I think a note that cannot be overlooked, much like in a host of other locations in the recent past.....this push to kill off naturally reproducing trout in waters where they have been "declared" non-native, where in fact essentially devoid of fish prior to the original stockings. I find it odd that folks would rather have 12 "declared native" fish per mile in a stream, instead of healthy populations of wild reproducing trout. Well guess what.....when they kill off the non-native trout?....they'll still only have the same 12 native fish. And the surroundings will still look exactly the same....minus the fishermen. The Alpine lakes in Washington had ZERO fish in them. They were stocked more than 100yrs ago. BUT, they were eating a native newt. So what do we have now? Barren lakes with lots of newts. When is the last time anybody has visited those lakes in order to "view or catch and release the newts?" Nothing essentially has changed there now, except there are no longer fishermen. Now they are doing the same in many streams in PA. Declaring the wild reproducing browns that have been in the water for 100yrs non-native....because it's been declared brook trout waters. SO in the end we will still have an unfishable population of brookies in the very same creek. Makes perfectly good sense to me. I think groups lose there sense at times with their "causes".

OK, I'm done now.