Heritage brook trout

[Scudly]

Popular topic. The heritage brook trout is in fact the native strain that has evolved here during the past 10,000 years. This native strain was thought to be wiped out due to overfishing and stream habitat destruction beginning in the 1840s.

Stocking of East Coast strains of brookies began early in the 1900's an brookies eventually rebounded. Scientists feared stocking East Coast trout also contributed to the demise of the native "heritage" brook trout. Not so.

U of MN researchers performed genetic fingerprinting showing these native brookies thrived while many stream with the East Coast strain went belly up.

Conclusion: Sixteen out of nineteen brook trout streams tested in southeast MN contain native heritage brook trout.

Source: DNA reveals secrets of brook trout. Brule River Sportsman article, spring 2006.

[s t fanatic]

i've always wondered wether or not the brook trout that reside on our property (the head waters of a decent size system) are of heritage strain.

[Scudly]

Cold Spring Brook near Zumbro Falls was one stream specifically mentioned in the article.

Fanatic - would be willing to bet your property has heritage brook trout. Contacting U of MN scientist directly to learn more. Will report back.

[Arctic]

Knowing how tough brookies are, and how small/short a stream they can live in, I never believed that they were totally wiped out of the SE Minnesota streams. I suspect that a lot of the stocked varieties just didn't survive long enough to reproduce in our streams. Nature tends to weed out weakness.

Arctic aka "Cutthroat"

[grate8]

dude thsat is some sweet s/

east coast cant KEEP UP BOYEE!

where you all gettn them? buddy got a tiger in the miss by wad...

[Scudly]

Quote:

where you all gettn them? buddy got a tiger in the miss by wad.

Trotlines and dynamite have been working quite well. J/K. However will tell you Cold Spring Brook one of the best brook trout streams. It also has the occasional "pig" brown trout if you put in your time and are not afraid of the dark. Trophy browns are meat eaters. Leave your fly box and 2wt at home.

[Dave Anderson]

CSB actually has undergone massive changes due to flooding, sedimentation, and several cases of trot lines as well. I wouldn't call it a great place to catch huge brookies consistently, though. You'd be surprised what someone who carries flies and has a two weight can do. You don't need a spinning rod to ALWAYS catch big trout. Trophy browns will gobble up well-presented flies also. You know that, I assume.

One of my favorites from '09 on a 7'10" 1 weight

[Scudly]

Nice fish D.A. You however are an expert fly fly fisherman with decades of experience. How many years have you been guiding and tying your own flies? Wish I was lucky as you to live in Winona with tons of choices minutes from your house.

CSB is a fantastic trout stream. For one it is numbingly ice cold. Bill Sherck the "Man About the Woods" (Due North Outdoors, Minnesota Bound) with whom I graduated with once told me CSB is likely the coldest trout streams in the state. I've never had a problem catching decent sized brookies. However the nighttime browns interest me most.

Dave you should come fish stream with with a mouse pattern at night...

[Dave Anderson]

My point was, simply, that CSB needs some TLC at this point. It's good, but it's not great; however, it could be. Maybe the DNR, TU, or the LOHC funding will find its way onto the stream some day.

[grate8]

dude csb sux. fished severl times no decent fish but lots of little ones. i heard years ag may have been good.

DA you caught all them on flies? respect.

my rod is 9 foot...5wt i need to go lighter.

[Scudly]

Quote:

dude csb sux. fished severl times no decent fish but lots of little ones.

You and DA are right in that the average brook trout is pretty small for our area. Any brookie 12" or larger would be considered big

Yet all of those little brookies are the perfect meal for big browns feeding at low light. That is why I love brook trout streams. Brookies are dumber than a box of rocks - they will bite at anything. Easy to catch. They are also the perfect recipie for growing big browns.

Find a brook trout stream with beaver dams and if you get lucky you will find a land locked brown eating brookies like potato chips until he is finally caught. Found several like that this summer. Len also found a trout of a lifetime this way.

