That Could be Your Fishing Pond

It’s a dream many pondmeisters share. Young son or daughter, in the boat, enjoying the outdoors on your very own fishing pond. Birds flit above, something with scales spanks water’s surface not far from the boat.

For years, pond and lake owners carefully practice pond and lake management tactics. Proper fish stocking, adding cover or fish structure, fish feeding, pond fertilizing, dealing with runaway aquatic vegetation growth.

Long years, short years, go by raising the family, working hard at what you do. Stealing time to go fishing, and enjoying your pond and the outdoors.

Recently, there have been a number of pond owners who let us know if what they are doing is working and they are having a ball. Here are a few photos and some stories to share.

Johnny Tanner, III is a wonderful family man from Carrollton, Georgia. He takes care of a fourth generation grocery business while being the quintessential husband and father, doing what good men do. Of course, his bride takes pretty good care of him, too. She makes great chicken pie. I know that, first hand.

Johnny lives on a lake, plus has property with its own lake, a pet lake project dating years ago. Eight or ten years ago, Johnny renovated the lake just outside of town, restocked it with fish, and is doing everything he can do to have the greatest bass lake he can create.

He is exceptionally passionate about it. He believes in lake management. He believes in proper fish stocking. He believes in God and Country.

In the meantime, Johnny has spent countless hours doing what he can do with the lake behind his home. It’s a community lake with few rules, and few helpers. Over time, Johnny has added fish cover, especially Christmas tree brush piles. He has kept logs of his bass catches, tagged fish, and kept pretty good records. He has tagged fish weighing four to nine pounds.

He has a new story to tell.

Here are his words.

“On September 26, 2004, my son John (who is 8 years old and uses a baitcaster) and I were at Lake Carroll in Carrollton, Georgia about to go for a ride in the boat. I suggested we put a fishing rod in the boat. While we are out there we might as well fish a little bit. Fishing conditions were terrible but we put a rod in anyway. After an hour we had not caught anything. Winds were from the east at 15-20 mph. (Isn’t there a saying that if the wind is from the east the fish bite the least?) It was the day Hurricane Jean was coming up the eastern coast.

“John had picked out a 1/2 oz white spinnerbait. It was 7:00 pm and I cast it out 3 or 4 times trying to find some submerged trees. We had put out several trees in an area using the old pickle bucket method (May – June 1999 Pond Boss article X Marks The Spot). When I finally came across the top of them a bass hit and almost took the rod out of my hand. It was pulling the drag pretty good when I asked John if he wanted to bring it in.

“I handed the rod to John and immediately he said ‘Daddy the fish is going to pull the rod out of my hands.’ I repositioned his hands so the left hand was in front of the reel and the butt of the reel was in his stomach. It was a standstill for what seemed like an eternity. Finally, John started to get some line back on the fish as I moved the boat closer in her direction. John got the trophy bass closer and when she saw the boat, she went straight down. I thought for a minute that the rod was either going in the lake or going to break in half.

“My son John was straining with all he had.

“Finally, the fish came up and I almost had a stroke. I reached down and picked up the giant bass and brought her in the boat. The hook immediately came out of the fish’s mouth. At this point I had no idea how much this fish weighed because I had never, ever seen one this big.

“I had a set of Normark digital scales in my tackle box that went up to 10 pounds. When I put her on the scales, they started flashing like they were broken. I tried it again and again they flashed double zero. Finally, I let the fish down easily on the scale and watched them register 4 pounds the 5 then 6… .7… .8… .9… .then flash. I knew we had the bass of our lives. (My biggest bass ever is 9 pounds 3 oz. which I tagged and released in this lake).

“We got back to the dock and I had another digital scale that went up to 15 pounds. When I put her on those scales they registered an amazing 12 pounds and 4 ounces. I checked the scale when I got back home and it was correct to the ounce.

“The first thing John said is ‘Daddy, can my name be on the plaque,’ which I replied that he had done more work than I had so yes when we get her mounted we will both be on the plaque. What I didn’t tell him is that if I had known the fish was that big, he probably wouldn’t have gotten the rod.

