A Big (Accidental) Win for Native Fish
Bob Mallard - Executive Director, Native Fish Coalition
In early February, a podcast on Orvis News got the internet buzzing unlike anything I have seen in years. The podcast was entitled “Have we gone too far with native species?,” later retitled “Talking trout with Kirk Deeter” due to backlash… The podcast featured author, fly fishing personality and host Tom Rosenbauer of Orvis, and guest Kirk Deeter, head of media for Trout Unlimited.
In a David and Goliath moment, spokespersons from Orvis, the biggest name in fly fishing retail, and trout advocacy giant Trout Unlimited threw shade on the grassroots native fish movement, and by default those driving it. While their message resonated with some, it drew immediate and negative attention from the growing pro-native fish community.
To be clear, both Tom and Kirk attempted to distance themselves from their respective organizations at the end of the podcast. But to be fair, in their highly visible roles they can no more distance themselves from their respective organizations than I can from Native Fish Coalition, or you can from your own affiliations. Denying this is naïve, and ignoring it is selfish…
Like two old friends sitting around a bar or campfire, Tom and Kirk talked about the native fish movement. At times they spoke for the movement, tossing generalizations and opinions around as if they were facts. The unfounded, alarmist, dangerous and unfair “fear of incrementalism” reared its ugly head as well. While having a public discussion about what you think and feel is everyone's right, speaking for others in a sweeping and often inaccurate manner is not.
Rosenbauer and Deeter implied that the native fish movement is looking to eradicate all nonnatives, something that would be ecologically and economically impossible and socially impractical. In fact, no one I know in the native fish movement has ever said that, and to be clear and fair, we are talking about our fellow anglers, many of whom fish waters where there are nonnatives, and even stocked fish, myself included.
Kirk compared nonnative fish to human "immigrants," a position his organization thankfully didn't take when nonnative smallmouth bass invaded the fabled Rapid River in Maine, imperiling the finest wild native brook trout fishery in the nation, or when nonnative lake trout infested iconic Yellowstone Lake, putting the most significant population of native cutthroat in the country at risk. When we use anthropocentric terms for wildlife, the resource loses, no matter the intent…
At the detail level, Rosenbauer defended the nonnative trout in the fabled Batten Kill, once arguably the most famous trout river in America, and historically home to wild native brook trout. He went on to challenge the removal of nonnative brown and brook trout from the upper Gibbon River in Yellowstone National Park, saying it had been done “quietly,” implying underhandedly, which is a falsehood as it was all over the media at the time.
For his part, Deeter challenged native Arctic grayling restoration in Michigan. These locally extinct fish represented a truly unique and geographically isolated form of grayling in the last place you would expect to find them – the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. They are the namesake species for historic Grayling, Michigan, one of the most famous fishing towns in the nation. The implication was that this posed a threat to the wild nonnative brown trout.
“There's discussions now about [restoring] grayling in Michigan... To me, the trout fishing culture is about brown trout in Michigan.” -Kirk Deeter
Kirk went on to defend brown trout as a “superior trout,” because they are “more fun to catch.” Is this really what fly fishing is all about – fun to catch? Deeter added that “It bothers me when folks say [browns] are invasive.” As the most aggressive and piscivorous of the four commonest trout found in America, browns are invasive – and that’s a scientific fact. When a senior representative of Trout Unlimited makes a statement like this it undermines both science and conservation.
Rosenbauer and Deeter challenged the use of chemical reclamation to “poison” streams to remove nonnative fish. This flies in the face of projects supported by Trout Unlimited such as Maine’s “5 in 5,” where a local chapter chemically treated five ponds in five years to remove nonnative fish. And per the esteemed Dr. Robert Behnke, the foremost salmonid expert in the history of the world, “Without rotenone, restoration of native fish is essentially impossible.”
After several days of internet chatter, which is still playing out as I write this, and cries of foul play, Rosenbauer reached out to Native Fish Coalition with an offer to come on the podcast to tell our side of the story. Having listened to others speak for us, we jumped at the opportunity to clear the air on what is a large and important media. As the Executive Director of the organization, the responsibility to do so fell on me…
Recognizing this was far bigger than Native Fish Coalition, and understanding that in a way I would be speaking for the native fish movement as a whole, I felt pressure to get it right, saying what needed to be said in a fair, accurate and objective manner. After jotting down some notes, writing down bullet points, and otherwise trying to make sure I didn’t fumble the ball, I decided to throw away any gameplan and come at it in a totally unscripted manner.
