# Creeks / Possible Gar infestation/Input



## joshtrum (Jun 13, 2009)

Got out on Sunday to fish at a few of my favorite creeks, caught nothing but had some bites on a wee craw. One question I would like to ask though is that if anyone has noticed in the past few years a spike in the Gar population in the Hamilton fishing area? I noticed last year that the GMR below the Dam, Indian Creek, and 4 mile all were riddled with gar, caught one at indian, and this year at one of my favorite spots on 4 mile, i noticed a small one making action in a small school of minnows. I have fished in some way all my life but have been seriously fishing for the past three years now and three years ago I didn't notice them at all. Last year I noticed some HUGE ones and multitudes of them as well. Anglin and Trey will attest to that at least. Any thoughts, ideas, or calling me an idiot for not noticing them would be appreciated. Sorry for the long post.


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

I definitely noticed a lot more in the river last year and they were all over in Indian that day you caught one. I'm not one for killing fish you catch that you don't target like some people (throwing drum and gar up onshore) but I hope the apparent increase is isolated and not a trend that continues. I haven't talked to many people that go out in search of gar and I know I sure don't go out looking for them


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

They've been around millions of years.  I don't think you have anything to worry about. If there is indeed a larger population than years past, it's probably due to a large shad hatch in the preceding years...leading to a healthier, more visible group. 

I actually enjoy seeing them corral baitfish, as that means the baitfish are there...which is good.


----------



## fisharder (Mar 18, 2005)

This time of year shad and really any number of speices spawn
and its is not uncommon for gar to follow schools of bait fish
up these creeks. This is even more common when the spawn takes place during high water periods because it enables both bait and preditors to push
futher up stream. As long as you are in a area where the Ohio river influences
the tributarys gars will be present and lots of times in large numbers.
My fishing buddy loves to fish for them and he makes his lures out of small
peices of fine fiber soft rope its very effective.


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

Once watched a fishing show on the alligator gars of Texas, they are caught either on very small treble hooks or wire nooses because their mouths are almost entirely bone and teeth, these 2 guys got 1 that went 75+ pds of absolute DYNAMITE; man! The water flew! Hard part is releasing them, the bigger ones can break your arm if you aren`t fast getting it back...


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

I guess that is a good thing then. Like I said I've never fished for them but I have heard that lure made of rope thing more than once. Maybe if I'm skunked a few times out I'll see if I can make myself one of these contraptions. I saw the River Monsters where he goes after monster gator gar..now a gar that size I wouldn't mind catching lol


----------



## joshtrum (Jun 13, 2009)

I guess I should clarify myself, haha. I'm not wanting to target them nor just see them in the spring in a spawn, I mean last year they were EVERYWHERE throughout the spring summer and early fall, and i'm not sure how they get to 4 mile unless they can climb up dams or they come from acton? It is a good thing to see them in the baitfish and active but I worry this might affect the bass spawn or other fish in my area, it's one thing to see them in the GMR which drains into the Ohio, but for them to make it ALL the way up indian creek in very abundant numbers and size(swear on my life a 4 foot gar swam by me in a deep pool on indian) and even into 4 mile which is above to dams? i know they are very peaceful fish, but i've seen with my own eyes a Gar beat off a bigger sized Smallie for a baitfish. All i'm curious about is if a large amount of Gar would affect the bass population. Thanks for the input guys, i have heard of what I like to call frayed baits working good on gar, I caught mine on a 3" twister tail and 1/8" jig head. Any more information or making me look like an idiot is appreciated, sorry for the long post again ha.


----------



## Dandrews (Oct 10, 2010)

They are not migrating from the Ohio; theyre here, theyve always been here and theyre part of the fishery. I dont think Ive ever seen one in 4 Mile but I wouldnt be surprised to see one. The biggest one Ive ever seen was in Brookville Tail Waters last spring. Id guess it in the neighborhood of 4 and fat.


----------



## fisharder (Mar 18, 2005)

A few gar pot holed up in your favorite holes can really hurt.
Carp and gar don't seem to have a very good survival rate
when I catch them??


