Naturally Reproducing Trout Fisheries

[BugChucka]

Last night I was laying in bed thinking about the various waterbodies in NH (specifically rivers), that contain populations of naturaly reproducing trout. Plenty of small streams, lakes, and ponds do, but what about the larger rivers of our state? Southern NH for the most part is depending on hatchery trucks to keep the rivers stocked, a few may hold over, but what about self sustaining populations? I'd like for us to identify the states major trout rivers, look at the river's current wild trout potential, and give some thought to the possibility of imroving it and creating wild trout fisheries. Here's what the state has listed...only the Andro is of any real size I believe.

"The N.H. Fish and Game Department manages selected waters to provide wild trout fishing experiences, meaning anglers have an opportunity to catch trout that occur naturally and the trout population is not supplemented or maintained by stocking. Since the abundance of wild trout is subject to the will of its natural environment, many wild trout fisheries are subject to catch and release only, fishing tackle is restricted, and the open season is shorter to protect spawning trout in the fall.

Waterbody Town
Alder Brook Second College Grant
Androscoggin River Berlin/Gorham/Shelburne
Ethan Pond Bethlehem
Flint’s Brook Hollis
Greenough Pond, Little Wentworth Location
Gulf Brook Chesterfield
Lamb Valley Brook Second College Grant
Long Mountain Brook Stratford/Odell
Loomis Valley Brook Second College Grant
Lyman Brook Columbia
Meadow Brook Sharon
Mohawk River, West Br. Colebrook
Pond Brook Stratford/Odell
Sand Brook Hillsborough
Shoal Pond Lincoln
Witches Spring Brook Hollis"

- NH F&G

The COLDWATER FISHERIES COALITION, Inc. does an excellent job I believe of identifying exactly the type of water I'm talking about:

A. The Connecticut River and its tributaries from the First Lake

dam south to North Stratford.

B. The Ammonoosuc River and its tributaries upstream from its

confluence with the Zealand River.

C. The Saco River and its tributaries upstream from the Route 16

bridge in Conway.

D. The Wild River and its tributaries upstream from the Maine border.

E. The Sugar River and its tributaries.

F. The Cold River in Cheshire/Sullivan counties and its tributaries.

G. The East Branch of the Pemigewasset River and its tributaries.



H. The Pemigewasset River from the Ayers Island Dam downstream

to the Boscawen boat ramp.

I. The West Branch of the Peabody River and its tributaries.

J. The tailwater fisheries on the Connecticut River below the Moore,

Comerford, and McIndoes dams.

K. The Gale River and its tributaries.

L. The Contoocook River and its tributaries upstream from Henniker.

M. The Bearcamp River and its tributaries.

Check them out here....
http://www.nhcfc.org/vision.html

[sbeausol]

I am also interested in understanding what waterbodies can naturally sustain fish in the wild, specifically trout. As far as wild tout go, is the interest in creating any wild trout fishery, or a wild brook trout fishery for example?

I am partial to brook trout myself, but would be happy to find any wild trout population in the state. I imagine this would never be possible for rainbows...

[BugChucka]

The type of trout makes no difference to me when it comes to most of the larger rivers... just as long as I have the piece of mind that the fish are reproducing. I think it's important to keep the traditional streams and such with the native brook trout.

[Steve H.]

I checked this year's NH regulations for streams managed for wild brook trout and found that this has increased now to twelve different streams. These vary in location from Hillsboro County up to Coos County, and while I haven't had the pleasure of fishing many of them, I have caught trout in a few...but this may have been while the state was stocking them. I know that these are not the only streams that have naturally reproducing trout, there are many streams in the White Mountains that have self-sustaining wild brookie populations. Apparently F&G doesn't want to mandate catch&release on all of them. I don't know of any ponds that have naturally reproducing brook trout (or other trout for that matter) but I would like to know if there are. I know a lot of lakes and ponds have a "false spawn" or run of fish that try to spawn but never do successfully due to poor conditions. Rainbows will run up Winni's tribs to try to spawn, but I've been told that these efforts are never successful. I also know a few lakes where browns make spawning runs in the fall, but these are not reproducing either. I don't know if the larger rivers like the Pemi, Androscoggin, and Connecticut support wild, reproducing trout. I guess if their smaller, colder tribs are supporting wild, reproducing trout then there's the possibility that these trout may drop down into the larger rivers at times. I think the key is the availability of cold, ph-balanced tribs where the spawning efforts are successful.

[Jammin' Salmon]

You hit it right when you said "ph balanced" tributaries. This is one of the obvious and major differences between here and western creeks. Each year I wait and hope that a stream or section of river would be used to try out a "liming station" to maintain proper ph. As you know the proper ph will lead to a whole change in the amount of life in a stream improving water ecology. Someday, hopefully in my lifetime, I will see at least one liming station tried in this state. Not expecting our streams to fish like the Bitterroot but if we could improve our fishery even a little it is worth it!

