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
Posts557,126
Members18,452
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
Top Posters
esshup 28,422
ewest 21,475
Cecil Baird1 20,043
Bill Cody 15,112
Who's Online Now
16 members (rjackson, jpsdad, esshup, Boondoggle, jbird5986, Sunil, Rick O, Angler8689, anthropic, Justin W, Bing, bstone261, DenaTroyer, Theo Gallus, Shorthose, Freg), 941 guests, and 196 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
OK so as a heads up I will follow up with a paper I just read that will suggest that it isn't required. I am hoping to spark up some conservation about this topic and also hope to understand prevailing ideas and the extent to which they are pervasive. To be sure, only a few short months ago I would have told you that it is absolutely necessary and that low quantities of this size class would greatly reduce growth of fish > 21". The paper I read suggested that a mass size ratio of 100 to 1 of predator to prey (piscavorous relationship) is most appropriate in a sustainable ecosystem. For an 8 lb bass, the corresponding length of BG is between 4 and 4 1/2 inches or between 1/6 to 1/5 the length of the LMB. This 1/6 to 1/5 length ratio is predominate for all LMB weight classes studied (the largest which was ~ 15"). So not much data on trophies but these are rare and hard to collect data on.

Your thoughts and supporting arguments are welcome.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/04/18 09:11 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
Offline
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
I am strictly going off memory here (from PB posts) but I've read about 1 to 3 ratio, regarding LMB length and the necessary gape size for larger prey fish. So the thinking is, a 12" LMB could handle up to a 4" BG. Add to that the thinking that, the LMB would expend less energy on chasing and eating ONE or TWO 4" BG than 4 or 5 two to three inchers.

So so how does the 100 to 1 mass size ratio correlate to the above?


"Politics": derived from 'poly' meaning many, and 'tics' meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
I have no personal experience growing 8 lb lmb but I am working on it and may see it happen this next spring. Like Dr.Luke, I thought the lmb would take a larger meal when offered. In my pond I thought a 21" lmb would eat a 7" bg, Tp, lmb and an Res because they have to hunt less for food. My personal experience to date is that it will take a pond that is heavily stocked with different sized or aged forage unless there are only a few lmb in the pond.

If I need MORE 4" BG then I could see where feeding my bg may cause them to outgrow the size I need to feed my lmb.


Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 514
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 514
In electrofishing samples in a Res in west central KS we very frequently rolled bass with tails present extending from their mouths.
A prey of 1/5 the length would not be visible when swallowed. We had many bass with Gizzard shad with tails exposed. The most memorable was 1 of 22" that we extracted a 12.75" Shad from.
In gill nets we've had bluegill/crappie trapped in nets and Largemouth literally swallow the fish and be stuck until we run nets.
I'm no expert but I'd say when considering Bluegill as the main forage, 4" would be about what a 17-18" LMB would take, no problem. When you start getting into larger bluegill for larger bass you loose some return efficiency because gape size limits the seemingly "taller" BG that length is just not present for that size of fish. If Shad were present, the same LMB that can eat a max of 5" bluegill would probably be able to utilize a 12-13" shad or similar sized fish body shape wise.
It all comes to a head when you consider the effects of stocking shad and the higher potential for problems.
Dr. Luke's example of 35% may be spot-on as the Max size for Bluegill. If other species are present, that could very easily go to near 50% for some forage types.

Last edited by Snipe; 12/04/18 01:59 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
Send me the paper please.

Energetics formula can be done with all factors present. Science is not always in agreement with reality as there are significant deviations from the mean/norm - it does all depend.

Last edited by ewest; 12/04/18 04:11 PM.















Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,861
Likes: 298
A
Online Content
A
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,861
Likes: 298
I've seen 15" LMB trying to eat a 12" LMB that was obviously distressed, floating. They couldn't quite take it in, but I'd bet money a 9" would have been down the hatch.

Same with trout and shad and maybe TP. More fusiform shape, easier to swallow than CNBG/BG.


