Pond Boss Magazine
https://www.pondboss.com/images/userfiles/image/20130301193901_6_150by50orangewhyshouldsubscribejpeg.jpg
Advertisment
Newest Members
Cionweest, Kansan, myriadeyes, Mike E, helppls
18,586 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums36
Topics41,104
Posts559,585
Members18,587
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
Top Posters
esshup 28,721
ewest 21,548
Cecil Baird1 20,043
Bill Cody 15,198
Who's Online Now
9 members (Boondoggle, liquidsquid, Kansan, Tinylake, Chadsnider, Bill Cody, Jhust, Fishingadventure, Thomas7), 818 guests, and 537 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
I wonder how many is too many? I read in the archives about a ponds carrying capacity and saw where it was dated back 9 yrs ago. There has to be more information/experience with a sports pond today. From what I read, to figure your total pounds of fish in your pond was pretty much a scientific wild ass guess or what I call a SWAG. So, why do I ask? Because I have a pond with some nice and healthy fish (lmb, hsb, res, cnbg,) except for the 15" male lmb that are still trying to put weight back on after this past spawn. And I would like to keep these fish growing and not dying from being overstocked, underfeed or swimming in too much pee. This pond also has Tp, TFS and maybe a few GSH. Did I miss any recent articles on ponds carrying capacity in the PB Magazine? I have CRS you see, so maybe I just don't recall right now. It seems to me that Bob Lusk is always looking for things to discuss in his Facebook live. Maybe he could do a whole program on how many pounds of or how to swag on how many fish we have swimming around the pond? In my pond I think there are some good numbers of healthy predators, except for those male lmb and I would like to keep it that way.

Last edited by TGW1; 06/22/19 07:10 AM.

Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 277
C
Offline
C
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 277
I base it off the ammonia, nitrate and nitride levels.

Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 212
Likes: 5
Offline
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 212
Likes: 5
The two main limiting factors in aquaculture are oxygen and ammonia, plenty of the former and none of the latter.

If you have to feed your fish, you have more fish than your pond can naturally sustain. Imagine if all the lakes we fish, needed someone to feed the fish. Feeding your fish is one of the top contributors to "nutrient pollution" and algae growth is the number one sign of nutrient pollution.

In the end, you have to decide, do you want a pond you have to manage and turn into a chemistry experiment or do you want a natural ecosystem?

Last edited by Joey Quarry; 06/23/19 04:18 PM. Reason: typo
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,198
Likes: 511
B
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Online Content
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
B
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,198
Likes: 511
Interesting and thought provoking way to describe natural vs enhanced carrying capacity feeding or not feeding.

Last edited by Bill Cody; 06/22/19 08:52 PM.

aka Pond Doctor & Dr. Perca Read Pond Boss Magazine -
America's Journal of Pond Management
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
Originally Posted By: Joey Quarry
The two main limiting factors in aquaculture are oxygen and ammonia, plenty of the former and none of the latter.

If you have to feed your fish, you have more fish than your pond can naturally sustain. Imagine if all the lakes we fish, needed someone feed to feed the fish. Feeding your fish is one of the top contributors to "nutrient pollution" and algae growth is the number one sign of nutrient pollution.

In the end, you have to decide, do you want a pond you have to manage and turn into a chemistry experiment or do you want a natural ecosystem?


A pond is an unnatural BOW to begin with. If nature wanted a pond in that spot, it would have created one.

"Natural" is in the eyes of the beholder. I have "natural" all over the back side of my place. Briars, weeds, trees, sticker vines, itch weed, poision ivy, etc. The last thing I want my pond to be is "natural". I want it unnatural. I want it pleasant.

Last edited by snrub; 06/22/19 11:53 PM.

John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,868
Likes: 301
A
Offline
A
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,868
Likes: 301
Very interesting question of natural vs artificial. I'm in the camp of enhancing natural while attempting to keep unwanted natural at bay (no pun intended). Thus, fertilize (unnatural) but stock TP (natural) to keep algae from taking over.

Last edited by anthropic; 06/23/19 01:05 AM.

