Selecting a Pond Site for Reliable Fish Farming

Why site selection determines success

A pond site is not just a place to dig. It is a system that must reliably supply water, hold water without excessive seepage, stay safe from flooding, and remain accessible for daily management and harvest. A good site reduces ongoing costs (pumping, repairs, fuel, labor) and lowers fish health risks. Use a screening process so you can reject weak sites early, then invest time and money only in the best candidates.

A step-by-step site screening process

Step 1: Map your candidate area and set “non-negotiables”

Start with 2–5 candidate spots on your land (or available land). For each, note approximate pond size, distance to water source, and access route. Define non-negotiables you will not compromise on, such as year-round water availability, legal water access, and flood safety.

• Tools: phone GPS, notebook, measuring tape, simple level (or A-frame level), shovel/auger, clear jar, stopwatch, and local rainfall records if available.
• Output: a short list of sites worth field testing.

Step 2: Verify water source options and reliability

Fish ponds need a dependable water budget: water in must cover evaporation, seepage, and planned water exchange (if any). Evaluate each water source for quantity, quality, seasonal reliability, and legal access.

Water source option A: Groundwater (borehole/well/spring)

Strengths: often more reliable year-round; usually clearer and lower in pathogens than surface water; easier to control intake.

Risks: pumping costs; possible low dissolved oxygen (especially deep groundwater); may contain iron, hydrogen sulfide odor, or extreme pH/alkalinity; permits may be required.

Continue in our app.

• Listen to the audio with the screen off.
• Earn a certificate upon completion.
• Over 5000 courses for you to explore!

Or continue reading below...

Download the app

• Screening checks: confirm well yield (liters/minute) in dry season; ask neighbors about seasonal drawdown; test basic water quality (temperature, pH, alkalinity if possible); ensure power/fuel logistics for pumping.
• Practical example: If your pond needs 10,000 m³ to fill and your pump delivers 2 m³/hour, filling takes ~5,000 hours (too long). A higher-yield well or smaller pond footprint may be needed.

Water source option B: Surface water (stream, river, canal, lake)

Strengths: can provide large volumes quickly; may allow gravity filling if the intake is higher than the pond.

Risks: seasonal drying; flood surges; contamination from upstream farms, sewage, pesticides; introduction of wild fish, parasites, and predators; legal restrictions on diversion.

• Screening checks: visit in dry season and after heavy rain; identify upstream activities; confirm you can legally abstract water; plan for screening/filtration at intake; evaluate whether you can shut off inflow during floods.
• Minimum biosecurity measure: install an intake screen and a settling/silt trap if turbidity is common.

Water source option C: Rain-fed (runoff capture)

Strengths: low operating cost; no pumping if designed well; useful where groundwater is limited.

Risks: highly seasonal; drought risk; runoff can carry silt, manure, and chemicals; may not refill fast enough after partial draining.

• Screening checks: compare local rainfall pattern to evaporation; evaluate catchment area (land draining into the pond); check soil erosion risk; plan a grassed buffer strip and a silt trap.
• Rule of thumb for screening: if your area has a long dry season and high evaporation, a purely rain-fed pond is usually high risk unless catchment is large and well-managed.

Seasonal reliability test (simple field method)

• Ask and verify: talk to nearby farmers about the lowest water level month; then visit at that time if possible.
• Look for indicators: dry streambeds, algae lines on rocks (past water levels), pump marks, cracked soil in wetlands.
• Plan for worst month: if the site fails in the driest month, it fails overall.

Legal access and rights (do not skip)

Even a perfect physical site can be unusable if you cannot legally use the water or build the pond.

• Confirm land tenure: written permission/lease boundaries; right to excavate and build embankments.
• Confirm water rights: permits for abstraction, drilling, or diversion; restrictions on damming streams; minimum downstream flow requirements.
• Confirm environmental constraints: protected wetlands, riparian buffer rules, setback distances from waterways and roads.

Step 3: Check soil suitability for pond sealing

The pond must hold water. Soil with sufficient clay content and low permeability is ideal. Sandy or gravelly soils often leak unless lined (which increases cost). Do not rely on appearance alone—use basic field tests.

What you want in pond soil

• High clay content: clay particles swell and seal pores.
• Low gravel content: gravel creates leak paths.
• Uniform layers: avoid fractured rock, old root channels, or buried trash.

Field test 1: The ribbon (texture) test

This quick test estimates clay content by how well moist soil forms a ribbon when pressed between fingers.

1. Take a handful of soil from the depth you expect to build the pond bottom and core trench (not just topsoil).
2. Remove stones and wet it until it feels like putty.
3. Roll into a ball, then press and squeeze to form a flat ribbon.
4. Measure how long the ribbon holds before breaking.

• Pass indicator: ribbon holds together and reaches several centimeters without crumbling (suggests moderate to high clay).
• Fail indicator: cannot form a ribbon; feels gritty; falls apart quickly (often sandy).

Field test 2: Jar sedimentation test (clay/silt/sand estimate)

This test separates particles by settling speed.

1. Fill a clear jar 1/3 with soil (from pond depth), 2/3 with water.
2. Add a pinch of salt or a drop of dish soap to help dispersion.
3. Shake hard for 1–2 minutes, then set it down.
4. After 1 minute, mark the sand layer; after 1 hour, mark silt; after 24 hours, mark clay.

