Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Types of fish to choose Keeping Things Simple

The article by Dave Willis posted by Shorty makes an important point. We DO NOT need a prey species for a predator! They young of the predator and the frogs, insects etc. around the lake provide enough prey.

Hopefully, Dave Willis will see this post and comment on it.

If we feed pellets, we don't need live forage at all. Look at the people raising huge male bluegill, catfish, trout or HSB on pellets. I can't think of any reason that LMB and SMB couldn't be added to this list.

If we're willing to actively manage our lakes, our options are much wider than we've even though about so far.

Norm, good point about active management. IMO, this goes to the heart of Todds original question. I doubt that many new pond owners really understand just what that means. Further, due to time, distance and $, not everyone can actively manage. Absentee landowners, like me, can't always get there often enough to do it right. Toss in a few external factors like drought and it gets even tougher. Business and family pressures have given me a pretty good guilt trip regarding my ponds. I wonder how many others are in my situation.

As often said here, it goes back to goals. However, along with goals, a pondowner should also take a realistic look at personal and other constraints. I still prefer a balanced pond (what's that?) but even the standard BG/LMB combination can get out of whack without active and knowledgeable management.

Regarding feeders, I remember an old post by Lusk. He said to only feed about 5 days per week. For good health, fish need natural food.

Dave here is a point about active mgt. that involves 2 of your points.

There is good evidence that BG growth is better using compensatory feeding methods ( my equivalent, like yours via Bob, is feeding 5 on and 2 off). I don't live at the ponds and while they are managed they are not actively managed like Norm's or Bruce's. My timers on the feeders don't allow compensatory feeding (can't set them like that). I would not do so anyway in my situation as the feeding is limited to growout of small fish for release in limited netted areas.

In the larger pond world I manage the ponds much more than most owners ( not more than many on PB). That is changing though as more info and mgt. companies become available. I have not seen nor heard anyone say that there is a method which results in a "good" stock , fish and forget pond.

I get a lot of pond related questions and think I can give some pretty good general answers/advice. I tell people that ponds are like kids. No matter what you do, the results can be unpredictable. However, if nothing is done, I have a pretty good crystal ball.

Dave, you are absolutely right, when we intensively do anything in life, we can do so much more than we ever thought we could.

I'm guessing that I manage our lake less than many people on this forum. We do have two Stren feeders, each to go off for one second in the morning and evening. This doesn't come close to providing all of the food needed and is completely supplemental. After that, I try to add 20% of subadult fish every year. The CC are 5-15 pounds and I will just let them die out to make room for other species. Everything is catch and release and that's all of the management I do.

Back to Todd's question. One form of management is to use only LMB or SMB in a lake. To do this, we harvest small fish (say 10-12 or 14 inches) as panfish. This allows some fish to get bigger and keep the population of smaller fish from stunting. For someone that doesn't or can't manage their lake, this is a very realistic option.

This has turned out to be a great thread! I'm not sure there will be a final word on the subject of small pond fish stocking and management.

Times are a changin'. More folks are drilling wells to keep their ponds full and installing aeration systems and feeders. High protein feed has become readily available by special order. Feedtrained predators are available from some hatcheries. Different types of fish are being produced for pond stocking, i.e. hybrid stripers, tilapia.

With this evolution in pond and lake management comes an evolution of ideas, concepts, and overall understanding.

More specific information regarding specific combinations of different fish species, stocking rates, and management practices should be available in the future. For now, at least we know a lot about raising big largemouth bass, which seems to be the most difficult persuit. So now if we step back and simplify we should be able to take an increased understanding of fishery management and apply it to objectives that are more realistic and easier to manage.

It seems as if production potential in a small pond is directly related to fertility and/or supplemental feeding. Assuming all other potential problems like drought, nuisance vegetation, oxygen concentrations, etc can be managed, we need to develop stocking and fish management guidelines based on fertility and supplemental feeding.

So a small pond with low fertility and no supplemental feeding is to be stocked, consider baitfish with high reproductive potential and predators with low reproductive potential. Fish stocking rates should be relatively low. Then management of the predator population, by harvest or restocking, can have a direct impact on the baitfish population if things go slightly out of balance for whatever reason.

A small pond with significant natural fertility and no supplemental feeding can be stocked with more fish, but otherwise managed as above.

Now, the ability to feed a high protein fish food on a regular basis opens all kinds of possibilities. Consider all feed-trained predators and no baitfish: largemouth bass, hybrid stripers, channel and blue catfish, hybrid bluegill (GGs), plus northern species options, then rainbow trout in Texas winters. Could treat this scenario as a put and take system, with the need to restock advanced fingerlings to insure survival rates in the future.

