Are beaver ponds good or bad for trout?

[FarmerDave]

I don't doubt that they could back water up and across low divides. And some places do have very low divides.

But most of our trout streams have much higher divides between them, and it's hard to believe that beaver dams could raise the water high enough to go over those divides. The beaver dams I've seen are roughly 3 feet high or so. Maybe 4 ft.? I don't recall ever seeing one 6 feet high.

I'm with you on this, Dwight. What was described earlier that beavers could step water over a ridge is simply impossible unless it's the YellaWood beavers and they figured out how to build an Archimedes screw. Water flows downhill. I wasn't going to say anything but let's get real. Beaver dams are a mixed bag when it comes to trout, but mostly beneficial for brook trout. Most definitely beneficial to the overall environment.

I have no doubt that there are places where headwaters can intermingle. I know of two of them in Ohio where this happens from time to time during flooding, and both involve very flat swampy land. Some of it flows North, and some flows south. If there are any in PA, I'd look in the flatter swampier and formerly glaciated areas south of Erie. Beaver dams would be enough to divert some water over those divides, but they simply can't move water over a ridge.

So, how did brook trout spread to their current or previous ranges? Simple. When glaciers melt, it produces a lot of water all along it. Those glaciers covered most of the northern hemisphere with up to 2 miles thick of ice. The weight of that ice compressed the land, so as the glaciers melted, plenty of water was left behind in the depression. The ground rebounded slowly. In fact, land that was formerly glaciated is still expanding and contracting to this day even though the last great glaciers receded about 16K years ago. Look up "glacial isostatic adjustment."

 

[hooker-of-men]

I don't doubt that they could back water up and across low divides. And some places do have very low divides.

But most of our trout streams have much higher divides between them, and it's hard to believe that beaver dams could raise the water high enough to go over those divides. The beaver dams I've seen are roughly 3 feet high or so. Maybe 4 ft.? I don't recall ever seeing one 6 feet high.

As explained in my subsequent post, this wasn't described as one and done but rather as a series of dams that slowly backed a stream up a mountain to change it's course towards, I believe, a valley with more preferable poplars. Feel sceptical if you wish; it's not my book.

 

[troutbert]

Here's a low gradient place where it could happen. N 40.74319 W 78.13202

If you put that in Acmemapper, you can see it on USGS topo maps.

In Bald Eagle Valley, at the Centre/Huntingdon County border, is the divide between 2 streams, both named Bald Eagle Creek. They flow in opposite directions. One towards Tyrone, the other towards Milesburg and Lock Haven.

Where they originate is a flat marshy area. Looking around there it's hard to even see where the divide is.

But, I looked at topo maps of the area around Cherry Springs firetower, at the divides between the upper end of Cross Fork Creek drainage and West Branch Pine Cr and East Fork Sinnemahoning Cr drainages. The stream lines go up to about 2000 ft elevation or 2100 ft max. The divides are at about 2400 ft elevation. The beavers would have to elevate the water about 300 feet.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

Troutbert gives a good example, but both of those streams end up in Susquehanna drainage, albeit pretty far apart. Headwaters of Towanda creek and Lycoming Creek just south of Canton is another similar example where this could occur. One flows to West branch other to North branch.

I was thinking about the triple divide in Potter Co, I think the issue there is the headwaters of Genessee and Allegheny Rivers are in pretty broad low gradient valleys. It would be difficult to gain significant elevation. Great area to fish for wild trout in beaver dams though!

 

[JeffK]

I say it all depends. Beaver ponds warm the stream, add fertility, and add a big pool. For small, cold oligotrophic brooks that is great. For warmer, more fertile streams that is maybe not so great.

Over in the limestone valleys of NJ there are a number of spring creek trickles that hold tiny brook trout in brush covered jungles that were once cow pastures - generally not worth fishing. When a beaver dam is built it initially provides great conditions for brookies over a foot. However, as the pond matures and gets wider and shallower and the trees are cut back further from the stream the pond warms and pickerel become the main predators. Then it is time to try a new stream. Eventually the beaver dam is neglected and falls apart, the trees grow back and in a decade or two another beaver comes back and forms a good brook trout pool. This has only been going on for 40 or 50 years since before that the limestone valleys were prime dairy country. Then the farmers vanished and the lower pastures became woods and the beavers returned. Now some of that former pasture land is becoming developments and the brookies are disappearing since the water table is dropping and some of the tiny streams are dewatered.

Found a beaver pond on a tiny trickle atop a mountain and it showed promise for a year before the beavers were removed. Not everyone likes beavers.

 

[Roofin' Trouter]

Are beaver ponds good for trout? We know that beaver ponds add great habitat for trout, but they also add sediment. Ive watched a vox video where they talk about beaver ponds decreasing water temps, but also read that a potential “tailwater” near me is threatened by increased steam temps from beaver ponds? What are your thoughts on beaver ponds?

Over the past few years I've taking a new appreciation for the beaver and its conservation value. I fish some streams that beavers have had a positive role in reshaping them. I also imagine there is situations where they may have a negative impacts on streams.In Europe and the Western US, beaver restoration and study seem to be gaining traction.I don't know for sure but I see more beaver in PA now,as opposed to 30 years ago.

 

[Roofin' Trouter]

FWIW - I remember distinctly (because I wet wade 99% of the time) noticing that a particular braid I was fishing upstream on Lyman Run was feeling considerably warmer than the stream section I fished not far above the reservoir..

Soon I figured out why:

View attachment 1641228190

The pond was massive and quite possibly full of fish, but I didn't want try try walking through it to find out so I moved about 50 yards to my left and fished the main part of the creek and colder w

Appetite for construction

 

[BradFromPotter]

Jeez that’s a big beaver pond! That’s one of the downsides of beaver ponds, that they have a larger surface area, therefore can heat easier and faster. In an extremely forested watershed and prior to global warming, beaver ponds probably wouldn’t raise temps too much. But even today there are still some beaver ponds that remain cooler in higher elevation areas and tailwaters.

Now beaver ponds are warming because of global warming! How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[TheBluegillMaster]

alright, it’s probably not global warming, but it definitely has something to do with it. In a pristine watershed with good forest cover, temps wouldn’t be affected too much, but sadly those aren’t too common. Beaver ponds in an agricultural area definitely warm up the strwam.