Pond Boss Forums STOCKING A NEW POND Creating the food chain Is acheiving balance a lot about stocking rates?

I have been wanting to pose this theory to the forum for a while and the recent thread about stocking crappie and LMB has prompted me to go ahead and do it. I think stocking rates of each species is huge and a lot of consideration needs to be given to what species you are stocking together.

My theory is well it depends....

For example, a lot of folks believe that a YP and SMB pond with a SF (sunfish) as the primary forage species will not work do to the small mouth gap of these predators being able to control the SF population (maybe true, that's why it's a theory! ).

If I happen to get lucky and stock the SF, SMB and YP at a rate that there are enough YP to control a high percentage of the SF and SMB fingerlings less than 2 inches, and then I have the right number of SMB to target the rest of the SF and the YP spawn, my thought is recruitment can be controlled and the pond can actually be balanced. It's all about thoughtfully approaching stocking rates. If the fish are not performing and just surviving then maybe look further down the food chain at stocking scuds, grass shrimp or crawfish?

Obviously, it is not as easy as that but I think drawing lines in the sand as to what you can successfully stock together in a pond is not correct and it all depends....

I also wonder whether, when you call the local fish farm for an initial stocking recommendation and you rattle off what fish you want, if they consider the interaction of the species being chosen and adjust the numbers accordingly.

By the way, I am not suggesting that you can stock any old fish together. Common sense prevails! I am simply suggesting that we run across exceptions to the rule and maybe diving deeper into looking at population densities of each species in those "exception" ponds could be enlightening.

If I read this right, I believe I'm trying to manage my new pond along the same lines. Even though well respected individuals in pond management advised me to follow the typical formula of large numbers of bass to limit recruitment of sunfish in order to achieve a trophy Green Sunfish pond, I (perhaps arrogantly) theorized that if a large enough population of 9+ inch green sunfish could be reached, the fishery could exist as a panfish only pond. Omitting the bass would obviously result in more intensive management in the beginning, but the hope is that eventually a balance will occur where >90% of YOY bluegill (the main forage base) and gsf (acting as the top predator in the pond) would be eaten by the end of each growing/spawning season. In order to obtain a large enough stock of GSF, (or at least take a step in the right direction) I'm raising a year class of about 40 green sunfish in an aquaponics system. I may have gone off on a tangent here, so if this comment diverges from what you were trying to discuss, please feel free to tell readers to disregard it!

Just remember that a balance in the pond is only for a split second, you will not keep the pond "balanced" year to year on it's own.

Bill D., it's not theory on the SMB not being able to control sunfish. Dave Willis has data to prove it. Now would SMB in conjunction with human help be able to control sunfish in a pond? I guess it all depends on the amount of human help.....

GSF will work as a predator providing that all of the prey species sizes are smaller than what a 9"-10" LMB can eat. If the prey species gets larger than what that sized LMB will eat, then the mouth gape on the GSF will be insufficient to allow them to eat those fish.

Probably right but you left out the front line gauntlet of a large YP population the small SF fingerlings would need to get past to get to the SMB.....My scenario provided two tiers of SF predators

What if I put one pair of BG in a pond full of YP and SMB? Would the BG over populate? How about two pairs or three pairs? My point is the population density of SF compared to density of the predators is a factor. I agree if you stock say BG at the "normal" recommended rates you will probably fail. My thought is you must consider the other species in the pond and their population densities and adjust your stocking accordingly.

Mouth gape of the YP, and areas of the pond that they live. Fingerling sunfish like shallow water. Adult YP don't. Once the sunfish get larger, they venture out to deeper water. BUT, will they be too large for the gape of the YP? My educated guess is yes. Don't forget the YP will have YOY YP to chow down on.

Now I'm confused. I see posts where folks have FHM and other minnows stocked as forage for YP. Are you saying FHM prefer deep water? Mine hang out all summer in the shallows.

Does SF stand for Sunfish? Please verify - multiple lepomis species to which you could be referring, and each are quite different in how to manage. I am assuming for the sake of this response you mean Northern BG. If so, Shawn Banks, Yolk and I all manage BG populations in our cool water species fisheries and our challenges/successes have been documented on the forum multiple times over the years and can be reviewed. In short, BG populations can be managed in cool water/limited gape species fisheries, but in my case requires employing seasonally shifting management strategies and trapping, angling, and seining in addition to very dense predator populations [which present additional challenges on their own].

