A question for BC, BC, CB1, et al.

I'm pretty sure this youngish BG is a male. Does he appear to be sexually immature or mature?

I'm wondering if my BG are saving it until they're older, as I would prefer.

Beautiful fish . Did a slight squeeze of the urogenital area have any results. Our male BG are thick as thieves on the beds all going in circles. It is after all the full moon in April. They started preparing the beds earlier this week and the females are just off the beds in slightly deeper water. It is the magic moment and may have started last night. To be honest I got out the last PB issue and went through the chart which resulted in a mixed answer from this pic.

I will not make a comment as I believe Bruce and Bill Cody or much more qualified to answer your question. I did so little in that article in Pond Boss I'm not even sure why my name was even on the article.

I will say one thing though, until they go on the beds even an expert would probably hestiate to make a 100 percent judgement.

I have fish that look EXACTLY like the one in your picture but they were 8 1/2 inches last fall.

What kind of water clarity do you have Theo? Is it murky right now? The reason I ask is due to the lightness of the fish.

Theo, Firstly, nice photo.

To me this appears to be a late maturing male and currently immature. At least it would be classed as one in a normal population that included bigger sexually mature dominant males. Based on what I know about your pond, I would not consider it a "Sneaker" or "Satellite" male. More about that topic in the Jul-Aug PBoss mag article about raising Behemoth Bluegills. In the May-Jun Bluegill article by Cody, Condello, Baird there will be a Plate showing several males that look very similar to your fish. Your fish pictured may or may not spawn in June depending on the dominant influence of other larger male bgill. There is still 6 weeks for him to "prepare" or develop more male characters for courtship and spawning. If this is one of the largest males in your pond then it will definately be on a bed in June. Otherwise it may wait till next year when it is 8"+ and can better compete with existing larger males.

If I caught this fish it would go into a cage for rearing until it showed more definate signs of being a male before it was stocked into a all male bgill pond. It looks healthy and to me it looks like a good candidate for the behemoth 2 lb status. But a mistake in gender for an all male bgill pond produces lots of small mixed sex bgill. Not the best situation if you are wanting all male bgill.

Note to those interested. The PBoss editor has decided that the Behemoth Bluegill article by Cody, Condello & Baird is going to be a three part article. Third part will focus on male BG management and will be in the July- August PBoss.

Thanks guys, glad for your input.

I owe the photo quality to my wife, who hasn't found a good place to hide her digital camera yet.

Eric:

There was no evidence of milt and 100% guaranteed no eggs. My inexperienced abdominal exploratory revealed no sign of gametes (eggs I don't think I would have missed, milt???).

Cecil:

Water is indeed pretty murky, from recent heavy rain and wind. This boy was also in a fish keep for 1/2 hour and a bucket with pond water for 45 minutes or so before the picture was taken; that may have affected his coloration as I remember him being darker when caught.

Bill:

My little buddy above isn't going to be developing into much except part of supper, hopefully sometime soon (he needs more friends in the freezer first). Yesterday was the first day I caught any Lepomis this year, but there should be (much) larger BG present. This BG is defeinitely NOT one of the original stockers; my best guess is he is from the first good, solid BG spawn in Spring 2004 (I might have had BG spawn in late 2003, but am only sure of a late RES spawn that year). So I believe him to be 2 years old, with a Father, many Uncles, and at least some brothers/cousins who've got some size on him.

Definitely a male.

Probably a late maturing fish.

Note the black dots anterior to the spiny dorsal. Only see that on a male. Also the top of the ear tab has that tiny little upturn that you don't see on females. If you trace the eartab on a female it almost always drops down from the upper point of the crescent.

Theo, I was wondering about the color of his eye. I could not figure out if it was due to the camera and lighting or its condition for the picture, it was probably dead, correct?

Very nearly dead, Bill; he was still moving a little, but I would say he was past the point of no return.

Here's one that I caught out of the pond yesterday. The picture was taken immediately after it was caught. So this is a male? The ear tab is short, has some black spots, but the color is pretty bland.

Ryan:

For my money, that is a very nice female BG.

By 10" in length, secondary sexual characteristics should be very prominant (per Dr. FrankenBruce) That is (to me) a female-length eartab, and I do not see the black-tipped scales in the "shoulder" area (between the eartab and the front of the dorsal fin) that are quite visible in smaller but mature male BG.

Now, let's see what the experts think!

Ryan's looks like a very nice female, one to keep in the pond. Theo, I can appreciate Bill's suggestion that your late maturing male in great body condition may have been very large one day. It would have had a while to bulk up before beginning the rigors of courtship.

