Jump to content
Andy Macfarlane

Eating Perch...or any other prized species.

Recommended Posts

Don't German angling laws *require* all fish over a certain size to be killed?

It seems to me this must represent a far far higher mortality rate than merely taking the odd fish for the pot, so how are German fisheries doing? Judging by some opinions expressed here, they must be virtually empty (or are those German anglers sneakily returning the fish when nobody's looking? ;) )

 

All fish in germany are required to be killed when caught thats the green party for fortunatly their pike anglers are condtantly challenging this ethos and catch and release is becoming more popular.

I have eaten most things that move including most coarse fish and would do so again but not on a regular basis, I think that the amount of anglers who have taken perch/pike will be quite high in fact I would say that the proliferation of carp angling and the ethos behind that is what brings the whole fish preservation debate to a head as untill carp fishing became the no1 pursuit any debate like this would have been seen as ridiculos. Does anyone remember when clubcards carried size limits on fih above which you would be alowed to keep what you caught?

ps squirrels are lovely but dont even think bout taking a red to eat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...and horse...of course all these things are culturally specific and relative to taste and custom. I personally choose not to eat freshwater fish (with the exception of trout and salmon) not for any great moral reason, just that I do not have to! I agree with previous comments that fish stocks are under so much threat generally that there seems every reason to leave them alone and little reason to eat them...

 

I'm with the above...haven't killed or eaten any of my pike catches and doubt I ever will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To put it simply, I am a modern angler, with no need to gain energy from british course fish to survive.

we have no depression and life has never been easier in terms of survival, so there is no actual need to take fish for the pot.

Aside from that, todays fishing is about the recreation and what makes that possible is numbers of fish to be caught, and so the implications of taking fish to eat is obviously to reduce the recreational side of angling.

 

The situation is different in poor nations that rely on fish for food but we are a developed nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The situation is different in poor nations that rely on fish for food but we are a developed nation.

 

Also different where there is more available water per capita which is the case in quite a few developed nations. No reliance on fish as essential food but plenty of fish that taking some for the table (within limits) is either harmless or in some cases, good for the fishery.


" My choices in life were either to be a piano player in a whore house or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference!" - Harry Truman, 33rd US President

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't!! :unsure: They all taste muddy! :headhurt::headhurt:

Why catch a good fish once? They are too good for that!!


5460c629-1c4a-480e-b4a4-8faa59fff7d.jpg

 

fishing is nature's medical prescription

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ate a perch a long time ago very nice it was too but the club rules forbid it now,I ate a trout I caught last year and it tasted of mud so I think they are best off left in the river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...