Pond Boss Magazine
https://www.pondboss.com/images/userfiles/image/20130301193901_6_150by50orangewhyshouldsubscribejpeg.jpg
Advertisment
Newest Members
Shotgun01, Dan H, Stipker, LunkerHunt23, Jeanjules
18,451 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums36
Topics40,899
Posts557,071
Members18,451
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
Top Posters
esshup 28,411
ewest 21,474
Cecil Baird1 20,043
Bill Cody 15,110
Who's Online Now
17 members (Bob Lusk, LeighAnn, Shorthose, catscratch, Justin W, Requa, Freg, DenaTroyer, Blestfarmpond, Snipe, RAH, Rick O, bstone261, Theo Gallus, esshup, jpsdad, Bing), 775 guests, and 186 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#558727 05/28/23 06:38 AM
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
What is the optimum sized BG prey for LMB and how many do they eat every day during the growing season? For size use a proportion like 1/4 or .25 ... whatever feels about right.

Last edited by jpsdad; 05/28/23 06:43 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
I have no idea as to the correct answers, but that sounds like a great experiment for you to run!

Put a single bass in a cattle tank, or a small lined pond that you built. Add a bit of ambush cover for the bass.

Measure 8 BG of various sizes and fin clip them for easier predation. Check how many, and of what size the bass eats every day.

Caveat - "caged" LMB behavior must differ from wild behavior, but I don't know by how much. Otherwise, Cabela's and the hard core aquaculture guys would have LMB in their tanks that exceed the world record!

However, the experiment might help you determine the answer to your "optimal size" question. Further, after you determined the optimal size, you could eliminate that size cohort from your tank, and experiment to see what ranges the LMB would consume when the optimal size was not available.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
Lusk sez 1/4 to 1/3 their size. It’s a matter of energy expended versus calories obtained


It's not about the fish. It's about the pond. Take care of the pond and the fish will be fine. PB subscriber since before it was in color.

Without a sense of urgency, Nothing ever gets done.

Boy, if I say "sic em", you'd better look for something to bite. Sam Shelley Rancher and Farmer Muleshoe Texas 1892-1985 RIP
1 member likes this: jpsdad
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
Quote
I have no idea as to the correct answers, but that sounds like a great experiment for you to run!

Put a single bass in a cattle tank, or a small lined pond that you built. Add a bit of ambush cover for the bass.

Measure 8 BG of various sizes and fin clip them for easier predation. Check how many, and of what size the bass eats every day.

I was thinking rather than putting various sizes in, stock all of the prey at the same length proportion but at the same total stocking weight. One could then measure how many they consumed and how much they gained after a specified time period.

There are other ways to determine optimum. For example, don't fish eat a distribution of sizes that optimizes the energy gained/energy expended? Wouldn't knowledge of the realized consumption of prey tell us this? So we have acquired substantial evidence along the line of realized consumption. Just saying some times it is better to open a tin can with a can opener than with say a pocket knife. We can use other ways to determine this optimum.

Part of the reason I am posing the question is to get feedback on impressions and pre-existing bias. It may be helpful, for any brave enough to answer the question of optimum proportionate length and daily consumption number to also explain why they feel this to be the case. If enough participate in the poll, I will ultimately share how we can determine if the impressions can be actuated in the real world. Basically to predict the growth of a predator to see if the impression is reasonable. Ultimately testing various scenarios. Finally I will tie known realized consumption distributions to the same tests to demonstrate that predators really do feed optimally and what relative sizes are optimum and what daily numbers of this size lead to maximum rates of known realized growth (for LMB 2 lbs growth annually). In the end, all can judge whether this is reasonable or not and absorb or reject it for themselves.

Why would anyone care? For some it might have management decision implications. For example, for a forage supplement intended to support the trophy LMB in a pond, how many, how often, and what size would yield the best growth of these fish? Anyways, I'll share if at least 8 take a stab with their own best guess based on the impressions they have.

Last edited by jpsdad; 05/28/23 09:53 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
Originally Posted by Dave Davidson1
Lusk sez 1/4 to 1/3 their size. It’s a matter of energy expended versus calories obtained

Thank you Dave. What is your impression on how many of this size prey can be consumed daily?


