Working on an inshore cook book. Here's the start...
* An extremely bad taste reference to cults and their food of choice
“Mr. Solomon, Mr. Solomon, paging Mr. Solomon.”
I looked up as the young dwarf drifted by. He disappeared around the corner.
“Mr. Solomon, Mr. Solomon, paging Mr. Solomon.”
He had returned. “Say, can I help you?” I said.
“Are you Mr. Solomon, the esteemed jurist, the one who is able to split babies in half just to prove a point?”
“No, I’m Mr. Jones, the purveyor or fine truths about the local fish and piers.” “Are you famous, are there any books in the Bible about you?”
“No, but my book, Pier Fishing In California, is considered by some to be the Bible on California pier fishing and several songs were written about Mr. Jones, will that do?”
“I'm not sure!”
“Listen,” I said, “I don't have a lot of riches, or even 900 wives, but maybe I can be of help...I really don't think Mr. Solomon is here. What's the problem?”
“Well, Mr. Jones, it says here in the paper that the fish in the oceans and bays aren’t safe to eat. They contain everything from DDT to PCBs to radioactive calceus. What in the heck are we to do?”
Assuming my normal Buddha-like position for thought and wisdom (even though I wasn’t on the top of any darn mountain), I tried to answer his question. “Listen Bud, you are faced with three possible courses of action.”
• “Declare all bay fish and inshore ocean fish as toxic and dangerous to the public health. Make it illegal to keep any fish from those areas and declare all public piers ‘fish free zones’ on which angling is prohibited.”
• “Ignore all warnings. Let families (primarily poor and immigrant) continue to fish and to eat all the fish they catch to their heart’s content. Also be prepared to pay some medical bills down the road because some of these people may get sick, especially the kids.”
• “Educate the public as to the real dangers and teach them how to minimize the dangers.”
“But Mr. Jones, are those the only choices?” “Probably not but we’ve got to move this book along.” “O.K., but how do we do it?” About this time the peaceful tranquility of my dream sleep was shattered by the 6 a.m. alarm, and then the soothing sounds of...
Inshore Fish as Food
It’s a conundrum! On one side of the ledger are the many reports saying that eating fish is healthy, in fact healthier for people than beef, pork or chicken. It’s especially true for certain oily fish that contain high amounts of omega-3 fatty acids.
But that is only true if the fish being used as food are themselves healthy. Going down to the pier or a similar inshore venue, catching a few fish, and then taking them home to eat used to be a simple, straightforward exercise. It isn’t so simple anymore. In California, most bays and many inshore areas along the coast are polluted and sometimes polluted to such an extent that there is little realistic hope of cleansing or removing the pollution in our lifetime. Unfortunately, this fact is ripe for exploitation by the Fourth Estate. Story after story sensationalize the bad parts of the picture and skip or downplay a knowledgeable examination of what is taking place. Factoids replace facts and for many, the result is fear. Some people say they’re not only afraid to eat locally caught fish but don't want to even touch the nasty critters.
By nature, I am not an alarmist. Instead, I simply feel that anglers must understand the environment and how to use its resources in a safe manner. Since one of the primary reasons why many people fish is to bring home some food, it’s reasonable to question the safety of eating those same fish.
Unfortunately the answer is complex. Most biologists (and they’re supposed to know) say that as a general rule, it is safe to eat fish from California's coastal waters and bays. Some species are safer to eat than others, and fish from some locales are safer than fish from other areas. Unfortunately for anglers fishing inshore areas, several of the fish that contain the highest concentrations of toxins are the species most common to those areas. Croakers, perch and various flatfish are primarily bottom eaters, scarfing down tasty little worms, clams, ghost shrimp and whatever other creatures they find on the sand and mud bottoms they inhabit. The muck that makes up the bottom is often polluted and sometimes contains toxic substances. These toxins are taken in by the smaller creatures such as worms, the worms are then ingested by the fish, and the toxins remain in the fish captured by the “oh so happy” anglers. That’s the bad news and unfortunately that is the only news (or perhaps more accurately, newspeak) reported by some of the Chicken Littles in the environmental movement.
