|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #31
It does kick up well, but mixing it with a bit of crumb can calm it down. Of the two, straight hemp is easier and better. The oil isn’t the be-all and end-all though – I’d say it’s the crunch factor that really matters. I love hemp; it’s the greatest bait going, but it’s a shame it’s got so pricey. Gone are the days of a sack for £7 from Titmuss when it all split perfectly. Straight hemp, garlic hemp – excellent gear. Id think of nothing of a sack on a spot 1m out, now I think twice !!.
Also thinking about it some real good hemp ground should be like a damp sharp sand that will clump into a ball when squashed in ones hand.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
My experience of crushed raw hemp was in groundbaits/method mix and a lot of it floats, which in the groundbait really helped break it down and mix it up on the bottom of the lake.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your input gents. Funny it's exactly the opposite from each other.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Is your last sentence correct? You talk both times about cooked hemp?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #27
Watched carp drop down in the edge onto crushed raw hemp and eat the area with gusto, grinding up cooked hemp does not seem to leech of as much oil as crushed hemp does either imho.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #26
Can't answer that direct but think about it. Hemp becomes more attractive to carp when cooked. So do Tigers, Peanuts etc. To cook some of these particles takes a long soak to soften them then anything up to 30 minute boiling really get the best from them.
Why do so many add ground up uncooked things like this to a bait mix and think it will work just like the prepared particles do?
A 60-90 second dip of the boilie in water to cook it is not the same as the above process by a long shot. Many years ago (15-20 if my memory is correct) I recorded the internal temperature of a boilie (like you do) whilst cooking it for 90 seconds in a rolling boil. It was under 60°C. This surprises a lot of people. But why, if my baits are soft inside then the egg has not been cooked which happens >75°C.
Don't even get me started in steaming....I am NOT buggering up the inside of my bait by boiling which I proved with this test.
Anyway, back to the topic. I have been playing around with a 'nut mix' over the last couple of years for my own interest. I am increasingly becoming convinced that pre-cooking the nuts (not that tiger are nuts) then dehydrating before grinding them up unlocks more attraction. At least that is what my pond fish told me this summer  Now it's turned cold my fish don't tell me a great deal so something I will carry on looking into next spring plus a better way to dry them out in suitable quantities prior to grinding up for making 5-10kg batches of boilies.
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone found any difference between toasted/roasted, ground hemp vs raw ground hemp in baits? The toasting would make it more easily digestable, but I would also think the toasting can damage some of the attractive elements in the hemp?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #24
Properly prepared particles are just more palatable. Preparing helps release there attractive properties. You wouldn't eat a raw spud would you..
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #23
you are aware that continental fish farmers feed their carp unprepared maize, wheat & barley through the colder months to keep their metabolism.
I have actually been using maples over the last couple of weeks & found they hardly swell up at all when I was preparing them compared to other particles. Being such a small particle, pass through the fish in minutes. I actually had fish passing whole peas on the mat as they were being unhooked - these weren't massive fish either & all swam off strongly.
I suspect there was something else at play here & nothing to do with them swelling up.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #22
Well you can call bull##it as much as you like, but I, and others have witnessed it. It wasn't just one fish either.
We quickly sussed who was feeding unprepared maples and put a stop to it. No more dead carp full of maples were ever found again on that water.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #20
There was a lot of stuff written about nuts having detrimental effects on carp in the 80's that was based on guesswork.
Large amounts were used in lakes - they would all get caught loads & then the bites would stop & the fishing became really hard on the lakes for weeks afterwards.
This scared loads of fishery owners & there were lots of bans & pseudo rubbish written about afloxins, swelling up inside fish & vitamin d deficiencies all of which were based on assumptions & not science.
From what I have read over the last couple of years, I would suggest that it was more likely down to high amounts of sugar making the fish hyperglycemic instead the nuts themselves.
With respect to unprepared particles swelling up in a fish stomach & damaging them - I call bulls1t because -
a) their gut tract is too short & there is no way particles will be inside them long enough for them to swell up
b) They can pass large items through their bodies - I have found all sorts in the bottom of the sack after retaining fish including swan mussel shells.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #20
Exactly.. a load of pseudo science nonsense. By as you say people with vested interests.
|
|
|
|
Is this not the same as
"carp get so addicted to peanuts they will never eat another thing ever again untill they shrivel up and die"
It's some made up nonsence that was said in the 80s and seemed to stick for some reason. Possibly perpetuated by people with a vested interest in bait?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #18
Carp don’t have the same digestive system as us. They have to crush the food item up and then as it travels through the stomach the nutrients are absorbed through the lining. No acids, etc involved. Fairly inefficient but suited to their natural diet.
If you feed carp constantly you can get them to eat so much they just excrete whole pellets. I’ve seen this in a tank situation.
They will eat the particle, not be able to crush it up and it will go through their system. Depending on size of fish it may become stuck as it swells up inside after taking on water. I think it’s pretty rare. Peanuts are soft enough to crush, whichever way you buy them. They aren’t dehydrated completely like particles are for storage.
That’s the premise anyway. But then I can’t imagine a carp would ingest large, hard particle objects they can’t crush up. Bit like when they sift out stones and spit them out. Essentially it would feel the same to them wouldn’t it?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #17
Very different from nuts but I have witnessed carp killed by maple peas swelling up inside them. I've no idea why they are just passed out quicker than they swell, but they did.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #16
Can't really get my head round this un cooked particle thing killing fish. Supposedly swelling up in fish causing there demise... How's that work then? How does say a nut swell inside a fish? Has this ever been proven as a cause of death and if so by who?
Finding uncooked nuts in the margin... really... throw a handful of uncooked nuts beside a handful of cooked in the margin. And I defie anyone to tell me the difference after half a day or so.. 
You will always get a poorer grade of peanut supplied for the Animal feed market. They get what the human food market don't want.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #14
Yes that was the potential reason via the owner. But more so that they weren’t cooked and ended up swelling inside the fish. I can’t believe that would have happened personally. Never known a nut swell so big, even the big red peanuts that a huge carp like that couldn’t pass it whole.
Poisoning? Doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
I get a kilo of fine, oily, salted peanuts here at the supermarket for 3,18 euro. 25kg of animal grade with membrane go for 50 euro. A bit cheaper, but imo the supermarket ones are miles ahead, like a different league. Also saves a lot of preparing, easy with pva etc etc. Overall fish seem to agree with it.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
The risks around them are related to human poisoning more than carp poisoning & I have never heard of a single case of afloxin-related illness in a carp angler or fish in over 40 years of carp fishing.
I don't think it will ever be proven, but didn't Benson die potentially due to uncooked nuts?
I believe the owner said they found the baits in margins of the lake.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
Yes you are right Aflatoxin can become prominent in poor storage conditions , but as only parts of the sack of peanuts become infected it's very difficult to trace.
You would not know if a carp had died from aflatoxin poisoning as they don't perform post mortems on every carp that dies.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #11
And when it comes to carp eating them, are they, um, animals?
|
|
|
|
afloxins aren't just present in peanuts - they can be found in any seed or grain including hemp, pigeon conditioner, barley & maize & come about due to bad storage practices. (check out Salem witch trials for the effects of them)
The risks around them are related to human poisoning more than carp poisoning & I have never heard of a single case of afloxin-related illness in a carp angler or fish in over 40 years of carp fishing.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #9
But what about the import regulations and requirements? Are you saying it’s not being followed? Border control are checking and letting through peanuts with toxic levels of aflatoxin in?
FSA info here
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #8
If you buy American peanuts you are almost guaranteed that the Aflatoxin is at a acceptable level however the cheaper peanuts come from Asia and Africa where their quality control for aflatoxin is virtually non existent.
Yes some packets of bird grade peanuts say aflatoxin approved or checked , but the vast majority of them do not. It's only the larger brands in the UK that test for aflatoxin.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #6
Yet they are and have to have the certification on import.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #4
There is another solution to drastically remove the aflatoxin from peanuts and that is to roast or microwave them. Roasted nuts used in nut butters have a much smaller ppm of aflatoxins compared with the raw unblanched peanuts.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #5
Seeing as they colour sort the peanuts to remove the aflatoxin using complex vision systems in the food industry , I would be surprised if they are allowed to use fungicides in their process due to the possible toxicity problems Involved.
It's only possible to see a small percentage of aflatoxin in peanuts with the human eye , they use UV lights to cause a fluorescent effect for removal of the peanuts containing aflatoxins.
They do not use colour sorters for animal grade peanuts , hence I have no idea how they are removing the Aflatoxin.
I would suggest to everyone that they use food grade peanuts for fishing conditions , they are a bit more expensive then animal grade in large quantities but you can guarantee the aflatoxin levels are greatly reduced.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #4
No difference these days between food quality and animal feed with peanuts these days. There all treated for Alfatoxins.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #3
I would buy food grade nuts from Amazon , bird peanuts can contain aflatoxin.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
buy raw, shelled nuts from a pet food supplier, soak & boil - they are much cheaper than the roasted / salted ones you get in the supermarket
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
Imo roasted peanuts are perfect used straight from the bag as a hookbait only. Fished over a small bed of boiled standard nuts works very well. The roasted will stand out much more and tend to picked up pretty quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
Should I be using raw or roasted peanuts when using them for carp bait? They will be soaked and boiled, but I am wonder which is the preferred type. Is there a reason one is preferred over the other?
|
|
