|
The tide of public opinion turned against carp starting in the United States around late 1890’s (about 20 years after the first federal stockings) at the start of introductions Common Carp were a fish intended for the masses- yet carp remained popular in Europe to this day, why? Reputations are shaped by public views-- just as the Carps reputation was shaped by events 125 years ago in the USA, then why was the carp not held in distain in the UK or Europe?
It is a myth that Europeans do not have anything else to catch or have few places to fish, Northern Pike, many trout species (even our own rainbows and brookies)--Zander--"a walleye like fish"—even a mega Predator called the Wels Catfish, are available to fisherman from any walk of life, but Carp are still king by a wide margin with billions spent across the EU. Why?
Carp became a metaphor for all things poor—carp introductions was not meant as a federal institutionalization of fish farming per say but more like the Brits planting of breadfruit trees as a cheap food source for slave populations of the Caribbean. Or like the potato in Ireland.
These foods wealthy landowners considered foods that were low class.
The growing animosity that developed over time toward African Americans in the old south & immigrants in the North East around the time of carp introductions-is well documented. [Today we see a similar attitude toward immigrants} Naturally, any low income population subsists to some degree on hunted and gathered food sources to supplement more modern ways of working and earning wages to put food on the table. Unwanted items, became "poor mans fodder" chitins--fatback--possum--coon--and carp-- plentiful and cheap---any family that ate them, where looked at in the same light--back then you fished to catch and eat--and if your a middle class man and caught some carp the proper thing was to give them to “that poor family down the street” a still pervasive attitude even today.
Hunger was an issue in post civil war south and its boarder states--the complete dismantling of the old south plantation cotton economy/ and the poor food crop production from played out old cotton fields took many decades before the average southerner was living as well as they did pre-civil war--carp were an abundant food possibility--that could be harvested with no more than a trot line an a bit of cotton seed cake--- a rational way to catch carp in southern rivers--many an African American family ate carp--and why not?- considering how little cost was involved and the poundage of quality protein that would feed the large families at that time.
Many lakes & streams were very polluted and distressed, rivers turned into sewers from un-treated dumping & less hardy bass and crappies were unable to compete the way carp and other fish like gar can in contaminated waters because of the ability to take oxygen from the surface in low in oxygen environments. soon some waters only had carp and gar so called "rough fish"
In the USA stocking Carp was intended to supplement traditional food fishes as a sustainable food source in many lakes & streams to augment fish stocks. At the time of the first carp stockings, many states did not like the idea of the federal government telling them what to do—remember the political landscape at the time...confederate civil war veterans, most who would have been in their late 30’s to early 50’s at the time of the 1st carp stockings, Many with resentments of reconstruction still fresh in locals minds, many viewed the carp as carpet bagger in the old south or immigrants fish in the north east with all the distain that comes with associated politics. In the northeast a flood of immigration from Eastern Europe where carp had been part of there diet for centuries. In many ways public opinion on immigration today mirror those at the turn of the century.
Common carp quickly became considered a "poor mans fish" that’s was given to the states as a means to feed the poor minorities and immigrants. That along with the ability of the carp to dominate or take over distressed aquatic environments, was an uncomfortable metaphor for some anglers EXAMPLES northern business folk swooping down on the south to take advantage of new business opportunities (carpet baggers) or African Americans would displace whites living in some areas (the phenomenon is called white flight) even the huge wave of emigrants entering the northeast. it’s not surprising how the view of carp happened the way that it did
The Brown Trout also once had a negative public reputation but seemed to weather the negativity, were as the common carp elsewhere did not--possibly because the numbers of browns where not as wide spread as carp due to water temp requirements--and as trout were not a major food source for thosehe tide of public opinion turned against carp starting in the United States around late 1890’s (about 20 years after the first federal stockings) at the start of introductions Common Carp were a fish intended for the masses- yet carp remained popular in Europe to this day, why? Reputations are shaped by public views-- just as the Carps reputation was shaped by events 125 years ago in the USA, then why was the carp not held in distain in the UK or Europe?
It is a myth that Europeans do not have anything else to catch or have few places to fish, Northern Pike, many trout species (even our own rainbows and brookies)--Zander--"a walleye like fish"—even a mega Predator called the Wels Catfish, are available to fisherman from any walk of life, but Carp are still king by a wide margin with billions spent across the EU. Why?
