101 replies to this topic

[NADO]

Are you still not going to address all of the information that supports an Invasive designation for Common Carp? You can only get away with ignoring it so many times...

[hammercarp]

Are you still not going to address all of the information that supports an Invasive designation for Common Carp? You can only get away with ignoring it so many times...

From the guy that does not know what country he is in or what Great Lake he is talking about.

[NADO]

From the guy that does not know what country he is in or what Great Lake he is talking about.

That was a mistake, I copied the headline from the page I read it on. Get over it.

Why are you not acknowledging those links?

[hammercarp]

Jim
Please show me the law that says it is illegal to catch and then release immediately an invasive fish . You have posted everything but that.

[JimCanuck]

hammerhead, you are a true bigot. I already posted that. But clearly the section of the law regarding to release of invasive species is prohibited. But apparently your mind cannot process the truth of the matter. Maybe bigger font text will help?

Release of Fish

12. A person, other than a person fishing under a commercial fishing licence, who catches a fish, other than an invasive fish, the retention or possession of which is prohibited by these Regulations shall immediately return the fish to the waters from which it was caught and, if the fish is alive, release it in a manner that causes the least harm to that fish.

What is it so hard to understand? Catching any prohibited to possess fish must be released, unless its a invasive species, which is illegal to put into Ontario waters regardless of how you acquired it.

Jim

[staffman]

I know that you believe in what you preach Jim, however until the MNR shares your opinion I won't feel bad fishing for and releasing common carp. Since the MNR doesn't list the common carp as one of the invasive carp species your release rule doesn't apply. You should perhaps look to get involved with the upcoming match tournament in Toronto and talk to some very knowledgeable carp anglers. I've watched a few times and these boys know how to catch them and treat their catch with respect so others may enjoy the sport. I do not have the proper equipment needed to actively partake in these tournaments . This is definitely part of the urban fishing scene and will likely grow as these match tournaments spread.

[SmackUm]

OFAH Invading Species Common carp are included: http://www.invadings...m?A=Page&PID=20

[JimCanuck]

OFAH Invading Species is in cooperation with the MNR, every Fishing show here the OFAH and MNR CO's are together promoting that website and the control of invasive species.

Jim

[NADO]

OFAH Invading Species Common carp are included: http://www.invadings...m?A=Page&PID=20

Unless I misread that document it does not actually state that Common Carp are on the list. This is the problem, the "naturalization" classification. What is notable about that document is the below quote. Common Carp are considered an invasive species by MNR and OFAH and ISAP, but if you are a member of the general public you cant participate in the conservation efforts and conservation efforts are limited to specific sanctioned events. Some people like to twist this and say that this means that Common Carp arent invasive which couldnt be further from the truth.

Common and grass carp can do severe damage to wetlands and other aquatic habitats by destroying large quantities of plant life, which is detrimental to some native fish populations and other animals that depend on aquatic vegetation for food, cover and spawning and nursery habitat. Since both types of carp can only digest about half of the plant material it eats, the rest is expelled into the water. This process can enrich the nutrient levels of water leading to algal blooms, reduce water clarity and decrease oxygen levels. Grass carp may also carry several parasites and diseases known to be transmissible or potentially transmissible to native fishes.

This quote is common knowledge to most anglers which is what astonishes me about this thread. I guess there is only 3 or 4 members here that are pushing the pro-carp agenda but I just thought more of the knowledgeable anglers would have chimed in by now. Although it can be difficult to jump into a thread with 84 replies...

[hammercarp]

Release of Fish

12. A person, other than a person fishing under a commercial fishing licence, who catches a fish, other than an invasive fish, the retention or possession of which is prohibited by these Regulations shall immediately return the fish to the waters from which it was caught and, if the fish is alive, release it in a manner that causes the least harm to that fish.


