Keeping Stockies for the benefit of Wild Trout

[wildtrout2]

ryansheehan wrote:
I prefer to take the other route, harvest those pesky gemmies to make room for the much larger stockers ;-)

Very good! :lol:

 

[tomgamber]

If there are guys at camp to fed, I keep some stockers for dinner. if no one is going to eat them, I leave them in so someone else can catch them. When all that is left in the stream are wild fish, those are the ones people will eat.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

misanthropist wrote:
Stocked trout have an affect on the stream both directly and indirectly. The direct affect is obviously a disruption of the Streams ecosystem and the indirect affect is the crowds of fisherman that these streams attract and the problems they bring: Fishing line tangled up in tree limbs for birds to get tangled in, trash on the ground and so on. This is in stark contrast to a wild trout stream, or at least the ones I fish.

Stocking trout has an affect on a lot more than just wild trout, it has an affect on all living creatures in that particular drainage.

I tend to look at things through the eyes of an ecologist and not a fisherman.

Exactly! Very well stated.

 

[Lkyboots]

I like a Trout dinner but wouldn't eat a freshly stocked Trout. Their flesh is mushy and has a grey look. The only Trout I'll eat are what we used to call pinkys. After a Trout has been in the stream for awhile their flesh turns a nice pinkish and firms up. I use to keep one nice Brownie a year for my parents. If I caught a nice 16 or 18 inch brownie that had nice color I'd keep it for them.

 

[troutbert]

Lkyboots wrote:
I like a Trout dinner but wouldn't eat a freshly stocked Trout. Their flesh is mushy and has a grey look. The only Trout I'll eat are what we used to call pinkys. After a Trout has been in the stream for awhile their flesh turns a nice pinkish and firms up. I use to keep one nice Brownie a year for my parents. If I caught a nice 16 or 18 inch brownie that had nice color I'd keep it for them.

Most of the trout people describe as having "been in the stream awhile" are wild trout, not stocked trout.

 

[troutbert]

If you cook them with bacon, they taste good. Because they taste like bacon.

 

[Wild_Trouter]

Dave-
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Falling Springs DHALO should have stocking terminated. That stream section should be surveyed for conclusive proof that it is likely Class A. I agree with your general assessment that most DHALOs suffer thermal problems in the Summer and thus aren't hurt by creeling fish. With this particular stream, I don't think it should be stocked or allow for harvest. The last few years, I have found more and more wild rainbows in the upper half of the project water coupled with a pretty robust population of wild browns that only gets better as you head down to Walker Avenue.

 

[salmonoid]

misanthropist wrote:
Stocked trout have an affect on the stream both directly and indirectly. The direct affect is obviously a disruption of the Streams ecosystem and the indirect affect is the crowds of fisherman that these streams attract and the problems they bring: Fishing line tangled up in tree limbs for birds to get tangled in, trash on the ground and so on. This is in stark contrast to a wild trout stream, or at least the ones I fish.

Stocking trout has an affect on a lot more than just wild trout, it has an affect on all living creatures in that particular drainage.

I tend to look at things through the eyes of an ecologist and not a fisherman.

Wild trout streams are not immune to fishing line tangled in limbs, trash on the ground, and so on. I've found San Juan worms in trees on a class A stream in Cambria county at least two miles from a road (cleaned it up by adding it to my fly box), a bobber and line and glob of Power Bait stuck in a tree on another stream closer to home, and several containers of Power Bait that must have fallen out of an unsuspecting angler's vest on another Class A stream, a few miles off the beaten path. Oh, and that reminds me of what appeared to be deep sea line and hook that had been embedded in a stream a good ways from a road on another Class A.

Angling has an affect on fish, stocked or wild, and the stream they are in, no matter what eyes you look through.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

salmonoid wrote:
Wild trout streams are not immune to fishing line tangled in limbs, trash on the ground, and so on....Angling has an affect on fish, stocked or wild, and the stream they are in, no matter what eyes you look through.

True enough. However, there can be little doubt the negative effects are magnified by increased angling pressure. The A-holes are in every crowd to a greater or lesser degree. It's a numbers game.

I think your examples are the exception, not the rule. A metric could be volume of litter per stream mile. How do you think easily accessed stock streams would rank after opening weekend as compared to wild, unstocked streams any time of year?