Rick

[BugChucka]

Steve....I listed in my first post the streams you were wondering about. Most of these are very small water bodies. The best fisheries I suppose in terms of health are usually tailwaters that are regulated with appropriate flows. The Connecticutt and Androscoggin both have wild populations of trout, the Andro has drastically improved If some of our other tailwaters were managed differently, we'd start seeing some natural reproduction I believe. We just need to concentrate on getting appropriate flows. If more water flowed durring the summer months etc.. I bet we'd see some changes. The south has some unbelievable fisheries right now because of these constant cold flow tailwaters and the fertile and nutrient rich areas they flow through.

[SaltH2oFly]

Not to head too far off track but...Steve and Rick are on to the real issue (in my opinion). One of the latest updates I heard on S. Salar in Maine was that as the Y of Year were heading out to the salt for the first time, they would turn back up stream as soon as they hit the brine. More work is needed but the thesis is that the freshwater Ph is so low and the fish are just able to survive but when they hit the salt - they just can't handle it. So a liming station on that front may be in order. I've been talking to NHF&G for a few years about us implementing a lime dropper as well but like Rick said...we are slow in getting there.

F&G said bring it to the Commisoners and present it as a "rehap" project not an enhancement. Bascially, we need to say, with the current EPA laws in place, we will get our streams back to the healthy state they used to be in, but it will take 100 years (generaly speaking), but with a lime project, we can get there in 3-6 months. I'm game to start a project with someone to gather the data from Maine, W. VA and other states and make a pitch to the Comminsioners if anyone else wants to.

If you asked me - my preference would be to create wild Trout streams that support Brook Trout - RT are not a NH native so leave them to the stocked streams. Let's lime a remote Brook Trout stream and watch them grow!!!

[PW]

Just curious anybody ever fish Witches Spring in Hollis? It's a little tiny brook and I wouldn't think it would be healthy enough to hold natives. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the state uses the fish from here and another brook on the Brookline/Hollis border for nursery stock. I wonder if it's Flint's Brook?

[BugChucka]

Whatever the issue...I'm in favor of supporting anything geared toward naturally reproducing wild trout. The needs are different from river to river, that's why the first step is to identify the water body. I presented lists of streams and rivers that are being or have been looked at. Each piece of water will have different needs and avenues of approach whether the issue is PH, dissolved oxygen levels, water temps, shelf ice, etc...etc...

Maybee we could begin by identifying a few different waterbodies throughout the state and put something into action?

[FishcaneNH]

Hello, All~

I've read this thread with interest and may be able to offer some useful information.

TU has a very successful program in place down South that is doing exactly the kind of things that you're all talking about. It's called "Back the Brookie" and can be seen at <www.brookie.org>

It's in place in the Southeastern states, and is in its early formative stages here in the Northeast.

Admission: I'm a TU member.

With that out of the way, I'd like to suggest that if there's a real interest in doing this type of work, TU may well be a good vehicle to do it through as it goes hand in hand with TU's plans and goals. My chapter has gone a bit dormant for the summer, and others may have as well, but there is still a lot of work being done behind the scenes.

Basil Woods Chapter in Concord always welcomes guests at the meetings- I'm sure that others would also. Go to <www.TU.org> to see if there's a chapter near you or I'll b e happy to answer any questions I can , either on-board or through my inbox.

Just a thought.

All best~

Dan

[SaltH2oFly]

Paul - in response to your question. I actually walked into the area of witches spring in late summer a few years back (actually, doesn't take much, just park on the road and walk up stream a bit) and I have seen the brookies in there. They are very skiddish (sp?) but I saw at least a dozen of them. About 6-8" and it was a beautiful site. To think we could have a Wild Brook Trout population down there was just awesome!

[BugChucka]

From the sounds of it more anglers would prefer to see the smaller streams improved first. Is this the case?

I'd lalso ike to see a big river like the Pemi focussed on where fish would have a higher growth rate potential.

[fessiewig]

Without a lot of background in this area, I'd think it would be a smaller project in both dollars and energy expended to tackle a small stream.

In my lifetime I've seen rivers and streams ruined simply by development within a watershed. Cutting down the watershed effects ground water levels, especially if you're drilling wells for water consumption. This lowers the water levels in the streams and rivers in that watershed and the ripple effect goes on from there, so it's not only pH that's the problem, it's much more complicated than that. At least that's the way it looks to me.

[SaltH2oFly]

B.C. .....Maybe...this is a sticky subject from the F&G perspective. You have to keep in mind we have a very small subset of the overall NH fishing population here. Most of us are fly fishers and most of us perfer C&R etc.

There are many in the state who do not FF and only want put & take fisheries b/c that's "what they pay for". And there are a number of people who don't think we should expend resources on FF only waters or C&R waters or wild Trout waters. And many who just want to target Bass.

I suppose like anything else you could look at it from an economic perspective and make a much larger argument. That is, if we can prove that wild trout, C&R could bring the state as much or more revenue than Bass..then maybe we would have a shot at winning more resources...

