If all the Carp went away what would replace them?

[Peter M]

Well it would be cat fish. They are already taking over as the speci anglers quarry of choice. i have recently been in a battle to prevent them being put in a CAA water but they have gone in any way last month. Now the club forum is alive with how to catch a big moggie. They can be stocked easy into any water and survive well. You think you have problems with carp but i think we are going to get more problems with Cats in the future. Big carp are becoming old hat now.

[Steve Walker]

On the idea that if we didn't have stew pond fishing some of the anglers might not be interested in fishing at all - well, there's always golf, though they might ask to have the holes enlarged and the fairways shortened!

 

There is another similar situation with a species other than carp - apparently some trout fisheries have bait ponds where you are allowed to fish for stockies with a bubble float and a worm. Less angling, more "pick your own trout". It's also the case, in my opinion, that some of the small stillwater trout fisheries sail perilously close to being no better than the carp puddles. There is a local one that I sometimes fish which stops stocking in early summer and closes from the end of June to the start of October because the conditions become borderline for trout in the warm weather, but there are others which stay open through the summer, and the fish do not do well for it.

[Dales]

True, but how many of these people would actually love fishing for a variety of smaller species if they had suitable (i.e. lighter) tackle and had someone to show them how to use it?

 

A lot of people have no idea what they're missing out on, and it's not their fault - hence the carp machine will keep rolling on until there's little else left.

 

What I suspect the majority of 'instant carpers' mean when they talk of nuisance species is, 'this non-carp can just be reeled straight in on my heavy carp gear'.

 

But the small species are still there and its choice, on any "commercial carp fishery" for every two or three "instant Carp anglers" you will find a clued up angler emptying the water of good quality Roach, Rudd and the one I am most envious of good Perch. Sadly they do seem to be the more mature anglers and the young anglers do seem to go the Carp route. It does not take a genius to work out they are using different rods and tackle to most of the Carp anglers.

 

But as my mum used to say to me as a kid, if every one else jumped under a bus would you do it? This odd line was fed to me when ever I tried to blame some one else or used the excuse that it was not only me that done some thing wrong. So this line has stuck with me, so just because everyone else is hauling small Carp on sea gear it's no excuse to say the carp machine, tackle trade, angling media, fishery owner made me do it. If some anglers do not have an interest in other species or are just happy to catch carp, then good luck to them, but people can not blame everyone else for there own lack of imagination and sticking to the same species all the time, this goes for other species specific anglers and not only Carpers.

 

The thing I find most odd is that many who assume that these poor deluded Carp anglers are missing out on something by not river fishing for Chub or waggler fishing for Roach are the only people who raise this issue. Could it be that those catching Carp on commercials are actually enjoying what they do? If some one is enjoying the angling they do, long may it continue. Why should they cut there teeth on minnows and Gudgeon down the canal. Granted it may well make them a better angler in the long run, but the idea that they are missing out by not doing so is a little patronising.

 

I would welcome the postings of those who fish commercials, oddly they never seem to post that they have missed out on anything and it's the rest of us telling them that they have missed out

Edited July 6, 2010 by Dales

[gozzer]

I think the idea of going back to natural stocked waters that go through there own species cycles is a lovely one and the mystery of not knowing what is in a water is magical. Has a year class of one species come through that have gone unnoticed and you catch a big one or a species that no one thought were in the water start showing up, but the reality is that for most waters they are heavily managed and you can even get a stock list on a website with top weights for each species. So stocked fish are here to stay, well on most still waters anyway and if you are going to stock them, it makes sense to stock big species as that's what most of the paying angling public want.

 

If the majority of anglers feel this way, then I feel that angling will be finished in the not too distant future. No longer can anglers claim to be "guardians of the waterways", "naturalists", or any other name that we think will enhance our profile. The fickle attitude of the general public will change, and the antis will get their way. Their accusations of "tormenting fish just for our own gratification" will ring true, it will no longer be a 'hunter and prey' situation, more like a fairground attraction with a prize guaranteed every time. As I said earlier, not angling, just catching.

 

John.

 

I would welcome the postings of those who fish commercials, oddly they never seem to post that they have missed out on anything and it's the rest of us telling them that they have missed out

 

If you've never had, or experienced something, how can you know if you're missing out Stephen?

Edited July 6, 2010 by gozzer

[Dales]

Well it would be cat fish. They are already taking over as the speci anglers quarry of choice. i have recently been in a battle to prevent them being put in a CAA water but they have gone in any way last month. Now the club forum is alive with how to catch a big moggie. They can be stocked easy into any water and survive well. You think you have problems with carp but i think we are going to get more problems with Cats in the future. Big carp are becoming old hat now.

 

I think you may be right, they are certainly becoming more popular and I have noticed that they do seem to be getting there own sections in many tackle shops, granted only little ones but from small acorns..........

 

This was the fish I had in mind when I started this thread and for the reason you stated, the popularity of cats is going to grow and grow and this could well lead to problems and no doubt to the horror of many it's a species that I would like to see increase (Duck and cover). Although I am sorry to hear about the stocking by CAA, but this is one of the problems that the popularity of cats will cause and even though I started the thread looking for a species to replace Carp if they were no longer around, Cats may do so to some extent even with out the magic disappearence of the Carp.

[Anderoo]

There are probably lots of styles, methods and species I have never experienced but would absolutely love - but if I never hear about them how can I know for sure?

 

People do enjoy themselves catching lots of carp; it is addictive. But I don't think it's patronising to say that they might also enjoy trotting for dace, if they tried it.