“We kept her alive for a couple of hours in a cooler full of lake water and I debated whether to release her or keep her. I finally thought that in that particular lake I have records going back to 1994 of releasing between 150 and 200 bass that I have personally tagged. Their weights are from 4 pounds to 9 pounds. I also knew that a bass this big probably would have been in the neighborhood of 15 years old or more and had very little life left. So I decided to keep her. It was a tough decision, but when I saw the look on John’s face, and quickly reflected about my life, fishing with my Dad, and looked back at John, it was an obvious decision. I knew John may never see a fish this large again. We have always practiced catch and release and continue to do so.

“Lake Carroll is about 150 acres and full of Crappie and Gizzard Shad. The bass (even the big ones) have plenty to eat.

“Now, Little John and I have a fishing story that neither one of us will ever forget.”

Then there’s 30 acre Fin & Feather Club Lake in Atlanta, Texas. Gordon Pynes and his neighbors are conscientious about pond management in their pristine east Texas fishing hole. A number of people live around the lake and this club works to educate their members. Years ago, the lake was a vegetated mess full of algae and aquatic vegetation, when one of the members took it upon himself to become the caretaker. He had a pond management agenda, one that didn’t necessarily jibe with the rest of the membership. After all, they hadn’t done much pond management, except stocking a few fish now and then. The proactive member got their attention; they united and created a good pond management strategy. They limed the acid water lake to adjust the ph levels, fertilized the pond as needed, set up some fish feeders, and began culling slot bass.

The results on their fishery have been predictably amazing.

Electrofishing surveys have yielded bass larger than twelve pounds. Take a peek at the photos of recent fish collected, weighed and measured.

Then, there’s Stan Graff. You might remember the Pond Boss Magazine cover story several years ago. Stan has had hundreds of gar removed from his 30 acre lake in northeast Texas. With fish feeding stations, and moderate aquatic vegetation control, the program has yielded quick results. Slot sized bass, without competition, have grown to look like footballs with a mouth.

You can’t wipe the grins off the guys’ faces. Fishing is fun again at Flagg Lake.

Everyone enjoys looking at giant fish. But, knowing the effort it takes to provide the best habitat, best forage fish, best genetics and best pond management to create a moment in life is staggering to think about. Everything must come together at the right time, at the right place. Even when the stars line up, there’s no guarantee what you do will work. But, here are three shining examples where pond management has paid off.

POND BOSS Magazine is the world’s leading resource for fish, pond and fisheries management information including discussions on muddy water, raising trophy fish, fish feeding, building a pond, algae control and more. Check us out at www.pondboss.com or contact Bob Lusk, the Pond Boss himself, at 903-564-5372. His books, Basic Pond Management, Raising Trophy Bass and Perfect Pond, Want One, may be purchased by calling 800-687-6075 or ordering online at www.pondboss.com

Pond Boss moderator Dave Davidson examines a crawfish trap. Pondmeister Johnny Tanner, from Carrollton, Georgia, has a small pond where he raises crawfish to feed his bass in a larger lake. Inset: Oronectes, ‘papershell crayfish’ from Missouri.

Any bass angler who fishes Midwestern ponds or lakes can testify to the importance or frequency of finding remains of crayfish in stomachs of largemouth bass (LMB). When food habits of LMB were studied at Murphy Flowage, Wisconsin many years ago, the most prominent forage item was crayfish. A conclusion of the study was that LMB were not an effective predator on the high-density population of slow growing bluegill (BLG). Biologists failed to recognize that panfish outweighed the total weight of LMB by about 10:1. Apparently when LMB have relatively little competition for food they chose crayfish over forage fish. What would you choose in your favorite cafeteria offering free food, lobster or fish?

A sidelight of the Murphy Flowage studies was a major effort to improve BLG growth rate by removing as many fish as possible with large seines. Large seines have relatively large mesh and were effective at harvesting the largest fish of the adult population. It was a surprise to discover that subsequent to the removal, BLG growth rate declined. Harvesting adult bluegill resulted in reduced competition for food, an explosion of bluegill reproduction and a dramatic increase in BLG numbers in the lake.

More recent studies have shown that in order to have a balanced population of BLG with good growth and fish of quality (6-inch) and larger sizes, at least 90% annual mortality of age-I and age-II BLG (1.5 to 3.5 inches long) is needed: i.e. 10,000 age-I reduced to 1000 age-II which are reduced to 100 age-III. BLG of this size and age are prey for LMB 12 to 15 inches long. In well balanced communities of BLG and LMB a favorable total weight ratio is 3 or 4 to 1 at any point in time.

