Let's break down Jighead's original question.

He initially makes the supposition that feeding higher protein feed for a shorter period of time will cut down on feed costs, improve growth, improve utilization of natural food sources and improve catchability.

My answer to Jighead would be that growth rates would be influenced only to the extent that additional natural forage is indeed available for the number of fish that he has to take the place of the calories now unavailable to the fish through pellet feeding. Feeding five minutes instead of fifteen means that the fish will receive approximate 33% as much feed but with about 25-30% more protein.

.33 X 1.25 = .4125

This means he is artificially supplying about 41% as much protein. If he has increased his fish biomass in his pond through a previous feeding program, then these fish will need to look elsewhere to fill their bellies. If there is additional food available, and the additional calories burned by the fish pursuing and capturing this food source is also replaced, then growth rates will be comparable to what he had before.

Furthermore, he believes that the catchability will improve by using this feeding method. I think that the discussion since his original post has somewhat addressed this but ultimately it depends on the species, individual makeup of the fish, time of year, and a myriad of other factors. The best way to answer the question would ultimately be to try the new method and keep logs of how catch rates improve, or worsen.

My guess is that growth rates will initially slow and that the overall pond biomass will adjust to the new feedings. I also believe that the fish will be very agressive immediately after these "teaser" feedings, making the fish easier to catch for a while. How the pond's fishability adjusts after this change will depend on continued availability of natural forage and whether or not the same number of fish remain in the pond.


Holding a redear sunfish is like running with scissors.