No more stream stocking

[JDR]

I am a member of the Pisgah Chapter of Trout Ulimited, which is based around the Brevard, NC area (about 30 mile SE of Asheville). The home water for the club is the well-known Davidson River, but also encompasses many more good streams in the area. We have always been an active TU chapter and have been involved in a number of projects over the years to enhance water quality, which is the sole mission of TU. I received an interesting email from the club last week.
In a unanimous decision by its Board of Directors,, Pisgah TU will no longer participate in any trout stocking activities in the region. The reason is because by stocking sterile, hatchery trout there is no benefit to the water. These stocked fish compete with the few natives for food and other resources, but because they are sterile fish, they cannot sustain their population, and they are basically like parasites.
According to one of the regional tourist agencies, WNC generates approximately $400 million dollars a year in revenue from trout fishing. Fish and Wildlife has not changed their stocking schedule, and as far as I know, have made no comment about this decision by TU.
So, just wondering if your TU chapter is considering anything like this? Do you think this is a good or bad move by TU? How many of you rely on stocked water? What are your thoughts on stocking in general?

 

[jayr]

That’s a very touchy subject in my opinion. I think a lot of the answer boils down to personal preference, whether you like wild trout as opposed to stockers. Stockers traditionally have the size and wild has the wileyness, if you will.

In my opinion, the Davidson in particular is suffering from all of the pressure and news it gets and the way it’s promoted. Having fished that area a lot, I much prefer the upper D and the several other wild streams in the area. I am more of a “get off the beaten path” guy.

The D brings in a lot of dollars as we all know but it is also fished very hard especially in the summer and fall months. Having recently been there a couple of months ago, the pressure was unreal even during the week which is now the norm. If the stocking does stop I think the allure of the D, in particular will fade. Not saying I want that, that’s just a reality in my opinion although it will take it awhile before that happens and also depends on how it is presented publicly.

 

[JDR]

Let me be clear... this is the policy for Pisgah TU only. State DNR has made no indication that they are going to slow down, modify, or stop stocking. While it has been clear to me, when I have helped with stocking, that the volunteers are a huge help to get the work done, the state can probably handle the job. Maybe just change the timing of the stocking so they don't need so much outside help. Also, there is no reason to be affiliated with TU to volunteer to help with stocking if you want to.

 

[flyminded]

I wonder how sustainable trout fishing would be on that river without stocking - especially in a warm dry low water year ?

If the DNR was to follow the local TU’s lead and stop stocking I doubt the pressure would go away until sometime after stocking had stopped ie. When the fish population had been decimated in the harvest sections. The lower river is too easily accessed to dissuade people until it becomes recognized that the trout population is no longer worth fishing for.

 

[Joey Bagels]

I’m torn on stocking. In the alakali, high plains lakes I learned to fish on, there would be no fish without stocking. Many are put and take fisheries but some are (were) managed as trophy lakes. Stocking helps replenish the redfish and speckled trout populations off the Texas coast where I now spend a good chunk of my time. So there’s definitely benefits. On the other hand, some of my favorite places to fish are waters where native fish, or at least natural reproducing populations exist. I PREFER to fish for natives or naturally reproducing fish. But natural resources are so messed up, that’s almost an impossibility in many cases. So....yeah. I dunno.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dillon]

Entirely Synthetic Fish | Yale University Press

An Entirely Synthetic Fish
How Rainbow Trout Beguiled America and Overran the World

The above book chronicals the history of rainbow trout stocking in the United States. IMO, it is a must read for all trout anglers as it gives us a better understanding of the fish we profess to have a passion for. Some shockingly interesting stories are documented in this book. At least click on the link and read the introduction.

 

[redietz]

Stocking has its place in marginal streams, where there is little wild trout reproduction, but I'm completely against stocking streams with a sustainable wild trout population. Too many streams are stocked for no other reason than to sell fishing licenses and trout stamps.

