Large gravel pit, loathsome sailing club, biblically stupid commodore, dye black three times a year, visibility two feet.
I'd appreciate the views of those of you have experience of similar circumstances or people with an understanding of temperature, sunlight and water.
I'm guessing the first application in March will have little effect on a population of carp living in cold water but as the sun gets warmer and the ecology of the water begins to increase in the very shallow water effected by the weak early sunshine, the carp will themselves come right on close or frequent the most shallow points of the bars. Any views on early season activity?
I'd appreciate the views of those of you have experience of similar circumstances or people with an understanding of temperature, sunlight and water.
I'm guessing the first application in March will have little effect on a population of carp living in cold water but as the sun gets warmer and the ecology of the water begins to increase in the very shallow water effected by the weak early sunshine, the carp will themselves come right on close or frequent the most shallow points of the bars. Any views on early season activity?
In reply to Post #1
Plenty of fisheries use either blue or the black dye (lake shadow) to suppress weed and algea.
Overall water temperatures will be higher but fishery owners that use it say that there's no detrimental effect on the fishing.
Plenty of fisheries use either blue or the black dye (lake shadow) to suppress weed and algea.
Overall water temperatures will be higher but fishery owners that use it say that there's no detrimental effect on the fishing.
In reply to Post #1
Blue dye used on my lakes. Looks odd first time you see it but it didn't affect the fishing.
Blue dye used on my lakes. Looks odd first time you see it but it didn't affect the fishing.
In reply to Post #2
I have absolutely no doubt that it's possible to increase catches of carp by restricting sunlight and thereby massivly reducing ecological conditions. Those fish are reliant on anglers bait. I'm often still surprised by how human beings think up new and imaginative ways of destroying the natural environment and how the regulator (very small 'r') let's them.
That point aside, dye, spring, carp?
I have absolutely no doubt that it's possible to increase catches of carp by restricting sunlight and thereby massivly reducing ecological conditions. Those fish are reliant on anglers bait. I'm often still surprised by how human beings think up new and imaginative ways of destroying the natural environment and how the regulator (very small 'r') let's them.
That point aside, dye, spring, carp?
In reply to Post #4
The lakes weren't dyed to increase catches, but to reduce weed growth. I saw no evidence the 'natural environment' was destroyed & indeed the club would not do anything that might affect the carp or the lake.
The lakes weren't dyed to increase catches, but to reduce weed growth. I saw no evidence the 'natural environment' was destroyed & indeed the club would not do anything that might affect the carp or the lake.
In reply to Post #4
What on earth are you talking about
What on earth are you talking about
In reply to Post #4
None of the owners have reported dyes causing reduced numbers of naturals or general damage to the environment.
I'm sure they wouldn't use it if they believed it was doing harm.
I honestly believe that if you're unhappy about the way they're running the water you should vote with your feet and go elsewhere.
None of the owners have reported dyes causing reduced numbers of naturals or general damage to the environment.
I'm sure they wouldn't use it if they believed it was doing harm.
I honestly believe that if you're unhappy about the way they're running the water you should vote with your feet and go elsewhere.
In reply to Post #5
You know that big round hot thing in the sky? It's pretty important. How on earth you can think eliminating every macrophyte except those that get themselves free of the water is not wide scale environmental destruction is well beyond me. I'm not equipped to cope with such stupidity. Where on earth do you think the non-benthic macroinvertibrates live? I didn't see a single hirundine over the water all of last season.
I'm guessing I'm not going to get the information I'm looking for.
You know that big round hot thing in the sky? It's pretty important. How on earth you can think eliminating every macrophyte except those that get themselves free of the water is not wide scale environmental destruction is well beyond me. I'm not equipped to cope with such stupidity. Where on earth do you think the non-benthic macroinvertibrates live? I didn't see a single hirundine over the water all of last season.
I'm guessing I'm not going to get the information I'm looking for.
