Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Types of fish to choose New Pond Stocking

Hey y'all - long time lurker and just joined today so I could post a question about stocking compatibility.

I've got a new 2.5acre pond in Southern MN with 15', 9', 6' and 3' sections. Got eight 6'x6' rock piles placed at the shoreline elevation rise edges and depth change rise centers of the 9' and 6' sections and have rocks lining the depth change rises of the 6' and 3' sections.

Pond will be filled by a 5hp well water pump I plan to have beat over rocks to knock the iron down while filling, which should be done by June and then stocking with GSH and BG this fall. Next fall I'm looking to put in SMB and CC. I would also love to add some YP.

My question is about perch and the channel catfish. I know the YP will feed on the GSH and BG so I was thinking of throwing them in with the SMB since they won't decimate the YP like LMB would. I assume the CC will feed on them though and so was wondering if it would be best to wait until year 3 to add the CC to give the YP time to grow and spawn? Any other advice/critiques are welcome and happy to answer any questions I may have missed.

Thanks in advance!

SMB and YP will likely have trouble controlling a BG population. My SMB and YP manage to control less fecund BGxRES in 1/2 acre with help from angling removal of 400-500 BGxRES per year.

With a bunch of rock piles, you may have location(s) for CC to reproduce. Again, SMB and YP won't control CC young like LMB could. (The CC in my SMB/YP pond found acceptable spawning structure in either the tire structures or the 6' diameter concrete tile filled with Osage Orange fence posts. The pond rule is "Remove all CC caught", which may be controlling their numbers - although the biggest CC are very good at snapping lines).

IMHO, stock CC sparingly and allow time for your predators to get some size and numbers.

Welcome to the forum!

Ditto what Theo said. The SMB/YP/CC won't be able to control the BG numbers. The BGxRES that Theo talks about most likely wouldn't do well in your pond due to the northern latitude. PS are what northern pond owners need to stock to control snails. My experiences with CC are that I prefer NOT to have them in my pond, but that's just me. Too hard to catch if caught and released, I had some escape the holding tank and now I have some in the pond again that I have to work at to get out.

Saugeye would help control the BG, but since Snipe isn't hatching them any more I have no idea where in the US to source them.Keystone Hatchery in Wi has PS. AT least the last time I looked.....

WE might help with the BG but they'd also target the YP. HSB would help with the BG and minimally affect the YP, they just won't help as much as LMB would. The CC would have to be big to help with the BG, a 4# CC still has a relatively small gape so the BG they'd control would be smaller - 4" and under. WE target more fusiform shaped fish, so while they will help somewhat with BG control, they don't do as well of a job as the Saugeye do.

I'd be tempted to say just stock the GSH, YP, larger sized PS if you can find them (and look at every one to minimize getting BG in there), SMB and wait a year or two before adding the CC. Look at sourcing some HSB. That's a safe bet because they won't reproduce in the pond. They are also more of a pelagic fish like the more adult GSH so they will help control their numbers. Keep in mind that LMB might have to be an option if you DO get BG in there and you can't control their numbers.

Make sure you have fine cover like brush piles made annually from Christmas trees for the YP to use as spawning habitat.

I also agree with Theo and esshup. They have experience with the fishes you are considering. If I were me I would leave the CC out until year 3 or 5 or completely to get the other species established. My concern is the SMB will not control very well if at all the reproduction from the CC. CC will sooner or later find a way or make a way to spawn in your pond. Then it has to be up to the other fishes to do a good job of eating the fry before the quickly grow to the 3"-5" sizes. Then with your planned fishery you start having too many CC who will make the water turbid, likely eat more YP than sunfish. With turbid water these fish do not do as well. When caught and released are very hard to dependable catch. CC smarten up quickly to angler methods.

Do you have room/money for an additional 0.5 acre pond that is not that deep?

You could build a CC-only pond with a feeder - like the commercial growers. You could catch and eat them on a 2 year cycle since the 3-4# fish are still very catchable and tasty if you like catfish. You would need aeration in winter at your location I believe.

If you got bored with that after a few years, you could use that pond as a YP brooder facility and transfer YP over to your main pond when they reach the optimal size.

Lots of other options too - and it would give you much greater control over managing your main pond.

Thanks for the feedback!

Sounds like the best option is to replace BG with PS and forego the CC altogether. Maybe add FHM alongside the GSH for additional forage. Probably some crayfish and scud for the YP.

Would WE do well in place of CC once the forage population is established? Or would they completely decimate the YP? Do we need a CC replacement species at all if the only fish we're really interested in angling and consuming are the YP and SMB (and potentially WE if they'd provide balance)?

With WE you have complete control of their population, so you can start with a few and add more or ladder stock them depending on how they work out.

