Carp Baits and Nutrition Recognition

Great pair of articles from Graham & Jeff, extremely well written andbased on common sense and logic, reflecting the thoughts and observations of many of us on this site.

With carp I feel that their success as a species is based on their willingness to try & exploit new food sources, where other species are less inclined. However, prolonged exposure to a food source can change feeding habits of other species, look at the success of pellets for bream & barbel for example. When I started fishing most of the baits available & successful today were not invented, or readily available. In fact if it were not for the exponential increase in the popularity of carp, I do not believe that this change in baits would have occurred.

I firmly believe that it is as a result of anglers prolonged use of a particular bait type, that the feeding habits of fish has changed, were it not for the introduction of baits a lot of waters would be unable to support the biomass now available.

Baits first have tocatch the angler, who then is confident enough to use it for a prolonged period, and hopefully enjoy some success, as the fish become familiar with this new food.

I remember reading somewhere as a kid that on some lincolnshire rivers below pea processing plants that peas were an excellent bait, never heard of peas being used wholesale as a bait though.

Bait is likefaith to some people, they have their own theories, which are virtually impossible to substantiate, but they entirely believe.

If we had to work hard to survive we wouldnt be as gutty - same as the fish. Though i do think the fat gutty fish thing is hereditary, theses plenty of big lean fish. After all, we all know overweight people is down to genetics, not just eating too much!

I would like to think that Carp can on the odd occasion be tempted to try something completely at random, just like you or i might in a sweet shop, we happen to see something and without knowing that we would like or dislike it we might be tempted to try it, based on its colour or smell or both, or perhaps we dont particualrycare forthe colour but we'd try it anyway.

I have tried using blue sweetcorn, i dunno why, i just did, it didnt do all that well infact i caught nothing, but ive also caught nothing before on commercially sold baits that score well everywhere on every species for everyone!!.

There is ofcourse more to catching fish on certain baits or certain smelling baits or certain smelling coloured baits, there is always chance, however slight, it must always be there, or we wouldnt try in the first place.

Now i know that humans are not the same as fish and neither for that matter are cats, i do know that my cats will not eat just anything that they dont normally eat, no matter how hungry they are, they might have been outside all day and come home starving, if i offer them some Aldi home brand they just sit there looking at me, and if i offer them nothing else they just go and lie down without eating anything.

My cats will not eat anything just cos thats all thats available, yet they may try new things albeit reluctantly, each cat has its own preferences, whilst these do not vary wildly they do still vary slightly, it could be the same for fish, infact im sure it would be, why not?

Ihave 1 cat that only eats gravy based cat food, and another that eats only jelly based cat food, i have others that eatboth gravy and jelly but on some days will only prefer one and notboth.

Anyway fish are obviously not cats, well some fish are cats but... my point is that if its what they want then they may eat it, if its something new then they may still be tempted to try it, but that can take time, andif its something they 'personally' dont like with a passion... well, good luck, you will need it, but we know all this already.

I like chicken and mushroom pies and other unhealhy things, based on the fact they smell nice and taste delicious, im not caring how good or bad for me they are, i personally dont think Carp swim round looking for the 'healthy option' i dont think they even know the difference, to them its just food, what they need to survive, they either like it or they dont, theyre either hungry or theyre not... could it be that simple?

I no longer have any idea what im talking about... this is the cats are magic forums right? ;D

A bit of a rambling response Paul but I get your point.

The most telling remark in your post though is:

"i personally dont think Carp swim round looking for the 'healthy option'"

Which sums up exactly what I feel about much of the claptrap written about baits and flavours.

However, you also wrote:

"..... i do know that my cats will not eat just anything that they dont normally eat, no matter how hungry they are, they might have been outside all day and come home starving, if i offer them some Aldi home brand they just sit there looking at me, and if i offer them nothing else they just go and lie down without eating anything. My cats will not eat anything just cos thats all thats available, yet they may try new things albeit reluctantly....."

