It has come to my attention that our state record has been broken. I claim BS. A 46 pound carp was taken from Lake Quinsigamond by a resident of Shrewsbury...via crossbow. This is not in my mind fishing and should not count as any fishing records. I also understand that it is not legal to use a crossbow unless you are impaired and disabled to the point of not being able to fire a normal bow...which the man hefting a 46 pound fish does not appear to be. I hope to work with various groups and raise awareness and start petitions toward seeing carp as a gamefish in order to prevent this kind of mockery in the future.
I personally cannot stand or condone the act of bow fishing for any species of fish, especially carp in which the fish is typically wasted and/or simply tossed back into the river/lake dead. While the carp is not as revered here as it is in Europe, it has gained quite a bit of popularity with anglers as a sportfish. Even the sacred art of fly fishing has started to see the sport in these great fish. There is no need to treat them as trash fish and disrespect them any more then any other species. Our government brought them here and stocked them just as they do with Large mouth Bass, Trout, Northern Pike, Muskie among other sportfish that are not native to our state. The double standard needs to end and I call on people to help end the ignorance and idiocy surrounding carp.
The other part of the article that bothers me is the "must bring in the record fish whole"...There is absolutely no reason to kill a record fish, of any species simply to collect a record. In todays day and age we can verify anything about the fish without having to kill it. Catch and release is a viable option and anglers who practice as such should not be punished for not wanting to waste a record bass, pike, carp etc...Even our own anglers here who bagged a 9.4 lb larry last year let it swim away out of respect for a great fish and a hell of an achievement, are we still in the mind set of if it was 20lb's he should have been forced to kill it?
I am rambling and ranting a bit now but I am pissed to be honest. This as a record spits on any angler worth his salt. This record is the rubbish and the man who shot a 40lb fish from 5 feet with a high powered weapon while shining a large light in its eyes deserves no respect, as there is no skill in this feat..point click and you have a record.....especially not compared to actual fishermen who actually fish.
Read the article below...
http://environment.blog.state.ma.us/blog/2012/05/monster-carp-breaks-state-record.html
I personally cannot stand or condone the act of bow fishing for any species of fish, especially carp in which the fish is typically wasted and/or simply tossed back into the river/lake dead. While the carp is not as revered here as it is in Europe, it has gained quite a bit of popularity with anglers as a sportfish. Even the sacred art of fly fishing has started to see the sport in these great fish. There is no need to treat them as trash fish and disrespect them any more then any other species. Our government brought them here and stocked them just as they do with Large mouth Bass, Trout, Northern Pike, Muskie among other sportfish that are not native to our state. The double standard needs to end and I call on people to help end the ignorance and idiocy surrounding carp.
The other part of the article that bothers me is the "must bring in the record fish whole"...There is absolutely no reason to kill a record fish, of any species simply to collect a record. In todays day and age we can verify anything about the fish without having to kill it. Catch and release is a viable option and anglers who practice as such should not be punished for not wanting to waste a record bass, pike, carp etc...Even our own anglers here who bagged a 9.4 lb larry last year let it swim away out of respect for a great fish and a hell of an achievement, are we still in the mind set of if it was 20lb's he should have been forced to kill it?
I am rambling and ranting a bit now but I am pissed to be honest. This as a record spits on any angler worth his salt. This record is the rubbish and the man who shot a 40lb fish from 5 feet with a high powered weapon while shining a large light in its eyes deserves no respect, as there is no skill in this feat..point click and you have a record.....especially not compared to actual fishermen who actually fish.
Read the article below...
http://environment.blog.state.ma.us/blog/2012/05/monster-carp-breaks-state-record.html
I have been talking with people and I really do hope to start making a change in the classification of carp. There is no reason in my mind that the cyprinus carpio cannot be classified as a sport fish.
I also want to work with people to change the "kill to receive credit" system as well. If anyone has any connections or ideas please hit me up. I will be researching petitions, laws, science etc over the next few to try and formulate some sort of plan.
I don't want to simply complain..I want to change the system.
I also want to work with people to change the "kill to receive credit" system as well. If anyone has any connections or ideas please hit me up. I will be researching petitions, laws, science etc over the next few to try and formulate some sort of plan.
I don't want to simply complain..I want to change the system.
