Where are the brown trout?

[Billfish715]

With talk of trout being caught in the Raritan below Somerville, and the interest in holdover trout in the streams and rivers, I started thinking about the purging of the brown trout from the Pequest Hatchery a few years ago. What information, if any, was ever collected about their effects on the massive stocking. Did any survive? Have any been caught recently in any of the streams into which they were stocked?

I guess what got me started was the discussions about the trout fishing on the Raritan River in places far from the stocking points. Does anyone think there could be a sizeable number of trout that make it down the Raritan to brackish water? Weren't a bunch of browns stocked in the lower Raritan? Does anyone think any of them are now living in the river or its tributaries? If any of them are surviving, what does it say about the disease that affected them?

I'm just wondering about what happened to all of those brown and brook trout after they were put into the streams. Did any survive? If they didn't, was their disease to blame or did they become a food fish for the herons, ospreys, eagles, pike etc.?

If any survived, shouldn't the state revisit their brown and brook trout rearing program? Just curious.

[Drossi]

Rainbows are easier to raise(I.e. Cheaper). Only stocker brooks and Browns will be from private stockings. PA doesn't seem to have the same issue raising them though.

[JDTuna]

No need to stock them. There are a number of rivers and streams with self-sustaining populations of wild brown trout. Some nice fish in the mix, too.

[AndyS]

There are no trout in the Raritan river below the last stocking point, just ask Mark B.

[thmyorke1]

Im sort of ok with rainbow-stocking only. This way catching browns/brooks are more rewarding.

However it would be cool if they focused more on that idea of "brown-trout enhancement", sort of like only stock browns in specific waters that have potential.

Rainbows are the least successful at maintaining a population in NJ out of the three trout (from what ive read)

Put rainbows in majority of water, but put browns in streams that have the potential to become good holdover streams, or even production streams.

[Billfish715]

To my point.......Yes, the rainbows are easier to raise, but the state did not purge the raceways because the rainbows were diseased. They got rid of thousands of brook and brown trout, however, because they were diseased. Yes, there are "native" brown trout in some places if you know where to look. Those "native" browns are survivors of trout that at one time had to be stocked by someone, somewhere.

But, what happened to all or most or even some of the thousands of purged brooks and browns that were set free? Will their offspring become "native" trout someday? The state released at least a truckload of brown trout in the Rahway River in Rahway in a stretch that was never stocked with trout. Did they swim to the Arthur Kill and become searun trout? Did any make their way up a tributary and try to spawn?

I'm just asking questions to learn if any studies were done to assess what results may have occurred because of the release of the trout in question. Are any of those that may have survived now disease-free?

Finally, if so many trout are released into a stretch of stream ( like the ones into which the diseased trout were let go ) and they are not caught, can we assume they swam off, never to be seen again? That would make me want to know if the biologists have considered just how many trout should be released into a trout conservation area in order for a reasonable amount of trout to remain and perhaps reproduce or also just swim off.

[acaravaglia]

I personally prefer to fish for brookies or Browns over rainbows. These two species are more aggressive and likely to hit plugs and other lures (I've caught my share of rainbows to over 9 lbs on jigs and plugs, but by far the action isn't like plugging a stream full of beautiful brooks and Browns). In my experience Rainbows are more inclined to hit Inline spinners, power bait or meal worms. Fly fisherman do well with the bows as well. I can't use meal worms due an allergy when I touch them and power bait just seems fake (was ok when I was a kid). I think it's time to start restocking our state fish, the Brooktrout. I'd also love to see Browns reintroduced. That's my two cents.

[Jigman13]

Itll happen once the hatchery is ideally set up for it i.e. covered raceways etc to protect from birds etc.

[Dave B.]

Rainbows are easier to raise(I.e. Cheaper). Only stocker brooks and Browns will be from private stockings. PA doesn't seem to have the same issue raising them though.

Rainbows are no more or less costly to rear than the other 2 species. They're simply far more resistant to many pathogens than brooks, and to a bit lesser degree browns, are susceptible to. One of the few exceptions to this is 'whirling disease' which seems to primarily effect rainbows.

