Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
155
Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Russell A. WRight And CliffoRd e. KRAft
6.1 INTRODUCTION
One of the most exciting and crucial steps in the management of a recreational fishing pond is the establishment of fish populations through stocking. Stocking turns an impound-ment into a fishing pond. Since the beginning of the 20th century, stocking recommendations for small impoundments have evolved substantially. Prior to the 1930s, ponds were often stocked with not only a wide variety of fishes, but also with an array of plants, algae, and invertebrates (Embody 1915). Such prescriptions were difficult to follow, which produced unpredictable and often poor quality fishing (Edminster 1947; Swingle 1970). While early attempts at creating good fishing in small impoundments largely tried to mimic natural assem-blages, research in the 1930s and 1940s took a more experimental approach using simplified pond fish communities (Swingle 1949a; Bennett 1951). During the past century (the period of modern, science-based small impoundment management), approaches to pond stocking have evolved from haphazard attempts to mimic nature, to largely standardized combinations of fishes, and more recently to specialized combinations of fishes that managers recommend to serve the changing goals of pond owners.
Food webs established by stocking small impoundments can be broken into two primary categories: those that are self-sustaining and those that must be maintained through stock-ing. Self-sustaining approaches rely on the establishment of a food web through an initial stocking or series of stocking events early after the impoundment is created. Populations of fish are sustained in the pond via reproduction and recruitment. Early research demonstrated that to maintain fast growth rates for prey species such as bluegills, predators were needed to keep bluegill populations under control (Swingle 1950). In a self-sustaining food web, the prey species must be somewhat vulnerable to a predator, but not so vulnerable as to be easily eliminated. The prey species must be highly productive (i.e., reproduce and grow success-fully) to provide sufficient prey to facilitate fast predator growth rates. The predator should also reproduce well in pond conditions and be able to feed on and control the abundance of the prey species. Although the top predator in the pond is often the fish species of greatest interest to many anglers, ideally both predator and prey should be fishes favored by anglers, thereby maximizing the recreational potential of the pond.
In pond food webs maintained via stocking, recruitment by one or more of the fish species is either not possible or severely limited. This recruitment limitation permits greater control
Chapter 6
156 Chapter 6
of pond fish abundance, although stocking is required to maintain fishable populations. Prob-lems with overcrowding are minimized by limiting the abundance of fish stocked into the pond, but the cost and effort of routine stocking can lead to pond owners failing to maintain the approaches required to sustain fishable populations. If long-term sustainability of the pond is a goal of the pond owner, these ongoing costs of stocking programs should be considered before initiating that particular pond management strategy.
Many species of fishes are stocked into recreational fishing ponds, some create or im-prove fishing (Figure 6.1), others cause negative effects (Figure 6.2), and for others the effects are equivocal. In this chapter we provide the common recommendations for species and ap-proaches to stocking recreational fish ing ponds in North America.
6.2 LARGEMOUTH BASS–BLUEGILL
Largemouth bass and bluegill comprise the most common combination of stocked fish-es in small impoundments in the middle and lower latitudes of North America (Dauwalter and Jackson 2005). This combination of predator and prey demonstrate species charac-teristics that lead to long-term sustainability. Both species are native to a wide range of latitudes and are well-adapted for life in shallow littoral systems. Both reproduce in ponds, and largemouth bass readily consume bluegill. Both species are popular sport species. In fact, the black basses are the most sought warm water sport fish species by anglers in the USA (USDI 2006).
However, the success of the largemouth bass–bluegill combination in ponds is somewhat regional, generating the most sustainable productive systems in the Southeast USA (Bennett 1970). In the northern portion of the range of these species, bluegill often become overabun-dant and sometimes prevent recruitment by largemouth bass. This imbalance can be due to de-layed reproduction of adult largemouth bass in northern latitudes (Bennett 1944; Dillard and Novinger 1975) because bluegill typically reproduce at age 1 while largemouth bass often do not reproduce until age 2, requiring a modified stocking strategy. In addition, overly abundant submergent vegetation in northern ponds may inhibit largemouth bass predation, also leading to overabundant bluegill (Regier 1963).
6.2.1 Largemouth Bass and Bluegill Characteristics
Largemouth bass meet most of the criteria that make them an excellent choice for stocking in small impoundments (Table 6.1). Most importantly, largemouth bass successfully spawn in shallow littoral habitats that dominate most ponds. They are opportunistic feeders with a large gape size that allow them to take advantage of available prey. This large gape permits large-mouth bass to consume larger deep-bodied prey such as sunfish species (Hambright 1991).
Largemouth bass do have some disadvantages as a pond predator. Due to their high rate of reproduction at relatively small size, largemouth bass commonly become overabundant in small impoundments, resulting in slow growth and reduced size structure (see Chapters 7 and 8). Their flexibility in habitat and broad environmental tolerances permit this species to become invasive outside their natural range. Therefore, largemouth bass never should be stocked in public waters without approval from state or provincial fishery authorities. Their preference for the littoral zone also limits their ability to prey on limnetic species in larger, deeper systems.
157Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Figure 6.1. Commonly recommended fish for stocking in North American small impoundments. Photo credit for fish plates: Duane Raver, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Rainbow trout
Redear sunfish
Threadfin shad
Yellow perch
Bluegill
Channel catfish
Fathead minnow
Largemouth bass
158 Chapter 6
Figure 6.2. Examples of fishes not typically recommended for stocking in recreational fishing ponds in North America. Photo credit for fish plates: Duane Raver, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Black crappie/White crappie
Green sunfish/other sunfish
Brown bullhead/other bullheads
Common carp
Gizzard shad Spotted gar
159Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Se
lf-
R
epla
ced
C
ontro
llabl
e Po
tent
ial
Bro
ad
Can
con
trol
Rap
id
D
esira
ble
su
stai
ning
th
roug
h
by a
nglin
g fo
r
diet
pr
ey sp
ecie
s gr
owth
spor
t fish
st
ocki
ng
over
crow
ding
Larg
emou
th b
ass
Ye
s
No
Ye
s
Hig
h
Yes
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
Smal
lmou
th b
ass
Ye
s
No
Ye
s
Low
1
Yes
Yes
N
o
Yes
Cha
nnel
cat
fish
Ye
s, w
ith
Yes
Ye
s
Hig
h
Yes
No
Ye
s
Yes
m
acro
phyt
esH
ybrid
strip
ed b
ass
No
Ye
s
Yes
N
o
No
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
Cra
ppie
Yes
N
o
No
H
igh
Ye
s N
o
No
Ye
sFl
athe
ad c
atfis
h
No
Ye
s
No
Lo
w
Ye
s Ye
s
Yes
Ye
sPi
kes a
nd p
icke
rels
Ye
s, w
ith
Yes
Ye
s
Mod
erat
e N
o Ye
s
Yes
Ye
s
mac
roph
ytes
Wal
leye
No
Ye
s
Yes
Lo
w
Ye
s N
o
No
Ye
s
1 Can
be
high
in m
any
north
ern
pond
s.
Tabl
e 6.
1. C
hara
cter
istic
s of p
isciv
orou
s fish
spec
ies t
hat a
re st
ocke
d in
smal
l impo
und
men
ts.
160 Chapter 6
Bluegill possess many traits that make them an excellent sustainable prey species in small impoundment systems (Table 6.2). Bluegill spawn multiple times throughout the summer, creating both high numbers and a wide range in sizes of potential prey for piscivores. Critical to the sustainability of bluegill populations, large adults are invulnerable to predation by all but the biggest largemouth bass. Their broad diverse diet allows bluegill to take advantage of varying food resources, increasing their sustainability and the stability of pond food webs. This flexibility in feeding is demonstrated by the fact that they readily accept pelleted feeds, which can be used to enhance their growth, production, and attract them to feeding stations for angling opportunities (Berger 1982; Porath and Hurley 2005).
Negative characteristics of bluegill as a prey species include their anti-predator defenses (deep bodies with spines), high reproduction potential, and tendency to be egg-predators. It may seem confusing that high production rates and reduced vulnerability to predation are both positive and negative attributes. These characteristics help maintain the population and there-fore provide prey for largemouth bass at moderate to low densities of bluegill; however, at high density these characteristics can also prevent largemouth bass from controlling the blue-gill population. Bluegill also may suppress the recruitment of largemouth bass when bluegill population abundance is excessive by interfering with bass spawning or nesting behavior (Smith 1976), or by eating the eggs and larvae (Swingle and Smith 1943; Bennett 1970; Swingle 1970). This suppression makes it difficult to correct a bluegill crowded situation by simply reducing the harvest of largemouth bass.
