We all know that selective harvest of largemouth bass is one of the most important aspects for ponds. I would also contend that it is one of the best aspects as well because of the fried fish fillets.
That being said, is the fall harvest potentially the most important of all? Is there merit to this conversation or not really? I Google searched several articles that make a compelling point about fall harvest conditioning the pond for the winter months and then ultimately spring spawn.
Subscribe to PB mag ! If you do then you read this article below. I don't post whole articles often but this one is a reminder that things aren't as they seem on first analysis. Cull underperforming fish all year long - don't wait for the problem to manifest. Fix the wheel before it starts squeaking. IMO its better to harvest underperforming LMB before fall (cull in summer). See the article below about harvesting LMB before fall so that the fish to be culled don't use up part of the fall feeding frenzy. That way your better LMB get all of the food rather than letting fish that should be culled use up resources.
The Cutting Edge - Science Review
Fall Frenzy , Winter Soon
Fall followed by Winter is an interesting time at the lake from a biological perspective. Many people think of Fall as a quiet time of year. In reality for many pond creatures Fall is a period of frenzy followed by Winter survival struggles . A good way to view the workings of a pond or for that matter a fish is like that of an engine. An engine that is dependent on sunlight for power and nutrients for growth. Add to that , fish are cold blooded making water temperature a critical factor in all metabolic aspects. Because fish are cold blooded they have optimum growth in warm spring and early summer waters , then growth slows and can stop or even reverse in extremely hot summer temperatures. Then as the water starts to cool in Fall metabolism ramps back up as optimum temperatures occur again. Then metabolism slows when temperatures cool more into Winter and feeding and growth slows substantially and stops. If not enough energy reserves of the right type are stored going into Winter fish may have a difficult time. Lack of adequate food resources is the most common reason for lack of energy reserves in many fisheries. Increasing food intake with very little energy use during the optimum Fall feeding frenzy period is good. More energy acquired and less used equals more energy reserves. Obviously in Fall and Winter the sun’s energy reduces to low levels so the pond and fish engine slows. However, in the optimum temperature Fall lead up to Winter there is a frenzied attempt by fish to secure energy reserves.
Fish energy sources are mostly carbohydrates, fats (lipids), and proteins (muscle). The amount of energy actually obtained and stored is lower than the amount present in the food as some energy is used in catching food and in the fish’s digestion, metabolism, and thermogenesis. Understanding the role of energy as it works through biological seasons of the year is fundamental to management. This was noted in Energy Partitioning in Largemouth Bass under Conditions of Seasonally Fluctuating Prey Availability by S. Marshall Adams R, . B. McLean and J. A. Parrotta, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 111:549-558, 1982. Here, in order to maintain condition Largemouth Bass maximize caloric growth in the Fall, store visceral fat, and minimize active metabolic demands in preparation for Winter. This study site was in Tennessee which like many freshwater systems of the United States, particularly in temperate areas, have threadfin and gizzard shad as a primary prey source of several predators. These prey species have large fluctuations in abundance due to heavy Winter mortality thus the growth and mortality of a largemouth bass population were indirectly influenced by temperature effects on prey availability. Shads reach optimum size and abundance in early Fall when temperatures are perfect for Largemouth metabolism and the Largemouth need energy reserves, so the feeding frenzy begins. This study notes that growth of females was highest in June following the May peak in consumption (post spawn feeding) and then gradually declined through a summer depression in growth and consumption. Males had high growth levels in the summer and Fall. More importantly both male and female bass added fat during the Fall. Both sexes built up their fat reserves in the Fall when consumption (Fall feeding) was high as evidenced by a Fall increase in the visceral-somatic index (VSI). Decreases in VSI in both sexes during the Winter and early spring probably were due to utilization of stored fat to meet metabolic demands when feeding and prey abundance was low, which is also reported for other fish species.
