Hi,
First off this thread wasn't meant to be a debate on the feeder issue, I just had a question to ask and hopefully others will chip in.
Over the years having seen the odd nature programme, the phrase 'predators will pick out the sick and injured' has pretty much been used alot. Now one of the arguements against using feeders is that they carry diseases and that they will be passed onto other fish. But in nature surely the sickest/weakest fish would be eaten before the healthier fish, so fish would naturally get their diet of ill fish.
I know its common sense not to feed diseased fish to other fish, but my question is are fish in the wild better able to cope with the diseases? Is it the quantity of 'ill' feeder fish that a fish could potentially eat that would cause problems? Are the diseases that mass produced fish could have different from those in the wild?
Thanks, might not have explained it well but its got me thinking.
First off this thread wasn't meant to be a debate on the feeder issue, I just had a question to ask and hopefully others will chip in.
Over the years having seen the odd nature programme, the phrase 'predators will pick out the sick and injured' has pretty much been used alot. Now one of the arguements against using feeders is that they carry diseases and that they will be passed onto other fish. But in nature surely the sickest/weakest fish would be eaten before the healthier fish, so fish would naturally get their diet of ill fish.
I know its common sense not to feed diseased fish to other fish, but my question is are fish in the wild better able to cope with the diseases? Is it the quantity of 'ill' feeder fish that a fish could potentially eat that would cause problems? Are the diseases that mass produced fish could have different from those in the wild?
Thanks, might not have explained it well but its got me thinking.