Brook trout movement

[lycoflyfisher]

I believe this research has already been discussed, but significant genetic connections have been found in brook trout throughout the Loyalsock Creek watershed that all but prove significant movement of st through the main stem into different tributaries to ultimately spawn. As dedicated wild trout anglers, I think many are already aware to some degree of this movement. From a resource management perspective, I believe this just further emphasizes the need to maintain aquatic connectivity even in larger river systems.


https://news.psu.edu/story/621981/2020/06/03/research/larger-streams-are-critical-wild-brook-trout-conservation?fbclid=IwAR1l_rbDERefaSPlGjAyTcZWS3iH5CrjM8j9sWGjS9hqDXqdNoeHV35CWZE

 

[Dave_W]

Thank you for posting this.

Important stuff and another brick in the wall of knowledge dealing with our state fish.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Yes!

But unfortunately even in our own ranks a brook trout is a brook trout is a brook trout. You can switch brook with brown if you wish.

As i said here before, the early season stocking a melee kills these moving fish. They are still in the system!

 

[foxfire]

Good read. Thanks!

 

[troutbert]

"The findings of the Penn State study, recently published in Ecological Applications, contrast with other research related to brook trout behavior, White conceded. The consensus has been that trout do not move very far, she said. “But Loyalsock Creek is a fairly big watershed, and we have found that fish are moving quite a bit, and populations on opposite ends of the watershed are connected to one another genetically.”

Conceded? She's not making a concession.

She's stating that the consensus has been that trout do not move very far, and that her research shows that they do move a lot.

Actually I don't think the idea that brook trout and other trout move quite a bit is all that new.

Nessmunk wrote about brook trout moving from large streams up into the tributaries in June as temperatures warmed. That was around the early 1900s.

A Penn State study on Kettle Creek documented brookies moving from the mainstem to the headwaters and tribs. That was around 1940.

More recently the PFBC did a study using transmitters in trout that showed that both wild brookies and browns moved back and forth between the Driftwood Branch and its tribs.

There have been other studies with transmitters in the Delaware River and the Little Juniata and other places that showed a lot of trout movement.

Fishermen have known about trout movement for ages. On some of the small streams you don't catch brown trout in the spring, but in the summer you do.

I know of a brook trout stream that is 70 feet wide and gets up to 80F in the summer. In the summer the brookies go up the tribs. But in spring and fall you can catch them in the main stream.

But there have been many published statements that brook trout are confined to tiny headwater streams. And many people do seem to think that. So it's good to have a university study that quashes that myth.

I wonder if they found much genetic differences in brook trout above impassable waterfalls and culverts. The article doesn't say. If the hypothesis that separation would lead to genetic differences is true, that would be seen in the population above the impassable barriers.

 

[silverfox]

troutbert wrote:
"The findings of the Penn State study, recently published in Ecological Applications, contrast with other research related to brook trout behavior, White conceded. The consensus has been that trout do not move very far, she said. “But Loyalsock Creek is a fairly big watershed, and we have found that fish are moving quite a bit, and populations on opposite ends of the watershed are connected to one another genetically.”

Conceded? She's not making a concession.

She's stating that the consensus has been that trout do not move very far, and that her research shows that they do move a lot.

Actually I don't think the idea that brook trout and other trout move quite a bit is all that new.

Nessmunk wrote about brook trout moving from large streams up into the tributaries in June as temperatures warmed. That was around the early 1900s.

A Penn State study on Kettle Creek documented brookies moving from the mainstem to the headwaters and tribs. That was around 1940.

More recently the PFBC did a study using transmitters in trout that showed that both wild brookies and browns moved back and forth between the Driftwood Branch and its tribs.

There have been other studies with transmitters in the Delaware River and the Little Juniata and other places that showed a lot of trout movement.

Fishermen have known about trout movement for ages. On some of the small streams you don't catch brown trout in the spring, but in the summer you do.

I know of a brook trout stream that is 70 feet wide and gets up to 80F in the summer. In the summer the brookies go up the tribs. But in spring and fall you can catch them in the main stream.

But there have been many published statements that brook trout are confined to tiny headwater streams. And many people do seem to think that. So it's good to have a university study that quashes that myth.

I wonder if they found much genetic differences in brook trout above impassable waterfalls and culverts. The article doesn't say. If the hypothesis that separation would lead to genetic differences is true, that would be seen in the population above the impassable barriers.

That was my thought when I read the article too. I thought it was pretty well known that trout can, and do move incredible distances. I just watched a video from MT FW&P that showed rainbows moving between 150 to 250 miles to spawn.

There is a lot of information on Shannon's "blog" about genetic diversity and barriers. I encourage anyone even remotely interested in brook trout to read her posts: https://www.thetroutlook.com/latest-updates/category/genetics

So the question is, how do you manage those downstream sections that get too warm in the summer to support trout, but are critical for brook trout habitat throughout the colder months (including the April opening of trout season)?

