brown trout selective harvest?

[glamcaster]

Hello all

How do people feel about intentionally removing/harvesting brown trout from sympatric brook/brown trout streams?? More and more, I find myself feeling guilty for releasing browns. Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.

My home stream holds Class A brown trout, where the population is revered as a game fish. Pa's wild brown streams are a real privilege in many senses. Lots of conservation and economic activity stems from the European salmonid. That being said, brown trout are undoubtedly an invasive species. Many brown trout streams remain

 

[Swattie87]

glamcaster wrote:

Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.

I have to assume to interpret this to mean you are always fishing a general regulations stream and that you catch 5 or less Browns, all of which are greater than 7” long, and that you only fish during the months where such “dispatching” is allowed on these “outings”. Otherwise, it would be silly (at best) to post something like that on a publicly viewable website. We’ll assume that’s the case. If it’s not, you may want to PM a moderator and ask that they delete this thread.

While there are ecological arguments to be debated on whether systemically targeting and removing removing Brown Trout from watersheds that have native Brook Trout in them is a good practice, keep in mind there are also currently laws in place (in PA anyway) that would largely prevent it, unless done in accordance with those laws.

 

[McSneek]

glamcaster wrote:
Hello all

Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.

You should be embarrassed to admit this on a public forum.

 

[jifigz]

McSneek wrote:

glamcaster wrote:
Hello all

Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.

You should be embarrassed to admit this on a public forum.

No, you shouldn't be embarrassed to admit this. Mcsneek, you should be emabrassed to judge someone so soon and criticize someone that may not fit into your ideals of trout management.

If glamcaster harvests trout that are legal and follows all PFBC regulations, he has nothing to be embarrassed about. Stop the shaming of people who keep a wild brown trout.

I basically release every thing I catch, but I'm not going to complain at those who don't.

There are going to be many here that support the removal of browns from brookie waters.

 

[afishinado]

McSneek wrote:

glamcaster wrote:
Hello all

Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.

You should be embarrassed to admit this on a public forum.

I have no issue with an angler legally harvesting brown trout in the open harvest season, meeting the legal size requirements and not exceeding the daily limit in a stream dominated by brook trout.

 

[glamcaster]

glamcaster wrote:
Hello all

Admittedly, I have outings where every brook is released, and every brown is dispatched.


[/quote]

You should be embarrassed to admit this on a public forum. [/quote]


I have no issue with an angler legally harvesting brown trout in the open harvest season, meeting the legal size requirements and not exceeding the daily limit in a stream dominated by brook trout.[/quote]

Thank you--should have prefaced that my actions abide by PFBC guidelines in my initial post. I understand some of the gasps here, but people seem to forget that brown Trout are European in every sense; a species poised for success against brook trout in the age of development and sedimentation.

Still, I appreciate all feedback

 

[McSneek]

I stand by what I said. He “dispatches” them. Is that taking a few home to eat or tossing them in the bushes?

 

[larkmark]

Brown Trout are here to stay. Trying to exterminate them won't work and is really kind of extreme and ridiculous especially in the suburban settings you describe. Keep in mind this is a fly fishing site and one of the things true fly fishermen can take pride in is the catch and release ethic. Brook Trout will succeed or fail but not because you decide to take it into your own hands to kill all the nice legal or non legal Browns you can catch. Just my take.

 

[glamcaster]

McSneek wrote:
I stand by what I said. He “dispatches” them. Is that taking a few home to eat or tossing them in the bushes?

Hey McSneak, I'm here lol. I have some neighbors who appreciate brown trout, but I don't eat them myself. It's a shame this conversation strayed away from conservation; the main purpose of my post if that was in doubt.

Us commoners all share streams that are legally accessible to us, and I'm curious what others' hopes and fishing practices are. While I prioritize brook trout in my own fishing and activism, many don't. That's ok, and every fisherperson has their place in Pennsylvania. I know less than I'd like, and simply want to change that

 

[glamcaster]

larkmark wrote:
Brown Trout are here to stay. Trying to exterminate them won't work and is really kind of extreme and ridiculous especially in the suburban settings you describe. Keep in mind this is a fly fishing site and one of the things true fly fishermen can take pride in is the catch and release ethic. Brook Trout will succeed or fail but not because you decide to take it into your own hands to kill all the nice legal or non legal Browns you can catch. Just my take.

Hey Larkmark, thank you for your take. The streams I'm referring to are generally gameland with a few state park ones in there. No where did I say I "kill all the nice legal or non-legal browns" I catch. I think anyone's license would be yanked doing that, regardless of motive or tact. Sorry that my affinity for native trout welfare reduces me from "true fly fisherman" status..

 

[Swattie87]

glamcaster wrote:
No where did I say I "kill all the nice legal or non-legal browns" I catch.

In post #1, you said you kill “every” Brown (on some outings in locations where they coexist with native Brook Trout).

Perhaps it’s not what you meant to say, but most would interpret “every” to include “all the nice legal or non-legal browns” on those outings. And that’s how I interpreted your initial post. Right or wrong.

