Pool 9 project will benefit fish and wildlife

Q&A with Ted Danson, author of ‘Oceana’

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

Tue, May 03 2011 at 7:38 AM EST

Comments

Photo: Kate Danson

MNN: What is this book about and why did you decide to write it?

Ted Danson: This book is about the crisis in ouroceans: How did we get here and how do we bring it back to abundance and health. I decided to finally sit down and write it because science is saying we are coming to a tipping point. And science also shows that our oceans can bounce back if we make some necessary changes. People should read this book and be worried about the state of the oceans but they should also walk away feeling hopeful and empowered, knowing that we still have time to solve this problem.

What influenced your dedication to the oceans growing up?

My father was an anthropologist and my mother was a very spiritual person. They taught me that we are part of the world we live in and that we have to understand it and be good stewards. I also had the benefit of having Hopi friends as a kid in Arizona and their appreciation for the natural world had a great influence on me. And while I grew up in Arizona, I always enjoyed the ocean on visits to see family in California. I had a very vivid dream when I was 7 years old. I had a high fever and I woke up screaming and I ran into my parents’ room. They asked me what was wrong and I described my nightmare. I was sitting on the beach and God’s voice said, “Ted, you have one hour to enter the oceans into this bucket,” and then he gave me a spoon with holes in it. Typical young actor’s megalomania in development, maybe, but you’d have to say I’ve been thinking about the oceans for many years!

Earn Points What’s this?

• Comments
• Email
• Twitter
• Stumble
• Digg
• Share

Why did you feel the need to become an ocean activist?

During my fifth season doing “Cheers” I was living in Santa Monica. I was taking a walk with my daughters on the beach and we came to a sign that read: “Water polluted, no swimming.” I didn’t know how to explain to them why the beach was closed. That was my call to action.

What was the first issue you took on as an ocean activist and what are some of the lessons you learned during those early years of activism?

In the 1980s, the debate on offshore drilling was starting up again. Occidental Petroleum was attempting to start slant drilling off the coast of Malibu. With the help of my friend Robert Sulnick, we set out to protect our coast from offshore drilling — and won. And, then we realized we could do a lot more and started our own oceans organization, American Oceans Campaign. During those early years I learned how much hard work it takes to be successful. I also learned that in order to be effective in conservation you need to rely on science. I have been so lucky to have been able to work with some of the finest ocean scientists and experts in the world.

What is the state of fisheries around the world today?

Eighty percent of seafood fisheries are at their limit of exploitation or already in collapse. We are destroying the oceans from the top down and from the bottom up, and not giving them a chance to recover. We overfish using illegal and destructive methods to take out too many fish. Ninety percent of the large predator fish — sharks, tuna, marlin — in the oceans have disappeared. Carbon emissions cause climate change and ocean acidification, which attacks the lowest level of the food chain, harming coral reefs and killing off food that’s critical for the ocean ecosystem.

How is industrial fishing destroying our oceans and hurting the livelihood of people that depend on the ocean?

The global fishing fleet is estimated to be 2.5 times larger than what the oceans can sustain. Too often, destructive gear is used that kills everything its path. Industrial fishing ships with huge nets catch and kill marine life — dolphins, sea turtles, birds. Bottom trawlers destroy deep sea coral and other seafloor habitats, which provide critical nurseries and feeding grounds for innumerable fish and shellfish species. Destructive fishing also jeopardizes the millions of small-scale fishermen and others who have depended on the oceans for their livelihood for generations. It also threatens the nearly 3 billion people in the world who rely on animal protein that comes from the sea.

Despite all of this, you see this as a pro-fishing book. Can you explain?

I want fishermen to be able to make a living for years to come. And, I want my grandchildren to enjoy fresh, healthy seafood that comes from an abundant ocean. I also want the more than three billion people who depend on fish as a major source of animal protein to be able to continue to do so. Many fishermen know their catch is shrinking. I have spoken with fishermen over the years — some are featured in the book — and they understand, and many support, that changes need to be made in the industry to let the fish populations recover.

Can you still eat seafood while being an advocate for the ocean? Do you still eat seafood?