I'm going with you guys on being a female. She looks spawned out and black tips in the shoulder area very faint if there at all. Theo, have your gills spawned yet? I haven't seen any nests but the water is high and there's so much algae right now it's hard to tell.

I can't tell for sure, my water is normally not clear enough to see the beds and has been cloudier than usual the last couple of weeks due to wind & rain. They should be about ready, I think. Saturday there was one hole where I kept pulling out (females) big enough to spawn - maybe I found the ladies room and they were all powdering their noses to get pretty for the boys. OTOH I found no evidence of eggs, either pre- or post-mortum.

We caught a couple of 9" HBG with broad shoulders. They looked ready to spawn by my uneducated eye, bright colors and fat bellies. The HBG are supposed to be male, maybe I have a pond full of cross-dressers. I haven't introduced any to the peanut oil aquarium yet but the day is near.

Even the most sexist BGxGSF crosses are supposed to have about 3% females.

Peanut Oil ... MMMMMM!

Here is a good one for all to think about.

A big-10in. female colored/traits lepomis -- no male BG fin spot - no male BG black scale edges - no visible bars - light colored gular/stomach area - small ear tab - no eggs apparent (no fat stomach) prior to spawn -- hmmm mouth looks a little fat/large (hook damage) but jaw does not extend back to near eye - hmmm pond also has HBG (96 %+- males) that are big - no yellow on fins - crazy data on different looks/types of HBG.

Question - has anyone seen (or seen a report/data) on what a female HBG (3 %) looks like ? I have not nor have I seen it written about. Not saying this is one ( my guess is no) .. but hmmm ! I may need to review some material to see if it can be ruled out. What about a female backcross BG X HBG (still don't know if that is possible) and % - same question.

Ryan's fish looks pretty pure bgill and a female to me. Although the opercle is raised and you cannot see the complete gill flap. Very little if any GS genes in this fish. For Cincinnati area this is still too early for a bgill spawn. Bass should be in early to mid stages of the spring spawn. Bgill should not be on the beds in southern Ohio for at least 2-3 weeks yet.

Bill if they are 20 days out from spawning should they be having visible egg development (fatness) yet? I think it is a female BG . The point was to see if anyone has seen or can describe a female HBG and to have folks think about what to look for (to those who have not read the PB bluegill articles - you should do so) in terms of iding BG and other lepomis male and female.

Ewest, I tried to find the pics you posted a while back of GSF hybrids. One near the bottom looked as though it could have been a female hybrid. Couldn't find the thread.

BM :

I am sorry to not get to this quicker. This forum is getting so busy it is hard to see all the posts. At 2 and 3 pages of active topics listed a day it is easy to lose track. Here is the link to the thread you ask about.

http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000439;p=1#000000

Yessir, Ewest, busy indeed. Are you on the payroll yet? Sorry, I could have found this, but thought it was longer ago than March. I was thinking the pic of the one in the grass may have been female, but now look for the size of gill flap. Everything else could be consistent with a female. What do you think? I would also like to see pic of a known female. Maybe in ML's pond in a couple of months.

Ewest,
Time to start looking for an assistant

The pond was built in late 2003 and BG were stocked at that time. 25 2-3" HBG were stocked in March 2004 so there is no way the picture could be anything but pure BG. The HBG do differ in size from 6" to 9" but all exhibit very bright colors. I'm located in Springfield, OH which is more Central/Western but the DNR calls it Southwest which was misleading. So the spawn is at least a month away relying on Bill's input. With the 75 degree weather this past week I may have been getting a case of Spring fever. Back to Ohio reality today...45 Deg. and rainy

Ryan - Yes a few cooler days this week will keep water temps in the low 60's. It will take a few weeks of stable warm water temps in the high 60's low 70's for final egg development of bgills. In the mean time the males need about 4-6 days to complete nest construction.

I agree with Bill based on prior research. It should take about 21 days for the female BG to develop eggs to full ripeness from the time she is exposed to the required photoperiod ( 14 hrs of light in studies)and the right stabilized temps. ( 68 F and above as I recall). I would also guess that there could be some local adaptation to these within a minor range.

Maybe the post spawn/deflated belly I observed was just stretch marks

I thought the belly looked pretty deflated, too Ryan. Very strange.

I think it is very likely that the female had a "deflated belly" because it was skinny and under weight with no fat reserves i.e. below standard weight. This fish looks typical of a bluegill that is not getting enough to eat either due to not enough food items present or from too much competition from other similiar sized fish.

