August.....Couldn't Ask For Much Better

[zwiggles]

Do you have a link to this study by any chance? I've always been under the impression that water temperatures (and food availability) dictate trout growth not water flows.  Hence why hatcheries can grow trout so fast as they can control those factors (temperature and feed) precisely i believe.  Of course the more flow = more oxygen which is a good thing for trout.

I’m no expert, but I was always under the impression that stocked fish grew more quickly in the wild given proper conditions vs a hatchery. But this also could be because NH can’t grow fish in hatcheries worth a d**n... but I digress.

[TightLinesMaine]

I was always under the impression that stocked fish grew more quickly in the wild given proper conditions vs a hatchery.

I'm no expert either - far from it, but I would say to that that it depends on the "proper conditions".  Stocked trout such as brown trout, rainbow trout, & splake do have a chance to grow exceptionally large (10+ lbs) in the wild in Maine, though i'd be willing to bet a hatchery that was large enough could grow a trout to 10 lbs faster than one would grow in the wild.  I very well could be wrong about that but just seems like common sense to me?  There are hatcheries in Maine that grow brood Lake trout up to 30", that would take years and years and years in the wild. (Don't mean to hijack your topic - sorry Jim)

[Jim C.]

No worries on hijacking the topic, Randall!  It's an interesting discussion.  Maybe "SaltyShores" (he's a retired bio on this forum) can add his experience and info to the question of growth rates, etc.

I'm no expert either - far from it, but I would say to that that it depends on the "proper conditions".  Stocked trout such as brown trout, rainbow trout, & splake do have a chance to grow exceptionally large (10+ lbs) in the wild in Maine, though i'd be willing to bet a hatchery that was large enough could grow a trout to 10 lbs faster than one would grow in the wild.  I very well could be wrong about that but just seems like common sense to me?  There are hatcheries in Maine that grow brood Lake trout up to 30", that would take years and years and years in the wild. (Don't mean to hijack your topic - sorry Jim)

[lowaccord66]

Do you have a link to this study by any chance? I've always been under the impression that water temperatures (and food availability) dictate trout growth not water flows.  Hence why hatcheries can grow trout so fast as they can control those factors (temperature and feed) precisely i believe.  Of course the more flow = more oxygen which is a good thing for trout.

I'll try to dig it up and report back. 

[seamonkey84]

Trout will grow as long as they aren’t stressed and have plenty of food. The ones in the hatcheries are kept in optimal temps and fed as much as they want to get them to grow to catchable sizes in a year or less, vs one in the wild being a few years old at the same size. Places that have feeding stations for stocked ponds end up with these
https://www.ginkandgasoline.com/fly-fishing-tips-technique/sooooo-ee-calling-all-pellet-pigs-what-you-should-know-about-feeding-trout/

[lowaccord66]

Here it is.  Make sure you have time its 76 pages.  Seamonkey that link didn't work for me.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/022015-JFWM-011.S8&ved=2ahUKEwjH1bKRrbjkAhURj54KHWxBCl0QFjAMegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw3-pTWTXIXz3mH7D1jGk1dr

Link brings you to download of the PDF. 

[TightLinesMaine]

The ones in the hatcheries are kept in optimal temps and fed as much as they want to get them to grow to catchable sizes in a year or less

Yep

Here it is.  Make sure you have time its 76 pages.  Seamonkey that link didn't work for me.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/022015-JFWM-011.S8&ved=2ahUKEwjH1bKRrbjkAhURj54KHWxBCl0QFjAMegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw3-pTWTXIXz3mH7D1jGk1dr

Link brings you to download of the PDF. 

Thanks, i've read a bit so far:

"As temperature increases, the
dissolved oxygen saturation level in the water decreases, while the dissolved
oxygen requirement for the fish increases. As a result, an increase in
temperature resulting in a decrease in dissolved oxygen can be detrimental to
the fish. Optimal oxygen levels for rainbow trout are not well documented,
but appear to be 7 mg/l at temperatures 150 C and 9 mg/l at temperatures
> 150 C. Doudoroff and Shumway (1970) demonstrated that swimming speed and
growth rates for salmonids declined with decreasing dissolved oxygen levels.
In the summer"

