Nice BIG surprise (and some questions for the biologists)

[Bryon Anderson 0]

I have been fishing small inland lakes for bass and bluegill a lot this summer. Prior to this summer, I hadn't really messed with lakes that much, but now that I am, I have learned that most of Michigan's small lakes are quite shallow and very weedy, and that many of them have good populations of both bass and bluegill. However, while the bluegill seem to grow fairly large in these lakes, the bass seem to top out around 12-13 inches. They are very aggressive and a lot of fun--a 5 wt. rod and a handful of small poppers and you're set for the day--but I almost never catch any smaller than 10" or larger than 13".

 

I've heard others who fish these lakes say that this size range is the result of stunting--i.e., there's only so much food to go around, so it allows a population of x number of bass to grow to that size, and that's it. Two things, however, cause me to question this:

 

1) the bluegills get quite large (for Michigan bluegills, anyway) in these lakes. Every trip out, I'll catch 4 or 5 that are 8-10" long.

2) while paddling the shoreline of one of these lakes last night, I looked down and saw a largemouth bass that was enormous compared to the cookie-cutter 10-13-inchers. This thing was easily in the 18-20" class and fat--like can't-get-both-hands-around-it fat.

 

So my questions for those who know their warmwater biology/ecology better than I --what gives? Why are the bluegill so robust but the bass--except for this one--apparently stunted at 10-13"? And where did that monster fish come from? Are there more of them that I just never see? If the big fish is an anomaly, how did it get so big? What is it eating that the others aren't? Is it eating the smaller bass? And most importantly, how can I catch it?

[Fisherboy0301 0]

Well the ponds around here in ga are the same way. Most bluegill are huge, but the bass very small. It's has to do with overpopulation if I'm not mistaken. Too many bass=not enough food= stunted bass growth. Because the bass don't get big, the bluegill have less predators once they reach a certain size, so they tend to get bigger. Also there are more things in the ponds for bluegill to eat than bass. Bass eat mostly other fish( sometimes terrestrials, insects, nymphs too) and bluegill are their main food source. Since the bass start to rely on other means of food( insects, nymphs and the occasional frog or lizard) they are getting less nutrition than from other fish, this they don't get as big. As for the larger bass, sometimes people catch larger fish and place them in other ponds to try to breed larger fish into the pond, try a baby bass colored streamer. Or a larger popper on a bigger rod.

[Mickalo 0]

I've also noticed this same trend here in N.W., Iowa. This summer has been unseasonable cooler and allot more rain then normal too. The ponds & lakes I fish here are the same ones I've been fishing for about 5+ yrs now and this year the Bluegills have been allot larger then I remember in the past years. Possible due to the numbers of them compare to the bass population in these waters. A few of the gills I caught last week put a heafty bend in my 5wt bringing them in. Most are caugth on small streamers or tandom streamer rig with rubber leg type nymphs and a streamer as the point (bottom fly). I may have to try some top water poppers to see if that brings up those bigger bass.

 

Mike

[williamhj 0]

Perhaps they are in there but you aren't fishing with the right flies or at the right time to catch them? Might try some of those larger patterns, streamers, or even fish in the evening / at night. After dark see if you can get one throwing a mouse or similar pattern near structure by the bank?

[Cannonx4 0]

One thing I have noticed is big fish like big baits and a lot of the time the smaller fish are just more aggresive than the bigger fish. Thus why more smaller fish get caught. You can bet in every lake or pond there are some big fish of all types. Or at least that has been what I have noticed around here.

[Stevester 0]

For any fish population, like a population of almost every living thing there will be a distribution of sizes. For your pond there is likely a larger number of 6-8 inch fish, a slightly smaller number of 10-12 in fishy and even fewer 14-16 in fish. The one you saw might be the only 20 in fish in the pond. The absolute size is dependent on a lot of factors such as food, number of predators, water quality and temperature, the genetic strain of the fish just to name a few. As a general rule smaller bodies of water will produce smaller fish but that said, the number big fish in tiny pond stories are legion. If you live in the norther third of the country, the drop in water temperature during the cold months sets limits on how big fish will get since they feed very little during the winter, this slows growth and fish in the north will die of old age before ever reaching the average size of fish in say Florida that can eat and grow year round.

 

Steve

[mikechell 0]

Okay, my two cents worth, based on reading different accounts over the decades. Most of these observations are based on those articles, so I don't claim they are 100% truth.

1) Big Bluegill grow when big predators reduce the small fish population. The fact that there are large Bream suggests that there ARE big fish helping to control the Bream population. But, a large number of medium predators might be just as effective since they will be eating more of the tiny Bream fry.

