Rusty Spinner
Active member
I think the Division is planning to do just that, Pat.
Give us a try!
Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!
2014 NJ trout stocking changes due to disease at Pequest
- Thread starter Rusty Spinner
- Start date
I think the Division is planning to do just that, Pat.
WVULax22
New member
I'd support those signs on any waters that have wild fish. Would be nice if the worm dunkers saw the signs and assumed there were no fish in the river and went home.
NJpatbee
Can be found on NJ/NY/PA waters!
That's great news and will discourage most of the meat hunters, who for the most part, want those stockies because they "paid for them".
mtthwnvk
Picture-Taker // Fish Scare-er
At least you can get a sack of ten from white manna and fish at the same time. Win.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FIN-ITE 34
Well-known member
Cheeberg, cheeberg, cheeberg coke. No coke, pepsi. Fishing the Hack for trout and sliders at Manna. Just like fishing the Pequod and eating at Hot Dog Johnny's.
Last edited:
Rusty Spinner
Active member
Any? Yes. In large numbers? No. Would any survive to return to spawn? Highly unlikely. But it could happen as we see more dams coming down on that river. We don't see it sea runs of any trout species in the Delaware River, so I'm not sure if it can happen for the Raritan. But it's not beyond reason some trout can sea run and come back. I do know they find a few each year at the one fish ladder on the Raritan that people man or used to man to write down species and quantities that swim up this ladder.
DG138
Top Water Frogs, Dry Flies and Nymphs, oh my!
Didn't they have a tag program for sea run brown trout a few years ago? i think i remember hearing about one
Oliver10
Profishional Cupcake
in the manasquan river they do. Not adding fish this year.
BAck from 1990.
[h=5]By Nancy Petersen, Special to The Inquirer[/h]Posted: September 03, 1990
Jay Hannon at age 28 has never landed a salmon. Nor has he hooked a steelhead trout. Brook trout, lake trout and northern pike, yes, but never a salmon or a steelhead.
"You have to travel too far to catch them," he said the other night from his dad's sporting goods store, Al's Rainbow Sporting Goods on South Broad Street near the Delaware River and the Schuylkill.
Sounds as if Jay is New Jersey's kind of angler.
With all the energy of the mighty salmon heading home to spawn, New Jersey officials are pushing forward with a controversial plan to stock thousands of Pacific salmon and steelhead trout in the Delaware.
"That sounds great," said Hannon.
But when he learned the project might ruin the world-famous trout fishing streams in the upper Delaware River basin, Hannon had second thoughts.
"I would probably opt for the trout," he said.
The plan calls for more than 500,000 chinook salmon and steelhead to be produced at the Hayford Fish Hatchery in Hackettstown, N.J., then released into the Musconetcong River, a tributary that empties into the Delaware south of the Phillipsburg-Easton area.
The youngsters will drift downstream through the Delaware Bay into the open ocean, where they'll spend the next few years dodging hungry bluefish and putting on a few pounds. When the urge to reproduce hits them, back into the bay they'll swim, driven by the all-powerful urge to hit the Musconetcong and spawn. A chemical cue will alert the fish when to make that right turn into their home stream.
Although these Pacific strains have yet to be successfully introduced into Atlantic coastal waters, the scheme nevertheless is being touted by New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife officials as an economic and recreational boon for the Garden State. A 1983 study showed that for every dollar the state spent on the program, $2.50 would come back.
Other states that border the river, however, fear an environmental disaster of massive proportions with resident species of trout being wiped out by interbreeding, and beer-drinking fishermen roaming the river on speedboats snagging the big fish.
Environmentalists and conservationists the length of the 390-mile river are stunned and outraged by the proposal.
"We've learned the hard way that alien species can destroy ecosystems and cause problems that no one anticipated," said Cynthia Poten, who has served as Delaware riverkeeper since 1988, when she was hired by the American Littoral Society, an environmental group.
She and others are quick to point out the nearly unrelenting havoc and expense being caused by the killer bees, gypsy moths and zebra mussels, all of which were originally introduced with the best of intentions and all of which managed to escape from their original confines.
