Arizona Fly Fishing Forums  

Go Back   Arizona Fly Fishing Forums > Arizona Fly Fishing > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 11-15-2013, 03:35 PM
joe's Avatar
joe joe is offline
member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,148
Rimfisher,
It can be said with 100% certainty that Brown trout are not indigenous to the USA and Rainbow trout are not indigenous to AZ. The trout that are indigenous to AZ are entitled to "Grandfatherhood" within "some" their historic range.
__________________
"People Throw Rocks at Things That Shine" Taylor Swift
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-15-2013, 03:40 PM
lando lando is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 401
In the end, the project will turn Haigler into a crayfish paradise. There will be no Browns to eat the crayfish and the crayfish will feast on the Gila fry.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-15-2013, 03:44 PM
RIMFISHER RIMFISHER is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 92
I don't remember ever saying brown and rainbows were native or indigenous to the United States. I don't even remember thinking it. Weird? I consider wild fish to be a product of reproduction in the wild and not in a hatchery.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-15-2013, 03:47 PM
Westy's Avatar
Westy Westy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,258
Haigler is a classic Arizona trout stream, from top to bottom and its also very productive and has a wild, self sustaining population of rainbow and brown trout that do very well in this creek. The headwaters is where many of the rainbows and browns spawn. Certain sections here are high value habit. I think the general consensus is that its hard to swallow wiping out such a healthy population of fish to be replaced with Gila trout, which is a big unknown at this point and unlikely to provide the same sport fish opportunity.

I enjoy fishing for native trout and have done so many times and made trips to NM & CO dedicated to fishing for native trout, however I don't enjoy fishing for native trout that can't establish self sustaining populations and or provide productive fishery such as the one that already exists at Haigler. It seems this has been the case time and time again in AZ, with Gila and Apache trout. Re-stocking, barriers, re-poisoning the creek, re-stocking over and over, etc, its a never ending cycle. Its also very expensive, as Zor pointed out.

Leave the browns and rainbows alone. The number of quality trout creeks in this state is fairly good, but its certainly not to the point where there are a surplus and enough to be destroying / poisoning the good ones, even if it is only a section. This section is of high value to the existing population of trout.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-15-2013, 04:04 PM
Westy's Avatar
Westy Westy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIMFISHER View Post
According to the WNTI site this is already a done deal.

http://www.westernnativetrout.org/node/285

Awesome! I look forward to catching 6-8" Gila trout in 3 years that will probably have an after catch mortality rate through the roof. At least I can say I bagged a $100 fish. Actually, even after a population of over 1,000 fish are established it's more like $300/fish.

I try to stay current on what the AZGFD is working on as far as recovery efforts and I don't know how I missed this over the last couple years.
That is scary if its already been implemented. What is the basis for the two public meetings I wonder?

I discussed this proposal of reintroducing Gilas to Haigler via email with a couple G&F employees about 15 months ago but they had stated it was a ways out still.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-15-2013, 04:10 PM
RIMFISHER RIMFISHER is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 92
AZGFD site says for public comment. If it's already underway which it is then I don't know why they would still be requesting public comment?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-15-2013, 04:33 PM
Jeremy V Jeremy V is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westy View Post
That is scary if its already been implemented. What is the basis for the two public meetings I wonder?

I discussed this proposal of reintroducing Gilas to Haigler via email with a couple G&F employees about 15 months ago but they had stated it was a ways out still.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIMFISHER View Post
AZGFD site says for public comment. If it's already underway which it is then I don't know why they would still be requesting public comment?
The funding from WNTI has been approved, but these initial public meetings are to begin the scoping process.

With the new rotenone regulations in Arizona, there will be extensive opportunities for public input throughout the process.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-15-2013, 05:39 PM
Litespeed1 Litespeed1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tempe
Posts: 1,201
good discussion here.

I thought Gila were native to rim streams. When one looks at historical trout range maps it seems unlikely and more likely Apaches were. I would imagine the reason for choosing Haigler is for separate populations of the Gilas in case of catastrophic environmental damage. I believe they used Frye creek for the same reason.

I have no desire to fish for Gilas. ZERO. However....

In another context: if upper Haigler held no trout at all right now, but did have leopard frogs, narrow headed garters, dace and suckers and not me, and the question was posed to either introduce Browns and Rainbows or introduce a trout native to AZ. I would choose the native. I love fishing for Browns and rainbows much more than Apaches or Gilas or Brookies. Upper Haigler is pretty pristine.

Crayfish are the scourge of all waters where they aren't native. I used to think browns provided some semblance of population control. I don't think they do to any great extent anymore. Those things are far too efficient in their reproduction.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-15-2013, 06:21 PM
Jeremy V Jeremy V is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 178
W.L. Minckley believed that Gila trout and what we now call headwater chub shared a range. Headwater chubs are throughout the Tonto Creek drainage. It's always seemed bizarre to me that there are no reliable native trout records from the Tonto drainage. But, based on the known native fish community in that drainage, it is pretty similar in species composition and habitat types as those in the upper Gila in New Mexico which holds the last wild Gila trout.

I want to stress that most of us working on native trout are also avid anglers and understand the importance of balancing the conservation needs of these listed species while still providing a variety of angling opportunities.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-15-2013, 07:08 PM
mynameisjohne's Avatar
mynameisjohne mynameisjohne is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 94
Young?

...and how many of us who live in the Valley or Tucson or anywhere else in AZ for that matter, can feasibly be in downtown Young at 6:00 on Tuesday night for a meeting???

When are we gonna have meetings in the metro areas? Seems very suspicious to me.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bring back the chub, car salesman, seaworld, stockers r us

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Logos, Trademarks are property of their owners. Other content Copyright 2006-2015 azflyandtie.com . All Rights Reserved.