Roy wrote:
>
> On Nov 1, 7:32 pm, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
> > On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 18:21:39 -0700, Arri London >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >Ophelia wrote:
> >
> > >> "Arri London" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >> > Ophelia wrote:
> >
> > >> >> "Arri London" > wrote in message
> > >> ...
> > >> >> > Back in the 'old days' oysters used to be so cheap and plentiful (in
> > >> >> > the
> > >> >> > US as well as Britain) that they were food for the poor. An oyster
> > >> >> > sandwich was eating at the bottom of the barrel, literally. Think
> > >> >> > Colchester in the past
> >
> > >> >> Yes! I have read stories of the poor complaining about having to eat
> > >> >> salmon
> >
> > >> > Must be nice, ya?
> >
> > >> Heh they thought they were badly off
> >
> > >In those days, there were. Salmon is affordable locally as a treat. Too
> > >pricey to eat on a regular basis.
> >
> > Nothing beats smoked whitefish.http://www.murrayssturgeon.com/ShowMenu.tpl
>
> ==
> Black Alaskan Cod isn't too bad either.

Smoked fish around here costs far more than salmon. That's an even rarer
treat.

> ==