6.2.2 Selection of Genetic Strains
Taking advantage of strain-specific characteristics has been a popular approach for both largemouth bass and bluegill for pond stocking. The genetic and morphological differences between northern largemouth bass and Florida largemouth bass are sufficient to define them as separate species according to some authors (Kassler et al. 2002), but the American Fisheries Society currently recognizes them as subspecies of largemouth bass (Nelson et al. 2004). These subspecies differ in several characteristics relevant to pond management. Florida largemouth bass have a larger maximum size than northern largemouth bass; however, Florida largemouth bass are less tolerant of low water temperature (Cichra et al. 1980; Fullerton et al. 2000) and are apparently more difficult to catch via angling than the northern subspecies (Zolczynski and Da-vies 1976; Kleinsasser et al. 1990). In an attempt to incorporate the growth potential of Florida largemouth bass with the catchability of northern fish, hatcheries have produced the cross be-tween subspecies for pond stocking. While the cross has been successful, it is not clear that these populations will retain the desirable characteristics of high catchability and large maximum size over multiple generations. In fact, there are concerns that stocking these crosses could lead to introgression, outbreeding depression and loss of fitness (Phillip et al. 2002). Thus, introduc-tions of either subspecies or their cross outside their native range has the potential to cause genetic problems in ponds and in the receiving waters to which stocked fish could escape. In ad-dition, further assessment is needed to follow genetic outcome of multiple generations of ponds stocked with the cross between the two subspecies, or with both subspecies.
Two subspecies of bluegill also have been routinely stocked in small impoundments, the northern or common bluegill, and the coppernose bluegill. The coppernose bluegill is native to north-central Florida and has different coloration and marking patterns than the common bluegill. There is a perception that coppernose bluegill grow more rapidly, are more aggressive,
161Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Self-
Mai
ntai
ned
Po
tent
ial f
or
Prod
uctiv
ity
Adu
lts
C
alor
ic
Spor
t fish
sust
aini
ng
by st
ocki
ng
over
crow
ding
vu
lner
able
de
nsity
to
pre
dato
r
Blu
egill
Ye
s
No
H
igh
H
igh
N
o
Mod
erat
e Ye
sR
edea
r sun
fish
Yes
N
o
Low
Low
No
M
oder
ate
Yes
Pum
pkin
seed
Ye
s
No
H
igh
H
igh
N
o
Mod
erat
e Ye
sC
rapp
ie
Yes
N
o
Hig
h
Mod
erat
e N
o
Mod
erat
e Ye
sYe
llow
per
ch
Yes
N
o
Hig
h
Mod
erat
e N
o
Mod
erat
e Ye
sTh
read
fin sh
ad
Yes,
in la
rge
Ye
s, in
Mod
erat
e H
igh
Ye
s
Hig
h
No
pond
s in
deep
m
id-s
outh
1
sout
hG
izza
rd sh
ad
Yes
N
o
Hig
h
Hig
h
No
H
igh
N
oG
olde
n sh
iner
Ye
s, w
ith
No
M
oder
ate
Mod
erat
e Ye
s
Mod
erat
e N
o
su
ffici
ent
aqua
tic p
lant
sFa
thea
d m
inno
w N
o, u
nder
pr
edat
ion
Yes
N
o
Low
Yes
M
oder
ate
No
Mos
quito
fish
Yes
N
o
Low
Low
Yes
M
oder
ate
No
Cre
ek
Ye
s
No
Lo
w
Lo
w
Ye
s
Mod
erat
e N
o c
hubs
ucke
rTi
lapi
a
In su
b-tro
pics
Ye
s
Mod
erat
e H
igh
N
o
Mod
erat
e Ye
s
on
lyC
rayfi
sh
Yes (
at lo
w
Yes
Lo
w
Lo
w
Ye
s
Low
No
dens
ity)
1 Thr
eadfi
n sh
ad st
ocki
ng is
not
feas
ible
furth
er n
orth
due
to te
mpe
ratu
re li
mita
tions
.
Tabl
e 6.
2. C
hara
cter
istic
s of c
omm
on p
rey
spec
ies t
hat a
ffect
thei
r util
ity in
smal
l impo
und
men
ts.
162 Chapter 6
and train more easily to eat supplemental pelleted feed than common bluegill; however, there is little published literature to support these claims (Dauwalter and Jackson 2005). Prentice and Schlechte (2000) did find differences in growth in an experimental stocking in Texas with cop-pernose bluegill growing faster during the first year of life. Further research regarding the differ-ences of these sub-species of bluegill and any effects of outbreeding could be extremely useful.
6.2.3 Stocking Protocols
The stocking approaches and densities developed by early researchers have been refined and modified by subsequent generations of fisheries biologists to both better meet the needs of pond owners and to adapt to the various regions of North America (Regier 1962). Large-mouth bass–bluegill ponds are routinely stocked with fingerlings rather than adults of each species. Stocking adults tends to produce highly variable results depending on whether the stocked fish successfully spawn after stocking. The most common approach in southern and mid-latitude ponds is “split stocking” of the fingerlings, where the bluegill are stocked in the fall or winter prior to stocking fingerling largemouth bass the following spring. Stocking blue-gill prior to bass provides them with time to grow and reach reproductive size by early sum-mer. The stocked bluegill are, therefore, too large to be eaten by the newly stocked juvenile largemouth bass. The bluegill will spawn, producing small juveniles that will be prey for the stocked largemouth bass fingerlings. This process is sometimes reversed in northern latitudes where largemouth bass fingerlings are stocked 1–2 years prior to stocking bluegill (Willis et al. 2010). Stocking the largemouth bass first at northern latitudes reduces the chance that the pond will become overcrowded with bluegill. Fathead minnows are typically stocked at the same time as the largemouth bass to provide a source of prey for the bass.
Recommended stocking rates vary across North America (Dauwalter and Jackson 2005); however, the most common rates are approximately 2,500 bluegill and 250 largemouth bass fingerlings per hectare in fertile ponds and half of these rates in infertile systems. While these rates have been arrived at largely through trial and error, they reflect extensive growth experiments conducted by H.S. Swingle and others in the 1930s and 1940s (Swingle 1949a; Regier 1962). These stocking rates result in sufficient growth in the bluegill during the first year to allow them to reach maturity and spawn, creating prey for juvenile largemouth bass. With typical mortality and growth rates experienced by stocked fingering largemouth bass and bluegill, this stocking rate tends to generate the ratio of predators and prey necessary for balanced populations after about a year in southern portions of the USA (Swingle 1950). Re-ducing the initial stocking rate to 125 largemouth bass fingerlings per hectare while enhancing prey fish populations can provide faster initial bass growth rates (Willis et al. 2010). In north-ern systems, approximately 250 intermediate sized (80–125 mm) bluegill can be stocked per hectare in the fall–spring 1.5–2 years after stocking the largemouth bass fingerlings (Willis et al. 1990). These larger bluegill can avoid predation by the largemouth bass and will begin to reproduce their first summer in the pond to provide prey for the first age-0 bass that are expected that year (i.e., 2 year old bass will spawn for the first time).
6.3 SPECIES STOCKED FOR ANGLING ENHANCEMENT
Depending on the management goals of the pond owner, several other species of fish are often stocked with the largemouth bass–bluegill pond system or in combination with other
163Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
species. These fish species are stocked to provide alternative fish to catch and not specifically to enhance the growth of other species.
6.3.1 Redear Sunfish and Pumpkinseed
Redear sunfish (Gabelhouse 1978) and pumpkinseed can provide an alternative to blue-gill for the sunfish angler in small impoundments. Redear sunfish are native to the south-eastern USA, where they typically grow to larger size and spawn earlier in the spring than bluegill. Pumpkinseed are native to the cooler waters of the upper Mississippi River and Great Lakes drainages. Pumpkinseed reach smaller maximum sizes than either redear sun-fish or bluegill. Both redear sunfish and pumpkinseed are primarily benthivores as adults, feeding extensively on small mollusks, and do not strongly compete with adult bluegill. Feeding on mollusks is an added benefit, as snails are an intermediate host for many para-sites that will infect fish.