I love to eat seafood. We should all be able to eat seafood if we choose, and for many people it is a major source of protein. I want people to continue to be able to rely on eating seafood. But we need to start fishing smart and also eating smart. The easiest way to do this is to ask questions. What kind of fish is it? Where was it caught? How was it caught? Was it farmed? Where was it farmed? One good rule of thumb is to try and eat locally caught seafood if you don’t have any more information. And, get a seafood guide. You can find them at Oceana.org and other organizations.

What is seafood fraud and how does it affect consumers?

Seafood fraud has been discovered across the United States — less expensive fish like tilapia have been passed off as grouper and red snapper, for example. It is a disturbing trend and most people don’t know they have been lied to and ripped off, and it disguises the fact that overfishing is taking place. This creates an illusion that we have an endless supply of fish when in actuality, many of these species are on the brink of collapse. The fraud undermines efforts to convince the restaurant-going/supermarket-shopping public that overfishing is a real concern. How can you believe that grouper is at risk when you can have a so-called grouper sandwich every day?

What are fishing subsidies and how do they affect the taxpaying public?

Subsidies are payments governments make to fishing companies to keep fishing. They pay for fuel, nets, trawls and even the vessels themselves. They are paying fishing boats to overfish.  Subsidies pay to maintain a global fishing fleet two-and-a-half times the capacity the oceans can sustain. This is less an issue in the U.S. Tax money pays to catch the fish, then we pay to eat the fish and we are destroying the oceans in the process, which makes the prices for fish higher.

What are flags of convenience and why are they dangerous?

Fishing ship owners flag vessels in places like Panama, the Marshall Islands or Bolivia. The ships then don’t have to adhere to stricter maritime laws from other nations. These boats can catch as many fish as they want in any manner they want. This practice leads to a more startling problem as well. These vessels skirt human rights laws and end up forcing their crew to work long hours in inhumane conditions while making pennies in comparison to the value of their catch.

How does fish farming affect the oceans and our own health?

Fish farming creates more pollution and overfishing pressure around the world. Irresponsible fish farms pollute with fish waste and introduce dangerous chemicals into the food chain (that we then can ingest). It takes up to 5 pounds of smaller fish — all of which are important species to the marine environment and many of which are edible for humans — to create 1 pound of farmed salmon, resulting in a net loss of protein.

How are offshore drilling and climate change related to the failing health of the oceans?

Offshore drilling can pollute the ocean even when there are no accidents because of how it takes place and the many opportunities for oil to end up in the sea. Drilling in the oceans continues to enable our dependence on oil and puts more carbon dioxide into our atmosphere, which leads to rising ocean temperatures and acidification.

What is ocean acidification?

We have filled our atmosphere, and our oceans, with carbon dioxide. As a result, the oceans’ pH balance is out of whack, and the water is becoming more acidic. Acidification prevents animals that build shells and skeletons out of calcium from doing so. Those animals, such as krill and coral reefs for example, are the heart of the ocean food web. Corals provide a home for 25 percent of marine life.

Considering your start in conservation, what were some of your thoughts as you learned about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill?

I was upset for the people in the Gulf. It didn’t need to happen again. This is the same cycle we have seen since the Santa Barbara spill in 1969. We have an oil spill. We react and stop offshore drilling. We are then lulled into a false sense of security because there has not been an accident in years. We loosen regulations. There is another disaster. I am hopeful that we can fix this, though.

What has happened since the BP spill and what still needs to happen?

The Obama administration has removed most of the U.S. coastline from drilling plans, except where drilling is already taking place and part of the Arctic. It’s a step forward, but it’s not enough. Offshore drilling will never be 100-percent accident-free, and we need better monitoring of the oil rigs that are still out on the water. We also need to have a strong commitment to invest in and implement clean energy technology — offshore wind has the potential to generate 30 percent more electricity than offshore oil and gas resources combined.

What can be done to bring the oceans back to health? What can individuals do in their everyday lives to help the oceans?

