Edited By Moderator:

Two "Texas" papers, for you.
Claim:
Common carp have an adverse effect on their environment, potentially harming native fish.

Data:
This one shows significant increases in total phosphates, total nitrogen, and chlorophyll, and provides confirmation of similar results worldwide.

Chumchal, M.M., Nowlin, W.H., Drenner, R.W. 2005. Biomass-dependent effects of common carp on water quality in shallow ponds. Hydrobiologia: Vol. 545, No. 1, pp. 271-277.

This one you have to read more than just the abstract, but it shows they do affect catch rates for LMB.

Drenner, R.W., Gallo, K.L., Edwards, C.M., Rieger, K.E., Dibble, E.D. 1997. Common Carp Affect Turbidity and Angler Catch Rates of Largemouth Bass in Ponds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management: Vol. 17, No. 4 pp. 1010�1013.

Warrant:
Common carp can be considered a nuisance species and deserve specific management plans dealing with their abundance and distribution.

Carp are fun to catch. But admit that they are not a harmless fish to be promoted.
I respect your interest in fish, again we have more in common than in difference, and I would like to retract the previous statement of "wasting my posts" on you. Any diagloge on the subject can only be considered beneficial. The more we can converse, the closer each party comes to understanding the other.
Peace.

What part about applicable science don't you understand? We asked for Texas studies on public lakes or water ways (rivers/creeks) You give us studies done on shallow stagnant ponds. Please! No way can you extrapolate that they are the same aquatic environment.

Ok I really tried to avoid this thread.. but I can't. I have read numerous studies, all from out of state but I don't believe that invalidates them. We're missing the point here. First I'll state my position in three parts. First, Some studies claim to have "proven" that common carp, when introduced in any substantial quantity do in fact increase turbidity thus stirring up harmful chemicals already present in the lake sediment. Any logical mind can come to the same conclusion. These studies are normally performed in very small bodies of water where carp were not present previously. No control body of water. So the studies, in my opinion are not valid. Not that their point does not have some merit. Proving only that we should carefully consider all points before introducing fish into a small body of water. Second point, Much of the popular "opinion" of carp does in fact come from the perception of the correlation between less than desirable waters and seeing live carp in them. The carp don't put the chemicals and silt in the lake, they just stir it up. You think catfish don't? You think bass and bluegill don't when bedding? Third point: If you have an unbalanced population of ANY fish in a body of water it WILL be detrimental to other species. But few if any of us are qualified to make that call. What is overpopulation in a specific body of water should be left to those qualified to make a judgment. If you feel that there are too many carp in a lake, call TPWD and demand that they look into it. But don't go killing fish without all the information. You need to realize that all of the best trophy carp lakes are also known for trophy bass. They've come to a natural balance. Stocking fish into a water will upset the balance if all factors are not considered. So will killing large carp. Competition in the common carp is important for natural selection. A good population of larger fish will ensure that a number of smaller fish don't reach a size that they are beyond the ability of predators to kill, thus ensuring a food source for bass, catfish and other species. This is the natural balance. Anything we do to upset that balance hurts the lake. To sum up this LONG and DRY post. Look at Lake Fork, Lake Austin, Town Lake, Lake Athens, Lake Tawakoni and many others. They hold a great population of carp and all are known to produce world class bass and/or catfish. The fish are naturalized so just drop it already. They are not going anywhere so let mother nature do her job. She knows what she's doing. Anyone who feels that they know better than nature is just ignorant.

How bout this question. If you were to illiminate all the carp in Lake Fork, what would the outcome be in effect to the bass population? Better it, worsen it or no effect whatesoever?

The loss of carp fry forage for the bass would lessen their attainable size and very probably lessen the lake population capacity due to lack of available forage.

The only way to prevent this would be to replace their forage with another species of comprable nutritional benefit.

yeah check out the fat/oil content in carp...there is a reason TPWD feed carp/koi to there share a lunker's in athens

Re: Removing "All" Carp from Fork.

Yep. Brewboy and Lonestar pretty much nailed it. Considering that the common carp was already present in the Sabine River long before it was ever dammed, they developed a healthy, balanced part of the Lake Fork Ecosystem.

If you don't think that lake is in nearly perfect balance, you've obviously not spent much time there. Every fish of every species that comes from that body of water is in perfect shape, beautiful color, and every species gets huge!

Lots of largemouth over 15lbs, lots of carp over 30lbs, etc.

As stated, carp fry are incredibly nutritious, and you better believe those largemouth devour more then their fair share of them every year. ( To say nothing of eating their own fry every year lol. )

If carp were suddenly and "magically" removed, the ecosystem would be thrown into turmoil and be totally unbalanced.

Right now, not one single species is anywhere near overpopulated in that lake. But if you removed an entire species, be it carp, or anything else, you'd throw the whole ecosystem of balance and some species would quickly start to overpopulate.

If you want to destroy a good largemouth bass fishery, I assure you it's not a carp population you should worry about, but a Striped Bass population.

If Stripers were ever stocked on Fork, that lake would be over lol.

And of course, overseas, where Carp fishing is more popular then Largemouth Bass fishing, Largemouth Bass are often considered a "dangerous, invasive species that destroys local fisheries."

It goes both ways lol.

i'm just wondering...if...there were no carp or buffs in my swim @hubbard who or what would keep control of all the algea and moss build up in the area....i've seen several buffs and carp back in like june-july sucking off moss on the bases and poles out there?...just wondering

Well, the carp and buffs aren't eating the moss anyway. They're going for the snails and insects in it most likely. They *can* eat moss, but with all the other tasty morsels in there they're probably not going to.

turtles will be there soon to help control it......plus, the cold will help