Trout In Missouri

[ozark trout fisher]

Okay, first of all, I'm not trying to anger anyone with this post. As most of you probably know, when it comes to fishing, trout are my first love. Most of all, I'm not suggesting anything. An admission of guilt would be a better word for it.

I've been thinking about this in depth for a pretty long time. Like most people on this forum, I enjoy trout fishing in Missouri more than anything else. But I also consider myself a conservationist. The simple fact is, trout are non-native to our Missouri streams. So, put simply, any trout present in our streams are an intrusion on the natural, native ecosystem. It's really a tough thought. Basically, the species of fish that I love to catch more than anything else, are pretty much nothing more than an invader to the native species of our streams. This is something most Missouri trout fisherman don't want to face up to, but basically we are hypocrites. We want conservation of our streams, but we also want this non-native species that we enjoy catching so much.

Like I said at the beginning, I'm not suggesting anything. I would be totally crushed if trout weren't stocked anymore in Missouri streams, or they weren't protected in the streams in which they are wild. Basically, I'm just facing up to an uncomfortable fact. It's a tough deal for me. I really feel like I'm straddling both sides of the conservation fence here.

[Danoinark]

OTF...I will agree, but at the same time, I am more concerned about the strIeam itself than what's in the stream. Water quality, habitat, stratum along with the riparian edge must be preserved or nothing will grow in the stream anyway. I think we have an obligation to save what we have and to make it better for those that follow us. Just my humble opinion.

Dano

[eric1978]

I don't believe the trout have any major negative impact on the environment they are inhabiting. They cohabitate with native species well and they don't have much of an impact on the smallmouth, so I don't really see the problem. You can't stop man from screwing around with the environment, so any changes that we do create, we should just breathe a sigh of relief when they don't end up as disasters. I'll bet if you ask some East Coast smallmouth fishermen how they feel about smallmouth not being native to their state, they would respond with a shrug of the shoulders, and would probably add, "Well, I'm glad we got 'em now."

[ozark trout fisher]

OTF...I will agree, but at the same time, I am more concerned about the strIeam itself than what's in the stream. Water quality, habitat, stratum along with the riparian edge must be preserved or nothing will grow in the stream anyway. I think we have an obligation to save what we have and to make it better for those that follow us. Just my humble opinion.

Dano

I agree with that. By the way, this post is not an allusion to the Crane Creek and Indian Creek issue. Those streams needs to be saved for what they are heck, I'd still fight to protect them if they only held suckers.

And I couldn't agree more with you about how we need to protect the stream and its banks for future generation. I agree strongly.

I don't know what I'm even trying to say with this post really, maybe I shouldn't have made it at all. It just seems tough to me to endorse the idea of stocking trout, when it does seem like we are playing a role we shouldn't be playing. But on the flip side of this, I enjoy catching those trout more than just about anything else. It's really tough when you get to the core of it. I hope you guys understand. I'm not trying to step on anyone's foot.

[Greg]

I'm probably biased on this issue because just like you (OTF) because I am first and foremost a MO trout fisherman. It's what I love too. But I agree with Eric in that I'm not sure the trout that are stocked in our streams and rivers have that much of an impact on the native species. My impression is that they just have an entirely different ecological niche than do smallmouth, panfish, suckers, etc.

Take 2 of my favorite streams the NFOW and the Current. Both rivers have smallmouth and trout. But they coexist very well. And while there is overlap the trout thrive more in the colder areas of the streams and the smallmouth in the warmer (but still cool) areas. I think some areas like Taneycomo would be fairly barren without stocked trout? I don't think anything but trout could thrive in those frigid waters especially the upper regions. Which is why they started stocking trout once the dam was built - it was well know that the thriving warm water fishery would not completely die out - but would certainly wither away.

