Big Spring Rainbows being killed

[geebee]

harvesting wild rainbows is a terrible idea - there are less than a dozen streams in the entire Eastern US with wild rainbow trout, it totally ignores those of us who WANT to catch a wild rainbow on the fly.

 

[Gorosaurus]

Checked out Big Spring for the first time this week. Didn't see anyone banking or killing rainbows (in fact I caught and released my first PA wild rainbows that day).



That's not to say that I didn't see any evidence of banking.

Catfish are getting nailed. But it looks like the trout, at least, aren't subject to this fate.

 

[oncorhynchusmykiss]

Nope, thats totally wrong, they're an invasive parasite in the southeast and they're gaining a foothold up here too. They've displaced more southern app natives than habitat damage from improper building. They've taken over about half of their range depending on who you believe. The streams down there are a little different in composition but all freestoners have limited habitat and capacity. Theres at least a dozen streams in PA that have wild bows and the number has been growing. I'd be glad to tell you every one I know if you like catching em. I've been seeing more of them every year in brookie streams and I eat or feed the raccoons as many as i can from those streams. It wouldn't surprise me if the state has been fingerling stocking them along with the browns whether on purpose or by accident cause I've been seeing them in some fingerling stocked streams that haven't supported them before.

On the topic of big spring I still think it would be nice to see more brookies and less bows in the upper section. Someone mentioned that having more brook trout would stunt them and make them weaker... it's pretty hard to do that in a healthy limestone spring creek. I think it would be nice to preserve the native strain brookies in the stream and give them a stronger larger population for WHEN the water and surrounding habitat quality degrade in the future. They're gonna need as much help as they can get if improper building practices continue in that area...
But then again I guess when that comes the state and trout unlimited will do a tax payer funded restoration of the stream and limit access to those willing to pay $40 a day like the limestoners in VA.

Tight lines

 

[allan_s]

The old fish barrier was there for that reason, people would take the bows and browns caught and put them above the barrier. Which is why it is no longer there. In fact the sign is still in the PFBC office, as I have seen it before. I don't know where the barrier got to though...

I would support putting it back in, but I don't think if it would work. I agree with Jack if harvest is supported, there is nothing wrong with eating the fish.

I think this 'invasive parasite' thing and feeding them to the raccoons is really lame.

 

[NickR]

The only invasive parasites are people.

 

[BrookieChaser]

Oncorhynchus is correct on the usage of invasive to describe rainbow trout in brook trout streams. An invasive is a non-native species that takes over the niche of, and/or inhibits the growth of, a native species.

A parasitic relationship is a symbiotic relationship where one player benefits and the other suffers. Does this sound similar to rainbows and brookies in the Smokies?

 

[geebee]

Rainbows in the smokies doesn't help me if I want to fish for them in PA.

I can agree they are invasive though, same as browns. Should we throw brownies on the bank too ?

The smokies aside, there's no denying that wild bows are much sought after by anglers in the northeast due to their rarity.

 

[Mason5419]

For those in favor of reinstallation of a fish barrier to manage the upstream portions of the creek for brook trout only, I recommend taking a lok at the Managment Plan (link posted be Eric Levis from the PFBC). This plan addresses most of the discussion points on this forum about Big Spring Creek. The section titled "Removal Logistics" from pages 39 to 40 addresses the feasibility of a barrier. In short, the PFBC and PADEP do not view this as a viable option.

 

[BrookieChaser]

geebee wrote:
Rainbows in the smokies doesn't help me if I want to fish for them in PA.

I can agree they are invasive though, same as browns. Should we throw brownies on the bank too ?

The smokies aside, there's no denying that wild bows are much sought after by anglers in the northeast due to their rarity.

If your plan is to save brookies then the browns should be harvested as well.

It's this "I want a fake fishery" attitude that has gotten us in the situation we're in here in PA. Historically its been I want 2'+ trout like I had back in Europe... fine let's stock brown trout. I want to fish for rainbows but I don't want to go West to their native habitat... fine let's stock rainbows. All this with no appreciation for the native brook trout that we have, so the brook trout pays by displacement due to invasives. I now understand what Nick said about people being invasive parasites.

 

[LetortAngler]

You know what's more rare than a spring creek with wild brook trout? A spring creek with wild Brookies and rainbows, now that's a rarity and it pleases both the rainbow angler and Brookie angler.

 

[FarmerDave]

geebee wrote:
Rainbows in the smokies doesn't help me if I want to fish for them in PA.

