bream spod mix

[gozzer]

I'm sorry Gozza. Your arguments about carp may be right, may be wrong or may contain a bit of both.

 

But what is apparent is that earlier posters on this post have just been downright rude...

 

I can understand why anglers such as Anderoo are giving the site a break for a bit and why Specimen Sean feels a bit put upon.

 

Some of the behaviour on this site recently is a long way from humourous and simply insulting...

 

One of the reasons I joined in the banter with Phone, was to lighten the tone of the thread a bit, after the silliness that led to Andrews decision. There were no insults, (personal or otherwise), just taking the pee a bit. What was there to be insulted about? Or for anyone to feel put upon about?

 

Please explain.

 

John.

[Phone]

gozzer,

 

Thank you my good man. Alas, flattery does impress me.

 

SpecimenSean,

 

You say you don't often "do that". Seems to me you "do that" all the time. I understand your passion, although I don't share it, and the carp guys are winning. The UK is decimated by carp puddles. WE WIN! Why do you insist on antagonizing hostile or unfriendly banter? Your intensity is entertaining but frankly disingenuous. (and I'm on your side).

 

Worms,

 

That is "cut and paste". Say something new to impress me. I will understand it better when you tell me when any particular species becomes or became "naturalized" in the UK. Warning, you will be on thin ice, as in the end of the ice age was what? maybe 10,000 years. I would like it better is you simple said you are in favor of selectively removing and destroying in a scheme "according to Worms" without rhyme or reason. At least "because I say" doesn't hide behind hocus pocus science.

 

Phone

[gozzer]

gozzer,

 

Thank you my good man. Alas, flattery does impress me.

 

 

Phone

 

Hello Mr Phone, I assure you I never flatter, I just 'tells it as I sees it'.

 

One of the great ironies of this 'debate' is, that I probably have maybe 10 or so years angling left in me. My kids have never really shown an interest, and there doesn't look like any grand kids in the foreseeable future. So as one of my main concerns is for the future of angling in 10, 20 or more years time, (after I'm gone), I find it ironic that it is usually the younger anglers who seem blind to the dangers the current situation presents. Maybe I should say, "OK, you'll get what you deserve". But then I think that it involves so much more than just angling, that I'll continue campaigning about it, as I've done for the last 25-30yrs.

 

John.

[Worms]

Worms,

 

That is "cut and paste". Say something new to impress me. I will understand it better when you tell me when any particular species becomes or became "naturalized" in the UK. Warning, you will be on thin ice, as in the end of the ice age was what? maybe 10,000 years. I would like it better is you simple said you are in favor of selectively removing and destroying in a scheme "according to Worms" without rhyme or reason. At least "because I say" doesn't hide behind hocus pocus science.

 

Phone

"Cut and paste" from what I told you on a recent thread Phone, say something new? what, make something up? Sorry I don't do the "hocus pocus science" of the "carp circus", they don't do science, just anecdotal conjecture...or worse still the ramblings of the 'red-top' fishing comics and the sponsored fishermen that earn loads of cash from 'new' techniques, baits and tackle.

 

Just to repeat the definition of "naturalised": when a non-native species becomes viable in its 'new' habitat....(regardless of when that species was moved by Man since the retreat of the last Ice-age)

 

"Because I say", well, yes it is both my opinion and my professional view as well.

 

I deal in the scientific side of it, as well as being an angler. I rectify or, preferably, given the chance, initiate mitigation schemes to prevent ecological damage at a number of levels. This not infrequently involves draining (natural) ponds that have been illegally stocked with fish (frequently carp) and installing structures or procedures by which they can be drained annually over winter months to prevent re-colonisation and allow native wildlife to utilise the ponds without risk. The big difficulty is removing them from rivers! The biggest culprits? well, carp anglers obviously, they are the ones moving the fish and, the ones that comprehensively backed compulsory C+R and the killing of non-native fish except carp, all in a bid to prevent "fish theft". Who's stealing now?

 

To make you happy though Phone. "I'm in favour of selectively removing and killing any non-native species that I find when I go angling or dog walking because they annoy me and shouldn't be there".......

 

 

 

 

I also kill them professionally because it's my job....fully backed by UK and International legislation.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Worms

[Sportsman]

The biggest culprits? well, carp anglers obviously

 

Would that be all carp anglers, some carp anglers or just one or two carp anglers?

Just to be scientific of course.

[Worms]

The biggest culprits? well, carp anglers obviously

 

Would that be all carp anglers, some carp anglers or just one or two carp anglers?

Just to be scientific of course.

Obviously, some carp anglers (to be precise and as scientific as possible), those carp anglers that steal fish and put them into ponds of their choosing.

 

I'm sure that these idiots are a tiny minority of carp anglers just as you get a tiny minority of idiots who damage things for the rest in any field. Unfortunately the impact of such actions can be devastating to some natural habitats.

[Phone]

Worms,

 

Well you can rest assured every time we catch a carp and remove it from the water we are contributing to it's earlier and earlier demise.

