In attempting to look for patterns, the Commission cross referenced its finding on the percentage of fish recaptured with variables in stocking such as water temperatures, pH and total alkalinity between hatcheries, truck tanks and the receiving streams. No significant influences were found. Factors such as transportation time from hatcheries to the water the numbers of stops made along the way or the density of trout in each tank showed no significant differences.
Likewise, the Commission found no single factor that would explain the relative absence of stocked trout in those waters that returned poor or very poor recapture rates. Streams in sub-basin 8 of the West Branch of the Susquehanna River had relatively low recapture rates. Of the eight sample sites in sub-basin 8, six were below the 40% recapture rate. A portion of sub-basin 4 (the upper North Branch of the Susquehanna River basin) also showed localized poor trout recaptures. Those sub-basins are known to be vulnerable to acid precipitation and pH has been observed to be a factor affecting trout residency. However, that relationship was weak based on the 2006 data.
The complete 2006 study report is available on the Commission’s web site at www.fishandboat.com.
In 2007 Commission biologists will continue to study trout residency, but will concentrate on revisiting the waters sampled in 2006 that had low recapture rates. If results from the 2007 data suggest that changes in the stocking program on some streams are needed, options could include stocking trout just prior to opening day or stocking only during the open season.
Daryl Pierce, a Commission biologist who was lead author of the 2006 study report, said the collection of additional data will give fisheries managers more information to consider. “Even if a sample site had poor or very poor retention of stocked trout in 2006, this does not imply that the entire stream or even the section is poor water for trout or trout fishing. Our sample sites encompass a relatively small distance, when given some of the sizes of the sections that we stock; the planted trout might just have simply moved to the nearest pool that was outside of our sampling area.”
The ongoing study of stocked trout residency is part of an agency strategic initiative to re-engineer trout fishing opportunities. Improvements such as consolidating special trout regulation programs, stocking of larger hatchery trout, providing specific details on stockings during the open season and an earlier opening day in those areas of the Commonwealth that warm sooner in the spring are all results of this process.
“Trout stocking is one of the most valued services the Commission provides to anglers. So making sure we get the best possible recreational use for the millions of adult trout we are producing is essential. Evaluating when, why and where trout move after stocking will have a direct impact on how we manage stocked trout going into the future,” said Doug Austen, PFBC Executive Director. |