It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
No idea


It's not about the fish. It's about the pond. Take care of the pond and the fish will be fine. PB subscriber since before it was in color.

Without a sense of urgency, Nothing ever gets done.

Boy, if I say "sic em", you'd better look for something to bite. Sam Shelley Rancher and Farmer Muleshoe Texas 1892-1985 RIP
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
I suspect Snipe is slammed at work right now, since it is the end of May.

However, I believe he participated in the State of Kansas LMB program where they very quickly moved the bass from fingerlings to big 'uns using koi.

They probably have good data on optimum forage size and feed rates - but I don't know if that data would be publicly available.

Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
S
Online Happy
S
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
Conversion of Koi was measured in weight of koi. Length means nothing if the fish is average, below average or above average for it's length. Also matters how accessible those fish are, whether BG or Koi..
State uses Koi because average conversion is around 4.5 to 1 and are easier to raise than BG. But, that's a very controlled situation.
If you are going to study FCR of BG, you have to establish a RW standard of the fish being eaten.

1 member likes this: FishinRod
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
That's a remarkable number of gross FCR for an adult LMB. The koi results are a little better than I estimated for carp which comes in about 6 for a 1 lb LMB growing to 3 lbs in 180 days. I wonder if the koi are possibly more energy dense than carp or perhaps some of the koi fed in the brood ponds manage to grow before being eaten. Do they feed forage daily, weekly, monthly?

Yes, I agree that length isn't what converts so I always use standard weights when estimating prospective scenarios. The question of length I think is important from the perspective of a predator's realized consumption. A predator can consume a variety of different sizes but what is it going to consume? Would what it consumes most be most optimum? If not, why would what it consumes most be less optimum?

Fishing with my son the other day we fished with a 4 1/2" BG and a 18" LMB seemed very interested. He chased it multiple times but never got his mouth on it. After about 10 minutes of this we fished for a different bait ... a 3 in BG ... and the 18" LMB took it within 10 seconds and the fight was on. I know the LMB could have eaten the 4 1/2" BG. It was, like the 3" one, struggling and obviously distressed and vulnerable. Yet the 18" LMB seemed cautious about taking the larger bait. At standard weight, the larger BG would be 4 times as heavy as the 3". The 3" BG is only 1/6 the length of an 18" LMB yet two of them is almost enough energy to sustain the 18" LMB for a day(assuming standard weights for BG and LMB). With three of them every day for 180 days it can double in weight (even though the FCR isn't that great 11.94). In a typical pond, getting 3 meals of 1/6 BG prey everyday for 180 days must not happen very often for LMB that are 18" long.

Last edited by jpsdad; 05/28/23 08:47 PM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


1 member likes this: FishinRod
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
S
Online Happy
S
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
Standard fin Koi should be the same as std carp in FCR if close in condition.
Koi are dumped weekly into grow out ponds during summer which is not exactly a farm pond setting so it's not going to be the same as a normal pond, in which case all of the BG are not going to be the same length, condition or population structure. Some will even be more aware of their surroundings than others.
I think this is a great project to take on, but in my opinion, it's going to take 3 different ponds with like numbers of fish with consideration to fish health of both Prey and Predator, cover and ambush points available.
LMB will eat when it wants to eat and we've all seen when one has bigger eyes than stomach. I don't think Bass need a huge mouth-full every time, but I do think a couple of things have to be present...1, high forage numbers that increase frequency of encounters with little effort to ingest, and healthy, stress-free conditions.
I believe you can get close to an assumption, but to know the true growth, we need to know the density of the fish being consumed at the time it is consumed, and how much energy did it take to run it down on that specific feeding burst. I "think" every encounter would be a different measure, although an average could be established if fish are sampled often but we know this is a stress inducer.
I'm sure there's a way to do it, just not sure how but there are folks doing this much smarter than me that may have an answer.

1 member likes this: FishinRod
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
S
Online Happy
S
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 513
Would what it consumes most be most optimum? If not, why would what it consumes most be less optimum?
The second part of your question -or answer to-is less optimum might be most abundant and more optimum might be harder to catch.
There may be an answer to that that we don't know...might be an "It depends" type deal until someone proves otherwise.

Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
Thank you for expanding on the koi

Quote
I don't think Bass need a huge mouth-full every time, but I do think a couple of things have to be present...1, high forage numbers that increase frequency of encounters with little effort to ingest, and healthy, stress-free conditions.
I believe you can get close to an assumption, but to know the true growth, we need to know the density of the fish being consumed ....

The standard is to relate consumption in energy units to energy density. That is, what quantity of energy is consumed at different quantities of energy per unit area. Comparing for example a 4.5" BG to a 3" BG ... to have the same energy density there must be 4 times as many 3" BG. So it would be taboo to feed equal numbers of each. For example, it would be like feeding the same number of 1/4" pellets as 3/8" pellets. The 3/8" pellets weigh 3.75 times more and so it would skew how much they are fed.

Quote
I "think" every encounter would be a different measure, although an average could be established if fish are sampled often but we know this is a stress inducer.

I think it more than just an encounter and how much energy was expended for it. A predator is expending energy all day and all night. To be sure, not as much per unit time as when it lunges for prey. But the time between foraging forays can be extensive. Also a foraging session can extend for a considerable amount of time without success. A few weeks ago I observed a 16" LMB foraging. I was well above it looking down and all the fish were behaving as though I was not there. The LMB would try to position itself relative to a potential prey and then accelerate towards it. But every time the prey would react and skirt out of the way in a direction askew to the motion of the LMB. I will mention that the LMB displayed foraging activity throughout the entire time. Constantly moving and trying to get a good angle and proceeding to accelerate multiple times. All of the prey targeted, at least what I could see were in the 4" to 5" sizes best I could tell. So this falls a little above the 1/4 mark. I do think that 1/6 to 1/5 length fish are more easy for an LMB to consume. At the time there was a dearth in smaller prey. Presently we've already had a spawn but fish smaller 4" are not numerous and are being consumed. There seems to be plenty of >4" BG ... though to be sure ... I don't know the energy density of them but this much I do know. The 4" to 6" BG are by far the most numerous BG in the pond except for brief periods following spawns.

Regarding individual encounter metrics, this just seems cumbersome. The best way to do a test is over a specified period of time where the average is embedded (and apparent) in the final result. Most research I have read does it this way.

Though energy expended per energy consumed is important for the efficiency of conversion ... we cannot overlook the LMB problem of survival. If feeding on BG it must consume an average 1.3% of its body weight daily or it will shrivel and die. It must be successful in consuming prey. Going without food for a day results in a loss of body weight in excess of 1% during the growing season. In other words, there is a daily cost to failing to consume a maintenance ration each day. MOST of the energy cost is between the lunges and attacks. Larger BG, because LMB are less successful at consuming them, require more investment of time (which is also an increase in investment of energy). The same applies to prey that are too small. To consume the same daily ration requires more encounters and this means more investment of time and energy. It stands to reason, that the most frequently consumed prey sizes are the ones that provide the better balance of energy investment and energy consumed.

For LMB and BG at standard weight, a 1/4 length standard weight BG comprises 2.41% of a 1 lb standard weight LMB. So if an LMB can eat 2.41% of its body weight in BG every day, it can grow an astonishing amount. It can almost quadruple its weight going from 1 lb to 3.73 lbs at an FCR of 9.42 in only 180 days. This would be a very unusual growth rate of course so suffice it to say, even in a pond where 1/4 BG prey is abundant, they must be relatively difficult to consume. I can say this with confidence because the limit of LMB weight in the above referenced pond seems to be around 3 or 4 lbs. I've not seen or caught any LMB larger than 19" and yet 4" to 6" BG are the most abundant both in number and combined creel weight (despite my efforts to cull them). If an 18" fish could consume a 4.5" bluegill daily the growth would be astonishing and the LMB in this pond are not growing beyond 19". So what seems to be missing is sufficient spawning and survival to the range of sizes that are the most energy efficient.

Quote
Would what it consumes most be most optimum? If not, why would what it consumes most be less optimum?
The second part of your question -or answer to-is less optimum might be most abundant and more optimum might be harder to catch.
There may be an answer to that that we don't know...might be an "It depends" type deal until someone proves otherwise.