I've said it numerous times, but there are brook trout in stocked trout sections in April that are likely being harvested due to their aggressive feeding behavior, by folks that don't realize they're wild fish. Unfortunately, those "movers" that are likely being harvested, are also probably the most important fish in the stream in terms of genetic diversity and the overall health of the brook trout population in the entire watershed.

This is also completely counter to the sentiment that wild browns occupying the downstream sections of streams that hold brook trout in the headwaters is completely acceptable.

I really wish PA would consider regulations like MD is proposing with C&R for brook trout in some stocked watersheds.

 

[troutbert]

In PA stocking of the small and modest-sized brook trout streams is still very common.

Yet there seems to be more discussion about changing management of the large streams to help brook than there is about ending stocking over brook trout in the small and modest-sized streams.

 

[silverfox]

troutbert wrote:
In PA stocking of the small and modest-sized brook trout streams is still very common.

Yet there seems to be more discussion about changing management of the large streams to help brook than there is about ending stocking over brook trout in the small and modest-sized streams.

I assume that's such a well known, and generally accepted point here that it probably doesn't need reiterated. The point I'm trying to make, is that it's not just the small wild brook trout streams where stocking is a problem, and it's entirely possible that those fish that do move are more important than the ones that don't.

So the short statement would be; Stop stocking over wild brook trout and protect wild brook trout that use stocked water for seasonal habitat.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Spot on silverfox.

Hey, thanks for the link too.
Ill check it out later.
Good stuff.

 

[KenU]

In 1996 I put together a technical report “Brook Trout of the Large Freestone Streams of Pennsylvania.” I didn’t try to publish it because I didn’t have credentials in Fisheries Science. I did hand out copies to anybody who wanted one and there were a lot of takers. I have no idea how widely they were read.

It took about 2 years of time to study the science and history of our native brookies and what it was like fishing for them just as the logging era was ending and roads were being put into the NC region. In those days big freestones like Loyalsock, Kettle Creek and Sinnemahoning were still producing lots of 12-inch brookies and some occasionally as big as 20 inches, according to old angling literature. These fish did this by moving in and of the big downstream waters just as Shannon White and some other researchers are now finding. They reached these sizes by using the big streams in order to winter over and increase their forage base in the spring when brookies achieve most of their growth. The old timers published lots of articles about it, even in the PA Angler, so it is no secret to the PFBC.

As the streams were decimated by uncontrolled logging and other man-made environmental damage hubris drove the response. We built hatcheries. The thought at the time was that humans could outdo Mother Nature and now we know the result. Now those big freestones are managed as put-and-take fisheries in the spring whenever brookies are just coming out of the winter fast and growth rates are the highest of the year. Few survive the spring madness or leave as soon as their living space is invaded by the larger and far more aggressive hatchery fish. That’s why brookies now seldom get much over 7 inches and peak out at about 10 inches. A foot long brookie is a “Wall Hanger.” Most of the streams where they could reach this size are regularly stocked and plundered every spring. Now, really nice brookies, i.e., those over 8 inches or so, are few and far between and usually found far from the road. Once stocking is halted on streams accessible from the road size improves - until they are discovered. Once discovered the nice brookies seem to just disappear.

 

[JeffP]

So which streams are the home streams? It would seem that they spend more time in the big creek than the little ones. Do they only spend time in the spring? Are these fish always spawning in the trip? Fall can be extremely low water and I just wonder if more of the spacing is done in the big creek. Many seem to seem to think that most of the browns are spawned in the tribe but I sometimes wonder. Any thoughts?

 

[JeffK]

One point about the warm water "winter" spots is that even the Delaware R has decent trout temperatures 8 months of the year (October through May) and has some spring holes that hold trout all year as far down as Reigelsville (that I am aware of). One of my shad holes was full of brookies and I could pick up a couple if the shad fishing was slow. Many little rivers can hold trout longer.

Therefore, these are trout that can live in larger rivers 2/3 of the time and must find cooler temperatures 1/3 of the time.

Dams and pollution hurt, but one thing that hurts in the limestone valleys of Warren Co, NJ where I grew up is lowering of the water table with development. With more straws drawing out water the water table has dropped and many little spring creeks/springs have dried up. These were full of summer brookies (some large) in my youth and many are now gone. Seems like one or two springs drops off each year. Maybe this is an issue in PA as well.

 

[KenU]

The life history of brook trout is very flexible. They can live in any stream where the water stays cold and there is sufficient food and cover (habitat). They grew big in the past in limestone streams because these were cold, clean and had lots of food year round,. Even when the water warmed in the summer they could move into the big springs that typically feed these waters.
Freestone waters , especially the big ones like Kettle Creek, Sinnemahoning and Loyalsock were wide and open, even in the old days. The trees were never tall enough to shade them in the summer when flows slowed to trickles. But the headwaters and tributaries stayed cool thru the summer because they were well shaded by tall trees. Old timers often referred to big brookies of the larger freestone streams as “ River or Speckled” trout.” Brookies of the upstream waters were called hemlock trout. Although gorgeous, especially in their spawning colors during the fall, they seldom got much over ten inches; just like today.

