Pond Boss Magazine
https://www.pondboss.com/images/userfiles/image/20130301193901_6_150by50orangewhyshouldsubscribejpeg.jpg
Advertisment
Newest Members
Shotgun01, Dan H, Stipker, LunkerHunt23, Jeanjules
18,451 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums36
Topics40,902
Posts557,116
Members18,452
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
Top Posters
esshup 28,420
ewest 21,475
Cecil Baird1 20,043
Bill Cody 15,112
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 774 guests, and 221 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#246304 01/27/11 06:53 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Our family owns a 3 acre farm pond. It maxes out around 7-8ft deep with little cover. We have CC, black crappie, LMB, BG, as well as numerous species of small panfish and minnows. I have a pretty good idea how the crappie, bass, and bluegill populations affect each other, but what about the catfish? How much do they compete with or prey on the other species?

Thanks,
Sam


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246309 01/27/11 07:10 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,028
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Online Content
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,028
Likes: 274
You bet they do


It's not about the fish. It's about the pond. Take care of the pond and the fish will be fine. PB subscriber since before it was in color.

Without a sense of urgency, Nothing ever gets done.

Boy, if I say "sic em", you'd better look for something to bite. Sam Shelley Rancher and Farmer Muleshoe Texas 1892-1985 RIP
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted By: Dave Davidson1
You bet they do


I know they have to compete with and prey on the different species, but I'm just curious how much. I've read they do a poor job of controlling bluegill populations, so I was kind of under the impression that competition with other species would be minimal compared to the bass and crappie.


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246313 01/27/11 07:17 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Sam,

First, welcome to Pond Boss. We should be able to answer a lot of your questions about the pond and pond management.

It really depends on the size of the channel cats, as to what they will do. Once they get large, maybe 24 inches long, they can become major predators of everything swimming in your pond. They will compete very heavily with your large mouth bass and they will eat your bass fry. But, that is not all bad in some cases. It really depends on the goal of your ponds management.

You mention that you have black crappie as well as numerous species of small panfish and minnows. Crappie can pretty easily get out of control, although a good population of large mouth bass can mostly keep them controlled. Similarly, if you have "undesireable" sunfish in your pond, the catfish and the bass will help clean them out.

If you can keep reasonable numbers of channel cats, maybe 15-20 per acre, that are less than 20 inches, they are great fun to catch and they are great to eat. But if those same fish get to 30 inches, you've got major trouble, because they will be extremely difficult to catch, they will muddy your pond, and they will eat everything in sight (or within touch of barbel).

Ken


Subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine

Peculiar Friends are Better than No Friends at All!
catmandoo #246323 01/27/11 08:08 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
My goal is to keep the small crappie under control. I enjoy catching crappie but I think the bigger ones will be easier to manage (and funner to catch). Right now the plan is to remove any crappie under about 12". If they are small enough to be bass bait, I'll cut the tail and fins off and toss em back. The rest will go in the fryer. I also plan to remove a lot of the smaller (less than 12") bass. Hopefully a population of larger bass will help keep the smaller crappie in check. So basically I guess I am trying to manage it for large crappie and bass. I just didn't know how catfish would factor into all this. I'm thinking supplemental feeding combined with a slot limit on CC (16"-22" maybe) might help the cause. The way those crappie spawn I'll need all the help I can get. Am I crazy for trying to manage crappie in a pond this size?

Last edited by fishinbub; 01/27/11 09:21 PM.

Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246351 01/27/11 10:01 PM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
Am I crazy for trying to manage crappie in a pond this size?

IMO yes by that method unless you want to do a lot of work with high risk of failure. If you want large crappie leave in the LMB as they are the only effective predators you have on small crappie. Ken is right on the CC. When small CC will help with the BC but not much when big.

Here is the archive on Crappie

http://www.pondboss.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=92447#Post92447
















ewest #246360 01/27/11 10:48 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
I thought small bass would be more likely to compete with the crappie vs. feeding on them. My logic was less small bass=more large bass=less small crappie. What am I missing? Will the small bass feed on the crappie?

