Can we build a better bluegill?

Fishing Panfish & Warm Water
21

lee, maybe we can get some clarification from Gary on this but as I understand it there is nearly a 50% mortality rate on fish in a pond in a given year. This includes all reasons - predation, disease, injury, old age.

So, based on that, the figures quoted can “theoretically” (my word - my quotes) be taken with virtually no effect on the pond’s overall population. Remember, it is imperative that you harvest the right ‘size’ ratio. You cannot take 200# of 9" bluegill from an acre of pond and not expect disastrous results. And notice those figures where based on a pond “not fed”.

Ed - I agree with you on feeding. Fish have about the best “rate of gain” in the animal kingdom. I’m not sure on panfish and bass but on catfish the rate is very nearly 1 to 1. One pound of weight gained for every one pound of feed consumed.

We have had very good luck in newly stocked ponds by feeding heavily. IMO, the faster you get parental stock to a decent size the faster a pond gets on track and the less chance you have of stunting.

I have heard of feeding dogfood and plan to try it. I’m lucky to have a friend who is in the feed business and also owns several ponds so I’ve had a little 'in" on fish food. We feed the ‘floating’. Gives us a chance to keep an eyeball on the fish.

You are so right about ponds. I like to say, “Everything that happens in a pond, happens in a lake. It just happens a lot faster.”

22

Personally I would find it very “odd” to fish in a pond where the fish are fed. Would you use a dog-food pellet fly? I had assumed that this discussion was on a pond maintained for flyfishing. If you are running a fish farm I would assume the requirements and aims would be different.

As usual, just my opinion, etc…

Donald

23

LOL - BL, actually, I made some “fish food pellet flies” for catfish. They look great but the fish avoided them like the plague.I think it’s a ‘scent’ thing. Got to ‘match the hatch’ more closely I think.

Definitely not “raising fish to butcher”. In my experience supplemental feeding has absolutely no bearing on the normal feeding habits of bluegill. Just results in nicer fish faster.

[This message has been edited by HideHunter (edited 30 December 2005).]

24

Danged good thread.
Sounds like the BOTTOM of the “food chain” in our ponds is quite important too. Though, as pond users, we seldom intentionally mess with it. Of course this is not news to most of us.
With the “goings on” in the Calif. delta (a BIG pond?) concerning copepods (a food chain “base” bug) now, you would
think that it is news to a lot of VERY well educated people.
I have heard said that a goldfish will only grow as large as his container. Realizing the why’s, at what size pond does one expect that the maximum size for our fish occour?

25

lee, the ‘bottom’ of the food chain is a lot of what I’m interested in. Zooplankton - daphnia - all kinds of little critters seem to be extremely important to bluegill (and judging from what gary said, probably crappie)

One of the big things here people tend to do is throw a number of grass carp into their ponds. Keeping the weeds ‘down’ is one thing but these things will clean a pond and the all the leaves off low-hanging branches. Once in a pond they are a bear to get out. When they reach about 15 pounds they tend to slow way down on their eating and then are just “oxygen hogs”. The big problem is everyone wants intstant gratification so if 4 is good, 12 should be better. Takes weeds to make ‘bugs’. ‘Bugs’ make bluegill.

BL to expand a little on the 'feeding’I’m talking about we’re talking strictly supplemental. We’ve been doing it mostly to get ponds ‘started’ and mostly where landowners have houses close to the ponds. They really enjoy it.

The fish don’t really feed until the water temps reach 50, so we’re usually looking at about 5 months a year here. Then I’m talking about a pound or two a day so it’s definitely not like fishing in a commercial catfish pond. It certainly seems to give ponds a boost though.

We either need ice or open water. This half-way stuff is bad.

26

Here is a commercial web site I quickly located that has some pertinent info on feeding gamefish: [url=http://www.atac.cc/pages/fish_feeding.asp:ad716]http://www.atac.cc/pages/fish_feeding.asp[/url:ad716]

I have no affiliation with this site; it is the first one that appeared in a search on Google. Here’s another site for you to review : [url=http://www.atac.cc/pages/fish_feeding.asp:ad716]http://www.atac.cc/pages/fish_feeding.asp[/url:ad716]

As you will read in the latter site, for best results and for better cost/benefit ratio, do NOT feed dog food to your fish. Fish feeding can run into some serious dinero, especially if your pond is large. Avoid overfeeding at all costs. It costs you money in lost food and the food can become spoiled, causing a toxic response in fish that eventually feed on it.