"It amazes me that having worked for a fish and game department that biologists never learn to stop playing around with exotic and alien species," said Ted Williams, conservation editor of Fly Rod and Reel. "It's insane," he said of the New Jersey proposal.
For Bob Ewald it is an absolute certainty that some of the chinook and steelhead will find their way north to the upper reaches of the Delaware, an area that Ewald believes is poised to become the best trout fishery on the East Coast by the end of this decade.
"We are talking about the potential loss of a multibillion-dollar fishery here," said Ewald, who is chairman of the Delaware River Defense Coalition. ''The upper Delaware fishery needs to be protected."
The powerful invaders, said Ewald, could carry diseases for which the resident brown, brook and rainbow trout populations have no resistance. They would wreck the trout-spawning areas.
And being a cousin of the rainbows, the steelheads could interbreed with the rainbow natives. The lure of the open sea would be too strong for the resulting offspring to resist and off they'd go, said Ewald.
"I'm not against having these fish in the lower stretches of the Delaware as long as they don't come north," he said. "If they can contain them, God bless them."
Ewald warned, however, that containment was doubtful.
Moreover, he pointed to a number of studies that have shown - even under the best conditions - 10 percent of the alien fish will ignore their home stream and keep moving north.
"Given the opportunity of selecting a heavy cold-water flow or the imprinting of the native stream, the chinook will take the cold-water flow," he said. "The Musconetcong is a tepid stream at best. And as conditions worsen, the number of strays rises."
Walter Murawski, supervising biologist for New Jersey's Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife of the Department of Environmental Protection, said that these and other questions were what would be addressed by an environmental impact statement on the project. It will be ready in early 1991.
The division is holding meetings Tuesday night at Mercer County Community
College in Trenton and Wednesday night at the Port Jervis Holiday Inn in Port Jervis, N.Y., to describe the project and hear what the public has to say about it.
The sessions will run from 7 to 10 p.m.
Murawski believes the program will work with few, if any, negative environmental effects.
"We don't anticipate much straying beyond the native stream," said Murawski. "That's what we're counting on and that's what we see as happening."
New Jersey officials are relying on a 1983 study by Normandeau Associates, a Bedford, N.H., consulting firm, which concluded it was feasible to stock both the steelheads and chinooks in the Delaware River. The assessment noted that stocking must be done in the cool of early spring before the river warms up and before levels of dissolved oxygen dip, as they do each summer.
Normandeau's John Shipman admitted that the study did not address any negative economic effects that might occur if the upper Delaware fisheries were ruined.
Murawski said tremendous economic benefits would accrue from New Jersey's having a thriving sport fishery in the Delaware. The 1983 Normandeau study estimated that over a 20-year period, between $20 million and $30 million would pour into the state.
But he added: "Recreation is our main objective here."
"There are a number of unanswered questions," said Murawski. "Federal officials and other states want us to come up with the answers. To be honest I don't see there's much of a problem."
Versar Inc., a Springfield, Va., consulting company, has been given $101,000 by New Jersey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to write the environmental impact statement. The first draft is expected to be released for public comment in February.
"Our biggest concern is disease," said William A. Richkus, an ecologist with Versar. "If someone were to introduce a disease, you don't call it back. We're viewing that as a fatal flaw."
Richkus' concern may not be unfounded.
In 1967, fishery experts in Michigan and other states surrounding the Great Lakes began stocking those waterways with the Pacific strains of salmon. The stocking has added billions of dollars to state coffers since then as fishing boomed.
It is only now, however, that a downside to this success story is becoming evident. Sick salmon are beginning to show up on Lake Michigan's east shore.
"Since 1985, the chinook harvest has dropped 50 to 60 percent," said fisheries biologist Ron Rybicki of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. "Something is happening."
Rybicki said that while some of the fish were dying from a bacterial kidney disease, that was not the sole cause of the die-off. "We don't have this thing pinned down by any stretch of the imagination," he said.
New Jersey's wish to have chinook salmon frolicking in the Delaware River could have international repercussions as well.
David Goldthwaite, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regional office in suburban Boston, said the stocking plan violated an agreement the United States had with Canada not to introduce Pacific salmon on the East Coast because of their potential interaction with wild Atlantic salmon.
