# Asian Carp Getting Closer...



## KWB (Mar 1, 2009)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/52605357.html


----------



## Catfishingfreak (Sep 6, 2008)

This is gonna suck if they make it. :rant: Time to get the bowfishing equipment back out.


----------



## Fishbone (Oct 10, 2008)

Fishing poles will become a thing of the past. 

[youtube]bBpV7NP4e1M&hl[/youtube]


----------



## brookies101 (Jun 23, 2008)

This carp thing sucks bad!!!!! I think they need to wipe out any river entering the great lakes that has a population of this species in it. Sounds harsh, but damn, this has been talked about for a couple of years now. Its time for something to happen. Before its too late. Unless it already is:sad::sad:


----------



## jiggineyes (Feb 19, 2005)

I agree. Wipe that river out!!!!!!!!!:rant:


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

jiggineyes said:


> I agree. Wipe that river out!!!!!!!!!:rant:


So let me get this right, you are proposing that the entire Mississippi and Illinois Rivers' fish populations be wiped out?  

Unfortunately, it is probably inevitable that these fish will end up in the Great Lakes despite the measures taken to block their progress. There is no simple solution as these fish have become so widespread. 

There is a limited commercial fishery for them and purportedly they are quite good table fare, as they filter-feed on plankton and other microorganisms as opposed to the common carp's diet of minnow, insects, and crustaceans. Despite significant commercial and recreational takes of these fish, it does not appear to be taking a great toll on the population.


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

I would love to go after them with a 12 guage.....******* skeet!! At least with a shotgun, you have a better chance at making a dent in the population with recreational use. Currently, it's only a matter of time. I can see the Michigan boating regs in 2016....helmets required:sad:


----------



## lunker69 (Oct 20, 2007)

Humans have been the most successful animal on the planet in terms of wiping other species from the face of the earth. It took us what -- 100 years to completely decimate the grayling population from Michigan, and we weren't even trying. If there's one thing we're good at, it's killing things. I think we can get creative on this one. Carp and Cormorant tournaments anybody???


----------



## no lead (Jul 28, 2005)

why not put a bounty on these fish? $1.00 apiece dead. kill them any way you want. catch 20 a day and you would do alright. $140 a week $560 a month x 12 = $6,720 a year. x 10,000 people would be $67,200,000. how much have we spent already with no cure? 

got some kids? take em fishing and clean up! maybe .50 apiece, you do the math.:idea: 






:coolgleam


----------



## kmoney14 (Jan 6, 2009)

lunker69 said:


> Carp and Cormorant tournaments anybody???


Count me in. Whoever can bring the most back wins.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

no lead said:


> why not put a bounty on these fish? $1.00 apiece dead. kill them any way you want. catch 20 a day and you would do alright. $140 a week $560 a month x 12 = $6,720 a year. x 10,000 people would be $67,200,000. how much have we spent already with no cure?
> 
> got some kids? take em fishing and clean up! maybe .50 apiece, you do the math.:idea:
> 
> ...


Got an algae pattern in mind? They cannot be caught by sporting fishing methods - hook and line and bait. Bowfishing from a fast moving boat looks exciting, until you think about the reality of what the situation is. 

I am inclined to agree that poisoning long stretches of rivers might be the best solution for these. At least it would push them back from the upper reaches of rivers for a time. It is just stupid that all these invasive species are causing so many problems - all because we NEED to import stuff from other countries to have comfortable lives. Flippin STUPID. 

At the very least, commercial fishermen should be seining the crap out of the rivers where these things are prevalent. I have heard that they are used to feed prisoners. Seems like a decent use for them.


----------



## hmdomn (Sep 22, 2008)

no lead said:


> why not put a bounty on these fish? $1.00 apiece dead. kill them any way you want. catch 20 a day and you would do alright. $140 a week $560 a month x 12 = $6,720 a year. x 10,000 people would be $67,200,000. how much have we spent already with no cure?
> 
> got some kids? take em fishing and clean up! maybe .50 apiece, you do the math.:idea:
> 
> ...



Speaking of $$$$$....all those carp in the bed of the pickup could be sold. Throw em on ice and take them to the China town, or Arab town--they pay good money for carp. You could make a butt load of money selling them instead of disposing them. Just another incentive to hold the event......


