curious scenario

[the local angler]

i'm just sitting here thinking about the prussian carps thats taking over our local waters. they eat everything our native species eat causing the decline of our favorite species. if the gov stocked say like various types of suckers would they eat the eggs of the prussian carp and reduce their population?

[EZM]

Originally Posted by the local angler

i'm just sitting here thinking about the prussian carps thats taking over our local waters. they eat everything our native species eat causing the decline of our favorite species. if the gov stocked say like various types of suckers would they eat the eggs of the prussian carp and reduce their population?

Sounds like a perfect plan ............ except how do you train them only to eat carp eggs? And would they?

I think we have learned by now that "introducing yet another invasive species to control another" is far too risky here.

We already have suckers. What would this to them?

Maybe this would result in double the game fish eggs being eaten and double the pressure on the game fish.

Too many potential issues here IMO.

[thorne]

I'm pretty sure evertime someone, somewhere, introduced a new species of anything, anywhere, to do or control something, its always ended up being an "Opps" and created a new bigger issue with something else. Except for Introducing shrimp to Okanagan Lake to fatten up the rainbow trout...What Could Possible Go Wrong!!

[Smoky buck]

Every introduced has an impact on the system and an over abundance of suckers would have an impact on all the species in the body of water

Best thing we can hope for is pike and other predator species benefit from the carp as a good source but the carp are here to stay

[the local angler]

i was just thinking because the suckers are already in alot of our waters and invasive and unwanted in some waters. talking to some people they smoke suckers, grind them into burgers and various uses and seems to be a more useful one over the other for a lack of better definition by various cultures. the carp seems to more of a favorite for a much smaller "community". just kinda brainstorming of what to do with the prussian carp since we can't release them. i have tried eating them and are quite tasty but can't get past the huge amount of Y bones in it regardless of the age class of the fish. if you bury them in your garden would they stink up the area when it decomposes?

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by the local angler

i was just thinking because the suckers are already in alot of our waters and invasive and unwanted in some waters. talking to some people they smoke suckers, grind them into burgers and various uses and seems to be a more useful one over the other for a lack of better definition by various cultures. the carp seems to more of a favorite for a much smaller "community". just kinda brainstorming of what to do with the prussian carp since we can't release them. i have tried eating them and are quite tasty but can't get past the huge amount of Y bones in it regardless of the age class of the fish. if you bury them in your garden would they stink up the area when it decomposes?

Unfortunately an over abundance of suckers will just be another negative impact on the watershed combined with the carp issue. Suckers are still an under utilized species that don’t see a lot of harvest

Maybe we need someone to create a pet food or fertilizer plant and create a commercial harvest for carp

Nothing wrong with trying to think of solutions because you might come up with something good

[antlercarver]

In my trout pond a few carp were bought to keep the weeds down.
These carp are sterile. Their eggs will not hatch.

[pikeman06]

Did someone bring up stocking suckers? Are we high? How about we try protecting our last few remaining predators and see how things balance out on their own. 70 cm and over pike go back and 50cm and over walleye go back for 5 year pilot project. Start there...for instant results, and quality fisheries. Province wide. We don't stock pike perch and whites and barely any walleye and at the current state of affairs don't expect much. Let the spawners spawn for a few years, and eat those carp. A 45 cm walleye or pike isn't gonna eat a mature 2 lb carp but the trophy predators will, those are the ones you want gone not the little hatchling carp.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by pikeman06

Did someone bring up stocking suckers? Are we high? How about we try protecting our last few remaining predators and see how things balance out on their own. 70 cm and over pike go back and 50cm and over walleye go back for 5 year pilot project. Start there...for instant results, and quality fisheries. Province wide. We don't stock pike perch and whites and barely any walleye and at the current state of affairs don't expect much. Let the spawners spawn for a few years, and eat those carp. A 45 cm walleye or pike isn't gonna eat a mature 2 lb carp but the trophy predators will, those are the ones you want gone not the little hatchling carp.

I bet there is some 45cm pike that will try really hard to eat a 2 lb carp even if they don’t succeed

But I agree the only balance in the carp population we will see is do to predators. I am crossing my fingers that we might see some big pike out of the carp disaster

[338Bluff]

Originally Posted by the local angler

i was just thinking because the suckers are already in alot of our waters and invasive and unwanted in some waters. talking to some people they smoke suckers, grind them into burgers and various uses and seems to be a more useful one over the other for a lack of better definition by various cultures. the carp seems to more of a favorite for a much smaller "community". just kinda brainstorming of what to do with the prussian carp since we can't release them. i have tried eating them and are quite tasty but can't get past the huge amount of Y bones in it regardless of the age class of the fish. if you bury them in your garden would they stink up the area when it decomposes?

Suckers are invasive? It's more likely the Rainbow and Brown trout are invasive. Suckers were there since the last ice age.

[the local angler]

[QUOTE=pikeman06;4166368]Did someone bring up stocking suckers? Are we high? How about we try protecting our last few remaining predators and see how things balance out on their own.

i am merely speaking regarding lakes or ponds that do not have the big predatory species you are referring to like pike and walleye. stocked ponds and lakes that only consist of trout is my concern because i am seeing the carp growing fast and similar sizes to the stocked trout. other then the odd bird of prey like a hawk is the only predator i see. some of my favorite trout ponds and lakes are swarming with the carp.

[Smoky buck]

[QUOTE=the local angler;4166495]

Originally Posted by pikeman06

Did someone bring up stocking suckers? Are we high? How about we try protecting our last few remaining predators and see how things balance out on their own.

i am merely speaking regarding lakes or ponds that do not have the big predatory species you are referring to like pike and walleye. stocked ponds and lakes that only consist of trout is my concern because i am seeing the carp growing fast and similar sizes to the stocked trout. other then the odd bird of prey like a hawk is the only predator i see. some of my favorite trout ponds and lakes are swarming with the carp.