Because of their lower productivity, redear sunfish will not produce sufficient prey to maintain good growth rates of largemouth bass if stocked without bluegill. Even when stocked with bluegill, redear sunfish populations often decline in numbers over several years (Swingle 1949b; Hall 1959; Gabelhouse 1978). Occasional restocking of intermediate sized (80–150 mm total length) redear sunfish will help maintain their populations in the face of largemouth bass predation. Pumpkinseed are multiple spawners like bluegills, and have high reproductive potential. Thus, careful management of pumpkinseed populations through predation by a species such as largemouth bass will be required to prevent pump-kinseed overpopulation.
Redear sunfish are typically stocked concurrently with bluegill as fingerlings at approxi-mately 20% of the total number of the combined redear sunfish and bluegill combined. Pump-kinseed stocking rates have not been defined, although 20% of the total sunfish is a reasonable target in cooler regions.
6.3.2 Catfish
Stocked in moderation, channel catfish can provide both a source of recreation and fish for the table for the pond owner without seriously reducing the productivity and growth of either largemouth bass or bluegill. In ponds that are fertile, channel catfish fingerlings can be stocked at 125 per hectare without significantly reducing the productivity of largemouth bass and bluegill. With addition of pelleted feeds, stocking rates can be increased to 250 per hect-are. In ponds with limited aquatic vegetation, channel catfish juveniles rarely recruit to the adult population largely due to predation by largemouth bass and large bluegill. Therefore, to maintain fishable stocks of catfish in most ponds, it is necessary to periodically restock with replacement catfish. Replacement channel catfish should be at least 250 mm to avoid being eaten by largemouth bass in the pond. While most stocked channel catfish are relatively vulnerable to angling, a small proportion are not easily caught (Masser et al. 1993). These “hook shy” fish can become abundant in ponds, but evidence suggests that they must reach high density to reduce the production of largemouth bass and bluegill in ponds (Michaletz 2006). The channel catfish × blue catfish hybrid has been stocked in recreational largemouth bass and bluegill ponds; however, the success of this hybrid in this scenario has not been well evaluated.
164 Chapter 6
Stocking other species of catfish has produced mixed results, and some species can com-pete with bluegill or largemouth bass or cause degradation of habitat. Bullhead species are of-ten present in ponds, finding their way in through contaminated stocking or as wild fish from connecting streams. Because of predation by largemouth bass, bullheads typically remain in low abundance unless there are significant amounts of vegetation or high turbidity in the pond. When abundant, bullheads can cause suspension of sediments and increase turbidity in small ponds. Flathead catfish have been stocked to control overabundant bluegill, but this is not recommended because of their large size and effectiveness as a piscivore on all species in the pond (Swingle 1964; Hackney 1965).
6.3.3 Crappie
Both black crappie and white crappie are highly desired by many anglers and are often stocked in largemouth bass–bluegill ponds. Unfortunately, crappies tend to cause management problems in small impoundments. Highly variable recruitment success can result in years with strong cohorts of these species followed by years with little or no recruitment, a scenario quite common in the southern USA where crappies are discouraged in pond management. This boom and bust production creates a substantial management challenge regarding other fishes in the pond. In Midwestern and northern ponds, recruitment is more consistent (Gabelhouse 1984; Guy and Willis 1995). Regardless, crappie management in small impoundments should only be attempted by highly motivated pond owners.
As juveniles and small adults, crappie may compete with bluegill for invertebrate prey. As crappie grow larger, they become more piscivorous and potentially compete with largemouth bass. Maintaining crowded largemouth bass populations will help control the abundance of the crappie (Gabelhouse 1984; Boxrucker 1987; McHugh 1990) and permit better growth of all prey species. However, this requires that the largemouth bass population be characterized by thin, small, slow growing fish, which may not be desirable to the pond owner. The management prob-lems caused by crappie in largemouth bass–bluegill ponds are less evident in ponds greater than 10–15 ha. Larger ponds provide a pelagic zone that provides habitat to reduce the resource over-lap between crappie, largemouth bass, and bluegill. Recommended crappie stocking rates are generally inconsistent, given that these fish are not generally recommended for small largemouth bass–bluegill ponds; however, experience suggests that relatively few adults will establish a self-sustaining population. An alternative approach to creating crappie fisheries in small impound-ments would be to use sterile crappie that would not overpopulate in ponds (see Section 6.6.2).
6.3.4 Hybrid Striped Bass
The cross between female striped bass and the male white bass is produced to capture the favorable characteristics of both parent species. Striped bass prefer large systems with cool, relatively clear water and abundant schooling limnetic fish prey such as clupeids. In these systems, striped bass may grow to large sizes often exceeding 15–20 kg. Water temperature exceeding 25°C can be stressful and temperatures over 30°C are generally lethal to striped bass (Coutant 1985). White bass are more tolerant of turbid warm water conditions but gener-ally only grow to 1–2 kg maximum size. The hybrid striped bass is tolerant of pond conditions and can grow to >4 kg when fed commercial prepared feeds or in ponds with dense popula-tions of threadfin or gizzard shad.
165Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Hybrid striped bass can be stocked in small impoundments to increase diversity of the angling experience (Moss and Lawson 1982; Neal et al. 2004) and to help control overabun-dant prey species, particularly gizzard shad and threadfin shad. Hybrid striped bass do not reproduce in ponds so they must be maintained via stocking. Stocking rate depends on the management goals for the pond. As an enhancement to the fishery that should not compete ex-tensively with other predators, 10–25 fish per hectare are recommended with the higher level in fertile ponds with abundant shad prey and the lower rate for less fertile ponds with sunfish as the primary prey. If hybrid striped bass are intended to control abundant prey, substan-tially higher stocking rates should be used. Stocking greater than 60 fish per hectare has been demonstrated to reduce the abundance and improve the size structure of crappie and bluegill populations (Neal et al. 1999) and a biomass of 22 kg per hectare was effective in controlling gizzard shad in small ponds (Dettmers et al. 1998).
6.3.5 Pike, Pickerels
The esocids are cool water species that have been evaluated as either an additional or pri-mary predator in ponds with appropriate temperature regimes. In ponds with cool water avail-able, esocids can maintain populations. They are more successful in ponds with submerged vegetation or other forms of cover. In combination with another primary predator such as large-mouth bass or smallmouth bass, esocids (particularly northern pike) can provide an alternative and exciting fish for anglers and can help control overabundant prey species such as yellow perch or bluegill or stunted largemouth bass (Gurtin et al. 1996). Unfortunately, northern pike can become too abundant if natural recruitment occurs, reducing both largemouth bass and prey species through excessive predation (DeBates et al. 2003; Jolley et al. 2008).
Stocking rates have not been clearly established for these species, although some private hatcheries recommend 2–5 northern pike per hectare. It is recognized, however, that esocids are very vulnerable to predation by largemouth bass at the time of stocking and, therefore, should be stocked as advanced fingerlings (>200 mm) to ensure reasonable survival rates if other predators are established in the pond (Wahl and Stein 1989). If adult northern pike are stocked, pond managers could specifically select either male or female pike for stocking and avoid future reproduction.
6.4 SPECIES STOCKED AS PREY ENHANCEMENTS
Prey enhancement through stocking is intended to increase the growth and perhaps re-cruitment of a favored predator. Stocked prey species may or may not be self-sustaining, and most often the target consumers are the top fish predator in the pond. The effects of these added species on the pond community can be complex. Through competition or predation, the new species may have direct negative effects on fishes other than the target species. In addi-tion, indirect effects mediated through the predators can cause either positive or negative ef-fects on other prey species. Prey enhancement can lead to increased abundance, biomass, and number of large individuals in the predator population, leading to greater predation on all prey species and on larger size-classes of prey. Alternately, the enhancement species could buffer other prey species in pond from predation. These complex interactions should be considered prior to stocking a prey enhancement, and this added complexity of multispecies fish commu-
166 Chapter 6
nities is why simple combinations of predators and prey—such as bass and bluegill—provide more consistent and predictable results.
