Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GA Secondary Trout Streams

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • richf7
    started a topic GA Secondary Trout Streams

    GA Secondary Trout Streams

    The state defines a secondary trout stream as "streams with no evidence of natural trout reproduction but capable of supporting trout throughout the year."

    There are a number of these streams not far from my home in Cherokee Co. Does anyone know if they actually contain trout?

    1. Bluff Creek watershed upstream from Cherokee County Road 114.
    2. Boston Creek watershed.
    3. Murphy Creek watershed.
    4. Pine Log Creek watershed.
    5. Salacoa Creek watershed.
    6. Soap Creek watershed upstream from Cherokee County Road 116.
    7. Stamp Creek watershed.
    8. Wiley Creek watershed.

  • fishinbub
    replied
    On a side note, I'd rather catch wild northerns than SABT any day. (ps. what happened to the :stirs: emoji?)

    Leave a comment:


  • I_got_skunked
    replied
    As good a place to ask it as any... I was under the impression that any SABTs in the coosa river basin were introduced and that they aren't truly native populations. Whether that's true, the streams that seem to be good candidates appear to have suffered from relatively recent habitat destruction by the time I venture there. Be it development upstream or drought/wildfire/deforestation combinations. There are certainly a number of streams left on my list to explore for the fabled coosa basin specks, but that's taken a back seat to exploration of other basins. So, what say you, are they the work of midnight bucket runs?

    Leave a comment:


  • fishinbub
    replied
    Originally posted by browniez View Post
    Could it be habitat fragmentation? Those small stream seem like that would happen naturally due to various reasons, but in the past they could repopulate?
    Doubtful. If there is a barrier to keep bows out, it would keep brookies out too. Our current populations have always been cut off from other populations of fish. They could go downstream, introducing their genes to a different population, but there have never been new genes coming UP the barrier falls. The exception being human introduction.

    Leave a comment:


  • browniez
    replied
    Originally posted by THE EG View Post
    Fellas, no need to sneak around in the dark of night. Because of the popularity of brook trout, the DNR will pay you to analyze streams, repair habitat and tote brook trout. They call them interns. If you want to do it for free, they call you TU volunteers.



    My anecdotes are several streams I am aware of (I think you know a couple now) that have previously been known to contain brook trout, then did not have brook trout, were then restocked with "as best they know" pure SABT, and end up once again not having any brook trout in them. I learned the new word to me "expirtated" through Back The Brookie activities. Nobody knows exactly why streams sporadically lose their populations but yall have mentioned the main suggested reasons; drought and high temps. I'm not sure siltation is as big a concern with the National Forest fish, but it probably does happen also.

    I think that Foothills project has been posted on the message board before. If you want more brook trout in the National Forest, go make those concerns known there, if the comment periods are still available. It's not just about trees.
    Could it be habitat fragmentation? Those small stream seem like that would happen naturally due to various reasons, but in the past they could repopulate?

    Leave a comment:


  • THE EG
    replied
    Originally posted by buckman1 View Post
    The Brookies will need a little redneck creativity in the form of a cooler in the winter, a minnow bucket, and a few buddies. Shhhh. Just our little secret.
    Originally posted by mudrun View Post
    Carrying buckets of water for several miles into the wilderness sounds like it might be great obstacle race training.
    Fellas, no need to sneak around in the dark of night. Because of the popularity of brook trout, the DNR will pay you to analyze streams, repair habitat and tote brook trout. They call them interns. If you want to do it for free, they call you TU volunteers.

    Originally posted by splatek16 View Post
    Being relatively new to this whole thing, what do you mean the primary streams fail? Fail to support the fishery, habitat, or fail in some other manner.

    To all:
    Also, the chattahoochee-oconee foothills project may be (?) a start toward this, particularly if we had input from fisherman about restoration, conservation, saving of various stream watersheds....
    https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/conf/...d=fseprd514937
    Not sure if all these things are related and there are a lot of various interest groups for the forest ranging from ATV usage to hunting and hiking.
    My anecdotes are several streams I am aware of (I think you know a couple now) that have previously been known to contain brook trout, then did not have brook trout, were then restocked with "as best they know" pure SABT, and end up once again not having any brook trout in them. I learned the new word to me "expirtated" through Back The Brookie activities. Nobody knows exactly why streams sporadically lose their populations but yall have mentioned the main suggested reasons; drought and high temps. I'm not sure siltation is as big a concern with the National Forest fish, but it probably does happen also.

