Worth a read if you are using shelf lifes...

[carpmachine]

So, anybody know when these things first started appearing for sale and take a guess how many fish deaths they were responsible for and why this problem is a little known fact.

[smufter]

1 hour ago, carpmachine said:

So, anybody know when these things first started appearing for sale and take a guess how many fish deaths they were responsible for and why this problem is a little known fact.

Two?????

 

[carpmachine]

Did you read the report, 95 out of a hundred, that was just on the test,, it is a little known fact and speculation is all we can do.

[greekskii]

what carp in a lake feeds on solely shelf life boilies though...that's where the tests, etc fall down. 

In a lake or river or canal those fish are eating more than one type of food, and can swim a lot more than a tanks length back and forth.

[smufter]

If you put me in a 12x12 room and fed me nothing but McDonalds burgers, funnily enough I'd be eating nothing but McDonalds burgers!

For years we have been using luncheon meat for bait. How much poop is in that? It's hardly a natural bait is it???

 

[B.C.]

Dug this up on-line... This sort of thing was being talked about a decade ago...… Most magazines have commercial bait companies as sponsors..... Funny how a subject so serious isn't really talked about in the capacity that it should be imo….. You do the maths....

https://www.anglingtimes.co.uk/fishing-news/2008/presevatives-are-they-killing-our-fish

[cloud9]

Interesting read there BC..

[greekskii]

Peanuts second to trout pellet. Makes you think doesn’t it.

[Gazlaaar]

If I was angling in a sterile fish tank, I'd be worried but this simply isnt applicable. You only have to look on the packets for the 100% Fish Friendly logo to see things have moved forward from 2008. 

Plus you have to take into consideration, the fish your angling for have a varied diet, naturally and unnaturally. 

How many anglers do you know who use boilie only?

How many venues receive boilie only?

How many venues receive only one type of boilie?

Most waters could happily sustain the fish they contain so surely any bait is a mere addition.

The test simply doesn't hold any value in an angling environment.

The closest we have seen to this was either Birch Grove or The Mangrove when the fish lost condition through only being fed peanuts by anglers. 

The simple fact is, too much of any one thing may pose a problem, but this senario just doesn't exist.

 

 

[salokcinnodrog]

7 hours ago, B.C. said:

Dug this up on-line... This sort of thing was being talked about a decade ago...… Most magazines have commercial bait companies as sponsors..... Funny how a subject so serious isn't really talked about in the capacity that it should be imo….. You do the maths....

https://www.anglingtimes.co.uk/fishing-news/2008/presevatives-are-they-killing-our-fish

This is an old study though.

I do know of a commercial French water that suffered fish deaths that were likely caused by high levels of preservatives in the predominant bait used, supplied on their own water that the bait company sponsored or owned. However as a water that received high quantities of boilies, quite possibly overstocked the fish could have been bait reliant.

 

However since that study, most bait companies have totally changed the way they make shelf life baits. The sodium and potassium salt based preservatives have mostly been removed. Numbers of shelf life baits now contain exactly the same base as the freezer version. The preservation process is air drying, then giving a glycerol sugar syrup bath, then a dry.

 

 

[cyborx]

interesting but flawed study there BC, sterile environment, no supplemental food offered?

if this were fact there wouldn't be a fishery in this country that didn't have fish floating belly up on a daily basis and there would be no such thing as a blank sesh cos the carp would be queuing up just waiting till the dinner gong went

[B.C.]

7 hours ago, salokcinnodrog said:

preservatives

These are now re-badged as mould inhibitors.....

 

 

[B.C.]

8 hours ago, Gazlaaar said:

The simple fact is, too much of any one thing may pose a problem, but this senario just doesn't exist.

Sometimes you need to use extremities to prove a point......

[B.C.]

5 hours ago, cyborx said:

sterile environment,

The one thing that isn't stipulated is where the water came from (unless I missed it).. If it's lake water, then it should contain natural enzymes which would help to break any non preserved baits down.. If it's lake water, then the only thing that would make this into a sterile environment, would be the preservatives being chucked in, via the shelfies which would inhibit the enzymes from doing their thing. imo….. I would suggest that it's a sterile bait, rather than a sterile environment. 

 

9 hours ago, Gazlaaar said:

The test simply doesn't hold any value in an angling environment.

It holds loads of value, don't be blind Gaz..... Fish dying, their organs shot to pieces, fish eggs dying after 96 hrs exposure to the bleaches in shelfies… And all this, from a well respected and qualified scientist..... In what way is there no value in these experiments? Please explain...….. BTW, this is not an argument, just like to hear why these experiments mean nothing to you...……. Did you stock up on shelfies? 

 

[greekskii]

let's translate it in to humans... it's the same as someone only eating preserved junk food all the time. science shows its bad for you. For the healthiest lifestyle you dont ever eat any, most have some as part of a varied and balanced diet. Those that dont end up obese with significant health problems and die young. 

That's exactly what this study tells us, feed them just preserved stinky winky or solely one food source then they will be unhealthy. same as humans. 