Two other unsuccessful efforts to improve growth rate and size structure of forage are informative. In one case, in Wisconsin, adult northern pike were introduced into a population of stunted yellow perch. The result was a decline in the number of quality-size perch. A second case in Nebraska was an effort to reduce numbers and improve size distribution of bullheads by stocking an effective predator, adult flathead catfish. In both cases the introductions did not result as intended because both predators were selective for the largest of the forage available in the lake. The principle learned is the importance of the relationship between size of predator and size of prey.

Back to the question of crayfish. The rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) is an unwelcome visitor in some northern lakes. It has been introduced by anglers using crayfish as bait… not the first time the bait bucket has been a source of an introduction. The impact in many of these lakes has been loss of valuable habitat and native aquatic plants.

I had a similar experience with a different species of Orconectes in a one-acre fishing pond in Missouri. The pond was about 8 feet deep and with clear water. There was a ring of vegetation growing to a depth of 7 feet. In mid-summer the pond looked like a donut with a small opening in the deepest part. Fishing was difficult or impossible except in early spring.

In the fall I had the opportunity to introduce about 10 gallons of crayfish, a byproduct of some other fishing pond research. From my perspective the result was a success. The following year water transparency declined to about 2 feet and vegetation was limited to water less than 2 feet deep. It was easy to fish the pond from shore all summer long. The species of crayfish in this genus do not burrow but have a strong thigmotaxis–a desire to be touching something. In native habitat that could be a log or rock that they could get next to or under. In clay-bottom ponds they work to form a shallow depression where they rest during the day. This tactic may help to avoid predation.

In a small shallow pond without fish and wall-to-wall vegetation, I introduced a small number of Orconectes. The next summer the pond looked muddy; the water transparency was reduced to a few inches and a plant hook came back empty. The aquatic plants were gone. The impact of the crayfish was excessive.

In an established fishing pond with an excess of rooted vegetation into deep water the introduction of Orconectes might yield positive results by improving conditions for fishing, increasing capacity for production of LMB, possibly promoting better wind induced circulation, an improved oxygen profile and a reduction or avoidance of excessively high pH due to decreased aquatic plant mass. The problem is how to find a source of Orconectes?

Fish farmers often produce crayfish in minnow ponds. There, crayfish can be a liability because they injure minnows when ponds are seined or harvested. On fish farms, crayfish are an unwanted byproduct. It is unlikely to find crayfish in catfish ponds because they are a preferred food item.

An easy source of crayfish is the red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) sold for human food. Production is a major industry in rice fields. Although Orconectes prefers to feed on vegetation, the red swamp crayfish can be carnivorous and eat insect larvae, tadpoles, snails and small fish. Such food habits would not be an asset in most fishing ponds. Red swamp crayfish have been introduced into many areas. An undesirable attribute of the genus and a relative, Cambarus, is the habit of burrowing. Burrowing activity can damage water control structures, dams and levees. P. clarkii is an intermediate host for parasitic helminthes of vertebrates. Because of adverse affects, efforts for eradication have been attempted in some areas.

What might a pond owner do to introduce something with limited ability for natural dispersion that would feed primarily on plant material or detritus and increase the production of food for fish? A critter that has appeal to me is a different decapod, Palaemonetes, a freshwater prawn also called glass shrimp. They are relatively small, up to 2 inches long, and free swimming. I introduced some into a sediment trap pond above a 35-acre lake in Missouri. They moved downstream and have persisted in the lake for many years.

What about simply buying red swamp crayfish and using them as supplemental food for LMB? Sure, it has been done, countless times. As a pond manager, your job is to learn the facts and make the best decisions you can make. One pondmeister, in central Oklahoma, has bought different kinds of living supplemental food for his bass for years. During the crayfish season, he might buy 2,000 pounds to stock into his 10 acre lake. His mission is to supplement the natural food chain. For him, it works. His bass are so overcrowded that crayfish don’t stand a chance to establish themselves. There is relatively little crayfish habitat and so many bass that the mudbugs don’t stand much of a chance at survival. Advantage, bass.