2) Big Bass will eat medium bass. You haven't mentioned just how "small" the lakes are. If they are true "ponds", then stunting is possible. If they are small "lakes", it's not as likely. It is very possible that there are many large bass in those waters, but unless you are using something the size of the 12" bass, you'll not attract their interest. I once caught a 14 inch bass that had the tail of a 10 or 12 inch bass sticking out of it's throat. It had that meal in it's gut and still hit the 7 1/2" stick bait I was using.

3) With large numbers of "food" sized fish, the large fish don't have to chase. They just wait in ambush. You'll have to drop a large lure directly in front of one to get a hit.

[FlaFly 0]

• Mike's guess is good as anything. Usually, especially in smaller lakes, when anglers reduce the number of predators (bass), the bluegills become extremely numerous, but small due to competition for food. In the referenced cases, apparently there's plenty food for bluegills, and still enough bass to keep their numbers in check. Without doing otolith analysis (and stomach content analysis), all we can do is guess. It's possible that all the smaller bass are yearlings, and the parents are the fewer large bass.

[Bryon Anderson 0]

Very good responses all -- thanks guys. Everything that was said above makes good sense to me.

 

Mikechell, you asked about the size of the lake I'm fishing. This particular one is very small at 19 acres. Its maximum depth is reported to be anywhere from 24 to 54 feet, depending on what source you consult. (I refer to it as a "lake" because that is how it's named on the map, and also because it is a natural body of water, and I once read that the term "pond" actually only refers to man-made bodies of water; supposedly "pond" derives from "pound" as in impoundment.) I know it's at least 40-45 feet deep in spots because I have dropped anchor in there and all but a few turns of my 50-foot anchor line peeled off the spool. I suppose that fact alone could account for the big bass I saw, and in fact would indicate that there are probably more like it in there.

 

Mike, you're probably quite right about what it would take to hook one of the big ones - with larger prey in abundance, they're not going to expend much energy chasing something the size of my small-to-medium size poppers and streamers.

 

There is one other interesting thing about this little lake. I doubt that this is relevant to the discussion of fish populations in the pond, but it's been noticeable enough to me that I thought I'd mention it anyway. This lake has the largest population of turtles I've ever seen in any body of water in Michigan. Red-Eared Sliders, Soft-shells, and at least one super-jumbo, mac-daddy sized snapping turtle. I mean that thing was enormous--head bigger than a baseball, almost as big as a softball. Punchbowl-size shell. BIG. Scared the bejeezus out of me the first time I saw it--I was sitting in about 2 feet of water, re-rigging, happened to look down and there was this prehistoric-looking thing just staring up at me. Anyway the turtles are just crazy in this lake--everywhere you look they're paddling around. Kinda cool actually.

[ditz2 0]

IMO that is definitely a lake and not a pond. I would be quite willing to bet that there are several Large bass in it. Probably larger than the one you saw. Tie you a few large ( 1/0 hair bugs ) and spend some time casting the shore cover at dawn and dusk. "Cover" does not need to be obvious. I once caught 3 nice bass out of less than a foot of water within a foot of the shore. All 3 from the same spot within 5 min......I like fishing the surface and I have caught all my nice bass from the surface. Some on poppers and hair bugs and some on casting buzz baits. I once had a bass hit a buzz bait out in the middle of a weedy end of a pond and he hit it so hard he jerked the reel handle out of my grip and tore the skin off one of my knuckles. M buddy on the other end of the pond caught a 7#+ on a popper about 15 min earlier. That my friend is a big bass in east central Indiana. Get out there and catch that big bass on your fly rod.

[mikechell 0]

Wow! Look for Pond vs. Lake designations online, and you'll find there is NO size limit. One site says ponds are 2 acres or less. I remember reading that 5 acres and less is a pond, but I don't know where I read it.

One "rule of thumb" for lakes is that light doesn't penetrate to the bottom over the entire area, in a pond it does.

Here in Florida, I know there are -1 acre retention ponds that don't get light on the bottom because of the intense tannin staining of the water. There are also MANY huge bodies of water that are shallow enough and clear enough that light reaches through to the bottom across the entire area.

I figure, if I can fish the whole shoreline from my boat in half a day, it's a pond. If it takes more than half a day, it's a lake.

[FlaFly 0]

I used to attend the annual meetings of the North American Lake Management Society, and taught an opening day session for non-scientists who were not familiar with all the jargon. I always started out with "what is a lake?" and explained that there are lots of regional differences in how lakes are formed (prairie potholes, florida sinkhole lakes, Appalachian reservoirs, Canadian shield glacial lakes, even bomb crater lakes in Vietnam, etc.). And there is a similar variation in how those different types of lakes behave depending on their shape.

Like Mike said, people in Florida live on little 2 acre detention ponds, but they name them Wottalottahatchee Lake, and so on. In Vermont there are hundred acre lakes that are locally called ponds. Basically they're all a hole in the ground, filled with water (most of the time). But then so is a well.

Oh well, what's it matter?

[tidewaterfly 0]

Mike's post makes the most sense for your situation IMO. The fact that you've seen at least one larger bass should indicate there may be more. Especially since the pond/lake is 19 acres. I've gone through a similar experience fishing our tidal rivers. There are bigger bass in these rivers, but the 10" to 14" bass are the most prevalent. They're also more aggressive.

 

There are a couple of other ideas I feel are worth mentioning. It's highly likely that in MI, with a shorter growing season, any larger bass will be older than similar size bass in places where they have a longer growing season. Those bigger MI bass may also have been pressured harder since they may have been around longer & bass don't get big by being careless no matter where they're found. Enticing them to hit your fly will be more difficult than the smaller bass or panfish. They'll be more wary so presentation will be important to the extent you'll need to not let them know you're there.

 

Again, I went through similar experiences trying to catch larger fish. Most bass I may catch now are still smaller, but I've added some of the bigger ones to my catch list. Generally a 5 lb or larger bass here is a trophy. There's a good number in the 2 to 4 lb range. Those over 4 lbs are not as numerous, so finding them is not as easy. A lot of water has to be covered to do so. I've yet to catch a bass over 5 lbs on a fly however. I keep trying & I'll do it eventually. I hooked up with one in FL once, saw it briefly, but didn't land it. On a 6 wt that was a lot of fun!

 

I changed my approach for targeting bigger bass & I agree with others who said go bigger with your offerings. That can be a difficult thing to do, because it will decrease your overall catch rate. However, if you develop the mind set that you will go big & take them as they come, provided there are sufficient numbers of those bigger fish, you'll catch some of them. I did.

 

I go big now with flies & heavy with my rod, even using a 10 wt often. I fish in the heavy vegetation & heavy snags now, and that 10 wt has been ideal for that purpose. I couldn't do the same with lighter rods. The 10 is also often needed to get even the smaller fish out of thicker vegetation. It's no different than the guys using baitcasters with heavy line, heavy rods & big lures. Not always needed for the size fish, but needed for the conditions.

 

You may eventually hook up with one of those bigger bass, but IMO with a 5 wt & the size flies that are often used with that size rod, you lessen your chances. Of course, big bass are often caught on light tackle just as trout are often caught on lighter rods. IMO, you'll need stealth, finesse & longer casts with your 5 wt to improve your chances.

[Guest rich mc]

I have fished some private ponds in Illinois for the last two years some are 20 acres and others 2. they get very weedy especially this summer. gills have been fair size wise with a few 11-13 inchers each year. bass this year are averaging 13-14 inch and largest we every caught was 17 1/2 inch last year fishing pond yesterday my buddy caught dozens of 6-8 bass on the fly one was attacked by a large bass that was actually landed and measured at 20 1/4 the smaller bass was almost dead and was floating just off shore 5 mins later it was eaten by another big bass. glad to see larger bass but we are still scratching our heads. I will be using larger flies next time . rich mc

[Bryon Anderson 0]

Thanks RichMC, Tidewaterfly, FlaFly and Ditz2 for your responses as well. My feelings about lake vs. pond are aligned with yours FlaFly--as long as there's water with fish in it and it's legal to fish there, I don't really care one way or the other.

 

As far as the pursuit of the big ones, I agree that it will probably have to be with a fly big enough to catch their attention, fished at dawn or dusk. Probably dawn, as I've had much better luck with bass in the early hours of the day than I have had later on. In this lake it would almost have to be a topwater bug because it is so weedy. Perhaps a big streamer fished along one of the drop-offs, but it would have to be as close to "weedless" as possible. I have no problem going big and catching fewer fish in order to target the big ones. I can walk out of my office and be on this lake, geared up and fishing in less than 30 minutes, so going fishless a few times is no biggie. Fishing with heavy tackle to wrench flies and fish out of the salad is a good idea too. As it happens, I just got a new 9' 8 wt. that is a joy to fish.

 

I will keep after the big fish and keep everyone posted. If I get one, there will be photos.