Brookies just showed up......

[GANGGREEN]

So I live on a nice freestone stream that's been pretty much nothing but wild browns since I've been fishing it (I've lived here for 23 years and know that it was nothing but wild browns long before I lived here and started fishing it). In those 23 years, I've caught hundreds of browns, 3 or 4 rainbows that were nice ones and which I presume migrated from way downstream where the stream does get stocked and exactly ONE wild/native brookie. My brother claimed to have caught some brookies there years ago when I think he was drowning worms, but I'm not 100% convinced that he wasn't catching small browns and just didn't know better (although he should know the difference, given that he used to catch brookies in West Virginia quite a bit).

So, I went out with a buddy the other day and gave him a rundown of what he should expect. I told him that we'd catch some trout, all browns and that most would be small, but the potential was there for big ones too (water conditions stunk with low/clear water and I didn't anticipate anything better than 10 or 11 inches, but you never know). I ended up being embarrassed when he caught 2 brookies right in front of me and lost another that we both thought was probably a brookie. So I've fished the stream for hundreds of hours over the years and have caught ONE brookie there and he hooks 3 in one afternoon. All 3 of them were almost surely wild/native trout and not someone's stocked trout that migrated in.

In fairness, I typically don't fish this stream a ton and usually do it in the spring or in late fall/winter after any fear of destroying redds is gone. So, I wonder if these brookies DO drop down into this stream from nearby tribs in the summertime and I've simply never noticed it or if this was just a one off. In hindsight, I think when my brother claimed to have seen/caught brookies in there may have been at this time of year as well. Thoughts?

 

[Schaefer406]

So I live on a nice freestone stream that's been pretty much nothing but wild browns since I've been fishing it (I've lived here for 23 years and know that it was nothing but wild browns long before I lived here and started fishing it). In those 23 years, I've caught hundreds of browns, 3 or 4 rainbows that were nice ones and which I presume migrated from way downstream where the stream does get stocked and exactly ONE wild/native brookie. My brother claimed to have caught some brookies there years ago when I think he was drowning worms, but I'm not 100% convinced that he wasn't catching small browns and just didn't know better (although he should know the difference, given that he used to catch brookies in West Virginia quite a bit).

So, I went out with a buddy the other day and gave him a rundown of what he should expect. I told him that we'd catch some trout, all browns and that most would be small, but the potential was there for big ones too (water conditions stunk with low/clear water and I didn't anticipate anything better than 10 or 11 inches, but you never know). I ended up being embarrassed when he caught 2 brookies right in front of me and lost another that we both thought was probably a brookie. So I've fished the stream for hundreds of hours over the years and have caught ONE brookie there and he hooks 3 in one afternoon. All 3 of them were almost surely wild/native trout and not someone's stocked trout that migrated in.

In fairness, I typically don't fish this stream a ton and usually do it in the spring or in late fall/winter after any fear of destroying redds is gone. So, I wonder if these brookies DO drop down into this stream from nearby tribs in the summertime and I've simply never noticed it or if this was just a one off. In hindsight, I think when my brother claimed to have seen/caught brookies in there may have been at this time of year as well. Thoughts?

Hmmm this sounds like I will need to investigate. Please send me the exact longitude and latitude of the parking spot you used to access the stream and I will let you know

In all seriousness, this somewhat tails the other thread discussing brook trout being present in larger waterways that they were not previously found in. Are brookies somehow re-establishing themselves in waterways they may have been pushed out of? Is there private stocking occurring downstream leaving holdover brookies that resemble wild fish? You do mention that you haven't really fished this stream during this time of year - Maybe the brookies migrate into the larger water from tributaries, either seeking more available forage, or maybe there are coldwater/spring inputs in the larger system leading to favorable water temps in the larger system during warmer months? Maybe they migrate due to lack of water in warmer months in the tribs? Hard to tell, but that is quite interesting!

