Limestone Streams and Brookies

[Stone_Fly]

OK guys, here is a challenge. Name a limestone stream that has wild browns that would not have a brookie population if the browns were not there. The only one I know that may not is Penns Creek. But I even think that would. The second question is, would the brookies grow as big as the browns that are currently in the stream? I say yes, and they may even get bigger then the browns. I'll explain why I think so later.

 

[RLeeP]

That's an interesting query.. I guess I'd say a lot would depend upon how we define the word "population" as well as whether we are talking present realities in a given watershed in terms of sediment loading, temperature regimes, etc. as opposed to what these conditions were like in the days of people in three-cornered hats and powdered wigs.

So, I'll frame it this way. I'll define "population" as sufficient brook trout to be comparable with the wild brown trout pops currently in place in terms of biomass. Additionally, I'll go with the way things are today (or at least the last time I saw these places, since it's been a few years).

To that end, I have a hard time believing brook trout would meet this bar in the following limestone drainages (freestone portions excluded):

The Honey/Kish watershed. Spring Creek, including Logan Br. and Slab Cabin, etc. Clover , Piney and the Frankstown drainage. The (as noted) Penns watershed. Yellow Creek and tribs. Probably Spruce and the Little J.

I don't know enough about the Lehigh Valley streams to include any of them, but I have my doubts there as well. They are all pretty urbanized drainages with all that goes with that. I would say that in general the same would apply to the Cumberland Valley streams

My view would be that the mere presence of browns, even in a dominant role, is not in itself sufficient to preclude brook trout from at least being present in these streams, even if not in abundance. I'm not even sold on the notion that the presence of browns, even a strong brown trout pop., precludes the presence of a viable brook trout population. Here in the Midwest, there are quite a few streams with pretty potent brown trout pops. where healthy brook trout pops. co-exist in sympatry.

So, I tend to think that if conditions were ameanable to wild brookies in these waters, we'd see them, even if, as usual, they occupied the lesser niche.


I think you can go home again, if you really want to. But we shouldn't be surprised if it feels less like home than it once did and that somebody has moved all the furniture...

 

[TimMurphy]

Dear stonefly,

Brook trout don't grow as large as brown trout, period. Conclusive proof lies in the fact that the world record brown trout is well over 40 pounds and the world record brook trout is about 15 pounds depending on what record is accepted. Even the cutthroat and rainbow grow to be substantially larger than the brook trout, brook trout are puny compared to the other trout. All the wishful thinking in the world will not change that fact, it's science!

Regards,
Tim Murphy

 

[JackM]

Just this:

Brookies have one thing going for them in the eastern US that no other trout species does: rabid enthusiasts who wish to turn back the pages of history and glorify them over other trout to the detriment of the fisheries. Carry on.....

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

ya im not sure how they could grow as big as the browns. its an interesting question though. im not sure what stream you are thinking of. im curious though how fixng a stream or even an entire watershed, planting in stream structure, and making water quality better to boost a wild brook trout population will do a fishery harm? you a little sore?

 

[Chaz]

Let me answer a few questions, I don't think there are any limestone stream that now hold fishable wild brown trout populations that would not hold fishable brookie populations, here's why. First of all the temperature range that brookies tolerate is only a little over a degree difference then browns, i.e. brookies don't like temperatures over approximately 78 degrees, brown a little over 79 degrees. Limestone streams seldom get that warm.
The browns in most of these streams grow to about 14 or 15 inches in this environment and only very few get larger, unless PFBC is just not capturing them during surveys.
There are infertile AMD streams in PA that have decent populations of large brookies, at least as big as the majority of the browns we see.
I know a few limestone streams that have brookies larger then that and the brookies are very fat. The streams that have these fish are Class A streams so they are not marginal streams. No one is saying turn back the clock here, just making observations. Anglers need to stop believing that brookies only grow to 7 inches, the 7 inch limit is do to harvest at that size. When you get back in the forest away from the roads you'll find the larger brookies in the freestone streams. As for limestone streams some of them just aren't fished by brookie enthusiasts like I fish them.
Stop believing what writers tell you and go out and find these fish yourself, you know PFBC Believes this too. Just don't tell anyone except PFBC, or you won't find these big brookies the next time you go to these places.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