 

No, no, you're not getting off the hook that easily. I would like an "introductory date" we can use as a cutoff for "native vs invasive". Surely you must have one??

 

As for me personally, as a younger git I was all in favor of a becoming a killing machine. Usually I didn't distinguish between "native and naturalized" - I distinguished between moving and dead. I didn't have to be annoyed, in fact, I was usually delighted. Only rule in my family was you had to eat what you shot - fish or foul - no wasting.

 

Seems to me these puddles and my favored quarry they contain are legal. Seems to me there are more and more of them. Seems to me you're just grumpy because we like it. In America "other species" anglers say carp are negative in one respect or another all the time. Hog wash! They assimilate as well as any freshwater fish and better than most. What's that got to do with "who's ox has been gored"? Seems to me your just (a British word please) because it is your ox, mine's fine.

 

Phone

[DavyR]

No, no, you're not getting off the hook that easily. I would like an "introductory date"

 

Shouldn't you just go ahead and get a room?

[Worms]

Worms,

 

Well you can rest assured every time we catch a carp and remove it from the water we are contributing to it's earlier and earlier demise.

 

No, no, you're not getting off the hook that easily. I would like an "introductory date" we can use as a cutoff for "native vs invasive". Surely you must have one??

 

As for me personally, as a younger git I was all in favor of a becoming a killing machine. Usually I didn't distinguish between "native and naturalized" - I distinguished between moving and dead. I didn't have to be annoyed, in fact, I was usually delighted. Only rule in my family was you had to eat what you shot - fish or foul - no wasting.

 

Seems to me these puddles and my favored quarry they contain are legal. Seems to me there are more and more of them. Seems to me you're just grumpy because we like it. In America "other species" anglers say carp are negative in one respect or another all the time. Hog wash! They assimilate as well as any freshwater fish and better than most. What's that got to do with "who's ox has been gored"? Seems to me your just (a British word please) because it is your ox, mine's fine.

 

Phone

You mentioned it yourself Phone, the end of the last Ice-age or, in other words, to put it more simply again, any animal or plant that found its way here with the help of Man.

 

Same rule in my family...do you honestly think I'd waste something edible....read my signature.

 

As for my views on carp puddles, I have no problem if the pools are legal as long as they are not overstocked or badly maintained...but there are laws about that... some are, some are in breach of numerous UK legislations which is why quite a few are being prosecuted now regarding illegally imported fish. Moves are also afoot I hear to inspect a number on siting, local councils that allowed planning consent may also be in the mire....It's been illegal to situate a number of developments on flood plains for a long time in the UK, especially if it impacts on native wildlife and restricted sites.

 

Grumpy because people like fishing muddy puddles? Jesus Phone, haven't you read anything I've written? I don't wish to fish them, they offer no challenge. Yes I have fished a few with the children of friends who were learning to fish...when a 6 year old can hook, play and land an 8lb carp on her own that's when I choose not to fish waters like that...it's "child's play".

 

I don't stop others from using them and, as long as the pools are legal I'm glad that so many people do fish them...it keeps them off the decent waters. Whilst the angling gutter press are spouting on about "king carp" every 5 minutes I'm also glad...they're not encouraging everybody with a fishing rod to run down to the rivers and practice the art of trotting for dace or chub or grayling etc. Whilst they are on the carp pools I can wade up some of my favourite streams and rivers and catch grayling, trout, sea-trout and salmon on fly or spinner.

 

What I do object to is the way that even the laws have been altered to protect carp angling. Fine if carp theft is a problem just make it illegal to steal a fish...oh, I forgot, those laws already existed!....the new ones restrict MY angling. So, when a muddy carp pond angler tells me that all native predators should be culled because they are eating carp that are chucked into ponds by the lorry load I have no sympathy...more than that Phone, I'm positively angry. Nature works because of a balance which is why natural 'wild' waters are so productive....which is why I fish them...I don't need some noddy in a tent watching telly with camo slippers on whilst carp hook themselves three at a time on 'set lines' to tell me how fishing should be.....I like mine natural as do many others...carpers can do what they like as long as it doesn't affect my fishing and I'll continue doing what I like which has absolutely no relevance to carpers because they don't appear to understand it.

 

NOTE: Carpers here refers to muddy puddle carpers who think that otters are pests ok!

 

By the way Phone, I fish for carp occasionally in an old estate lake, not as old as some but 150 years old. The lake is spring fed and isolated from other natural waterbodies by a series of filter ponds.....The lake also has crucian carp, tench, roach, perch and eels...and kingfishers, herons and otters and water voles. It may not be a natural lake but it has a natural balance...that'll do for me.

 

As for the States, well, it is of no consequence to me what you choose to do there...I understand that federal law is quite strict on illegal fish game and wildlife introductions or other crimes...wish it was stricter here!

[Phone]

Worms,

 

I'll take a moment to re-load. I don't want you to get overheated.

 

From what I'm reading from you then, it's not the species, it's their location. You use "invasive" for theatrical purposes. Am I right?

 

Phone

 

I like your sig.

 

Davy R,

 

HA HA!!!!!