Still water fish movement.

[rayner]

After reading a thread posted by steve2 regarding flooded rivers, I had an idea with regard to still water fish.
Obviously commercials from my point of view.
Commercial fish are thought of more pets than wild mostly by a few natural water anglers I know. With that thinking are commercial fish liberated from their prisons into more natural waters thought of by some as wild when they catch them? because of the water they are now in. Or is it the angler who makes them wild :wh
I know it's impossible to say a fish was once a commercial fish. I'm sure river anglers would spot a rogue fish like Ide, that's an immigrant, especially in rivers they fish on a regular basis.
This is not a fact, just an idea I had.
PS the line with imogies used is a joke.

 

[sam vimes]

Yes, you can spot an unusual and non-native fish in your local river. However, if fish grow legs and walk between stillwaters it can be similar, though being certain about the source isn't really possible. I have encountered situations where the source and the fact that they've been relocated is more obvious. Big carp, distinctive by their size and individual scale patterns are the most obvious. Some of the most infamous big carp have grown legs down the years. However, even less distinctive sizes and types of fish can be suspicious. Fish with battered mouths will invariably provoke the thought that they come from a commie if they suddenly turn up elsewhere. Likewise, when unusually large examples of species that are present in a stillwater turn up out of the blue, it is likely to leave people suspicious.

 

[theartist]

There's was a series of lakes near me that flooded a few years back now, it was only a couple of inches over the banks but lo and behold many of their prize carp had got into the local stream. Seeing 20 -30lb carp pottering about in a tiny stream that only held small dace and the odd trout was not as interesting as the club members desperately trying to catch them so that they could be returned.

As Samv said many more carp grow legs and get passports in the dead of night with no floods needed

Ornamentals like Ide, orfe and anything bright and shiny often get into other waters from domestic ponds, my local canal is full of such surprises. Back in the day at a park stretch of river we used to get lots of Crucians, at least we thought they were back then until my dad caught one with a fan tail, turned out they were goldfish that were won from the fair once a year with the old darts game. They would be dumped straight in the river and I'm guessing it wouldn't take them long to change colour with the amount of herons about

 

[rayner]

I liked both posts above, but.
Two interesting posts, both replies are a little off the mark to my question. My post was really, do anglers who fish natural waters consider commercial fish as wild animals when they are caught in a natural water.
Especially when some consider commercial fish to be more like pets than wild creatures.
I'm not saying that the comparison with commercial fish is wrong. The fish are stocked so heavily in a water that the owners have to supplement the feed when customers drop off in winter or lose fish. Effectively making commercial fish pets.
When rivers are stocked for one reason or another then the fish come from fish farms or still waters. Hand-reared fish, the same hand-reared fish that are loaded into still or commercial waters.
So is it the venue that makes them pets or the fact they are hand-reared or could it be the heavy stocking policy.

Whilst writing this I have come to the feeling that commercial fish are indeed pets, they are made pets by the reason they are hand-fed.

 

[sam vimes]

Fish are fish. They simply adjust to their environment as necessary. The behaviour of fish in a full on match type commie can be drastically different to those in a more natural environment. However, if commie fish are relocated to a natural water, provided they don't succumb to predators, they'll change their behaviour and adapt.

I don't believe commie fish to be pets, but their behaviour can be a long way removed from fish in a more natural environment.

 

[rich66]

Whilst writing this I have come to the feeling that commercial fish are indeed pets, they are made pets by the reason they are hand-fed.

Many forms of livestock are hand fed or machine fed, poultry in cages or barns for one. They are definitely not pets but livestock.

I think any fish unless in an aquarium are more or less wild to a lesser or greater degree. Even normal pond fish have a certain element of “wildness” about them.
Definitely commercial fish are possibly semi-wild most of the time they are doing their own thing eg. looking for food naturally as well as queuing up for a supplemented diet.
As we have all noted fish that escape the confines of a lake/pond soon revert to being completely wild.

If we take a literal definition of the word pet
“a domestic or tamed animal kept for companionship or pleasure.”
then even a commie fish would probably not fall under that definition as I’m sure they are not “tamed” although they are there for pleasure. A thin line I suppose ?

 

[rayner]

When in the past I heard mostly friends say commercial fish were nothing but pets I rolled my eyes.
Then thinking they are not far off the mark. The hand-fed remark that I made sort of got me thinking they were pets.
Posts above have swayed me back the other way. Now I have a conflict of ideas. I guess I'm confused. To be truthful I've confused myself.
Replies from both sam and rich, are of a similar thought as to when I rolled my eyes after hearing folk say the commie fish were pets.
Now I've returned to my original thought, folk who say they are pets are wrong.
It's difficult to find myself being undecided, I think I never used to be.

 

[108831]

Fish in commercials have to act differently than they would in natural waters,higher stocking densities create hungry fish,more anglers mean more food available,but fish are fish and do respond by wising up a little to certain methods....

