|
|
|
Forums36
Topics42,113
Posts571,660
Members19,114
| |
Most Online13,012 Jun 7th, 2026
|
|
|
2 members (Bill Cody, LeighAnn),
1,119
guests, and
91
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 473
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 473 |
I don't think there is any downside to removing the 8"-14" size bass. In my 5 acre pond I take out any fish that is shorter than 12" always unless its just really fat and show potential, not to many of those though. I usually throw back any bass that is longer than 14" unless its really skinny. You want to get as many of those hungry stunted bass out as you can so the bluegill population can recover from all those years of bass crowding. In my 5 acre pond in one year ive removed 168 bass that were smaller than 14" and still catch alot of bass that are skinny. Ive added 1500 bluegill and still need more. You could take out as many as 30 lbs of bass per acre the first year.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|
|
|