As far as PA not having issue, actually they have Furunculosis outbreaks at many of their hatcheries every year. They treat and stock the fish with little regard for the potential impacts on either existing wild pops or other species since furunculosis is not just a salmonid disease. There have been many outbreaks in other states that involved everything from smallmouth to sunnies.

[Drossi]

. Fly fisherman do well with the bows as well

Misconception. Browns especially are much more inclined to take flies. Brooke's too. Rainbows are much more fickle. Just as likely to catch them on corn.

[Royal Coachman]

I for one get bored catching the same 10.5 inch Rainbows all day long. I'de like to see a return of the Brookies and Browns but it doesn't look like that is likely to happen anytime soon.

[Billfish715]

I for one get bored catching the same 10.5 inch Rainbows all day long. I'de like to see a return of the Brookies and Browns but it doesn't look like that is likely to happen anytime soon.

Welcome to the NJFishing.com family. If you are joining us from another .com you will find the discussions here, both lively and informative. If you are solely a trout fisherman, your comments will be appreciated as well as anyone else's. There are, perhaps, more fly fishermen on this board than people may imagine, so please join in the conversation and feel free to start your own threads and be sure to encourage your friends to do the same.

As for the 10.5 inch rainbows..........you may be too young to remember when a 10.5-11 inch rainbow trout was almost a trophy in N.J. As a kid, a stringer of 9" skinny brook trout was something to be proud of. NJ trout production has improved by leaps and bounds except for the ability to control some pathogens. I would love to catch state-raised browns and brookies again soon. I understand the Division's caution to prevent the spread of disease, but it's time to get back to raising other trout besides just rainbows.

[Billfish715]

Rainbows are no more or less costly to rear than the other 2 species. They're simply far more resistant to many pathogens that brooks, and to a bit lesser degree browns, are susceptible to. One of the few exceptions to this is 'whirling disease' which seems to primarily effect rainbows.

As far as PA not having issue, actually they have Furunculosis outbreaks at many of their hatcheries every year. They treat and stock the fish with little regard for the potential impacts on either existing wild pops or other species since furunculosis is not just a salmonid disease. There have been many outbreaks in other states that involved everything from smallmouth to sunnies.

And yet, we never hear about any drastic affects to stocking furunculosis riddled brown trout into Pa's waters. With all of the diseased brooks and browns that NJ unloaded into many non trout production waters, there has been no report,of which I am aware, of the effects of those infected trout on other fish species within those waters.

Let's just keep dumping thousands of rainbows into all of the streams and hope they don't affect the existing "native" browns and brookies. With all of those rainbows being stocked, shouldn't they present incredible competition with the other two naturally producing species? Shouldn't they be the ones, by now, that are naturally spawning and reproducing on a wider scale? I'm waiting for someone to be "salmonidically correct" and demand sections of streams to be protected for wild rainbow trout production just like the ones for brooks and browns. If browns and brookies are the ones that naturally reproduce in the streams, then start stocking them again and cut back on the rainbows.

[thmyorke1]

And yet, we never hear about any drastic affects to stocking furunculosis riddled brown trout into Pa's waters. With all of the diseased brooks and browns that NJ unloaded into many non trout production waters, there has been no report,of which I am aware, of the effects of those infected trout on other fish species within those waters.

Let's just keep dumping thousands of rainbows into all of the streams and hope they don't affect the existing "native" browns and brookies. With all of those rainbows being stocked, shouldn't they present incredible competition with the other two naturally producing species? Shouldn't they be the ones, by now, that are naturally spawning and reproducing on a wider scale? I'm waiting for someone to be "salmonidically correct" and demand sections of streams to be protected for wild rainbow trout production just like the ones for brooks and browns. If browns and brookies are the ones that naturally reproduce in the streams, then start stocking them again and cut back on the rainbows.

I think the majority of wild populations arent in the same stretches as stocked trout. Maybe if the stocking points were lowered downstream, maybe some wild populations could have the chance of extending downstream too?

