Ok, observations to date.
After raking out some of the worst areas of FA in the spring, early summer brought lots of it to the surface and blown by the wind to various parts of the pond (depend on which way the wind was blowing).
Having had back surgery 3 times previous, I'm a little selective of what I do with a shovel/rake/pitchfork. Doctor said he did not want to see me again because the next time it would not be as much "fun". So I decided to go the "John Monroe" route of letting the pond evolve to see what happened, as opposed to raking lots and lots of FA. I really appreciate John's observations.
The early portion that I raked out, brought along with the algae a lot of various critters (nymphs, etc) along with some tiny BG fry. Since this pond is still in its early stages it seemed important to me to have good spawns and fry survival. Having no established rooted weeds yet (that I knbow of or can observe) it seemed the FA was taking the place of weeds as habitat for these small fish. So I left the FA in the pond. Fortunately the wind kept the coverage of the surface down to 10-20% of pond surface area. Ugly, but tolerable.
As I've watched the FA die and float to the surface, channels have developed and I can clearly see lots of small FHM fry using it as refuge. Earlier this year we had an explosion of FHM. Adults and half grown schools. The half grown schools sometimes were 10' in diameter. Now I hardly see an adult FHM. None chasing pellets like earlier. I think the LMB (9-10" back then) and adult BG (8") have done a number on them. But I have gobs and gobs of FHM fry interlaced in the FA beds. Also lots of BG fry seen around the plumes of FA held up by gas bubbles and floating dead FA (kind of look roughly like............. nuclear explosion mushroom cloud????).
So it is my observation, that by leaving the FA, I will have FHM for another year (maybe) than I otherwise might. I also expect to have BG fry to live to larger size for LMB food than they would have with a bare shore line. So for me, while FA sucks to look at, I think it has served a purpose till other natural cover develops. My non-expert opinion. Would love to hear other opinions and/or facts.
FA in ponds reminds me of something I have observed in the ocean for many years. I had the pleasure to scuba dive the same wreck (specifically sunk for an artificial reef) for about 7 years, every year and most years both summer and winter (near Peurto Morelos, Mexico). My first dive on it was only a few months after it had been sunk (maybe 4 months). The first thing to colonize it was a red algae (more green towards the base and red on the tips). The whole ship was covered in this 6" long algae (I guess you could say it was filamentous, because it had length). Looked like a big fuzzy ship. I've also noticed this algae on reefs that have been torn up by hurricanes. It is the first thing (that I observe at least) that colonizes the bare, exposed, broken limestone. I watched this underwater wreck "evolve" like I imagine what John Monroe describes his pond evolving. Although I have not went diving on it for a few years not, the last time I did there was none of this algae left. The algae had taken advantage of the nutrients available and colonized the boat, then gave way as more complex organisms made the boat their home. Now it is encrusted with hard and soft corals, mussels or clams, sponges, etc.
I do not know, but I suspect FA plays a similar role in a pond (and would be happy to hear others experiences or expert observations). It appears to me, at least at this time, that the FA will prepare the pond for the next progression of colonization which will likely include rooted weeds.
So while the stuff really looks sucky, it appears to me it plays a natural role in the progression of a pond. Not saying that we have to abide by any natural progression (because they make algaecide's and other things to modify the natural progression), but if we do likely the FA will eventually be less of a problem to be replaced by whatever the next thing is that replaces it.
It appears to me, from the standpoint of the fish populations reproduction and food chain, the FA has served a positive purpose.
Would like to hear others experiences so I know what mother nature is going to throw at me next.
Pond was built 2012 and initially stocked Mar 2013 with FHM and BG (with a few RES). LMB, CC and some more RES late fall of 2013.