If you dont see value in this experiment then you dont believe the research in to obesity, etc. To prove a point you have to use extremes as BC said. what would be the point in an experiment that used a varied diet? there would be no control, no variables, no actual real outcomes or conclusions. 

Things have moved on since the research was conducted, and it would be interesting to see it replicated with modern day shelflifes but also using freezer baits too. This would see the overall quality difference between the two. Good dissertation for a student (not recommended as the tackle & bait industry wont like you very much for saying shelflifes are bad!) 

[Gazlaaar]

45 minutes ago, B.C. said:

The one thing that isn't stipulated is where the water came from (unless I missed it).. If it's lake water, then it should contain natural enzymes which would help to break any non preserved baits down.. If it's lake water, then the only thing that would make this into a sterile environment, would be the preservatives being chucked in, via the shelfies which would inhibit the enzymes from doing their thing. imo….. I would suggest that it's a sterile bait, rather than a sterile environment. 

 

It holds loads of value, don't be blind Gaz..... Fish dying, their organs shot to pieces, fish eggs dying after 96 hrs exposure to the bleaches in shelfies… And all this, from a well respected and qualified scientist..... In what way is there no value in these experiments? Please explain...….. BTW, this is not an argument, just like to hear why these experiments mean nothing to you...……. Did you stock up on shelfies? 

 

Because an angling environment is totally different to a sterile tank, where the only option is the food the student pumped in. Anyone with half a brain knows that too much of one thing may cause long term damage, the conclusions are obvious. 

Every species from fish to man needs a varied diet, that's not rocket science. I applaud his efforts but the findings aren't really shocking are they?

Do you know what, if the date of the experiment was 2018, and conducted in a lake, using the baits we have now, I'd be shocked. Weve moved on a long way since then in many forms and I choose to pit my faith in the companies who tell me their baits are 100% Fish Friendly.

 

[B.C.]

1 hour ago, Gazlaaar said:

Anyone with half a brain knows that too much of one thing may cause long term damage, the conclusions are obvious. 

True, there is no mention of how the other fish fared, fed on just one food item.... I'm guessing if 90% died, then it would have been mentioned...…...

 

1 hour ago, Gazlaaar said:

Weve moved on a long way since then

How exactly?...……. Still preservatives in shelfies or they would go off...…..

 

1 hour ago, Gazlaaar said:

Because an angling environment is totally different to a sterile tank, where the only option is the food the student pumped in. Anyone with half a brain knows that too much of one thing may cause long term damage, the conclusions are obvious. 

Very much, short term damage...….. Short term death , even.

 

1 hour ago, Gazlaaar said:

Anyone with half a brain

Lol...…… People with whole brains used to think the Earth was flat...…...😊

[Gazlaaar]

5 minutes ago, B.C. said:

True, there is no mention of how the other fish fared, fed on just one food item.... I'm guessing if 90% died, then it would have been mentioned...…...

 

How exactly?...……. Still preservatives in shelfies or they would go off...…..

 

Very much, short term damage...….. Short term death , even.

 

Lol...…… People with whole brains used to think the Earth was flat...…...😊

Lol some still do 

Without knowing exactly who uses what, it's not my place to speculate. Some shelfies have a use by date, which tells me preservatives haven't been used or at least inferior products such as sugar solutions have.

By inferior I mean these solutions won't preserve a food item for as long as a chemical synthetic variation.

You say preservatives are still used, maybe they are, but how do you know without knowing the ins and outs of every company out there, it's all speculation.

 

[B.C.]

12 minutes ago, Gazlaaar said:

such as sugar solutions

I don't mind that to be fare at least it's functional in simple form, I've used diluted sugar solutions to keep hook baits a few days longer...…..

Maybe a few companies are looking more towards semi-preserving baits in this way..... Hopefully more will follow...…..

I just know that a lot of them aren't...…. You can tell by what you see advertised and also on the bank.... They look like bags of sweets, brightly coloured and over flavoured no accident imo, aimed at the youngsters...…. Just need to be a bit careful when you see these cheap imitations imo……. Probably save a couple of quid a kg without knowing what they contain...…..

From a fishing point of view, I like to use something that breaks down quickly, tbh, the whole preservative thing goes completely against my way of thinking, on the bait side of things...….

[smufter]

10 hours ago, Gazlaaar said:

Do you know what, if the date of the experiment was 2018, and conducted in a lake, using the baits we have now, I'd be shocked. We've moved on a long way since then in many forms and I choose to pit my faith in the companies who tell me their baits are 100% Fish Friendly.

 

I'm a relative newcomer to "carping", having started around 2010. I'd been fishing for years, (mainly for Tench), and hadn't come across boilies prior to then. 

I didn't know the 1st thing about them, but had to "get on board" as they were what you caught carp on, weren't they???

I can remember the first ones I ever bought. They were shelflife, (fresh/freezer baits confused me), and were like bullets. Chalkie things, crumbly and horrible.
I don't remember what flavour or brand they were, but do recall that they were a "name" as I wanted to give myself the best chance of catching a fish.  I do remember wondering to myself how fish were ever attracted to these things when they could have a lovely lump of luncheon meat, breadflake or worm??? 

