sign in sign up
<<
Home , Brook trout, Brown trout, Burbot, Gillaroo, Lake trout

Page 26 Wisconsin Spring 2021 Wisconsin salmonids: Past, present and future : An import from other countries, but an important to anglers. Words and photos by John Lyons arranged for a shipment of brown trout, in the form of fertilized eggs, Brown trout present an ultimate comprised of 20,000 bachforelle, challenge for trout anglers. An im- German for “,” a port from , it is to many the stream-dwelling -eating form most desirable of the Wisconsin sal- of the Black Forest, and 60,000 see- monids, but to some an interloper forelle, “ trout,” a larger fish- (“spotted carp”) which has re- eating form found in the of the placed their beloved native brook . These eggs were sent to feder- trout. Regardless of how you feel ally run hatcheries in about the brown trout, it has had a State and northern , where huge effect on the trout streams and they were hatched and raised for a fisheries of Wisconsin. It is the most year. The first official stocking in numerous and widespread trout in the U.S. took place in the Pere Mar- southern and central Wisconsin and quette River in Michigan, a Lake common in many areas of tributary, in 1884. Wisconsin. It is able to thrive in Soon brown trout stockings were streams where other salmonids of- being made throughout the country. ten cannot, and it persists and can Wisconsin received its first 1,000 grow to large size, even in the face brown trout eggs at the Bayfield of high pressure. Hatchery on the shores of Lake Su- Brown trout are demonstrably perior, and the first stockings took NAMEKAGON RIVER, A CLASSIC NORTHWOODS BROWN TROUT STREAM the wariest and most difficult to place in 1887 in northern Wisconsin catch of all of Wisconsin’s stream streams. In 1884, eggs from brown trout, and their devotees spend trout from , , their entire lives differ genetically Brown trout also have more flex- countless hours and many dollars in arrived in the U.S., and they were from “lake-run” brown trout that ible spawning requirements. Brook pursuit. Occasionally, the fishing raised in Wisconsin hatcheries and spend much of their adults lives in trout need areas of strong ground- can seem almost impossible, but stocked in Wisconsin waters by the . Could this reflect water input, which disappeared as then on special rare days the fishing 1890’s. By the early 1900’s, all the the initial stocking of both the bach- the water table dropped from poor gods smile, and, if you have reason- major river systems and both Great forelle (resident?) and seeforelle land use and former spawning areas able skills, nearly every good cast is Lakes in Wisconsin had been (lake-run?) forms? The problem were covered with silt. Brown trout rewarded with a strike. Most outings stocked with some form of brown with this idea is that there appears like strong groundwater areas too, are of course somewhere between trout. to be little genetic difference be- but they aren’t as dependent on these extremes. But the appeal of tween bachforelle and seeforelle in them, and they could often in brown trout is that each time you go their native . But large ge- the gravel riffles that remained even Wisconsin brown trout netic differences may arise relatively after the groundwater areas were out, you can never be sure which strains kind of a day you’ll have. quickly when new populations are largely eliminated. The German and Scottish brown established from a small number of Brown trout were also harder to trout looked different, with the Ger- adults, which undoubtedly was the catch than brook trout and persisted The past: A new fish for man fish tending to have many red case with the first brown trout eggs in the face of fishing pressure that Wisconsin spots intermingled among black that reached Wisconsin. would have decimated brook trout The brown trout is native to spots of a range of sizes, and the It would be fascinating to use populations. The difficulty in catch- much of Europe, western and a Scottish fish usually lacking red modern genetic methods to look at ing browns made them unpopular at small part of North Africa. It is a spots and having mainly relatively different Wisconsin populations and first. The techniques used for brook highly variable in terms of large black spots. Anglers in the late try to derive their ancestry from the trout often didn’t work nearly as appearance, behavior, life history 1800’s and early 1900’s often distin- various European forms. A recent well on the more wary browns. and potential size. Some forms are guished between the two forms and study examined and Some anglers complained that they adapted to spend their entire lives in identified the fish they caught as ei- Lake Superior browns in Michigan couldn’t catch the new arrivals and small streams, whereas some occupy ther “German browns” or “Loch and Wisconsin and found evidence lobbied for more stocking of brook lakes as adults and enter streams Leven browns” based on spotting of German and Scottish heritage trout and less of brown trout. But only for spawning, and some run to patterns. Even today, some anglers but also some indication of geno- other anglers embraced the chal- the sea like . Most forms pri- speculate about which type they’ve types from Denmark and the lenge and developed new approach- marily eat and other inverte- caught. However, both the German French Pyrenees. This finding sug- es to catch the browns. As these new brates, and some lake dwellers focus and the Loch Leven fish were rou- gests that the origins of Midwestern approaches become well-known and on tiny , whereas others tinely crossbred in hatcheries and browns are more complicated than widely available, the clamor against mainly eat fish. Each form looks a were mixed in the wild soon after we thought. brown trout subsided and eventually little different, and Europeans have they arrived in the , largely disappeared. given many of them their own color- and interbreeding appears to have Browns versus brookies Another reason for their accep- ful common names such as Ferox or eventually eliminated any “pure” tance was that brown trout grew . types in Wisconsin waters. It is fair to say the brown trout much larger than brookies in most The brown trout first arrived in What is interesting is that in Wis- saved Wisconsin trout fishing in the streams. Whereas a typical adult the United States in 1883. Fred consin Lake Superior tributaries early 1900’s. Browns were able to brook trout in an inland stream Mather, a well-known early fish cul- such as the Bois Brule River in survive and even thrive in streams might be only about 8-10 inches, an turist, had journeyed to Germany Douglas County and the Sioux Riv- where brook trout had been elimi- adult brown trout could easily be and become enamored of the brown er in Bayfield County, “resident” nated, and many parts of southern twice that. Many anglers were trout he encountered in Bavaria. He brown trout that remain in the river and central Wisconsin would have drawn to the possibility of a trophy had few trout if not for browns. This brown trout referred to in pounds was not because brown trout could rather than a brook trout referred tolerate more extreme warm tem- to in inches. Eventually, some an- perature or lower dissolved glers came to prefer brown trout to concentrations than native brook brook trout. trout as some fishery biologists and However, the dislike of brown anglers have assumed. Both labora- trout among other anglers never tory and field studies demonstrate completely faded out, in large part that temperature and oxygen toler- because in many instances brown ances are similar for both species, trout displaced brook trout. The although brown trout do prefer and reasons for this aren’t completely grow better at slightly warmer tem- clear. Some experimental studies peratures than brook trout. show that brown trout are more ag- What the brown seems to have gressive and able to chase brook been able to do was handle habitat trout away from the best feeding degradation better, particularly sed- and resting areas. But other studies imentation. Widespread poor agri- show that among fish of the same cultural and timber harvest size there is little difference in com- practices in the late 1800’s and early petitive abilities between the species 1900’s had led to massive erosion or even that brook trout may some- that choked streams with sand and times be able to outcompete brown silt. Brown trout were not immune trout. to these impacts, but they were bet- I speculate that the dominance ter able to deal with them than of brown trout in many Wisconsin brookies. As stream pools filled and streams may lie in their faster rocky substrates were covered by growth rates and larger ultimate VARIATIONS IN LAKE-RUN BOIS BRULE BROWN TROUT sediments, brook trout disappeared Two lake-run browns from the lower Bois Brule River during their spawning size compared to the brook trout. but brown trout often could hang At water temperatures from the 60’s run, showing some of the variation in coloration and spotting patterns. on. to the low 70’s, which is typical of Spring 2021 Wisconsin Trout Page 27 many Wisconsin trout streams in states, began stocking summer, brown trout grow faster coho and , steel- and reach a larger size than brook head (), and once trout. This size difference may give again brown trout in Lake Michi- browns an advantage in competi- gan. With potential food every- tive interactions. Generally speak- where and little competition, these ing, larger trout dominate smaller stocked fish thrived and quickly trout in experimental studies and grew to very large sizes, creating a field observations. Browns