• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

It’s back !!

Joe Winstanley said:
My late Grandmother who was Yorkshire born and bred (Garforth) always maintained that the proper way to serve Yorkshire pudding was as a starter with gravy, before the roast.

And then with Wensleydale cheese and a rich fruitcake for pudding.
Click to expand...
I live in the next village from Garforth ( Kippax) and i remember starters were a dinner plate sized Yorkshire filled with onion gravy
don't think nobody does this now , the sign of a good Yorkshire to me is when you fill with gravy there should be no leaks onto the plate 👍
 
Tim Marks said:
Yes.

We eat for pleasure as well as nutrition; a fish is programmed to eat to survive.
Click to expand...
Yes, and thus will eat anything that comes it's way to do so?
 
Terry Harman said:
Damian damian damian … there is so much to learn….. pick up yes … eat no !!!
Click to expand...
So they're that clever that now, not only are they able to reject a bait they recognise to be attached to line, but also one they are able to assess and based upon the bait's nutritional composition?
Honestly, is there any part of you that doubts that?
 
Simon Archer said:
Mine tend to be quite doughy in the middle, probably the mix being a little thick. I'd like to get them a bit crisper and with a hole in the middle. Less flour I think.

How are you guys doing the large ones ?? They look spot on.
Click to expand...
2oz normal flour 2 eggs 1/4 pint of full fat milk and water Once mixed keep it cold as possible till it goes int oven on full whack. Turn the oven down to 7 after 10 minutes then cook for another 10/15 mins
 
Joe Winstanley said:
My late Grandmother who was Yorkshire born and bred (Garforth) always maintained that the proper way to serve Yorkshire pudding was as a starter with gravy, before the roast.

And then with Wensleydale cheese and a rich fruitcake for pudding.
Click to expand...
We have it as a starter and then with your dinner as well.
Not had it with cheese but it's on my to do list now. Had it with jam, honey and lemon and golden syrup
 
Damian Kimmins said:
So they're that clever that now, not only are they able to reject a bait they recognise to be attached to line, but also one they are able to assess and based upon the bait's nutritional composition?
Honestly, is there any part of you that doubts that?
Click to expand...
None whatsoever………you need to do a bit of research Damian ….because If that’s not the case they would eat the lead or why fish with any bait just let them eat the hook….seeing as they will eat anything
 
Damian Kimmins said:
So they're that clever that now, not only are they able to reject a bait they recognise to be attached to line, but also one they are able to assess and based upon the bait's nutritional composition?
Honestly, is there any part of you that doubts that?
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what they do Damian. When They feed aggressively everything in the river ends up in their mouths, quite often small stones as their natural food gets lodged between the stones and weeds etc.

They reject anything that sends the wrong signals nutritionally and eat the items that send the correct signals. In theory you could catch a barbel on a stone if it’s surrounded by food items and it was fitted to a very aggressive anti eject rig as there’s a good chance they’d pick it up and spit it out.
 
The carp’s feeding is driven by instinctual capabilities, which, although not ‘thoughtful’ in the human sense of the word, are none the less highly competent ways of seeking out nutrition which will benefit it. The ‘knowledge’ is accumulated in millions of years of coding in the carp’s DNA - it actually senses what is better nutrition and can discern this through chemo-receptors – at the base of a ‘u-bend’ channel in the snout. There, a ‘rosette’ of chemo-receptor cells - up to half a million in a square millimetre -can detect not only the aroma but the nutritional quality and therefore contribution of food. Carp have many more receptor cells than most other fish, and pass information back to the instinctual part of the brain, which assesses it against its ‘database’ built up in the DNA of the fish since time immemorial.
Carp know what’s good for them, and make their selection accordingly, preferring relevance and quality of nutrition over poorer quality food stuffs.
If there is anything unnatural, the carp will sense it.

If the bait smells attractive, but has little innate nutritional value, the carp will pass over it in favour of a bait which does – and in lakes which have reasonable to high fishing pressure and lots of available food, the carp is inclined to be highly selective in what it does and doesn’t choose. High nutritional content will win every time.