[Dave Anderson]

I understand the dynamics involved with growing big fish: forage, cover, etc. I wouldn't say land locked carnivorous browns that are cornered due to a beaver dam is necessarily beneficial to the overall health of the stream. Those dams slow and impound the water causing warmth and siltation, two ingredients trout don't need.

grate8 - thanks for the kind words.

[Arctic]

I've fish CSB a few times while enroute to streams farther south. I've never done well there. It looks like it has tremendous potential. Beautiful water. [Note From Admin, Please Read Forum Policy Before Posting Again, Thank You].

[Scudly]

Gordon you shoud give them directions to Hay Creek (5000/mile), or Trout Run Creek (12,000/mile). Worms not allowed but they can use PowerBait, plastic worms, marshmallows, or cheese. More than enough fish dinners to be had for all. Just Be sure to explain the slot limits and barbless rules to them.

[Arctic]

True enough, Mark. I think the 12,000 fish per mile includes young-of-the-year fish, many of whom don't live to adulthood, thankfully. Food for the bigger browns.

Not thrilled about fishing with PowerBait, plastic worms, cheese, or any other organic bait on SOME trout streams. Current regs are pretty reasonable, as there are plenty of streams open to any type of angler.

I was hesitant to post on CSB, because I didn't want to sound like a biggot. I'm not. Just stating what I have actually observed.

[Scudly]

OK let's learn something here from recent fall electroshocks:

Trout Run Creek*

Adults/mile = 3,847

>12 inches/mile = 332

>14 inches/mile = 30

>16 inches/mile = 11

Recruits/mile = 7,950

11,797 trout/mile total

Trout Run Creek, lower end

Adult Brown Trout 2,600+ per mile

Younger Brown Trout 2,300+ per mile

Trout over 12 inches per mile 452

Trout over 14 inches per mile 62

~5,000 per mile total

Why is Trout Run so unique with an explosion of young-of-year for 2009? Likely direct evidence that all the HI work is paying off huge dividends? Obviously simplistic answer, there are hundreds of variables that come into play - volume of spring water, runoff issues, farming practices, pollution etc.

* Data from Vaughn Snook, Lanesboro Fisheries Biologist

[Scudly]

One step at a time Len. I see only $11 for a muskrat farm permit. That is a steal.

Quote:

This license authorizes the licensee to establish, operate and maintain a muskrat farm for the purpose of breeding, propagating, trapping and dealing muskrats.

MN Commercial Game & Fish Licenses

[Scudly]

Is a large number of young-of year (YOY) a good thing or a bad thing? As Gordon mentions, majority will not make it. So in C&R areas like Hay and especially Trout Run where you have good number of YOY, can we expect bigger fish next year and years to come? Presuming we have another record YOY population for 2010 (speculative) then there will be even more trout?

Other "consequences"? Guess there could be an explosion of coons and birds.

At what point do trout become stunted? Finite space and only so much forage, the system cannot support trout growth? Or do the larger fish just migrate further downstream?

[fsh4trout]

Scudly you bring up a good point. Now, I'm no fisheries biologist but I'll take a stab at this one. Big trout eat little trout, therefore a big year class can provide forage for those twenty inchers. These big trout keep the population down which ensures there is enough food to go around. That is why big trout are necessary in high trout population streams. Angler harvest is another tool that can be used to cull the excess samll trout.

The not enough food to go around idea is a complex question. One school of thought says all the fish will live, but they will be stunted since they get just enough food to survive. I wonder if some trout just die because there is not enough food.

Hypothetical situtation, stream X has enough food for 4000 trout to live and grow. One year there is a really good year class, say an extra 2000 younguns. Would these fish die off, returning the stream to its carrying capacity? Or would all fish live on less food, creating small trout? I dunno, but I would think that starvation is a factor in trout streams just as it is a factor for critters like deer. Not enough food and some die, the rest finally get enough food and things balance out. If more food becomes available the population could rebound. Population dynamics are confusing to say the least and are best left to trained biologists.