But, look at another real world case. In 1984, lake manager Billy Cooper, from Houston, Texas, helped renovate a well-known fishing lake that sits less than fifteen miles from the Texas coast. The lake was drained, bulldozers did their magic, rearranging heavy clay soils in the flat country. The lake refilled and restocked with forage fish to set the table to grow giant largemouth bass.

Within months, the lake looked like chocolate milk. What happened?

This 30 acre lake sits in the middle of rice country along the Texas gulf coast. After the bulldozers left, the landowner seeded part of the lake bottom with rye grass and let it grow to six inches before flooding the lake in January… about the time crayfish are feeding and growing as fast as they can.

The source of the muddy water was literally hundreds of pounds of growing, thriving crayfish, fighting for food and for space and stirring bottom clay soils. These creatures were outcompeting the fish, overeating the food chain and making the lake muddy.

After a concerted effort at trapping, crayfish numbers were reduced to the point that fish could begin to thrive and the water cleared well enough the lake could perform as wished. In this case, crayfish cost the landowner some time and were a problem.

Crayfish asset or liability? The best answer is, it all depends. If they are introduced under appropriate circumstances, it would be important to prevent overharvest of LMB and maintain numbers and sizes to take advantage of an increased food supply. If you get a good population established you may decide to trap out a mess to make a poor-man shrimp cocktail or a New Orleans gumbo. Bon Apetit.

POND BOSS Magazine is the world’s leading resource for fish, pond and fisheries management information including discussions on muddy water, raising trophy fish, fish feeding, building a pond, algae control and more. Check us out at www.pondboss.com or contact Bob Lusk, the Pond Boss himself, at 903-564-5372. His books, Basic Pond Management, Raising Trophy Bass and Perfect Pond, Want One, may be purchased by calling 800-687-6075 or ordering online at www.pondboss.com

Pond Boss subscriber Shane Howell of Dallas stepped on rocks near one of five shoreline feeders surrounding his spanking-new 30-acre Oklahoma lake. He pushed the timer button, then stood back to watch the action as thousands of tiny protein-laced nuggets pelted the water’s surface.  

Hundreds of young bluegill and fathead minnows welcomed the offering, and quickly dispensed with the free meal, in a frenzy fit for starving piranha.

“We designed and stocked this lake to become a trophy bass lake,” Howell said with a smile, “and part of our management plan is to feed the baitfish.”

Feed the baitfish? What gives? Why put protein pellets in the water that the top-end gamefish may or may not eat?

Those are questions many fish pond owners ask themselves. Should you feed your pond fish? Nationwide, biologists disagree on the issue of feeding pond fish.

Proponents point out that high-protein pellets supplement the natural food supply in a fish pond and directly boost growth-rates among certain species, while indirectly improving the rates on some others. Rainbow trout, for instance, can be fed like so many barnyard chickens.

Then again, you might hear some negatives, such as: It’s a commitment. The cost is prohibitive. Feeding causes fish to congregate, altering their behavior. It’s like welfare. Pellets aren’t “natural” in a pond. Water quality is changed, forever.

So’s which side is right? Here’s how to decide the issue for yourself.

If you want to expedite growth-rates of bluegill, catfish and trout, or if you want to increase standing crops of fish in your pond, the answer is simple. Feed the fish.

For every two pounds of protein-rich, pellets (I recommend the floating variety) a group of fish consumes, those fish collectively gain a pound. The fish in your pond now weigh one more pound than before. Two pounds of feed, a pound of fish, and so on.

Let’s look a little deeper into the numbers. The best fish foods cost about 30 cents a pound. So, 60 cents of feed grows a pound of fish.

Stocked any fathead minnows lately? Priced at $10 a pound, fathead minnows can not compete with commercial pellets when it comes to feeding your pond fish.

Trying to grow huge largemouth bass? So many Pond Boss readers are.

Ol’ Bucketmouth won’t dare eat a prepared, pelleted diet. Heck, sitting atop the food chain, with a mouth big enough to swallow a cantaloupe, bass can eat anything in the pond, especially living critters. Bass snub tiny little pellets. Largemouth have bigger fish to fry, so to speak.

But what does a largemouth love to eat? Bluegill. And Mr. Bluegill loves to eat pelleted fish food.

