FFIM

FFIM is a non-profit organization devoted to promoting and preserving Maine's fisheries
It is currently October 22nd, 2017, 4:54 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: April 1st, 2017, 6:26 am 
Offline
FFIM-aholic

Joined: May 21st, 2004, 12:00 am
Posts: 1002
Location: Westbrook, ME
Sharing...

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/04/01/d ... ook-trout/

_________________
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 1st, 2017, 9:16 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: December 18th, 2012, 12:31 pm
Posts: 116
They should close waters that need to recover. Plenty of stocked fish and other species to chase


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 12:36 am 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: January 24th, 2002, 1:00 am
Posts: 2302
Location: Lyons, CO
The interviewed bio made it sound like there would still be plenty of young fish this year...

But wouldn't it follow that there's a shortage of spawners last year and this year (and probably next) which will have a pretty big impact on populations 3-5 years from now, e.g. first we are missing the holdover larger fish, for a couple of years, then we'll have some fish around, but we'll be suffering for lack of recruitment for a bit after that as well, so numbers of fish may be down for a while.

I would imagine that in stream systems where recruitment is NOT an issue, then there won't be as much to notice. But if there isn't good spawning habitat, then we'll have an issue for a while. I don't know how many systems suffer for lack of spawning habitat -- I'm guessing that some of the more productive (and marginal) wild trout waters with lower densities and larger sized fish (some of the streams I fished as a kid in the flat swampy part of Maine) would get beat up and potentially take many years to recover. In my opinion, these stream systems are already the ones where wild trout need more protection. This is just another reason to give them more. A very simple rule would be to temporarily take the general law limit down to 1 trout in all of southern Maine and 2 trout elsewhere, unless otherwise opened for greater harvest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 2:14 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: March 30th, 2017, 2:42 am
Posts: 2
Great shearing :P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 8:31 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: December 18th, 2012, 12:31 pm
Posts: 116
Under general law, native brook trout have less protection than bass. I've seen brooks get wiped out in a single season with good water conditions. Those brooks have never recovered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 9:06 am 
Offline
FFIM-aholic
User avatar

Joined: October 16th, 2006, 12:00 am
Posts: 1274
Location: Harrison
Thanks for sharing this article!
If things are as bad as many have theorized, I seriously think ALL wild brook trout waters which are NOT stocked, should be closed to harvest until a time when LEGITIMATE surveys have indicated a full rebound.
However, I would point out that, based on this article, the issue is just a theory at this point. For example, Fleming writes "While biologists cannot quantify losses to the wild brook trout population, they said the evidence is everywhere."
And then there is no scientific data to back this up...other than the statement that streams and brooks dried up and low water prevented movement to refuge areas. OK...so it's LIKELY that fish perished under these conditions, but not yet proven. Also the theory of increased predation as fish were unable to find cover. Sounds logical, yet no actual data to present as evidence.
A guide says he found a lot of dead fish from hooking mortality last summer...
OK...so how does he know a dead fish has indeed perished from hooking? Marks around the jaw area? That doesn't prove anything other than the fact that the fish was caught once, or more, depending. It's a wild leap to attribute the mortality to the hookup unless you actually observed the fish dying after being released.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for increased regulation based on environmental conditions, and articles like this are great to plant the issue in the angler's conscience. Take it easy this year, be mindful of your impact and share your observations with the wider fisheries community.
But this article has several glaring holes, and we really won't know what the true impact of the drought is until the bios start conducting real surveys.

_________________
"It gets late early out there" - Yogi Berra


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 12:05 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict
User avatar

Joined: December 4th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5116
Location: Near the tying bench
This isn't the first drought to hit the reset switch (the drought in the early 2000's was worse on waters I frequent than the drought of 2016). What I remember- brook trout took about 2 years to rebound fully, but then actually did better for 6-8 years as a result of the drought having been a reset switch on invasives as well. I attribute this to the decrease in predation from large smallies in those local waters- which take a long time to be large enough to be major predators on juvenile brookies.

I too found a lot of dead fish (complete with fungus covered hand prints and smelled hooks hanging from their mouths) on a stream I was working on last summer. I'm not sure if the fungus was from poor fish handling, or as a result of the drought, but stressed fish don't survive well with multiple things working against them.

For instance- they struggle to breath when streams go dry.

_________________
"You never miss the water until the well runs dry" - traditional blues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 2:00 pm 
Offline
FFIM-aholic

Joined: May 21st, 2004, 12:00 am
Posts: 1002
Location: Westbrook, ME
“The (Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife) commissioner tends to be really protective of the wild trout”

If this is even half true - the state ought to be erring on the side of caution for this important, heritage fish.