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

fisharder said:


> A few gar pot holed up in your favorite holes can really hurt.
> Carp and gar don't seem to have a very good survival rate
> when I catch them??




Now there's a brilliant post. Kill the fish because you're dumb enough to think they affect the fishing. 



To the original post, they don't hurt the fishery at all. They've been around for _millions of years_, you're still catching fish aren't you?


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Grrrrrrrrrr.




> Q: Has research been done that shows the effect of gar populations on glamour species populations?
> 
> A: I attempted to address this question a bit in my thesis. I found many sources from 60,70, and 80 years ago describing what a nuisance gars as a whole are, and in truth, many of those sentiments are still held today by most anglers and biologists. Still, I found much research that shows that while gars do eat the occasional young bass, nongame species (such as minnows) make up a large percentage of their diet. Much of the problem is in how you define game species. I dont know if I would include panfish (bluegill, crappie, etc.) in that category, since populations of those fish dont usually require the type of management that bass, walleye, or pike requie (stocking, length limits, closed seasons, etc.). Many of the studies found gars feeding on various panfish, as well as invertebrates such as crayfish. One thing that can get overlooked when talking about predation is that the limiting factor is usually not how good the predator is at catching its prey, but how bad the prey is at avoiding being caught. That holds true with gars as well as any predator. Gars will eat whatever prey are easiest to catch, and that can vary from one body of water to another. Some species of fish may be easier to catch than another, and fishes as a whole may be easier to catch than crayfish. The point is, if a young bass is going to be eaten by a gar, it would probably stand just as good a chance of being eaten by a larger bass, or a walleye, or pike, whatever. Its not that the gar is a super predator, its just that the young bass (for example) cant stay out of harms way.


----------



## I_Shock_Em (Jul 20, 2008)

fallen513 said:


> Now there's a brilliant post. Kill the fish because you're dumb enough to think they affect the fishing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## AnglinMueller (May 16, 2008)

I think the biggest threat they'd pose to bass wouldn't be eating them at all but just being another competitor for food sources. I'm basing that entire statement on the fact that when i catch bass in places i see a lot of gar, they haven't been as big as bass that i've caught in places where i have seen fewer or no gar. Just my 2 cents


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

fallen513 said:


> Now there's a brilliant post. Kill the fish because you're dumb enough to think they affect the fishing.
> 
> 
> 
> To the original post, they don't hurt the fishery at all. They've been around for _millions of years_, you're still catching fish aren't you?


I have to disagree, carp are an invasive species to North America and are detrimental to any fishery they are a part of. And when the Asian Carp take over, I believe you will probably change your mind.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

fallen513 said:


> Now there's a brilliant post. Kill the fish because you're dumb enough to think they affect the fishing.
> 
> 
> 
> To the original post, they don't hurt the fishery at all. They've been around for _millions of years_, you're still catching fish aren't you?


I have to disagree, carp are an invasive species to North America and are detrimental to any fishery they are a part of. And when the Asian Carp take over, I believe you will probably change your mind.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Big James said:


> I have to disagree, carp are an invasive species to North America and are detrimental to any fishery they are a part of.



Sounds like Horse$&#@! to me.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

asian carp are newly invasive but your normal run of the mill carp have been in the usa since the 1800s, if they were going to be a problem, it would have already occured. like said earlier, gar have been around for millions of years, they have absolutely no detrimental effect to any fishery. they arent aggressive, they coexist, they do not function as an appex predator even though they prob could. go to bass pro shops and check out an aquarium, nearly all of them have some gar in them, if they were such a problem species, they would not be able to co-exist in a tank with other sport fish. killing them out of ignorance is a shame.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

those of you that think a bunch of carp and gar in your favorite hole is a bad thing, you might be kind of right but for the wrong reasons. gar and carp thrive in hot, low oxygen water, they are often in areas with muddy bottoms. if your favorite hole is filled with them, chances are, their arent many bass their simply because its muddy and has less oxygen.