Thanks,
Sam


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246366 01/27/11 11:08 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Originally Posted By: fishinbub
I thought small bass would be more likely to compete with the crappie vs. feeding on them. My logic was less small bass=more large bass=less small crappie. What am I missing? Will the small bass feed on the crappie?

Thanks,
Sam


Crappie usually spawn earlier than bass or bluegill, and they get to where they can eat their younger cousins before the cousins can really compete. It is the crappie feeding on the young bass and bluegill that cause the pond balancing problems.

With that in mind, I do have a small pond (0.7 acres) that includes crappie, bluegill, red-eared sunfish, large mouth bass, channel catfish, white catfish, hybrid stiped bass, winter trout(rainbow and golden), one very colorful and friendly old koi, and two very senior grass carp.

When the pond became mine six years ago, it was dominated with monster channel catfish, mud, and algae.

My goal was lots of big bluegill, which I have. I also have a great crop of put-and-take catfish. We always have lots of fun pulling out the winter trout before Memorial day. By accident, this all works.

Someday, I expect I will have a catostrophic pond failure. I'll start over. If it all fails, we can look back at hundreds of great meals provided by the grandkids and their friends. We'll have had lots of parties with the neighborhood kids and adults. We have regular parties with four generations of human families. The fish will have had it far better than living somewhere else.


Subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine

Peculiar Friends are Better than No Friends at All!
catmandoo #246370 01/27/11 11:29 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted By: catmandoo
Originally Posted By: fishinbub
I thought small bass would be more likely to compete with the crappie vs. feeding on them. My logic was less small bass=more large bass=less small crappie. What am I missing? Will the small bass feed on the crappie?

Thanks,
Sam


Crappie usually spawn earlier than bass or bluegill, and they get to where they can eat their younger cousins before the cousins can really compete. It is the crappie feeding on the young bass and bluegill that cause the pond balancing problems.


So I guess the crappie will be doing enough "small bass management" without my help. The crappie, LMB, CC, and BG have been coexisting in this pond as long as I can remember. Based on my observations over the last 10-12yrs they kind of go in cycles. For a few years we'll have a good crappie fishery, then CC, then LMB, then back to crappie. Seems like we've always had a good bluegill fishery, up until the last two years or so.

I know the crappie had a RIDICULOUSLY large spawn last year, so I have my work cut out for me.


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246373 01/27/11 11:59 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,712
Likes: 3
Think seriously about "If it ain't broke -- don't fix it."

If it collapses, then do something. Until then, enjoy!


Subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine

Peculiar Friends are Better than No Friends at All!
catmandoo #246403 01/28/11 08:59 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted By: catmandoo
Think seriously about "If it ain't broke -- don't fix it."

If it collapses, then do something. Until then, enjoy!


That is how we've been managing it, but the fishing has really dropped off in the last 2-3yrs. The bass are topping out around 3-4lbs (vs. fish in or approaching double digits), catfish population and average size has gone way down, very few nice gills, and TONS of small (4-6") crappie. The only bright spot is some large (12"-16"+)crappie. With all those small crappie I'm afraid the quality of the fishing is going to continue to deteriorate. What do you pondboss experts think?


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
catmandoo #246421 01/28/11 10:13 AM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
Ken you have HSB in there which are a big factor and lots of other predators (including trout a cold water predator) and including you. Plus a small pond with intensive mgt.

As I said the only effective predator in fishinbub's pond for crappie control is LMB plus the big crappie. Specifically the 4 to 12 inch LMB that are eating crappie yoy and small offspring. Those are the crappie (5 inches and under) that must be cropped in a huge way and the sooner in their life cycle the better. Up to 600,000 crappie yoy per pair is one amount provided in studies. They can decimate the plankton population first when they are fry then move on to eat the LMB yoy and then the BG yoy. They act like a hoard of locusts in a small pond.

