Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Types of fish to choose Tiger Bass ( F1)

I was looking for some first hand experience with stocking the Tiger Bass or F1 in my pond. The pond is a new dig in south louisiana, it is 7 acres it has recently been stocked with blue gill and fat head minnows. I will be stocking large mouth bass in june. My problem is which strain of lmb to stock with native, florida or tiger? Any suggestions? Thanks

Lots here on the subject. Tiger Bass are a special (trademarked)type of F-1 LMB. They are specially selected for size and aggression. Only American Sport Fish can sell them as they own the trademark and have the selected fish. Others have F-1s but I am not sure about them being specially selected like ASF's. Todd Overton has tigre bass which are his version. You could talk to him or send him a PM. IMO if the brood fish are not specially selected for size and aggression like ASF's then all F-1's are is a sub strain (Fl/Northern cross) of LMB to be used for the center of the LMB's geographic range.

Many of the fisheries guys here have F-1s for sale but I don't know about their brood stock.

ewest thanks for the info. I am thinking about going with f1's but i wanted to mix some native with them. Do you think thats a good idea or should i stay with just f1.

cajun touch base with us if you like we are working on a project just west of New Orleans and should be taking them F1 Tiger Bass, Northern and Florida bass next June. I used to just stock Tiger and Love them. However we now normally mix to meet demands more northern for better catchability or some pure Florida for more trophy potential or some of all three.

Also Do not know the numbers you stocked but it is not too late if really want to grow big bass to stock additional forage or more numbers and scale back on numbers of bass stocked next June. We can flip you a stocking plan based on your goals if interested it is working pretty dang well.

I use a mix like Greg indicated. Last time I used 1/2 Northern , 1/4 Fla and 1/4 Tiger F-1s.

Greg, is there any evidence thus far about the maximum size potential of the tiger bass as compared to pure strain florida LMB?

What is the northern limit where you would advise against the stocking of pure florida LMB as the lone predator in a new lake? I know they have been stocked as far north as Maryland to add florida genes to the pool, but that is a very different scenario.

Not real hard data I know of, Ewest? Im still saying Tiger tough to get them much into double digits.
SOmewhere aorudn Lexington KY I think the Flordia bass thing is not a good idea. The TIger we stocked for Deer Creek Lodge near Evansville,IN are doing awesome bunch around 8-9 lbs right now- 6 years.

Cajun, there are a few fishery guys here in Texas who are not convinced about the catchability of pure Florida bass being different than that of native bass. I beleive there are studies that say different to that opinion. Which makes my head spin on who is right. However, the evidence is clear that pure florida bass do get larger. If your goals are to grow trophy bass, you may want to consider only pure Floridas. If Trohy is your goal finding pure Floidas is your next task.

Greg Grimes has as much expereince with this as anyone I know and if he says there is a difference than I would go with that. For me the real question is how much size are you willing to give up to catch more fish. Or said in other words how do you QUANTIFY harder to catch. Size is easy to quantify, "catchability" is a bit more subjective.

If your goals are to grow big fish with a few trophies than the Tigre or F1 sounds like a good bet. If this is your goal I would tend to go with a 50% FI's 25% native and 25% Floridas. There are many opinions on this subject and getting a defentive "correct" answer is not as easy as I thought it would be. The more I learn, study, and ask questions of those in the know, the more I am leaning towards recommending a heavier Florida or all Florida stocking; providing your goals are to grow really big bass.

I would like to see the study that says catchability of pure Florida LMB is as good as Northern LMB. Can you provide a cite so I can compare it to the other studies ? I may have miunderstood your post if you are not saying there is such a study.

Greg there is an extensive study on Fla LMB and cold tolerance. IMO the northern limit for good results from Fla LMB is about the North line of Tenn extended but factoring in elevation and water source (cold water). There is no data I have seen on F-1 results by latitude but there is anecdotal evidence of good results a good bit further north than Flas.

I want to point out again that F-1 crosses are not the same as Tiger LMB. The entire concept of Tiger LMB is selected genetics. The brood fish are picked especially for size in the Fla female and aggressiveness in the Northern male. Also keep in mind that Fla male LMB are small in comparison to Northern males and especially to Fla females. If you want half of your LMB to be undersized then use all Flas. Also want to point out that Fla LMB have a longer life span in the south therefore they will be in the pond reproducing longer than the Northern. This reduces the need (%) of Flas that you need to maintain a viable population. IMO the best way to approach the situation , depending on goals is to stock only Fla females plus northern and Tigers. Stock a few (small % ) every couple of years to keep a ladder of potential trophy fish. For most people LMB strain and genetics is not a major factor in results. That is because the limiting factor for growth and condition in a high % of waters is not strain or genetics but is not enough food for the LMB. Without enough food LMB strain and genetics never get a chance to evidence results. Only with enough food and good water quality can the other factors make a difference.

