The idea that pellet raised advanced fingerlings can be "trained" to eat live forage may hold promise for otherwise useless fish (unless fed). I still wonder to what extent they may remain handicapped by the initial period of feed dependence.

Forage fed LMB standing weights >400 lbs are all but absent from the literature. Where weights approaching this standing weight have been achieved with forage, it has been through the use of forage that gets a head start and then disappears by the end of grow out. So in situ production of prey seems to be associated with LMB production <400 lbs/acre. This starkly contrasts with the production achieved in aerated fed pond where production can exceed 3000 lbs/acre. Sad thing is, these sorry fish at 8 inches are sold for .50 cents to a food producer or for 8 to 10 dollars to a pond owner. It is rather ridiculous because as you mentioned above they are not going to work for the pond owner as he imagines they will. If they did ... it would be cheap ... but they don't tend to work at all unless they are fed.

People just don't understand the value of forage raised advanced fingerlings. DOWs do because it is expensive and they've been doing it for years long before these studies simply because they suspected (correctly) that fish fed formulated feeds are ill suited to thrive in natural waters. Esshup, do you have any customers willing to pay 60 dollars or more for forage raised 10" fingerlings/subadults? I would venture a guess that few of your customers would understand the cost and value sufficiently to bite that bullet. Forage raised fish are worth the same return on acreage as are fish fed formulated feeds. This isn't because the acreage must return as much ... its because these fish can succeed where the others are doomed to fail. To have successful results is priceless ... to have forgone unsuccessful results is just burning money no matter how cheap.