Wait.....so we're bringing semantics back into it? Well if the state were to only stocks triploid rainbows incapable of reproducing then they aren't invasive, right? They are only temporarily disruptive.
There is the PFBC's next move.
Your plan to end Stocking over Wild
- Thread starter Stenonema
- Start date
There is the PFBC's next move.
Fish Sticks
Well-known member
triploids are not 100% triploid there is a six sigma issue with producing just like anything else. Some can reproduce. Now its a spectrum, is it better than browns? Is it better than rainbows that all can reproduce? Yes. Am i going to fight it if they go to a lower number of triploids? No.
But I don’t know how much gene flow they suppress, how much displacement from thermal refuge they displace brook trout from, or how many YoY they eat compared to regular rainbows/browns. Alot of these sterile fish can be more aggressive since energy is not out into spawning.
Shawn Joseph
Active member
Unfortunately, I think until the majority of trout stamp purchasers value native and wild trout fisheries over stocked trout you won’t see the rate of change that you want. It’s supply and demand. Interesting fact, brown and rainbow trout are in the top 100 of most invasive species in the world. I enjoy stocked trout in local waters near me that don’t support wild trout (put and take streams). I love to cook. So the stocked trout in warm water streams go right to the smoker. I C & R brookies and wild trout. The biologists know what’s best I believe. But then again, you have that thing called politics…
Regards,
Shawn
Regards,
Shawn
wildtrout2
Well-known member
You MUST buy the trout stamp to fish for trout in Pa. I value native/wild trout as much as anybody. In fact, I only fish wild, unstocked streams. So, there's that.
I'm basically funding something that I don't benefit from.
Last edited:
Shawn Joseph
Active member
I’m not trying to get into an argument, not my style. I think the majority of trout stamp purchasers are into the stocked trout vs. native or wild is what I was saying. I have been fishing for 30 years. I obviously know you have to buy a trout stamp to fish for trout.
Shawn Joseph
Active member
I meant don’t value native and wild trout fisheries over stocked. Typo
Many people also wouldn't have learned the value of wild trout without first being exposed to stocked trout. I'm not saying stocked trout are a necessity to people finding wild trout in the future, I'm speaking of the past.
wildtrout2
Well-known member
Admittedly, I'm one of those who learned (many years ago) from fishing for stocked trout. I've since mended my ways. 😉
Shawn Joseph
Active member
I agree with that. I’m one of them as well. The older I get the less absolute I get in my stances. So many moving pieces.
Nittanycane
New member
Not a proposal to end stocking over wild fish per se, however why are all trout treated the same for harvest on these streams? The game commission expects hunters to count points prior to taking a shot. In the streams that are Class A and receive stockings (Penns, BFC, Kish), the fish commission can require anglers to release BTs in streams that are Class A and receive stockings.
Education, through a harvest restriction, can potentially lead to more understanding of the valued resources that exist in the state. This can be a good first step.
Education, through a harvest restriction, can potentially lead to more understanding of the valued resources that exist in the state. This can be a good first step.
Why would I not be allowed to harvest a wild trout (especially an invasive brown) for the table in a responsible manner when we continue to overfish our oceans at an alarming rate?
I'm tired of the disdain people look at on others for harvesting game fish responsibly. In that regard I used to be one of them who would look down at people with a stringer of bass or a wild trout, I've since mended my ways.
silverfox
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,928
Well said. That's at the crux of the issue for brook trout. Why are brook trout treated exactly the same as any other species, in some cases (slot limit) treated worse, and yet are the only "trout" in the state wildlife action plan listed in need of conservation?
From a purely biological standpoint, are C&R regs going to result in more brook trout? In some cases, maybe; in others, no, however, angling regs serve as an educational tool (as you put it) that likely has more value than the results of the regulation itself. That's an important angle that is likely lost when everything is viewed through the strict lens of natural resource management and fish counting.
I've heard the argument repeatedly that "if all these anglers fished for wild trout, there would be no wild trout left" in defense of stocking. Imagine if the PGC allowed each hunter to harvest 32 whitetails every season and then made up for the mess it caused by propagating and stocking deer. Sounds absurd right?
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
We over fish oceans, so we should keep open the possibility to over fish trout streams in Pennsylvania, regardless of their hierarchy or vulnerability.
No, regulations and restrictions would follow a slot limit I would assume. Most anglers who value wild trout would rarely ever keep one anyways.
