live baiting for perch

[Guest Rabbit]

 

a 1lb pearch is more than big enough,

 

I have had a very pleasent meal with 3 x 1/2 peaqrch sevred whole on the pleate.

Blimey!! we do have some posh boogers on 'ere

[ayjay]

name='Rabbit' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:33 PM' post='1245322'

 

name='bluerinse' date='Jul 29 2008, 05:29 PM' post='1245202'

 

a 1lb pearch is more than big enough,

 

I have had a very pleasent meal with 3 x 1/2 peaqrch sevred whole on the pleate.

Blimey!! we do have some posh boogers on 'ere

 

 

Crockery not reached Tewkesbury yet?

[Guest tigger]

Now your talking bull, all them cows are knackering the ozone.

 

 

Yeah but that's only when they do what a lot talk on here

[Guest tigger]

a 1lb pearch is more than big enough, the trick is not to fillet it but cook it whole and debone it after its cooked, loads of meat.

 

I have had a very pleasent meal with 3 x 1/2 peaqrch sevred whole on the pleate.

 

 

That's not how I like to eat my fish, I prefer not to have something lookin up at me while I eat it. Also there's nothin worse than fish bones I like to eat my fish without the fear of chokin to death

bluerinse, I think you seem to be a Perch eatin fanatic

[Emma two]

You can get enough fillets out of a few even modest sized Perch, and 'Zero' bones if you do it properly. Your kitchen and knife skills just need to be as good as your angling ones.

 

The method somone pointed out, where the spine complete with all the attached is removed from the soft cooked flesh works (it's a simple way to do trout too), ithats the way we used to do 'em at the lakeside as kids, Now I like crispy fried fillets and I'm better with a filleting knife.

Edited July 29, 2008 by Emma two

[Guest Rabbit]

Crockery not reached Tewkesbury yet?

 

We eats with our fingers my babber, and no toilet paper either....still here though

[Guest tigger]

You can get enough fillets out of a few even modest sized Perch, and 'Zero' bones if you do it properly. Your kitchen and knife skills just need to be as good as your angling ones.

 

The method somone pointed out, where the spine complete with all the attached is removed from the soft cooked flesh works (it's a simple way to do trout too), ithats the way we used to do 'em at the lakeside as kids, Now I like crispy fried fillets and I'm better with a filleting knife.

 

Cookin fish without filleting them is for people who can't fillet a fish properly or if the fish are too small to fillet properly in the first place

 

I'm probably the best filleter in the world..............

[Anderoo]

Blimey, you look away for a couple of days and this is up to 14 pages What does that tell you? Lots of heartfelt opinions. The Polish weren't even mentioned until page 11, which must be a record.

 

There have been some very good posts. Emma sums it all up for me extremely well. She seems to be one of the few people who sees this issue in its proper context, not from within an odd, selfish angling bubble.

 

This topic has once again exposed the incredible hypocrisy in modern angling and modern sentiments. I just want to repeat the point that I think it all comes down to - unless you either don't eat meat or eat only ethically reared organic/free range meat, you are not allowed any opinion on cruelty or what is or what is not acceptable angling practice.

 

Also (concerning livebaiting and eating fish specifically), please try to understand that (despite what commercials lead you to believe) fish do not exist just for us anglers to catch. Assuming some weird 'right' to be allowed to go out and do whatever we want to catch a fish just to put it back again is starting an argument from very dodgy ground.

 

Eat misery meat but are fiercely opposed to killing and eating fish? Isn't that really strange?

 

PS Richard, yes it is acceptable to put maggots in your mouth - in fact if you catch any more bream I think some people will be putting them there for you

[Dick Dastardly]

Like Anderoo said you go away for a few days and it takes some catching up on!

 

Some replies to SPS's comments on my post.

 

I totally agree that smokers need to show a bit of consideration.I (even when I smoked) hated people smoking next to me whilst I was eating.Considerate smokers would refrain from doing so or at least ask if it was ok.My main point though is that things have to work both ways.ie just because I smoke doesnt mean I must make all others smoke is equally valid as just because I dont smoke then neither should anyone else.

 

This carries on into our angling debate. Its also very easy to take the moral high ground if the consequences dont affect you! eg I dont like eating coarse fish so dont is fine but just because I dont means you cant either is totally unaceptable and my whole argument. Great to not like live baiting if you dont do it isnt it?

 

SPS takes me to task on the fact that when he sticks a hook in a fish he doesnt intend to kill it but when I stick a hook into a live bait it inevitably does die,SPS can I ask if you think its acceptable to use a dead fish for bait?

 

Not having a go at SPS BTW just that his points are the most interesting. Ive several other things to say but would be interested in SPS's reply first.

 

Also is it the killing of the live bait (bit double Dutch that but you know what I mean!) or the "cruelty" thing that you object to (in fact any anti livebaiter)?

Edited July 31, 2008 by BUDGIE

[SPSwallow]

Like Anderoo said you go away for a few days and it takes some catching up on!

 

Some replies to SPS's comments on my post.

 

I totally agree that smokers need to show a bit of consideration.I (even when I smoked) hated people smoking next to me whilst I was eating.Considerate smokers would refrain from doing so or at least ask if it was ok.My main point though is that things have to work both ways.ie just because I smoke doesnt mean I must make all others smoke is equally valid as just because I dont smoke then neither should anyone else.

 

This carries on into our angling debate. Its also very easy to take the moral high ground if the consequences dont affect you! eg I dont like eating coarse fish so dont is fine but just because I dont means you cant either is totally unaceptable and my whole argument. Great to not like live baiting if you dont do it isnt it?

 

SPS takes me to task on the fact that when he sticks a hook in a fish he doesnt intend to kill it but when I stick a hook into a live bait it inevitably does die,SPS can I ask if you think its acceptable to use a dead fish for bait?

 

Not having a go at SPS BTW just that his points are the most interesting. Ive several other things to say but would be interested in SPS's reply first.

 

Also is it the killing of the live bait (bit double Dutch that but you know what I mean!) or the "cruelty" thing that you object to (in fact any anti livebaiter)?

 

 

 

It's all swings and roundabouts. I suppose if you use dead baits they were living once and had to be killed for the purpose. I'm not really sure how it works. I'm not dead against anything, each to their own. My view on smoking wasn't that nobody should do it because I don't, just that they should do it where it only effects them or other smokers. I'm quite happy for people to smoke, it is their choice as long as I have the choice not to breathe it.