Obviously, different species of fish differ in their ability to use fat deposits. This in turn affects the temperature range in which different species can grow and survive. For example, Nile tilapia do not store excess lipids in the muscles but rather rely on visceral deposits which it is incapable of using at low temperatures, resulting in high mortalities when water cools. However, many pond species which are capable of using lipids (fat) from muscular and visceral deposits are able to survive much colder temperatures under the same conditions. It is believed that the lipid composition in the fish muscle plays a vital role in the ability of fish to adapt from one temperature to another. Variations in the liver weight of largemouth bass reflect storage of glycogen, fat, and water, which vary with consumption rate. Consumption was high during the late spring and summer, yet the liver-somatic index (LSI) of both sexes declined. This decline may have been related to utilization of energy for reproduction and temperature-induced metabolic demands. Other studies have found this same pattern in the LSI for field-collected bluegill over a year and attributed the low summer LSI to spawning and temperature.
Fall is the period when many species accumulate these fat deposits while adjusting to a lower metabolism. Of course, it depends on a pond’s location and the type of fish involved. Bluegill in one report consumed at higher rates in the Fall like bass and very little food during the Winter in more northern climates. Whereas Yellow perch (a cool water fish) ate much more food than did bluegills during the Winter and did not have to indulge in the Fall feeding frenzy to the same degree.
So, as you watch the Fall changes around you also look for Falling fish as they eat away packing on fat in preparation for Winter.
A gem to keep as we all move forward - "But what really makes sense to me is that LMB consume more frequently the most profitable prey that are available to them."
FYI this LMB was stocked at 10-12 inches (appx 9 mths old) and in 18 mths grew to 10 lbs. No small LMB stocked. 12 acres 197 LMB ( 47 Fla ,100 North and 50 F-1)- into a large base of BG/RES ,shad, and FH with supp feeding. Several mths later an extensive ES survey with DNA analysis was performed. There were a bunch of 5 lb LMB but not another one like this. Sample size was about 10%. Was this fish smarter, or lucky. There were other LMB with the same genetics. Growth is an enigma.
.... There were a bunch of 5 lb LMB but not another one like this. Sample size was about 10%. Was this fish smarter, or lucky. There were other LMB with the same genetics. Growth is an enigma.
I think every fish has limited potential to grow. Each has its own limitations. Some more limited than others. I estimate that Lake8's best fish so far at least has the potential to grow 3.3 lbs annually. So, if it were instead 10" on May 1st, 2025, it could potential make >7 lbs by 11-1-2026. Being 4 lbs today, it has the potential of being in excess of 7.3 lbs 10-7-2026. This is fastest growth I have yet to see posted by a Pond Boss Member. BUT ... I would also concede that even this fish might have grown better. IOWs, it may not have consumed as much as it could have ... it may not have been satiated all the time. Lake8's best fish exceed the average estimated of the model. His averages - limited in number of samples - have set the model. That said, there has been good agreement when compared to others growing F1s during the first 18 months. It's pretty good growth and he now has multiple fish exceeding 3 lbs. The one he posted above ... might actually be male. At the very best, it seems to be one of the slower growing females.
For me, the model provides a limit to what I should expect of a population of female LMB when all is well. I would want to manage for that maximum average as opposed for the outlier that may or may not be present. To gain a good sense of growth, one really needs to understand what the population is doing and how the population is growing. One needs to understand the population density and the biomass. Within these metrics are the calculable forage consumption requirements. The biomass and the average growth are going to balance with this consumption. This consumption is a reflection of forage production. IMHO, the example above is just like that. If we were to look at the entire population what we would find is that the growth and biomass of LMB was in balance with a reasonable expectation of forage production. We shouldn't take 1 fish and project its seemingly unlimited growth as a metaphor for the entire population. In the end, biomass will balance with consumable forage production and the whole population will reflect that.
You asked:
Quote
Was this fish smarter, or lucky.
I love this question. Could well be smarter, lucky, or even something else. Part of the profitability of prey is the success that LMB have in consuming varying sizes of prey. Small prey are easy whilst bigger prey is more difficult. This is countered by the fact that smaller prey contains less energy than bigger prey. These two relationships maximize the energy gained per pursuit (predatory attempt or whatever one wants to call it) somewhere between the maximum size (defined by gape) and a minimum size that would prompt a pursuit. Its a curve with a bump somewhere in the middle.
