Hat tip to The Adventurist.

A friend of mine used to do a lot of work as a graphic artist and much of his work appeared on T-Shirts sold in Maine and then abroad as their popularity grew. Several of his designs became very popular and I believe it was him that used the “Maine State Bird” on a T-Shirt. The one I do remember vividly is “Black Flies Don’t Bite They Suck”.

Evidently there are bad things that come with the good when it comes to cleaning up our rivers and streams – black flies. It appears these 2,000-plus species of blood sucking insects are finicky when it comes to where the female fly decides to drop her eggs that have been nourished with your blood.

Many people believe these bugs thrive in standing, stagnant and even murky, dirty water. That actually closely describes where mosquitoes breed but black flies prefer pristine, fast-moving water.

Many of Maine’s rivers used to be very dirty, polluted from paper mills and municipal runoff which included raw sewerage. Over the past 30 years, we have made great strides in cleaning up our waters and as a result we now are seeing more abundant black flies and the pesky creatures are showing up in places many of us never saw them before.

I grew up on one of America’s ten dirtiest rivers, the Androscoggin. Not so now. The area where I now spend my summers, the Upper Androscoggin, is a decent place to go fishing for rainbow, brown and brook trout, as well as bass. The state record rainbow was caught on this river near here.

Of course as we watched the river clear up, stop stinking and become a bit more user friendly, we also witnessed more and more fish, birds and other wildlife. According to an article yesterday in the Boston Globe, much of the return of the fish and wildlife is also due to the return of the black fly.

Unlike mosquitoes, which breed in stagnant pools, black flies like clear running water. The adult female typically mates with males in midair before seeking a blood meal to nourish eggs. The female then deposits the eggs in flowing water, where they hatch into larvae. But the running water must be nearly pristine: Black flies are incredibly sensitive to pollution.

This helps explain what happens when hardcore fishermen venture deep into prime wild brook trout territory only to emerge a quart or two low on blood and demand a very large and raw beef steak. Brook trout and black flies seem to make a good combination as far as survivability goes. Both like clear and cold water, so when you find prime trout fishing you also are apt to find prime blood sucking by black flies. This helps ensure the survivability of the brook trout as whimpy casters dare not venture into these areas.

According to the same article in the Globe, Maine has no intentions of doing anything to slow down or stop the growth of the black fly. They are still enjoying the successes of cleaning up their waters and aren’t much interested in dumping things back into them in order to kill black flies. Pennsylvania, it’s reported, spends $6 million annually to rid the state of the pesky suckers.

I guess then it would be prudent to inform readers that the next time you are swatting and batting at nasty biting black flies, itching and scratching until your skin falls off, think about how clean your water must be and the great job we have done getting to a point where we all must suffer from the results.

Yippee!

Tom Remington

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Last year the Pennsylvania legislature unsuccessfully tried to adopt a law requiring kids to buy a fishing license before they can drown a worm. This tax proposal met with opposition and died in session last year. That isn’t deterring those who believe charging a kid five bucks to go fishing, is worth every penny.

According to the Morning Call, the new bill is identical to last year’s.

The proposal being discussed is virtually identical to the bill introduced last year by former Rep. Bruce Smith, R-York. Smith’s bill called for a mandatory $5 fishing license for kids 12-15. The fee would include trout stamp and Lake Erie stamp fishing privileges.

The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission supports this bill and Douglas Austen, commission director, says five bucks is no big deal.

”The common response we get when we tell people we want to charge kids to fish is, ‘No Way!”’ he said. ”First of all, $5 isn’t an issue for most kids. Five bucks is less than a Happy Meal in most places.”

Most kids? So should we continue the trend of believing it is ok to eliminate some kids from fishing because they couldn’t pay the fee? Even though there are several organizations who say they will provide vouchers to any kid who wants to fish and can’t afford the fee, one has to question the move in the middle of a time when we are all scrambling to figure out how to attract and retain more hunters and fishermen.

But the PA Fish and Boat Commission says that 100% of all money collected will go toward that goal.

Austen said money raised through the sale of youth fishing licenses would be used to hold special youth fishing events, purchase equipment for fishing tackle loaner programs, develop printed and online educational materials and host fishing workshops for teachers who could incorporate fishing and fisheries conservation into lesson plans.

”The whole point of this is to get kids connected with the outdoors and create people who, as adults, are knowledgeable about the value of the natural resource and will take that with them, whether they become biologists or waterways officers or bankers or doctors,” Austen said.

”I’ll be honest with you — if these kids grow up to be adults who vote for conservation and stewardship, and never fish another day in their life, that’s still a success.”

I question whether they will achieve the goals they think they will. While I agree that such programs will educate those willing to get involved, I don’t think it will reach other kids that might get just enough out of fishing to keep them out of trouble but would be deterred from the requirements and attention. There are such kids.