 

[silver creek]

I have never heard of a TU chapter paying to stock trout. It is foreign to the founding doctrine of TU which is the preservation and improvement of cold water resources and native trout. My question for the chapter directors is whether any chapter funds are used for stocking? If chapter funds are were used for stocking sterile trout, how does this improve the cold water resources of their region?

History | Trout Unlimited - Conserving coldwater fisheries

"In 1962-63, TU prepared its first policy statement on wild trout, and persuaded the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to curtail "put-and-take" trout stocking and start managing for wild trout and healthy habitat. On the heels of that success, anglers quickly founded TU chapters in Illinois, Wisconsin, New York, and Pennsylvania."

https://www.tu.org/sites/default/files/BP_TU_Strategic_Plan_Framework.pdf

https://www.tu.org/sites/default/files/TU Strategic Plan Framework 2015-2020.pdf

Note the Mission Statement of the Pisgah Chapter of Trout Unlimited:

”To conserve, protect and restore coldwater fisheries and their watersheds in western North Carolina.”

So I believe the Directors of the Pisgah Chapter of Trout Unlimited are moving in the direction of the vision of TU as founded by the original founders of TU and restated the by the National Organization. For those who believe the Chapter should continue stocking, I ask how does this conserve, protect and restore coldwater fisheries?

The purpose of TU is two fold. The first is to preserve and improve the cold water resources meaning the physical resource - the rivers, streams and lakes. The second purpose is to preserve and improve the cold water biologic resources, meaning the actual trout.

If there is fishing in the Davidson during high temperatures and low waters, and the chapter is not educating the public about the damage this does to the fish population, then the chapter is not fulfilling the second purpose of protecting the trout population. Whether this is by education or by pushing for “hoot owl” fishing restrictions as the Montana DNR does during low waters and high temperatures is up to the chapter.

During the Wisconsin 4 year drought in the late 1980s, our chapter of TU voted to petition the Wisconsin DNR to close the trout fishing season. The season was closed in our county for one year and for the next year was mandatory C&R for all the waters in our county.

The true test of a TU chapter is what the members willing to give up to protect and preserve the resource. In contrast to our chapter of TU, the FFF chapter in Madison, Wi voted to petition the DNR to keep the trout season open. This illustrates the fundamental difference between the two organizations. FFF is about promoting fly fishing of all types. TU is about resource preservation for all cold water fishers.

 

[redietz]

I have never heard of a TU chapter paying to stock trout.

He didn't say they were paying anything. Many TU chapters, including my own, help the state DNR (or whatever) by providing manpower to float stock streams rather than just dumping bucket loads of fish off a bridge. This spreads the fish out, and helps them survive through the stocking season. (This in stream where survival is possible, but low probability of spawning success.)

 

[bumble54]

This is a subject that has interest and concerns for all fly/trout fishers worldwide.There would be very little trout fishing in the UK without stocking, even in what are perceived to be our wilder waters. Not the ideal situation but one that has come about purely by the fishing pressure from anglers who fish these waters.
My own belief is that such waters should have their native stock of fish augmented by stocking only with native bred fish, stocked as fingerlings at the end of the fishing season. This would give those fish time to "naturalise" and only the strongest would survive to grow on and breed. This is not the view of the majority of trout fishers however who see the score as more important than the game, and money rules as far as trout fishing is concerned. I'm happy to spend a day at the water with, hopefully, a trout or two to hand, whatever their size, it's where I started my fishing life and our "modern" fisheries with their oversize, tame fish leave me feeling slightly let down.
Maybe I'm overcome by too much nostalgia but it just isn't the same anymore as it was in those long ago days when I crawled through undergrowth to cast a fly to a wild 10" monster, the sense of achievement was pure joy that I don't seem to be able to replicate these days.
Anglers today seem to rate their day by the size and number of fish they catch. Can't help feeling they're missing the point of the game.
No fish, no anglers, no money, no stocking, no fish ETC, a vicious circle but it's where we are and have to make the best we can of it.

