Managing Bass Populations In My Lake

[NEBasser101]

 (I know I posted about this before over 6 months ago) I live on a private lake in NH called Cobbetts Pond. The lake has great fishing but over the past few years I've seen the bass start to overpopulate and the average size is starting to shrink. I want to get the average bass size back to about 2.5 lbs over the next few years and possibly grow a trophy  I know I have to start harvesting fish from here but I don't know where to put them. I can't and don't want to kill them if possible. Thanks

[pawpaw]

If you "can't" or won't reduce the population can you increase the food source? Possibly stock shad or something else? You might want to check on the legality of transporting/transplanting  game fish in your state before considering that option. Assuming that IS an option.

[NEBasser101]

13 minutes ago, pawpaw said:

If you "can't" or won't reduce the population can you increase the food source? Possibly stock shad or something else? You might want to check on the legality of transporting/transplanting  game fish in your state before considering that option. Assuming that IS an option.

I think if I increase the food source AND get rid of fish, that would be ideal

[pawpaw]

Yes, but you're still left with the problem of how to get rid of the fish without a fish fry.

It's hard, I know.  But I think we both know what you have to do. For the greater good.

[pawpaw]

Do you have a community lake association that manages the lake? If so is there any chance you could get them to put up a small amount of prize money or anything to hold a tournament. You could limit it to community members if that is how it has to be.You could allow only fish under 12" or what ever length you choose and allow contestants to weigh all the fish they caught that day. Then, have a big fish fry. If you could draw 10 boats and each caught 10 fish under 12" you could get rid of 100 small fish in a single day. Plus, you get everyone else to do what you can't bring yourself to do.  You could unexpectedly come down with the flu that day.

Oh, you may need fried potatoes and hush puppies too.

Just a thought

 

[NEBasser101]

11 minutes ago, pawpaw said:

Do you have a community lake association that manages the lake? If so is there any chance you could get them to put up a small amount of prize money or anything to hold a tournament. You could limit it to community members if that is how it has to be.You could allow only fish under 12" or what ever length you choose and allow contestants to weigh all the fish they caught that day. Then, have a big fish fry. If you could draw 10 boats and each caught 10 fish under 12" you could get rid of 100 small fish in a single day. Plus, you get everyone else to do what you can't bring yourself to do.  You could unexpectedly come down with the flu that day.

Oh, you may need fried potatoes and hush puppies too.

Just a thought

 

My lake does have a community lake association. I think I will mention this the next meeting. I'm also thinking of mentioning that the community should hire somebody to come and electrofish the lake.

[pawpaw]

That's great. I can't kill a bass either. Even when I know it would benefit the lake and remaining fish. Good luck.

[NEBasser101]

Its hard to kill something that you sport fish for

3 minutes ago, pawpaw said:

That's great. I can't kill a bass either. Even when I know it would benefit the lake and remaining fish. Good luck.

 

[MikeOGNR]

1 hour ago, NEBasser101 said:

Its hard to kill something that you sport fish for

 

I work in Derry and have done many camps dewinterizing them around the lake as I am a plumber. Also was wondering not to take away from the original topic, but if I park at the beach on the lake can I bring my canoe over to the beach and launch? 

[Mainebass1984]

Careful stocking ANYTHING into the lake. Although the shoreline is privatized it still is public water in the state of NH. If you want to do anything involving harvest outside of fishing regulations that are already imposed speak with your regional biologist and game warden. Do not stock anything until you get approval. Once a species is introduced it is there forever. Extremely hard to remove. Unauthorized stocking and harvesting over your limit is illegal. You could get in a lot of trouble Before you do anything make sure you get approval from the regional biologist and game warden.

 

["hamma"]

Take a limit when you can, and wait a few years. Dont involve the state. So many waters are so screwed up when the state gets involved.,...they start with messing with electro shock, and when they only get certain fish from it? thats what they determine are in there and anything else is "foreign",... then weed eradication, and before you know it? your beauty of a small pond is a mess

 So many Mass. waters are still recovering from stuff done by the state back in the 80's

[Mainebass1984]

6 minutes ago, "hamma" said:

Take a limit when you can, and wait a few years. Dont involve the state. So many waters are so screwed up when the state gets involved.,...they start with messing with electro shock, and when they only get certain fish from it? thats what they determine are in there and anything else is "foreign",... then weed eradication, and before you know it? your beauty of a small pond is a mess

 So many Mass. waters are still recovering from stuff done by the state back in the 80's

I'm curious. How does the state screw them all up ? How familiar are you with electro shocking ?

 

[patred]

Just keep some bass.  Not everything but impose a personal slot limit, like only keep largemouth between *** inches.

