NZ Mud-snail outbreak at PA Fish and Boat/Co-op Hatchery confirmed. Invasive NZ Mud-snails transmissible by stocking trout that ingested them.
- Thread starter Fish Sticks
- Start date
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
Yea but the freezers, hydro geologist consultants/water source testing, electrical deterrent devices and redoing all the netting and equipment used by staff for decontamination are an added cost. Hatcheries have already been awarded growing greener money that could have gone to stream/wetland restoration To clean up the effluent that stems from raising so many fish. The price of gas and feed is going up and the nimber of people buying licenses is not keeping pace mandating license fee increases(which id be fine with if the money went to conservation instead of aquatic invasive species production). We know license fee increases have ceiling before you get loss of individual purchasers.
I think the point is what we are doing with the hatchery program is working less and less for people as costs go up and environmental concerns increase in the setting of other a lot of other states leaving us in the dust in terms of stocking reform. Also stream access and overcrowding is an issue that has certainly seen an increase in angler attention/prioritization post pandemic.
Stocking reform is going to have to happen eventually as the gap between other states and ours increases, more native species get listed, more research is done on the effects of other species besides native brook trout, costs get unworkable based on license sales vs. growth of expenses, and more pathogens and AIS get spread as a result of hatcheries. It seems like not rocking the boat socially/politically and procrastinating till native brook trout and other species are on the brink and waiting for the feds to come kick down the door with the endangered species act listing in a short number of decades is the game plan here.
Last edited:
With two hatcheries full of trout, adapting to the immediate problem as they have has been the appropriate route to take. As a fisheries colleague used to say; “when you are up to your keister in allegators, it’s not the time to be asking who drained the pond.”
Last edited:
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
I disagree, i think we just need to stop creating predictable expensive problems and harms to wild native fish
Sharknado5
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2017
- Messages
- 134
The video notes they like limestone streams. Do they do well in freestones also?
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
My question is does the fact that there were co-ops that “already had NZ MS infestations mean PFBC has already spread the mudsnails beyond their hatcheries to begin with. This would mean the efforts they are under taking now would not be primary prevention of an AIS spread event but rather secondary prevention and mitigation of an already transpired/transpiring AIS spread from these hatcheries that are supposedly worth salvaging in name of stocked invasive trout species decimating our state fish?
Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture Lists invasive brown trout as 3rd biggest threat/disturbance in Pa. Lot of people would not have guessed brown trout was ranked above sediment and urbanization in PA.
Invasive rainbows are one of several invasive trout species listed as 4 rth largest threat range wide. Does risking mud snails spread(that may have already happned to 4 co-ops from PG and Benner???) worth it considering this.
Range wide threats
Pa specific disturbances /threats
Notice PA fish and Boat still spending millions a year to create more of disturbance/threat number 3 for PA and threat number 4 range wide in PA. #Aquaculture first. And if those coops were infested by PG and Benner then we can add an AIS outbreak impact to those streams from the hatchery program.
Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture Lists invasive brown trout as 3rd biggest threat/disturbance in Pa. Lot of people would not have guessed brown trout was ranked above sediment and urbanization in PA.
Invasive rainbows are one of several invasive trout species listed as 4 rth largest threat range wide. Does risking mud snails spread(that may have already happned to 4 co-ops from PG and Benner???) worth it considering this.
Range wide threats
Pa specific disturbances /threats
Notice PA fish and Boat still spending millions a year to create more of disturbance/threat number 3 for PA and threat number 4 range wide in PA. #Aquaculture first. And if those coops were infested by PG and Benner then we can add an AIS outbreak impact to those streams from the hatchery program.
Before I would call an improvement, treatment, maintenance, or monitoring program expensive, including ongoing costs, I would want to know the cost per trout (delivered) and amortized over the life of the improvement that has been made. Remember, annually it’s about a 3.1 million trout adult program plus fingerlings.
Last edited:
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
Im calling the entire hatchery program expensive it was 12.4 million dollars in 2009 and just like our gas and food bills the hatchery trouts gas and food has gotten more expensive. In 2009 they had used a growing greener grant for hatchery effluent that could have gone to fixing a problem we were not paying to create in perpetuity. Its way too much when we have not had any published survey data on our state fish in PA since Hudy et al. 2006 while we have streams marked class A brook trout or mixed that have little to no brook trout any more. How come surveying and getting an updated statewide assessment initiative in a timely matter to see how our management strategy(or lack there of) is actually working ? Why is that not just “shifting around some personnel and resources” like you suggested with NZ mudsnail decontamination? Its just that the goal, messaging, and priorities are all wrong and we are reminded time and time again that is stock above all else. We cannot say this program is not too expensive its the in the top two expenses not including the numerous staff it takes out of the equation that could be applied elsewhere. You can say who is going to pay for all this if the stocked trout stop but the truth is we are headed for a financial reality where the serial fee increases to keep ip with expense growth will decrease sales any way.
Do we really want to wait for all the further damage stocked invasive species will cause our state fish just to procrastinate on this inevitable eventuality of costs beating out license sales and depleting reserves? Or should we make some common sense reforms now and shut down a few infested hatcheries that will get re infested with mid snails, cut costs, and take some brook trout streams off the stocking list while redirecting some personel into the feild tonhelp these stretched biologists managing 1/6th the state and responsible for managing like10-12 species in that huge area who can’t keep up with surveys??
I don't think so.
pcray1231
Well-known member
2020 surveys on where mudsnails were found. Many, but certainly not all, of those are limestoners.
Fishing Creek in Clinton County, Jordan and Trout creeks in Lehigh County; Bushkill, Saucon and Monocacy creeks in Northampton County; Perkiomen Creek, in Montgomery County; Tulpehocken and Wyomissing creeks in Berks County; Wissahickon Creek in Philadelphia County; Big Spring Creek and Letort Spring Run in Cumberland County; Pohopoco Creek in Carbon County; East Branch Brandywine Creek in Chester County; Schuylkill River in Berks, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties; and Lehigh River in Lehigh and Northampton counties.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
Penn live article
“cooperative nurseries operated by volunteer conservation organizations in Northampton, Lehigh and Franklin counties, were found to contain the invaders.”
Wonder if the lehigh area streams mentioned above got their mud snails from coops who got them from PG and Benner.
It kills me when the media or websites refer to people engaging in hatchery trout husbandry and stocking “conservation volunteers”.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
Fish & Boat Commission takes emergency steps after invasive species found at hatcheries
The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission has found New Zealand mudsnails in some of its hatcheries.
www.pennlive.com
silverfox
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,928
I always cringe when I see operators of hatcheries defined as "conservation organizations." Those aren't conservation hatcheries, and raising non-native trout isn't conservation. It's the exact opposite.
It should say,
How long will it take before an infestation is sufficient enough to be detectable? Just because they didn't find any a few months after stocking, does that mean it's safe to continue stocking fish from the infested hatcheries in uninfested waters?
I’ve read the article, and while it is informative, there is still a risk that mud snails could be transmitted via stocked trout.
What percent chance of spreading this invasive species are you ok with? For me the answer is 0. I would depopulate immediately and cut my losses. Perhaps some better bio security practices could benefit the hatchery system.
I don’t have much faith the the PFBC will do the right thing here, considering the multitude of other pathogens that their fish carry, including many that have depopulated hatcheries in other state and federal hatcheries.
