What's with the Carp hating?

[BoldBear]

I've had some of my most productive days (and nights) on rivers catching Barbel, Chub & Roach; it just takes a bit of watercraft and work finding them without alerting them to your presence, especially in clear water unlike like the cloudy lakes that most of the Carp live in.

It is not that the Roach are not there in numbers on a river; it's more a case of them not being in every swim between 9am and 5pm like a lot of the anglers today seem to expect. The smaller generations of roach that are so important are still there (on the rivers that I fish anyway); although as you would expect some years are better for their survival than others. But when Carp have entered the equation where they have not been before in numbers they have had the effect of ruining the fragile balance.

I love Carp, and I like fishing for them in the same way as Anderoo does; by searching for them and then stalking them stealthily, but no-one could ever convince me that stocking them in numbers into upstream rivers would be good for the river.

 

As long as I can remember Carp have been present in the slower deeper and wider parts of the Thames and as you know they have recently started to grow to very large sizes in these stretches, and I think thats OK, but I definately don't think it's OK to stock them into the upper stretches of the Thames or other similar sized rivers, and thats not being predjudiced that's just being sensible in my book.

Edited May 24, 2008 by BoldBear

[terry t shirt]

I dont hate carp> I do hate that some great waters for Tench and Bream and other species Have been basically erradicated by stocking with huge Quantities of Carp. Boddingtons resevoir is a classic example 20Yrs ago a great Bream water with fish running to Double figures Now an oversized carp puddle with fish willing to hang them selves on bare hooks theres that many.

[poledark]

Vagabond, yes the forest streams do keep running, but the flows have been low for many years. Flash floods once or twice a year cause havoc with homes and fish, but they are not indicative of good average flows. I can't be sure of this, but isn't the water table in the forest extremely acid? Would this in itself limit the survival rates of trout if the flow were reduced with a subsequent increase in acidity?

 

MC, not just the Darenth, (pumped dry..no flow...no water....nothing survived...for several miles) R Eden and the Eden brook, almost unrecoganisable. Go to Haxted Mill, the river is almost lost in a ditch full of rushes. I used to catch roach and gudgeon and the occasional trout there.

 

The Medway (mudway) is almost stationary in the summer, but quickly becomes a raging torrent in the winter rains. All its headwaters flood at the first drop of rain. Yes Dave, there are good fish in the medway, but match anglers don't want to struggle with 20 empty swims for one with fish in.

 

It's a simple fact, that most anglers want to catch bigger fish. Particularly the young ones...it is no mistake that the classic image of a fisherman is with arms outstretched saying "it was this big"

 

Hence the growth of Barbel fishing, the queues to fish Wingham and the anglers of all ages lining the banks of the comercials.

 

And as for catching roach on carp gear, a happy accident, one which I hope to repeat soon. Of course I am geared up for carp or tench or an eel, but that wont stop me getting enormous pleasur if I get another one Perhaps you would rather I took the risk and left hooks in lost fish.

 

Bold bear, did anyone ever suggest stocking carp in the upper reaches of a river? does anyone actually do that?

 

And lets get one thing very clear..it is not just carp that muddy up the water, tench do (no one hates them) bream do (no one hates them) and so does every other bottom feeing fish to some extent.

 

Be grateful for the carp, the saviour of angling and the angling shops.

 

Den

[Vagabond]

Sussex Ouse Conservation Society (of which I am a patron - www.sussex-ouse.org.uk) was originally formed mainly to combat these low flows, which were caused in the large part by over-abstraction by South East Water.

 

Yes, that is true (I also am a patron of SOCS) but I am talking about the UPPER reaches of all three of the rivers that drain Ashdown Forest - as I explained in my previous post, the nature of the Ashdown aquifer precludes exploitation by water abstractors.

 

Even in periods of drought, there is a steady flow into these streams. The fact that Ouse and Medway suffer low flows in the middle and lower regions is due to over-abstraction as MC points out.

Don't let water companies and government kid you it is simply down to low rainfall, its down to over-abstraction, which in turn is down to overcrowding in the SE, and don't get me started on the political background to that!