6.4.1 Threadfin and Gizzard Shad
Freshwater and landlocked anadromous clupeids are usually abundant in reservoirs, particularly in the southern and Midwestern USA, and are often the choice of managers to stock as a prey enhancement (Noble 1981). Threadfin shad and gizzard shad are the clupeid species typically stocked in small impoundments. While stocking these species can result in improved growth of the top predator (Haley 2009), undesirable side effects have also been observed, including reduced recruitment of sunfish juveniles and the subsequent reduction of growth and survival of juvenile largemouth bass (DeVries and Stein 1990; Garvey et al. 2003). Positive characteristics of clupeids include their high potential productivity, lack of spines, and high caloric density (Eggleton and Schramm 2002) that can increase the growth of predatory fishes.
Threadfin shad are perhaps the most common sustainable species stocked as an enhance-ment for growth of piscivores in southern portions of North America (Noble 1981; Higgin-botham 1988; DeVries and Stein 1990; Haley 2009). This species spawns prolifically in the early spring and only reaches a maximum length of about 200 mm; therefore adult threadfin shad are vulnerable to predation by largemouth bass greater than 400 mm TL. Threadfin shad school in open water to avoid predation and are therefore typically only sustainable in ponds greater than 2 ha in surface area. In smaller ponds, threadfin shad are successfully maintained only in very productive systems with high algal turbidity. Threadfin shad are native to the riv-ers and oxbows of the southeastern USA (Mettee et al. 1996) and are not tolerant of sustained water temperatures less than 4–5°C (Strawn 1965). These fish are particularly vulnerable to sharp declines in temperature, and this susceptibility to winterkill limits the effective estab-lishment of threadfin shad in recreational ponds to the Southeast USA.
While threadfin shad can compete with bluegill, particularly at the bluegill larval life stage (DeVries et al. 1991), stocking threadfin shad does not appear to have a substantial detri-mental effect on bluegill population structure (Haley 2009). However, to reduce the potential negative effect on the initial bluegill population, threadfin shad should not be stocked until bluegills are established and reproducing. To maximize the probability of successfully estab-lishing populations in ponds with largemouth bass or other piscivores, threadfin shad should be stocked at 2,000 or more per hectare in the late winter or early spring just prior to spawn-ing. This clupeid does increase the prey available to and growth potential of largemouth bass, but the addition of threadfin shad does not prevent ponds from becoming predator crowded (Haley 2009; see Chapters 8 and 9).
Gizzard shad grow to larger size and are more tolerant of cold temperature than thread-fin shad. Because gizzard shad grow to a large size, they are invulnerable as adults to most pond predators and their population biomass can grow out of control (Swingle 1949a; Kirk and Davies 1985). Furthermore, gizzard shad can compete with bluegill causing reduc-tions in bluegill growth, abundance and size structure (Kirk and Davies 1987; Garvey and Stein 1998). Largemouth bass may control gizzard shad abundance in ponds with limited bass harvest and moderate fertility (Irwin et al. 2003), and high stocking rates of hybrid striped bass have also successfully controlled gizzard shad density in ponds (Dettmers et al. 1998).
167Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Due their potential negative effects, gizzard shad are normally only recommended for stocking in largemouth bass–bluegill ponds where the goals are focused on producing a rela-tively few trophy largemouth bass larger than 5 kg. In this situation, gizzard shad can produce the large, energy-rich prey needed to support extremely large predators.
6.4.2 Mosquitofish
The western and eastern mosquitofish, members of the family Poecilidae, are commonly found in small impoundments as well as other waters throughout much of North America and much of the sub-tropical and tropical world. These small fish (maximum length of about 60 mm) are native to southern North America but are among the most widely stocked fish in the world to control mosquitos by eating the aquatic larvae (Mettee et al. 1996). Unfortunately, the intro-duction of mosquitofish has resulted in declines in sensitive native taxa (Courtenay and Meffe 1989). While other species of fish in ponds such as bluegill and juvenile bass will eat mosquito larvae, mosquitofish have the advantage of being able to thrive in habitats where most other fish cannot survive, such as very shallow water and ditches with very low dissolved oxygen. Large-mouth bass and large bluegill will eat mosquitofish, virtually eliminating them from all areas of a pond except weedy margins. Stocking a few mosquitofish in a small impoundment may help control mosquitos in low oxygen areas of the pond and will provide alternate prey for small fish predators and fish-eating birds. As with other potentially invasive species, mosquitofish should not be stocked where they would threaten sensitive native aquatic species.
6.4.3 Golden Shiners
As a species that grows to an intermediate size with no spines as anti-predator defense, golden shiners may provide an alternative or even an enhancement in prey resources. The rec-ommendations for the use of golden shiners in ponds is largely divided by latitude. While there are few published scientific evaluations of golden shiner stockings as enhancements to typi-cal largemouth bass–bluegill systems in the southern regions of North America, experimental evaluation in Alabama in the 1940s suggested that golden shiners were generally not sustainable in ponds with largemouth bass and little or no vegetation (Swingle 1949a). Concern that golden shiners might prove to reduce recruitment of largemouth bass and bream through egg predation also limited their recommended use. However, early research demonstrated the efficacy of gold-en shiners as a replacement for bluegill in the northeastern USA (Regier 1963), and this species is currently recommended or considered an optional prey species in largemouth bass–bluegill ponds at northern latitudes (Dauwalter and Jackson 2005). Anecdotal evidence suggests that golden shiners are most likely to persist in shallow ponds with moderate coverage of submersed macrophytes. As part of an initial stocking, the recommended stocking rate for golden shiners varies greatly from about 500–2,500 per hectare (Dauwalter and Jackson 2005).
6.4.4 Fathead Minnows
Fathead minnows are often stocked at about 10 kg per hectare before the initial stocking of largemouth bass to provide extra initial prey for the stocked fingerling largemouth bass (Stone and Modde 1982; Dauwalter and Jackson 2005). These minnows are usually eliminat-ed due to predation by the largemouth bass before the end of the first growing season (Brown
168 Chapter 6
1970). However, minnows added as a prey enhancement to ponds with established predators may have little positive effect. Under controlled experimental conditions, the typical conver-sion of prey fish biomass to largemouth bass biomass is approximately 4–6 kg of minnows to produce 1 kg of largemouth bass growth. In pond stockings this conversion would be less ef-ficient due to other sources of mortality in the minnows. Given this rate of conversion, routine stocking of fathead minnows to enhance the growth of top predators is likely not practical or sustainable for most pond managers. Temporarily boosting the growth of predators without additional harvest could result in greater predation on the established prey species once the minnows are eliminated. Failure to maintain the extra prey stocking could exacerbate a preda-tor overcrowded condition.
6.4.5 Lake Chubsucker
The lake chubsucker has been recommended as either a supplement to or replacement for bluegill in largemouth bass recreational fishing ponds (Bennett and Childers 1966). This sucker species is common in lakes and slow flowing rivers in the Midwestern and southeast-ern USA. Experimental trials with lake chubsucker stocked with bluegill did not increase the growth of largemouth bass in Illinois (Eberts et al. 1998). Lake chubsuckers may provide an alternative prey species for some ponds; however, it is not clear that they would enhance the production or growth of predators in typical small impoundments.
6.4.6 Tilapia Species
Tilapia are cichlids native to tropical Africa but have been naturalized in large portions of Florida and Texas and in isolated portions of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Because they are nonnative species, stocking tilapia may be prohibited in many jurisdictions. In fact, tilapia have been listed among the most invasive fish species (Costa-Pierce 2003). The most common species of tilapia stocked for pond prey enhancement are Nile tilapia, blue tilapia, Mozambique tilapia and the hybrids among these species. While there are no controlled ex-perimental evaluations of tilapia stocking rates for prey enhancements published, stocking rates of 50–100 mixed sex adult or about 500 fingerling tilapia per hectare have been used as prey enhancements (Goodwin et al. 2004; Henry et al. 2005). The reproduction from these stocked adults will provide additional prey for largemouth bass or potentially other piscivores in the pond. Because tilapia are tropical species, they will not survive winter water tempera-tures below 10°C for extended periods (Shafland and Pestrak 1982; Sifa et al. 2002). To main-tain tilapia in ponds outside of subtropical regions, it is necessary to restock adults each spring when water temperatures reach the safe handling temperature above 21°C.
Tilapia have a very broad diet including both algae and detritus. Because of their abil-ity to consume filamentous algae and small plant species like watermeal Wolffia spp., tilapia have been stocked as a biological control for these nuisance species in ponds. This broad diet reduces their competitive effect on other planktivorous species such as bluegill.
