QuietJourney Forums - SM Bass consumption

(Moderators: fishinbuddy, db, Kingfisher, The_Beaver)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Poll

Question: Assuming you eat fish, do you eat SM bass in Q/BW


Yes, without a second thought 39 (46.4%) Sometimes. It's no big deal. 20 (23.8%) Rarely and only in a pinch. 17 (20.2%) Never. Why would you? 8 (9.5%) Total votes: 84 « Created by: PhantomJug on: Apr 30^th, 2011 at 9:55pm »

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8

SM Bass consumption (Read 26179 times)

mastertangler Inukshuk Offline Posts: 3111 Location: florida Joined: Feb 1^st, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #30 - May 2^nd, 2011 at 11:02pm	Quote Print Post
	Right you are! Shellfish are a cleansing agent in any ecosystem. That is one reason I'm not always crazy about eating oysters, shrimp and the like. Must be some reason they aren't kosher. So if the crayfish eat up the pollution and the bass eat the crayfish ............


	WWW IP Logged

Puckster Inukshuk Offline Posts: 1208 Location: St. Paul, Minnesota Joined: Feb 10^th, 2009	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #31 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 1:51am	Quote Print Post
	I think another factor is cultural. I caught a whitefish in Pickerel Lake once...looked like a rough fish, almost like a carp. I didn't know what it was until I got home and had a fisheries biologist id it. Anyway, I let it go, but found out it is considered a delicacy. Carp, for that matter, are eaten by millions of people! So to me it's: fish feed, water quality, and culture. prouboy


	IP Logged

Preacher Contributer Subscriber Offline Posts: 1327 Location: COTU Joined: Apr 10^th, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #32 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 1:50pm	Quote Print Post
	solotripper wrote on May 2^nd, 2011 at 10:45pm: Pollution does it's worse on the lower end of the food chain, we sometimes don't see the results until they show up in the food/game fish. I think you have this backwards, but agree with what I think you're saying. The low end is closest to the source, herbivoires & photosynthesizers & such. The top end is where we tend to eat & where concentrations are highest. Little fish pick up & store little quantities of pollution. They don't live very long so they don't have the chance to build up large quantities. Big fish live for decades & subsist on the little fish. Pollution has a chance to build up. We need to eat further down the chain. Leave tuna & salmon & swordfish alone. For our own health and the health of the world. Ironic that our move to eat up the food chain resulted in our ability to critically examine the results of eating up the food chain. (You need to *Login* or *Register* to view media files and links)


	IP Logged

Preacher Contributer Subscriber Offline Posts: 1327 Location: COTU Joined: Apr 10^th, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #33 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:04pm	Quote Print Post
	mastertangler wrote on May 2^nd, 2011 at 11:02pm: Must be some reason they aren't kosher. Because it's written, that's why. For example, sole is found in the same muck as crab. Those rules exist in the reality of 600BCE - 2000BCE depending on your belief. Cheesburgers aren't kosher either. So much for kosher. For the most part, accepting that the waters are relatively clean, shellfish are fine. Something that irks even my jewish biologist pal. As he states, "Those old rule makers had no understanding of metabolism." The big problem being that much of our waters aren't clean and wont be clean for another 1000 years, all the while we ruin more and more waters in our quest for the two-car-garage.


	IP Logged

Android Jr. Member Offline Posts: 69 Location: Wright County, MN Joined: Apr 19^th, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #34 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:42pm	Quote Print Post
	Preacher wrote on May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:04pm: For the most part, accepting that the waters are relatively clean, shellfish are fine. Something that irks even my jewish biologist pal. As he states, "Those old rule makers had no understanding of metabolism." I hate to get into a religious discussion on this thread but just remind your "pal" that when the orignal idea of kosher was created, there wasn't "rule makers" but only one "Rule Maker". And I'm sure He had all the knowledge of metabolism. I'll leave my comments at that.


	IP Logged

Preacher Contributer Subscriber Offline Posts: 1327 Location: COTU Joined: Apr 10^th, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #35 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:55pm	Quote Print Post
	Android wrote on May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:42pm: Preacher wrote on May 3^rd, 2011 at 2:04pm: For the most part, accepting that the waters are relatively clean, shellfish are fine. Something that irks even my jewish biologist pal. As he states, "Those old rule makers had no understanding of metabolism." I hate to get into a religious discussion on this thread but just remind your "pal" that when the orignal idea of kosher was created, there wasn't "rule makers" but only one "Rule Maker". And I'm sure He had all the knowledge of metabolism. I'll leave my comments at that. He never shows up for his book signings. I suspect it was all done by ghost writers. And that book is, even in the most radical sects, understood and accepted as written by a man with the exception of the Ten Commandments which the first edition was lost entirely and the second written by a man. All my posts are as dictated by FSM, may you be touched by His noodly appendage. Behold The Divine Word.


	IP Logged

SaltedLeech Jr. Member Offline Posts: 54 Location: Michigan Joined: Jan 19^th, 2011	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #36 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 3:04pm	Quote Print Post
	A bit late joining this one but I would prefer eating my shoes versus LT. SM are great from clean water. Like any of the fish don't lkeep the big ones eat the smaller fish. We like to mix up the meals so Walleye are first then Pike and Bass but we very our menu, helps the pallet enjoy the flavor variations of good fish. It amazes me how many people eat LT in MI most of us consider them a nusaunce fish like CARP! Actually I think Carp Would Taste Better


	IP Logged

solotripper Inukshuk Offline Posts: 8103 Location: clarkston MI Joined: Mar 14^th, 2005	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #37 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 3:53pm	Quote Print Post
	S_L, I can't speak for Lake Trout from MI waters, I've only had them smoked and they were excellent, but a LT grilled over a open fire with your choice of seasonings is my 1st choice for Q fish dinners. After that it would be a tossup between pan seared Walleye and NP. SMB I prefer in chowders but in pinch will pan sear as well.


	IP Logged

Preacher Contributer Subscriber Offline Posts: 1327 Location: COTU Joined: Apr 10^th, 2010	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #38 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 4:10pm	Quote Print Post
	My basic rule for eating what I catch is how it tastes without any seasonings or sauces.


	IP Logged

Snow_Dog Voyageur Inukshuk Offline Posts: 1858 Location: Twin Cities Joined: Jul 11^th, 2003	Re: SM Bass consumption Reply #39 - May 3^rd, 2011 at 5:16pm	Quote Print Post
	Quote: A bit late joining this one but I would prefer eating my shoes versus LT. SM are great from clean water. Like any of the fish don't lkeep the big ones eat the smaller fish. We like to mix up the meals so Walleye are first then Pike and Bass but we very our menu, helps the pallet enjoy the flavor variations of good fish. It amazes me how many people eat LT in MI most of us consider them a nusaunce fish like CARP! Actually I think Carp Would Taste Better Have you ever eaten lakers from the BWCA/Quetico? My guess based on this post is that you have not. You really oughta try one someday. They taste nothing like Great Lakes lakers.


	IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›