In reply to Post #6
I think the point is that fishing and sensible management of the environment are not the same thing. Using dye will greatly reduce the number of organisms that rely on photosynthesis, hence a lot less weed and algae. Unfortunately weed, algae and the micro organisms that are associated with them are the first fundamental building blocks in the aquatic food chain. Quite literally everything else is utterly reliant on them.
Reducing or eradicating them will greatly reduce the health and productivity of the natural environment.
As carp are happy to survive and thrive on articial food( anglers bait and feed) the carp fishing may well improve as the fish will be more and more reliant on it as there are fewer and fewer Naturals. As the fishing improves, more anglers, more bait, bigger fish and the destructive cycle continues.
It is a sad fact that carp, carp angling and the profiteeringmodern management of carp fisheries judged solely on easy fishing, convenience, numbers and weights have caused and continue to cause massive damage to our native species and habitats.
There is room for carp fishing but a respect for a healthy natural environment comes first.
I think the point is that fishing and sensible management of the environment are not the same thing. Using dye will greatly reduce the number of organisms that rely on photosynthesis, hence a lot less weed and algae. Unfortunately weed, algae and the micro organisms that are associated with them are the first fundamental building blocks in the aquatic food chain. Quite literally everything else is utterly reliant on them.
Reducing or eradicating them will greatly reduce the health and productivity of the natural environment.
As carp are happy to survive and thrive on articial food( anglers bait and feed) the carp fishing may well improve as the fish will be more and more reliant on it as there are fewer and fewer Naturals. As the fishing improves, more anglers, more bait, bigger fish and the destructive cycle continues.
It is a sad fact that carp, carp angling and the profiteeringmodern management of carp fisheries judged solely on easy fishing, convenience, numbers and weights have caused and continue to cause massive damage to our native species and habitats.
There is room for carp fishing but a respect for a healthy natural environment comes first.
In reply to Post #8
If Dosed properly not everything dies. There are numerous examples of match waters double dosing or even triple and pretty quickly the fish die as they turned it in to a sterile environment.
If dosed properly the weed can still grow, it is just suppressed. I'm assuming the sailing lot only need 3/4ft of clear water to sail happily in. Loads of waters dye and the shallows still have weed growing fine.
If Dosed properly not everything dies. There are numerous examples of match waters double dosing or even triple and pretty quickly the fish die as they turned it in to a sterile environment.
If dosed properly the weed can still grow, it is just suppressed. I'm assuming the sailing lot only need 3/4ft of clear water to sail happily in. Loads of waters dye and the shallows still have weed growing fine.
no need to get so melodramatic 
the Dye is not permanent its widely used especially in Europe I know of one lake that the owner has a constant drip feed going in the lake and the fish are in the 80 plus range and still growing
the Dye is not permanent its widely used especially in Europe I know of one lake that the owner has a constant drip feed going in the lake and the fish are in the 80 plus range and still growing
In reply to Post #10
The weed can survive and grow in the shallow margins because the light can still penetrate. In any dyed lake depending on type and dosage there will be a depth below which the weed will not grow.
If you dye a lake you are greatly reducing the production of natural food, daylight oxygen levels and the overall health of the environment. It is unavoidable. The fact that an alien species fed large amounts of highly nutritious food survive and thrive doesn't mean that serious environmental damage isn't being done
Sunlight is life, reduce it or cut it off and damage is inevitable.
The weed can survive and grow in the shallow margins because the light can still penetrate. In any dyed lake depending on type and dosage there will be a depth below which the weed will not grow.
If you dye a lake you are greatly reducing the production of natural food, daylight oxygen levels and the overall health of the environment. It is unavoidable. The fact that an alien species fed large amounts of highly nutritious food survive and thrive doesn't mean that serious environmental damage isn't being done
Sunlight is life, reduce it or cut it off and damage is inevitable.
In reply to Post #11
So the carp are fine, I haven't said otherwise. What about everything else. I think that environmentally speaking a bit of melodrama is long overdue. There are too many people who have a blind and unhealthy obsession with carp. A lot of them write on here.