In order to get much bigger than about 10 inches trout must have larger prey like crayfish and minnows or an abundance of insects on which to feed. These were plentiful in big freestones However; they got too warm for brookies in the summer even in the “Good-Old-Days.” So the flexible brook trout gene pool provided a way for them to continue to thrive and grow. They did what salmonids do - they moved. Thru generations of living in these waters some brookies developed a life history that provided them with the opportunity to live long lives and continue to grow. As the big waters receded and warmed in the summer sun, they moved upstream into the headwaters and tributaries to reach cooler water temps. They spawned in the early fall as the leaves were changing. Then, as winter rains raised and cooled the streams, they returned downstream to the big main stem pools for the winter. Here they were safe from anchor ice and ice floods. And their eggs were safe from massive flooding during ice out. This cycle had been repeated for thousands of year; Old Timers called it the June Rise. It was well documented but, unfortunately, forgotten until recently.

This then was the life history of Pennsylvania’s only native stream dwelling trout until brown trout were introduced into our waters in the late 1800s. About the same time the logging era was in full swing and big freestone streams and their entire watersheds were denuded of the precious shade and cover the trees provided. Limestone streams fared better because they were fed by deep springs that kept them cool. The limestone streams have been taken over almost completely by brown trout. That is, for all practical purposes, irreversible.

But the forests grew back. Many of our mountain freestone streams still support brookies. I know, because that’s where I fish. Native brookies are still caught during spring in Kettle Creek all the way down to well below Ole Bull. I have caught them in the riffles above the swimming pool in the park as late as mid-June. Others tell me they have caught wild brookies as far down as Leidy Bridge.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

KenU,

I can agree with most of that.

IN your opinion, do you think we can have a few watersheds in the state with seasonally moving large brook trout that can become true fisheries?
IMO yes. We do but we are currently hurting them

 

[Mike]

Please define “large.”

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Wrong question.
You should ask to define the watershed.

One capable of returning a closed environment with limited competition but large enough and with enough connectivity to produce a some what natural condition to the population size structure that once existed in PA.
That is the real question.

To answer yours while historically, yes 20" fish did exist but i feel as though people would be happy to see 12-16" brook trout be possible.

Brook trout move into bigger waters. There are now studies confirming it. If these fish are protected, not stocked over or yanked out in the spring and left to do their thing, i could think of a handful of watersheds that could produce some fantasic wild brook trout fishing.

 

[silverfox]

I think the upper Savage river in MD is the perfect model to follow. Proven results, neighboring state that I'm sure would be willing to share data w/ PA fisheries biologists and not that unlike other watersheds in Pennsylvania. That's +/- 100 miles of connected waterways (mainstem and tribs).

As of now, they even stock the lower mainstem before the lake with rainbows and goldens, so it's not like there wouldn't be some put-n-take in the system too.

In PA terms, it would be like making kettle creek from the dam at Ole Bull upstream and all tribs C&R for brook trout and stop stocking browns. I'm not saying Kettle is the best place to do it, but size wise, it's a good analogy to the size of the USR project.

I find it hard to believe that a state as big as PA, with all our trout water that we couldn't set aside an area like that.

 

[Swattie87]

I've said it before, but one of the keys to this equation (growing large, 12"+ Brook Trout with any consistency) is the absence of wild Brown Trout. This becomes especially hard to do when you're talking about watersheds big enough to allow movement of fish from a larger main stem to smaller tributaries like we're talking about here.

Look at a watershed that used to this, not all that long ago relatively speaking, but was, and still is, stocked with Browns. And although it has Brook Trout still, they are of your typical size curve for PA waters. The big fish are all wild Browns now. (Admittedly, it produces some very nice Browns, but the point is they could have been Brookies.) Let's hope the same mistake is not made with one of its neighbors, though I fear it will be. Mike/sal - I'm certain you know which two I'm talking about.

 

[Dave_W]

silverfox wrote:
I think the upper Savage river in MD is the perfect model to follow.

This is a good watershed analogy and, I agree, might serve as a model for a similar experiment somewhere up in the PA Wilds region.

With the lackluster results of the old Brook Trout Enhancement project, combined with local resistance, I'd guess it could be a tough sell... but at the very least pulling together some sort of multi-year watershed plan for ST management along these lines - maybe Kettle like you suggest - would be an intriguing project.

Might be a good start to get the state TU council on board as I think they'd be a more receptive audience than some other stakeholders.

 

[Dave_W]

Swattie87 wrote:
I've said it before, but one of the keys to this equation (growing large, 12"+ Brook Trout with any consistency) is the absence of wild Brown Trout. This becomes especially hard to do when you're talking about watersheds big enough to allow movement of fish from a larger main stem to smaller tributaries like we're talking about here.

Agree.

I think the biggest hurdles are "social" but from a biological standpoint the BT control may be the biggest problem.