With rare exception, I don't fish streams that don't have natural reproduction. That said, if the stocking program ended tomorrow, I think it may have consequences that many are overlooking. It would likely have a negative impact on all of our fishing experiences.
Sure, some people will just stop fishing for trout when the opportunity is no longer within 15-30 minutes of their residence. Not all will stop, though. Pressure will increase on the wild trout fisheries.
At face value, I don't support stocking over wild fish. In reality, though, isn't it likely that those stockers actually protect some wild fish? Especially in small streams, when the catch and keep angler intent on getting his limit hits the stream, he likely spooks the wild fish and harvests the stocked. If there are no stocked fish, will he not adapt and learn to harvest the wild fish?
Reducing rather than retiring the stocking program will have the same effects just to a lesser extent.
People want to fish for trout. Making it easy for them might not be the worst thing for both the wild fish and those of us who pursue wild fish.
FWIW, I do not support stocking over native brook trout populations at all. In an ideal world, we wouldn't have any stocking programs. In a nearly ideal world, maybe only some fingerling stocking would occur. The world we live in is far from ideal. Unfortunately, we can't just go by the science and ignore the societal aspect. Those must be carefully balanced by resource management agencies.
Someone is always going to be upset. Those who are upset are almost certainly overlooking some aspect of the the situation. Here's an example. I think there should be be no brook trout harvest or stocking allowed in PA. Given the difficulty that rainbows seem to have reproducing in our state, they should be the only trout stocked in order to protect native brook trout and wild brown trout strains. I'm sure I'm missing something.