DDT, lead, and mercury were widely used. We'll have to live with that for a long time.
Carbon dioxide, methane and sulphur dioxide have been dripped into the atmosphere for a long time. We may not get a chance to live with that.
So the carp are fine, I haven't said otherwise. What about everything else. I think that environmentally speaking a bit of melodrama is long overdue. There are too many people who have a blind and unhealthy obsession with carp. A lot of them write on here.
DDT, lead, and mercury were widely used. We'll have to live with that for a long time.
Carbon dioxide, methane and sulphur dioxide have been dripped into the atmosphere for a long time. We may not get a chance to live with that.
In reply to Post #5
Reducing weed growth IS an example of a destructive effect on the natural environment
If the artificial dye wasn't used then the natural environment would be more weedy.
Halfcentury makes some very good points.
Carp fishing in the UK is artificial and engineered from its most basic principles
Reducing weed growth IS an example of a destructive effect on the natural environment
If the artificial dye wasn't used then the natural environment would be more weedy.
Halfcentury makes some very good points.
Carp fishing in the UK is artificial and engineered from its most basic principles
I simply dont fish waters that get dyed. Even worse when its done under the guise of 'making it easier for anglers' the few waters i know that have been dyed the general feeling is its lead to problems and 'coincidently' fish kills months later.
Like someone eludes to it feels like a plastic water once its done...not for me.
Like someone eludes to it feels like a plastic water once its done...not for me.
Sorry Justin_time. My take on your question is simple. The shallow water will be the only areas of the lake where daytime oxygen levels and natural food production will be anywhere near normal levels. This at a time when the amount of bait going in is at a minimum means increasingly active and therefore hungry carp will have to feed there. Until the number of anglers increases after the general winter layoff and start pouring bait in there will be very little food in the rest of the lake. Also carp do naturally seek out the shallows in late winter, early spring as they are the first areas to warm up with increasing sunlight.
In reply to Post #13
You do realise the dyes are non-toxic. Bit of a stretch to compare to DDT and lead.
There will be an effect on the natural environment but as long as it's done properly the effect wont be as drastic as a couple of you are making it out to be. You also have to weigh up the other effects, an oxygen crash could kill everything in the lake, the dye can help prevent that. The biggest and most natural pits can succumb to o2 crashes.
And when you think about it, why is it so weedy? Is it natural or is it a result of phosphates leaching in off surrounding farmland? Fertilisers, etc. what if it's artificially weedy due to man made influence and the dye is rebalancing the environment?
No point forming an opinion on something without thinking about the wider picture is there.
You do realise the dyes are non-toxic. Bit of a stretch to compare to DDT and lead.
There will be an effect on the natural environment but as long as it's done properly the effect wont be as drastic as a couple of you are making it out to be. You also have to weigh up the other effects, an oxygen crash could kill everything in the lake, the dye can help prevent that. The biggest and most natural pits can succumb to o2 crashes.
And when you think about it, why is it so weedy? Is it natural or is it a result of phosphates leaching in off surrounding farmland? Fertilisers, etc. what if it's artificially weedy due to man made influence and the dye is rebalancing the environment?
No point forming an opinion on something without thinking about the wider picture is there.
In reply to Post #17
Plus in most instances the Dye is being used to treat an invasive species of weed, that's chocking the life out of the Lake
Plus in most instances the Dye is being used to treat an invasive species of weed, that's chocking the life out of the Lake
In reply to Post #8
Why do people act like this online. Trying to sound like they are an expert on the topic they are asking questions about.
Why do people act like this online. Trying to sound like they are an expert on the topic they are asking questions about.
In reply to Post #19
In fairness he's not getting an answer to his question. The rights/wrongs and ifs/buts were already covered by his thread back in August:
http://www.carpforum.co.uk/Shared/Messages.asp?TopicID=430015&ReadAll=1
He's now asking what it'll do to the fish's behavior in early spring so he can take advantage of it.
