cyprinid boy

I suggest no such thing Steve. I had not heard you theory before and that is why i question it. Peoples’ concepts of the wildie/'normal' carp are odd. I suggested that they are commonly mixed up with slow growing males simply because they are small. Thanks for reiterating the very same point Paul. Its all very interesting, however, does anybody have scientific proof. No proof, no believe - could just be anglers hearsay or Chinese whispers ? Mat

I suggest no such thing Steve. I had not heard you theory before and that is why i question it. Peoples’ concepts of the wildie/'normal' carp are odd. I suggested that they are commonly mixed up with slow growing males simply because they are small. Thanks for reiterating the very same point Paul. Its all very interesting, however, does anybody have scientific proof. No proof, no believe - could just be anglers hearsay or Chinese whispers ? Mat

Never heard that theory before. You'll find every carp classed as a 'wildie' turns out to be male and this is why they do not exceed 10lbs+. Additionally, every time we visit a fishery these so called wildies are common carp!! Not so sure about this one. Mat

Never heard that theory before. You'll find every carp classed as a 'wildie' turns out to be male and this is why they do not exceed 10lbs+. Additionally, every time we visit a fishery these so called wildies are common carp!! Not so sure about this one. Mat

I do not remember waving a flag in favour of culling – i neither said it was right or logical. In my opinion any guideline set by the EA is either lacking science or is under serious misconceptions. As providing a living I am probably involved in 15 days a YEAR! Hardly a living!! And to address newts point, I am aware of two companies consisting of 9 employees undertaking such work. Hardly a plus on the British employment stakes. The only place these fish are really well adapted is the canal system and the equipment used is very effective in capturing zander. A 10 metre wide, 1.5 metre deep canal is not the same a spoons and oceans so a relatively poor comparison. The silver fish populations have increased ten fold since the operations began. I have never fished for zander anywhere else thus its not a country wide hate campaign and cull which people seem to forget or refuse to realise. Rivers, lakes and drains are let be. No one will pay for the work so it’s not done and as the species are not a problem in these areas everybody is happy. Regarding the continent, zander are farmed for food fish in many countries like France for example. When caught in the wild they are taken home and eaten. Another point many fail to realise. We are not a fish eating nation. The fish we catch are distributed through out the canal network for food. The odd larger one find their way to non-mandatory licence holding waters. The reason I get involved in this argument is not through a hatred of zander, but because I’m trying to explain the facts behind the removal schemes. I know many anglers reply with their heart but just try to digest what I have said before exploding. Cyp.

I do not remember waving a flag in favour of culling – i neither said it was right or logical. In my opinion any guideline set by the EA is either lacking science or is under serious misconceptions. As providing a living I am probably involved in 15 days a YEAR! Hardly a living!! And to address newts point, I am aware of two companies consisting of 9 employees undertaking such work. Hardly a plus on the British employment stakes. The only place these fish are really well adapted is the canal system and the equipment used is very effective in capturing zander. A 10 metre wide, 1.5 metre deep canal is not the same a spoons and oceans so a relatively poor comparison. The silver fish populations have increased ten fold since the operations began. I have never fished for zander anywhere else thus its not a country wide hate campaign and cull which people seem to forget or refuse to realise. Rivers, lakes and drains are let be. No one will pay for the work so it’s not done and as the species are not a problem in these areas everybody is happy. Regarding the continent, zander are farmed for food fish in many countries like France for example. When caught in the wild they are taken home and eaten. Another point many fail to realise. We are not a fish eating nation. The fish we catch are distributed through out the canal network for food. The odd larger one find their way to non-mandatory licence holding waters. The reason I get involved in this argument is not through a hatred of zander, but because I’m trying to explain the facts behind the removal schemes. I know many anglers reply with their heart but just try to digest what I have said before exploding. Cyp.

