As some of you may remember, I belong to a new developement that has been designed around a Jimmy Houston designed fishing community near Conroe, Texas. While the lakes were designed by Mr. Houston, he has not been involved in the initial stocking of the more recent lake, since that was by the POA board once they took over possesion of the community from the developer.
I recieved several recommendations for doing the initial stocking of the newest lake now that it is finished after a rough start ( leak after initial construction). My question revolves around one of the recommendations that differs significantly from the others. Here it is.
35 acre lake, average 12 foot depth, maximum to 35 foot.
1500 CN
1500 BG
180lb. FH
12,000 adult TFS
240 lbs. GS
2400 F1
700 Florida
Does this provide sufficient BG? Do the GS make up the lack of BG? Are there too many LMB for the initial stocking? Are the lack of RE an issue?
Unfortunately, the POA board has decided to go with this recommendation based on a number of reasons, he least of which is price. i nopw have to try to make this work if it is wrong
I appreciate any feedback from the experts.
Mike
I am not an expert, however, I think the forage base stocking (Bluegill, CNBluegill, Fatheads, TFS, Golden Shiners) is on the very low end for a 35 acre pond.
If that was all that you could afford, I would put that in and then wait a full year before putting any predators in.
Mike, I hope you don't mind a non expert responding. I'm sure you are dealing with a professional who knows more about this than I do. This is just my opinion.
I would prefer some redears. Although BG have been reported as sucking small snails out of their shells, RES can handle larger ones.
Another disclaimer is that I'm a traditionalist. I prefer to stock predators after the forage has had a chance to populate. I see no problem with your BG and CNBG numbers if you hold off on predator stocking and if they are already of spawning size. No matter what else you stock, these guys are the backbone of the future forage base. You are only stocking about 10% (85 per acre) of the recommended number and making up for it with other prey. That comes out to about 85 BG per football field instead of 1,000. Predation and natural causes will take a toll on them. The 5 lbs per acre fatheads will take some pressure off the BG as they do in all newly stocked bodies of water. The TFS are open water fish and not likely to be preyed on much by newly stocked predators. I don't know enough about shiners to comment.I understand that they rob the nests of the other fish. You're going to need a lot of successful nesting.
Size of the stocked bass can make a difference. If they are fingerlings, you can expect to lose some; but that is to be expected. If they aren't fingerlings, they will be eating machines preying on your forage.
I would PERSONALLY go with the "tried and true" that has often cussed and discussed here and do it in stages.
If it were mine, and it's not, I would stock the recommended 1,000 or so BG/CNBG/RES per acre along with fatheads. With those numbers, I would probably stock the shiners.
I would then stock the TFS and bass at a later date, but after appropriate spawning of other forage. I really like the idea of TFS but don't think they will be utilized for awhile. I might even give it some time before I stocked the shiners but before I stocked the bass.
As a traditionalist, I like the idea of a newly stocked bass being able to go to sleep with its mouth open and wake up with a full belly.
As I said earlier; just my opinion.
I think he was off by 10X on bluegill. Seems he left off a zero. If that is the case and he wanted 15000 of each BG and CNBG then not too bad a number. Also I think if you want quality bass fishery too many bass but that is my 2 cents. Good luck I have seen so many ponds ruined by shot changing on the fish end.
We need more info on size and timing of fish introduction. We need to know if the GS is green sunfish , golden shiners or gizzard shad. With this and your goals I would be happy to give an opinion. Are you sure you are getting an apples to apples comparison from the different sources. I will highly recommend that if the GS refers to gizzard shad you do some research. That alone in my opinion is a big risk. Will the fish be fed and or a fertilizer program used (if your water productivity allows/requires). Initial stocking is critical. If a serious error is made here it can take years and many $$$ to recover. If you are using all 2in. fish then I agree with Greg they are 10 x off on BG unless they are going to wait 18 mths to stock predators. I would have RES in the south if only to reduce the snails which can carry parasites. I would also change the LMB mix and numbers. Less #s and include some northerns.
I think your association and developer has spent around 1 million dollars on building the lake. Why would you skimp when it comes to proper stocking and management of the lake? You could end up spending another hundred thousand dollars if you must rotenone and start over because of mistakes made while stocking. Let alone the 5 to 9 years wasted in the end.
Thanks Sunil, Dave, Greg, and Ewest
I appreciate the information. I should have provided more detail, so here goes.