that tremendous fishery. Brown trout grow larger than a foot or so also never became as popular or numer- become a predatory threat to brook ous as the salmon or steelhead, and trout, further contributing to their they never reproduced successfully advantage. in Wisconsin’s portion of Lake Whatever the reasons, intro- Michigan, but their continued duced brown trout have often re- stocking created a valuable near- placed native brook trout, even in shore trophy fishery, particularly in streams that otherwise remained harbors and bays. suitable for the brook trout. Only in the coldest waters, where brown The present: Current trout have less of a growth advan- status tage, in tiny headwaters, where the larger size of brown trout may actu- Today, brown trout are common ELK CREEK IS A CLASSIC BROWN TROUT STREAM ally be a disadvantage, and in areas statewide. Rough estimates are that of northern Wisconsin with particu- there are about 4,000 miles of in- land streams with completely or Stocking United States. Compared to exist- larly long and cold winters, which ing domesticated strains, Seeforel- brown trout may not tolerate quite largely self-sustaining populations Stocking practices for brown and another 3,500 miles with popu- trout have changed over the last 30 len have the desirable quality of as well, have brook trout consistent- tending to stay in the lake for one or ly been able to hold their own. lations maintained mainly or com- years. Prior to the 1990’s, brown pletely by stocking. These streams trout stocking in inland waters was two years longer before migrating encompass the largest and most sto- almost exclusively of the domesti- into tributaries or nearshore areas Brown trout distribution ried trout fisheries in the state. cated “St. Croix” and “Wild Rose” to spawn and consequently can By the mid 1900’s, brown trout Lake Michigan has only stocked strains, named after the Wisconsin reach a larger size. Seeforellen also were widespread on the Wisconsin populations. Lake Superior has sev- hatcheries where they were first de- migrate for spawning later in the landscape. They were found in hun- eral self-sustaining lake-run popula- veloped in the 1950’s and 1960’s. fall, extending the nearshore fishing dreds of inland streams throughout tions in the larger tributaries, These strains could be efficiently season into the early winter. the state, and resident and lake-run although some stocking also occurs. raised in large numbers to catchable Seeforellen are cultured like populations were established in the Brown trout in Lake Superior size and could handle well the rigors “wild” inland stocked fish, and each Lake Superior basin. Stocking was tributaries have two life histories. of handling and transport to the fall DNR crews collect eggs from extensive, but many self-sustaining There are resident fish that never stocking site, but their long-term Seeforellen adults running out of populations were also present. leave their tributary system even survival in the wild was often poor. Lake Michigan and then raise the However, despite many early stock- though they could. These fish reach In the early 1990’s, the Wiscon- offspring to fingerling size at a sin Department of Natural Re- hatchery until stocking the follow- sources began experimenting with ing year. In recent years, nearly all rearing eggs taken directly from the brown trout stocked in Lake wild self-sustaining populations and Michigan have been Seeforellen. stocking the resulting offspring. Al- Initial Seeforellen stockings though they were more difficult to went well and contributed to a pop- rear and did not reach as large a ular fishery. But by 2000, stocked size in the hatchery, these “wild” trout survival and success stocked fish did much better than began to drop precipitously. The the domestic fish in streams. In- declines were lake-wide but were deed, they sometimes established a particularly acute in Green Bay. It self-sustaining population in places remains uncertain what the cause where previously the domestic fish was, but possible explanations in- had supported only a short-term clude a major decrease in “put and take” fishery. abundance, fundamental shifts in Eventually, culturing of “wild” the lake caused by the brown trout became widespread in proliferation of non-native zebra DNR hatcheries, and stocking be- and quagga mussels, and in Green gan to incorporate a mix of wild and Bay, a large increase in potential domestic fish. For a given amount predators such as muskellunge, of money, space and effort, the do- walleyes and . mestic fish could be raised in larger Efforts were made to improve numbers and to a larger size, but survival of newly stocked Seeforel- the wild fish survived much better len in Green Bay by acclimating once stocked. Currently, streams in them to the lake in net pens before