The Commission estimates that they will be able to generate as much as $2.2 million dollars to put toward their program. Taxing kids $5 to fish I don’t believe is in the best interest of fishing. History shows us that once a tax is levied, it is never repealed and it just keeps going up. A tax is a tax and all taxes are an impediment that stifles growth.

If the Fish and Boat Commission, along with Trout Unlimited and other groups and individuals so believe that this program is so valuable, then let’s do it through volunteering and donations. How much of that hoped for $2.2 million will go toward administration costs and how much toward attracting and retaining kids to go fishing?

It may sound good on paper but to me it sounds too much like just another bureaucratic taxation in which to pad the coffers of a fish and game department that doesn’t have the best track record when it comes to staying within its budget.

I would try a different approach.

Tom Remington

I’ve followed for you the story of the unexplained fish kills in the Shenandoah River. Now, similar fish deaths are showing up in the James River, upstream from Buchanan and the lower Cowpasture River, downstream from Route 39.

There are similarities between the two unexplained fish kills but scientists have yet to make a link nor have they determined what is killing fish in the Shenandoah River.

Read more about the latest bodies of water affected by sick fish.

Tom Remington

From DA Newsroom.

There will be a public meeting on May 8 to discuss the problems of intersex fish and fish-kill instances in the south branch of the Potomac River. The meeting will take place from 6 to 9 p.m. at Moorefield Middle School.
U.S. Geological Survey and various sponsors will give presentations throughout the meeting. Following the meeting, citizens will have the opportunity to speak with representatives about current investigations during an open house session.
Intersex fish exhibit both male and female characteristics, and they have been found among the high number of fish kills in the rivers.
The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Natural Resources and the Potomac Water Watch are sponsoring the meeting.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The future of the East’s premier native trout is looking up, thanks to a coalition of state and federal agencies, academic institutions and conservation organizations.

The Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture today released a first-of-its-kind conservation strategy to restore healthy, fishable populations of eastern brook trout throughout their eastern native range. The Conservation Strategy is based on the status and threats information contained in the Joint Venture’s initial report, which was issued in May 2006.

The 2006 report found that only 5% of historical brook trout habitat remains intact. Populations have been eliminated or greatly reduced in almost half of the areas that historically supported brook trout. Poor land management practices are responsible for the majority of this decline.

“Once the partnership recognized the threats facing brook trout within its historic eastern range, we developed regional and range-wide strategies to take swift and deliberate steps to conserve strong populations and restore weaker ones,” said Steve Perry, Inland Fisheries Division Chief for the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department and Chair of the Joint Venture. “We created a model for fish conservation – a large-scale, habitat-focused conservation strategy for a species at risk. This strategy provides us with a roadmap to significantly improve brook trout populations by 2025.”

The report contains a set of aggressive range-wide and regional targets, including protection of highest quality habitat, improvement of 30% of damaged brook trout watersheds, and reintroduction of brook trout to 10% of those watersheds where they have disappeared. Using the 2006 status and threats data as a baseline, the Joint Venture will evaluate progress toward these targets at five year intervals.

In conjunction with the range-wide strategy released today, each of the Joint Venture states is developing a specialized plan based on that state’s existing brook trout populations and dominant threats. Through these plans, the states will prioritize protection and restoration efforts to meet the collective targets outlined above. Projects will address priority needs in each state, ranging from restoring streamside habitat in Georgia to cleaning up pollution from abandoned coal mines in Pennsylvania, to fixing road culverts to improve brook trout passage in Maine.

“The significance of these state efforts really can’t be overstated,” said Gary Berti, Eastern Brook Trout Campaign Coordinator for Trout Unlimited and the Joint Venture’s Communications Chair. “They are the ones who will do the hard work to make this range-wide plan a reality. And they will need support from conservation groups, watershed associations, landowners, businesses, educators, citizens and policy-makers at all levels to accomplish the ambitious goals laid out in this strategy.”

The Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture partnership began in 2004 as a pilot project under the National Fish Habitat Action Plan. Active partners include fish and wildlife agencies from 17 states, federal agencies, conservation organizations and academic institutions. The Joint Venture is seeking additional partners and support to assist in the protection and restoration of brook trout habitat.

Brook trout are the only trout native to the streams and rivers of the eastern United States. Once prolific throughout their historical range, brook trout populations have declined as land use changes have altered their habitat. These fish survive in only the coldest and cleanest water, and they serve as excellent indicators of the health of the watersheds they inhabit.

For more information on the range-wide eastern brook trout conservation strategy and state-specific plans, please visit http://www.easternbrooktrout.net.

This press release was sent to me by the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department.

