Carp are not native to the U.S., they were imported from Europe as a food fish, but Americans did not take to eating them (except during the depression when everything was eaten). The European carp is not the same as the new influx of Asian Carp that do all the jumping. In Michigan archers will go into the shallow water flats where they spawn and shoot them (introduced European Carp) with fishing arrows (harpoon points), while they splash about and then discard them on shore. In Europe, that would be considered a waste.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Do you know what this is?
- Thread starter Mirror Lake 444
- Start date
Carp are not native to the U.S., they were imported from Europe as a food fish, but Americans did not take to eating them (except during the depression when everything was eaten). The European carp is not the same as the new influx of Asian Carp that do all the jumping. In Michigan archers will go into the shallow water flats where they spawn and shoot them (introduced European Carp) with fishing arrows (harpoon points), while they splash about and then discard them on shore. In Europe, that would be considered a waste.
Werbung:
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
its against the law to throw one back in the water here....no one wants them they just screw up lakes
Mirror Lake 444
Well-Known Member
Ditto. I have doubts these bighead carp will even go after a fly on a fly rod as they are plankton feeders vs. European common carp that are omnivores that root for invertebrates. You' probably have as much luck catching a bighead carp on a fly rod as you would a paddlefish, which is also a consummate plankton feeder. The only paddlefish that are brought in by rod and reel are snagged. For those of you that don't know plankton tends to be microscopic.
I have caught a few bass in my day, it was fun, I didnt catch any to write home about, but most of the fishing tv coverage is about largemouth, so I am somewhat familiar with the concept. I do get a kick out of watching these pro anglers using 30lb braided line to land fish generally weighing less than 5 pounds.
While my Mother's family at some point walked over from Russia, my Father comes from Wisconsin. I think you know I am a long time cheese head. I find it fun to point out that Alaska over twice as big as Texas, I like to point out that Alaska has over 3,000,000 lakes that are unnamed. Alaska...land of 3million lakes without names, more coast line that the rest of the Lower 48. With more oil and gas reserves, coal, gold, copper, lead, timber, freshwater, and other undeveloped resources than the rest of the states combined.
Well there have been plenty of Native groups opposed for a long time. One has to understand the finer points of the ANSCA legislation to fully understand. The point being is that the major regional Native Corporation which had previously declared neutrality have now officially become opposed. It means a few signifigant things, first that BBNC land or resources will not be used for the road and other infastructure that will be necessary for the mine to exist.
It also says that despite the corporation exists to generate revenue and profits and create economic development for it shareholders who have the potential to make a considerable amount of money of the mine, that the existing fishery and pristine habitat found in that area are far more important than the potential short term revenue and long term destruction not worth it.
In regards to local efforts in the lower 48 and elsewhere, it is important to make raise awareness with others, and to support the exisiting resource locally and by even making a trip here and experiencing the last great untouched major salmon and trout fisheries left in the world. The volume and size of the fish are unimaginable to someone fishing wild rivers elsewhere.
There are considerable aquaculture efforts happening in Puget Sound, as well as in British Columbia and down in Chile on the Pacific Coasts, I am sure there are things going in Asia as well, but I know they 3 locations I mentioned are major producers.
I am glad to hear that in some areas the fisheries are healthy in the great lakes, and I mean no disrespect but the scale of salmon returns found in just one medium sized river in Bristol Bay would probably outnumber the entire poppulation of all the spawning salmon in the great lakes. We are talking about literally millions of salmon per river. There are probably hundreds of known rivers in Alaska that accomodate a salmon run of more than a million. More than 1/3 of them exist in the Bristol Bay region. It truely is a fishermans paradise.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
the reason for the thick line is not the Fish them self, but the heavy cover you often times are pulling them out of. And I myself never go more then like 15 for bass. Imagine trying to pull that Salmon out of a pile of stumps while also in a thick heavy weedbed...thats where the thick line helps.
Mirror Lake 444
Well-Known Member
In case you didn't know most of our Pacific salmon reproduction in the Great lakes are produced at hatcheries except for the pink salmon.
Maybe it is just me, but it seems like the braided line is over rated. At least for the fishing I do in freshwater. When I am dropping a lead pound ball with a salmon head attached to the hook, braided line is awesome. The smaller diameter lets me spool much more on. Plus the fact it doesnt really stretch is a nice factor. I have managed halibut well over the 80lb test I use.
But casting it is largely impractical for what I do. I would just think that actual professionals would be more sporting in that sense.
I was generally aware of that actually. I am more surprised to hear that the pinks(we call them humpies) are still running naturally. I also have some friends from Michigan, and they have said the numbers are minimal compared to Alaska and there are recomendations against eating more than a certain number of great lake fish due to mercury(I believe) levels. Either way, the safety level is something like 5 fish a year or a very small amount.
Here, we eat natural, dam free, hatchery free, zero industrial pollution, that has sustained itself for at least 20,000 years.
California used to have the same thing, back when the population of the state was a quarter million or so. Now, the second biggest river in the state not only no longer has salmon, it no longer has water in it at all. A river that once supported ocean going vessels now is a dry bed. The biggest river, the Sacramento, still has salmon, but the runs have declined dramatically in the past couple of years, and no one knows why.
Meanwhile, we use more water than nature gives us every year. Sooner or later, we'll be out of ground water.
I think I'll move to Alaska.
Werbung:
You could run the wastewater from the tank through a hydroponic system or simply use the water for a garden and then replace what you use with fresh water. That way you can have an ecologically closed system without having to filter the water.
Are you familiar with the New Alchemy Institute?
Are you familiar with the New Alchemy Institute?
