Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

6 Pages«<23456>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Guillermo  
#31 Posted : Monday, February 12, 2018 9:31:23 PM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 429
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 19 times
Was thanked: 25 time(s) in 23 post(s)
Brookies are more resilient than folks think and are never given the credit they deserve. They deserve our utmost attention and assistance after the way we raped them and their habitat since settling here. I think that’s the least we can do.
thanks 1 user thanked Guillermo for this useful post.
s.t.fanatic on 2/21/2018(UTC)
NBrevitz  
#32 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:11:34 AM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,366
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 49 times
Was thanked: 35 time(s) in 30 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Guillermo Go to Quoted Post
Brookies are more resilient than folks think and are never given the credit they deserve. They deserve our utmost attention and assistance after the way we raped them and their habitat since settling here. I think that’s the least we can do.


Exactly, we shouldn’t just throw our hands up and say, “f*ck it.” They’re a true keystone species and deserve protection and restoration. Browns are a fine gamefish, but an invasive, and should not be a first priority for management in the Midwest. If a stream can’t support Brookies, then let Browns have it.

The biggest fish I’ve found have come in low pressure, natural sections with very few or no Brown Trout, I don’t find that to be a coincidence. They also aren’t always from big water, we don’t need to give them the run of the lower Kinni to get them that big.
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
rschmidt  
#33 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:38:10 AM(UTC)
rschmidt
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 1/16/2015(UTC)
Posts: 482
Location: West WI

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 35 time(s) in 31 post(s)
Considering WI settlers were catching 10# brook trout by hand, reparations seem fitting. Again the key to fishing the driftless is to venture out and go where no one else is willing to go. It's worth it and I am sure there are still dinosaur sized brookies running around safe and free from mankind. :) Ron
NBrevitz  
#34 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:52:42 AM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,366
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 49 times
Was thanked: 35 time(s) in 30 post(s)
Originally Posted by: rschmidt Go to Quoted Post
Considering WI settlers were catching 10# brook trout by hand, reparations seem fitting. Again the key to fishing the driftless is to venture out and go where no one else is willing to go. It's worth it and I am sure there are still dinosaur sized brookies running around safe and free from mankind. :) Ron


Apparently they used to average 2-3 lbs in the Rush. Not up to, average. It’d be cool to see that again.
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
Gurth  
#35 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 2:13:14 PM(UTC)
Gurth
Rank: Stone Fly

Joined: 11/7/2016(UTC)
Posts: 932
Man
Location: Madison

Thanks: 57 times
Was thanked: 72 time(s) in 58 post(s)
Lol

First off… not sure how you accomplish growing brook trout that average 2-3 pounds anywhere in Wisconsin – there aren't even brown trout streams where that is the case.

If that did happen though, you'd be shoulder to shoulder trying to fish it and hating life… or at least your fellow fisherman.


I think brook trout are great. The first trout I caught were brookies. Didn't catch my first brown till almost 10 years into trout fishing.

I spend entire days on brook trout streams and go up north specifically looking to fish for them. I've caught heritage brookies up in the deep dark places where they still reside in the lower Driftless.

I can understand and fully support keeping brook trout streams pristine and exclusive. Moving forward, don't put browns or bows in those places until (if) it becomes necessary due to climate change – many years down the road or never (hopefully).


Trying to switch currently brown or heavily mixed streams back though… how would you do that?

Mass kills? Shock the browns and throw them on the bank? Fishermen catch them and throw them on the banks?

I'd be very opposed to any of that and I would hope that most other trout fishermen would be too. (I'm aware of the brookie eradication efforts out west and I would not participate in it if out there and caught a brookie – I'd put it back in the water.)

You're not going to be able to remove all of that biomass and move it live either as it would be cost prohibitive and impossible to get them all anyway. Or I would think so.

To dovetail with that, the DNR is interested in providing as many quality fishing opportunities in as many places featuring as many species as efficiently possible. Have to imagine that they see the brown trout as a success rather than something that needs to be fixed - there are fishable trout year round in many places much, much further downstream than brookies would be.

Encourage larger bag limits? Nobody's eating them or so few are that it wouldn't make a dent.

The ship has sailed.


In terms of brown trout… I like em... a bunch. Love catching them and love how big some of them get. They can be just as stunning in their own way as brookies too.

I'm very happy that we have more than one species of "trout" in our waters.

I believe that my overall enjoyment of trout fishing would be lessened if I didn't have the option to hit "brown trout" streams.

Wish that bows had been able to get a reproductive foothold in more places. I take no joy in catching old mutant brood bows but love it when I get a former fingerling that's all growed up. One of these years I'm gonna get one out of one of the inland streams where they naturally reproduce. That will be cool.


Anyway… living down here at the southernmost edge of Midwestern trout water, I believe that if we didn't have browns, my options for cold water stream fishing would be limited to just a few places – especially around Madison.

As it currently stands, I have a whole bunch without having to drive to Richland Center or beyond.


Up north though… I agree. Keep the waters for brookies.

And you guys keep and eat as many browns from those waters as you can stomach. Laugh



.