Based on my experience managing these cool water species fisheries for the last 8 years, I now recommend RES and HBG as lepomis companion species to all my clients who want to take the cool water route. Tony has helped pave the way for a lot of HBG science the last few years - shown their populations can be managed without much management effort on his side other than keeping an eye on things and periodically supplementally stocking or nudging things one way or another. I give him full credit for dissolving my HBG ignorance!

Bill, in absence of predators, FHM will roam in all parts of the pond above the thermocline (if there is one). The first year for my pond I could scuba dive and lay anywhere in the pond and within minutes FHM were swarming around me. I had wondered if it were possible to have an overabundance of FHM. But as soon as the LMB were stocked and got big enough to eat them as their numbers declined they were more and more pushed to the shoreline. Now that is the only place I think they are and there are few of them even there. Diving a year later I see lots and lots of BG fry around mid pond and shore line structure and cover, but I recall seeing no FHM out in the main body of the pond.

So I think the FHM that are smart enough to temporarily avoid being eaten are forced to shallow water to exist.

I believe this to be true even in a pond where there are only FHM, RES and BG. I noticed in my sediment pond where there are no LMB that when the pond was new the FHM populated it thickly. Now that the RES and CNBG are big enough to eat not only the small FHM fry but likely larger sizes, the FHM are not thick at all in that pond. So I would assume even in a LMB pond, the 8 and 9" BG are going to work on the FHM some, keeping them relegated to very shallow water.

In my forage pond I have only RES and FHM. Same story. FHM thick as hair on a dogs back.......... till the RES got some size. Now still FHM there, but I have a very hard time trapping any. They just seem to disappear as the RES get bigger.

At least that is the way I see it from my limited observations.

Edit: Ewest has posted studies showing that lepomis mostly eat things other than fish (based on what was found in their gut). This would lead one to believe they do not eat that much fish. The way I reconcile these studies with my experience is I believe when there is abundant food BG will eat more preferred/slower moving food first. But as preferred food diminishes and FHM become very abundant I believe they eat what is available. In this case more fish. That is the way I see it. Not scientific at all, just my observation and reconciliation with what literature on the subject is available. Otherwise I have to lay the disappearance of FHM in two of the three different ponds to disease or some other factor. I believe it is the BG (CNBG in sediment pond) and RES eating them.

Bill, another tidbit of information I have picked up since my beginning quest of the initial stocking of my main pond. I was warned, and read in more than one place, that under stocking of forage fish (specifically BG) can actually lead to over crowding and stunting more than if the correct stocking rates are used. This is in absence of predators in the initial stocking.

It sounds counter intuitive, and I still question it somewhat, but here is the basic explanation as I understand it.

If correct numbers are stocked, the fish grow more or less evenly up to the size where they can spawn. Upon the first spawn, there are enough fish of size to eat enough of the eggs, yolk sac stage and small fry to keep the population from exploding.

But with two few stocked, the first spawn has very few fish to feed on the young, so the population explodes leading to too many BG in that size class.

At least that is the way I understood the situation of under stocking (maybe it is just an old wives tale for fish sellers to sell more fish???????). It would really be informational if some of the experts would weigh in on what I describe with their knowledge and experiences.

TJ,

Yes, SF is the PBF acronym for sunfish. I used SF instead of picking say BG for the discussion because, as you stated, management strategy is tied to what species. Perhaps another way to ask the question...

If I called a fish farm and asked how many BCP I should stock in a new pond, would they ask what predator species and how many will eventually be in the pond or will they recommend a number of BCP to stock based on size of the BOW? I would think the number to initially stock, to have a chance of achieving a good balance, should vary significantly depending on predator and predator density. In other words, it seems logical to me that there is a "perfect stocking ratio" for each combination of SF and predator that would maximize your chance of success.

Snrub,

My experience with FHM mirrors your own. Wandering everywhere until a "predator" is introduced into the pond and then they head for shallow water.