The GS is indeed golden shiner. These are in the
1 1/2 -3" size. The BG and CN are 2-3" and are reportedly "sexually mature" so they are expected to spawn soon. I agree with the comments that the BG and CN are off by a factor of 10X. I questioned the biologist contracted to do the stocking, and he told me that the shiners make up for the lack of BG and CN, are a "softer flesh fish and easier to swallow since they are less spiney, so they will make better initial forage for the smaller LMB". The fat heads are also supposedly mature and ready to spawn, so they will grow in number before the bass are stocked. The shad are all threadfin, adult size, and will be added in 3 weeks. The initial stocking of forage was Monday evening, lake temperature is 71 degrees.
LMB will be added in late May at 2" size.
As I said earlier, I have some doubts that we have enough forage fish, and too many bass with insufficient Florida and no Northerns. Your comments about skimping now is right on the money. I kn9ow that price played into the decisions, but the range in price was with-in 10% on all quotes, so a few hundred dollars will be wasted if this proves to be the wrong start I hope we are not being set up for a fall.
The Pond Boss believes this will be an interesting and educational experiment.
I agree that it will be an interesting and educational experiment; what I call a possible character builder. I am told that character builders add to growth. I am now 17 ft. tall and I don't believe, given this mixture, that I would add the bass this year.
However, I can kinda see where the guy is coming from and how it just might work to your satisfaction.
Please keep us posted.
In the latest issue of Pond Boss, Lusk talks about the stocking of the Richmond Mills project. In the article, he talks about how they added LMB at the same time as the forage. I believe he mentions that he'll describe why they added the predator at the same time as forage.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall any further descriptions of why they did so, except to say that they will be feeding pellets on an astronomical level with numerous feeders, some even placed out in the middle of the water.
Mike, as Dave suggests, if you wait until next spring '07 to add LMB, you could be in great shape.
If you add LMB in May '06, your forage base could be greatly depleted by the end of '06. With a (35) acre lake (green with envy here, mind you), it won't be so easy to jump start a forage base once the LMB are bigger.
I am glad to learn that the GS were not GShad.
Here is my 2 cents worth. The plan may well work. It will be interesting to follow. One mistake I see made in people picking between different stocking proposals from pros is the inability to assess the level of risk in them. I think that is evident here. Do I take 50% more risk to save $500 on a $5000 plan? I am not sure anyone can properly figure the risk % anyway.
To me the largest risk is that those 2-3in. BG may not spawn in time and in #s sufficient to feed the 2in. LMB by the fall. You need the right size forage at the right time. I would feel better about it if those BG were 3-5in. but then the price would go up.
Plans must fit together as a whole to work. Timing the right sizes and pieces of the puzzle together is important. That is why most stocking plans follow a fairly standard program. To avoid the risk of less proven plans. This is a less proven plan. I assume the plan is a done deal.
IMO it is critical that by the time the LMB spawn that you have 2 or 3 (depending on how you count them) year classes of BG. To guard against this risk of failure I would be prepared (locate a good source) to add both 3-5in. BG (either or both types) and 1-2 in. BG in the late fall.
Other than that I would want some RES for the niche they fill both in the water and in snail control. Further I would ask now if I could substitute some of the F1s for some northerns. That should not change the cost. Good luck and let us know what happens.
Sunil the pics on the article show they are putting in some larger RES 3-4in. - don't know about BG.
Am I missing somehting here, you guys are saying it is ok to stock 86 bg/cnbg per acre? I do not see how this plan will work at all if only that many bluegill are stocked. From the shiners are softer comments I think this guy is a fish dealer not a biologist. Lusk has said it many times bluegill is the "backbone" of any bass mgmt plan and this lake will not be able to standup with this weak backbone in place.
Greg, I agree that the stocking rates are way, way low for Bluegill and forage in general.
But I think that Mike mentioned that the forage stocking already happened (this past Monday).
Now that it's already happened, what do you suggest (assuming they cannot spend more money on forage)?
This is why I was suggesting to delay the LMB stocking until '07.
