Pond Boss Forums GENERAL QUESTIONS Pond Boss The Home Run

Granted, Eric, limestone is great for fertility, hence the practice of liming; but I've never read anything about the Ketona Lakes being former phosphate pits, and I just re-read (twice) the article I linked to and there's no mention of such; I wouldn't think a limestone quarry could also be a phosphate pit. I read the article in Outdoor Life that's referenced in the article linked above when the former came out, and it didn't say anything about the lakes ever being phosphate pits.

The Ketona lakes would seem not to be overly fertile, because Coke McKenzie said that one could see the bottom in ten feet of water. That's not much of a plankton bloom. Some biologists from the state of AL did a study of the lake in an effort to determine what made the bluegill grow so large; they even transplanted some of the bluegill to other area lakes thinking that their genetics must be better; but they concluded it was the high bass density, and the absence of spawning areas, that accounted for the difference in size. They did allude to the positive effect of the limestone; they also mentioned that McKenzie's fish was nine years old, which is three years older than what they had previously believed a bluegill in the region could live to be. The longevity factor obviously will help Bruce, as you noted.

I agree that it should be very interesting to see how Bruce's elysium unfolds, to say the least. Isn't 8" a little above average for bluegill in that region that aren't being managed, Bruce? I think I'd have a very hard time not managing that sweet of a BOW if I owned it.

No shallow water not only limits bluegill spawning - and fewer bluegill fry means the overcrowded bass can thin them more drastically than if there were many, as is normal - but it also means there's no refuge for the fry and mid-sized bluegill alike to escape predation, no small factor in itself.

In-Fisherman

"Pits created by mining operations often fill with rainwater, springwater or groundwater from the water table. Where water chemistry is suitable, bass and many other species thrive. Pits are typically deep and clear, with manmade structure such as shelves, roadbeds, mine shafts, and spoil piles.

Biomass is usually low due to infertile conditions, but trophy fish are possible. Some Florida phosphate pits are fertile and produce extraordinary bass fishing where the harvest is controlled. And the world-record 4-pound, 2-ounce bluegill was caught in Ketona Lake, a flooded limestone mine in Alabama."

The Fla lakes waters flow through natural limestone formations into the old phosphate pits so the two in common happens.

In much of the south the limiting factor in water fertility is acidity ( the lack of limestone). Once lime is added nothing else is required. Some locations require P but others do not. That is why it is necessary to know your watershed/water and not just blindly add fertilizer.

Here is another report on Ketona:

"Biologists, eager to learn the quarry’s secrets, sampled its bream and found no genetic reason for the massive fish. They did, however, find an environment suitable for producing big bream. There was nothing magical: The habitat had just the right combination of minerals, population control and fishing pressure.



According to biologists, the presence of limestone promotes high growth rates and higher productivity, because it enhances nutrients."


The point is all pits , like all ponds are different. Those that are old hard mineral pits (rock ,aggregate , granite etc) are usually infertile. As noted by IN-Fisherman.That was the point Dave and I were making.

Looks like Bruce already has a good handle on the fish populations!

"Looks like Bruce already has a good handle on the fish populations!"

We would expect no less.

I expect that he already has some of them measured , weighed and named by now !!! A few may even have been moved to his bathtub ! -

At 15 acre, the crappie may be a little easier to manage. Are you glad there are crappie or upset with the challenges they may give you in managing them?

I do realize that some pits are infertile and thus not very productive; I would never dispute that. I just was differing with the statement that a pit could not produce monster bluegill, which obviously is not true. I agree a hundred percent that not all pits are created equal.

But I do think it's important to note that the biologists who studied the lakes concluded that one of the two main factors in the unusual size of the bluegill was limited spawning areas. That's their conclusion, not mine, though I've observed the same thing, i.e. ponds with lots of shallow water are much more likely to be overpopulated with bluegill.

I like crappie, so I would love to have a nice sustainable crappie fishery, however I've been told that the few that are in there are a result of a stocking a few years ago, and there are no small individuals.

I guess either the bass density is so high that their reproduction is being suppressed, or they don't have adequate spawning substrate.

Like I said before...I really don't want to manage this fishery. Too much pressure. If something went wrong I'd be to blame. I just want to blend in and be one more good steward of the pit.

I will however be proactive if the other members want to establish and/or reinforce existing plans to keep nutrients down. I love the minimal fertility they currently have. Really nice clarity, which I appreciate quite a bit.

The best of both worlds Bruce.

Ponds you manage and a lake that you can look out and admire with minimal concern for it's care---Able to gain the pure enjoyment of it!!

You are a blessed man!

Seems like all the rock, SMB would do well in there. Not sure if they could hold their own in a lake 15 acres with LMB though? I just can't believe you're not gonna put some HSB in there!

Will you own the whole lake or is there shared ownership? With your talent and knowledge Bruce, I doubt you would damage the fishery. But with 40 other ponds to manage I can understand the hands off mentality...