 

[theartist]

When in the past I heard mostly friends say commercial fish were nothing but pets I rolled my eyes.
Then thinking they are not far off the mark. The hand-fed remark that I made sort of got me thinking they were pets.
Posts above have swayed me back the other way. Now I have a conflict of ideas. I guess I'm confused. To be truthful I've confused myself.
Replies from both sam and rich, are of a similar thought as to when I rolled my eyes after hearing folk say the commie fish were pets.
Now I've returned to my original thought, folk who say they are pets are wrong.
It's difficult to find myself being undecided, I think I never used to be.

I think you just gotta go fishing and enjoy it mate, if folk are calling them pets let them, Sometimes some opinions are just there to ignore especially if they are trying to put down what you enjoy

 

[rayner]

It really doesn't worry me what folk want to call anything, least of all fish. Web sites, in particular, have many opinions that differ. They still don't affect me, different opinions are the blood of sites like ours. I joined this forum for one particular reason. This forum is far more accepting of others opinions without turning into a free for all row.
I'm of the same opinion as whitty, fish in still waters in general, not only commercials soon become wary of methods that they see as danger. Being hooked a number of times with a certain method they learn to be wary.
It happens to waters all over, my particular venue is no different. Method feeder and bomb fishing can easily spook fish after a couple are caught.

 

[sam vimes]

I'm of the same opinion as whitty, fish in still waters in general, not only commercials soon become wary of methods that they see as danger. Being hooked a number of times with a certain method they learn to be wary.
It happens to waters all over, my particular venue is no different. Method feeder and bomb fishing can easily spook fish after a couple are caught.

Whilst that's true to an extent, it's also true that the greater the stocking density, or the lower the natural food levels, the less picky the resident fish can afford to be. It's this lack of pickiness in commercials that tends to put the more purist angler off, and turn them against, commercial fisheries. Some folks go too far in their condemnation, but there is a grain of truth in their "impossible to blank", "shooting fish in a barrel", "starving fish", "pet fish" and "too easy" accusations.

 

[rayner]

I can't condemn your logic sam. There are small anomalies in your analysis.
True a blank is hard to find but to get the best out of commercials is generally a little more tricky. Fish soon get to know the safest time to feed, they can be really easy at times, especially when the fish get a feeling it's safe to feed when anglers dump bait in the margin at pack away time.
Big weights can be achieved during the day when anglers who are not attuned to the vagaries of a venue can really struggle to have decent days fishing.
You only have to look at match weights versus pleasure anglers, who don't fish a water on a regular basis. Unless they get a little inside information they can struggle.
Fish in commercial waters can be easy or really tricky. There are occasions when they refuse to feed. The one mistake that anglers make who struggle is feeding, too much feed is a sure-fire way to spook fish. Totally different in the margin where large amounts of ground bait work well, so long as you let the fish settle before fishing for them.
Generally, I doubt those who condemn commercials have rarely if ever fished them, they are far from easy at times than is thought by some.

 

[sam vimes]

Rayner,
you have interpreted my words as some kind of denigration. All I've said is that there can be a grain of truth in some of those extreme views that some folks have. I don't have anything against commies, even if they aren't really my thing. I know that being consistently good on a commie is a skill in itself. It's just a world away from more natural venues. Please try to avoid picking a fight with someone that doesn't actually hold extremely negative views of commies. If you want an argument about commies, take it up with those that slate them and actually say some of the things I put in quotation marks. That person is not me.

 

[rayner]

Sorry sam, I've read my post a couple of times since reading your reply. I can't see any part that I deem argumentative, perhaps it's my lower education, I truly can't see anything.
I am a little bemused by you accusing me of picking a fight. That was certainly not my intention. I just gave my view, if others take a different stance that's their choice.
I was speaking in general. I must take care with what I post in future. I must be spending too much time alone.

 

[sam vimes]

Sorry sam, I've read my post a couple of times since reading your reply. I can't see any part that I deem argumentative, perhaps it's my lower education, I truly can't see anything.
I am a little bemused by you accusing me of picking a fight. That was certainly not my intention. I just gave my view, if others take a different stance that's their choice.
I was speaking in general. I must take care with what I post in future. I must be spending too much time alone.

The reason I put some of the text in quotation marks was because they are things other people say when they take swipes at commies. You've taken them to be things I'm saying and taken me to task over them. That would be fine if I was saying them, but I'm not. The people you should be disagreeing with are not me. The very worst I've said is that there's a grain of truth in some of the things I put in quotation marks.

I'm not averse to commies. Some would suggest that the place I fished yesterday is one. I've not had a pop at them or anyone that fishes them, yet you've responded to me as if I had.

 

[rayner]

I promise you. Any part of my post that you see has me admonishing you is not intentional.
I try not to disagree in print with anything anyone says on this forum.

 

[108831]

I promise you. Any part of my post that you see has me admonishing you is not intentional.
I try not to disagree in print with anything anyone says on this forum.

Ohhhh,go on,just a bit,lol....