What defines a truly English carp?

Philip

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
5,884
Reaction score
3,432
Again excellent stuff and thanks for the reply but I am still not sure how they knew even the Danube Carp were "true" Wild carp. Wasn't there mention that out of however many hundreds if not thousands only 3 were proved "beyond any doubt" to be true wildies ? ..how did they know ?

It can't have been a visual test alone as we know that's not conclusive so I assume it must have been a DNA test ?

Bottom line for me is this :- Does anyone know if its possible to i.d the different strains such as Galician, Aischgrund, Dinkelsbuehl and so on from DNA ?
Would they each give a different distinct result or would they all just be defined as CCyprinus carpio by such a test ?
 

Chevin

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
2,830
Reaction score
3
Location
Wanneroo
Kevin, the cow comparison is a bad one....any domesticated mammal, humans included would probably die if left to fend for themselves, fish may not( which is basically what you said).......how can you be so sure the carp would never totally revert back to a danubian? if they can almost get there what stops the final metamorphis?.

I must confess to having no knowledge as to whether carp would revert, but cows certainly have no problems with living in the wild. Out here in Australia there are cattle stations of over half a million acres - possibly close to a million - where cattle, sheep and goats roam with no cultivated grass or or fodder except in the case of serious drought when all animals die. Our exploding populations of feral donkeys, camels, water buffalo and even horses are also proof that domesticated animals have no difficulty in fending for themslves if it becomes necessary to do so.
 

preston96

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
2,107
Reaction score
8
I must confess to having no knowledge as to whether carp would revert, but cows certainly have no problems with living in the wild. Out here in Australia there are cattle stations of over half a million acres - possibly close to a million - where cattle, sheep and goats roam with no cultivated grass or or fodder except in the case of serious drought when all animals die. Our exploding populations of feral donkeys, camels, water buffalo and even horses are also proof that domesticated animals have no difficulty in fending for themslves if it becomes necessary to do so.

Good point Chevin, ....... but i can't understand why, if carp can revert so far back to their original status they can't go all the way.

I'm not nit picking anyones words, just a genuine question.
 

Nathan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
252
Reaction score
1
Location
Buckinghamshire
This has honestly been one of the most interesting theread i've read on FM. I had no idea there were so many strains of Carp or where they all came from! Its been a very interesting read.

---------- Post added at 07:28 ---------- Previous post was at 07:14 ----------

I caught a carp which looked like a proper old carp. It was long torpedo shaped and i would guess weighed around the 6lb mark. As i understand it a few carp escaped from a nearby ressie into the local canal back in the 70's but there were also a few resident carp in there already. I've also seen a match angler with 2 or 3 similar looking fish in his keepnet. Is it possible that these fish had somehow reverted back to a near 'wildie' state? I've had a few mirrors from the canal from 12-22lb & i would say these were the escapees and the small commons were the original resident carp. Your thought/views on this please

picture.php

http://www.fishingmagic.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=49&pictureid=1312
 

Nobby C (ACA)

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
1,098
Reaction score
0
Location
leafy green nowhere
Is that the Marsworth canal Nathan? Bucket loads of carp used to reside in there, came through the flood overflow sluices I heard?
Going back 30 odd,(very odd) years now so I may be mistaken (but not for an alien or something).
Marsworth canal fish were'stocked' into the pond I cut my teeth on in Bucks.
 
Last edited:

Chevin

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
2,830
Reaction score
3
Location
Wanneroo
Good point Chevin, ....... but i can't understand why, if carp can revert so far back to their original status they can't go all the way.

I'm not nit picking anyones words, just a genuine question.


It's a good question too. An odd thing though is that I have known waters that held both what we called king carp and those we called wildies. Perhaps ther king carp were introduced at a time before any possible hybrids began to show while I was fishing the waters. Carp were being moved around a lot in those days. I have seen a lot of carp in China but only koi and smaller gold fish type of carp. I caught some fish there that I first thought to be carp until I noticed that they had teeth or rather cusps like some of the ray families. I never did find out what kind of fish they were, it is difficult to ask questions like that when you can't speak the lingo. Mind you if I had been able to ask what they were called, I would have probably been told "Dinner".
 

