Beyond Bucket Biology: Just Because it’s Legal, Doesn’t Mean it’s not Harmful…
If you were there at the right time you could see Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife stocking nonnative and highly invasive lake trout on top of rare wild native Arctic charr within sight of this sign at Green Lake in Ellsworth. (Diana Mallard)
“Just because something is legal doesn’t mean that it is not harmful. This is especially true with regard to fish and game management, where conservation of the resource often takes a backseat to the desires of sportsmen...”
Authors Note: After 5 years and 50+ articles across 3 outdoor editors as a formal guest columnist for Bangor Daily News in Maine, as well as submitting a number of random OpEds and Letters to the Editor for 5 or so years before that, NFC Executive Director was recently censored by the incoming Outdoor Editor, a former Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife employee, who refused to run the piece below. Instead she asked Bob to submit “engaging pieces about fishing…” The piece was a rebuttal to an article published by the same editor that placed all the blame for moving nonnative fish around on anglers.
Beyond Bucket Biology: Just Because it’s Legal, Doesn’t Mean it’s not Harmful…
Make no mistake about it; while warming water, droughts, floods, wildfires, development, pollution, and habitat degradation all threaten wild native fish, nonnative fish introductions are and likely always will be the number one threat.
While bucket biology, anglers moving fish around, is a huge problem, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) moves nonnative fish around regularly and has for generations. Although no one wants to talk about it, these legal actions have negatively impacted wild native fish in the same ways that illegal bucket biology has.
Just because something is legal doesn’t mean that it is not harmful. This is especially true with regard to fish and game management, where conservation of the resource often takes a backseat to the desires of sportsmen.
Consider the state-sponsored introduction of nonnative landlocked salmon and smelt into the Rangeley Lakes which contributed to the loss of the largest native Arctic charr population, formerly known as blueback trout, in the contiguous United States. And it was the state that introduced nonnative lake trout into Sebago Lake, one of only four native landlocked salmon waters in the state, and the namesake water for the species, Salmo salar sebago.
According to MDIFW, there are now 202 lakes and ponds with “Principal,” or fishable populations, of landlocked salmon. Salmon are “Present” in another 113 waters. This represents a roughly 75-fold increase in landlocked salmon lakes and ponds in Maine and does not include rivers and streams. Most are the result of legal introductions, not so-called “bucket biology.”
Neither brown trout or rainbow trout are native to Maine. Per MDIFW, browns are “Principal” in 123 lakes and ponds, and “Present” in another 46. Rainbows are “Principal” in 23 lakes and ponds, and “Present” in another 6 waters. And this does not include rivers and streams for which very little data exists. Like landlocked salmon, most brown trout and rainbow trout found in Maine are the result of state sponsored stocking or introductions.
MDIFW is stocking nonnative landlocked salmon in Moosehead Lake on top of wild native brook trout and lake trout, both of which are already stressed due to illegally introduced white perch and smallmouth bass. Smelt introduced to feed salmon have negatively impacted native lake whitefish, the primary forage for lake trout.
A similar situation exists at Pierce Pond in Somerset County where MDIFW is stocking nonnative landlocked salmon on top of what is arguably the finest big lake wild brook trout fishery east of Rangeley and south on Moosehead. While defended as a way to take harvest pressure off the wild native brook trout, the salmon put additional stress on the brook trout via competition for food and space.
Green Lake in Ellsworth is one of just 4 native landlocked salmon lakes in the state, one of just 12 remaining native Arctic charr waters in the contiguous United States, and the only water in Maine where salmon and charr coevolved. MDIFW is stocking nonnative lake trout, the species blamed for the demise of Arctic charr in New Hampshire and Vermont.
In 2003, I wrote about MDIFW moving nonnative smallmouth bass captured from Meddybemps Lake into Fourth Machias Lake. Both lakes are located in Endangered Atlantic salmon watersheds. And it was done using trucks used to stock trout in other waters. This was done in violation of a formal Memorandum of Understanding between MDIFW and the Atlantic Salmon Commission.
Nobody wins when we play Good Nonnative Fish/Bad Nonnative Fish. While you may have it your way for a period after introducing your favorite fish, it’s quite possible that someone will come in after you and introduce their favorite fish, doing to your fish what your fish did to what was there before. We have seen it over and over again – nonnative salmon introduced over native brook trout, nonnative bass introduced on top of native brook trout and landlocked salmon, nonnative pike introduced on top of nonnative bass, and nonnative muskies introduced on top of native brook trout…
Per MDIFW, “Illegal [fish] introductions can destroy native fish populations and alter the ecology of Maine’s waters, FOREVER!” Doing so, or even being in possession of live fish, excluding baitfish, without a permit, is illegal. It is a Class E crime punishable by a fine from $1,000 to $10,000, and the possible suspension of all MDIFW licenses and permits.
When state fish and game agencies do what they are telling the public not to do, they send mixed messages and confuse the masses. It is another example of, “Do as we say, not as we do…” And when anglers see illegal fish introductions as bad, but legal introductions as good, or not bad, we are part of the problem...
