101 replies to this topic

[staffman]

Wow NADO that is one big carp on top of you.

[NADO]

LOL thats not me, I was trying to find an image of a dude violating a carp's sexual integrity and that was the best I could come up with.

[riverhugger]

That picture and a picture of a guy hacking a carp in half basically define the paradigm of this thread.

[hammercarp]

Well I only talked to one farmer and they said they would be more than happy to take the flesh. The practice of using carp for fertilizer is not an idea I came up with myself, it is actually happening on a much larger scale in the states. Flies and racoons????? Were not talking about the stay at home mom (farmer lol?) who has a garden in her backyard...were talking about acres of farmland, not a 5x20 plot lol. People actually go to the river during salmon season and use them for their own backyard gardens which is a pretty bad idea for all of the reasons you mentioned above, but only a "Citiot" would think I was talking about a backyard garden.....

Please tell us where carp are harvested to use as fertilizer? I will be sure not to eat anything from the farms using them . Carp live a long time and large carp can have high levels of chemicals in them. Chemicals like PCB's, Dioxins/Furans and a whole lot more including heavy metals . Farms grow our food. It is a very bad idea to put these chemicals into our food supply . Talk about not giving a dam.
.

The part about abandoning fish that is suitable for human consumption is a fair point and I will put in a question to the MNR and see what their position is on this. Oh and BTW I like how you tip toed around the point made in the guide to invasive species that clearly states “studies indicate substantial and varied negative impacts have been documented”. Looks like any scientific information that doesn’t support your position isn’t work acknowledging.




Aha, the true reason for the carp conservation finally comes through. The Carp Anglers Group could clearly care less about the impact carp have on the fishery. It’s a shame you guys are the ones who scream the loudest, but that’s the way politics always go. A small group of like minded individuals yell loud enough and get their way, it doesn’t matter if they are right or not.

"Good for you.. I have talked to quite a few guys that say carp are a great fish to angle for between trout and bass season. Carp allow me to go fishing as much as I want without having to spend lots of money on gas, sit in traffic and have to plan an entire weekend just to wet a line. They are a fantastic urban sportfish and In Fisherman magazine named the carp " The World's Greatest Freshwater Sportfish" ."

How could some one draw that conclusion from this statement is beyond me.

I started this post with the intention of engaging fellow forum users in a discussion. I chose information that backed my point of view. I have no obligation to state information that did not back my point of view. The post about me not mentioning those facts is just plain ignorant and in fact made by some one who neglected to mention their foolish scheme is in fact illegal, and poses serious health risks. This is the kind of " win at any cost " mentality of the " true believer" . They don't care who pays the cost and who they have to step on to get their way.

In a way this discussion about using carp for fertilizer and animal feed is a complete waste of time because the governments at both provincial and federal levels would never allow it to happen because of the aforementioned health risks. End of story.

[riverhugger]

Well if the carp meat isn't safe for eating then you could legally toss them into the trash I guess.

[hammercarp]

Well if the carp meat isn't safe for eating then you could legally toss them into the trash I guess.

I said "large carp" and it also depends on where they came from. The same could be said for a number of big fish here in Ontario. Check the guide.

[NADO]

Hammer can you honestly not see how selective you are being with your logic? Clearly your passion for Carp angling has clouded your judgement.

[getin]

"Common Carp IS NOT an invasive species" / "Common Carp IS an invasive species"

Whatever, has anybody really changed his opinion based on zillions of comments on this topic? I guess not! Do what you have been doing

[JimCanuck]

Lots of fish in Ontario waters are non-native.

Lots of fish in Ontario waters are invasive.

The bigger picture is, if people are fishing for them, or if there is a perceived value to them we can capitalize on, who the hell cares?

Jim

[hammercarp]

"Common Carp IS NOT an invasive species" / "Common Carp IS an invasive species"

Whatever, has anybody really changed his opinion based on zillions of comments on this topic? I guess not! Do what you have been doing

Thanks I will. Which is, to fish and have fun!

[hammercarp]

Well Gentlemen on that note. I would like to thank all for a spirited discussion and especially those that made intelligent , thoughtful and also humorous posts.

[georgianbaydrifter]

lol nice pic nado

[NADO]

I thought the thread could use a humorous spin lol

I apologize to all for filling up all of the recent post slots the past few days with all of this Common Carp nonsense. I should probably explain myself....

This forum is used quite a bit not only by members but by thousands of anglers surfing the internet as well. When members here post information about how it is pointless to deal with invasives like gobies, rusty craw etc. or that certain invasives don’t pose a threat or aren’t invasive at all I have to react. Users come across that information in their google searches and will take that information as verbatim and then tell their friends who will tell their freinds. I just cant allow that to happen without at least voicing the other side of the argument.

So I apologize to all for adding another 20 posts to my roster, I just cant help myself lol....I tried to keep it as civil as possible and I apologize if I offended anyone.

[LogJam]

no worries NADO, we all have the right to voice our opinions, weather it is offensive or not... that's the whole point to "freedom of speech"... we can agree or disagree.. that's what life is about. you can tell by the passion people have in this topic, and the views they have. just imagine if we were all the same, in the things we do, the ways we think.

we should always be leave in our self's, and what we think is important, even if others don't. that is how change happens, for better or not. i think heated topics like this help everyone educate them self's. other people facts may be the key to helping others start a new way of thinking..

