Pond Boss Magazine
http://www.pondboss.com/images/userfiles/image/20130301193901_6_150by50orangewhyshouldsubscribejpeg.jpg
Advertisment
Newest Members
nogoer, Jillayne, Jack Sasquatch, Drake1028, Michael78
16027 Registered Users
Forum Stats
16027 Members
36 Forums
36757 Topics
500472 Posts

Max Online: 1210 @ 08/23/18 11:01 PM
Top Posters
esshup 24033
Cecil Baird1 20043
ewest 19847
Dave Davidson1 13875
Bill Cody 12817
Who's Online
4 registered (anthropic, dreams of ponds, Snipe, optimalfishfood), 83 Guests and 536 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Topic Options
#500560 - 01/11/19 07:23 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Snipe Online   content


Registered: 10/26/18
Posts: 387
Loc: NW Kansas
There's a reason the water is so clear, generally.. Lack of nutrients (fertility) is normally hand in hand with clear water-naturally occurring. Fertile waters tend to grow all sorts of organisms that "color" the water.
_________________________
I Subscribe!

Top
#500563 - 01/11/19 07:48 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Bill D. Offline


Registered: 10/19/14
Posts: 5867
Loc: Boone County Illinois
A data point....There is a decent walleye lake near me in a state park. The lake is 147 acres. They stock 50 WE/acre every year. They estimate the harvest at 54 lbs/acre/yr. Their last survey showed 80% of the WE caught are 14+ inches. The lake also has BCP, BG, GSD, LMB, CC, YP and they also stock one muskie/acre yearly.


Edited by Bill D. (01/11/19 07:48 PM)
_________________________

You'll never know what ya can catch unless you wet a line!

Top
#500564 - 01/11/19 09:13 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Snipe Online   content


Registered: 10/26/18
Posts: 387
Loc: NW Kansas
Originally Posted By: Bill D.
A data point....There is a decent walleye lake near me in a state park. The lake is 147 acres. They stock 50 WE/acre every year. They estimate the harvest at 54 lbs/acre/yr. Their last survey showed 80% of the WE caught are 14+ inches. The lake also has BCP, BG, GSD, LMB, CC, YP and they also stock one muskie/acre yearly.

That's a perfect example of maintaining a supply of WAE for angler opportunity, and as stated 54lbs per acre is being removed at 14"+. That's a 1lb fish (approx.)
I hope I didn't mislead someone on the WAE situation, because stocking at this rate is taking into account this is an annual repeat, which some other predator would likely fill if WAE were not present. It also means any other predator biomass is lower as a result. I'm probably confusing more than just myself here but to stock densities such as this, something else is affected in another way. LMB are lower in number, as are YP, and I'm sure the BCP get some control by WAE.
This is a good example of rates that would wreck a more controlled and established pond environment. I hope I cleared that up..??
_________________________
I Subscribe!

Top
#500580 - 01/12/19 03:58 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Bill Cody Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent

Lunker

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 12817
Loc: Northwest Ohio - Malinta OH
The state biologist really did not say the opposite when he said
Quote:
... but the state biologist said the opposite. He said that the clear water allows deeper sunlight penetration and therefore more water with habitat and oxygen.


What the biologist said was true but more habitat and oxygen does not mean that more fish food is present compared to more fertile water (greenish). More fertile water & more productivity means more fish food per unit of water as in enriched cloudy with a greenish hue from lots of microorganisms present (productivity), usually phytoplankton. The amount of productivity is on a scale or range from essentially none (clear swimming pool) to hyper eutrophic pea (soup green).

What he was saying is with clearer water, it produces deeper oxygen causing more space for fish to live because the oxygenated water layer is deeper but not necessarily more is food present. There is more volume/space for fish to live. What good is more volume or space if production of food is lacking due to lower concentration of nutrients (phytoplankton) that grow the fish food? More space can provide more benthic organisms but not necessarily more phytoplankton-rotifers to feed fish fry. If fish fry do not grow larger, high numbers of fry won't survive to eat the larger foods. Generally the clearer the water is,, the fewer or less food items that are present. Lack of food present results in fewer fish that can survive and flourish (carrying capacity) per acre. Productivity or fertility is measured by how much algae/zooplankton/macroinvertebrates are present in each unit volume (milliliter, ounce, quart, gallon) of water.


Edited by Bill Cody (01/12/19 04:55 PM)
_________________________
Keep This Forum Viable, Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management

Top
#500583 - 01/12/19 05:18 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Don Mulligan Offline


Registered: 01/10/19
Posts: 9
Loc: Indiana
Bill, Well put and your assessment is likely spot on. To his credit, I think that was probably what the biologist said, along with lots of other observations. What is curious to me, however, is that it is nothing to see schools of hundreds of panfish in every part of the lake, and common to routinely catch lots of 10 and 11 inch bluegills and red ears all summer. Like I said as well, the bass I find in the spring can be very large and healthy looking. I hear there are big cats in there, but I just haven't had time to fish for them yet. I see clouds of something suspended in deep sections, which might be crappies, but may also be smaller forage fish (I'm hoping). The locator I currently use there isn't sophisticated enough to distinguish.