The issue with your theory is suckers will just be another species competing for food, depleting oxygen, add waste to the system, and stirring up the bottom. The carp would not see much impact compared to the more sensitive trout

Basically you would just end up with two course fish species have a negative impact on your stalked trout

There would be no positive out come stocking suckers

[Red Bullets]

One solution to the carp would be a few year project and could be 100% successful. The only drawback is this method would affect many species.

Any lake or reservoir with carp could be hit with rotenone and killed off. Then the following year re-stock the water body with the desired fish. Also restore amphibian and micro fauna. In 5 or so years you would have a restored fauna and fishery.

Any canal, smaller river or stream would be a matter of gating off each end of a section or channel of the moving water and systematically using rotenone over the length. Would be much more challenging to restore moving waters with resident species like stickleback, various minnows, sculpin, etc..

A second bonus to such a project would be we could get rid of the crayfish at the same time too.

Or we maybe just need to release some big snakeheads where there are carp.

[flyrodfisher]

Originally Posted by Red Bullets

Any lake or reservoir with carp could be hit with rotenone and killed off. Then the following year re-stock the water body with the desired fish. Also restore amphibian and micro fauna. In 5 or so years you would have a restored fauna and fishery.

Any canal, smaller river or stream would be a matter of gating off each end of a section or channel of the moving water and systematically using rotenone over the length.

Your solution is feasible...but...
1) Rotenone projects are VERY expensive
2) AEP doesn't like to use rotenone anymore because of all the environmental issues associated with it....permitting, notification, etc
3) Rotenone also kills off more than just fish
4) Killing off the waterbody only works for the first year....the next year some idiot puts the invasive species back in again

The above points are why perch/pike have not been removed from stocked trout ponds

[flyrodfisher]

Originally Posted by 338Bluff

Suckers are invasive? It's more likely the Rainbow and Brown trout are invasive. Suckers were there since the last ice age.

So true....

[the local angler]

[QUOTE=Smoky buck;4166532][QUOTE=the local angler;4166495]

The issue with your theory is suckers will just be another species competing for food, depleting oxygen, add waste to the system, and stirring up the bottom. The carp would not see much impact compared to the more sensitive trout

but the thing is suckers need their own kind to reproduce, prussian carp does not. they have this scary ability to use sperm from other species and use only the elements they need and they can clone themselves and spawn up to 4 times a year according to the pamphlet i read. its the carps numbers that is an issue for me over populating the other species.

this article explains some of it too https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...sive-1.4341547

[Smoky buck]

[QUOTE=the local angler;4166576][QUOTE=Smoky buck;4166532]

Originally Posted by the local angler

The issue with your theory is suckers will just be another species competing for food, depleting oxygen, add waste to the system, and stirring up the bottom. The carp would not see much impact compared to the more sensitive trout

but the thing is suckers need their own kind to reproduce, prussian carp does not. they have this scary ability to use sperm from other species and use only the elements they need and they can clone themselves and spawn up to 4 times a year according to the pamphlet i read. its the carps numbers that is an issue for me over populating the other species.

this article explains some of it too https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...sive-1.4341547

Yes I realize this but your sucker theory is completely flawed and will not bring any positive results. The carp are flourishing in waters a long side suckers all ready. You would just be introducing another species

Red bullets gave an option that has been effective with invasive species but it has its consequences and flaws as well. It is still the most effective way to remove invasive species

There has been tons of attempts to remove invasive species and most are not successfully

[calgarygringo]

Wouldnt work well in Central and the south at all. The Red Deer and Bow river are full of these things. That water is used for irrigation and fills many reservoirs via the canal systems. They move through them too and there is no way they are goingto try to kill off the rivers. They are here to unless the predators take care of things.

Originally Posted by Red Bullets

One solution to the carp would be a few year project and could be 100% successful. The only drawback is this method would affect many species.

Any lake or reservoir with carp could be hit with rotenone and killed off. Then the following year re-stock the water body with the desired fish. Also restore amphibian and micro fauna. In 5 or so years you would have a restored fauna and fishery.

Any canal, smaller river or stream would be a matter of gating off each end of a section or channel of the moving water and systematically using rotenone over the length. Would be much more challenging to restore moving waters with resident species like stickleback, various minnows, sculpin, etc..

A second bonus to such a project would be we could get rid of the crayfish at the same time too.

Or we maybe just need to release some big snakeheads where there are carp.

[the local angler]

i guess then more birds of prey is another option as i have seen on some lakes diving for the stocked trout. scared the crap out of me when the hawk dive bombed from the top of the pine tree and into the water.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by the local angler

i guess then more birds of prey is another option as i have seen on some lakes diving for the stocked trout. scared the crap out of me when the hawk dive bombed from the top of the pine tree and into the water.

So we can bring in more birds of prey. We would have to train them first, so they leave the desired trout alone, and focus on the suckers and eating them instead. People have trained hawks for hundreds of years to catch foxes, rabbits and other prey ...... but we would have to bring in those Mongolian bird of prey trainers too. We can set up their Yurts along the shoreline and they could live there and maybe run a fair and circus for the local kids every summer too.

The other thought, which is also equally feasible ....

I understand Bull sharks are able to live in fresh and brackish water too - that would be another option. Trout are faster, and suckers would be easier for the sharks to catch and eat - plus we would have other new angling opportunities in the province to. Swimming would be a problem, but if we teach the kids how to swim really fast, they should be OK - they just need to take the their slower and fatter friends with them when they go swimming.