We need active enforcement of laws already on the books, and governments must stop distributing fishing subsidies that allow overfishing. We need a reduction in the size of the fishing fleet and the most harmful fishing gear should be eliminated. Nations around the world also need to protect habitat and allow fish populations to bounce back. Groups that manage fisheries internationally need to start protecting some of the species that are at risk like bluefin tuna, sharks, swordfish and forage species like krill. As for individuals, my first piece of advice would be to go and enjoy the oceans. Go for a walk on the beach, surf, fish, swim, boat, whatever you like. The more of us that are connected to the oceans the better. And, getting involved is fun and you can make a difference. You can join a group that works on ocean issues, like Oceana. Vote for representatives that want to improve the ocean’s health. And you can eat sustainable seafood and avoid products that are harmful to the oceans. We also need to manage what we put in the environment by reducing our plastic use and conserving our energy use.

Are you optimistic about the future of our oceans?

Yes, I am optimistic, and here’s why: The oceans are resilient. Fish populations can bounce back if given a breather from intense fishing pressure. And, I’ve been doing this for years and I am so impressed by how many more people are becoming aware of the importance of conservation all the time. Most of the oceans’ most vibrant ecosystems — coral reefs, for example — are near coastlines, and people are motivated to save them. We are getting the will, and now we just have to find the way.

This Q&A was provided by Rodale Books, publisher of “Oceana.”

National Weather Service publishes updated precipitation-frequency atlas for California

The Times-Standard
Posted: 05/03/2011 02:00:13 AM PDT

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced the release of a new precipitation-frequency atlas for the state on Monday.
The data is used by hydrologists, engineers and others when designing infrastructure, such as storm drainage systems, flood control structures, and water quality devices. The estimates are also needed for managing flood plains and flood-prone areas, fish habitat, stream erosion control and soil conservation and pollution control systems.
To find out more, visit www.noaa.gov.

Fish Habitat Award Winners Honored at Jim Range National Casting Call
THURSDAY, 21 APRIL 2011 15:08
(Washington, DC) – The winners of the National Fish Habitat Action Plan (NFHAP) Awards were honored for their extraordinary achievements at the Jim Range National Casting Call on Friday, April 15th on the grounds of the C&O Canal National Historic Park, along the banks of the Potomac River in Washington, DC.

Maureen Gallagher (Midwest National Fish Habitat Partnership Coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Mark Johnson (District Manager, Coos Bay District Office, BLM), Andy DuPont (Glen Lake Association), Dr. Stephen Brown (NOAA) were all recipients National Fish Habitat Awards for 2011.
This was the fourth year the NFHAP Awards have been handed out, recognizing outstanding achievements in Fish Habitat Conservation.
The NFHAP Award winners for 2011:

Maureen Gallagher, Midwest National Fish Habitat Partnership Coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service received the Jim Range Conservation Vision Award in support of Fish Habitat.

Award Presented by: Rowan Gould, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Background:
Maureen Gallagher was instrumental in the recognition of five new Fish Habitat Partnerships. Maureen worked across Fish Habitat Partnership and US Fish and Wildlife Service regional boundaries, and developed a committee of Midwest state Fish Chiefs to weigh in on large scale National Fish Habitat Action Plan issues.

Through her vision and leadership, a Science Advisory Network was established including science expertise at all NFHAP levels. She worked with this group to fund and conduct basinwide assessments to help FHPs prioritize habitat efforts. This assessment effort was expanded to the Great Plains Fish Habitat Partnership.

On a national scale Maureen helped develop the National Fish Habitat Action Plan through participation on several committees to develop guidance and provide recommendations to the National Fish Habitat Board. She provides technical expertise in partnership building, fundraising and strategic planning to Fish Habitat Partnerships nationwide. Maureen is well known as an advocate and spokesperson for the Fish Habitat Partners and the National Fish Habitat Action Plan. Her thoughts and actions that relate to the Action Plan are always on target and in the long term interest of the success of this program to all involved.

Mark Johnson, District Manager for the Coos Bay District office for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), accepted the award for Extraordinary Action in support of Fish Habitat Conservation Award.

