Dicky123

As I said to Yonny, this will be my last word Carpbell (really?) Please have the last word, I'm through arguing with you. You want me to think highly of you, but I don't understand why it's important to you to gain my good favour? I would have thought better of you had you been able to spell the simplest of word like "psychiatrist" 😂or even "emergency. " 😂 That simple print and paste paper simply went over your head, you did not even understand the how "important "a work it was. I gave you an Alphabet to carp nutrition, something you could read, then follow the references, and sources to gain a working knowledge on carp nutrition, yes, it would take some time and require some work. But no, you didn't even read it, amazing. I can give you an alphabet, but you had to learn to spell and make up a sentence. That knowledge would have allowed you to understand nutrition and more, gain a working knowledge of bait, something you're supposed to be interested in. But you and your friends were too busy trying to knock me and denigrate my words, fine remain ignorant, but don't knock fine writing. The paper is a few years old now, but would have really helped your knowledge, you would have been able to answer questions by others with authority? Smithery is a person that works with metal, sorry thats not me?🤣 If you're talking about a wordsmith, then thats not how the word is spelt or used? "Arguing with a fool is pointless, they will only bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience." Albert Einstein. "Any fool can know. The point is to understand" Albert Einstein. "The strongest man in the world, is he who mostly stands alone." Henrik Ibsen. I'm really not interested in prolonging this debate, its pointless and people seem to be getting upset, so let's agree to differ as adults do. Have fun in your fishing, and best wishes to your family.

Again Yonni, thats not what I've claimed is it, or what I've ever said is it? Problem is when you're uneducated or close minded or have never used critical thinking in your work life/education, you find it difficult to converse with people that have, I repeat this is why you have not understood exactly what I've said. It was you in your first post that took a swipe at me, remember so don't be surprised when I defend myself. You kept telling me I was re-stating the terms of my reference and still you don't understand exactly what I'm saying. I'm not going to repeat it again. I apologise without reservation if I've offended you, it was not my purpose, or intention. The point about my writing is I do understand such papers, and that gives me much more information than a person that only has anecdotal evidence. I'm quite comfortable to leave it and you can have the last word, however unless people challenge you on your bias you will never get any further in understanding anything. It's clear you're not use to people challenging you at all, thats really sad and if you do ever get into a position of trust, or higher education, you will have to accept it as normal. Once again, I'm not looking for friends or to have buddies that take my side regardless, I'm an adult and can argue my own thoughts and views. But once again if I've upset you just by asking questions, (I've never been rude or gotten angry, thats just being insulting! and a known tactic for deflecting issues you cannot answer? ) I do apologise. RB. Please have the last word I'm finished now. 😀

Why, I understand it don't you? If you want to make a claim about almost anything, you have to prove it with scientific data. Other wise it's just an opinion, not fact? If you struggle to understand my writing, just ask me, and I will help you? Its NOT rocket science, I've studied much harder data at University taking a degree?