----------



## fisharder (Mar 18, 2005)

fallen513 said:


> Now there's a brilliant post. Kill the fish because you're dumb enough to think they affect the fishing.
> 
> 
> 
> To the original post, they don't hurt the fishery at all. They've been around for _millions of years_, you're still catching fish aren't you?


Carp are a invasive species and gar most certainly can have a drastic effect on restricted waters. But take a chill pill because I never target carp or gar.
Name calling is small minded and has no place on this website.


----------



## Salmonid (Apr 14, 2004)

We need to understand that each species, invasive or not, carp or gar, each fill a niche in the present day ecosystems. Tons or reseach been done on gar and Fallen is correct, they are not top predators, they are a lazy eater and f you think they are bad for a body of water, then I think we should reverse the situation and say that smallies are bad for the Gar population as they were latecomers to the world the gar have so long dealt with without some stupid bass coming along and eating all there fry. I say we gar fishermen unite and start killing off all the bass since bass are hurting the gar populations. ( of course that statement is not how I feel but its using your logic in reverse form) 
Bottom line is I never kill any fish on purpose and I , as a "sportsman", respect what each species has to offer, for the carp its a strong , long winded runner that will test every inch of your equipment. Gar are hard fighters, excellent jumpers, offer sight fishing, and love the" I just saw the net" last second run which will break your line in a heartbeat if your not ready for it. Did I mention that from clean waters are EXCELLENT table fare??? The beauty of the gar is it has remarkable markings and the fact it is one of the 3 "dinosaur" species still around, ( Sturgeon, Gar and Bowfin) 

I have never had the pleasure of catching a sturgeon but can not wait until that day.... Bowfin are stong fighters, also have fantastic colorations and are very catchable and readily take lures as do Gar. 

I guess Id like to hear your definition of a game fish because all 3 species would certainly be on the top of most folks ( who give them a chance) list. 

Sorry for the rant but as a "Fish Hugger" I like to stand up for those species who have gotten a bad rap. If your ever in SW Ohio, give a me a day and after you catch some big gar, youll change your mind, I pretty much would bet on it. 

Salmonid


----------



## bsmith (Mar 26, 2010)

Well this is about the third of fourth time I've seen a gar debate on here. They're usually pretty cyclical and they don't seem to change anyones mind. I'll throw my two cents in here anyway.

Yes, the presence of too many gar can have a negative effect on the populations of other fish species. That doesn't really have much implicit meaning though because too much of anything can have negative effects. For example, humans absolutely need water to survive but if you drink too much water, your sodium levels will get out of balance and you could die.

The point is that in most cases, the presence of gar is a good thing and they're not likely to displace sport fish. They're an ancient fish that has been living in harmony with other native fish for a very, very long time. They're also a blast to catch. When hooked, they have a tendency to do a gnarly tail dance that's pretty impressive.

I've seen people throw them up on the bank because they think that they're "trash fish" or "they kill bass populations." I don't think it's my place to tell people how they should think or what they should do but I do think that it's pretty ignorant to render an opinion like when the facts tend to point toward the contrary.


----------



## RIDGE_RUNNER91 (Aug 13, 2010)

fisharder said:


> Carp are a invasive species and gar most certainly can have a drastic effect on restricted waters. But take a chill pill because I never target carp or gar.
> Name calling is small minded and has no place on this website.


Throwing a fish up on the bank is small minded and bragging about it has no place on this website. Just sayin'

I'm actually happy when I see gar. That means the bait is there and if the bait is there so are the fish I want to catch. There have been lots of gar in the water on some of my best days.