7ac 2015 CNBG RES FHM 2016 TP FLMB 2017 NLMB GSH L 2018 TP & 70 HSB PK 2019 TP RBT 2020 TFS TP 25 HSB 250 F1,L,RBT -206 2021 TFS TP GSH L,-312 2022 GSH TP CR TFS RBT -234, 2023 BG TP TFS NLMB, -160




Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
I am pretty sure most lakes and ponds are natural in Wisconsin or is that Minnesota I am thinking of? But here in Texas the natural lakes and ponds are few and far between. I believe Texas has only ONE natural lake and that is Caddo Lake that is only about a mile or so from my farm. Its more like snrub said. A pond here is unnatural and most of the ponds here were built for watering holes up until the 60's and 70's. But today, I think most are built for recreation. Fishing for the most part. And that is why I built my pond. I know I am not the only one that wanted a fishing pond around here because of the number of fish suppliers that are in and around our part of Texas, La, Okla and Ark. So, the question was in the last 10 yrs how much more have we learned about a sport fishing pond when it comes to pounds per acre? Keeping in mine that each type of fish in a pond might take up a different area of the pond. Has the recommended pounds per acre of fish remained the same? I am fairly certain the recommended pounds per acre of Tp has changed along with the numbers or ratio of bg to lmb depending on a trophy pond or a general fishing pond. So, I was just thinking maybe things have changed in the last 10 yrs?

Last edited by TGW1; 06/23/19 07:03 AM.

Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 212
Likes: 5
Offline
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 212
Likes: 5
Just to be clear, I didn't write ponds were natural or unnatural, just the ecosystems they contain.

How much someone wants to manage their fishery is a personal preference. Since I have brook trout and live a few hours from my quarry, I go natural with no feeding and no aeration and no over the counter additives.

Having been raised on a farm, I'll take Snrub's "Briars, weeds and trees" over manicured fescues and city sidewalks any day. It's all a matter of personal preference.

Last edited by Joey Quarry; 06/23/19 04:30 PM.
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
I like both, in their place.

I like the the natural part of our farms at times of the year when they are pleasant. Spring and fall is nice. As far as my ponds, I don't keep them "city" manicured, but I do keep them mowed and accessible, trees and brush off the dam, all weather access.

I feed the fish because it is one of my most enjoyable aspects of the pond. I'm not really trying for trophy's, but when I go "fishing" I prefer catching over actually fishing. I get bored pretty quick if I am not catching anything. Not much of an agler really.

Like you say, personal preference.


John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,285
Likes: 560
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 2,285
Likes: 560
snrub, I don't know how you could make that place any more desirable..
You've got a great balance of "wild" and pleasing to the eyes. From the stop I made there, the boys made the "catching" look good too, and I'm just like you in that I like to feed just to see what comes in, and I find I really enjoy that time as well.
Any serious Pondmeister would Naturally be happy to have something as Unnatural as your setup. :-)

Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,088
Likes: 96
Thanks for the kind words. Sorry I missed you but we were on our way driving to Alaska. Typing this in Kodiak, Alaska. Be home in a few weeks if you are by again.

Last edited by snrub; 06/27/19 09:22 PM.

John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
J
Offline
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
It's contextual. Carrying capacity is not an indicator of relative weights or the ultimate weights achieved. These are completely independent of carrying capacity. These coveted measures can only be improved and maintained by means of harvest.

This is not say a temporary effect improving relative and ultimate weight cannot be achieved by introducing new food chain items (like tilapia or TFS) or by feeding. By temporary, I am only saying that the initial effects are unsustainable without an appropriate harvest. IMHO these measures are easier to manage in 3 acre BOW with lower carrying capacity than in a 1 acre BOW with high carrying capacity (perhaps 3 times the per acre carrying capacity). Fish benefit from space and improved water quality. They will tend to live longer and grow faster ... provided ... the numbers of fish are appropriately managed.

If one is limited with BOW size, there is incentive for increasing carrying capacity. On the other hand, increasing carrying capacity will ruin a BOW if one is harvesting all he wants to harvest. Expanding carrying capacity will not sustainably increase RW or Ultimate weight without increased harvest effort and even then it is questionable whether ultimate weight can be improved at all.

Last edited by jpsdad; 07/17/19 06:26 PM.