    I think that Foothills project has been posted on the message board before. If you want more brook trout in the National Forest, go make those concerns known there, if the comment periods are still available. It's not just about trees.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jakkbauer
    replied
    Originally posted by splatek16 View Post
    I'm just arm chairing here, between classes....

    I have a feeling Durniak would be writhing in pain at the thought of bucket biologists "stocking" under a full moon... (he's told me that in not so many words).

    I wonder if I missed the operational definition of secondary vs. primary streams. I know the OP posted about specific "secondary" streams, but apart from that. If we are talking about Brook trout, sure there need to be some elevation, pH, etc things to think about and I think this is where some science needs to step in. But I was also wondering about so called "fishless" streams/creeks. I've spoken to a few rangers that have told me that electroshocking studies have demonstrated that "x" stream is "fishless." I am always surprised when I hear this, particularly when I am catching fish on another stream in the same wilderness area with what appear, at face value like similar stream habitat and what not. I also wonder about the challenge of producing increased wild brown trout streams. Assume this was something that was going to actually happen and a set of streams were deemed uninhabitable by SABTs, could they not become candidate streams for Brown trout management? I know, I've read in various scientific reports that the RBTs really really seem to like our watersheds, as evidenced by the fact that you can toss a fly in 100's, maybe more, streams in NoGa and catch small wild rainbows very easily.

    again, just thinking out loud here...
    There's quite a few things taken into consideration when evaluation is done. The ratio of runs to pools, the height of riffles, riparian buffers. Some of this has to do with having enough space for the fish to reproduce and have enough holding territory, some to determine oxygenation, some to determine whether siltation could impede reproduction.

    All of this stuff tells you how much work has to be done to make the stream adequate for reproduction, and from there you can decide if it is feasible.

    My guess would be these secondary streams would simply require too much research and then renovation for it to make sense but that is just a guess!

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Jakkbauer
    replied
    Originally posted by Trout Fear Me View Post
    Hey Jakkbauer,
    Cohutta Chapter of TU meets on the fourth Tuesdays of the month at Hudsons Grill near Town Center. You are welcome to come. We are involved with three stream projects this year. They are Raccoon Creek, Lovinggood Creek and I forgot the third one.
    Mike
    Mike,
    Thank you kindly for the invitation! It's just what I needed. Hudson is not 15 minutes from my house, I will certainly try to make the next meeting.

    Regards,
    David Hubbard

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • mudrun
    replied
    Originally posted by splatek16 View Post
    I have a feeling Durniak would be writhing in pain at the thought of bucket biologists "stocking" under a full moon... (he's told me that in not so many words).
    Lol - we need a designated font color for 'just kidding' or 'joking'. Don't want anyone writhing in pain, and based on what little I know, stocking at night wouldn't be ideal for the fish.

    I have done stream restoration over the years, mostly in other states - it consisted chiefly of planting wide riparian buffers to account for development in nearby geographies and mitigating the impacts of culverts that were thrown down in quick, thoughtless fashion.

    ...the difference in those cases being that there were still fish somewhere in those streams, and the idea was to make the different areas healthier for existing fish to migrate to.

    As an example, three years ago I went to a creek here in GA that I had last gone to in the 90s. This creek requires either four miles of rough hiking followed by another mile and a half of bushwhacking to get to, or slightly fewer miles of hiking followed by some diabolical and dangerous navigation around a non-trivial waterfall. I took the longer, safer option and came in from the top - and the creek was empty of specks. Where did they go? Temps were right, no development, what happened to them? I concluded it must have been the droughts, but I have never found someone to ask for specifics.

    What are the issues with putting specks back in such a creek?

    (other than getting a bucket full of minnows to this particular place would require an Acme Co rocket piloted by Wile E Coyote)

    Leave a comment:


  • splatek16
    replied
    I'm just arm chairing here, between classes....

    I have a feeling Durniak would be writhing in pain at the thought of bucket biologists "stocking" under a full moon... (he's told me that in not so many words).