That may be the case Bill. I just started feeding again on April 12. The HBG and 2"-3" BG dominate the feeding area. The HBG look obese to me so I thought I was feeding enough. I'll get a pic of one if I can catch one.

I have green water where my fingers disappear when I get elbow deep. 225 BG stocked in Fall of 2003 and Spring '04. 25 HBG stocked Spring '04. I am feeding about 2 pounds of feed per day seasonally.

This one, I think is mature:


I caught him Friday night and extremely excited as he has the best set of shoulders I have seen come out of my pond. Another 7.5" BG I took at the same time only weighed 5 Oz. at cleaning; I think this guy was considerably heavier. The only fish I have been in a bigger hurry to return to the pond was our one and only HSB.

I'm glad I took the picture, or else this "Baby Bull" BG would have already grown to 10" in my memory! Now if I can just super-size him.

Theo, that is one hunk of a baby BG. Has Bruce been peddling his steroids?

Theo, This is an obvious male despite the pale body color. Note his numerous darkened nape scales and larger squarish opercle flap. I think his body color will darken as June spawning date gets closer. Where did you get your original stock of bgill; Jones' FH?

BC:

Yes, they were from Jones.

BM:

Don't ask, don't tell . And don't do like Barry Bonds and write a book.

These three pics are of a HBG, looks very male to me, flipped him over to let the experts see. He looks well fed to me.




On this standard though, it has a longer ear, none of the obvious black specks on the nape. I flipped it over and took the pic when my wife walked over and accused me of making fish porn. Hopefully this proves usefull to someone making an all male BG pond. I'll let the experts decide.



I think this is another female?

Great Pics, Ryan.

My takes are
1. Male HBG
2. Probably Female BG (least sure on this one, but hard to believe more secondary male characteristics like blackspotted scales wouldn't show up on a fish that size)
3. Female BG
but I'm interested in what the BC/CB1 fish Gynecologist types have to say.

Thanks Ryan for the pics and for adding the top one to the other thread on HBG !

1. Male HBG

2. Female BG but note the fin colors.

3. Female BG but note the fin colors.

Both the female BG and the one on pg 1 of thread (all from Ryan's pond) have yellow and dark tails/fins. Ours do not have this coloring (excluding pectorial fins). The PB articles on iding male/female BG (you really should read them if you have not) caution us about the need to look at a number of fish from a pond to pick up on local adaptations in color. This may be an example of those differences between Ryan's pond and mine ( yellow and dark tails/fins). Ours have the dark/gray/green colors of Theo's fish in this thread and no yellow on fins/tail.

1. HBG, can't tell the sex. Could it be carrying eggs?? Obviously the vast majority are males. This would be a very interesting fish to do a "procedure" to, in order to evaluate.

2. Male bluegill. Just give him about three more weeks and the colors will become obvious. Certainty rating: 95+ percent. Was the water stained at all that the fish came from?

3. Female bluegill. This isn't a slam dunk. I'd like to see the other side of the fish, but given the photo I'm thinking probably female. Certainty rating: 80 percent.

I basically agree with Bruce's comments. Although for Fish #2 I would not stock this into an all male pond. Too much room (even 5%) for doubt in my opinion. This fish is around 10" long and should by now have at least a couple dark nape scales. It should also have at least a little darkness in the gular area. I have sometimes seen some large female bgill (9"+) with fairly large gill flaps similar to that the No 2 fish. I would want to see some males from this pond before I put any money on if this fish is male or female. I like to be 100% when stocking all male bgill. That why I have no BG offspring so far in my all male BG pond.

The last (No.3) fish's coloration looks to me a little more like a female than fish No 2. However the gill flap is at an angle and not in a good view due to the gill being partially open.

Agreed. I'd be way too nervous to put the #2 fish into an all male pond. It's gotta be closer to 100% than that one is. I actually think I can see a dark fleck or two on the nape.

Bill is definitely correct that in the case of slowly maturing or non-dominant males it would be better to see this fish in the context of other fish from the same pond.

I have one pond that I put all of the ninety-five percenters in and haven't had an accident yet. It will happen eventually though.

Not exactly on the subject, stemming from the previous "deflated" BG, based on the above pictures do you think I am underfeeding or are the other fish outcompeting the BG?

Ryan, your BG & HBG are all stunted, underfed runts . It would be to your advantage, nay, it is your duty as Pondmeister to remove every last one of them ...

... and send them to me, because I would love to have sunfish like that in my pond.