On 06/09/2021 at 15:27, Carpbell_ll said: Can I ask who wrote this garbage? I've not heard professional or scientific people talk like that, " Chow down" Truck across" Chuck in cheap bait" "Flashing dorsals" Sorry no scientific writer would write such childish rubbish, I don't care who he is? Let me give you something a little more professional like this? Common carp - Nutritional requirements Nutrient requirements of common carp were fairly well researched and established (Table 4.1, Table 4.2, Table 4.3 and Table 4.4). Protein requirements The daily requirement of common carp for protein is about 1 g/kg body weight for maintenance and 12 g/kg body weight for maximum protein retention. The efficiency of nitrogen utilization for growth is highest with a protein intake of 7 to 8 g/kg body weight/day. Crude protein levels ranging from 30 to 38 percent appear to satisfy the fish optimally. This level has been determined by using semi-purified diets containing a single high-quality protein source (casein, whole-egg protein or fishmeal). When the diet contains sufficient digestible energy, the optimal protein level can be effectively kept at 30–35 percent (Watanabe, 1982). The quantitative requirement for amino acids has been determined by several studies and is shown in Table 4.1.There are some minor differences in the requirement for individual amino acids, depending on the growth stage. The lysine requirement at the fingerling stage is 2.25 percent of the diet (6 percent protein) and decreases to 1.75 percent (5.4 percent) at the fingerling stage, whereas the methionine requirement does not change. As has been recognized in other fish species, cystine and tyrosine can spare or replace certain portions of dietary methionine and phenylalanine, respectively (Takeuchi, Satoh and Kiron, 2002). It remains questionable whether carp requires dietary taurine supplements. Ogino (1980) reported that the amino acid requirements could be estimated from data on the amino acid profile of the whole-body and daily body protein deposition. Data shown in Table 4.2 are based on the assumption that fish consuming a diet containing 35 percent protein with 80 percent protein digestibility and fed daily at a level of 3 percent of the body weight deposits 0.58 g of protein per 100 g of body weight daily. However, in this approximation of deposition rate, metabolic pathways of amino acids that do not lead to protein synthesis are not accounted. The absorption of individual amino acids differs greatly, depending on the protein source and time after feeding (Dabrowski, 1983, 1986). Although the absorption rate is a useful tool for describing metabolic amino acid requirements, further studies are needed in this area. Dietary lipids requirements As an omnivorous fish, common carp can effectively utilize both lipids and carbohydrates as dietary energy sources. The enrichment of the digestible energy content from 13 to 15 MJ/kg diet by addition of lipid at levels of 5–15 percent to diets did not result in higher growth rate or improved net protein utilization (Takeuchi, Watanabe and Ogino, 1979a). Increasing dietary lipid seems to increase its body deposition. From the essential fatty acids, common carp requires both n-6 and n-3 fatty acids. Supply of 1 percent of each of these fatty acids leads to best growth and feed efficiency in juvenile common carp (Takeuchi and Watanabe, 1977). Phospholipids (PL) have numerous roles in larval feeding, so they have to be supplied when common carp larvae are fed on artificial diets instead of PL-rich live food. Radunzneto, Corraze and Charlon (1994) found that during the first two weeks, dietary PL supply seemed to be more critical for early larval survival and growth than a supply of n-3 fatty acids from cod liver oil. Dietary carbohydrate requirements Studies on carbohydrate utilization in common carp have shown that the amylase activity in the digestive tract and the digestibility of starch in fish are generally lower than those of terrestrial animals. Common carp, being omnivorous, has an intestinal activity of amylase that is higher than in carnivorous fish. It was found that the ratio of intestinal length to body length in carp is 1.8–2, i.e. four times greater than that of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Japanese eel (Anguilla japonica). This accounts for the better utilization of carbohydrates by common carp. Murai, Akiyama and Nose (1983) investigated the effects of various dietary carbohydrates and the frequency of feeding on feed utilization of common carp. While the starch diet produced the highest weight gain and feed efficiency at two daily feedings, glucose and maltose were as efficiently utilized as starch when fed at least four times daily. This indicates that there is a drop in the absorption efficiency of glucose and maltose when large amounts are fed at a time. Other investigators found that common carp used carbohydrate effectively as an energy source. Later, Takeuchi, Watanabe and Ogino (1979b) also confirmed the dietary value of carbohydrates. The optimum range of dietary carbohydrate may be considered to be 30–40 percent for common carp, as proved by many studies in this field. Vitamin requirements The qualitative and quantitative vitamin requirements of carp are also well investigated (Table 4.3). The dietary requirements for folic acid and vitamins B12, D and K have not been determined, but it is supposed that some of these vitamins can be synthesized by the intestinal microflora in common carp, as in other freshwater fish (Lovell and Limsuwan, 1982; Hepher, 1988). The vitamin requirements of common carp are affected by various factors, such as size of fish, water temperature and diet composition. For example, fingerling or adult common carp do not require vitamin C because they can synthesize ascorbic acid from D-glucose. The vitamin E requirement may increase corresponding to the level of polyunsaturated fatty acids in the diet. As extrusion techniques to make floating feeds become more popular, it seems certain that vitamins may be destroyed during feed manufacture and storage. Hence, the supplemental levels of vitamins in fish diets are always two to five times higher than the requirement levels. Mineral requirements Mineral requirements are summarized in Table 4.3. Common carp requires cobalt, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus and zinc. Since common carp lacks an acid-secreting stomach essential for digesting and solubilizing various compounds containing both calcium and phosphorus, the availability of phosphorus depends on the water solubility. Phosphorus from tricalcium phosphate or fishmeal (FM) is less available than that from the more soluble mono- and dicalcium phosphates. Supplementation of monobasic phosphate to FM-based diets resulted in an increase in growth response of common carp (Takeuchi, Satoh and Kiron, 2002). It was also found that exogenous supply of copper, manganese, magnesium and zinc is necessary for carp diets. Tricalcium phosphate may inhibit the availability of trace elements, such as zinc and manganese, although to a much lesser extent than in rainbow trout (Satoh et al., 1989). Dabrowska, Meyer-Burgdorff and Gunther (1991) found a significant interaction between magnesium supply and protein level of feed when feeding young carp with diets containing graded levels of magnesium and protein. A magnesium level of 0.6 g/kg was required to elevate plasma and bone magnesium content and to reduce clinical signs of hypercalcinosis, but a further increase of dietary magnesium up to 3.2 g/kg did not affect fish growth. In magnesium-deficient fish, a considerable amount of magnesium was absorbed via extra-oral routes; however, this way of meeting the need for magnesium is inadequate in fast-growing fish. These non-oral routes of mineral uptake may be important, especially in pond conditions. In a study on the interaction between zinc deficiency and lipid intake, Taneja and Arya (1994) observed that the malabsorption of nutrients was linked to the deposition of lipid in the intestine. Energy requirements The energy requirements of carp are much less investigated than other aspects of nutrition. As described in other teleosts, both fasting metabolic rates and maintenance energy requirements are affected by water temperature. The resting metabolic rates at temperatures below 17 °C are quite low. A linear relationship between nitrogen (N) intake and heat increment in feeding was also proposed, with a value of around 40 kJ/g N intake (Chakraborti, Ross and Ross, 1992; Kaushik, 1995). Protein and lipid requirements are related to digestible energy. The optimum range of the digestible energy/protein ratio for maximum growth was 97–116 when based on the measured digestible energy (Takeuchi, Watanabe and Ogino, 1979b). Ohta and Watanabe (1996) provided a dietary energy budget for carp fed a practical diet comprised of 25 percent FM, 4 percent meat meal, 10 percent soybean meal and 8 percent maize-gluten meal as the main protein sources. Gross energy intake (100 percent) was partitioned as follows (Ohta and Watanabe, 1996): 29.9 percent lost as faecal energy; 1.5 percent as non-faecal energy; 31.9 percent as heat increment; and 36. 7 percent as net energy (including 12.6 percent for maintenance and activity and 24.1 percent as productive energy). It was also reported in the same study that the digestible energy requirements for maximum growth were 285, 548 and 721 kJ/kg body weight/day (at feeding rates of 1.83, 3.60 and 5.17 percent of body weight/day, respectively). I can add the tables if required, but they will need to be read with the above content Salokcinnodrog? Its also worth noting some of the data I quote is little dated now. R.B. BSc e.f. F.P.C dip.

