Big Spring Rainbows being killed

[BrookieChaser]

^^I'm not arguing at all, on the contrary, I agree with your point.

I just find the net handle and the viewpoints on this topic ironic.

 

[Squaretail]

The source of this possibly comes from PA Outdoor News. I could swear I read in the Q & A part that stated the PFBC was asking anglers to throw browns and bows on the bank to help the brookies, and then asked like 6 anglers their feelings on it. The question didnt read hypothetical at all and sure sounded like they were already advising it.
Had me feeling uneasy after I read it and I'll double check today.

 

[krayfish]

Problem- someone is tossing trout onto the bank to help the brook trout (ala weak trout)

Solution- call Chaz and ask him to stop it.

Fee- "On the house"

 

[FarmerDave]

krayfish wrote:
Problem- someone is tossing trout onto the bank to help the brook trout (ala weak trout)

Solution- call Chaz and ask him to stop it.

Fee- "On the house"

LOL! I was thinking the same thing.

 

[boychick]

Those who throw fish on the bank should be thrown in the water. Fish should be released unless regulations permit harvesting a couple of fish for the table or mandate killing the fish (think lake trout in Yellowstone Lake).

 

[SBecker]

Telling you guys, lasers on the rainbows would solve this potential problem.

 

[Stenonema]

Before we get emotional and allow anger to control our thoughts. We should consider that removing a percentage of the population even a large percentage may have the opposite effect long term. Streams have the ability to produce a certain mass. Pruning the tree as it were. Fewer trout in a stream as fertile as BS. Growth rates will most likely increase. Larger trout produce larger and more hearty eggs and young. Population goes up and growth rates go down and the cycle continues. I don't believe that fishing alone will completely decimate the bows. Would the population of Browns increase in the case of the bows demise? Balance.
For those who are emotionally attached to the B.S. I'm sure that this is very touchy. I am in no way condoning the stupidity of throwing trout on the bank or even the removal of any trout from the B.S. I am only trying to provide some solace, if that is the right word.
The view point I've heard expressed is that a wild trout fishery that is not public is not a fishery and not worthy of care. This is a very public fishery. Cared for by many, with various veiws. The B.S. has to be the most tampered with stream in the country right now. We humans spend so much time, effort and resources trying to undo our previous tamperings. When do we learn. I'm sorry the whole thing boders on the ridiculous. The Hatchery is gone but the mentality that created it has migrated downstream.

 

[RyanR]

SBecker wrote:
Telling you guys, lasers on the rainbows would solve this potential problem.

"You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have [d]sharks[/d] rainbow trout with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now evidently my cycloptic colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here!"

 

[pcray1231]

I obviously do not support anyone taking it upon themselves to throw fish on the banks.

But yeah, BS is public, and as such, is a very important resource. We should manage it to make it better. I'm not ready to throw my support behind ridding it of bows for the sake of the brookies. I'm not personally familiar enough with it myself, and would want convinced that doing so would improve the resource. But I'm open to that discussion. Would want to know things like the biomass of bows being removed vs. expected increase in biomass of brookies, etc.

If biomass, catch rates, sizes, angler usage, etc. of brookies in such a situation were expected to be similar to or better than they currently are with bows + brookies, I'd lean towards the brookies as a largish, limestone, wild brook trout stream is more rare than the same with wild bows. But if the increase in brookies doesn't come close to matching the lost bows, I wouldn't support it.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

I highly doubt any of those brookies are related to the original native strains that were there. These are the descendents of hatchery fish, same as the wild bows, correct?

 

[pcray1231]

I don't know for sure. But if there were anywhere I'd expect heritage strain brookies to exist intact, this would probably be it.

Not that it matters a whole awful lot to me. Elsewhere in the state, our brookies are likely a mix of different heritage strains (rather than the original heritage strain for that stream), with maybe a little stocky thrown in for good measure. I don't have less respect for them.

If you throw out the strain argument, you still have native vs. introduced. Even that doesn't hold a lot of sway for me.

