I like the sound of it regardless of motivation, a “put-grow-and-take” fishery versus the standard watery extrusion of 10″ fish through the gauntlet of floating Cheez-it scented Powerbait.
I’ve been many kinds of fisherman throughout my career, but the portrait of the “ovulating” hatchery truck being stalked by a cadre of militant anglers – has always been offputting.
It’s the Charge of the Bucket Brigade reenacted with great violence and no quarter; a stream of pellet-fattened silver splattered from the bridge, accompanied by the snarl of offroad tires, hoots and catcalls mixed with unruly sportsmen jostling for position, and the cheese scented screams of “federales” wrested from their new home.
Planting them at the fingerling stage would end the carnage, allowing them to populate something other than the pool they’re thrust in, and might even engender hatchery fish with “stream smarts.”
With state budgets in upheaval, and wildlife agencies among the first to suffer cutbacks – it might prove to be the economical alternative.
“A put-grow-and-take program is cheaper,” Young said. “It gets fish out of the hatchery system earlier — at six months instead of 18 months — and they look better and have more of a wild-fish behavior. It only takes a year for a fingerling to reach catchable size.”
High mortality rates are an issue with fingerlings, but the mortality rate of planted fish of catchable size may rival that of fingerlings in small waterways.
The costs of hatchery fish cited by the article are fairly astounding. If I were buying them off the restaurant menu, I’d be thinking I was in rarified company ..
The agency has scrapped a program it began five years ago in which it purchased hatchery trout from Tellico Fish Farm in North Carolina to make up for the 2001 closing of Pennsylvania’s Big Spring hatchery. Tellico had charged the state an average of $1.15 per fish (last year it was $1.27) — significantly less than the $2.14 it costs to raise a trout at a Fish and Boat Commission facility. When this year’s Tellico bid came in at $3.38 per trout, the commission drew the line.
Assuming three fish to the pound, that’s a $10 meal. I’d be staring down my nose only long enough to find a wedge of lemon.
With most of Our Trout and Salmon here in Finland being landlocked the Finish fisheries institute release 50 000000 Trout and Salmon fly back into its rivers annually. Half of these are released as fingerlings several weeks before the rivers are open to the general public thus allowing them to hopefully move between river and lake systems to find their own niche, while the other half (18 month old) are released 2 weeks before the rivers open here. Granted many are caught, but with these new laws that were put in place several years back, we have seen a drastic improvement in the quality of fish being pulled out of our waterways here, also in recent years as well.
Simon, that confirms my expectations – and with the poor fiscal climate of most US states, it wouldn’t surprise me to see adoption just due to the financial implications.
As a recreational fisherman here in Finland we have 2 separate licenses.
The fishing management fee (20 EUR for the calendar year 2009 or 6 EUR for seven days’ fishing) and
The provincial lure fishing fee for the calendar year 2009 is 29 EUR, 7 EUR for seven days’ fishing.
Practically all the money received from the national fishing management fee is divided between all the fish hatcheries over here. With over 3,8 million licenses being bought here annually…..well you can do the math, everyone becomes a winner.
The Money received from the Provincial takings gets used to fund each association within those provinces….Which to me seems reasonable because these provincial associations allocate the money between many or the river restoration projects that are taking place….Long story, but during the 50’s & 60’s many rivers here were dredged so as to allow large shipments of Logs to be transported down them.
Anyway each year after paying these licenses they send me a print out of precisely where each euro has gone too and why….You cant grumble with that!
I’m trying to wrap my mind around what would be reasonable for the state to release just above John-Paul-George-Ringo’s Brownwater Fly lodge. Are diapers enough. Indeed what sort of fly is the “Fat-Guy” going to recommend for goat carcass. And surley we have over-looked the names of the flies that are particular to Brownlining. Will SMJ be satisfied to cast the Cat-Frisby? What price will the Trout Underground be willing to pay to avoid photographs of his catch? This new sport of ours is going to require some serious thought.
Simon, our funding is complicated by each state’s willingness to collect the money from anglers – to protect fisheries, then reallocates it to whatever pet project the Governor feels more worthy.
It’s unfortunate, but both anglers and hunters don’t represent a vocal enough lobby to dissuade the government from stealing the money whenever it suits them.
Igneous: the flies of brownlining are largely unknown due to the cavalier nature by which relatives treat my fly box.
I crack the lid and must endure tithing “one half my get” to older brothers that forgot their fly box (or so they say).
Wait a minute. In waters containing native populations (like the Upper Sac), we don’t want higher survivability rates. We want the things stocked and out right away – before their hatchery genetics muck up the native genes.
Stocking rubber trout as fingerlings means the things travel farther and (perhaps) interbreed more. Cheaper yes, but potentially worse for the fishery.
Best solution is to let people catching the damn things right out of the hatchery runways, and charge a break-even price for the privilege.
I disagree.
Don’t stock fisheries with viable native populations at all. Plant fingelings versus pellet trout in those watersheds whose population are already “mutts.”
There’s two kinds of anglers, those fishing to eat, and those fishing for sport. Both groups would be better suited with an acclimated fish with stream smarts and better muscle tone.