The difference between your cats and wild fish is that your cats know you, they know that you won't allow them to starve, and they're clever enough to work out that if they ignore the 'new' food for long enough you'll give them what they want.

sorry for the short reply, was secretly replying from the dinner table in Seville where I was forced away for the weekend..... lol!

i think it depends on the water you fish, and how long you are fishing for, if you had a syndicate lake with limited numbers of members, then you can outfish everyone by applying a decent "food" bait - but you'll always have guys get results on "crap" baits as, just like us, fish must just like the change. its the old steak dinner analogy.

however, fishing somewhere like Linear, where hundreds of different baits can go in over a week, i cant see how fish "know" which bait has done them the good - so a decent "attractor" bait is the way to go - no harm having a decent "attractor" food bait though is there......

carp will try everything, so long as it doesn't actually repel them then there is a chance that you'll get a take with an efficient rig. but again, no harm having a bait that might do them a bit of good is there?

as an aside, look at how premier took apart waters where people were fishing high protein milks in the late 80's.... do fish just prefer the taste of fishmeals or was it a baiting situation they hadn't come across before?

i do find it amusing that a post about a £600 reel gets 430 views and 30 odd posts, and one about a though provoking bait article gets 3!

Last year i tried prebaiting a few spots for carp on my local canal & had some positive results. Im not sure whether the bait i introduced was keeping the fish coming backbecause it was good for them or if it was just that they liked the taste. I tried to mix up lots of particles & sometimes included a handful of various boilies (some food based & some hi-attract) over a long period of time. The hi-attract boilies always sat there for longer than a lot of the other food items, in fact the first item to be picked up was usually Chickpeas - did they prefer these food items for nutritional reasons or taste? I'll never know but what i do know is i caught myself a new PB!

I can't dispute what you're saying Dave for the simple reason that what we're saying -me, you and everyone else -about baits and flavours, is based on a mixture of personal experience, assumption, conjecture, perception and, to a degree, what the masses have come to accept.

None of our opinion is based on scientific fact, the results of scientifically controlled bait and flavour trials, or any kind of evidence that makes any of our findings indisputable.

You say: "if you had a syndicate lake with limited numbers of members, then you can outfish everyone by applying a decent "food" bait."

I can'tprove you're wrong because I have no evidence to say otherwise, and you can'tprove you're right for the same reason.

You can offer plenty of circumstantial 'evidence' by quoting several instances in your experience that back up what you're saying. And I could argue against that by quoting several instances in my experience that suggest something else.

For instance, the syndicates of my experience are made up of a majority of members who are very experienced, dedicated anglers. Being experienced they are more likely to use a 'food' bait (mainly because they've been told a 'food' bait is best and because they believe that and therefore fish it with confidence).

But also because they're experienced they are likely to fish better than the less experienced in all other respects - location, method choice and application - as well as bait choice. I would suggest that it is their overall ability that is resulting in their success, rather than it being down to a 'food' bait.

The majority of experienced carp anglers believe (not 'know')that a 'food' bait is more likely to consistently catch carp than a 'stodge' bait, and therefore that's what they use. So with a majority of experienced carp anglers using 'food' baits it isn't surprising that 'food' baits catch the most fish.

I agree with you Graham about the clap trap regarding baits. Carp can be caught on artificial baits with no nutritional value whatsoever.

I agree totally Graham, i was in a bit of a rush this morning and should've expanded again.

take the "experienced syndicate" - they are all really good anglers, can find fish and get them feeding. rigs are efficient and the anglers are fishing well - so the last 1% might come down to which one has the most acceptable bait - whether thats a food bait or not is the question!

one of the most successful brands of freezer baits around at the moment rely on attractors in the main - there is an argument that a lot of the popular "commercial" baits aren't exactly that great in the HNV stakesanyway....

not so sure about the scientific thing.... theres a huge amount of work on carp nutrition, but how a lot of that translates from a lab to a highly stocked lake is debatable.

the "humans still choosing crap" arguement is difficult - we have the thought process to make a choice and fast food companies spend huge amounts to make their food attractive - a mcdonalds burger has to have a gherkin in it or it would technically bea sweet! - and marketting to try and portray their meals as healthy. because we have all the healthcare, heated homes and pharmaceuticals people stay alive after abusing their hearts, livers,kidneys, etc.whether they would a few years is debatable!

but carp are looking at survival, rather than just having the most satisfying short term experience...... aren't they?