Goldthwaite said the matter boiled down to an issue of states' rights versus the federal government.
"Constitutionally, the states give up various powers when the United States enters into a treaty with foreign nations," said Goldthwaite. "New Jersey is attempting to get an exception" to this agreement.
Because of the threats of disease and the impact to the Atlantic salmon, Goldthwaite said, the Canadians would like to see a reduction in this kind of transfer of exotic stock.
"Frankly, the Canadians are sensitive to this issue," he said.
Fishery officials in both Pennsylvania and New York are waiting to see what conclusions are reached in the environmental impact assessment before taking a formal stance on the project.
"We have concerns with the proposal and we want to see them thoroughly addressed," said Philip Hulbert, cold-water fisheries specialist for the New York Department of Environmental Conservation. "Then we'll see where we stand. The upper Delaware is an important resource and we don't want to see that jeopardized."
Bob Hesser, a fishery biologist with the Pennsylvania Fish Commission, echoed Hulbert's concerns.
"The reason we insisted on an environmental impact statement in the first place is the outstanding cold-water fishery in the upper Delaware," he said. ''As we work with New York City and get better releases from their reservoirs, we feel the cold-water fishing up there will only improve."
Like a hooked trout, Ewald and the Delaware River Defense Coalition are prepared to put up a fight including going to court to get it blocked if the project is approved.
"This is our own Valdez problem," he said, comparing it to the huge, destructive oil spill off the coast of Alaska last year. "We want New Jersey to guarantee it will contain its spill. That's what we're looking for."
Jeff Nissle, owner of a fly-fishing tackle store in Kimberton, Chester County, does not think highly of the idea.
"The Delaware is not a salmon river and it doesn't have the capability to be one," he said. "The upper river is superb for trout fishing and the lower part is great for bass."
Said Nissle: "My opinion is that it's more of a money-making scheme for New Jersey. I hope I'm way off base."
Oliver10
Profishional Cupcake
From another old article;
There would be no natural spawning of the chinooks although some steelhead reproduction could take place, said Pyle.
New Jersey has already released chinook and steelhead in the Raritan River in northern New Jersey. In 1987 45,000 chinook smolts were liberated and last year another 90,000 salmon and 1,100 steelhead were planted.
According to Pyle it takes three or four years for the fish to return to their native waters. The fish live at sea and, like shad, return to freshwater to spawn.
Controversy Spawned Over N.j. Plans For Delaware River Salmon, Steelhead Releases Inside The Outdoors - Morning Call
There would be no natural spawning of the chinooks although some steelhead reproduction could take place, said Pyle.
New Jersey has already released chinook and steelhead in the Raritan River in northern New Jersey. In 1987 45,000 chinook smolts were liberated and last year another 90,000 salmon and 1,100 steelhead were planted.
According to Pyle it takes three or four years for the fish to return to their native waters. The fish live at sea and, like shad, return to freshwater to spawn.
Controversy Spawned Over N.j. Plans For Delaware River Salmon, Steelhead Releases Inside The Outdoors - Morning Call
Oliver10
Profishional Cupcake
LU you like books Heartbeats in the Muck: The History, Sea Life, and Environment of New York Harbor
Heartbeats in the Muck: The History, Sea Life, and Environment of New York ... - John R. Waldman - Google Books
Chapter 4 or pages 37-39 I hope the link works
lightenup
A fan of Boobery
That's a lot of reading..I can't see pages 37-39..I will look later....
Looks like an interesting read, SO
Did Atlantic salmon live as far south as the Delaware river...and the Hudson, or did their native range only go as far south as Connecticut? I don't know..I am sure someone can answer this....
Oliver10
Profishional Cupcake
Thursthouse
Tight Loins
Got anything with more pictures and less words?
Rusty Spinner
Active member
No known Atlantic salmon as far south as NJ in past history. Any salmon being introduced in NJ would be non-natives.
Rusty Spinner
Active member
No that far south either. I forget what the river's name is, but somewhere slightly further north on the coast in CT.