Interesting discussion on under stocking potentially causing over population. I'm struggling to wrap my brain around the concept. If I stock one BG pair and they spawn creating 5000 fry, each parent needs to eat 2500 to have no recruitment. If I stock 100 BG pairs and they each spawn 5000 fry, doesn't it still work out that each adult BG has to eat 2500? I'm with you and hope one of the pros chimes in with an explanation of why under stocking can lead to over population.

The difficult thing about the perfect stocking is as soon as the first spawn takes place, things change. Not saying what you say is wrong. It probably is right. Thing of it is the stocking rates usually recommended are likely based on a lot of practical experience of "what has worked in the past".

If you have something that you think will work, try it and let us all learn from your experience. Like Esshup says, that perfect balance is likely fleeting.

My old refurbished pond had runaway GSF and BH trash fish explosion. By putting a few hundred BG big enough the GSF could not eat and a half dozen LMB, my intention is to over time turn the pond around. So far it is working. I've went from catching nearly all GSF to now about 50-50 GSF to BG catch ratio and am starting to trap a very few BG recruitments where used to be all that would be in the trap are GSF and BH.

So at some fleeting moment, the pond will probably be in some balance where LMB, BG, GSF and BH (as well as a half dozen 12" CC I put in there) are all surviving and in a ratio that as an angler I can live with. But I expect that balance to be fleeting. At some point I expect to see mostly BG and LMB with an occasional catch of larger BH and larger GSF. Eventually I expect the BG and LMB to take over the pond and relegate the GSF and BH to "also rans". Now had I not introduced larger LMB (12"+) and advanced size BG (4-7") the GSF and BH might have kept the upper hand on the pond for ever.

At least that is my plan. Don't know if it will work out exactly as I envision (likely not), but a person has to have a plan and that is my plan.

I would suggest if you want to have a balance of fish that might not want to stay "balanced", having another pond to raise the desired fish to size above what predators could eat would be one way of maintaining that balance. In my old refurbished pond, I had my main pond that I could take advanced size BG, CC and LMB to supplement what the old pond already had. If I needed to rely on conventional stocking of small purchased fish, I think they would have become only "snacks" for the existing GSF population. So you might consider a forage pond to raise certain desired fish to supplement stock your main fishing pond for the species that tend to not keep up with the more aggressive species.

Just a thought.

I suspect yer right on all points. My thought was simply, there might be an initial ratio that gives you the best chance of success. There are way too many variables to think you can put in even the perfect ratio, if it exists, and be able to walk away and have a balanced fishery forever. Constant management would still be required but perhaps more passive management.

Bill
This is very thought provoking idea that you've put out there. I think you have hit the nail on the head. When I first stocked my puddle I was counting on a limited number of CNBG to not have the number of preds other than the 300 BCP. But when I found out that I had bass in the mix and they spawned the first year as well as the crappie did. Then that threw the "balance " out of whack as it is still. An addition of forage and removal of some bass in the short term should restore some balance to the mix..... Looks good on paper. Thanks

In my experience, most fish hatcheries don't spend much, if any time posing questions like "what are your goals" - they simply try to sell as many fish as they possibly can. I get it, that's their role. I've also found while hatcheries are experts growing fish, dealing with diseases, etc., many lack even basic fishery and pond management knowledge regarding stocking density, timing, interaction with other species, etc. This is where a fishery management professional comes into play - use the hatchery as your supermarket to purchase materials, but follow your the established strategy based on input from professionals way before you head to the store. You should have a blueprint in hand before planning to stock fish # 1.

snrub "Edit: Ewest has posted studies showing that lepomis mostly eat things other than fish (based on what was found in their gut). This would lead one to believe they do not eat that much fish. The way I reconcile these studies with my experience is I believe when there is abundant food BG will eat more preferred/slower moving food first. But as preferred food diminishes and FHM become very abundant I believe they eat what is available. In this case more fish. ... "

I have also posted that the largest/biggest predator of fry/yoy BG (they are fish) is mid-sized BG. If BG eat BG they will most assuredly eat yoy/fry FH.

YP have been shown to be very active eating small BG when water temps drop (physiological advantage in cool water).

WRT BG and LMB , balance is like balancing on the edge of a knife with one side being unbalanced bluegill crowded and the other side unbalanced LMB crowded. In short unbalanced one way or the other is the normal static state (the natural way for the pond to go). This can be managed but the more factors you add (species)the harder it gets to stay in unnatural balance.