Award Presented by: Tom Mendenhall, Senior National Fisheries Program Manager, Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

Background:
The Bureau of Land Management’s Coos Bay District Office (CBDO) has been in the forefront of efforts to restore habitat for native fish species on the southern Oregon coast over the past two decades. Numerous stream and riparian restoration projects at varying scales have been implemented by the CBDO over that time, but the scope and extent of the restoration work has increased substantially over the past 5 years as an outcome of developing partnerships with private landowners, watershed councils, and other state and federal agencies.

Dr. Dana Infante – Assistant Professor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University and Dr. Stephen Brown- Chief, Assessment and Monitoring Division (NOAA/NMFS), each accepted the award for Scientific Achievement in support of Fish Habitat Conservation on behalf of the National Assessment team for Michigan State University and NOAA, for their work on the National Status of fish habitats 2010 Report.

Award Presented by: Stan Moberly, past President, American Fisheries Society, National Fish Habitat Board

Background:
The NFHAP 2010 Assessment Team conducted an assessment of fish habitats in all 50 states at a scale and level of detail never before attempted. Their efforts included numerous steps, including: amending existing geospatial reference systems to their needs; searching out, collecting, and evaluating data sources; in some cases converting the data for their use: developing statistical methodologies; and seeking review of the assessment results.

Almost two dozen scientists from five academic and federal government institutions participated in the work, sharing ideas and solving problems in a true spirit of intellectual cooperation. The results of this team’s efforts have been used to publish the first comprehensive report, titled: Through A Fish’s Eye: The Status of Fish Habitats in the United States 2010 Report, on the status of fish habitat in the US, which will be used by aquatic habitat conservation policy-makers and practitioners to support and prioritize fish habitat conservation efforts.

The team has also laid the groundwork for recurring assessments to ascertain trends in fish habitat over time, which will help the National Fish Habitat Board determine where fish habitat conservation efforts are making a difference.

Andy DuPont, President, Glen Lake Association, accepted the Outreach and Educational Achievement Award in support of Fish Habitat Conservation.

Award Presented by: Kelly Hepler, National Fish Habitat Board Chairman

Background:
The Glen Lake Association is a grassroots organization of over 800 individual and business members. They work to protect and improve the Glen Lake watershed, which is recognized as an “interim priority watershed” in Midwest Glacial Lakes Partnership’s Strategic Plan. Through numerous outreach and education campaigns, the Glen Lake Association protects the Glen Lake watershed from aquatic invasive species, physical habitat degradation, and water quality impairment, while promoting aesthetic and recreational enjoyment by riparian owners and the public. The many programs that the Association implements serve many purposes including, providing high-quality status and trend data on the health of the aquatic ecosystem, and to engage and educate the community on the importance of long-term monitoring and the health of their local resources.
________________________________________

Award Winner Quotes:
Maureen Gallagher: “I am truly honored to accept such a prestigious award. Working with the National Fish Habitat Action Plan has been a rewarding experience for me both professionally and personally. Truly I accept this award on behalf of all of the partners involved in the Action Plan. Success stories through the Action Plan truly take a team effort.”

Mark Johnson: “The conservation work that has been done in the Coos Bay region of Oregon is nothing short of amazing. The Coos Bay staff of the BLM in all aspects is responsible for making a difference, by working in partnership with businesses and landowners to make a significant impact in Aquatic Conservation in Oregon.”

From Dr. Dana Infante: “The work that went into the assessment for the status report, took a great deal of effort to organize and compile. This would not have been possible if it weren’t for the great team that I have to work with at Michigan State University. We look forward to the challenge of completing the next assessment of our national waters.”

From Dr. Stephen Brown: “The NOAA assessment team really pulled a lot of critical information about our estuaries and coasts in a short amount of time for this report. Working in coordination with the Michigan State team took a lot of teamwork which resulted in a quality assessment of our national waters.”

The National Fish Habitat Awards presentation was just a portion of the program for the Jim Range National Casting Call. Other agencies represented for the Monday event included The American Fly Fishing Trade Association (AFFTA) and the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation (RBFF) and numerous other partners that help make the Jim Range National Casting Call a success every year.

Price: $350.00
SKU: oas-6
Weight: 142.00 LBS
Rating: ( 1 product review )
Shipping: Free Shipping
Quantity:                                             

Product Description
Here is what you have been asking for! A substanial addition to any habitat plans, this deeper water structure group, has room for all ages and sizes of fish.

