This may sound controversial (who me?) but I don't like keeping small pike and much rather keep bigger ones.

If you don't like eating pike you are missing it........big time. But here's the rub........avoid the little fellars like the plague.

First off......little pike are a pain in the rear to clean. Oh sure it can be done but it's a pain in the keister. Plus you end up with small stringy strips off the back that doesn't do justice to the firm and fine nature of pike meat. The bones are small and fine and it is easy to cut through them making for a mess and a mouthful of bones  :P .

I like a pike at least 30" in length and if there are a few guys around one about 36" is even better. If it's a fat one your really in for a treat. Those top strips are now nice and meaty........You will start to get an appreciation of just how firm and sweet pike meat really is once a bigger fish is put into the pan. Plus......with thicker, fatter bones Mr Pike is easy to clean. I will clean a small one in a pinch but usually won't bother. Learn to clean pike, get a decent one and try it out........the local walleye population will thank you and so will your canoeing partners.  8-)

apparently, i clean pike differently than you. who would have guessed???

i like those mid side fish 20-25" ones if im going to eat pike. i clean them as you would a walleye, then skin and finally every 1/4" i cut almost all the way through the fillet which cuts the "Y" bones. fish this size have bones that fry out when cut in this method. then i cut the fillet (which should look like a piano keyboard) into chunks, then bread and fry.

its how my dad did it and how he taught me. not sure if it is the best/easiest/fastest method out there, but it seems to work for us and we never have anyone complain of bones.

When my brother and I were kids, our grandparents took us up to Canada a couple of times.  We fished all day, every day of those trips with my brother and I catching a lot of small pike.  Being boys and not knowing any better, of course we wanted to keep and eat as many as we could.  Grandpa would clean just enough for supper, but no more.  We ate pike every day for both shore lunch and supper back at camp.  Looking back on it, I not only can't thank my grandpa enough for cleaning those fish for us, but I feel kind of sorry for him!  Lol!  But man, were those ever the good ole days.

Aside from the incredible palatial fish cleaning facility, electric knife, and squeegie, this is how I was taught to clean northern pike.

Big ones are easier to clean, but small ones taste better IMHO.  Of course, what is considered "big" and "small" varies considerably.

I agree with MT, northern pike are tasty fish. 

prouboy

It helps if I remember to add the link.

  (You need to Login or Register

he forgot to cut the cheeks out!! thats the best part!

also, those plier doo-dads look pretty nifty, might have to find me a pair of them

That was a pretty good video. He makes it look pretty easy!

Do Northerns have fat cheeks? Do Bass? I honestly don't know. I always thought Walleye cheeks were for the cook to nosh on while checking the temp in the pan.

Yet, as a kid, I also remember my dad once frying up a pan of frozen cheeks. His skinner was strictly used for bullheads which are also excellent in Spring. His fingernails and a sharp knife live on I guess.

But honestly, I'll cut off the three real easy fillets from a Northern. Eagles gotta eat too and I've never discovered a nice bug free waist level countertop....

FWIW -   (You need to Login or Register There is a kind of a a trick to it that works on bullheads too.

Jax.......

Hold your pike upright......go from the back downward until you hit the tops of the Y bones.........strip off to the dorsal fin.

These are the best pieces of fish in freshwater other than perch (sacrilege!!). I will definitely disagree with Prouboy here.......the bigger pike will render the fattest tenderloin strips. Now they can strut their stuff. There is no other freshwater fish that I know of with such firmness. Canadian Walleyes have a little better taste but if you like it less flaky the pike strips are the treat.

And like db I take the two pieces from the dorsal to the tail on either side. This is all fast and easy and yes everything needs to eat so that is all I bother with on a smaller pike..........but, on a bigger pike it is not that tough to proceed to put a little time in and work around the Y bones. The bones are now fully developed and not so bad to work around with a sharp knife.

I put a death sentence on a 14lb pike on Isle Royale (blood flowing from its gills). It fed 7 people and was absolutely a wonderful eating fish as far as taste was concerned. I do strongly suggest releasing such fish though as they are spawners but bigger pike taste great IMO.

Oh, one last thought on bigger pike filets.......

I'm a little picky on fish flavor and for that reason won't buy usually purchase fish in restaurants or at the supermarket. Here is a tip you should definitely employ on larger fish of any species......

Cut the red out. Red is blood/fat and it will impart a bit of a stronger "fishy" flavor. It is well worth the few extra seconds per filet to trim this red stuff off your meal. A sharp knife and a flat surface helps.

Smaller fish have far less of this and consequently are thought to be better eating. This may be true to a point........but you can improve the table quality of the big boys by this simple step.

Now that I think about it a bit longer, boiled chunks of Northern smothered in squeeze butter ... Ahhhhh ... tastes just like FREASH lobster and the meat is way easier to get to when sitting on a rock watching the sunset.

My mouth is watering watering just typing this.

yep, all decent size fish have cheeks. they are bit more stringy in texture but i really enjoy them.