Pat

["hamma"]

Go on the mass f&g site, pick any of the ponds that were electroshocked in the pond/lake topo maps, many will state right on the ponds info page that electroshock produced etc. but other fish are known to be in there, so they are saying that they really didnt capture whats actually there, after spending the funds to find out.. also, weed eradication involving chemical treatment???,...ummm,.. floating bridge pond  on the salem/lynn border is still screwed up from the "chemical" treatment that was done in the 90's. Pillings pond in lynnfield was "treated" but still received a "dredging" a few years later, to remove the weeds. (dredging may have been from lake association) but done just the same,.... These are just 2 of my close to my hometown ponds, that I can name off the top of my head. I used to fish, but it was stopped short after "eradication",... Do I really need to dig for info? One failure,..?  is one too many.

 How many ponds in NH received a ramp funded by "anglers licensing", or wallup beroux funds, or whats the other one, oh yeah,.. Braxton Hicks, I think (outdoorsmen funding)  only to have the ramp taken over by a lake association, that now has a locked gate? Pine river pond, Belleau lake, and however many more,...again,...one failure is too many.

Actually,.. I may be wrong,... but, I think the pond in question "Cobbetts" received a ramp, with "our" funding... thats now not accessable

 You have the right to question my statement, and, I have no gripe with you, or anyone else, for that matter. But I dont think I need to be a electroshock expert, or, even be familiar with it, to see that a state used "our" funding wastefully. Therefore my statement of not getting a state envolved, when you have the right to a daily creel.

[Mainebass1984]

2 hours ago, "hamma" said:

Go on the mass f&g site, pick any of the ponds that were electroshocked in the pond/lake topo maps, many will state right on the ponds info page that electroshock produced etc. but other fish are known to be in there, so they are saying that they really didnt capture whats actually there, after spending the funds to find out.. also, weed eradication involving chemical treatment???,...ummm,.. floating bridge pond  on the salem/lynn border is still screwed up from the "chemical" treatment that was done in the 90's. Pillings pond in lynnfield was "treated" but still received a "dredging" a few years later, to remove the weeds. (dredging may have been from lake association) but done just the same,.... These are just 2 of my close to my hometown ponds, that I can name off the top of my head. I used to fish, but it was stopped short after "eradication",... Do I really need to dig for info? One failure,..?  is one too many.

 How many ponds in NH received a ramp funded by "anglers licensing", or wallup beroux funds, or whats the other one, oh yeah,.. Braxton Hicks, I think (outdoorsmen funding)  only to have the ramp taken over by a lake association, that now has a locked gate? Pine river pond, Belleau lake, and however many more,...again,...one failure is too many.

Actually,.. I may be wrong,... but, I think the pond in question "Cobbetts" received a ramp, with "our" funding... thats now not accessable

 You have the right to question my statement, and, I have no gripe with you, or anyone else, for that matter. But I dont think I need to be a electroshock expert, or, even be familiar with it, to see that a state used "our" funding wastefully. Therefore my statement of not getting a state envolved, when you have the right to a daily creel.

 Your knowledge and understanding of electrofishing and weed eradication is all based on opinion. It seems you have no knowledge on electrofishing or weed eradication. Sadly what I have understood from your post is something that is far to common on this site. Anglers making statements without facts, without knowledge based on personal opinion, thinking that they are more knowledgeable about fisheries management then their fisheries biologist.  In todays world you must possess a masters degree and several years of in the field experience before even being considered for a fisheries biologist position. These individuals should be entrusted to make the decisions about fisheries management, not an angler with a skewed opinion.

How experienced are you with electrofishing ? Have you ever witnessed it ? Been involved first hand in the sampling ?

How expensive do you think electrofishing is ? What exactly do you know about electrofishing ?

I can assure you that the chemical used to eradicate the weeds back in the 90s has been broken down for many years. It is not an easy process to get approval to use chemicals for weed eradication.  It must be a EPA approved chemical. You must apply for a permit through the EPA. It is not an easy process. The chemicals used break down naturally over a short period of time. Why do you think that after 25 years this pond is "screwed up"  ?

 I am not sure exactly what you are referring to as "dredging " Dredging is usually done because overtime an area of a lake or pond has become silted to the point where boat owners want the silt dredged out so they can more easily use there boat in a specific location. It is usually done near a marina or association owned dock to create a channel for boat traffic.  Dredging has nothing to do with weed removal.

For give me If I am a bit hostile. I take offense when individuals make uninformed statements blaming "the state" or biologists. As you said you are not an electrofishing expert, how can you make any statement regarding it ? Or on weed eradication ? From your statements it is obvious you are not educated or experienced with either.

