Cant be any better either. You and me ain`t gonna agree on any of this, because you want to change the environment and bring in invasives. I don`t.
Welcome Guest!
Trout Id
- Thread starter mikevp
- Start date
Cant be any better either. You and me ain`t gonna agree on any of this, because you want to change the environment and bring in invasives. I don`t.
Why not stock some hogs into the WMAs up there while the stocking another breed of trout? Along with the gator gar you want in Lake Lanier.
If you don`t understand, I`m not gonna waste my time to try to explain it to you. You figure it out.
deerpoacher1970
Senior Member
If they didn't stock browns and rainbows, they wouldn't be many trout caught in Georgia now would they.
If they had never stocked browns and rainbows, there would be a lot more native trout in GA, NC, SC, and TN now. And I like to catch browns and rainbows. They have devastated the native speckled brook trout, though. Some areas of VA have regulations where all rainbows and browns caught must be killed. They are maintaining a good population of native brook trout. I think the southern Appalachians would be swarming with 10"-16" native speckled trout right now if there were no browns or rainbows after the forests have grown back from the industrial logging from the turn of the last century. Some places like the Hooch tailwaters, browns and rainbows are probably a good thing, because the water is too cold now to support native species.
Yup,
Hatchery trout are not a problem.
Reproducing wild fish impacting native fish? Thats another story.
Last edited:
Buckman18
Senior Member
I don't think it's really doable here, Nick. Cutthroats die when the water hits 67 degrees, some say 64 degrees. The ONLY stream in our state that does not exceed those numbers is below Buford dam for a few miles.
Ive caught a few of the cutthroat varieties out west. They are a pretty fish. And very delicious.
Kentucky stocks them in tailwaters only.
I'd assume Georgia would do the same?
https://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=FishandWildlife&prId=374
I'd assume Georgia would do the same?
https://kentucky.gov/Pages/Activity-stream.aspx?n=FishandWildlife&prId=374
Last edited:
Nitram4891
Flop Thief
Very nice catch!
Thank you! It was definitely an experience I will remember and it was a trophy in my eyes. Although it was washed out and pitiful it seems to be a little more unique than I realized and sparked an very interesting conversation. And by the way I have been able to see some beautiful pictures posted on here which gives me something to strive for on my next trip!
I called the law enforcement about tiger trout and person said they were only aware of brook, brown and rainbow trout in the regulations so told me to call the Gainesville? office to find out for sure the status of tiger trout.
The gainesville people said they would probably consider them game fish and any other trout species.
*So even if a species trout is not listed as a game fish, the state of georgia considers it a game fish.*
The gainesville people said they would probably consider them game fish and any other trout species.
*So even if a species trout is not listed as a game fish, the state of georgia considers it a game fish.*
Last edited:
IvyThicket
Senior Member
That damage was done a century ago, before hatcheries and licenses and such. Wild Brown and Rainbows are as much a part of the landscape today as the native population.
The greater issue impacting streams and the natural ability for wild trout to reproduce, is habitat degradation.
IvyThicket
Senior Member
Not cutthroat but you can catch wild sockeye salmon on the Nantahala. That may be as close to a western salmonoid as you're gonna get here in the east. (Besides rainbow).
IvyThicket
Senior Member
I somewhat agree but the elephant in the room here is the fact that the rainbow and brown have filled a void and thrived in streams where the native specks won't due to pollution. Native brooks aren't found in high elevation streams more so due to the fact that there aren't rainbows and browns, but because that is where water is free of pollution, rich in oxygen and cooler.
The truth is that in 2020 if they didn't stock, we wouldn't be catching trout in half the streams we catch them in now.
And around here, you can only catch them in about half the streams you could 25 years ago.
I agree in some cases, others, not. I think specks could live just fine in all the watersheds in the GSMNP now after a hundred years of forest regrowth, for example. Same on most National Forest land. Elevation has not nearly as much to do with it as water quality, which is definitely not related to elevation. A lot of the higher elevation streams are worse off than the lower elevation ones now, due to acid deposition.
They used to live below 2000', in major waterways, and I still catch them pretty low in places. In a lot of areas in the GSMNP, they are moving back downstream. I catch specks miles lower in several places than I did back when I was a teenager, and catch them in some main stem streams now. In those cases, it's the rainbows and browns that are the main thing holding them down. If they thrive and swarm above a waterfall, but don't exist at all a hundred feet below the same waterfall where browns and rainbows live, that tells you something. A hundred feet upstream doesn't change the water quality, it just blocks the browns and rainbows that out-compete them.
I agree that there are a lot of marginal streams that specks wouldn't live in but hold rainbows and browns. And I agree that wild browns and bows have been here long enough to be considered semi-native species now. And I love to catch them, I surely do. But if there was a magic button I could mash to completely eliminate them from some watersheds, I'd mash it in a heartbeat.
IvyThicket
Senior Member
Correct.
Not stocking would not have saved the native population. Being one of the most southern reaches where trout are found in the northern hemisphere, temperature matters. When the hemlocks began to die off, it warmed many of the lower elevation streams to the point that natives would never have been able to exist. Unlike the chalk streams of the UK or wide open freestone streams and the elevation of the west, a naturally cooler climate wasn't on our side and our streams needed the shade to thrive. Take that away and couple it with pollution, sediment, etc and you get the recipe we are seeing now. Laurels and Rhododendrons have helped fill the void on many wild streams but we need more high canopy cooling.
IvyThicket
Senior Member
Disagree. Although acid deposition is a problem on many western facing slopes and high points (especially near the Tennessee border), higher elevation streams are verified better quality due to cooler temperatures, higher oxygen saturation and less sediment. That is without question.
This is straight from the NCWRC page:
'Wild brook trout are most abundant in isolated, high-altitude headwater streams where the water is free of pollution and rich in oxygen. Brook trout prefer streams with stable water flows, silt-free gravel for spawning'
If stocked fish were a problem for specks, then their own fingerlings would cease to exist. The reason they used to exist below 2000' feet where they don't now is because of water quality and the reason they are beginning to pop up now in lower places especially in the GSMNP and NF, is due to conservation efforts and habitat restoration to improve water quality, such as dumping limestone sand to balance ph levels.
https://wlos.com/news/local/forest-service-what-looks-like-dumping-is-actually-fighting-pollution
Last edited:
