A discussion of native VS non-native trout species. To kill or not to kill.

[GraphiteZen]

A continuation of the thread:

Take it away folks!

 

[OnTheFly]

This went over my head. What's the point?

 

[Moe]

This went over my head. What's the point?

To not hijack the other thread on tiger trout

 

[everett464]

What's the point?

$10 gift card aspirations?

 

[GraphiteZen]

$10 gift card aspirations?

Mods don't get gift cards.

 

[everett464]

fair enough... my money's still on you gunnin', though.

 

[GraphiteZen]

Well, the best way to get a high view count is to start a thread with a completely ambiguous yet irresistible title. Such as: "OMGZ craazy celebrity fishing blooperz video!! "

Celebrities are popular, bloopers are popular, videos are popular. Of course I learned this on other forums.

 

[everett464]

hahaha... and then link to some pay per click sie, that pays you. I like it.

 

[GraphiteZen]

The only better situation would to not be a mod. Get the e-card and get the clicks. Cha-ching!

 

[cookshot]

Like i said in the last part of the tiger trout thread, I didn't know that brook and browns were non native. So first I will make my point, then I will ask a question. In some places, like many of the high lakes, there were no trout prior to stocking since most trout don't reproduce in still water and we don't have natural warm water fish in high lakes. So, places where brook trout exist exclusively, they aren't really taking the place of natives, they are instead providing a brand new fishery.

OK now the question part. What species of fish are native and non native in Oregon?

 

[GraphiteZen]

OK now the question part. What species of fish are native and non native in Oregon?

As far as I know that is where the majority of the contention lies. Panfish, browns, brooks and even your typical rainbow have screwed up native populations so far past the point of return, is it realistic to consider the restoration of native stocks as a goal? I'm answering a question with a question I know..

 

[cookshot]

So what does that leave as native? Bull trout? Chinook? I don't see the point in trying to restore some fisheries if they are beyond the point of no return. Why kill a lake full of one fish to try to re-introduce another? I'm not a huge fan of poisoning lakes, I like when they just lift limits on species they are trying to get rid of, that way the fish are at least not going to waste.

 

[GraphiteZen]

However, I'm not even sure browns are non-native, or brooks for that matter... Cutthroats and redbands I think are the ones.

 

[cookshot]

I'm not sure either, just read it from the other thread.

 

[everett464]

Browns are for sure, non-native. They are not even native to North America.

 

[cookshot]

Where are they from? Out of curiosity.

 

[cookshot]

Found this on another thread.

Native fish of Oregon:

Bull trout

Chinook Salmon

Chum salmon

Coho salmon

Cutthroat trout

Western Brook

mountain whitefish

Rainbow trout/Redband trout/Steelhead

Green sturgeon

White sturgeon

As well as some sculpins, lampreys, chubs, and some other fish I have never heard of.

 

[cookshot]

Oh and suckers, it said they were native too.

 

[everett464]

Where are they from? Out of curiosity.

I actually had to check the Wikipedia page for that one. My knowledge was limited to the fact that they are not native to N. America.

Anywho, Wikipedia says that they are native to Europe and Asia.

 

[GraphiteZen]

And pike minnow are native to the center of the earth.