HideHunter, I have never experienced a real problem with flatheads in the ponds I have stocked. Usually, larger adult bluegill and bass can pretty easily escape a marauding flathead. But flatheads are death on 3-5 inch bluegill! Another nice thing about flatheads is that IF they become a problem, you can catch them out of the pond relatively easily by jug fishing. A big plus is “Have you ever hooked a 30-pound flathead with a 5 weight?” Believe me, that will charge your battery!

BTW - optimum pH is around 7.5 . I have witnessed some Agency personnel liming strip mine pits to get the pH to a more “fish-friendly” level.

One thing to remember in fertilizing - liquid fertilizer is by far the best for water application. It goes into solution with the pond water much quicker than granular formulations. If you use granular formulations, a good bit of it (maybe even most of it) will sink to the bottom and get tied up in the sediment, where it does little or no good.

If you consider young-of-year (YOY) in the mortality equation and look only at raw numbers, “normal” annual mortality would be greatly in excess of 50%. YOY frequently suffer 90%+ mortality in their first year. Think about this - a female bluegill may spawn as many as two to four times per spring/summer, depending on latitude. Each time she spawns, she may spew as many as 60,000 (yes, that’s sixty THOUSAND!) eggs (range is 10,000 to 60,000). Just imagine if all of those bluegill from just one female survived to age three … we’d be wading in a sea of bluegills in just a few generations! Prolific is a mild word to use with this fish. Of course, as bluegill grow in size, mortality rates per age class decline until the fish become senior citizens.Then mortality rates again rise as they die of old age (sort of like other critters do in the wild). Of course, if the pond is fished, you will definitely increase the mortality rate of those middle-aged bluegill either by harvest or hooking mortality.

As far as grass carp go, you are correct in saying their efficiency in weed reduction slows dramatically as they age and grow larger. By far, the most efficient weed-eating grass carp are the ones from 12-18 inches in length. They can be a problem to remove from a waterbody after they get large. Most pond owners do not have access to the equipment needed to catch these fish with great success. The best piece of gear I have used is 5-7 inch mesh monofilament gill netting. Grass carp are extremely sensitive to electricity - I have witnessed these fish running from the electric field around my electroshocker boat at distances over 100 yards. I didn’t have a dip net handle that long! Another way to get rid of them is to find a good bowhunter who wants to brush up on his shooting. Using spotlights at night, these fish can be shot with arrows. I’ve seen several harvested by bowfishermen in the Tennessee Valley.

Lee S, typically, the recommended harvest is the amount of fish to REMOVE each year. As you probably already suspect, this is a general rule for the State in which you live. Many State Fish and Wildlife agencies have a small lakes/pond biologist who can be called to assist you in determining specific management strategies for your particular body of water. In some States this is a free service, in others there are various charges for the service. Additionally, there are private companies that specialize in managing ponds for individual landowners. Again, check with your local fisheries biologist.

27

A few years ago a small lake that I was fishing [~40a] was a study area for an Indiana Univ grad student doing “aquotic [sp?] biology” and I ran into him several times during that summer. His colletion method was very simple - he had an oversize scoop net [about 2’ in diameter] with a very fine net on it. He scooped up a load of weeds from the shoreline area, raised them over the net by hand and shook the “heck” out of them. Little buggy thangs by the hundreds ended up in the bottom of the net - oftentimes 2 or 3" deep. There were small minnows, scuds, nymphs of several different species, leeches, and a lot of little frogs. Made me a believer in leaving the weeds be!! Now that slimy algae stuff is a different animal. This was just from IN the weeds; he didn’t scoop up any bottom.

Donald

28

Gary,
YOY. Simply protien collectors for Ma Nature. Generally “nature in balance” “end produces” only replacements for spawning #'s. Everything else is expendable, generally as food. Or, like you say, we would be wading in fish.
We were fortunate to witness a feeding frenzy near a dock at the river several seasons back. What carnage! The “big” fish were 1 1/2" - 2" in length and the food was “little” fish that were about 1/4" long. A miniature tuna scene.
Collecting protien starts early in nature.
One of the problems locally is fertilizing ponds. Cattle fertilizer. If we get not enough water to flush a pond and only enough to collect, a pond can quickly go bad. Too rich in nitrates? Is this the same as you speak of, only way too much?
And…fish TO remove…or…fish that CAN be removed. EVERYTHING in nature returns to nature. So, any harvest EXCEPT for personal consumption (assuming we as part of nature), would be robbing nature of her just (and necessary?) dues. Maybe this is just a difference in how one looks at a pond. Either as a commercial production (farming) interest, a sport fishing (no take) zone, or somewhere in between with general public fishing and harvest.
Inquiring mind…

[This message has been edited by lee s (edited 30 December 2005).]