This allied to its natural wariness as a species, means that bait has to be both a powerful attractant to get past first base and come to the attention of the fish. Then it has to match up to a nutritional screening to be chosen over other available bait
you might say it’s about carp but it’s still a cyprinoid it’s all the same

………it’s not difficult Damian just simple scientific study’s carried out by people that are much more cleverer than me and you
 
Terry Harman said:
The carp’s feeding is driven by instinctual capabilities, which, although not ‘thoughtful’ in the human sense of the word, are none the less highly competent ways of seeking out nutrition which will benefit it. The ‘knowledge’ is accumulated in millions of years of coding in the carp’s DNA - it actually senses what is better nutrition and can discern this through chemo-receptors – at the base of a ‘u-bend’ channel in the snout. There, a ‘rosette’ of chemo-receptor cells - up to half a million in a square millimetre -can detect not only the aroma but the nutritional quality and therefore contribution of food. Carp have many more receptor cells than most other fish, and pass information back to the instinctual part of the brain, which assesses it against its ‘database’ built up in the DNA of the fish since time immemorial.
Carp know what’s good for them, and make their selection accordingly, preferring relevance and quality of nutrition over poorer quality food stuffs.
If there is anything unnatural, the carp will sense it.

If the bait smells attractive, but has little innate nutritional value, the carp will pass over it in favour of a bait which does – and in lakes which have reasonable to high fishing pressure and lots of available food, the carp is inclined to be highly selective in what it does and doesn’t choose. High nutritional content will win every time.

This allied to its natural wariness as a species, means that bait has to be both a powerful attractant to get past first base and come to the attention of the fish. Then it has to match up to a nutritional screening to be chosen over other available bait
you might say it’s about carp but it’s still a cyprinoid it’s all the same

………it’s not difficult Damian just simple scientific study’s carried out by people that are much more cleverer than me and you
Click to expand...
Makes you wonder how so many big carp get caught on plastic baits. And why they like hemp?.
 
Terry Harman said:
The carp’s feeding is driven by instinctual capabilities, which, although not ‘thoughtful’ in the human sense of the word, are none the less highly competent ways of seeking out nutrition which will benefit it. The ‘knowledge’ is accumulated in millions of years of coding in the carp’s DNA - it actually senses what is better nutrition and can discern this through chemo-receptors – at the base of a ‘u-bend’ channel in the snout. There, a ‘rosette’ of chemo-receptor cells - up to half a million in a square millimetre -can detect not only the aroma but the nutritional quality and therefore contribution of food. Carp have many more receptor cells than most other fish, and pass information back to the instinctual part of the brain, which assesses it against its ‘database’ built up in the DNA of the fish since time immemorial.
Carp know what’s good for them, and make their selection accordingly, preferring relevance and quality of nutrition over poorer quality food stuffs.
If there is anything unnatural, the carp will sense it.

If the bait smells attractive, but has little innate nutritional value, the carp will pass over it in favour of a bait which does – and in lakes which have reasonable to high fishing pressure and lots of available food, the carp is inclined to be highly selective in what it does and doesn’t choose. High nutritional content will win every time.

This allied to its natural wariness as a species, means that bait has to be both a powerful attractant to get past first base and come to the attention of the fish. Then it has to match up to a nutritional screening to be chosen over other available bait
you might say it’s about carp but it’s still a cyprinoid it’s all the same

………it’s not difficult Damian just simple scientific study’s carried out by people that are much more cleverer than me and you
Click to expand...
I reckon that's half right Terry.

They can detect amino acids at mind bogglingly low levels. And these are the cues they use to search for and detect food. They are hard-wired to respond to certain key amino acids that meet their nutritional requirements, but I think perhaps it's a step too far to assert that they 'know what's good for them'. We know that high oil pellets aren't very good for them, but they still eat them. We known that too much hemp is bad for them and that some fisheries have have had to place limits on hemp use to prevent fish from losing condition.

Learnt behaviour must also play an important role in HNV baits/baiting strategies, not just instinct. I fancy that this learnt behaviour probably steers them away baits that have 'attractive' amino acids cues but might not be very digestible (for example) rather than it being an instinctive behaviour.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
I reckon that's half right Terry.