[fessiewig]

As far as that goes, NH will always play second fiddle to Maine when it comes to cold water fisheries. Simply stated, Maine has much more of it. On top of that, the Northeast will never be the "destination" that the states in the "Golden Triangle" are.

That being said, our fish & game department needs to preserve, as best they can, the cold water fishery we have for the simple reason "we have one". Not every state has a cold water fishery, let alone one as good as the one we enjoy here in NH. Even though NH doesn't have the "best" cold water fishery, we do have a good one and wise management of that resource will preserve it for future generations to enjoy. It should never be a matter of money, but rather what is best for the environment. Naive, I know, but I would hope that sentiment would play some part in the decision making process at F&G. I think it does.

Again, just my 2 cents worth.

[BugChucka]

You all make excellent points...

I think flow changes can be one of the easiest or most difficult things to adjust. The benefits can be staggering however. A simple flow adjustment can improve an entire fishery at times. A dam can be regulated and can facilitate to the needs of trout....it may not always happen, but it is possible in many rivers. With the changes comes the fishermen, and with the fishermen comes the revenue. The Tennessee Valley Authority has realized this and they've helped create some top notch fisheries. Here we are in the Northeast and I can think of only 1 river in NH, maybee two that even compare. Most of their dams are bottom fed providing year round cool water like the Connecticut River and this of course plays a major role. But up here our overall natural temperatures remain cooler, if we only could keep flows up a little more in many of our rivers, I bet we'd see some significant improvements. How many times have we seen our dam regulated rivers dead low and basically boiling in the summer months?

[fessiewig]

Flow isn't everything. I was fishing the Sugar yesterday AM and the flow was up in the 300 CFM range and the water temp was in the high 70's at 6am. That's very warm! There was plenty of water, and yes, if there wasn't the temps would have been even higher, but even so with temps in the high 70's the fish are easily stressed. On the Upper Connecticut the difference between fishing the river between 2nd and 1st Lake vs between 1st Lake and Francis is marked and it's because the dam at 2nd is a top water release and the one at 1st Lake is bottom release. The flows can be exactly the same and the water temps will be markedly different. How would everyone feel about a split season? Say a season that closes between the 2nd week in July and the 2nd week in September?

[BugChucka]

Fessie....

You're right...each river system is different, but there are many more rivers that would benefit from better flow regulations than those that wouldn't.

I would be in favor of your proposed closed season, and a closed season in waters where reproduction occurs naturaly during the spawning season. Plenty of Bass both fresh and the striped kind to keep me busy. It would actually open people up to the other great fishing our state has to offer. I really do believe we have some of the best warm water fishing around.

[sbeausol]

It sounds like there are many issues surrounding this problem - with the goal being to create/restore a wild fishery in some places. The question is are we really going to do something about it, and if so, how?

[BugChucka]

I think we need to concentrate on battles that can be won.... dams are being removed in NH for the first time and many organizations are supporting this...will this help trout fisheries....I don't know? The Ashleot had a 120 yr old dam removed recently. It cost roughly 40,000 and I believe four or five organizations some of which were state and I believe federal, provided funding.

NH has.... I believe 591 dams at this time

When dams come up for re licensing, we have the opportunity to curb discharges and water release if we get together and decide to do something, we first need to identify if it would make a difference. Take the Piscataquog below Glen Lake for an example, all the way to Manchester... If more water came out of Glen Lake in the summer I bet you'd see a drastic change. I've caught hold overs before and there's no telling what better flows would do.

I think liming sounds like an awesome approach but can't speak for it. Here again, let's identify a water body where it would be appropriate.

TU chapters are probably the most effective orgs around simply because they get together a number of improvement oriented individuals. Take the work on Black Brook that has been done for example...

It boils down to our desire to be pro active or passive, the harder we work, the greater the rewards.

[mer]

Salt:
skiddish should be "skittish"

skiddish == "scandavanian yiddish"

:)

[SaltH2oFly]

Thought so...Geography Maj. not English! :lol:

Thanks Mer!!

[dan hall]

I was just at Meadow Brook on saturday. The water was suprisingly low so i didn't fish it.

Wild trout have it tough in NH; granite bedrock, competition from invasive fish species, water quality (especially high temps) and quantity, stocking policies to list a few. This results in finding the remaing wild fish in the headwaters and finding them in the most remote ponds.

I wanted to say that i'm apart of NHTU. The wild trout program (and trophy section of andro.) was brought about for many of the reasons given in this thread. Each year we hope to have more waters assigned to this management style but it hasn't been easy for many reasons. As mentioned before we (NHTU) are looking into a Back The NH Brookie program and tonight will be our second meeting.

It seems that each year a new wild trout water is under attack from something. Please consider getting involved individually or by joining a fishing/ watershed group that cares about wild trout. Brookies really need help in NH.


Regards,
dan

[BugChucka]

Dan,

Could you give us an update on how the meeting went?