@mt, yep, definitely have to cut the "mud line" out. all the brown glands/mucus producing stuff. ESPECIALLY on lake trout. thats why i skin everything. its worth taking the extra minute to clean off all that stuff.

i too, shy away from fish from restaurants, aside from salmon(store bought that i prepare), my wife loves the stuff

to be honest, i dont know if ive eaten a pike from canada to date? usually we have enough lakers/walleye that we dont even really think to try. same with smallmouth bass. the pike/bass from where im from are pretty mushy/soft and really slimy.

jaximus wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2013 at 9:59am:

to be honest, i dont know if ive eaten a pike from canada to date?

Eating fish from Canada reminds of eating saltwater fish> in this way.........when I eat grouper (that I caught, cleaned and prepared) I say "yup, this is the best fish" and then I eat mutton snapper and say "nothing is better than Mutton" and so on. It is all good.

Pike are not inferior to any of the canoe country grand slam species and in some respects are better especially if you use a bigger fish. Here, try this on your next fish fry.........catch a fat 33" pike and clean it in the manner I describe. Then have your walleyes and smallys along for the ride. Taste and compare. What I like is the change in texture from walleye to pike.......especially if you have big thick pieces. That is the key IMO.

Furtman has a illustration on how to fillet a NP in his Boundary Waters Fishing Guide.
I've done it a few times and you end up with 5 fillets.
The bigger the fish the easier to get those nice long side fillets while avoiding those Y bones.

Smaller NPI do as db does and "feed the eagles".
IF your only exposure to eating pike is from warm waters, your in for a treat with cold water caught NP.
Same with bass from warm waters. I think that's the reason they invented some of those good old boy fish frying breading. It helped hide that mushy/nasty flavor. :P

Even if your a fan of breading/frying your fish, try just a simple pan fried fillet with minimal seasons from just SM/LGM/NP or even Walleye from a cold water source and it's head and tails better than it's warm water brethren.

I'd rather not feed the wildlife any more than necessary, just to avoid training the birds to depend on handouts, so I try to keep nothing that's bigger than I can eat. Last summer on Metacryst (a fairly untravelled lake), by the time I had pulled up to a rock to clean my catch, there were two seagulls floating about 20 m offshore, just waiting. I don't think I've ever seen eagles eating "Quetico roadkill" though.

So for NP, my keepers are usually 18-20" or so, which I assume counts as "small". Besides, northerns this size are everywhere, and they're really dumb, which is important for fishing noobs like me  ;D. I use Furtman's method for cleaning too, and, well, I'm getting better at it.

NP has a stronger taste than walleye, so I find it takes better to spicier recipes. Fried blackened or seasoned with lemon pepper are my two favourites for NP, while walleyes, trout and lakers usually get just a bit of s&p and maybe some herbs. I can go either way with bass.

[/size]
Quote:

there were two seagulls floating about 20 m offshore, just waiting

Ever notice that even if you can't see or hear a seagull for hours/miles of paddling, the minute you stop to clean your catch, they show up. :-?

If we could get the seagulls to start posting on QJ, we could set up a "PCRD" (Paddlers Cleaning Rock Database). I'm sure they know all the standard spots.

Joe_Schmeaux wrote on Sep 24^th, 2013 at 8:12pm:

I don't think I've ever seen eagles eating "Quetico roadkill" though.

On Basswood in Backbay I popped a healthy Pike off a point on a topwater ( a memorable fish).......we pulled onto a long grassy point to clean the fish and eat it. By the time we were done we had not one but two eagles fussing and picking at the pike which was apparently a bit to big to fly off with. It was quite a treat to see them so close and on the ground.......they seem so much bigger on the ground.

Another time I was on Argo and picked up a laker. I cleaned it and was in the process of frying it up when a gull showed up soon followed by an eagle. Both assumed positions in the treetops waiting for my departure. I wonder who won that battle?

I see no adverse effect from leaving cleaned fish behind. The animal kingdom is rife with such examples. From the wolves running herds of caribou and clipping the back tendons and leaving far more than they could ever eat...... to mink who kill for the fun of it and leave a bloody trail of dead things every where they go. Everything has to eat and very little actually goes to waste.

Joe_Schmeaux wrote on Sep 24^th, 2013 at 8:12pm:

I'd rather not feed the wildlife any more than necessary, just to avoid training the birds to depend on handouts, so I try to keep nothing that's bigger than I can eat. Last summer on Metacryst (a fairly untravelled lake), by the time I had pulled up to a rock to clean my catch, there were two seagulls floating about 20 m offshore, just waiting. I don't think I've ever seen eagles eating "Quetico roadkill" though.

What time of year? I'm still not seeing the gulls I use to. Way more eagles though.

Eagles are scavengers too. It's a service I appreciate. FWIW - It's a good idea to cut the heads off the carcasses. Otherwise, if they get challenged they tend to fly off with more than they can carry and sometimes drop stuff in shallow water that's a bit deeper than gulls can reach.

This year on Nan I picked up a hungry gull. He was swimming and flying in front of my canoe for quite a while as I looked for a portage to Camel. He sat in front of the camp I took on Camel as I lounged and ate and was in front of the canoe for my evening paddle until it got too dark for him.