No matter what hypothesis I consider, I consider the null hypothesis and every counter argument I can to discredit it. But I even do that with the counter arguments (Maybe I'm bipolar?). That's all I was doing in my comment that you quoted. A counter argument can seem tenable until what it must mean is untenable in and of itself. The question of what are predators actually doing has been thoroughly demonstrated. Since they are survivors, they tell the story of what fish are doing to survive. I just find the thought that the survivors are doing something more when it is less advantageous for them to be a very unappetizing thought. I would like to think that what they do most frequently is that which is most rewarding.

Last edited by jpsdad; 05/29/23 08:18 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
jpsdad,

I like the fishing anecdote - especially if young ones catching more fish is the primary goal of the pond management!

LMB (and other fish) will strike for reasons other than eating. I have caught large bass on tiny lures. I don't know if they decided to "eat" a small meal that was going right past their mouth, or if they wanted to "punch" an intruder in their home - but they lacked fists.

We have also caught a 9# CC on a tiny hook with a bit of worm while fishing for BG. The CC was only landed because the curve of the hook was perfectly wrapped under the cats lower jawbone, so the fish could only exert force on the straight shank. I don't know if the large cat struck the tiny bit of worm because his whiskers could only signal "worm" without conveying the quantity of worm?


Snipe,

Thanks for weighing in on your koi experience! I think that project will be a very informative study if the state ever does a publication of their results. Even if the koi portion is not easily reproducible in farm ponds, it still provides some data as to the top end of potential growth rates.

If pond managers can get close by other means, then they would know they are very close to the optimum.

Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
Originally Posted by jpsdad
A few weeks ago I observed a 16" LMB foraging. I was well above it looking down and all the fish were behaving as though I was not there. The LMB would try to position itself relative to a potential prey and then accelerate towards it. But every time the prey would react and skirt out of the way in a direction askew to the motion of the LMB. I will mention that the LMB displayed foraging activity throughout the entire time. Constantly moving and trying to get a good angle and proceeding to accelerate multiple times.

jpsdad,

Was that bass foraging in open water?

If so, then your observation may show the importance of "ambush cover" for bass.

That factor could actually be more important than the size and quantity of available forage!

If a bass has to expend the energy of 50 attempts to catch a meal compared to a bass that only has to expend the energy of 3 attempts to catch a meal, then the latter bass could grow more quickly - even with less than optimal available forage.


P.S. How were you observing the bass from the high vantage point? I didn't know if a nice drone was part of your "pond supplies" since you have a son (or sons?).

It certainly frustrates me to take people fishing, and then have a very poor outing. I am pretty sure we presented lures to the fish - but the fish turned up their noses. I have little doubt that I would be a much improved fisherman if I could determine what I was doing wrong - especially on the days with no feedback from the darn fish!

1 member likes this: jpsdad
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
Rod, the guy who could figure out what he was doing wrong would win all the tournaments, buy the right stocks, woo the beauty contest winners, etc.

And then there’s thee and me. Keep doing things until something works repeatedly.


It's not about the fish. It's about the pond. Take care of the pond and the fish will be fine. PB subscriber since before it was in color.

Without a sense of urgency, Nothing ever gets done.

Boy, if I say "sic em", you'd better look for something to bite. Sam Shelley Rancher and Farmer Muleshoe Texas 1892-1985 RIP
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
Originally Posted by Dave Davidson1
Rod, the guy who could figure out what he was doing wrong would win all the tournaments, buy the right stocks, woo the beauty contest winners, etc.

And then there’s thee and me. Keep doing things until something works repeatedly.

Well, I got one out of three right!

I was hoping to improve my fishing and get my batting average up to .667!

I was also hopeful in the prior LiveScope discussion about a chance to view the fish behavior and figure out if I could boost my learning curve a little farther up the scale.

I did start out a few years back as a deer hunter that knew ZERO about the topic. Sitting in a high tree stand and getting the photos from the game cameras has certainly taught an idiot like me a lot about deer behavior. I wish I could see the fish just as clearly, when I am certain they are outsmarting me!

Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
Originally Posted by FishinRod
jpsdad,

Was that bass foraging in open water?

If so, then your observation may show the importance of "ambush cover" for bass.

That factor could actually be more important than the size and quantity of available forage!

If a bass has to expend the energy of 50 attempts to catch a meal compared to a bass that only has to expend the energy of 3 attempts to catch a meal, then the latter bass could grow more quickly - even with less than optimal available forage.