Aha. Feed the fish that feed the bass. By so doing, you have created your own miniature food chain.

A well-managed pond, covering half a surface acre up to three acres, can grow and maintain 200-to-300 pounds of channel cat or trout along with 200-to-300 pounds of forage fish, per surface acre. That’s with an abundant supply of bluegill and other forage species. But, if you were to add high-protein fish food, the same pond can easily double that production.

Arguments arise. Is feeding a commitment? You tell me.

Much of the U.S. has at least 200 days of growing season, slightly less in the Upper Midwest and northern New England, fewer still in Canada. For the sake of creating a model feeding program for a mythical pond, let’s just say you intend to feed only three or four days, maybe five days some weeks.   

Your fish consume all of what you feed, say four pounds a day per surface acre of water. Over the course of 150 days, you feed 600 pounds of feed. Those 600 pounds of feed yield 300 pounds of fish, doubling your ponds natural production capabilities.

Do the math: Six hundred pounds of feed, at 30 cents a pound … $180. Less than $200 to put 300 pounds of weight on your fish. Cheap. I consider that a bargain.

Can you feed more? Sure, but be careful.

Two pounds of feed yields a pound of fish, but there is a balancing act to consider. For every pound you feed to the fish, there’s a pound of nutrients, some converted to energy, some processed by the fish and expelled into the water as waste. When waste dissolves in your pond, the water must process it.

Too much feed can result in too many pounds of fish, too many pounds of waste, and ultimately, problems with your water quality, if your pond water can not work with Mother Nature to clean up the extra mess. In extreme cases, I have seen overfed ponds end up with massive die-offs related to poor water quality and low levels of dissolved oxygen.

Feeding catfish? Grow Mr. Whiskers to two pounds, then catch and eat the little darling. Want bigger catfish? Stock lower numbers in the beginning. Want to name them? Stock fewer yet.

In short, do not overfeed, or plan on removing a few fish as you go along. Otherwise, your fish and your water quality will suffer.

Here’s one of my Rules of (Wet) Thumb: Never feed more than 10-to-20 pounds of floating fish food, per surface acre, per day.

Theory can get a little complicated, since young, fuel-burning fish, converting at a rate of 2-to-1, will eat 3 percent of their body weight per day during the growing season. So, keep your feeding program simple.   

To keep it simple, I recommend that in most sportfishing ponds that you feed no more than twice a day, for brief durations, once in the morning, once in the late afternoon. Feed only what the fish will clean up 10-to20 minutes. Otherwise, you’re wasting your money to watch the wind and waves carry your pellets to the other side of the pond.

Either way, keep your feeding program simple and consistent. Feed from the same place, same time, each day. As your fish grow, you may discover that where you once were feeding for production, now you are feeding to maintain. That’s when you reach decision time.

Do you feed the same amount of feed, to the same number of fish that stay the same size? Or do you reduce numbers to increase individual size?

Some biologists contend that feeding fish is akin to welfare. It creates an artificial environment. Point well taken.

Granted, when you offer pellets to a fish, it tends to leave the real world of fish-eat-fish. But it’s a balancing act. The fish you feed are not necessarily taken out of competition, but they compete less with other fish for natural prey in your pond.

In that regard, feeding pellets makes “more” natural food, to be distributed among all fish, not just a few. This increases a pond’s ability to support fish — the very point of pond management.  

Critics say a feeding station tends to congregate fish, to pull them away from their natural underwater home. Absolutely. When the dinner bell rings, fish come from as far as 100 feet away.

Bluegill and minnows surface to attack the pellets, then disappear just as quickly as they came. Hybrid stripers can put on quite a show of force when they gulp down pellets. Bass take note, too. A big bass will not be attracted to the pellets, but to the creatures partaking of the free offerings.

After all, bass won’t turn down an easy meal either. Bluegill eat fish food; bass eat bluegill eating fish food. In nature, there’s always a payback.

Too many fish can jeopardize water quality, so feed less or reduce the number (or size) of the fish. One option is adding an aerator. The tiny air bubbles bursting at the surface help Mother Nature to combine oxygen and sunlight in helping to flush or “burn” the waste products.

