Just curious, After reading about outbreeding depression issues of stocking one species of largemouth, What would be the pros and con's of mixing 4 strains of bass instead of solely stocking 1 strain in a new 1 acre pond?
For example:
50 - F1
50 - Pure Northern
50 - Pure Florida
50 - Camelot

Also when ordering new fish would it be wise to order from different hatchies to diversify the genetics even more?
California Bass + Texas Bass + Florida bass etc?


Thanks

I am not a pro but FWIW, IMHO If I was starting all over again, I would get all of each species I wanted to stock from the hatchery that has the best reputation of producing outstanding fish of that species. I see little value in mixing great fish genetics from one source with mediocre fish from another. With that said, if I was out fishing another BOW and caught an incredible looking fish, I would consider bucket stocking to get some diversity and possibly improve the genetics of my fish.

Not to worry, I am sure a pro will come along and give you some advice. Good luck with the pond!

What is your goal or what are you goals, probably need to answer that first.

Largest bass? Largest catchable bass? Hardest fighting bass? Best coloration? etc.

Got a question.. Won't most LMB get up to 10lbs if given plenty to eat and a little room to grow? No matter what kind it is?


Pat

Years ago, I talked to a guy in another boat right at dawn as he was moving along on his trolling motor. He was heading home. Said he fished most of the night. Whitewater in Indiana before Brookville reservoir sucked it up. Had a 10+ Northern Bass on his stringer.

Most bass will never approach 10 pounds reguardless of how perfect the environment

What is the reason for this? Is it age? Or other reasons. I have seen multiple 10# come out of small stock tanks around the Livingston area


Pat

I'm curious to learn why bass won't approach 10lbs as well? Is there a study or research paper available? By the way, not challenging what you said, truly am sincerely interested.

Not 10, but 8.5:




And 8.75:


Landed both in the same pond this past Autumn. Landed loads of other 4+ lbs largemouth same pond. Buddy landed 9.5 and the owner insists there are a few 10+. Met 2 folks who landed 10lbers. Given the sheer number of fat toads I've landed and personally seen others land in this pond, I don't doubt the owner at all regarding his statement there are multiple 10+ lbers.

I have a client (shop customer) who has grown a couple of LMB to double digits. That's a noteworthy feat for an Indiana pond. And to top it off, that same BOW yields a handful of 5-6lb smallies every year. Very impressive.

Tony, check back in 5 yeaars. There's a pond near you that most likely will have a few in it.

Scott, of that I have no doubt! Safe travels today!

I think the key word to this post is "most".

Then my question becomes, is it lack of food or other resources within the control of the pondmiester that limits a pond to producing only a fraction of the total bass population to double digit, or is the genetic potential simply not there for many of the individual LMB that never reach 10 lbs?

In other words in sports terms, will I never be a Wilt Chamberlain level basketball player or Wayne Gretzky hockey player no matter how hard I try?

Or in even more other words, can we ever create a pond full of 10 lb only LMB with no little ones? Or even "most"?

Maybe most LMB just decide to become couch potatoes and watch the game instead of becoming star players. Maybe the potential was never there.

Maybe I don't have a clue what I'm talking about.

Personally, I think it's doable, but every time I think about it, all I come up with is a snapshot. A moment in a pond's life when everything hits perfectly. You'd almost have to start from scratch every 5-10 years, and that's a pretty big gamble.

A buddy of mine's a ranch foreman at a place that has a 35 acre spring fed lake. This pond has given up more 10+ LMB than any other place I personally know of, including the lake record of 16+ pounds. What it doesn't have is a lot of 4-8 pound LMB, so there seems to be a huge gap in generations. I hope it doesn't happen, but I see the potential for a big fall off in the size of those fish once that oldest generation is gone.

WAG, but I think a well manged pond with multiple generations of healthy LMB would probably provide the best opportunity for a 10+. At least I hope it does.

Please point me to a study indicating outbreeding depression in Fla X Northern LMB in the zone where they occur naturally. IMO when fish are stocked outside of the range of their required environment then problems occur but they are not due to outbreeding depression. IE stocking F-1 LMB in Minn or Wisc. or stocking LMB originating in Minn in deep south TX. Those are adaptation problems some of which are genetic but are not outbreeding depression.

There will be a lot on LMB crosses and the topic in general at the Convention.

There are a number of studies on LMB crosses (Fla and Northern) and what has occurred and much more to come. I have not seen one study (it may exist though)that shows outbreeding depression in Fla/Noth crosses. They are the same species (different strain) and not like crossing 2 different species such as Bluegill and Green Sunfish ( BG X GSF) to get a HBG.

Would agree with ewest that the outbreeding depression angle has been hugely overplayed. As he said, the more critical factor is consideration of natural ranges, habitat usage, and habits of the bass you are considering stocking and whether those match up with the setting you will be placing them into. One often overlooked factor in this is that all Northern bass are not the same. With newer genetic analysis techniques we see considerable differences between "Northern" bass in the Tennessee River and "Northern" bass from Kentucky or Minnesota. For example, "Northern" bass in the Tennessee have residual Florida alleles, likely from a shared common ancestor with Florida bass, that are far less common in the far North.