So yes, a smarter fish might have a greater success rate or be able to consume more frequently larger prey sizes. Perhaps both. If a fish had just a small advantage, it could grow faster than peers. Even if the difference is small, COMPOUNDED these can lead to remarkable differences in growth over a period of 18 months (especially if including 2 growing seasons).
Luck? Why the heck not? By my best reckoning, the optimum prey has a 42% probably of being consumed in a pursuit. Lets just call that 50-50. Its a coin flip so to speak. So if probability plays any role in success of pursuits, then there will be strings of success and strings of failures that for limited spans of time seem to violate the 50-50 rule. Just like flipping coins. These sequences can propel one fishes growth while hindering another's.
Another possibility is the variation of sizes of the initial stocking 10-12 inches doesn't seem like much variation but the difference is 81% by weight. I do model relative weight as THE variable affecting pursuit success so if the prey available was most optimum for 12" fish ... then they would have a distinct advantage over the 10" fish. Imagine also the potential outliers of the stocking. Sure, most were between 10" and 12", but is it not possible that there were 1 or 2 13" fish in there? If the prey available at the time of initial stocking significant favored a 13" LMB ... then this fish would have a strong competitive advantage.
Just throwing a few ideas around for the "odd girl out".
Anyways, one can't expect 197 LMB to grow like that one example did ... even if they were clones. How do I know that? Because I know how much forage it would take to balance that growth. That much forage will not be produced in situ ... it would require supplementation of forage. In the end, the population biomass will find balance with forage production (specifically that portion of forage production that is consumed).
I’m in the process of this right now on selective harvesting on a 1+ year old pond. Looking for fish that don’t meet pond goals specifically for RW or very short fish. My take would be that it can only make room/food for the others to benefit from.
This little fella for example was caught tonight. 12-1/2” @ just barely 1lb. Not sure what was up with him/her but definitely don’t want a pond full of that style fish.
Released 2 others.
13-1/2 @ 1.4lbs 13-3/4 @ 1.6lbs
Little fella is currently chilling in a little saltwater in the frig.
His points were: 1. If the summer's fish weight gain is harvested at the end of the growing season, this thins the herd of consumers to allow all remaining fish sufficient available foods during winter to eat more and maybe grow or stay at good maintenance weight (if they are below the standing weight that natural fertility can maintain). They will not go hungry and they will likely gain a little over winter. Note the Fall harvest needs to remove enough fish to get the pond's carrying capacity or standing weight below what the natural foods will support.
2. Fall harvest also then allows more winter foods to be available for adult fish to eat more, be healthier and be in better body condition and ready for the spring time spawning season.
3. When fish standing weight is below what natural foods the pond can support fish grow well or best. Adding pellet food increases the pond’s natural foods and this suppliment feeding allows more fish pounds that the pond can produce. Adding pellet food increases the pond’s carrying capacity. However there should be annual harvest of the fish crop to keep the pond water a good healthy quality. Boosting the carrying capacity increases the danger of a fish kill. Be warned.
Fall is a great time to adjust LMB populations. I think this is also a good time to collect RW data.
However, any time you have a good handle that competition is slowing growth OR soon will be slowing growth below the targeted growth goals, that is also a good time to thin a population. A good example is Lake8's pond. He stocked F1s at 1.5" of length in his 3/4 acre pond last year's 4th of July. He culled some in mid spring (IIRC) because he knew he had stocked more than required for optimum growth. He took some out BEFORE growth was limited by competition. Now, not even quite 1.5 years of age, he has fish breaching 3 lbs.
But then he is a victim of success. Can he get another 2.5 lbs of growth out of them next year? Probably not without thinning them (and now is the time to thin them) AND/OR feeding them supplemental forage.
