What's Wrong With This Picture - Again, Again, Again?...
“WHEN IT COMES TO FISH CONSERVATION, WE’VE NEVER REALLY GOTTEN IT RIGHT. THE EMPHASIS HAS BEEN TOO GAMEFISH CENTRIC, TOO ACCEPTING OF NONNATIVES, AND TOO RELIANT ON ARTIFICIAL PROPAGATION AND OTHER FORMS OF HUSBANDRY. NOWHERE IS THIS MORE EVIDENT THAN IN THE TROUT CONSERVATION ARENA...”
The image above was scraped from an electronic newsletter one of our members sent in. We removed the chapter name and event date, time and location, as the problem is not specific to any one chapter, or even a group of chapters or region, it is an issue that starts at the top of the organization as evident by the use of nonnative brown trout art on the cover of the recent edition of their national membership magazine.
The advertised event is being held on the east coast: 1,500 or so miles east of the native range for rainbow trout. It is happening on a historic wild native brook trout stream of note, that is now home to naturalized nonnative brown trout and nonnative rainbow trout. It appears that there is some stocking of nonnative fish as well.
You could argue that when it comes to wildlife, nowhere have we done more damage with regard to nonnative species than our coldwater ecosystems. The problem is so widespread that nonnative trout, salmon and char are now the rule not the exception. And the issue runs coast to coast and north to south with naturalized nonnative browns, rainbows and brookies found throughout the nation.
The problem with nonnative trout started a century or more ago when federal wildlife managers began moving fish all over the country under the guise that variety was good and nonnative species provided better sport than native species. State fish and game agencies were quick to jump into the fish-stocking business, and private landowners and sporting clubs got involved as well.
Today, much of our “fish” and “watershed” conservation” involves activities that aid in the conservation of nonnative species. While most groups acknowledge that wild native fish should be a top priority, and some only deal with wild native fish, some have a clause that allows for the conservation of naturalized nonnative fish when things like habitat degradation, water use, stocking and/or angler exploitation are negatively impacting them.
While the burgeoning multi-organization native fish movement has done a lot to influence positive change in regard to true conservation as it applies to aquatic ecosystems, salmonids, and non-game species in the last decade or so, we still have a long way to go. In order to take it to the next level, those working to conserve naturalized nonnative fish will have to make some concessions. Until they do there will continue to be offsetting activities that work against the conservation and restoration of wild native fish.
“THE PROTECTION OF NATURALIZED NONNATIVE SPECIES SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH CONSERVATION. IF WE TRULY WANT HEALTHY, RESILIENT, FUNCTIONING AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS, WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE THE PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION OF WILD NATIVE SPECIES AND PUT FISH AHEAD OF FISHING.”