Greg

[FishinCricket]

I don't know what I'm even trying to say with this post really, maybe I shouldn't have made it at all. It just seems tough to me to endorse the idea of stocking trout, when it does seem like we are playing a role we shouldn't be playing. But on the flip side of this, I enjoy catching those trout more than just about anything else. It's really tough when you get to the core of it. I hope you guys understand. I'm not trying to step on anyone's foot.

Meh, your simply starting a conversation about it.. That people will read forever. lol

Seriously though, it's something that's always bugged me about people who want to rant and rave about conservation of our streams, and especially those who want to horde these fishing holes and this fantastic pasttime to ourselves. I want to pass it on to your children, and your children's children.. And so on..

Good topic, glad you started it...

[flyfishmaster]

OTF,

As FC said great topic.

If it weren't for trout fishing in MO I don't think I would have even started fly fishing, heck I probably would not have fished in any of the MO streams or river. So along with the conservation issue, the trout have made a very larger economic impact for the state, outfitter, bait stores (and fly shops) and the fishing tackle manufactures. So I wonder how many people are employed in MO because the trout are in the streams and rivers?

Later,

FFM

[Thom]

It seems to be a moot subject to me. Conservationist had nothihg to do with the daming of the streams. It was for flood control and power generation. So what do we do then. Just leave the stream wiht out any fish except suckers and a few smallmouth and crappie . None of these fish do well and are seldom caught in the upper end of Taney.

I think it is a good use of the cold water to introduce Trout instead of just leaving it mostly barren of fish.

There is no evidence that Trout compete with or destroy the native fish left there.

BTW just how prolific is the water downstream where there are no trout in large numbers. Yes there are a few good runs there but not a fishing paradise but a long shot.

It seems a no brainer to me. Stock it and use it since we could not do anything to change it anyway.

HOweve for those who are true conservationist...... please don't wade into the stream.... boycott it .... dont compromise your conservation morals.

The rest of us will wade in up to our bellies and laugh with joy at the absence of the wader hatch in the summer.

[ozark trout fisher]

It seems to be a moot subject to me. Conservationist had nothihg to do with the daming of the streams. It was for flood control and power generation. So what do we do then. Just leave the stream wiht out any fish except suckers and a few smallmouth and crappie . None of these fish do well and are seldom caught in the upper end of Taney.

I think it is a good use of the cold water to introduce Trout instead of just leaving it mostly barren of fish.

There is no evidence that Trout compete with or destroy the native fish left there.

BTW just how prolific is the water downstream where there are no trout in large numbers. Yes there are a few good runs there but not a fishing paradise but a long shot.

It seems a no brainer to me. Stock it and use it since we could not do anything to change it anyway.

HOweve for those who are true conservationist...... please don't wade into the stream.... boycott it .... dont compromise your conservation morals.

The rest of us will wade in up to our bellies and laugh with joy at the absence of the wader hatch in the summer.

Of course I agree the benefits of stocking trout are probably more than the downsides.

Really, this post was more about the freestone streams, where native species actually are existant in good numbers. But, now that you guys mention, trout may not have that big of a negative impact in those areas either. I dunno.

[Bird Watcher]

I have thought about this many times myself. I agree that trout probably do not directly compete with many of the native species, but the fact remains...They are not native. That is why I have so much more respect for the 5lb smallmouth out of a river than I do for the 5lb trout out of Taneycomo. Let me be clear....Not the angler who caught it, the fish itself. It's still tough to catch either one.

I just really like seeing an old, mature, native fish. I really like to see Big Flatheads from Rivers, Big crappie from rivers, Turkeys from places like Camden County where they haven't been supplemental stockings. I like seeing big Ozark Whitetails from Mark Twain, I like that the fact that there are Elk on the Buffalo River again. I don't know, I guess what I am trying to say is I personally get a huge thrill out of seeing things the way they are supposed to be, they way they have always been. There is less and less of that the older I get.

To me, there will always be a little bit of a "high fence" feel to trout in Missouri. They are neat, I'm glad they are available, but "they're not from around here, ya know?"