The good news is that proper precautions can eliminate most (but not all) of the unhealthy substances in the fish you catch. However, if you want a 100% guarantee that the fish you catch and eat are totally safe, you will be disappointed; toxins (a.k.a. poisons) are now found in the flesh of fish taken from the Polar oceans as well as fish taken from the high seas. No fish, whether from an inshore area, a party boat fishing the offshore waters of our state, or the local fish market, is 100% toxin free—nor is the air we breath or the water we drink. Sad but true!
Given the healthy or unhealthy nature of some fish, should there even be a cookbook dedicated to the fish caught from piers and other inshore areas? I believe the answer is yes. People are going to continue to catch and eat fish taken from inshore areas—the piers, surf and rocks. Given this fact, they should know how to minimize the dangers from these fish.
Three simple precautions help reduce the danger from eating our local fish:
Box and highlight
Live and learn! One day I had a long and rambling conversation with a Fish and Game man; we had been ruminating on a number of diverse subjects when the topic of toxicity came up. We were in agreement as to the three methods commonly used to lower the risks—moderation, cleaning, and cooking techniques. “But,” he said, “you must remember how culture in its many variations enters into the equation.”
As example, he cited the use of white croaker (aka tomcod and kingfish) by many Asian immigrants. In most southern California and Bay Area locations it is recommended that white croaker not be eaten. They are the worst of the worst when it comes to species harboring toxins in their systems.
However, they are considered a delicacy by many immigrants. They are caught by the bucketful, scaled, and then steamed whole. In particular, their skins and intestines are considered delicacies. It is the antithesis or opposite of a healthful approach to eating pier-caught fish. Unfortunately those following that approach will probably ignore my meager preaching on the subject.
I mentioned to the man that perhaps it was a good thing that for the first time a limit was imposed on the species in the late ‘90s. He said the limit was necessary because the number of white croaker had decreased AND it was also a way that the department could try to lessen the harmful impact of eating these fish.
Behavior modification at the state level! Of course it only will be an impact if the people involved obey the rules but it should help some. I don’t believe I had ever considered that the department might use rules and regulations in such a way until that conversation. But it makes sense!
The concern over the toxicity of fish is a fairly recent phenomenon. More long-term, shall we say at least several hundred years, has been the debate over good and bad fish. “Sport” fish” versus “trash” fish, good eating, “mild-flavored” fish versus “strong-flavored” fish. Such debate has often led to the following scenario—a scenario that never fails to leave me shaking my head.
An angler catches a fish which he or she has heard is “no good to eat” or “too hard to clean.” Next, the fish is killed and then simply left to dry and rot (to attract flies, impress passerby's, show it who was boss, keep it from screwing up the better fish, etc.), or kicked back into the water.
It shows the tremendous misinformation about many of the fish we catch. Unfortunately, it often comes from the past experience of many of these same people, people who may have taken a glassy-eyed, shriveled, and poor-smelling catch home, and then been disappointed in the barely edible product produced in their kitchen. It must be the fault of the fish, it can’t be the fault of the superior being—the human who caught and cooked the fish. WRONG!
Although there are a few exceptions, most fish are good to eat (noting the information presented above). The key however, is proper preservation and preparation. Poor preservation can present a raw product that even the finest chef cannot resurrect, and a poorly trained cook can ruin even the finest raw product. Given all of this, the good news is that cleaning and cooking procedures are fairly easy to learn (and discussed in the following chapters).
Some Basics Concerning Fish and Eating Fish
• Beef, pork and chicken usually taste like beef, pork and chicken. There can be variance in taste in regards to the “cut” or “piece” being cooked, but generally the differences are fairly minimal. Most cuts and pieces can be cooked using the same cooking methods. Fish are different. Fish species can show a wide variance in taste dependent upon (mainly) the fat content of the fish. Knowing the fish, the cut of fish being used, and the fat content of the fish helps in choosing the cooking method to use—pan frying, deep frying, grilling, baking, broiling, steaming, etc. Luckily it isn’t hard to learn the different types of fish.
• The darker the flesh of the fish the higher the fat content and the higher the fat content the more flavorful the fish. The same with vitamins and mineral in the flesh, the darker the flesh generally the higher the vitamin and mineral content.