During the follow-up podcast, over the course of more than an hour I gave a brief overview, answered a few general questions from Tom, and ran with it. When I listened to it after the fact, I realized I barely came up for air, testimony as to how important and personal this was to me. To Tom’s credit, he let me go, agreed on some points, and was otherwise a more than gracious host. We even managed to have a few laughs...
I defended Arctic grayling restoration in Michigan, explaining that nothing I had seen said anything about eradicating brown trout, and that knowing watershed firsthand, it couldn’t be done even if someone wanted to. I made it clear that grayling posed no threat to the far more aggressive browns. And I noted that we didn’t even really know what caused the demise of the grayling in the first place, and that it was likely a combination of things.
“I joined right after learning about NFC from your interview on the Orvis fly fishing podcast. Like you, I was disappointed in the previous podcast with Kirk Deeter and broad stroke positions that were taken, particularly towards Grayling.” -Email from a new NFC member
I also talked about how the native fish movement was doing for fly fishing what we have said we wanted to do for years, and that is to make it younger and more diverse. Native Fish Coalition is the youngest sporting-centric conservation organization I have ever been part of, and notably so with both a lower bottom end and average age. We have a higher percentage of women members as well. If we truly want to get beyond the “Old Men’s Club,” we need to embrace not challenge the emerging native fish movement.
Most importantly, I clarified that while uncompromised native fisheries is the goal of Native Fish Coalition, our approach is pragmatic and takes into consideration feasibility, cost and social impact. I made it clear that most of the self-sustaining brown trout fisheries Tom and Kirk were worried about are too far gone to do anything about. And that our primary focus, and that of other groups, is rare species and subspecies, unique lifeforms, and isolated populations where something can be done about it.
“I appreciated your focus on these shared goals in your follow up discussion. The Native Fish Coalition was well represented by your presentation of its values and goals.” -Facebook Comment
In a rebuttal on the Trout Unlimited website titled “On native trout, wild browns, and common sense,” Deeter defended his position in regard to nonnative trout, side-stepped his statements against grayling restoration, and understated the number of people who took offense to his comments, missing an opportunity to unite not further divide the fish conservation and fishing community. And to be fair, the term “common sense” in this context is somewhat leading...
“Apparently, the episode we did together last week caused a few folks some concern because they couldn’t understand how I could like fishing for brown trout and other wild, though non-native fish, and at the same time advocate for native species.” -Kirk Deeter
After Rosenbauer had denied that the original podcast was directly, or even indirectly, about Native Fish Coalition specifically, Kirk went on to reference a statement pulled more or less directly from the Native Fish Coalition website, and a scientifically accurate fact, as the impetus for his defense of wild nonnative trout:
“…asked [by Rosenbauer] if it was a step too far to argue that streams and rivers cannot be considered truly healthy until their native species are restored and non-native species eradicated, what in the heck do you think I’d say?” -Kirk Deeter
“It is the belief of Native Fish Coalition that no stream, river, pond or lake is truly healthy or ‘restored’ until its full complement of native species is intact and it is devoid of nonnative species and hatchery-raised fish.” -Native Fish Coalition
Native Fish Coalition’s position on self-sustaining nonnative trout is well documented, and has been since our inception. If any attempt had been made to ascertain the facts, Tom and Kirk would have found the following in our FAQ webpage, easily accessed from our home page. Using part of a high-level mission statement as the basis for judging and criticizing an organization without making any attempt to ascertain the facts is unfair, disingenuous, and divisive:
“NFC is more 'for' native fish than 'against' nonnative fish. All nonnative fish however negatively impact native fish to some degree, and some to a high degree. We will address nonnative fish only where control, reduction, or eradication is a biologically, economically, and socially feasible option. As avid recreational anglers, many of our board members fish for nonnative species because they are what is there. We do not however promote or defend nonnative fish in any way, or get involved in the protection or proliferation of nonnative fish.” -Native Fish Coalition Online FAQ
Lastly, Kirk implied, and wrongly, that nonnative trout are not a threat to “all trout”. This simply isn’t true as to date, the introduction of nonnative trout has accounted for the loss, or significant decline, of more wild native trout populations than any other single issue. Could that change up the road? Sure… But to imply that nonnative trout are not a major threat to native trout, or even wild trout, is inaccurate, dangerous and self-serving.
