jpsdad, thank you for really expanding on your previous comment.

Our location in Kansas is pretty darn windy, plus I will add aeration. Therefore, I think I can have fairly nutrient-rich ponds while avoiding a plant decomposition-induced oxygen crash.

Originally Posted by jpsdad
I think edge habitat is important. Examples of edges are terrestrial-littoral & littoral-pelagic. So food production can obviously be increased by having increased perimeter relative to surface area.

I really like the additional terms you have added to the discussion. I was only considering the perimeter as a single "edge".

Originally Posted by jpsdad
On the other hand, there is risk the volume is too restricted when there is too much perimeter. I can't help you with what is optimal because I don't know. But if I had to guess, I would suspect that higher standing weights probably favor lots of edge but that carrying capacity favors lots of euphotic volume.

I frequently go back and check the advice in good 'ol Agriculture Handbook 590 Ponds—Planning, Design, Construction. I don't think I have seen the experts in the forum dispute the basic advice in the handbook.

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs144p2_030362.pdf

Their advice on pond sizes for fish production is:

"Ponds that have a surface area of a quarter acre to several acres can be managed for good fish production. Ponds of less than 2 acres are popular because they are less difficult to manage than larger ones. A minimum depth of 8 feet over an area of approximately 1,000 square feet is needed for best management."

1,000 square feet is just over .02 acres. I am going to assume that .02 acres at 8 feet deep is probably the minimum euphotic volume to support a quarter acre pond. Therefore, I think your advice about edge habitat being the key to total pond productivity (all other things being equal) is probably true for ponds over a minimum threshold of 0.25 acres. [Experts, please correct me if that is an erroneous, or over-simplified, conclusion.]

I really don't think I have the pond management skills for highly-productive micro-ponds, nor for very large ponds. Based on all of the advice I have received, I think the "sweet spot" for my situation would be several ponds - ranging in size from 0.5 to 1.0 acres. (Or maybe slightly larger.)

This leads me to one additional question: If I excavated two 0.5 acre ponds that were nearly touching, and I could not manage them well enough to meet my goals. Could I come back in and breach the divider and make a 1.0 acre pond? How wide and deep would the connection have to be to turn the two-pond ecosystem into a true 1.0 acre ecosystem?

Assume aeration would be possible for each 0.5 acre lobe of the resulting larger pond.

Thanks,
FishinRod