Pond Boss Forums MANAGING AN EXISTING POND Evaluating and adjusting fish populations Pellet eating Bass! Do they really exist?

I have a 15-acre lake and have just had an electroshock done and the results were not too “shocking”. I have a real good population of blue gill but have stunted bass as there are way too many small thin bass fighting for similar sized forage and on top of that I have too many large blue cats so the bass have no real chance for growth. With this population mix and the bigger issue of having a relatively shallow lake (Avg. 4ft with max 7.5ft), I have come to the conclusion that I will not have a trophy bass lake unless I do some serious reconfiguration of the lake.

I bought the place for the kids to have fun fishing and recreating (100 acres total) and after talking to the lake management professional that shocked my lake, I am leaning towards eliminating as many large cats as I can between now and October and then stocking 100lbs. of “Feeder Bass”. I was told that these bass do eat pellets but do not grow as large as Florida Largemouth. I am fine with the lack of size (I was told the Feeder Bass may get as big as 5-6lbs) since my kids like to catch anything. However, I was wondering if anyone here has heard of this type of Bass and have you had any success stocking them? Thanks.

csullivan,

I'm not familiar with "feeder bass". I have Florida bass in one pond, native bass (northern) in another, and a cross called F1 in a third pond. The F1 is possibly what your fish supplier is talking about. I would ask him/her for specifics.

I don't think you need 100 pounds of feeder base. You need to do two things as quickly as possible.

1) remove every one of those blue catfish, and any other kind of catfish in that pond. They compete directly with LMB, and blues even outcompete LMB.

2) remove every LMB 12 inches and under...as soon as you can and as many before next spring as possible. There is only so much forage to go around, and from your description, you do not need more bass, you need less small bass and no catfish.

If you really want to get into this, then consider a couple of more options (both of these are somewhat controversial but I have done both myself with great results).

1) stock Tilapia next spring at a rate of 5 to 15 pounds per acre...on the high side if you also want algae control. Todd Overton carries them but get your order in early.

2) stock gizzard shad. They provide great forage and are suitable for stocking with mature bass, Gizzard shad can grow fairly large and make a very tasty meal for the large LMB.

csullivan,
My first thought is: Adding bass, or any preditor when you are already bass heavy doesn't sound like a solution. Surely I'm missing something here.
I would think the evaluation from the survey would have recommended removing a slot bass, say 10" to 12" & alot of them considering it's a 15 ac lake. But then I'm not the one getting paid for advise, meaning I'm no professional. I'm sure some of the more knowledgeable ones here will be able to offer some help.

CSullivan :

Just a note . We need to get Greg in on this post he deals with this a lot. From reports that I get about pellet trained bass , which is what I think your pro is talking about , you should be careful.

The idea is these pellet trained bass eat fish food and therefore do not rely on the BG and so they don't add to the bass heavy problem. They will out grow the other bass which you can take out. I have great doubts about this being accurate. The reports I get are that these pellet trained bass when stocked in a pond quickly start eating forage fish . They will still eat pellets but as time passes they rely more and more on BG/RE , shad ,tilapia , shiners etc. If there is more to this Greg will know. Good luck but if my assumption above is correct I would not try that approach. ewest

ps : I just remembered CB1 I think has some pellet trained bass he may also have a thought on this.

I too wonder how the solution to a problem of too many bass would be to add more bass. Doesn't make sense to me.

I have no problem keeping bass on pellets for the most part in my .62 acre pond, but I would think in a 15 acre pond that would not be the case. Most likely they would scatter and would compete with your present bass for live feed.

Not sure I understand "good bluegill population" and still bass heavy. Skinny bass usually means a lousy BG population.

I agree to clobber the cats and remove most of the bass under 12 inches. That's easier said than done when you don't live on the place.

MAN! you have an awsome 15 acre lake with blue cat, and you want to get RID of them? . Man that breaks my heart!!

This is the VERY fishery that I have been trying to get for over the last 7 years, and have failed on several occasions to do.

Not to take this thread in a different direction, but if that is indeed the reason Greg and others are saying this is the new "tried and true", then I have a few questions.

These "feeder bass" do not reproduce?
They do not overpopulate like all other LMB?
They do not eat BG to keep BG in check?
Their offspring do not eat BG but only pellets?

They must indeed be a radically different LMB if that is the case. I sure would like to see the data that backs up these things.

Did you get a management report? I agree with what others had to say. I would not recommend stocking these bass. They will eat fish as well as pellets in fact I said thie in a post last week.

Also like Dave said what is good populaiton of bluegill? did it meant you shocked 100 or does it mean you have a highe percentage 3-5 inches? This is what you want to see. Overall numbers indicate somethings but size distroibution tells you alot more. Many other ideas to offer but off subject.

ML- no these fish are not a magic bullet. Many folks want that special fish that just fixes every thing, drives me crazy some claims made but this is not one of those deals. They do every single thing you mentioned. They are really not much diff than bass in your pond just trained to eat pellets. They can be either F1 of pure northern. They have been "selected" genetically for the agressive nature. Not 100% postivie about that but they work maybe so.

Greg,

Thanks for the info...that does indeed answer my questions and I appreciate your comments.

I believe you are 100% right.

A Management Report is in the works. They did recommend that I harvest as many bass as possible and since most of them were less than 12’ it really did not make sense to put a slot limit on the lake. When i said the BG population looks good that is only from my perspective and I will see what the report says before I do anything.