There's an association with several other members. They all seem pleased with the fishery as it stands, so I'll quietly sit by. If they ever ask me for advice I'll have plenty.

Ah, that explains it! I couldn't fathom why Bruce wasn't going to amp up those bluegill to state-record sizes. But an owner's association is a pretty good reason.

Been in those shoes... You're either the hero, or someone that everyone complains to. I can now completely understand the hands off approach!

Bruce will you have any small ponds that are yours to manage on the property. You may sense my concern of losing all the work and science from the Condorosa? Will you continue that (like the RAS and data collection) at the new location or others ? If not I understand , times change and life moves onward and upward.

I know that Brucille says he's not going to manage the large BOW.

I am willing to place money on it that he will not be able to resist the larger BOW.

I submit that Brucille is not capable of denying the call to duty of any BOW.

He may think he is, but I think we all know better.

I think he'll have a hard time resisting the urge to give those 8" bluegill some new friends with the initials CSBG...And then he'll want to make sure the CSBG get fed...And so on, and so on...

Heck he even manages carp in the bathtub !!! -

I blame you for everything that goes wrong on my pond so what difference does it make?

Actually that makes perfect sense to me, management by committee is no fun, just ask 2cat.

You guys are funny.

I suspect in addition to indoor tank activities, Bruce, you will succumb to experimenting outside again. Hopefully there are no covenant restrictions against small ponds filled with large fish. You have shown that some remarkable work can be done in BOW 1/10 acre and down (I am specifically thinking of the large exterior bathtub with trout, on the bottom end of the scale).

I don't think that Mrs. Condello is gonna look too kindly on bathing outside with trout, OTOH, she did marry Bruce so I would imagine that she might be more tolerant of this type of activity that other spouses.

"Honestly, Honey, it's a jacuzzi. See all the bubbles?"

I wonder if I could pull that off for a minnow farm?

Walt said: "I do realize that some pits are infertile and thus not very productive; I would never dispute that. I just was differing with the statement that a pit could not produce monster bluegill, which obviously is not true. I agree a hundred percent that not all pits are created equal.

But I do think it's important to note that the biologists who studied the lakes concluded that one of the two main factors in the unusual size of the bluegill was limited spawning areas. That's their conclusion, not mine, though I've observed the same thing, i.e. ponds with lots of shallow water are much more likely to be overpopulated with bluegill."

Walt, you certainly make valid points. Any time we generalize, we can always find exceptions. That’s one of the darn hardest things about being an educator, actually. I hope you realize that I just fired off a quick note, trying to “gig” Dr. Condello a little about his future challenges.

Yes, some pit-type waters are more fertile than others (the phosphate and limestone pits come to mind). Also, even the infertile ones tend to get more fertile with time. Yes, record fish could come from any water body (even the ones I discuss below). A unique individual can always show up nearly anywhere. I certainly did not mean to generalize to the point to discount Walt’s point on this. By monstrous, I was thinking of those huge, PLUMP Condello bluegills that I had held in my hands! Again, just typing quickly and not trying to write a scientific paper.

Having said that Walt is right, I will also stand behind part of what I said. In our part of the Midwest, which I will call SD to CO to KS and back up to MN (those are the places where I have experience with the pits), sand or gravel pits that are dug into the water table are relatively infertile compared to hill ponds in those same areas that are indeed on fertile soils. I think part of this infertility comes from the ground water movement through the ponds. In addition, these tend to be very attractive waters – blue, clear, you can see fish, etc. My wife would love for us to own a pit and build a house at such a location. The typical steep sides for the pits lead to effective predation by fish such as largemouth bass on panfish such as bluegill, just as Walt said.

OK, do I have any evidence? Well, when I posted the original note, I was thinking that productivity = standing crop. You could argue that, too, and say it is too general. However, SD hill ponds and small impoundments averaged about 70 pounds per acre for largemouth bass in a study we did; maximum was about 100 pounds per acre. In contrast, we did a population estimate on largemouth bass, in a crowded population, on a very pretty 13-acre sand/gravel pit that was long established, and the biomass estimate was only 33 pounds per acre. George Bennett, the old IL Natural History Survey biologist reported similar results, although I won’t dig up his old papers.

When great pondmeisters like Dr. Bruce manage for big bluegills, they really like to produce those with high Wr values. The Condello bluegills have those Wr values of 130 or 140 or 150! Those are the truly cool fish that he produces. It is very difficult to do that in less fertile waters. Exceptions again occur, of course, such as when people use a feeding or fertilization program. So, that really was my point. I was just trying to josh around with Bruce, but there was some validity to my story.

Edit: What do we always say? 'It all depends....'

And then, we have intensity of management as a huge factor.

To me, the perfect pond, is usually one with fertile soils, good management, a dependable water supply and a liberal application of cash.