Maryland considering new Brook Trout regulations

[Dalton Terrell]

Provide comments to the State of Maryland here: https://dnr.maryland.gov/fisheries/Pages/regulations/changes.aspx#brookie

In my opinion, it’s not a bad start but making brook trout habitat put-and-take is almost as idiotic as banning all catch-and-release fishing in the state.

Dalton

[Misha Gill]

My reading of the above would be that any brook trout caught from existing put-and-take waters would be required to be released. I think that's a positive step in the right direction. It does not address the initial lunacy of making any section of stream that has wild brook trout into a put-and-take fishery. But it would theoretically ameliorate an evil that has already been wrought. Unless you're a believer in the German theory of catch and release, of course.

[Evan D]

Misha,

I submitted a comment yesterday saying a very similar thing. I encourage others to submit comments as well. This proposed regulation, while a step in a better direction, is totally a bandaid on what has historically been terrible fisheries management by DNR. If you really care about native trout, don’t stock over them and make it harder for them to survive in the first place. They have a horrible track record with many fisheries, most of which are in rapid decline. Wonder why...? Striped bass is a prime example. Still, I am glad to see some positive changes, and I’m hearing that staff level folks at DNR are increasingly more conservation minded and are getting frustrated with DNR leadership. It may just be a matter of waiting out current leadership, and hoping new minds take over soon!

[Yambag Nelson]

Virginia does the same thing except it appears to be on an even bigger scale.

[Andrew Sarcinello]

I support the changes as a step in the right direction, and agree with those above who say they could just not stock brook trout water to begin with. There are some streams where that would be an obvious solution (Fishing Creek), but others where it would present a logistical challenge. If you're DNR do you end stocking over even the most marginal brook trout populations like in Deer Creek? They're certainly weighing the potential political consequences of doing something that drastic. For now, this is the only solution that makes sense *to them*.

The mandatory C&R of all brook trout east of I-81 is a far more important regulation that I wholeheartedly support. Nearly all brook trout populations in that region are threatened by climate change, development, and competition from brown trout, with maybe a few exceptions on Catoctin Mountain. In probably 80% of the brook trout populations that are remaining in that region, any additional harvest of adult fish will only speed up their extirpation.

[Andrew R]

Dalton and all,

NCC-TU and Mid-Atlantic Trout Unlimited are already working with MD-DNR and the Maryland Sportfishing Advisory Commission on these regulatory changes and are supportive of both. We would greatly appreciate TPFR members voicing their support in favor of the same. Ultimately, TU, like many of you, would like to see Brook Trout protected entirely in all waters in the state of Maryland. This is a step in that direction.

On the subject of stocking, Trout Unlimited has made plain its opposition toward the state's continued stocking of hatchery fish in waters known to be inhabited by wild trout populations, whether native brook trout or wild browns. It's a subject that can be very political in nature and I won't elaborate any further on a public forum. I just want to be clear that so long as it is under my leadership, TU in Maryland will continue to work towards the conservation of wild trout populations in the state, regardless of what people's preconceptions of TU otherwise might be. 

Thanks,

Andrew Reichardt

President, NCC-TU

Vice-Chair, MAC-TU

Conservation Chair, TPFR