The data and findings are all included in the archive. It tells the whole story with the findings of the FS who study the question. FB you are right that their spawning is cyclical - just like locusts. Can it be done successfully? The only one doing so is SEP with TShad , crappie , & HSB IIRC. That too is in the archive. However it is all about goals and mgt and the freedom to run your pond the way you want. Our collective effort at PB is to address the questions asked and provide data/opinions. Be sure to let us know what you do and how it works. New data is most welcome.



Last edited by ewest; 01/28/11 10:14 AM.















ewest #246427 01/28/11 10:44 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Well something in the past has allowed these large crappie to grow so big. The obvious answer (to me, anyways) is that poor spawning over the last 4-5yrs has led to less competition.

From the research I've done it looks like crappie spawn cycles could be at least somewhat reliant on current fish populations. Almost like they know the pond is overpopulated, and that they need to wait on some of these fish die off before they have another boom in numbers. I wonder if extremely aggressive harvest of small fish (basically doing in one or two years what nature has been doing in four or five) would help make their spawning cycle somewhat less sporadic. I'll have to do some more research, I'm sure somebody has tried it before.

I've yet to find anyone that suggests removing small crappie is a bad thing, so it seems like a logical place to start. I guess I'll determine my next course of action (if any) based on how the fish react. To quote Macgyver "I've found from past experience that the tighter your plan, the more likely you are going to run into something unpredictable".


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.
fishinbub #246431 01/28/11 11:10 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,420
Likes: 794
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,420
Likes: 794
Yes, remove every small crappie that you can. Large LMB won't eat small BC because they have to expend more energy for a smaller return. They'd rather eat a larger meal once than have to chase after 10 small meals for the same calories.

Those larger crappie are the ones that survived the previous spawns. You might be seeing less of the CC because they get very hook shy and hook wise once caught and released, or even if they see their buddies caught (in my experience). The LMB are probably not getting too large in the pond because of the crappie eating too many of the smaller fish. (less to grow to the right size for the 4# LMB to get optimum growth)


www.hoosierpondpros.com


http://www.pondboss.com/subscribe.asp?c=4
3/4 to 1 1/4 ac pond LMB, SMB, PS, BG, RES, CC, YP, Bardello BG, (RBT & Blue Tilapia - seasonal).
esshup #246437 01/28/11 11:42 AM
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,475
Likes: 264
From the Crappie archive.

AFS has had 3 symposia on Crappie covering many years of research. Here is a historical of the papers which will show you the ideas that have come up and a glimpse of the results. I have included some parts and omited others including the list of authorities.


Challenges of Crappie Management Continuing into the
21st Century
JEFF BOXRUCKER*
ELISE IRWIN

White crappie Pomoxis annularis and black
crappie P. nigromaculatus are among the principle
species sought by anglers in the midwestern and
southeastern United States. The focus of management
activities aimed at improving crappie fisheries
has shifted over the years, and the published
literature reflects this shift. Three symposia on
crappies sponsored by the American Fisheries Society
have been significant contributors to the body
of knowledge on crappie ecology and management.
The third in this series, entitled ‘‘Challenges
of Crappie Management Continuing into the 21st
Century,’’ was held at the society’s 130th Annual
Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, in 2000. The organizers’
objective was to compile the most current
work on crappie ecology and management and
help set the direction for research in the next decade.
This
introduction will try to show how the focus of
research has shifted and the role that these symposia
have played in that shift.