With three each of the Keeper and Safehouse, this resting area provides a total of 318 square feet of surface area.

The right amount of cover to create room for fish to rest and feed in the same location.

These six units will cover an area between 20×10 feet, or a line over 30 feet long.

Experiment with different layouts with each additional refuge you install.

Keeper

Maximum shade and protection is abundant throughout this eco. friendly product made with reclaimed pvc material. With limbs all standing a full 48″, these 2-1/2″-3-1/2″ wide surfaces grow algae and aquatic life quickly.

Each keeper weighs approx. 32 pounds, and is recommended for depths over 10 feet. This large and somewhat coarse cover, provides habitat for all sizes of fish.

Bass,crappie,panfish alike utilize the shading effects of this new type of artificial fish attractor. Go-green and promote fish habitat restoration! Made in the USA with all American made materials.

Reclaimed pvc limbs provide an eco.-friendly solution to fish habitat loss and degradation.

Safehouse

These safehouse fish habitat units stand 46″ tall and weigh 16 pounds each. This fish attractor has all the needed shade and coverage to hold all sizes of fish.

Consisting of limbs ranging in width from 2.5″-3.5″ wide and 18″-46″ tall, they open to a full 72″ wide. With a minimum of 44 square feet of surface area, it provides plenty of room for algae and shade to attract fish.

Recommended for depths of 6′-12′. Reclaimed pvc limbs provide an eco.-friendly solution to fish habitat loss and degradation.

Bend to shape by hand to any desired shape and toss in water. Sinks itself. Made in the USA with all American made materials.

Over 44 square feet surface area each.

Find Similar Products by Category
Artificial Fish Structures

Product Reviews
perfect price and size
Posted by Unknown on 27th Apr 2011

thanks for adding this group of structure. i alraedy bought two keepers and they work good.Will be ordering more of these groups sonn.

Customers Who Viewed This Product Also Viewed

“Cradle” Artificial Fish Habitat
$60.00

Add To Cart

“Safehouse” Artificial Fish Habitat
$55.00

Add To Cart

Artificial fish habitat “Starter Pack”
$675.00

Add To Cart

“Keeper Four Pack” Artificial Fish Habitat
$260.00

Add To Cart
Our Newsletter
Your First Name:Your Email Address:

Add to Wish List
Click the button below to add the “The Refuge” 6-pack artificial fish habitat structures and attractors to your wish list.

Related Products
“Bassinet” Artificial Fish Habitat
$30.00

“Keeper” Artificial Fish Habitat
$70.00

“Nursery” Artificial Fish Habitat
$30.00

“Playground”Artificial Fish Habitat
$30.00

“Safehouse” Artificial Fish Habitat
$55.00

You Recently Viewed…
“Keeper” Artificial Fish Habitat
$70.00

Add To Cart
“New 8″ Cradle” Four Pack fry fish habitat
$210.00

Add To Cart
“The Refuge” 6-pack artificial fish habitat structures and attractors
$350.00

Add To Cart
“Keeper Four Pack” Artificial Fish Habitat
$260.00

Add To Cart
“Triplet” Artificial Fish Habitat-3 pack
$75.00

Add To Cart

Warmwater Lake and Pond Habitat Initiative

The Department’s fisheries biologists recently discussed the feasibility of installing fish habitat structures to mitigate for the absence or loss of physical fish habitat in some New Hampshire water bodies. This discussion was initiated because of the potential opportunity that exists to enhance warmwater fisheries through fish habitat improvement projects.

The overall goal of these habitat projects is to improve warmwater fish populations and the opportunities to fish for these species. An additional objective of installing shoreline habitat structures would be to increase youth fishing opportunities.

Improving fish habitat by installing structures has been a successful management strategy in use for many years in states across the U.S., as these structures can benefit both forage and sport fish populations in a number of ways. Habitat structures have been shown to provide important nursery areas for many fish species and can act to increase fish growth and survival. The abundance of forage fish species is often enhanced in areas with habitat structures, which in turn can increase the abundance and growth of sportsfish (this is especially relevant in some NH lakes and ponds where a decline or lack of forage fish and/or crayfish may be the result of the absence or loss of appropriate habitat). Additionally, studies have shown that habitat structures can increase nest density, spawning success and juvenile survival of both largemouth and smallmouth bass.