So?

I wouldn't mind fishing for Northern Snakehead in PA, but wouldn't argue about it if someone was throwing them on the bank.

I can agree they are invasive though, same as browns. Should we throw brownies on the bank too ?

Sure. why not.;-)

The smokies aside, there's no denying that wild bows are much sought after by anglers in the northeast due to their rarity.

Sought after because they taste better, too.

All kidding aside... IMO Big Spring should be managed for Brook Trout. You wanna talk rare... It would be the only major limestone spring creek in PA managed for Brook Trout when at one time brook trout dominated ALL of them. And you are worried about loosing one invasive fishery when there are many. That said, I would not selectively harvest Rainbow or Brown trout from there without the direction of the management agency in charge.

 

[geebee]

FarmerDave wrote:
IMO Big Spring should be managed for Brook Trout. You wanna talk rare... It would be the only major limestone spring creek in PA managed for Brook Trout when at one time brook trout dominated ALL of them. And you are worried about loosing one invasive fishery when there are many. That said, I would not selectively harvest Rainbow or Brown trout from there without the direction of the management agency in charge.

all good points i guess, I just wonder though if you'll end up with a bunch of dead wild rainbows and lots and lots of small brookies - unlike in small creeks, rainbows and brookies hold & feed in different spots don't they ?

why not spend the time and money on improving marginal brookie fisheries elsewhere, rather than eradicating wild fish in the attempt to produce trophy brookies in already mixed fisheries ?

it just doesn't make sense to me, i think you lose more than you gain imho.

just my .02 anyway...

 

[oncorhynchusmykiss]

The barrier is useless because some idiot is bound to put a bow above it again. Changing the regs on the upper strech to WBTE regs would be free and there would still be plenty of bows in the rest of the stream because they have less strict spawning requirements. Look what the silt problems have done to spawn on the letort just in the past few years (I'm sure Ed Shenk would talk your ear off about it), and browns have alot more success spawning in silt than brookies.
Big spring is one of few larger limestone spring creeks left in the world that still has nearly native strain brookies in it. VA has two or three spring creeks that have a few wild brook trout in em, new york has a few, the driftless region has quite a few, and theres a few more in PA, but none of them have the potential that big spring has.
I'm quite certain that if some Colorado spring creek with blue belly cutthroat trout ;-) were being overrun by brook trout Trout Unlimited would be having a bird and asking for your money and your signature on a petition to stop it, but they're happy to have rainbows in big spring even though they're interfering with the quality of the native trout fishery.
I wish more people here were as proud of our natives as people out west are of all their different native strains and sub strains of cutthroat and redbands. I wish more people realized how diverse the strains of brook trout in pa are too.

just a couple more cents

 

[LetortAngler]

"I am grateful that I have lived through the time that equiptment was refined, when introduced brown trout created their own native populations, and when restricted killing became the vogue in regulated areas. This period has been the foundation of dry fly fishing in America. It is saddening, however, to see my beloved srreams---Cedar Run, Big Spring, and the LeTort---suffer unnecessary deterioration from an instrument called "progress" "... Charles Fox

 

[FarmerDave]

geebee wrote:

FarmerDave wrote:
IMO Big Spring should be managed for Brook Trout. You wanna talk rare... It would be the only major limestone spring creek in PA managed for Brook Trout when at one time brook trout dominated ALL of them. And you are worried about loosing one invasive fishery when there are many. That said, I would not selectively harvest Rainbow or Brown trout from there without the direction of the management agency in charge.

all good points i guess, I just wonder though if you'll end up with a bunch of dead wild rainbows and lots and lots of small brookies

I don't wonder that.

- unlike in small creeks, rainbows and brookies hold & feed in different spots don't they ?

No idea, because I have never fished Big Spring because I never had an urge to travel that far to fish for an introduced species. And before the hatchery was removed, I never had an urge to fish a polluted ditch. But my best guess is that you are completely wrong on this. Why would it be different? The reason a brook trout is not holding and feeding where a rainbow trout (or brown trout) is holding and feeding is simply because there is a larger rainbow (or brown) holding and feeding there. The simplest answer is usually the accurate one.

Rainbows are an introduced species, and I can even fish for them in Ohio this time of year if I chose. Or I could fish for a different introduces species in any number of limestone spring creeks in PA. But I would most definitely travel the distance to fish for large Brook trout in a limestone spring creek. PA would then have something TRULY unique and a true destination.

why not spend the time and money on improving marginal brookie fisheries elsewhere, rather than eradicating wild fish in the attempt to produce trophy brookies in already mixed fisheries ?

