Hi There - I have a new to me pond in upstate New York - currently totally swamped with brown bullheads. The pond is ~50 years old, 0.9ac in size, and about 8' and max depth. Bullheads are the only fish that were in the pond when I moved in. This spring I stocked ~65 rainbow trout as a test to see if they'd survive the summer. No deaths yet, but I'm getting worried as the surface temperature as risen above 73 a few times already. It has a decent amount of shade, wind, and we're at ~1500' elevation so we stay a few degrees cooler than the surrounding towns.
The pond is spring/runoff fed, and we've had a drier year than most this year so my water level is a little low and currently not flowing out. Last year it only stopped outflowing for a few weeks in august.
In any case, my main goals are just to have a varied fishery with a little bit of a few things, and nothing that is totally dominant. I'm not worried about trophy fish, though good tasting fish that aren't totally stunted would be great. And if the bullheads would stop silting up the water that'd be great too.
I'd like to put in a predator to control the bullheads, but as I read through the forums, what I see is LMB and CC, and basically people saying after a year there were no more bullheads to worry about. I kind of like having them so I'd prefer to not totally crush them. I was wondering if something like SMB would put some pressure on the population, at least on the fry side, and if I culled a good portion of the stunted ones, then I'd be in good shape.
I'd be happy to throw in any single or combination that would help. If I get enough BG and minnows along with the bullhead, would that be enough diverse forage that the LMB wouldn't eat all the BH? Should I get a single CC, let it get to work on the BH, then try to catch it again?
So my main question - is what fish(es) should I put in here to bring balance to the force?
jpsdad - its a good question about the ponds history. I don't know much about it, and the house changed hands several times in the last few years so all historical knowledge was lost. As for clues, I kind of suspect there have been some heavy kills that might have knocked off everyone but the bullhead. Previous owners left a bunch of algaecide in the basement, I haven't seen any algae issues so presumably the conditions have changed over time - adding that to Bill Cody's comment about fewer BH improving water clarity and increasing algae - maybe those things go together, Im not sure. For the Esox species - would I have to harvest those heavily to keep numbers in check or would those be somewhat self limiting? As for harvesting the BH as is, man they are tiny with a lot of work to clean for a little bit of meat. For 80 lbs/year that'll probably be a couple hundred fish at this size, but I suppose thats what it takes. There's at least one lunker in there that has come up for pellets, we call her big bertha.
Just looking at them in the photo, I thought they were in the neighborhood of 8" (which is ideal for me). So I may have been wrong about their size? This brings back memories of fishing with my granddad. I threw back a 6" BH once and he asked "What you doing there? That's breakfast" Having been properly scolded, I checked to make sure I didn't throw any food back, LOL. So in the video below, you will notice that the yellow BH he is cleaning are around 6 to 7 inches in length. Panfry is the way to go with small BH (meanwhile I would throw back anything bigger than 10" for sure). They are TOO BIG to panfry and will eat a fair amount of smaller BH which is a good thing. In the video you will learn how my granddad taught me to clean small catfish (up to 1/2 lb).
[video:youtube][/video]
BH can achieve standing crops as large as BG. In essence they are both panfish. But BH do have some differences. They have a larger gape for one. So don't remove Big Bertha. They will be properly managed when some can reach 12" in length. Removing the middle sizes should allow you grow the largest to bigger sizes. A little feeding should help growth too but thin them before feeding (if they are very small) to get more bang for your feed investment (more growth in individual fish). So I like Bill's idea of trapping. Whatever you are not eating or releasing .... you could dice and feed back to them. A heavy knife with a curved blade that can quickly sever by rocking (ideally something like a heavy ulu) can do this quickly and with less effort. Without a predator species, you may have to do trapping on an ongoing basis but once you have the population with 20% of its weight in 10" fish or greater it will be much easier than this early going.
As for the ESOX. I mentioned them because they should be more resistant to low DO. So just some thoughts.