29

Lee S,
Cattle “fetilizer” is somewhat different from the chemical formulations you buy at the Co-Op (and not just the smell!). when animal feces enter a waterbody, decompositon of the organic matter removes oxygen from the water. Given enough animal waste, a waterbody can be completely depleted of oxygen. Properly applied chemical fertilizers do not result in a significant increase in “biological oxygen demand”; that oxygen required to decompose organic matter.

Overfertilization can and does occur; the common result is a bloom of undesirable algae. Sometimes the bloom consists of a type of algae called “blue-green” algaes; these can frequently be toxic to aquatic organisms, including fish. Again, your local fisheries biologist is your best guide for your pond.

Your comment about any harvest except for the anglers consumption “robbing” Ma Nature is not always accurate. First, most ponds are NOT natural systems to begin with. Therefore, in many cases, Ma Nature does not balance the pond in a short time frame, if ever. I have seen ponds that were literally unfished for years that were so far out of whack (severely stunted bluegill and bass) that I had to totally eradicate the fish population and start over. If one wants to keep a pond in balance such that good fishing for quality fish is the primary goal, active management is usually needed. Of course, there are always ponds and lakes that defy human “logic” (there’s a misnomer for you!) and produce fish out the wazoo when they look like they really shouldn’t. I’ve seen ponds like that, and at least one large reservoir (J. Percy Priest, just outside Nashville, TN). So, I reckon it does just depend on what kind of glasses you look through as to your feelings about removing fish from a pond …

Beadleech, I agree that weeds are food factories, up to a point. Usually, that point is reached at about 25-30% coverage. Research I have been involved ion and other research I have reviewed indicates when weed coverage starts exceeding 30%, problems start cropping up. Stunting of fish can be a real problem in heavily infested ponds. The food critters are still there, but the weed density is such that feeding is so inefficient the fish exert more calories chasing food than what they ingest. Additionally, heavy weed populations can cause severe sags in dissolved oxygen levels during the early morning hours. Remember, weeds don’t just produce oxygen, they consume oxygen as well. During the night, with no sunshine to allow photosynthesis, the plants must still respire. I have seen complete oygen depletion about 4 a.m. in ponds, resulting in total fish kills. If you look at farmed fish ponds in the South, you will see paddlewheels hooked to tractors or a donkey engine to oxygenate ponds during critical times. Usually, their problem is not vegetation, but overcrowding and high amounts of nitrogenous wastes in the water. (Just a side note!)

30

A slight correction - organic decompositon is just one part of the BOD (biological oxygen demand). Others include the respiration of fish and other aquatic animals, and aquatic plants. Anything that consumes oxygen from the water contributes to the BOD.

31

Gary, I used to do BOD/COD 5 tests in NW Tn. and some of the results were quite surprising as far as water qualtiy goes, but I’m sure that you have more stories than me. The worst shock I got was from a water fountain on campus that had such a high number that it would have failed as sewer effluent! The school put that one out of commission at once and didn’t re-open it until whole new plumbing had been re-installed.

I suggested dry dog food because it is easy to come by, not because it is the most efficient. If I went to the trouble and expense of installing a feeder, then I would look for prepared fish feed. But if I had a pond that got the occasional coffee can of dry food, then that is different. Of course all of the caveats about dissolved oxygen (DO) depletion and nitrogen build up apply.

Sometimes generic dry dog food can be picked up for pennies on the pound when it is on sale. Under those circumstances, it can even make reasonable fertilizer, if it is worked into the soil. Unused dog food becomes de facto fertilizer, and thus O2 consumer, in a pond.

Do any of you have any experience with adding things like native crayfish to a pond to increase the feed base for fish?

Do large minnows, say 8 inches or longer, damage gamefish stocks by competing for food &/or damaging spawning areas in places where there are few predators for minnows of this size?
Ed

32

A long post follows. I appreciate your interest and speculation on the situation.

