The sensitivity of any treatment comparisons in pond experiments is often l
imited by large variability among ponds. Standard techniques of increasing
the number of replicate ponds to account for the large variability may be i
nappropriate as only a limited number of ponds may be available for any one
experiment. This paper considers various 'balanced incomplete block' desig
ns and compares their use with 'completely randomized designs' and 'randomi
zed complete block' designs. With simulated data, it is shown that 'balance
d incomplete block' designs can reduce the standard error of a treatment es
timate by as much as 50%, and reduce confidence intervals by 25%, although
increases of similar sizes may be experienced. The pattern of allocation of
blocks to ponds by neighbour or by pond number shows no clear distinction
in estimation improvement. Where missing ponds occur a large increase in im
precision may be experienced. These results are supported by data from nonu
niformity experiments, Further work is needed to explore block structures f
or specific types of treatment that may influence the patterns of variabili
ty to different extents.