FFIM

FFIM is a non-profit organization devoted to promoting and preserving Maine's fisheries
It is currently December 10th, 2017, 9:57 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: November 7th, 2017, 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 3rd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 2128
Location: N44.88305* W68.67206*
...in New Zealand, that is. Last month the Kiwis celebrated the sesquicentennial of the arrival of Brown Trout down there - it's interesting to note that they made it all the way down there about 16 years before they arrived in the USA, but the reasons for that seem pretty clear - I've copied and pasted the story and the address, from the NZ Fish & Game web site, of their importation to NZ - it's a pretty interesting article - cheers!

https://fishandgame.org.nz/freshwater-f ... own-trout/

150 years of brown trout

October 10th, 2017, marked 150 years since brown trout were first introduced to New Zealand.A great West Coast Brown trout2
The highly-valued sports fish survived the long trip by sailing ship from Britain to become established as not only a culturally valuable species, but also the basis of a multi-million dollar tourism industry.

Brown trout are native to Europe and were first introduced into New Zealand in 1867 from British stock which had been established in Tasmania only three years earlier.

The delicate cargo of trout and salmon eggs had been brought by ship from England in 1864, delicately packed in boxes with moss and ice as reliable shipboard refrigeration machines would not be developed until 1877.

Only the trout eggs survived the perilous three-month journey to the other side of the world, with all the salmon eggs dying during the voyage.

Once in Tasmania, the trout eggs were taken to a hatchery north of Hobart where they hatched a few weeks after they arrived. The trout were then released into the nearby Plenty River, and Tasmania's highland lakes.

With a finhold now established in the southern hemisphere, brown trout were bred and then sent to Victoria, New Zealand and South Africa, spawning a new pastime for thousands.

In New Zealand, the first live trout to hatch here was a brown in Christchurch on October 10, 1867.

It was one of 1200 ova that the curator of the Canterbury Acclimatisation Society, Andrew Johnson, brought back from Tasmania.

The fish was hatched in a small wooden box, at the Society’s grounds in Hagley Park, Christchurch, according to Jack Kos who has researched the introduction of brown trout for his PhD.

The lone trout’s hatch was followed a few days later by a further two. “Just three trout in total but New Zealand had brown trout nonetheless,” Jack Kos says.

A year later in August 1868, the Otago Acclimatisation Society, sent their curator to Hobart to procure a supply of trout ova.

“Returning on the Free Trader, Charles Clifford brought with him 800 ova, of which 724 hatched.

“In many ways it was this introduction that assured the presence of trout in New Zealand, as the Otago Acclimatisation Society now had a sufficient population from which to establish a breeding supply and remove the reliance on Tasmania,” Jack Kos says.

The Nelson and Southland acclimatisation societies also secured trout ova that year.

“There is no doubt that the South Island acclimatisation societies, and in particular Canterbury and Otago, were the driving force behind the introduction of trout to New Zealand.”

In the years that followed the initial introductions, these societies grew their populations of trout, both through further importations from Tasmania and natural reproduction, and began to distribute the fish throughout their regions.

Brown trout are now esteemed by New Zealand anglers and the fishery here is rated as one of the best in the world, attracting high-spending international anglers here every year.Magnificent brown trout2

Chris Baker with a hefty 11 pounder caught on a dry fly.

Jack Kos spoke to Radio New Zealand about brown trout - click here.

Or you can read his article in our Fish & Game magazine here.

Jack and Ben Pierce have produced on the introduction of brown trout and they've entered into a competition put on by the Royal Society of New Zealand for young researchers.

Click here to view his video trailer.

MAPS

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 9:40 am 
Offline

Joined: December 5th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5130
Location: Manchester, ME
Tough one for me Brian. The angler in me would love to fish browns in New Zealand some day. But the conservationist hates the idea of "naturalization societies" spreading European fish and wildlife around like Johnny Appleseed.

This tension is at the heart of much of the world's best trout fishing and I am conflicted.

Fortunately, a NZ trip isn't in the budget for a long time to come, so this dilemma remains purely theoretical for me. :lol:

I've "stayed pure" in Montana and Wyoming the last two years, but friends out there keep sending me pictures and stories about blanket hatches on waters like the Yellowstone, Madison, Henry's Fork, Missouri, and Big Horn with acres of rising browns and rainbows.