7ac 2015 CNBG RES FHM 2016 TP FLMB 2017 NLMB GSH L 2018 TP & 70 HSB PK 2019 TP RBT 2020 TFS TP 25 HSB 250 F1,L,RBT -206 2021 TFS TP GSH L,-312 2022 GSH TP CR TFS RBT -234, 2023 BG TP TFS NLMB, -160




Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 1,220
Offline
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 1,220
Originally Posted By: anthropic
I've seen 15" LMB trying to eat a 12" LMB that was obviously distressed, floating. They couldn't quite take it in, but I'd bet money a 9" would have been down the hatch.

Same with trout and shad and maybe TP. More fusiform shape, easier to swallow than CNBG/BG.


All this being said makes me wonder why GSF aren't more readily accepted as a forage "addition" to the base. Their form makes them much easier for LMB to swallow. Not having the reproductive motsy of BG would keep them from getting overpopulated, but I know they get up to 9+ inches without much effort.


.10 surface acre pond, 10.5 foot deep. SW LA. The epitome of a mutt pond. BG, LMB, GSF, RES, BH, Warmouth, Longear Sunfish, Gambusia,Mud Minnows, Crappie, and now shiners!!...I subscribe!!
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Don't mean to keep you guys waiting for the paper ... but here it is ...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5854328/

The source of data they analyzed was from field collected data from various authors. Some of the data was unpublished. Those data that were unpublished are source to state DNRs. The paper is basically a report of what sizes of forage different predators eat according to their size. Intuitively, it seems wholly plausible that fish will target the largest meal they can swallow. The energy is maximized in this scenario. Yet this size forage is actually far less taken by predators ... than forage we currently think to be energy negative. After reading the paper, it seemed plausible that predators like LMB actually benefit from prey less than 1/4 of their length. The most frequently taken range in the 1/6 to 1/5 length range ... but I am sure that these do not comprise the majority of the mass a predator eats. Even so, it is also clear that 1/3 length prey isn't either in the large and diverse samples of this paper. With some effort, I could extract some information from the graphics as to percentages of mass attributed to differing relative lengths ... for another time .. maybe.

I propose that willing readers here at the Pond Boss forum that harvest their bass might examine the stomach contents of their harvests to determine the lengths of prey their bass are eating. Feel free to post in this thread. I would help with getting the data into db form where it can be analyzed statistically, regionally, and according to other potentially relevant relations. Large fish > 20" might provide some information that is notably lacking in this paper. I'll refrain from any debate but it is worth asking the question. If you harvest a 24" fish and have lots of 7-8 BG, conventional wisdoms says that it will have them exclusively in its gullet. But if you find predominately 5" BG then it would seem to challenge convention.

To be sure, BG 1/3 the length of an LMB will fit in an LMB. If they don't predominate in the diet then there must be an explanation as to why. Possible reasons may be that they are less plentiful or that they are more difficult to capture unless sick or dying. These questions are worth asking because a BOW can produce significantly more weight of 5" BG than it can of 7"-8" fish.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/07/18 09:15 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
I agree with this train of thought....It seems logical to me that the predator's mouthgap is the limiting factor. In other words, it's not how long the prey is, it's how "tall" it is that is the limiting attribute. The more fusiform the prey, the greater the length that is viable prey for any given sized predator.

Originally Posted By: Mike Whatley
All this being said makes me wonder why GSF aren't more readily accepted as a forage "addition" to the base. Their form makes them much easier for LMB to swallow. Not having the reproductive motsy of BG would keep them from getting overpopulated, but I know they get up to 9+ inches without much effort.


Mike,

I think one of the reasons GSF are not stocked as forage more frequently is their mouth gap is similar in size to that of an equivalent length LMB and therefore are direct competitors as predators for forage.

Just my 1 cent...

Last edited by Bill D.; 12/04/18 08:07 PM.