Mitzner (1984) identified the ‘‘small-crappie
syndrome’’ as a common theme in papers from the
first crappie symposium, ‘‘Crappie Management:
Problems and Solutions,’’ which was held at the
44th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference in
1982. As early as the 1940s, management activities
centered on reducing abundance through mechanical
or chemical removal. These techniques have
been used sparingly over the past 30 years because
of their high costs and short-term benefits. Investigations
of the interactions within crappie trophic
communities (O’Brien et al. 1984; Ellison 1984)
published in the first symposium led Mitzner
(1984) to conclude that management activities
were moving toward prey management. Published
accounts of the effects of prey stockings on crappie
population structure range from beneficial effects
on community food webs (Bartholomew 1966; Li
et al. 1976; Mosher 1984) to neutral effects (Boxrucker
1986; Boxrucker 1993; Hale 1996) and potentially
negative effects (Crowl and Boxrucker
1989; DeVries and Stein 1990; Guest et al. 1990;
DeVries et al. 1991). Mitzner (1984) also set the
stage for another shift in management strategies
by pointing out that managing angler harvest has
the potential to rectify the small-crappie syndrome.
A second crappie symposium, entitled ‘‘Crappie
Biology and Management,’’ was held
in 1990. Many of the papers published in connection
with this symposium were descriptive in nature,
with the topics including culture (Smeltzer
and Flickinger 1991), aging (Hammers and Miranda
1991; Sweatman and Kohler 1991), movements
and habitat use (Markham et al. 1991), relative
weight (Neumann and Murphy 1991), and
population characteristics (McDonough and Buchanan
1991; McInerny and Degan 1991; Colvin
1991a). The first accounts of the effects of minimum
length limits on crappie population structure
were published in the proceedings of this symposium
(Colvin 1991b; Webb and Ott 1991). Reed
and Davies (1991) and Larson et al. (1991), also
participants in this symposium, cautioned against
the use of restrictive harvest regulations due to the
high levels of natural mortality seen in some crappie
populations in Alabama and Georgia. Published
accounts of the use of length limits to manage
crappie fisheries increased following this symposium
(Allen and Miranda 1995; Allen et al.
1998; Maceina et al. 1998; Hale et al. 1999; Boxrucker
2001). The use of length limits in crappie
fisheries has been refined, with either a 229-mm
or a 254-mm limit being used depending on the
population’s growth rate. Equilibrium yield models
have assisted in refining the use of length limits
(Maceina et al. 1998; Slipke and Maceina 2001).
Currently, 15 of 27 states in the Northcentral and
Southern Divisions of the American Fisheries Society
manage crappie fisheries with length limits.
Crappie recruitment was historically thought to
be cyclic, with strong year-classes being produced
every 2 to 5 years (Swingle and Swingle 1967).
However, despite the importance of crappies as
sport fish, little research into the factors affecting
their recruitment has been published. Environmental
variables were identified as possible influences
on year-class strength (Jenkins 1955; Goodson
1966; Mathur et al. 1979), yet little cause-andeffect
data were presented. In the first crappie symposium,
O’Brien et al. (1984) discussed the effects
of abiotic factors on the survival of early life stages.
In the second crappie symposium, Mitzner
(1991) presented the relationships between crappie
year-class strength and various environmental variables,
including water level, turbidity, substratum,
and wind.
Crappie recruitment dynamics were the focus of
an increasing amount of research in the 1990s.
Water temperature influences spawning times and
subsequent growth and survival, with later-hatching
cohorts experiencing higher temperatures,
growth, and survival (Pine and Allen 2001). Dubuc
and DeVries (2002) failed to identify consistent
relationships between reservoir productivity and
larval crappie density. Guy and Willis (1995)
found differences in the recruitment variability of
crappies in South Dakota based on landscape characteristics.
Recruitment was less variable in systems
with high shoreline development indices (i.e.,
more embayments). The recruitment of black crappies
in South Dakota was also less variable in systems
with high watershed : water body surface area
ratios (Guy and Willis 1995). Water level fluctuations
have increasingly been suggested as a primary
influence on crappie recruitment. High inflows
and subsequent water releases in spring and
summer can lead to the reduced recruitment of
crappies (Pope et al. 1996; Maceina and Stimpert
1998). High winter water levels had a positive influence
on crappie year-class strength in Alabama
tributary impoundments (Maceina and Stimpert
1998), yet the mechanisms underlying this relationship
are not clear. Allen and Miranda (2001)
used a population model to conclude that crappie
recruitment was quasi-cyclic due to random fluctuations
in the environmental variables and density-
dependent mechanisms. Allen and Miranda
(1998) developed an age-structured model to help
explain the effects of erratic recruitment on crappie
management alternatives, particularly the use of
length limits.
Information from the two previous symposia on
crappies set the stage for the papers from this symposium.
Whereas the majority of manuscripts from
the 1990 symposium were descriptive, most of
those that follow evaluate management strategies.
Six of the papers deal with exploitation. Estimates
of exploitation were typically made from tagreturn
data and were subsequently used in conjunction