Browns and Brooks are just better at holding over and reproducing than rainbows for NJ's waters
(from my knowledge: Every stream that has wild rainbows also has the other two trout species, but never the other way around where it's exclusively rainbows.)
So just because there are now more rainbows being stocked doesnt necessarily mean there's going to be new streams supporting rainbow populations.

I am a bit in favor of that idea of stocking less where wild browns/brooks are. Some downstream sections of WTS do receive stockings, where I think wild trout could be swimming around fine instead.

[Drossi]

I think the majority of wild populations arent in the same stretches as stocked trout. Maybe if the stocking points were lowered downstream, maybe some wild populations could have the chance of extending downstream too?

Browns and Brooks are just better at holding over and reproducing than rainbows for NJ's waters
(from my knowledge: Every stream that has wild rainbows also has the other two trout species, but never the other way around where it's exclusively rainbows.)
So just because there are now more rainbows being stocked doesnt necessarily mean there's going to be new streams supporting rainbow populations.

I am a bit in favor of that idea of stocking less where wild browns/brooks are. Some downstream sections of WTS do receive stockings, where I think wild trout could be swimming around fine instead.

I think it has something to do with the Ph composition in NJ streams. The Ph is good for brown/brookie reproduction but not optimal for rainbows except for a few select streams.

[Skunk City]

But where did all those trout go? They stocked a ton in the Passaic and Hackensack that year as well. We caught some in the weeks after but never saw any again.

[fishingbuddies]

Pike food.

[Royal Coachman]

Welcome to the NJFishing.com family. If you are joining us from another .com you will find the discussions here, both lively and informative. If you are solely a trout fisherman, your comments will be appreciated as well as anyone else's. There are, perhaps, more fly fishermen on this board than people may imagine, so please join in the conversation and feel free to start your own threads and be sure to encourage your friends to do the same.

As for the 10.5 inch rainbows..........you may be too young to remember when a 10.5-11 inch rainbow trout was almost a trophy in N.J. As a kid, a stringer of 9" skinny brook trout was something to be proud of. NJ trout production has improved by leaps and bounds except for the ability to control some pathogens. I would love to catch state-raised browns and brookies again soon. I understand the Division's caution to prevent the spread of disease, but it's time to get back to raising other trout besides just rainbows.

Thanks for the welcome. I've lurked on the site for many years, especially the saltwater message board. I'm a refugee from another message board that closed down recently.

I've been trout fishing for over 40 years so I do remember those years. Just saying I find it boring to catch the same cookie cutter Rainbow all day.

[Bruce Litton]

Can anyone offer a little dry-fly advice? The last spring of the brown trout stocking--which is why I want browns back so much, loved the brookies, too--I witnessed mid-May rises that amazed me, and I got in the action with my six-weight, too. All browns. Has anyone May experience with swarms of rising rainbows?

[Chrisper4694]

Can anyone offer a little dry-fly advice? The last spring of the brown trout stocking--which is why I want browns back so much, loved the brookies, too--I witnessed mid-May rises that amazed me, and I got in the action with my six-weight, too. All browns. Has anyone May experience with swarms of rising rainbows?

with the stocked fish? your best bet is a fly tied in the shape of a hatchery pellet :D

[Capt. Lou]

When a hatch is on its my expierance on any stream not only local any trout species therein will rise to feed .
It’s not uncommon to catch several species in that particular stream if available on flies , not so much on dries since our local hatches are not always strong .
Streams that are heavily fished are not your best bet to focus on dries but nymphs and streamers will collect more trout then dries .
Many Streams dries can be deadly after dark if your on the correct waters exibiting a particular hatch that gets em going !
Many surrounding states have the type hatches that make dry fly fishing easier
but timing is the key

[Bruce Litton]

with the stocked fish? your best bet is a fly tied in the shape of a hatchery pellet :D

By mid-May, those hatchery browns were wild for dry flies. Not that they were quite "wild" yet, no, but rising for sure. Come to think of it, way back in the day, my salmon egg Master friend gave homage to a dry fly angler, who caught rainbows, while we got skunked, end of May.

[Dave B.]