Using fish habitat structures in New Hampshire waters is currently in a conceptual phase and there is no firm timeline for when, where, and what types of structures will be used. Before formulating a specific plan, the Department’s fisheries biologist will first thoroughly review the existing scientific literature, inventory current habitat quality and quantity on various lakes and ponds, and communicate with anglers in an effort to better understand their interest in this type of initiative.

The Department is also actively pursuing a feasibility analysis of using fish habitat structures. The feasibility analysis will answer the following questions: Will fish habitat structures provide habitat for the fish species of interest? What types of structures have been used elsewhere and for what purpose? What types of structures (artificial or natural) are allowed under current regulations? What are the potential problems (maintenance, ability to obtain permits from NH DES, potential navigation issues, potential effect on other fish species such as invasive species) in using fish habitat structures? What are the costs of building, deploying and maintaining such structures? How will anglers use the fish habitat structures (i.e., how will they access them)? What monitoring efforts would be best suited for evaluation purposes?

Warmwater fish habitat projects offer an exciting opportunity to improve fish habitat and warmwater fisheries in New Hampshire lakes and ponds. Additionally, involving anglers in this process presents an excellent opportunity for the Department and anglers to work together towards the common goal of improving and sustaining our state’s fisheries resources for current and future generations.

CONTACT:
John Magee, Fish Habitat Biologist
Gabe Gries, Region 4 Fisheries Biologist and Warmwater Project Leader

Ohio Pond Management
Increasing Fish Production
Methods of Increasing Fish Production
Fertilization
Artificial Feeding
Adding Fish Habitat Structures

Pond owners should view their ponds as selfsustaining bodies of water that are capable of providing all of the ingredients necessary for good fish production. The amount of fishes that can be harvested depends upon a pond’s ability to produce them, and this amount varies from pond to pond. Ohio ponds can often support up to 250 pounds of fish per acre, although this amount is generally less for ponds that are smaller than one acre. If a pond’s normal fish production is less than what the pond owner deems acceptable, it may be possible to enhance production.

The most effective methods to artificially increase fish production are pond fertilization and fish feeding (pellet feeding pictured). However, each of these methods can also cause pond problems, so pond owners should consider them only after carefully weighing the trade offs associated with trying to increase fish production.

Fertilization
Fertilization can improve fish production by increasing the production of tiny plants and animals at the bottom of the food chain, the phytoplankton and zooplankton. This increase in production at the bottom of the food web may ultimately translate into improved growth and production of sport fish. However, negative impacts from fertilization can also result if the added nutrients stimulate growth of undesirable types of aquatic vegetation and algae. Whereas excess vegetation can be a problem to anglers and swimmers during warm weather months, it can also make the pond more susceptible to fish kills due to a build-up of dead and decaying plant material. The pond owner may find that the cost of fertilizer, effort to maintain a fertilization program, and risk of fish kills outweigh the benefits of the increase in fish harvested.

Most ponds in Ohio are adequately supplied with nutrients from the surrounding watershed and should not require artificial fertilization. In fact, many ponds receive so many nutrients from the watershed alone that problems develop with growth of excess vegetation and reductions in water quality. The following criteria should be met if a pond is to be considered for fertilization: 1) the watershed to pond ratio is less than 20 acres of watershed per surface acre of pond, 2) the watershed consists primarily of woodland acreage with soils that are low in fertility, and 3) the pond has a minimal amount of shallow water and most of the shoreline has the recommended 3:1 slope to discourage the growth of aquatic vegetation. Ponds without these characteristics should not be fertilized.