One question then, just one to answer. You mentioned Earith and Trigga bait. From memory it had a very strange smell, almost sickly. 20 kilo and 1 kilo a week and total domination and (your words) other baits were ignored. So had you ever thought it could simply be the taste and smell the fish like? And not what was in the bait, you have to if you're a logical person admit that could be a factor. The fish simply loved the smell of the bait, and were drawn towards it. I do actually have a good back ground in what we are talking about and could send you some papers on the subject if you're interested? Out of interest how often do you fish now? If we walk past a fish and chip shop, or Chinese, we often comment on how the smell induces a taste bud reaction in us. It makes us salivate and want to taste that food. Carp don't have the same receptors as us, they are much stronger. People never seem to want to look at alternatives, only what they want to see if it suits their own narrative? Again your analysis on Brackens pool, how do you know for sure. Maybe you are just a better angler with more experience, maybe you fished more than anyone else. If you don't want to be taken seriously you would have to factor all that and more, in to prove it was the bait, don't you see that?

You're very welcome, pleased you see the irony In what you're saying.

We'll think about this, I've fished all my life, three days a week. I don't put myself up as an expert, and answer almost every question on carp forums. For a person that fishes so little, I wonder how you get the experience to offer such advice all the time on a wide range of topic and have an opinion on such a space amount of fishing. Who's conning who?😇 I'm genuinely please you have such a good home-life far too many people have relationship problem through a total obsession with our sport, its sad to see so much gear on E-Bay that someone paid a fortune for being sold for salt? You quote aminos and proteins as if you know all about them, but do you REALLY, or is it what the carp industry and all those EXPERTS have said in conversation you're simply copying maybe? Could you write a scientific paper on them for an audience? Sorry you feel that way about me, but I'm sick to death with frauds, and people that put themselves up as expects, but don't have the lineage to offer it. Yonny, maybe we can have some accord on this then, the average carp angler has a massive ego that hates to be challenged, if they say something against the "status quo" as I'm doing now, all you get is derision. It's clear you have never attended a proper debating platform, i'ts proper to be polite, but you can disagree and remain respectful of others. However the people you debate with must have some credibility in the first place? And yes, your first statement is right, it's important to keep to the facts (terms of reference) of the debate and not go off on a tangent. Its clear even though I've stated it several time, you still don't understand what I'm saying sadly, your missing the point I'm trying to make as politely as possible. I ask you to just re-read my objection to the carp bait fallacy. Best regards Richard.