Consider baitfish options with predators: bluegill, shiners, fatheads, tilapia, shad, mosquito fish, redear, etc.

Consider novelties like trophy bluegill, trophy tilapia, gar, albino catfish.

No doubt that most folks with a single pond will want as much variety as possible. Since we are gaining a better understanding of fishery management on this forum and through personal experience, I believe the possibilities are huge. Kind of like the number of different ways you can have your whataburger.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by overtonfisheries:
[QB]

Now, the ability to feed a high protein fish food on a regular basis opens all kinds of possibilities. Consider all feed-trained predators and no baitfish: largemouth bass, hybrid stripers, channel and blue catfish, hybrid bluegill (GGs), plus northern species options, ....

When I read Todd's quote above , which I agree with, for some reason the first thing that came to mind was one of those wrestling matches on TV where 10 wrestlers go in the ring which is caged off and the last man standing wins.

With all those predators in one pond it would no doubt get interesting.

We have touched on this before, but we are all part of a "new era" of pond management. It would be foolish to throw all the older proven management techniques out the window, but most do not apply "pellet predators", predictable forage spikes & crashes (Tilapia), HSB open water patrols (a.k.a. crappie assassins!) and more. This forum is on the leading edge of new ideas...keep em' comming !

Todd, I agree with you totally. There is no one "right" way but rather, we are developing many different management options. Most of our thinking is based on raising big LMB. In this case, the most important requirement is a good forage base.

Not everyone wants to raise big LMB or other species. Many people just want a place to go on the weekend, fish and maybe eat a few. Now we have a totally different situation.

Single species of predators now become a very realistic option. The upside is that this is a very simple form of management that is hard to get wrong. The downside of this option is that the amount of fish a lake can support with just one species of predator is limited. However, that might not matter. Adding a feeder increases the amount of fish that can be raised in a lake. Species that might fit into this type of management are CC, HSB, trout, LMB and SMB.

Just a note to say that the same basic biology , chemistry, etc. (and Mgt. principals based thereon) apply no matter the number or types of species. I don't want any readers to think we are talking about some new rules of science only new ways to combine and apply them to meet different mgt. goals.

My recent experience supports what I've seen on this forum. The neighboring ranch pond is a good case study of what happens in a good size reservoir (5 ac. up to 30 ft deep) with only BG/LMB, receives very light fishing pressure, and has never been "managed". The pond is very old (~100 yrs) and was periodically stocked w/ "local" BG/LMB from yet another larger ranch pond in area. It has not been supplemented by stocked fish since the 70's. Theo would love this place. It is a pure unadulterated 5 acres of 10 billion 6-12-inch LMB with an OCCASSIONAL lunker, and truly behemoth BG. I mean these things are PIGS. Largest I've ever seen.

I put some of the stunted LMB in a 5-gallon bucket and they were burping up LMB fry. I need to get y'all some facts from the field, and I need some help ID'ing the males/females, but I caught nearly two dozen BG hogs last week down there and I'll swear some made 2 lb and they all felt like 10lb LMB on light tackle. They are now the first breed stock in my pond.

A while ago I was contemplating a BG/LMB population for the newpond, and am now (keeping things real simple) strongly considering BG only, and/or stunted/breedable LMB just for BG forage

I'm dribbling and drooling at the thought.

Dave do you ave any pictures of the BG hogs?

I knew someone'd ask that question Bill.....as I told Mr. Eitel (on another thread), I am an idiot. Had three great trips to ranch pond w/ my son while he was visiting, and DIDNT bring the camera.....duh.

I could probably go catch one out of my pond, but dont want to fish it yet.....I want them to "settle" in to their new home. Saw them getting bugs at surface last night......first time to see fish rings on my pond since ~1998.

What I'll do is finagle another pig hunt w/ the neighbor (ranchers), and bring the stupid camera this time....I am anxious to get your feedback. I think they might be a GSF/BG hybrid cause their mouths, while not real big like GSF, are definitely bigger than pure BG I've seen pics of....but really not sure about the GSF part cause they are so big. They have wavy blue streak patterns extending from mouth back towards Gills (hence BG?) and any spots at dorsal and basil fins are only weakly visible if at all. Might have been Meadowlark, Brettski, or ewest (sorry don’t remember off top of my head) that shared the Virginia Tech link w/ me that showed pics of all the sunfishes.

www.cnr.vt.edu/efish/families/redearsun.html

Our pigs are shaped more like the pure BG, but have coloration similar to the GSF (w/ out really pronounced fin spots).

A pic will be worth a 1,000 words…….