Interpretation: a thicker clay layer after 24 hours indicates better sealing potential. If sand dominates, seepage risk is high.

Field test 3: Infiltration (percolation) test pit

This test checks how fast water disappears in a small hole.

1. Dig a hole about 30–50 cm deep in the proposed pond bottom area.
2. Roughen the sides (do not smear), remove loose soil.
3. Fill with water and let it soak once (pre-wet).
4. Refill and measure the drop in water level over 1–2 hours.

• Pass indicator: slow drop (site-specific, but “slow enough” that the hole still holds most water after 1–2 hours).
• Fail indicator: rapid drop or hole empties quickly (high permeability).

Important: A single test pit is not enough. Repeat in at least 3 points: center, near the planned embankment, and near the inlet area.

Red flags that often mean “reject or budget for lining”

• Visible sand lenses or gravel layers in the profile.
• Cracked limestone, fractured rock, or old streambed gravels.
• Termite mounds and root channels throughout the subsoil (potential seep paths).

Step 4: Evaluate topography, drainage, and flood risk

Topography affects construction cost and pond safety. The best sites allow you to build with minimal earthmoving and provide controlled drainage.

Topography screening

• Prefer gentle slopes: enough fall to drain by gravity but not so steep that embankments become tall and expensive.
• Avoid depressions with unknown inflows: they can become flood traps.
• Check for a natural outlet: you need a safe place to discharge overflow without eroding your dike or a neighbor’s land.

Simple slope check (A-frame level)

Build an A-frame level from three sticks and a string with a weight. Walk the site to see how quickly elevation changes. Mark high and low points and sketch a simple contour map. This helps you estimate where the pond can sit with the least cut-and-fill.

Drainage and flood risk checks

• Look for flood indicators: debris lines in trees, scoured channels, flattened grass, silt deposits.
• Identify upstream catchment: a small pond below a large catchment can be overwhelmed in storms.
• Plan overflow control: ensure there is space for a spillway/overflow route that will not erode the embankment.
• Avoid building in active floodplains: even if water is abundant, fish loss risk is high.

Earthmoving cost minimization checklist

• Can you place the pond where one side uses natural ground as part of the embankment?
• Is there suitable clay on-site for dike construction and sealing, or would you import material?
• Is the water table so high that excavation will be difficult or unstable?

Step 5: Confirm access for vehicles, inputs, and harvest

Daily operations require reliable access in all seasons. Poor access increases feed cost, delays harvest, and can prevent emergency response (e.g., aeration equipment delivery).

Access screening questions

• All-weather road: can a vehicle reach the pond during the rainy season without getting stuck?
• Turning space: can a pickup or small truck turn around near the pond?
• Feed storage proximity: is there a dry, secure place nearby to store feed and tools?
• Harvest logistics: can you bring nets, containers, ice, and labor to the pond edge?
• Power access (if needed): is there a practical route for electrical lines or generator placement?

Practical example: “Hidden cost” of poor access

If feed delivery requires carrying 25 kg bags 200 meters through mud, the labor cost and feed handling losses can exceed the cost of improving a short road segment. Screen access early so you can budget correctly.

Step 6: Biosecurity spacing from other ponds and livestock

Biosecurity starts with distance and separation. Nearby ponds, livestock pens, and drainage from animal areas can introduce pathogens, parasites, and nutrient loads that destabilize water quality.

Biosecurity screening rules

• Separate water pathways: avoid sites where runoff from livestock areas flows into the pond.
• Distance from other ponds: greater separation reduces disease transfer via birds, shared equipment, and overflow water. If close proximity is unavoidable, plan strict equipment separation and controlled water intake.
• Upstream risk: do not place your pond below another pond’s overflow or drainage channel.
• Buffer zones: maintain vegetated strips around the pond to filter runoff and reduce sediment entry.

On-site biosecurity observations

• Are there poultry houses, pig pens, cattle yards, or manure piles uphill?
• Do vehicles and people routinely pass through animal areas before reaching the pond site?
• Are there wild bird congregation areas (e.g., wetlands) immediately adjacent?

Site evaluation worksheet (pass/fail + risk notes)

Use this worksheet for each candidate site. Mark Pass, Fail, or Conditional (possible with mitigation). Add risk notes and mitigation ideas. Reject sites with multiple “Fail” items in critical categories (water, soil sealing, flood risk, legal access).

How to use the worksheet to decide

• Critical fails (usually reject): no legal water access, unreliable dry-season water, high flood exposure, highly permeable soil with no affordable lining option.
• Conditionals (budget and plan): surface water with contamination risk (needs filtration and intake control), moderate seepage (needs compaction and clay core), access road improvements.
• Document evidence: photos of soil profiles, notes from neighbors, dates of water level observations, and test results.

Quick reference: minimum field kit and data to collect

• Shovel or hand auger for test pits
• Clear jar with lid for sediment test
• Measuring tape and stakes/flags
• A-frame level (homemade) or simple line level
• Notebook with worksheet printouts
• Local rainfall pattern notes and dry-season visit date
• Contact list for water authority/land office and nearby farmers