# Hey Burly1 so they have no good fish in europe eh?



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

:roll:



Burly1 said:


> . I guess some people will even buy a magazine about fishing for carp. I hope they get an opportunity to go to Europe, where carp are viewed as something special. Europeans are different that way. They have very few genuine gamefish available to the fishing public, so they settle for what will survive in their polluted lakes and rivers. Burl


"The English only fish for Common carp because they do not have anything else to fish for in their nasty polluted waters"

Northern Pike:
pike grow far bigger in the Europe than they do in the states
How would you like one of these babies?


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

Zander a UK favorite very much like our walleyes didn't North or South Dakota stock some of these a few years ago?


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

Here are some UK Yellow perch that any Midwesterner would love to catch!


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

These are called bream and can be a pest and over run a lake much like our crappie can do here









This is a barble-sort of like our red horse here


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

This is the mighty wells catfish-looks like a Flathead crossed with an eel
The 1st one is more common size









This one shows the possibilities


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

These are called roach-if they look like you have seen these before -its because they raise them for bait minnows in the USA









These are Tench these fish a tough brusers


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

These are Eels and are said to make great wells catfish bait


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

last but not least world class Rainbow and Brown trout
just like we have in the good US of A ..."both non native to Britain"


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

It is a myth that Europeans do not have anything else to catch or have few places to fish, Northern Pike, many trout species (even our own rainbows and brookies)--Zander--"a walleye like fish"-even a mega Predator called the Wels Catfish, are available to fisherman from any walk of life, but Carp are still king by a wide margin with billions spent across the EU. Why? because that FIGHT and are a blast to catch and are a challenge for the seasoned fisherman

Mo

trout /grayling fishing http://www.yorkshire-dales-flyfishing.com/day-ticket-yorkshire.htm

http://www.coltsfordmill-fishery.co.uk/day-prices.phtml

http://www.furzebraylakes.co.uk/


----------



## fishunt (Jan 24, 2004)

interesting


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

I stated that there are very few gamefish available to the fishing public. I stand by my statement. Pike, zander, perch and trout are available. But mostly only to the landed gentry. Their fishing doesn't differ a great deal from their hunting. You pay to play. That is a fact. If you are a working man who fishes waters available to the public, you are mostly limited to what's available in those public waters. That, sadly, is carp, or a subspecies thereof. If gamefish are so widely available, then why do so many of the Euro tournaments focus on catching fish so small that we Americans call them bait? For you to think that I am uneducated on this subject is a mistake. I am familiar with Euro components and Euro style fishing. I have read a great deal on the subject. Choosing selected photos was a good attempt to take the focus away from the real issue. Trash fish is a trash fish Mo. I honestly don't care what kind of spin you want to put on it. When you come up with some real world research that show carp to be beneficial in US waters (other than for fertilizer or cat food) I may reconsider my feelings toward those overgrown goldfish. Carp, and various species of the carp family have caused nothing but problems for the waters to which they were introduced.We don't need them, or want them. Those who feel they are a worthwhile gamefish are in the vast minority. I will grant you a boon though. I don't think carp fishing should require a license. But there should be a requirement to kill each and every fish caught. That would be a beginning to addressing the problem of carp in the US. Read the latest issue of ND Outdoors. Our G&F biologists published an interesting essay on what carp have done to some fine gamefish waters.


----------



## tumblebuck (Feb 17, 2004)

Looks like some good bowfishing to be had over there!!! :stirpot:


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

> tumblebuck Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:04 am Post subject:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Looks like some good bowfishing to be had over there!!!


AMEN :beer:


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

Burly1 said:


> I stated that there are very few gamefish available to the fishing public. I stand by my statement. Pike, zander, perch and trout are available. But mostly only to the landed gentry . Their fishing doesn't differ a great deal from their hunting. You pay to play. That is a fact. If you are a working man who fishes waters available to the public, you are mostly limited to what's available in those public waters.


The evidence I posted is irrefutable, Have you ever spoken to a Brit? ever fished in the UK?--if you had done ether, you would know that it is a pay as you go fishing, some buy a day ticket that allows them to fish 24 hours on a lake, usually they set up camping in a fishing tent called a bivy, some more serious Carpers belong to fishing clubs called syndicates where they buy a membership for the year--costs are all over the place from the cost of a big mac and fries--to the cost of a full blown Disney week end. to insinuate that we as americans pay less to fish is a misrepresentation of facts, it costs to fish here--but I will bet the avg. carp angler in england spends far less in a year if one figures in a bass or walleye boat payment and the gas to haul and run it at the lakes--

the reason common carp are so valued is they fight harder that darn near anything pound for pound, add to the fact they get far bigger that most any game-fish, a five pound bass or walleye is a good fish where a 5 pound carp is a puppy--add to that the complexity of Euro style fishing and you have the makings of a life long passion--the reason people like you, who put down carp, do so because you know once some gets a taste of that fight they will be hooked for life, and the idea of lakes managed just for rod and reel /catch and release carp-fishing twitches a primal coard in your brain--

--as far as carp always causing problems in every water they are in --thats a myth, scores of lakes have carp that manifest no ill-effects on the game-fish populations or water quality--some lakes yes, but the same can be said of stunted bass , crappies, and northerns, balance is the key

MO


----------



## johnsona (Dec 4, 2003)

Mo,

I gotta agree with Burl on this one. Carp often do nothing but hurt the ecosystem of otherwise healthy lakes. They're called trash fish for a reason. I've heard of state DNR and G&F departments poisoning lakes because such fish have taken over.