Guys the method here is the same as if you are stocking 1 year old BG to spawn now (usually 3-5in. BG). Some pond mgt. groups say if you take this approach then you stock at 1/10 the rate used for 1-2in BG. The idea is their spawn in spring and summer when combined with FH ,TS , and GShiners will be enough. It is based on the idea that those first stocked BG will be to big to be eaten by the LMB for the first year and that they will establish a first spawn when they are first added. I do not recommend this approach but have used it in combination with 2in BG at reduced #s to get to 3 year classes of BG by the time the LMB spawn. It has more risk than the regular method. But you have to be able to judge what is going on and be ready to do supp. stocking of the right size BG. Based on what I have seen there is a better than 50% chance that you will have to add more BG 3-5in. and 2in. in the first fall or winter to make it work. If so you will end up spending more than the 10% you saved by not using the normal method to start with.
ewest, when do you recommend stocking the LMB for Mike's situation?
Sunil :
Let me be clear. I do not think this plan is the best way nor would I recommend it , but it may work.
If forced to use the plan as described with no changes or additions other than when to stock the LMB (using the same 2in. fish as they progress in size) I would stock the LMB as follows. In late summer I would stock 200 3in Fla., 200 3in northerns and 300 3in F1s. In Nov. I would stock same # and ratio of 5in. LMB and the next March stock 300 of each at 6-7 in. For a total of 2300 LMB. But this is crazy because it is a fluid situation so I would base the actions on the results in the lake at the time and not some set schedule. How is that for a guess?
Ewest,
Thanks for the information. Sounds like we are complicating the situation with the plan supplied by the biologist. Although the initial stocking is done, the TFShad and the LMB are not added as of yet. One thought I had would be to reduce the numbers of LMB ( take it from 90 down to 50 / acre) and adjust the ratios to include some northerns. With he reduction in LMB, we could add additional CNBG and possibly RE. Since the prices were roughly 40% for CNBG vs. LMB, we could add 100 CNBG per acre to what was originally planned. that would get the total BG stocking rate to 186 / acre. This along with the golden shiner stocked would yield approximately equivalent numbers / acre of forage fish.
I agree we should probably wait for another year for the LMB, but this lake was supposed to be finished in May'04. Permitting delays delayed construction for a year, then a leak required draining, re-engineering, 4200 truckloads of clay, and a 6 month delay. Nearly 2 years past the initial lake readiness date, we finally have water. Getting everyone here to wait another year would be tough. I for one have been staring at an empty hole in the backyard for 2 years. I am not sure I can wait anymore.
Mike
Mike, for my part, it's easy to sit where I'm at and postulate about waiting a year for adding LMB to your pond.
But your comments about the other owners and your own desires do not fall on deaf ears.
Have you thought about showing some of the more interested neighbors to this forum? Maybe if they read some of this thread, it could buy you some time before the LMB. You could print out this thread for some.
Maybe it could open the others minds about being prepared to spend some future dollars on bigger bluegill like ewest suggests.
Watching some of the Bluegill feed on pellets is pretty enjoyable as something nice to watch to help the few months go by to stocking time for the LMB.
I have sent the thread to the other member of the lake committee and have mentioned t him hat we ought to take a step back from the POA decision before we make a mistake. I have als sent this link to the POA board president as well as the developer suggesting they read the infromation and then meet with me to discuss. I hope they will take up my invitation.
Please feel free to add additional comments on this thread so they will have plenty to consider.
Mike
Mike :
I think what you described would help. Not only would you be increasing the forage base but you would also be reducing the initial impact of the predators thus less risk of plan failure. I am a fan of under stocking LMB by about 30%. I think that provides a better chance of avoiding the initial potential of LMB crowding 4 yrs. into the plan. Also less competition between predators should provide a better growth rate for those first 2 spawn years of LMB yoy. The risk is that the predators will not be able to control the forage populations which can cause problems. I prefer to be on the to high forage side as it is easier in my opinion to correct than to many predators. All you have to do is add a few 6-8 in LMB to replace the lower recruitment rate of the LMB caused by to many forage fish eating the eggs and fry. One thing I have not addressed is your winter water temps. Will they get to cold (45 degrees) for the TS to over winter. If they can survive your winters that will be a big help. One other reason to under stock LMB is that it leaves you room to add a few LMB (8in.) about 3-4 years down the road. I add them from a different source than the first (different brood stock) so as to add some genetic diversity. Enough rambling for now.
questioned the biologist contracted to do the stocking, and he told me that the shiners make up for the lack of BG and CN, are a "softer flesh fish and easier to swallow since they are less spiney, so they will make better initial forage for the smaller LMB".