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


Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
Harvest is necessary for sure if you want to grow some nice fish. But how many to harvest is based on RW/WR isn't it? And what about too many fish in a pond where the too many are the forage fish, Tp, TFS, Bg, RES that feed my lmb/hsb? Still not sure how one determines how many pounds of fish per acre is too many? Or how many pounds do I actually have in the pond? Mother Nature knows the answer because when there is too many she will drop by and kill them off, not all of them but most of them. I wished I knew the answer when it comes to how many pounds of fish are in my pond so Mother Nature does not drop by.


Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
J
Offline
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
Originally Posted By: TGW1
Harvest is necessary for sure if you want to grow some nice fish. But how many to harvest is based on RW/WR isn't it? And what about too many fish in a pond where the too many are the forage fish, Tp, TFS, Bg, RES that feed my lmb/hsb? Still not sure how one determines how many pounds of fish per acre is too many? Or how many pounds do I actually have in the pond? Mother Nature knows the answer because when there is too many she will drop by and kill them off, not all of them but most of them. I wished I knew the answer when it comes to how many pounds of fish are in my pond so Mother Nature does not drop by.


Tracy, it's going on 4 years as I remember. If your BOW isn't at its capacity then you have been harvesting some of its production.


IMHO, the goal shouldn't be to achieve or maintain carrying capacity. Rather, I think it is much better to have a goal as to what the standing weight won't exceed. Consider what you not willing to risk the standing weight exceeding. A good rule of thumb is that this weight will be 1/4 predators and 3/4 prey. So if you know the standing weight you will risk to mother nature, then you can calculate the number of adult bass the bow can sustain. If the RWs are very high, this may be a sign of an overabundance of prey and a BOW nearer the carrying capacity. I don't know but I wonder whether it might be better for long lived fish to have LMB at 110 RW than at 130 RW?

IMHO, the carrying capacity isn't probably the greatest risk to your fishery. The greatest risk would be that the predators will out grow your BOW's production of prey. When a BOW is in this condition, it wouldn't be at carrying capacity because the predator overweight prevents it.

**BUMP**

I know this didn't answer your question. It isn't easy to answer which is why no one has. But typically there is a limiting standing weight for the forage fish. This limiting standing weight would reflect the fertility of the water. A good distribution of secondary trophic organisms (insects, minnows, shrimp, cladocerans, etc makes a bonafide difference also). Its complex but there is limit to the standing weight and to the annual production. When you introduce the predators, the standing weight will fall but there will be more annual production of prey fish. So there is difference between production and standing weight. When the predators crop the prey ... this benefits remaining prey fish. It reduces predation of secondary organisms allowing them to recover numerically. So you might observe this cycle as a greening and clearing of your water as consumption at the primary level goes through a cycle caused by cycles in the abundance of secondary trophic organisms. These cycles indicate effects of the predators cascading through the trophic pyramid.

These cycles are natural as every creature in the pond would like to just take it over. Relationships with their predators is what prevents them from doing just that. When everything is working in high production mode the predators are cropping what is being produced preventing the carrying capacity from being reached. This cropping enhances reproduction of prey fish and so cropping enhances production overall.

The problem is understanding the standing weight of LMB. For the first couple of years after a BOW is stocked with known number of LMB an educated guess can be made about the production of prey. This can be made from using well documented weight conversion ratios and observations of the LMB actual growth. It can serve as baseline for annual production potential but this number will be less than potential standing weight. Production is however, probably a much better yardstick to manage by than standing weight or carrying capacity.

Last edited by jpsdad; 07/18/19 07:26 PM.

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: 16,103
Likes: 289
D
Moderator
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Lunker
D
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,103
Likes: 289
Lusk sez that a balanced pond is like a garden. You have to cull fish and tomatoes. But, that's easier said than done. Balance generally lasts about 15 minutes in a ponds life.

After the cormorants hit me I had no idea what was left. Not many fish came to feed. I restocked with fatheads, 3 to 4 inch BG and a dozen small HSB's.

However, last weekend I found that bass had spawned and I'm butt deep in 8 to 12 inch bass. I don't need them eating my newly stocked bluegills. I culled 6 of them before they stopped biting. Now the water is too warm to fish for anything. Once the water hits 88 degrees a struggling fish is going to die if you release it.


