3Ponds,

Common Carp are under fished and definitely under harvested just about everywhere. There are lots of examples of detriment caused by standing weights that are too high. On the other hand, I have also seen data that suggested the other side where, for example, there was positive correlation between Common Carp and LMB standing weights. To be sure, I agree you had too much standing weight. But you have them and it may be very difficult to get rid of all of them.

I wouldn't be to concerned about the standing weight taking up niche for BG and LMB provided you keep them below your BOWs critical threshold. I think probably a good litmus test for that is the level of turbidity. They use a niche that the BG and LMB cannot access and in doing so they free nutrients that would otherwise not be available to the food chain for the BG and the LMB. So below that critical threshold they are probably increasing the carrying capacity for BG and LMB. Much like TP do but with regard to the sediments the Carp go much deeper to forage and have a more profound impact.

Finally, don't add any and don't release any you catch. I would have done the same as you ... that is ... I would have fished for them and took them out just like you did. I am just saying that especially after seeing the water's reaction to the removal ... that I would seek to harvest more when the turbidity becomes a problem again ... but probably not until then. A kind of don't fix what isn't now broke approach. If you still have carp, they are going to grow into the vacuum the removal created. If you caught them out, they will no longer be a management issue for you.

It is possible that you only just now broke below the threshold and that now the standing weight of carp is around 105 to 180 lbs/acre (assuming that 180 lbs/acre is the threshold). What I find interesting is how each one harvested increased clarity. So maybe now something along the line of 30 lbs each year may be sufficient. If your water is very clear, then there isn't much of bloom going on in the water column. Keep in mind, even slightly turbid water with more nutrients may produce more lettuce for the food chain than strictly clear water or water that grows macrophytes instead. You just don't want the turbidity to offset the benefit of additional nutrient cycling.

Plants are a challenge. There is benefit to having the right amount but too many and they have their own set of problems. There are some members who have extensive knowledge about chemical control and hopefully they'll drop in. If you inhibit the macrophytes and FA then phytoplankton will grow in their place.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers