Forage base opinions.

[Gamalot]

What does it mean?
Some of the spots I fish have great schools of bait, usually saw bellies, moon eyes or herring depending on what you call them. We can't buy them during ice season here. Other lakes I fish I have to wonder about the health of this forage base. A couple places produce plenty of action on pickerel and bass but almost every fish is the same size. Pickerel go between 17-20 inches and rarely any larger. LM Bass are all around 2 pounds and maybe 12-15 inches. A few friends keep the pickerel to pickle them, bass are out of season here. I always ask my pals what was in the stomachs when they gut them and always the same answer, completely empty!
I have to wonder if this is because the forage base is suffering and this is why the fish are all similar size and usually skinny. Other lakes that I know have massive schools of bait are like fishing in the dead sea and usually pretty unproductive but when I do get a nice trout they are stuffed full of bait. Is it low food for the fish or too many fish for the body of water with not enough bait?

Gam

[RCNY1]

I'm not sure how long food stays in a fish's stomach but I would think it would take a fairly decent forage base to sustain a decent fish population, I fished a lake today and there were plenty of decent sized fish with fat bellies  yet I've never "seen " much evidence of the forage base

[32footsteps]

Many different ways to approach the topic of "forage base."  For starters, any fishery biologist worth an ounce of salt will tell you that to manage a healthy fishery you need to manage the forage.  The general public doesn't seem to get this idea...they just think you need to stock bass/walleyes/muskies etc into a lake and in a few years it'll be a great fishery.  Nope...if the forage base isn't there then those things will not thrive.  "Forage" is basically the canary in the cave so to speak. If it is suffering then the apex predators will also suffer.  If the phytoplankton that minnows feed on crashes then the minnow base will crash and with it the larger predators will crash as well.  It's quite simple really...

Going just a step farther...what I consider my true "home" lake is absolutely packed with bullheads, minnows, and all sorts of invertebrates.  The pike and perch in there can get quite large for a lake it's size but when the bullhead, invertebrate, and minnow population is high you can guarantee that the fishing is going to be tough as hell. Why would they want to eat something you offer them when they can gorge themselves on what exists already?  So on that one knowing the minnow species that are in there are essential in terms of having success on it.  On the other hand, if there is a substantial winter kill where the bullhead and minnow numbers are knocked way back it's time to focus on it harder.  The great thing about this is that when people hear "winter kill" they shy away from a body of water that has one.  I'm just the opposite.  If there's a reported winter kill I investigate it.  What actually was killed off?  If forage was killed off then you can count on a year or two of some really, really good fishing. 

[Gamalot]

Great thoughts 32FS!

The basic lakes I fish are loaded with very large schools of saw bellies. In open water I see large schools boiling on the top water and on my Humminbird finder I pass over numerous large bait balls all the time. The trout and walleyes are usually quit fat with bellies full of them. Too bad all we can get here during ice season are shiners and not saw bellies. I think this is the difference to the fish similar to if we eat rib eye steak or chuck. Saw bellies inside the fish seem to break down and digest quite easily while if I find a minnow inside they are often only partially digested and have a much tougher meat. Why would a fish eat chuck steak when there is plenty of filet mignon or rib eye available? During the winter I also believe fish do all they can to conserve energy both in finding food and in digesting it. Lakes that produce lots of fish but all in the same general size seem to me to be either over populated with those fish or under populated with the correct forage base. I once caught a rather large pickerel on a minnow and while removing the hook I found the pickerel still had the tail of a good size perch inside his throat.

Gam

[Oldbear]

My thought on that is over population of fish for to  few feeder fish.  I see this in ponds that no one is allowed to fish in compared to ones that people are allowed in to fish and its hit hard.  The later has much healthier fish with the keep out ponds having stunted fish of all the same size.

[Gamalot]

My thought on that is over population of fish for to  few feeder fish.  I see this in ponds that no one is allowed to fish in compared to ones that people are allowed in to fish and its hit hard.  The later has much healthier fish with the keep out ponds having stunted fish of all the same size.

My thoughts exactly Oldbear. I have a local pond where every LM Bass is between 12-15 inches and lots of them. I have heard it stated that fish ecology allows them to grow to a size depending on the water that will support them. I know this it a reality in aquariums and even in fish tanks in homes but I suppose it translates to ponds and lakes as well. Cannibalism is also present in bodies where the forage base is severely depleted. A big fish in a little pond eats what ever he can swallow but I am pretty sure that big fish would prefer many small meals over one real large one.

Gam

[MC_angler]

My thought on that is over population of fish for to  few feeder fish.  I see this in ponds that no one is allowed to fish in compared to ones that people are allowed in to fish and its hit hard.  The later has much healthier fish with the keep out ponds having stunted fish of all the same size.

It's actually the exact opposite. Angler pressure harvests the larger fish selectively and then the size structure gets driven down. Especially in species such as bluegills that have the ability to change when they mature and have multiple reproductive strategies. Fastest way to get stunted bluegills is to harvest the big ones

Stunted fish populations are generally a result of human intervention via angling and messing with the fishery

Why do you think there's amazing fishing and lots of big fish in remote areas? Go to Canada and catch huge fish... even though their forage base (productivity) is FAR lower and their growing seasons far shorter than somewhere in central or southern USA. Difference is fishing pressure and harvest

[Gamalot]

It's actually the exact opposite. Angler pressure harvests the larger fish selectively and then the size structure gets driven down. Especially in species such as bluegills that have the ability to change when they mature and have multiple reproductive strategies. Fastest way to get stunted bluegills is to harvest the big ones

Stunted fish populations are generally a result of human intervention via angling and messing with the fishery

Why do you think there's amazing fishing and lots of big fish in remote areas? Go to Canada and catch huge fish... even though their forage base (productivity) is FAR lower and their growing seasons far shorter than somewhere in central or southern USA. Difference is fishing pressure and harvest

Not sure I agree with some of this. Canada does have large fish, large lakes and less fishing pressure in many of them. I disagree regarding the shorter growing season and smaller forage base. Fish grow year around no matter where they live. Colder water lakes often have different species of the forage base so in Canada it might not be saw bellies that the fish feed on and could be crayfish, sculpins or some other food source as the staple. Big lakes with large Pike and Musky usually also have large sucker populations. My typical bass lakes here seem to have lots of frogs and top water insects the fish feed on. In the local big swamp waters the large bass and pickerel feed on baby ducks and birds all the time. I do agree that removing too many of the larger fish in their prime reproductive age is never good and this is why we have seasons. Just yesterday I caught a real nice perch around 12 inches that was super fat and loaded with eggs, she went right back in to promote future population growth. We all have to wonder about fish life if she lays 2 thousand eggs just how many of them grow up to be adults before they are eaten or caught and kept?

Relate some of this to the White tail deer population of a particular area. Too many deer in one place destroys the ecosystem and if the herd is not culled they and the entire forest suffer.

Gam

[MC_angler]

Not sure I agree with some of this. Canada does have large fish, large lakes and less fishing pressure in many of them. I disagree regarding the shorter growing season and smaller forage base. Fish grow year around no matter where they live.

It's an objective fact that the Canadian shields lakes are much less productive than the lakes in most of the USA. Google "oligotrophic" vs "eutrophic". Obviously there are exceptions but for the most part, the northern lakes are nutrient poor and southern lakes are nutrient rich. Same reason why we grow corn in the Midwest but there's no tillable land up in the Canadian forests - the land is nutrient poor up there

Also, fish growth slows to a near crawl in far northern areas during the winter - it's how biologists age them using scales. For some good reading, check this link out http://www.michigandnr.com/publications/pdfs/ifr/manual/smii%20chapter09.pdf

Key part "During the colder months, when fish eat little and growth ceases, the circuli are crowded together and may be incomplete. In the spring, when feeding and growth resume, new circuli form that are spaced further apart. "

[ClearCreek]

Many different ways to approach the topic of "forage base."  For starters, any fishery biologist worth an ounce of salt will tell you that to manage a healthy fishery you need to manage the forage.  The general public doesn't seem to get this idea...they just think you need to stock bass/walleyes/muskies etc into a lake and in a few years it'll be a great fishery.  Nope...if the forage base isn't there then those things will not thrive.  "Forage" is basically the canary in the cave so to speak. If it is suffering then the apex predators will also suffer.  If the phytoplankton that minnows feed on crashes then the minnow base will crash and with it the larger predators will crash as well.  It's quite simple really...

Going just a step farther...what I consider my true "home" lake is absolutely packed with bullheads, minnows, and all sorts of invertebrates.  The pike and perch in there can get quite large for a lake it's size but when the bullhead, invertebrate, and minnow population is high you can guarantee that the fishing is going to be tough as hell. Why would they want to eat something you offer them when they can gorge themselves on what exists already?  So on that one knowing the minnow species that are in there are essential in terms of having success on it.  On the other hand, if there is a substantial winter kill where the bullhead and minnow numbers are knocked way back it's time to focus on it harder.  The great thing about this is that when people hear "winter kill" they shy away from a body of water that has one.  I'm just the opposite.  If there's a reported winter kill I investigate it.  What actually was killed off?  If forage was killed off then you can count on a year or two of some really, really good fishing.

32:

Another reason that fishing can be good for a few years after a winterkill is the fish that died and rotted in the lake "fertilize" the water body and add nutrients.  These added nutrients produce more phytoplankton which will produce more zooplankton which provides food for forage fish species and young game fish species. 

Unfortunately, winterkills can destroy a lot of the larger game fish species and that can set things back.

ClearCreek