8/1/2007

Build it and they will come: Trout populations growing thanks to stream habitat work

MADISON – 2007 marks the 30th anniversary of the Wisconsin trout stamp and state fisheries biologists say trout anglers have plenty of reason to celebrate. Data collected from streams throughout the state show that trout populations -- and anglers fishing inland waters – have benefited significantly from habitat restoration work supported with trout stamp funds.

“Studies conducted by fisheries biologists across the state show that where habitat restoration or improvement work is done, the overall number and size structure of the trout populations improve,” says Mike Miller, a Department of Natural Resources stream ecologist who coordinates stream monitoring. “In general, more young fish survive and the number of larger, older fish increase.”

Wisconsin fisheries biologists pioneered trout habitat restoration work in the 1950s. Robert Hunt, a retired DNR fisheries researcher, described these efforts in numerous scientific publications. But stream restoration work in Wisconsin got a big boost in 1977, when lawmakers created a dedicated source of funding, annual trout stamps for trout fishing in Wisconsin’s inland waters. All the money from those stamps is used for trout habitat development projects, maintaining trout habitat, and doing a limited number of trout surveys.

Since the trout stamp began in 1978, the DNR has restored more than 750 miles of trout stream, kept more than 700 miles free of beaver dams and maintained the good condition of many miles of trout streams throughout Wisconsin.

The program has also restored dozens of spring ponds -- some of northern Wisconsin’s most productive native trout waters -- through projects that remove the debris and silt accumulated over hundreds of years. An article in the June issue of Wisconsin Natural Resources magazine highlights these projects.

Trout Unlimited in a 1999 national report called the state’s inland trout program a model for the nation because of its commitment to providing angling opportunities by focusing on protecting and rehabilitating trout habitat rather than on stocking hatchery trout of catchable size.

“Trout streams require certain environmental conditions to be healthy,” says Miller. “Cold, clean water, overhead cover such as undercut stream banks or woody debris, clean gravel for spawning, and an adequate supply of insects and forage fish for food. If a stream is missing any one of these factors, it won’t be producing to its capacity.”

A 2000 study reviewing 15 years of studies of habitat development techniques identified which methods work better than others. DNR has used the results of that study, conducted by Ed Avery, a now-retired DNR fisheries researcher to guide its work since.

“Our goal is to have streams restored to the extent where there is good habitat, increased natural reproduction, and we have a good recreational fishery. The Ed Avery study showed us which techniques were most effective at improving fish populations,” says Larry Claggett, coldwater fishieries ecologist. “Certain methods like bank covers for protection, current deflectors which guide the current under the covers, beaver dam removal and stream bank brushing, all proved to be successful techniques of improving the habitat and therefore, the fish population.”

Wisconsin Trout Unlimited groups, along with Land Conservation staff (NRCS), numerous local rod and gun clubs and other partners have worked in cooperation with the DNR on many of the habitat improvement projects, contributing time, labor and organizing large fund raising efforts.

Today there are nearly 9,000 miles of Class 1 and 2 trout streams in Wisconsin, making up 85 percent of the total of trout stream miles. Class 1 streams are high quality waters that have self-sustaining trout populations and although the fish in these streams are often smaller in size, the streams hold good numbers of trout.

Class 2 streams have some natural production, but require some stocking to maintain desirable trout populations. Just because they’re Class 2, however, doesn’t mean they’re coming in second for trout fishing. These streams often have good survival of adult trout, frequently producing fish of larger than average size.

Recent fish population surveys found that the vast majority of streams with the most trout -- those with 1,000 to 7,000 trout per mile that were 7 inches long or more -- had had habitat work done on them. The following streams had the highest number of trout at the particular stretch where fish were sampled: Cady and Pine creeks, and the South Fork and main stem of the Kinnickinnic, Rush and Eau Galle rivers in Pierce County; the North Branch of Gilbert Creek and Wilson Creek in Dunn County; Beaver and Parker creeks in St. Croix County; Pompey Pillar Creek in Iowa County; the Middle Branch of the Embarrass River in Shawano County; Silver, and Upper Pine creek in Barron County; Black Earth Creek in Dane County; and the North Branch Copper and Pine creeks in Crawford County. The Springville Brook, Bad Axe River, Bishop Brook of the West Fork Kickapoo River and Hornby Creek in Vernon County were also on the list of waters yielding the highest number of trout during spring surveys.

All of Wisconsin’s 2,931 trout streams require some sort of management, but about 30 percent of these streams could significantly benefit from habitat improvement work.

More information on Wisconsin Trout Streams can be found on the Fish Wisconsin page of the DNR Web site, including stream classifications and maps of trout streams by county.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Miller – (608) 267-2753, Larry Claggett – (608) 267-9658