By Ethan Hollifield
The trout streams of Western North Carolina are a paradox; being both relatively the same in their structure yet each one holding it’s own uniqueness. This individuality can come from the tiniest details in the watershed’s geological makeup, the amount, or lack, of development, and the abundance of aquatic insect life. All of these factors, in turn, play a critical role in the growth rates and overall abundance of trout in any given stream. I have spent the greater portion of my life fishing and studying these tiny characteristics to get a better understanding of why each stream is as productive as it is. The devil is in the details, as they say. Those details are not as prevalent on other anglers’ minds as they are on my own. Maybe I just hold too great of a respect for these places compared to others, but I believe everyone would agree that these places are special. This leads me to write about a somewhat controversial topic. I’m going to share my opinion, based on my experience as an angler and a guide: the sustainability of keeping fish.
Our society has become evermore materialistic, and that mentality has leeched into the outdoor community. More frequently, our streams have become renewable in the minds of many. We want our big trophy brown or to catch and keep our limit as quickly as possible without thinking what that might do to a trout stream as a whole, in terms of it’s population health. Why should people worry anyways? A good portion of the streams in the mountains are stocked, who cares if someone keeps a limit every time they go out (if not more)?
Let’s play out this hypothetical scenario that I have personally seen executed more than once. The regulations that fall under a “wild trout” stream in North Carolina are a limit of four fish, all being 7 inches long, and caught on a single hook artificial lure. Ten people go out in the span of a week and fish different sections of a stream that is under this regulation, with each legally keeping their limit. Doing some basic math, that would mean 40 adult trout seven inches or longer were harvested out of that stream in a week. Granted, this scenario does not play out on every stream on a weekly basis, but lets take into account some details about wild trout streams in general.
On average, a rainbow trout, born in the wild, will take four years to reach seven inches long, depending on the amount of bug life and factors such as fry mortality, predation, etc. on top of increasing angling pressure. This means that it will take four years to replace the fish previously stated. If that happens multiple times for a given stream, then the trout population will be decimated. With ever increasing angling pressure across Western North Carolina I can only imagine that the odds of this scenario occurring will become higher. These regulations, I’m afraid, are too broad in terms of overlooking the individual health of trout streams along with increasing angling pressure.
Am I being overly pessimistic? Perhaps, but I think the root of the problem is in our perceptions of these streams in general. Our mentality needs to change from these places being an unlimited supply of fresh trout meat, to being a well-respected nonrenewable resource. Learning about the little details of what makes a stream productive as an angler will not only help you catch more fish, but will also enable these streams to live on for years to come. Keep this in mind on your next trip on the water: you can keep your limit, but you and future generations of anglers will get to keep the consequences.
Ethan Hollifield is an Environmental/Physical Science Teacher and is also a guide for Southern Appalachian Anglers.