Invaders !

[shoju]

Here in Ohio, we haven't had to face too many "alien" species of fish invading yet, but I have heard about, and seen (god I love River Monsters) the Asian Carp Problems in some nearby rivers. The biggest problem we have faced locally, was a lake / river system that had little to no Crappie in it previously, somehow has seen an explosion in their numbers, and drop off in numbers of Bluegill that were of impressive size.

I'm not sure why, but as the Crappie started showing up, the Bluegill size began to diminish. I remember as a teenager catching large numbers of 6"+ Bluegill, a really nice size for eating. (They have lots of small bones, and smaller fish make it harder to get all the bones out). As the Crappie have been introduced, Most are 4-5", and 6" are increasingly rare.

[kandrathe]

Here in Ohio, we haven't had to face too many "alien" species of fish invading yet, but I have heard about, and seen (god I love River Monsters) the Asian Carp Problems in some nearby rivers. The biggest problem we have faced locally, was a lake / river system that had little to no Crappie in it previously, somehow has seen an explosion in their numbers, and drop off in numbers of Bluegill that were of impressive size.

I'm not sure why, but as the Crappie started showing up, the Bluegill size began to diminish. I remember as a teenager catching large numbers of 6"+ Bluegill, a really nice size for eating. (They have lots of small bones, and smaller fish make it harder to get all the bones out). As the Crappie have been introduced, Most are 4-5", and 6" are increasingly rare.

Does your state DNR manage (stock) the lake? They may be choosing the winners and the losers here. Here when a lake loses all its predator fish (leaving only Blue Gills, and Suckers) the DNR will poison the lake and rebuild an ecosystem based on the lakes ability to sustain populations. Oddities in weather occur locally, where sometimes it's too hot, or too cold, or we get too much snow cover. Our biggest aquatic invasive species here are Zebra Mussels, and Eurasian Watermilfoil.

Bigger crappies will eat the young of all species, including their own predators. We've had both in our lakes here in Minnesota, and I believe Crappies are considered the better tasting fish. I remember some of the most thrilling fishing I had as a boy some 40 years ago was hauling in our fill of Crappies at dusk, when the bait would hardly hit the water and you'd be wrestling in another nice 6" pan fish. We'd head back to our cabin, clean the fish, batter them up, and invite all the neighbors for a fresh fish feed with local grown sweet corn on the cob, and watermelon.

I think our most hated native species is the Burbot -- ewww soooo slimey.

[shoju]

I'm partial to Bluegill, if only because of my dad's (which was his father's, which was his, and so on and so forth) preferred method of frying. I would assume that the ONR is in charge of the lake's stock, and so forth. It's a shallow, silt bed lake, fed by 2 rivers, and housing a spillway / Dam.

It's just weird. You would find a Crappie or two when I was a kid, but you would never go "crappie fishing" because the numbers just weren't there to do so, and the Bluegill were plentiful. Now, the opposite is almost true. I Pretty much fish for only "bigger" fish now, and let the kids bobber fish for the pan stuff. So far this year, the warm winter seems to have royally messed up the river / lake system. I haven't caught anything resembling a "big guy" in the lake (which boasts a fair amount of species), except for carp. No Pike, Walleye, Saugeye, Catfish, or Muskie so far. Just Carp, and not even many of them. I would have been excited as a kid to catch carp, I always thought they were really cool, but now they are just a fun fight, I'm certainly not eating it.

[kandrathe]

Although, I must say, the video at the end of the story is enough to give me serious pause. I sure hope I never see anything like that in Lake Huron.

I've seen these videos before, and I always think it would be easy enough to just tow some sort of net capture device behind the boat that would hover about 18" above the water and snare the jumpers.

[LochnarITB]

Bigger crappies will eat the young of all species, including their own predators. We've had both in our lakes here in Minnesota, and I believe Crappies are considered the better tasting fish. I remember some of the most thrilling fishing I had as a boy some 40 years ago was hauling in our fill of Crappies at dusk, when the bait would hardly hit the water and you'd be wrestling in another nice 6" pan fish. We'd head back to our cabin, clean the fish, batter them up, and invite all the neighbors for a fresh fish feed with local grown sweet corn on the cob, and watermelon.