To my knowledge the RE, as the primary fish, hasn't been widely tried and reported on in small ponds. I might in a few years, though my opinion isn't fully formed yet. I've caught RE in Lake Guntersville(AL) using small minnows. I think RE would thrive on the little FH's and bypass the Rosy 'trouphy' minnows that would then spawn. Throw in a doz albino CC and let 'em get big enough to gulp a few small RE along with the FH's. The predator CC would be simple put and take. I'd hope the Redear would fairly manage themselves. Shallow FH structure, some rip rap rock, would just about do it. :rolleyes:

Bill, here are some pics (prob. too many, but compressed for those of us on dial up). I went down to ranchpond yesterday evening and this morning....hot weather (95-100), hot weedy water, not a lot biting. but did manage some hoglets. they are good size, prob. average for pond, but not as large as some caught two weeks ago when weather was in 80's.

The length of the cork at butt of rod handle is 11-inches (12-inches to end of metal ring on other side of reel stem). Fish shown are ~8-10 inchers.

Fish 1



Fish 1 length



Fish 2



Fish 2 again



Fish 2 length



Fish 3



Fish 4



Fish 4 length



will post remaining pics shortly

edited post.....restored pic links

remaining pics:

Fish 5



Fish taken from here:



Fish put here:



Stocked 9 (yeah NINE) Gambusia in May (provided by County...its all they had at time , saw a cloud of at least 50 by spillway today :p :p , a mediocre pic (tough subject)



This little guy really gets the job done on both LMB and sunfish:



SO, help w/ type of sunfish (GSF, GSF/BG hybrid??) Do not see pronounced spots if any at dorsal and basal fins, not shaped quite right for pure GSF?, mouth a little smaller than pure GSF? Overall large size..typical of pure GSF? or too big??

and any thoughts on male and female??

D.I.E.D.

edited post.....restored pic links

DIED those look like HBG (hybrid bluegill) to me. They would be crosses BG x GSF and a very high % will be male 95 % +- . See this thread. http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000439;p=1
http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=7;t=000272#000000
The reason I point this out is they don't do a good job breeding/populating your pond (not good brood fish).

D.I.E.D,

Nice pictures....and how about those Gambusia...9 stocked and now clouds of them. The real beauty is that unlike Fatheads which disappear in a flash, you will never have to re-stock those Gams. I have one pond with them that is estimated to be over 75 years old and never re-stocked... 75 years of continous forage. Another nice thing about Gams is that they seem to be preferred food for HBG.

Your fish pictures look like HBG with definite GSF genetics. It seems that their are many, many variations on the HBG. Bz's pictures are very different from my GG's and Ryan's pictures are also different. Yours are different also. The differences appear to me to be more than just coloration patterns. It would be interesting to confirm if these variations are real, i.e. genetic, or just appearances.

ML makes a good point. Coloration can and is effected by a number of things like the environment (water color/condition , light penetration/intensity, bottom composition ) current conditions (like feeding , being hunted , stress ) as well as genetics. Appearance is in the larger sense genetic but so are many other traits like size potential , reproduction rates , adaptive abilities and instincts. Each of these can also be effected by conditions/environment.


I try to remember that, like people , all fish in a species are common on the species level but can be different on the population basis (distinct populations can be different) and also different on the individual basis. We all know people look different, are of different sizes , shapes and have distinct traits and abilities. So to with , for example all BG (each with traits of its parents). When you cross a species with another (BG x GSF) that adds even more potential genetic variation. That is one reason I started the HBG thread with pics.

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

D.I.E.D. guilty of threadjacking??....sorry todd (et.al.). thanks for moving pics over to that other thread ewest and also thanks so much for links to all those other threads.....all great stuff, but still confusing for me. I never realized just how complex the world of "BG"s could be. i would like to continue that discussion over there at some point.

Regarding my small pond mgmt, i am finding it very difficult to locate and purchase locally some of the fish I wanted to try such as pure strain BG, CNBG, and RES. We have pretty tough conditions with the long hot dry summer, no supplemental water situation. These large GSF/(hybrid?) ranchpond fish are very hardy, good survivors, fun to catch, good to eat, and free......so I guess my near term strategy is to keep things simple by keeping our "native" perch stocked with Gambusia and keep the water quality up through aeration.

if I understand a little of what i have just learned the last couple days re fish populations in small ponds, our GSF hybrid natives are not particularly good breed stock (mostly male prodigy), their numbers should naturally stay low, and there should be a good ratio of food mass to fish? So if not fished too heavily, this management approach should continue to produce large class fish?

Correct - that's pretty much the standard small pond, HBG approach.

Ditto. You will need some type of predator at some point to control the HBG offspring. Kind of like a shotgun. Load it up have some fun and then reload. HBG are the shells. Here is a link to a good HBG pond discussion.

http://msucares.com/pubs/publications/p1893.htm