----------



## AnglinMueller (May 16, 2008)

Salmonid said:


> We need to understand that each species, invasive or not, carp or gar, each fill a niche in the present day ecosystems. Tons or reseach been done on gar and Fallen is correct, they are not top predators, they are a lazy eater and f you think they are bad for a body of water, then I think we should reverse the situation and say that smallies are bad for the Gar population as they were latecomers to the world the gar have so long dealt with without some stupid bass coming along and eating all there fry. I say we gar fishermen unite and start killing off all the bass since bass are hurting the gar populations. ( of course that statement is not how I feel but its using your logic in reverse form)
> Bottom line is I never kill any fish on purpose and I , as a "sportsman", respect what each species has to offer, for the carp its a strong , long winded runner that will test every inch of your equipment. Gar are hard fighters, excellent jumpers, offer sight fishing, and love the" I just saw the net" last second run which will break your line in a heartbeat if your not ready for it. Did I mention that from clean waters are EXCELLENT table fare??? The beauty of the gar is it has remarkable markings and the fact it is one of the 3 "dinosaur" species still around, ( Sturgeon, Gar and Bowfin)
> 
> I have never had the pleasure of catching a sturgeon but can not wait until that day.... Bowfin are stong fighters, also have fantastic colorations and are very catchable and readily take lures as do Gar.
> ...


Have to agree with that. Gar are extremely hard fighters and i would absolutely love to finally catch one. I took a couple trips last year specifically to places i knew they were there in numbers. I hooked into several of them but each time my lure was spit or they broke the line. Oh well maybe this year. 

To clarify i have never thrown a gar or carp up on the bank because i respect each species. I do believe though that if a stream has a very large gar population then the bass will on average tend to be smaller than in streams with less gar. Makes since to me at least, more fish that eat minnows equals less minnows to go around, but i believe it'd be the same with any other predator fish that was in competition with bass for food not just gar.


----------



## nitsud (May 22, 2010)

Salmonid said:


> Sorry for the rant but as a "Fish Hugger" I like to stand up for those species who have gotten a bad rap


I agree with most of what you said, but you should never try to hug a gar. They don't appreciate public displays of affection 

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

fisharder said:


> Carp are a invasive species and gar most certainly can have a drastic effect on restricted waters. But take a chill pill because I never target carp or gar.
> Name calling is small minded and has no place on this website.




Kiss it on the lips fisharder:


----------



## joshtrum (Jun 13, 2009)

Wow....I don't know how this got so blown out of proportion by everyone, it's kinda sad when all i wanted was some useful info and all i got was random babbling. I caught a gar last year (although small) and was happy if not excited about it, It was a fun catch and I wouldn't MIND catching one again, i just prefer runs of the bass and worried that Gar would overpopulate and compete with the bass forcing the bass out of my favorite streams. I don't want to kill off the gar, nor i do i know who mentioned that, nor have i ever thrown a fish on the shore? Either way though thanks for the info guys.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

You asked a question, the answer is all over this thread. Gar (and carp) do not interfere with your fishing. The rest of the thread deals with ignorant "anglers" who throw fish on the bank to die, one of which was kind enough to bless us with his opinion. If you read the thread again you may catch it. A bunch of responsible outdoorsmen then chimed in & reminded everyone that throwing fish on the bank to die is a dumb thing to do. 



Don't be a dummy. Enjoy the resources.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

It's also worth mentioning that not only is it dumb, it's _illegal_ & you'll be ticketed for it.


----------



## fontinalis (Mar 29, 2011)

fisharder said:


> A few gar pot holed up in your favorite holes can really hurt.
> Carp and gar don't seem to have a very good survival rate
> when I catch them??


i cant wait till i get my badge(hopefully this year) so i can write idiots like him tickets.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

Division of Wildlife seem to think Carp pose a problem to lakes. 
http://www.dailystandard.com/archive/story_single.php?rec_id=14661


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Here are the facts about carp & the problems they supposedly cause, with sources:


> Impact of Introduction: The common carp is regarded as a pest fish because of its widespread abundance and because of its tendency to destroy vegetation and increase water turbidity by dislodging plants and rooting around in the substrate, causing a deterioration of habitat for species requiring vegetation and clean water (Cole 1905; Cahoon 1953; Bellrichard 1996; Laird and Page 1996). Available literature indicates common carp may destroy aquatic macrophytes directly by uprooting or consuming the plants, or indirectly by increasing turbidity and thereby reducing light for photosynthesis. Bellrichard (1996) found that alterations in macrophyte biomass are due more to direct effects of common carp. In their review of the literature, Richardson et al. (1995) concluded that common carp has had noted adverse effects on biological systems including destruction of vegetated breeding habitats used by both fish and birds, and an increase in turbidity. It stirs up the bottom during feeding, resulting in increased siltation and turbidity (Lee et al. 1980 et seq.). This feeding behavior also destroys rooted aquatic plants that provide habitat for native fish species and food for waterfowl (Dentler 1993). There is also evidence that common carp prey on the eggs of other fish species (Moyle 1976a; Taylor et al. 1984; Miller and Beckman 1996). For this reason, it may be responsible for the decline of the razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus in the Colorado River basin (Taylor et al. 1984). In another case, Miller and Beckman (1996) documented white sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus eggs in the stomachs of common carp in the Columbia River. In California, carp have been implicated in the decrease in water clarity in Clear Lake, Lake County, and in the gradual disappearance of native fishes (Moyle 1976a). McCarraher and Gregory (1970) wrote that in 1894 there was documentation that Sacramento perch Archoplites interruptus were becoming more scarce because carp were destroying their spawning grounds. Laird and Page (1996) stated that common carp may compete with ecologically similar species such as carpsuckers and buffalos. Because this species has been present in many areas since the first surveys, its impacts on many of the native fishes are difficult to determine. Once established in a water body, common carp are difficult and expensive to eliminate (e.g., Cahoon 1953).





They've been around since the 1800's. They're not going anywhere. Gar have been around for 100's of millions of years. They're not going anywhere. All you do by throwing them on the bank is make yourself look stupid. 

Congratulations.


----------



## lovelandfly (Mar 11, 2010)

fallen513 said:


> Kiss it on the lips fisharder:


LOL!

My 2 cents - they've been around longer than I have, and I'd love to catch one, take a picture, and put it back in the river - no kissing!


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

I have never referred to Gar and I never said I throw them or carp on the bank, so what you said doesn't apply to me. But I do feel I should argue the point about Carp being bad for out fisheries, they are and that is fact not opinion.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Big James said:


> I have never referred to Gar and I never said I throw them or carp on the bank, so what you said doesn't apply to me. But I do feel I should argue the point about Carp being bad for out fisheries, they are and that is fact not opinion.




Carp aren't hurting the GMR fishery James.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

> The common carp is very active when feeding and its movements often disturb sediments and increase turbidity, causing serious problems in some regions especially where the species is abundant. The species also retards the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation by feeding on and uprooting plants (King and Hunt 1967). Silt resuspension and uprooting of aquatic plants caused by feeding activities can disturb spawning and nursery areas of native fishes (Ross 2001) as well as disrupt feeding of sight-oriented predators, such as bass and sunfish (Panek 1987).



They've been doing it for 180 years now. I'm still seein' ducks & gamefish.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

Fallen you like to make a lot of assumptions and we all know what that does don't we? I promise I fish other body's of water than the GMR, I never said Carp would eradicate all other wildlife in fisheries. I am going to type this next part sssllloooowww for you. The presence of Carp hurt fisheries. You should read that article on Grand Lake St. Mary's, Carp are cited as the cause of the toxic algae, which severely damaged that lake. Now the fact is that any one body of water(even theGMR) can only handle so much bio mass, in my opinion I would rather Carp not make up a big part of it. 
If you are so adamant about this you should be up at GLSM protesting the slaughter of the thousand's of pounds of innocent Carp at the cost of your tax dollars and license fees. I don't think the biologist are going to accept "they've been around for a hundred years" as a reason to stop though. 
Everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless of fact I guess.