Fall, IMHO is an exceptionally good time to prepare for the following year. The present condition of fish is the cumulative history of the prior 12 months. It's not a predictor of the next 12 months. Things change ... it's like what they say about investments, the past doesn't predict the future. Especially once you have examples of LMB > 18", you need Fall representation of forage in large quantities in the 1"-3" size size ranges. These will be the forage for large fish in the coming year. They need to grow to be optimum food next year. Also, they need to survive the smaller LMB in sufficient quantities to feed larger LMB. So, the point Bill made above about keeping standing weights below what the pond can carry are absolutely essential to support LMB standing weight and growth. Here I am speaking of the standing weights of adult forage fish that are too large for consumption.
Neglecting standing weights of forage fish adults will eventually lower the production of consumable forage below what is needed to sustain the targeted standing weight of LMB and their growth. This is because, a growing standing weight of adults squeezes out the carry available to YOY. The sword is double edged and it's a good idea to use both of them.
More proportionate food consumption and more proportionate gain will occur at satiation rations for smaller LMB than for larger LMB --- At any temperature. It's a strawman argument. Small LMB don't make larger weight increments than large LMB when large LMB are feeding to satiation.
jpsdad - I do still agree with this and your statement of : Bill, numerous times you have advised us that LMB in your climate should average/make 1 lbs weight increments each year if there is sufficient forage. Do you no longer believe that?
I still believe that 1lb gain for LMB per year and at times more is possible when eating to satiation. My thinking of less weight gain of 1 lb/yr per year was possible as the bass grew larger than 5 lbs was poor thinking on my part and based on guess work and based on lack of the actual facts. Thanks for helping to improve my thinking about this topic. But on the positive side, my erroneous information did stimulate discussion to point out that there is better information about bass feeding weight gain and their optimum ability for growth rate.
Quote
IOWs, the growth is actually forage limited and therefore below model estimate of maximum growth.
Thanks for that, great info as always. I have been trying to catch that ole girl again. She might have wised up to the hook. I switch up baits a fair amount to keep them guessing. One thing I can tell you is that in a small pond, the more natural colors and smaller presentation baits are the key. My bass right now don't want anything to do with a larger crankbait, like a 2.5 or larger swim baits 4 inches and up. Throw a 3 inch strike king swimming minnow or a ultra light crankbait and they are money. So, I would have to assume the bass are gorging themselves on newly hatched bluegill and minnows. I only fish with ultralight rods, so these girls are always fun to catch.
I know I kind of hi-jacked this thread and am sorry about that. But I do intend to harvest a few more smaller bass this fall, especially the ones from an unexpected spawn of first year bass. Which was the subject of the thread.
I know that my bass will not continue to grow at the rate they are growing now, but it sure is fun being able to see results of all the hard work, time and money I have invested in this project that has been a passion of mine for quite some time.
To answer your question about initial stocking. I stocked FHM and 1"-2" bluegill in February of 2024 and added some larger bluegill (4"-6") harvested from a local pond (about 60 of those). I fertilized the pond using Pefect Pond Plus to achieve a good green tinted water. I started feeding them Optimal bluegill feed pretty aggressively soon after, and upped feeding amounts and time as the bluegill grew. I added 75 F1 Tiger Bass from American Sportfish on July 3, 2024, they were 1"-2" each. I added GSH several times that fall. I culled about 20 bass in late winter, early spring of 2025 and added more GSH and more structure. And they thrived after that.
If I may offer a few facts about growth I have had over the summer. I caught a tagged bass this weekend (10/3/25) that weighted in at 2lbs 7oz, length 15.5 inches. I tagged this fish 3/29/25 it was 1.0 lb, 12.5 inches. I caught it again 5/2/25 it was still 1.0 lb and 13 inches. So in about 6 months this fish more than doubled it's body weight. I have caught several other bass that were over 2.5 lbs and one that weighed in at 3lbs 8oz, so it seems like my fish have made significant gains over the summer, which was fairly mild for us this summer. I also run aerators at night during the summer and pump water in from a well, due to a leaking pond. I don't know if that kept temperatures down in the pond or not. I also added more structure, more forage fish and seemed to have really good bluegill spawns.