with catch curves to estimate natural mortality
rates. This information was then used to
model the potential effects of length limits on crappie
fisheries (Boxrucker 2002a, this issue; Isermann
et al. 2002a, this issue). Miranda et al. (2002,
this issue) found that the uncertainty surrounding
estimates of tagging mortality, tag loss, and particularly
reporting rate led to imprecise estimates
of exploitation in spite of the high costs of data
collection. These authors suggested that indirect
measures of exploitation (i.e., condition, total mortality
estimates, length and age distributions, and
increased recruitment variability) be used rather
than expensive tag-and-reward programs. Isermann
et al. (2002a) used equilibrium yield models
to evaluate Tennessee’s statewide 254-mm minimum
length limit on the yield of crappie fisheries.
The authors grouped the study reservoirs into three
categories: those in which 229-mm or 254-mm
length limits would increase yield, albeit at the
expense of the number of crappies harvested; those
in which length limits had no impact on yield; and
those that were negatively impacted by length limits.
The authors suggested that applying length
limits to fisheries using a categorical approach was
preferable to using a single, areawide regulation.
Bister et al. (2002, this issue) and Hurley and Jackson
(2002, this issue) reported decreased growth
rates in crappie populations in South Dakota and
Nebraska, respectively, as a result of length limit
regulations. The 229-mm length limit was removed
from Lake Alvin, South Dakota (Bister et
al. 2002), while Hurley and Jackson (2002) recommended
removing the 254-mm length limit
from two small Nebraska impoundments for only
a portion of the year to help maintain crappie densities.
Boxrucker (2002a) detailed population and
angler creel characteristics prior to, during, and
after the removal of a 254-mm length limit at an
Oklahoma reservoir. Even though the abundance
of quality- and preferred-size crappies and angler
catch rates improved as a result of the length limit,
angler dissatisfaction with the regulation led to its
removal. This is in contrast to the positive angler
sentiment in regards to harvest restrictions in the
Sardis Lake, Mississippi, crappie fishery (Dorr et
al. 2002, this issue).
Recruitment has been a common theme in all
three crappie symposia. McKeown and Mooradian
(2002, this issue) found that neither the low
density of adult stocks nor the overwinter mortality
of age-0 crappies was the cause of reduced
recruitment (relative to historical levels) in Chautauqua
Lake, New York. The authors concluded
that management efforts aimed at increasing adult
density would have little effect on recruitment
and the subsequent recovery of the fishery to historical
levels. Sammons et al. (2002, this issue)
found that crappie recruitment in Tennessee tributary
impoundments was positively related to
high water levels during the prespawning period
(January through March). Maciena and Stimpert
(1998) found a similar relationship in Alabama
tributary impoundments.
Two papers in this symposium dealt with supplemental
stocking, a little-used technique to improve
crappie recruitment. The results of stocking
black-nosed crappies (a morphological variant of
the black crappie) in Tennessee impoundments
were mixed, with contributions to year-class
strength ranging from 0% to 93% (Isermann et al.
2002b, this issue). Racey and Lochmann (2002,
this issue) determined that the year-class contribution
of white crappies stocked into Lake Chicot,
Arkansas, ranged from 0% to 3.1% and concluded
that other management options to improve adult
abundance should be considered.
Stocking predators to reduce the abundance of
slowly growing populations of crappies was the
topic of two papers in this symposium. The concept
was introduced by Willis et al. (1984) in the
first crappie symposium. Saugeyes (walleye Stizostedion
vitreum 3 sauger S. canadense) were
stocked into Richmond Lake, South Dakota, to improve
the size structure of a black crappie population
(Galinat et al. 2002, this issue) and into
Thunderbird Reservoir, Oklahoma, to improve that
of a slowly growing white crappie population
(Boxrucker 2002b, this issue). The growth rates
and size structure of both crappie populations improved
following the introduction of the saugeyes.
Boxrucker (2002b) cautioned that consideration
must be given to the effects of such biomanipulation
on all trophic levels and that thorough evaluations
need to be conducted both before and after
implementing it.
Spier and Heidinger (2002, this issue) investigated
the effects of turbidity on the growth of juvenile
and adult black and white crappies. No differences
were found in the growth of juveniles,
but the weight gain of adult black crappies was
higher than that of adult white crappies at low
turbidity.
The importance of crappies as sport fish ensures
that research into their ecology and management
will continue. Recruitment dynamics appear to be
the focus of current work, with water level manipulation
having the potential to significantly impact
year-class strength. The expanded use of
population models will assist managers in selectively
applying harvest regulations. Many crappie
populations have a high rate of natural mortality
that negates the potential benefits of length limits,
even when there is fast growth and high exploitation.
Research into the causative mechanisms in
populations exhibiting high natural mortality will
broaden management alternatives.
Acknowledgments
This symposium was sponsored by the Fisheries
Management Section of the American Fisheries
Society.
