Warmer water = less oxygen = worse salmonid growth rate

"The upper and lower incipient lethal temperatures for adult rainbow are
25° and 0° C, respectively (Black 1953; Lagler 1956; McAfee 1966; Bidgood and
Berst 1969; Hokanson et a1. 1977). Zero growth rate occurred at 23° C for
rainbow trout in the laboratory (Hokanson et al. 1977). Changes in the natural
growth rate of rainbow trout are detrimental to their development and survival.
Therefore, 25° C should 'be considered the upper limit suitable for rainbow
trout and then only for short periods of time. Adult lake rainbow trout
select waters with temperatures between 7 to 18° C (Fast 1973; May 1973) and
avoid permanent residence where temperatures are above 18° C (May 1973).
Adult stream rainbow trout select temperatures between 12.0 and 19.3° C
(Garside and Tait 1958; Bell 1973; Cherry et al. 1977; McCauley et al. 1977).
Dickson and Kramer (1971) reported that the greatest scope of rainbow trout
activity occurred at 15 and 20° C when tested at 5° C temperature intervals.
Stream rainbow trout select temperatures between 12 and 19° C; lake resident
trout avoid temperatures> 18° C. Therefore, the optimal temperature range
for rainbow trout is assumed to be 12 to 18° C."

So optimal Rainbow trout growth rate is somewhere between 53*F and 64*F, a hatchery is undoubtedly more capable of producing year round water temperatures in this range then a lake, pond, or stream is, hence why i believe trout can grow much quicker/faster in a hatchery setting.

However, you are correct that trout do better in waters with a high "base flow", just not sure where you got the 1" to 2" a month growth figure (i've only read about a half a dozen pages so far, maybe i'll keep reading).  Maybe in a hatchery setting that would be possible, but not sure about in the wild:

"There is a definite relationship between the annual flow regime and the
quality of trout habitat. The most critical period is typically during base
flow (lowest flows of late summer to winter). A base flow 50% of the average
annual daily flow is considered excellent for maintaining quality trout
habitat, a base flow of 25 to 50% is considered fair, and a base flow of < 25%
is considered poor (adapted from Binns and Eiserman 1979; Wesche 1980)."

[Jim C.]

Thanks for the link, Iowaccord.  I'll read it when I get a chance.

Food availability has to be prime limiting factor in the wild I'd think.  The mountain flows I typically fish are quite "sterile" for most of the year in terms of food.  Big difference from lake or pond with smelt, etc.

[lowaccord66]

You're welcome Jim, always appreciate your posts.

[Jim C.]

The paper was good reading, Iowaccord.

I found the discussion of maintaining a buffer strip of at least 30 meters (about 100 feet) wide next to streams very interesting.  Makes sense, especially given vegetation's impact on other variables like shade (temp), fine sediments, food in the form of terrestrials, etc.  Muck these up and there goes your trout stream.  Unfortunately, Maine law allows for an awful lot of logging, mining, and related disturbance down to within 25 feet!  As weak as the laws are, enforcement is weaker.  I have presented pics and other info to the authorities in the past and basically "sent to my room".  Politics and such.  Sorry for the rant, but I've seen a bunch and it's a raw nerve.

You're welcome Jim, always appreciate your posts.

[lowaccord66]

The paper was good reading, Iowaccord.

I found the discussion of maintaining a buffer strip of at least 30 meters (about 100 feet) wide next to streams very interesting.  Makes sense, especially given vegetation's impact on other variables like shade (temp), fine sediments, food in the form of terrestrials, etc.  Muck these up and there goes your trout stream.  Unfortunately, Maine law allows for an awful lot of logging, mining, and related disturbance down to within 25 feet!  As weak as the laws are, enforcement is weaker.  I have presented pics and other info to the authorities in the past and basically "sent to my room".  Politics and such.  Sorry for the rant, but I've seen a bunch and it's a raw nerve.

Jim we should connect and fish.  I have also tried to advocate against those activities with some of our local municipalities having clear cut river bank on the Farmington.  The State says get in touch with the town.  Nothing to be gained there.  The only action I can ever get is State vs. Entitled home owners changing the riverbank.  I had one such home owner tell me to mind my business last year when I asked if he had permits....bet he wish he didn't.    

Rant away.  We need more ranting in that area.

[Jim C.]

Thanks.  Sounds good.  As it turns out, I have family in the Hartford area.  I don't get down there much, but likely will in the future.

