A new website: wildtroutstreams.com

[wtsobsessed]

With Joe's permission, I'm posting this notice about a website which has been my obsession for the past 6 months or so. Hence my username.

The site is: www.wildtroutstreams.com

This has an enormous amount of information that will be of interest to the readers of this forum. I'm hoping that most of you will find it a useful contribution to the resources you use to find fishing spots (though no doubt some of you will be upset).

This is a non-commercial site. There’s no advertising, and I’m not plugging anything. Coverage of MA is extensive, in part because this whole thing started with me looking for wild trout streams near my dad’s condo in Stockbridge. I’m continually adding to the resources: a series of MA town by town stream maps went online this weekend.

But, as you'll see, it's an east coast site with information covering, literally, Maine to Georgia.

With resident fishing license sales down almost 50% in the past decade in MA, it seems to me that the state’s resources need more exposure rather than less. I noted with some amusement the thread by the gentleman who claimed never to have seen another fisherman on a Berkshire stream in 26 years. But in the end, that can’t be good for the resource.

A few other fishermen aren’t the problem: it’s neglect and careless development (which caring fisherman can impact).

Anyway, I hope you enjoy the site. I'm open to dialog and will hope to make the site better with your input.

M

[Uplander]

I’m not going to get into a philosophical debate, I’m not going to argue with you, I’m not going to get angry.

I am only going to address this matter this one time, and that is to say that I think you are appallingly wrong in unilaterally deciding for all of us that these steams need more fishing pressure and that exposure is somehow “good for the resource.” You are being terribly unethical in disclosing such information on the Internet, and terribly naive in your belief that doing so will be beneficial to the trout or the anglers who pursue them. You may, single-handedly, be the direct cause of the demise of numerous fragile wild trout streams.

Bravo.

[FishinCane]

All of the spots outlined on the website can be found on any topographical map. How is the website going to do any more damage than a DeLorme topo map?

[Uplander]

Topo maps don’t color code wild trout streams (which, by the way, based on my experience, are erroneously coded in many spots on this map).

At any rate, I’ve said my piece and I’m not going to get into a discussion on this subject.

[wtsobsessed]

Uplander, do you really believe that my little website has as much power as you credit? Do you imagine hordes of fishermen descending on your favorite streams after reading the stream maps?

The stream maps are comprehensive in nature and provide hundreds of streams to choose from. The impact on any single stream should be slight. If, as you point out, some are erroneously coded that's OK. I've never claimed omniscience, I'm merely creating maps from data which the Commonwealth makes available in a form useful to fishermen. If some are wrong, that's part of the game, which is to encourage exploration. It's a pretty good starting point, but the ending point is being out in the wilderness fishing a stream. Apparently, you feel the results aren't completely whacky, or there'd be no point in getting so upset about them.

There are no reviews on my site, and no directions to specific access points. Nothing that would concentrate pressure on any single spot. The goal is to encourage people to get out and explore, broadly. I think that's a good thing.

How many people are actually fishing these resources? If the number went up by 5 or 10% (which would be an enormous impact, far in excess of what this site could accomplish), would you notice? You started a thread on this forum where you said you've seen only 5 or 6 other fishermen on a Berkshire stream in 30 years! If you saw one every 2 years (mind you, a 3-fold increase), would it be so bad? Yet it could have a huge impact on saving these resources...

In the process of researching this site, I've come into contact with a number of fisheries biologists whose job it is to protect these resources. So far, all have been supportive. I'll quote from an email one of them sent me recently:

"Nice job on your website. I don't believe that wild trout streams should be kept a secret - fishermen can be some of the best advocates for protecting these resources. On the flip side, it does not take a whole lot of harvest to impact a small population in a headwater stream - so it becomes something of a balancing act."

Let's talk about "harvest", which is clearly part of what may be upsetting you.

A tiny headwater stream with small population (and typically small fish) isn't likely to experience much "harvest" from the readers of this site. In the first place, I would venture most readers will be practicing catch and release.

But let's say I'm wrong. Suppose a few fishermen read about a stream on the website, and descend on it to kill a lot of fish - presumably this is the scenario you fear the most, judging from your comments.

As bad as that would be, it's not the worst that could happen to the stream, and it's a problem that will self-correct. The next few times these rapacious wild trout fishermen descended on the stream, they would have a bad experience. What's worse to a meat fisherman than getting skunked? They'll stop going. But the point is, as long as the watershed remains healthy, the remaining fish will repopulate it in a season or two. [Mind you, this is the worse case. I believe that the overwhelming majority of folks who will use the site will respect the resources and treat them gently].

The worst enemies of these streams are the ones that distroy them forever. These aren't other fishermen: they're uncontrolled development, and climate change. Addressing these issues requires political clout, and passionate advocates. No one better than someone who fishes the resource. The combined impact of development and climate change on small stream resources is orders of magnitude greater than all of the readers of fishing websites put together, even if all of us decided to fry up everything we catch (which of course we don't)!

