|
Forums36
Topics40,947
Posts557,808
Members18,485
| |
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
|
14 members (catscratch, Boondoggle, TLL, FishinRod, BCR Pond, Theeck, Sunil, Justin W, Amhano8r, Steve Clubb, Terry Battisti, Donatello, GunBoss, Fishingadventure),
1,080
guests, and
267
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300
Moderator
|
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300 |
The lack of any new TX state records for LMB however, tends to make me believe the results are almost completely forage based. When Fork filled, there was unlimited forage for an incredibly small LMB population. Now, years down the road, Lake Fork produces hundreds of 10 pound LMB annually, and almost on a daily basis. But few are over 13 pounds. The competition for forage has increased, so the true monsters have to fight more for food.
With the loss of water at Fork and Falcon last year, and the subsequent refilling, I believe the next several years will show a tremendous number of new trophy LMB. Tilapia at Falcon, and shad at Fork drive the food chain, and I know for a fact that Fork has roaming schools of shad that literally black out a graph.
Reviving an old thread, but I think I got the above statement half right. I've fished and watched Lake Fork a lot this year, and the number of XXL LMB have increased dramatically. Bob's original post was basically about genetics vs. opportunity, but strange things have happened at Fork. Yellow Bass, shad explosion with the water level rise, and LMB range. These fish (Yellow Bass) have thrived at Fork and suddenly LMB in the 13 to 15 pound range have started rolling in. Shad populations are very strong also. But, what's interesting is that the larger LMB are being caught off shore. Fork's historically been a stump filled reservoir that offered great protection to the larger fish. But, they seem to have moved to where the forage is, and have grown accordingly. It's not uncommon for these LMB to be caught in 25'-35' of open water. Quite a change from the historical range of these fish. So, at least to me, forage is king and it trumps both cover and genetics. I think if I was starting a new pond, I'd be inclined to overstock forage, wait a little longer to stock the best genetic LMB in could find, and then get larger, but fewer fish. All this has me thinking that I'll add shad to the mix next Spring, and hope I see the same results. The next few years will tell, but I think LMB in the 17 to 18 pound fish will start showing back up at Fork.
AL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
Al, I fished Lake Fork on all three rises starting back in the 80's when 100 LMB days under 14 inches were the norm - then came the slot limits. I believe in strong forage base but also believe in hi-bred cattle and race horses.. 
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame  Lunker
|
OP
Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,505 |
Al, why would you buy larger fish if stocking a new pond if you believe forage is king?
On another releted note In my opinion I think the front end of a fishes life is equally as important as the back end in terms of growing a true monster....most folks think forage in terms of bigger prey for adult fish.......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300 |
I believe in strong forage base but also believe in hi-bred cattle and race horses.. George I agree, but I'm low-bred, and am growing tremendously with my large forage base. Maybe I need to move to a smaller pond. 
AL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14 |
In my opinion, I believe the front end of a fish's life is possibly more important than the back end....at least where BG are concerned....
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,312 Likes: 300 |
George, let's say you have budgeted $500 to buy LMB. I think if size is what you're after, then buying 200 4-5" LMB would be better than buying 500 2-3" LMB. They could eat larger forage fish, and have less competition for the forage that's available.
Right now, I'm trying to reverse my own bad decisions, by adding structure specifically for forage protection. I need them to grow bigger, faster, stronger.
I'm jonesing to learn more about the Camelot Bell's like yours, but would be curious if in a pond like mine is presently, if I would get the growth numbers you're seeing. They are more aggressive, and I'd want to make sure they had plenty eat.
Heading out soon.
AL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
I believe in strong forage base but also believe in hi-bred cattle and race horses.. George I agree, but I'm low-bred, and am growing tremendously with my large forage base. Maybe I need to move to a smaller pond. Al, we gonna have some fun today lookin' at some good water! See'ya in about 30 minutes! I'm a lucky guy having friends like you and Brian that pick up and deliver for special days looking at ponds - lakes in your and Brian's. I'll be on my front porch lookin' for adventure, my friend! George
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,794 |
George, let's say you have budgeted $500 to buy LMB. I think if size is what you're after, then buying 200 4-5" LMB would be better than buying 500 2-3" LMB. They could eat larger forage fish, and have less competition for the forage that's available.
Right now, I'm trying to reverse my own bad decisions, by adding structure specifically for forage protection. I need them to grow bigger, faster, stronger.
I'm jonesing to learn more about the Camelot Bell's like yours, but would be curious if in a pond like mine is presently, if I would get the growth numbers you're seeing. They are more aggressive, and I'd want to make sure they had plenty eat.
Heading out soon. Al, I have some good ideas - I like small water for grow out smaller inexpensive stockers to transfer to main lake. See 'ya in a bit! George
N.E. Texas 2 acre and 1/4 acre ponds
Original george #173 (22 June 2002)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,490 Likes: 265
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014 Lunker
|
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014 Lunker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,490 Likes: 265 |
Just read back over this thread. There is some new info on both genetics, traits and management. Not going to post it here yet. Look for it in the next few PB mag articles.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57 |
|
.gif)