That's all I can tell you about them; my complete WE-in-a-pond experience is from one that showed up with our first batch of YP stockers, went into the pond with them, and was never seen again. But there is plenty of WE info here.

With the existing YP and SMB, walleye (WE) could be later added as a bonus fish providing the SMB are not allowed to be too abundant and some predation is needed to keep the YP at densities desired for the goals of the pond. IMO each WE will at least take the place of one SMB. In that the WE will be eating what fish that SMB was or would have been eating. Thus harvesting one adult SMB could be replaced with one WE who will not be reproducing and recruiting more walleye. Keep in mind the SMB will each year be reproducing and recruiting new smallies into the pond as more predators and overall fishery competition occurs, THUS the SMB numbers need to be watched and controlled. also keep in mind the adult YP are also preferring to eat small usually 'minnow' type fish. Too many predators in the pond can easily over crop the YP causing fewer harvest of YP. Number of predators need to be balanced with numbers of prey so goals are achieved. For a BG-LMB pond the prey-predator ratio is usually at least 10 to 1 and sometimes 20:1 or more.

Note - I help manage some 0.2-0.5 ac YP only ponds where there are ONLY 1, 2, or 3 predators in the entire pond lacking habitat to control the YP reproduction. With pellet feeding this allows for good harvest each year of the YP (usu. 9"-13" some 14"-15"). Size of the predator has a lot to do with the amount of and size of fish it eats. Larger predators as growing predators eat more pounds of fish each year. . Management, management, management.

Note in "esshup and TJ" posts below that the amount of or lack of cover and good habitat can be very important for the success of the fishery. Achieving a long term high quality fishery is not a matter of just stocking the fish. Management, management, management.

FYI, a customer that does not really fish at all has a SMB/YP/RES pond. Without harvesting the SMB like should have happened, the YP were decimated along with the RES. The FHM/GSH disappeared after 3 years.

One thing that I have to add is there is virtually NO habitat in the pond for cover (a couple of root balls in the deepest part of the pond, 4-5 clumps of 5 Christmas trees near shallow water and minimal underwater weeds). There is virtually NO spawning habitat in the pond for the YP, 4-5 areas of 6' x 10' pea gravel on an otherwise sand bottom, BUT the shoreline banks are tapered pretty steeply - between 2:1-3:1 . He also stocked the ponds at 50% of the recommended stocking rate for the SMB/YP/RES In a 1 ac pond he started out with 10# FHM, 10# GSH in early Spring, then added the RES/YP late spring. FHM were in the 2" length range and the GHS were around 3 1/2" long. YP were 4"-6", RES were 1"-3.5". Smallies when stocked the next year were 5"-7" and some 10"-12" were stocked the following year. Total stocking of SMB were 50 per acre, RES were 750 per acre and the YP were 200 per acre.

The SMB were severely stunted, some that were caught in the 14" range were 55% RW. The SMB are being removed every year at the rate of 20#/acre, and they have rebounded RW wise. Somehow Hybrid BLuegill were bucket stocked in the pond and the SMB are keeping their offspring under control. There is no artificial feeding going on in the pond, and the pond owner was putting 30-40 pound of FHM in the pond annually but stopped doing that a few years ago.

It all boils down to having the proper habitat for the fish to successfully reproduce, have habitat in the pond for the fish to hide in and have habitat in the pond for fish to use as cover. Many pond owners do not realize how critical having the proper habitat in the pond is for having a successful pond, and just how MUCH habitat is needed. A few root balls and some underwater weeds won't cut it.

A pond needs roughly 20% minimum to 25% (maybe 30%) of the surface area of the pond in underwater cover for the fish to utilize. This means habitat that they can use during 12 months out of the year. Shallow habitat for summer use, deep water habitat for winter use. Without the proper habitat (think of sizes of openings in the cover) and having the proper spawning habitat in the ponds, a pond owner is setting themselves up for failure, or at the very least a lot of extra time and $$ spent managing the fish in the pond.

Every pond owner should actually go measure a few pieces of cover that they are putting in the pond, then actually do the math on whether that is enough cover for the pond, don't estimate "that looks like enough" because typically it isn't.

I don't believe I have EVER read a post on Pond Boss where the pond owner was lamenting having too much cover in their pond! (Not counting weeds.)

Conversely, a limited gape predator 'Canadian Shield" fishery that includes BG benefit from the exact OPPOSITE approach - lack of habitat is intentional to encourge BG predation in addition to angling, trapping, seining management efforts. It's about all I can do to keep up over the seasons.

In contrast with both of the above situations, YMMV. Every pond is different; you have to observe and manage towards your goals (or decide to change them).