6.4.7 Crayfish Species
Crayfish can be added to largemouth bass–bluegill ponds to provide additional tempo-rary prey for largemouth bass. The most commonly available species of crayfish for this
169Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
type of stocking in the southern USA is the red swamp crayfish, the most common cultured crayfish species in North America. Little evidence is available to indicate that the addition of crayfish to typical largemouth bass–bluegill ponds will increase the growth or recruitment of largemouth bass. The primary effect of stocking crayfish may be to stimulate feeding by largemouth bass on crayfish and fishing lures that mimic crayfish, thereby increasing angler success. Unfortunately, the red swamp crawfish as well as other species of crayfish can be invasive species outside of their native range (Lodge et al. 2000). Stocking crayfish could cause structural problems with the pond as well because these crayfish create burrows that can increase the leakage rate and compromise dams or levees.
6.4.8 Rainbow Trout
In an attempt to replicate the production of trophy largemouth bass experienced in Cali-fornia reservoirs, some pond managers stock rainbow trout in cooler months as a supplemen-tal prey. While a few of the trout may survive and grow to be large enough to be of interest to anglers, the goal of stocking small trout is to provide a high quality, highly vulnerable prey for largemouth bass just before winter. Using trout as prey is cost prohibitive and not sustainable for most pond owners.
6.5 OTHER POND STOCKING OPTIONS
6.5.1 Largemouth Bass–Yellow Perch
In the upper Midwestern USA and in southern Canada, yellow perch have been demon-strated to be sustainable with largemouth bass in small impoundments (Guy and Willis 1991; Paukert et al. 2002). In many cases bluegill and minnows are also part of the stocking mix. This combination appears to be most successful with at least some submersed vegetation in the pond.
6.5.2 Smallmouth Bass Combinations
In mesotrophic ponds in the upper Midwest USA and southern Canada, smallmouth bass can fill the role of predator (Bennett 1970). In most cases smallmouth bass will not control the abundance of bluegill, so other less productive or more vulnerable prey species are recom-mended. These prey species include golden shiners or redear sunfish. The rates or timing of stocking of these combinations has not been well studied. Pond managers following guide-lines for largemouth bass–bluegill ponds have been successful with these fishes.
6.5.3 Catfish “Only”
Channel catfish and the channel catfish × blue catfish hybrid can be stocked in ponds as the only species of interest to anglers. Catfish populations in ponds are generally maintained through stocking and their recruitment limited by the addition of a predator such as large-mouth bass at about 30–50 fish per hectare. If catfish are allowed to reproduce without con-trol in ponds, their populations will exceed what can be supported with fertilization or light amounts of feeding. Up to about 220–750 per hectare can be supported without feeding in
170 Chapter 6
fertile ponds (Masser and Hyde 1996). Higher stocking rates require the use of pelleted feeds to maintain good growth rates in the catfish. Appropriate stocking rates depend on the number of fish the pond owner harvests (Masser and Hyde 1996). An initial stocking of fingerlings can establish a population of catfish before predators are stocked. Subsequent replacement stocking must include only catfish large enough, typically 200-250 mm, to avoid being eaten by predators (Santucci et al. 1994; Michaletz and Dillard 1999).
6.5.4 Trout Only Ponds and Winter Trout Stocking in Warmwater Ponds
Trout only ponds can be maintained with a sufficient supply of cold water during the warmer months. Rainbow trout are the most common species of salmonid stocked in recre-ational ponds, although brown trout and brook trout are sometimes stocked as well. Rainbow trout have an optimal temperature for growth of about 18°C (Hokanson et al. 1977), with an upper lethal temperature of 26°C (Kaya 1978), and rainbow trout are often maintained in ponds using pelleted trout feeds. The recommended stocking rate for trout only ponds is ap-proximately 1,300 per hectare but varies greatly depending on the likely harvest rate of the pond owner (Ochterski et al. 2007). Trout can also be stocked in warmwater ponds during the winter months either in the pond at large to provide a winter fishery (Miko et al. 1995) or into cages for aquaculture production. Winter recreational trout fisheries in warmwater ponds is a strategy that can provide both recreational opportunities and excellent table fare. Most trout cannot successfully reproduce in ponds; therefore, routine replacement stockings must be done to maintain populations. However, in northern climates brook trout can successfully reproduce in ponds and establish self-sustaining populations (Ochterski et al. 2007).
6.5.5 Hybrid Sunfish
The hybrid cross between bluegill and green sunfish has been used both alone and in com-bination with channel catfish. The hybrid sunfish typically displays excellent growth poten-tial, trains readily to pelleted feeds, and is relatively easy to catch via hook and line (Brunson and Robinette 1986). Stocking rates in ponds dedicated to producing these hybrids are typi-cally 1,500–2,000 fingerlings per hectare. Although mostly male and not prolific, this hybrid is not sterile. The juveniles produced in subsequent generations generally grow poorly and have lower overall productivity. Largemouth bass should be stocked with the hybrid sunfish at about 125 per hectare to eat the juveniles produced by the hybrid sunfish. In ponds managed for sustainable largemouth bass and bluegill, hybrid sunfish should not be stocked because they will backcross with bluegill, causing reduced productivity and growth in the sunfish population. This reduced productivity will result in less available prey for largemouth bass or other top predators in the pond.
6.6 AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
6.6.1 Redear Sunfish as a Bluegill Replacement
In the northern portions of the USA and southern Canada it can be more difficult to main-tain the common largemouth bass–bluegill stocking combination in balance than in southern
171Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
areas. The bluegill population can become overly abundant in the northern areas due to vari-ous potential causes (Bennett 1970), especially if largemouth bass are overharvested. Using a combination of predators with a less productive prey species, such as redear sunfish, may be at least part of the solution. Research is needed to find the right combination of prey species, which may include redear sunfish and species more vulnerable to predation such as minnow or sucker species and predators that will promote good growth and sustainable recruitment. Research will also be needed to determine the northern limit for redear sunfish survival. Proper management strategies will also need to be matched with these species combinations to create long term suc-cess (Towns 2003).
6.6.2 Sterile Crappie
Triploid crappie have the potential to provide a much desired species for stocking in ponds without the problems associated with boom and bust reproduction and the competition it causes. Sterile crappie currently are not widely available for stocking in small impound-ments and verified triploid crappie can be costly. Improvements in hatchery techniques to produce triploid crappie could create exciting opportunities for using crappie in small im-poundment management.
6.6.3 Sterile or All-Female Largemouth Bass
Overproduction and recruitment and insufficient harvest of largemouth bass have result-ed in many ponds becoming crowded with largemouth bass. As the bass angling public has shifted away from harvest for food and toward catch and release in the last few decades, the problem of largemouth bass overcrowding in small impoundments has increased substan-tially. One approach to this problem is to attempt to eliminate largemouth reproduction in the pond by stocking either sterile triploid largemouth bass or stocking only female bass. Triploid largemouth bass are not routinely available for private pond stocking. All-female bass would be appealing because female largemouth bass typically grow larger than males; however, sufficient numbers of all-female largemouth bass to stock ponds are generally not available. Production of all female bass requires treatment of juvenile largemouth bass with feminizing hormones (Arslan et al. 2009), which is not approved for fishes that may be eaten. An alternative approach would be to cross masculinized genetic females with normal females to create all female offspring, or sorting and removing males by hand. All of these processes are expensive and not without error. Unfortunately, if only one male is stocked and survives to reproduce, the system quickly becomes fully mixed-sex. Because the stock must be main-tained through repeated stocking of more female largemouth bass to replace those that die or are harvested, the potential error of stocking a male is a recurring problem.
6.6.4 Hybrid Striped Bass–Shad–Crappie
Pond managers are always exploring new approaches to pond management, including different combinations of species to try to solve the shortcomings of traditional approaches or provide pond owners novel systems to meet their goals. The combination of hybrid striped bass, crappie, and threadfin shad may provide a new approach to meet novel goals. This com-bination is designed to provide the pond owner with an opportunity to routinely catch quality
172 Chapter 6
sized crappie and exciting hybrid striped bass (Willis et al. 2010). At the present time, pub-lished research is lacking to provide management recommendations regarding the effects of fertilization, precise stocking densities, and replacement rate for hybrid striped bass. Annual stocking of threadfin shad would also be necessary in areas that experience winter water tem-peratures consistently below 5–6°C (Hale 1996). Other prey species such as golden shiners or fathead minnows may have a role to play in this combination.
