Post By: Inlandsharpie777 Posted: 12/4/2018 6:11:18 PMPoints: 245
Caught a bunch of turned kokanee today, and personally don't like eating them at all, but see no point in putting them back to die and not get used. So I kept a few today and am thinking about turning them into some dog food, but am a little worried about the smaller bones. Has anyone else ever tried this with any kind of fish and had issues? Hate to waste fish but also don't want to shell out to the vet!
Growing up in the PacNW, I was told to never let dogs eat raw salmonoids as they can develop salmon poisoning. I have not heard that here in Colorado but not sure if it's because Colorado fish don't carry the parasite or if it's just not talked about here. We always cooked any fish before we fed it to the dogs.
Reply by: blackdog1 Posted: Dec. 5, 6:41:19 AM Points: 0
since 99 % of the kokes are hatchery raised in Colorado the rotting gut pile in the streams do not sustain the eggs, I cannot think of a better thing to do with nasty rotten kokes, maybe feed the cats?
Reply by: Inlandsharpie777 Posted: Dec. 5, 7:50:00 AM Points: 245
Brookieflyfisher, normally Iíd agree but these fish were caught in standing water and wander quite a bit, to the point where Iíve seen them over 200+ fow. While some of those fish might die in shallower stuff and their nutrients can get mixed throughout the water column, I suspect a great deal do die over the deeper stuff where theyíll more or less get mummified in an anoxic environment with no bacteria to break them down. Not trying to be a jerk, just explain my position. The Cpw puts them in at random points in the lake that they try to return to and end up getting snagged anyway.
Thank you for the advice yíall, I think Iím going to freeze them and then boil it down into some kind of gravy for em. Again, very appreciative of the advice
Reply by: SirGreg88 Posted: Dec. 5, 10:59:52 AM Points: 15
Feed it to your babies and let he dog eat out of the dirty diaper. This is sustainable as it kills 2 birds with one salmon--and you can use the diaper one more time before using it as a rag when you change your oil. Im trying to save the planet.
Reply by: brookieflyfisher Posted: Dec. 5, 11:32:40 AM Points: 6182
Inlandsharpie...decomposition can happen in anoxic or oxic environments (besides, many of our deep mountain lakes lack enough productivity to get anoxic). Those fish aren't mummified. Then, when the lake mixes during spring and fall turnover, the decomposed nutrients are brought to the surface where they encourage algal and zooplabkton growth, which feeds juvenile trout and adult kokanee.
You are of course free to do what you want with zombie salmon, I am just saying you don't have to feel bad about putting them back. They aren't going to waste, especially in low-nutrient systems.
As others have pointed out releasing them no matter the depth would not have been a waste of resource.
But why not fry them? Or make seasoned salmon patties? Ive done both with spawned out kokes and it was fine..
Also though, if you are going to feed it to your dog, why not cook then flake the meat off the skin? That would eliminate any worry about bones..I used to do that for my pup if I had freezer burnt whole fish
This question fascinated me. It looks like you have to reasonably attempt to prepare for human consumption any edible parts of wildlife you take (though I'm sure there is some discretion here when enforcing this law). The definition of "wildlife" includes fish.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in articles 1 to 6 of this title or by rule of the commission, it is unlawful for a person to fail to reasonably attempt to dress or care for and provide for human consumption the edible portions of game wildlife. A person who violates this subsection (2) is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall, with respect to big game, be punished by a fine of three hundred dollars and an assessment of fifteen license suspension points or shall, with respect to all other game wildlife, be punished by a fine of one hundred dollars and an assessment of ten license suspension points.
Reply by: Ryan Posted: Dec. 5, 6:43:25 PM Points: 1550
If the lake in Colorado are nutrient poor (which I know they are), why does CPW prohibit disposal of fish entrails in the lakes?
On a side note, if you are worried about the bones harming fido (they won't), but everything you have of the fish (which could include the organs), in a crock pot, simmer on low for 24-48 hours. Add 1 TBS of either lemon juice or apple cider vinegar to every gallon of water. This will break down the bones. We do it with poultry carcass to produce a bone broth.