• Flavorful is interpreted by some as simply mild or strong-flavored fish. A white-fleshed halibut fillet, or a piece of cod or pollock used in fish and chips, is the standard for many. They have a very mild, almost non-fishy taste. All have a very different flavor and taste than a dark-fleshed piece of mackerel that is strong flavored. Much of the American public prefers mild-tasting, white-fleshed fish whereas people reared in many countries, especially many Asian countries, are used to the stronger flavored fish and know how to use spices and sauces to compliment the flavor of that fish.
• Fish caught inshore show a wide gamut of colors and flavors and if an angler intends to keep and eat the fish he or she needs to learn the differences and learn how to treat (cook) them differently. That, of course, is a main purpose of this book and described in detail in Chapter Three.
Fish From Stores
• Sometimes the fish simply aren’t biting and you may decide to buy some fish. The general rules as far as color and flavor will remain true. However, the color of a fish doesn’t always give a true picture of a fish. The fish may not be fresh and, depending upon where it was caught or raised (on a fish farm) it may contain as many toxins as locally caught fish.
A few thoughts borrowed from Tommy Gomes, The Fishmonger
• One half of fish sold in markets is not inspected by the government (FDA).
• Know the source of your fish – is it locally caught and somewhat fresh, thawed from a frozen state, or still frozen? If frozen you should be able to read the country of origin. If thawed and sitting in a fish counter you should be able to ask the origin of the fish. You may or may not get an answer.
• Good seafood is not cheap—cheap seafood is not good.
People will continue to fish, continue to catch fish, and continue to eat fish. The goal of this cookbook is not only to present some seafood recipes that are tasty (I Love Seafood!) but also to teach the readers a little about the fish themselves, how they differ, and good ways to clean, store, and properly prepare them.
Chapter One
Cleaning and Cooking The Fish or Recipes For A Toxic World
(Skip the Kool-Aid and Skip the Applesauce and Vodka,
But Pass the Fish)*
Cleaning and Cooking The Fish or Recipes For A Toxic World
(Skip the Kool-Aid and Skip the Applesauce and Vodka,
But Pass the Fish)*
* An extremely bad taste reference to cults and their food of choice
“Mr. Solomon, Mr. Solomon, paging Mr. Solomon.”
I looked up as the young dwarf drifted by. He disappeared around the corner.
“Mr. Solomon, Mr. Solomon, paging Mr. Solomon.”
He had returned. “Say, can I help you?” I said.
“Are you Mr. Solomon, the esteemed jurist, the one who is able to split babies in half just to prove a point?”
“No, I’m Mr. Jones, the purveyor or fine truths about the local fish and piers.” “Are you famous, are there any books in the Bible about you?”
“No, but my book, Pier Fishing In California, is considered by some to be the Bible on California pier fishing and several songs were written about Mr. Jones, will that do?”
“I'm not sure!”
“Listen,” I said, “I don't have a lot of riches, or even 900 wives, but maybe I can be of help...I really don't think Mr. Solomon is here. What's the problem?”
“Well, Mr. Jones, it says here in the paper that the fish in the oceans and bays aren’t safe to eat. They contain everything from DDT to PCBs to radioactive calceus. What in the heck are we to do?”
Assuming my normal Buddha-like position for thought and wisdom (even though I wasn’t on the top of any darn mountain), I tried to answer his question. “Listen Bud, you are faced with three possible courses of action.”
• “Declare all bay fish and inshore ocean fish as toxic and dangerous to the public health. Make it illegal to keep any fish from those areas and declare all public piers ‘fish free zones’ on which angling is prohibited.”
• “Ignore all warnings. Let families (primarily poor and immigrant) continue to fish and to eat all the fish they catch to their heart’s content. Also be prepared to pay some medical bills down the road because some of these people may get sick, especially the kids.”
• “Educate the public as to the real dangers and teach them how to minimize the dangers.”
“But Mr. Jones, are those the only choices?” “Probably not but we’ve got to move this book along.” “O.K., but how do we do it?” About this time the peaceful tranquility of my dream sleep was shattered by the 6 a.m. alarm, and then the soothing sounds of...
Inshore Fish as Food
It’s a conundrum! On one side of the ledger are the many reports saying that eating fish is healthy, in fact healthier for people than beef, pork or chicken. It’s especially true for certain oily fish that contain high amounts of omega-3 fatty acids.
