Diversification of Taneycomo Trout

[ozark trout fisher]

Oh, you didn't hear about the MDC's new stocking efforts? They're introducing these hybrid rainbow/cutthroat/chinook salmon/Northern Pike. No one knows how that works, and the scientists behind it aren't telling. They're not FDA approved for eating and have been known to eat dogs and small children, so I guess it's no longer safe to swim in the lake. 

And also they put in a few thousand of these guys. I guess they are called the Speckled Scarlet Trout (Oncorhynchus uglificus) and are only native to one watershed in Southeastern Narnia. But supposedly Taneycomo is the perfect environment for them. 

[bkbying89]

20 hours ago, mikeak said:

It's fine just like it is. For sure don't want another stamp to buy for trout,but I could probably get behind a Carp stamp.

If that stamp was to be responsible for the removal of the algae eaters destroying our waterways I would gladly buy that stamp.

[Ham]

2 hours ago, bkbying89 said:

If that stamp was to be responsible for the removal of the algae eaters destroying our waterways I would gladly buy that stamp.

Please help me understand what you're saying here. What fish do you want eradicated? What fish do you want protected? 

[MOPanfisher]

Might be an issue with the cost of producing or procuring the additional species too.  I suspect that there is likely a slightly temp, o2, wtc. regimen for producing them.  That would result in either having to purchase them.somewhere and transport them here, or reduce the capability to produce rainbows and browns etc?

[Johnsfolly]

8 hours ago, ozark trout fisher said:

Oh, you didn't hear about the MDC's new stocking efforts? They're introducing these hybrid rainbow/cutthroat/chinook salmon/Northern Pike. No one knows how that works, and the scientists behind it aren't telling. They're not FDA approved for eating and have been known to eat dogs and small children, so I guess it's no longer safe to swim in the lake. 

And also they put in a few thousand of these guys. I guess they are called the Speckled Scarlet Trout (Oncorhynchus uglificus) and are only native to one watershed in Southeastern Narnia. But supposedly Taneycomo is the perfect environment for them. 

This post did make me laugh out loud. Hopefully I didn't hurt your feelings ! That top fish is one butt ugly fish!

[SpoonDog]

I guess I don't understand the why.  Tiger trout, cutts, and brookies aren't nearly as easy to grow in hatcheries as browns and rainbows, which is why most states don't stock them willy-nilly.  Any other coldwater sportfish are gonna compete directly with what's already there for food and space, and unless MDC's gonna add more raceways at Shepherd of the Hills you'll be taking something away from brown-rainbow production.  And since Shepherd's been having periodic trouble consistently producing browns due to water temps/levels/quality coming out of Table Rock, I don't know why anyone would want to move to an even less-certain formula of browns + rainbows + novelty species. 

If anything, I'd rather see MDC investigate other strains of browns and rainbows, which may be less susceptible to the environmental issues they've been having at the hatchery.  Or restoring some wild trout water, or heck- repairing any number of accesses damaged by spring floods.  Adding more species is pretty low on the priority list for me.

[Gavin]

I've always preferred to catch wild trout in their native range. I'm fine with the status quo in Missouri. We have some wild fish, stockers for the masses, and some big feral trout.  Our stream trout fishing is top notch when compared to most in the lower 48. Could not care less about tailwater trout fishing. Did plenty of it years ago, just not my thing anymore.

[MoCarp]

for the record no trout are "native" in Missouri, some may be naturalized,

I look at it this way other states have no issues hatching Cutts or Tigers. browns are one of the tougher ones to raise, there are strains of cutts that get bigger, way bigger.... but stocking bigger fish and raising the keep size to 22" on browns, Tigers and cutts.

brookies prob would stay in the upper reaches until winter, and a 3 fish a day limit would be fine, because how many trout do you REALLY need to eat?, a $10 stamp would be a small price to pay, personally it should be $25, and a requirement to fish in the upper trophy area. grow the fish a bit bigger before putting them in, 

"20 Pounds? Not Too Bad, for an Extinct Fish"

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/24/us/lahontan-cutthroat-trout-make-a-comeback.html

[SpoonDog]

Because they come from different genera and have different chromosome counts, mating brook and brown trout results and very low survival of eggs and young.  Survival of browns and rainbows is typically 80-90%, surival of tiger trout is typically no more than 25%.  That means you need more broodstock and more hatchery space to produce the same number of tiger trout as browns and rainbows.  It means for every dollar spent, >50 cents is getting flushed down the toilet.  That's why Pennsylvania discontinued stocking, it's why Wisconsin discontinued stocking, it's why states like Arizona and Wyoming only stock them occasionally and only in certain reservoirs, it's why the states which do stock them regularly are flush with federal matching funds from the sale of fishing licenses- they have money to burn.  And in many places they don't even grow as fast as browns.  So again- aside from the fact they're pretty, why should they be stocked?

Cutthroat are also tough to produce in hatcheries- unlike browns and rainbows, they haven't been domesticated for decades.  Biologists are still working out how to spawn and rear them.  It's done in the west principally for restoration, with funds contributed from state agencies plus federal groups like Fish and Wildlife Service.  Lahontans get real big in a couple Nevada lakes with unique ecological conditions in no way replicated by Taneycomo, throughout most of their range they barely reach ten inches.  They're federally listed anyway, so no one's gonna give up eggs just so Ozarkers can do the grip-n-grin without having to leave home.

As for the tag...again, why?  I'm not interested in eating or mounting trout, so I'm not gonna spend $25 bucks when all I want is a picture.  Meat anglers aren't gonna spring $25 on exotic species if they can creel browns and rainbows with just a basic license. 

[Phil Lilley]

14 hours ago, SpoonDog said:

I guess I don't understand the why.  Tiger trout, cutts, and brookies aren't nearly as easy to grow in hatcheries as browns and rainbows, which is why most states don't stock them willy-nilly.  Any other coldwater sportfish are gonna compete directly with what's already there for food and space, and unless MDC's gonna add more raceways at Shepherd of the Hills you'll be taking something away from brown-rainbow production.  And since Shepherd's been having periodic trouble consistently producing browns due to water temps/levels/quality coming out of Table Rock, I don't know why anyone would want to move to an even less-certain formula of browns + rainbows + novelty species. 

If anything, I'd rather see MDC investigate other strains of browns and rainbows, which may be less susceptible to the environmental issues they've been having at the hatchery.  Or restoring some wild trout water, or heck- repairing any number of accesses damaged by spring floods.  Adding more species is pretty low on the priority list for me.

I like this post.