Edited by user Tuesday, February 13, 2018 2:16:22 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Private correspondence at: jkschind "at" tds.net
Guillermo  
#36 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 5:36:58 PM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 429
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 19 times
Was thanked: 25 time(s) in 23 post(s)
If folks want browns they should move to Europe. They shouldn’t be here and we never should have introduced them. Brevitz is correct that browns are often the main obstacle standing in the way of large brookies. Brookies shouldn’t be our West either and if I lived there I’d support the local Cutthroats and keep a limit of Brookies.

If it gets bad enough, well hell, I bet browns would make good coon food.
thanks 1 user thanked Guillermo for this useful post.
s.t.fanatic on 2/21/2018(UTC)
NBrevitz  
#37 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 5:49:35 PM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,366
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 49 times
Was thanked: 35 time(s) in 30 post(s)
Gurth
I’m not trying to get rid of Browns and Rainbows, I like them too. I just think they shouldn’t be priority #1 or 2.
I highly doubt that a popular stream like that could be established again in the face of angling pressure. That said, I know streams where they probably average just under a lb. As for the 2-3 lb Brown average, that absolutely exists in a couple streams up north.

I’m not saying simply eradicate the Browns from everything. I’m saying that we need to keep those streams with the best thermal regimes Brown free, as Brookies should be able to use these for eternity. They’ve isolated some streams in the Driftless from Browns. Seas Branch and Hemminway Creek are two examples, they shocked the fish out and released them downstream of man-made barriers. It’s been working on both creeks. Taking over select, isolated watersheds and ridding then of Browns could be very effective.
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
NE IA Drifter  
#38 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 6:20:11 PM(UTC)
NE IA Drifter
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 7/9/2013(UTC)
Posts: 162
Location: Decorah

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Everyone should read "an entirely synthetic fish". It would really shed light on the entire trout management philosophy we have in the US and even the world. It's amazing that trout have been so widely propagated and many times it was because they were so romantized.

While I recognize that it's hard to eradicate non-natives, my position would be to focus on natives first and stop stocking non-natives. If you want brown trout go to Europe if you want rainbows go to California and the pacific coast. Cutthroats and brookies should be the realm of the us. I'm sure I'm in the minority here.

I haven't finished the entire book yet but will follow up with my thoughts/notes.
thanks 2 users thanked NE IA Drifter for this useful post.
NBrevitz on 2/13/2018(UTC), s.t.fanatic on 2/21/2018(UTC)
Gurth  
#39 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 6:40:10 PM(UTC)
Gurth
Rank: Stone Fly

Joined: 11/7/2016(UTC)
Posts: 932
Man
Location: Madison

Thanks: 57 times
Was thanked: 72 time(s) in 58 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NBrevitz Go to Quoted Post
Gurth
I’m not trying to get rid of Browns and Rainbows, I like them too. I just think they shouldn’t be priority #1 or 2.
I highly doubt that a popular stream like that could be established again in the face of angling pressure. That said, I know streams where they probably average just under a lb. As for the 2-3 lb Brown average, that absolutely exists in a couple streams up north.

I’m not saying simply eradicate the Browns from everything. I’m saying that we need to keep those streams with the best thermal regimes Brown free, as Brookies should be able to use these for eternity. They’ve isolated some streams in the Driftless from Browns. Seas Branch and Hemminway Creek are two examples, they shocked the fish out and released them downstream of man-made barriers. It’s been working on both creeks. Taking over select, isolated watersheds and ridding then of Browns could be very effective.



A reasonable response.

I agree.

I would only amend that the top priority should depend upon suitability of the water.

For some streams the #1 priority should be and will remain browns.

I don't see any reason to continue spending effort and money on rainbows as they have proven to be ill suited for self sustainability in our inland streams for the most part.



Originally Posted by: NBrevitz Go to Quoted Post


As for the 2-3 lb Brown average, that absolutely exists in a couple streams up north.




Awaiting your PM. Flapper
Private correspondence at: jkschind "at" tds.net
thanks 1 user thanked Gurth for this useful post.
NBrevitz on 2/13/2018(UTC)
Gurth  
#40 Posted : Tuesday, February 13, 2018 6:46:11 PM(UTC)
Gurth
Rank: Stone Fly

Joined: 11/7/2016(UTC)
Posts: 932
Man
Location: Madison

Thanks: 57 times
Was thanked: 72 time(s) in 58 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NE IA Drifter Go to Quoted Post
Everyone should read "an entirely synthetic fish". It would really shed light on the entire trout management philosophy we have in the US and even the world. It's amazing that trout have been so widely propagated and many times it was because they were so romantized.

While I recognize that it's hard to eradicate non-natives, my position would be to focus on natives first and stop stocking non-natives. If you want brown trout go to Europe if you want rainbows go to California and the pacific coast. Cutthroats and brookies should be the realm of the us. I'm sure I'm in the minority here.

I haven't finished the entire book yet but will follow up with my thoughts/notes.




I could get behind the purist pro-native idealism if it weren't so futile.

The brown trout are here to stay.

I think that the fish management opportunity exists in the areas that Neil brought up....

Protecting what's left of native ranges and responsibly returning suitable streams to native dominated places. And these "suitable" streams should be ones that are projected to stay cold in spite of climate change. No point in putting a lot of effort into removing browns and reestablishing brookies if in 10-20 years the brookies will all die out anyway.



On another note, how do you feel about introduced great lakes salmon and steelhead?
Private correspondence at: jkschind "at" tds.net
Users browsing this topic
6 Pages«<23456>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2018, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.513 seconds.