The point is, the white trucks are beacons to anglers, therefore increasing the angling pressure on limited streams manifold. There is also a culture of entitlement tied to stocking.

Ironically, many of the same folks who scream at any reduction in stocking will rail at other entitlement programs that mainly help minorities.

 

[Mike]

misanthropist,
It appears (did not do an extensive search) that the jury is still out on the ecological effects of stocking adult trout on macros and other fish species. My quick search suggested that the impacts on macroinvertebrates were equivocal. As for the impact on non-game stream fishes, the one study that I recall was published relatively recently and revealed no impact.

Meanwhile, the only stream where I ever noted what appeared to be a substantive impact on minnow abundance was in a C&R fly stretch, not the regular stocked trout stretch on the same stream. The C&R fly stretch was stocked adequately by the PFBC, but sportsmen added many additional trout and the density of stocked trout appeared to be too high ecologically, and certainly higher than I would have liked to see in any stocked stretch. The difference in minnow abundance between the fly stretch and the "bait" stretch was clear. A year later the sportsmen cut way back on the stocking of that CRFFO based on the results.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Do more than a quick search and report back the studies you are citing. If In fact, you are unable to find such a study, showing the effects of stocking on macro life, I will provide you with some.
The jury is only out because they ruled on the subject long ago

 

[KenU]

In small, low-fertility, freestone streams. most wild trout growth occurs during the early spring months whenever water temperatures and levels are favorable. During summer, they just get by. Weight gains are just adequate enough for them to develop eggs and sperm and gain sufficient weight to get thru the fall spawn and then winter. Actually some will not and perish by the time the stream again has favorable conditions for growth. Trout living in such streams are always balanced on the edge of survival.

Knowing what we do now, imagine the additional stress imposed on the wild trout population by stocking over them. How can anybody still believe that stocking massive numbers of hatchery trout, and the ensuing harvesting that it encourages, does not have a deleterious effect on wild trout survival and growth? And most studies have shown this to be the fact. That a few have not means nothing. Do enough studies and a few will always reach a different conclusion, especially if they are done by those with an inclination to favor one result over another.

 

[tomitrout]

Hypothetical question/too lazy to parse the rule book....

If I toss a stockie on the bank like some folks do to fall fish and chubs, but don't take it home to eat, does that count towards my daily limit?

What if I string one up early in the day, then release it later in favor of a fresher/bigger catch, and it drifts away belly up (ooops), does that one count towards my daily limit?

All for the benefit of the wild fish of course...

 

[streamerguy]

I've kept stockies out of wild streams. Does it help in the grand scheme of things, idk. But at the very least I'd like to think it does help out a few individual wild fish, until they dump the next batch of stockies.

tomitrout wrote:
Hypothetical question/too lazy to parse the rule book....

If I toss a stockie on the bank like some folks do to fall fish and chubs, but don't take it home to eat, does that count towards my daily limit?

What if I string one up early in the day, then release it later in favor of a fresher/bigger catch, and it drifts away belly up (ooops), does that one count towards my daily limit?

All for the benefit of the wild fish of course...

Yes and yes, in both instances they count towards your limit. Take them home and do as you wish.

Anyone that tosses native fall fish or chubs on the bank needs their license revoked, especially if their reasoning is "they're bait stealers, they eat trout eggs/trout food, etc..". Just flat out stupid. No different than tossing a native brookie on the bank to die. That's my personal opinion.

 

[salmonoid]

tomitrout wrote:
Hypothetical question/too lazy to parse the rule book....

If I toss a stockie on the bank like some folks do to fall fish and chubs, but don't take it home to eat, does that count towards my daily limit?

What if I string one up early in the day, then release it later in favor of a fresher/bigger catch, and it drifts away belly up (ooops), does that one count towards my daily limit?

All for the benefit of the wild fish of course...

You've creeled a fish in both cases.

It is unlawful to:

"To kill any fish and fail to make a reasonable effort to lawfully dispose of it."

"To fail to immediately return unharmed to the waters from which it was taken, any fish caught out of season, or undersize, or over the daily creel limit. Any fish placed on a stringer, in any container or given away, counts toward the possession limit of the person having caught it, and the person to whom it was given."