As far as angling in the UK goes, did you ever stop to think about the fact that the cost of living there is higher, so maybe the everyday person can't spare that extra cost of access fees. Also, if they charge money for access to carp waters, I'm guessing that they also charge for access to lakes containing "better" fish, such as pike and trout, right? So does access to lakes containing those pike and trout cost more than access to lakes containing carp? If so, maybe the average Brit doesn't fish for the "good" fish because he/she simply can't afford to. So they go with what they can afford, which is access to carp lakes. If this is the situation, that would make Burly quite right with his statment that game fish are available "mostly only to the landed gentry."

Also, you should really look into the "agree to disagree" theory. It's getting old seeing all of these posts about how great carp are. I don't have a problem with it if you want to fish for carp or talk about them on these boards. If you want to, by all means do so, but please stop trying to convince all of us "disbelievers" how great you think they are. We've got our own favorites to fish for, and you've got yours. Let it be.

Go pick up the most recent issue of ND Outdoors; the essay on carp holds some valid points. But I'm guessing you can't, because you probably don't live here. Which would be why you're having such a hard time comprehending how we feel about this subject.

One more thing: I've gotten a taste of "the fight," and I sure didn't get hooked. As a matter of fact, I'd take a big pike smashing my topwater lure over "the fight" anyday.

Now I must quit this mess and get back to my English paper. Later.


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

No, the reason I put down carp is because I have seen, and unfortunately will have to continue to see the damage they have caused to many of my favorite fishing haunts. I really could care less what you or anyone who is daft enough to call carp sportfish, fish for. And to your credit, it makes sense that people in England don't pay as much to fish as we do. Why in the world would anyone pay anything to fish for carp? Do the rest of us a favor and kill the parasites. Make your self some nice smoked carp or some carp fritters. Seems fitting since you are frittering away your time promoting a cause with no redeeming features. Why don't you start a carp website? I'll help you promote carp fishing, but never ever will I condone catch and release for them. They are nothing but infectious trash and should be treated as such. And to answer your question, yes I occasionally bowfish for carp, not as a goal, but as an aside when things are slow when fishing for worthwhile species. When I'm done I give them a nice burial in a mass grave, as befits their station. But If I never had another carp stuck on the end of an arrow, I would not miss it. Burl


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

johnsona said:


> Carp often do nothing but hurt the ecosystem of otherwise healthy lakes. They're called trash fish for a reason. I've heard of state DNR and G&F departments poisoning lakes because such fish have taken over. .


Yes in the past no one wanted them-that IS changing as witness to the growth of vendors selling carp only gear---and if a carp is hurting a lake then it would not be "otherwise healthy lakes" would they?

as far as taking over-sure I don't want a lake over run with runts-I want big fish-as far as taking over a lake.... many native fish do that too, carp do not have a monopoly on that.



johnsona said:


> As far as angling in the UK goes, did you ever stop to think about the fact that the cost of living there is higher, so maybe the everyday person can't spare that extra cost of access fees. Also, if they charge money for access to carp waters, I'm guessing that they also charge for access to lakes containing "better" fish, such as pike and trout, right? .


-the same lakes that are managed for carp usually have a healthy population of BIG pike and Zander-a crucial componant to growing big carp -you need good carp preds-so the cost factor would be moot. So the answer to the question "So does access to lakes containing those pike and trout cost more than access to lakes containing carp? " not anymore than carp fishing would--by the way a new bass boat will cost between 14k-30k--with a cost of owning--insurance, gas, fees--well over $500 a month if you count the gas to haul it to the lake--I am sure a lot of folks cannot afford that in our country ether--

The idea that the only the wealthy Brits have access to the "good stuff is a myth-even so that would not explain why across all of Europe common carp are THE fish-in fact some of the best record class carping now come from some of the former chech republic countries-where carp are mostly caught for food

Inclosing I guess I will have to get a brit to post on it as they live there as far as your states attitudes on common carp-sure that's now -but wait will change

Mo


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

Burl--do you think a native fish only stance is one that NODAK fisheries folks should go by???

Mo


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

Many of our fish were introduced, and have proven to be great for anglers and the environment as well. Carp are trash fish in ND. Carp will always be trash fish in ND. If you like them so much, go fishing. You are well and truly wasting your time here.