----------



## no lead (Jul 28, 2005)

hhhmmm. should i swing down division with my morning catch? 

seriously.


----------



## abstract_72 (May 27, 2007)

you could probably snag them pretty easy I would imagine... seems like they are pretty condensed in some of those areas.


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

Fishndude said:


> I am inclined to agree that poisoning long stretches of rivers might be the best solution for these.


And to hell with the native species like the paddlefish, threatened in some of it range. I think the biologists and scientists would have already explored poisons if feasible. 

The carp are extremely prolific so its unlikely that they will be captured into oblivion, bounty or not. Hopefully commercial operations will impact their numbers enough stem the migration of these fish.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

I think they should be poising the [email protected]#$ out of that river NOW!


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

Steve said:


> I think they should be poising the [email protected]#$ out of that river NOW!


So just how much of the Illinois River/Chicago Shipping Canal do you poison, Steve? And how long will it take for more of the carp to repopulate the river from the Mississippi? And what effect does this poison have on all the native species present in a given area? These are all questions that need to be answered before we "nuke" the place.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

Steve said:


> I think they should be poising the [email protected]#$ out of that river NOW!


Poison? Fill the f'er in!

In reality they are already probably in the great lakes.


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

TSS Caddis said:


> In reality they are already probably in the great lakes.


You are right, they have captured a few in Ontario, but had no indication of an actual established population.

I guess I am in the minority on an environmentally friendly ways to prevent their spread? Without poisoning the entire Mississippi River basin, we are not going to be able to exterminate them from the US. Perhaps continual poisoning of a stretch of river/canal could create a barrier, at best.


----------



## KWB (Mar 1, 2009)

Flyfisher said:


> You are right, they have captured a few in Ontario, but had no indication of an actual established population.
> 
> I guess I am in the minority on an environmentally friendly ways to prevent their spread? Without poisoning the entire Mississippi River basin, we are not going to be able to exterminate them from the US. Perhaps continual poisoning of a stretch of river/canal could create a barrier, at best.


I read about the Ontario findings, but then I also read somewhere they ended up not being Asian Carp. Its been a long time since this stuff was published, I will try and find it...


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

TSS Caddis said:


> This is the wrong attitude. Some times people worry too much on what is moraly and ethically right. These fish are not supposed to be in the U.S. Any steps necessary to eradicate them before it is a bigger problem should be taken.


People advocating poisoning of these fish fail to realize, or choose to ignore, just how widespread this problem is in the entire Mississippi River basin. Do we just wipe out all the walleye, bass, catfish, paddlefish to get rid of the carp?


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

Flyfisher said:


> People advocating poisoning of these fish fail to realize, or choose to ignore, just how widespread this problem is in the entire Mississippi River basin. Do we just wipe out all the walleye, bass, catfish, paddlefish to get rid of the carp?


If it was that simple, yes. Those are all native fish that can be restocked. In reality something should have been done about this a long time ago. This is like letting Iran get nukes then trying to deal with them. These fish should never have been in the U.S. To begin with.


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

TSS Caddis said:


> If it was that simple, yes. Those are all native fish that can be restocked.


You're right...not that simple. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of miles of main river and tributaries would have to be nuked with rotenone. It is not a viable scenario whatsoever. I think that they are going to have to have multiple electrical barriers and perhaps a "dead zone" where they continually pump rotenone. In my opinion, the arrival of asian carp in the Great Lakes is inevitable but it will be quite a few years from now.

As far as importing them in the first place, that's a bit of spilled milk at this point. You are right to say that are reactive state now is due to a lack of proactivity when these fish originally escaped.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

I wonder if Snakeheads would consume those Carp, when they are small? 

Of course, I am only kidding. MAN has created this spreading of different species around the globe. All because we WANT stuff that we don't have here, and import it from other places; as other countries do, too. So, eventually we will not have Ash Borers, because they will have eradicated the Ash trees, and won't have anything to eat. And the Asian Carp (Silver and Bighead) will decimate the ecosystem of the Great Lakes, which will kill off the Gobies, Salmon, Steelhead, Brown Trout, Smelt, and perhaps even the Quagga and Zebra Mussels - all of which are technically invasive species.