Cheers~!

[JimCanuck]

no worries NADO, we all have the right to voice our opinions, weather it is offensive or not... that's the whole point to "freedom of speech"...

Freedom of Speech is only between you and the government, not between you and anyone else. So SHUSH you!

Seriously though, the more opinions and the more arguments the more people learn who is right and who is wrong. People also learn who to listen to and who are the crazies not to listen to. So why not?

Jim

[hammercarp]

Freedom of Speech is only between you and the government, not between you and anyone else. So SHUSH you!

Seriously though, the more opinions and the more arguments the more people learn who is right and who is wrong. People also learn who to listen to and who are the crazies not to listen to. So why not?

Jim

Thanks Jim. Here is what I propose people do with the carp they catch. If they are not going to eat them, put them back. Take a picture if you want. Post it up on this forum if you want. Fish and have fun. He is what others propose. That you take action which may be illegal , is definitely placing others in a health risk and that you drive maybe 100 Km. to do so. So who is the crazy?

[hammercarp]

[hammercarp]

A while ago I sent an email to the MNR regarding carp and the regulation on killing fish and not eating them. here is the reply.

Hi Lorne,



Thanks for your question. The answer comes from subsection 36.(5) of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act which states:



36. (5) A person who takes a fish whose flesh is suitable for human consumption shall not,

(a) abandon the fish if its flesh may become unsuitable for human consumption; or

( permit the flesh to become unsuitable for human consumption.



The trigger for this provision is the term “suitable for human consumption”. There are no technical criteria for determining whether or not a fish fits this definition. As many people catch and eat common carp it could be argued that they are suitable for human consumption. The best practice to avoid the potential offence is to either live release a fish or keep the fish with the intention of eating it.



Best of luck,



Mark Robbins





Mark Robbins

Provincial Enforcement Specialist

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

300 Water Street

Peterborough, Ontario

K9J 8M5



(705) 755-1775



Plain enough.

[NADO]

I actually received the same response from the MNR last week. It seems that they get these questions quite frequently and would prefer not to touch them with a 10' pole! I have gotten conflicting responses from them. Once in the past I was told that it would be up to officer discretion. I have asked two officers since then, the first was in favor of my point of view and said it was not a chargable offence. Then this weekend while fishing on Bass opener I was carded by an MNR officer and decided to get his opinion. He didnt directly say it was a chargable offence however he did refer to the same clause and was clearly not encouraging me to start up the farmer network system.

Just today I got a response back from the Invasive species outreach program sanctioned by the MNR and the OFAH.

If i recall, your question last year referred to the euthanasia of Common Carp. In short, i do not believe there has been any amendments to the legislation to include other types of invasive species. The Ontario Fishery Regulation under the federal Fisheries Act is where the piece of legislation exists to prevent the live possession of certain invasive species. Only nine species are included on the list most of which are not known in Ontario at this point. As you know, Common Carp are not included on this list. This however does not mean that Common Carp are not an invasive species.

An invasive species is defined as a species of plant, animal, or microorganism introduced outside of its natural past or present distribution that causes “harm”. That harmful property is the key in separating a non-indigenous species from an invasive species. For example, a Chinook Salmon in the Lake Ontario is a non-indigenous species, however they do not cause any harm to the fishery, therefore they are not an invasive species. Common Carp do cause harm, making them an invasive species. In many lakes they exist in however, they have been there for over 100 years. I would not go as far to call them naturalized, however they are a species that we are going to have to live with. That being said, if they are to spread into new waterbodies, they would certainly cause damage. This is where we really try to promote prevention. Anglers dumping bait buckets provides a pathway to spread something like a common carp, or even a round goby.

In conclusion, unfortunately even though Common Carp are an invasive species, they are a species we are going to have to accept as a part of the fish communities in many of the lakes and rivers they have already invaded. Our job at this point as anglers and conservationists, is to prevent their spread into new waterbodies.

Im not sure about the Chinook Salmon comment in there as I believe they are harmful to the fishery as well. With Chinook Salmon they don’t have the same effect as Common Carp where once established they are impossible to get rid of however they do have a negative impact on Native Atlantic Salmon and Brook Trout.

Lets not lose sight of the fact that Common Carp ARE an invasive species. Nobody should EVER be advocating the release of Common Carp, it just makes absolutely no sense! The battle may be lost in the great lakes and their tributaries but if Carp start showing up in a inland lake up north where they weren’t previously found then efforts should be made to remove them from that lake. Many people would have thought the Humber River was a lost cause but look at what the efforts of volunteers have accomplished. Its not over till its over.

[hammercarp]

"Just today I got a response back from the Invasive species outreach program sanctioned by the MNR and the OFAH." Just what the heck and who the heck are they? Like I said private institutions trying to get our tax dollars.
But I point out that they clearly tell you that carp are not included in the list of invasive species." In short, i do not believe there has been any amendments to the legislation to include other types of invasive species.......... As you know, Common Carp are not included on this list.."

." Nobody should EVER be advocating the release of Common Carp, it just makes absolutely no sense!" This statement is complete and utter nonsense. It is just your opinion based on your own bias. Which is pretty skewed if you ask me.