|
Forums36
Topics42,113
Posts571,682
Members19,115
| |
Most Online23,413 Yesterday at 08:18 AM
|
|
|
1 members (Pond Star),
19,151
guests, and
139
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 14,676 Likes: 509
Moderator Lunker
|
|
Moderator Lunker
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 14,676 Likes: 509 |
This info may all be in george's missing links; more on that below.
HSB are typically not as effective a predator on BG as LMB are. This is partly due to having smaller mouths, and partly due to natural habits - LMB's choice of ambush predation in & near cover matches well with the BG tendency to hide in & near cover, while HSB's forte is high speed pursuit in open water. This is not to say that either species will not catch BG in the other situation, but each has their strengths and that is where they would do best.
HSB potential to control BG numbers is maximized in ponds completely devoid of structure and vegetation. This situation forces the BG to live in the HSB's world of open water and is where HSB effectiveness most closely approaches that of LMB. Darryl's pond, with "hills, rock piles, tree islands already in place", does not sound like an open water playground for HSB (but rather like a pond thoughtfully and intelligently created for LMB fishing - I've been reading Lusk's Perfect Pond again).
As george mentioned, either species CAN be added to a pond with a climax population of the other predator, through use of advanced size stockers (possibly in conjunction with some growing out in cages or with blocking nets). Darryl could try using only HSB as a predator and, if BG numbers obviously got beyond HSB capacity to control, introduce large LMB stockers to the pond and get it back under control. Additional HSB could be added after that point if large HSB restockers were used.
If this scenario is pursued, I would stack the deck in the HSB's favor as much as possible initially by using low numbers of BG and high numbers of HSB and trying to prevent all weed growth (say, with lots of GC). Bruce or other HSB experienced PMs may have an idea how effective feeding those high numbers of HSB to get them to large size, and then cutting back or eliminating feeding to incentivise them to catch and eat BG might be.
IMHO if managing for either large HSB or large LMB, establishing a large initial forage base with both FHM and GSH is a good idea. Based on my personal experience of stocking these two fish a year ahead of BG and LMB, I feel a large starting population of GSH causes a setback (perhaps of 1 or 2 years) in the emergence of BG as a large proportion of a pond's biomass. This would seem to be desirable in Darryl's contmeplated HSB-only scenario.
"Live like you'll die tomorrow, but manage your grass like you'll live forever." -S. M. Stirling
|
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
archer
|
09/07/07 08:37 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
george1
|
09/08/07 12:01 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
Theo Gallus
|
09/08/07 12:59 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
Bruce Condello
|
09/08/07 01:02 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
ewest
|
09/08/07 01:39 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
george1
|
09/08/07 02:16 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
ewest
|
09/08/07 02:25 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
george1
|
09/08/07 06:25 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
Bill Cody
|
09/09/07 12:09 AM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
ewest
|
09/09/07 12:56 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
Theo Gallus
|
09/08/07 12:46 PM
|
Re: HSB/CNBG/RES only, no LMB ?
|
george1
|
09/08/07 02:25 PM
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|