 

[tcorfey]

I think this decision by your TU chapter falls in line with TU's mission statement. However, politically it may be a bad decision if their decision to pull out of a long-standing volunteer effort results in an undue hardship for the state. It also may mean the loss of a few members that view stocked fish as their primary quarry and joined TU due to their continued efforts to assist in providing this resource.

I know in the Bay Area of CA they only stock lakes not streams or rivers but I am sure that there is a substantial fishing population that would love to have some of the streams in the area that previously harbored trout be stocked by the state. Even if it was only put & take. Alas, efforts are only made to try to restore native fisheries in the area and primarily for Salmon and Steelhead populations. While that is a noble goal the reality of the situation is that in a heavily populated and growing area the ability to jumpstart and maintain a native population is pretty low. As opposed to focusing on only native populations creating a put & take fishery that may produce more income for the state and the environmental groups like TU and Caltrout. That is if more people had access to stocked fish locally in streams and rivers they may open their wallets for other goals and provide more volunteer effort for local causes. The benefit to the people would also be that they would not have to travel 3-4 hours to fish for trout which helps with reducing fuel consumption and greenhouse gasses, it takes some pressure off the water that currently supports native populations, and it gets more people involved with understanding the resource and the activities of these fine organizations.

While for many of us getting out in the mountains and woods and finding native fish populations is the ultimate experience, for many people they just want to catch a fish. Sometimes lots of fish, but that is a stepping stone to a better understanding of the resource and it is a great way to get people acclimated to the sport.

I am probably in the minority but, I truly believe that we should strive to protect and enhance native populations wherever viable. However, there is also value in creating the opportunity to increase knowledge and support of the resource by introducing people to the sport locally and if that means supporting and/or creating local put & take fisheries then so be it.

I mean how many of us really got their start in this game because we grew up with a local stream, pond or river near us and we got involved simply because we just wanted to catch a fish native or stocked it did not matter. Now take my area of the country if a beginning angler can only go fishing if they pay a fee to fish at one of the lakes and/or only have access to fish in a location that can be reached via a long car ride then how many of us would have never have really gotten started and how many of us would not be donating to TU or others because we had other interests. The kids of today while more numerous than in the past have fewer opportunities to fish in local waters and hence they have fewer chances to hone their craft or to consider the fisheries as a valued resource.

Regards,

Tim C.

 

[rfb700]

The barn door is open and the horse is long gone for a lot of water these days. A lot of streams that used to be productive waters have been marginalised by environmental degradation and increased angling pressure.

You can't keep taking the numbers we do out of waters less and less able to sustain natural populations of fish and expect to have a productive fishery.



Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

 

[pjciii]

In alot of cases fish stocking is done as a food source for us and recreation. people used to keep more of the fish as a food source thus the hatcheries stock more fish. in the last couple of decades 80's surveys found that a larger percentage of fish were caught and released and thus less stocked fish.
this is the best and easiest explanation for triploid usage that i have seen and is from the ADF&G
Why does ADF&G stock triploid fish?

Because triploids are sterile, stocking triploid fish protects the genetic integrity of wild fish populations and prevents the establishment of new breeding populations. If stocking results in adverse effects on wild fish, such as competition for resources or predation, the stocking can be suspended and the adverse effects will disappear when the stocked fish die out.

Because of the potential risks to wild fish populations of stocking hatchery fish, if we did not have sterile fish, we would not be allowed to stock in many sites.

patrick

 

[rodneyshishido]

Does is have to be only one way or another. Can your chapter not work with the state to restrict stocking to only certain waters and let others be catch and release only so the natives can prosper? On the other hand if your state agencies are like my state's, the only way is their way.

 

[denver1911]

I am not surprised. TU is a “water” organization, not a “fish” organization. They focus on water quality, not fishing quality. Nothing wrong with that. The fishing bent to some of TUs activities is intended to draw fishermen to their organization and make funding and numbers (for lobbying purposes) available to further their cause. I was a TU member for 20+ years, but recently bowed out. Nothing against the organization, but I’m more a fisherman than a conservationist.