P.S. How were you observing the bass from the high vantage point? I didn't know if a nice drone was part of your "pond supplies" since you have a son (or sons?).

It certainly frustrates me to take people fishing, and then have a very poor outing. I am pretty sure we presented lures to the fish - but the fish turned up their noses. I have little doubt that I would be a much improved fisherman if I could determine what I was doing wrong - especially on the days with no feedback from the darn fish!

FishingRod,

As far as I know these are the two largest LMB in the 3/4 acre pond. They seem to have territories and I have seen them chase away other LMB. One hangs out around a bridge structure and the other near a dam (two ponds separated by the dam of the upper pond). The dam has a retaining wall on the downstream side. It is bricked and its about 5 feet above the water. (That was my vantage point). The dam area has structures related pond aeration (by pumped fountain) and the dam area has cattails along its edge. Both locations are in some of the deepest water of the pond.

There used to be an old cartoon where a buzzard says to another, "Forget this! I am going to kill something!" That may be the basis of the story above. There is structure it probably uses for ambush cover but it was probably impatient or just felt like chasing something down. I have heard there are two types, one that roams and one that claims prime real estate. I do think these two fish have staked claims.

Hey I am with you on having a successful outing. Can't always happen but I can't help trying. There is a lot of fishing pressure on the bass in these two ponds and every year I notice two or three morts of ~16" LMB. I try to be very kind to LMB when I personally catch them which is usually on flies fishing for BG. Fishing for LMB is kind of tough with artificials but they really take BG well if they are small enough. My son fishes with BG and likes to catch the bigger fish (the largest are CC). We have a pond with stunted BG (no decent predator other than CC) and its a cinch to catch a dozen or two 2" to 3.5" BG for bait. I mean like 5 or 10 minutes cinch releasing 2/3 of them as too big ... LOL. Anyways, James fishes with them while I cull BG. He is conscientious and careful in landing and releasing fish and asks for help if he is having any trouble. The problem I have is just getting him out and away from his online friends with whom he games. Anyways, when we go I make him and for the past year he complains the whole way there but on the way home he never fails to thank me for taking him fishing. I really enjoy making these memories.

Quote
If a bass has to expend the energy of 50 attempts to catch a meal compared to a bass that only has to expend the energy of 3 attempts to catch a meal, then the latter bass could grow more quickly - even with less than optimal available forage.

Yes, I think this is true but I want to share something I have learned. We have all heard from Lusk, Eric and Dave that balance in a pond is knife edge. What I have learned is that once carrying capacity is achieved, the struggle seems to be to consume enough for maintenance. Swingle thought 2lbs per year was maximum growth. This seems to apply whether it is a 2" fingerling or a 6lb bass. After an LMB reaches an adult size it tends to consume a relatively small proportion above maintenance to achieve the maximum growth. IOWs Growth is VERY sensitive to even small increments of consumption above maintenance. For example, a standard weight 20" LMB can grow 2 lbs in a year simply by consuming 0.29% of its body weight in addition to the maintenance rate for 180 days (assuming the rest of the year it consumes only maintenance). Almost 90 percent of what it consumes is just to survive ... even when it is growing 2 lbs in year (from 4.71 to 6.71). STARVATION is the primary motivator I think. They work hard to survive and if they can get a small increment above maintenance they grow much more than one might suspect they would.

OTOH, the same applies inversely. IOWs when a fish consumes less than it needs for maintenance it declines more than one might expect it would. Even in the same pond, some may grow at the expense of decline in others. When fish are declining, mortality is higher and this is natures way of making room for the fittest survivors.

Last edited by jpsdad; 05/30/23 06:42 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


1 member likes this: FishinRod
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
J
jpsdad Online Content OP
OP Online Content
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 278
Originally Posted by FishinRod
jpsdad,

LMB (and other fish) will strike for reasons other than eating. I have caught large bass on tiny lures. I don't know if they decided to "eat" a small meal that was going right past their mouth, or if they wanted to "punch" an intruder in their home - but they lacked fists.

We have also caught a 9# CC on a tiny hook with a bit of worm while fishing for BG. The CC was only landed because the curve of the hook was perfectly wrapped under the cats lower jawbone, so the fish could only exert force on the straight shank. I don't know if the large cat struck the tiny bit of worm because his whiskers could only signal "worm" without conveying the quantity of worm?

