Eh, up!
There were rumoured to be some carp in the 50-60lb range stocked near me in Norfolk last year. Obviously, imported fish, I don't no if with permission or not. If one of these was caught over the record weight and the bloke who caught it claimed the record should it be granted?
As far as I am concerned, it should. A carp is a carp and they soon wise up. What do you think, lads!

Er Paddy?

I am going to look forward to some of the replys on this one! I know there are some very strong views on this subject and I have a suspicion Paul S may well respond!

Personally, my feeling is that they are here, they are thriving and eventually it may be nigh on impossible to sort out which is which - native or not.

However, if there was more concern there would eventually be more controls - and that does not seem to be happening - a case of door...horse...bolted methinks.

But is is all sour grapes or is there a smattering of 'won't join the euro' perhaps. It will be good to see the reaction of the Euro carpers when the fishingwarehouse start the 'across the channel' area.

Steve

If as you suggest foreign imported carp are considered for the British record, any fishery owner could quite easily import a 60lb fish and the next day joe bloggs could turn up catch the fish and claim the record which is total cobblers as far as i see it.
Just to confuse matters even more, How do you prove if a fish is a foreign import
or not, I mean although some have been imported legally and their must be records for these, there are still alot that have come in illegally.

Hmmmm, this may put the cat amongst the pigeons so to speak.

Were carp not introduced into this country from abroad originally anyway ?

Were the original Redmire fish not imported from Belgium in the first instance ?

If a fish is moved from another country, lake or pond or river into another lake or pond or river does it then not become a resident of it`s envrioment ?

Chris S

Chris,
True enough mate BUT (and isn't there alway's a "but" with me?). Carp, though an introduced species and not indiginous to this country DO spawn successfully here and are therefore sorta considered to be "naturalised". The Redmire stock? True, imported from belgium or somewhere as fingerlings NOT as bloody great big huge things so they actually spent many many years in Redmire grubbing about and growing big. That's the difference you see? I reckon if we were buying stock fish from france at 8oz and they were growing to huge sizes in their new environment there wouldn't be an issue. The fact is, as you know that many of these imported (from wherever!) fish are already huge, I guess that many of them actually loose some of there weight once stocked especially if they're dumped in one of these bloody puddles.
You see Chris, the issue is not with importing, stocking or moving (legally of course) carp, it's with the stocking of carp that are already record breakers in this country.
Remember the Rainbow Trout fiaso? Can't remember the name of the place but the owner was regularly stocking the place with artificially hoime grown record fish...what a joke.....

Can I have a coffee now?

Simon N

With the trout thing, were there not 2 records 1 for wild fish (I think it was something like stocked more than 2 years ago) and one for artificially farmed fish

true, but the fish we now consider english have been residing in uk waters for decades and have spent most of their lives in uk waters.
I can't see how you can claim a british record for a fish that has spent most of it's
life abroad and then imported into some commercial fishery to break the record.

Andy,
Yeah I think you're right - but that only happened after there was an uproar from the angling press didn't it?

Ritchie,
Exactly! Fish that already break the record (or come close to it) when they are stocked should not be counted. To be honest, and I know I'm probably being naiive here, I wouldn't want to fish a water were the fish were stocked at more than low doubles....wherever they came from

Simon N

[This message has been edited by Simon N (edited 16-06-2000).]

There is an ethics/generation issue here. Personally I detest the introduction of these foreign monsters. They devalue our existing big-carp heritage and pose enormous health risks. Obviously the success of the likes of Darenth indicates that many do not share my views. It saddens me to see these fish paraded on the front pages of our magazines/newspapers whilst genuine fish with real pegigree are overlooked. What can you do?
The younger generation of anglers will be largely unaware of these issues and will be quickly seduced by the easy access to these enormous imposters. Many of my friends in the North West feel the same way and will continue to fish exclusively for 'heritage fish'. However I know an increasing number who have beaten a path to Acton in search of a little piece of the continent.
It will be a sad day indeed when (not if) the record is claimed by an import hunter.

Should known recently-stocked foreign carp count as record fish?.....IMO no.
Surely in this day and age a fish could be identified accuratly when stocked.
When an identified fish is stocked at say 10 lbs or under, then it can be concidered as native and eligable to be a record, if it ever does.
If a fish is at a record weight but cannot be identified as native, then it should not count as a record.
I know that it is more complicated than that but it would be a start.
It would also deter large imports as they just would not count.
Gaffer.