_________________
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 2:24 pm 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: April 27th, 2003, 12:00 am
Posts: 747
Maybe FFIM & its membership could step up and volunteer to undergo a self imposed moratorium and not fish any wild brook trout stream in York and Cumberland counties for the next 3 years, and do strictly C&R on all remaining wild brook trout waters in the State. Call it the "Protect Maine Wild Brook Trout Oath" Market the idea, get some media attention and then hopefully shame the powers that be to take action.

I'm already gonna do this, but if FFIM makes it official, I'd be the first to sign.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 6:15 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: September 28th, 2003, 12:00 am
Posts: 2497
Thanks for sharing this article!
If things are as bad as many have theorized, I seriously think ALL wild brook trout waters which are NOT stocked, should be closed to harvest until a time when LEGITIMATE surveys have indicated a full rebound.
However, I would point out that, based on this article, the issue is just a theory at this point. For example, Fleming writes "While biologists cannot quantify losses to the wild brook trout population, they said the evidence is everywhere."
"And then there is no scientific data to back this up...other than the statement that streams and brooks dried up and low water prevented movement to refuge areas. OK...so it's LIKELY that fish perished under these conditions, but not yet proven. Also the theory of increased predation as fish were unable to find cover. Sounds logical, yet no actual data to present as evidence.
A guide says he found a lot of dead fish from hooking mortality last summer...
OK...so how does he know a dead fish has indeed perished from hooking? Marks around the jaw area? That doesn't prove anything other than the fact that the fish was caught once, or more, depending. It's a wild leap to attribute the mortality to the hookup unless you actually observed the fish dying after being released.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for increased regulation based on environmental conditions, and articles like this are great to plant the issue in the angler's conscience. Take it easy this year, be mindful of your impact and share your observations with the wider fisheries community.
But this article has several glaring holes, and we really won't know what the true impact of the drought is until the bios start conducting real surveys."

And there's no real proof of climate change......

_________________

_________________
The charm of fishing is that it is the pursuit of something that is elusive but attainable, a perpetual series of occasions for hope.

Sir John Buchan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 3rd, 2017, 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 3rd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 2117
Location: N44.88305* W68.67206*
I'm not so sure that the drought of 2016 is over yet - all of the coastal streams I'm familiar with are lower now than I've ever seen them at this time of year - question is: is the the water still locked up in snow and ice or is there no water to be had? One stream I keep an eye on has come up quite a bit in the last 36 hours, so that's encouraging, but it's starting to look like any flow we'll have on the coast is going to come directly from any rain we get - or don't get...

_________________
The best things in life...aren't things.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 4th, 2017, 7:01 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: December 18th, 2012, 12:31 pm
Posts: 116
brian foley wrote:
I'm not so sure that the drought of 2016 is over yet - all of the coastal streams I'm familiar with are lower now than I've ever seen them at this time of year - question is: is the the water still locked up in snow and ice or is there no water to be had? One stream I keep an eye on has come up quite a bit in the last 36 hours, so that's encouraging, but it's starting to look like any flow we'll have on the coast is going to come directly from any rain we get - or don't get...


What he said. Water levels in my area are already pretty low. Add to that the state hasn't stocked any fish since last spring(causing me a drought of my own). I do all of my trout fishing from September to June. We were told that the St. George will get the fish that it should have gotten in the fall this spring plus the usual spring stocking. I'm afraid these fish will have a very short life in the wild. I stopped fishing the St. George the first week of June last year, after seeing 4 dead trout and about 100 Brookies piled up in 6"-12" of water where a spring comes in. This might be a good season to target other spieces.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 4th, 2017, 7:14 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: March 16th, 2013, 11:04 pm
Posts: 517
TMarchetti, same river, same experience. I pulled the plug in late June as well. I found some interesting things in sections of the river throughout the summer and fall (no rod).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 4th, 2017, 7:57 am 
Offline
FFIM-aholic

Joined: May 21st, 2004, 12:00 am
Posts: 1002
Location: Westbrook, ME
Interesting...

http://georgesoutdoornews.bangordailyne ... naccurate/

_________________
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 4th, 2017, 9:58 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: July 1st, 2003, 12:00 am
Posts: 657
don't tell me that anyone was really surprised by IFW opposition to this ,anyone in the trout/salmon management circles anywhere in the country ..that look at Maine and see how we do things says "really" while scratching there heads ..I travel to Carlisle PA 3 or 4 times a year and try and do a little fishing while there ..and I see 1st hand from fly shop owners ..other fisherman .. when I tell them I am from Maine ,they reply something like "You people have no idea what you have until its gone " no one and I mean no one from outside of Maine looks at our state and says we should do like Maine does.. its actually quite sad to say the least.

to me the most telling statement is from B Mallard about all those bodies of water that went from not stocked ..to stocked with NOTHING in between to address the decline NOTHING !

that's sums up our approach pretty well I would say


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group