• Welcome to Pretentious Snobby Bastard Fly Fishing!. Please login or sign up.
October 28, 2021, 00:34:10 AM

News:

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.


Brook Trout - Endangered/Threatened List

Started by TROUTMASTER3000, October 19, 2009, 12:51:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TROUTMASTER3000

I know I have not been the most active member of this forum, this is partially because I am in college at UNC right now, and I don't really have the time to fly fish except during breaks.  But for my ENGL 102i (Writing in Natural Sciences) we have to create a website based on our research project that we have been working on all semester.  Mine is providing information necessary on warming waters within the Appalachian Mountains that is causing fragmentation and displacement of the App Brook Trout that may cause their extinction, etc.  I want to attach a petition to the website for adding them to the Endangered/Threatened list; that currently includes 27 Salmon & Trout species.  I would appreciate all the support I can get, it should be up within the next 2-3 months.  Please post any conscerns, advice, etc.

Thanks

TM3000

Anything is possible with will, determination, and an endless supply of expendable labor.
AMERICA RULES

Woolly Bugger

cool... let us know when it's up and running!

ex - I'm not going to live with you through one more fishing season!

me -There's a season?

Pastor explains icons to my son: you know like the fish symbol on the back of cars.

My son: My dad has two fish on his car and they're both trout!

jwgnc

One bit of advice I would offer is to "reflect" the language of your target in your responses.  That is, as an example - if the Endangered/Threatened people say "non-point-source polution" in their blah-blah-blah, then use the phrase "non-point-source polution" in your communications.  People like to hear their verbiage used by others. Use ALL their buzz-phrases.  With hundreds of responses, they may be scoring the petitioners on how many times they show that they "understand the problem" by using our language (regardless of your real understanding).  Your goal, other than getting and A, is to win the petition.

That is how we typically repsonded to a "Request for Proposal" (RFPs) from major banks and State Agencies, and it worked for me in my only request for a grant to protect a stream in MI, a few years ago.

I'd be happy to help if I can.

Stalk softly and carry a green stick.

peter p

Been wondering where you ended up TM3k.  Hope you are at the football game tonight. 

Peter

croaker

-you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.  Robert A. Heinlein.

9ft4wt

Certainly, more needs to be done to protect brook trout habitat and prevent framentation of populatons as they are driven higher and higher into watersheds.

However, listing entails a lot restrictions that need to be considered:

The Endangered Species Act prohibits "take" of species that are listed as endangered or threatened except where authorized by permit or by a special rule that exempts the take prohibition for certain activities that are consistent with conservation of the species. "Take" is defined in the Act as harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.

Does that mean, no more fishing in the SNP, where the populations are healthy?

Does it mean no more fishing in waters that were once brookie habitat, but from which they have been extirpated? Mossy Creek for example was once brookie water.

If someone knows more about the ramifications, I would be interested in getting their take.

9ft4wt


Al

Quote from: 9ft4wt on October 26, 2009, 14:25:31 PM

Certainly, more needs to be done to protect brook trout habitat and prevent framentation of populatons as they are driven higher and higher into watersheds.

However, listing entails a lot restrictions that need to be considered:

The Endangered Species Act prohibits "take" of species that are listed as endangered or threatened except where authorized by permit or by a special rule that exempts the take prohibition for certain activities that are consistent with conservation of the species. "Take" is defined in the Act as harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.

Does that mean, no more fishing in the SNP, where the populations are healthy?

Does it mean no more fishing in waters that were once brookie habitat, but from which they have been extirpated? Mossy Creek for example was once brookie water.

If someone knows more about the ramifications, I would be interested in getting their take.

9ft4wt

My thoughts as well - Be careful of what you ask for because "Listing" could come back to haunt us all.

5xTippett

I have a habit of trusting the biologists on stuff like this.  If something is in trouble, they will know first.  They make a living managing their streams and generally take pride in their work.


TROUTMASTER3000

As far as I know, that is mentioned under the difference b/n endangered and threatened.  For example, one of the solutions for hunters wanting to "take" rare species and have pictures taken with the animal is to use a gun that fires a dart that puts the animal to sleep for a few hours.  That is somewhat of a cool idea, as well as the moral concept behind catch and release fishing.  Obviously I am not advocating any policy that would not let us fish for this majestic species.  However, I also do not think adding them to a list would definitely restrict us to the definition previously imposed.  You could argue that correct catch and release fishing doesn't harass the species.  I mean with correct procedures, what is it 5% fatalities?  I don't know it is an interesting point that you bring up, I will try and add it to the site, maybe try to contact some local legislatures.  There just isn't enough time to actually devote as much to it as I want to, but I would like to continue the website beyond the classroom so we will see.  Your support is much appreciated.

Pearce

Anything is possible with will, determination, and an endless supply of expendable labor.
AMERICA RULES

Al

Quote from: TROUTMASTER3000 on November 08, 2009, 22:50:20 PM

As far as I know, that is mentioned under the difference b/n endangered and threatened.  For example, one of the solutions for hunters wanting to "take" rare species and have pictures taken with the animal is to use a gun that fires a dart that puts the animal to sleep for a few hours.  That is somewhat of a cool idea, as well as the moral concept behind catch and release fishing.

I had not heard of that but assuming it is true you can bet the folks who "take" those rare species under this concept put some serious money into permits, etc. I would imagine it costs a bit more then a fishing license with trout stamp ::).

Like I said in my previous post, "be careful what you wish for" :police:


trouthead

I really don't know anything about this subject but I'll post anyways. My understanding is that App. brook trout aren't considered a seperate species from Brook Trout in general. I think that would be the biggest roadblock to having them listed. I'm sure someone around here knows alot more about this. Personally, I agree with the "Be careful what you wish for" sentiment.


phg

Quite correct.  Efforts to get the App. Brookie recognized as at least a subspecies have failed, simply because there is no identifiable difference between the App. strain and the "northern" strain.  A DNA test is the only way to tell the difference.  Of course, we all know that certain water sheds only have App. strain in them....


TROUTMASTER3000

It is true what you said, however there are distinguishable differences.  An Appalachian Brook trout averages in length 6-8 in.  The Northern strain is much larger, fatter, and more plentiful.  It is also true that it has not been recognized as a subspecies, but also field biologists have mentioned the need/ concern for more research into the issue.  I don't really see the harm in all Brook Trout to be placed on the list, including the Northern strains, simply for the reason that the harms caused to them here in the Appalachians will probably follow the species north.  I will put in the petition clauses that protect fly-fishermen and maybe even limit fishing to fly-fishing only; at least catch and release only.  I think that would be an interesting step forward in this issue.  Please continue to let me know your opinions, it is helping me out a lot... These possible negative ramifications never even crossed my mind. 0--0

Anything is possible with will, determination, and an endless supply of expendable labor.
AMERICA RULES


#CommissionsEarned