Stocking rates are the starting point only to try to achieve a goal. They rarely last more than 4 years as the natural course of seeking its own natural balance (unbalanced)plays out. This is of course subject to the biggest variable - human management including harvesting mortality.

Very interesting thread, Bill.
I think TIMING of stocking is at least as important a variable as RATE, at least where SMB and BG are concerned. I have to do far less BG control now, seven years in, than I did early on to keep numbers of BG controlled in a BG/SMB pond. I attribute this to a large number of SMB up to 5lbs, and multiple class years below putting pressure on BG from larve up to about 4" in size-the BG have a pretty long gauntlet to run now. I have a suspicion that, at least in ponds with good WE habitat, a population of 2-4lb WE will significantly augment the SMB as well.
However, if one stocks BG first, then fingerling SMB [+/- fingerling WE], I suspect the stocking RATE of the various participants isn't going to make any difference-the BG will overpopulate. If I was going to do it all over again, I'd stock FHM,GSH,and RES in the spring, then SMB and WE in the fall, then add BG a couple YEARS later, maybe even more.

IMHO you are spot on. Perhaps timing, rate and size are all factors that go hand in hand. I suspect these factors vary significantly depending on what species are going to be stocked into a particular pond community.

I've been thinking about this some today. Maybe it is because as you increase BG in the pond, competition for spawning sites comes into play and only the dominant fish spawn. So maybe only 40 pairs of the hypothetical 100 pairs stocked spawn. Now each adult BG would only need to eat 1000 new spawn to prevent recruitment. Just thinking out loud...

Dave - Good to hear from you. Your experiences need to be shared with the forum as you are achieving some incredible things down there. Please share your science with us as it can help nudge us in the right direction to achieve our goals.

BG management for me dictated the need for dense stocking of HSB, WE, SMB and YP, and like yourself I now manage less than several years ago by angling seining and trapping. Frequency of BG caught has decreased, and average size has increased, and I still remove all females caught and save them for friends in cage. Few questions for you:

Are SMB and WE your only BG predators? YP and HSB present - I forget?

Please indicate the stocking density/ac of these predators which worked for you.

Do you supplementally feed these predators and the BG? If so, what pellet?

Do you ladder stock WE and HSB or other species?

Do you experience recruitment of SMB and YP?

What is the average size of BG now through your management efforts? What's average BG WR? Is it improving in yr 6?

When you refer to WE habitat, please share the details of what you did and what seems to be working and why. My WE are growing very slowly and I wonder if I need to implement something to enable them to succeed with structure or different forage base stocking.

5# SMB and 4# WE is amazing - I don't think anyone on the forum approaches those levels. Density of my predators seems to be limiting their size potential, but I fear harvest will allow BG to gain the upper hand again.

I would like this on my desk by close of business tomorrow. That is all, for now.

Another good thread with numerous good personal experiences - observations. Actually much of fishery research / study results are usually and essentially personal observations of someone watching some sort of experiment i.e. practical research. So don't 'be-little' the observations that you are seeing as occurring or happening in your pond which is your "experiment".

At this point are there any unanswered questions for this topic that I can comment on other than those posed by TJ to be answered by Dave? I too am eager to hear Dave's answers.

For the most part, I think BillD's initial question / theory was addressed adequately. A lot of times what in theory looks good on paper (or in your mind) or mathematically does not work too well when it comes to animals and plants interacting because they do not follow the normal scientific laws or human interpretive behaviors.

I think I got what I was looking for in this thread. If someone asks how many BG, how big and when should I stock in a 1 acre pond, or how many YP, or how many SMB, or how many LMB....the answer should be it depends. It's all about the community as a whole and how they interact, not individual species considered alone and the size of the BOW. How many pounds a puddle can support is a good number to know but, the species ratio, size and timing of how you get there is important. I think TJ summed it up nicely with, "You should have a blueprint in hand before planning to stock fish # 1." Consider all the interactions as best you can and go from there.

Thanks to everybody for their inputs!

Only thing missing is a copy of proven "blueprints" to help achieve each individual goal and an archive of actual experiences that were tried to achieve each.

As Bill C. stated, to paraphrase...critters are critters and logic to you is not necessarily logic to them. Not to say what they do is not logical, maybe we are just not observing close enough.

Bill D.