At a time when streams need more friends there are fewer of us. The number of people purchasing resident fishing licenses in NJ and MA is down roughly 50% in the last decade. PA over 40%. Virtually every state in the union has seen a signficant decline in the popularity of fishing. I'd be happy if my website helped a little to slow the rate of decline. With so much conservation work depending on license revenues, it's the least we can do.

As to my "ethics" for making this information available over the Internet, virtually all of it is already available over the Internet: I've simply repackaged it in ways that are useful to fishermen and made it easier to find. These are public data which are freely downloadable. I've observed the license agreements, respected copyright laws, and credited the sources as required. The whole point of this website is to make it a little easier for folks to use the information that is available, especially younger and newer folks, on whom the ultimate survival of these resources depends.

Bottom line: I've thought about it very carefully, and continue to believe it's in the best interest of the resources. I'm sorry you don't agree.

[troutjunkie]

Hey wtsobsessed keep up the good work most of us appreciate your efforts. ;D

[jf5]

wtsobsessed said:

The worst enemies of these streams are the ones that distroy them forever. These aren't other fishermen: they're uncontrolled development, and climate change.

Well said. Enviormental conditions off these streams is the real critical factor for wild fish .

It also goes to note that most of the wild trout streams in MA a mere trickles with native brookies, with short life spans and small growth rates. A harvest will have minimal and short term impact on streams like that. Larger rivers is another thing though where harvest of wild fish can effect it. But honestly, I find that most of the guys who keep allot of trout on a regular basis don't care wether they are wild or not, and seem to concentrate on stocked fisheries for the most part. Anyone who travels long distances to catch wild trout over stocked fish is not going to keep allot in my experience.

[Uplander]

Catching a little Hell....

outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/zerothread?id=496110

[JoeOverlock]

They need to find something better to worry about then WildTroutStreams.com

[strbender]

Wow

That was the only (magazine) board that I was still visiting. I always respected most of the guy's over there. Now I don't know anymore I stopped going to the other (Mag's) boards because of the small mindedness of the members.

[JoeOverlock]

It's just a few bad apples, they still have a good forum over there.

They're just trying to break that stereotype that all Fly Fisher's are Gentlemen.

[Uplander]

Simply because someone has strong feelings regarding the public “outing” of their treasured wild trout streams does not, in my opinion, make one a “bad apple.” And, Joe…a “Gentleman” would not have crafted such a website with such potential to cause great harm to wild trout populations, and to adversely impact the fishing of thousands of other fishermen in multiple states, in the first place….

[wtsobsessed]

uplander said:

Catching a little Hell....

It seems to me that sanity more or less prevailed, and that the balance of opinion supported wts.com

Uplander, I've read many of your posts and you're a gentleman. Unlike many of the folks who post on your "side of the issue", you're literate and thoughtful. I respect you, even if I disagree with you, and it bothers me that you're so upset by this.

But in the final analysis, I just don't understand your reaction. Where is this "potential to cause great harm to wild trout streams" coming from? Have you noticed a surge in fishing on your secret streams? Do you see folks wearing "WildTroutStreams.com" T-shirts buying pancakes in the local coffee shop at 6 AM?

I'm making a little joke out of it, but it's a serious question. Please explain.

[Uplander]

We are simply diametrically opposite in our thinking relative to what is a better method of protecting wild trout streams.

You appear to view “fly fishermen” through rose-colored glasses; ascribing to the subculture as a whole altruistic characteristics lacking in the general public. Perhaps I simply don’t have the faith in other people that you do. I’ve seen too many once beautiful wild trout streams littered with trash, lined with trails, and stripped of fish to ever want more attention brought to those that remain.

Look what’s happening with the Battenkill, and even rumblings about the Hoosic. Some fly fishermen want to “protect” those wild fisheries by stocking. No offense, but I’d really prefer to skip that sort of protection of the places I fish….

And yes, I have admitted several times now that I treasure solitude and wild places above all things. I honestly don’t care if others fish the same places I do. In fact, I’m well aware that they do. But, I simply don’t want to see the detritus of humanity that an influx of people always brings to a place. The cigarette wrappers, the dropped water bottles, the tangles of tippet material, the trails running along the stream banks, the cell phone clattertrap, etc. Fly fishermen are as guilty of these things as bait fishermen and the public at large.

There was a study done not too long ago that purports that there are few places remaining in the continental United States where one can sit for 15 minutes and not see or hear any evidence of human civilization. As this nation becomes more crowded, it will become increasingly more difficult to find those precious wild places where solitude may be drunk in deep draughts. And, many of those places harbor wild trout streams…. See, now I know places where I can walk without hearing the hum of an airplane or the distant rumble of a train or a road, seeing another person, a human footprint, or a beer can. But those places will become increasingly more difficult to find as the years advance. I certainly don’t begrudge anyone who desires the same solitude I do. But, I suppose what all this boils down to is that I believe that such a place should be earned, and not simply handed out on a website or in a guidebook. When you discover a special, wild place through your own intuitive ramblings and map work, it is a wonderful feeling. Dare I say it, you are even left with a sense of ownership; not in writ or deed, but in your soul. I just don’t believe such a connection to a place is formed when you, and 1000 others, read all about it first in a guidebook, or are turned on to its essentially assured likelihood through color-coded maps on the Internet.