Fast forward 8 years. I now use fresh/frozen baits whenever possible, but still use the odd shelfie now and again. They bear no resemblance to those first ones I used. There is absolutely no comparison, I cannot tell the difference between a fresh/frozen bait or it's shelf life equivalent. 

I think massive strides have been made in the manufacturing of boilies over the years and have no hesitation in using a brand I trust. 

[Gazlaaar]

A lot of this distrust and animosity toward bait companies comes from these Facebook groups, from supposed ex employees or disgruntled hearsay mates from the trade. Don't fall into the trap of believing everything you hear or read. Kev Knight, Gary Bayes, Keith Sykes, Ian Moore, Geoff Kemp, Bill Cottam, Geoff Bowers, Ken Townley, Mike Willmott and many more were all making baits while I was a glint in the milkmans eye. They know what their doing, if they didn't, they wouldn't of survived as long as they have. 

I've browsed these groups and they all have one thing in common and that's the same animosity toward the existing big companies. They think they know everything, and most are looking for that something special to replace their inability to locate and catch fish, It simply doesn't exist. 

Rumours are rife and facts are a little thin on the ground, just don't fall into the trap of thinking like them. 

[salokcinnodrog]

Any bait company I won't use is based on personal reasons, ethics etc.

I can honestly recommend bait companies I have used, Nutrabaits, Solar, Crafty Catcher, Rod Hutchinson etc. In fact I have been round the factory that rolled boilies for Rod Hutchinson, Nash Baits, various tackle shop specials. That factory is that of Crafty Catcher, they make or made bait for various companies. 

I have been round the factory of Starmer Baits.

We are getting to the stage of ingredients being printed on packaging, Mainline do it, Crafty Catcher, Nutrabaits, Solar. Nutrabaits were the first, in fact Bill Cottam used it as a selling point.

I think some of the animosity Gaz mentions is down to cost, yet many anglers don't understand retail, and the difference between going direct to a bait company, a one man band or a bait company selling retail only.

 

You have a bait company that in the tackle shop sells boilies at £11 a kilo. A retail trade.

From bait company to tackle shop is rarely direct, there is often a middleman, wholesaler or agent. All of them need to make money, the bait company sells to agent at £5 a kilo, the agent sells to tackle shop at £8 a kilo, the tackle shop sells to angler at £11.

The bait company needs to pay its staff for rolling, needs to buy ingredients, to pay for electricity.

The wholesale agent needs to pay for transport, staff etc.

The tackle shop staff, carriage.

The theory is that the bait should only be sold at £6 CAN NOT equate, it can't be done, not while having retail stores.

 

A bait company that sells direct can sell a bait at £6 a kilo.

Your one man band that sells you bait may do it for £4.50 or less. He is probably not including his labour, just covering the cost of ingredients.

 

Big companies can buy ingredients in larger amounts, therefore sometimes getting better prices on ingredients, not in all cases. Some ingredients due to shelf life, you do not want to buy in large quantities. Fishmeal has quite a short shelf life, yet due to the fishing 'seasons' quality changes over the year.

Some bait companies buy ingredients from animal feed suppliers; fishmeals, birdfoods, and other animal feeds.

Some bait companies like Dynamite are selling a kilo of 'budget' shelf lifes for £6.99, yet their genuine food range premium boilies are £10. What does that say to you?

 

A few years ago Nash Bait made the claim about one of its baits being stabilised for a shelf life version, compared to the freezer version. This is quite simply in my view down to being dipped in glycerol sugar syrup. 

 

Here is something else to consider, any bait you put a flavour in, the chances are that flavour is a preservative in its own right. 

 

 

 

 

 

[hutch]

This one could spin in ever decreasing circles for ever.

People making bait expands to a massive circle not just big companies any more, the problem from smaller start ups will be pressure from there buyers to have a shelf life option the required finance to get it right will out way the quick fix fill it full of potassium sorbate option, bigger companies have invested a little bit of time and money to get this right (some will still cut corners to hit price though) looking at alternative methods of making it work.  Some one mentioned dates on some shelf life's and im guessing these are using a process that just prolongs the life of the bait to a point where the buyer will have used it.

There are companies that alter there mixes by reducing the amount of the volatile ingredients that cause it go off (are shelf life's different to freezer baits if your doing this they are), improving there system for removing the moisture and like Nick suggests a good dip in sugar would probably get long enough out of them.

For every company doing it right there is probably 2 doing it wrong, there are some baits I have seen pictures of that shouldn't be allowed to be put in the water, stories of lake owners netting there lakes and scoping up kilos and kilos of none broken down bait is not a good place to be in, if the lake water can't break them down what are the doing to the fishes digestive tract.

I have also seen lab analysis on company X bait, which is aimed at colder water and is said to contain a high lipid content than there fishmeal offerings but the lab report on the shelf life version showed percentages nowhere near what they had published in a mag.  So the mag values must have been for the freezer bait option.