Newt would be dreading me appearing on a zander post!! Right then, Zander are classed as non-indigenous by both DEFRA and the EA. A licence is required to hold these fish and will only be granted to non-mandatory water (no link to other waters). There are some exceptions due to historical backgrounds. So, firstly, no licence, no zander. If they are resident they need removing – the law I am afraid, regardless of the science. Zander, like pike are effective predators. The difference is that small zander, unlike jack pike, hunt in packs. However, they will only deplete silver fish stocks in the right water conditions – they require coloured water. Clear water, and they find a natural balance, like in the drains, lakes and large rivers. However, they thrive in the canals throughout the midlands. Not in the south though as the deeper, less used cuts, stay clear. A few corrections. It is believed zander were first introduced in the 1960s by the Great Ouse River Authority. They were introduced then, however, the first recorded introduction was in 1878 by the Duke of Bedford when he stoked Woburn Abbey. Secondly, a comparison between zander and any other species (catfish and grass carp on one hand a ludicrously carp and barbell on the other) is totally unjust. Zander a successful breeders year in year out, again in correct water conditions. Cats and grassies are not. Thirdly, the EA cull a minimal quantity of zander themselves as they have neither the ability or know how to do it – it is contracted out. The figures they quote are gained from contractors. In conclusion, It doesn’t matter what any of us think it’s the law to cull zander if no licence is granted. It is not, however, the law to throw them up the bank if you catch them. I guess this thread has stemmed from chap who had the audacity to kill the 17 pounder. Quite some move, especially as a fish that size is of no risk to any fishery. In the follow up in the anglers mail a small piece about culling, with a quote form British waterways, appeared. At the top was an electrofishing boom boat in zander culling action. Middle right is a **** with a white cricket floppy hat on, that’s me! I have experienced it all first hand so any questions fire away.

Newt would be dreading me appearing on a zander post!! Right then, Zander are classed as non-indigenous by both DEFRA and the EA. A licence is required to hold these fish and will only be granted to non-mandatory water (no link to other waters). There are some exceptions due to historical backgrounds. So, firstly, no licence, no zander. If they are resident they need removing – the law I am afraid, regardless of the science. Zander, like pike are effective predators. The difference is that small zander, unlike jack pike, hunt in packs. However, they will only deplete silver fish stocks in the right water conditions – they require coloured water. Clear water, and they find a natural balance, like in the drains, lakes and large rivers. However, they thrive in the canals throughout the midlands. Not in the south though as the deeper, less used cuts, stay clear. A few corrections. It is believed zander were first introduced in the 1960s by the Great Ouse River Authority. They were introduced then, however, the first recorded introduction was in 1878 by the Duke of Bedford when he stoked Woburn Abbey. Secondly, a comparison between zander and any other species (catfish and grass carp on one hand a ludicrously carp and barbell on the other) is totally unjust. Zander a successful breeders year in year out, again in correct water conditions. Cats and grassies are not. Thirdly, the EA cull a minimal quantity of zander themselves as they have neither the ability or know how to do it – it is contracted out. The figures they quote are gained from contractors. In conclusion, It doesn’t matter what any of us think it’s the law to cull zander if no licence is granted. It is not, however, the law to throw them up the bank if you catch them. I guess this thread has stemmed from chap who had the audacity to kill the 17 pounder. Quite some move, especially as a fish that size is of no risk to any fishery. In the follow up in the anglers mail a small piece about culling, with a quote form British waterways, appeared. At the top was an electrofishing boom boat in zander culling action. Middle right is a **** with a white cricket floppy hat on, that’s me! I have experienced it all first hand so any questions fire away.

I have currently been working on a reservoir catching large carp for commercial fisheries. The largest so far is 53lbs and there are bigger still. They are all natural, English and never seen a bait other than an artificial fly. There are bigger English carp in this water than in any commercial fishery in this country so i would be dubious as to whether commercial fisheries are to blame for the escalating size of the species. Maybe the anglers are to blame for using the baits? Do you really think trout pellets are designed for carp? Cyprinids = carbohydrate diet, Salmonids = protein diet!! They are not, but this doesn't stop people putting in tonnes - education is the answer. Who is greedier – the carp or the angler? Cyp.

I have currently been working on a reservoir catching large carp for commercial fisheries. The largest so far is 53lbs and there are bigger still. They are all natural, English and never seen a bait other than an artificial fly. There are bigger English carp in this water than in any commercial fishery in this country so i would be dubious as to whether commercial fisheries are to blame for the escalating size of the species. Maybe the anglers are to blame for using the baits? Do you really think trout pellets are designed for carp? Cyprinids = carbohydrate diet, Salmonids = protein diet!! They are not, but this doesn't stop people putting in tonnes - education is the answer. Who is greedier – the carp or the angler? Cyp.