1. The presence of the algaecide in the basement suggests that BH were not so prevalent and the pond had other fish species. The BH are a natural and great choice for this old pond because they match it's trophic status. Just being there, they prevent FA and many submerged weeds. Its just a matter of thinning BH to numbers that will allow survivors to grow to lengths that interest you.
2. If you introduce predators, I think it will be some time before you get reproduction from them. The numerous BH population will probably prevent successful reproduction for a time. To increase the average size of your BH will require you being a predator and/or introducing a predator. But increasing the average size of your BH will also increase the amount of predation from the BH themselves. Too much predation and your water will clear and vegetation (Both FA and others) will grow. So this isn't necessarily good. The shift to non-phytoplankton vegetation could actually reduce food chain production and accumulate more muck. It could also increase YOY survival and work against goals of growth. Also the more vegetation you grow, the more likely it is that you could have a fish kill. Probably the best balance would be where visibility is limited to some ideal (unknown) depth that prevents FA and submerged vegetation in the deeper waters.
3. So I like a balance of you being predator with a little help from some other predator that never reproduces but lives a long time. But it may be possible that you (with fish , trapping, and repurposing) with the help of larger BH can achieve a good balance (good annual production of 8" to 10" harvested pan fry size fish). So I think I would try to be conservative with the predator fish and try to maintain no more than 40 to 50 lbs/acre (less may be better for production of BH)
import some IOWEGIANS they would catch and clean out the bullheads. There favorite food. You could also catch them and brine and pickle them in anise alcohol and bottle them in mason jars and sell them to catfish people for bait. Excellent bait.
Do you know anything about the pond's history? For example, are the brown bullhead all that remain of a more diverse stocking? May be worth investigating. They look big enough to eat and so you may be able manage them by hook and line. Were I doing that, I would consider harvesting a slot between 8 and 10 inches to ensure the largest fish could serve predation.
If you find the pond may have winter killed before then it may be better to avoid fish that need higher DO. Esox sp. as a bonus in limited quantity may be an option that could survive events that would kill Centrarchids for example.
Anyways, its hard to kill out bullheads which can survive in mud for a time. Might take rotenone. But if you like the bullheads and they are achieving harvestable sizes, I would consider only introducing predators on a limited basis as bonus fish. There may be enough predation by the larger Bullheads to achieve harvest sized fish on an on going basis. A pond like that could carry 400 lbs or more of BH and so consider starting with a goal of 80 lbs/year using a slot as the harvest size.
Channel catfish will reproduce to populate offspring in a small pond - saw it happen several times.
Bullheads can be pretty prolific. They easily enter baited wire mesh traps. Look for the larger sized traps or build your own trap from plastic netting on a PVC frame. Abundant bullheads can as you now see will make the water turbid. Turbid water minimizes algae and submerged plant growth that will return when the water becomes clearer as bullhead density is noticeably reduced.
I do think SMB would help reduce BH numbers. How much is unknown. So with some manual fish trapping and SMB predation you could significantly reduce BH density. If you try and add some SMB IMO it would be best to also add a few yellow perch 4"-6" sizes to help them survive competition from BH. Also the SMB stockers should be larger size to best compete and survive with dense BH numbers that are currently overpopulated and have most all natural foods consumed. When the BH density becomes lower the SMB and YP might increase in numbers. If a low oxygen concentration (DO) happens again the SMB will die and YP likely survive. If that happens then try some pike to control BH and YP. Pike(NP), YP, and BH tolerate low DO.
This place makes very good fish traps for smaller fish. I like their cylinder traps. The other traps should have a more shallow area of flat pond bottom to effectively "fish"" the box and barrel style traps. When choosing / buying be sure the trap opening (funnel or throat) is large enough for your size of bullhead to enter the trap. If you contact them, they can build you a trap with a special larger trap opening or wire mesh for catching bullheads. https://ktraps.com/pages/about-our-traps