I think the LMB I was thinking of stocking is a Northern LMB and the idea was to get some larger predators in the lake to eat a greater amount of varying sized forage fish and to the extent there was not enough, then the pellets would help both the LMB and BG. Is this faulty logic? I assume I can stock more forage fish in the spring if it looks like the tables have turned too much (again the pellets should help here – or so I thought) but I get the impression from the group that this is a backwards logic in that the forage should come first then the LMB.

wait on the report, we may be gettng ahead of ourselves. Working on report right now this is why I'm sutck in the office. However if they said to harvest bass then makes no sense to stock more. Now a year from now maybe reasons such as freshen genetics, more agressive, etc. However I usualy list a plan and right on the top first year is major harvest of less or equal size "stunted" bass.

My guess is what csullivan means by a good BG population is alot of large BG but few other sizes, classic bass heavy pond

Greg , ML , and others :

To be clear about this matter. The idea or assumption in my prior post which ML quoted in his [as set out below} was what I assumed to be the thinking { basis } of CSullivan's pond pro's recommendation.

quote :

" Originally posted by ewest:
CSullivan :

The idea is these pellet trained bass eat fish food and therefore do not rely on the BG and so they don't add to the bass heavy problem. "

The sentence quoted would have been clearer if written as follows:

" In order to make that recommendation CSullivan's pond pro must working from the assumption that pellet trained bass eat only fish food and therefore do not rely on the BG and so they don't add to the bass heavy problem."

As stated in my post I do not believe this to be a sound idea nor do I think pellet trained bass will continue to eat pellets only if placed in a pond like CSullivan's. They are not a majic fish. The questions noted by ML are the reasons among others why the above idea is strange based on my understanding of pellet trained bass. I would be suprised if a pond pro would make that recommendation , so there must be something missing at this point.

No one to my knowledge { not me , Greg , ML , CB1 , or anyone} has indicated that they think pellet trained bass would work in that situation as described by CSullivan . The use of pellet trained bass is common place and widely accepted as an aquaculture method. But they are bass with bass genetics and they will do what all bass do as Greg noted .

When the report is issued lets see what it says , then if CSullivan wants our thoughts on the report we can go from there. ewest

EWEST & Greg,

No disagreement from me on EWEST's last post.

However, this discussion may have shed more light (to me at least) on previous discussions we had regarding feeding, LMB aggression, and using Tilapia to offset the need for feeding...

Just as a test, this weekend, I'm going to take a handful of pellets to the "pure" F1 pellet trained bass experimental pond that has not seen any pellets at all since stocking in April. Take a guess what will happen...my guess is that the "pellet" trained bass will ignore the pellets, that BG will come up to feed on the pellets and maybe Tilapia, and the F1's will chase the BG that come up to feed on the pellets. I'll try that and report on Monday.

p.s. I'm assuming that one handful of pellets won't invalidate my experiment to determine the effects of no feeding and assess if Tilapia can offset feeding?

Meanwhile we wait for the report on Mr. Sullivan's pond.

ML- I will guess the same as you. They will go off food if nto feed on consistent basis. But what do you hope to prove by doing this?

ML :

Are you sure you want to tinker with the expir. while it is in progress. I have no idea if it would comprise the test or not. How long has it been since any of those fish have seen a pellet? The longer the time the less chance any of the fish will give a feeding reaction to the pellets.

If you do throw in some pellets this is what I guess you will see. No reaction -- the pellets will sit there and sink and become part of the bottom silt. Maybe a tilapia will eat a few off the bottom. If you do get a reaction from the BG or tilapia and they stop in open water to feed on the surface and the bass are in an active phase { no low o2 or real high heat etc.} , based on your prior comments about those F1 bass , you will have served them a fish lunch. ewest

ps : I suggest you wait until you get the mail to at least get a better insight on some of your questions.

Greg,

It probably wouldn't prove anything to anyone but it would suggest to me that the pellet training of LMB when subsequently stocked in a pond has nothing to do with their aggressiveness...its the genetics that count.

I'm guessing you somewhat agree with that.

EWEST,

One handful surely couldn't make any difference, but I'll wait...but I'm not very patient

p.s they have not seen a pellet, any of them, since stocking on April 1 of this year. Actually, the BG haven't seen any since last fall when they went into the experimental pond.

ML :

After reading your last post I began to wonder if I had failed to include the full data on the F1 bass I will be stocking in this falls expir. I did not go back and check the prior posts to be sure. I may not have been clear. To the best of my understanding the F1s to be stocked are pellet trained to a point { not sure to what size} then they are placed in ponds with a forage base to grow out to 8-10 in. It is not the pellet training that is unusual it is the genetics. These fish are the offspring of brood stock specially selected for aggressiveness. Both the female { fla.} and male { nort.} parents are a result of years of selective breeding for this purpose. It is like most cattle operations as you know. Pick the cows and bulls with the wanted traits - breed study the results - breed again and over time " hopefuly " you get what you were trying for. But in any case it is the genes not the learned behavior {pellet training} that makes the difference. The mail is on the way . More to follow in a week or so. ewest

I believe my original bass stocking was of artificially fed bass. What that means is that when I stocked them they were about 1.5 inches long and I got them straight from an Arkansas hatchery fish truck. At that size I bet they had been started on commercial feed. I waited until my pond had abundant prey. I never saw them take or show any interest in the 1/8 inch pellets that I was feeding. Had they been fed out to a larger size, they may have stayed with the pellets. I also do not use a commercial feeder and only feed when I can get there. I believe they turned opportunistic and ignored the easy protien. BTW, when I asked if they were F-1, I was told that they were. No idea whether that was true.

I don't know Dave. At 1.5 inches I have my doubts they were feed trained. Why? Because that is the absolute minimum size for feed training bass. I would say they were grown out in a pond on zooplankton and sold as soon as they reached 1.5 inches instead of feed training.

Cecil, I figured they were because at a Bass101 Conference held at San Marcos Texas a couple of years ago, we visited a TPWD hatchery. The little suckers were in tanks and being fed pellets the size of dust. I figured commercial feeders did the same.