One of their favorites is tiny Bluegill. As a kid, I spent a lot of time fishing and I used to make a killer Crappie lure that was nothing more than a circle of tin cut from a can and folded over a hook, then painted including a dot for the familiar little gill tab. Finding a school of nice slab side Crappie using light tackle is some of the best fishing there is!

I think our most hated native species is the Burbot -- ewww soooo slimey.

Poor-man's Lobster

---

I would have been excited as a kid to catch carp, I always thought they were really cool, but now they are just a fun fight, I'm certainly not eating it.

Find someone that knows how to smoke them! If they know what they're doing, the greasiness (very fatty fish) goes away and they become very meaty and smoky. Yum!




Wow, cool, didn't know it did that. I replied to two messages and the forum jammed them together for me.

[kandrathe]

Poor-man's Lobster

Neat. If I deign to suffer that ignoble Minnesota sport of ice fishing (such as on one of our Northern deep lakes), and catch a mess of Burbots, I guess rather than chuck them perhaps they'd cook up nicely in a pasta with an Alfredo sauce. There are a few bits of fish and seafood I can eat plain, but mostly I like it as a part of something more complex such as bouillabaisse, gumbo, stew, bisque, pasta, jambalaya, stir fry, hot dish, etc...

[RiotInferno]

When I started fishing again a few years ago, I found out that one of my favorite lakes was overtaken by carp. At one end of the lake is a dam with a causeway that feeds a creek, but at the bottom of the causeway is a much smaller fishing area that's a decent bit of fun. During the late afternoon, the bottom of the causeway is so full of carp that it looks like the water is a churning mass.

That being said, the carp was good practice when I was re-learning to fish, including how to net on shore, and how to fight them once they're hooked.
One of my best memories was fighting for 10+ minutes with a 13-pounder with my light rig.

Up here, people say carp can be pretty good if smoked, but I've yet to try that, and have since moved on to more edible fish, like trout and sunfish.

Fishing aside over, Carp are a damned nuisance and anyone that knowingly introduces them somewhere needs to be dealt with. They can straight up just ruin an ecosystem.

[eppie]

Fishing aside over, Carp are a damned nuisance and anyone that knowingly introduces them somewhere needs to be dealt with. They can straight up just ruin an ecosystem.

It is amazing that with todays almost criminal emptying of the seas by overfishing there are actually area's with too much fish.

You have carp.....can't they take them out and use them for something? Huge quantities of animal-biomass that you can use without damaging a ecosystem (even helping it) are scarce these days. The seas in 20 years will only have jellyfish....and they are 99% water so harvesting them will probably never be economcially feasible...and we first need to find a use for them.

[Nystul]

You have carp.....can't they take them out and use them for something? Huge quantities of animal-biomass that you can use without damaging a ecosystem (even helping it) are scarce these days. The seas in 20 years will only have jellyfish....and they are 99% water so harvesting them will probably never be economcially feasible...and we first need to find a use for them.

When something gets introduced to one of the Great Lakes, "taking them out" is no small thing. People want to eat walleye, perch, and a few other local treats. Asian carp, not so much.

[eppie]

You have carp.....can't they take them out and use them for something? Huge quantities of animal-biomass that you can use without damaging a ecosystem (even helping it) are scarce these days. The seas in 20 years will only have jellyfish....and they are 99% water so harvesting them will probably never be economcially feasible...and we first need to find a use for them.

When something gets introduced to one of the Great Lakes, "taking them out" is no small thing. People want to eat walleye, perch, and a few other local treats. Asian carp, not so much.

So does it really taste bad or does it just have a bad name? If so you need some kind of campaign. It happened before with the south pacific hake I believe. Some cooks started experimenting and finally it became very popular. This would work unless indeed it really tastes like crap.
Humans manage to completely drain parts of ocean from all living things.....because indeed there is good money in it. So if it would be possible to sell Asian carp it would take a matter of a few years before the great lakes are empty again.

wikipedia actually has a nice article about this.