----------



## SullyFloats1 (Dec 25, 2007)

Any info on the carp being a warm water species? would they really inhabit our rivers and lakes with the winters that we have? and would they be able to thrive in those conditions? From what I've heard (not necessarily a professional on the topic) the carp will hug shorelines in the great lakes, and inhabit streams in the summers, but it is in question what will happen during the winter months when water is 35 degrees. Anyone have FACTS about this sort of theory?


----------



## snakeman (Sep 17, 2005)

SullyFloats1 said:


> From what I've heard (not necessarily a professional on the topic) the carp will hug shorelines in the great lakes, and inhabit streams in the summers, but it is in question what will happen during the winter months when water is 35 degrees. Anyone have FACTS about this sort of theory?



Having lived in Illinois on the river I can tell you the Illinois river gets down in the 30's and it hasn't affected them there. I suppose there is the possibility that they can't handle extreme cold which would save some of the fisheries possibly north of Grand Haven. I would expect the St. Joe, Allegan, and Grand to all be infested though. Also carp are adaptable fish and it might be only time till they move north. Just my opinion, but if they make it into Lake Michigan they will reek havoc.


----------



## Sprig (Jul 18, 2004)

SullyFloats1 said:


> Any info on the carp being a warm water species? would they really inhabit our rivers and lakes with the winters that we have? and would they be able to thrive in those conditions? From what I've heard (not necessarily a professional on the topic) the carp will hug shorelines in the great lakes, and inhabit streams in the summers, but it is in question what will happen during the winter months when water is 35 degrees. Anyone have FACTS about this sort of theory?


Yes, they just won't be able to jump as high.


----------



## Flyfisher (Oct 1, 2002)

On a positive note, an invasion of silver carp would eliminate the use of jet-skis in the great lakes.


----------



## Silverexpress (Sep 6, 2006)

DNR will need to breed a crocodile that can survive the winters here. That should take care of this problem in a hurry.


----------



## doctor's orders (Aug 25, 2009)

These fish are ecosystem destroyers. Will equal the demise of the great lakes if they find a way in. Personally I think the canals connecting the great lakes to the mississippi river should be filled in and the vast railways should be used more efficiently. Im sure Union Pacific wouldn't mind bearing the load.


----------



## REG (Oct 25, 2002)

One fisheries biologist speculated that the Silver/Bighead carp may not do as well as feared as the quagga mussels filter plankton out of Lake Michigan so effectively already.

I want to stress the word "speculate" as he prefaced it by emphasing no one knows what will happen if/when they get in the lake.


----------



## Razzo (Feb 17, 2005)

MEL said:


> Poisen the bastards. Nuke the rivers NOW!!! Do it before they get into the great lakes in numbers. If you wait til they become a "proublem" in out great lakes it will be to late. It will cost Billions on top of Billions to
> try to kill them once they are here. Look at Gobys and Zebras, we cant stop them. This is one big scarey fish for the great lakes.


What if they had a posion campaign to nuke them upto that last barrier they just crossed. You could consider that zone between that barrier just crossed and and the last barrier (the electric one) a DMZ zone and nuke it on a annual basis. Chase em back to the last barrier and make that a mainteance plan???

That is doable?


----------



## FishinGryph (Aug 7, 2006)

I say fill the gateways into the great lakes in completely. Water flow issues? Construct 8inch holes through the concrete structure and place electrical "barriers" over the holes. With enough voltage to kill anything! make it nice and crispy.


----------



## Ferris_StateHunter (Apr 24, 2006)

After doing the whole bowfishing trip for those flying carp this past summer. I can honestly say first hand they are out of control. They are like locust in the water. Any given bend or flat in the river they will school up with 100's if not 1000's.

One major difference between the IL river and most rivers up here is the size. They are having numerous problems down there and the river is HUUUUUGGGEE. I could only imagine what it would do to some of the smaller streams. A definite nightmare I would not want to see happen

Check out the bowfishing forum on the top, and you can see some video and pictures from the trip, gives a small glimpse of what to expect up here


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Razzo said:


> What if they had a posion campaign to nuke them upto that last barrier they just crossed. You could consider that zone between that barrier just crossed and and the last barrier (the electric one) a DMZ zone and nuke it on a annual basis. Chase em back to the last barrier and make that a mainteance plan???
> 
> That is doable?