Again, these are just my own views, some rooted in concern for the health and viability of the wild trout streams themselves, and some rooted in my own personal selfishness to keep “my” wild places wild.

I should note that I’m not opposed to friends and family sharing their spots with one another, and discussing likely spots, etc. I do it with my father, and trusted friends who I know will cherish a place as much as I do. It was not too long ago that Joe Overlock, the Grand Poo-Bah of the BFF, asked me about a place in the mountains and its potential to harbor fish. I had only been there in the winter, cross-country skiing, so couldn’t speak to the fishing, but I told him what I knew about the land and the potential for water and trout. I’d do the same for any friend who asked about a place. There’s just something about wide scale public broadcasting of information, be it guidebooks, or the Internet, that makes me fear for the future of wild trout streams, and the wild places they’re found….

Finally, I’d like to apologize for my somewhat harsh attitude toward you. It was uncalled for. I understand your point of view, and while I don’t agree with it, I respect your sincere cherishment of wild trout streams.

[FishinCane]

While I don’t have a problem with your site you have to be naive to think that it won’t bring more attention the wild streams. I realize this info is readily available, however, up until now not so accessible. Just look at the impact “The Movie” had on flyfishing. Up until then it was a rather obscure pastime.

[wtsobsessed]

uplander said:

We are simply diametrically opposite in our thinking relative to what is a better method of protecting wild trout streams.

You appear to view “fly fishermen” through rose-colored glasses; ascribing to the subculture as a whole altruistic characteristics lacking in the general public. Perhaps I simply don’t have the faith in other people that you do. I’ve seen too many once beautiful wild trout streams littered with trash, lined with trails, and stripped of fish to ever want more attention brought to those that remain.
...I’d like to apologize for my somewhat harsh attitude toward you. It was uncalled for. I understand your point of view, and while I don’t agree with it, I respect your sincere cherishment of wild trout streams.

Uplander, I continue to respect your opinion, even if I still don't agree with it.

I accept that my view of the type of fly fisherman who will take advantage of www.wildtroutstreams.com is slightly rose-tinged, but I don't think it's totally unfounded, either.

I do most of my fishing in NJ, which has substantially more licensed fishermen than MA (148K vs. 114K), and about 20% of the fishing resources (a total of 175 streams state-wide that support wild trout vs. around 1,000 in MA).

I too crave the quiet and a wilderness experience. No doubt the places I fish aren't nearly as pristine as the ones you do. But the stream I fish most often is about 40 minutes from Times Square (if you don't hit traffic). And yet on Memorial Day I fished it and saw NO ONE ELSE on the stream all day. Last Sunday I fished it again. While I saw 3 or 4 hikers...again I saw no one else fishing it. Of the nearly 100 times I estimate I've fished this stream, I've run into other fishermen perhaps 5 or 6 times.

I'm not the ONLY fisherman who fishes the place...from a sign-in system that operates intermittently, it seems that about 3 people a week fish it. But I saw none of the fisherman's detritus that you worry about...and I don't ever remember seeing any (other than some snagged flies in brush). The brush is a little warn away on favored casting spots, but that's typically the only evidence of other anglers.

This watershed is fortunate in that it mostly falls on public or preserved land. However, it's too built up for brookies, and holds mostly wild rainbows and the occasional brownie.

Several "legendary" WTS in NJ have been virtually destroyed by suburban sprawl over the last 20 years including Ledgewood Brook and Flanders Brook...despite their listed status. I'll send you a PM with a description of what happened to Ledgewood, written by my friend and long-time TU advocate Agust Gudmansson.

From my experience, the risk of streams being destroyed by development is so much greater than by over-fishing. My experience is that most fly fishermen do respect the streams, and don't leave trash. And in the rare occasions I've run into people, I've generally enjoyed the interactions.

[Mark Patenaude]

My turn to chime in.

I'm complete with Shaun (Uplander) on this, as I am with most things of this nature.

Preserve our resources. If you want to find good water; do the research and start hiking.

This site is the equivalent of revealing too much detail which will get you "flamed" on any one of the Midwest boards that I'm a member of.

Come on especially with wild brook trout. They are a minority and extremely limited to begin with. Leave em' alone and maybe someday (though highly unlikely) they will return to their former numbers and grandeur. (I used the word grandeur, now I'm sounding like Shaun

Mark
(Who Will Be Enjoying the Trout Fishing the Berkshires, Rain or Shine In 2 Days!!!)

Man I hope I don't fall in the water. I probably jinxed myself now...