 

 

Den. Yes the Ashdown waters are on the acid side of neutral, which is why a pound trout there is a good one.

On a chalk stream they would grow to four times that size. On the other hand, the Ashdown water is nowhere near as acid as that found in mountain streams coming off (say) granite, where a trout of over half a pound would be exceptional.

 

Trout survive and thrive, number-wise over a great range of pH. They will spawn in peaty streams just as in chalk streams. All they need is CLEAN water. Its only their individual size that is affected by pH (via the food chain consequent on pH)

 

Bold bear, did anyone ever suggest stocking carp in the upper reaches of a river? does anyone actually do that?

YES THEY HAVE - which is exactly what I am complaining about. OK, not actually in the river itself but in the dams made in the upper reaches, from where they can easily escape as carp fry over the spillways.

 

The point is Den, the trout thrive in the headwaters above the carp ponds, they do not do as well in the tailwaters below. Before all these carp were introduced, the tailwaters also held plenty of good trout. No other factor concerning water quality has changed. There is no industrial input, no new housing, only the same woodland and heathland catchment that has been there for several hundred years.

Edited May 24, 2008 by Vagabond

[gozzer]

It's a simple fact, that most anglers want to catch bigger fish. Particularly the young ones...it is no mistake that the classic image of a fisherman is with arms outstretched saying "it was this big"

 

Hence the growth of Barbel fishing, the queues to fish Wingham and the anglers of all ages lining the banks of the comercials.

 

And as for catching roach on carp gear, a happy accident, one which I hope to repeat soon. Of course I am geared up for carp or tench or an eel, but that wont stop me getting enormous pleasur if I get another one Perhaps you would rather I took the risk and left hooks in lost fish.

 

 

Be grateful for the carp, the saviour of angling and the angling shops.

 

Den

 

Your choice of fishing for the biggest is just that Den, your choice, it's not everyones. I've already told you my choice between a 20lb carp and a 20lb bag of roach.

 

Do you suggest that we all fish with tackle capable of landing the biggest in the water, whatever we are after?

Or use tackle suited to the target species and the swim?

 

You still haven't answered my question as to your opinion on stocking an old established fishery (that has a natural balance of fish), with thousands of carp. Do you think they're the "saviour" of the fishery, or the ruination?

 

As I've said so many times before, it's the diminishing choice that's my concern. Choice of species and choice of waters in which to fish for them.

 

John.

[Steve Burke]

As I've said so many times before, it's the diminishing choice that's my concern. Choice of species and choice of waters in which to fish for them.

 

John.

 

Amen to that!

[poledark]

Gozzer, your reply suggests that I am an oddball because I want to catch bigger fish. Not so old fella, I have yet to met an angler who would not be happy to get a PB. Even the hardened match anglers I have met will boast of "the 20lber they landed on a pole" or similar.

 

I have very litle knowledge of carp puddles, not to deny I have fished a few. I have no wish to fish any more either thankyou

I have fished lakes with only a half dozen good fish in them, almost all unknown fish, and I now fish pits with a large stock of fish in them. Not knowing just what will take my bait next, be it a mid thirty carp, 10lb tench, large eel or roach, keeps the interest going.

 

To be honest I can't really see much problem with catching a surprise roach on carp gear. Doesn't mean it will be ill treated, more like reverence from me. And the so called sporting aspect doesn't wash with me either, it is the catching that matters, not the rod you use.

 

OK, so you know some waters that have ben overstocked with carp, I used to know plenty that were overstocked with little roach and bream. I also know of a lot of waters that have been specially created purely to feed the demand for easy fishing.

DDAPS lakes are a good example of a lake finding it's own balance. Roach and bream....stocked with hundreds of 4" carp in the late 50's. Now holding a large stock of big carp (not thousands, but quite a few) big roach (I have caught them to 1.10oz, stacks of 6 to 8lb bream, large pike etc) A well balanced water by any standards.

