Trending
Pennsylvania anglers have faced more than their share of invasive species. Flatheads in the Susquehanna. Snakeheads in the Delaware River. Rusty crayfish border to border.
The list goes on, and adding another name to the list should come as no surprise - but trout?
Keystone anglers and outdoor enthusiasts alike are accustomed to seeing three forms of trout -- brook, brown and rainbow. Four is the golden rainbow. They are a stable of the Pennsylvania fishing experience, and it is hard to imagine a season without the Fish and Boat Commission's fleet of stocking trucks crisscrossing the state to reach your favorite stream, but that is exactly what some trout anglers want to see happen.
A growing coalition of anglers and conservationists is taking a stand against invasive brown and rainbow trout. Yep, invasive trout. Now, before you start scratching your head and thinking, "What? Invasive trout?" they are technically correct.
Neither brown nor rainbow trout are naturally found in Commonwealth waters. While there may be streams supporting reproducing populations of either, the only common trout species originally native to Pennsylania is the brook trout.
The brook trout which is, by no coincidence, also the state fish, was once common to the mountain waters and limestone-fed streams early settlers encountered. Now, with the exception of high-quality mountain streams untouched by man or isolated populations scattered about, the native brook trout is no longer at the top of its game.
Those who wish to see the brookie's downward trend reversed are placing the blame squarely at the foot of stocked trout.
Stocked trout, they say, are responsible for not only the demise of their native cousin but also for keeping it from swimming out of its hole. Stocking browns and rainbows in waters where brook trout reside causes unnatural competition for food and habitat, and the brookies lose more often than not.
Stocking near isolated brook trout populations prevents those fish from moving to other nearby communities, which in turn reduces breeding opportunities and lessens gene quality. Stop stocking these waters and the brookie will rebound.
Or so their fanbase says.
As mentioned, the brook trout proponents are technically correct. The brook trout is the only inland trout species native to the Commonwealth. The brown and rainbow trout are not native to Pennsylvania, having been imported to boast fishing opportunities in streams no longer capable of sustaining brook trout. Over time, the stockings would expand to streams, rivers, and impoundments throughout the Commonwealth, with an average of 3.2 million trout stocked annually, providing fishing opportunities in close proximity to every would-be angler.
The critics are also correct in stating that these stocked trout often occupy traditional brook trout streams and have tremendous success when competing with brook trout for resources.
So far, the theory that invasive trout are responsible for the brookie's downfall holds true. After all, they are a non-native species harming a native population. Again, this is technically correct, but there is more to the story.
Brown and rainbow trout were not introduced to eliminate native brook trout. They were introduced to provide additional angling opportunities. Not only are these species hardier than brookies, allowing them to be stocked in far more areas of the state and less-than-ideal water conditions, but they also have grown larger and faster. The brook trout population started a downward spiral before introducing non-native trout species.
Pollution, mainly due to heavy commercial timbering, had turned many pristine trout streams into mud and muck. Acid mine drainage would also be a significant player in killing streams with a massive one-two punch. Where the stream survived, the lack of cover resulted in increased water temperatures that were no longer suitable for brook trout or, in many cases, any year-round trout population. The put-and-take trout fishery was born.
But in declaring the stocked trout invasive, critics overlook one essential part of the puzzle: the economic impact.
In most cases, an invasive species not only causes ecological harm but economic harm as well. Not so with the stocked trout. The ability to provide fishing opportunities is a vital mission of the Fish and Boat Commission, and stocking trout is a critical component in meeting this objective. Having fishing opportunities in every county, often within easy reach of every citizen, drives interest in fishing and license sales.
This in turn helps the commission achieve its other missions in protecting the Commonwealth's waters and aquatic resources. One can hardly exist without the other. This does not consider the impact trout fishing has on the local economy.
Whether it is fair to brook trout, the stocked trout is a well-established and vital part of the Keystone State fishing experience.
So why are we talking about it now? Critics and proponents alike will soon have a chance to have their voices heard and potentially shape the future of Pennsylvania trout stocking.
On Oct. 4, the Fish and Boat Commission began accepting public comments regarding a new strategic plan for Trout Fisheries Management. According to the commission's press release, public comments will be accepted between Oct. 4 and Nov. 2. The plan aims to "ensure that adequate protection is afforded to Pennsylvania's wild trout resources and that fisheries provided through the management of wild trout and stocking of adult and fingerling trout produce high quality angling opportunities across the Commonwealth."
Everyone will have a say, and if there was ever a time when stocking attitudes could change, this could be it. But the question remains: should it?