[Linked Image]
Be Brave Enough to Suck at Something New!
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112
Likes: 478
B
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
B
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112
Likes: 478
Great topic! The data and concept of reducing the optimum forage size as it relates to the predator size makes a lot of good sense to me. For LMB and several other piscivorous fish, I've always considered their catching and eating 'sunfish' 1/3 the predator length was not their most common (bass) food item. I've thought the larger sized food items were most commonly eaten usually as the weak or most vulnerable individuals encountered. Most frequent forage was smaller that what the predator was capable to swallowing. LMB as many predators are opportunists. Success of capture no doubt plays a big role in what predators most successfully eat.

Also handling time is longer for eating the maximum sized forage items. Handling time of predatory action due to chances of other predators stealing the food is considered a pretty important factor by fishery researchers. When I hand feed large softened sinking pellets to various species, I almost always see several individuals after the same piece of food which suggests "neighbors" are always willing to steal a food item (kleptoparasitism). So if when eating it takes one too long to get food swallowed, food can easily get stolen. It behooves predators to eat as quickly as possible which to me means eat the smallest yet largest items that can be swallowed quickly.

Last edited by Bill Cody; 12/04/18 08:26 PM.

aka Pond Doctor & Dr. Perca Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: DrLuke
I am strictly going off memory here (from PB posts) but I've read about 1 to 3 ratio, regarding LMB length and the necessary gape size for larger prey fish. So the thinking is, a 12" LMB could handle up to a 4" BG. Add to that the thinking that, the LMB would expend less energy on chasing and eating ONE or TWO 4" BG than 4 or 5 two to three inchers.

So so how does the 100 to 1 mass size ratio correlate to the above?


No the mass ratio is about 15 to 1. A 4" BG provides roughly 6.67% of a 12" LMB's body weight. It is enough to sustain 12" LMB for four days and if 12" LMB can eat one every day for 30 days he'll gain >30% of his body weight shocked !

Here is spreadsheet where you can play with the mass ratio:

Attached Images
LMB_LENGTHWEIGHT.xlsx (11.09 KB, 120 downloads)
Last edited by jpsdad; 12/04/18 08:29 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,028
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,028
Likes: 274
Good topic. I've always accepted the 1/4 to 1/3 without really questioning it. From an energy expended versus calories obtained, it always made sense. However, thinking about it for the first time, It seems that one prey fish would take longer to break down versus two in the predators body.


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: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: Dave Davidson1
Good topic. I've always accepted the 1/4 to 1/3 without really questioning it. From an energy expended versus calories obtained, it always made sense. .....


I agree, good topic. I now wonder whether it is really true that a big meal provides more calories vs energy extended. How much energy does a big fish use over the hours and hours it is struggling to swallow prey that is so large that it extends from its mouth vs quickly swallowing smaller prey?


[Linked Image]
Be Brave Enough to Suck at Something New!
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: TGW1
... If I need MORE 4" BG then I could see where feeding my bg may cause them to outgrow the size I need to feed my lmb.


Tracy,

To be clear, I am not recommending that you deviate from your plan. This goes for everyone following a plan recommended by professionals or of their own making.

If, however, anyone finds themselves down the road, or presently, in a situation where the plan isn't providing growth and fish are stalling prior to the ultimate weight goal. Also where one has been diligent to cull bass and the only resolution is additional inputs ...
then I think what has one to lose?

The idea of harvesting > 6" BG is that their harvest results in a freeing of carrying capacity. Also these BG consume many of their own young below 3/4" in length. In a hatchery setting, it takes only a few breeding pairs to completely fill the carrying capacity with 2" BG in a couple of months. In the south a minimum of 3 crops of these can be produced. The point I am making is that the idea is to have a smaller biomass of breeders and a large biomass of YOY. BG can easily attain 4" in the first year where the biomass is below carrying capacity. LMB provide the cropping to keep the BOW below BG carrying capacity which stimulates additional breeding and crops of YOY BG.