The other part of the article that bothers me is the "must bring in the record fish whole"...There is absolutely no reason to kill a record fish, of any species simply to collect a record. In todays day and age we can verify anything about the fish without having to kill it. Catch and release is a viable option and anglers who practice as such should not be punished for not wanting to waste a record bass, pike, carp etc...Even our own anglers here who bagged a 9.4 lb larry last year let it swim away out of respect for a great fish and a hell of an achievement, are we still in the mind set of if it was 20lb's he should have been forced to kill it?
I completely agree with you Eric. There is a huge difference between fishing with a rod & reel and bow and arrow. And a crossbow for that matter.
First off Bow fishing is NOT fishing. It is Hunting. That is what bows and arrows were invented for, HUNTING NOT FISHING. If they want to add his name to the hunting records fine, but do not call it a fishing record. Doing that is like comparing apples and oranges.
Secondly you can't practice catch and release when bow fishing. It's kind of tough to release a fish after it's been shot with an arrow.
When fishing, you are trying to outsmart the fish. You have to outsmart it and make it think that your lure, baited hook, fly or whatever is it's natural food. It's the fishes decision whether or not it eats the anglers offerings. If the fish bites then the angler has to fight the fish and land it. If it does not bite then the angler has to keep fishing and try to outsmart the next fish. Getting the bite when fishing is what it is all about. If the fish don't bite, you don't catch any fish.
When crossbow fishing you spot a fish, at night, probably sleeping, and pull the trigger. A five year old could do that after practicing with a red rider BB gun for a few days.
If the State of Massachusetts is going to allow a fish shot with a crossbow to be a new state fishing record then why not allow saltwater fish that have been harpooned? Seems pretty damn hypocritical to me? I know plenty of bluefin tuna that have been harpooned, some as recent as last year, that would shatter the states bluefin tuna record. And I'll add that harpooning a giant bluefin tuna takes a hell of a lot more skill than aiming and pulling a trigger on a crossbow. You are 25' out from the bow of the boat, on a pulpit, 15' above the water and HAND throwing a 15' harpoon.
I also wanted to address the crossbow and the legalities. Getting a crossbow permit is about as easy as going to the nurse back in high school and faking sick so you could miss a class. She would give you a doctors note and you were all set. Yeah it's about that easy. You can use them but you need to present the state with a note explaining why you can't use a regular bow, a glorified doctors note. My uncle has his crossbow permit. He has gotten Lyme's Disease multiple times and according to his doctor's note can't draw back a normal compound bow. I say B.S. but it is what is.
I also wanted to caution about transporting LIVE fish for weigh-ins and such. I have heard of this happening A LOT with a few State pin and record sized fish lately. BE CAREFUL DOING IT and KNOW THAT YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW WHEN YOU DO IT. An EPO is not going to care that you are going to return it to the same lake after weighing it. To him, you are transporting LIVE fish and it is illegal to do so in MA without the proper permits.
See last sentence.
MA FISHING PROHIBITIONS
Explosives
Jug, toggle or trot line fishing.
Lead Sinkers, Lead Weights, and Lead Jigs Weighing Less Than an Ounce. Any sinker or weight made from lead that weighs less than 1 ounce, and any lead jig (meaning any lead-weighted hook) that weighs less than 1 ounce, is prohibited for use in all inland waters of the Commonwealth. The term lead sinker shall not include any other sinkers, weights, fishing lures or fishing tackle including, but not limited to, artificial lures, hooks, weighted flies, and lead-core or other weighted fishing lines.
More than two hooks for fishing or more than five hooks when ice fishing. A hook is defined as an angling device attached to a fishing line which is designed to take one fish at a time but is not limited to devices commonly called spinners, spoons, bait harnesses, lead head jigs, or plugs.
Possession of: Sturgeon (all species), American Brook Lamprey, Atlantic (sea-run) Salmon, Bridle Shiner, Burbot, Eastern Silvery Minnow, Lake Chub, Longnose Sucker, and Northern Redbelly Dace is illegal! If caught, release immediately. This means remove hook or cut line and return fish to water immediately—do not pose for photographs, place on a stringer, hold in a net, or delay in any way the immediate return and release of the fish to the water.
Poisons
Releasing fish or spawn into inland waters, except by permit.
Rubbish in inland waters.
Sale of freshwater fish without a permit.
Snagging
Transporting live fish (except bait for personal use) without a permit.