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: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
Originally Posted By: jpsdad
Originally Posted By: TGW1
Harvest is necessary for sure if you want to grow some nice fish. But how many to harvest is based on RW/WR isn't it? And what about too many fish in a pond where the too many are the forage fish, Tp, TFS, Bg, RES that feed my lmb/hsb? Still not sure how one determines how many pounds of fish per acre is too many? Or how many pounds do I actually have in the pond? Mother Nature knows the answer because when there is too many she will drop by and kill them off, not all of them but most of them. I wished I knew the answer when it comes to how many pounds of fish are in my pond so Mother Nature does not drop by.


Tracy, it's going on 4 years as I remember. If your BOW isn't at its capacity then you have been harvesting some of its production.


IMHO, the goal shouldn't be to achieve or maintain carrying capacity. Rather, I think it is much better to have a goal as to what the standing weight won't exceed. Consider what you not willing to risk the standing weight exceeding. A good rule of thumb is that this weight will be 1/4 predators and 3/4 prey. So if you know the standing weight you will risk to mother nature, then you can calculate the number of adult bass the bow can sustain. If the RWs are very high, this may be a sign of an overabundance of prey and a BOW nearer the carrying capacity. I don't know but I wonder whether it might be better for long lived fish to have LMB at 110 RW than at 130 RW?

IMHO, the carrying capacity isn't probably the greatest risk to your fishery. The greatest risk would be that the predators will out grow your BOW's production of prey. When a BOW is in this condition, it wouldn't be at carrying capacity because the predator overweight prevents it.

**BUMP**

I know this didn't answer your question. It isn't easy to answer which is why no one has. But typically there is a limiting standing weight for the forage fish. This limiting standing weight would reflect the fertility of the water. A good distribution of secondary trophic organisms (insects, minnows, shrimp, cladocerans, etc makes a bonafide difference also). Its complex but there is limit to the standing weight and to the annual production. When you introduce the predators, the standing weight will fall but there will be more annual production of prey fish. So there is difference between production and standing weight. When the predators crop the prey ... this benefits remaining prey fish. It reduces predation of secondary organisms allowing them to recover numerically. So you might observe this cycle as a greening and clearing of your water as consumption at the primary level goes through a cycle caused by cycles in the abundance of secondary trophic organisms. These cycles indicate effects of the predators cascading through the trophic pyramid.

These cycles are natural as every creature in the pond would like to just take it over. Relationships with their predators is what prevents them from doing just that. When everything is working in high production mode the predators are cropping what is being produced preventing the carrying capacity from being reached. This cropping enhances reproduction of prey fish and so cropping enhances production overall.

The problem is understanding the standing weight of LMB. For the first couple of years after a BOW is stocked with known number of LMB an educated guess can be made about the production of prey. This can be made from using well documented weight conversion ratios and observations of the LMB actual growth. It can serve as baseline for annual production potential but this number will be less than potential standing weight. Production is however, probably a much better yardstick to manage by than standing weight or carrying capacity.



That's a mouthful and well done smile In my swag, I have one problem with how many pounds are there. And that is how many have been removed by Otters, Eagles, Osprey, Cormorants? All have dined at the pond more than once. Culling by Mother Nature effects my swag, I'm just not sure how much?


Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
Natural carrying capacity can range from 40 lb per acre to up to 2000 lbs per acre. Every waterbody is different. In the south natural carrying capacity is reached about 18 months after stocking , up north about 24 months. In poor waters carrying capacity can be enhanced by removing limiting factors (fertilizer , lime , feeding etc.). In many ponds no enhancement is needed. Management is based on goals and is a personal preference. No goal or management method is always right or wrong - it just depends.
















Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
DD1, Dave yesterday my water temps top to bottom at 1 pm were 88.7, the temps you mentioned where catch and release can or will kill my fish. I am confident in the temp number you gave is a good number. So, my culling of the lmb/hsb has been postponed till fall. I could fish and remove some for eating but I don't want to risk catching some of my trophy sized fish and then have to eat them instead of these trophy's providing memories to my guest.

