New Jersey removes brown trout to restore wild brook trout populations

F

flies&brookies

New member
Joined
Jul 16, 2025
Messages
4
City
cross fork
During the initial removal, Brown Trout greatly outnumbered Brook Trout by a margin of 725 to 58. This was repeated during the fall of 2017, until the 7th pass, when only 9 Brown Trout (all young-of-the-year) and 60 Brook Trout were encountered (87.0% Brook Trout). Following the removal of non-native Brown Trout during year one, the Brook Trout population doubled in year two. Removals resumed in each subsequent year and is ongoing. A total of 1,533 Brown Trout have been removed from Rinehart Brook over a 5-year period (1,255 in 2017, 65 in 2018, 118 in 2019, 87 in 2020, and 8 in 2021). The maximum number of Brook Trout captured on any given complete pass has consistently increased from 65 in 2017, 147 in 2018, 841 in 2019, 1,169 in 2020, and 1,095 in 2021. This project will continue in 2022, with intentions to enhance the existing natural waterfalls, thus preventing Brown Trout recolonization. Knowledge gained during this pilot project will help further Brook Trout restoration efforts in New Jersey.
 
flies&brookies said:
During the initial removal, Brown Trout greatly outnumbered Brook Trout by a margin of 725 to 58. This was repeated during the fall of 2017, until the 7th pass, when only 9 Brown Trout (all young-of-the-year) and 60 Brook Trout were encountered (87.0% Brook Trout). Following the removal of non-native Brown Trout during year one, the Brook Trout population doubled in year two. Removals resumed in each subsequent year and is ongoing. A total of 1,533 Brown Trout have been removed from Rinehart Brook over a 5-year period (1,255 in 2017, 65 in 2018, 118 in 2019, 87 in 2020, and 8 in 2021). The maximum number of Brook Trout captured on any given complete pass has consistently increased from 65 in 2017, 147 in 2018, 841 in 2019, 1,169 in 2020, and 1,095 in 2021. This project will continue in 2022, with intentions to enhance the existing natural waterfalls, thus preventing Brown Trout recolonization. Knowledge gained during this pilot project will help further Brook Trout restoration efforts in New Jersey.
Click to expand...
Hate to say it, but it's sad when New Jersey is beating Pennsylvania too.
 
I've fished a stream that they've done this to up in Wisconsin. It has an old dam on it and they spent several years taking out the browns. The brook trout population is nuts, at this point (I believe my math worked out to around 180 kg/ha from their data). Unfortunately, it's also the Driftless, so from the 50 fish in one hole you get to catch maybe one before they all spook.

It's an interesting concept. I would not be opposed to trying it on some PA waters of interest. I can't imagine it getting much traction in PA until or unless the brookies are really on their last legs, which would probably be a while in any circumstance.
 
sixfootfenwick said:
Hate to say it, but it's sad when New Jersey is beating Pennsylvania too.
Click to expand...
Nobody ever accused PA as being a frontrunner or innovator on anything. The wheels turn slowly in the 5th most populated state.

Edit: I mean bureaucraticlly. Our government and governmental controlled organizations always seem to lag behind our neighbors in implementing things that are forward thinking.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t we just have a huge tech/energy/crypto conference in Pittsburgh?
 
dudemanspecial said:
I should have clarified better that I meant that from a bureaucratic standpoint.
Click to expand...
This is true but it's our fault. Look at what is happening right now.

New Jersey: let's remove brown trout and restore a brook trout streams.

Pennsylvania: let's stock class A water

The push to stock is our fault. If the bureaucratic authorities move slow it's because we aren't focused on what's right.

We are still snot noses kiddies demanding cotton candy at an amusement park.

Hence, it's sad even New Jersey is beating us. I can just imagine the guys in jumpsuits and gold chains shocking the stream. 🤣
 
sixfootfenwick said:
This is true but it's our fault. Look at what is happening right now.

New Jersey: let's remove brown trout and restore a brook trout streams.

Pennsylvania: let's stock class A water

The push to stock is our fault. If the bureaucratic authorities move slow it's because we aren't focused on what's right.

We are still snot noses kiddies demanding cotton candy at an amusement park.

Hence, it's sad even New Jersey is beating us. I can just imagine the guys in jumpsuits and gold chains shocking the stream. 🤣
Click to expand...
I don't know.....seems like a lot of the comments in threads brought up about the PFBC meetings sure make it sound like its one or 2 commissioners and house members that are to blame.
 
dudemanspecial said:
I don't know.....seems like a lot of the comments in threads brought up about the PFBC meetings sure make it sound like its one or 2 commissioners and house members that are to blame.
Click to expand...
So you don't think the vast majority of anglers aren't behind them?
You should talk to troutbert about how organized the other side of the coin is on this.

If no one wanted it, the powers that be wouldn't advocate for it. Bread and circuses.
 
sixfootfenwick said:
So you don't think the vast majority of anglers aren't behind them?
You should talk to troutbert about how organized the other side of the coin is on this.

If no one wanted it, the powers that be wouldn't advocate for it. Bread and circuses.
Click to expand...
No I understand that for sure. Shouldn't it be PFBC's job to educate the vast majority on why they shouldn't be stocking certain places instead of fighting for it though?

Catch 22 i suppose.
 
Interesting. It's almost as if NJ feels that browns don't belong in a stream that can support native brook trout. Good for them.

I'm out of the loop these days, since most of my trout fishing is done in other states. Anything like that being done in PA? The fisheries folks I've spoken with in other states/provinces shake their heads at PA's stocking culture and lack of protections for native species.
 
TimB said:
Interesting. It's almost as if NJ feels that browns don't belong in a stream that can support native brook trout. Good for them.

I'm out of the loop these days, since most of my trout fishing is done in other states. Anything like that being done in PA? The fisheries folks I've spoken with in other states/provinces shake their heads at PA's stocking culture and lack of protections for native species.
Click to expand...
Nice. Me too. I like WV and MD a lot.

No we are still trying to find ways to stock class A streams
 
flies&brookies said:
During the initial removal, Brown Trout greatly outnumbered Brook Trout by a margin of 725 to 58. This was repeated during the fall of 2017, until the 7th pass, when only 9 Brown Trout (all young-of-the-year) and 60 Brook Trout were encountered (87.0% Brook Trout). Following the removal of non-native Brown Trout during year one, the Brook Trout population doubled in year two. Removals resumed in each subsequent year and is ongoing. A total of 1,533 Brown Trout have been removed from Rinehart Brook over a 5-year period (1,255 in 2017, 65 in 2018, 118 in 2019, 87 in 2020, and 8 in 2021). The maximum number of Brook Trout captured on any given complete pass has consistently increased from 65 in 2017, 147 in 2018, 841 in 2019, 1,169 in 2020, and 1,095 in 2021. This project will continue in 2022, with intentions to enhance the existing natural waterfalls, thus preventing Brown Trout recolonization. Knowledge gained during this pilot project will help further Brook Trout restoration efforts in New Jersey.
Click to expand...
I hope it works. seems to me that they will have to keep going back and remove them though. Hard to imagine BT will be zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top