Tom Remington

Fish dying at hatcheries isn’t uncommon. Whenever you contain large masses of fish in small tanks, disease or changes to chemical makeup and balance of the water can suddenly create a lot of dead fish. This is what happened at one such private fish hatchery in Brandonville late last month.

Officials believe the cause was due to a sudden change in the water – a drop in Ph resulting in acidic water. Scientists say that brook trout can live in fairly acidic water but when sudden changes occur, as was the case at this hatchery, death is eminent. What’s puzzling is no one knows what caused the spike. The system is one, as I understand it, that takes water in from the nearby stream and releases it back to the stream.

The 22,000 fish, comprised of brook trout, brown trout, rainbow trout and golden trout, will eventually be buried officials say. The investigation into what caused the water change is ongoing.

Tom Remington

What began as scientists finding male small mouth and large mouth bass with both sex organs has now grown to include redbreast sunfish.

Vicki Blazer of the US Geological Survey said she verified the abnormality in sunfish last week while preparing for her talk Tuesday at the start of a three-day conference on fish kills in the six-state Chesapeake Bay watershed. The conference was sponsored by the Annapolis-based Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

“We do see it in some of the redbreast sunfish, although I have no idea what the incidence will be,” Blazer said.

It seems that we are just dragging our feet on this issue and doing very little to address a potentially disastrous situation.

You can read more about this topic on previous posts listed below.

Are We The Dumb Leading the Dumber?
Finally Federal Lawmaker Concerned Over Intersexed Fish In Potomac
What Is Estrogen Doing To Our Fish And To Us?

Tom Remington

The snakehead or walking fish, was introduced somehow into the Potomac River watershed some time ago. At that time, fish biologists didn’t know what the walking fish would do to other native or not-so-native species. They feared the worst and got something a little less drastic, so far.

National Georgraphic covers the story of the walking fish and how it has affected the Potomac River watershed area. It looks ahead in hopes of learning more about what the future holds for this fish and other competitive species, including the smallmouth bass.

Tom Remington

Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission officials have agreed to open up 18 counties to an earlier trout season. Most of the counties affected are in southeastern and south central Pennsylvania.

The reason officials gave for the change has mostly to do with differing climates through the state. Another reason has to do with the time element involved with stocking and opening day.

New opening day in the 18 counties will be the first Saturday after March 28. The remainder of the state will stay as the first Saturday after April 11.

The 18 counties affected by the change are:

Adams, Berks, Bucks, Chester, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Franklin, Juniata, Lancaster, Lebanon, Lehigh, Montgomery, Northampton, Perry, Philadelphia, Schuylkill and York.

Tom Remington

I certainly find personal satisfaction when groups bent on destroying lifelong heritages and attempting to promote their personal agendas with lies and deception, screw up.

A group called the Commonwealth Foundation and Citizens Against Government Waste issued a report called, “Pennsylvania Piglet Book”. It was their attempt at showing the public how badly the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission misspends tax dollars.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan of taking money away from government that they can needlessly throw down the proverbial drain but before I went public with accusations as big as this group did, I might want to make sure I knew what I was talking about.

The group accused the PFGC of spending $25 million in tax money for the sole purpose of stocking fish in waters throughout the state. They declared this to be poor use of tax dollars.

The Fish and Boat Commission officials felt it necessary to set the record straight. They first pointed out that the $25 million budget for the fish fund is used to raise fish, fund aquatic resource education, habitat improvement and enviromental protection.

The biggest mistake they made was in declaring the money tax dollars. 88% of the $25 million dollars for the fish fund comes from selling fishing licenses. The remainder from other sources but none comes from tax dollars at all. As a matter of fact, the agency gets no money from tax sources.

Now, you might still think the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission doesn’t know how to spend dollars wisely but make sure you know where the money comes from. Making errant statements like this one sure does little for one’s credibility.

Tom Remington

The Delaware River is a boundary river between the state of New York and Pennsylvania. In theory, if you drew a line down through the river exactly in the middle between shores, that would be the boundary line – to the east would be New York waters, to the west Pennsyvania.

For years both states have agreed to a boundary fishing law that permits anglers to fish either side of the river no matter from which state you held a license. This sharing has worked well for many years.

The Delaware River is also used by guides leading fishermen by boat down the river. Now under a new law that Pennsylvania has put in place, Pennsylvania guides using the Delaware River will have to pay an annual fee of $100. All other guides will pay $400.

I would call that a raw deal. For more information on this, go here and you’ll also find contact information if you would like to voice your support or opposition.

Tom Remington

Are you going to go out and battle the crowds tomorrow in hopes of catching a fish and not the rath of some angry fisherman who got his line tangled with yours? If you’re going in Pennsylvania, here’s a few suggestions of where you might be able to go and catch more fish than fishermen.

Tom Remington