hey chaz you are right. as you are most the time. :-D but i once called our fishies biologist here. i was worried about a secret little gem on the rumor it may be come class a. then the population may decline. i asked what biologist studies where coming up. the stream was mentioned. when i said that it has a higher population than our other class a streams here he wasent suprised. he did say however that they just wanted to survey it to see. they are not going to release the findings because of where it is located and how many people would no about it then. see some of them do care, but not all of the pfbc does. i was very happy!
also people dont like to go off the beaten path. might have to work for the catch. little do they know that if they did, it would be worth it. but hey, its better fishin for me then! :-D

 

[TimMurphy]

Dear Chaz,

Since the only thing that keeps brook trout from growing to 8 pounds is a 7 inch size limit is it even remotely possible that what keeps brown trout from growing larger than 15 inches is that people like to eat the big ones they catch?

If it works one way it has to work the other way too. Just sayin'. :-D

Regards,
Tim Murphy

 

[tomgamber]

Absolutely true! Now, a stream full of brookies in the 3, 4, 5 lb range (nowhere near the record) would still be one hell of a stream. I also don't see a lot of 40lb brown trout being caught in PA either. Does that mean those fisheries are a failure?

 

[BrookTroutLover]

Well, my screen name gives away my bias, but here goes:

I'd love to see Big Spring brought back to a predominantly Brook Trout Limestoner. I remember reading about the old days of Big Spring B-trout in Marinario and other books when I was kid just starting to tie flies and try to fly fish back in the 1970s. I dreamed about the limestone brookies for years, but didn't actually make it to Big Spring until 2002. A bit of a disappointment. But I've been keeping up with the restoration efforts via the Internet over the past few years, and just yesterday (coincidentally) I wrote a check to join the B- Spring Watershed Association.

A Big Spring full of wild brookies again would, in my opinion, truly be a Hertitage Angling Destination. I hope it happens.

Scott

 

[afishinado]

 

[Chaz]

Tim,
Don't be ridiculous, Stone Fly didn't say anything about 7 pound brook trout. We rarely see even 5 pound browns in PA. The point is that 7 inches eliminates all the large fish from the gene pool and limits the maximum size in several ways. Poor habitat is responsible for much of the problem but the size limit of 7 inches is a major issue.
It is not unreasonable to think that we could have a few limestone streams with 5 pound brookies in them; some of the biggest have been at Big Spring and Fishing Creek (Lamar). Shouldn’t our 1 native stream dwelling salmonid be a part of any streams recovery plan?
Big Spring is on its way back to respectability with larger brookies beginning to take hold and the population bouncing back, let's hope it gives us an example of what can happen. Big brookies are very tough to catch since their diet isn't just tiny insects. As I've said in the past there are a couple of limestone streams where brookies grow quite large, but there are no browns in them to push the brookies out of the best lies so they can grown large. There is also a good forage base for the brookies to grow large that is what it takes to grow big brookies.

 

[TimMurphy]

Dear Chaz,

I'm not being any more ridiculous with my 8 pound brookie argument than you are with your 7 inch size limit argument, yet that argument seems to be the only one people have for the relative infrequency of larger brook trout besides habitat which is equally an issue for all species of wild trout.

Brown trout are subject to the exact same harvest limits in terms of minimum length and creel limit as brook trout yet I cannot think of one wild brown trout stream where there are few if any fish over 8 or 9 inches in length. Allowing for the fact that perhaps I can't catch brook trout larger than 9 inches, I can think of many wild brook trout streams where that is the case. Brook trout are slower growing and simply don't live as long as brown trout, they will never grow as large on average as a brown. It's science.

