The problem I'm running into is that most ponds I receive data from contain HBG that are on a feeding program. I was hoping to gather some info from populations that rely solely on natural forage, and compare them with fish that receive supplemental feed.

Here's some HBG data I have close at hand right now, on unfed fish:



11.25 in 1 lb 5 oz

11.125 in 1 lb 6.5 oz

10.5 in 1 lb 4 oz

11 in 1 lb 4.5 oz

10.25 in 1.005 lbs. approx 1 lb.

10.125 in 1.003 lbs. " 1 lb.

11.125 in 1.332 lbs. " 1 lb. 5 oz.

10.25 in .769 lbs. " 13 ozs.

10.125 in .761 lbs. " 12 ozs.

12.125 in. 1.670 lbs. " 1 lb. 10 3/4 ozs.

12.25 in. 1.790 lbs. " 1 lb. 13 ozs.


10.25 in. .785 lbs. approx. 13.5 oz.

11.25 in. 1.470 lbs. " 1 lb. 7.5 oz.

11.25 in 1.420 lbs. " 1 lb. 7 oz.

12 in 1.575 lbs. " 1 lb. 9.5 oz.

9.5 in. .904 lbs. " 14.5 oz.

I would be thrilled to hear from anyone willing to share their HBG stats. I will gladly share any and all info with the forum.



Last edited by sprkplug; 07/25/14 08:56 PM.

"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.