 

Lack of choice? nothing stopping me from fishing for roach/bream/tench on any of the lakes I fish. Indeed I have the additional choice of going to an easy water and catching a fair few nice sized carp,and "getting a bend in my rod"

 

Den

[Sportsman]

I feel a bit out of my depth, being a new (or at least a born again, after 40 years) coarse fisherman. Last time I coarse fished it was for wild fish, the stocked ponds didn't exist, at least not where I lived.

So now I am in a bit of a quandary. I have a days fishing tomorrow. pressure of work means that I get to go just once a week at the moment so I like to make the most of it.

Coarse fishing venues are a bit thin on the ground up here but I have the choice of 3 tomorrow. Not much to choose in distance and cost so it's just down the the fishing.

 

Venue one is a day ticket water. 5 acre lake with apparently carp, tench, roach and perch, all to a good size. There is a good chance I will have it to myself although it is in a public park so lots of dog walkers etc.

Problem is I have fished here a couple of times, never had a bite and never seen any sign of a fish. I have seen others fish it and have never seen anyone catch anything.

Likely to be a restful day in very scenic surroundings.

 

Venue two is the wild option. Massive loch, 15 miles long by a mile wide. There are stories of large shoals of roach at the western end where a river runs into the loch. There are also supposedly roach in the river but river fishing on a Sunday up here can be a bit iffy. I spoke to the guy who sells the permits and he said he has never heard of a roach being caught but he has seen some when trout fishing. When asked he did also mention that he has never seen or heard of anyone actually fishing for them Could be an undiscovered roach anglers dream, or another restful day. I am likely to be sharing the loch with the occasional trout angler and the odd pike angler so not going to be crowded, but it is a hell of a walk from the car, carrying all the gear, and I've got a bad back.

 

Venue three is a low key commercial. He has two lakes, a match lake full of fish up to around a pound and a " specimen lake" with carp to 20lb and Tench to 6lb along with good roach and rudd.

I would probably spend a couple of hours on the match lake fishing a light waggler and just enjoying the action of casting and watching the float disappear regularly. Then along to the other lake for a few hours on the feeder catching every 10 minutes or so (mostly carp of 2-3lbs with the occasional better fish.) On both lakes I can park at my swim, there is an onsite cafe for a hot drink and a proper toilet (important for a man of my age) Now I know it's not proper fishing and its completely artificial, and it's too easy and all of that, but I have to say, it's not a bad day out either.

 

So, where do I go in the morning?

 

What would you do?

[Team Man]

Venue three is a low key commercial. He has two lakes, a match lake full of fish up to around a pound and a " specimen lake" with carp to 20lb and Tench to 6lb along with good roach and rudd.

I would probably spend a couple of hours on the match lake fishing a light waggler and just enjoying the action of casting and watching the float disappear regularly. Then along to the other lake for a few hours on the feeder catching every 10 minutes or so (mostly carp of 2-3lbs with the occasional better fish.) On both lakes I can park at my swim, there is an onsite cafe for a hot drink and a proper toilet (important for a man of my age) Now I know it's not proper fishing and its completely artificial, and it's too easy and all of that, but I have to say, it's not a bad day out either.

 

So, where do I go in the morning?

 

What would you do?

 

 

I think I would choose venue three, I would fish the match lake and give it a thumping good try, but if I didnt have any luck in three hours I would then go along to the other lake, at least there would possibly be a chance of going home having caught something

 

There's no shame in catching Carp, I don't find them a foolproof catch

[poledark]

Sportsman, you have summed it up in a nutshell. If you subsistute a couple of rivers for your first two options, then you have the dilemma which faces most anglers today. And eventually most end up going for option 3 because they want to catch fish.

 

I want to catch fish as well, but Gozzer would be amazed if he knew the amount of time I spend experimenting with rigs and setups, many of which never catch me anything. I am often advised to try my ideas out on an easy water full of small carp, but that would be pointless, I want to get the wiser and more cautious ones.

 

I will fish the parts of a water which are not popular (can't get a bivvie up ) just to see if I can catch there.

 

Anyway, I am getting off the point................

 

Den