Yes we have been through this and I repeat. It does not say that it is illegal to catch and release invasive fish. All it says is that you are not mandated by law to release them. like other fish. There is a big difference between what you think that statement says and what it actually says.
I will repeat it for you one more time. It says that by law you must release fish except invasive fish. But it does not say it is illegal to release invasive fish. That distinction is what you are mis understanding. All it says is that you cannot retain or possess them . If you practice C&R with them you are within the law.

[hammercarp]

OFAH Invading Species Common carp are included: http://www.invadings...m?A=Page&PID=20

My reply to you is this. Common carp are not included in the list of invasive fish in the Ontario Guide to Aquatic Invasive Species and this is what biologists and technicians use to report invasive species.

[efka]

From The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (O.F.A.H.)

"Carp are members of the minnow family and can grow to very large sizes under the right conditions. There are currently five species of Asian carp in North America that are of concern and they include: common carp (Cyprinus carpio), grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella), bighead carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis), silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix), and black carp (Mylopharyngodon piceus). Common carp have been in North America since the late 1800s and are now so widely distributed that they are thought of as a native species in most areas. Asian carp are considered injurious in many areas and in May 2004, the Ontario government placed a ban on buying and selling live bighead, black, silver and grass carp, this was taken further in 2005, with a provincial ban on the possession of live Asian Carp. The ban does not extend to Common Carp which are a popular sportfish for recreational anglers. Similar bans have also been implemented in the United States in many individual states."

The mnr invasive species list

http://www.mnr.gov.o...ROD_085427.html

lets put this to rest.

[staffman]

Amen!

[NADO]

Efka that list isnt the sole decided if a fish is invasive or not. If Common Carp weren’t invasive there wouldn’t be efforts like Cootes Paradise, Humber River, the Seneca College tournament etc. etc. Please explain to me how efforts like that can go on for a fish that isn’t invasive? I really couldn’t see a bass or pike barrier going up?

[JimCanuck]

efka,

There is no ban on owning live common carp because of its commercial value to certain communities, and the fact most water ways that are in reach of people who have possession of live common carp are already infested. One of the Lakes I've fished in for the last 13 years was infested by them nearly 6 years ago through intentional release.

Do you happen to guess what the CO I talked to on that lake told me to do with my carp a couple years ago? "If you don't eat it, dump it in a park waste bin and let the township deal with it".

Additionally, even fish species that would never survive in Ontario waters (such as Tilapia), apparently warrents a investigation by the MNR and even a slap on the wrist. Why? Because dumping non-native fish into out waterways is still a offence regardless if the fish had no hope in hell to live here.

Releasing Supermarket Fish Into Rouge River Leads To Fines

Publish Date: Friday, 15th of June 2012
by MNR


Two Greater Toronto Area residents have been fined a total of $1,000 for releasing live fish into the Rouge River, in the City of Toronto.

Li Zhang of Toronto and Zhuolun Zhang of Markham pleaded guilty to releasing live fish into the Rouge River. They were each fined $500.

The court heard that on March 3, 2012, a member of the public was walking in Rouge Park when he observed a man and woman carrying buckets of fish from a vehicle to the river. The man approached the couple and explained that it was illegal to release the fish into the river. The couple ignored the warning and the incident was reported to the Ministry of Natural Resources TIPS hotline. A conservation officer subsequently located and charged the man and woman involved. The fish had been purchased at a supermarket for the purpose of being released to the wild.

The Ministry of Natural Resources reminds the public that it is illegal to deposit live fish into any body of water other than the body of water from which they came. The illegal release of live fish poses a significant threat to Ontario’s environment, and could result in the introduction of harmful diseases and invasive species.

Justice of the Peace Ruby Wong heard the case in the Ontario Court of Justice in Toronto on June 7, 2012.

To report a natural resources violation, call 1-877-TIPS-MNR (847-7667) toll-free any time or contact your local ministry office during regular business hours. You can also call Crime Stoppers anonymously at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477).

Jim

[tonypigz]

I have my own invasive species list as well, JimCanuck and NADO. And YOU both are on it!