Quote: "Most bass will never approach 10 pounds reguardless of how perfect the environment."" Ewest, our resident librarian, or other members can provide more data on this topic. I suspect the basic information in the quote probably came from a fisheries class topic or similar discussion.

If we take this exactly as it was written, then IMO it is correct. Most bass in each year class, probably 99.8% or higher, die due to various forms of mortality, most often predation and often harvest before that fish or a few of its siblings become a trophy. Dr. Willis in his Pond Boss articles occasionally discussed this fishery mortality characteristic. Years ago I also posted a lengthy note about fish mortality. http://www.bassresource.com/fish_biology/mortality_rates.html

Very few bass and likely all fish species live long enough to even reach the 10 lb status which often takes 7-10 yrs or longer. Many of the older larger individuals are harvested by anglers. Old bass are not always big bass. Sometimes a 13 yr old bass can weigh less than 3 pounds. One if not both of the bass pictured above were probably harvested, thus they will never make the 10 lb mark. Many influences occur during the 7-10 years to 'cut' life short or suppress growth rate. There are other past forum discussions about what it takes to grow trophy bass. See the Archives for more big bass topics.

If one implies additional meaning from "Most bass will never reach 10 lbs ..." to mean 'if all siblings lived' then there could be lots of room for discussion.

Other related topics include size and age specific harvest mortalities. Often anglers crop the fastest growing and most aggressive fish in a cohort group. This results in a shift in the population toward slower growth and earlier mortality over time. Fish kills are another big cause of random mortality. Older larger fish are the first to die when DO becomes limiting.

As most of the members know for a fish to reach trophy status lots of "stars" need to align properly. Ponds are very dynamic and constantly changing not always for the optimum state or condition to grow trophies. A trophy bound fish needs ample food and the correct general sizes of food every day and have the right genes for best growth. Those needed foods change as the fish grows and ages. Truth be fully known the optimum nutrition needs may even change as that fish ages from fry to middle age, to "old timer". Availability of ample proper foods does not always happen. Often the food supply does not match the needs of the trophy bound fish or number of fish living in that habitat, thus there can be numerous "hiccups" in the growth of that trophy bound fish.

Disease and water quality are also constant hurdles to overcome during the trophy bound life span.

Release of trophy bound fish is important, but proper handling is even more important to that particular fish. What happens to that trophy bound fish that gets caught and mishandled by an angler, especially when the "bass" is in the final stages of trophy bound growth and the angler lifts that bass by the jaw and injures,cracks or breaks the jaw just by lifting that fish? Remember that fish rarely if ever 'feels' gravity in his weightless environment. A big fat bass is not 'designed' to be lifted by the jaw. A released injured fish is likely to die or waste away. The trophy pathway is now ended.

More reading about mortality:
http://www.cfr.msstate.edu/students/Wfpa...tory%20mort.pdf
Previous PBoss thread - mortality:
http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=22339#Post22339

In PA - ""On average the total annual mortality rate for adult largemouth bass is 58 % annual mortality is 60% for adult smallmouth bass, these include annual losses due to fishing and loss due to natural circumstances such as predation and disease."" This means that each year a large percentage of that age group dies due to natural and angler mortalities. Very few fish in that age group remain after 6-10yrs of a significant amount of mortality each year. If a pond has too many big fish survive each year will there be enough and adequate amount of large easy to catch foods available DAILY to keep them growing? Thus the statement "Most bass will never approach 10 pounds regardless of how perfect the environment."

I added some yankee bass in my texas pond and i've already got them trained to say "ya'll", like TexMex food, and cheer for the Cowboys!

Both of the bass I landed in those pics were released back into the pond. I wouldn't find them good eating at that weight, and anything that large deserves to swim free another day. If I landed a personal trophy for myself I would photograph every angle, record some measurements, and release the fish. Then have a replica made. And in my pond it is catch and release all bass at this stage. So they just keep eating and growing.

Both of those bass in the pictures were landed on 3-inch minnows. In fact in one day I landed 13 bass for 34lbs all on those little 3-inch minnows.

I sometimes wonder how accurate any studies are, beyond the controlled environment or group they're studying. So many variables at play that attempting to apply the results or findings in one study to another environment may be wrong.

If we look at humans, especially in Western Society, just look at how large humans have become. The percentage of overweight or obese people in the USA alone in 1960 versus 2015. The growth in overweight and obese people is staggering. Sometimes I look at toads (bass) like people - if the bass just sits around and eats and eats and eats without much exercise, it is gonna put on the weight. And if you feed that bass food that increases growth to a point, and then just feed it to fatten it once body growth has reached its capacity, that weight gain just continues around its midsection (like humans).