Nathan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
252
Reaction score
1
Location
Buckinghamshire
That's actually from the Aylesbury canal but thats only a few miles from Marsworth. The fish doesn't look like any other common i've caught shapewise which is what made wonder if it was a little bit 'wildie'.

My very first 'proper' carp actually came from marsworth canal after feeding a carp bits of bread then hopping a bridge to get to the far bank & doing some jungle style stalking - good times.

---------- Post added at 07:53 ---------- Previous post was at 07:52 ----------

Im actually planning on going back to marsworth canal this saturday for a 'tiddlers only' fishing match with a friend.
 

dezza

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2000
Messages
32,331
Reaction score
9
Location
Rotherham South Yorkshire
Many of the carp I caught in South Africa looked just like that one Nathan.

A few more interesting facts I have gleaned. I refer to the book: "Freshwater Fish and Fishing in Africa" - 1963 by various authors, notably AC Harrison, Secretary of the Cape Piscatorial Society and RA (Rex) Jubb - one of Africa's most noted ichthyologists.

"The earliest importation of carp is lost in the mists of the past, but before it became evident that these fish were undesirable in many waters (particularly in the potential rainbow trout waters of the Eastern Cape where no large indigenous fish existed), a good deal of attention was given to their culture at the Jonkershoek Hatchery. An importation from England was effected under government auspices in 1896, and carp fingerlings were distributed until 1921.

The stock was then destroyed when strong representations had been made, pointing out the damage that had been caused by the objectional habits of carp and the losses that had been incurred in the case of clean watering dams. This was ordered to prevent further trouble, although by then, many areas with prospects for better fish had been invaded with carp.

A note concerning Largemouth bass is also of interest:

"Largemouth Bass were another introduction of the Rand Piscatorial Association and propogation from imported stock was carried out at the Jonkershoek and Pirie hatcheries of the Cape.

Fortyfive fingerlings were recieved at the Jonkershoek Hatchery on 20 February 1928. They had been bred in Holland in 1927 and were shipped by the Surrey Trout Farm.


So perhaps Leney was partly responsible for the importation of bass to Southern Africa, a species which today is one of that areas most popular amongst anglers.
 
Last edited:

kevclifford

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
These are questions I've ponder myself, and I cannot give you an authoritative opinion why carp (or any truly domesticated species) cannot revert back to its original form (as I said I am no geneticist). I can refer you to Professor Eugene Balon's substantial body of work on wild carp (in which he does refer to cows never being able to revert back the to auroch. I guess part of the question might be answered by Chevin and his Australian cows. To truly revert back the domesticated species must have the same conditions to adapt to, that existed when it first evolved. Certainly planet earth now is nothing like it was when the wild carp and the auroch evolved. If you do a Google search you will find Balon's work, some of it is freely and fully downloadable. I could try and justify what I have said by examples, such as the huge amounts of money being spent trying to save the Danubian wild carp. This wouldn't be necessary if domesticated carp revert back. But the scientific work is out there, if you really want to check for it, it's not that difficult nowadays with Google.
I also think Chevin (Ian?) makes the point about his Australian cows in a severe drought where, without man’s intervention, all would die. Well it’s such dramatic events that would have helped to shape the evolution of the auroch over millions of years. A few hardier individuals would have survived and from those, their genes would have been passed on to mould the species. Darwin!!! With “domesticated” species man interferes, even with the Ozzie cows, even if it is only in times of crisis, and by doing so he interferes with Darwin’s “survival of the fittest.”

DNA testing would show differences between wild carp, Galicians, Aischgrunder, Dinks, etc.

Ron. That date 1896 ties in with some old Fishing Gazettes I have recently been going though. I thought I had read of some stockings from the UK to SA around that time (please don't ask me go through them all again!). This was a time when a lot of carp (and other species) were being spread throughout the world and the rise of what were called “acclimatization societies” who thought they were doing great service by introducting new species all over the place. There is a book all about this titled ‘They Dined on Eland’ by Christopher Lever.
 
Last edited:

Graham Marsden

Editor Emeritus
Joined
Mar 4, 1999
Messages
10,414
Reaction score
6
Location
Stoke on Trent
Definitely one of the best threads for a long time, and I thank Chris and Kev in particular for their time and effort, and their obvious enthusiasm for the topic, and for taking the time to indulge us with their wisdom.
 

dezza

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2000
Messages
32,331
Reaction score
9
Location
Rotherham South Yorkshire
Acclimatisation societies were very British organisations who worked to take not only the British fauna but also the flora to the parts of the world where we colonised.

