O.K. move over Dr. Condello. Got a brainstorm the other day. (Actually I'm askin for feedback on this one too).

I'm going to try and put in at least one broodstock pond, hopefully two before next spring. Only about 20 by 40 feet each max depth maybe 4 feet sloping to one end with a scooped out area for easy draining and capture of production. One for planting broostock gills and the other for broodstock yellow perch to produce them myself.

O.K. here's the idea I had to keep fresh water flowing in and out using gravity only. Both ponds will be next to my .62 acre pond, which from April to November receives a continous flow of water which originates from my trout pond before running through one more pond into the.62 acre pond. I'm thinking I can run a 4 inch PVC pipe at a downward angle to the small 20 by 40 pond from the .62 acre pond. It will be placed just below the water line in the big pond. This will bring in fresh water and of course would be screened to keep other fish out. I could also put a gate valve on it to control flow. On the other end of the 20 by 40 pond will be another 4 inch PVC pipe, this time at an angle down towards the .62 acre pond for an outflow of water. Both pipes working in tandem would allow a continous flow of water to move back and forth which would have obvious benefits to the pond. Typically the .62 acre pond has gin clear water of excellent quality since it's orginally well water.

I don't see why this wouldn't work. But of course while the fry are too small to keep out of screening there would be no flow in and out to keep them in.

Thoughts?

The 6 inch flow pipe to the .62 acre pond from an upstream pond can't be reasoally tapped into since it's buried so deep, and being corrugated drainage pipe isn't easily tied into with other piping.

Man, you got it BAD!!!

You're starting to think more and more like me.

If you have fry movement into a little pond like this it would still be easy to drain it real quick with the transfer pump to start again if necessary. I'm all about ease of draining for new ponds.

I just haven't figured out yet how you're going to get water to flow downhill both into and out of the same pond. Maybe I'm just not visualizing it correctly.

I am confused, too. Can you ellaborate on this, Cecil?

I assume you are describing the set up for 1 broodstock pond. If you do 2 , make the high one for YP as it should be cooler being next to the big pond. Make it the width of your seine for ease of capture.

Yes I've got it bad! And it will only get worse over the long winter! I've had it bad ever since my dream was to be able to keep trout in a pond year around! But I guess there are worse addictions.

Here's a diagram that may help:

(sorry Cecil, you didn't deserve that)

Could you elaborate? I have a thick skin. I think I know what the pic is saying but I'm not sure.

Edit:

Oh I get it! You're saying I'm trying to get water to flow up hill. Not so!

Joking aside, I can see how you could fill the small pond from the big one but I don't see how gravity could do both. Without a pump the levels of the two ponds would find the same level and then there wouldn't be any flow. Do you need water exchange?

Ah but if the inflow pipe was angled downward not only does the water have to flow in, the outflow pipe if set at enough of downward angle will flow out. Yes, there is an equalibrium met, but it would be a continuous flow. There is also a continuous flow coming into the big pohd from another source. Flow coming in to the big pond is manny times that of the pond inflow and outflow. Outflow from the big pond can also be controlled.



Water exchange allows higher carrying capacity and keeps the small pond from getting stagnant. If the phytoplankton bloom starts getting out of hand frssh water would eleviate this.

I guess I'll have to prove it you. Or I will end up proving myself wrong. Worst case scenario... easy to fill, but a pump needed ocassionally to exchange water.

Ponds on property and proposed two ponds. They may end up side by side though.

For gravity to move water there has to be a difference in the levels. Once the small pond fills, the outflow from the big pond will push on both pipes equally so the water won't move, I think.

You "think?!" Ah hah! So you're not sure anymore!

Think about this: If the ouflow pipe was gong down hill, water would flow out once the level reaches the pipe would it not? What's the difference if it is going down hill into the big pond?

So why aren't any of the other heavy weights chiming in? Maybe they are embarassed for me?

Water will move on a level surface. If you don't believe me pour water in a pipe that is laying on a level surface. It will move in the pipe!

The water moves on a level surface when you first put it there, but once it flattens out it stops moving. "I think" that's exactly what will happen in your small pond.

If you eliminated your inflow pipe and raised the big pond level, the water would simply flow up the outflow pipe until the levels equaled. The same will be true even with the inflow pipe installed. As the big pond fills the water will move into the small pond through both pipes. "I think".

I'm no heavyweight when it comes to physics and hydrology, but I'd think you could run an experiment by building two tiny ponds in the dirt in your backyard and use two straws to represent the PVC.

I just think that if you have two ponds connected with two PVC pipes, that you essentially just have one pond with a small landbridge between them. I don't understand how water would circulate between them any more than water circulates naturally in a single body of water.

But if there is more water behind it, it will continue to flow will it not?