Those are '04 stockers, right? If that's correct (or even if they're a little older than that), then their growth has IMHO been excellent. You have demonstrated both good fish managing and fish catching abilities, at least one of which is greatly in excess of my own. I have seen pictures of a few better looking BG (so don't pout, Dr. Frankenbruce!), but I think your bream rate an "A' or "A-" and are the kind of sunfish most of us would be happy to have. After another few years of growth like that, they should challenge big BG almost anywhere.

Those are '04 stockers, right? If that's correct (or even if they're a little older than that), then their growth has IMHO been excellent.

Theo, that's the confusing part to me. With that growth rate, and the deflated belly, this condition must have just occurred recently.

All the rest of the fish Ryan posted looked ok other than the one. Don't draw to many conclusions from one fish but it is as the male (?) BG and the females look close to the same and are all the same size and big.

BM:

My RW is high, according to the Gubmint. Now, if I don't eat for a while, my belly TELLS me it's deflated. If I don't eat for long enough, it actually would be. But it takes too darn long for my RW to drop.

So I agree any belly deflation would probably have been a recent occurence.

I am happy with the growth. There is a chance that some of the BG are from the October 2003 stocking. Spent yesterday evening with my 4 year old niece and 7 year old nephew. I took a pole but never got a cast in. They caught a toad, my sleeve, my niece's jacket, and several 3-4" trophies. I guess size is in the eye of the bluegill-holder

Bruce (and Bill Cody):

I just retrieved my March/April 2006 issue of Pond Boss from two talented coworkers that both read and fish, and have been looking at the pictures of Ryan's #2 wrt the 7 rules of sexing BG. Other than seeing a hint of black tipped scales, can you eleborate why you sex #2 as Male with 95% certainty?

To my untrained eye, the opercule appears kind of an intermediate length and coloration does not approach the urogenital pore very closely (although when judged for both these traits, I think it looks "more male" than Ryan's #3).

Sometimes when you've looked at thousands upon thousands upon thousands of bluegill, and cut open just about as many, you'll start to go a little beyond the rules and just "know" what a fish is. I know that's not terribly useful, but the second I saw that fish I just knew it was a male.

Here's my best description of why that I can quantify:

1. The breast color of a female like this will look yellower. Males that have yet to attain spawning color, or come from turbid waters have a hint of burgundy like this one does.

2. The ear tab on a female "drops" as soon as it heads posteriorly from the superior attachment. Male ear tabs head upwards or rearwards in the case of a non-dominant or immature fish. The female eartab looks like a crescent moon, while the males can be more of a lobe.

3. This fish meets the classic criteria of a fish that is not ready to be the top nesting dog in his pond, but you'd be surprised how quickly that tab will grow when his time comes. This fish's tab could look quite a bit different in a few weeks.

4. I think the best description of my certainty stems at least as much from the fact that this fish exhibits no female characteristics as it does from the fact that it looks like a male. Remember that males mimic females a lot more than females mimicing males.

5. The urogenital pore coloration could be currently absent for the same reason that the other colors are all washed out. It could be turbid water, immaturity or even an individual quirk that makes this fish so pale, but he looks truly healthy and with a lot of potential to be a trophy?

Does this help, or muddy the waters further?

BTW, on the third fish, the ear tab is either damaged or partially folded--that's why I wanted to see the other side.

Thanks for the expert explanation, Bruce.

I understand "feeling" that something is what it is, without having words much involved. I used to have a Program Manager who said that after ten years, he could smell the horse manure in any tech writing I had done.

Theo, The photos of immature males and mature females in Part II of Behemoth Bluegill may help "shed some more light" in what Bruce is saying about the features of the male in Ryan's fish #2. Again I agree with all of Bruce's comments. I can not add much else to Bruce's good explanation. Our experiences with male bgill are very similar. I guess that is why we are coauthors with Cecil on the male BG article.

Bill and Bruce :



I have read both parts 1 and 2 of the BG articles several times and I am fairly sure Theo has also. I had them both out when I looked at Ryan's fish. WRT fish 2 I missed the size of the earflap (did not pay enough attention - uggh) but other than that I see no black/dark tipped scales , gular area looks female , as does urogenital area, and other pic indicates females larger than this and colored like this in the pond. I see no hint of burgundy . Ryan indicates plankton bloom and algae and bright colors on HBG no indication of muddy/ turbid water. If Theo and I ( Ryan missed also) are having this much trouble with the help of the articles what does that say wrt those of us, other than you guys, if we were to try a male only pond or to need to be able to make reliable sex determinations on BG. I will try to take some pics this weekend and post them for round 2.