If fertilization is appropriate, then the pond owner needs to proceed with the proper treatment applied on a careful schedule. The recommended procedure is monthly applications of liquid fertilizers 10-34-0 (N-P-K) applied at the rate of two gallons per surface acre. Treatments should begin when water temperatures reach 60°F in the spring, and stop when water temperatures drop below 60°F in the fall. Fertilization should be temporarily halted when water temperatures exceed 80°F during the summer. Dilute each gallon of fertilizer with 10 gallons of water and spray the mixture evenly over the pond surface. Water clarity is a simple and convenient way to measure the progress of a fertilization program. The water clarity should be monitored twice each month throughout the fertilization season. This is easily accomplished by simply lowering a white object into the pond, such as a coffee mug on the end of a string. The white object should be visible to at least 18 inches below the water’s surface. If the object is not visible down to 18 inches, overfertilization may be a problem. In this case, postpone the next fertilizer treatment until the water has cleared somewhat and remeasure water clarity.

Artificial Feeding
Feeding is the most direct and reliable method to increase production of bluegills and channel catfish in ponds that are less than five acres. Proper artificial feeding will increase fish growth and provide larger fish for anglers. Unlike fertilization, with artificial feeding all of the nutrients go directly into fish production rather than the complex food chain. For ponds less than five acres, feeding is a feasible way to increase fish production. Bluegills and channel catfish will readily eat pelleted feeds that are available at agricultural feed stores. Pellet feed containing at least 25 to 32 percent protein will produce the best growth. Largemouth bass prefer live natural foods and will seldom eat pelleted feed.

Training fishes to accept artificial pellets may take a few days. When bluegills are feeding on the surface in the evening, tossing a few floating pellets into the areas where they are feeding will teach them to eat pelleted food. Begin an artificial feeding program by feeding fish about two pounds of pellets per acre per day. This amount may be increased to 15 pounds per acre per day after they have become accustomed to being fed. The feeding rate should be adjusted in the summer according to how much the fish are eating. Feeding may slow or even cease during the summer if water temperatures get above 85°F.

The best guide to feeding fishes is to give them no more than they can eat in 15 to 20 minutes. Using floating pellets in a feeding ring is a good way to monitor how much food they are eating. A feeding station approximately three feet in diameter can be constructed by sealing the ends of a piece of corrugated field tile. Connect the ends after sealing to form a three-foot circle and place the tile in an area of the pond that can easily be reached to fill with food (pictured right).

A pond owner should be willing to make a long-term commitment to continue feeding before a feeding program starts. Feeding should begin in the spring when water temperatures reach 60°F and should stop in the fall when water temperatures drop to 60°F. Fish should be fed daily at approximately the same time and in the same place. Missing a few days of feeding while on vacation will not cause problems if feeding is consistent during the remainder of the summer. Overfeeding fish can cause many of the same problems as overfertilization. Food that is not eaten by fish will decompose and use up the pond’s dissolved oxygen (see fish kills). Decomposing food can also release nutrients into the water that may promote the growth of aquatic vegetation and algae.

Adding Fish Habitat Structures to the Pond
Habitat structures –“fish shelters,” or “fish attractors”– are primarily designed to concentrate fish and increase an angler’s chances of success. Depending upon the size and type of materials used, structures can provide cover, resting areas, and feeding areas. Habitat structures can act as substitutes for natural cover in ponds where these types of areas are lacking.

Habitat structures can be constructed from many different natural and man-made materials. Easily obtained materials such as discarded Christmas trees can be banded together, weighted and sunk, although trees such as oak, hickory, and cedar work best due to their resistance to decay (brush pile picture right) . Man-made materials such as PVC pipe, field tile, concrete block, and wooden pallets can also be fashioned into fish attracting devices. Habitat structures can be placed into the pond from the bank if the structures are not too large and there is relatively deep water near the shore. Larger structures can be placed from a boat to allow access to deeper water.

Winter ice cover provides an excellent opportunity to build and place structures too large to install from the shore or by boat. These structures can be built on the ice, or built on shore and dragged out onto the ice. In either case, the structure is placed on the ice and allowed to fall into the desired location when the ice melts (see brush piles on ice to the right).

Fishes & anglers alike will make the best use of habitat structures that are distributed carefully in the best locations. These structures are best placed in water that is within reasonable casting distance from shore & two to eight feet deep to allow consistent fish use. Habitat structures should not be placed in the deepest part of the pond where low dissolved oxygen levels (common during summer) make them inaccessible to fish.