In some ways they did good, and in others, very very bad indeed. New Zealand for example had virtually no fish of any great interest in the rivers save for eels and a few tiny minnow like species. Yet here were rivers that would be ideal for trout and salmon. During the latter period of the 19th century, many successful stockings of rainbow and brown trout took place. Today, as we all know, New Zealand is famous for its trout fishing which attracts people from all over the world.

And to the same extent, the trout fishing of Tasmania and the Snowy Mountains in Australia has enhanced the money making potential of the tourist industry in that country.

However the introduction of carp to parts of the world such as Australia and South Africa was never a good idea. Although trout may have had a negative influence on some of the local indigenous species, it was never all that serious. One thing that trout do not do is root up the bottom of a river or lake, churning everything to murk, preventing the breeding and feeding of many predatory game species.
 

Dal

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
675
Reaction score
1
Location
The Garden of England
Definitely one of the best threads for a long time, and I thank Chris and Kev in particular for their time and effort, and their obvious enthusiasm for the topic, and for taking the time to indulge us with their wisdom.

The best thread for a long long time!
 

lostwan

New member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Contact

Hi Ron
I read with interest your comments re my dad, Ray Clay.
I would appreciate it if you could get in touch with me at paulclay1747@hotmail.com when you get chance
Cheers
Paul
 

mikeshaw1979

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
Location
Cheshire/Wales border
"The earliest importation of carp is lost in the mists of the past, but before it became evident that these fish were undesirable in many waters (particularly in the potential rainbow trout waters of the Eastern Cape where no large indigenous fish existed), a good deal of attention was given to their culture at the Jonkershoek Hatchery. An importation from England was effected under government auspices in 1896, and carp fingerlings were distributed until 1921..


Much of the carp importation to Australia and South Africa was on the back of trout and salmon shippments organized by various acclimatisation societies.
This thread from our sister Forum has several accounts. I quote the best from (Charles Rangely-Wilson) who is 'accidental' on there:
http://www.flyforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17210&highlight=norfolk

I wrote this story up in The Field in '99 / 2000. It was great fun researching it and I've thought about developing it into a book. Not got round to it yet ... but maybe I should. Anyway, here's the text of the final version I sent to The Field. I may have some notes somewhere too. I'll take a look.

By the way, when you get to the mention I was later corrected about James Youl – he wasn't "employed" by the Acclimatisation Soc.

Charles RW

Before the 4th May 1864 there were no trout in the southern hemisphere. Many had thought that there never would be: “You may as well try to fetch Australia to England as to carry spawn to it in moss,” wrote Robert Ramsbottom, an eminent breeder of salmon, to James Youl, the man trying to take them there.

Homesick colonial fishermen eyed their local streams with longing. Wherever the map was red, and land was high enough and water cold enough, new world fishermen imagined scenes of highland bliss in their adopted lands; of “bringing the lordly salmon to grass among picturesque granitic hills, which may well recall many a wild scene in the highlands of bonnie Scotland, or the softer glories of the Irish lakes,” wrote Arthur Nicols.

If the physical difficulties of carrying trout and salmon 16,000 miles on a voyage lasting three months were considerable, the Victorians never questioned the ethics of success, even though the new “exotics” would most likely oust the native fish. “Though a distant and obscure relative (of the trout) is found in some rivers of India, and another in New Zealand and the Falkland Islands, no one ignorant of anatomy would suspect the remotest connection of these imposters with the noble stock.”

Shipping out the best of the old world to the new in the mid-nineteenth century was nothing more than a good idea, and the Victorians played God in doing so.

By 1861 the Acclimatisation Society of Victoria had filled the Melbourne Gardens with camels, magpies, skylarks, Angora goats, and English pheasants, among a host of other beasts, and the thrush, blackbird and starling could be heard in all directions. But there weren’t any trout.