But that is only true if the fish being used as food are themselves healthy. Going down to the pier or a similar inshore venue, catching a few fish, and then taking them home to eat used to be a simple, straightforward exercise. It isn’t so simple anymore. In California, most bays and many inshore areas along the coast are polluted and sometimes polluted to such an extent that there is little realistic hope of cleansing or removing the pollution in our lifetime. Unfortunately, this fact is ripe for exploitation by the Fourth Estate. Story after story sensationalize the bad parts of the picture and skip or downplay a knowledgeable examination of what is taking place. Factoids replace facts and for many, the result is fear. Some people say they’re not only afraid to eat locally caught fish but don't want to even touch the nasty critters.
By nature, I am not an alarmist. Instead, I simply feel that anglers must understand the environment and how to use its resources in a safe manner. Since one of the primary reasons why many people fish is to bring home some food, it’s reasonable to question the safety of eating those same fish.
Unfortunately the answer is complex. Most biologists (and they’re supposed to know) say that as a general rule, it is safe to eat fish from California's coastal waters and bays. Some species are safer to eat than others, and fish from some locales are safer than fish from other areas. Unfortunately for anglers fishing inshore areas, several of the fish that contain the highest concentrations of toxins are the species most common to those areas. Croakers, perch and various flatfish are primarily bottom eaters, scarfing down tasty little worms, clams, ghost shrimp and whatever other creatures they find on the sand and mud bottoms they inhabit. The muck that makes up the bottom is often polluted and sometimes contains toxic substances. These toxins are taken in by the smaller creatures such as worms, the worms are then ingested by the fish, and the toxins remain in the fish captured by the “oh so happy” anglers. That’s the bad news and unfortunately that is the only news (or perhaps more accurately, newspeak) reported by some of the Chicken Littles in the environmental movement.
The good news is that proper precautions can eliminate most (but not all) of the unhealthy substances in the fish you catch. However, if you want a 100% guarantee that the fish you catch and eat are totally safe, you will be disappointed; toxins (a.k.a. poisons) are now found in the flesh of fish taken from the Polar oceans as well as fish taken from the high seas. No fish, whether from an inshore area, a party boat fishing the offshore waters of our state, or the local fish market, is 100% toxin free—nor is the air we breath or the water we drink. Sad but true!
Given the healthy or unhealthy nature of some fish, should there even be a cookbook dedicated to the fish caught from piers and other inshore areas? I believe the answer is yes. People are going to continue to catch and eat fish taken from inshore areas—the piers, surf and rocks. Given this fact, they should know how to minimize the dangers from these fish.
Three simple precautions help reduce the danger from eating our local fish:
- The first is moderation. Most of the fish listed in California Fish and Wildlife Department warnings contain minuscule amounts of toxins and biologists say they are safe to eat if you limit your monthly consumption to a couple of meals.
- Second, most toxins are found in the gut areas of the fish, especially the liver, and proper cleaning will eliminate the majority of those toxins.
- Third, certain methods of cooking help reduce toxins by eliminating fats in the flesh (the other area where most toxins are found). Combining these three approaches with the tried-and-true methods recommended in the following should help present as safe and tasty a piece of fish as is possible.
Box and highlight
Live and learn! One day I had a long and rambling conversation with a Fish and Game man; we had been ruminating on a number of diverse subjects when the topic of toxicity came up. We were in agreement as to the three methods commonly used to lower the risks—moderation, cleaning, and cooking techniques. “But,” he said, “you must remember how culture in its many variations enters into the equation.”
As example, he cited the use of white croaker (aka tomcod and kingfish) by many Asian immigrants. In most southern California and Bay Area locations it is recommended that white croaker not be eaten. They are the worst of the worst when it comes to species harboring toxins in their systems.
However, they are considered a delicacy by many immigrants. They are caught by the bucketful, scaled, and then steamed whole. In particular, their skins and intestines are considered delicacies. It is the antithesis or opposite of a healthful approach to eating pier-caught fish. Unfortunately those following that approach will probably ignore my meager preaching on the subject.