[shoju]

The problem with Carp is exactly what Lochnar pointed out. it is IMMENSELY Greasy. I have heard several people talk about smoking it, and how it ends up being fantastic to eat at that point. The problem is, Smoking something isn't the type of process that a "chain" restaurant is going to do, and the small "mom and pops" around here, are big on the perch and walleye, leaving only a few places that would offer smoked carp, and then, with that small percentage of restaurants that are locally owned mom and pops, you would have to convince the population to try and eat it.

[RiotInferno]

The problem with Carp is exactly what Lochnar pointed out. it is IMMENSELY Greasy. I have heard several people talk about smoking it, and how it ends up being fantastic to eat at that point. The problem is, Smoking something isn't the type of process that a "chain" restaurant is going to do, and the small "mom and pops" around here, are big on the perch and walleye, leaving only a few places that would offer smoked carp, and then, with that small percentage of restaurants that are locally owned mom and pops, you would have to convince the population to try and eat it.

I've also heard that it's supposed to be really good smoked. The other problem, at least with the type of carp we have up here, is that they are thickly-scaled and full of bones, so it's a pain to clean them.

[kandrathe]

I've also heard that it's supposed to be really good smoked. The other problem, at least with the type of carp we have up here, is that they are thickly-scaled and full of bones, so it's a pain to clean them.

I think if you filet them you can avoid the bones and the scales.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BtdIhv3h7I

Don't miss the special technique at 2:10. Of course, a good bone shears works equally well.

[eppie]

I've also heard that it's supposed to be really good smoked. The other problem, at least with the type of carp we have up here, is that they are thickly-scaled and full of bones, so it's a pain to clean them.

I see a pattern here.
We are still so spoiled we are not considering eating a fish that we consider an invasive species, because although it tastes allright, it costs a bit more time to clean. For the same money we can easily empty some piece of water in the deep pacific or south china sea and ship it over.
So instead of just dealing with the situation, we 1; don't make use of a sustainable source of high protein/healthy fish that if we catch lots if it actually helps solving a problem and 2; we just continue destroying the seas in other parts of the world, because we still can.?

This is one of these situations where I rapidly loose faith in human kind.

[shoju]

The problem becomes one of profitability. It's one thing for you, or I to go carp fishing, catch a few good size carp, take them home, clean them, and them smoke them.

That's not hard.

The problem becomes, it is an invasive species that needs more than just you, me, and the rest of the fishermen on the lounge to curtail. And with the negative connotations surrounding the species, and its preparation taking more than a normal fish, It is a high risk, low reward scenario for a commercial setting.

Sadly, in todays day and age, the bottom line is going to fuel decisions like this from companies. They can't take a risk, and fail, or they lose all.

[eppie]

The problem becomes one of profitability. It's one thing for you, or I to go carp fishing, catch a few good size carp, take them home, clean them, and them smoke them.

That's not hard.

The problem becomes, it is an invasive species that needs more than just you, me, and the rest of the fishermen on the lounge to curtail. And with the negative connotations surrounding the species, and its preparation taking more than a normal fish, It is a high risk, low reward scenario for a commercial setting.

Sadly, in todays day and age, the bottom line is going to fuel decisions like this from companies. They can't take a risk, and fail, or they lose all.

Of course I understand. As long as the impact on ending resources and environment are not put into the price of things we buy, we are destroying our planet at an incredible rate.

I just wanted to emphasize this fact when I read about this carp story. It is a clear example of the fact that the most dangerous invasive species is actually humanity.

[shoju]

Reading your post, I was smitten with the thought "Is that really something we can call a fact though?" I mean, I'm not arguing that Humanity isn't invasive. But is it a proven fact that we ruin things more so than any other species?

Sorry, it's kind of trollish, but I would be hesitant to call it fact.

[Kevin]

Reading your post, I was smitten with the thought "Is that really something we can call a fact though?" I mean, I'm not arguing that Humanity isn't invasive. But is it a proven fact that we ruin things more so than any other species?

Sorry, it's kind of trollish, but I would be hesitant to call it fact.