And yet, we never hear about any drastic affects to stocking furunculosis riddled brown trout into Pa's waters. With all of the diseased brooks and browns that NJ unloaded into many non trout production waters, there has been no report,of which I am aware, of the effects of those infected trout on other fish species within those waters.

Let's just keep dumping thousands of rainbows into all of the streams and hope they don't affect the existing "native" browns and brookies. With all of those rainbows being stocked, shouldn't they present incredible competition with the other two naturally producing species? Shouldn't they be the ones, by now, that are naturally spawning and reproducing on a wider scale? I'm waiting for someone to be "salmonidically correct" and demand sections of streams to be protected for wild rainbow trout production just like the ones for brooks and browns. If browns and brookies are the ones that naturally reproduce in the streams, then start stocking them again and cut back on the rainbows.

My apologies for the delayed reply, I haven't been able to get online for several days.
To your first point regarding not hearing of any drastic outbreaks in PA waters, first not all disease events are reported, as well many are not large enough to be noticed. Secondly, even if no outbreaks are occurring does that mean it's acceptable to just keep dumping disease carrying fish into a water body until an outbreak occurs and then say 'Gee, maybe we shouldn't have done that."?

In 2014 seven (7) of PA's 14 state hatchery had furunculosis outbreaks. They have a quite serious problem on their hands. They've (PA) been approached by the Great Lakes Fish Health Advisory Committee to address these issues and have been prevented from stocking any fish from their contaminated hatcheries into any Lake Erie tribs in PA. Frankly I see no problem with erring on the side of caution. Anyone who feels otherwise I would speculate has never had any vaccinations of their own nor their children I would imagine. Why bother trying to prevent something that's not occurring, right?

As for ''dumping thousands of rainbows into all of the streams and hope they don't affect the existing "native" browns and brookies", there are no native browns and many of the wild brookie populations we have are from introduced populations. That aside the vast majority of the stocked streams have little to no wild populations, and those few that do have been shown to be unable to support an adequate wild population to warrant 'special' designation status.

Speaking to your thoughts on the stocked fish presenting competition for the wild populations in those areas where both exist, most certainly there is some competition for food for a time but angler mortality both kept and post-release as well as natural predator mortality very quickly diminishes the vast majority of such competition, especially given the fact that the stocked fish are much easier to catch as we all know.

Regarding 'sections of streams to be protected for wild rainbow trout production' that already exists. Check the list of designated WTS's, several of them have rainbows, one has almost exclusively wild rainbows.

Finally to this statement, "If browns and brookies are the ones that naturally reproduce in the streams, then start stocking them again..." Why would you want to stock hatchery brookies over wild, possibly 'Heritage' strain brook trout? This would be potentially detrimental to the indigenous brookies. As for browns, they've been stocked in every viable waterway in this state for over a century. If there were some piece of habitat where they could establish a new self-sustaining population it very likely would have happened long before now so stocking them at this point would only be a measure of providing variety to the angling public rather than attempting to establish some new wild population somewhere.

All of that being said believe me when I tell you that I am personally no fan of the 'rainbows only' situation we currently have. That's a part of the reason myself and a few friends pool our resources each year and purchase a 100 or so trout of various species to stock into a 2+ mile section of public waterway that has great holdover capabilities. We stock mainly browns and tigers with a few goldens in the mix for kicks, and I get reports every year of our fish being caught both in the section we stock as well as many miles both up and down stream from 'our' area, and at all times of year.

No person, program, private company or government agency is perfect, however despite the occasional' hiccup' in things I strongly feel our NJF&W Freshwater Fisheries staff do an incredible job of providing us all a great deal of tremendous angling opportunities, especially for such a small yet intensely over-crowded state. When I dis-agree with them I let them know, likewise I give them credit where I feel credit is due.

Oh BTW, Drossi I agree with you on the 'Ph' issue 100%. IMHO that is the primary limiting factor against the ability of rainbows to reproduce here in NJ. I also believe that very low Ph levels are what have prevented the wild browns from occupying areas of the Flatbrook further upstream than they presently do. The only section of the BFB that has consistently shown brown trout reproduction is basically from the top of Blewitt down to about Walpack. Above Blewitt it's the realm of wild brookies without question as has been repeatedly documented, below Walpack the thermal conditions relegate the stream to a 'trout maintenance' designation.

