What is the Future of US Trout Fisheries, part two
In part one of “What is the Future of US Trout Fisheries”, I discussed the role played by fishery managers, the “Restore the Natives” programs, and the impact of dams. In this blog, I will address several additional issues that adversely affect US trout fisheries.
Irrigation
Much of the western US is arid, unable to support ranching or agriculture without supplemental water. The Mormons, beginning with their arrival in Utah in 1847, developed extensive open-ditch irrigation systems. This allowed a robust ranching/agricultural industry to flourish. Unfortunately, the ditches do not distribute water efficiently. It is estimated that only 50% of the water entering an open irrigation ditch reaches its destination. The other 50% is lost to evaporation and absorption into the soil.
There has been little modernization over the past 177 years! Can you imagine what our streams might look like if even half this lost water remained in them? Of course, there is no incentive for ranchers to modernize irrigation methods, like using wells or converting ditches to pipes. They enjoy guaranteed water rights, and only our streams continue to suffer, especially in drought years. Interested organizations need to help defray the cost of modernizing irrigation, reduce the need for irrigation, or even purchase water rights.
Lastly, most Western ranchers stop irrigating after the 2nd hay-cutting, usually in early September. Yet the irrigation ditches continue to run full! Why? Couldn’t at least some of the water stay in the streams? Surely an accommodation between ranchers and conservationists is available.
Shade
Macro stream restoration is largely dependent on reversing global warming. While this is not likely to occur in my lifetime, there are things that can be done on a smaller scale to slow the degradation caused by global warming. Exposed streams warm roughly 10 degrees on sunny days. This warming can be reduced by providing a canopy of trees. So in addition to planting willow bushes, which stabilize stream banks but provide no shade, larger trees need to be planted as well. In the west, this is primarily cottonwoods and willow oaks, and in the east it is sycamores. red and white oaks. It will take time for a canopy to develop, but we need to start somewhere, sometime, with something. In addition to providing shade, a robust canopy also reduces atmospheric CO2.
Angler Behavior
Next, let’s consider the effect of increased angling pressure. We must admit that we do have a negative impact on our trout fisheries. It is generally accepted that there is a 5% mortality rate associated with catch & release fishing. But that figure comes from studies of professional anglers. I seriously doubt that most amateor anglers treat their catch as skillfully as professionals. It begins with equipment, that is, using rods strong enough to quickly land fish, rather than using wimpy rods that prolong the fight. Then comes the release. The fish should to the greatest extent possible be kept in the water while the hook is released, a barbless hook of course!
And we need to get rid of the picture-taking fetish! How many pictures do we need of average sized fish? A fish of a lifetime, sure. But fish after fish, no! Every second a fish is lifted from the water for whatever reason, increases its mortality rate. And handling the fish rubs off some of its slime, increasing the risk of infection and death. Do not be reassured when a mishandled fish swims away. Most released fish die 1-2 days after their release.
An unknown effect on fish mortality is being caught multiple times in a season. The 5% rate is based on a single catch. Is there a multiplier rate? I can’t find any studies regarding this, but most likely the rate is higher. So, should we self-limit our catch, similar to catch and keep anglers? Must we catch 40-50 fish to call it a good day? I don’t have an answer, but raise this as something to consider as we strive to maintain our sport of fishing for wild trout.
Lastly, on popular streams, trout must contend with anglers nearly every day during the few months of abundant food. This is when they must feed and grow. Do we need fish sanctuaries, that is, stream sections with no fishing allowed? Or do we need to return to a limited fishing season, to allow for undisturbed feeding and spawning? I’m sure there are additional actions/regulations that could benefit the trout, albeit with reduced fishing opportunities for anglers.
Stocking ?
As a died-in-the-wool proponent of wild fisheries, it pains me to think that stocking may become necessary to maintain sport fisheries in the face of continued global warming. If streams can no longer maintain a healthy, wild fishery, then stocking is a last resort. If it comes to that, I encourage stream managers to implement catch and release fishing more widely. After a month or two, stocked fish behave like wild fish. That is, they realize that anglers are predators, rather than a food source, and seek cover. They also learn that insects are their primary source of food, and stop responding to mop flies! Such an approach provides nearly year-long fishing, the warmest months excepted. Is this a ” deja vu all over again”, from over a hundred years ago? Truly a very last consideration!
Summary
So, what is the future of trout fisheries in the US? Are they doomed? Perhaps not, but it will take the cooperation of fishery managers, land owners, conservation organizations, the fly fishing industry, and individual anglers to do a major reset of current practices. Do we have the will to do so? I hope these blogs encourager anglers to speak up, and get involved with organizations working to preserve and restore our coldwater fisheries.
written by Al Simpson, 10/2024
Related blogs-