Referring back to the original question. In any state in any situation, you want to stock fish or take more fish then you are legally allowed you should first speak with a fisheries biologist. Stocking of fish is a huge problem. Not only are you stocking the fish you are also adding any foreign or invasive organism from the water you are stocking with.

Unauthorized stocking is highly illegal in most states. If you are caught stocking fish with out a permit, without approval you can face a huge fine, jail time and loss of your privilege to fish in your state for the rest of your life.  For example in Maine you lose your fishing license for life, receive a $25000 fine and up to 3 years in jail. I am sure the angler that began this has only the best intentions but needs to contact his local fisheries biologist. I am also pretty sure he would hate to lose his right to fish for the rest of his life in his home state.

 

 

["hamma"]

I just tell it as I see it, thats all.  How do I know of these ponds?, I use to fish them, until the state did what they did. Now I dont fish them, because of what the state did. Im sorry if you see this as my "skewed opinion"? I see it as hands on,.. end result,... experience.  And Im not alone, alot of bass anglers were upset over these 2 ponds "transition", complaining to tackle shops and others while bankfishing

8 hours ago, Mainebass1984 said:

Sadly what I have understood from your post is something that is far to common on this site. Anglers making statements without facts, without knowledge based on personal opinion, thinking that they are more knowledgeable about fisheries management then their fisheries biologist.  In todays world you must possess a masters degree and several years of in the field experience before even being considered for a fisheries biologist position. These individuals should be entrusted to make the decisions about fisheries management, not an angler with a skewed opinion.

I dont need a college degree to see the end result,.. The fish were there, The state interviened, and after they did? The fish were gone,.. That sir,... is a fact. Floating bridge pond is now mosquito infested pit compared to what it was. And Pillings Pond may be better off than floating bridge,..but nothing like it was. 

I am telling you now, for the record. I "DO NOT" think I know more than a biologist,..But,......

 It doesnt take a fisheries biologist to see that, money was first spent on a survey, then application of chemicals for eradicating weeds in pillings pond,...and within the next few years, the weeds returned, and again money was spent to "dredge" the silt. And it was no small feat to complete the dredging, they built a coffer dam, diverted water. then they started digging and the methane stench was horrendous, for months the nearby homeowners were stunk out in mid summer, and finally in fall the pond was "done" I can only imagine what the cost was for that endeavor, but im sure it wasnt $20

So now I got a few questions for you,...shouldnt a highly educated fisheries biologist be held accountable?,.. not only accountable for the decision made to chemically treat a water body or not, but also, (since they are to be the authority on said subject), Shouldnt they known that the shallow silty bottom only needs the smallest amount of an evasive weed, for it to return?,..

Now, as you've stated Im obviously no biologist by any means, but the sticker I pay for to fish in Maine states that I understand the concept of evasive weeds taking over a pond. Why does that simple $25 sticker make me aware of this, but a masters degreed person with several years of experience in the field, isn't aware of it.

 What Im getting at is, The state wasted funding treating a shallow, silt laden pond with chemicals 

And for the record,. again,..It was a states biologist that did the ponds survey, and their decision to chemical treat to begin with. wasnt me.

 Furthermore I said nothing of stocking any ponds with anything.,..I merely suggested that the op takes his daily creel.

 Im sorry if I hit a nerve Mainebass, the posting was not a shot at you personally

 I would much rather that the cash strapped New England fisheries management boards and commissions, use said funds to add access to more waters for all to use, and not just lakefront homeowners. also,.. not spend it on weed eradication, that "may" just come back.

Keep in mind please, at this point in time I am heavily medicated to relieve pain, If I seem like im rambling,... maybe i am, I just wanted to explain myself thoroughly. No disrepect to ya Mainebass,  Its just that these 2 ponds remind me of my dead fishing buddy Henry, as we'd fish them together. And they were "his" ponds,.. so its a sore spot for me to defend, as I did, and I will.

 Off my soapbox now

 

[deaknh03]

On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 6:00 PM, NEBasser101 said:

 (I know I posted about this before over 6 months ago) I live on a private lake in NH called Cobbetts Pond. The lake has great fishing but over the past few years I've seen the bass start to overpopulate and the average size is starting to shrink. I want to get the average bass size back to about 2.5 lbs over the next few years and possibly grow a trophy  I know I have to start harvesting fish from here but I don't know where to put them. I can't and don't want to kill them if possible. Thanks

I've been fishing that pond regularly for 40 years, took my pb of 9.5 from there. I know there are bass in that pond over 10lbs, I've seen them. I personally haven't seen any difference in size or numbers over the years..I have seen more ignorants on jet skis and speedboats though. Hamma, you are correct, the ramp was paid for by the state then given to the town and immediately privatized, I have access but think it is very unfair.

