[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lake vs pond
- To: <Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com>
- Subject: Re: lake vs pond
- From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:06:51 -0500
- In-reply-to: <200301211157.h0LBvuhD027528 at otter_actwin.com>
- User-agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
> From: "Bill Curtin" <wcurtin at attbi_com>
> Subject: RE: Pond vs. Lake
> I was always under the assumption that pond had vegetation growing at its
> deepest point and a lake has no vegetation growing at its deepest point. A
> great pond has the acreage of a lake but the shallow depths to allow
> vegetation to grow.
> Ponds good....Lakes bad.....for aquatic gardeners!!
This has been my definition also.
But..........Lake Okeechobee is only 2 to 4 meters deep depending on the
weather and have a great deal of plants along it's bottom.
It's one of the largest FW "lakes". Pretty big pond you can easily see from
There is no good definition, but I still like the one above.