    I wonder if I missed the operational definition of secondary vs. primary streams. I know the OP posted about specific "secondary" streams, but apart from that. If we are talking about Brook trout, sure there need to be some elevation, pH, etc things to think about and I think this is where some science needs to step in. But I was also wondering about so called "fishless" streams/creeks. I've spoken to a few rangers that have told me that electroshocking studies have demonstrated that "x" stream is "fishless." I am always surprised when I hear this, particularly when I am catching fish on another stream in the same wilderness area with what appear, at face value like similar stream habitat and what not. I also wonder about the challenge of producing increased wild brown trout streams. Assume this was something that was going to actually happen and a set of streams were deemed uninhabitable by SABTs, could they not become candidate streams for Brown trout management? I know, I've read in various scientific reports that the RBTs really really seem to like our watersheds, as evidenced by the fact that you can toss a fly in 100's, maybe more, streams in NoGa and catch small wild rainbows very easily.

    again, just thinking out loud here...

    Leave a comment:


  • THE EG
    replied
    Originally posted by Philhutch80 View Post
    @EG, I spoke extensively with Carl and Mack at the Spring Fling last year. Carl gave me his card and asked me to email him which I did and I never got a response for some reason or another. I have not met Jeff but plan on talking to him. BOTH my Tacoma and Subaru have a Brookie license plate. I will go speak to these gentlemen today. Thanks for the guidance EG!
    Stopped by the booth to drop off a card reader this morning. Durniak was at the show but not working the booth until tomorrow. Mack Martin was in the Atlanta Fly Fishing School booth as he owns it along with Scott Schwartz. Tell Durniak about your vehicles and he’ll love ya. Those tags have been the best thing for DNR trout fisheries since they wrestled the money away from “the general fund” a couple years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • mudrun
    replied
    Originally posted by Philhutch80 View Post
    And most of this data can be found in a colored map form from the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture web pages!!! http://easternbrooktrout.org/
    I really enjoyed reading this point of view. I think your analogy of these fish on the precipice of a cliff is accurate. I also totally agree that moonlight minnow buckets are being talked about because it is the elephant in the room. And what a lovely elephant it is!
    You just COMPLETELY blew my mind with this ... I had no idea someone has this around. Oh glorious day. I am pleased to have added something to your day and thank you for adding a whole lot to mine! Going to totally math-nerd out with all of this data, pardon me for a few hours...

    I love beautiful elephants and just so you know ... I also love Spartan races, where participants have to perform obstacles such as carrying logs, boulders, or buckets full of rocks (hint) over and through trails (hint) for long periods of time. Carrying buckets of water for several miles into the wilderness sounds like it might be great obstacle race training.

    In all seriousness ... given that the habitat is fashioned into 'islands', releasing minnows into an island minimizes the impact on the area outside of the island. Further, trout enthusiasts who know the creeks and trails (and who have likely blue-lined these and stared at the water over a slow peanut butter sandwich on the bank, wondering why exactly there arent fish in so perfect a stream) would have an almost automatic sense of where and when to deploy those sweet little minnows.

    As opposed to a large, top-down intervention which has the higher risk of either wasting resources (time, dollars, people, trout) or looking at our islands of habitat as 'one thing' instead of the interesting, distinct, and ultimately individual plots that they are.

    Leave a comment:


  • Philhutch80
    replied
    Originally posted by mudrun View Post
    Thanks for sharing this ... there is a lot in here.

    Regarding the fisheries, I don't exactly know the answer to your question, but ... I think of it this way.

    Draw a line up the Appalachians from Rome, Georgia to say Caribou, Maine. Widen the line into a bar by ~ 50 miles on each side, and now draw latitude lines across your Appalachian diagonal. The latitude interval doesn't matter too much, but make it reasonably discrete.

    Now imagine a histogram. Y axis is 'summed numbers of trout' and X axis are the latitude lines you just drew. Say the Y even sums between the latitude lines. This histogram will mostly be a diagonal upwards, with Rome, GA containing 0 trout, a dramatic slope upwards to somewhere like Harpers Ferry WV, then sloping upwards at a much slower rate, and mostly flat from the Catskills to Maine, where the trout habitat is mostly steady and year-round.