 

[silverfox]

My guess is they might be in transit. They could be moving from downstream where they were all winter because the water is getting warmer down there. Or they could be moving from one trib to another. There's pretty good evidence (not published yet) that tributary density may increase/decrease the amount of movement in systems. Or some other pressure/condition is causing them to move using the larger stream. Hard to say without knowing the watershed.

 

[Bamboozle]

I've fished more than a few streams where no one would expect to catch a non-native stream-bred brook trout or rainbow trout because the streams are well established wild brown trout streams...

...yet I've caught them and in a few instances pulled off a wild trout grand slam (BT, ST, RT).

However on EVERY stream where this irregular occurrence has happened SOME section (not necessarily an adjacent section) of the stream is stocked, the stream WAS stocked at one time or the stream is a tributary to another stocked stream.

Therefore it is my belief that the term "native" is a huge stretch and the brook trout are probably the offspring of hatchery fish or good looking stockers.

 

[Fish Sticks]

My guess is they might be in transit. They could be moving from downstream where they were all winter because the water is getting warmer down there. Or they could be moving from one trib to another. There's pretty good evidence (not published yet) that tributary density may increase/decrease the amount of movement in systems. Or some other pressure/condition is causing them to move using the larger stream. Hard to say without knowing the watershed.

Hmmm this sounds like I will need to investigate. Please send me the exact longitude and latitude of the parking spot you used to access the stream and I will let you know

In all seriousness, this somewhat tails the other thread discussing brook trout being present in larger waterways that they were not previously found in. Are brookies somehow re-establishing themselves in waterways they may have been pushed out of? Is there private stocking occurring downstream leaving holdover brookies that resemble wild fish? You do mention that you haven't really fished this stream during this time of year - Maybe the brookies migrate into the larger water from tributaries, either seeking more available forage, or maybe there are coldwater/spring inputs in the larger system leading to favorable water temps in the larger system during warmer months? Maybe they migrate due to lack of water in warmer months in the tribs? Hard to tell, but that is quite interesting!

I have seen reports of this in the Lehigh, Penns(the real head scratcher), and I had another person tell me a stream they wished to remain anonymous was large and having a return of brook trout.

There are tons of factors and no one really knows why for sure because to my knowledge this has not been studied or acknowledged in PA where PA fish and boat can’t say the word “brook trout” and just proposed protections for brown trout in Penns Creek where brook trout are making a recovery.

Of you look at presence of species data from the drift-less area reviewed in hoxmier and deitermans habitat requirements review paper , deeper habitat seems to correlate with bigger brown trout. That said brook trout are head water specialists and have had adaptive pressures placed on them in the last 150-200 years to persist in shallow, even intermittent, headwater streams.

We have seen from case studies and controlled studies on the shavers fork in WV that building these deep habitat structures benefits invasive browns and rainbows and they mention the possibility of habitat improvement structures to help these invasive species displace brook trout.

This is what I have been wondering and have yet to see researched at this point: Does drought and low water levels(making lower streams more like shallow headwater streams) confer an advantage to Brook trout to an extent over their invaders. We know brown trout have a SLIGHT thermal advantage to brook trout that is famously overstated by lay persons, BUT drought and lower water levels can be either an additional or independent factor to water temperature.

Ifs brown really like deep habitat with overhead cover but the stream has been so low its sitting in the middle of the stream in a foot and a half riffle constituting all thats left of that streams flow can it hack it in the unstable headwater conditions potentially simulated by extreme drought?

I think this would be a really interesting research question to try to answer.

I have been told by conservation geneticists that maladaptive genes or non favorable genes are often falsely thought to show their inferiority right away by lay persons. However, these useful adaptations native species derive from evolving in their landscapes can be for surviving catastrophes that only come every 50-100-1000 years. I the mean while non adapted genes can proliferate setting a population up like dominos until one of these large events happen.

Look at what is happening to brown trout relative to other trout species in southwestern montana with the drought there! It makes you wonder how much of an effect low water levels/drought has on competition between invasive brown trout and native species.