I have read this thread with great interest. Five years ago I moved back home to Far Western Kentucky and bought a house on 17 acres which has two ponds. They are less than 200 yards apart and could not be more different. Both ponds are about an acre apiece when full and contain Catfish (up to 13 lbs.), Bass (up to 5 lbs.), Bluegill (more on the size later), and Crappie. The Upper Pond, so called since it is closer to the house and about thirty feet higher in elevation, used to contain eight very large Triploid Carp, (Grass Carp) which all died over the course of 2 winters, and also contains a few very large Golden Shiners while the Lower Pond has given up at least one Rock Bass. The Upper Pond is fed by a well and the Lower relies on the run-off from my neighbor’s pasture, hence the difference. Neither pond is available to fishing other than from my back yard and at my invitation. When I first moved in, I consistently caught Hybrid Bluegills, which I found were “Georgia Giants”, in the 1.5 to 2.25 pound range. Over the years the size of these fish has gone down dramatically but that is due to the Hybrid reverting to it’s original species. (That should be the subject of an other thread.) Now that I have laid out the basic facts of my situation, I will get on the point of my post.

I very much would like to manage the Upper Pond for Bluegill. The Lower Pond is subject to the whims of the rain gods, and this year it has gone from 22 ft. deep to about 3 ft. The Upper Pond is about 10 feet deep at the dam and has some stumps and brush in it for cover. However there are no weeds. I have every intention of fertilizing the pond in the early spring and finally start harvesting the Bluegill, something I have not done to this point. I have access to inexpensive fish feed as this area has some commercial Catfish farms and it is readily available at the local CO-OP. So besides the above mentioned steps what else can I or should I do? Should I consider re-introducing Hybrids into the mix or stay with the “local” breeds? I have read lots on selective harvest and know enough to remove all the Golden Shiners and to not to remove the Big Bass but also have read conflicting advice on removing the larger Bluegills and the smaller Bass. The Crappie are also a consideration. Everything I read says not to introduce them into a pond of the size my are. So, should I harvest them also to reduce the pressure they put on the Bluegill spawn since they spawn considerably before the Bluegill? And what about the catfish? Should some/all of the Catfish be harvested? The Catfish is the only species that I can get any voluntary help with since this is the Catfish Corner of the Midwest and has more Catfish anglers than Bass Busters, and that is saying a lot since the property is less than 3 miles from Kentucky Lake.

I eagerly await your views and opinions.

Clint

I feel closer to HIM when I’m fishing.

33

gary - I’m going to try one of those Bugmaster 5000s. I’ve been trying to figure some kind of ‘bug feeder’ that would work without ‘frying’ them.

We occasionally exerience a ‘summer kill’ and I was aware, of course, that is usually was an oxygen factor but didn’t know that it could be often traced to weeds. (The “Four in the Morning” syndrome?) I have been told that these conditions may only exist for a few hours, which is, of course, enough to kill the fish.

One other thing I haven’t been able to find information on. In the case of ‘cuckolding’ in bluegill nests. I’ve read that these fish don’t achieve ‘spawning colors’ so it is easier for them to slip close to a parental male. As I understand it, and to put it in laymen’s terms, the sperm of the cuckolder tends to be more ‘potent’ and the offspring slightly larger. I know this follows the guidelines of other ‘parasitic’ species. So this fish is simply a smaller male that has adapted to take advantage?

Thanks for everyone’s input. Great reading.

[This message has been edited by HideHunter (edited 31 December 2005).]

34

“E”,
I don’t know if it applies to smaller ponds, but we have several reservoirs that have very substantial draw-downs during the summer. This, I think, tends to negate much bug production in’em. They use shad as a food base in these impoundments. Usually warmwater fish are present along with planted troutoids.
There is also a draw-down pond nearby that does not have shad. It has only warmwater fishes.
I DOES seem that the fish catching is far better at the lakes with shad. #'s-wise anyway.
Interesting about the unbalance with “left alone” waters too. There was a very small pond locally that went thru a hot sommer and probably had your oxygen depletion thing happen. It killed ALL the bluegills and left some largemouth, which “took off” to become the 1# cookie cutter type fish. Lots of factors in a “Ma nature” balance. Which may not be the same “end goal” as our balance.
Do you have any unplanted ponds? If so, what seems to get introduced first or best by… birds? There does not seem to be many in waters around here, but the first, or most prolific thing, I have noticed is a kind of warmouth (panfish). Looks like a cross between a bass and a bluegill or redear and is VERY fond of fry a or minnows.
More questions…