The regulations are crafted by "stakeholder's groups".  That doesn't go well.  I will say that the State did acknowledge that I found some activity that wasn't quite right, but no penalty if it was corrected "quickly".  Weak regs erring toward industry with mega loopholes. 

No penalty if it was corrected "quickly".  I can slow my car down quickly from 100 MPH.........I guess that means no ticket

Jim we should connect and fish.  I have also tried to advocate against those activities with some of our local municipalities having clear cut river bank on the Farmington.  The State says get in touch with the town.  Nothing to be gained there.  The only action I can ever get is State vs. Entitled home owners changing the riverbank.  I had one such home owner tell me to mind my business last year when I asked if he had permits....bet he wish he didn't.    

Rant away.  We need more ranting in that area.

[TightLinesMaine]

The paper was good reading, Iowaccord.

I found the discussion of maintaining a buffer strip of at least 30 meters (about 100 feet) wide next to streams very interesting.  Makes sense, especially given vegetation's impact on other variables like shade (temp), fine sediments, food in the form of terrestrials, etc.  Muck these up and there goes your trout stream.  Unfortunately, Maine law allows for an awful lot of logging, mining, and related disturbance down to within 25 feet!  As weak as the laws are, enforcement is weaker.  I have presented pics and other info to the authorities in the past and basically "sent to my room".  Politics and such.  Sorry for the rant, but I've seen a bunch and it's a raw nerve.

I believe i've discussed this topic with you, but i've had the same issue with a popular/highly utilized stocked & wild trout stream in Southern Maine (you probably know the one).  At least 2 farms on the banks of this brook have several dozens of cows in pastures right alongside the brook.  The owners let their cows run loose/wild trampling the stream beds and the vegetation buffer on the banks at all months of years (including trout pre-spawn time), one of the owners doesn't even attempt to mend/fix his fence to keep the cows out of the brook.  I've fished this brook for almost 10 years now and each year it gets more and more sediment and/or sand piled up on the stream bottom (erosion).  Trout used to love one of the particular stretches right next to this farm, i visited recently this year and it is almost void of trout.  I have discussed this issue with Biologists in my region, they were helpful at first and at my concern they talked to the farm owners apparently, but little to nothing was done.  I followed up with the Biologists (was Francis at the time or maybe Jim Pellerin i believe, can't remember 100%) to tell them nothing had been done and basically their response was (paraphrasing here obviously) "we can't do anything about it" & "talk to the landowner yourself".  As an ordinary citizen and not a state employee, i don't feel 'right' going up to a landowner and telling/suggesting to them how to take care of their land/property... there's my rant...

[TightLinesMaine]

No penalty if it was corrected "quickly".  I can slow my car down quickly from 100 MPH.........I guess that means no ticket

 

[Jim C.]

Randall, this is also a real concern.  Trout Unlimited and others have worked with landowners mainly out west to work on getting cooperation.  Where stream grazing has been reduced or eliminated, conditions have improved.  I agree with your reluctance to approach the landowners 1 on 1.  I'm also afraid that small, basically "no name" waters  won't get the environmental attention from government that is given to big name waters......not to say that these are being handled perfectly either.

I believe i've discussed this topic with you, but i've had the same issue with a popular/highly utilized stocked & wild trout stream in Southern Maine (you probably know the one).  At least 2 farms on the banks of this brook have several dozens of cows in pastures right alongside the brook.  The owners let their cows run loose/wild trampling the stream beds and the vegetation buffer on the banks at all months of years (including trout pre-spawn time), one of the owners doesn't even attempt to mend/fix his fence to keep the cows out of the brook.  I've fished this brook for almost 10 years now and each year it gets more and more sediment and/or sand piled up on the stream bottom (erosion).  Trout used to love one of the particular stretches right next to this farm, i visited recently this year and it is almost void of trout.  I have discussed this issue with Biologists in my region, they were helpful at first and at my concern they talked to the farm owners apparently, but little to nothing was done.  I followed up with the Biologists (was Francis at the time or maybe Jim Pellerin i believe, can't remember 100%) to tell them nothing had been done and basically their response was (paraphrasing here obviously) "we can't do anything about it" & "talk to the landowner yourself".  As an ordinary citizen and not a state employee, i don't feel 'right' going up to a landowner and telling/suggesting to them how to take care of their land/property... there's my rant...