Just some observations and obviously could be very wrong but I’d like to see it studied because we are managing under the assumption currently that brown trout’s displacement of brook trout is permanent in a lot of places which may not be accurate as the last few years have suggested in PA.

There is research that very strongly indicates that if we were to discontinue stocking that, in alot of these places, they might really rebound if they were only competing with wild invasive trout.

 

[silverfox]

I've fished more than a few streams where no one would expect to catch a non-native stream-bred brook trout or rainbow trout because the streams are well established wild brown trout streams...

...yet I've caught them and in a few instances pulled off a wild trout grand slam (BT, ST, RT).

However on EVERY stream where this irregular occurrence has happened SOME section (not necessarily an adjacent section) of the stream is stocked, the stream WAS stocked at one time or the stream is a tributary to another stocked stream.

Therefore it is my belief that the term "native" is a huge stretch and the brook trout are probably the offspring of hatchery fish or good looking stockers.

People sure like to misuse the word native.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I've fished more than a few streams where no one would expect to catch a non-native stream-bred brook trout or rainbow trout because the streams are well established wild brown trout streams...

...yet I've caught them and in a few instances pulled off a wild trout grand slam (BT, ST, RT).

However on EVERY stream where this irregular occurrence has happened SOME section (not necessarily an adjacent section) of the stream is stocked, the stream WAS stocked at one time or the stream is a tributary to another stocked stream.

Therefore it is my belief that the term "native" is a huge stretch and the brook trout are probably the offspring of hatchery fish or good looking stockers.

What your talking about is heritage genetics not the word native.

"Indigenous: originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native."

heritage strains are obviously really good genetics wise because they retain adaptation that can be super geographically specialized however wild native brook trout just means a brook trout in its historic native range that was born in a stream.

 

[silverfox]

... wild native brook trout just means a brook trout in its historic native range that was born in a stream.

Exactly.

 

[6xAdams(Jones)]

Therefore it is my belief that the term "native" is a huge stretch and the brook trout are probably the offspring of hatchery fish or good looking stockers.

Let's add the term "Reintroduced Native" to account for this.

 

[GANGGREEN]

To clarify at least a little bit, this stream does have some native brookies in its headwaters, but the section where we caught these is likely at least a couple of miles downstream of where I'd expect to find them. There are also multiple streams that feed the main stem of this stream that likely have brookies in them, but most/all of those would be miles downstream (unless I'm overlooking a nearby tributary, which I suppose is possible). I know that fish aren't confined and can migrate in sections of the stream without physical barriers, but again, I've been fishing this section of stream for decades without seeing them in any numbers and suddenly we find 3 in the same afternoon? For what it's worth, I can all but guarantee that these were not fish stocked elsewhere and would be extremely surprised to find out that they were the offspring of stocked trout.

I still think it's possible that perhaps this isn't a terribly unusual circumstance in this stream and maybe I've just never fished it during the timeframe when it typically happens, but I'd be more inclined to think that something's up, I just haven't figured out what that something is yet......

 

[Fish Sticks]

To clarify at least a little bit, this stream does have some native brookies in its headwaters, but the section where we caught these is likely at least a couple of miles downstream of where I'd expect to find them. There are also multiple streams that feed the main stem of this stream that likely have brookies in them, but most/all of those would be miles downstream (unless I'm overlooking a nearby tributary, which I suppose is possible). I know that fish aren't confined and can migrate in sections of the stream without physical barriers, but again, I've been fishing this section of stream for decades without seeing them in any numbers and suddenly we find 3 in the same afternoon? For what it's worth, I can all but guarantee that these were not fish stocked elsewhere and would be extremely surprised to find out that they were the offspring of stocked trout.

I still think it's possible that perhaps this isn't a terribly unusual circumstance in this stream and maybe I've just never fished it during the timeframe when it typically happens, but I'd be more inclined to think that something's up, I just haven't figured out what that something is yet......

Like silver fox said they could just be passing through as well, i think over the past few years in a few of the larger creeks with brook trout tributes (Pine, Penn, Lehigh, ect) I have been hearing angler reports about more frequent catches in the big water with Penns being more brookies than browns in some smaller focused sections as well.