I guess the real question for me is what, if anything, can I dip to make it even better? I was hoping adding some walleyes was a good start.

Top
#500584 - 01/12/19 05:36 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Snipe Online   content


Registered: 10/26/18
Posts: 387
Loc: NW Kansas
Mr. Mulligan, Something I've found as a good catfish "finder" is a 1 gal jug, 2ft of nylon line and a Kayle style hook. a 3-4" panfish with the tail fin cut mostly off. A night or 2 of floating around on the pond in 65deg+ water should show you an example of whats swimming around.
_________________________
I Subscribe!

Top
#500586 - 01/12/19 05:49 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Don Mulligan Offline


Registered: 01/10/19
Posts: 9
Loc: Indiana
Thanks Snipe.

Top
#500587 - 01/12/19 06:04 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Don Mulligan]
anthropic Online   content


Registered: 05/03/14
Posts: 1788
Loc: East Texas, USA
Originally Posted By: Don Mulligan
Bill, Well put and your assessment is likely spot on. To his credit, I think that was probably what the biologist said, along with lots of other observations. What is curious to me, however, is that it is nothing to see schools of hundreds of panfish in every part of the lake, and common to routinely catch lots of 10 and 11 inch bluegills and red ears all summer. Like I said as well, the bass I find in the spring can be very large and healthy looking. I hear there are big cats in there, but I just haven't had time to fish for them yet. I see clouds of something suspended in deep sections, which might be crappies, but may also be smaller forage fish (I'm hoping). The locator I currently use there isn't sophisticated enough to distinguish.

I guess the real question for me is what, if anything, can I dip to make it even better? I was hoping adding some walleyes was a good start.


You may also want to consider 1 tiger musky per acre.
_________________________
8ac E Tx, full 3/16. CNBG, RES, FHM 10/15; TP 5/16; FLMB 6/16. 100 12" NLMB & 1k GSH 10/17. 150# TP & 70 HSB 5/18. 1k PK 11/18. 100# TP 4/19





Top
#500589 - 01/12/19 06:56 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: anthropic]
Bill D. Offline


Registered: 10/19/14
Posts: 5867
Loc: Boone County Illinois
Originally Posted By: anthropic
...

You may also want to consider 1 tiger musky per acre.


Now that would be an awesome fish to add as a bonus catch! I would probably only stock 1 per every 2 or 3 acres though to keep them from dominating the fishery.
_________________________

You'll never know what ya can catch unless you wet a line!

Top
#500590 - 01/12/19 07:25 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Bill Cody Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent

Lunker

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 12817
Loc: Northwest Ohio - Malinta OH
If the 50 acres has little fishing pressure or little harvest, a low nutrient clear body of water can have what seems a lot of fish with a fairly low medium productivity close to what we call mesotrophic. Clear water with a fairly deep thermocline could likely support trout. Have any trout ever been stocked in the lake? They would stay deep during mid-summer and be easily available to anglers in water 5-18ft deep spring, winter, and fall. Medium large bass & poossibly large CC could be cropping the 3.5"-5" BG resulting in numerous larger BG. Deep clear water could be supporting a thick layer of crustacean zooplankton that would feed the BG. Lots of filter feeding zooplankton can maintain clear water and a healthy fishery with numerous panfish.


Edited by Bill Cody (01/12/19 07:35 PM)
_________________________
Keep This Forum Viable, Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management

Top
#500591 - 01/12/19 07:46 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Don Mulligan Offline


Registered: 01/10/19
Posts: 9
Loc: Indiana
Great minds think alike. I already talked to my fish supplier about getting ten tiger musky to plant next fall. I want to be careful about stocking too many predators, before I really understanding the forage base.

Bill, I wish there was more history available for the lake. Always privately owned for 70 years by the coal company who sold it to me. They knew nothing other than "there are fish in there." They were correct. Any harvest or stocking history is unknown, but I am glad/surprised to say I don't believe there are any rough fish in the lake. Beavers, otters and muskrats are my biggest pest issue. I thought about trout, but personally prefer catching and eating walleye to every other fish, including what we musky/walleye guys call green carp (LMB).

Top
#500596 - 01/13/19 01:02 AM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Snipe Online   content


Registered: 10/26/18
Posts: 387
Loc: NW Kansas
" including what we musky/walleye guys call green carp (LMB)."
grin grin
_________________________
I Subscribe!

