I have an update of sorts and a few pics. I took the water sample and sent it in asking for the "poultry" test as suggested. According to the timelines given, they will probably have it done by tomorrow, I should have the results back in the mail late next week. Oddly enough, unlike the soil sample I sent in last year ( not of the pond bottom, several locations close by where I put in food plots ) there was not an option to have the sample E mailed back to me, at least it seemed to plainly state that for soil samples it was an option, but no mention made of water results. This probably is totally unrelated to any management necessary for pond matters, but as it turned out, the samples I sent in so I could determine how much lime, fertilizer, etc I would need to have a shot at successful food plots in our area, known for fairly poor dirt in this part of the state ( as compared to many other areas of the mid west, or even Northern Missouri ) turned in results that were as close to perfect as one could hope for, I didn't have to add a thing to the soil, all of the numbers were exactly in the "ideal" range. And luckily, it produced 2 small plots that were beyond anything I thought we could ever do with our limited ability and equipment. The drought this summer unfortunately absoultly destroyed it, should have made it up to 5 years, I have had it looked at and it is a gone pecan according to our local farmers. One photo is of one of the two plots in the early stage, less than 150 yards from the pond.
My bass guy, along with several family member fished the pond on Sunday, with instructions to try and remove as many of the bass as possible, as well as any large CC. They fished exclusively with bass lures, but still managed to catch a few of the smaller size CC. He did hook up to one of the monsters, and, like always, it took him all over the pond in a frenzy ( he came prepared, put on 15# test this time ) but he could ever get it close enough to actually see if it was Moby, Darth, or one of the others, as usual, it finally found one of the few stumps in the larger pond and wrapped the line around it, that was that. However, it hit the large bass lure, as did all the fish they caught.
I had instructed them to release all the BG until I can actually get some kind of idea IF I actually have a large enough of a population of them to sustain fishing without any additional stocking ( remembering the goal to be a great, BIG BG pond ) or if I just have a batch that hang out by the feeders. He told me ( I was in to bad of shape this time to even make the 100 yard drive out there to watch, I did observe them occasionally from the 45X spotting scope ) that they caught a LOT of large BG, and maybe 6 of what he thought might be green sunfish, as they were noticeably larger than the biggest BG they caught. What he described to me sounds exactly like the HBG that I did stock 5 years ago ( only 100 ) as they grew very quickly and had the bright, orange/yellow belly and were noticeably larger and more aggressive than the BG. Occasionally I still see a few pulled out each time the pond is fished for more than an hour or so, they are far less in numbers than the BG, and fewer show up each year, which would make sense if they are the basically mostly one sex or sterile fish the hatchery stated, citing that they would need occasional restocking if that is a goal fish, as they would not be able to reproduce in enough numbers to make a difference. They were sold as "HBG" with a description of size, other background information but one thing I have realized over the years is that we are not really 100% sure what they are, what is sold as a certain species of sunfish or other type of fish in one part of our country might not be the same fish elsewhere, perhaps even more so in very small hatcheries. Whatever they are, the information they provided on these fish, claiming they were an excellent choice to stock in a pond for children, beginners, etc since they tended to be more aggressive than regular BG and had a considerably larger mouth, making it easier to catch and land them, was completely accurate, along with the claims that they would average somewhat larger than BG and get that size very quickly.
The pictures I took are not very good, I was not up to really being able to get more than a few quick shots. He kept the CC because he thought they were large, he did not know they were not, but that is fine, they need to go also, I know I have plenty of them. As far as the bass, I noticed each time I spent a few minutes watching him in the scope while he was casting, he kept hooking up and fighting bass ( turns out many were bass, but they were also plagued all day with large BG hitting the very large lures they used for bass, and having to release them ) about every 4th cast or so. They were fishing in the middle of the day, it was in the mid 90's, and very hot. I was surprised the CC were that bold on a hot day to hit surface bass plugs, I think perhaps shutting off the feeders as Shawn advised has made them a little less "picky" now and a little more hungry? As you can see from the pics, most of the bass all the same size again, didn't actually catch that many to take home, ( only about a dozen I think, I did not see the other stringers ) due in part because of the pesky BG that insisted on making fishing for bass exclusively, which was their goal, very difficult. They switched to over sized bass lures he told me in what turned out to be a foiled attempt to simply avoid the BG altogether, apparently they were large enough to sill be regularly landed and released. It is very difficult to tell from the pics, but a few of the bass were actually better than I have ever seen so far out of this pond.
He did say when I asked him his opinion why there appeared to not be any large bass in the pond that there in fact were some very nice bass, he said he had at least 8 over the course of the afternoon that were much larger than any he kept, but lost them all at different parts of the fight, most right at the bank where he got a good look. They also released a great many that were in the 10" or less range, said the pond appeared to be heavy with them, and that, along with the big BG and occasional CC, made it difficult to actually focus on the larger bass.
Tomorrow is the visit from the MDOC, and after that, along with the results of the pond water sample, I should have as much information as I will be able to get at this point. Frankly, I am beginning to feel a bit like a fool, I am asking all of you for help for what still continues to appear to be a healthy pond, just very unsure of the numbers of the different species, how to balance that assuming I can even determine it, etc. However, although I continue to discover new things about the pond as all of you kind people help me with my questions, my goal still remains the same. When all the dust has settled and all of you have enough information, I would really love to be able to clear this pond up as much as I can, realizing of course that I will probably never be able to return it to the beauty it was before I changed that! And perhaps it is not even a good idea to try and clear it up to much, I understand that. But the 14" or so is just not at all what we want, and maybe, with the help of everyone, we can do something about that when all the fact come in. IF that is even within reason.