There's a LOT of info being spread around to indicate carp being introduced to "control growth" have actually destroyed habitat for more than a few species of native fish in a few local ponds; and I've seen a dramatic decline in anything but carp - the local ponds are riddled with nothing but carp and it seems like the grass beds have all by disappeared with their arrival. I'm not going to get a cross-bow and kill them, that's plain stupid, but please help me understand why I shouldn't believe the info and be concerned about the result they indicate is due to the carp? Thanks in advance - and peace I'm just looking for supporting/refuting data, not emotion!
The Cyprinus Carpio was not brought here to control weeds.
It is commonly accepted that our relationship with carp began around 4,000 years ago when the Chinese initially discovered Carp in their Native Yellow River where they were heading upstream to spawn. The Chinese admired the carp's strength and determination so much they began to adopt them as a symbol for strength and nobility. They also began to raise carp for food and ornamentation, which is still practiced today. The Japanese were also heavily influenced by this and created carp kites and flags to show strength for their warrior class.
The original range of carp is unknown, other then they were native to Asia specifically the watersheds of the Black, Caspian, and Aral seas. Debate continues as to whether carp were native to western Europe, one side says there is no record to support that they were until the middle ages, the other side says that if they were in the Black sea they could have gone as far as Germany. Records show carp being introduced to royal ponds of Austrian nobility as early as 1227, there are records, however, of carp being brought to Greece and Italy a millennium before during the Roman empire. European monks told stories of Carp being raised in monasteries during the middle ages.
What is accepted by most is that the spread of carp really took off during the middle ages. Carp were brought to England around 1496 and were kept and fattened on milk and bread to be food for royalty. In fact King Henry XIII offered a reward to those who brought " carpes to the king" when some escaped into waterways. This is further supported by a passage in THE COMPLEAT ANGLER by Izaak Walton which stated that [carp] "hath not been long in England."
Over time the standard of living for most improved and so did the availability of carp. By 1876 Dr. Spencer F. Baird of the Smithsonian Institute and head of the newly formed United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries was receiving roughly 2,000 letters a year from immigrants who had grown accustomed to eating carp and found none here in the US. These requests came at a good time, considering the states had been heavily harvesting the native stocks of fish which were dwindling fast. Add to this the clear-cutting of lumber, draining of many wetlands, and of course the waste from many newly formed towns and mills along most waterways, the native fish were disappearing at an alarming rate.
In 1871, President Grant created a fish commission to oversee the countries fisheries. The first task it had was to find a way to replenish fish stocks. Baird wrote to Europe and received reports on many fish, most notably the carp. The mere fact that as a cash crop in Europe and Asia it rivaled grain and livestock in sales and protein. In 1874 Baird wrote a report stating the common carp would survive better then most since it ate only vegetation, which while only partially correct was enough to warrant more research. In 1876 a second report from Baird stated the carp had good table quality, rapid growth, adaptability, and harmlessness to other fish. Based on Baird's reports Congress appropriated funds to import carp from Germany.
In 1877 the commission imported 345 carp to ponds in Baltimore, the next year some of these fish were moved to Washington, D.C. where they produced 6,000 fingerlings which were shipped to 273 applicants in 24 states.
This is the official report. However, it is accepted by most historians that Julius A. Poppe from Sonoma Ca, tired of waiting for the government and in 1872 had gone to a commercial operation in Reinfeld, Germany to purchase 83 carp. He had returned by August of that year with only 5 surviving carp, which were hearty and strong. He placed the handful of 6 inch fish in a pond at his house and by the following May they had grown to 16 inches and produced over 3,000 young. As early as 1876 Poppe had a thriving carp fishery, of which he wrote to many states commissions to follow suit stating "Every fish I can possibly send to market here sells readily for one dollar a pound."
By 1883 the first reports had come in of carp being caught by hook and line in the Mississippi river, which can only be attributed to accidental release since carp were only destined at this time to prominent citizens. Dr S.P. Bartlett of Quincy Illinois replied when asked if the carp had been planted intentionally in the river with "As we value Carp to highly to experiment with them by putting them in the river, those taken must have escaped from live boxes or from ponds. It never the less demonstrates the practicality of eventually stocking our streams with this wonderful fish."
Within 2 years that is just what happened as most state commissions began actively stocking riverways and streams with Carp. By 1894 over 453,000 pounds of carp were netted in the upper Mississippi River alone. At first this was a good thing and restaurants in New York City were selling Carp in Rhine Wine Sauce, a dish which sold for more then halibut or kingfish.