I mentioned to the man that perhaps it was a good thing that for the first time a limit was imposed on the species in the late ‘90s. He said the limit was necessary because the number of white croaker had decreased AND it was also a way that the department could try to lessen the harmful impact of eating these fish.
Behavior modification at the state level! Of course it only will be an impact if the people involved obey the rules but it should help some. I don’t believe I had ever considered that the department might use rules and regulations in such a way until that conversation. But it makes sense!
The concern over the toxicity of fish is a fairly recent phenomenon. More long-term, shall we say at least several hundred years, has been the debate over good and bad fish. “Sport” fish” versus “trash” fish, good eating, “mild-flavored” fish versus “strong-flavored” fish. Such debate has often led to the following scenario—a scenario that never fails to leave me shaking my head.
An angler catches a fish which he or she has heard is “no good to eat” or “too hard to clean.” Next, the fish is killed and then simply left to dry and rot (to attract flies, impress passerby's, show it who was boss, keep it from screwing up the better fish, etc.), or kicked back into the water.
It shows the tremendous misinformation about many of the fish we catch. Unfortunately, it often comes from the past experience of many of these same people, people who may have taken a glassy-eyed, shriveled, and poor-smelling catch home, and then been disappointed in the barely edible product produced in their kitchen. It must be the fault of the fish, it can’t be the fault of the superior being—the human who caught and cooked the fish. WRONG!
Although there are a few exceptions, most fish are good to eat (noting the information presented above). The key however, is proper preservation and preparation. Poor preservation can present a raw product that even the finest chef cannot resurrect, and a poorly trained cook can ruin even the finest raw product. Given all of this, the good news is that cleaning and cooking procedures are fairly easy to learn (and discussed in the following chapters).
Some Basics Concerning Fish and Eating Fish
• Beef, pork and chicken usually taste like beef, pork and chicken. There can be variance in taste in regards to the “cut” or “piece” being cooked, but generally the differences are fairly minimal. Most cuts and pieces can be cooked using the same cooking methods. Fish are different. Fish species can show a wide variance in taste dependent upon (mainly) the fat content of the fish. Knowing the fish, the cut of fish being used, and the fat content of the fish helps in choosing the cooking method to use—pan frying, deep frying, grilling, baking, broiling, steaming, etc. Luckily it isn’t hard to learn the different types of fish.
• The darker the flesh of the fish the higher the fat content and the higher the fat content the more flavorful the fish. The same with vitamins and mineral in the flesh, the darker the flesh generally the higher the vitamin and mineral content.
• Flavorful is interpreted by some as simply mild or strong-flavored fish. A white-fleshed halibut fillet, or a piece of cod or pollock used in fish and chips, is the standard for many. They have a very mild, almost non-fishy taste. All have a very different flavor and taste than a dark-fleshed piece of mackerel that is strong flavored. Much of the American public prefers mild-tasting, white-fleshed fish whereas people reared in many countries, especially many Asian countries, are used to the stronger flavored fish and know how to use spices and sauces to compliment the flavor of that fish.
• Fish caught inshore show a wide gamut of colors and flavors and if an angler intends to keep and eat the fish he or she needs to learn the differences and learn how to treat (cook) them differently. That, of course, is a main purpose of this book and described in detail in Chapter Three.
Fish From Stores
• Sometimes the fish simply aren’t biting and you may decide to buy some fish. The general rules as far as color and flavor will remain true. However, the color of a fish doesn’t always give a true picture of a fish. The fish may not be fresh and, depending upon where it was caught or raised (on a fish farm) it may contain as many toxins as locally caught fish.
A few thoughts borrowed from Tommy Gomes, The Fishmonger
• One half of fish sold in markets is not inspected by the government (FDA).
• Know the source of your fish – is it locally caught and somewhat fresh, thawed from a frozen state, or still frozen? If frozen you should be able to read the country of origin. If thawed and sitting in a fish counter you should be able to ask the origin of the fish. You may or may not get an answer.
• Good seafood is not cheap—cheap seafood is not good.
People will continue to fish, continue to catch fish, and continue to eat fish. The goal of this cookbook is not only to present some seafood recipes that are tasty (I Love Seafood!) but also to teach the readers a little about the fish themselves, how they differ, and good ways to clean, store, and properly prepare them.