Rule of (Wet) Thumb: Buy good fish food. Read the bag tag, make sure the feed contains at least 28-to-32 percent digestable protein. Read the ingredients, looking for the words “fish meal.” If you don’t see those words, don’t buy the food.

For best results, use only feed intended for fish. Feed dog food to dogs, monkey food to monkeys. Your fish deserve the real meal deal.

When it comes to feeding, pond owner Shane Howell has it figured out.

“Since our goal is to grow trophy bass, and this is the first year our lake has been stocked,” he said, “we decided to grow as much baitfish as possible, to grow the biggest bass possible.”

Howell knows that it takes at least 10 pounds of baitfish for his bass to gain a pound. In his fishing hole in south-central Oklahoma, five feeders pitching out 10 pounds of feed each day will set the buffet table for his bass to grow as fast, and as large, as they can.

Howell has done the math … 10,000 pounds of feed over 200 days will produce an extra 5,000 pounds of baitfish for the 1,500 Florida bass fingerlings he recently stocked. That’s an extra 170 pounds of baitfish per acre, (above what the lake produces without feeding) that will make his bass grow to large sizes much more quickly than a “normal” lake of similar size.

The irony of Shane’s program is that when he buys $3,000 worth of feed, the largemouth will be growing rapidly, without eating so much as one pellet.

POND BOSS Magazine is the world’s leading resource for fish, pond and fisheries management information including discussions on muddy water, raising trophy fish, fish feeding, building a pond, algae control and more. Check us out at www.pondboss.com or contact Bob Lusk, the Pond Boss himself, at 903-564-5372. His books, Basic Pond Management, Raising Trophy Bass and Perfect Pond, Want One, may be purchased by calling 800-687-6075 or ordering online at www.pondboss.com

Ralph Manns is a trained fisheries biologist and contributing writer for several fishing magazines. He resides in Rockwall, Texas.

When largemouth bass feed actively, they move. Underwater observers, scientific experimenters, and electronic trackers all report the same things: black bass hold inside or near to cover when they are inactive and resting. When they are actively feeding, they move outside thick cover and usually travel along edges.

The slim, muscular, and streamlined shape of bass is best suited to make short dashes after forage fish. It is less well designed to ambush forage fish by lying hidden and camouflaged inside cover. Predator fish that routinely feed by ambush usually have several characteristics in common. They are bulky, camouflaged, sit on the bottom, and move only inches when they strike. Moreover, ambush feeders normally have big mouths and heads and relatively small bodies and few muscles because they move little and often must wait many days between feedings. Sculpin, rockfish, halibut, and sole are typical ambush predators.

Experiments in which bass were given chances to feed inside and outside cover show bass forced to live inside thick cover are unable to chase forage fish and are forced to use ambush tactics. These bass catch few forage fish, grow slowly, and may even starve if forage fish aren’t abundant. Although they sometimes ambush forage fish, ambush is an inefficient tactic for bass.

Bass that can leave cover to cruise individually or in small schools along edges of thick cover do so. They startle individual forage fish and scatter forage fish schools. Forage fish that dart the wrong way or dash too near another bass were eaten. Big bass expert Doug Hannon calls this tactic “flushing.” The tactic is suited to bass’ ability to cruise at slow speed and then to accelerate rapidly to strike vulnerable forage fish a few feet away.

When forage fish aren’t overabundant, cruising bass encounter and have chances to catch many more forage fish than ambushing bass. Studies show bass feeding along the edges of thick cover catch enough food to grow and remain healthy.

Scuba divers, me included, have watched bass that were immobile inside cover and apparently asleep. These fish didn’t feed, even though edible-size forage fish were within inches of their mouths. These inactive bass also refused fishing lures presented within inches of their noses and were almost impossible to catch-unless something aroused them from their torpor before the lure passed by. Electronic trackers frequently report that bass that hold for long periods in the same place aren’t usually catchable.

In contrast, bass that held near the edges of cover and moved back and forth were occasionally tempted by fishing lures that were placed nearby. They were also more easily aroused to active status by repeated casting. These bass are usually neutral or semi-active. Neutral bass tended to hold near other bass, but don’t synchronize their movements or hold close together. Scientists call such groups “aggregations” rather than schools. Forage fish often hover nearby, but stay at least 3 feet away and remain constantly wary. Neutral bass will strike forage fish that blunder too close and often drift around rather than holding in one place only. Electronic trackers often report these local wanderings, but anglers find only precisely placed casts interest such fish.

