Challenge to all Trout Camps

[GeneBeam]

Maybe you guys should read this:

https://www.fishandboat.com/Fish/Fisheries/TroutPlan/Documents/TroutPlan2020.pdf

Strategic Plan for Management of Trout Fisheries in Pennsylvania 2020-2024

Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission

Jason Detar, Kris Kuhn, Dave Nihart, Tyler Neimond, Scott Bollinger, Tom Cochran,

Brian McHail, Charles Murray, and Rob Brown

Stocking hatchery Brook Trout into watersheds where wild Brook Trout are present can potentially have a negative impact on wild Brook Trout populations. Potential negative impacts include introgression of hatchery genes into wild trout populations, increased angling mortality of wild Brook Trout, spread of diseases and pathogens, and displacement of wild Brook Trout.

Strategies:

• By 2020, cease distribution of Brook Trout fingerlings to the 22 cooperative nurseries located

in and/or stock fish into watersheds where wild Brook Trout reside.

• Between 2020 and 2022, Area Fisheries Managers will eliminate the stocking of Brook Trout in watersheds where wild Brook Trout reside. Rainbow Trout will primarily be stocked in place of Brook Trout.

• Between 2020 and 2024, the DFM will work with Bureau of Hatcheries to substantially
reduce the production of Brook Trout at all PFBC state fish hatcheries and cooperative
nurseries. Additional Rainbow Trout, golden Rainbow Trout, and/or Brown Trout will be
produced to replace the Brook Trout. No reduction in total number of trout produced at state fish hatcheries is planned.

• Through 2024, as needed, update the trout stocking fact sheet and outreach plan to explain the benefits of reduced Brook Trout production and increased use of Rainbow Trout and/or Brown Trout in the catchable trout program.

 

[krayfish2]

Stock golden. They are sterile, they attract anglers with OCD and predators. Holding over isn't likely AND they are so genetically jacked up, they don't act like a normal trout. They try to live in strange places where no normal trout would live. They do seem a tad aggressive toward other fish though

How are they doing at adhering to their plan of no stocking over wild brook trout populations? 🤣

 

[Swattie87]

Stock golden.

There’s been far worse serious ideas kicked around in these threads.

 

[troutbert]

How are they doing at adhering to their plan of no stocking over wild brook trout populations? 🤣

It doesn't say they will do that.

 

[GeneBeam]

It doesn't say they will do that.

• By 2020, cease distribution of Brook Trout fingerlings to the 22 cooperative nurseries located
in and/or stock fish into watersheds where wild Brook Trout reside.

 

[troutbert]

• By 2020, cease distribution of Brook Trout fingerlings to the 22 cooperative nurseries located
in and/or stock fish into watersheds where wild Brook Trout reside.

That section was worded clumsily. But the whole piece is about ending stocking of hatchery brook trout where they might harm native brook trout populations. From the context, that is what they meant.

They didn't mean they are going to quit stocking fishing in watersheds where brook trout reside. If they tried that, they better have another job lined up.

 

[wildtrout2]

It wasn't above the main falls, but there are smaller falls below. Big bend hole, rock cliff, kinda separates lower from upper in my mind because it's where you hit if you come in from the top to fish the upper end, you know it. It was the run immediately below that hole, in sight of. First brown I've ever caught in that stream and I've fished it some, ran into you once! But I knew you had caught them before so I wasn't fully surprised, just surprised how high it was.

This was a 100ish fish day after 2+ inches of rain in August. Guy with me had a similar day. It was the only brown encountered, so 1 in 200ish on this day and probably closer to 1 in 1000 in my lifetime there. But I do not think he was a temporary resident that came up from the stream below, they're reproducing in there.

After thinking about this situation a little more, I'm amazed that brown trout got above the old dam! That thing is no less than four feet high, and maybe five feet. It would take an awful big rain event for the stream to rise enough for a trout to pass above it, and that would mean he fought a very strong current to achieve it. A very determined trout.

 

[krayfish2]

Hey, the browns have evolved to walk on land like a snakehead and are genetically programmed to kill brook trout. Just think of the terminator movie but with fish

 

[Fish Sticks]

Hey, the browns have evolved to walk on land like a snakehead and are genetically programmed to kill brook trout. Just think of the terminator movie but with fish

I know its crazy they figured out how to move on land. I saw one doing it yesterday and took a picture.

They can even go up steps now

 

[silverfox]

I know its crazy they figured out how to move on land. I saw one doing it yesterday and took a picture.

View attachment 1641227959

They can even go up steps now

I can't imagine why anyone would think moving trout around would be a bad idea. The messaging is so clear.

 

[pcray1231]

After thinking about this situation a little more, I'm amazed that brown trout got above the old dam! That thing is no less than four feet high, and maybe five feet. It would take an awful big rain event for the stream to rise enough for a trout to pass above it, and that would mean he fought a very strong current to achieve it. A very determined trout.