Consider the topography, geology and stream bed substrate compositions in the various areas along with the nature of the tribs. Above Blewitt the BFB is a high gradient, rock boulder bedded, very poor acidic soil waterway. From Blewitt to Walpack it changes a great deal to a lower gradient, mainly sand and gravel bed stream with both the LFB and a couple of limestone influenced tribs entering in. This both slightly warms and 'sweetens' the water as well as the different substrate being a factor. IMHO the segregation between the 2 species' established wild pops is pretty easy to understand. Considering the state has stocked all three species throughout the entire watershed for about a century, if browns were going to establish a wild population elsewhere it would have already occurred, and if rainbows were going to establish at all it likewise would have long since happened.

Finally, to THMYorke, sorry I didn't get to answer you on the other thread before it was closed. No word yet on the results of the Flatbrook telemetry study. The only thing I can say for certain is that it will almost definitely be repeated this year, hopefully with more effective results than my preliminary 'gossip' has indicated from last year.

My apologies to all who take the time to read this entire diatribe, I hope I haven't bored anyone too badly.

[Capt. Lou]

I fully concur with Dave B’s assement of NJ trout programs .
I spend over 75 days a year on NJ’s trout waters and probably another 20 on PA. ‘S waters !
All these native browns that appear on this site are not native but just stocked fish period .
Many I’m sure come from privately stocked waters , I’ve personally only caught 3 browns in public waters in the past several seasons while hundreds of bows to 9#’s
If there were a solid holdover or native browns all the water I cover I would get more than 3 !
When a buddy invites me to fish club water then it produces whatever they stock
be it browns , bows ,brooks or occasionally tigers etc .
I never intentionally target native brokkies that live in specific trout streams too fragile u end up killing them !

[JDTuna]

All these native browns that appear on this site are not native but just stocked fish period .
Many I’m sure come from privately stocked waters , I’ve personally only caught 3 browns in public waters in the past several seasons while hundreds of bows to 9#’s
If there were a solid holdover or native browns all the water I cover I would get more than 3 !

That is completely false. A number of public rivers/streams in NJ have well-documented, self-sustaining populations of wild brown trout. Some very nice fish, too. Not sure where you are fishing but I target them and catch wild browns on most of my trips in NJ.

[Billfish715]

Dave, I, for one appreciate and respect your reports. The more we know about why things happen, the more we can understand what we didn't understand. It's why questions should be asked and why they should be answered openly.

Over the many, many years I've been fishing for trout in NJ, I've seen different strains of browns introduced into the streams. The " native" brown trout are certainly not "native" just as you intimated. Some may naturally reproduce, but relatively few ever grow to jumbo proportions ( tributaries to major rivers not withstanding).

It should be obvious to everyone (even though you didn't say it) that NJ must continue to aggressively stock trout if we have any wish to catch them. There is not enough natural reproduction to sustain a large holdover population in most waters......some, yes, most, no. It is also obvious that given the thousands of stocked trout most of the trout are harvested or swim off or just perish since the streams only have a limited carrying capacity.

Dave, please keep us informed with any information you wish to share. Other than social media reports or press releases, fishermen have no more ways to find out about what is going on. Howard Brandt was the last reporter who was a voice for the sportsmen and women. Now we are left with rumors, inuendos, suspicion, and divisiveness among ourselves because we are left in ignorance.

Thanks for your candid responses and please excuse my diatribes.

[Dave B.]

Dave, I, for one appreciate and respect your reports. The more we know about why things happen, the more we can understand what we didn't understand. It's why questions should be asked and why they should be answered openly.

Over the many, many years I've been fishing for trout in NJ, I've seen different strains of browns introduced into the streams. The " native" brown trout are certainly not "native" just as you intimated. Some may naturally reproduce, but relatively few ever grow to jumbo proportions ( tributaries to major rivers not withstanding).