I have not heard any complaints from LMB on swallowing or tough meat. We did have one bass complaint in this thread:
http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000199#000000 Where the bass could not complain for himself.
While doing my daily AM tour of my 7 acre lake, I noticed what appeared to be a large skinney dead fish near the shore. Further investigation revealed a live 12" Bass with a live 9 1/2" Bass stuck in it's mouth just beyond the gills. The smaller fish was so tightly wedged into the larger bass' mouth that it took me several minutes to seperate them. Now is that aggressive winter feeding or what? For further info, my lake is in southern VA and the water is 38 degrees. Both fish swam slowly away after they were seperated. I wonder which felt the luckiest? I even took pictures that I'll post as soon as I can figure out how.
What are the goals for the lake anyway?
Around 85 CNB/RegularBG per acre is awful low.
Especially since the F-1s/Floridas will be about 88 per acre. That would mean Bass would be stocked 88% of the recommended rate for texas and bluegill will be 8.5% of recommended texas bluegill rates.
FH, GShinners, and TFS all appear to be around 3/4 recommended numbers.
CNB and Florida for southern ponds.
I think that this stocking plan is for too much small time forage while those stocking rates will end up with alot of fast growing young bass and few bluegill for their retirement. Then again TFS complicates the situation since they reproduce well(from what I've heard) but are only open water and just get moderately sized. But with FH, GShinners, and TFS it may be enough to keep the largemouth busy until bluegill can produce enough young to provide for the largemouth in later years.
Since the pond is new and stocking rates will be moderate except for an almost punitive bluegill population I think growth will be good for a good number of years. Maybe 10 years, base on rough inexperienced estimates and given that Lusk noted that new ponds generally have good growth for 6 years until competition sets in. And then once the fish grow into the lake the bass will dominate. Mhuahaha another lake added to the LMB Dominion...err weight...or are we trying to accomplish something else?
Glad to see you send it to the board and that is why I came on so strong. If they are reading this I have see this situation many times. Skimp on fish and it will cost in the long run, in both success and budget. It is much cheaper now to stock the bluegill than later when talking about adult size bluegill.
Ewest the plan about bass stocking, while I like it is costly. If I were asked to stock a few here then afew more later, etc. There will be delivery/handling chagres per trip.
I like the diversity of forage base, that will work, that diversity cost you money while the main thing is left lacking, get more bluegill now. If you do this quickly the 1-2 inch bluegill and surely 2-3 inch will spawn in plenty of time to stock the fingerling bass this June.
Mike, I haven't seen anything that sounds like a well thought out, stated goal for this lake. However, since you are going with all Floridas and F-1 bass, it sounds like you guys are looking for really big LMB. There's nothing wrong with that and it is a fairly common goal. I have never seen anyone that wanted to wind up with runty, undersized fish. BTW, has anyone told you that Florida strain bass have a reputation for not being as "catchable" as natives?
There are some proven formulas to achieve that goal. None of them are interesting and educational experiments and all involve a certain degree of patience. I can assure you that I have had my share of those experiments. Most of my failures are what, after the fact, I have called experiments. Lack of a well thought out plan and the patience to implement it have been major contributors. It has been said that good judgement is usually achieved by the application of bad judgement. I'm certainly guilty of that.
I, and others, have said that we can see where this just might work. But, you will notice that these are cautious statements. I have noted no actual endorsements. All of us like to experiment. Ten years ago, Tilapia and Hybrid Stripers were considered unacceptable in anything but large lakes. Now, they are heartily endorsed for a lot of ponds, but not in every situation. These guys were pioneers and we seldom hear about the overwhelming % of failures.
Most pond/lake fish problems can be corrected by the liberal application of cash and/or rotenone;
often both. Those actions usually occur after considerable loss of sleep.
Think about it. What are your stated goals and business plan? Do you want an interesting and educational experiment?
DD very well said.
Greg that LMB stocking plan was not my idea. I was working under the constraints of Sunil's question. Like you I think there are better options. Also like you I would rather spend a few more $ and get the better results even if I have to pay for 3 trips to the pond. The first ones could be done by picking up the fish and self stocking (cut out one delivery charge).
Dave,
We certainly do not want an ineresting experiment, but that is what we might get if I do not convince the POA to re-think the carte blanc recommendations of the biologist. Keep n mind that I am a neophyte to pond management, and am in the initial stages of education on the topic. That is why I have posted the questions, and appreciate the frank answers.