Unfortunately the appeal of carp did not last long. Many people began to realize that the european carp they had loved did not taste so good now that it was grown here in America. One reason for this is that the Austrian carp farms were very particular about their carp with ponds that covered over 20,000 acres and fish that were cared for and bred for taste much like cattle or hogs. American farms on the other hand often tried to turn a quick buck and would place carp in anything that held water. These shallow ponds with stagnant muddy water produced inferior and muddy tasting fish. By the mid 1890's most states had stopped stocking carp and most farmers had moved on to more lucrative ventures. Seeing as carp were so plentiful now they sold for a mere 3-4 cents per pound.
This is also when the view of carp went downhill. People began to notice the population of carp rise while native fish like bass and sauger continued to decline. There is an old saying that two men stood on a clear-cut hillside with a pail of garbage in each hand , they looked down on the rivers and saw carp swirling happily in the mess humans had created and made a connection, albiet the wrong one, that carp were to blame for the decline of the waterways.
This claim is not totally false as carp can muddy waters and uproot vegatation searching for food. They have dominated some fisheries, crowding out bluegills and bass and increasing water turbidity to the point some sight feeding fish like walleye cannot find food. Yet these instances are relatively uncommon. Carp are found in almost every watershed in America and most still have plenty of good fishing. In most areas carp find a balance with other species. Most fisheries scientists that have studied carp agree that human impact and land use have hurt game fish much more then carp ever could. Carp are simply able to survive in much more polluted waters then other fish. ---Taken from the book Fishing for Buffalo
There are plenty of rumors and misinformation about carp. This is further continued by the media focusing on various species related to the Cyprinus Carpio but that have been brought here either unintentionally or illegally like the Grass Carp and Big Head carp which can have a much larger impact on the environment yet still slight when compared to many other impairments to our waterways.
This is fact and not emotion. I don't fault you for asking so please don't feel the need to apologize for stating your opinion or questioning why you should care etc. The fact is that there is not a single valid reason why fishing with a bow/crossbow for one species should be allowed and not another when all species swimming in our waters offer the same great sport and food value. Compounding this is the fact that 90% of bow "fishers" simply toss their dead fish along the banks or back into the waterways after shooting them. Which leads to even more water issues. I have also seen bow "fishers" firing bows from the tow path for instance at riverbend farm..while joggers passed them within 2 feet. I fail to see how this sort of activity should be allowed in such close range of people and buildings when hunting is not allowed.
I at least respect hunters because they plan to eat their kill. Bow "fishers" are simply looking to kill a fish for no reason other then inborn ignorance and hide it behind the "sport" of fishing.
All this being said. I know we will never stop bow fishing. I don't condone nor support the "sport" but it is here.
My biggest problems with it is that when I had issues with people in the past, firing near buildings, next to pedestrians etc and called the EP, I was informed that most officers did not know how to address the situation as it is such a grey area. Is it hunting or fishing, is it legal to fire a bow for fishing where it wouldn't be for hunting etc etc...
My thought process over the last few days while reading various articles both about carp, history, ecology, invasive status and reason plus bow hunting in this and other states etc. Is that I want to compromise our two groups and come to a solution that protects the public and the species for us anglers..as well as the integrity of our records. Below are my suggestions:
1. That being said I would like to see the bow record be different then the rod record. I see no reason why these two accomplishments if you will, should be equal to each other and having a category for both would be no significant hinderance to anyone.
2. I would like the records for fishing in general to be able to encompass catch and release. Other states do this and have no issues. A friend mentioned a method used in England where volunteers put their names on a list by region who can verify and witness a catch. This way if you get a record you call dispatch, they call a witness and send them out to your area. I myself and I know others who would be more then willing to do this. This is one suggestion but there are ways to do it, safely and legally. At this point in time it is simply unfair and unreasonable to ask that the fish be killed in order to claim a record.
3. To protect the trophy class fish I would propose a bag limit of 1 fish over 30 inches per day. Any number of fish under 30 inches can be taken per day, but this would help stem the tide of bow fishermen as well as catch and eat anglers from taking large numbers of big fish, but still allowing for the culling and or the taking for food source of the smaller ones.
4. To further protect the fish when vulnerable, I would propose a closed season on bow hunting carp during their spawn, typically May and June. I have watched bow hunters cruise the shallows while hundreds of fish spawned and just shot dozens of them and kicked them back into the water in a matter of hours. If you are doing it for the sport I think you can agree that hunting and shooting them would be far better then simply shooting fish in a barrel. This measure helps ensure that we can maintain a good fishery, while protecting this species when it is most vulnerable.