It should be obvious to everyone (even though you didn't say it) that NJ must continue to aggressively stock trout if we have any wish to catch them. There is not enough natural reproduction to sustain a large holdover population in most waters......some, yes, most, no. It is also obvious that given the thousands of stocked trout most of the trout are harvested or swim off or just perish since the streams only have a limited carrying capacity.

Dave, please keep us informed with any information you wish to share. Other than social media reports or press releases, fishermen have no more ways to find out about what is going on. Howard Brandt was the last reporter who was a voice for the sportsmen and women. Now we are left with rumors, inuendos, suspicion, and divisiveness among ourselves because we are left in ignorance.

Thanks for your candid responses and please excuse my diatribes.

Bill, in my humble opinion there is absolutely no good reason to feel the need for anyone to 'excuse your diatribes'. You have valid, legitimate questions and concerns about the current state of our trout program as do I and many others. As a longstanding WCC volunteer with a primary focus of freshwater fisheries I have the opportunity from time to time to talk rather candidly to our biologists about issues and areas of concern to myself and others. When those good men and women are able to they will absolutely answer my questions and/or explain to me the reasons and thought processes behind the decisions that are made regarding the various fisheries programs. Obviously they're not permitted to discuss any subjects that are for whatever reason still in certain stages of internal development or review, which I completely understand. That being said the Freshwater Fisheries Bureau is in my opinion by far the most open and publicly accessible group within the entire DF&W. Lisa B. and her team work very hard to maintain open lines of communication with the angling public in NJ. Between the 2 freshwater fisheries forums held each year, the annual trout meeting at Pequest as well as the annual Open House at Pequest, the phone number for the Lebanon Lab is in every copy of the Freshwater Digest. As well one can easily access the Div via their website and pose any question to any bureau or person via email. The Div. information officers do an outstanding job of answering any and all inquiries and when warranted forwarding such communications to the appropriate persons.

Back to 'diatribes', we're all quite human. I'm just as guilty as the next guy of 'getting my panties in a bunch' over some issue or another. However, like yourself when someone presents me with information to help in my understanding of a situation I am both grateful and completely willing to change my position on a given issue based upon said new information.

Bottom line, keep asking questions! If we don't know something the most logical course of action is to ask! Personally I'm grateful to know there are many other gents on here with the same long histories of fishing in NJ. Our experiences and memories of how things 'used to be' are a fantastic resource for the younger guys and gals coming along to utilize as they grow through the stages of being an angler, and carrying the torch of continuing the tradition we've all been blessed to be a part of.

My Father started me at 5 years old fishing with him, and hunting with him at 9. In my humble opinion he gave me a tremendous gift in helping and allowing me the chance to develop such a tremendous respect for the outdoors and the natural world we all need to survive. I can't think of any better way to honor that man and show my appreciation than to pass on all he gave to me, to pay it forward in any way possible, by sharing the knowledge and skills I've gleaned in my lifetime thanks solely to his gift to me, and by doing what I can to preserve and enhance the woods and waters that allow us all to enjoy our pastimes and rejuvenate our spirits.

Ehh, sorry folks, I'll step down from the pulpit now. :o

[Chrisper4694]

That is completely false. A number of public rivers/streams in NJ have well-documented, self-sustaining populations of wild brown trout. Some very nice fish, too. Not sure where you are fishing but I target them and catch wild browns on most of my trips in NJ.

unless someone is stocking 5 inch trout all over the place, all trout are spawning with at least moderate success here in NJ in, at minimum, many of the places we fish.

If by NATIVE you mean naturally here before people put them here than you're talking pickerel and brook trout pretty much as far as game fish go, i think that's it.

as far as WILD fish, yes there are plenty! and just for the record the state regulated boundaries are way off as far as where those waters are ;)

[tautog]

There are plenty of wild browns in NJ streams. How many clubs stock fish under 10"? South Branch from Middle Valley up is full of them for example.

[Adrenalinerush]

I for one can't wait for the state to start the brown trout production again. We used to have great lake fisheries for big brown trout in NJ. Sadly, rainbows don't do nearly as well. Bring on the football browns again!