 

By the way, I have fished commercials, back in the 90s when they first took off, and my opinion of them is based on experience.

 

I guess I'm old fashioned. What I love about fishing is the relationship with nature, the changing seasons, the different species and the tackle and methods used to catch them, outwitting wild creatures that do not need to eat my bait and that bolt off at a clumsy footfall. Stocking lakes with stupid levels of fish - and worse, ornamentals and non-native fish - just to make fishing interesting and easy for people leaves me feeling hollow, and if that was the only kind of fishing available to me, I would give up tomorrow and take up photography.

 

It will all get looked at very closely on animal welfare grounds at some point, and we will find ourselves on extremely dodgy ground.

[Dales]

If the majority of anglers feel this way, then I feel that angling will be finished in the not too distant future. No longer can anglers claim to be "guardians of the waterways", "naturalists", or any other name that we think will enhance our profile. The fickle attitude of the general public will change, and the antis will get their way. Their accusations of "tormenting fish just for our own gratification" will ring true, it will no longer be a 'hunter and prey' situation, more like a fairground attraction with a prize guaranteed every time. As I said earlier, not angling, just catching.

 

John.

 

If you've never had, or experienced something, how can you know if you're missing out Stephen?

 

Very true, but who are we to decide what some one should or should not do. I agree that choice should be available and the lack of it is what most people rightly complain about, but maybe many anglers have made a choice and rejected the natural waters and other species and want to fish the waters that many on AN describe as Hell Holes.

 

One of the things that I like about AN is that it has a very good general coarse forum and many members do enjoy different species and enjoy fishing in natural locations. It is one of the few forums where using the terms "guardians of the waterways" and "naturalists" carries any merit and could describe some of a forums members, but sadly I don't think that these terms could or should be used to describe many anglers. Many do not care about the environment or nature and I think if given a choice between a beautiful low to mid stocked natural water that may be a little challenging or a bulging heavy stocked hole with a good chance of plenty of fish, they would choose the heavy stocked water

 

I just think that many more people who fish (Will not use the term anglers) want to and get great enjoyment out of puddle bashing then the rest of us self appointed Angling Police would like to believe. Just because many of us on Anglers Net care about the state of our countryside, waters and want to fish nice natural waters, we overlook that plenty of others only care about whether they have a very good chance of catching a fish and it better be a good size.

 

I do sympathise with those who have had good waters ruined, but it only happens because enough people want it and it makes commercial sense. For all those who mourn the loss of a natural water, there will be many others that no doubt welcome the stocking of F1's etc. They are just not the sort of people who seem to hang out on AN.

 

The horror show of a pond on the thread about Carp good or bad says it all, I doubt any one on here would wet a line at such a place, but I bet plenty of people still fish it. There are plenty of holes in the ground around my way and they are all ways full. Oddly the more bland the fishery and easier it is to catch the more people seem to fish them. No lack of fishing to choose from around my way, but people in there droves head to the mud puddles. It's what they want I feel for those who have no choice.

[Dales]

There are probably lots of styles, methods and species I have never experienced but would absolutely love - but if I never hear about them how can I know for sure?

 

People do enjoy themselves catching lots of carp; it is addictive. But I don't think it's patronising to say that they might also enjoy trotting for dace, if they tried it.

 

You are right, but I just can't help feeling that many may have tried trotting for Dace and for all those who found it a rewarding experience there will be others who dismissed it and head back to the hole in the ground. You could lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

 

I guess I'm old fashioned. What I love about fishing is the relationship with nature, the changing seasons, the different species and the tackle and methods used to catch them, outwitting wild creatures that do not need to eat my bait and that bolt off at a clumsy footfall. Stocking lakes with stupid levels of fish - and worse, ornamentals and non-native fish - just to make fishing interesting and easy for people leaves me feeling hollow, and if that was the only kind of fishing available to me, I would give up tomorrow and take up photography.

 

If more people held your views, we would not have got ourselves in the situation we find ourselves in with so many heavy stocked waters with little character, but I do think many like these waters and actively seek them out. It's hard to understand to others who prefer a challenge to there fishing and enjoy a nice environment as you and gozzer clearly do.

 

I'm only playing devils advocate as I prefer a more natural place to fish, but I don't think everyone does and it's not because choice is not there.

Edited July 6, 2010 by Dales

[Rusty]

There are probably lots of styles, methods and species I have never experienced but would absolutely love - but if I never hear about them how can I know for sure?

 

People do enjoy themselves catching lots of carp; it is addictive. But I don't think it's patronising to say that they might also enjoy trotting for dace, if they tried it.

 

I don't think that's being said Andrew. Anglers who prefer to fish commercial carp fisheries are well aware of other styles and methods (it would be really patronising to think they're not) but they choose not to try them because they get enjoyment from how they like to fish. The partonising bit comes in when other anglers assume that they'd get much more enjoyment from a different style.

 

I too have spent a lot of my time fishing commercials, some good some not. I fish differently now and prefer it but not everybody would have the same opinion.

[Vagabond]

It will all get looked at very closely on animal welfare grounds at some point, and we will find ourselves on extremely dodgy ground.

 

But not looked at closely enough ! More than likely it will be looked at superficially (like the question of the right to eat some of your catch) and inappropriate blanket legislation, orchestrated by the media and those organisations that purport to "represent all anglers", will be imposed.

 

My friend the late Roger Standen, angling author and journalist, wise beyond his years and his educational opportunities, said to me around 2002 "Dave, I think our generation has already had the best of it" I fear he was right.