You could then kiss that steely/king you are holding good bye. You are proposing a system that would work without prejudice to any species.

Posting bounties on these fish...we already are in a deficit, kill them for the good of the ecosystem rather than for the good of your pocket book. Make it legal to sell them without needing a commercial license. Do everything possible to allow the eradication of these thing without impacting our established ecosystem. Anyone that can figure that out should be the next director of the NRC.


----------



## Razzo (Feb 17, 2005)

TrekJeff said:


> You could then kiss that steely/king you are holding good bye. You are proposing a system that would work without prejudice to any species....


Not sure I follow you? How could nuking the section between the carp barrier to the last lock, which they passed, keep me from catching that St. Joe River Steelie in my avitar?


----------



## wanderboy (Sep 24, 2008)

i like the bounty idea. w/ all these folks w/o jobs. just chop a few packet changes from the BIG loans to the banks/wall-st. will do just fine for the carp thing. how many are there? a million? 10 million? 100 million? .50 - $1 per fish. you just watch some folks will get their bills pay, gas up their cars/boats, carp's population going down, and no harm to any other speices lives in the same water.

it's a win-win-win for all (except the carps).... :idea:


----------



## real mccoy (Jan 8, 2006)

got a suggestion hire the indians to come in with their nets and spears they do a good job of netting our fish in lake michigan.:fish2:


----------



## Ieatantlers (Oct 7, 2008)

Unfortunately the spread of these carp to the great lakes would have only been preventable long ago. At this point, its inevitable. Filling in rivers, electrical barriers, etc won't work. Waterfowl will transport fish eggs over that distance with no problem. I agree some of these measures will slow the process, but keeping them out is almost impossible at this point. The retards 30 years ago could have prevented a lot of what has happened, but we can't change that now. Hopefully they will find some way of poisoning these carp alone.


----------



## Echolalia (Mar 10, 2009)

Unfortunately there is no right answer. Carp are some of the most resilient fish out there, and they've already breached the Mississippi and its tributaries. We can't poison the river because of all the negative implications that it will cause to the surrounding environment. The fishing industry throughout localized poisoned regions will cease to exist. Water supplies will be unsafe, and locals will be pissed (and rightfully so). Then after poisoning it, what are you supposed to do? How are you going to prevent carp from reinhabiting the area while simultaneously allowing catfish, bass, plankton, algae, crawfish, etc etc etc to repopulate? Is it realistic to invest in replanting every single species that lives in poisoned areas one at a time until you covered all of the mississippi river and its tributaries, as well as any other infected regions? Who's responsible for paying for this? Who's responsible for doing it?
The bounty idea won't work either because there's no guarantee (far from it) that all carp will be extinguished. It may slow their growth rate, but they will still inhabit the waters. And is it worth the investment from the DNR or any other agency to front the money for an inefficient plan?

What is interesting is that both the carp and the zebra mussels rely on the same source of food. If both species inhabit the same body of water, who's the first to die off?


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Razzo said:


> Not sure I follow you? How could nuking the section between the carp barrier to the last lock, which they passed, keep me from catching that St. Joe River Steelie in my avitar?



Indiscriminate killing of fish. Nuking one section is not going to target carp only, it will kill everything from steel to dogfish.



wanderboy said:


> i like the bounty idea. w/ all these folks w/o jobs. just chop a few packet changes from the BIG loans to the banks/wall-st. will do just fine for the carp thing. how many are there? a million? 10 million? 100 million? .50 - $1 per fish. you just watch some folks will get their bills pay, gas up their cars/boats, carp's population going down, and no harm to any other speices lives in the same water.
> 
> it's a win-win-win for all (except the carps)....


Great idea....but where do you propose the funding for this comes from?


----------



## Silverexpress (Sep 6, 2006)

Genetics maybe an answer.

Maniuplate the genes on farm raised experiments, and then let them loose in the wild, so that succeeding wild offsprings are sterile, and thus cannot reproduce.


