|
Forums36
Topics42,113
Posts571,671
Members19,115
| |
Most Online13,012 Jun 7th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 92
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 92 |
ok, so i fished the lakes this weekend.. caught several over a pound... the largest was about 1.13lbs, at 16"... now per this fish calculator i have, (got the link from this website) its saying that a 16" fish should roughly weigh about 2.25lbs, does this sound right? we also caught sever in the 1.8lb rang that were about 15", we also put a depth finder over the lake, and there is no structure what so ever.. i did see several small fish swiming along the banks,(could'nt id them) and several small bass as well. i really think that these fish are hungry, and the lack of forage fish and structure might be what these lakes are lacking?.. what do you think.. ?
any imput would be awesome.!!!
-chris
"Born to fish, Forced to work!"
2.3 acre, 1.5 acre, 1 acre , .5acre (bgill only)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 241
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 241 |
It does not sound like they are too radically overstocked. If you saw baitfish, and if they are as big as you say, they are getting some food. Probably could use more. I would take some out, but your circumstance is not as bad as it could be.
Nick Smith
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,587
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,587 |
Christopher -- Yes. A 16 inch largemouth bass in good condition would weigh 2.26 pounds. If your bass only weighed 1.13 pounds, that is very skinny. In fact, a largemouth bass with a relative weight of 50 (actual weight divided by that standard weight X 100) would be so emaciated that it would almost be dead. It would be a big head and a very thin body. You would notice that it was extremely skinny. So, I wonder if perhaps your scale was not very accurate??
Just a thought.
Dave
Subscribe to Pond Boss MagazineFrom Bob Lusk: Dr. Dave Willis passed away January 13, 2014. He continues to be a key part of our Pond Boss family...and always will be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 92
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 92 |
it was a brand new scale..  ... but the fish did'nt look that bad.. it was'nt super skinny, and its head was'nt that huge.. kinda looked normal,just a little long and skinny, it did look like it could use a plate of bgills, but those will come this spring.. -chris
"Born to fish, Forced to work!"
2.3 acre, 1.5 acre, 1 acre , .5acre (bgill only)
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|