• Get over it, common carp are NOT classified as invasive species, bighead, silver, grass and black carp are. This is stated directly on the links you have posted.
• Organizations like royal botanical gardens setup barriers to stop carp from using places like coots paradise as a spawning ground, this does not mean they are invasive and must be killed. They do this for the same reason you put up a fence in your backyard to keep the coyotes out.
• There are a lot of politics involved in all of this and it seems that even the government (and all of its different arms) dont really know where it stands on this issue
• You guys have quoted some CO's saying that you should dispose of the fish. These people are sick and narrow minded as well. They should lose their job because they obviously don't understand the laws they are meant to uphold. They disgust me with blatant disregard for animal life.
• You all will see, in the coming years, carp as sport fish will flourish. Already you can find carp fishing tackle making its way into mainstream tackle stores like SAIL and BASSPRO. You will be eating your words. I invite you to watch your respected anglers, pete and angelos show on carp fishing Fish'n Canada 2012 e11 Carp Ontario Style

Twisting facts isn't going to help your arguement, it just makes you seem desperate to prove your point that has already been proven by the governments website http://www.mnr.gov.o...ROD_085427.html and a bunch of the links you have posted yourself.
GIVE IT UP, the title of this thread has been proven. what you lot are saying is your opinion of what is invasive. Therefore, in that regard, I can say that you are invasive and I am not.

[efka]

the regulations clearly states that you cannot dump the fish and let it rot if it's good for consumption, yet some people would still do it because some co told them his personal opinion that common carp is invasive, and then they would go and talk about breaking laws... that doesn't make any sense.

the rules are there for a reason. carp fishing is big sport in europe, and it's already making it's way here. it brings revenue to local businesses that sell carp tackle. we are lucky to have so many great locations to fish for big carp and have fun.
i met a guy last year in peterborough who flies once a year to canada to fish for carp for the whole week, because it's too expensive to fish in england.

so until common carp will be in the list on mnr website, lets treat them as sport fish.

[hammercarp]

efka,

There is no ban on owning live common carp because of its commercial value to certain communities, and the fact most water ways that are in reach of people who have possession of live common carp are already infested. One of the Lakes I've fished in for the last 13 years was infested by them nearly 6 years ago through intentional release.

Do you happen to guess what the CO I talked to on that lake told me to do with my carp a couple years ago? "If you don't eat it, dump it in a park waste bin and let the township deal with it".

Additionally, even fish species that would never survive in Ontario waters (such as Tilapia), apparently warrents a investigation by the MNR and even a slap on the wrist. Why? Because dumping non-native fish into out waterways is still a offence regardless if the fish had no hope in hell to live here.



Jim

There is no ban on possessing carp because they are not listed as an invasive species. Straight forward and simple.

I believe what you are saying is an absolute lie. No CO would ever tell someone to break the law here in Ontario. Just more desperate tactics on your part to try and save a lost cause which you have been steadily losing since we started this discussion.
And
What the heck do tilapia have to do with this discussion anyway. Just more clutching at straws to try and keep your sinking ship afloat.

[FrankTheRabbit]

As efka and others have mentioned, the rules are stated on the gov't website. Whatever the CO tells you that contradicts to the actual rules, are just their opinion. It's like me telling you to run a red light when there are no cars around. If you get caught, you are breaking the law, plain and simple. It doesn't matter who tells you what.

[jaminsk1]

Release of Fish

12. A person, other than a person fishing under a commercial fishing licence, who catches a fish, other than an invasive fish, the retention or possession of which is prohibited by these Regulations shall immediately return the fish to the waters from which it was caught and, if the fish is alive, release it in a manner that causes the least harm to that fish.

As far as I can tell the bit in bold is the only part of the above law that refers to invasive fish. I actually interpretted this law as it being illegal to retain or keep alive an invasive species if you don't return it to the water it has come from - surely this would make more sense as this would cover them being moved between different waterways and risk them being populated elsewhere?