What money? Aren't we talking about simply a management idea that would not cost any additional money? Also, brookie streams mostly just need to be left alone.

it just doesn't make sense to me, i think you lose more than you gain imho.

Of course it doesn't.... to you.

 

[FarmerDave]

LetortAngler wrote:
"I am grateful that I have lived through the time that equiptment was refined, when introduced brown trout created their own native populations, and when restricted killing became the vogue in regulated areas. This period has been the foundation of dry fly fishing in America. It is saddening, however, to see my beloved srreams---Cedar Run, Big Spring, and the LeTort---suffer unnecessary deterioration from an instrument called "progress" "... Charles Fox

I don't care what Charley Fox says or any other name that you wish to drop. The part in bold is contradictory and never happened. Unless of course he considers this full blooded German (me) to be a Native American.

Just curious... How does he feel about carp?

 

[Fishidiot]

FD,
Sure, anyone can find a quote to support a point of view......but in fairness to Fox - who is revered around here - he lived and fished in PA during a time when streams had suffered greatly and many were indeed in decline. The term "native" back in the day was used more interchangeably with naturally reproducing. With respect to his views on non-native species: he was a huge fan of smallmouth bass and muskies (which aren't native to this part of PA) and was among the leading proponents of the state expansion of its muskie program. He didn't write much about carp nor did he ever tell me he fished for them......but my guess would be that, if he were still around today, that he would be fascinated with the current trend of FFing for carp. He was a far cry from being a snob - with respect to both fish and fishermen.

 

[FarmerDave]

Fishidiot wrote:
FD,
Sure, anyone can find a quote to support a point of view......but in fairness to Fox - who is revered around here - he lived and fished in PA during a time when streams had suffered greatly and many were indeed in decline. The term "native" back in the day was used more interchangeably with naturally reproducing. With respect to his views on non-native species: he was a huge fan of smallmouth bass and muskies (which aren't native to this part of PA) and was among the leading proponents of the state expansion of its muskie program. He didn't write much about carp nor did he ever tell me he fished for them......but my guess would be that, if he were still around today, that he would be fascinated with the current trend of FFing for carp. He was a far cry from being a snob - with respect to both fish and fishermen.

Here's a quarter...

His words are irrelevant to the subject matter and could actually be used to support brook trout enhancement.

And by the way, the carp question was purely rhetorical.

Edit: I meant no disrespect to Charley Fox. However, times are still changing.

 

[Chaz]

Remove the rainbows from the stream and it won't happen anymore.

 

[troutbert]

The PFBC paper at the link does not favor using a barrier, to manage for brook trout. And does favor allowing harvest of rainbows and browns to manage for brook trout.

But that paper is simply what PFBC staff is proposing. It is now open for public comment. And the commissioners have the final decision.

IMHO, their proposed plan of allowing harvest rainbows and browns would definitely not work. Two things would happen if that plan was adopted:
1) The really large rainbows would be quickly removed by people wanting trophies to hang on their walls.

2) The brook trout population would not benefit at all. The reason is that the number of medium sized rainbows would still be high enough to out-compete the brook trout.

So it would be a lose-lose proposition.

But using a barrier, along with periodic electrofishing removal, could make a very big difference for the brook trout. In the paper it says that the former barrier fell into disrepair and lost its effectiveness. They could have chosen to repair or rebuild it. They simply chose not to.

And it says that the escapement of fish from the hatchery was part of the problem. That problem is now gone. And in the intervening years, there are probably more good options for designing and building a barrier.

Regarding the occasional outlaw who would transfer fish above the barrier. That's a law enforcement issue. The people who fish certain streams often know each other. The WCO could ask around and find out who is doing that, and "have a talk" with them.

And if the occasional fish is put above the barrier, the periodic electrofishing would deal with that. As long as the rainbow numbers above the barrier were kept very low, the brook trout population would respond.

In some places where brookies have limestone waters mostly to themselves, there are brookies 12 inches to 15 inches, and even up 17 inches long. Pretty interesting potential, IMHO.

I think they should place the barrier where the old one was. In this way the brookie management zone would not be the entire regs area, just the upper part of it. And the rainbow fishery would continue below that.

As Big Spring Creek continues to recover, the wild trout fishery overall, including rainbows and browns can be extended downstream. And perhaps the brookie management zone could then be extended in the future also. But I think it will always be only the upper end of the creek.