Maine’s Wild and Native Brook Trout

By George Smith, SAM’s Executive Director

            Maine has done a poor job of protecting and managing its native brook trout over the last century.  There is plenty of blame to go around.  We deliberately stocked competing species in brook trout waters, ruined a lot of spawning habitat, and changed entire ecosystems with illegally or inadvertently introduced exotic species.

            The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine is leading a campaign to save our remaining wild and native brookies – and I have found that most anglers, after they hear the details of our initiative, are enthusiastic supporters.  Unfortunately, a great deal of incorrect information about our initiative has been distributed by other organizations and even the Fisheries Division of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

            Here are the facts.  In the last legislative session, SAM successfully proposed that the native brook trout be designated a state “Heritage Fish.”  Recognizing the importance of maintaining the remaining populations of brookies that have not been altered through stocking, the legislature directed DIF&W not to stock these waters with competing species nor allow fishing with live bait.

            These rules were applied to 305 waters that – as far as DIF&W and federal records show – have never been stocked.  Isn’t it a shame that these are the only waters left that can still boast Maine’s original unaltered native brook trout?  We nearly lost this Maine legacy.

            When the legislature discussed SAM’s brook trout bill last session, DIF&W also produced a list of brook trout waters than have not been stocked in more than 25 years.  Some were only stocked once a half century or more ago.  We began discussing what could be done to protect and enhance these populations of trout.

            This year we are leading an effort to identify waters from this list where wild brook trout need to be protected from competing species.  Although we are still waiting for DIF&W to create this list, some fisheries biologists and others have distributed lists they claim will be governed by our new legislation.  None of those lists is accurate.  There is no list yet!

            Prior to the April 12 public hearing on SAM’s bill, LD 285, SAM will post on our website (www.samcef.org)  the new list of wild trout waters that would be recognized as Heritage Fish waters where stocking and the use of live fish as bait would be prohibited.

            In its Wild Brook Trout Report to the legislature in March of 2006, DIF&W defined a wild brook trout fishery as a principal fishery of brook trout based on natural reproduction in water that has not been stocked with brook trout for at least 25 years.  The list of waters governed by SAM’s new bill would be defined the same way except that waters that have been stocked with ANY SPECIES – not just brook trout – WOULD BE REMOVED.  This has always been SAM’s position.

For example, The St. John Valley Times reported that SAM’s list included Fish River, Churchill, Eagle, Umsakis, and Spider lakes.  Because all of these lakes have been stocked with species other than brook trout in the last 25 years, none will qualify for the revised list of wild brook trout waters.  

            Contrary to rumors, we have not and will not try to ban ice fishing on any of these waters.  For more than a decade SAM’s Fishing Initiative Committee and Board of Directors have followed a policy that requires us to treat open and ice anglers equally.  It is silly and counterproductive to pit one group against the other.  We have tried, unsuccessfully, to get DIF&W to adopt this policy.   

            According to Forrest Bonney, DIF&W’s brook trout specialist, nearly all of the state’s 6,000 lakes and ponds were suited for brook trout at one time.  There should be no debate that we must protect what native and wild brookies we have left in the few hundred waters where they live.

All SAM asks is that we do everything we can – together and individually – to keep competing species of fish out of these waters, so our wild and native brook trout can survive for future generations.  Surely we can all work together to achieve this important goal.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO LD 285

An Act to Designate Additional Wild Trout Waters for Recognition and Protection

Proposed by Rep. Koffman

Amend the bill by striking everything after the enacting clause and before the summary and replace it with the following:

Sec. 1. 12 MRSA §12462,  is enacted to read:

§ 12462.   Wild brook trout waters.  

1.  Adoption of initial list of wild brook trout waters.   The commissioner shall adopt by rule a list of wild brook trout waters.  For purposes of this section “wild brook trout waters” means lakes and ponds that as of the effective date of this subsection:

A. Contain a self-sustaining population of eastern brook trout based on natural reproduction that does not require stocking to maintain its existence;

B. Contain eastern brook trout that are regularly sought after by anglers and make up a significant portion of the catch of those anglers; and

C.  Have not been directly stocked from a hatchery or other water body within the last 25 years.

 Rules adopted pursuant to this subsection are major substantive rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.

2.  Addition of waters to list.   The commissioner may adopt rules to amend the list established in subsection 1 to add a lake or pond if that lake or pond meets the definition of a wild brook trout water. Rules adopted to add a lake or pond to the list established under subsection 1 are routine technical rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.

3.  Removal of waters from list.   The commissioner may by rule remove a wild brook trout water from the list established in subsection 1. Rules adopted pursuant to this subsection are major substantive rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.

4.  Stocking wild brook trout waters.   The commissioner may not stock or issue a permit to stock fish in a lake or pond listed as a wild brook trout water under this section.

5.  Fishing restrictions.   A person may not use live fish as bait in or possess live fish as bait on a wild brook trout water.  A person who violates this subsection commits a Class E crime.

summary

This amendment replaces the bill and directs the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to create and maintain a list of wild brook trout waters.  It defines “wild brook trout waters” to mean lakes and ponds that as of the effective date of this Act contain a self-sustaining population of eastern brook trout that are regularly sought after by anglers and have not been directly stocked within the last 25 years.