“…I implied that the fly-fishing community should focus, foremost, on key issues like clean water, and climate change, and habitat degradation that impact all trout.” -Kirk Deeter
On a brighter note, the original podcast and subsequent rebuttal proved to be a boom for the Native Fish Coalition, and I believe the native fish movement as a whole. We saw a flurry of support, memberships, donations, and schwag sales that has continued for several weeks now. It brought the native fish movement out of the shadows and into the mainstream. And it gave folks involved an opportunity to tell their side of the story, not have it told by others.
“I enjoyed your podcast with Tom and wanted to show some support. It also gives me an opportunity to share the message with others who may not be aware of the movement. This hat will be worn in California, Hawaii, Washington, and Montana.” -New NFC Schwag Purchaser
“And great job on the Orvis Podcast. I felt your arguments were strong and reasonable, and for me prompted a desire to jump in and get my hands dirty.” -New NFC Member
“And it’s us who should be thanking you sir, not the other way around you're doing a job that needs to be done.” -Facebook PM
To be fair, Rosenbauer and Deeter didn’t say anything that dozens of others in the fly fishing industry haven’t said before. In fact, just a few weeks earlier I had an equally uncomfortable discussion about the native fish movement with another notable fly fishing insider. And while Kirk seemed to cross a line in regard to nonnative fish and native fish restoration, he wasn’t that far off Trout Unlimited’s stated mission which is as much about wild trout as it is native trout.
“We bring together diverse interests to care for and recover rivers and streams, so our children can experience the joy of wild and native trout and salmon.” -Trout Unlimited
To say that the fly fishing industry, media and trout advocacy machine have a long way to go in regard to true aquatic ecosystem conservation, and native fish, would be fair. When it comes to trout conservation, we had it wrong right out of the gate, and after a half a century, we still don’t have it right. While we can’t expect to turn the ship overnight, we shouldn’t have to wait decades. But in an unexpected turn of events, the recent podcasts helped get the needle pointed in the right direction.
The modern trout conservation model is ecologically flawed. It has failed to advance at the rate the available science has. It's rooted in the dangerous belief that trout should be unlimited, and that all trout are good trout, as long as they are wild – and even that isn’t an absolute. And while we've progressed in regard to protecting the places where trout live, we are still somewhat stalled out in regard to what lives there and doesn't.
When people introduce bass, pike, muskies, walleye or carp on top of wild native trout we cry foul, and rightfully so. Yet, we defend nonnative trout on top of native redeye bass and other native species. Opposing Arctic grayling reintroduction in Michigan is akin to opposing greenback cutthroat reintroduction in Colorado, Bonneville cutthroat in Nevada, or Apache and Gila trout reintroduction in Arizona and New Mexico.
There was very little in the initial podcast that promoted native fish conservation. And there were numerous points where it was directly and indirectly challenged. It was mostly done in defense of wild nonnative brown trout, something that doesn’t need to be defended as there are very few real threats to them. And to be clear, this wasn't a simple misunderstanding; it was a sadly honest look in the mirror for the fly fishing community.
For better or worse, nonnative fish are here to stay. This includes trout, bass, pike, muskies, carp, walleye, and countless species of baitfish and roughfish. While in theory native fish restoration is a noble cause and a great target to shoot at, in practice it is only possible in 1% or so of the cases where nonnative fish have naturalized. The goal of the native fish movement is not to eradicate all nonnative fish, but to stop the bleeding, and regain lost ground where it is possible and practical to do so.
The native fish movement is made up of avid anglers, as well as industry insiders. Native Fish Coalition has scientists, academics, guides, outfitters, outdoor writers and authors, fly designers, and fishing retailers at all levels and in all states where we have a presence. We are your friends, family and fellow anglers, as well as Orvis’ customers, and members of Trout Unlimited.
If you want to know more about native fish, the native fish movement, and the organizations behind it, check out the websites of Native Fish Coalition, Native Fish Society, Downeast Salmon Federation, Sea Run Brook Trout Coalition, Trout Power, Protect Rhode Island Brook Trout, Western Native Trout Initiative, Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture, Lonesome Larry Project, and the many other groups working to preserve our wild native fish. And consider supporting these groups as they are the ones pushing the needle…
Former Trout Unlimited President Charles Gauvin once said the following in reference to federal efforts to save the endangered native humpback chub, bonytail chub, razorback sucker and Colorado pike minnow endemic to the Colorado River system. Truer words have never been spoken…
“If we fight this, what will we say to Walleyes Unlimited when they complain about some coho recovery program in Oregon? Let’s grow up. This is a problem we have to live with in these altered habitats where trout are a mitigation species. If the science is good, what business have we to be complaining about efforts to save a native species?”
A wild native brook trout from Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Tennessee. (Diana Mallard)