The interesting experiment was made, I think, as a way of providing a classy rebuttal to the recommendations I had recieved from the fish supplier.
My goals now will be to try to get the LNB numbers reduced, add back an equal dollar amount of CNBG ( or maybe even add to that) at the time the shad are released in 2 weeks.
BTW, the mean winter temperatures are in the 50's, with average low's to mid 20's and high's to mid 60's. the water temp in mid february was in the ow 60's, so the shad may do fine in over wintering
Here is a picture of the CNBG stocked last week. These are stated as 3-4" and sexualy mature. What do you think? Are these larger than standard 1 1/2-2" normaly stocked?
I'm having a hard time seeing that these are CNBG at all. Maybe it is just me. I see forked tails on several. Are you sure these are not the shiners? However if I'm wrong these are for sure bigger than standard 1-2" and yess they can start spawning right away at taht size. Man still looking and don;t they are bluegill. See that shiny flash in the middle, stil think shiner.
Greg, I'm like you. It must be the picture but those look nothing like any sunfish I've ever seen. The picture I'm seeing makes them look elongated and torpedo shaped.
I too think they are shiners...I lightened up the image and coppernose just don't bend that way...several in the pic have sleek bodies too.
This has been an interesting thread, if bass must be added according to schedule, you better add 30-60 adult (5-7 inch) BG per acre immediately to have a shot at pulling this accellerated plan off.
I tried to adjust and enlarge the pic. One fish I would say is a BG all the others can't tell. On that one can see the bars well enough and head also. Often when they are in current as when bucket is poured out their fins lay back sleek to the fish. These fish are for sure not regular size 2in. stockers.
Try this one. i may hae gotten the wrong image in the las post.
Or maybe thjis one.
THOSE are BG - the ones I can get the best idea of, look to be 3" or better.
Yep those are BG. They will spawn right away as long as the tmep is high enough. I just wish you could convince the board to get some more. BTW how many buckets like this did they dump? With 3,000 cnbg/bg we would not bucket put temper and shot them in, just making sure you got at least 3,000.
Everything will work fine except the predators. With no predators, those mature-ish BG and forage fish will explode by fall. Predators stocked in early fall will have plenty of food for sure!
It's a slower way to go, and much cheaper than "conventional" stocking. I'm sure money is a consideration, but a bit puzzling for a high dollar project like that. Why not do it the faster way? Life is too short!
Greg,
There were several buckets. the truck arrived witha 61 degree temp water and we had 71 degree lake temp. the decision was to temper he fish by taking a 1/2 bucket of lake water, add 1/2 bucket of truck water, then add the fish. These were then lowered into the lake and the bucket submerged till the fish started to swim out on their own. Total time to unload the shiners, BG, and minnows was 2 1/2 hours. the tuffies were added without the "tempering".
Based on this size, I am being told they will spawn this early summer. Is that right?
If the lake conditions are good those 3-4 in BG should spawn this summer at least the ones that were in good condition. When we did a stocking of 3-5in. BG in March the fish ,which were bigger than yours ,spawned about June 15 or about 90 days after they went in. However they were feed trained when they arrived and resumed eating art.feed about 2 days after they went in. Compare your BG to these.
Sounds like you were treated well. They will spawn before that depending on temp. I have seen bluegill on bed in late April lots of times. I would start lokin garound for beds in May though.
While our regular population (existing) of BG/RES usually start spawning in late March depending on temps. and weather that has not been true for the newly added fish. They have taken time to adjust to the new location become acclimated and de-stress from the move. If the water they came from was not rising in temps vs yours and not been subjected to lengthing photoperiod it could take a while for them to be able to spawn. See this link and text below FYI :
From SRAC :
If smaller bluegills and redears are
used for spawning, they should
be stocked at higher rates to compensate
for reduced fecundity and
greater variability of spawn size,
consistency and success. Most culturists
agree that broodstock
should be stocked in the winter,
or at least by early spring ....
http://www.pondboss.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=002523;p=1#000009
I would hold off on the predators totally for two years and then stock largemouth bass.
That way tons of forage and a good chance to get 18 pound plus bass in the future, especially if the threadfin shad can overwinter.
Lots of small bluegill, golden shiners and threadfins will = a bass smorgasbord.
Especially if the bass are stocked at a really low density.