I've fished some ponds in Georgia wherein 3 year old bass are already 7-8lbs. So even if the weight gain slows, some of these should make double digits well ahead of 7 or 10 years. Food, food, food. And no exercise. Like an oscar I had in college. We fed, fed, fed, that Albino oscar and it just grew, grew, and grew.

Anyways, end of day it's all tied to a bunch of variables that outside of our control.

I wonder how well those two released bass recovered from the angling experience since they were not released immediately back into the water. I say this because the back ground in the pictures were not on the water locations. I think we overestimate the vitality or recovery ability of old, overweight fish after they have been jaw jerked and harassed to exhaustion and then placed back into a harsh survival of the fittest environment. I am not saying what you are doing is wrong. I am just questioning the ability of big old fish to successfully survive intense jaw jerking episodes by sometimes less than the best of anglers who do not place the fish's health as the utmost importance vs extended handling for science, deep hooked situations, slime removal, show and tell, etc.
An older thread about handling of fish to be released:
Handling fish
http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=90341

Summer time they are history- cooler water they have a chance depending on how long they were paraded around. At that weight I've heard that's its best to support the bass and not hang it by its mouth



Pat

Quote basslover " I sometimes wonder how accurate any studies are, beyond the controlled environment or group they're studying. So many variables at play that attempting to apply the results or findings in one study to another environment may be wrong. "

Good point. Both agree and disagree. "wonder how accurate any studies are ... " Peer reviewed studies are accurate and depending on what they are measuring have different applications. For example genetic studies of Fla/Northern LMB introgression repeatedly over different varying locations show similar results. Different studies by different scientists , different locations, different brood fish etc. all measuring introgression over time appear to show similar trends over somewhat similar lakes (not Minn v TX but southern US). This is information we can use.

"So many variables at play that attempting to apply the results or findings in one study to another environment may be wrong. "

Agree and would add .. every water body is different .. never assume you will get a guaranteed result.

IIRC, the ratio of LMB that were caught by anglers of pure 13 pound Florida LMB vs. a Northern/Florida mix was right at 50/50 in the TX Share a Lunker program.

What I wonder about is the actual numbers of the resident LMB caught. Are the mixed LMB more aggressive, and therefore skew the results of the fish caught, or are there really as many mixed as pure strain LMB growing to 13+ pounds?

The first bass held by its jaw is literally 3 feet from the pond. Landed it, snapped a couple pics, and released it by placing it in the water, holding it, slowing moving the water over its gills. It shot off right quick. You can see a mark on its side. That same toad was landed over 2 months later by a mate of mine. I recognized that mark in his pic.

The second bass inside is literally a 20 second walk from the pond. You saw the building in the other bass pic - the white stone exterior. It was taken inside to be weighed and then released in the same manner as the first. I know the owner and while fish can die and stay on the bottom there were no reports of any dead floaties.

I understand that picking up a bass by its jaw can due damage, and while not justifying it, I would also think that hooking a bass with a sharp steel hook and essentially dragging it against its will as it fights to go the opposite direction is also likely to harm it. So I don't know that picking it up at this point by it's belly will do any less harm than the possible traumatic experience of being hooked and drug through the water.

BTW, I understand you're not attacking me or saying I was wrong even if you think I was, and I hope my reply isn't interpreted as a defensive attack. Online forums don't convey the intent and expressions that face to face conversations do.

Thanks for all the lively discussions on this.

My goal is to have the largest bass possible that are fairly catchable.

I was reading up on Georgia Giants and kens-fishfarm stated:


The logic that followed was that by obtaining bass from 1 place and if new bass were never introduced, could increases the chance of inbreeding within a small pond.

If the problem is noted and prevalent in Georgia Giants, it would seem logical that the same could be true for bass... All speculation of course but wanted to hear what you guys thought.

There is none (0) information indicating a similarity between GG and LMB (F-1 , FX etc.) with respect to this topic. There are plenty of studies on LMB strain crosses and not 1 that I know of mentions out breeding depression. In addition no one here with a LMB pond/lake has indicated that they have experienced that problem.

Not to mention that the GG are pretty much a put and take fish....management efforts, in my opinion anyway, should concentrate on severely curtailing recruitment, due to the fact that two different species are involved in creating that particular hybrid. Unlike the LMB efforts discussed in this thread.

You can put anything in print especially if it is not peer reviewed. Printing it does not make it true even if you own and operate a fish farm.

One of the things I really liked about Dave Willis was his oft repeated "We really don't know". I always figured that if he didn't know, nobody did and there are no truisms.

Cody always says "All ponds are different". Again, blanket statements don't cut it and there are no truisms.

Lusk says that there are a lot of variables but it mostly concerns the overall environment. So, there are no truisms there either because environments are not static. Mama Nature has a way of scattering your chickens.

Regarding peer reviews, some of the peers have their own agendas and can't always be considered 100% trustworthy. However, somebody has to say "yeah, but".

About the only thing I know for sure is that it doesn't rain much 3 or 4 miles south of Bowie Texas and my curiosity has killed a lot of fish.