I've lost my previous post on this and couldn't find it. Still not settled.

Basically, I know someone who has a 2 - 3 acre pond which they use for drinking water. They don't want fish in it - except for maybe a very few to help control other critters and to eat any undesired fish that might get in it. I had thought about the HSB; but I don't think he wants to feed them regularly and they would have to dine on whatever they could find. We have discussed LMB of one sex. The obvious concern with that is judging sex. Recently, I decided that maybe some SMB might be the answer with the thought that they might do a good job controlling frogs and other critters, I could catch and transfer lots of them, and we could add a tiger musky or two to control their numbers if they really got out of control. He really doesn't want it to be a fishing pond. I don't think he is really sold on the SMB theory and is not convinced that it'd be safe for grandkids near the water if musky are put in it. What are your recommendations?

P.S. I was told today by someone bankfishing over the weekend beneath a big local lake. Someone near them caught a huge musky (sounds like could have been state record), drug it up on the bank, and hit it repeatedly on the head with a big rock complaining about gars and muskies ruining the fishing...

How about LMB only? The stunted little ones will eat bugs, etc., and the few big ones can handle frogs and other large intrusions.

I don't ever recall hearing LMB interfering with swimmers. Has anyone else?

muskies are some of the best fishing in North America, IMHO. Unfortunately, I hear the same thing on the Detroit River. the walleye fisherman complain every once in a while when their run of an occasional 18 inch walleye gets interrupted by a 35 inch, big shouldered muskie that takes them 20 minutes to land!

I don't think an SMB can come close to controlling things and eating frogs like a LMB.

I think I would go with hybrid bluegill. They will reproduce but at a lower rate.

I know this isn't your pond Rangersedge, but I don't get the logic of this. Virtually every reservoir in California has fish in it. I'll bet most folks that live in cities are drinking water that fish have swam in (or spawned in ).

For the first couple of years that we owned our property we used the pond as drinking water. The trick is to design and build a good water filtration/sterilization system. We home built one using three stages of filtration: the first was a ultra small micron cotton filter, the second was a charcoal filter and the third was a UV sterilization system. It all ran on 12 volt. It's the bacteria in water that will cause you problems - that can be there whether or not you have fish.

As as fish what about a RES only pond. They would eat plenty of bugs wouldn't they? And perhaps not overpopulate as fast? I don't know I'm just throwing out ideas.

Hey how about Georgia Giants? They could grow to 6 or 7 pounds!

Sorry I'll go back to my corner now.

Chicago has a big reservior for drinking water - Lake Michigan!

No fish means lots of mosquitoes.

I know. Not my pond or decision. If it were, it'd already be stocked with fish.

As it is, I think the person has decided to put in ONE largemouth bass and ONE bluegill.

Thanks for all the advice.

The DC Metro area gets much of its drinking water from the Potomac River... Makes you feel queasy!

Kind of a lonely pond eh? hahaha.

To each his own. I'm interested to see how well those fish do. That BG could get pretty big.