Grasshopper...Grasp the pebble from my hand.

Just because Bill and I are 95% sure doesn't mean that a newbie to this sort of thing would be any more than 51%. Be assured that by reading the article and being selective, there will be those fish that are 100% sure to everybody.

Honestly, I'll bet that if I sorted through 1,000 randomly captured bluegill (both sexes) over 8 inches there would be 400 or so that I'd be sure enough to stock in an all male pond, and I'll bet there would be at least 300 out of that thousand that a person who read the article would be certain of. This fish is one of the 20% or so of 8+ inch males that I probably wouldn't "pull the trigger" on to put in the all male pond.

The burgundy is there. See the burgundy, be the burgundy.

It is, what burgundy is, right before it turns white.

Keep in mind also that in mystery fish, such as this, that the eartab trumps the vague coloration issues. Kind of like thinking that you may have just caught a sauger, but the fish has a big white spot on the base of it's tail, making it a walleye--or at the very least a saugeye.

...and two other things while I'm at it. Fish are a lot easier to ID in person than they are in a photo. Also you've seen so many humans that you may look, and in an instant say "male", even if he's got long hair, earrings and a kilt.

All of the big bull BG I have caught in surrounding lakes have exhibited what I would consider unquestionable male traits, like the magazine pics. Big earflaps, bright colors, differences as significant as between peacocks and peahens. Most of the big bulls I have caught while they were on their nests (I think) in late spring dragging tiny jigs on the bottom in 7' of water off of rocky banks with no vegetation. The one outstanding difference in how I manage my pond compared to most others on this forum is the type of feed I use. I am feeding 42% protein all plant based pellets. No fish meal or animal by-products. The trout I have purchased raised on this feed look like every rainbow I've caught from the Mad River in Ohio to the Obey below Dale Hollow's dam in Tennessee. Would a feed designed for trout be the cause of lack of coloring in the male BG?

No way, master Bruce - last time I tried that, I got a boot to the head! :p

Ryan :

I don't think the feed you are using would have an effect on coloration under your circumstances. The feed I use, as best I understand, is like yours wrt not having fish meal or animal by products although it is not 42 %.

Bruce it is good to know that with all the BG I have observed and read about including your great articles I can tell male from female about as well as flipping a coin (60% of the time). :p Just kidding. As you , Bill and Ryan note the obvious males and females (probably 65% of the population)are no problem. It is the young ones and the sneekers and cuckholders that are hard to id. I am not trying a male only pond so the if in doubt hold them out process will not help rid the pond of lesser fish and sneekers and cuckholders. Thanks for the help. Any more tips ?

Another question about fish 2. It like the others was stocked at the same time. It is just as big as the other males of the same age and is in good condition. Some females in this pond are also that big. Why would it not have dominate breeding male colors and ear flap? With those colors any chance its breeding strategy is that of a female impersonator ?

Ewest,

Actually I politely disagree on the feed relation to the coloring. I have had at least one fish farmer tell me bluegills exclusively on pellets are lighter in color than wild bluegills. And I've observed this myself. However I have to admit there could be other factors as in water color and clarity. However if you think about it, it could make sense. Why? Because with less caroten and other pigments in their diet from zooplankton and crustaceans, they may have less to work with than if they are exclusively on pellets.

During the off spawning season my trout are rather pale to silvery in coloration. However if I get a diet that is supplemented with astaxithan (artifical coloring) and feed it for 90 days they do color up and not just the flesh. I also have a text that says I can enhance the red/orange in my brook trout by adding paprika to the feed with fish oil.

CB1 :

I appreciate your thoughts and input and am glad you help keep an eye on these posts. Noted and I will do some checking.

No doubt that fish in aquaculture settings (lots of fish in a small area) where they rely on a large intake of pellets or where something else is added to the pellets, may be effected. Diet can do that just look at flamingos and the pink colors from the food they eat. "The young hatch with white plumage, but the feathers of a flamingo in adulthood range from light pink to bright red, due to carotenoids obtained from their food supply."

Where a wild pond has only supp. feeding I have observed no difference from normal fish food. Plus in Ryan's pond it is not a lack of color but possible male - female color reversal and some minor lightness that is in question. His HBG have vivid colors of males and his females have BG colors and all are eating the same food, a small part of which is pellets. He has been feeding only since April 12 for this year. The question I answered was " is his fish food the cause of his BG colors" not "could food effect any fish colors" . I hope this helps and I will post what I find.