Eric, "It depends" is as good of an answer as I can get for now. And Thank you for reminding me of all that. You know this pond has been different from the average pond and its been that way since the first stocking. I remember Todd Overton telling me that there was only one or two others in the state of Texas that was taking the same or similar path. So here it is 4 and a half yrs later. Lots of time and money since then. Highflyer (Brian) once told me a pond will only hold so many large lmb per acre. That was about 4 yrs ago. He is right. But I am not sure what that number really is? As I think about this, I look at ponds that are over run with stunted lmb and hold a lot of pounds per acre with no fish kill. I have fished those ponds where you can catch 25 +- per hr or maybe 30 to 40 lbs per hr. for several days. That shows me a pond can support a lot of pounds of fish like you mentioned. I am just trying to figure out how many pounds of trophy lmb/hsb can my pond will support without that fish kill due to having too many pounds per acre.


Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
My example is that of an engine. If you run it to hot for to long it will break. A good indicator is if your fish are growing and in healthy condition you should be ok. Look for stress indicators in the fish for a first sign of over capacity. That and watch your water quality.
















Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
J
Offline
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
Originally Posted by TGW1
In my swag, I have one problem with how many pounds are there. And that is how many have been removed by Otters, Eagles, Osprey, Cormorants? All have dined at the pond more than once. Culling by Mother Nature effects my swag, I'm just not sure how much?


It's certainly hard to tell. Something to consider ... Those additional predators may have helped you with trophy potential.

IMHO, managing for trophies means managing numbers. Give Toledo Bend some thought. There has been over that past few years a very good harvest 10+ lb LMB. What if these fish hadn't been harvested? What would the condition of the larger LMB be today? I dare venture that the largest might be in poor and declining condition. The harvest of those 10 lbers made room for the production of more 10 1bers. IMHO, you need a plan for how large you want them to grow. Then you can determine how many you can select for grow-out. Those selected should be fin clipped so that you can harvest the others.

I attached a spreadsheet below that seeks to grow 4 10lb LMB annually in a 3 acre impoundment. This scenario seeks a standing weight of LMB (> 12" TL) at ~47 lbs/acre. It's a doable goal for modestly fertile pond (say between 300 to 400 standing weight potential). It does require 369 # of total prey production. This production must be in and above that consumed by the < 12" LMB and those in the pond you don't know are there. Its a pretty rosy scenario to control the numbers of LMB in such fashion. There might be others that slip through but as part of the plan, they must be harvested when caught. Additionally, the fin clipped LMB that are caught and are 6 years old must also be harvested to continue the future and perpetual production of trophies.

If one applied such a plan, and wasn't able to achieve the goal after 6 years, then the prey production required was insufficient or the LMB culling goal wasn't achieved. TP should in an average BOW should be able to supply most of forage requirement. If, on the other hand, one exceeded the goal, then he could increase the number of selected LMB.

One other thing I think is important. The standing weight of BG shouldn't be near the carrying capacity. The only way for the BG to achieve a high percentage of carrying capacity is if they have outgrown the capacity of the LMB to easily consume them. They will require a lot of maintenance and vastly decrease the potential of "production". Production in this case means newly grown biomass that the LMB can eat. Production will greatest when there is a lot of carrying capacity space for newly hatched BG fry to grow into (a perfect example of this condition is a year old BOW).

Attached Images
Bass Population Structure.xlsx (10.82 KB, 227 downloads)
Copy of Bass-Population-Structure.xls (29 KB, 44 downloads)
SHA1: ca40f1ab036b392eb43b2f85d282af88f3e7a46c
Last edited by jpsdad; 04/30/23 07:13 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: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
Erick, the lmb and Hsb seem to be pretty healthy and most all of them caught were above the charts. I don't fish all that often but I will need to catch more in the future. I don't want them to become lure shy and the best I can tell my relative weights are good. My last time fishing I had 4 lmb in the 17" size where the standard wt would have been 3lb 2 oz but mine were all in or around 3lb 15 oz or so. A couple of 16" were also above the charts. However the 3 at 15" were at the standard but not below the standard. I was pretty sure these were male lmb because they did not look to be holding any eggs. That was my last lmb fishing time and was back in May. I did remove one 16" lmb that had gone blind in one eye.
And I should have removed those three 15" er's. Hindsight is 20/20. These were all caught in a couple of hrs fishing. In the last 60 days or so I have seen one lmb that I suspect is a double digit and my son also saw an extra large lmb. One he said was larger than a trophy 10lb'er I have on the wall. He had a spotlight on it at night at the pier. He said it was just swimming on the surface so he got a good look. I also caught some nice sized hsb up to 5lbs that looked to be really fat and healthy.