Chunting's old clubs used this strategy along with LMB culling to grow > 10lb bass. So if all else is failing, it is very much worth giving it a try.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/05/18 04:50 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
Offline
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
Originally Posted By: jpsdad
Originally Posted By: DrLuke
I am strictly going off memory here (from PB posts) but I've read about 1 to 3 ratio, regarding LMB length and the necessary gape size for larger prey fish. So the thinking is, a 12" LMB could handle up to a 4" BG. Add to that the thinking that, the LMB would expend less energy on chasing and eating ONE or TWO 4" BG than 4 or 5 two to three inchers.

So so how does the 100 to 1 mass size ratio correlate to the above?


No the mass ratio is about 15 to 1. A 4" BG provides roughly 6.67% of a 12" LMB's body weight. It is enough to sustain 12" LMB for four days and if 12" LMB can eat one every day for 30 days he'll gain >30% of his body weight shocked !



Here is spreadsheet where you can play with the mass ratio:


Do you have some data, or can you comment, on the conversion ratio of the 'raw BG' into net body mass for the LMB?


"Politics": derived from 'poly' meaning many, and 'tics' meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: DrLuke
Originally Posted By: jpsdad


No the mass ratio is about 15 to 1. A 4" BG provides roughly 6.67% of a 12" LMB's body weight. It is enough to sustain 12" LMB for four days and if 12" LMB can eat one every day for 30 days he'll gain >30% of his body weight shocked !


Do you have some data, or can you comment, on the conversion ratio of the 'raw BG' into net body mass for the LMB?


Assuming 5lbs forage annually for maintenance works out to 1.36% of body mass daily maintenance. So actually maybe 5 days maintenance. That available for growth is the excess above maintenance :

6.67% - 1.36% = 5.3%

The relative weight ingested for growth over 30 days:

1.053^30 - 1 = 4.7- 1 = 3.7 times the starting weight

Divide by conversion of 10 to 1 = .37 or 37% .... to be conservative, I stated > than 30% growth.

The estimate relies on the validity of maintenance and gain conversion factors and it neglects the rising maintenance as the fish grows through the 30 days.

>30% in one month is AWESOME but most pond-owners have LMB that surpass that growth early in the life of the BOW. Let's say you grow your initial stocker LMB from 2" to 2lbs in the first 12 months. The monthly growth must average 74%/month in order to achieve the weight. Most of the growth rate is frontloaded where the bigger the LMB gets, the slower its rate of growth. Even so, to achieve 2lbs in 12 months likely requires >30% monthly growth rate when the fish is 1lb.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/05/18 04:47 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,861
Likes: 298
A
Online Content
A
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,861
Likes: 298
Re checking the stomachs of LMB greater than 20 inches, it would be very stressful for me to kill such a fish. They are too hard to grow!

Last edited by anthropic; 12/05/18 05:28 PM.

7ac 2015 CNBG RES FHM 2016 TP FLMB 2017 NLMB GSH L 2018 TP & 70 HSB PK 2019 TP RBT 2020 TFS TP 25 HSB 250 F1,L,RBT -206 2021 TFS TP GSH L,-312 2022 GSH TP CR TFS RBT -234, 2023 BG TP TFS NLMB, -160




Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: anthropic
Re checking the stomachs of LMB greater than 20 inches, it would be very stressful for me to kill such a fish. They are too hard to grow!


No worries Frank. The request was for harvested fish only. Perhaps a candidate for this might be tubguy who has a goal of 5 - 6 lbs ultimate weight with lots of 2+ lbers. His plan involves harvesting fish when they reach 20 inches (5 lbs) to keep the cycle going. Plus he has many 3lb+ fish he currently needs to harvest. His BOW could provide a lot of useful data just working with the harvest he is planning.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/05/18 05:56 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
Offline
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 618
Likes: 73
Originally Posted By: jpsdad
Originally Posted By: DrLuke
Originally Posted By: jpsdad


No the mass ratio is about 15 to 1. A 4" BG provides roughly 6.67% of a 12" LMB's body weight. It is enough to sustain 12" LMB for four days and if 12" LMB can eat one every day for 30 days he'll gain >30% of his body weight shocked !


Do you have some data, or can you comment, on the conversion ratio of the 'raw BG' into net body mass for the LMB?