ewest #246455 01/28/11 01:01 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,544
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,544
That seemed like alot of reading leading up to nothing.. Let me read that again..


I believe in catch and release. I catch then release to the grease..

BG. CSBG. LMB. HSB. RES.

[Linked Image from i90.photobucket.com]
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
F
OP Offline
F
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted By: Bluegillerkiller
That seemed like alot of reading leading up to nothing.. Let me read that again..


Basically what I gathered from it,
1)Crappie spawn is very sporadic
2)Length limits protecting the smaller fish just make things worse
3)Introducing predators to feed on small crappie led to larger crappie


Practice makes bad habits. Learning from practice makes perfect.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Today's Birthdays
cro, HC1968
Recent Posts
Relative weight charts in Excel ? Calculations?
by esshup - 03/29/24 01:06 AM
pond experience needed
by esshup - 03/29/24 12:45 AM
New pond middle TN: establishing food chain?
by Bill Cody - 03/28/24 07:57 PM
Happy Birthday Bob Lusk!!
by FireIsHot - 03/28/24 07:33 PM
Working on a .5acre disaster, I mean pond.
by PRCS - 03/28/24 06:39 PM
Fungus infection on fish
by nvcdl - 03/28/24 06:07 PM
Can anyone ID these minnows?
by Dylanfrely - 03/28/24 05:43 PM
1 year after stocking question
by esshup - 03/28/24 04:48 PM
Yellow Perch Spawn 2024
by H20fwler - 03/28/24 04:29 PM
New 2 acre pond stocking plan
by LANGSTER - 03/28/24 03:49 PM
Paper-shell crayfish and Japanese snails
by esshup - 03/28/24 10:39 AM
Newly Uploaded Images
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
by Tbar, December 10
Deer at Theo's 2023
Deer at Theo's 2023
by Theo Gallus, November 13
Minnow identification
Minnow identification
by Mike Troyer, October 6
Sharing the Food
Sharing the Food
by FishinRod, September 9
Nice BGxRES
Nice BGxRES
by Theo Gallus, July 28
Snake Identification
Snake Identification
by Rangersedge, July 12

� 2014 POND BOSS INC. all rights reserved USA and Worldwide

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5