[Scudly]

I wrote directly to the U of MN scientist who did the work publishe in the article I shared who had this to say:

Quote:

Dear Mark,

I did the work described in the article and am still working with MN brook trout. As I gathered more data on SEMN populations and others throughout the range of brook trout, several clusters of streams still appear likely to have remnant Driftless genetics, especially in the Pine/Rush system and parts of SF Root. Note that this does not mean all of the individual streams maintained their populations. Natural or human-assisted movements may have spread remnant genetics from some sources that persisted. I have not tried to publish my findings yet. The DNR continues to add samples and I am relying on other lab's data which they have not yet published.

Loren

[Arctic]

He confirms what I have suspected all along about the resiliancy of native stocks of brook trout.

[Scudly]

Quote:

Is a large number of young-of year (YOY) a good thing or a bad thing? As Gordon mentions, majority will not make it. So in C&R areas like Hay and especially Trout Run where you have good number of YOY, can we expect bigger fish next year and years to come? Presuming we have another record YOY population for 2010 (speculative) then there will be even more trout?

Back to this TOUGH question. My bet is population dynamics is the main "gray area" in trout management and research. Keep in mind I am not a fisheries biologist. What I state here are my own best thoughts on the subject.

If big trout were effective predators on little trout then the Kinnikinnick would also have big trout, not just little trout. I have talked with folks that have done years of electroshock work for years. One thing is certain. Little trout and big trout live in completely different areas. Little trout live in 2' or less of water. Tiny riffles. Areas where big trout cannot get to. They have their own niche.

Let me ask you this. How many trout have you kept in your lifetime to date? My answer is ~200 over 15 years. I bet there are many that have kept >1000 trout. Out of all the trout 12" or larger that you kept, how many had small trout in their stomach? None? Or close to none? Majority of big trout I catch in a typical trout stream have crayfish. Some have the occasional minnow and some warmer streams I've found chubs in their stomachs. Yet to date I have never found a small trout in a big trout's belly.

It makes logical sense that big trout eat small trout. However this is generally not the case. Roger Kerr wrote to me he has cleaned thousands of trout in his lifetime and never found a small trout in a big trout's stomach.

The only rare exception I can think of is brown trout eating brookies. Browns seem to feast on them. Find a brook trout stream and fish a deep hole at low light with something big and you have a good chance of catching a big brown. That is because most brook trout streams are ice cold, too cold for minnows, chubs, sculpins, and crayfish. So to sustain their size (if not grow) their only food source comes down to small brookies.

I think we can all fish Trout Run or Hay Creek or Timber Coulee or West Fork or anywhere else where we have a slot limit, lots of HI and maybe even no kill areas. It does not matter what you do. Trout populations are growing at a rapid rate and the number of bigger trout will never significantly increase.

If anything, we need to thin out those smaller trout. Quote from Marty Engel, fisheries biologist for western Wisconsin regarding the Kinni being plagued with small trout:

"The slot was to encourage harvest of small trout,and encourage medium trout to reach larger sizes, however angler attitudes have changed and taking small trout is no longer popular. If people keep trout they tend to want a larger fish. I don't believe today's anglers will keep enough small trout to make a difference."

[fsh4trout]

Quote:

I think we can all fish Trout Run or Hay Creek or Timber Coulee or West Fork or anywhere else where we have a slot limit, lots of HI and maybe even no kill areas. It does not matter what you do. Trout populations are growing at a rapid rate and the number of bigger trout will never significantly increase.

After the Hiawatha Chapter did H.I. on a reach of TR fish per mile went from 3800 to 7126, trout over 12 inches went from 237 to 406. H.I. works.

I believe big trout are rare. Regs, H.I. can help but still there will not be very many big ones. It is just how things are.