Ken B. almost shook me out of my purist stance this year with Madison stories, before those big Slough Creek cutts refocused my attention.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 10:01 am 
Offline
FFIM-aholic
User avatar

Joined: October 16th, 2006, 12:00 am
Posts: 1322
Location: Harrison
Bringing this issue to Maine. If we could go back, I would be against the introduction of any non-native salmonids to Maine waters. This includes both browns and rainbows, but it also includes salmon outside their (4) native watersheds, togue and smelt. Bkt are stocked all over now, but I'm not sure they have been introduced to Maine waters where they didn't historically exist.
Now that we have them, though, I'm glad they are being managed for quality fisheries. Both Browns and rainbows. I enjoy fishing for both. I think smelt have had more of an adverse affect on native fisheries when stocked out of their historical range than have either brown or rainbow trout.
Interestingly, it was the introduction of salmon outside the original four watersheds that made the smelt stockings a required endeavor, as the new salmon populations could not exist without smelt. We know how smelt populations led to the decline of bluebacks and, in conjunction, the trophy bkt that fed on them.
I'm not aware of Browns or rainbows causing a collapse or severe reduction of native salmonids in Maine. Not on the level of smelt.
Some very nice brown and rainbow trout being distributed this year!!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 11:29 am 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3287
Location: Vassalboro, Maine
Jeff- you put me of a mind...is it pure to move foods? I mean, we see some against the re-settlement of trout and birds (pheasant comes to mind)...but APPLESead? Potato? Tomatoes? in fact, aren't most of our foods from other places? So---is it okay for foodstuff to move around for the good of humanity...but for the movement of fish, it is bad? Interestingly, trees, plants, animals (humans?) are all invasives...

While I see the logic of not stocking invasive fish over native...I do not see a strong case that to stock fish in areas that are w/o a working fishery as bad...and, as always- opinions are subjective.

The Mo is possibly the greatest fishing water in North America...and it is all fake if one uses this definition...I doubt I would travel for sauger.

Hutch

_________________
Fall, the BEST time of year!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 5th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5130
Location: Manchester, ME
Hutch:

I would travel for sauger--and in fact had a ball many years ago catching sauger on a Lake Superior trib when I got sick of catching non-native steelhead smolts. They take a streamer something wicked. I'd rather fish native alewives than stocked browns in the St. George--though I didn't always feel this way.

I think a "viable fishery" is in the eye of beholder. So is your term "working fishery". I've been told many times that some of my favorite waters in Maine--tiny little brooks and pocket ponds teeming with brook trout that max out at about 7"--are not a viable fishery and so not worthy of conservation. I love fishing them--though I'm glad I know some spots where the trout grow bigger, too.

Some of those Western rivers are so altered from their native state that talking about native species is maybe kind of silly. When you change the flow regime, the water chemistry, the water temperature, and the forage base, is native aquatic species conservation even possible? I understand the desire to turn them into trout fisheries after all those changes, and if I had to make my living year round as a guide or fly shop owner, I'm sure I'd spend some time on them. But I've taken less then 10 airplane flights in my life where fishing was a primary part of the trip, and I've been chasing native species every time. (I did make some long drives in my broke-post-college days that featured wild rainbows, browns, and steelhead in the south, mid-Atlantic, and Great Lakes.)

As for food, I grow all sorts of things that are not native to Maine and some that are not native to North America. There is a difference between what we grow in tended gardens and tossing new species (fish, wildlife, or veggies) into the wild and hoping for the best. Maybe some of those altered western rivers fall into the "tended garden" category.

And I freely admit that if confronted with huge rising browns on the Madison on a day Dee Dee wanted to go down to see Old Faithful, I'd stop and cast to them. But I probably wouldn't make the drive past Soda Butte and Slough Creek from Cooke City just for the fishing. Call me a conflicted purist. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 5:08 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3287
Location: Vassalboro, Maine
I am comfortable with confliction... it is also worthy to save waters with viable unmixed species....but there IS a difference in worth (a social construct- and subjective) of both plants as invasive, and fish as invasive. I have arrived at----I LIKE invasives in certain conditions.

I also like domestic beer.

Color me a deplorable.

Hutch

_________________
Fall, the BEST time of year!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 8th, 2017, 10:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 3rd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 2128
Location: N44.88305* W68.67206*
I feel your confliction Jeff - I prefer to fish for native/wild fish way more than the others and 90% of the time, when I have a choice, I will chase the natives - but...this Sunday they are off the table, so I'll chase FOB Browns and have a good time of it - likewise, during the dog days of summer I'm perfectly happy to angle for bass, even though I hate what they've done to our trout waters...
As far as the budget goes, I'd be willing to bet that I spent less on my last trip to NZ than most folks spend on their trips out west...
And I like domestic beers too - especially the ones brewed across the bridge from my house - cheers!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TMarchetti and 4 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