Brown Trout Petition

[larkmark]

Two things that might help. Close season in fall and winter.
Stop stocking over wild fish.
Doesn't that go beyond what any of these other overly complicated plans propose? Do I realistically think either will happen? Well, no.

 

[BrookieChaser]

"If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it" - Albert Einstein

 

[Chaz]

Only if it’s shown that it won’t impact brook trout populations. Unless pfbc fixes the study to show it won’t, it will. What pfbc should do is raise the size of brook trout to the size the should attain using a similar regulation on brook trout. In my opinion we don’t need more large brown trout, we need to protect what populations we have with the goal of improving brook trout size.

 

[troutbert]

Dave_W wrote:
Troutbert is right.
We should focus on moving the needle in small, incremental ways (perhaps closing to stocking, harvest or angling on a specific stretch of sensitive water). Aspirational regulation changes that are impractical and would never be accepted by the majority of PA anglers are pie in the sky..

I'm not advocating small, incremental changes.

I'm advocating ending stocking over native brook trout populations.

Which would be a huge change. But it should be done.

The result would be great increases in brook trout populations.

And the number of stocked trout would be the same. They would just be shifted away from brook trout streams to larger waters that do not support brook trout populations.

 

[troutbert]

"Select a cold-water stocked stream that is considered a nursery stream

Do a baseline survey noting young of the year and age class structure on the selected stocked stream

Stop further stocking"

These nursery streams are wild trout streams.

And many of us have been saying for years that stocking should be ended in wild trout streams. Fisheries biologists have been recommending that since the 1940s. Trout Unlimited was formed in the mid-1950s for the purpose of advocating ending stocking over wild trout.

So, yes, stocking should be ended in wild trout streams, whether or not they are considered "nursery" streams or not.

Just about any wild trout stream could be considered a "nursery" stream, i.e. trout can move back and forth between smaller and larger waters, unless there is some kind of barrier to passage.

Do the right things and you'll get good results. End stocking over wild trout. Remove barriers to passage. Improve riparian and floodplain vegetation. Reconnect streams and their floodplains. Restore streams that have been straightened, channelized, diked and bermed, etc.

If the habitat conditions of the streams with year around populations are improved and stocking is ended on them, their populations will go up. That will improve the numbers of runners as well as the number of stayers.

 

[larkmark]

Add closing the season for fall and winter to protect fish and give them a break and I am on board. Any proposal that doesn't close to protect redd's and vulnerable breeding fish is just not serious.

 

[silverfox]

Chaz wrote:
Only if it’s shown that it won’t impact brook trout populations. Unless pfbc fixes the study to show it won’t, it will. What pfbc should do is raise the size of brook trout to the size the should attain using a similar regulation on brook trout. In my opinion we don’t need more large brown trout, we need to protect what populations we have with the goal of improving brook trout size.

Couldn't agree more. The fact that this petition doesn't even mention brook trout is more than a little concerning.

This suggested reg change from 3 over 7 to 3 under 14 removes any size limit on brook trout. Without qualifying species, and simply referring to "wild trout", that implies that there would be no size limit on brook trout caught below STW boundaries. That's a major problem in my opinion because we know for a fact that brook trout use those same waters for the same reasons.

Frankly, tying cessation of stocking over wild trout with protections for brown trout is a bit underhanded. This is put together like a typical legislative bill for necessary items with pork included. It's all over the place on what it's arguing. Why should I chose between ceasing stocking over wild trout (especially brook trout) which I agree with and protecting non-native species which I don't agree with?

I wonder how these folks would feel about Muskies Inc. petitioning for protections for musky in those same waters? This is what happens when you disregard what is biologically sound management and focus on what anglers want.