Now as far as my water quality, it has looked good after we treated with the alum sulfate last year. Right now I have a 7.2pH and visibility is running 29" of an olive/slightly brown or tan look to it. I think the alum treatment was a good call. Prior to that treatment, my water had been in the 9 to 12" range of green water. I had no plants then but today I have the amount of A. Pondweed that I wanted along with some bushy pondweed. The bushy stuff, I am not so sure of how much of it I want? But from what I have herd on the Bob Lusk Facebook program then maybe its ok to have some. And Thanks once again Eric smile


jpsdad, thank you for the post up. Well thought out I think. And something to think about. I hope to grow some of the lmb to the 13# range within the next 3 to 4 yrs. These Floridia's came from Todd Overton and the genetics are great.
where did you obtain this information or was it something you came up with? Either way it looks good. I believe I am in the numbers of forage needed (based on your chart)at this time. And the hsb along with some of the northern lmb are hand feed Purina lmb 4 to 5 days per week. But I will keep an eye on the size and the numbers to maintain the lmb growth. One of my reason for asking these questions of how many is because of all the forage that is in the pond. Tp,cnbg.res,tfs. The Hsb also contribute to my questioning as to how many lbs per acre of fish? I plan to start culling some hsb and lmb this fall. I would remind you we had no lmb spawn or fry survival until the 3rd spring/last year 2018. I also added some res, cnbg fhm and gsh this spring.









Last edited by TGW1; 07/25/19 04:12 PM.

Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
J
Offline
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
Originally Posted By: TGW1

jpsdad, thank you for the post up. Well thought out I think. And something to think about. I hope to grow some of the lmb to the 13# range within the next 3 to 4 yrs. These Floridia's came from Todd Overton and the genetics are great.
where did you obtain this information or was it something you came up with? Either way it looks good. I believe I am in the numbers of forage needed (based on your chart)at this time. And the hsb along with some of the northern lmb are hand feed Purina lmb 4 to 5 days per week. But I will keep an eye on the size and the numbers to maintain the lmb growth.


Tracy,

The only pertinent calculation in the spreadsheet is the one that calculates the forage required for maintenance and growth of the selected LMB. 5 lbs forage to 1 lb LMB is assumed for maintenance while 10 lbs is assumed to grow a pound. In the real world, some fish would outperform these assumptions while others underperform. In any event, these are widely accepted conversion ratios that do have research behind them. The SS isn't protected so if you like you can play with the assumptions, add additional rows, and see how the scenario changes with different goals.

One reason for posting it was to demonstrate the extent to which large LMB must be limited number in order to grow really large LMB. This particular plan allows only 8 LMB/acre spread across 5 year classes (or at least 5 years of selection. These 8 LMB/acre are forecasted to weigh an average of 5.83 lbs which IMHO would be a remarkable achievement and one that requires considerable effort.

I think your goals can be met. Perhaps ironically, I do also think some of the predation has been a blessing in disguise to keep the surviving original stockers growing at their optimum. Do I remember correctly that 50 Lonestars/acre were originally stocked? To make 13 lbs, there may need to be some additional mortality, either by you or the otters. By the time they reach 10 lbs they will require 50 lbs forage each to stay at 10 lbs.

I think feeding the HSB and FT Northern LMB helps take pressure of the forage allowing your Floridas and Hybrid LMB to forage with less competition. It also fertilizes the water. But you have consider that as they grow, they also need more feed for maintenance and they will contribute to limitations of space, DO, and other key variables your trophies and prey need. Just something to think about.

Quote:
One of my reason for asking these questions of how many is because of all the forage that is in the pond. Tp,cnbg.res,tfs. The Hsb also contribute to my questioning as to how many lbs per acre of fish? I plan to start culling some hsb and lmb this fall. I would remind you we had no lmb spawn or fry survival until the 3rd spring/last year 2018. I also added some res, cnbg fhm and gsh this spring.


