Wild Trout Stream (mis)Management

Consider a stream that has demonstrated the ability to support a naturally reproducing population of wild brook & brown trout. (In fact, it's 'Class A' trout water in some stretches.)

Add to that the fact that the stream is lacking significant in-stream cover, as determined by 5 years of state-sponsored fish & wildlife research.

If you were charged with managing this as one of your state's only 5 remaining Wild Trout Streams, and you thought significant real river restoration work (as planned to begin this summer/fall) could help the wild trout population begin to tick upward and rebuild, would you jeapordize the past 5 years worth of scientific research (and who knows how much taxpayer $) and add a previously unaccounted for wild-card into the mix? Wouldn't you be concerned that the findings of your research would be somehow skewed by this new variable?

Would you be willing to throw some hatchery raised rainbows into the mix just to appease some of the vocal locals who say 'Enough of this science *&%$, I want to catch some fish in my backyard!'?

What if that stream held a special place in American fly fishing history?

The Battenkill for instance.

That's what we're up against right now.


[url=http://www.TUSWVT.org:58fda]Southwestern Vermont Chapter of Trout Unlimited[/url:58fda]

"Only after the last tree has been cut down; only after the last river has been poisoned; only after the last fish has been caught; only then will you find that money can not be eaten." Cree prophecy.

We've made some progress on this front, but we're not out of the weeds yet.

The public hearing on the Battenkill management plan was last week (9/21) and those of in favor of 'keeping it wild' outnumbered those in favor of stocking by approximately 4-to-1. The period for public comment extends until 10/21 - so barring a giant write-in by those in favor of turning the BK into a put-and-take fishery, we're looking good in terms of maintaining the Battenkill as a wild fishery for the forseeable future.

For those interested in lending their voices, send an email to VT Fisheries Biologist Ken Cox at Ken.Cox@state.vt.us and let him know that you favor keeping it wild.

Thanks to all who've written in to date or attended the hearing in person and spoke up!


The Southwestern Vermont Chapter of Trout Unlimited
http://www.TUSWVT.org

I have been fishing the battenkill for a number of years on the new york side but close to the vermont border. I love the river and its fish, but doesn't new york already stock fish? This is more of a question than a reply. And if New York does, wouldn't that affect the research in some way? Trout don't always stay put and can very easily move upstream. I am in favor of keeping all remaining stream wild or as close as possible, and trying to make streams wild again, but since this is a river that flows in 2 states don't both have to be close to the same page for it to work?

As I understand it, for many years the state of NY did not stock the special regulations stretch, from the Eagleville Bridge up to the state line. I have heard that the state has in recent years stocked as far upstream as the green bridge on County rd. 61.
AgMD