I think this is why it's best to diversify your pond's portfolio. If our ponds' were propped up solely by a daily infusion of AQ, then I would worry. We talk often of the difference between feeding supplementally, vs. feeding to satiation, and maybe this illustrates that point.

I am of the opinion that ANYTHING that is constantly run on the ragged edge at maximum rpm is subject to problems. Maybe that's just a simplistic view from the guy who has to scrub his fingernails clean every night, but that's just the way I see it. When you're pushing something that hard, a hiccup somewhere may spell disaster.

I would hope that those who truly rely on feeding AQ have a supply on hand to hold them over. The problem for me, is the timing....I don't like to carry feed over during the cold water period when I'm not using it, so I tend to order heavy when spring arrives. But I may need to rethink that strategy.


"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.