My BG, LMB, and HSB feed aggressively at my three feeders on my 9ac pond in Chester SC. BUT- it has become very difficult to catch fish in the pond except next to the feeders. I currently feed twice a day and fish consume approx.100lbs "Aquamax 600" every week.

In order to encourage fish to feed on natural forage and artificial lures, I am considering turning off feeders for several days in a row or maybe every other day to see if fish will respond and create better fishing in other areas of my pond.

Looking for some advice from others that use fish food and wonder if your fish also become dependent to the feeder areas. Have there been any studies of on and off feeding as to fish catchability? Response appreciated!

Thanks,
Al Allison

Al, are your LMB Florida strain? They are notoriously difficult to catch on artificial lures when they get large.

Some theory whose name I can't remember (senior moment) states that fish will grow better if NOT fed every day - perhaps only 5-6 days a week.

I only fish where I feed them at, usually after a couple of days' fasting. Unless I want to fish instead of catch.

Theo, I take my hat off to you: You are one dedicated fisherman! If I had to fast for a couple of days before fishing, I'd take up another sport.

I have northern LMB and F-1 LMB. I do catch some LMB at other areas- but it is rare that I catch a BG that is not near a feeder! I also have tilapia and abundant thread fin shad as forage.

You have to really want to catch them.

Lol now that is good

Compensatory feeding is the concept you are remembering. It has been studied somewhat and has worked.

Here is an example. I have not see a study where catch rates were involved.

We studied the use of compensatory growth (CG) to grow fish larger than control fish that were fed every day without restriction. Five treatment groups of 10 juvenile hybrid sunfish (F1 hybrid of female green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus × male bluegill L. niacrochirus) received repeating cycles of no feeding and refeeding; fixed no-feed periods of either 2, 4, 6, 10, or 14 d distinguished the treatment groups. No-feed periods elicited the CG state and were immediately followed by days of ad libitum refeeding. Refeeding periods within each treatment group (D2, D4, D6, D 10, or D14) were continued until mean daily food consumption by fish no longer exceeded that of controls fed ad libitum every day (i.e., ad libitum refeeding was continued for as long as hyperphagia persisted, then another no-feed period began). Fish in two groups, D2 and D 14, consumed more food and significantly outgrew controls by 2 and 1.4 times, respectively, in 105-d experiments. Gross growth efficiency (GGE, fish weight gained/weight of all fish consumed) did not differ among the control and treatment groups over full experimental periods; however, GGE was higher than controls during some refeeding periods in group D14 (i.e., when CG was active). Findings show that the CG response can be exploited in some fishes to cause them to substantially outgrow conspecifics that are fed every day without restriction, with no loss of growth efficiency. Our use of hyperphagia to gauge durations of refeeding periods was critical to achieving growth improvements through CG.