, it appears they thrive in water with pretty good overall water quality, not the stuff in your pictures above.
Limited US Distribution:
http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?SpeciesID=317Picture & drawing. Around 21 species of them in the genus Chirostoma
http://eol.org/pages/16281/overviewDetailed Study:
http://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?pid=S0327-95452006000100018&script=sci_arttextDiet Study:
http://books.google.com/books?id=40DqktQ...oma&f=false
Well, I checked some local suppliers and one said they could get me "charal de burro" which they claimed is a type of FHM. (Sorry, don't really belive them.)
They did have on hand the following carp variants, they said these were the most resiliant they have on hand. (Shown below)
I have seen some minnows/small fish in another location with similar water supply. I am going to try and snag a picture of them...that takes a lot more work. We'll see.
The top picture look like what's called feeder goldfish here, and the bottom picture look like a type of Koi.
For anyone that's interested, this is a quick update on the pond.
It's been a year and there is some nice cattails in the lower pond as well as some other growth that has provided a habitat for a tadpoles (there were about 500-1000 in the shallows) and some frogs. A number of times I have caught a glimpse of something larger in the pond, it might be a large frog or a muskrat. The water is loaded with sediment, but is much freer of top growth.
View of the city heading up to the pond.
Tons of these tiny little fellas on the road up.
I would estimate 500-1000 in this area.
Local fella headed home from a trip up the mountain. The upper pond is in the background right behind the road.
The water is loaded with sediment, but otherwise seems to be quite clear of debris.
Again, a few from the northern edge of the dam for the lower pond.
I heard a frog in there singing...honestly, I haven't heard many frogs in this pond before. This was encouraging.
Again, another nice view from the NW side of the pond looking towards the cloud covered volcanos.
Looking a lot better than before Harry. Thanks for the update. I need to go back and read some of your earler posts to see what fish you ended up with for stocking. Did you put some of the carp/goldfish in?
I can't really say what type of minnows ended up in there, but I haven't seen any sign of them in the past year or so.
Honestly, I can't really say that I have really done that much to actually help to pond...but I am glad to see it is looking better!