It's a resource. Those who enjoy the resource are mostly fishermen. So long as what they want isn't ecologically damaging, it's fishermen's desires that hold sway with me, rather than some sense of preserving a certain strain. That said, if fishermen's wishes are native fish, or even heritage strain, well, that does hold sway.

 

[troutbert]

I think it would be a good idea to try to create a brookie zone in the very upper end of the regs area.

Not the entire regs area, just a short segment of it. Maybe just the Ditch at first, since it already as a barrier. And a barrier is actually required for it to work.

The rainbows could be electrofished out of the Ditch and placed in the lower part of the regs area. They would probably have to electrofish once a year or maybe once every two years afterward. Or just whenever they notice that rainbow numbers are going high in the Ditch.

If this experiment works, then construct a barrier downstream a little ways, about the same length again as the Ditch.

At the same time as trying to establish a good brookie area in the upper end, start extending the wild trout zone downstream. Now that the water quality issue is resolved, there is no reason why the stream could not support wild trout, big fish and lots of them, the whole way to the mouth.

Maybe the regs below the current regs area could be something different, such as Spring Creek regs, i.e. C&R all tackle, so that that section is open to all, like Spring Creek.

Why not have a small section on a limestone stream managed specifically for brookies? The only reason I can see is cost of managing it. It would be somewhat labor intensive.

But from both a fishing and conservation perspective, it would be a good thing.

I think it's possible that the PFBC would be willing to try something like this, if there was enough public support. If there is not public support, they won't do it.

 

[tomitrout]

Well, as I've said here before...if you want it to be like the golden olden days of yore that none of us ever experienced, you're gonna have to dam the stream back up again and create a series of brookie ponds to recreate that fishery. And you could do this in the ditch since the breastworks still exist, then we'd be fishing from the paved road and where you stand now to fish the ditch you'd either be treading water or sitting in a float tube. This stream is nothing like what it used to be, and nothing like what it was when it first earned its reputation, those days are long, long gone.

The rainbows are there to stay in BigSpring, folks just need to realize this and accept it.

And regarding heritage strains, there is a study currently happening to determine this. Samples are being taken for comparision to what PFBC feels is a true example of heritage brookie for the watershed. It's my understanding that this was done previously many years ago, and they found only 60ish% purity of something or other, don't remember the exact details of quantifying this. But that was done 20-30 yrs ago and I would expect the true native population to be even more diluted now. It'll be interesting to see the results of the study, but don't expect it to influence any management decisions with regard to the fishery.

Whoever is banking the rainbows is a small, bitter and ignorant person. Hope they throw the book at 'em.

 

[firandfeather]

Emailed one person- no responce and then spoke with another. The PFBC and the restoration was about "stream habitat" not "brook trout" habitat. From who I spoke with I was told they want to now see what the stream wants to do and take it from there brookies/rainbows.

I don't thing I will get a reply back from the e-mail.
Mike

 

[Fishidiot]

The_Sasquatch wrote:
I highly doubt any of those brookies are related to the original native strains that were there. These are the descendents of hatchery fish, same as the wild bows, correct?

Probably.
The hatchery bows are definitely of recent stocky genetics and this can be seen in their propensity to spawn in the fall. Whether the brookies are a "heritage" strain or otherwise unique is, of course, much more complicated. The claim is often made that the wild brook trout in BS were wiped out in the mid 20th century, but this is not the case (although they declined greatly). Wild brook trout have persisted in the upper ("ditch") section through the years. Stocked brook trout, both adult and fingerling, have been added to the stream over the decades too and this has likely diluted the genetics. I suspect, however, that some unique genetics may remain since the current wild brook trout in BS are winter spawners. This is highly unusual. I don't know anywhere else in PA where brook trout spawn in the Dec-Feb time frame. The fact that BS brookies spawn in winter has been documented for decades. This suggests to me that the current wild fish may have some unique characteristics and may be related to the ones present decades ago. There are tissue samples from decades old brookies from the Cumberland Valley watershed and - as Tomi pointed out - there is a current genetic study underway to compare current BS brooks with this genetic population. Results should be interesting. My guess will be that the results will show a mixed heritage. My personal view is that the genetic strain of brook trout is not an especially critical issue with respect to management decisions....however, I recognize the point that other folks feel that unique strains deserve special protections.

