Eric, Yes fish production as food was a primary consideration as well as justification for the funding required. My study of his work gave me the impression that his primary focus in understanding initial stocking rates of LMB and BG was to determine optimum stocking rates that ensured balanced recruitment of LMB and BG avoiding overweight in either species. There are two out of balance conditions that Swingle may have advised all to avoid but these actually are of considerable interest from the recreational fishing perspective.
He may have been the first to document maximum growth rates of LMB in a pond setting and the conditions that are favorable for this growth. Bluegill size structure for this scenario is large overweight of intermediate size bluegill. Today, high initial stocking of BG are recommended when LMB growth is a goal. Even though Swingle wouldn't have recommended this stocking rate, we benefit from his research findings for our recreational goals. I think Swingle would tell us that this growth rate is not so much a function of the total weight of bluegill in the pond but rather that the sheer number of bluegill make most spawning attempts by LMB a complete failure. He documented complete recruitment failures under this scenario. With no competition and all the bluegill on the menu, LMB are free to grow where prey is not a limiting factor. Of course, eventually the LMB grow to size that fills the carrying capacity of the pond and growth would slow.
Here is another Female LMB study as reported by the Georgia DNR.
http://www.seafwa.org/Use%20of%20a%20Fem...-2016-03-01.pdfIn this paper you will find that they also introduced males accidentally. But what is remarkable is that it didn't have an adverse effect in one of the impoundments. Their explanation was:
Because we maintained high densities of numerous forage species through the study, predation on largemouth bass eggs or fry by these species may have been limiting factors in preventing or reducing bass recruitment Later reading Swingle there was confirmation that BG can be quite limiting to LMB reproduction when large numbers of intermediate sized BG are present. One of the keys, I think, to the optimum Female only scenario is to be careful that LMB never quite reach the carrying capacity. If they do reach it they may inhibit the BG's ability to ruin the spawns of accidentally stocked males. Female only is a very capable strategy IMHO but I think it requires an understanding of the LMB carrying capacity to include a stocking and harvest regimen that does not stress that limit. The bigger the ultimate weight goal, the fewer the number of bass can be stocked. An excel spreadsheet with year class goals seems a pretty good starting place to strategize a stocking plan.
When I think of a BOW which is BG only and full of stunted 4-5 in bluegill ... I think female only strategy pond candidate. It wouldn't need to be killed out IMHO if a female only strategy were employed. Provided the largest bass are harvested before LMB reach carrying capacity, the BOW may also be able to withstand periodic accidental stocking of a male.