Assuming 5lbs forage annually for maintenance works out to 1.36% of body mass daily maintenance. So actually maybe 5 days maintenance. That available for growth is the excess above maintenance :

6.67% - 1.36% = 5.3%

The relative weight ingested for growth over 30 days:

1.053^30 - 1 = 4.7- 1 = 3.7 times the starting weight

Divide by conversion of 10 to 1 = .37 or 37% .... to be conservative, I stated > than 30% growth.

The estimate relies on the validity of maintenance and gain conversion factors and it neglects the rising maintenance as the fish grows through the 30 days.

>30% in one month is AWESOME but most pond-owners have LMB that surpass that growth early in the life of the BOW. Let's say you grow your initial stocker LMB from 2" to 2lbs in the first 12 months. The monthly growth must average 74%/month in order to achieve the weight. Most of the growth rate is frontloaded where the bigger the LMB gets, the slower its rate of growth. Even so, to achieve 2lbs in 12 months likely requires >30% monthly growth rate when the fish is 1lb.


Thanks for walking me through the math! You actually answered my question before I even asked it, I just didn't realize it! I love the depth of knowledge people bring to the forum. I also think this thread is extremely interesting, in that it potentially challenges (and perhaps updates) prior management strategy. I know, I'll wait and see what the data says, but pretty exciting concept!
I added LMB to my pond in Oct 2017 (as corrective stocking), and my personal management plan doesn't call for start of harvest yet. But when I do, I'll be happy to add some data.


"Politics": derived from 'poly' meaning many, and 'tics' meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,285
Likes: 288
Moderator
Offline
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,285
Likes: 288
Originally Posted By: Bill Cody
...So if when eating it takes one too long to get food swallowed, food can easily get stolen. It behooves predators to eat as quickly as possible which to me means eat the smallest yet largest items that can be swallowed quickly.

As a rule, the largest LMB(9#'+) in the pack I fed are the most aggresive, and the first to grab a handout. I've had them attack a 4-5" CNBG/GSF and swim away, and I've also seen the same LMB come back 2 more times and feed again. That's far rarer. 20+" LMB rarely hit a 8" CNBG here.

The biggest CNBG I've removed from a LMB here was 10.5". Probably an old CNBG that was slow moving. The LMB didn't survive the meal.

I've posted all this before, but over the last 4-5 years, I've really cut back on feedings in the upper part of our pond where most of the CNBG spawning beds are. These fish are fed once or twice a day for one second only, and dependent on the season. These fish primarily get a maintenance diet of 1/8" pellets and nothing more. I want them in that smaller LMB gape friendly range for as long as possible. More pellets per pound means more fish eat, and are more apt to spread the calories evenly. The feeder at our dam is targeting trophy sized CNBG (10"+) and only 9.5mm pellets are thrown, and are thrown multiple times a day. Short throws seem to keep smaller CNBG away from the open water frenzy. Both methods seem to work as intended.

So here's a question. What's the gape of this LMB? Is it 5.5" from extended lip to lip, or is it 4.75" from the protrusions on the roof palette to the lower lip? This LMB was 9#'s, and if measuring from the narrowest part of the mouth opening (4.75"), she would max out at about an 8-8.5" CNBG, which has an average height of 4" here. 10" CNBG average 6-6.25" height. Gape determines everything.






Attached Images
IMG_2879_lines.jpg IMG_2880_Lines.jpg
Last edited by FireIsHot; 12/05/18 07:05 PM. Reason: spelling

AL

Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: DrLuke

Thanks for walking me through the math! You actually answered my question before I even asked it, I just didn't realize it! I love the depth of knowledge people bring to the forum. I also think this thread is extremely interesting, in that it potentially challenges (and perhaps updates) prior management strategy. I know, I'll wait and see what the data says, but pretty exciting concept!
I added LMB to my pond in Oct 2017 (as corrective stocking), and my personal management plan doesn't call for start of harvest yet. But when I do, I'll be happy to add some data.


Most welcome Dr. Luke.

