Why Rainbows?

[jifigz]

When evaluating the number and types of trout stocked throughout the Commonwealth, it is astounding the number of Rainbow Trout that are stocked in comparison to Brook and Brown Trout. Why is this? The state stocks as many Rainbows as it does Brooks and Browns combined. Are Rainbow trout easier to raise in a hatchery setting than the other two? I can understand why Brook Trout are stocked the least as their habitat requirements are a little more picky and less common in the state than those that are suitable habitats for Browns and Rainbows, but why not stock more Browns and less Rainbows? Given that by the large number of Class A Brown Trout streams in the state and the very few streams recognized as Class A Rainbow Trout waters, it seems that Browns are much more likley to colonize and create a self-sustaining and reproducing fishery. So why not stock Browns instead with the hopes to create a reproducing population of fish? I know that Rainbows do colonize and reproduce in a higher number of streams than they are given credit for, but Browns are still more likely to do so. Do they stock Rainbows to keep the wild Brown Trout genes separate and uncontaminated with hatchery brood? I doubt this as Browns and Rainbows are often stocked in the same waters...so I'm stumped. What is the reason?

 

[Fishidiot]

They're cheaper and more cost effective to raise (slightly).

Most PA anglers are probably not concerned with the species of trout they catch. There are some constituencies who prefer browns or brooks for various reasons, but for the most part RTs satisfy the goals of the PFBC and most coop hatcheries.

 

[barbless]

fwiw, a study was done in Maine a few years ago showing that it took anglers an average of 6 times longer to catch a brown trout than a rainbow.

I'd like to see PFG use a method of identifying stockers, like notching a fin or clipping the adipose.

 

[pete41]

To we serious trout chasers, browns are a thing of beauty as most of us see them as the ultimate test of our skills [or luck].To casual types they are down right dowdy compared to rainbows and don't fight nearly as well.

 

[troutbert]

The purpose of the hatchery program is not to establish populations.

Populations are already established.

The hatchery program is intended to be "put and take."

PFBC staff themselves will tell you this.

 

[JackM]

They grow faster in the hatchery, thus more efficient as noted.

 

[PennKev]

barbless wrote:

I'd like to see PFG use a method of identifying stockers, like notching a fin or clipping the adipose.

It varies, but more often than not it seems that hatchery fish have at least one damaged or deformed fin. I helped stock some fish this spring and it seemed like all the fish had some sort of abnormality.

So... I'm not sure it would be worth it for the state to go through the effort of clipping a fin on fish that already are (inadvertently) marked.

 

[afishinado]

add a little more temperature tolerant (high temperatures).

 

[Chaz]

Rainbows grow faster and survive better in a hatchery environment, and it's been found that they will also stay put in the area of streams they are stocked. PFBC did a study of stocked trout residency, that's how we know.
As for Brooks and Browns, because there are many streams with these 2 species PFBC stays away from stocking brooks and browns where there are wild populations. That doesn't mean they don't stock over wild fish, they do, but brook trout require pretty pristine habitat, so they will go only where clean cold water is.
Browns presumably are stocked in the more stressed waters because they are more suited to marginal water. Browns are more likely to move than bows, and brooks are most likely to move.

 

[jifigz]

Troutbert - I understand that the purpose is for a "put and take" fishery, but any establishment of some wild and reproducing fish sounds like a win to me.

Afish - I am well aware that Rainbows and Browns can tolerate much warmer water than Brook Trout, but I'm pretty sure Browns can tolerate even warmer water than Rainbows.

The cost efficiency of Rainbows seems to be the most likely reason, then. Don't get me wrong. I like Rainbows. I like fish of nearly any kind.

 

[PennypackFlyer]

and they are more heron tollerant....

 

[PennKev]

PennypackFlyer wrote:
and they are more heron tollerant....

How so? The local herons seem to gobble up stocked trout like crazy around here.

And most of 'em are bows.

 

[LetortAngler]

I remembering reading a while back, that when the PFBC started stocking rainbows, they would not stay in place and would always migrate to larger river systems.
Maybe that explains why bows have not established themselves in more streams across the state with the majority of stockings being rainbows?

 

[JackM]

The temperature tolerance difference is only a couple degrees F between brook trout and browns and rainbows IIRC.

 

[jifigz]

A couple of degrees can make a huge difference, but I believe that the 3 species' temperature preferences are within a couple of degrees, not what they can tolerate. Brookies can't tolerate water much warmer than the mid sixties while Brown Trout can tolerate water approaching the 80° mark. That is a staggering difference and can make all the difference in the world. Rainbows can tolerate water just a few degrees cooler than the maximum for Brown Trout.

 

[Maurice]

Back in the 2002 Trout Summit a number of sportsmans groups and concerned anglers were assembled and asked whether they would rather see more fish or bigger fish? The answer was bigger fish.

So because the biomass restrictions in the hatcheries is dependent upon the NPDES Discharge permits the biomass is fixed on what they can raise.

To grow bigger fish means fewer of them and the Rainbows grow faster than the other species in a hatchery.


And thats why you have more rainbows.

 

[duckfoot]

Maurice wrote:
So because the biomass restrictions in the hatcheries is dependent upon the NPDES Discharge permits the biomass is fixed on what they can raise.
To grow bigger fish means fewer of them and the Rainbows grow faster than the other species in a hatchery.
And thats why you have more rainbows.

There's your key word right there.

 

[JackM]

jifigz wrote:
A couple of degrees can make a huge difference, but I believe that the 3 species' temperature preferences are within a couple of degrees, not what they can tolerate. Brookies can't tolerate water much warmer than the mid sixties while Brown Trout can tolerate water approaching the 80° mark. That is a staggering difference and can make all the difference in the world. Rainbows can tolerate water just a few degrees cooler than the maximum for Brown Trout.

Not sure what you are saying but optimum temperatures vary greater than tolerance levels.

 

[troutbert]

Maurice wrote:
Back in the 2002 Trout Summit a number of sportsmans groups and concerned anglers were assembled and asked whether they would rather see more fish or bigger fish? The answer was bigger fish.

Were you there Maurice? I was. Mike was too.

I thought the idea of the Trout Summit was to talk about ways of improving wild trout populations in PA.

Maybe applying the lessons learned on Spring Creek (doubling the trout population) to other limestone streams.

Maybe doing something to improve native brook trout populations, such as ending stocking over brookies.

But instead we got: "More or bigger" hatchery trout?

I thought that was sort of a diversion. Talking about something totally trivial, to avoid talking about the choices that are more difficult, but that actually matter.

 

[jifigz]

What does it mean on the table when the Brook Trout have two temperatures on the "Upper Limit Adult" section? I am pretty sure that Brook Trout cannot survive anywhere near the 78 degree mark...I could be wrong, though. And if Brook Trout can't tolerate 78 degree water, which I don't believe they can, then their upper limits vary more than their omptimum water temperatures.