I should add that when it comes to ear tab shape and size, that there is a fairly significant overlap between males and females. If the only factor allowed in making a differential was the eartab, there would be a good number of females that would qualify as possible males, and vice versa. I guess you could call it a rule of thirds, with one-third being strictly male realm, one-third female and one-third that could go either way.

There are also some regional vaviations that I'm beginning to notice. Some of the examples of female ear tabs that I've seen from other regions give the female ear tab a little more of an upturn that I would never see here.

Maybe the true "art" to bluegill ID is just knowing which fish that you don't know, if ya know what I mean.

I just received the mag. today; thanks to the personnel envolved. Much better than mid to last of month.
Now I am really confused. The lower left pic of immature BG males' eartab looks the same as the females on the next page to this untrained eye.
But, I do almost see the lavender color on the lower left picture, and more yellow on the females' breasts.

Ah, yess....Lavender recognition is an early sign of pondsanity.

That lower left fish is from my all male bluegill pond. He's one of the specially selected fish from my little breeding program. That fish is fast growing, and hasn't attained any dominant male characteristics, but I caught what I think is that same fish yesterday morning on a newly built nest. If you were to hold that fish in your hand, you would see the black nape scales (which females never have) and the lavender hue would be more apparent as you turned him a little to catch the sun's reflection. Part of the point of the article, which we may not have stated clearly enough, is that those pictures are to illustrate how similar these immature or late maturing fish are to females. The first part of the article showed the characteristics of the dominant males, which are the ones most people would choose for an all male pond.

Check out figure 3 in the first article. Those are the dominant, easy to ID fish, then look at figure 2 of the second article and those are the toughies.

Burgundy and Lavender. Say what !! They are going to think we are in France talking about wine and spices. :p

Bruce said ""when it comes to ear tab shape and size, that there is a fairly significant overlap between males and females. If the only factor allowed in making a differential was the eartab, there would be a good number of females that would qualify as possible males,..."

This is what I was saying in my earlier post about fish #2 that sometimes a few females will have fairly large ear flaps. Ryans bgill #2 is a very good example of a fish you want to reject for stocking into your all male bgill pond. Stock only the definate and distinctly male looking individuals. Again when selecting male fish you have to see several fish of various sizes from the same pond before you can confidently sort and select the males. If you are a novice and don't see at least two or better three positive male features on a fish REJECT IT. The more practice you get the better and more profecient you will become at sorting males. Some ponds can have a larger percentage of "iffy" bgills than others. This could be due to the strain of bgill or environmental conditions. Obviously I stay away from getting fish from ponds with iffy bgills. I prefer to get my male bgill from sources that have individuals with pronounced or enlarged types of ear flaps. It makes sorting easier. I usually segregate all new males for awhile in a cage while I feed train them and allow male features to develop if the fish are not quite fully mature.

Yes the Figure 1 (Part II) of immature males was to show readers what immature male look like and that the immature males can look a lot like females, especially to novice bgill sorters. Note the article said that you want to select your males from a POPULATION that has late maturing males such as those in figure 1. We did not say that you should stock the type of individuals or sizes of fish that were in figure 1 of Part II. Presence of late maturing males mean you have a population of bgill that are growing relatively fast.

Note to magazine readers. Part 2 of our article left out our Table of Standard Weights for bluegill. I was not given a chance to proof a final copy before it was printed. I will some how try to get it inserted into Part 3 and make it conform to the title.

I did a little fishing last night and caught what I would consider a definite male that I would guess at 7". Long ear flap, definite black tips on the nape and brighter coloring. I wish I would have taken a picture now but the bass were chasing forage all over the place. Right or wrong I think of feeding fish like feeding chickens. A broiler with good genes fed 28% turkey starter will grow to 7lbs in 6 weeks. Feed it 21% Broiler feed and the same chicken might go 6lbs. in the same amount of time. Supplement carotene by adding corn gluten meal, alfalfa hay or marigold flowers and their skin will turn yellow, which roasts to a beautiful golden color. Commercially grown chickens are often dyed yellow to achieve this. Maybe I can get C.B. to do some touch ups

Time for round 3. First were Theo's fish , second were Ryan's fish and now as promised mine. All from one pond in 2 hrs. and only the mid-sized fish. No big ones no little ones. Are they male , female or other ? Some are easy, some are ... well you decide.

1



2



3



4



5



6



7



Colorful aren't they.

Here's a scarey one. Colorwise this bluegill looks like a male to me. But it's a female full of eggs! Apparently it's from a pond with some color to it and possibly the males are even darker?