I don't believe its a traveler. Back in the early days, before the hatchery system was established, they brought eggs in from Europe, hatched them, and shipped em as fingerlings to everybody who wanted them. They carried them on backpack to the headwaters of soooo many streams, they'd target the upper end of them all to let em spread down through. Not saying there's zero reproduction from stockies, or that travelling browns aren't a thing, but thats when our wild brown trout populations took hold, and the genetic basis for most of our populations. The modern stockies are "hatcherified" and inferior genetically, and add a fairly small (not zero) contribution to the genetic makeup of wild brown trout populations.

A lot of these streams, including this one it seems, carry low level reproducing populations of browns and have for a very long time. I have been told of browns caught above the big falls too, although just by a stranger I passed once on the way out, but I believed him. Who knows what that upper road was like way back then, but most likely the population was planted from the upper end. And there's a bunch of streams that are similarly "impossible" to have browns, but do, and it makes you wonder how 1 in 1000 can hold on like that without growing in % or dying off, but they do.

If it was a traveller its more likely it came DOWN. I never fished the way upper reaches, but the gradient is lower up there and it wouldnt shock me if there's more browns in the intermittent headwaters than there are in the steep sections.

 

[wildtrout2]

I don't believe its a traveler. Back in the early days, before the hatchery system was really established, they gave fingerlings to everybody who wanted them. They carried them on backpack to the headwaters of soooo many streams. Not saying there's zero reproduction from stockies, or that travelling browns aren't a thing, but thats when our wild brown trout populations took hold.

A lot of these streams, including this one it seems, carry low level reproducing populations of browns and have for a very long time. I have been told of browns caught above the big falls too, although just by a stranger I passed once on the way out, but I believed him. Who knows what that upper road was like way back then, but most likely the population was planted from the upper end. And there's a bunch of streams that are similarly "impossible" to have browns, but do, and it makes you wonder how 1 in 1000 can hold on like that without growing in % or dying off, but they do.

If it was a traveller its more likely it came DOWN. I never fished the way upper reaches, but the gradient is lower up there and it wouldnt shock me if there's more browns in the intermittent headwaters than there are in the steep sections.

That's interesting. I've fished Jeans from it's headwater source, which is in Hughes Swamp, all the way down. I have pics of Jeans actually coming up out of the forest floor as it begins it's journey downstream. I thought it was very cool when I first saw that!

It's a very unique experience fishing in that swamp, which looks like bear country, catching very small natives in a two foot wide "stream". Never caught any wild browns up there.

 

[Swattie87]

I wonder in situations like this…Brookie stream with a few rogue Browns, that have barriers, how a male and female Brown can find each other amongst all the Brookies.

How do they tell their prospective mate is a Brown, and not a Brookie?

Do many of them attempt to mate with a Brookie, and the reproductive success of making little Tiger Trout is just that low?

Interesting stuff.

I’ve never caught a Brown in Jeans, though I’ve only fished it twice. I’ve caught Browns in the Nesquehoning in the hole at Jeans mouth though.

 

[wildtrout2]

It is interesting stuff. That's why my tiger from Jeans flips me out, the ungodly poor odds of that happening there.

 

[pcray1231]

Do many of them attempt to mate with a Brookie, and the reproductive success of making little Tiger Trout is just that low?

Yeah from what I understand its incredibly low. They aren't even closely related, brook trout aren't trout. They have a different number of chromosomes.

It's gotta be a male brookie and female brown. They spawn at slightly different times, and in slightly different location, and the eggs resist being fertilized. Even when they are fertilized the chances of a fertilized egg turning into a fry is like single digits low. In the hatchery they do some weird stuff with temperature, I think they actually heat shock the eggs to make them mutate and add chromosomes, which greatly increases the odds of fertilizion and survival, but the eggs are mutant before even being fertilized.

Point being you get a whole lot of fish trying before you ever get a single tiger, and apparantly you never get like a large batch of tigers, so even when the stars align that 1 fry surviving to adulthood are low odds. From my armchair, most wild tigers I've heard of seem to come from streams that are dominated by brookies. A female brown that can't find a male brown. And the 1 I've caught came from a brookie stream I've had people say was "allopatric", though I did catch 1 brown and 1 tiger in it.

Hope trying is as fun for them as it is for us. The wild tiger is like nature's birth control failing.

 

[Mike]

Precocial young, small, male fish, called “sneakers” in the scientific literature, take advantage of the spawning activity and are known to cross breed. This is one of the mechanisms for tiger production.

 

[troutbert]

2006 Biologist Report - Kistler Run, Wolf Swamp Run, Jeans Run

This report is on electrofishing surveys on Jeans Run and 2 other streams in NE PA. Only brook trout are mentioned.

I don't know if that means only brook trout, no browns, were found. But you'd think if browns were present they would mention that in their report.

