The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

We do know that some English rivers which flow east - certainly the Thames - were once tributaries of the Rhine, and that is why barbel are "native" to the UK, - they were left behind when the landmass known to scientists as Doggerland ended up under the North Sea.
I wonder how the barbel managed to survive, and not - apparently - the wild carp? Are there wild carp in the Rhine?
One Victorian biologist, whose name eludes me at present, did think that carp are native to the UK... Not many folks would agree...
But it's at least possible that the crucian is/was native, if not the common carp....

I have a question. How long does an animal need to have been established in a place or it to be considered native? There is no time scale to the word, or is there?

Native or not, they are still one of my favourite fish.

I never said my theory was fool proof. I know that barbel are natural to the UK in the Thames and Gt Ouse - rivers flowing west to east and all that. But I would have thought that carp would have become an adopted name for somebody.

Regardless, they are now part of the furniture in the UK. We are an island and have a very fluid list of inhabitants through introduction and climate change. As an example, the pheasant originates from China but is a common sight in the countryside as they remain in areas long after the local shoot has left. Grey squirrels are interlopers but are a part of the everyday wildlife. I think we should embrace the carp as a local by now.

Dave Burr wrote:I never said my theory was fool proof. I know that barbel are natural to the UK in the Thames and Gt Ouse - rivers flowing west to east and all that. But I would have thought that carp would have become an adopted name for somebody.

There is a character in Coronation Street with the surname Carp. But sticking to evidence that is not derived from fiction there are 168 Carps recorded in the UK. (As of 2002)

http://www.taliesin-arlein.net/names/search.php

MaggotDrowner wrote:I have a question. How long does an animal need to have been established in a place or it to be considered native? There is no time scale to the word, or is there?

Native or not, they are still one of my favourite fish.

I believe that the EA work to a 150 year rule for fish.

Native must be a tricky one, I always thought pheasants, apart from the fancy ones, were native (you learn something new every day - thanks Dave). I like to think of crucians as native and commons have enough history here for me to want to embrace them as a proper British fish. I suppose we could ask did it originate here, but that probably rules out nearly every species.

Its all a bit arbitrary isn't it?
At one time threre were no fish and then the species of fish evolved.
If you go back far enough in time all the land masses were together. Not that long ago in geological terms the UK was joined to Europe.
Looking at a different species, Rhinos used to roam the land in south east England and at that time would therefore probably have been considered a native species.
Catfish and zander a have now both been in this country's waters for over a 100 years - so they might be now considered native, but most anglers would say not.
How could we know if a species of carp was in this country several thousand years ago or even much longer ago?

Pardon my higgorance good sirs, but I'd like to pose a question.....! in the great scheme of things....... Does it really matter....?

I'm not that fussed if they were stocked in Roman times or are native...
They are a beautiful elusive and shy biting fish that I love catching....

Blue Label, My favorite fish, along with Tench.

Will I get one from Knighton Wood pond on the 17th of June?

Gaz

I thought that Blackweir (The Lost Pond) was the Crucian Capital round these parts.... (it was in my day)