Greg I have seen 12 lb F-1s but not heard of any bigger. No published info on the subjest that I have seen.

There is a lot here on the subject.

When I started this post, I was thinking that food and water quality being equal, if you are far enough south, and want to challenge for a state record LMB, you are better off stocking florida strain LMB. Then I went and looked at the Texas Lunker Share pogram.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/spdest/visit...5&Submit=Go

For the last 3 years, not only has Texas posted records of every LMB submitted to the lunkershare program, but they also have posted the results of genetic testing as to whether the bass was a pure strain florida LMB, or a hybrid florida/northern cross. I found the numbers surprising.

Of all of the 13 pound plus bass submitted, there were 34 pure strain LMB and 34 hybrid cross bass.

Of all of the 14 pound plus bass, there were 12 hybrids and 11 florida strain bass.

Of all of the 15 pound plus bass, there were 5 hybrid, and 4 florida strain bass.

Of all of the 16 pound plus bass, there were 3 hybrid and 1 florida strain bass.

I was expecting that as you increased the size of the bass, there would be a greater proportion of pure strain florida LMB. There aren't enough numbers for statistical significance, but it appears that the numbers skew in the opposite direction. More of the larger fish, especially when you look at the 15 and 16 pound fish, appear to be hybrids. This actually is consistent with the thinking that the world record fish, from Georgia,was a hybrid cross, and that most of the giants caught in California are also hybrid crosses.

I would think that the absolute best way to stock a new lake would be with stock from huge LMB caught in the same geographical area. For instance, in Virginia, if stocking a new lake and hoping for trophy bass, you might be best off using trophy fish caught from Briery Creek Lake, and Lake Connor, which have produced most of the huge fish in the state in the last 5 years. In California, you might be best served by stocking bass from Lake Castaic, and similarly productive waters. Certainly the food supply and water quality from the above waters played a huge role, but in stocking from proven stock, you would be nearly assured that your fingerlings would have the genetic potential to get huge, if given ideal growing conditions.

Large fish don't transplant well. The new environment often causes them to languish, drop weight and die off.

I've often thought that finding a huge female on a nest, running her off, getting the eggs and hatching them would be the way to go. However, every step of the process would be problematical.

I bet some commercial hatcheries have done it.

You might be better off buying from a really good hatchery and throwing lots of food in there.

All you would need is for the fish to survive for one spawn. I understand it would be difficult, but if the state of Texas can do it on a pretty large scale, I am sue it can be done.

It is a shame the Texas Lunker Share program doesn't sell any fry. I am sure they could make an absolute killing.

"and that most of the giants caught in California are also hybrid crosses."

I don't think that is the case as some of them come from smaller reservoirs that were stocked by the state with only pure Flas. I have some Calif data if I can find it.

In looking at data it is a must to keep it in context. Think about this. The Share-a-lunker program consists of caught (angling) fish. If , as is shown, Fla LMB are less aggressive and exhibit a less catchability trait than Northern or F-1s then the #s of caught fish would so indicate. In other words that data does not prove that a higher % of F-1s get bigger than Flas but only that they are more apt to be caught. It does prove that F-1s can get big also.

Trying to extrapolate from the small sample size of Texas caught bass over 13 pounds and turned over to the state alive, is even more complicated than you are stating.

Not only is the sample size small and accounting only for catchable fish, but it also doesn't account for the overall number of pure Florida strain bass vs hybrid bass.

What I am saying is that if 75% of the bass in Texas are hybrids and 25% pure strain Florida LMB, which may not be unreasonable since most lakes probably were not sterilized prior to stocking Florida bass, then if the hybrids grew just as big and were caught no more easily, you should see 3 times as many trophy hybrids as trophy pure strain florida bass.

Just going by what I've read regarding the castaic bass. I thought I had read that they are hybrids.

I believe that Texas does or did at one point auction off some of the Share a Lunker fry. I have a friend in Texas that purchased some a number of years in a row. Either that, or it was because he knows people in high places that they were available to him. He did say that they weren't cheap.

"What I am saying is that if 75% of the bass in Texas are hybrids and 25% pure strain Florida LMB, which may not be unreasonable since most lakes probably were not sterilized prior to stocking Florida bass, then if the hybrids grew just as big and were caught no more easily, you should see 3 times as many trophy hybrids as trophy pure strain florida bass. "

I will try and find some info I have on that from TX outside the SLP.

That would be awesome. Thanks.

I'm pretty curious about what would be an ideal stocking mix in southern Virginia, if the intent is to actively manage and grow true trophy bass.American Sportfish claims that their Tiger Bass have reached sizes of over 15 pounds, but I'm a little dubious of that claim. I wonder if stocking a mix of Tiger Bass and pure Florida strain LMB might give an ideal mix of Florida/Northern genes at this lattitude.