I've seen many other electrofishing survey reports, and where there were mixed populations, they always listed both species.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I wonder in situations like this…Brookie stream with a few rogue Browns, that have barriers, how a male and female Brown can find each other amongst all the Brookies.

How do they tell their prospective mate is a Brown, and not a Brookie?

Do many of them attempt to mate with a Brookie, and the reproductive success of making little Tiger Trout is just that low?

Interesting stuff.

I’ve never caught a Brown in Jeans, though I’ve only fished it twice. I’ve caught Browns in the Nesquehoning in the hole at Jeans mouth though.

There is a concept called “biotic resistance” meaning not the stream itself but instead the organisms can deter invasion. Environmental resistance is when the stream, climate, or surrounding areas deter invasion(example floods when introduced non native species would spawn when there would not be floods where native). I have always suspected if what you just mentioned(trouble finding a mate) is part of that biotic resistance or part of why some streams with micro population of browns like the savage never experience species shift or extirpation. Or i did not know if it was direct competition or not regardless of spawning, i don’t think scientists do either. You guys talking about the skew of high brook trout to brown trout ratio on jeans made me think of two interesting publications I have read on this topic suggesting just such a density dependent biotic resistance. Its this principle of biotic resistance that makes me very curious and optimistic for some streams if the brown trout stocking simply stopped with no removal at all .

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357133118_High_densities_of_conspecifics_buffer_native_fish_from_negative_interactions_with_an_ecologically_similar_invasive

https://www.montana.edu/mcmahon/Paradox%20book%20chapter.pdf

“Less traditional options for management of Brown Trout are promising and wor- thy of further study (Budy and Gaeta 2017). First, biotic resistance (Elton 1958), expressed as high density of native Cutthroat Trout, is the mechanism limiting ex- pansion and establishment of Brown Trout into upper headwaters of western U.S. streams. Although Brown Trout are unaffected by high density of native Cutthroat Trout, Cutthroat Trout performance increases with increasing density of conspecific species. Therefore, if Cutthroat Trout density is high enough, Brown Trout may not be able to expand, which is promising for native fish management, The potential for biotic resistance suggests that shifting the balance of predominance back to native fish may be sufficient, rather than trying to eradicate Brown Trout. Second, nonna- tive Brown Trout have difficulty passing American beaver Castor canadensis dams that do not impede native Cutthroat Trout (Lokteff et al. 2013). This presents a poten- tially promising management option for passive stream restoration across the western United States (e.g., Pollock et al. 2015), as beaver dam densities increase in the future. Third, natural large-scale wildfire can be used to reset native trout stream ecosystems (Chapter 18). After a fire that may kill many of the Brown Trout present, any surviving Brown Trout can be removed and streams restocked with native trout. In such cases, fire can help with public support because public agencies are not directly responsible for removing Brown Trout, but they provide the means to reestablish fishing opportu- nities with native trout in a postfire environment. In the western United States, more than 80% of anglers do not prefer Brown Trout to other trout as long as they can fish in a mountain stream to catch trout (Budy and Gaeta 2017). This general angler at- titude enables Brown Trout removal in conjunction with native trout conservation (Saunders et al. 2014).”

 

[pcray1231]

This report is on electrofishing surveys on Jeans Run and 2 other streams in NE PA. Only brook trout are mentioned.

I don't know if that means only brook trout, no browns, were found. But you'd think if browns were present they would mention that in their report.

Yeah I've seen that too. But I've seen that on A LOT of streams where I've caught a brown or two.

They are rare, but there. Not calling the fish commission liars. They shock a relatively small section and none were in that particular section at that particular time. You see a lot of others where they turn up like 1 brown, too. As Swattie mentioned, it'll be listed class A brookues but the biomass will read 50 something kg/h brookies and 0.8 kg/h browns. In the small section shocked, thats probably like 1 fish. And its just as likely they find 0, but that doesnt mean its truly allopatric.

We have 2 people talking in this thread who have caught browns there, including pretty high above multiple barriers, 1 tiger, stories of browns from others. Asking questions about other streams we think are purely brookies reveals this is NORMAL.

And more often than not, the size and appearance of the fish, the location, etc, suggest they are not just a random travelling fish. Yes there are situations where large browns from a large waterway run up small streams. But they tend to be obvious. They seem like they don't belong in the same community. More often when you get up in there a ways, I find fish that do belong.

 

[Swattie87]

FWIW the two Tigers I’ve personally caught did not come from predominantly Brookie streams, with a small token Brown population. I have the survey data on both. One was almost exactly 50/50 by biomass, which does suggest more Brookies by numbers, when accounting for the typical size differences between the species in a small freestone environment. The second is roughly 90/10 Browns by biomass. At least when they were last surveyed, understanding that these figures fluctuate. But I would consider the first a mixed stream, and the second a Brown Trout stream, if asked to describe them.

Though, I don’t disagree with your point Pat. Most of the Tigers I know caught by friends do come from Brook Trout dominant streams, and my experience seems a bit of an outlier.