6.7 STOCKING PROCEDURES
6.7.1 Check Regulations
Before constructing a new impoundment or restocking an existing pond, land owners should contact their local state, provincial, or in some cases federal fisheries agency to de-termine if the species they intend to release can be legally stocked in their locale. Stocking regulations often change and vary across jurisdictions. As more problems arise due to the introduction of invasive species, genetic pollution, and the introduction of diseases, federal and state fishery managers apply greater control on the movement and stocking of fishes in public and private waters. Several states require permits for stocking. For these permits to be approved, fish often must be purchased from approved hatcheries that are certified as disease-free and that supply fish that are genetically consistent with fish in the area where the impoundment is located. Permissible stocking may differ among basins within a given jurisdiction depending on the fishes present in the receiving waters of the impoundment. In some cases the ponds must be inspected by state fisheries biologists to determine if sufficient precaution has been taken to reduce escapement of fish into receiving public waters.
6.7.2 Choosing a Fish Supplier
Selecting a local hatchery can often reduce problems relative to purchasing fish from fish dealers who travel long distances and sell fish across a large area. Local producers will likely have fish well-adapted for their area and hauling fish over shorter distances should cause less stress. It is also easier to follow up with a producer should a problem arise with the stocking (e.g., high initial mortality). Local hatcheries should be familiar with stocking regulations and be properly licensed to sell and transport fish in the state. Box 15.2 (Chapter 15) provides recommendations to assist pond owners with selection of a fish supplier. In the past, many states provided fish at relatively low or at no cost to pond owners for stocking. Currently, six state agencies provide this service.
6.7.3 Reducing Transportation Stress
Reducing physiological stress on fish during transportation and stocking increases fish survival and thus stocking success. In general, transport time from the hatchery to the pond should be minimized and appropriate water quality maintained in the hauling tanks (Har-mon 2009). Dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, ammonia, and dissolved carbon diox-ide levels are the most important parameters that must be maintained in the hauling tanks within the species-specific tolerances to prevent excessive stress. Dissolved oxygen should
173Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
be maintained near saturation using either pumped air or compressed pure oxygen. Ideal wa-ter temperature for hauling depends on the species of fish being transported and season. The addition of noniodized salt, NaCl, can help to reduce the osmoregulatory stress experienced by some species. Typical salinities for hauling freshwater fishes range from 0.1% to 1%. Minimizing the accumulation of waste products (ammonia and carbon dioxide) is achieved by reducing stress, using appropriate hauling densities, and minimizing hauling duration. Am-monia production can be reduced by not feeding the fish for 24 h prior to hauling. Ammonia
Figure 6.3. Hatchery fish being stocked directly from a hauling tank via a tube (Top) and stocked by hand (Bottom) into small impoundments.Photo Credits: B.W. Smith, American Sport Fish Hatchery (Top); J.W. Neal, Department of Wild-life, Fisheries & Aquaculture, Mississippi State University (Bottom).
174 Chapter 6
concentration and toxicity also can be controlled chemically. Carbon dioxide concentrations can be reduced using appropriate aeration and ventilation of the hauling tank (Harmon 2009). Lightly anesthetizing some species during transport has been found to increase survival; how-ever, great care should be taken not to over-anesthetize the fish or to use chemicals that are not approved by regulatory agencies (Carmichael et al. 2001).
Rapid shifts in water temperature and chemistry (pH, hardness, salinity, etc.) both in the hauling tanks and in going from the hauler to the pond can lead to low survival of stocked fish. Ideally, water from the pond should be mixed with transport water to temper the fish and allow them to adjust to the changes in conditions before stocking the pond (Figure 6.3). The tempering rate and the amount of change in both water temperature and chemistry that fish can tolerate depend on the fish species and size of fish being stocked and direction and mag-nitude of change in environmental conditions. Conservative estimates suggest that fish should not be subjected to more than 1–2°C change in water temperature per hour before stocking; however, some species can tolerate a much greater change (Noga 2000). Stocking fish into somewhat cooler water than in the hauling tank is typically less stressful than stocking fish into water warmer than in the hauling tank (Harmon 2009).
Hauling rates (number or biomass per volume of water) and conditions depend on the species of fish and water temperature (Table 6.3). Attempting to haul either too many fish or hauling for too long will result in declines in water quality and reduced survival. The size of the fish will also affect the amount of fish that can be hauled. Smaller fish have higher specific respiration and excretion rates, which can cause more rapid depletion of dissolved oxygen and accumulation of waste products than for an equal mass of larger individuals (Brett and Groves 1979). In general, with longer haul duration, higher water temperature, or smaller fish, haul-ing load rates should be decreased (Carmichael et al. 2001).
Table 6.3. Typical hauling tank conditions for species of fish most often stocked in small im-poundments. The information provided in this table is summarized from several sources (Iversen and Puffinburger 1977; Higginbotham 1988; Jensen 1990; Carmichael et al. 2001).
Species Temperature (°C) Salinity (%) Loading rates Fish size Rate (g/L) Largemouth 16.5 0.2–0.5 50–80 mm 60bass 150–250 mm 80 Bluegill 16.5 0.2–0.5 30–80 mm 60 80–120 mm 80 Channel catfish 16–26 depending 0.2–1.0 80–100 mm 350 on season 250 mm 600 Hybrid striped 13–18 0.1–0.5 50–80 mm 18bass 250 mm 180 Threadfin shad 13–18 0.5 40–150 mm 19 Trout 10–12 0.2–1.0 80–100 mm 120 250–350 mm 300–400
175Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Threadfin and gizzard shad are particularly sensitive to handling stress. Every attempt should be made to handle these fishes gently with soft nets to reduce damage during handling (Higginbotham 1988). Shad should be hauled in tanks with rounded corners to reduce the chance that these open water schooling species will become trapped in the corners. Haul-ing shad when water temperatures are low (10–15°C) and adding salt to reach a salinity of 0.5–1% will greatly improve shad survival (Collins and Hulsey 1963). Use of the anesthetic MS-222 (Tricaine methanesulfonate) at 20–25 ppm in the hauling water has also been recom-mended to reduce activity and stress in shad (Higginbotham 1988), although not all haulers find this necessary (Iversen and Puffinburger 1977; Hale 1996).
For approximately 1–2 weeks immediately poststocking, the stocked fish are likely to experience some mortality due to the stress of handling and hauling. Observing a few dead fish (<10% of those stocked) is probably not a significant problem. A thorough assessment of the success of stocking would require that the pond manager revisit the pond and determine if the species are evident, growing and reproducing over the course of the year following introduction.
6.8 TIME TO FIRST HARVEST
When establishing a sustainable pond food web such as largemouth bass and bluegill, it is necessary to allow a period of time after stocking without harvest to permit the fish to grow and begin to reproduce. This delay in harvest also allows the pond manager time to evaluate the success of the stocking (i.e., was there excessive initial mortality). For largemouth bass and bluegill, the time from stocking to first harvest depends on the growth and reproduction of the largemouth bass, which is dependent on latitude and fertility of the pond. For ponds in the southern portions of North America that are stocked at typical rates of fingerling fish, harvest can begin as early as 1–2 years after stocking. The slower growth rate of largemouth bass in northern ponds often delays reproduction for an additional year or longer; therefore, harvest of largemouth bass in these northern ponds should start 2–4 years post stocking. Given that fishing typically would begin in the middle of the year, only half the prescribed annual harvest rate should be taken during that first season. Delaying harvest is more critical for largemouth bass than for bluegill because bluegill usually begin to reproduce in the summer following stocking if fingerlings are stocked in the winter. This early reproduction allows the population to compensate for typical harvest rates.
6.9 SUMMARY
The stocking of small impoundments has evolved over the last century. Early attempts to mimic natural systems gave way to combinations of a few species mostly centered around largemouth bass and bluegill. More recently the vision has broadened to try to meet the goals of pond owners and managers with a variety of species and combinations. Further research is needed to address options that could better control the reproduction of fishes (i.e., sterile fishes or single sex stocking) and novel species combinations to better understand the poten-tial and practical application of these approaches. Largemouth bass and bluegill are still the dominant combination of fish species stocked in warmwater ponds throughout the USA and southern Canada, primarily due to their favorable traits that have led to well-established man-agement practices that consistently produce sustainable fishing.