The tfs and Tp are helping you more than they hurting you with the DO as a limiting factor. They should be keeping your water clearer than without them which means phytoplankton (and other algal standing weights) are lower. Nightly drawdowns should not be as deep as they would be without them. Furthermore, their presence can introduce an inhibiting effect on the standing weights of other prey species by intercepting the food chain at the primary level. If they are numerous, this is probably happening. I don't think the prey is a top concern here but the standing weights of fish supported outside the food chain (the fish you feed)are a greater concern.

Last edited by jpsdad; 07/25/19 07:51 PM.

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


Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
T
TGW1 Offline OP
OP Offline
T
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 57
The more I think about the spreadsheet the more I think about how hard it is going to be to grow out more than a couple of extra large lmb. Or have a pond that provides the extra large lmb that are catchable. Al (Fireishot) pointed out to me 4+ yrs ago that a pond that has a lot of forage makes the lmb harder to catch. And the larger the lmb is and the older she is, makes her harder to catch because of conditioning, or learning. So, all the forage and being tougher to catch may not take the pond where I would like it to be. Either way, I may have to accept the pond the way it is. And do the best I can just to have some nice sized catchable fish in it. And THAT is where the pond is today. Something to think about. It would have been nice to have a larger pond to work with.
Pond Boss, a great place Bob Lusk!

Thanks guys!


Last edited by TGW1; 07/26/19 07:46 AM.

Do not judge me by the politicians in my City, State or Federal Government.


Tracy
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
J
Offline
J
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 281
Originally Posted By: TGW1
The more I think about the spreadsheet the more I think about how hard it is going to be to grow out more than a couple of extra large lmb. Or have a pond that provides the extra large lmb that are catchable. Al (Fireishot) pointed out to me 4+ yrs ago that a pond that has a lot of forage makes the lmb harder to catch. And the larger the lmb is and the older she is, makes her harder to catch because of conditioning, or learning. So, all the forage and being tougher to catch may not take the pond where I would like it to be. Either way, I may have to accept the pond the way it is. And do the best I can just to have some nice sized catchable fish in it. And THAT is where the pond is today. Something to think about. It would have been nice to have a larger pond to work with.
Pond Boss, a great place Bob Lusk!

Thanks guys!



There is lots of wisdom in your thoughts above. Ideally, you would like to keep the BOW just how it is. Just keep in mind that what you now observe is a reflection of the BOW's history. The thing to remember is that none of those fish want to stand still. As long as they live they want to continue growing. You might work with the spreadsheet until it reflects your goals. The last line will serve as the harvest objective. It's tough to have this kind of faith, but if you harvest those wonderful fish they will not become hook shy and nature will replenish them. This doesn't mean that there won't be some really massive trophies. If a couple escape the gauntlet they have the potential of becoming monsters, largely due to the harvest of those not so lucky fish.


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


Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
E
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Hall of Fame 2014
Lunker
E
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 21,548
Likes: 285
I agree - what you have is great ! Many folks have tried for trophy LMB ponds and not been happy with the results.
















Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Recent Posts
ID? Was suggested it's a hybrid...
by Boondoggle - 06/24/24 09:38 PM
I made a alotta babies...time for lmb?
by Tinylake - 06/24/24 09:31 PM
Poor preachers pond
by Chadsnider - 06/24/24 07:55 PM
Chestnut other trees for wildlife
by Rangersedge - 06/24/24 07:40 PM
20 acre pond advice needed
by catscratch - 06/24/24 07:27 PM
Varmint Rifle
by Rangersedge - 06/24/24 07:21 PM
Identification Help
by Sunil - 06/24/24 06:19 PM
I think I over stocked
by esshup - 06/24/24 05:48 PM
Fry Identification
by Boondoggle - 06/24/24 01:50 PM
Hybrid Crappie
by tylerd1994 - 06/24/24 10:31 AM
Aqequate filtration system
by FishinRod - 06/24/24 10:13 AM
Channel Catfish Pond
by LANGSTER - 06/24/24 09:55 AM
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