VARIATIONS IN DRIFTLESS BROWN TROUT which the goal is rehabilitation of a release or by stocking them offshore to avoid nearshore predators. How- Two inland brown trout from the Driftless Area, showing some of the variation population tend to receive wild-fish stockings whereas those that have ever, results so far have been equiv- in shape and mouth size that exists. Top: Trout Creek, County; Bottom: inadequate conditions for natural ocal, and brown trout populations Sugar River, Dane County. reproduction or that have high fish- in Lake Michigan remain down ing harvest early in the season tend from their 1970’s-1990’s heyday. ing attempts, brown trout remained a typical maximum size of 2-3 to get domestic fish. But the remaining fish are large, essentially absent from Lake Michi- pounds and their life cycle is like Brown trout stocking in the and the state record brown trout, a gan until only about 50 years ago. that of browns in inland streams. In Great Lakes has also changed. In 40.6-inch, 41.5-pound monster was Unlike in the state of Michigan, contrast, lake-run fish are born and 1991, the DNR began stocking the a Seeforellen from Lake Michigan where self-sustaining lake-run pop- spend one or sometimes two (rarely “Seeforellen.” Although originally caught in 2010. ulations had developed by the early three) years in the same tributary as derived from fish from the same ar- Stocking of Seeforellen browns 1900’s, few if any browns were the residents. But they then migrate ea of Germany as the initial see- has also occurred in Lake Superior found on the Wisconsin side of downstream to the lake where they forelle stockings of the 1800’s, the despite the presence of self-sustain- Lake Michigan before the mid live for one or usually two years be- modern Seeforellen is a semi-do- ing lake-run populations. 1960’s. This was because Wisconsin fore returning to spawn in that same mesticated strain developed in the See BROWNS, page 24 tributaries were too warm for suc- tributary at age 3 or 4. At this point cessful spawning and rearing of they usually weigh 4-8 pounds. young. But by the mid 1960’s, Lake The spawning run of lake fish in Michigan was a very different place the Bois Brule River begins surpris- than when brown trout had first ar- ingly early compared to resident rived in the late 1800’s. The lake’s and inland populations. Lake-run native top predators, and spawners first appear in July, peak , had been devasted by over- in August and early September, and fishing and non-native species, es- wind down in October, just as pecially the parasitic sea . spawning is beginning in inland With few predators, populations of streams. Lake-run fish are capable the non-native alewife, a small her- of returning to Lake Superior for ring species that became established another year or two, reaching a in the 1950’s, exploded and reached weight over 10 pounds, and then tremendous numbers. spawning again, but relatively few To take advantage of this re- survive the rigors of their first LAKE-RUN SEEFORELLEN BROWN TROUT source, the state of Michigan, quick- spawn, and repeat spawning is rela- A lake-run Seeforellen brown trout from the mouth of the Oconto River near ly followed by Wisconsin and other tively uncommon. Green Bay. Page 24 Wisconsin Trout Spring 2021 A warming planet salmon. Of course, if greenhouse BROWNS, from page 27 many producers are reluctant to Agricultural and urban impacts gases continue to increase un- The logic has been that Seeforel- embrace without more information are bad enough, but the biggest checked, then eventually the Great len might produce larger fish. How- and incentive. Thus, there are alter- threat to inland trout streams state- Lakes will become too warm. But ever, a recent genetic analysis in natives to the unacceptable status wide is climate change. Although within our lifetimes, they should Chequamegon Bay indicated that quo for manure management, but the numbers aren’t as dire as for have suitable thermal habitat. The Seeforellen survival was relatively whether these will be widely adopt- brook trout, the latest projections big question is, will the Great Lakes low and that most brown trout that ed remains to be seen. And until are that Wisconsin brown trout food web continue to support trophy anglers caught in the bay had been manure management is improved, stream habitat will decline by 33 fish? produced naturally in the nearby trout streams in agricultural areas percent by mid-century without in- Trout and salmon stocking of Sioux River and other tributaries. will be under constant threat. tervention. And if the root cause of Lake Michigan is massive, with ma- The latest Seeforellen stockings global warming, rising concentra- ny millions of fish stocked per year. have focused on the western end of Suburbanization tions of greenhouse gases such as There