Hoeseasons encourage eating the fish they catch

Hoseasons Boating Holiday Brochure states: "You might take time to read a good book, paint a little, or fish for your supper."

Not good news what with all the other goings on we have been hearing about of late.

To register you disgust contact: webmaster@hoseasons.co.uk

Just imagine how many fish a family of eight would get through in one sitting.

Lifted from P&P website

I imagine it'd just be the occasional trout or salmon.

or the coastal resort centres, - seafish....with chips!

Or Pike or Perch.... or possibly even the odd Carp.

Why on earth should we be disgusted at the prospect of eating the odd coarse fish ?

There are many brilliant french recipes for Pike, especially Quenelles. Perch tastes almost as good as brown trout and infinitely better than rainbow trout. The Carp is a mainstay of Chinese fish cuisine, with some amazing ways of preparing it.

I am not a vegetarian and I see no reason at all why we, as the fishing community, should start lobbying to make all fish effectively sacrosanct. Let alone the fact that it would mean the end of livebaiting and deadbaiting with coarse fish - only dead sea baits would be legal. You can't eat your cake and have it too...

As long as fish are caught by legal means, are of legal size to take, that taking is permitted by the owner of the water and the fish taken are genuinely for one's own consumption I see no problems with that.

Nor would I wish to lose my (very very rarely exercised but nonetheless real) right to take and eat the odd coarse fish; lost to the present and growing hysteria about foreign immigrants using deadlines, nets, grapnels and dynamite.

The answer is to stop them doing it, not to make the taking of any and all fish to eat an offence.

Even if we did go to such extraordinary lengths it would be pointless if not enforced. That is where the present situation is plainly lacking. The laws are adequate, the enforcement is pathetic. Frogmen with spears after Mussels for heaven's sake.

And before the "disgust" lobby goes too far do we really want to follow the example of the ludicrously over-protective RSPB ? Who, by dint of enormous membership subscriptions and consequential political clout have managed to have every single bird in Britain listed as protected.
Yep, that's all of them. Every single blessed one. Whether endangered or not.

Including Cormorants of whatever size. And Magpies, egg stealers extraordinaire - surprise surprise at the decline in the sparrow population as a result of their predation. But that's what happens when fanaticism takes over from rational balance.

Brown trout are an indeginous specie but no one objects when one of them is knocked on the head and taken home for dinner so why the concern for the odd perch or pike. I've tasted carp in Bulgaria and wasn't too keen on it but perch are delicious and lets face it on most waters pretty prolific, far more so than trout even on rivers such as the Test and Itchen.
There's a hell of a difference between taking the odd fish for supper and the organized illegal netting and trapping that's being practiced by certain elements of society so let's try and keep things in perspective. I can't see many families spending their holidays catching and cooking fish. Most of them will pull up at bankside pubs for a meal or moor up in a marina and head for the nearest fast food outlet.

"fish for your supper" is just a phrase that the copywriter has used to portray an idyllic boating holiday.

I think its unlikely that the average British holidaymaker, having read the advert, will go and catch a roach or perch and chuck it on the barbie. We British are used to eating sea and game fish but we haven't much idea about recipes for coarse fish.

Sorry Kevin with Evan's very good post on this one.

Isn't it good that Hoeseasons is encouraging people to fish in the first place?The more that is done to make angling part of the mainstream culture the better.

I agree with the aspect of taking fish for food, but to me there are local byelaws as regards to how many and what size of fish can be taken which hoseasons have clearly not defined, i do recall a big stink in the angling Times and debated on here recently where it was highlighted that fish thieves had targeted a certain broads boatyard.
If it was that legal and free surely the uproar that story caused wouldn't have surfaced?

By the way Evan, the post was lifted from the P&P website, don't shoot the messenger!

Kevin,

That story was widely held to be of very spurious foundation and angered a lot of predator anglers as it was stated the fish were being taken for the deadbait market.

Not having a pop at you Kevin, sorry if it seemed that way - you do say lifted from the P&P website !

I've had a look at the P + P thread.It appears Hoeseasons have agreed to amend their brochure for next year.Rejoice! The fish of the Broads are safe from the pillage holiday anglers are bound to cause with their 5 foot boy's rods and 10lb line. How many fish are we talking about?Its hard enough to get people to eat fish from Sainsbury's let alone knock up a quick bream en papilotte for the barby.

Of course its still all right for the same holiday maker to pole up at the nearest carp puddle and fish for stunted carp in overcrowded conditions because we do them great service of throwing them back so the next punter can do likewise.

Double standards?

Preserving fish from being taken for the table on an occasional basis simply to keep them alive them for our sport is not one that can be either intellectually or morally justified in my view.

The one thing that used to be of help way back when I were't lad, the Suffolk version of the equivalent of an EA rod licence used to come with a very handy idiot's guide on the back setting out a list of species and the minimum size, nose to fork of tail, below which you wern't allowed to take home for the pot.

Nowadays I haven't a clue if any such minimum sizes still exist - I assume they must do ? And if they do still exist, just what they are ! Google and Jeeves don't seem to know.... anyone ?

its always the same. rape the seas, wipe out the cod, destroy the breeding grounds, who cares.

but no one is allowed to mention eating a coarse fish. why not. are they gold plated?

Somtimes I think English anglers have lost the plot. Some species of fish are nourishing and good to eat - and this includes some of the coarse fish.

Yet some anglers act as if coarse fish are sacred, and it's a sin to eat them.

If my club rules allowed it, I would take home the occasional grayling or perch to eat - but the rules don't allow it, so I don't eat coarse fish.

It's normal throughout the rest of the world that anglers will eat some of the fish they catch. Why are English anglers so up tight about eating the occasional fish ?

It's ridiculous. We stuff fish into keepnets and a fair proportion of those die - just look along the water at the edge of the bank after a successful match.

Yet we're supposed to avpid eating fish. Not me. Where the rules allow, I've tried everything. Gudgeon were good, floured and fried. Perch are excellent, as are zeds. Don't bother with pike.

Even where the rules don't allow I'd probably whack an eel. What I don't eat I can use for bait.

Yes Mark why not finish them off who cares if they are becoming endangered...

I care a great deal. But the few I might take in a year is nothing, not a grain of sand, compared to the number that are being lost due to climate change and pollution. That's the problem I'd want to solve.

It's sheer fantasy to believe that if we stop killing the occasional fish there will be more around. I'm all for principles, but when they are overtaken by reality they become completely pointless.

Fish replenish themselves at the rate of tens of thousands per adult every year. If conditions are right, there's high fry survival. If they're not, there are fewer fish. That's what governs what there is to catch.

"Fish replenish themselves at the rate of tens of thousands per adult every year. If conditions are right, there's high fry survival. If they're not, there are fewer fish. That's what governs what there is to catch. "

and i suppose that the 1000's of tons of fish caught in the nets has nothing to do with the decline of fish stocks? or the 1000's tons of dead fish chucked back as being to small or the wrong species?

taking the occasional fish is fine and i have no problem with it, but to put the decline of any fish down to just not having the right conditions is wrong, while it isnt helping its the over fishing of the fish that is doing the damage.

I'm also a "I"ll try anything" man......in a prolific water there is nothing wrong with taking the odd one for the pot......i have a far greater problem with idiots throwing predators up the bank to stink!

Most modern palates would only try coarse fish once anyway!!