Many claim the Connecticut R to be the most southern river - there were big runs up to the tribs in Vermont and New Hampshire at one time that are unarguable. Other streams aren't as clear. Sea run brookies clearly go as far south as Long Island and at one time there was interest in bringing some of these strains to NJ.
The Dewitt Clinton citing is interesting. Dewitt Clinton was an amateur biologist who took a great interest in the fishes of NYS. He did a lot of work documenting the salmon runs (timing and phenotype) in the Lake Ontario tribs - so he was definitely interested in Atlantic salmon. His work is part of the evidence used by modern biologists to claim that the Lake O salmon matured in the lake and didn't go to sea.
NJ as well was part of the stocking boom of the 1870's through the 1890's. The Muskie and Delaware were stocked with Chinook and Atlantic salmon. No Chinooks came back, but a handful of Atlantics made it. Shad netters would snare a few and a couple were even caught by anglers. One was shot in the Bushkill in Easton. Of course, the smallmouth and largemouth bass, rock bass, pike, musky, carp, walleyes, bluegills, channel catfish, rainbow trout, and brown trout took hold.
And there must have been Atlantics in NJ sometime. 20,000 years ago when a mile high sheet of ice stopped at about Rte 46 the salmon must have found refuge in NJ. As the Earth warmed and the ice retreated there still must have been a long time when the conditions were right for salmon. Now they are gone, which indicates that the environment is not right, since they were here and then vanished. It would not be unusual in that case to get a stray one now and again.
The Dewitt Clinton citing is interesting. Dewitt Clinton was an amateur biologist who took a great interest in the fishes of NYS. He did a lot of work documenting the salmon runs (timing and phenotype) in the Lake Ontario tribs - so he was definitely interested in Atlantic salmon. His work is part of the evidence used by modern biologists to claim that the Lake O salmon matured in the lake and didn't go to sea.
NJ as well was part of the stocking boom of the 1870's through the 1890's. The Muskie and Delaware were stocked with Chinook and Atlantic salmon. No Chinooks came back, but a handful of Atlantics made it. Shad netters would snare a few and a couple were even caught by anglers. One was shot in the Bushkill in Easton. Of course, the smallmouth and largemouth bass, rock bass, pike, musky, carp, walleyes, bluegills, channel catfish, rainbow trout, and brown trout took hold.
And there must have been Atlantics in NJ sometime. 20,000 years ago when a mile high sheet of ice stopped at about Rte 46 the salmon must have found refuge in NJ. As the Earth warmed and the ice retreated there still must have been a long time when the conditions were right for salmon. Now they are gone, which indicates that the environment is not right, since they were here and then vanished. It would not be unusual in that case to get a stray one now and again.
trico mike
make mine wild
I don't think the state should ever try to establish a salmon run. The Delaware already has a shad and striper run. Let's let the fish that belong here thrive. With the steadily declining striper fishery we should be concentrating on bringing their numbers back up. I'm wondering if the Tom's will receive more fish this year,and will it get browns or just brookies.
One more comment. The salmonids have a tendency to stray - that is what enabled then to recolonize the glaciated part of the Northern hemisphere. Sure they are coldwater fish, but they got to most places first and their homeland is the previously ice bound part of the Earth. Therefore, it is not unusual for them to pop up now and again where they are not expected.
Rusty Spinner
Active member
I know you're joking around, but the reality is that nothing would likely happen. This is a disease that mainly impacts hatcheries where the trout are stacked up tightly in raceways and are stressed out.
Oliver10
Profishional Cupcake
Yes totally joking. I am really looking forward to a non stocked South Branch. I think people will find the new regs in the gorge a long with no stocked fish surprisingly productive. Hope they never stock the gorge again if it works well
Rusty Spinner
Active member
Agreed. And I have heard from many fly anglers about raising funds to privately stock the KLG this spring with Musky Trout Hatchery fish.
FIN-ITE 34
Well-known member
I hope everyone has visited the Shannon's website and made a donation to help stock the Gorge.
lightenup
A fan of Boobery
FIN-ITE 34
Well-known member
I thought that was Rusty's tip can.
Similar threads