 

[silverfox]

To clarify at least a little bit, this stream does have some native brookies in its headwaters, but the section where we caught these is likely at least a couple of miles downstream of where I'd expect to find them. There are also multiple streams that feed the main stem of this stream that likely have brookies in them, but most/all of those would be miles downstream (unless I'm overlooking a nearby tributary, which I suppose is possible). I know that fish aren't confined and can migrate in sections of the stream without physical barriers, but again, I've been fishing this section of stream for decades without seeing them in any numbers and suddenly we find 3 in the same afternoon? For what it's worth, I can all but guarantee that these were not fish stocked elsewhere and would be extremely surprised to find out that they were the offspring of stocked trout.

I still think it's possible that perhaps this isn't a terribly unusual circumstance in this stream and maybe I've just never fished it during the timeframe when it typically happens, but I'd be more inclined to think that something's up, I just haven't figured out what that something is yet......

I assumed from what you said initially that you were pretty sure they weren't the descendants of stocked brook trout or stocked brook trout themselves.

I think you nailed it on the "timeframe" part (IMO). IF they're transient fish, you may have missed them before and just happened to run into a pod that was moving through.

 

[brookieteeth]

Look at what is happening to brown trout relative to other trout species in southwestern montana with the drought there! It makes you wonder how much of an effect low water levels/drought has on competition between invasive brown trout and native species.

many watersheds in Montana would have no trout at all, if not for the introduced species. They'd be native squawfish rivers.

 

[troutbert]

If I knew the location, I could probably look at it on topo maps and aerial imagery, and provide some good hypotheses on what it going on. Feel free to send me the location in a PM, and I'll do my best.

Without any knowledge of the location, watershed etc. there's not much that can be said.

Many people talk about brook trout losing ground, i.e. their populations decreasing in the lower waters, and remaining only in the upper stretches. And that is often the case.

But, I've seen the opposite happening also, i.e. brook trout expanding their numbers and range downstream. Reasons for this are usually: Ending of stocking in those stretches, improvements in riparian vegetation cooling the water.

 

[Mike]

My guess is they might be in transit. They could be moving from downstream where they were all winter because the water is getting warmer down there. Or they could be moving from one trib to another. There's pretty good evidence (not published yet) that tributary density may increase/decrease the amount of movement in systems. Or some other pressure/condition is causing them to move using the larger stream. Hard to say without knowing the watershed.

I suspect that the tributary density paper(s) were either published decades ago by ethologists or ecologists or it was or documented but not published. Perhaps it was so well known that that it was just considered to be part of salmonid natural history.

This info was presented in university courses in the early 1970’s. In essence, limited habitat for various length groups of territorial salmonids forces movement through intraspecific competition for limited space…either prime resting or feeding areas. The behaviorally less competitive individuals may move in either direction, but generally movement is downstream into bigger habitat, particularly for individuals who have “outgrown” their existing habitat.

Similarly, we may see this occur in unusually high numbers when in a prior year a large year class has been produced, with good numbers of yearlings or two years olds eventually showing up downstream in areas that might not be very good habitat a few months later due to water temps. This was what appparently occurred in spring, 1988 when the wild trout headwaters of the Perkiomen and its wild trout tribs fed large numbers of 2 yr old BT into the stocked trout section, which in those years would become too warm for BT by Memorial Day or a bit later. More generally, similar events could occur in a number of regional streams and their receiving streams in any given year if regional weather conditions were uniformly conducive to good spawning success a couple of years earlier.

Likewise, when suitable habitat is abandoned through disease, predation, or harvest, it won’t stay vacant for long. This is why I am not concerned about the harvest of larger fish at replacement levels. They will be replaced.

 

[silverfox]

I suspect that the tributary density paper(s) were either published decades ago by ethologists or ecologists or it was or documented but not published. Perhaps it was so well known that that it was just considered to be part of salmonid natural history.