176 Chapter 6
6.10 REFERENCES
Arslan, T., R. P. Phelps, and J. A. Osborne. 2009. Effects of estradiol-17b or 17a-methyltestosterone administration on gonadal differentiation of largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Lacepe`de). Aquaculture Research 40:1813–1822.
Bennett, G. W. 1944. The effect of species combinations of fish production. Transactions of the Ninth Annual North American Wildlife Conference 9:267–276.
Bennett, G. W. 1951. Experimental largemouth bass management in Illinois. Transactions of the Amer-ican Fisheries Society 80:231–239.
Bennett, G. W. 1970. Management of lakes and ponds. Second edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold Com-pany, New York.
Bennett, G.W., and W.F. Childers. 1966. The lake chubsucker as a forage species. Progressive Fish-Culturist 28:89–92.
Berger, T. A. 1982. Supplemental feeding of a wild bluegill population. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 2:158–163.
Boxrucker, J. 1987. Largemouth bass influence on size structure of crappie populations in small Okla-homa impoundments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 7:273–278.
Brett, J. R., and T. D. D. Groves. 1979. Physiological energetics. Pages 279–352 in W. S. Hoar, D. J. Randall, and J. R. Brett, editors. Fish physiology, volume 8. Academic Press, New York.
Brown, B. E. 1970. Exponential decrease in a population of fathead minnows. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 9:807–809.
Brunson, M. W., and H. R. Robinette. 1986. Evaluation of male bluegill x female green sunfish hybrids for stocking Mississippi farm ponds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:156–167.
Carmichael, G. J., J. R. Tomasso, and T. E. Schwedler. 2001. Fish transportation. Pages 641–660 in G. A. Wedemeyer, editor. Fish hatchery management, 2nd edition, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Cichra, C. E., W. H. Neil, and R. L. Noble. 1980. Differential resistance of northern and Florida large-mouth bass to cold shock. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 34:19–24.
Collins, J. M., and A. H. Hulsey. 1963. Hauling mortality of threadfin shad reduced with M.S. 222 and salt. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 25:105–106.
Costa-Pierce, B. A. 2003. Rapid evolution of an established feral tilapia (Oreochromis spp.): the need to incorporate invasion science into regulatory structures. Biological Invasions 5: 71–84.
Courtenay, W. R., and G. K. Meffe. 1989. Small fishes in strange places: a review of introduced poecili-ids. Pages 319–331 in G. K. Meffe and F. F. Snelson, editors, Ecology and evolution of livebearing fishes (Poeciliidae). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Coutant, C. C. 1985. Striped bass, temperature, and dissolved oxygen: a speculative hypothesis for environmental risk. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114: 31–61.
Dauwalter, D. C., and J. R. Jackson. 2005. A re-evaluation of U.S. state fish-stocking recommendations for small, private, warmwater impoundments. Fisheries 30:18–28.
Dettmers, J. M., R. A. Stein, and E. M. Lewis. 1998. Potential regulation of age-0 gizzard shad hybrid striped bass in Ohio reservoirs. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 127:84–94.
DeBates, T. J., C. P. Paukert, and D. W. Willis. 2003. Fish community responses to the establishment of a piscivore, northern pike Esox lucius, in a Nebraska Sandhill lake. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 18:353–359.
DeVries, D. R., and R. A. Stein. 1990. Manipulating shad to enhance sport fisheries in North America: an assessment. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:209–233.
DeVries, D. R., R. A. Stein, J. G. Miner, and G. G. Mittlebach. 1991. Stocking threadfin shad: conse-quences for young-of-year fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:368–381.
177Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
Dillard, J. G., and G. D. Novinger. 1975. Stocking largemouth bass in small impoundments. In H. Clep-per, editor. Black bass biology and management. Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, DC.
Eberts, R. C., Jr., V. J. Santucci, Jr., and D. H. Wahl. 1998. Suitability of the lake chubsucker as prey for large-mouth bass in small impoundments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 18:295–307.
Edminster, F. C. 1947. Fish ponds for the farm. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York.Eggleton, M. A., and H. L. Schramm, Jr. 2002. Caloric densities of selected fish prey organisms in the
lower Mississippi River. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 17:409–414.Embody, G. C. 1915. The farm fishpond. Cornell University Reading Courses, 4. Country Life Series
3. 2007–2050.Fullerton, A. H., J. E. Garvey, R. A. Wright, and R. A. Stein. 2000. Overwinter growth and survival of
largemouth bass: interactions among size, food, and winter duration. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 129:1–12.
Gabelhouse, D. W., Jr. 1978. Redear sunfish for small impoundments? Pages 109–123 in G. D. No-vinger and J. G. Dillard, editors. New approaches to the management of small impoundments. North Central Division, American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 6, Bethesda, Maryland.
Gabelhouse, D. W., Jr. 1984. An assessment of crappie stocks in small midwestern private impound-ments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 4:371–384.
Garvey, J. E., and R. A. Stein. 1998. Competition between larval fishes in reservoirs: the role of relative timing of appearance. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 127:1023–1041.
Garvey, J. E., R. A. Stein, R. A. Wright, and M. T. Bremigan. 2003. Exploring ecological mecha-nisms underlying largemouth bass recruitment along environmental gradients. Pages 7–24 in D. P. Philipp and M. S. Ridgeway, editors. Black bass: ecology, conservation, and management. Ameri-can Fisheries Society, Symposium 31, Bethesda, Maryland.
Goodwin, A., J. Jackson, N. Stone, T. Burnley, J. Farwick, and M. Armstrong. 2004. Recreational fishing in small impoundments: alternative management options. MP-447, Cooperative Extension Program, University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff.
Gurtin, S. D., M. L. Brown, and C. G. Scalet. 1996. Dynamics of sympatric northern pike and large-mouth bass population in small prairie impoundments. Pages 73–85 in R. Soderberg, editor. Warmwater workshop proceedings: esocid management and culture. American Fisheries Society, Northeastern Division, Bethesda, Maryland.
Guy, C. S., and D. W. Willis. 1991. Evaluation of largemouth bass – yellow perch communities in small South Dakota impoundments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 11:43–49.
Guy, C. S., and D. W. Willis. 1995. Population characteristics of black crappies in South Dakota waters: a case for ecosystem-specific management. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15:754–765.
Hackney, P. A. 1965. Predator–prey relationships of the flathead catfish in ponds under selected forage conditions. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners 19:217–222.
Hale, R. S. 1996. Threadfin shad use as supplemental prey in reservoir white crappie fisheries in Ken-tucky. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16:619–632.
Haley, N. V., III. 2009. Privately-owned small impoundments of central Alabama: a survey and evaluation of management techniques and enhancements. Master’s thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.
Hall, J. F. 1959. Final report on the success of largemouth bass–bluegill and largemouth bass–shell-cracker rates and ratios in Kentucky farm ponds. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners 12:91–115.
Hambright, K. D. 1991. Experimental analysis of prey selection by largemouth bass: role of predator mouth width and prey body depth. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:500–508.
Harmon, T. S. 2009. Methods for reducing stressors and maintaining water quality associated with live fish transport in tanks: a review of the basics. Reviews in Aquaculture 1:58–66.
178 Chapter 6
Henry, S. D., S. W. Barkley, and R. L. Johnson. 2005. Exploitation of Nile tilapia in a closed-system public fishing reservoir in Northern Arkansas. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:853–860.
Higginbotham, B. 1988. Forage species production techniques. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center Publication No. 141.
Hokanson, K. E. F., C. F. Kleiner, and T. W. Thorslund. 1977. Effects of constant temperatures and diel temperature fluctuations on specific growth and mortality rates and yield of juvenile rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34:639–648.
Irwin, B. J., D. R. DeVries, and R. A. Wright. 2003. Evaluating the potential for predatory control of gizzard shad by largemouth bass in small impoundments: a bioenergetics approach. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 132:913–924.
Iversen, R. T. B., and J. O. Puffinburger. 1977. Capture transportation and pumping of threadfin shad, Dorosoma petenense. Pages 127–136 in R.S. Shomura, editor. Collection of tuna baitfish papers. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Report NMFS Circular 408, U.S. National Ma-rine Fisheries Service.