 

[triggw]

I am not surprised. TU is a “water” organization, not a “fish” organization. They focus on water quality, not fishing quality. Nothing wrong with that. The fishing bent to some of TUs activities is intended to draw fishermen to their organization and make funding and numbers (for lobbying purposes) available to further their cause. I was a TU member for 20+ years, but recently bowed out. Nothing against the organization, but I’m more a fisherman than a conservationist.

To say they are focused on water quality is a somewhat limited view of TU's mission. Their stated mission is to protect and restore cold water fisheries. That means water quality, habitat, and fish, with an emphasis on native and/or wild fish. As for fishing. their philosophy is that if you take care of the fish, the fishing will take care of itself.

They don't have an official position against stocking, but they are definitely opposed to stocking trout on top of struggling populations of native fish, which appears to be the situation at the OP's chapter.


And BTW, if you're just a fisherman and not a conservationist, you're just letting other people do the work to protect the fishing you enjoy.

 

[denver1911]

To say they are focused on water quality is a somewhat limited view of TU's mission. Their stated mission is to protect and restore cold water fisheries. That means water quality, habitat, and fish, with an emphasis on native and/or wild fish. As for fishing. their philosophy is that if you take care of the fish, the fishing will take care of itself.

They don't have an official position against stocking, but they are definitely opposed to stocking trout on top of struggling populations of native fish, which appears to be the situation at the OP's chapter.


And BTW, if you're just a fisherman and not a conservationist, you're just letting other people do the work to protect the fishing you enjoy.

As you and I have both said: “To conserve, protect and restore North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds” .. a water organization, not a “fish” organization.

And I’m pretty sure I did not say I was just a fisherman and not a conservationist. Yep. Read it again. Didn’t say that. Not there is anything wrong with that position in my view.

 

[triggw]

As you and I have both said: “To conserve, protect and restore North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds” .. a water organization, not a “fish” organization.

And I’m pretty sure I did not say I was just a fisherman and not a conservationist. Yep. Read it again. Didn’t say that. Not there is anything wrong with that position in my view.

If your point is that TU is not a fishing club, you’re correct. But over the past few years I’ve spent hundreds of hours—and my TU chapter as a whole has spent thousands of hours—working with a fish biologist to capture fish to track fish populations and to take tissue samples from fish to test for disease and for genetic analysis. We caught and relocated fish when a stream was being diverted. We raised money to pay for the removal of an abandoned dam, so fish could reach headwaters streams to spawn. We’ve held youth education programs where we taught kids to fish, so there would be more people in the future who cared about fish and fishing. During the same period we’ve held dozens of programs where conservationists explained what they were doing to protect fish populations and also dozens of programs where fishing guides and other experts explained where and how to catch fish. And every now and then we get together to fish just for fun.

I am sorry if I understated your commitment to fishery conservation, though. What have you done lately to help ensure current and future generations have healthy populations of fish to fish for, so they can enjoy the sport as much as you and I do?

 

[denver1911]

TUs primary mission is water quality.

What have I done? Helped with youth events, bought licenses, paid taxes, educated others, voted, been careful wading in habitat, C&R when appropriate, didn’t litter. Similar to things I’ve done to protect and conservethe roadways I use every day. I’m not a road worker either, it do my part to keep them going .. pay taxes, use them safely, don’t abuse them, don’t litter, etc.

 

[redietz]

TUs primary mission is water quality.

No, it is not. It is to protect cold water fisheries, not the the water or the water quality. Some part of the is water quality (and quantity in the case of tail waters.) It also means, among other things, advocating for appropriate regulations for individual streams. It may even involve helping with the stocking of streams with no natural reproduction, if for no other reason than to take some of the pressure off streams that do have good populations of wild fish.