Yellowstone Rainbows

[whit210]

Found this article on Fox News. Once again, the park service is trying to gin up a fake controversy in order deplete the hunting and fishing industry. This is essentially the same argument they made to reintroduce the Wolves to Yellowstone (and that has worked out so well, hasn't it?).

This article clearly states that the Rainbow trout is the enemy and they want all anglers to keep or kill every rainbow caught in the Lamar Valley. Supposedly the Rainbow is taking over the native Cutthroat. But if the Rainbow was introduced over 100 years ago, don't you think the Cutthroat would have been run out a long time ago?

As a Volunteer for Protect The Harvest.com, I have come to realize that the Anti-Fishing and Hunting agenda reaches deep into our Government. This is a classic tactic to demonize a particular game species and then advocate for it's removal, which then negatively impacts the sportsman and reduces involvement in the sport.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/19/rel...r-on-fish/
[signature]

[albinotrout]

As I recall this order has been in place for many years.
[signature]

[riverdog]

And somehow they're still getting 3 million visitors a year for the past several years. The propaganda makes it sound like it was going to chase away significant tourism. We would only be so lucky if it actually did. Thanks for pointing it out. I usually fish right to the east of there out of the Park. I'll make it a point to help remove some rainbow in the park.
[signature]

[cpierce]

Not much different than Idaho's rainbow rules on the South Fork. The rainbows cross breed with the cutts rather than just out compete them. In any attempt to improve native cutthroat stocks, wild rainbows are a problem.

If we don't improve our native fish, then they will end up being listed as endangered. If that happens, say goodbye to local control and fishing.

See page three in this newsletter for some of what is being done. [url "http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/docs/fishReportsNewsletters/upperSnakeReport13.pdf"]http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/...keReport13.pdf[/url]

Here is a quote from that article:
"We have an aggressive program to keep cutthroat as the dominant species, we also realize it is impossible to completely remove rainbows from the South Fork. Appropriate flows are not applied every year, our weirs have varying degrees of effectiveness, and anglers don’t always harvest every rainbow they catch. As such, we will always have rainbow trout present in the South Fork, and that’s OK. Our goal for the river is to reduce overall rainbow trout abundance to levels lower than we currently see now and
similar to abundances we saw in the mid 1990’s. You can help us meet our objectives by harvesting all your rainbow trout."

We should be more concerned with the EPA's attempt at new rules for streams:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/...ater-rule/


If we want to protect our rights to harvest, then we need to keep our local control out of federal hands!
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

I suppose I could be wrong, but I don't see this as anti fishing at all. They are simply using anglers to remove an undesirable non native species so there will be more native cutts. You still can fish for the natives as well. It isn't just rainbows, they have mandatory catch and kill for illegally introduced macks in Yellowstone lake and I believe brookies in some other places. They actually want more fishermen to help, especially for the macks. As Cpierce said, the only way that fishing opportunity will be taken away is if the native cutts become endangered and the Feds prohibit angling in key fisheries. If the agencies are proactive as they are here, that shouldn't happen.

Utah also has some mandatory catch and kill regs for bucket biology introductions. I have no problem with these regs and wouldn't mind the tool be utilized more.
[signature]

[unicornslayer]

How is that in any way anti-fishing? The main draw for anglers in Yellowstone, is the Yellowstone cutthroat trout. They're not preventing anyone from fishing anywhere, they're just trying to preserve the native trout in the area so that anglers can enjoy fishing for them for generations to come.
[signature]

[whit210]

In what I have seen from my work, I choose not to ever believe that this administration is doing anything to improve the conditions and enjoyment for the outdoorsman.
[signature]

[Ktrout]

[quote whit210]In what I have seen from my work, I choose not to ever believe that this administration is doing anything to improve the conditions and enjoyment for the outdoorsman.[/quote]

That's a great idea. Make a bunch of statements (likely inaccurate ones) as though they are fact without any data, just because it is your standard practice to question "administration".
[signature]