----------



## fontinalis (Mar 29, 2011)

i dont even consider grand lake a lake at all, more of a large open septic pool. The carp are so abundant there because the water quality is so bad that most gamefish cant thrive in it. The plentiful carp there are a result of the poor water quality, they didnt cause it. Thousands of tons of manure rich silt washed into the lake are the reason for it. WAYYYYY too much nitrogen, and phosphates in the water. So yea there are a bunch of carp, simply because nothing else can tolerate the crappy conditions. Just my opinion. In healthy lakes and rivers the carp dont hurt much at all.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Gar in creeks, carp in lakes. Who cares what the original question posed was! 

If you put 10 carp in a 5 gallon bucket, you might have some problems with the oxygen in the bucket! 

If you pull a carp out of any of the streams running into the Ohio and throw it on the bank, you're dumb! 

That's the nicest way I can put it. You aren't making a difference.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Just say you don't support vigilante carp & gar slayings and let's move on. LOL.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

fallen513 said:


> Just say you don't support vigilante carp & gar slayings and let's move on. LOL.


I will say that gladly, you should say Carp are bad for fisheries. ;-)


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Good, thank you. That's not so much agreeing with me as it is making a statement about yourself. A good one.



The problem with me agreeing with your statement is, it is not entirely true. Carp are not bad for _all fisheries_, as you've posited. Common carp are not causing problems in the LMR or GMR, or most other inland lakes they are inhabiting. They simply aren't. 

They're not the real problem at Grand Lake either. The problem there is what lies in the silt they're stirring up, which as fontinalis pointed out, is from the runoff. To add more to the Grand Lake discussion, those aren't even carp they're removing. Suckers, yes...carp, no. Trivial, but we are discussing facts after all.  


Now, I will concede that carp _can and do_ cause problems in _some _fisheries. Asian carp are a very obvious problem species, fortunately we don't have to deal with them just yet. I'd have to think in the next 50 years they will be up here from the Mississippi. They've been bad news everywhere they've been encountered & I don't think that's going to change. 


To the original post, talking about creeks, streams & rivers in SW Ohio, carp & gar have little to no effect at all on game fish!


----------



## nitsud (May 22, 2010)

So wait, your evidence that carp are bad for fisheries is GLSM? From what I understand the reason that carp are causing a problem there is because they are stirring up the manure on the bottom of the lake, not because carp are an inherent problem for fisheries. GLSM is pretty far from a typical fishery.

You got anything else?


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

It's a shame how much single mindedness causes people to completely miss the point. It was easy for for me to say I don't support "vigilante Carp and Gar slayings" not because I agreed with you but because I never stated anything in support of it. That is your poor interpretation.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

nitsud said:


> So wait, your evidence that carp are bad for fisheries is GLSM? From what I understand the reason that carp are causing a problem there is because they are stirring up the manure on the bottom of the lake, not because carp are an inherent problem for fisheries. GLSM is pretty far from a typical fishery.
> 
> You got anything else?


This ship has already sailed, there is a lot of info in this thread about the negative impact Carp have on fisheries. A lot of it posted by Fallen himself. I am not going to bother going over it again if you cannot be bothered to read it all.
"Carp also excrete high amounts of phosphorous, which feeds toxic blue-green algae blooms" A direct qoute from a biologist on GLSM.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Big James said:


> This ship has already sailed, there is a lot of info in this thread about the negative impact Carp have on fisheries. A lot of it posted by Fallen himself. I am not going to bother going over it again if you cannot be bothered to read it all.
> "Carp also excrete high amounts of phosphorous, which feeds toxic blue-green algae blooms" A direct qoute from a biologist on GLSM.


They excrete high amounts when they consume high amounts, which is pretty obvious. Do they excrete high amounts when there's none present in the body of water? :bananajump:


There is a lot of info in this thread about the impact Carp have on *some* fisheries, emphasis & indefinite pronoun added. Big difference when you're making a statement of fact.


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

I have a feeling this thread will be closing very soon lol


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

Fallen, so much for "moving on".


----------



## HOUSE (Apr 29, 2010)

Hey, somewhat related question. Are carp a normal part of the food chain for bigger predatory fish or do they taste as bad as they smell? Also, I wonder if the fact neither one is really sought after by many fisherman plays any role as to why they are so prolific. Probably minimal, if any...