Maybe you have just brought into the carp bait con, and are in denial? It Goes last on my list, after Being quiet, watching the water, location, moving onto fish, getting a good drop, and my own water craft and making chances during the day, and fishing only one rod at a time. Yonny, I seem you spend an extraordinary amount of time on forums my friend, and it makes me wonder how often you actually fish, I'm sure forums are a great source or friendship and plain fun, but nothing beats gong fishing and catching fish. Maybe you fish 7 days a week, I'm sure you will correct me😉. This season I've fished much like I've carp fished all my life, I make chances for myself. I don't like to style myself on other anglers, because most fish out of the box, but I do like Oli Davis as he seems to fish much like myself, he puts a lot of hard work in and gets results. Currently I've moved away from big fish waters I use to frequent like A1 pits, just to catch up on my life and enjoy the actual event of fishing. Where I fish I see carp anglers come and go, very few catch fish, because as mentioned they fish out of the box, clone style, thinking, like yourself the bait is the key. I don't see anyone making chances on theses trips, they bait and wait, fine if that's what you like. Most of the fish are very old, real big tails and stunning with it, many have a high percentage of Koi in them, but don/t grow over big, 25lb tops maybe. But at 70 I'm happy catching them, I have a target of a number of 20lb fish I'd like to catch in my lifetime, but that won't happen here and I may have to shelve that target Yonny. Just to confirm, my argument is not that boilies don't work, they do clearly. What I don't believe is that a carp can tell one for the other, or they can tell its doing them good, and that without huge baiting programmes, they don't choose one over the other as preference. Just a few nice fish from August Yonney Best wishes. Richard.

It's a debate, not an argument. If you don't want to have another opinion then say so, but I simply do not believe carp can become preoccupied on such little bait, unless other we're in on the baiting campaign??. Have you added that into the thought process? People in denial, simply don't won't other people offering them an alternative view, its a we'll know syndrome for deniers. It's fine to give me your credentials, but you don't know mine do you? If its true you did indeed manage waters in a professional capacity, then I'm sorry your writing and explanation simply does not suggest that, so do you have a professional qualification in aquaculture? That would be a BSc hon degree, yes? I put to you or a professional person, your not reading my post clearly enough, I did not ignore the type of water, in fact I gave you the three examples, high food type, med food type, low food type. I'm keeping it simple for full understand. Water management is for more than just bait my friend, or just taking out a few fish, it's far more complicated than that. For fish to maintain an optimum level of health, avoid stress or disease then the water quality of the water must be monitored and controlled 24/7. Fish become stressed when key water quality parameters such as temperature, pH nitrogenous waste, dissolved oxygen and salinity are not kept with specified thresholds. Its not an argument, I'm not telling you what to think, it's only what I think, and why I think your analogy is incorrect. It was you that said you managed waters, and had an understanding of biology and ecology, so you should be comfortable holding your own in a simple debate, you must have had to in your work? I still genuinely believe we are being taken in on the bait, boilie front. Unless you bait in huge quantities, no one bait will out fish another, why, the carp have no way of knowing what is good for them. I'll give you a true story of genuine pre-occupation. On one water I fish we seem to have had a few feral pigeons, clearly lost. They were looking really ill and not eating bread or sweetcorn donated by anglers. One chap (cleverly) said they were use to only eating seeds, so he started bringing in bird seeds, and the birds flourished, we have maybe a dozen now. Because from birth those birds only knew seed as food, they did not recognise any other food type. full preoccupation. It's just an example, because carp have been raised to eat anything and will try anything that looks like food. Kind regards, Richard.