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Ray Roberts wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>I agree with you Graham about the clap trap regarding baits. Carp can be caught on artificial baits with no nutritional value whatsoever.</blockquote>


very few carp get caught on artificials that aren't fished over some sort of bait...... typically, if you fish a hookbalancedwith a bit of cork over a bag of pellets, you'll catch as the hook will get taken in with everything else it sucks in.

thats not to say carp cruise around looking for bits of plastic.

if you look deeper, Butyric Acid is used in the production of plastics - who is to say that plastic isn't attractive?

Dave: "but carp are looking at survival, rather than just having the most satisfying short term experience...... aren't they?"

That's just it, unlike humans, carp are not making any kind of decision based on nutrition, or the lack of it,when they come across a bait. <ul>[*]Intense hunger will drive them to eat anything.[*]Simple hunger could make them more selective.[*]Just browsing but not particularly hungry at allcould make them very selective.[/list]

But that selection (I believe anyway) will be based on what they fancy, and that will be based on smell and taste. It won't be based on nutritional values.

If we accept that there is a preference for 'food' baits, that preference could be based on nothing more than the fact that 'food' baits (where carp are concerned) smell and taste better than the less nutritious ones.

Just because we may think that a heavily flavoured ball of stodgesmells more attractive than a ball of nutrition that may be unflavoured doesn't mean that the same thing applies where carp are concerned.

After all, we can't smell anything attractive in a bloodworm, but.........

if its as easy as a "heavily flavoured stodge ball" why do those baits go largely untouched on rich waters? or can only get takes as singles?

even trout pellets get ignored.... but hemp or tigers get picked up?

the fish obviously recognise them as food, but wont feed on them. they might pick up one in isolation though.....

its difficult to have a real discussion in relation to over stocked waters as they just want toget it down their neckbefore something else does!

What I'm saying is that the carp may well prefer the 'food' bait, but not because they recognise the nutritious appeal of it, but simply because, to them, it smells and tastes better than the ball of stodge.

It's the nutrition recognition theory I'm challenging, that's put forward so many times by the psuedo carp food scientists/bait experts.

ok, how about particles?

they'll catch really well, then around spawning time boilies will outscore them until a couple of weeks after. then it can close down again until early autumn when boilies come into their own again as they feed up for winter?

is that an example of nutritional recognition, as the times they need the nutrition they go for the boilie - if it was purly taste i dont know of a carp that'll turn their nose up at a tiger nut.....

as an aside, whatis itthat carp smell and taste? it doesn't know what a strawberry is, and some strawberry flavours are better than others. what makes a fish want to pick it up to investigate?

after all, fish eat their own excrement!

Too many questions with too many possible answers.

Are they going for the particles because at spawning time small food creatures are in plentiful supply and they are preoccupied with small items? Are they prefering boilies again in late autumn because they're going for the bigger mouthfuls when they feed up for winter?

"whatis itthat carp smell and taste? it doesn't know what a strawberry is"

Exactly the point madein both articles from Jeff and myself. "Some anglers state that x ingredient is best in winter and y flavour is best when the sun sets on an October evening. Others say that flavours don't make any difference; that it's all about having a good base mix. But how do they know?

And as I said earlier regarding what carp can smell and taste:

"After all, we can't smell anything attractive in a bloodworm, but........."

Ive seen adverts in the past where the blog basically said that Carp will want to eat our baits because they know our baits contain X amount of nutrients and Carp know whats good for them to stay healthy... etc etc, now i just dont buy that myself.

I would rather prefer to think that a well placed bait that is completely accepted as food by the fish on that venue and it is well presented that eventualy a run will occur...

Carp cannot surely swim round sizing up all the offerings that they can find before deciding on which one they think will keep them healthy or is 'better' for them, thats just being silly, isnt it?

Edit: Sorry for rambling earlier, and thankyou for the reply.

but like you've said Graham, any base mix - however bland to us - will smell different to a carp.

how does a carp find bloodworm? how about finding them by what they produce?

Has anyone tried using a non flavoured, non coloured yet high nutrient enhanced boilie tocheck results?

Surely if Carp really do care for their well being and acknowledge that these high nutrient baits really are good for them thenthey would still snap them up freely and happily at every opportunity?

We'd all be baggin up if that were the case...

We just don't know anything much about what carp are tasing and smelling do we? But like Paul, I don't buy the nutrition recognition theory at all.