I have a recently renovated pond expansion from 1/2 to 1 acre pond. I have some large Channel Cat ( haven't seen no small ones when I feed, probably GSF probably slowed that down) and GSF . I have took out close to 2 Home Depot buckets full of the GSF , I don't think I am ever going to get them all out. I have been fertilizing and hoping to purchase 400 BG , 50 LMB , 100 Red Ears and FHM's. My question is " are the GSF going to eat up all the BG future eggs and fry ? " I did make spawning beds for BG. Could I go ahead and keep pulling GSF out for a week or two , then stock and not worry about rest and just yank them out when we catch them ? Any help would be appreciated on this matter , THANKS IN ADVANCE !!!!

If it were my pond, yes, I'd keep yanking the GSF out. Some people prefer them over BG though, due to their higher aggressiveness. With a larger mouth gape, they will definitely compete for food with your other species, and in a lot of cases, win that competition.

I like GSF but not as well as I like BG and RES. I know a lot people say there is no difference in the their flavor ... but in my experience ... their flesh isn't as firm and they are very susceptible to black spot. Also, their guts have a foul odor comparatively. I can't explain why to any of this but it has been my experience where I fish for them in Northern OK. Once you get some LMB going, they'll thin 'em down. Stock advanced fingerlings >6", CC and GSF will eat the 2" to 3" fingerling LMB as snacks.

How are you taking the green sunfish out? traps? if not, build and use them - they are very easy to catch especially if they are coming to feed

Matt, I sent you a PM looking for any input on the fish trap suggestion. I too have a GSF "problem" with a new pond. Thanks!

Scruffy:

Back in 2003 / 2004, I was extremely concerned about green sunfish and bullhead catfish in my new 17 acre pond. I tried trapping, fishing, etc. with little real impact. Experts on here told me not to worry. That the stocked large mouth bass, channel cats, redear, bluegill, and hybrid striped bass would soon dominate. They did. I think it took about 5 or 6 years; but... I can't remember the last time I saw or caught either a green sunfish or a bullhead catfish in my pond.

Of note, I also had green sunfish get into a smaller pond (about an acre) - apparently came up an overflow from a creek during a rain event. I only have small mouth bass in that pond and they are most definitely NOT controlling the green sunfish. I'm hesitant to add LMB to that pond because I wanted it as a dedicated SMB / redear pond and the LMB would likely dominate. Plan was to develop another pond to transfer the SMB to and then drain / kill off the GSF.

Brother had GSF get into a 3.5 acre pond he had (again - probably up overflow during rain event). He didn't really want any fish in it; but agreed to have four HSB (in the 4 pound range) placed in the pond. I haven't checked if they were able to provide any control. I know they probably don't provide as good a control as LMB would; but he really didn't want fish in the pond and LMB would have resulted in a breeding LMB population.

Holy crap it’s a ranger sighting! Welcome back brother we’ve missed ya!

Welcome home Ranger.

Yours sounds like a common experience. GSF are known to swim and jump (up to 30 ft IIRC) from pipes to get to a new home.

Thanks Guys! Got married, had a son, took on bunch more responsibility at home and work... Not much time. Then the COVID19 wave hit so I've been VERY involved with COVID19 stuff for the past 13 months or so. Pretty burnt out so going to try to prioritize some fun stuff this year and maybe some long delayed work on several ponds.

Have barely taken time to fish in the 17 acre pond over the past 17 years! I'm sure I need to add structure and thin out LMB pretty severely. Not sure what is really in it anymore. Have caught LMB up to about 10 pounds, CC in the 15 pound range, HSB in 8 to 10 pound range, RE close to 2 pounds, and some BG in the pound range; but really need to see what is in there now and manage it. Fish feeder quit. Bought another identical Texas Hunter fish feeder (largest size) which should be delivered soon. I'm hoping I'll be able to swap parts between the two to figure out what is wrong with the older one and get them both going.

Did make time last year to convert an old pontoon boat into a barge so could transfer zero turn mower to / from the island. That works pretty well. Have another old pontoon boat planning to fix up. Have also planted Dunstan Chestnut, Apple, Peach, Pear, Persimmon, and Mulberry trees on the island. Most of them are doing well.