Regards,
Tim Murphy

 

[rckrego]

Save the native brook trout! Unfortunately, no one is bringing back the American Chestnut stands that shaded our streams and protected our waters from pollutants. Not that bringing them back would do us a lot of good. they need a good 300 years to develop. But if fisherman and environmentally-conscious people could think long-term enough to envision a Northeast covered once again in old-growth forests, not for our generation, but our children's children's children's generation, then maybe we'll stop viewing "stream recovery" myopically, and start altering our behavior to encourage the return of nature. But as it stands we're just going to dump more stockers in our rivers, and more silt, and more runoff, and then try to counter-balance it by sticking some "structure" in the water and calling "restoration." We're just sticking our finger in the dyke. Temperatures are rising, cover is disappearing, streams are warming. None of this bodes well for any trout species, native or invasive. So what's the difference? If we don't change our culture, much of the trout streams we know will die, so brookie or brown or rainbow, or tiger or cutbow or whatever won't matter. Don't think a "recovery" plan holds long-term solutions for saving a fishery or a species. We as fishermen and conservationists must look at the land the watershed flows through and alter the course of human interaction with that land to counter the detriment we have caused and will continue to cause as our mid-atlantic climate shifts, and many of the plant species that define the mid-atlantic biosphere can no longer cope with the conditions and must be replaced with more shoutherly species. We need an environmental management initiative that addresses these problems, that attempts to regrow our forests to counter our warming temperatures and to decrease our co2 output. Stop worrying about the fish they put in a river and start worrying about the development upstream that has no trees, the farm that isn't profitable but is subsidized by the government that could be a forest, the shopping mall parking lot that creates sheets of polluted runoff which could be covered with trees. we need more trees! Only then will our rivers continue to provide an environment worthy of trout, and then can we worry about what fish are in the river, and the effects of those species on the native ecosystem.

 

[Chaz]

There are 2 very good reasons when we find browns in a brook trout stream why the browns are always bigger, first the browns are aggressive when selecting feeding lies, they will always chase out the brookies from the best lies. This happens in freestone streams as well as limestone streams.
Second, even in streams where brookies appear to dominate they don't if it is a mixed population, because the browns force the brookies into less fertile water.
The only limestone stream in PA where brookies dominate in a mixed population is Big Spring, and there the brookies are growing larger then what we have in the rest of the streams where we find mixed populations. It is also where if you remember many people asking the FBC to keep stocking the ditch with big hatchery hogs, well those hogs are gone now. The population is dominated by brookies in the upper reaches and extends to the mouth, and rainbows dominate the lower waters, brown are relegated to third string.

 

[Wulff-Man]

I have been wondering what's been going on at Big Spring. I was under the impression that there was a mixed population of rainbows and brookies, and the brookies aren't very big. This is just based on periodic reports that I have read here, and I think maybe a survey that the PFBC did. Is it true that brookies are dominating the upper reaches? What kind of numbers and sizes? It seemed like the stream wasn't recovering at the rate that was theorized during the hatchery shutdown controversy. Is it meeting expectations?

 

[Chaz]

Of course below the res area the brookies don't get an opportubity to grow as large as they do in the regs area, because a lot get harvested, as is shown in the survey completed after the fingerling stocking, but in the regs area the brookies are growing. Even though they are not monsters they are getting bigger.

 

[Fishidiot]

Chaz is correct that brookies are dominating the upper section of Big Spring. At least the last three or so surveys by the PFBC suggest this. My own experience on BSC bears this out. I saw brookies spawning in the upper reaches last fall and didn't see any browns. I think that this can be construed - at least somewhat - that brookies are "dominating." I would like to see the old fish barrier replaced and the remaining browns/'bows removed. The PFBC would likely claim that the barrier didn't keep out the browns in the past - but they really didn't make any effort to remove these intruders. I worry that without the barrier brookies will be at a disadvantage and the rainbows will move up and come to dominate them.

 

[BrookTroutLover]

Would it be heretical to suggest allowing the harvest of browns and rainbows in B Spring? Isn't that the way the Wild Brook Trout Enhancement Areas are run?

I'm a committed C&R practitioner otherwise, but I'm also keen on the idea of restoring a robust wild brook trout fishery at Big Spring.

Scott

 

[Squaretail]

Making the ditch a Brook trout enhancement is a wonderful idea. BTLover and I have something in common. I was never able to make it to Big spring till after the stream crashed. However in 2005 I did see one heck of a brookie in the ditch somewhere over 20" but never saw it on any of the biologist reports. The stories I hear about the brookies that were there are very entertaining. Anyone got any pictures of them?