Top
#500609 - 01/13/19 01:13 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Bill Cody Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent

Lunker

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 12817
Loc: Northwest Ohio - Malinta OH
The musky - trout would be primarily surprising bonus fish. Walleye could be stocked at high enough density to serve as a fairly common sport fish. IMP the more LMB you are able to remove from the lake the better the WE would succeed/flourish. In my experience WE do not compete well with the aggressive nature of LMB.
_________________________
Keep This Forum Viable, Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management

Top
#500691 - 01/15/19 12:35 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
ewest Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014

Lunker

Registered: 03/08/05
Posts: 19847
Loc: Miss.
Just a note that the biggest problem seen in lakes , ponds etc. is a lack of sufficient food for top end predators. We often seem to focus on the predators and not the prey. No predator will do well without enough food of the right size and at the right time. A substantial forage base is critical. It can be live forage and/or pelleted feed but having enough is necessary and often underestimated.


Edited by ewest (01/15/19 12:36 PM)
_________________________















Top
#500695 - 01/15/19 02:14 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
crashadp Offline


Registered: 07/01/16
Posts: 18
Loc: Nebraska
1. Don't taste as good as panfish.
2. Don't fight as good as panfish/bass.
3. Cost more than panfish/bass.
4. Don't reproduce.

Just my opinions, I would never stock them in any pond.

Top
#500696 - 01/15/19 02:24 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
Snipe Online   content


Registered: 10/26/18
Posts: 387
Loc: NW Kansas
And anyone can have success with panfish/bass to some extent.
My opinion on not tasting as good as panfish could be disputed.. smile
WAE also become fairly active and feed fairly aggressively starting in the low 40's..


Edited by Snipe (01/15/19 02:26 PM)
_________________________
I Subscribe!

Top
#500732 - 01/16/19 10:30 AM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: Bill D.]
ewest Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014

Lunker

Registered: 03/08/05
Posts: 19847
Loc: Miss.
People have different goals , likes and ideas and that is a good thing.

That is why we share them here and bounce ideas off the Forum.

Over the years the ideas have run the entire spectrum. Some have worked exceptionally well some have failed and some have resulted in things none of us expected. In almost every case we have learned something new.
_________________________















Top
#500735 - 01/16/19 11:57 AM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: ewest]
snrub Offline


Registered: 10/05/13
Posts: 5440
Loc: SE Kansas
And sometimes the learning process IS the end game. As we retire and no longer have an active work life, we have to find novel ways to entertain ourselves. Seeking out off the wall projects sometimes fills that need. We might even know ahead of time it likely will not be the "best" but do it anyway just for the heck of it. And low and behold, somewhat by accident, find out it was better than we imagined.

Kind of how my whole pond experience turned out.


Edited by snrub (01/16/19 11:59 AM)
_________________________
John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine

Top
#500760 - 01/16/19 04:34 PM Re: Why not Walleye? [Re: snrub]
anthropic Online   content


Registered: 05/03/14
Posts: 1788
Loc: East Texas, USA
Originally Posted By: snrub
And sometimes the learning process IS the end game. As we retire and no longer have an active work life, we have to find novel ways to entertain ourselves. Seeking out off the wall projects sometimes fills that need. We might even know ahead of time it likely will not be the "best" but do it anyway just for the heck of it. And low and behold, somewhat by accident, find out it was better than we imagined.

Kind of how my whole pond experience turned out.


Lot of truth there. The learning is at least as entertaining as the catching.
_________________________
8ac E Tx, full 3/16. CNBG, RES, FHM 10/15; TP 5/16; FLMB 6/16. 100 12" NLMB & 1k GSH 10/17. 150# TP & 70 HSB 5/18. 1k PK 11/18. 100# TP 4/19





Top
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Recent Posts
Young YP..Is this possible???
by Snipe
Today at 02:30 AM
Wetland/forage pond and mosquito management
by ShortCut
Today at 01:22 AM
Length, weight, and age of SMB
by 4CornersPuddle
Today at 12:59 AM
Mudcat Problem
by ShortCut
Today at 12:24 AM
Overpopulated Bass, Few Bluegill and Giant Catfish
by 4CornersPuddle
Yesterday at 11:30 PM
How hot is too hot?
by Mike Whatley
Yesterday at 10:43 PM
Pig pen contamination
by Joey Quarry
Yesterday at 09:10 PM
Waited 14 years
by Tony K
Yesterday at 08:36 PM
My front yard cow pond
by Augie
Yesterday at 08:34 PM
2 acre pond aeration questions
by Quarter Acre
Yesterday at 08:05 PM
Newly Uploaded Images
Fishing Colorado...finally
Releasing a quick snack
Tadpoles
Biofilm Need Help
The fish are biting again
Electrofishing survey

2014 POND BOSS INC. all rights reserved USA and Worldwide