Considering buying a regular polydock or something. Should probably post asking for experiences / recommendations on that...

I'll send you a PM regarding the feeder.

Good to hear from you Ranger

Following up on the Green Sunfish post from earlier this year.....

My new 8 acre pond filled this spring. The Golden Shiner fry I stocked early May are doing incredible. They are hitting the feeders and loving the chow, by the thousands. The water shimmers when they come up. I have stocked about 1000 straight/hybrid/redear BG, many sizes from adult to tiny. Those came from my other ponds. No bass yet.

In early June, My first run to ye ole bait man I bought 10# of what I thought were straight BG. I did not look at them closely. (He is very socially distant, loading them in the truck for me). Well I made the run home got to the pond and started acclamation process. Now I see they were Green Sunfish.

I debated to release them or dump on the bank or take to another pond. I released them. Since releasing I have been second guessing that decision.

Reading above it sounds like everything should be ok? I am planning on American SF bringing F1s in the fall, going with their 6 to 7" size range.

The only problem I see from green sunfish is that, if you need forage, they don’t make it like bluegills that never really stop spawning. If you need them as forage, continuous forage, it might be better to nuke the whole thing and start over.

Good point, thanks Dave. I think I have enough BG and shiners the Greens will get outnumbered.

Jambi, I like the greens. They are real fighters when hooked.

+1 to what DD1 has written

I was told about the F1's from a hatchery and then I did some research and now I don not want them . It has something to do with down the line the hybrid weakens from parent to kids and keeps deluting . The article was Tennessee Lake management : the truth about F1's I am going with a pure breed of LMB

Lots here on the subject. Don't believe everything you read.

I believe that's somewhat accurate. F1 hybrids don't keep their hybrid vigor when they reproduce, and their F2, F3+ offspring are inferior to their parents. With that being said, they still have a huge role in the ponds of folks wishing to grow large bass. You'll just have to restock more F1's every now and then. Since you're in Nevada, pure Florida bass might be good too, it just depends on your goals. There are pros and cons with both.

Here is some info

Read this recent thread on topic

https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=496522#Post496522

Here is another thread on point

https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=459981#Post459981

Stock some of each - Northerns and Flas. To my knowledge there is no proof of outbreeding depression in F-1 or F-X Fla /Northern LMB. They are in fact naturally common in the integrated zone where Fla and Northerns overlap.

See black dots on map.



More in depth genetics

https://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=141071&page=1


The premise is stocking F-1s (they are intergrades) into waters in the intergrade zone (an area naturally populated by LMB with both Fla and Northern genes) will not lead to a greater chance of outbreeding depression nor inbreeding (regression) than would stocking pure northerns or Flas. There are 2 genetic concepts involved. Outbreeding depression (crossing separate species which can lead to hybrid vigor followed by reduction in fitness in Fx generations) and inbreeding (genetic regression from continued reproduction from too small a related population leading to reduced fitness). One is from too diverse a gene set from 2 species when crossed over time and the other from too small of a gene set from related individuals. Any population of LMB , whether Fla ,Nort or intergrades in limited numbers ( fish from a small set of brood fish) in a closed environment will be subject to less fitness over time from inbreeding. That is not the reason nor question here involved as type of LMB has no bearing on that. A bunch of Northern LMB in that circumstance is just as likely as F-1s to exhibit the inbreeding problem. The fix on this problem is easy - remove some LMB and replace them with fish from another set of brood fish (add new genes) from a similar location. The second problem , outbreeding depression, is what was suggested in BM's post. In the article below , which is by some of the same cited writers, genetic testing over the entire US LMB population (90 locations) showed higher gene diversity in intergrades than in Fla or Norts. This same mix of intergrade genes is the naturally occurring gene mix in the intergrade locations. See map below. As such it is the set of genes best adapted for that location (intergrade zone). I suggest that stocking intergrade genetics into the intergrade zone is less likely to result in outbreeding depression than would stocking pure Flas or pure Norths because they are the best adapted genes for that location. This is consistent with these writers premise that you should not stock genes from one population into a separate different population because the mixing with non-native genes will be more apt to result in outbreeding depression. As per the article cited in BM's post " This kind of population mixing (termed stock transfer) potentially affects the fitness of the recipient population deleteriously as a result of outbreeding depression. Outbreeding depression is the reduction in fitness in the progeny of two parents that were too distantly related to each other. " In LMB terms this would mean parents from for example from different geographic regions not parents (whether Fla or northern) from the same location (the intergrad zone). More later.