When bass want to feed actively they form schools with bass of similar sizes and swim off together. They cruise fairly steadily along edges of cover (into open water if there are many bass and shad are abundant) to flush forage fish. These are active, catchable fish if anglers can locate them, predict their direction of movement, and put a lure in front of them. Nearby forage fishfish know when bass were preparing to feed and immediately move well out of range. The bass move away looking for forage fish that haven’t seen them coming.

The idea that bass feed by ambushing forage fish apparently resulted from some 0 observations and assumptions. Bass are inactive or neutral most of the time. While inactive, they frequently rest inside thick cover. It they aren’t digesting food, too sleepy, and totally immobile, lures flipped right on their noses may be taken. They also may wake up it aroused by repeated casts. Thus many bass are caught in cover where ambush is the most likely tactic. Moreover, moving bass still may stop periodically at places where cover or structure stops, starts, bends, or changes. Bass taken at these locations may seem to ambush lures or forage fish, even though the bass aren’t actually hiding there.

Bass usually don’t move only one way. Lunker bass monitored by Texas bass-tracker, John Hope, moved almost constantly when active, but they patrolled to-and-fro along the edges of cover or break-lines. Anglers who “hole-sit” on edges, bends, and points of weed beds or other cover during feeding periods may encounter several schools of passing bass or contact the same school several times as it passes back and forth. This can create an illusion that the feeding bass aren’t moving. Active bass also move along cover edges anglers can’t see. Fairly open pathways often exist under thick weeds and seemingly impenetrable brush. Fish that are apparently caught “inside” such cover may be moving along relatively open edges. It’s hard for anglers to tell the difference between a bass that was caught while holding inside or under a bush to “ambush” forage fish and another that was moving back and forth at the same depth under a cluster of bushes.

Truly inactive bass tend to sleep alone. When bass anglers take several fish during consecutive passes by the same bush, they likely have found a spot that fish are moving through rather than resting fish. Inactive bass seldom school, don’t strike readily, and don’t move about rapidly enough to quickly replace bass that were caught moments before.

The belief that bass “ambush” their prey apparently worked its way into bass fishing lore because many outdoor writers prefer to use aggressive, action-packed words. The image of a bass hiding behind a rock to “ambush” unsuspecting prey makes bass seem vicious, like a western movie “back-shooter.” and therefore a more worthy opponent. “Chasing” or “flushing” tactics just don’t make bass seem as tough and exciting. But “ambush” is the wrong word to describe how bass usually feed. Bass ambush if opportunity presents itself, but this is not their preferred feeding tactic.

To catch more bass, anglers must know how bass really behave. Actively feeding bass usually move in small groups. They usually don’t hide inside cover thick enough to block their vision and/or hinder attacks. Cover is cover for forage fish. Forage fish hide in it to escape bass. Bass use cover for the same reason. They move into it to rest undisturbed by larger threats like yellow catfish and anglers, rather than to feed. Bass are most often caught along the edges of cover because forage fish gather there and are more easily flushed there.

To feed effectively and often, bass move out of thick cover to seek, startle, or flush forage fish along the cover edges in ponds and reservoirs. Most pond owners will see and confirm this fact for themselves if they sit at pondside, as I do almost every day, and watch bass using Polaroid glasses.

POND BOSS Magazine is the world’s leading resource for fish, pond and fisheries management information including discussions on muddy water, raising trophy fish, fish feeding, building a pond, algae control and more. Check us out at www.pondboss.com or contact Bob Lusk, the Pond Boss himself, at 903-564-5372. His books, Basic Pond Management, Raising Trophy Bass and Perfect Pond, Want One, may be purchased by calling 800-687-6075 or ordering online at www.pondboss.com

Welcome to Pond Boss!
“We have a common bond – water!  Here, you’ll gain cutting-edge knowledge and practices to be a better steward of your private land and waters.  So climb in and click on!  We’re loaded to the gills with information… I promise, you’ll get the answers you seek.”

– Bob Lusk, Editor and
Fisheries Biologist

Actor and activist says oceans can recover from overfishing and acidification, but only with our help.