As to the debate, I think you can settle this the old fashioned way: James, you get to slap Fallen in the face with a carp... and Fallen, you get to slap James in the face with a gar.


I've fished the rivers enough times and pulled out a bunch of smallies with a gar swimming around nearby that I don't think it really matters. Natural speculation makes me think that it "might" be a better fishing hole if the gar wasn't around, but I think nature has it's own "checks-&-balances" system built in to itself to prevent one species from taking over. I stay away from lakes like Winton Woods because they do seem to favor the carp. I think that is due to inconsistent water levels due to the dam and no vegetation there unlike St. Mary's and other environmentally ruined run-off lakes.

I did enjoy reading this thread though guys! I think the flooded river has everyone getting Flood-Fever...very contagious. Let me know about the fish slap-off idea. We can televise it as an OGF fundraiser or something. :B


----------



## nitsud (May 22, 2010)

Big James said:


> This ship has already sailed, there is a lot of info in this thread about the negative impact Carp have on fisheries. A lot of it posted by Fallen himself. I am not going to bother going over it again if you cannot be bothered to read it all.
> "Carp also excrete high amounts of phosphorous, which feeds toxic blue-green algae blooms" A direct qoute from a biologist on GLSM.


Oh sure, make me read stuff...  One man's rough fish is another man's sport fish, but in any case, GLSM is not a typical situation.

I have a pretty laid back attitude towards invasive species in general. Sure asian carp will come, and when they do, I'll get a bowfishing setup. Snakehead? Looks like good fun to me!! Maybe what we really need is to genetically engineer a giant gar to eat the carp. Of course, then we'll have to introduce a cold-tolerant anaconda derivative to keep the gar under control... That or just let nature do it's thing. Invasive species are nothing new in the history of life. Sure, things change and species go extinct, but again, nothing new.

Warehouse, I'm all in on the gar/carp slapping idea.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

I was moving right along, but single mindedness?  As in, thinking that if the situation in one place is a certain way, it must be that way everywhere? 

Show me how carp have negatively impacted the Ohio river watershed and we'll go from there. More specifically, the fishery. That's really what you're talking about...and that is what fisharder was talking about... he fishes where I fish, so he's talking removing carp & gar from the LMR to better the fishery. 


That's not a sound theory. As I clearly posted, I know what negative impacts they _can_ have. That's enough italics for now. 


Friendly discussion.


----------



## Big James (Mar 30, 2011)

My last parting words on this subject, as far as rivers go the problem is, right or wrong most American anglers do not target Carp and that will not change anytime soon. That being said bodies of water can only support so much bio mass which means the more Carp the less other species of fish and all aquatic life there will be in that body of water. If you consider the shear amount of volume of Carp in the rivers that's a lot of missing sport fish and other native life. 
Happy fishing Fallen.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Good luck to you as well. I think this is going to be a good year fishing. No hard feelings to fisharder either, my ultimate opinion is to each their own. Enjoy the resources.


----------



## joshtrum (Jun 13, 2009)

I cannot believe this thread is still kicking, i've accepted for now that Gar aren't a problem, how did we get to carp?


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

face palm.



We've all started hugging & slapping each other with various rough fish. One big happy angling community.


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

fallen513 said:


> face palm.
> 
> 
> 
> We've all started hugging & slapping each other with various rough fish. One big happy angling community.


I call the angler fish.


----------



## AnglinMueller (May 16, 2008)

Wow i come back from a week and a couple days vacation and this thread is still going strong.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Angler management.


----------



## HOUSE (Apr 29, 2010)

AnglinMueller said:


> Wow i come back from a week and a couple days vacation and this thread is still going strong.


I've gotten more than a handful of good laughs out of it though!

"angler management" hahahaha

killin' me...


----------



## treytd32 (Jun 12, 2009)

How would you like to be hit in the face with this? lol


----------



## Dandrews (Oct 10, 2010)

Wow, kumbaya fellas


----------