Lets say there was a hole in the bottom of the pond. Would it not exit the pond? Isn't that the same as having a pipe exiting the pond at a downward angle? And wouldn't water continue to flow in as long as the water level in the big pond came up to the intake pipe?

I'm enjoying this even if there is a good chance I'm wrong.

It won't work, Cecil. You can't get water to flow downhill both ways.

Unless you get old enough to be like my Grandpa. He walked 6 miles to school and back, uphill both ways.












It would probably help if the water between the big pond and the brood ponds had to flow through the snow.

Excellent idea to do the brood ponds, though. You'll just have to figure out a way to flow a little water through them. Maybe garden hoses, in season?

I had some extra time on my hands, so I built a scaled down model of Cecil's concept. Unfortunately, I am having problems downloading the pics to the computer. Luckily, I have enlisted the help of my wife and she is working on it as I type. I will let you know the results shortly.

Here is what I did:

The two cups represent the big pond and the main pond and the black pipe represents the drain pipes.




I started off filling both cups with water to equal levels and then proceeded to top off the cup on the right (main pond) with purple gatorade to see if I could get one way flow. This represented flow from the well.



I could definately get one way flow between the "ponds".



Here is the same thing, except using red wine as a pigment (darker color).




I then equalized the water levels and used red wine as a pigment on the "brood pond" (left cup) and let a continuios flow of water (well) into the right cup (main pond) to see if I could get a two way flow going.




I could not. As pressure would equalize, it would only allow flow from the "main pond", since it had a continuios flow and a higher water level.




As soon as I stopped the "well flow" I could get a little reverse flow action from the "brood pond".



Hope this helps, Cecil.

Good thing you didn't use beer, especially Corona.

O.K. I guys I think you're right. I sure appreciate you taking the time to do the experiment BBjr.! That's what I like about this site! Lots of heads come to the drawing board!

I think I will have to dig down to the main pipe that flows into the big pond. Put a 'Y' or a 'T' in -- although this drainage pipe isn't the best for that, and that will make it possible to flow water to each pond that way. The original source (pond behind the house) is much higher than this level so there is plenty of gravity force. So much so that I can get the water to flow up vertically a couple of feet where it enters the main pond.

Well done, bbjr!

i havent both laughed and admired a young pondboss member so much in a long time......kudos bbjr.....
>
>
>
>
>
and welcome to the GSA...

Poor Cecil, I know how you feel.

I've been following all this and it is interesting but makes my punny head hurt.

During the drought my pond got down to the water table which is pretty low for the pond, but about where the water table is even during wet years, then never went lower. The evaporation was made up by the surrounding water table still being at that level. This happened two years in a row.

Now if I pumped water out at a sustainable level into a container that could hold water I could have water in that container at the level of full pool and the pond wouldn't go down either unless I pumped out so much I reduced the level of the water table. But if I just pumped water from the bottom of my pond into the air and let it fall back into the pond the pond level wouldn't go up.

What if I pumped the water into the container and let it over flow back into the pond. Could I start filling the pond back up if I didn't pump so much water as to reduce the seepage of the surrounding water table back into the pond? (The water table around here is pretty constant for a very expansive area and it would take a lot more water than what it would take to fill up my pond to reduce the water table.) I think not, but can't form the logic of why not.

Capillary action is confusing, takes a better mind than mine.

Good luck Cecil, I see what you are saying, but something says it will form an equilibrium and just all flatten out. Like my situtation I can't form the logic, just the feeling.

But otherwise a good idea and at worse a pump can fix it all.

Since you can only pump approximately 50% more water instead of doubling your well to 90 gpm do you think you can still double your pond production by some conservation methods.

BTW the way I emailed your ice fishing art piece to my wife. She is a photographer and love it. I had to copy and send her the whole post on how you made the ice and snow. She'd love to have something like that big enough to put little kids on for a prop. She sends you her compliments.

CB1, Now you know why I suggested (off forum) to use valves to divert flow from the inlet pipe to each spawning/fry pond. They make couplings for corregated drain pipe to smooth wall PVC drain pipe. They also now make smooth wall corregated drain pipe. Diversion valves could be as simple as surface access ports cut into the pipes from above and plugs used to reroute the flows. Since your flow pipes are not real deep below the ground surface, surface access ports could be located inside buried tubs, buckets or small barrels, each with lids for easy access.

Bill,

I've already done that with the back ponds. I can move water anywhere I want back there or even divide it between ponds. But it's a little easier when you install that stuff while you are laying the pipe.

One thing to keep in mind about all that drainage pipe, smooth drainage pipe, PVC, etc. etc. It's all different diameters even if they say it's the same. Not always easy to patch them together. I know from experience!