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

MoCarp said:


> Burl--do you think a native fish only stance is one that NODAK fisheries folks should go by???
> 
> Mo


dodge the question ehhh?

again do you feel that NODAK fisheries should have a native only mandate?--that is stock or manage for ONLY fishes native to ND???

you stance on carp are clear--but your reason can span other fishes--just trying to pin you down on why, carp CAN be in a lake with no ill effects to gamefish--do you say get rid of them even then?--is it because they would not be native? as in that case they would be inert to that lake

Mo


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

> Burl--do you think a native fish only stance is one that NODAK fisheries folks should go by???


MoCarp - That's a stupid stance to take ANYWHERE regarding almost ANY SPECIES and your rhetoric is duly noted.

Ringneck Pheasant, Smallmouth bass, Muskie, Bighorn Sheep, Steelhead, Trout, etc, they're all popular non-native species. Burly doesn't speak on behalf of Nodak, or GNF or whomever, but he's certainly entitled to his opinion, and I'm guessing that your question was so polarized, he chose to ignore it.

There are places where introduced species are appreciated by most, and places where they aren't by most, but I'm sure you already know that and deal with it.


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

maybe I was unclear not the forum but "north dakota state fisheries"

I agree many many non natives are a plus more than a minus

my question was such to get a feel against all non natives by burly1

if so then the debate shifts in a different direction

as far as devisive comments--the slash and hack in a other species thread should show where thats coming from

Respectfully
Mo


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

Well, reread his post then and I think you'd catch his drift, and outside of a yes/no/maybe answer, I say he summed it up pretty clearly with his response of:


> Many of our fish were introduced, and have proven to be great for anglers and the environment as well. Carp are trash fish in ND. Carp will always be trash fish in ND.


I don't see that as dodging the question you asked of him at all.

Mo...we get it, you love carp. It wasn't that tough to figure out in the first place. :lol: Not everyone loves carp, or smallies, or walleye or perch. You aren't gonna change anyone's mind by being confrontational or in-your-face about it...especially here.


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

I thought I answered your question quite clearly. But I'll clarify for you. I do not feel that a native fish only stance is one that would be productive for our state G&F Dept. Their stance is such that fish which can clearly seen to be sport fish,(carp are not) and will compete, beneficially, with other species within a body of water,(carp do not) can sometimes be introduced into bodies of water within the state of ND. Such introductions are done carefully, and with very serious monitoring, in order that an informed decision can be made regarding a species suitability to state waters.(carp are not suitable under any conditions) Carp are not on the list.(carp are an invasive species, not wanted within state waters) Our fisheries biologists view carp as an invasive species, which do often irreperable damage to the populations of sport fish, and their environs. _Their_ stance on the subject of carp and their subspecies is clear. Yours is as well. Perhaps you should take it up with them. 
Here are some pictures of good carp.
[siteimg]4030[/siteimg]
[siteimg]4031[/siteimg]
[siteimg]4032[/siteimg]
Good and dead.
Endit


----------



## MoCarp (Nov 22, 2005)

Burly1 said:


> Their stance is such that fish which can clearly seen to be sport fish,(carp are not) and will compete, beneficially, with other species within a body of water,(carp do not) can sometimes be introduced into bodies of water within the state of ND. Such introductions are done carefully, and with very serious monitoring, in order that an informed decision can be made regarding a species suitability to state waters.(carp are not suitable under any conditions) Carp are not on the list.(carp are an invasive species, not wanted within state waters) Our fisheries biologists view carp as an invasive species, which do often irreperable damage to the populations of sport fish, and their environs. _Their_ stance on the subject of carp and their subspecies is clear. Yours is as well. Perhaps you should take it up with them.
> 
> Endit


That attitude WAS a prevailing theme in Texas Fisheries folks--now just 3 years later--carp are to be promoted as a "game fish" as of a meeting on the subject today--I think with time, this state will be the same--you will always have the old ideas hang around for a while, but just like Texas--times are a changing!!!

Mo


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

:lame:


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

Carp will never be a popular gamefish in ND.I love bowfishing for them though.


----------



## sierra03 (Jan 27, 2005)




----------



## goldhunter470 (Feb 25, 2005)

mmmm..... chocolate ice cream. But what does that have to do with fishing??


----------



## sierra03 (Jan 27, 2005)

thats what i think of carp...juss my opinion though

[siteimg]4329[/siteimg]
Ok art time is over now, and i am not trying to hijack the thread. Go on with the chlorophyl.....more like borophyl.


----------



## goldhunter470 (Feb 25, 2005)

you mean that's not ice cream??

Oh.... I get it. It's pudding.


----------



## sierra03 (Jan 27, 2005)

haha uke:


----------



## goldhunter470 (Feb 25, 2005)

I'm on the floor. You gotta stop. Time for bed. :beer:


----------



## Fossilman (Mar 12, 2006)

A fish,is a fish,is a fish............. :beer:


----------