5. I want to make it clear that Bows and crossbows for fishing must follow the same rules as bows and crossbows for hunting. Which would be as follows under Chapter 131 section 58 ; A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.
6. There should be stricter Wanton Waste Regulations. Strict fines and/or confiscation of equipment should be imposed for taking more then the proposed bag limit. The same fines and/or confiscation of equipment should be applied to improper disposal of fish you have shot. Dead, or soon to be dead fish should be kept toward the bag limit and never thrown back into the water, onto the banks, etc. This applies also to anglers who believe they should throw undesirable fish into the woods instead of releasing them. To help with this perhaps the wildlife offices could start a parks program to use discarded fish as fertilizer in parks. They could create "drop off" composte piles for bow hunter who enjoy the shoot but want nothing to do with the fish. I am not a fan of killing them but at least this gives an option to get stop the completely wasted kills I see day to day.
Anyway these are my thoughts so far, curious what some of you guys think.
My biggest problems with it is that when I had issues with people in the past, firing near buildings, next to pedestrians etc and called the EP, I was informed that most officers did not know how to address the situation as it is such a grey area. Is it hunting or fishing, is it legal to fire a bow for fishing where it wouldn't be for hunting etc etc...
My thought process over the last few days while reading various articles both about carp, history, ecology, invasive status and reason plus bow hunting in this and other states etc. Is that I want to compromise our two groups and come to a solution that protects the public and the species for us anglers..as well as the integrity of our records. Below are my suggestions:
1. That being said I would like to see the bow record be different then the rod record. I see no reason why these two accomplishments if you will, should be equal to each other and having a category for both would be no significant hinderance to anyone.
2. I would like the records for fishing in general to be able to encompass catch and release. Other states do this and have no issues. A friend mentioned a method used in England where volunteers put their names on a list by region who can verify and witness a catch. This way if you get a record you call dispatch, they call a witness and send them out to your area. I myself and I know others who would be more then willing to do this. This is one suggestion but there are ways to do it, safely and legally. At this point in time it is simply unfair and unreasonable to ask that the fish be killed in order to claim a record.
3. To protect the trophy class fish I would propose a bag limit of 1 fish over 30 inches per day. Any number of fish under 30 inches can be taken per day, but this would help stem the tide of bow fishermen as well as catch and eat anglers from taking large numbers of big fish, but still allowing for the culling and or the taking for food source of the smaller ones.
4. To further protect the fish when vulnerable, I would propose a closed season on bow hunting carp during their spawn, typically May and June. I have watched bow hunters cruise the shallows while hundreds of fish spawned and just shot dozens of them and kicked them back into the water in a matter of hours. If you are doing it for the sport I think you can agree that hunting and shooting them would be far better then simply shooting fish in a barrel. This measure helps ensure that we can maintain a good fishery, while protecting this species when it is most vulnerable.
5. I want to make it clear that Bows and crossbows for fishing must follow the same rules as bows and crossbows for hunting. Which would be as follows under Chapter 131 section 58 ; A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.
6. There should be stricter Wanton Waste Regulations. Strict fines and/or confiscation of equipment should be imposed for taking more then the proposed bag limit. The same fines and/or confiscation of equipment should be applied to improper disposal of fish you have shot. Dead, or soon to be dead fish should be kept toward the bag limit and never thrown back into the water, onto the banks, etc. This applies also to anglers who believe they should throw undesirable fish into the woods instead of releasing them. To help with this perhaps the wildlife offices could start a parks program to use discarded fish as fertilizer in parks. They could create "drop off" composte piles for bow hunter who enjoy the shoot but want nothing to do with the fish. I am not a fan of killing them but at least this gives an option to get stop the completely wasted kills I see day to day.
Anyway these are my thoughts so far, curious what some of you guys think.
That is gonna be the interesting part. I need to talk with some folks, get a solid plan hammered out and of course make it professional looking Plus get some back up info etc.
I know you can do petitions, which may be a start to gauge and use as a show of support..but from my understanding many of the regs changes happen via public forum and various meetings. It isn't gonna be a quick thing of course but everything has to start somewhere right?
You can be sure that when the time comes I'll be sure to let everyone know just what I need
I know you can do petitions, which may be a start to gauge and use as a show of support..but from my understanding many of the regs changes happen via public forum and various meetings. It isn't gonna be a quick thing of course but everything has to start somewhere right?
You can be sure that when the time comes I'll be sure to let everyone know just what I need