Eric:
My guesstimates on your BG pics:
1. Male
2. Male
3. Male
4. ??? too much in the shadow for me to judge
5. Female
6. Female or possibly Female Impersonator
7. Male
Yes, very colorful, and indecently large (I hate you :p ). It will be interesting to see how the Yankee experts judge your Coppernose.

Cecil: You have quite a collection of fat bellied fish!

1. catfish bait
2. I almost see lavender
3. stunted female
4. fake
5. normal female
6. sneaker
7. GSF
:p those are real beauties.

Cecil, that's a bruiser of a lady.

That fish did not come out of my ponds gentlemen. It's a taxidermy customer.

1. Male 100%
2. Male 100%
3. I'm jealous. This fish looks immature and is nine inches long? Awesome. In the context of the previous fish I can't tell for sure.
4. Male 90%
5. No idea
6. Female 66.35%
7. Non dominant male 80%

Cecil's fish: Disgusting andromorphic shape-shifting female.

"I'm jealous. This fish looks immature and is nine inches long?"

My thought exactly.

CB1 that is the oddest BG I have seen. Male colors but on the pic I can't see any black scale edges (top is to dark/purple to tell).

My thoughts and recall I saw them as caught.

1 Male at small end of dominance range of 8-14in.

2 Male at small end of dominance range of 8-14in.

3 Immature male

4 Immature male note black fin spot and about 7in. Only one with yellow at fin base -very odd in this pond.

5 Color change artist. Hard to believe but this fish in about 15 seconds changed from color of 7 to as seen and 15 seconds after that was lighter and had a purple hue. My guess is an immature male.

6 Female

7 Like 3 an immature male

Of these I would only be comfortable with 1 and 2 as 100% male. None of these were CNBG from what I saw.

My first impression was that #3 was an immature male, but then I saw #'s 1 and 2 at approximately the same size and it was enough to spook me from committing. If I was forced to guess I'd definitely go male.

Time to revive an old thread. How about this one, guys and gals? Male or female? I have my ideas, but I'm not experienced enough to i.d. all the BG we catch. I'm sure it would be easier on y'all to see more BG from the same pond, but this is the only BG pic I have on the computer so far. It is an estimated 8-8.5".

Our BG are nowhere near the others posted yet, but they're still young and growing. This is a good example of the larger of our mid-range size.

That looks like a really nice, healthy immature male. I am, however, going mostly by color, and it seems like the color in that image isn't coming through quite right.

Male. Real nice fish, btw. The kind I'd like to catch.

David, are those reddish spots on the tail reflections or some kind of sores?

Male BG . Washed out colors happen a lot .

Thanks for the quick responses, guys. I was thinking male as well, so I'm glad to know I'm at least on the right path to making semi-accurate guesses.

Bruce and Eric- I am glad you both mentioned color. First, the camera used is actually a video camera that also takes still pictures. The video footage is great, but still pictures can be a bit fuzzy and are not the camera's strongest feature. I think part of the washed-out color is due to this. I also remember that fish being a bit more washed-out than the other males I caught. The others had the beautiful yellow belly and were much darker bodied.

Bruce- I most definitely defer to your expertise, but I am curious as to why you think the fish is immature. I thought b/c of size alone it should be a mature fish, but then again I noticed that you thought one of Eric's BG on the previous page of this thread was immature, despite its being 9". What features alert you to immaturity? A lack of stark coloration or girth?

Theo- Thanks for the compliment. The pond that this BG came from is actually BG-heavy, so we will be harvesting fish of this size in the fall. Yum yum. I remember those red spots, so they are not reflections. They could very well be sores, but I was hoping they might also be the result of spawning activity. I suppose they are too far forward and high on the fish's tail to be from fanning, or could that still be a possibility? The fish seem to be healthy, and I don't recall noticeable sores on other fish from that pond.

Thanks for the help guys, I'm still learning a ton.

That's the same thought I had when I asked about the sores - that they might be spawning induced. I would score this BG as immature if he was from my pond at this time of year, but as Bruce has pointed out, there is a lot of local variation in appearance.

I would LOVE to have immature BG that nice looking already. Still working on it.

You notice I did not say it was immature. The red spots could be from spawning. That is common but I can't see them well enough to see if it looks like scrapes or red bumps/sores (red sore disease). We all know that BG males can spawn early in life/size in BG heavy ponds. Also that will occur in newly stocked ponds ( those stocked with small BG 1 year ago). I think I knew the ponds status via prior conversations. Is that fish representative of the year class of biggest BG in the pond and is it over 1 year old? If so then in the deep south under those conditions that BG would be a spawner. Also if it is representative and you have BG yoy present then I would also guess it spawned this summer.

