• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

New Hebrides trench: First look at unexplored deep sea

Free episodes:

interesting han, dead fish sink to the bottom, doesnt matter what depth the bottom is at by the looks of it, theres natures hoovers cleaning it up.
 
Have you seen one like this before?
Split-Colored-Lobster.jpg


This is a genuine lobster and the picture is not doctored.

The reason I asked about the colour was because generally the colour of a "shellfish" is different before and after cooking, but there are some that are naturally red, like the ones in the picture in my first post.

When you said you ate some of the ones in the picture, it made me think about how "shellfish" is described on menus and packaging, for example shrimps, prawns, and crayfish*. It is very different to the way that "meat" for human consumption** is described, I for one would be very suspicious if I saw a dish described as for example "grass eating animal stew".
In short when it comes to meat we expect to know what species we will be consuming, but when it comes to "fish" we don't have the same expectation.
A good example is the Fillet-O-Fish from Mcdonalds, most people who eat them would not know when asked: what type of fish is used? (currently pollock but it has changed over the years)

The thing I find to be most ironic, is that the consumption and use of body parts from wild animals like Tigers, Rhinos, Gorillas and Elephants is seen as morally wrong in the "western World" but when it comes to the wild animals of the Sea (except Whales) they do not benefit from the same moral protection, that is to say if my local supermarket started selling Tiger stakes there would be uproar, yet I can go today and buy fresh or tinned endangered Fish taken from the "wild" no questions asked.
Just to be clear I think that eating or using parts of endangered creatures of any kind is wrong Fishes included.


Finally my understanding is that the Whales are not counted among the Fishes for historical financial reasons, rather than the fact that they breathe air.
The change in their classification was due to a dispute over taxes incurred by a whaler, who did not want to pay the levy on "Fish oil" that was due, so he went to court and argued that a whale is not a fish, and therefor exempt from "fish oil Tax".
In my strange little world I include the whales and dolphins among the fishes for a number of reasons but I will not bore you any further.



*I think you call these crawfish or crawdaddys in the US
** pet food can sometimes be labeled as containing meat and fish derivatives
 
The crawfish I eat are raised on farms in Louisiana.

They come in 60 pound bags like this...

8027058317_38f949d1b5_z.jpg


You can collect them yourself in muddy ditches with baited nets, but that is a lot of work.

I also like catfish, but also prefer farm-raised catfish over wild because they taste better.
 
I think it would be a good idea if some one set up a restaurant that had only "invasive" species on the menu, for example Asian carp, Burmese python, and Giant Snakehead.
That way everyone is a winner (except the invasive species).

I have unintentionally caught American Crayfish, when fishing in a local river, and I foolishly returned them to the water, when in hindsight I should have taken them home and "humanely" dispatched them, (put them in the freezer) but at the time I was not sure what to do.
The reason that we have American Crayfish in some of our rivers is because they escaped from a farm, and being much larger, they were able to out compete our native ones, and as one crayfish can produce many thousands of offspring the problem will only get worse, unless something is done.
 
I recommend you for a non-profit corporation NGO for the purpose of protecting the Commonwealth from this menace. Begin searching for government and corporate funding sources, and start filling out grant applications.

Your first NGO project should be is a trip to Breaux Bridge to attend the world's largest mudbug festival where you can spend several days conducting intensive eradication research.

Breaux Bridge Crawfish Festival

Get to work on those grant applications NOW. May Day will be here before you know it. Fly into Houston. Rent a car. Bring a wide-brimmed hat.
 
that was interesting hippy.

we dont have and fresh-water crayfish here, never seen a real one, plenty of lobster .......
Thats ok tranny. What surprise , jumping on my posts again like a dog in heat. I have yet to eat British freshwater cray fish or the US invader but the sooner people have the taste the more we can save these waterways.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry Nameless, but that is not the correct way eat mudbugs. You would starve to death doing it that way.

The correct, efficient way is the "Push-Pull" method employed by Cajuns.

Rip the tail off. Grasp the protruding tail meat with your teeth. Simultaneously push the meat out from the tail with your thumb as you gently tug the meat with your teeth. The tail meat will come out in one piece.

If you are an uncivilized brute, suck the guts and disgusting yellow mess from the body.

suck_da_heads_cajun_style_iphone_case.jpg


If you are a normal person, discard the body and proceed to a new tail.

You should be able to eat 3 or 4 tails per minute using this technique.
 
Last edited:
Ha, brilliant . Like I said , I've yet to tangle with this delicacy so am looking forward to it. Plus I've never had clam chowder or a real gumbo before.
 
Back
Top