Printable View
Hi People,
We recently got into a few Spanish Mackerel off the Fraser coast but unfortunately one of the larger ones could not be released successfully so the decision was made to bleed, fillet and freeze it. The only thing we were a bit worried about was that I heard that the bigger ones may contain some sort of poison / toxin in them. Just wondering if anyone has had any issues eating them?
Cheers Dan.
I've heard all about coral fish, herbivores fish others in the food chain that eat those fish and ciguatera poisoning.
It would be interesting to get 1st hand experience about what others think, but I think in general it's not worth the risk in eating it.
Saltwater fishing, boat mad but has a job that gets in the way.
How big are you talking? It's hard to say but a lot of times certain locations are more affected than others, I've eaten Spanish in the 20-25kg range caught north of Yeppoon with no problems, was I playing Russian roulette? Maybe, but I had no issues!
Sent from my iPhone using Ausfish forums
I have always believed that in southern waters as in Hervey Bay south anything over 10 kg fish should be treated with suspicion as far as ciguatera is concerned, Matt
Would only be a guess but would of been over 20kg. Measured in at over 1.2meters
Cheers Dan.
I'm lead to believe that Spanish caught around Fraser Island can be suspect .....
Chris
This is worth a read ..... & it specifically names Spanish Mackerel caught around Fraser
http://www.frdc.com.au/knowledge/pub...od-safety.aspx
Have eaten a 35kg from noosa with no problems. Start in very small portions to be on the safe side. I had the same deal with being unable to release it but glad to say that it didn't go to waste and they taste just as good as the smaller versions.
There was a study done recently, i cant remember who it was by but i have the following screenshot of the results which doesn't show any connection between size and risk of cig.
Locally in north qld we have noticed similar results with hearing of more cases of cig poisoning from ~10kg fish over the bigger ones with certain reefs having higher frequencies than others. Personally i have eaten fish well over 30kg and never have any issues but as recommended above we generally have a small portion the first time we eat any fish regardless of size.
Attachment 116050
Interesting study Nidrac.
Cig is a bio-accumulative which means the toxin builds up in the body and stays there. Hence larger fish are generally older and have consumed more of the toxin than smaller fish and therefore are more toxic. However, it seems with macks that bigger isnt always more dangerous- and this study finds the same thing.
One thing I have put it down to is where the fish are caught and live most of their lives. Cig is a toxin that comes from microalgae generally found in greatest numbers around coral reefs. Zooplankton eat the algae, baitfish eat the zooplankton and so on it moves and builds up the chain into the big fish. I reckon (no evidence just my thoughts) that macks, while they migrate, tend to stick to separate populations. I think there is a distinct inshore population and a distinct reef population. The inshore fish are more nomadic and migrate up and down the coast (we get a winter run in Townsville)and are caught around the headlands, islands and shoals. The reef fish seem to be there all year round. The school size macks are common on the shoals and at the reef while most of the big hooahs seem to be caught around the Headlands etc.
So these inshore macks feed predominantly on migratory baitfish like herring etc while the reef macks which I have found are generally smaller on average, feed on reef fish such as fusiliers etc. which are eating cig affected zooplankton. So this may be the factor why they are not finding a size relationship with macks whereas it is a pretty strong relationship with other species such as coral trout.
Just a theory.
As you stated this is just my opinion based on experience no hard research to back it up but I 100% agree with the statement about certain fish being migratory and some "resident" fish on certain reefs but just to throw another variable into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Camhawk88
We have found the Mackerel at the reef to be very nomadic as well at certain times and areas, commercially we target these fish as they are generally in bigger numbers and of larger size than the "resident" fish, increasing return per fish while keeping the risk low. This also reinforces your statement about the nomadic fish having less chances of having cig as they are eating a variety of different food sources throughout there lifespan. Also explains why there are so few cases of cig in the considerably large volume of Spanish mackerel sold in shops around Nth QLD.
Of course this is all theory taken with a grain of salt as who knows where the fish has lived up until the point it ends up in your esky.
Yep sounds like the Rib Reef aggregation you are talking about?
I reckon these are the big coastal fish from around the capes and islands that aggregate there each year to spawn and then bugger off back inshore.
Yep that's the main one, doesn't always happen at Rib reef though. There is a good chance that they do during that time however we have a couple other spots 50+km offshore that we regularly have big fish schooling well before spawning time, maybe they're just moving out a little early to be ready, every time we think we have them worked out they do something different.
There was a news article some years back where about a dozen people got ciguatera from eating a queenfish caught in platypus bay on Frazer. I'd be feeding a bit to the neighbours cat first, and probably still use it for berley
I work with a lady that has just finished her PhD on cig. She tells me she also that the data shows there isn't a relationship between cig poisoning and mackerel size. I thought she said the inshore mackerel had a higher incidence of cig poisoning. Most importantly, if you do get a case of poisoning it is essential that you go to the hospital within the first 48hrs because they will administer a saline drip with a drug (I forget the name) that will flush it from your system, but you have to get it within 48hrs. She says that you will pretty much have a full recovery. Don't go to your GP because they aren't up to speed with this latest treatment. Without the treatment you could suffer the effects for years whenever you eat fish.
I should add that seeing a GP is better than not seeking any medical treatment but try to get to the hospital first if you have the option.
A good article explains the treatment options at the following link:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2579736/
Having said that - I actually had to spell ciguatera for the docs in bundy ER 5 or so years ago as none had even heard of it. My son had a suspected case - from a longtail tuna believe it or not. He ate a couple of small peices raw off the cleaning table as I was cleaning. Complained of numb lips/throat so we bolted into the hospital. It spread slightly then stopped and cleared up overnight. Either it wasn't cig - or we were very lucky in that he only ate a little.Quote:
I should add that seeing a GP is better than not seeking any medical treatment but try to get to the hospital first if you have the option.
PS - we lived in Bundy for best part of a decade and ate tons of spaniards of all sizes (pretty hard to go outside and not have them jumping into your boat up there:)). With the bigger specimens I'd fry a very small piece on the BBQ just after cleaning. Eat a few mouthfuls and wait an hour or two for symptoms to appear (or not as was always the case - touch wood). Never had an issue and have eaten plenty of 20kg+ versions.
Sidebar: Bundy hospital reminds me of a western/comedy movie where the barber is the dentist and is the doctor. After the last episode where I could do with a couple if stitches, I bought a suture kit and will do it myself next time, rather than go back there!
... Ron via mobile