In fairness he's not getting an answer to his question. The rights/wrongs and ifs/buts were already covered by his thread back in August:
http://www.carpforum.co.uk/Shared/Messages.asp?TopicID=430015&ReadAll=1
He's now asking what it'll do to the fish's behavior in early spring so he can take advantage of it.
2 lakes near me use the blue dye to help with the extreme weed problems they have, 1 lake it doesn't seem to effect the fishing at all but the other once it goes in nothing comes out for at 2/3 weeks it's been like the last few years since they started using it so definitely effects it in some way but then after those 2/3 weeks it goes back to normal
I'm not against using it though I can see why they use it because on another one they drain the lake and pull the weed out by hand with rakes so takes up a lot more time
I'm not against using it though I can see why they use it because on another one they drain the lake and pull the weed out by hand with rakes so takes up a lot more time
In reply to Post #20
He doesn't sound like he wants to listen though. Even in that post he doesn't pay the blindest but of interest in anyone who doesn't think that dye is just there to kill everything in sight.
If you thought that putting dye in a lake was ecological holocaust, why would you carry on fishing that lake
He doesn't sound like he wants to listen though. Even in that post he doesn't pay the blindest but of interest in anyone who doesn't think that dye is just there to kill everything in sight.
If you thought that putting dye in a lake was ecological holocaust, why would you carry on fishing that lake
In reply to Post #22
I don't disagree.
Edit: I see a lot of talk about the use of dye for inhibiting weed growth. I can't say I agree with its use for that purpose. For me the dye is invaluable for use on waters that suffer with bad algae issues. It needs to work for the ecosystem, not against it.
I don't disagree.
Edit: I see a lot of talk about the use of dye for inhibiting weed growth. I can't say I agree with its use for that purpose. For me the dye is invaluable for use on waters that suffer with bad algae issues. It needs to work for the ecosystem, not against it.
In reply to Post #1
To reply to the OP, on the original topic.
It sounds like they have been dying it for multiple years previously. All I can say is that the entire ecology in the lake will be used to it and will have adapted.
Quite simply, although the dye should theoretically make the water cooler (blocking sunlight and UV to the depths will mean they wont warm up), on a large pit that will likely have water turnover due to wind constantly, it probably wont make much of an impact at all. Plenty of deep lakes in the country, they all are a month or so behind the "normal" cycle. So it may start slower but it will still fish later in the year than other places, that is IF the dye has any real effect on the temps.
To reply to the OP, on the original topic.
It sounds like they have been dying it for multiple years previously. All I can say is that the entire ecology in the lake will be used to it and will have adapted.
Quite simply, although the dye should theoretically make the water cooler (blocking sunlight and UV to the depths will mean they wont warm up), on a large pit that will likely have water turnover due to wind constantly, it probably wont make much of an impact at all. Plenty of deep lakes in the country, they all are a month or so behind the "normal" cycle. So it may start slower but it will still fish later in the year than other places, that is IF the dye has any real effect on the temps.
In reply to Post #24
No expert, but I don't think water is heated by UV, it will be heated mainly by Infrared(IR)
Blue dye is used since it absorbs other colours of the visible spectrum and reflects blue, hence you see blue. The chlorophyll, the pigment in weed that makes it look green absorbs light at the red/yellow end of the spectrum. Since the blue dye is absorbing these wavelengths there is less light of the particular wavelength used by the weed, hence its growth can be controlled.
If you want to absorb UV, then the lake would need to be yellow, not blue
No expert, but I don't think water is heated by UV, it will be heated mainly by Infrared(IR)
Blue dye is used since it absorbs other colours of the visible spectrum and reflects blue, hence you see blue. The chlorophyll, the pigment in weed that makes it look green absorbs light at the red/yellow end of the spectrum. Since the blue dye is absorbing these wavelengths there is less light of the particular wavelength used by the weed, hence its growth can be controlled.
If you want to absorb UV, then the lake would need to be yellow, not blue
Reading ALL pages