You said I quote: "I have seen good baits 'dominate' a water, the right bait outproducing every other bait used to the extent of that bait being almost the only one that caught, and it was not particularly heavily baited, around 1kg a week, after an initial 20kg in 2 weeks". I'm sorry but If that's not the daftest thing I'v ever heard, really. You only have to do the maths yourself. Imagine a water of just say 50 carp, you have to be assuming almost every carp eats some bait. Two large 20lb carp can eat a kilo of bait in minutes, the point is to dominate a water, you need so much more bait than you suggest. If only 10/20 fish eat the bait in that time, thats not domination is it? Or are you suggesting that every carp eats 20 baits only each time they find them, then leave the rest for others? It's just not common sence for a fish to leave food for another carp. A kilo of bait goes no-where in waters with even a few carp, say 30 decent size fish. I fished at Waveney when Hutch was there, and other famous names now long gone, it was my local water at the time, living in Suffolk. Protein baits were at the fore then, but no-one had one better than another as all knew the ingredients. You also mention that "I was ignoring the water type' well thats simple really. The more fish stocked in non rich waters (like commercials), the food content of a boilie matters less, why? Because they cannot remember what they ate yesterday with the huge amount of food going in all the time, and they would eat almost anything because as you say they are over-stocked. In much richer waters they don't need extra, so the needed protein argument is mute. Its in those 50/50 places where boilies really score, but domination with 20 kilo then a kilo a week, is just non-sensible I'd suggest, sorry. You said I quote: "Provide a better bait or thin the numbers they will start to grow, unless they have become permanently stunted" Again I'd dispute you could feed enough, long enough, to make any difference, unless its a sparsely stocked, small, poor quality water. Reducing fish numbers could work, but you would end up with less fish, who would support that these days, and how much bait would you have to feed, again an unsubstantiated, unrealistic arguement. You seem to be jumping all over the place with your suggestions, and talking about humans and nutrition, carp are not humans, treating their feeding as such is the cause most peoples misunderstanding of bait and carp. I only mentioned humans in the context of not knowing food thats good for you while your eating it, or even after. Domination is such a strange word really for such a attribute, it means influence and power over something. In all the time I've been fishing I've never known one bait dominate a water to the exclusion of another bait, even Redmire carp in the day took sweetcorn and seed, even the big one. You mention nuts and the low food value, but fish get hooked on small seeds, like hemp, and many pea type baits, one seed bait I did use almost dominated one water I fished, but people still caught on other baits, thats not really domination though is it? For this reason and as explained above, I don't believe carp can distinguish between on boilie or another based on how it makes them feel later. But its good to debate it and maybe advance one-self?

Even the cheap rods made in China are mostly high quality these days. They will catch fish and you would never know the difference, but as mentioned it's all about aesthetics and how it makes you feel. I doubt another could tell the difference in a blind test. I've had high quality rods and cheap, now I'm with MID-PRICED Free-Spirt rods and love the action. Never had to cast them over 30 meters as all my fishing is close in, but I expect they would do that if required. My advice would be buy second hand quality if you can, but remember most people do sell their gear at some time? I will say, I do find it strange how we have gotten into this "Everything must match syndrome" Most would agree it noting about catching fish, but the angler themselves? 🤣

After 50+ years carp fishing if I've learned anything its: Fish on your own terms. By that I mean heed good advice, but try to think for yourself, and don't judge your results against others. As long as you enjoy the day, feel you're doing the best, then accept other people have different values and skills. I'd also suggest with no disrespect to anyone on this forum offering help. But I'm convinced some people do all their fishing through forums, and rarely go carp fishing at all, or in the past. They are always on and the first to answer any questions, regardless of the time of day, maybe they don't work either. Trust people but don't take everything people say as right al the time?

Sorry, but the whole premise of quality bait is flawed. It may help you fish more confidently, but it's not the bait doing that. If you re-read my post, I also mention the old days of baits dominating waters, but there was no "other test" done against it. If you want a proper trial, you would have to bait exactly the same with a cheaper bait, I'm not talking stinky winky baits. People like Maddocks and Paisley had the old HNV baits and were often the only people baiting their waters, so naturally the bait worked. But the little guy in the corner fishing Tiger nuts was doing just as well? And normally you only hear about good bait from people selling them. You mentioned the Cell bait as a cheap bait, but that worked and worked on any water, why? Lots of people using it maybe, another factor you would have to include if making a scientific claim about quality baits and carp knowing them? Nash have just re-released their popular scopex squid again, why, it sells and is a good bait, catches fish. If you read the list of ingredients on bait now days they all read the same, fishmeal, or other meals. CC Moore have their main ingredient as Robin Red, so mostly seed based. They also site tuna, but again its just fish meal. Problem is you can only ever site your views and feelings and those of others, nothing scientific. The old days you may remember of HNV baits were different, but a carp would still pick up a tiger nut that did it little good at all. Sorry I'm just not convinced carp know a quality bait from another. But it's an interesting debate, sure you agree

Did just that Framey ordered several packets, love the hook myself. What a strange thing to do, maybe they were too expensive to make, sharpen and add a little bit of plastic to?

Thanks Buddy, may buy a few more then?