[Billfish715]

The variables involved in maintaining and improving a viable trout program are truly a monumental task. One of the variables that is not mentioned is political pressure. With so many interest groups all vying for attention, satisfying all of the whims on the " most wanted" lists of these groups has to be frustrating from a scientific point of view. Everyone seems to be a couch biologist or amateur trout improvement specialist. Some want streams to be stocked; some want only a limited amount of stocking. Some want "no kill", flies only, artificial only, size limit only, yada, yada, yada. It has already become ridiculous.

It is also extremely important to an increasing group of anglers to want more
"wild" trout streams or streams that are managed to encourage more natural trout reproduction. The trout management program is trying to entertain the yearning of everyone and I think it is a mistake. Let's come to grips with what the goal is. First, let's all be aware of what that goal is. Is it so important to have more and more "native" trout in our streams? Since brook trout are the only "native" trout (which are not trout) in N.J., is why is there so much consideration being given to keeping it that way.

From a scientific point of view, is it that important to encourage more wild trout production? Or, is it more of an emotional, non scientific, feel-good effort. If given the chance to catch a nine inch wild brown or rainbow trout or a state-stocked 15 inch fish of the same variety, I'm sure most fishermen would rather catch the 15" stocker despite the worn fins and raceway scars. Other than to say that you caught a "holdover" fish, the only different pleasure from catching one is that it makes you feel good. And, for all of that, the state shapes its decisions for how, when, and where the rest of us will be allowed to fish. The Flatbrook study is just one of many programs that has me wondering about the politics of trout stocking in New Jersey.