are serious concerns that this the lake near Duluth-Superior, Urban sprawl is another serious carbon dioxide and methane in the annual input of predators might where lake-run fish are scarce. challenge for Wisconsin trout atmosphere, isn’t addressed, habi- overwhelm the prey base, as appears streams. Occurring on the margins tat losses will continue and likely ac- to have already happened in Lake The future: of the larger cities in the state, celerate as we approach 2100. Huron. Trout and salmon in Lake Threats on the horizon sprawl often happens at the ex- As I covered in more detail in the Michigan feed primarily on alewife, pense of agricultural lands. Given brook trout article in the last issue but alewife numbers are now only a At the moment, brown trout dis- small fraction of their 1960-70’s tribution and abundance in Wiscon- all the problems with manure man- of Wisconsin Trout, the most impor- agement, maybe this is a good tant order of business is to reduce peak. Some of the alewife decline sin’s inland waters are probably as has been driven by but high as they’ve ever been. Years of thing? Unfortunately, the answer is greenhouse gas emissions and to no. On a per-acre basis, urbaniza- manage the and the land to changing dynamics have improved land use, intensive in- also played a role. The invasion and stream habitat improvement, better tion, or perhaps more appropriate- better absorb existing gases. This ly, “suburbanization,” has an even must be a global process. But at a lo- rise to astronomical numbers of first fisheries management and the in- zebra mussels and now quagga mus- corporation of “wild” strains into greater negative effect on trout cal level, groups like Trout Unlimit- streams than farming. ed can advocate for watershed land- sels have shifted lake productivity stocking programs have expanded from the water column to the lake the range of brown trout and in- The biggest problem with urban use and stream-management poli- sprawl is altered stream hydrology. cies that protect and enhance resil- bottom and decreased the abun- creased natural reproduction and dance of the zooplankton on which abundance in many streams. Unfor- The houses, commercial buildings, ience to the warmer and more sidewalks, driveways, roads and variable climate of the future. the mid-water alewife feed. How a tunately, however, we may be at the warming climate will affect the fu- high-water mark for the species. parking lots that are constructed as Suitable water temperatures in an area is developed are all types of Wisconsin trout streams are main- ture interactions between mussels, Two major threats are looming: zooplankton, alewife and trout and Poor land-use and climate change, “impervious surfaces” that don’t al- tained primarily by groundwater in- low rainfall or snowmelt to soak in- puts and to a lesser extent by sun salmon is hard to predict. and these may soon cause sharp de- Lake Superior may be less clines in brown trout numbers. to the ground to replenish the exposure and shading. Foremost to groundwater. Instead, water is re- protecting groundwater are land-use threatened by climate change than pelled and runs off, usually into a practices throughout the watershed Lake Michigan, at least in the short Too much manure ditch or storm sewer where it is that enhance the absorption of pre- term. Projections indicate that ma- Although there have been sub- transported quickly to the nearest cipitation into the ground to re- jor tributaries like the Bois Brule stantial improvements in agricultur- stream. This runoff also carries the charge the water table. This can be and the Sioux will continue to have al practices over the last 85 years, in and pesticides from our accomplished by minimizing imper- water cold enough for trout, al- some ways we are now moving in lawns and the oils and chemicals vious surfaces and directing runoff though the total amount of suitable the wrong direction. The wide- that get spilled on our driveways, to wetlands and other areas of natu- stream habitat will drop. The lake it- spread consolidation of cattle, hog streets and parking lots. ral vegetation and to rain gardens self is currently too cold to be ideal and poultry rearing, culminating in Although rapid drainage is good and other constructed infiltration for brown trout growth in offshore massive Concentrated for moving water away from build- zones. Many local, state and federal areas, and it’s plausible that a warm- Feeding Operations CAFOs), has ings and roads, it is bad for streams. programs provide information ing climate might actually increase led to huge volumes of manure that As development and runoff grow, about and support for proven prac- brown trout habitat in the lake over need to be stored and ultimately the frequencies and severity of tices that protect groundwater. the next 30-40 