This info was presented in university courses in the early 1970’s. In essence, limited habitat for various length groups of territorial salmonids forces movement through intraspecific competition for limited space…either prime resting or feeding areas. The behaviorally less competitive individuals may move in either direction, but generally movement is downstream into bigger habitat, particularly for individuals who have “outgrown” their existing habitat.

Similarly, we may see this occur in unusually high numbers when in a prior year a large year class has been produced, with good numbers of yearlings or two years olds eventually showing up downstream in areas that might not be very good habitat a few months later due to water temps. This was what appparently occurred in spring, 1988 when the wild trout headwaters of the Perkiomen and its wild trout tribs fed large numbers of 2 yr old BT into the stocked trout section, which in those years would become too warm for BT by Memorial Day or a bit later. More generally, similar events could occur in a number of regional streams and their receiving streams in any given year if regional weather conditions were uniformly conducive to good spawning success a couple of years earlier.

Likewise, when suitable habitat is abandoned through disease, predation, or harvest, it won’t stay vacant for long. This is why I am not concerned about the harvest of larger fish at replacement levels. They will be replaced.

The paper I mentioned hasn’t been published because the researchers/authors are still gathering data. I believe they’re looking at it in conjunction with some other movement related triggers.

What are your thoughts on the longterm impact of removing larger individuals? I’ve heard some concerns about forcing a shift to smaller individuals over time. This was specifically about brook trout, though in a different setting than most wild PA freestoners. Found it: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14420

 

[Fish Sticks]

They

I suspect that the tributary density paper(s) were either published decades ago by ethologists or ecologists or it was or documented but not published. Perhaps it was so well known that that it was just considered to be part of salmonid natural history.

This info was presented in university courses in the early 1970’s. In essence, limited habitat for various length groups of territorial salmonids forces movement through intraspecific competition for limited space…either prime resting or feeding areas. The behaviorally less competitive individuals may move in either direction, but generally movement is downstream into bigger habitat, particularly for individuals who have “outgrown” their existing habitat.

Similarly, we may see this occur in unusually high numbers when in a prior year a large year class has been produced, with good numbers of yearlings or two years olds eventually showing up downstream in areas that might not be very good habitat a few months later due to water temps. This was what appparently occurred in spring, 1988 when the wild trout headwaters of the Perkiomen and its wild trout tribs fed large numbers of 2 yr old BT into the stocked trout section, which in those years would become too warm for BT by Memorial Day or a bit later. More generally, similar events could occur in a number of regional streams and their receiving streams in any given year if regional weather conditions were uniformly conducive to good spawning success a couple of years earlier.

Likewise, when suitable habitat is abandoned through disease, predation, or harvest, it won’t stay vacant for long. This is why I am not concerned about the harvest of larger fish at replacement levels. They will be replaced.

They may be replaced but you are selecting for a life history by allowing the harvest. We think harvest is likely not as common in most cases in first second third order as it is where stocking occurs in larger streams.

Also that neglects the purpose of those fish genetically and as potential recognizers after stochastic events.

If you’d fix a culvert with an AOP score significantly less than 100 and pay maybe say $50,000 to do it in one place gravel lick run that goes into lower cross fork creek then why would you not limit the harvest of brook trout in all of kettle creek where each harvest event is an instant loss of gene flow. Kettle creek has some of the densest numbers of consumptive anglers that line its banks in the early season. Its free for christ sakes and it would teach those people those wild native brook trout have a value. If PFBC’s true intention was to actually keep brook trout around where we can do so they would be engaging the public to help acceptance of better management. But they don’t care, richard lewis said he can’t find any evidence that harvest regs work,despite silver fox sending him MD DNR’s findings after implementing on the savage multiple times, in the meeting last week. Charlesworth even said theres more than just the reg too it teaches people and their importance.

Overall its disgraceful abandonment of the state wild life action plan and trout management plan by these commissioners with regard to its goals for brook trout which include public education of the importance of brook trout. Here comes brown trout protections. This *hits free people