If you quit stocking, you would lose most trout anglers and that's fine. It would leave the smaller percentage of more serious trout anglers. Plus, even on those stocked streams currently open to general regulations the wild trout persist, even grow their population in certain area and streams without more restrictive regulations.
Do we over fish the other freshwater fish opportunities in our state?
This supports some of what I am saying about anglers on wild trout streams will not harvest many fish. Plus it's from the PFBC and almost 20 years old..... criticize away. Have at it.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Actually, I was half serious but also sarcastic.
Yes, over harvest has happened in our trout streams, though rare but not as reported as i would suspect. Mike has mentioned having to adjust things because of over harvest on a few. Let's keep it to the discussion we were commenting on, trout streams rather than "freshwater opportunities."
I just find the dichotomic comparison false. Basically you were saying, since we over fish oceans it would be ridiculous not to have it that we can harvest on trout streams.
There is no way to regulate individual watersheds from being over harvest in the current frame work.
Rather, should we be over fishing either?
Still, I think vulnerable trout streams that are unstocked should be, by in large, no harvest.
There are nearly 4 million trout from the PFBC being stocks this year alone, that doesn't include co op or any other game fish one wishes to keep. I find it hard to believe, given the wild trout open harvest, the stocked fish and all the other fish coupled with the ocean fish that are over harvested, that anyone in PA needs to harvest "wild trout" to feed the families gullet.
but why not?
perhaps if we bank some of the Spring Creek browns, can't eat them, they might not be cookie cutter minnows, we could even allow some harvest of them for flathead bait. Then we can kill those too.
I subscribe to restrictions that make sense and opening things up that make sense. There is no reason to open up harvest of 5 trout a day in vulnerable populations nor to have total catch and release cause we wish to maximize a stream population to stunting capabilities.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Cool study, I've read it myself.
Notice it says, "wild trout streams" and does not distinguish.
So take those angler hours, catch rate of ST an HR, the harvest rate of 9 adult trout a mile and apply it to a Class C brook trout stream and see how many days it takes to do some real damage to it.
All for the purpose of making a Sandwich out of 5 fish allowable a day.
I doubt there are even 9 fish a mile to harvest in such streams, making all the more possible to remove the best fish.
But it's perfectly legal and sanctioned by the PFBC, so I wouldn't criticize anyone for it.🤷
Notice it says, "wild trout streams" and does not distinguish.
So take those angler hours, catch rate of ST an HR, the harvest rate of 9 adult trout a mile and apply it to a Class C brook trout stream and see how many days it takes to do some real damage to it.
All for the purpose of making a Sandwich out of 5 fish allowable a day.
I doubt there are even 9 fish a mile to harvest in such streams, making all the more possible to remove the best fish.
But it's perfectly legal and sanctioned by the PFBC, so I wouldn't criticize anyone for it.🤷
What were the examples of overfished wild trout streams that Mike has pointed out in the past?
And I'm not saying all streams be open to general regulations. I'm just saying people shouldn't get their panties in a bunch over killing a wild trout. You're right, no one needs to harvest fish or game these days to stay fed but sometimes having a hand in the game of life goes a long way to valuing a resource. When you see it, participate in it, know that your stream or lake is healthy and alive and prospering a meal taken from its waters can be deeply meaningful to one's soul.
And I'm not saying all streams be open to general regulations. I'm just saying people shouldn't get their panties in a bunch over killing a wild trout. You're right, no one needs to harvest fish or game these days to stay fed but sometimes having a hand in the game of life goes a long way to valuing a resource. When you see it, participate in it, know that your stream or lake is healthy and alive and prospering a meal taken from its waters can be deeply meaningful to one's soul.
Sure, but given how unlikely a Class C wild brookie stream is to having that much pressure and then that much harvest in a short time period it doesn't seem likely to me..
But it's a possibility.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
I don't know, he would be the one to ask. I just remember him saying something about it.
But I would think it happens from time to time, I've seen a single angler destroy watersheds in my area. It's happened more than 4 times in my life. They recover eventually if they are decent in population and strength, but some populations not so much.
It just seems logical to conclude it could happen, so it probably does with the amount of streams in PA, enviromental stressors making limited harvest worse, the amount of anglers, the amount of WCOs, the crazy blanket limits and the "unrestricted" "unmonitored" harvest that could happen.
What can happen, will happen.
Eventually, somewhere.
That said, I think total C &R on all wild trout streams is just as stupid.