Glad to hear whatever it is you’re doing is within the law. Given where you live, I’m sure it’s on many of the same local streams I sometimes fish, and frankly, I wish you weren’t doing it.

I’m all for keeping Browns from getting into places they don’t currently exist. That said, if they’re already there, what you’re doing is simply a waste. And while it may be legal (assuming you’re on general regs streams, do it less than 5 times per day, all with fish over 7” long, and only during the open harvest season), it’s in poor sporting taste. If you want a few to eat, no problem, that’s cool, but leave the ecology of our streams to biologists.

I’m sure there’s plenty of guys on this forum who largely agree with you in terms of Brown Trout displacing Brook Trout. I’m also sure that despite that, they don’t engage in the angler behavior you’re describing and condoning here. That’s likely why the conversation “strayed” in the direction it did.

 

[Swattie87]

I noticed in another thread you mentioned you caught “wayyy too many Browns” recently on Segloch Run. The last time I fished there, I failed to turn up any fish in a few of the nicer holes that typically hold the nicer fish, usually a Brown Trout. I caught a few dinks, both Browns and Brookies, in the little pockets, but found it odd I didn’t turn up or see anything in the good lies. Coincidence? I hope so.

On a positive note, you’ve gotten larkmark and I to agree on something. So that’s good.

 

[glamcaster]

Swattie87 wrote:
I noticed in another thread you mentioned you caught “wayyy too many Browns” recently on Segloch Run. The last time I fished there, I failed to turn up any fish in a few of the nicer holes that typically hold the nicer fish, usually a Brown Trout. I caught a few dinks, both Browns and Brookies, in the little pockets, but found it odd I didn’t turn up or see anything in the good lies. Coincidence? I hope so.

On a positive note, you’ve gotten larkmark and I to agree on something. So that’s good.

OMG :hammer: she did her homework. I think I caught 2 browns approaching 7 inch that outing, both released. That is a stream which I took to be brown-dominated--unfortunate but still a trout fishery with recreational value. I would compare Seglogh to Hawk Run in terms of population ratio. As I said in my initial post, my brown trout harvest has had some "success" in streams dominant with brook trout. Brownier streams such as seglogh, are off limits for me. Just as you said, brown and brook trout subsist well together, there.

I'm kind of done bumping into semantics here; I sometimes harvest brown trout from 2x species streams. I weigh that decision on whether or not brook trout would likely benefit from the niche previously occupied by the brown trout. I stand behind that. It would be great if we could shift this away from a witch hunt. Anyone care to discuss conservation??

 

[Swattie87]

glamcaster wrote:
Anyone care to discuss conservation??

We are. You started the thread. The sentiment so far mostly disagrees with you. That’s not a witch hunt. That’s a discussion.

I don’t think killing wild Brown Trout without the intent to at least enjoy eating them, from areas where they are already established makes good conservation sense. I think it’s a waste. But I’ve already said that. I’ll let the rest of the board weigh in. I’ve been wrong plenty of times before, and stand willing to be wrong here too.

 

[McSneek]

I’m with Swattie on this one and am obviously opposed to Glamcaster’s “conservation” methods especially when I see his reports about fishing some of the streams in my neck of the woods that have wild trout.

To think that legally harvesting a few barely legal wild brown trout is going to tip the scales in favor of a small population of brook trout is absurd.

 

[jifigz]

I don't agree with the practice as a "conservation" strategy. I am not overly upset and I don't worry about browns (in fact, I love em) and I release them. I do keep one or two every 3 or 4 years, though.

I just don't want someone to be criticized for following the law for harvesting trout if it was done legally.

 

[Swattie87]

To be clear, now that it’s been seemingly clarified by the OP to be legal harvesting, I’m not being critical of their legal harvesting. I’m being critical of their legal harvesting methods as an attempted “conservation” strategy.

If someone posted on here “I catch my limit of 5 legal size wild Trout daily for the table”, though I probably wouldn’t like it much, you wouldn’t hear a peep from me on that. I keep a handful of fish/year to eat, and I’ve been criticized before on here for that. I get that. The OP acknowledges not harvesting them to eat. Wonder if it will be explained exactly what he does with them, and whether that will change any minds?

 

[troutbert]

Killing a few wild browns will have a negligible benefit to brook trout.

But, ending stocking over native brook trout would cause significant increases in their populations.

There is a petition about this in the General Forum.

 

[tabasco_joe]

Trying to remove all the brown trout from a stream which also supports brookies is an impossible task. Energy better spent on other projects to benefit wild trout.

 

[BradFromPotter]

How's this for selective harvest of browns... A old timer I meet when I moved to Potter almost 30years ago told me what he would do on certain "holes" along some of the streams here was to cover deep holes along small streams with brush so you really could not get a cast into. He would then remove the brush the night before & come back in the morning & drift a big juicy nightcrawler through the whole & most time catch a really nice brown & take it home. He would cover the hole over again & do the same thing a couple of weeks later & he usually wouyld catch another big brown.