In natural environments the dead salmon supply nutrients back into the system. Most of our reservoirs are low on nutrients, of course it's a good idea to put them back in the system. In AK they ask you to always throw the entrails after cleaning back in the water. When I was helping spawn Salmon I questioned the biologist at Granby why they don't return to the water if no-one to give away as it would help the poor water conditions. He said it would cause people to complain or question why dead fish are in the river. It's Colorado artificial lakes with artificial fisheries.
Reply by: adrenaline_junkie_ff Posted: Dec. 6, 6:33:56 AM Points: 6220
I also thought it was a silly law. When I was growing up in Washington state, it was encouraged to gut your fish on the river bank and throw the guts back. Provided nutrients for the crawdad population, which in turn provides feed for the steelhead and salmon. I checked with a couple CPW officers last winter regarding the legality of disposing of fish entrails in the waters they came from. One of the officers did a little research for me and when he got back, he told me there is no such law on the books preventing the disposal of entrails. There is a law against using said entrails to attract fish, chumming, but nothing else. It is only rumor throughout the fishing community.
Reply by: shiverfix Posted: Dec. 6, 9:05:01 AM Points: 3406
The no entrails in the water is an attempt to help curb the spread of whirling disease. Like why the practice of grinding up leftover chicken parts to feed other chickens was stopped. The 2018 Colorado Fishing Brochure specifically says "Donít dispose of fish entrails or other byproducts into any body of water."
I'm not sure if Freshwater land locked Salmon contain the same deal or not for Dogs but along the west coast it is a very real thing to keep salmon blood off of the banks best possible and avoid letting dogs near them. Its woth a google search before feeding salmon to dogs. I dont recall if cooking changes it or not but better to research before assuming
Reply by: adrenaline_junkie_ff Posted: Dec. 6, 10:15:00 AM Points: 6220
Whirling disease is a parasite so if the entrails of a fish are disposed of in the same body of water they were caught in, there is no added risk. If the body of water is free from whirling disease and you discard entrails from a fish caught in that same body of water, you are not magically creating a whirling disease introduction. If a body of water already has whirling disease and you discard entrails of a fish back into the body of water it was caught in, you are having no impact. My discussion I had with Sean Dunlavey at St Vrain resulted in in him having this discussion with a biologist who told him that was correct and the statement in the regs is merely a guideline, not law. If you transport entrails from a contaminated body of water to an uncontaminated body of water, you can be cited for transporting fish from bodies of water but not discarding entrails.
Reply by: wildtrouter Posted: Dec. 6, 11:44:00 AM Points: 150
My dogs both eat raw fish no problems. They eat them up whole and I've never seen any major issues. Change in diet issues are to be expected. When backcountry camping in areas where keeping a fish is legal......we take much less dog food.
I agree and disagree. Yes, if a body of water is already contaminated, then you are not introducing whirling disease. However, much more of the parasite will be added into the water by throwing entrails in than are released by a live fish. From a paper from the CDW "The whirling disease parasite has a two-host lifecycle that involves trout and an alternate host, a common bottom-dwelling tubifex worm. When an infected trout dies, large numbers of spores are released and then ingested by the tubifex." [log in for link]
This indicates that a dead fish releases more spores. More spores, more parasites, more chance for fish to get the parasite. Multiply that by the number of fisherman who could potentially be disposing of entrails, and you have increased the likelihood of infection exponentially.
I guess the way I look at it is that it is in the regulations book for a reason. It might not be a law, but it is guideline that is good to follow.
This is interesting, I did not know this. "Do not discard entrails or heads of fish down a garbage disposal. The whirling disease parasite can survive most water treatment plants and infect areas downstream"
Wow, crazy response to a question that I would've never expected. I'm the first to admit when I'm wrong and I'm convinced the fish aren't really going to waste, so I think I'll put them back now cause I have no desire to eat them. The fish we caught were pretty far along and just about as soft and gross as they get! Thanks for the info, glad to have learned something new.
Reply by: SirGreg88 Posted: Dec. 8, 6:35:50 AM Points: 15
My wives love to dry out all leftover parts from fishing/hunting trips in my industrial oven. I make jewelry and clothing for them as Christmas gifts. This way I have way more money to spend on myself throughout the year---AND it saves the planet!
Separate from the ethical issue of how the law reads, is that I would never give any animal raw freshwater species. The chance of parasitic infection is way too high. That's why, the roe from a large fish is super good to eat, but only if cured in a salt solution for about 2 hours. Add garlic for a taste of heaven....