On a separate note - but related to the spawning season issue: I have not seen the level of rainbow spawning the last month as I expected to see, and that I've seen the last couple years. Brookies, on the other hand, were spawning heavily at the beginning of this year, the most I've ever seen. I don't claim this as even remotely scientific.....but it seems to me that the 2013 YOY class may possibly see better brookie reproduction and fewer bows. Time will tell. The stream was not surveyed this year, but will be in the future and population trends will continue to be monitored. I haven't been up at BS as much this year as I'd like - if you've been watching the spawning picture, I'd be curious to hear what you have seen with respect to spawning.

 

[troutbert]

tomitrout wrote:
Well, as I've said here before...if you want it to be like the golden olden days of yore that none of us ever experienced, you're gonna have to dam the stream back up again and create a series of brookie ponds to recreate that fishery. And you could do this in the ditch since the breastworks still exist, then we'd be fishing from the paved road and where you stand now to fish the ditch you'd either be treading water or sitting in a float tube. This stream is nothing like what it used to be, and nothing like what it was when it first earned its reputation, those days are long, long gone.

No change in the physical structure of the stream would be required to have a brookie section in the upper end.

Brookies do not require dammed sections. They were there before the dams.

They live in a great variety of physical environments, from ponds to very high gradient streams, and the full range in between. There is no physical limitation whatever to brookies living there.

 

[troutbert]

Fishidiot wrote:

My personal view is that the genetic strain of brook trout is not an especially critical issue with respect to management decisions....however, I recognize the point that other folks feel that unique strains deserve special protections.

I agree that the genetics of the brookies is not a particularly important issue. If they are brook trout and they can live and reproduce there, that's good.

But if there is some feeling that the genetics of those brookies aren't "good enough", then they could bring in some brook trout whose genetics are "good enough" from another stream.

Regarding these rainbows. Do you see spawning in the fall or in the spring, or both?

 

[The_Sasquatch]

I didn't realize the heritage strain was even THAT strong. My point was going to be that if very little of the heritage strain remains, then why do we keep romanticizing the brookies in Big Spring when in reality, their origin is of little difference than the wild bows?

 

[Fishidiot]

troutbert wrote:
Do you see spawning in the fall or in the spring, or both?

In BS, I've only seen rainbows spawning in the fall. Keep in mind, however, rainbows have been stocked or escaped into BS at least since the 40s and concern over rainbow spawning has existed since the 50s so there could certainly be some spring spawners from these "older" fish. The bows in Falling Springs are typical, early spring spawners and there could certainly be some of these fish in BS. I haven't watched this particularly closely but, in my opinion, the early spring spawning in FS, and other wild rainbow streams, is very subtle and low key and not always very obvious.... so this may be occurring in BS too and folks just haven't noticed(?).
However, the current bows in the creek can be seen, certainly the last few years, spawning in late August/Sept and their spawning is very noticeable with large, very obvious redds. These fall spawners in the FFO are thought to probably be producing the very large year classes of bows that have popped up in recent years.

This year, however, I didn't see as much rainbow spawning. Perhaps they are shifting the times they spawn(?).

 

[Fishidiot]

The_Sasquatch wrote:
My point was going to be that if very little of the heritage strain remains, then why do we keep romanticizing the brookies in Big Spring when in reality, their origin is of little difference than the wild bows?

There's probably a good number of people who look at this the same way, regardless of the strain of brook trout currently present.

Big Spring and brook trout, however, will always be synonymous. The classic FFing literature is replete with stories about the brook trout of BS and there has been a long tradition in the Cumberland Valley of trying to protect these brook trout in BS. Perhaps some of these stories have indeed been romanticized.......but they're part of the historical culture of PA FFing.