In 1860 they employed James Youl to pack 30,000 salmon ova from the Dovey. The S Curling left Liverpool on February 25, eight years after a Mr Boccius had tried to ship trout to Tasmania and failed, the ova shaken and parboiled by the time they reached the tropics. This time, Youl’s apparatus was ingenious and complicated. The ice house was lined with lead, and charcoal. Above it, a water tank with a pipe passing round the ice, spilled cold water onto the ova, which lay on gravel swing-trays on an incline. But the ova died. More ice was needed.

Next time, the ice melted when the ship was no further south than on the first voyage, and there were protests in the press about misuse of money. But Youl had discovered the principle of success when he included a small pine box of ova and moss, and placed it in the middle of the ice.

After a series of experiments in the vaults of the Wenham Lake Ice Company in London, he found that he could dispense with the gimbals, swing trays and plumbing, and simply pack the eggs in ice. He took pleasure in proving his critics wrong. We “exhumed one of the boxes containing ova that had been buried (as many persons prognosticated, in their icy graves) on the 17th January last. I cannot describe the anxiety of all present to get a first sight of these ova, or the pleasure visible on every countenance to find as the moss (shrouds, as many expected) was removed, our little friends alive and perfectly healthy.”

In January 1864 the Norfolk sailed with 100,000 salmon and 3000 trout ova packed under fifty tons of ice. Eighty-four days later she dropped anchor in Hobson’s Bay, Melbourne. Half the shipment was quickly transferred by steamship to Tasmania, transferred again into a barge which was towed to the wharf at New Norfolk. By sunrise the next day fifty men and ten teams of horses were waiting. Boxes and ice were slung in blankets on bamboo poles and walked overland to the hatching ponds on the River Plenty. Of the three thousand trout ova, 200 hatched.

James Youl had done the impossible, but Youl was always too modest. His friend Frank Buckland who had helped with some of the experiments inspired the wrath of Arthur Nicols for taking credit that didn’t belong to him. Nicols wrote to the Field: “I wish to give him (Frank Buckland) the opportunity of unbinding the wreath of triumph from his brows. The whole of the success has been claimed by Mr Buckland repeatedly, and he has not been careful to disavow the honour at all times in all places.”

As it happened, that voyage was the first and only successful shipment of brown trout to Tasmania. Most of the time and money was spent sending out salmon ova. 867,000 were taken in ten voyages between 1861 and 1879, though they never established themselves in the south seas. Of those original 200 trout hatchlings, 30 escaped into the River Plenty, and six pairs survived in the ponds to spawn. The great grandparents of every brown trout in every river in Tasmania, Australia and New Zealand.

They grew well too. Ten years on a trout of over 16 lbs was caught in the Tasmanian Derwent, one of 5 1/2 lb was caught in the River Clyde, and a Mr Weaver took six trout weighing 30 lbs. Writers got carried away, with a mixture of wishful thinking and apocaliptic vision: “Long after our home fish have attained so critical an experience as to know at a glance the maker of the fly offered them – they really seem to be coming to this – the unsophisticated denizens of Australia will rush at the grasshopper impaled on the bent pin of the rustic urchin. Long before the end of this century when a growing population shall have driven the salmon in disgust from most of our rivers, the sportsman will take his rod, and seek among the fern covered ranges of the Australian Alps, and the deep tarns and pools of Tasmania and New Zealand, the noble quarry which has found a home in the antopdes.”

Looked at from our end of history there might well have been a dose of arrogance behind the acclimatisation movement. You have to be sure of your place in the universe to look at a native species, and call it an “imposter”. And yet southern hemisphere trout fishing is big tourism industry now, and one which governments seem determined to protect. The Victorian spirit which we might question today has undoubtedly given us a magnificent legacy. It is ironic that those New Zealand brown trout came from two home-counties streams that have been wiped out by pollution: the Wey and The Wick. The Wick famous for its strain of beautiful, fast-growing trout. We might well end up shipping them back.


This page image that I just rushed covers some of South Africa's trout - I suspect the carp imports were first or were at least concurent. (Ron - if interested; I'll scan a couple more pages)
6f28837b.jpg



Click twice in top l/h corner to view in full size.


Ella.
 

Bill Cox

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Messages
1,369
Reaction score
0
Location
Plymouth
very interesting topic this although its drifting a bit its full of good stuff.:cool:
 
Top