To be sure, I can't take credit for the concept of removing larger sizes of BG. Chunting's clubs were doing this decades ago and while this regional management method seems to have been widely known by the local private managers and their members, it also seems to have been a widely kept secret or now forgotten lore. It was Chunting's remarks that got me to asking the question and so I totally agree about how there is so much to learn here.

Thanks for offering to add to the data! As I compile it, I'll update in synopsis and also detailed form and share with all.

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/05/18 07:30 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: FireIsHot


So here's a question. What's the gape of this LMB? Is it 5.5" from extended lip to lip, or is it 4.75" from the protrusions on the roof palette to the lower lip? This LMB was 9#'s, and if measuring from the narrowest part of the mouth opening (4.75"), she would max out at about an 8-8.5" CNBG, which has an average height of 4" here. 10" CNBG average 6-6.25" height. Gape determines everything.



I would lean toward to the 4.75" measurement or perhaps just in between. It might interest you to learn that the 100 to 1 mass ratio is fullfilled at 4.5" for a 8.5lb 24" LMB and at 4.7" for 9.78 lb 25" LMB. These are standard LMB and BG weights. In both cases, the length is between 1/6 and 1/5 the length of the LMB (.188).

A BG has spines in its dorsal fins and extends them rigidly as defense. This may also play a role.

Looking at the photograph got me to think about another relevant feature of the mouth that might contribute to the success of capture. Its that tounge. Its there for a purpose and I think that purpose is to push prey to rear of the mouth. It may be used in conjuction with the roof pads for constraining prey motion. What are your thoughts Al? Would the tounge affect the measurement of effective gape?

Last edited by jpsdad; 12/05/18 08:26 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: jpsdad
Originally Posted By: anthropic
Re checking the stomachs of LMB greater than 20 inches, it would be very stressful for me to kill such a fish. They are too hard to grow!


No worries Frank. The request was for harvested fish only. Perhaps a candidate for this might be tubguy who has a goal of 5 - 6 lbs ultimate weight with lots of 2+ lbers. His plan involves harvesting fish when they reach 20 inches (5 lbs) to keep the cycle going. Plus he has many 3lb+ fish he currently needs to harvest. His BOW could provide a lot of useful data just working with the harvest he is planning.


Our pond is only an avg. of .5 acre and we harvest all LMB over 15 inches. Biggest to date is 18.75 inches. If the stomach content data on these fish would be helpful, I will be happy to provide it. If the info from these LMB is useful, should I report the data back to this thread or are you going to start a dedicated thread to the activity?


[Linked Image]
Be Brave Enough to Suck at Something New!
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112
Likes: 478
B
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
B
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112
Likes: 478
This thread continues in the GREAT discussion territory. It is innovative and creative thinking by our members.


aka Pond Doctor & Dr. Perca Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 278
Originally Posted By: Bill D.

Our pond is only an avg. of .5 acre and we harvest all LMB over 15 inches. Biggest to date is 18.75 inches. If the stomach content data on these fish would be helpful, I will be happy to provide it. If the info from these LMB is useful, should I report the data back to this thread or are you going to start a dedicated thread to the activity?


Good question Bill. I think a new thread is in order just for keeping records. It would be best if contributors list all their data in a single post and just append as needed when they acquire new data. I will start one and post a link in this thread.

So here is another question. Do we just want to keep data on locale, LMB Length, LMB weight, Forage Lengths, BOW size? Other possible data might be BG harvest weights, etc. Whatever, we find, we'll most certainly ask more questions and the more detailed the data the more we will be able to glean from it. I'll just ask for the initial suggestions unless members weigh in on additional data.


It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Today's Birthdays
cro, HC1968
Recent Posts
pond experience needed
by esshup - 03/29/24 08:19 AM
Relative weight charts in Excel ? Calculations?
by esshup - 03/29/24 08:05 AM
Can anyone ID these minnows?
by Sunil - 03/29/24 07:31 AM
Dewatering bags seeded to form berms?
by RogersTailgate - 03/29/24 05:45 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
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
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