years. But again, the disposed of. Storage facilities, often floods increase to the detriment of These same practices can also help big unknowns are how warmer wa- excavated lagoons or large contain- trout, their habitats and the aquatic offset impacts from urban sprawl. ter will affect the food web of the ment vessels, have a disturbing ten- insects they feed on. More omi- Reducing sun exposure and in- lake and if the changes will help or dency to leak or fail. Because nously, the reduction in the amount creasing shading is tricky. Constant harm brown trout. manure is largely liquid, it runs of water soaking into the ground shade keeps water temperature cool downhill when it escapes and too leads to a lowering of the water ta- but also blocks light to the understo- Conclusion often ends up in the nearest stream. ble and a decrease in stream flows. ry vegetation, often leading to bare The brown trout has gone from a Once in the stream, chemical and During droughts, streams may dry banks, greater erosion, reduced hab- newly with a con- biological processes break down the up or get too warm for trout. itat quality and tougher fishing. Ma- tentious reputation to the most manure, producing toxic chemicals It doesn’t take a “concrete jun- ny current habitat improvement widespread and abundant salmonid such as ammonia and using up the gle” for urbanization effects to oc- practices are effective for trout but in Wisconsin’s inland waters and an dissolved oxygen in the water. The cur. Suburban development of less reduce shading. This will be prob- important trophy species in the result is dead trout and other than one third of a watershed can lematic as air temperatures climb. Great Lakes. At the moment, brown and aquatic . cause problems for trout streams. New and innovative techniques trout are generally doing well and Many livestock producers There are building and drainage need to be developed to balance in- support very popular and valuable spread their manure on their crop practices that lessen urbanization’s stream habitat needs with protec- fisheries statewide. But dark clouds fields as a . While this is effects, but they usually make de- tion from rising temperatures. are on the horizon, and without ac- good use in concept, in practice velopment more expensive and may tive and targeted conservation mea- sometimes too much manure is not be practical in some settings sures, brown trout numbers are spread or the spreading occurs just What about the Great and so often aren’t employed. Con- Lakes? likely to decline in the future, per- before snowmelt or a heavy rain, tinued expansion of our urban foot- Future climate change effects on haps precipitously. again resulting in runoff to streams print is likely to lead to the decline John Lyons is a member of the and fish kills. Excessive spreading and even demise of the trout Great Lakes brown trout remain un- clear. The Great Lakes are huge, Southern Wisconsin Chapter of Trout on sandy soils or areas of shallow streams adjacent to our cities. Unlimited and Curator of Fishes at limestone bedrock, which encom- and even under mid-century climate conditions they should retain plenty the University of Wisconsin Zoologi- pass much of Wisconsin, can also cal Museum. lead to contamination of the High-capacity wells of water cold enough for trout and groundwater and drinking water Both farming and urban devel- wells with nitrates. opment require large amounts of Efforts to develop “digesters” to water, in agricultural areas for irri- convert the manure into natural gas gation of crops grown in sandy soils show promise to reduce impacts. and for watering livestock, and in But at present digesters have formi- suburban areas for household and dable up-front costs to install and a commercial uses. Much of this wa- steep learning curve to operate effi- ter demand is met by high-capacity ciently and economically, hinder- wells drilled into the shallow aqui- ing their adoption by many fer. As farming becomes more in- livestock producers. We can only tensive and urban areas have hope that the costs come down and expanded, the number and size of more effective operating proce- these wells has increased. Heavy dures are developed going forward. pumping by these wells can deplete Alternative livestock rearing the local water table, particularly practices such as intensively man- during droughts. A depleted water aged or rotational grazing, also table leads to reduced stream flow known as regenerative agriculture, and warmer water temperatures, are far better for the health of the neither good for trout. In some cas- land and streams and are gaining es, heavy pumping has caused small adherents, particularly in the Drift- trout streams to dry up temporarily, less Area. But they represent a fun- and fish kills have occurred. damental change in operations that