Carp became a metaphor for all things poor—carp introductions was not meant as a federal institutionalization of fish farming per say but more like the Brits planting of breadfruit trees as a cheap food source for slave populations of the Caribbean. Or like the potato in Ireland.
These foods wealthy landowners considered foods that were low class.
The growing animosity that developed over time toward African Americans in the old south & immigrants in the North East around the time of carp introductions-is well documented. [Today we see a similar attitude toward immigrants} Naturally, any low income population subsists to some degree on hunted and gathered food sources to supplement more modern ways of working and earning wages to put food on the table. Unwanted items, became "poor mans fodder" chitins--fatback--possum--coon--and carp-- plentiful and cheap---any family that ate them, where looked at in the same light--back then you fished to catch and eat--and if your a middle class man and caught some carp the proper thing was to give them to “that poor family down the street” a still pervasive attitude even today.
Hunger was an issue in post civil war south and its boarder states--the complete dismantling of the old south plantation cotton economy/ and the poor food crop production from played out old cotton fields took many decades before the average southerner was living as well as they did pre-civil war--carp were an abundant food possibility--that could be harvested with no more than a trot line an a bit of cotton seed cake--- a rational way to catch carp in southern rivers--many an African American family ate carp--and why not?- considering how little cost was involved and the poundage of quality protein that would feed the large families at that time.
Many lakes & streams were very polluted and distressed, rivers turned into sewers from un-treated dumping & less hardy bass and crappies were unable to compete the way carp and other fish like gar can in contaminated waters because of the ability to take oxygen from the surface in low in oxygen environments. soon some waters only had carp and gar so called "rough fish"
In the USA stocking Carp was intended to supplement traditional food fishes as a sustainable food source in many lakes & streams to augment fish stocks. At the time of the first carp stockings, many states did not like the idea of the federal government telling them what to do—remember the political landscape at the time...confederate civil war veterans, most who would have been in their late 30’s to early 50’s at the time of the 1st carp stockings, Many with resentments of reconstruction still fresh in locals minds, many viewed the carp as carpet bagger in the old south or immigrants fish in the north east with all the distain that comes with associated politics. In the northeast a flood of immigration from Eastern Europe where carp had been part of there diet for centuries. In many ways public opinion on immigration today mirror those at the turn of the century.
Common carp quickly became considered a "poor mans fish" that’s was given to the states as a means to feed the poor minorities and immigrants. That along with the ability of the carp to dominate or take over distressed aquatic environments, was an uncomfortable metaphor for some anglers EXAMPLES northern business folk swooping down on the south to take advantage of new business opportunities (carpet baggers) or African Americans would displace whites living in some areas (the phenomenon is called white flight) even the huge wave of emigrants entering the northeast. it’s not surprising how the view of carp happened the way that it did
The Brown Trout also once had a negative public reputation but seemed to weather the negativity, were as the common carp elsewhere did not--possibly because the numbers of browns where not as wide spread as carp due to water temp requirements--and as trout were not a major food source for those who subsisted to some degree on wild caught foods in areas where they where stocked, primarily African Americans and eastern European or poor whites -- ---Even today trout fishing in most areas of the USA if not the world are demographically upscale " meaning trout fisherman on the average have a higher income level " just look at an Orvis catalog and you can see what I mean--which is one reason browns never sank to the level of distain as the carp. A proper game fish for wealthy Victorians was trout and the early rise of sport fishing was about the fly and the fish that could be caught on a fly. Then later-in the south’s warm waters--the bass--which was the southern equivalent –in fact southern old timers called largemouth bass "green trout" and the fish were much less available and rarer than carp at that time, remember this is before many large man made lakes that where built after 1930. Into the boom years of lake building 1950---1975 where almost billion surface acres of new largemouth and also carp habitat where constructed which coincided with the exploding sport fishing movement aided by the advent of spinning reels with monofilament fishing line. Up until post WW2 early sport fishing gear was generally expencive.
in closing only now when anglers in the USA fish more for the fight than for food, are we re thinking our old misconceptions
|
Thank you. 