----------



## wanderboy (Sep 24, 2008)

TrekJeff said:


> Great idea....but where do you propose the funding for this comes from?


not sure, but i am thinking the amount will never be enough, but we aren't able to wipe out the whole population in reality, just slow down the process, and this will be an on going effect. so I don't think it'll putting a BIG dent on the buget on the federal, or the surrending states, or DNR. 

Hell, how about for whoever can catch 50 carps out of the water, gets a free annual fishing license at one of the states?? or a park entry from the national park, or metro parks, camping area? the best way to motivate people to do something is with reward, you got to sweeten the pot a little, and no other speice is more dangerous than human if we pull together make a little difference from each one of us.

the bottom line is, the carp is here, and they are growing faster than anything. you can't kill them all; even you find a way to do so, you'll kill whole lot other water speice/life with it, that wouldn't be funny for the next 50 years. (every time human acted as god, it's always hell turned lose... that's how i looked it...)

another thing, while so many people willing to catch one of those almost dead salmons, and smoke them put on dinner table, but will not give this carp thing a try, that's just weird. I ate them back home. it's a little boney compare to walleye, but nothing it'll grosse you out.

Does anyone know if DNR required you to have a fishing license in order to catch & kill those carp? if they do, they could change the rule, just allow pretty much everyone take a shot at them. or hell, get those immates from CA to kill those carps. i am sure they'll love the job....

i am off the soupbox now....


----------



## Razzo (Feb 17, 2005)

TrekJeff said:


> Indiscriminate killing of fish. Nuking one section is not going to target carp only, it will kill everything from steel to dogfish.


One small stretch, it just might be worth it compared to the alternative.


----------



## Echolalia (Mar 10, 2009)

Razzo said:


> One small stretch, it just might be worth it compared to the alternative.


What will prevent carp from reinhabiting a formerly poisoned stretch of river after it has become sterile, or even swimming through it to the safe water on the other side?


----------



## swmfdotcom (Aug 17, 2005)

I say drain the whole damn river and leave it dry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Razzo said:


> One small stretch, it just might be worth it compared to the alternative.



There is no such thing in a fugitive element such as water. Try pouring some food coloring in a stream and keep it in one small stretch. Concentrations may be lower in the point source area, but it will never be isolated.

But it's great to see people taking this issue seriously. Razz, I'm not trying to bustyerballz, we all just need to try and come up with a practical solution. Genetic engeninng is very risky..who's to say what we will have as a byproduct....remember, never mess with mother nature.

As far as a licence...odds are anyone concerned will have one anyway. Maybe we need to find a new market niche for these critters:idea:...start a rumor that ground up freeze dried asian carp works as a natural source of Viagra!!!! (results not typical):evilsmile


----------



## MEL (Jul 17, 2005)

TrekJeff said:


> *There is no such thing in a fugitive element such as water. Try pouring some food coloring in a stream and keep it in one small stretch. Concentrations may be lower in the point source area, but it will never be isolated.*
> quote]
> 
> So we kill off a section of a river to keep the crap, er ah, carp out of the Great Lakes. Again, I dont see the proublem with it. The possable damage to the Great Lakes system is so huge that I say lets nuke the bastards now!!!! (mother nature didnt put them here)


----------



## snakeman (Sep 17, 2005)

Ieatantlers said:


> Unfortunately the spread of these carp to the great lakes would have only been preventable long ago. At this point, its inevitable. Filling in rivers, electrical barriers, etc won't work. Waterfowl will transport fish eggs over that distance with no problem. I agree some of these measures will slow the process, but keeping them out is almost impossible at this point. The retards 30 years ago could have prevented a lot of what has happened, but we can't change that now. Hopefully they will find some way of poisoning these carp alone.



Unfortunately this is what will probably happen. Even if everything else keeps them out Mother Nature will probably be the downfall. You are right eggs will get transported by migratory waterfowl and end up in the systems eventually.:banghead3


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

MEL said:


> TrekJeff said:
> 
> 
> > *There is no such thing in a fugitive element such as water. Try pouring some food coloring in a stream and keep it in one small stretch. Concentrations may be lower in the point source area, but it will never be isolated.*
> ...


----------



## jimmyhimself29 (Sep 29, 2008)

yah i agreee with the bounty!


----------

