db wrote on Apr 12^th, 2014 at 5:56am:


good point and the answer is yes and no.......... or perhaps the best answer is "it depends".

Part of the reason that smaller fish seem to taste better is their fat deposits are usually quite minimal, in small walleyes it is often non existent. The bigger the fish the more likely some additional knife strokes will be required.

here is a story that might illustrate my point (not another story)

I became interested in fishing the overnight salt water charter boats some 20 years ago. That first trip results for my Dad and I were rather slim but we did manage a twin pair of 40lb Amberjacks (if you think your tough you don't know Jack). I asked a handful of guys on the boat if they were good to eat and to a man they replied that "they're good smoked". Whenever I hear that a fish is only good smoked the impression I am left with is the fish isn't fit for a dog.

Nevertheless we kept the mid size jacks. One we left with an artist friend (Bruce) who had let me park my rig at their place. He actually seemed quite pleased to have it. Hmmmm.

We got the fish home and put a knife to it. These fish have a deposit of fat and blood and their sides like nothing I had seen before. The whole side of the fish was layered in about 1/2" of yuk. I carefully trimmed it away and cut the plentiful meat into cubes and proceeded to fry up a batch.

I will never forget what happened next. My Dad and I were seated across from each other with a big pile of fish between us. We each grabbed a piece and as is my custom I broke a steaming piece open and gave it a whiff. "Doesn't smell bad" I quizzically commented. We each took a bite, there was a long pause, and then our eyes lock simultaneously.........My Dad shot one of his all time best lines......"We have to go back to Bruces and get our other fish"

To this day Amberjack get a bad rap. I believe it is because of a lousy cleaning job. I have served Amberjack on many an occasion including to large groups of over 20 and more often than not I am asked what kind of fish they are eating (Jack has a texture much like chicken).

Bottom line? Small fish don't worry about it but on the bigger fish take the time to remove the fatty deposits, it is easy enough to do.   

Doesn't most if not all of the lateral line come out anyway when you remove the pin bones ... depending on how you do it?

I too agree - - the strong fish taste usually is related to not removing the fat from the fish.  As stated above, the dark looking red stuff is fat and one should strive to remove all of it from the fillet.

Just like people, you can see differences in the amount of fat on fish of the same species.  If one just does the standard fillet & skin job, there can be quite a bit of difference in how much red fat is present right along the lateral line of the fish.  As MT suggested, take the extra time to cut out this section of red meat and you will definitely notice the difference in taste.

jaximus wrote on Apr 11^th, 2014 at 1:09am:


whats the old saying.........youth is wasted on the young .......I can never decide which fish I like best in the north country. When I eat walleye I think that it is the best. Then I eat a pike and marvel at the firm white meat, and of course then there is the lake trout, simply sublime.........

Fishy strong flavor >> Pike? you can't be serious Jax. They are wonderful and my mouth is salivating like Pavy boys dogs just thinking about them. You clean your knife from outside the fish to inside? I suppose I could be wrong but my guess is you would be unable to tell my pile of filets from yours (except of course mine would be lots bigger pieces and that would give the game away  )

Old Salt wrote on Apr 10^th, 2014 at 11:18pm:

I could really go for a few spring bullheads right now. When people say fish and mention a delicate flavor, that's what comes to mind for me. Lightly floured. Mom probably cooked 'em in lard. Can you still buy lard?

MT is dead on. get rid of the lateral line, all the brown stuff, and any white skin areas. i dont like the lower belly meat area, to me that is the WORST part. i always rinse my fillets in cold water also, using my hands to 'scrub' them. getting all of the oils/slime/scales/blood off.

i suspect that the fishy tasting ones are the pike. i ALWAYS clean my knife between filleting and skinning. pike have the worst slime (moreso in winter) and that has a really bad fishy taste. making sure you dont run a dirty(slimey) knife through clean meat is important.

ive never soaked my fish in anything, and only freeze them in plain water. ive heard that soaking fish in milk, saltwater, and some weird vinegar mixture (italian dressing has this so it makes sense) help to remove the fishy taste.

Not to sidetrack this great discussion of culinary art (which should probably be in the cooking forum), I'll share my favorite recipe for cooking carp. After proper cleaning, throwing out the unusable and undesirable parts, take what's left (if any) and bake it on a cedar  plank. When thoroughly cooked, remove the carp, and serve the plank.

Gimp there is no magic amounts. I just cover the fish with milk and splash a generous amount of italian seasoning in with it. It makes a curious combo with the oil in the dressing pooling into droplets and doing all sorts of weird things. Surprisingly enough the fish doesn't taste anything like the dressing at all......in fact I can detect no discernible or distinct type of flavor other than it is quite tasty.

Do remove the fat and blood infested lateral line, it tastes bad, period. Fat and blood is what makes fish taste a bit strong. Fat is usually stored around the belly (sounds oddly familiar  ) and the blood is usually concentrated along the lateral line. A simple "V" cut takes care of it quite easily.

Some fish smell quite strong right out of the lake....Gar are a fine example, so are carp (although both are eaten with abandon in certain circles). We have tried to eat carp on occasion caught out of cold, clean waters.....all without much success. I have no doubt that someone who really is familiar with them and knows how to properly bleed, clean and cook them could probably work culinary magic.

Quote:


I've never had fresh fish that tasted to "fishy/strong". Some fish do have a stronger natural flavor than others, but don't you want your fish of choice to taste like "fish", and not have the flavor hidden under to much breading/seasoning?

Most of the type of fish that are mild, like Cod/Tilapia are the ones that assume the flavor of whatever you prepare them with.

There the kinds of fish, people who "hate" fish will eat, because they're often served with a tasty breading or sauce.

It's like eating Venison/any wild game, compared to beef/chicken.

I don't get the idea that wild fish/game should taste like farm raised so people that don't like "wild" can be made to eat it because the chef has hidden it's natural taste.

IF it smells "fishy", then it's going/gone bad and shouldn't be eaten period.

Assuming you bleed them out before cleaning I'd not worry about the lateral line. It sounds like you're already doing it right if there is such a thing. Anything done in cooking preparation will only serve to mask the unwanted effects of decomposing fish flesh.

If fish caught and cleaned in the morning can be kept a day in the canoe with no ill effects, I'd suspect the flaw is coming during frozen storage. As I recall frozen always had more of a fishy flavor than fresh anyway.

FWIW - My current freezer is a horrible self defrosting model. Ice cream may be rock hard or way too soft depending on timing. Needless to say we don't keep things in our freezer very long. That and length of storage may be something to consider. Is there ever frost inside the bag?