[Mainebass1984]

1 hour ago, "hamma" said:

I just tell it as I see it, thats all.  How do I know of these ponds?, I use to fish them, until the state did what they did. Now I dont fish them, because of what the state did. Im sorry if you see this as my "skewed opinion"? I see it as hands on,.. end result,... experience.  And Im not alone, alot of bass anglers were upset over these 2 ponds "transition", complaining to tackle shops and others while bankfishing

I dont need a college degree to see the end result,.. The fish were there, The state interviened, and after they did? The fish were gone,.. That sir,... is a fact. Floating bridge pond is now mosquito infested pit compared to what it was. And Pillings Pond may be better off than floating bridge,..but nothing like it was. 

I am telling you now, for the record. I "DO NOT" think I know more than a biologist,..But,......

 It doesnt take a fisheries biologist to see that, money was first spent on a survey, then application of chemicals for eradicating weeds in pillings pond,...and within the next few years, the weeds returned, and again money was spent to "dredge" the silt. And it was no small feat to complete the dredging, they built a coffer dam, diverted water. then they started digging and the methane stench was horrendous, for months the nearby homeowners were stunk out in mid summer, and finally in fall the pond was "done" I can only imagine what the cost was for that endeavor, but im sure it wasnt $20

So now I got a few questions for you,...shouldnt a highly educated fisheries biologist be held accountable?,.. not only accountable for the decision made to chemically treat a water body or not, but also, (since they are to be the authority on said subject), Shouldnt they known that the shallow silty bottom only needs the smallest amount of an evasive weed, for it to return?,..

Now, as you've stated Im obviously no biologist by any means, but the sticker I pay for to fish in Maine states that I understand the concept of evasive weeds taking over a pond. Why does that simple $25 sticker make me aware of this, but a masters degreed person with several years of experience in the field, isn't aware of it.

 What Im getting at is, The state wasted funding treating a shallow, silt laden pond with chemicals 

And for the record,. again,..It was a states biologist that did the ponds survey, and their decision to chemical treat to begin with. wasnt me.

 Furthermore I said nothing of stocking any ponds with anything.,..I merely suggested that the op takes his daily creel.

 Im sorry if I hit a nerve Mainebass, the posting was not a shot at you personally

 I would much rather that the cash strapped New England fisheries management boards and commissions, use said funds to add access to more waters for all to use, and not just lakefront homeowners. also,.. not spend it on weed eradication, that "may" just come back.

Keep in mind please, at this point in time I am heavily medicated to relieve pain, If I seem like im rambling,... maybe i am, I just wanted to explain myself thoroughly. No disrepect to ya Mainebass,  Its just that these 2 ponds remind me of my dead fishing buddy Henry, as we'd fish them together. And they were "his" ponds,.. so its a sore spot for me to defend, as I did, and I will.

 Off my soapbox now

 

You are entitled to your opinion. Fisheries management should be left to the professionals. Sadly the invasive weed was most likely introduced by a careless uneducated boater, kayaker or fisherman. Just like any invasive species. I am sure the decision was made be highly educated professional with far more knowledge and experience on invasive weed removal then any fisherman. It is not a decision made lightly. There is a long process involving several people and agencies, not just one individual. The problem is public awareness. Few understand exactly what a fisheries biologist does or why they do it. You mention the weed returning. Couldn't it have been reintroduced by a careless individual ? Again, dredging has nothing to do with weed removal or eradication. You stated earlier that it may have been the lake association that dredged the pond. It is common for a lake association to dredge a pond so they can more easily maneuver there boats at launches or lake association docks.  More often then not a chemical application is applied to a body of water to manage invasive weeds as they are almost impossible to eradicate.  It is a common practice and widely accepted thought the entire country. If the weed is not treated then it could take over every surface inch of that entire pond making boating or even running a trolling motor impossible. That is most likely the reason a chemical treatment was used, to allow boaters and anglers to keep using the pond for their recreational activities.

Would you had preferred the pond remained untreated ? Allowing the weed to take over every inch of surface water making all recreational activities impossible. If left untreated the weed could possibly consume every bit of available oxygen leading to a fish kill or winterkill every year. Large amounts of decomposing and dying weeds consume vast amounts of oxygen.

Believe it or not such decisions are made with YOUR best interests in mind. Sadly no matter decision is made, it is never the "right" decision. There is always someone who does not approve, someone who thinks they know more for whatever reason. Sadly it's always "the states" or "the biologists" fault if anyone, angler or not, disagrees with there decision or feel the outcome isn't fitting for them.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I prefer to rely on science and facts not opinions. You know what they say about opinions ? They are like a******s everyone has one.

What soapbox do you speak of ?