The next morning I cleaned two walleyes on the rocks in front of the campsite. The eagle that must live behind the site got to them as I reached the campsite. A half hour later the gull shows up. You snooze you lose! Sorry bud. He still hung around for a while hoping. I felt bad for him.

Next morning I caught and cleaned one more for him before I left the lake. I didn't really want to portage a fish but I felt sorry for him as it was one of the two gulls I saw on my entire 11 days. I saw more eagles than gulls.

Quote:

to mink who kill for the fun of it and leave a bloody trail of dead things every where they go. Everything has to eat and very little actually goes to waste

I'm pretty sure only man kills for the "fun" of it.
Fun is something that you need a human level of intelligence to seek.

Mink kill by biting the necks of their prey.
Sever the neck artery, your going to get a lot of blood.
Animals that we say are having "fun" are just responding to outside stimuli that trigger biological responses on their part.
You take a cat/ mink/ weasel etc and put them in cage with multiple prey animals darting about, they'll attack everything that moves because it's a natural response for them.

Same with wolfs / caribou.  The wolves are just maximizing their chances for a meal by attacking as many as they can, not knowing if the animal will drop or just be wounded and escape. It's obviously a inexact "science" and that's why they sometimes kill more than they can eat. But like you said, everything needs to eat and maybe that's Natures way to make sure every predator/scavenger in that food chain has a chance to survive.

That's why animal experts say never to turn and run when facing a dangerous animal. It just triggers even more aggressive behavior.

What we humans might see as just killing for "fun" has a instinct driven reason that we might not understand but they do.

solotripper wrote on Sep 25^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

Quote: to mink who kill for the fun of it and leave a bloody trail of dead things every where they go. Everything has to eat and very little actually goes to waste I'm pretty sure only man kills for the "fun" of it.

But how do you know? I used to run coon hounds. My dog enjoyed going so much that he would blow the house down from his pen every evening so we could get going. When I showed up to load him he would be all wiggles and whines.......obviously delighting in the prospect of pursuing raccoons.

He was the best kill dog that anyone that I hunted with had ever seen. One night, late in the season and very late at night (the frost was heavy on the ground) I unleashed him in a cut corn field. Moments later was the most awful ruckus coming from him that I had ever heard (he was a big dog and very loud).........I thought he had gotten tangled up in an electric fence and went running towards him as fast as I could.

I came upon quite a standoff in my headlight beam........the biggest racoon that I had ever seen and Duffy were faced off amongst the cut corn stalks. The coon seen me and bolted and duffy grabbed hold. They tumbled round and round with the coon putting out the punishment in heavy doses as my dog howled with pain. The broke apart again and my dog was splayed out, tail in the air wagging wildly and face barking his adversary as another standoff ensued.......he was obviously enjoying himself tremendously. He liked nothing better than to grab a coon by the throat and pin it to the ground until it stopped moving.

After seeing what is obviously pure unadulterated pleasure in pursuing and killing no one can convince me that carnivores don't take some delight in doing their thing. But that's just my opinion and I could be wrong  ;)

Quote:

But how do you know?

I did a pretty thorough Google search and the answers came in two different perspectives.

I couldn't find one single scientist/report that said mink or any animal kills for "fun", which is a human "trait".

There were plenty of anecdotal posts by people who had observed what they consider mink/animals doing killing for "fun" but posts replying to their claims by actual scientist's explained that the "fun" was actually the animal re-acting to stimuli as nature programmed it too.


So while your coon dog in your eye's was having "fun" in his eyes, it was just doing what thousands of years and human help had bred him to do.

PBS Nova did a show about how they are working on way for humans to "talk" to dogs/animals?

Maybe then we'll know if there having fun chasing coons, chewing your slippers or crapping in the walkway.

I'm guessing the crapping part is just for giggles. ;)

I will agree with you that there is a genetic component which is intrinsic in (dare I say it) the Creation. But I contend that animals have lots of basic emotions that scientists would say is "instinct" or "programming".

There are far to many examples of animal behavior to suggest other wise. No one can convince me after having spent years, hundreds of nights and thousands of hours with my dog that he didn't enjoy his profession. In fact I would dare say he was as specialized in his art as these fellows  ;)
  (You need to Login or Register

And if I find out (after we can talk to our dogs) that the crapping in the house was just for giggles, well lets just say trouble is coming.

Oh goodness, we have strayed far and wide from pike filets have we knot? 

   

ahh! it appears  i missed out on so much

@MT, you said use thick pieces, im not really a fan, gotta be thin and crispy! im pretty OCD about my breading/fish ratios

@ the discussion about killing for fun, i was under the understanding, not sure where it came about, probably from MANY hours of watching animal planet, that mink, people and snakehead fish killed for fun

mastertangler wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2013 at 11:03am:

Hold your pike upright......go from the back downward until you hit the tops of the Y bones.........strip off to the dorsal fin. And like db I take the two pieces from the dorsal to the tail on either side.

Ditto, But there's a "parachute cord" that needs to be pulled out of that top fat piece too.