A Biochemical Genetic Evaluation of the Northern and

Florida Subspecies of Largemouth Bass 1

DAVID P. PHILIPP

WILLIAM F. CHILDERS

GREGORY S. WnXTT







We also have calculated for each population

the mean number of alldes present per locus,

the percentage of loci which were polymorphic,

and the mean observed and expected heterozygosity

(Table 1). The lowest levels of allelic

polymorphism were observed in the populations

of the pure northern subspecies (1.09 allele

per locus; 8.3% polymorphic loci; observed

mean heterozygosity of 0.024). Pure Florida

largemouth bass populations were considerably

more polymorphic (1.14 allde per locus; 11.0%

polymorphic loci; mean heterozygosity of 0.041),

but the intergrade populations were, as expected,

the most polymorphic (1.22 allde per

locus, 15.5% polymorphic loci; heterozygosity

of 0.051). These represent statistically significant

differences between groups. The observed

heterozygosity levels for the two pure subspecies

were somewhat lower than that reported

for teleosts in general: 0.051 by Nevo (1978)

and 0.048 by Winans (1980). The intergrade

populations, however, demonstrated a mean

heterozygosity consistent with these values

(0.051). It remains to be determined if the

higher heterozygosity in the intergrade zone,

relative to the pure subspecies, is a consequence

of heterosis. However, that maximal heterogeneity

is located in intergrade populations may

help to explain, in part, the existence of a "bigbass

belt" in northern Florida and southern Alabama

and Georgia, as well as the largemouth

bass of "trophy" size being taken from certain

lakes in Texas and California.

In any case, the intergrade zone today must

be considered to consist of northern Florida, as

well as at least substantial portions of the states

of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina,

North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland.

The extent of influence of some of the genes

characteristic of the Florida subspecies in certain

more peripheral states within the intergrade

zone, particularly those of Mississippi,

Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina is uncertain.

Some bodies of water in these states still

may contain populations of pure northern

largemouth bass. The presence of Florida alldes

in populations in Texas, California, Arkansas,

Illinois, and perhaps Louisiana, probably

are the result of deliberate introductions.

Further investigation to determine the status of

numerous populations throughout several states

is required to delineate the true extent of the

intergrade zone. Once genetic differences between

populations are better understood, and

once we understand the roles that short-term

and long-term fitness play in determining the

range and distribution of phenotypes, we will

be in a better position to design effective management

programs.



In addition, populations within each group

(northern subspecies, Florida subspecies, and

intergrades) were compared and the groups as

a whole were all compared based on Nei's (1978)

identity coefficient, I (Table 9). Intragroup

variation was least among populations of pure

Florida subspecies (I = 0.997), intermediate

among populations of the nortfiern subspecies

(I = 0.992) and greatest among the intergrade

populations (I = 0.972). The intergrade populations

were approximately as closely related

to populations of the pure Florida subspecies

(I = 0.960) as to populations of the pure northern

subspecies (I = 0.962). Finally, as expected,

the two most distantly related groups were the

two pure subspecies (I = 0.911).



In an environment with high thermal variability,

the long-term success of stocked largemouth

bass might be greatest for cohorts with

the highest levels of genetic variability. However,

the two subspecies have evolved quite different

tfiermal requirements (Hart 1952; Latta

1977; Cichra et al. 1981), and it would be unrealistic

to expect those fish in the intergrade

zone, those fish with the higfiest genetic variability,

to be well suited for either an extreme

northerly or southerly environment. Introduction

of Florida alleles into northern populations

of largemouth bass could lower tfie overall fitness

of these populations under the normally

lower temperatures encountered by the northern

subspecies. A similar but reverse situation

may result from the introduction of northern

alleles into populations of Florida largemouth

bass