I do know that Briery Creek Lake, which has produced multiple 16 and 15 pound bass, and is considered far and away the best trophy lake in Virginia, was impounded in 1986 and stocked with both Florida strain and northern LMB.


http://www.americansportfish.com/?option=com_content&view=article&id=34&Itemid=60

link about Briery Creek Lake
http://www.roanoke.com/outdoors/billcochran/wb/21780

link about Briery Creek Lake, Lake Connor and trophy bass fishing in Virginia
http://www.virginia-outdoors.com/articles/trophylargemouth.html

I would lean more toward Northern LMB at your location. IMO 50% northern 25% Tigers and 25% Flas. and then every few years stock a few pure Flas at 12 in. Several of us are trying some of each now with good results. To early to tell max size. We have caught one 13-6 in an older lake which was I think a Fla transplant. That lake has mostly northern LMB with some added Tiger LMB and some pure Fla from ASF.

TABLE 2 Sample sizes, percentage of Florida largemouth bass (FLMB) alleles (i.e., introgression), and relative standard error (RSE; with 95% confidence interval [CI] in parentheses) estimated for age-0 and adult (age &#8805; 1) largemouth bass from Texas reservoirs. Asterisk () denotes significant difference (P < 0.05) between age-0 largemouth bass and any other age-group. Age 0 Adult (age &#8805; 1)
Reservoir - Sample size - FLMB alleles (%) - RSE (95% CI)- Sample size FLMB alleles (%) RSE (95% CI)
Canyon - 69 63.3 10.8 (9.8–11.8) - 73 - 66.7 - 10.0 (8.9–11.1)
Kurth - 79 49.7 14.2 (12.5–16.1) -200 - 44.6 - 15.8 -(13.9–17.9)
Leon - 179 30.6 21.4 (18.9–24.2) - 215 - 28.2 - 22.6 - (19.8–25.9)
O. H. Ivie - 87 86.8 5.5 (4.6–6.6) - 87 - 85.1 - 5.9 - (4.9–6.9)
Pinkston - 24 76.2 7.9 (6.9–9.0) -100 - 85.2 - 5.9 -(4.9–6.9)
Waco - 129 46.5 15.2 (13.6–16.9) - 275 - 44.8 - 15.7 - (13.8–17.9)

Ewet, taken alone, that data is interesting. It would be much more interesting however if we knew how many trophy bass were caught out of each of those waters. Even then you would need to know the size of the impoundment, the quality of forage supply, and a myriad of other details to make heads or tails of those numbers.



What is the issue with Floida strain LMB in northern waters? Increased mortality and failure to reach growth potential I suspect? I wonder what the ideal Florda strain allele percentage is in southern virginia, if aiming for peak size, not volume of fish.

Like most Floridians, they don't like cold temps.

Many of the native floridian's I've met in virginia have been nice and fat and reproducing without difficulty.

I just found just the study I was looking for. This study examines the proportion of Florida alleles in multiple Virginia lakes. In this one study, performed in 2005, on average, Virginia bass possess 47% Florida alleles. Briery Creek Lake, the top trophy bass lake in Virginia, was found to have 61% florida alleles.
http://www.seafwa.org/resource/dynamic/private/PDF/dutton-251-262.pdf

I'm actually surprised the number aren't that different from the allele percentages you posted from Texas. I pulled some info below on Lake Fork. In surveys performed between 2006 and 2009, Lake Fork contained an average of between 48 and 53 percent Florida alleles.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/more-sp...unkers-down.ece

I would , over time, expect something near 50% if the 2 subspecies were stocked. Simple statistics would give half the offspring as crosses. That of course assumes a lot of factors are equal which they may not be.

Check your email.

Thanks for the email.

Your statement thaty over time the introgression should be 50% if both species were stocked is only true if they are initially stocked in equal percentages. From the study you sent me:



This means that if you stock 85% Florida strain into a new lake, and sample again in 10 years, you should find 85% florida strain alleles. If you stock 50% Tiger bass and 50% Florida strain, you should find 75% florida genes.

That of course assumes that there are not selective pressures favoring either Florida strain or northern strain LMB traits (phenotype). In that case one set of genes should begin to outnumber the other over time.

What is surprising to me, is that I have seen no study that indicates those selective pressures exist in most environments. For instance, in Briery Creek lake, an area thought to be too far north for successful florida strain LMB introduction, the percentage of florida alleles has remained quite high over time. Likewise, in Texas impoundments, the introgression rate seems mostly stable over time, typically changing significantly only when those lakes are stocked, which brings in new genes from the outside.

If northern strain LMB were really significantly better adapted to life in virginia, shouldn't the 25 generations since the stocking of Briery Creek lake be enough for those manifestations to become apparent?

On the flip side, if Florida strain were really better adapted to southern climates, after all of the generations since the fish was introduced into Texas waters with native hybrid LMB, wouldn't the percentage of florida genes have increased?