    Back to us - the North Georgia mountains are the first histogram bar that is not zero. This deep in the tails of that distribution, small events or variations are crazily impactful; compared to farther north, our trout are clinging to the edge of the cliff above the abyss, more or less, and seen through this lens, events like the Waters Creek poaching or development north of Dawson cause decades of negative impact.

    Draw a map of north Georgia in pencil and color in the trout habitat with a striking color - it will look like islands, and as you have spent time in those islands, you will note their dissimilarity to the surrounding area.

    This is a long way of describing why people are so quiet about where to find specks, or trout at all, why small streams aren't named, and so on - but here in the tails of that distribution, conservation requires some thought, as if it isn't done 'perfectly', it will be a futile waste of resources.

    Interestingly, the constraints can also be refashioned into strengths - a few enthusiasts with minnow buckets walking the trails under a full moon can save a stream, too.

    Thanks again for sharing this.
    And most of this data can be found in a colored map form from the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture web pages!!! http://easternbrooktrout.org/
    I really enjoyed reading this point of view. I think your analogy of these fish on the precipice of a cliff is accurate. I also totally agree that moonlight minnow buckets are being talked about because it is the elephant in the room. And what a lovely elephant it is!


    Originally posted by splatek16 View Post
    WOW. Really good way of looking at things.
    Thanks!
    I love data!
    Splatek... when do you want to come jump in a boat and talk and fish?

    Leave a comment:


  • Philhutch80
    replied
    Originally posted by THE EG View Post
    Go to the Fly Fishing Show today and tomorrow and talk to Carl Riggs or Mack Martin in the TU booth. Try and track down Kevin McGrath who coordinated the TU Back The Brookie program for about a decade. Find Jeff Durniak in the Smithgall Woods/DNR booth. Report back to us what they said.

    Have you purchased a brook trout license plate?

    Those would be a start.



    Why waste limited resources when the primary trout streams fail so often.
    @EG, I spoke extensively with Carl and Mack at the Spring Fling last year. Carl gave me his card and asked me to email him which I did and I never got a response for some reason or another. I have not met Jeff but plan on talking to him. BOTH my Tacoma and Subaru have a Brookie license plate. I will go speak to these gentlemen today. Thanks for the guidance EG!

    Leave a comment:


  • splatek16
    replied
    Originally posted by mudrun View Post
    Thanks for sharing this ... there is a lot in here.

    Regarding the fisheries, I don't exactly know the answer to your question, but ... I think of it this way.

    Draw a line up the Appalachians from Rome, Georgia to say Caribou, Maine. Widen the line into a bar by ~ 50 miles on each side, and now draw latitude lines across your Appalachian diagonal. The latitude interval doesn't matter too much, but make it reasonably discrete.

    Now imagine a histogram. Y axis is 'summed numbers of trout' and X axis are the latitude lines you just drew. Say the Y even sums between the latitude lines. This histogram will mostly be a diagonal upwards, with Rome, GA containing 0 trout, a dramatic slope upwards to somewhere like Harpers Ferry WV, then sloping upwards at a much slower rate, and mostly flat from the Catskills to Maine, where the trout habitat is mostly steady and year-round.

    Back to us - the North Georgia mountains are the first histogram bar that is not zero. This deep in the tails of that distribution, small events or variations are crazily impactful; compared to farther north, our trout are clinging to the edge of the cliff above the abyss, more or less, and seen through this lens, events like the Waters Creek poaching or development north of Dawson cause decades of negative impact.

    Draw a map of north Georgia in pencil and color in the trout habitat with a striking color - it will look like islands, and as you have spent time in those islands, you will note their dissimilarity to the surrounding area.

    This is a long way of describing why people are so quiet about where to find specks, or trout at all, why small streams aren't named, and so on - but here in the tails of that distribution, conservation requires some thought, as if it isn't done 'perfectly', it will be a futile waste of resources.

    Interestingly, the constraints can also be refashioned into strengths - a few enthusiasts with minnow buckets walking the trails under a full moon can save a stream, too.

    Thanks again for sharing this.
    WOW. Really good way of looking at things.
    Thanks!
    I love data!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X