Eric, the more I study the picture, the more I am sure that BG was stocked last fall at 4-5". The fish is representative of the year class of the second biggest BG in the pond, since we stocked BG about 6-8 mos. ahead of that class as the first class. I believe that fish should be right at 1 y/o. We definitely have BG yoy present in that pond...too many, in fact, for the LMB to keep up.

The age makes me think it may not have spawned, and it may indeed be immature. On the other hand, the abundance of yoy and the fact that it is a BG-heavy pond makes me think it might have spawned, as you indicated. Very interesting.

A 4-5 in BG from last fall would be capable of spawning this summer (it would be a year old) unless it was suppressed by one or more factors such as lack of spawning areas or many larger male BG or poor condition due to lack of food.

WRT the BG stocked 6 mths earlier what size were those BG when they were stocked? If they were 2in when stocked then they are all the same year class. BG grow quickly , mature and grow old in a hurry down here. A 5 year old BG is old in a southern location while it is just reaching its prime up north. From a 2006 study :


Differences in Population Metrics between Bluegill and Redear

Sunfish: Implications for the Effectiveness of Harvest Restrictions

STEVE M. SAMMONS*

Department of Fisheries, Auburn University, 203 Swingle Hall, Auburn, Alabama 36849, USA

DAVID G. PARTRIDGE

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 109 Hatchery Access Road, Dawson, Georgia 39842, USA

MICHAEL J. MACEINA

Department of Fisheries, Auburn University, 203 Swingle Hall, Auburn, Alabama 36849, USA

North American Journal of Fisheries Management 26:777–787, 2006


Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2006

DOI: 10.1577/M05-159.1


Many studies from northern systems have collected

bluegills as old as age 10–12 (Goedde and Coble 1981;

Otis et al. 1998; Schneider 1999); however, we rarely

collected bluegills older than age 5 in our reservoirs.

Ott et al. (2003) found few bluegills older than age 2 in

a Texas impoundment and attributed this to fast growth

rates and associated high mortality rates. Bluegill

harvest was assumed to be moderate because only 10–

12% of annual effort was directed at bluegills (Ott et al.

2003). However, Belk and Hales (1993) found bluegills

as old as age 9 in a South Carolina power plant

cooling lake where no fishing was allowed, so angling

may affect longevity of bluegills, even at moderate

rates of exploitation (Goedde and Coble 1981). In

contrast to bluegills, redear sunfish older than age 5

were common in our study reservoirs, and fish as old as

age 9 were collected in each reservoir.

Fish longevity has been linked to natural mortality

rates (Hoenig 1983), and the estimated natural

mortality of bluegills was generally greater than that

of redear sunfish in all three reservoirs.

Thanks for the info, Eric. That is an interesting study, seeing as how we have BG, RES, and CNBG in that pond. I wonder what the average age of CNBG in those same study lakes would be. I was surprised by the "few bluegills older than age 2 in a Texas impoundment..."--Wow! Without regard to population dynamics, angling, or predation, I'm guessing that I can expect the RES to live longest, followed by CNBG and BG.

I haven't been present for all stockings (will check with the 'ol man), but to my knowledge all BG were 3-5" with possibly a few 6-7" at the time of their respective stockings. The RES were only 3-4" and have been stocked twice, both times with BG. The CNBG were stocked first at 1-3" along with FH in March of 2006 after pond had been drained, dredged, and refilled, and then CNBG were stocked again between two BG RES/stockings (all rotated in spring/fall). I hope that makes sense.

I "caught" a few RES yoy during primrose raking, so I know they spawned. Given the abundance of BG yoy, it seems like the original BG stockers and the ones stocked with the pictured BG spawned. Interestingly, I have yet to sample CNBG from that pond, but I'd bet they're there. I'd love to sample the BG, RES, and CNBG in one outing someday, if the RES cooperate.

Sorry for the long-winded post...I never imagined our little BG pond would be such a blast!

We think a lot alike. I love those multispecies/same day things.

Last week I fished my pond and caught a 22 inch HSB, 7 inch RES (my first at my pond thanks to Yolkie), 7 inch black crappie, 11 inch yellow perch and 5 bluegill from 9-10 inches as well as a 14 inch smallmouth. I had another day similar to that but now quite as good. That really turns my crank!