I think it's pretty well established that as a species we modify the environment more than any other species. Now I used the word modify there, not destroy, there are environments that would have been destroyed if we didn't modify them there are environments where we have destroyed the environment that was there when humans arrived that have turned into what is possibly a healthier or more stable environment. There are environments that are very stable as long as we still provide some intervention, other that we've changed that will "rebound" very quickly if we stop (farms fall in both categories there).

I can't think of another macro species (I'm excluding virus and bacteria here) that exists in pretty much every land environment on the planet, and has a major impact on nearly all of those environments. There are species that are also in all those environments now that are there because of us (rats/mice, dogs, fleas, and cockroaches come to mind, and yes roaches don't do well in the cold, if you take away all the humans from New York the roaches would die out within a couple of winters).

We aren't the only species that can heavily modify an environment, and we aren't the only species that tends to modify every environment it enters (ants and termites modify every environment they move to) but we do tend to do more of it, and do it everywhere. There are also a lot of us for such a fairly large mammal which causes a larger impact.

Just some thoughts.

[kandrathe]

I see a pattern here.
We are still so spoiled we are not considering eating a fish that we consider an invasive species, because although it tastes allright, it costs a bit more time to clean. For the same money we can easily empty some piece of water in the deep pacific or south china sea and ship it over.
So instead of just dealing with the situation, we 1; don't make use of a sustainable source of high protein/healthy fish that if we catch lots if it actually helps solving a problem and 2; we just continue destroying the seas in other parts of the world, because we still can.?

I do agree with you. I only eat farmed fish now. Another issue with local wild fish in areas of the Midwest are the accumulations of heavy metals, and especially mercury in higher predators and bottom feeders.

Economically, (ocean and inland) fishing is an example of capitalism as it's worst e.g. the tragedy of the commons. Multiple industrial fleets not only violate international law, but cut their own throats by putting short term gains above sustainability. And then, coal burning power has been allowed to pump toxins into the air for decades. Implementation of the Clean Air Act has helped, but for most lake fish down wind from coal powered plants, there are limits to how much (if any) you'd safely want to consume. I do check the DNR's recommendation by lake for specific toxicity levels. Anyway, there is a huge role for government to regulate, and police the many commons we share be it the air, the fertile soil, or our waters.

While I'm a pretty hard core libertarian pro-capitalist, ecologic damage and sustainability are an area where I lean left of the greens when it comes to protecting and preserving our ecosystems. As I often do... I was listening just yesterday on my drive about the return in Minnesota to life sustaining agriculture (we can extend that to aquaculture), and the local food movement here in the Twin Cities area. A growing number of producers and consumers are finding there is more to food, and successful agriculture than the cheapest cost, and highest yield per acre. It also needs to be tasty, and not toxic.

[RiotInferno]

I've also heard that it's supposed to be really good smoked. The other problem, at least with the type of carp we have up here, is that they are thickly-scaled and full of bones, so it's a pain to clean them.

I see a pattern here.
We are still so spoiled we are not considering eating a fish that we consider an invasive species, because although it tastes allright, it costs a bit more time to clean. For the same money we can easily empty some piece of water in the deep pacific or south china sea and ship it over.
So instead of just dealing with the situation, we 1; don't make use of a sustainable source of high protein/healthy fish that if we catch lots if it actually helps solving a problem and 2; we just continue destroying the seas in other parts of the world, because we still can.?

Plus, at the end of they day, time is always a factor.
It takes so much less time to clean and prepare the "good" fish ( bluegill, walleye, trout, etc ) then carp. I don't just mean an extra hour or so. Cleaning them can be work (or so I've been told), and the process of smoking can take over a day.

That being said, as a fisherman, I take mild offense to you implying that because I don't want to clean carp, that I'll gladly destroy the oceans for my fish. There's plenty of other non-carp in our lakes that I gladly clean and eat. The only time I eat fish is during the fishing season, when I'm catching it.

This is one of these situations where I rapidly lose faith in human kind.

I agree. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a true fisherman who doesn't care about conservation. There's a fight to be had with big corporations and over-fishing the oceans / major lakes. You won't find any allies if you start yelling at the little guys.