Jensen, G. L. 1990. Transportation of warmwater fish: loading rates and tips by species. Southern Re-gional Aquaculture Center, Publication 393, Stoneville, Mississippi.
Jolley, J. C., D. W. Willis, T. J. DeBates, and D. D. Graham. 2008. The effects of mechanically reducing northern pike density on the sport fish community of West Long Lake, Nebraska, USA. Fisheries Management and Ecology 15:251–258.
Kaya, C. M. 1978. Thermal resistance of rainbow trout from a permanently heated stream, and of two hatchery strains. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 40:138–142.
Kirk, J. P., and W. D. Davies. 1985. Competitive influences of gizzard shad on largemouth bass and bluegill in small impoundments. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern As-sociation of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 39:116–124.
Kassler, T. W., J. B. Koppelman, T. J. Near, C. D. Dillman, J. M. Levengood, D. L. Swofford, J. L. VanOrman, J. E. Claussen, and D. P. Phillip. 2002. Molecular and morphological analysis of the black basses: implications for taxonomy and conservation. Pages 291–322 in D. P. Phillip and M. S. Ridgway, editors. Black bass: ecology, conservation, and management. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 31, Bethesda, Maryland.
Kleinsasser, L. J., J. H. Williamson, and B. G. Whiteside. 1990. Growth and catchability of northern, Florida, and F1 hybrid largemouth bass in Texas ponds. North American Journal of Fisheries Man-agement 10:462–468.
Lodge, D. M., C. A. Taylor, D. M. Holdich, and J. Skurdal. 2000. Nonindigenous crayfishes threaten North American freshwater biodiversity: lessons from Europe. Fisheries 25:7–20.
Masser, M. P., C. E. Cichra, and R. J. Gilbert. 1993. Fee fishing ponds: management of food fish and water quality. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center Publication 480.
Masser, M., and C. Hyde. 1996. Management of recreational catfish ponds in Alabama. Alabama Co-operative Extension System, ANR 826.
McHugh, J. J. 1990. Responses of bluegills and crappies to reduced abundance of largemouth bass in two Alabama impoundments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:344–351.
Mettee, M. F., P. E. O’Neil, and J. M. Pierson. 1996. Fishes of Alabama and the Mobile basin. Oxmoor House, Birmingham, Alabama.
Michaletz, P. H., and J. G. Dillard. 1999. A survey of catfish management in the United States and Canada. Fisheries 24(8):6–11.
Michaletz, P. H. 2006. Do channel catfish stockings affect growth and size structure of bluegills in small impoundments? Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 135:1254–1265.
Miko, D. A., H. L. Schramm, Jr., S. D. Arey, J. A. Dennis, and N. E. Mathews. 1995. Determination of
179Stocking Strategies for Recreational Small Impoundments
stocking densities for satisfactory put-and-take rainbow trout fisheries. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15:823–829.
Moss, J. L., and C. S. Lawson. 1982. Evaluation of striped bass and hybrid striped bass stockings in eight Alabama public fishing lakes. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern As-sociation of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 36:33–41.
Neal, J. W., R. L. Noble, and J. A. Rice. 1999. Fish community response to hybrid striped bass intro-duction in small warmwater impoundments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19:1044–1053.
Neal, J. W., S. Shreay, N. E. Heitman, M. C. Leao, K. R. Winningham, R. E. Edziyie, and C. Jackson. 2004. Hybrid striped bass in urban ponds: a pilot study on angler demographics, attitudes, and fishing success. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 58:130–138.
Nelson, J. S., E. J. Crossman, H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, and J. D. Wil-liams. 2004. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada and Mexico, sixth edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 29, Bethesda, Maryland.
Noble, R. L. 1981. Management of forage fishes in impoundments of the southern United States. Trans-actions of the American Fisheries Society 110:738–750.
Noga, E. J. 2000. Fish disease: diagnosis and treatment. Iowa State University Press, Ames.Ochterski, J., B. Swistock, C. Kraft, and R. Schneider. 2007. The pond guidebook, NRAES-178. Natu-
ral Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service, Cooperative Extension Ithaca, New York.Paukert, C. P., D. W. Willis, and J. A. Klammer. 2002. Effects of predation and environment on the
quality of yellow perch and bluegill populations in Nebraska sandhill lakes. North American Jour-nal of Fisheries Management 22:86–95.
Phillip, D. P., J. E. Claussen, T. Kassler, and J. M. Epifanio. 2002. Mixing stocks of largemouth bass reduces fitness through outbreeding depression. Pages 349–363 in D. P. Phillip and M. S. Ridgway, editors. Black bass: ecology, conservation, and management. American Fisheries Society, Sympo-sium 31, Bethesda, Maryland.
Porath, M. T., and K. L. Hurley. 2005. Effects of waterbody type and management actions on bluegill growth rates. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:1041–1050.
Prentice, J. A., and J. W. Schlechte. 2000. Performance comparison between coppernose and native Texas bluegill populations. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 54:196–206.
Regier, H. A. 1962. On the evolution of bass-bluegill stocking policies and management recommenda-tions. Progressive Fish Culturist 24:99–111.
Regier, H. A. 1963. Ecology and management of largemouth bass and golden shiners in farm ponds in New York. New York Fish and Game Journal 10:139–169.
Santucci, V. J., Jr., D. H. Wahl, and T. W. Storck. 1994. Growth, mortality, harvest, and cost-effec-tiveness of stocked channel catfish in a small impoundment. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 14:781–789.
Shafland, P. L., and J. M. Pestrak. 1982. Lower lethal temperatures for fourteen nonnative fishes in Florida. Environmental Biology of Fishes 7:149–156.
Sifa, L, L. Chenhonga, M. Dey, F. Gagalac, and R. Dunham. 2002. Cold tolerance of three strains of Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, in China. Aquaculture 18:123–129.
Smith, S. L. 1976. Behavioral suppression of spawning in largemouth bass by interspecific competition for space within spawning areas. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105:682–685.
Strawn, K. 1965. Resistance of threadfin shad to low temperatures. Proceedings of the Annual Confer-ence of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners 17:290–293.
Stone, C. C., and T. Modde. 1982. Growth and survival of largemouth bass in newly stocked South Dakota ponds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 4:326–333.
180 Chapter 6
ASwingle, H. S. 1949a. Experiments with combinations of largemouth black bass, bluegills, and min-
nows in ponds. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 76:46–62.Swingle, H. S. 1949b. Some recent developments in pond management. Transactions of the North
American Wildlife Conference 12:295–310.Swingle, H. S. 1950. Relationships and dynamics of balanced and unbalanced fish populations. Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, Bulletin 274. Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, Alabama.Swingle, H. S. 1964. Experiments with the flathead catfish (Plyodictis olivaris) in ponds. Proceed-
ings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners 18:303–308.
Swingle, H. S. 1970. History of warmwater pond culture in the United States. Pages 95–105 in N. G. Benson, editor. A century of fisheries in North America. American Fisheries Society, Special Pub-lication 7, Bethesda, Maryland.
Swingle, H. S., and E. V. Smith. 1943. Factors affecting the reproduction of bluegill bream and large-mouth black bass in ponds. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular Number 87. Ala-bama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, Alabama.
Towns, G. L. 2003. Redear sunfish management in Michigan. Michigan Department of Natural Re-sources, Fisheries Technical Report 2003-3, Lansing.
USDI (U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau). 2006. 2006 National survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recre-ation. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, DC.
Wahl, D. H., and R. A. Stein. 1989. Comparative vulnerability of three esocids to largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) predation. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46:2095–2103.
Willis, D. W., M. D. Beem, and R. L. Hanten. 1990. Managing South Dakota ponds for fish and wild-life. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre, South Dakota
Willis, D. W., R. D. Lusk, and J. W. Slipke. 2010. Farm ponds and small impoundments. Pages 501–544 in W. A. Hubert and M. C. Quist, editors. Inland Fisheries Management in North America, 3rd edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Zolczynski, S. J., Jr., and W. D. Davies. 1976. Growth characteristics of the Northern and Florida sub-species of largemouth bass and their hybrid, and a comparison of catchability between the subspe-cies. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105:240–243.