I have caught some nice LMB on small lures and flies. The largest was around 5lbs with my dad many years ago on a crappie jig. I figure the jig just fell right in front of his face and he just opened his mouth ... sucking it in by doing so. How much energy does it take to open a mouth? No more than what a crappie jig sized minnow has in it for sure! LOL. But I am always pleasantly surprised to catch >12" LMB on BG popping bugs and other small flies. I catch a few in the 16" class each year and I can tell you that they will usually inspect closely before taking which involves a gentle rise and take that just sucks the bug in. To be sure, small prey, particularly prey that are less than 1/10 the length of a piscivorous predator are uncommonly consumed, even so, they are consumed about as often as 1/3 length laterally compressed prey which is also uncommon per multistate DOW records on realized consumption. Uncommon but both happen where each make minor contributions to the overall consumption of predators.

As for the little bait and the CC. I once caught a 9 lb rainbow on a salmon egg. Trout grow huge in the White River on sowbugs and in the Blue River on green drakes and stoneflies. We shouldn't underestimate what small food can do when it is abundant and easily consumed.

Snipe earlier mentioned that we all have seen what LMB can do when their eyes are bigger than their throats. There are risks to larger prey and I do think they are harder to handle and to get positioned so the throat teeth can begin pulling them into the gullet. BG have large spines and it seems reasonable that they can damage gills like fish hooks do. I do wonder if this might explain why LMB sometimes seem more careful to take the larger BG and the time the bait is on the hook tends to be substantially longer.


It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers


1 member likes this: FishinRod
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
F
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
F
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 583
Originally Posted by jpsdad
Anyways, when we go I make him and for the past year he complains the whole way there but on the way home he never fails to thank me for taking him fishing. I really enjoy making these memories.

I think that is the real reason most of us are on Pond Boss and do the pond work that we do!

2 members like this: jpsdad, DrLuke
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,026
Likes: 274
I’ve been doing this stuff for a long time and still make idiot mistakes. That’s an understatement.


It's not about the fish. It's about the pond. Take care of the pond and the fish will be fine. PB subscriber since before it was in color.

Without a sense of urgency, Nothing ever gets done.

Boy, if I say "sic em", you'd better look for something to bite. Sam Shelley Rancher and Farmer Muleshoe Texas 1892-1985 RIP

Link Copied to Clipboard
Today's Birthdays
Bob Lusk, GaryK, GrizzFan, PhotographerDave
Recent Posts
Brooder Shiners and Fry, What to do??
by Freg - 03/28/24 09:42 AM
Alum vs Bentonite/Lathanum for Phosphorus Removal?
by DenaTroyer - 03/28/24 09:38 AM
Happy Birthday Bob Lusk!!
by esshup - 03/28/24 08:45 AM
Relative weight charts in Excel ? Calculations?
by esshup - 03/28/24 08:36 AM
Dewatering bags seeded to form berms?
by Justin W - 03/28/24 08:19 AM
Reducing fish biomass
by FishinRod - 03/28/24 08:18 AM
New 2 acre pond stocking plan
by esshup - 03/27/24 06:05 PM
1 year after stocking question
by esshup - 03/27/24 06:02 PM
Questions and Feedback on SMB
by Donatello - 03/27/24 03:10 PM
Paper-shell crayfish and Japanese snails
by Bill Cody - 03/27/24 10:18 AM
2024 North Texas Optimal BG food Group Buy
by Dave Davidson1 - 03/27/24 08:15 AM
Freeze Danger? - Electric Diaphragm Pump
by esshup - 03/26/24 09:47 PM
Newly Uploaded Images
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
by Tbar, December 10
Deer at Theo's 2023
Deer at Theo's 2023
by Theo Gallus, November 13
Minnow identification
Minnow identification
by Mike Troyer, October 6
Sharing the Food
Sharing the Food
by FishinRod, September 9
Nice BGxRES
Nice BGxRES
by Theo Gallus, July 28
Snake Identification
Snake Identification
by Rangersedge, July 12

� 2014 POND BOSS INC. all rights reserved USA and Worldwide

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5