35

Hide - Do you have a copy of the In-Fisherman article that presented the “cockolding bluegill” theory? It’s been years since I read it but if I’m remembering right [which may or may not be the case! ] the article was written by In-Fisherman’s “in-house biologist” in support of their policy of selective harvest that re-surfaces from time to time. But the bluegill certainly don’t develop a “sub-specie” [THAT would take millions of years]; just a sexually surpressed and stunted population. I don’t know if that theory ever hit “main-stream status”. However, it’s been my experience that IF you don’t remove bluegill and do remove bass the bluegill population WILL be stunted sooner or later. And it seems to me that the smaller the pond/lake the quicker this happens.

Donald

As usual, my opinion, etc…

[This message has been edited by beadleech (edited 31 December 2005).]

[This message has been edited by beadleech (edited 31 December 2005).]

36

lee, I’ve seen those fish “show up” in ‘mudholes’. I’ve looked them up and tentatively identified them as ‘green sunfish’. I don’t think the mouth is big enough for warmouth.

BL - Some Where - I have that magazine in hard copy but I’ve never been able to find it on line. That article was my introduction to the theory also. I’d like to have a copy of it.

I have several other articles ‘documenting’ the behavior. (And at the same time pretty much answering my question about the ‘adaptation’ of cuckolds.)

Here’s one by Brian D. Neff - Department of Biology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5B7, Canada

“In bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus), some males delay maturation and become “parentals” while other males mature precociously and become “cuckolders.” Parentals use an overt, territorial mating tactic, defending a nest and courting females. Cuckolders instead use a sneaking tactic to parasitize parentals.”
[url=http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/327:b14e4]http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/327[/url:b14e4]

There are several other sites including the MN DNR.

Fascinating stuff.

[This message has been edited by HideHunter (edited 31 December 2005).]

37

HideHunter,

Back up the way you asked a couple of questions.

Yes, we use artificial feeding in one pond which has the largest BG and also hybrid striped bass (HSB). It definitely adds weight to the BG. C&R is the rule on BG but the HSB is a put and take fishery.

I have never experienced an overpopulation of BG in my ponds…and never remove any. At times in the past, I have had underpopulation but Tilapia have solved that problem forever. They tend to take pressure off the BG and allow better populations of BG as a result.

An absolute killer fly for HSB and BG is a “Pom Pom” fly. This fly, which might be found objectionable to purists, imitates the pellet feed. You can find the Pom Poms in any craft store, Hobby Lobby, etc. It actually makes the fishing too easy and I only use it when impressing guests and sampling the fish population.

Great thread for me as I’m a huge fan of ponds and fly fishing in them. Thanks.

38

I don’t think I’d call using a “pellet fly” flyfishing. 'Course that may be an east/west thang. Would rather the size of my catch be determined by predater/prey relationship than “feed” also.

Just my $.02 worth…

Donald

39

Meadow lark… We have two ponds that a few HSB (fingerlings) were stocked into about 3-4 years ago. We thought they didn’t make it but last year a 5 pounder was caught. They won’t get as big up here but, man, they are strong.

Shoot, BL, your .02 is more than welcome. That’s why they make chocolate and vanilla. A “pellet fly” would certainly not be my #1 pick either.

As far as feeding, a farm pond is pretty much an artificial environment anyway, and as Gary alluded to, often/usually requires intense management. For me supplemental feeding is a way to get 'gills up to a size that ‘helps’ eliminate stunting.

Remember, there are fly fishermen who don’t consider fishing for bluegill “fly fishing” at all.

In spite of all the poetry and prose about “just being on the water”, there are two reasons I fish.

#2 - catching fish.

#1 - Having fun.

I “fly fish” (fish with a fly rod?) because it’s fun and I have the most fun when I’m catching fish.

40

HideHunter,

I like your style…however, being an unrefined Texan, I would have said you can call it what you want to, but if I’m fishing with a fly rod and inert materials, I’m fly fishing, purists notwithstanding. I love to hear the purists complain. It only makes me smile.

The pellet fly serves an extremely useful management tool on my ponds. I can sample the fishery quickly and determine what, if any, adjustments are needed.

Also, in three growing seasons, we have been able to produce 4 pound HSB and they are still growing. They are one terrific fish on a fly rod…with or without a pellet fly.