They can detect amino acids at mind bogglingly low levels. And these are the cues they use to search for and detect food. They are hard-wired to respond to certain key amino acids that meet their nutritional requirements, but I think perhaps it's a step too far to assert that they 'know what's good for them'. We know that high oil pellets aren't very good for them, but they still eat them. We known that too much hemp is bad for them and that some fisheries have have had to place limits on hemp use to prevent fish from losing condition.

Learnt behaviour must also play an important role in HNV baits/baiting strategies, not just instinct. I fancy that this learnt behaviour probably steers them away baits that have 'attractive' amino acids cues but might not be very digestible (for example) rather than it being an instinctive behaviour.
Click to expand...
I think it’s more than half right Joe and they are very able to evaluate and determine what is and isn’t nutritionally valuable to them.

Too much of most things isn’t good for anyone including fish and taste will obviously dictate as a partial priority when picking up a food source especially if they don’t know when the next meal is coming.

The pellets probably taste fantastic to a barbel in the same respect I love a chocolate digestive. They’ll eat so many then probably do what I do and go lay on the sofa in total regret of the indulgence while their poor bodies try and deal with the fat/oil content.

If there is enough fish to go around then I can see the appeal as you’ll catch plenty but on low stock waters there’s the risk you’ll fill em up with that high oil feed before they find your bait.
Very small quantities through a slow release feeder a bit like what @Jim Ufton does is the best way to use them as he only introduces a very small amount for a cast that’s out potentially a good couple of hours.

While I’m not a fan of pellets personally I do also believe they can be used responsibly and very effectively by good barbel anglers like Jim.

The rejection of baits based on John’s theory which I absolutely believe is more so when both aspects of the bait are wrong. Over flavored low nutritional boilies. These are high attraction flavours put into an inert round ball effectively.
Fish pick em up because they smell like something they want to eat but often blow them straight back out as they are too strong and provide no value to their diet whatsoever. That’s where your aggressive rigs come into play and you catch them on ejection right on the edge of their mouths.

I have had a lot of carp this closed season with my boy using plastic corn on a method feeder. The hook position every single time has been right on the edge of the lip and in the odd rare case it’s been just on the outside which I would declare as a foul hook. I believe based on John’s theory an over flavoured preserved bait would be very similar in action.

I honestly think they are way more evolved than we are at evaluating a food source in their mouths
 
Richard Isaacs said:
I think it’s more than half right Joe and they are very able to evaluate and determine what is and isn’t nutritionally valuable to them.

Too much of most things isn’t good for anyone including fish and taste will obviously dictate as a partial priority when picking up a food source especially if they don’t know when the next meal is coming.

The pellets probably taste fantastic to a barbel in the same respect I love a chocolate digestive. They’ll eat so many then probably do what I do and go lay on the sofa in total regret of the indulgence while their poor bodies try and deal with the fat/oil content.

If there is enough fish to go around then I can see the appeal as you’ll catch plenty but on low stock waters there’s the risk you’ll fill em up with that high oil feed before they find your bait.
Very small quantities through a slow release feeder a bit like what @Jim Ufton does is the best way to use them as he only introduces a very small amount for a cast that’s out potentially a good couple of hours.

While I’m not a fan of pellets personally I do also believe they can be used responsibly and very effectively by good barbel anglers like Jim.

The rejection of baits based on John’s theory which I absolutely believe is more so when both aspects of the bait are wrong. Over flavored low nutritional boilies. These are high attraction flavours put into an inert round ball effectively.
Fish pick em up because they smell like something they want to eat but often blow them straight back out as they are too strong and provide no value to their diet whatsoever. That’s where your aggressive rigs come into play and you catch them on ejection right on the edge of their mouths.

I have had a lot of carp this closed season with my boy using plastic corn on a method feeder. The hook position every single time has been right on the edge of the lip and in the odd rare case it’s been just on the outside which I would declare as a foul hook. I believe based on John’s theory an over flavoured preserved bait would be very similar in action.

I honestly think they are way more evolved than we are at evaluating a food source in their mouths
Click to expand...
Some of us have evolved nearly as far as a barbel and can tell that chocolate biscuits and Yorkshire pudding are bad for us !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top