I saw that as well if we didn’t have removals all over the east in small systems that bring back brook trout id deff want to look further down the rabbit hole. I think what that points out is that the effect of stocking on top of wild populations is much more harmful. However if the top 30 invasive species in n planet earth was indeed that benign we wouldnt see brook trout come back when nothing in the stream has changed except the presence of brown trout
Yea brookies are falling off the map. The survey data does not show it but there are class A’s allover the state that say brook trout that are all brown trout. There are class A mixed populations that are all just browns as well. There are class A brook trout streams that are now mixed. alot of these are in SF, SGL, and other relatively undisturbed places I can think of Old growth hemlock stands that are basically small streams in pre-colonial conditions that have browns in them. The tunnel vision on habitat and the myth that brook trout need reverse osmosis level water cleanliness killed us. No one wanted to see it because of the romanticism for brown trout created by authors and the fly fishing culture that out them on a pedastool. Then vince marinao impregnated charlie fox and dudeman special was born
Maybe I would be a better caster if this were true.
This always eventually happens. People see the the sobering findings from the fisheries science side and it differs from the fallacy created in fly fishing lure that building brown trout bunkers and starting new populations in tailwaters is “conservation”. All of a sudden sinply creating more of a sporting experience they like does not have the feel good “conservation” tag applied to it. Dysphoria usually ensues. Then people start trying to do the desperate mental gymnastics to connect harvesting the brown trout and the holocaust or some sort of ethnic cleansing. Only problem is europeans don’t meet definition of invasive species because we migrated. If someone made you by stripping milt from your progenitors and fertilizing an egg in a hatchery, sailed across the atlantic and stocked you and some friends in an area occupied by native americans youd be an invasive. But the migration and no other being planting you is what makes you not invasive species. Smithsonian published on this topic and gave that answer a while back. If we ever find out there is a species known as the galgamecks that travels from galaxy to galaxy trafficking species that put us in earth we are TOTALLY invasive.
You just can't admit you are what you hate so much, can you?
Again after being presented with more logic The invasivespecies-o-phile runs hiding for the realm of the subjective and what aboutisms. Operantly conditioned to salivate from the brown trout stimulus and negatively conditioned to scowl when the conservation stimulus is introduced the subject will display dysphoria and rage at the thought of an non utopian brown trout-verse populated by people who believe fly fishing in itself and creating their preferred fly fishing set up in natures watercourses equivalent to 18 hole planned manicured golf courses is conservation. We need some sociology grad students to record this interaction
It is cute hearing you talking about logic as if you have any real concept of what that is.
I mean I think people highly socially entrained to make the phrase “invasive brown trout” sound like nails on a chalk board to the point that it seems more logical to them to try to make human comparisons with people persecuting humans instead of just admitting stocking less insanely expensive invasive species is reasonable is not logical and pretty extremist. Hence the sociology grads.
I, like most people on this board, agree that native brook trout should not be stocked over.
Only the grossly uninformed would fall for this comparison. The Erie steelhead fishery is entirely man-made and would cease to exist once stocking of smolts stopped. It is as much an artificial fishery as the trout pond at at Sea World.
